OT - '99+ Miatas Approved for SM, [i][b]effective 3/1/05!![i

[Greg Amy]

Life just got more difficult for Spec Miata drivers. Bet we see a whole bunch more in Improved Touring! Note that the CRB approved this only a few weeks after requesting membership input!!!


http://www.scca.com/News/News.asp?Ref=238

SCCA Board Approves Late Model Miatas for Spec Miata Class
By Eric Prill

Miatas from 1999 and newer are now eligible to run in the Spec Miata class. (Mark Weber Photo)

TOPEKA, Kan. (February 22, 2005) – Sports Car Club of America announced today that its Club Racing Board approved the inclusion of 1999 and newer Mazda Miatas into its SCCA Club Racing Spec Miata class, effective March 1, 2005.

The approval adds the newer body-style Mazda Miatas into the class that previously included only the original body style (1990-1997) Miata, but with two different engine displacements (1.6L and 1.8L).

Like the first-generation car, Mazdaspeed has developed a suspension kit for the newer cars, including shocks, springs and sway bars. As with the two different engines in the first-generation Miata, air restriction and weight will be utilized to achieve parity between the cars. Miatas of years 1999-2005 must weight 2500 lbs with a 41 mm air restrictor installed.

The inclusion follows the move by SCCA’s Mazdaspeed Miata Cup Presented by Hankook pro series, which allowed the cars in for its 2005 season.

The Club Racing Spec Miata class will begin National competition in 2006, with the top drivers competing at the SCCA Runoffs® for the category’s first-ever National Championship.

Note: The Technical Bulletin regarding the newer Miatas’ introduction can be found at www.scca.com (http://www.scca.com) in the “SCCA Garage” section, or by clicking the link below. The bulletin will also appear in the April edition of FasTrack.

[Scott Koschwitz]

Yes, I believe it did. I run in SSM, but frankly, I think the way this happened and how quickly is an absolute crock of sh*t.

The guys like Jim Daniels, Sunbelt, and the guys selling $450 exhaust systems must be happy. Of course, these are the guys who are saying that the SCCA has speced the newer cars to be underdogs and that you won't need a newer car to be competitive. Riiigghht.

All I can say is thank goodness for SSM. I think this decision by the SCCA has ensured that SSM will remain a regional class after 2005. I think you'll see a lot of guys shift to either ITA or SSM in response.

[JohnRW]

Anybody who thought that SM going Nat'l wouldn't involve changes like this must be low on oxygen.

While I'm an SSM guy, I don't see the new cars as a threat to the older 1.6 and 1.8 cars. 'Corpulent' and 'wheezing' comes to mind...the 99+'s will be at 2500lbs. and be sucking thru a 41mm restrictor. Sounds underdogish to me.

I still don't 'get' how this is a bad thing. But then...I'm really an SRF guy at heart.

[Scott Koschwitz]

I had a feeling things would head this way regardless of National class status. When SM started heading in the direction of open intakes and exhausts, I jumped with both feet into SSM.

I think National class designation for '06 has only hastened the inclusion of the newer cars.

As for the competitiveness of the new cars, we'll have to see. I'm sure we'll see some this season. It will probably take them a while to sort it out, but my hunch is they will be the dominant car, even without an adjustment to the weight or restrictor. I have heard that the specs will allow them to run either the 5- or 6-speed transmission models, and models with different rear-end ratios.

The inclusion of the newer cars was inevitable and not necessarily a bad thing. I don't like the way it was done. I think the SCCA made a bad decision to include the newer cars with less than a month's notice, and without running them in Pro for a year to establish the baseline spec to ensure the competitiveness of all cars.

[Gregg]

Geezus...from reading the posts over at SpecMiata.com you'd think they added the New Beetle or something.

------------------
Gregg Ginsberg
http://www.ginsberg.org
'89 CRX Si -- MARRS ITA #72
WDCR-SCCA Rookie of the Year 2003

[Scott Koschwitz]

I read portions of that New Beetle thread.

Good analogy.

[dave parker]

THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!
I think the proper Simpson's quote would be from Nelson Muntz is "HA HA"

I guess that everything is not as perfect in Spec Miata land as the residents thereof want us all to think.

Will there be a mass exodus "back" to IT?
cheers
dave parker
wdcr ITC#97

[Jon Nelson]

Excuse me for asking.... but why is it such a big deal to allow Miata's in spec MIATA??

[This message has been edited by Jon Nelson (edited February 23, 2005).]

[mgyip]

Originally posted by Gregg:
Geezus...from reading the posts over at SpecMiata.com you'd think they added the New Beetle or something.


Just remember that Spec Miata IS THE SALVATION OF SCCA (at least according to the Spec Miata class reps locally) and by such offensive classification, the horde of Wreck Me Otters to go play with NASA to "punish" SCCA for their actions (which wouldn't hurt my feelings too much considering the SM attitude towards all other race classes other than themselves).

Given the weight and restrictions, the later model Miatas sound as if they'll be competitive but not necessarily immediate class winners. However nothing is written in stone and it's unlikely that SCCA is attempting to alienate the existing SM class but rather is attempting to include the newer cars which is very unlike the SCCA of old.

I'm not sure that I'm looking forward to an influx of ITA Miatas - not that I don't welcome the added participation but that it'll just make my car all the slower http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/frown.gif I haven't had a chance to test Miata brake pads yet - hopefully they're as good as (if not better than) RX7 brake pads http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

[apr67]

It amazes me the lack of class some of you people have.

[JohnRW]

Originally posted by apr67:
It amazes me the lack of class some of you people have.


HA!!! Just wait until the "Motorsport Messiah of Miami" weighs in on this issue, either here or at SpecPiñata.com. He's promised a run for the SCCA BOD on previous crusades -

"posted 02-03-2005 03:32PM
As a result I am going to run for the BoD and although I'm pretty sure they'll kick me out if I win, I've been told by enough people to shit or get off the pot."


but this is a way-better windmill for him. That should bring some real 'lack' to this class.

[This message has been edited by JohnRW (edited February 23, 2005).]

[This message has been edited by JohnRW (edited February 23, 2005).]

[apr67]

My point is, don't put down another class. We are all looking for the same thing. As much racing fun as we can get, for as little racing funds as we can spend.

Besides, if you really want to rip on people, those GT guys are just big woosies.


[This message has been edited by apr67 (edited February 23, 2005).]

[apr67]

John, you are right.

Matt is a real Pain in the A##.

[mgyip]

Originally posted by apr67:
My point is, don't put down another class. We are all looking for the same thing. As much racing fun as we can get, for as little racing funds as we can spend.

I couldn't agree with that statement any more but when a class comes on-board, claiming to be the salvation of a club that didn't need saving, then I start to wonder about their motivation. When the same class starts dictating what the club MUST do in order to accomodate them, it becomes clear that the intention is to force out the "lesser and unimportant classes such as Production, Wings, GT, IT and every other class that needs to go in order to accomodate their cars. Since the club is about racing for EVERYONE, there is no good nor simple solution but banishing every car that isn't Spec Miata is downright foolhardy and stupid. Either that or they can start the MCCA (Miata Car Club of America) and let them crash their cars to wreckless abandon.

We all heard this when Spec Wrecker (RX7) was formulated but they didn't dictate their demands - rather they stated that the class would grow to epic proportions. While Spec Wrecker did grow, it was a short burst and their numbers have diminished to the point where they no longer warrant their own race group in the DC region.

[jlucas]

I know at the very least SCCA did testing with Dave Roush running different restrictors to see the effect on lap times so that they could place the newer cars fairly. IIRC, they were trying to start the newer cars out slower than current.

------------------
Jeremy Lucas
Team Honda Research
Kumho - Cobalt - Comptech

[oanglade]

Originally posted by mgyip:
I couldn't agree with that statement any more but when a class comes on-board, claiming to be the salvation of a club that didn't need saving, then I start to wonder about their motivation. When the same class starts dictating what the club MUST do in order to accomodate them, it becomes clear that the intention is to force out the "lesser and unimportant classes such as Production, Wings, GT, IT and every other class that needs to go in order to accomodate their cars. Since the club is about racing for EVERYONE, there is no good nor simple solution but banishing every car that isn't Spec Miata is downright foolhardy and stupid. Either that or they can start the MCCA (Miata Car Club of America) and let them crash their cars to wreckless abandon.

We all heard this when Spec Wrecker (RX7) was formulated but they didn't dictate their demands - rather they stated that the class would grow to epic proportions. While Spec Wrecker did grow, it was a short burst and their numbers have diminished to the point where they no longer warrant their own race group in the DC region.




How does a class claim anything?

Anyway, if "they" make demands, and "the club" doesn't want to accept them, then "they" can go wherever they want. No harm, no foul.
What's the big deal?

I'm sure that if there were 50 GT-2 cars at every race, the GT-2 racers would be making the same "demands", etc.

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[oanglade]

Originally posted by jlucas:
I know at the very least SCCA did testing with Dave Roush running different restrictors to see the effect on lap times so that they could place the newer cars fairly. IIRC, they were trying to start the newer cars out slower than current.




At how many tracks?



------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[mgyip]

Originally posted by oanglade:

How does a class claim anything?

Anyway, if "they" make demands, and "the club" doesn't want to accept them, then "they" can go wherever they want. No harm, no foul.
What's the big deal?

In the DC Region, SM is busy telling the BOD that 1) it wants greater represenation on the Competition Commitee b/c they bring so many cars (currently each class has a representative that sits on a Competition Commitee); 2) the DC Region MUST make room for as many SMs as may register for an event at the cost of turning away competitors in other classes.

One SM pilot went so far as to tell me that if the DC Region didn't meet their "demands" that they'd pack up, race with NASA, and our pathetic little club (SCCA) would "dry up and go bankrupt". IMHO that's pretty bold talk for anyone, let alone a race class that is supposed to be part of the "whole". SM certainly has sparked a huge re-interest in SCCA but my concern is "at what cost".

[jlucas]

Originally posted by oanglade:
At how many tracks?


Not sure if anywhere besides MidOhio.



------------------
Jeremy Lucas
Team Honda Research
Kumho - Cobalt - Comptech

[Greg Amy]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I still don't 'get' how this is a bad thing. But then...I'm really an SRF guy at heart.</font>

John, I have no problem with the "what" happened. I think it's an OK thing and everyone knew it was inevitable. Plus, I think the performance numbers will work out, and this is coming from someone who's currently building one of the little M1 bastards (a '94).

It's the "how" I have a big problem with. Ram-rodded through, a couple of months after request for member feedback? This, after we've been screaming for YEARS for attention to re-org IT? It just kinda feels like we got "violated", like the prom date that trusted the boyfriend...I really thought things were going to be different.

Dudn't matter. We'll get over it.

[apr67]

Originally posted by mgyip:
In the DC Region, SM is busy telling the BOD that ...

SM is a racing class. It can't tell anyone anything, no more than it can grow wings and fly.

What you may have is a few jerkoff drivers. And I am sure no other classes have the same.

This kind of narrow minded thinking is where racism, and most of the other ism's come from.

[lateapex911]

This is the one troubling aspect of the club...

On one hand I am really bouyed by the thought that they did something proactive, and actually went out and tested! Wow!

And getting current model cars in the mix isn't a terrible thing either.

On the other hand, I do worry about the methods and the timing of it all. This isn't the first time things like this have been "fastracked" so to speak.

I also wonder when the SM fad will wane...
It is a great class, BUT...the car counts are SO high (here in the NE, we are in danger of having too many to fit on the track at Lime Rock..not there quite yet, but....), that I wonder when the guy who always finishes 30th or 35th is going to get fed up. I suspect we might see a leveling off, but who knows!

One thing is for sure, it should make a great race at the Runoffs in 06.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by apr67:
It amazes me the lack of class some of you people have.



Originally posted by apr67:
My point is, don't put down another class. We are all looking for the same thing. As much racing fun as we can get, for as little racing funds as we can spend.



Originally posted by apr67:
It amazes me the lack of class some of you people have.




John, you are right.

Matt is a real Pain in the A##.

Can you say 'hypocrit'?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[dave parker]

Originally posted by apr67:
It amazes me the lack of class some of you people have.



Class? You want class? There was nothing on the application for this site about class.
Obviously if you are looking for class you are in the wrong place. Perhaps this place is more upscale and classy www.rennlist.com (http://www.rennlist.com). Make sure you take the Grey Poupon with you.

Since it says right on the front door of this site "Improved Touring" why are we talking about spec miata? Isn't there a site just for spec miata.

I am like a teacher during the summer break.
NO CLASS!!! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif
cheers
dave parker
wdcr ITC#97

[mgyip]

Originally posted by apr67:
What you may have is a few jerkoff drivers.

Agreed but they're well-heeled and extremely vocal jerkoffs which exascerbates the problem.

I don't dislike SMs as a whole - Given the money, I'd probably race one myself. While SM has revitalized SCCA and has provided visibility to the Club that it hasn't had for decades. My fear is that with the swelling of SM ranks and the pressures that it puts on the Club (both real and perceived) could result in a detriment to the Club in the long run.

Right now I'm curious to hear how other regions are handling the influx of SM and SSM entrants. The DC Region race classes (except for wings and things) are quite full. With even a 5% increase in SM entrants, we're faced with the possibility of turning away entrants (and their lovely entry fee money). While we don't want to turn away anyone, SCCA Club Races do have an entrant limit and perhaps it's time that we simply enforce it - at the same time this flies in the face of "Everyone gets to race". Sigh...

[ddewhurst]

***While SM has revitalized SCCA and has provided visibility to the Club that it hasn't had for decades.***

"While SM has revitalized SCCA"

Do you have a serious bone in your body ?

David Dewhurst
CenDiv

[JohnRW]

Originally posted by GregAmy:
[B]It's the "how" I have a big problem with. Ram-rodded through, a couple of months after request for member feedback? This, after we've been screaming for YEARS for attention to re-org IT? It just kinda feels like we got "violated", like the prom date that trusted the boyfriend...I really thought things were going to be different.
B]

I think it's a little misleading to try and equate those two very different things.

Cars get dropped into classes all the time. Adding the 99+ cars to SM has been on the front discussion burners for over a year, there was adequate notice in FasTrack, and a call for member input. Anybody who was paying attention knew it was coming, and it doesn't suprize/shock/scandalize/me.

Adding a newer model of a Spec-class car, that has been heavily handicapped with weight and intake, is a very stretched comparison with the work necessary to 're-org' IT.

Apples and giraffes, dude.

[mgyip]

Originally posted by ddewhurst:
***While SM has revitalized SCCA and has provided visibility to the Club that it hasn't had for decades.***

"While SM has revitalized SCCA"

Do you have a serious bone in your body ?

Locally, SM tells us that it's our salvation. Personally I think it's bringing in new blood which is a good thing and it certainly has swelled the ranks of Club Racing but at a yet undertermined cost. So yes, I would say that I have a serious bone in my body. I get much more serious when SM tells me that I should stay home so they can run more SMs.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by mgyip:
Agreed but they're well-heeled and extremely vocal jerkoffs which exascerbates the problem.

I don't dislike SMs as a whole - Given the money, I'd probably race one myself. While SM has revitalized SCCA and has provided visibility to the Club that it hasn't had for decades. My fear is that with the swelling of SM ranks and the pressures that it puts on the Club (both real and perceived) could result in a detriment to the Club in the long run.

Right now I'm curious to hear how other regions are handling the influx of SM and SSM entrants. The DC Region race classes (except for wings and things) are quite full. With even a 5% increase in SM entrants, we're faced with the possibility of turning away entrants (and their lovely entry fee money). While we don't want to turn away anyone, SCCA Club Races do have an entrant limit and perhaps it's time that we simply enforce it - at the same time this flies in the face of "Everyone gets to race". Sigh...



My thoughts on this are simple:

Each Region has to take a long hard look at run-groups. They need to combine where they can in order to maximize entries. Wings and Things need to be put under a microscpoe. Combine where safe but EVERY CLASS has to know that it will get shuffled should subscription drop - business is business.

When everything is maximized, then you have to get creative. The bottom X amount of qualifiers run in a consolation race in a less subscribed run group for no points...whatever your solution may be, try and get everyone on the track.

Another interesting thing to do for SM is to introduce SSM in your Region should it not be there already. It allows more flexibility in terms of shuffling cars amongst the days groups. We have about a 50-50 split here in NER and should the TOTAL of the 2 groups get too large, they can be split.

The whole NASA threat is chicken-crap. If your Region is doing what is best for each class WHILE looking at the economics and fun-factor from the proverbial 10,000 foot view, it will all work out.

AB

EDIT: PLEASE everyone sign there name...it makes me wonder.
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[This message has been edited by Andy Bettencourt (edited February 24, 2005).]

[B Schley]

Excuse me for being ignorant, or out of the loop, but, what is SSM? I'm still trying to get used to SMT. Seems like too much alphabet soup. That would mean that there are 4 classes that Miatas can run in, SM, SMT, ITA, and SSM. Geez I'm confused, its starting to look like the class structure for Solo II.
--Bill

[B Schley]

One other question. With so many class options for Miatas, when does spec, stop being spec?
--Bill

[mgyip]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:

Another interesting thing to do for SM is to introduce SSM in your Region should it not be there already. It allows more flexibility in terms of shuffling cars amongst the days groups. We have about a 50-50 split here in NER and should the TOTAL of the 2 groups get too large, they can be split.

The DC Region is the unfortunate benefactor of SSM - the biggest concern here is that the well-heeled SM pilots (of which we have many) fully intend on running BOTH SM and SSM!! While other regions may find this as a benefit, this is an added curse for us as we now have TWO CLASSES that will potentially fill to capacity.

I found the NASA threat rather amusing since IMHO NASA is all about "getting the money" and nothing about "being safe".

Matthew - ITA Drivers Representative, DC Region

[racer14itc]

Originally posted by B Schley:
Excuse me for being ignorant, or out of the loop, but, what is SSM? I'm still trying to get used to SMT. Seems like too much alphabet soup. That would mean that there are 4 classes that Miatas can run in, SM, SMT, ITA, and SSM. Geez I'm confused, its starting to look like the class structure for Solo II.
--Bill

You forgot ITS (the 1.8's). That's 5 classes available to Miatas.

MC



------------------
Mark Coffin
#14 GP BSI Racing/Action Digital/Airborn Coatings/Krispy Kreme VW Scirocco
http://pages.prodigy.net/Scirocco14gp

[planet6racing]

And SSB. So, 6 classes.

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

[B Schley]

Holy Spec Me Otters Batman, 6 classes,Wow! Maybe its time to change the name to SMCCA, Spec Miata Car Club of America. My original question still remains, what is SSM, spec spec miata?

--Bill

P.S. Planet Six Bill- I have stored up a bunch of boxes of Scott towels for you so you can dry your hands at Blackhawk. Because of this added expense to my race budget, I am now going from Hoosiers to the more economical Kumhos. See you at the Farm http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

[Andy Bettencourt]

SSM is a class born in the NeDiv when the National ruleset came out. It is more conservative and more stable.

Go to the Competition corner of the NER site (www.ner.org), then to Club Racing and click on Miata rules..

If you have too many drivers in your SM/SSM gouping and some of those are the same drivers, then the Region shouldn't allow the duplicates until everyone else is accomodated. Everyone should get a chance to race ONCE before ANYONE gets a chance to race TWICE in one day.

AB



------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by GregAmy:
It just kinda feels like we got "violated"...

Was it good for you too, Greg?

G

[Andy Bettencourt]

Don't worry about all the classes. Half of them are Regional only. SSM doesn't exist everywhere, neither does SMT. Spec Miata is one class in the rulebook...each Region is free to do what they want to accomodate their drivers needs.

ITA and ITS have always had Miata's in them. CRX's are in 3 IT classes...who cares?

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
BUT...the car counts are SO high...that I wonder when the guy who always finishes 30th or 35th is going to get fed up.

That's why I think my next move will be to build an "A" Sports Racer, or maybe some SPO monstrosity so bizzare that I end up in my own class. Hey, I could finish first and last! I could dominate the podium! My driving certainly won't get me there. Where's that supercharger?

This could start a trend. It lends a whole new meaning to "IT": Improved Turbine.

http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

[JohnRW]

Originally posted by gsbaker:
That's why I think my next move will be to build an "A" Sports Racer...

You'll have to 'buy', rather than 'build'. The GCR specifies a 'freshness date' for ASR's, and you're about 20 years too late to build one.

[gsbaker]

Drat. It's always something isn't it, John.

[planet6racing]

OK, let's not worry about all the SM classes, but let's get them to put only the class they are competing in during that session on the car so my crew and I can know if we need to race them for position in class.

------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

[dave parker]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:

If you have too many drivers in your SM/SSM gouping and some of those are the same drivers, then the Region shouldn't allow the duplicates until everyone else is accomodated. Everyone should get a chance to race ONCE before ANYONE gets a chance to race TWICE in one day.

AB



Andy
Unfortunately the Washington DC Region BoD is only concerned with $$$$. Not with making sure everyone has a place to race safely. So normal logic does not apply in the DC Region.
Of course now that I think about it normal logic does not apply to anything in the DC area, just ask your congressman.

cheers
dave parker
wdcr ITC#97

[This message has been edited by dave parker (edited February 24, 2005).]

[mgyip]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
If you have too many drivers in your SM/SSM gouping and some of those are the same drivers, then the Region shouldn't allow the duplicates until everyone else is accomodated. Everyone should get a chance to race ONCE before ANYONE gets a chance to race TWICE in one day.

I like that thinking - now if only our SM/SSM classes would accept that type of logic without crying foul. To quote an SM competitor "Between 3 of us (drivers/car owners), we have 20 cars either race ready or in-progress". Those 3 people will be awfully upset when they can't race in all 6 Miata-allowed classes in one day http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Still keeping my fingers crossed...

Matthew

[Bill Miller]

By my count, there are 9 classes that Miatas can run in.

SM,
SSM,
ITS,
ITA,
SSB,
EP,
FP,
GT2,
GT3.

It's an even 10 if you count ITE.


/edit/ Is the new Mazdadpeed Miata in T3?
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[This message has been edited by Bill Miller (edited February 24, 2005).]

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:
By my count, there are 9 classes that Miatas can run in.

SM,
SSM,
ITS,
ITA,
SSB,
EP,
FP,
GT2,
GT3.

It's an even 10 if you count ITE.


/edit/ Is the new Mazdadpeed Miata in T3?

Now count how many classes "GTI's" can run in...

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[oanglade]

Miatas are that cool, after all.

http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
Now count how many classes "GTI's" can run in...

AB




Another post lost in the server switch.

Andy,

I'm not sure how your question is germane to the discussion at hand, but by my count, I have the following for the 4-cyl cars (1.8 and 2.0, 8v and 16v).

ITA,
ITB,
SSC,
FP,
EP,
GT3.

That covers 4 different chassis designs, and spans 21 years.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Andy Bettencourt]

No shots at anyone other than the perceived (by me) issue with the fact the Miata can run in so many classes. There are plenty of cars out there that can cross over VERY well. It's all irrelevant to anything.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[eprodrx7]

Geez Walsh, Matt hasn't even chimed in and you're shooting him down. How about picking on Miller for a bit http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif
John Weisberg
(The not so outspoken BERG)

[Bill Miller]

Morning John! http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[ddewhurst]

He is way to bussy stiring the pot trying to excite the folks on the Spec Miata site. http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/wink.gif

David

David

[badal]

Originally posted by dave parker:
Andy
Unfortunately the Washington DC Region BoD is only concerned with $$$$. Not with making sure everyone has a place to race safely. So normal logic does not apply in the DC Region.
Of course now that I think about it normal logic does not apply to anything in the DC area, just ask your congressman.

cheers
dave parker
wdcr ITC#97

[This message has been edited by dave parker (edited February 24, 2005).]


Dave,
If your statements were true, why do we have 2 formula groups with less than 25 cars each? The region could combine them and allow for one less group, and make races longer, allowing people to pay more money. The reason this is NOT done is safety. As far as I know, nobody in the region makes any more money based on increased car counts.

Matthew, nobody in SM wants you give up your track time for them.

The DC Comp Committe tries to make things as fair as possible for all club members. If people want to race Miatas, we want to give them a chance to race. If we had 100 GTI's, and 4 Miatas, we would do what we could to accomodate the GTI's.

Al Bell
SM/SSM driver rep, 2003-2005
ITC Driver Rep 1997-2002, 1990-1993
ITB Driver rep 1994-1996

[mgyip]

Originally posted by badal:
Matthew, nobody in SM wants you give up your track time for them.

The DC Comp Committe tries to make things as fair as possible for all club members. If people want to race Miatas, we want to give them a chance to race. If we had 100 GTI's, and 4 Miatas, we would do what we could to accomodate the GTI's.

However that was not how it was presented at the Planning Meeting. I agree that the intent of the Committee is to make things fair for all drivers however DC Region needs to first determine a manner of handling such issues as the formula classes with limited participation. This action will determine how many groups are available for the Comp Committee to work with to fit SM and SSM together.

Specifically related to SM and SSM is the issue of drivers running both SM and SSM. While not every SM driver will drive an SSM or vice versa, the classes are anticipated to be full in '05. Does this mean that DC Region will have to mandate that these drivers cannot race in both classes if the one or both of the classes is full?

There have been several interesting solutions I've heard but don't know that any of it will "fly" since they're not the usual "add another race group" or "combine groups 1 & 2 together".

[Mike C]

Matt, Matt, Matt what have you gone and done? This is deep. Don’t you have anything better to do? Do you have Miata envy?


Originally posted by mgyip:
Just remember that Spec Miata IS THE SALVATION OF SCCA (at least according to the Spec Miata class reps locally http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

I do not believe that Al or I have ever claimed that SM is the savior of the club.


Originally posted by mgyip:
When the same class starts dictating what the club MUST do in order to accomodate them, it becomes clear that the intention is to force out the "lesser and unimportant classes such as Production, Wings, GT, IT and every other class that needs to go in order to accomodate their cars. Since the club is about racing for EVERYONE, there is no good nor simple solution but banishing every car that isn't Spec Miata is downright foolhardy and stupid.



Matt, my intention at the meeting was to vote on a plan that allowed EVERYONE to race. I don’t recall any IT cars getting wait listed or told the class was over subscribed last year, SM did. In fact you voted for a plan that would exclude as many as 30 to 40 SM’s at each regional


Originally posted by mgyip:
In the DC Region, SM is busy telling the BOD that 1) it wants greater represenation on the Competition Commitee b/c they bring so many cars (currently each class has a representative that sits on a Competition Commitee); 2) the DC Region MUST make room for as many SMs as may register for an event at the cost of turning away competitors in other classes.



Matt, we wanted a rep for SM and one for SSM. You have one for each IT group do you not?


Originally posted by mgyip:
Agreed but they're well-heeled and extremely vocal jerkoffs which exascerbates the problem.



I am. But that is why I got involved. So I could keep those that fear change from crying about the sky falling!


Originally posted by mgyip:
I get much more serious when SM tells me that I should stay home so they can run more SMs.



Nobody ever told you to stay home. In fact I very much enjoy your company and you know that. We just asked that you share the track and work with us on developing run groups that would better utilize the track. Unfortunately for you, you didn’t want to do that so I went got the open wheels to vote with me.


Originally posted by mgyip:
To quote an SM competitor "Between 3 of us (drivers/car owners), we have 20 cars either race ready or in-progress". http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Still keeping my fingers crossed...

Matthew

At least get it right man. We have 9 racecars, and 12 street or parts miatas.


Originally posted by mgyip:
However that was not how it was presented at the Planning Meeting. I agree that the intent of the Committee is to make things fair for all drivers however DC Region needs to first determine a manner of handling such issues as the formula classes with limited participation. This action will determine how many groups are available for the Comp Committee to work with to fit SM and SSM together.

Specifically related to SM and SSM is the issue of drivers running both SM and SSM. While not every SM driver will drive an SSM or vice versa, the classes are anticipated to be full in '05. Does this mean that DC Region will have to mandate that these drivers cannot race in both classes if the one or both of the classes is full?

There have been several interesting solutions I've heard but don't know that any of it will "fly" since they're not the usual "add another race group" or "combine groups 1 & 2 together".


Matt, I raised this issue at the annual meeting. I was all for restricted regionals. You could have gone with me on this but instead you chose to go on your anti Miata crusade. All that did was force the Miata drivers (me) to align themselves with the open wheel cars and big bore to form a larger voting block.



------------------
Mike Collins
MEATHEAD Racing
WDCR SM Drivers Rep 2005

[mgyip]

Originally posted by Mike C:
I raised this issue at the annual meeting. I was all for restricted regionals. You could have gone with me on this but instead you chose to go on your anti Miata crusade. All that did was force the Miata drivers (me) to align themselves with the open wheel cars and big bore to form a larger voting block.

