Page 9 of 20 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 399

Thread: What is a "touring car?"

  1. #161
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Houston-ish
    Posts
    932

    Default

    Well the issue I see is that the STAC seems to be corking everything else down (SR20DET and turbos in general ) while opening the rotaries up.. So from the non-Miata driver's view, it sure looks like there's something going on..

    ....Why do you think I bought meself an RX7 to play in EP???
    Houston Region
    STU Nissan 240SX
    EProd RX7

  2. #162
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Knestis View Post
    ... But the academic in me will ask this, Andy: How many PURPOSE-BUILT-TO-THE RULES "sports car" or "GT" STL cars are actively running in the ENTIRE United States...? More than the three I can think of?

    K
    Yo, Andy! How's the counting going...?

    Seriously, though - I think it's germane to the conversation, exactly how many we're talking about when we say, "People built cars." How many do we risk disenfranchising by taking all of those sedan-vs-sports/GT car variables out of the formula for equalizing STL options...?

    K

  3. #163
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    Here's one of the latest ones. Can't wait to compete against that using a 60/40 weight split FWD Honda...even with a 400# advantage. Any bets?

    10612670_10203994794022680_6507227362278728714_n_zps4d5196d5.jpg

  4. #164
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Amy View Post
    Here's one of the latest ones. Can't wait to compete against that using a 60/40 weight split FWD Honda...even with a 400# advantage. Any bets?

    10612670_10203994794022680_6507227362278728714_n_zps4d5196d5.jpg
    you totally got this. no worries (man i'm dumb. a 1.5 SOHC stl car. what was i thinking)

  5. #165
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    If you think STL-TC can actually survive, then freaking make it happen. Just don't close the playing field for 90% of the entries, make them STL-SC. Ya I know, a class for everyone...except the SC version has entries. Maybe the TC version will get flooded with ITA/ITB field fillers, who knows?

    I hate the fact that a franken-NSX is being even mentioned as the pinnacle when nobody have even built one yet...and if the mere CONCEPT of it is scaring people off, then the rules makes for this class have really screwed the pooch.
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  6. #166
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Just got back from a little vacation...

    I bet you there are just as many sports car based STL cars as there are touring-car based that were built just for this class. Maybe more. So I say 'more than half your class'.


    Quote Originally Posted by Knestis View Post
    Yo, Andy! How's the counting going...?

    Seriously, though - I think it's germane to the conversation, exactly how many we're talking about when we say, "People built cars." How many do we risk disenfranchising by taking all of those sedan-vs-sports/GT car variables out of the formula for equalizing STL options...?

    K
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  7. #167
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Is there ANY middle ground here for you guys? Can we split the class or does it HAVE to be 'kill the sports cars'? The solution Kirk has in process is the kill shot. Can both run in parallel and see if either can survive?
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  8. #168
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    Settle down, Beavis. Sports cars will not be eliminated from Super Touring. - GA

  9. #169
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Amy View Post
    Settle down, Beavis. Sports cars will not be eliminated from Super Touring. - GA
    Not saying they will but the goal is to try and make everyone as happy as can be...cripes you don't even think that you can compete...so how is that good? What is the best solution for everyone, including the 'Club'?
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  10. #170
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt View Post
    Not saying they will but the goal is to try and make everyone as happy as can be...cripes you don't even think that you can compete...so how is that good? What is the best solution for everyone, including the 'Club'?
    We'd certainly love to hear your thoughts on that. Read the next Fastrack, then select this link:

    http://www.crbscca.com

  11. #171
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Knestis View Post
    Yo, Andy! How's the counting going...?

    Seriously, though - I think it's germane to the conversation, exactly how many we're talking about when we say, "People built cars." How many do we risk disenfranchising by taking all of those sedan-vs-sports/GT car variables out of the formula for equalizing STL options...?

    K
    So I 'know' of 5 Miata...Ron M's car, Farbman, Drago and 2 new MX5's. I know of Greg's, the Civic and a CRX on IT.com. Figure at least 2 more exist. Assuming I know of EVERY SC-based car (which is impossible) you probably have at least equal builds? So what's your action from that data?
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  12. #172
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Amy View Post
    We'd certainly love to hear your thoughts on that. Read the next Fastrack, then select this link:

    http://www.crbscca.com
    I am asking the 'squeaky wheels' for a solution to their problem. Right now I don't see a problem I need to weigh in on. I am weighing in on a perceived problem based on cars that haven't been built and races that haven't been raced.
    Last edited by Andy Bettencourt; 08-31-2014 at 09:43 AM.
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  13. #173
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt View Post
    So I 'know' of 5 Miata...Ron M's car, Farbman, Drago and 2 new MX5's. I know of Greg's, the Civic and a CRX on IT.com. Figure at least 2 more exist. Assuming I know of EVERY SC-based car (which is impossible) you probably have at least equal builds? So what's your action from that data?
    So we run the risk of alienating less than a half dozen sports/gt STL cars if we take the lead out of them, uncork em and move them to stu, and get STL on a path to (a) what it was intended to be and (b) without huge systematic inequities baked into the class structure.

    I hate the NSX idea too Andy but the option exists for someone to do it. You used to say that the ITAC had to write the rules presuming someone will go full tilt with whatever they allow. I always thought that was smart thinking.

    K

  14. #174
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt View Post
    So I 'know' of 5 Miata...Ron M's car,
    Ron Munnerlyn's car is a straight up ITS car only. Not sure if that is the same Ron M....

  15. #175
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    I guess my point is that you run the risk of alienating 'over half the people who actually built cars'. It's just as easy to eliminate the TC's. If there was 25 TC's and 5 SC's I'd say go for it but I think your 'issue' outweighs the 'ideal'.

    Split them by class and run them in the same group.

    - SC's will always have cars and they can reap the benefit of double-dip $$$
    - TC's can grow without the fear of 'I left STL because Miata'
    - The CRB can watch the relative performance of the two classes
    - You can actually see what class is a good idea and eliminate/add as it's proven out
    - You can expand the chassis years to really have fun without fear of hurting a layout
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  16. #176
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Earp View Post
    Ron Munnerlyn's car is a straight up ITS car only. Not sure if that is the same Ron M....
    Meant Tyler R.
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  17. #177
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt View Post
    Split them by class...
    The BoD will not support new classes. See "Concorde Agreement" where there are distinct actions toward a significant reduction in the number of classes.

    Don't waste effort talking about a new class; it's a non-starter and thus not a viable solution.

    GA

  18. #178
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt View Post
    I guess my point is that you run the risk of alienating 'over half the people who actually built cars'. It's just as easy to eliminate the TC's. If there was 25 TC's and 5 SC's I'd say go for it but I think your 'issue' outweighs the 'ideal'.

    Split them by class and run them in the same group.

    - SC's will always have cars and they can reap the benefit of double-dip $$$
    - TC's can grow without the fear of 'I left STL because Miata'
    - The CRB can watch the relative performance of the two classes
    - You can actually see what class is a good idea and eliminate/add as it's proven out
    - You can expand the chassis years to really have fun without fear of hurting a layout

    Of course new builds are going to skew toward sports cars. Anyone making a considered decision will go that way based on the built in advantages. The option of doing that encourages it and discourages building touring car. It's going to become a sports/gt class. Why would it NOT?

    ...and how many viable chassis will that route include? Is that the basis of a vital class? Does anyone care?

    K

  19. #179
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Well if I loved TC's and I felt the weight advantages we 'correct' then I would have no reason not to build one.
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  20. #180
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    If I had any confidence that this CRB would put the ballast on the sports/GT cars necessary to achieve any kind of parity, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

    K

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •