What is a "touring car?"

[benspeed]

Love the thread! Would those little excuses for backseats in a 968/44 count? Lol

[cjb25hs]

Love the thread! Would those little excuses for backseats in a 968/44 count? Lol

Alot more interior volume than a miata or lotus

[backformore]

For what it's worth, which is slightly less than nothing, I agree with Kirk and like the direction he is headed. When I decided to convert my SSC Civic to something else, part of the motivation was the creation of STL which looked like a class that was designed for "tuner" cars, which are often "touring" cars and maybe even aimed at FWD. As time has marched on though, it appears that the evolution of the class, whatever the motivating factors, keeps moving away from my first impressions. Heck, I just noticed my car's engine has been penalized. Not that I'm aware of a 1.6 liter anything showing any dominance anywhere.

At the last STL race at Rd Atl (my home track), the car to beat was, surprise, a Miata. Don't get me wrong, I love the miata. I am, however, getting kinda tired of every class, new or old, being dominated by them. Kudos to Mazda for building such a kick-ass car.

So, I am for a 4 seat/interior volume or some other criteria to make STL a class for "other than sports cars". Like Kirk said, you eliminate a few options while making a large number of cars suddenly viable.

[Andy Bettencourt]

For what it's worth, which is slightly less than nothing, I agree with Kirk and like the direction he is headed. When I decided to convert my SSC Civic to something else, part of the motivation was the creation of STL which looked like a class that was designed for "tuner" cars, which are often "touring" cars and maybe even aimed at FWD. As time has marched on though, it appears that the evolution of the class, whatever the motivating factors, keeps moving away from my first impressions. Heck, I just noticed my car's engine has been penalized. Not that I'm aware of a 1.6 liter anything showing any dominance anywhere.

At the last STL race at Rd Atl (my home track), the car to beat was, surprise, a Miata. Don't get me wrong, I love the miata. I am, however, getting kinda tired of every class, new or old, being dominated by them. Kudos to Mazda for building such a kick-ass car.

So, I am for a 4 seat/interior volume or some other criteria to make STL a class for "other than sports cars". Like Kirk said, you eliminate a few options while making a large number of cars suddenly viable.

- your engine probably didn't get penalized in the context of everything getting more weight too
- actually I think the class is trying to keep it within your first impressions. Weight for RWD has been added since inception
- You take away the Miata from STL and you would be surprised what you had...23 cars at the Glen Majors...4 were non-Otters. Of those 19 Otters, I bet no more than 4 were real STL cars...maybe 3.

It's a displacement to weight class with adders for 'stuff'. That's a cool concept. If we need a FWD car to win, we should have never allowed other platforms in. I say enjoy the revenue stream with one eye on the cash and the other on competitive balance...and I think the PTB are doing that now.

[StephenB]

At least my RX8 is a 4 door :-)

[Andy Bettencourt]

I honestly think you could break them out if you really wanted an 'interior volume' minimum for STL. But is the core market there? Maybe!

[gpeluso]

This is very interesting. Not that my opinion matters but I think of touring meaning 4 passenger cars... Not 4 doors but cars that were meant to carry 4 adults. I think this maybe the problem with STU because we are not seeing many ex pro cars running like many thought would be .....

Greg

[Greg Amy]

...the car to beat was, surprise, a Miata. Don't get me wrong, I love the miata. I am, however, getting kinda tired of every class, new or old, being dominated by them.

...23 cars at the Glen Majors...4 were non-Otters. Of those 19 Otters, I bet no more than 4 were real STL cars...maybe 3.

QFT.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Are people not building other cars for the class "because Miata" or are Miatas simply dominant in double-dipping numbers because no one else is building cars? Which is the cause, and which is the effect? What happened to all the "this is gonna be a FWD Honda class!!!" STL hand-wringing back when the Miatas weighed something like 4% less than they do now (and weren't even yet developed for the class)...?

I am personally aware of a few competitors that are actively choosing to not participate in STL "because Miata". And I'm also aware of some, active in STL, who are looking for alternative classes that do not have Miatas. STU is hurting overall, but I hear the same stories from competitors about the Lotus in there.

Miatas are wonderful cars. I went to the WGI Inner and Outer Loop and watched the SM race this past weekend and I was f*****g amazed at how fast they blasted through there. Shocked, actually. Even the slowest of the group was going through there gangbusters. And I immediately recognized that there's no way my big car would ever do that, certainly not consistently, short of my not caring about bringing it home intact (or having to worry about paying for it afterward). And the pointy-end SM double-dippers creamed me through there in the races.

Miatas bring the numbers and the revenue; of that there is absolutely no doubt. But as rulemakers and leaders, should that be our over-riding goal? If so, I'm quite certain we could create many more classes for these cars and increase our revenues even more. Hell, let's look into getting rid of all those other pesky classes and focus on what's really important to the Club (he says, quite tongue-in-cheek).

So...chicken, or egg...? I'm sure everyone will have their own opinion on that.

GA, who recognizes this discussion at this point as nothing more than IT.com paddock blah-blah...

[adamjabaay]

as someone who just started a honda STL build, and a weird one (just brought engine to machine guy, a 1.5 sohc, shooting to be just a tad over 2klbs, becausetinymotor), the "miata" problem sort of concerns me, but I'm buildiing this car to be easy on consumables, and fun, as half my use for it will be during HPDE stuff I organize or instruct at, yet I want it to be competative, and its looking like it might be


those dumb little miatas are awesome cars. I REALLY wish I wanted one....because they are so good

[Andy Bettencourt]

QFT.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Are people not building other cars for the class "because Miata" or are Miatas simply dominant in double-dipping numbers because no one else is building cars? Which is the cause, and which is the effect? What happened to all the "this is gonna be a FWD Honda class!!!" STL hand-wringing back when the Miatas weighed something like 4% less than they do now (and weren't even yet developed for the class)...?

I am personally aware of a few competitors that are actively choosing to not participate in STL "because Miata". And I'm also aware of some, active in STL, who are looking for alternative classes that do not have Miatas. STU is hurting overall, but I hear the same stories from competitors about the Lotus in there.

Miatas are wonderful cars. I went to the WGI Inner and Outer Loop and watched the SM race this past weekend and I was f*****g amazed at how fast they blasted through there. Shocked, actually. Even the slowest of the group was going through there gangbusters. And I immediately recognized that there's no way my big car would ever do that, certainly not consistently, short of my not caring about bringing it home intact (or having to worry about paying for it afterward). And the pointy-end SM double-dippers creamed me through there in the races.

Miatas bring the numbers and the revenue; of that there is absolutely no doubt. But as rulemakers and leaders, should that be our over-riding goal? If so, I'm quite certain we could create many more classes for these cars and increase our revenues even more. Hell, let's look into getting rid of all those other pesky classes and focus on what's really important to the Club (he says, quite tongue-in-cheek).

So...chicken, or egg...? I'm sure everyone will have their own opinion on that.

GA, who recognizes this discussion at this point as nothing more than IT.com paddock blah-blah...

It's an interesting debate for sure. What I don't like about it is that a well built and well driven STL should beat every one of the double-dippers. What is the REAL 'because Miata' issue? To me (and I only know the Drago and Farbman cars) 90% of the Miatas out there are double dipping. A class that can hold 19 card-carrying, entry-paying drivers that doesn't upset the competitive balance gets a resounding HELL YES from me...and it should from everyone who likes their entry fees where they are and their participation numbers way above average.

Then there is the mindset of the current drivers and prospective drivers. I would think they would love the 'goal' of beating all the double dippers and then targeting the real cars at the front as the second tier goal. Now as far as the Drago car goes, drivers have to realize that this is a multi-time National Champ, in that chassis with now 3 years of development in motor, suspension and aero. Is it a Miata problem really or a Drago problem?

No offense meant here but I think the Miata issue in STL is BS and almost an excuse. Drivers SHOULD be able to beat 90% of the field with driver talent and a well prepped car...fact. Now if the issue is about one cars build and driver skill - and we think there are other FWD 'touring' builds out there with equal development and driver skills that can't compete...then that is another topic completely. And a Comp adjustment is the answer if it's warranted.

[Knestis]

There are multiple "problems" here so try to focus on the one I'm arguing for a moment: ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, a 2-seat sports/GT car has inherent advantages, thanks to Newtonian physics, over a "touring car" (seats for four adults). This is the "better than the sum of the parts" issue personified in Club Racing by the Miata ('cause there's a huge sample to work from) but operationalized by car designers ANY TIME the priority is performance over utility.

I take it a little personally to be told that "my issue is BS" since I *THINK* I have a clue. Our showing at NJMP at least suggests that we're in the ballpark with the Si - beating, as Andy suggests we should, all of the double-dippers and getting within a fraction of Farbman's new lap record. However, qualitatively, having followed him around there, I KNOW that's a soft record. I KNOW that as we develop the car, it will go faster. I KNOW that I'm not a complete wanker, but I equally KNOW that I'm not as fast as the really good guys/gals out there.

I KNOW all of that but I also KNOW that a lower Cd, frontal area, COG, and MMOI are going to beat up on higher values.

The point at which we confound that physical reality with rotary engines, rear wheel drive, and National Champion-caliber drivers, we go completely SCCA-screwy.

I'm also more than a little bothered when we start talking about revenues, particularly when the quest for entries becomes a driver of short-term policy decisions that often result in longer-term unintended consequences that the Club has a TERRIBLE time undoing. The "we'll let in [whatever] to make up the numbers" trap is going to be an increasing problem - particularly in light of the fact that most of those are double- or triple-dippers rather than new members. If we just care about participation and the dollars people bring, why don't we just have Group 1 be "Everyone," Group 2 be "Everyone's Second Entry," Group 3 be the tiny handful of small formula cars we keep subsidizing with options for multi-dipping, Group 4 be "Everyone's Third Entry Including Friends and Relatives," and so forth...

Make the classes make sense. Have a limited number of them. Have a cohesive program. Stop catering to handfuls of whiners. Build a program.

K