IIRC your version of a restricted regional was to exclude certain classes of cars in perpetuity. While some folks would like to see wings and things go away, this flies in the face of the Club mentality. Anne had a good idea but it may be too different for anyone to grasp yet - exclude ONE CLASS PER WEEKEND which would reduce the number of race groups running on a weekend but would allow 10 groups instead of the current 9.

As for representation - the comment was made that "Since SM is so large, we want more representation" - there was no mention of SSM with that particular demand that was made at an Open Competition Meeting which made it sound very much like the spoiled child wanting more toys. You may not have made comments about saving SCCA but some of your compatriots most certainly believe that SM and SSM are the compelling reason for SCCA's current affluence.

I think that the '05 season will be the transisiton season. With a huge influx of new SMs and SSMs and the converse decline in the ranks due to attrition, '06 will provide more realistic entrant figures. SRX7 made the same claims when the class was started and even in '04 - reality is that the class grew by 1.4 cars in '04 (as opposed to the 10+ that was predicted) and that the class is much smaller than in it's heyday of 3-4 years ago.

Miata envy? To some degree - I think Miata is the undeveloped ITA overdog but I'm buried in my VW junk and will stay there for at least another season. However I have no urge to race SM however where body damage and rebuilding wrecked cars is the norm for a good quarter of the field after every race. I don't come out to crash my racecar although it happens - racing in a class where everyone seems to want to hit each other. Even Spec Wrecker wasn't that bad...

It's tough to become a car whore which is what's necessary to win. I welcome change however - ITA's face is changing and I'm curious to see how fast the newly classed Integras will be and what that'll do to the front of the ITA field. The only place where the sky is falling is in ITC where the New Beetle will eclipse the Fiesta...

[Mike C]

Originally posted by mgyip:
IIRC your version of a restricted regional was to exclude certain classes of cars in perpetuity. While some folks would like to see wings and things go away, this flies in the face of the Club mentality. Anne had a good idea but it may be too different for anyone to grasp yet - exclude ONE CLASS PER WEEKEND which would reduce the number of race groups running on a weekend but would allow 10 groups instead of the current 9.

...

Matt, I feel we need to provide a place for everyone to run. But in doing so we need to be resposible for using our limited resources in the best manner possible. My plan was to allow only one wing group to run per race weekend. That would offer each group a 5 race series. I was not for the rotating elimination of each group. that only penelizes those that participate in greater number. Why should we run two different run groups that hardly field 20 or so cars when every other group is busting at the seams and has 45 cars in it? Our workers don't want 10 groups and we don't want less track time. We need regional supplemental rules about making and maintaining class size or risk getting restricted.

------------------
Mike Collins
MEATHEAD Racing
WDCR SM Drivers Rep 2005

[mgyip]

Originally posted by Mike C:
My plan was to allow only one wing group to run per race weekend. That would offer each group a 5 race series. I was not for the rotating elimination of each group. that only penelizes those that participate in greater number. Why should we run two different run groups that hardly field 20 or so cars when every other group is busting at the seams and has 45 cars in it? Our workers don't want 10 groups and we don't want less track time. We need regional supplemental rules about making and maintaining class size or risk getting restricted.


Thanks for refreshing my memory - now I remember why I disagreed with that form of a restricted regional. While I agree wholeheartedly that we need to formulate rules about maintaining class sizes, I also think that it's unfair to reduce the number of races for just one or two classes - if you're going to reduce the number of races for one group, you should do so for all groups.

I'm not talking about RUNNING 10 race groups on any given weekend but rather running 9 race groups (as has been the norm lately) with 1 group sitting out. I understand the workers' desire to not add more groups as well as the desire to not give up track time which is one of the reasons why such an approach could work - the only sticking point is that MARRS goes "on the road" and those races would have to either be factored into the rotation or (more likely) factored out.

There's no perfect solution but the solution should be fair to ALL race groups, not just the ones with large participation. DC Region is somewhat of a test-bed for these issues due to the local affluence and participation levels - I'd be curious how they handle this in other areas with similar demographics such as San Francisco or Los Angeles.

[badal]

Originally posted by mgyip:

Thanks for refreshing my memory - now I remember why I disagreed with that form of a restricted regional. While I agree wholeheartedly that we need to formulate rules about maintaining class sizes, I also think that it's unfair to reduce the number of races for just one or two classes - if you're going to reduce the number of races for one group, you should do so for all groups.

I'm not talking about RUNNING 10 race groups on any given weekend but rather running 9 race groups (as has been the norm lately) with 1 group sitting out. I understand the workers' desire to not add more groups as well as the desire to not give up track time which is one of the reasons why such an approach could work - the only sticking point is that MARRS goes "on the road" and those races would have to either be factored into the rotation or (more likely) factored out.

There's no perfect solution but the solution should be fair to ALL race groups, not just the ones with large participation. DC Region is somewhat of a test-bed for these issues due to the local affluence and participation levels - I'd be curious how they handle this in other areas with similar demographics such as San Francisco or Los Angeles.


The solution should be fair to the largest number of people possible.The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Excluding all groups on a rotating basis does not solve anything.
If we exclude the 20 car groups, it only affects 20 people, not 45-50. Look at the thread on this forum, "too many races". If the formula cars had less chances to play, they would come out in larger numbers whan they could race.

It would be sort of like the probationary status for national classes.

I know we don't want to combine all the formula cars, but if we have 2 cars show up, do we have a race for them? By your logic, yes, because "it is fair to the group".

I don't see where this anti SM sentiment comes from. I have never said SM was the salvation of SCCA. We had a strong program before SM and had car count issues then. The comments that a quarter of the field have body damage after the race are the same things we heard when IT started, and they are just as false now as they were then. I've raced Miatas for 3 years and have not had to replace a single body panel.

------------------
"Bad" Al Bell
ITC #3 Datsun 510
DC Region MARRS Series

[mgyip]

As was pointed out numerous times during the Planning Meeting, wings is protected for whatever reason. I understand the logic of serving the largest number of participants but it's unlikely that the BOD will allow such a change to occur. However now is a good time to begin lobbying this as an '06 change - I would like to see more efficient use of the race groups that we currently have. It's distressing to see a race group dedicated to 20 cars when other groups are almost to (or over) capacity.

The issue of body damage is quite real - I've looked at the cars that come off the track. While most of the damage is minor (dents and doughnuts), there's usually one car that comes back on a hook after each session. Damage depends on who you race with and dumb luck - in my case dumb luck has forced the replacement of 2 body panels in 6 years (with the same car) - all from the same incident.

[grjones1]

Originally posted by badal:


Al and Others,
I'm really going to be smacked for this, but the discussion has been opened and I'm going to throw in.
Given DC Region has run a pretty good show for years, but in the area of efficient implementation of a schedule we sometimes leave a great deal to be desired.

We have for the past few years been subject to some rather strange group mixes due to a desire to limit the number of race groups without it seems to me giving attention to "pushing the schedule along." For example NCR at VIR runs in excess of 12 sessions a day of very large race groups and manages to finish by 5:00 PM. We appear to have a problem at Summit squeezing in the 9 groups. Mainly because of delays between sessions and a rather relaxed attitude about getting cars "on track."

Perhaps if we did away with some of the ride arounds during lunch and a few social events, we might get everyone racing in appropriate groups. Businesses that fail to pay attention to efficiency in the face of increased sales eventually "straightline" or fall to the competition.

Now don't anyone accuse me of not wanting to be "charitable," I'm all in favor of helping the communities that put up with us, but we are afterall in the "business" of racing. There's plenty of time outside the racetrack for helping the less fortunate.

GRJ

[mgyip]

However well intentioned the schedule, unforseen events occur that result in delays - knowing the EV folks personally, I don't believe that they're lacksidasical about clean up between groups. And you can't blame them for that since that's usually the fault of poor prep or unfortunate (or stupid) driving. On-track is quite timely - no sitting around twiddling thumbs unless there's clean-up required.

Bear in mind that the workers are all volunteers and they are currently "at capacity" for race groups regardless of ride arounds and post-event parties. While participation in some race classes has been slowly dwindling, worker participation has been plummeting. In fact for the past few years, the BOD has been trying to develop a recruitment program to provide new bodies and to keep the existing bodies from quitting/retiring from sheer frustration.

Racing cannot be run like a business - at least not on the front end b/c it's not that stable nor does racing fit cleanly into a business model. The back end is a different story - Get the Money, Get the Money, Get the Money...

Thinking about Mike's proposal - this may be the golden opportunity to turn former wings racers (who can only race 5 events/year) into workers for the rest of the season http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/wink.gif

[grjones1]

Originally posted by mgyip:
However well intentioned the schedule, unforseen events occur that result in delays - knowing the EV folks personally, I don't believe that they're lacksidasical about clean up between groups. )

I appreciate what you are saying. And I have nothing but gratitude and respect for what the EV folks do. However, I don't believe Summit MARRS races experience anymore off-track, clean-up time events than do the regionals at VIR. They are on the same 24 hours we are, and they run qualifying and races on the same day that total 3-4 more sessions than we get at Summit. Somthing is causing a waste of time somewhere.

And then there have been those weekends at Summit when we do finish at 4:00 (on quite a few occasions). And I wonder then why we could not have enjoyed a few more sessions(i.e., race groups.) As far as numbers of workers dwindling, I have always thought (since my own participation on the corners in the '70s and '80s) if you make the volunteers feel welcome and important (as they are), they will come.

GRJ



[This message has been edited by grjones1 (edited March 01, 2005).]