National Class

[jhooten]

I heard the lynch ropes being pulled out when, as a point of argument in the runoffs qualifying debate, I suggested that we do away with the two tier system and treat all classes the same and send them all to the national championships.

[mossaidis]

We're just "regional drivers", what the hell do we know anyway? We're the equivalent of oval dirt track driving, beer drinking drivers to NASCAR drivers. Psst... regional drivers. The classification system sounds more NYC housing situation before mandatory low-income housing was placed into regulation. Perhaps SCCA will "show us" around the runoffs like boy scouts at LRP.

Feeling cynical,
Mickey

[StephF]

We're just "regional drivers", what the hell do we know anyway? We're the equivalent of oval dirt track driving, beer drinking drivers to NASCAR drivers. Psst... regional drivers. The classification system sounds more NYC housing situation before mandatory low-income housing was placed into regulation. Perhaps SCCA will "show us" around the runoffs like boy scouts at LRP.

Feeling cynical,
Mickey

Why would anyone worry about being a "regional" driver rather than a "national" one? And why would anyone feel like they are less because their class is a regional one??
There's some damn good drivers in IT. And there have been many who went on to be pro from here too. That's nothing to hang your head over.
If you run 4 events a year or more, you still get a National license. Doesn't matter what you class you run in, YOU are still licensed nationally.

We have the ARC, IT Fest, Pro IT, enduros, etc. If anyone really wants to do the Runoffs now, you can go with STU, or run something that's Nationally qualified.
It's not like we are sitting out here in the backyard with a few random scraps for races to eat while the house dogs are getting Alpo inside.

This subject has been done to death (usually during the bench racing months) with the exact same result every time. Some people want it, some don't. Maybe someday that will change to a national class, but for now, it is what it is.

And shwah, don't put words in my mouth. I told the OP that was the Cliff's notes version as I understood it. I really don't care either way, and don't care to see myself "quoted" like that. If those are your feelings, then you own your words.

[mossaidis]

Oh Steph, my facebook friend... my comments were part fun part serious. I never hang my head, well unless I eat too much chocolate cake and get a belly ache. I will correct myself and say this is a regional ONLY class vs national available class issue. Sorry to mislead.

Again STU <> IT (that's a not equal sign for you non-SQL heads). No reason why IT as it is, albeit with revised weights (doh!), should not be a national class. Why was it designed to be a regional only class? Folks wanted to have fun without the expense and those sophicated ruling members wanted nothing to do with it at a National level, true? no idea. I do know that running competitively in SS means *usually* means buying a newer car and unfortunetaly w/o the fun and speed of IT trimmings... (mickey DUCK!). I pick IT over buying a new Civic Si SSB anyday.

[shwah]

And shwah, don't put words in my mouth. I told the OP that was the Cliff's notes version as I understood it. I really don't care either way, and don't care to see myself "quoted" like that. If those are your feelings, then you own your words.

Your post suggested that the opinions that you placed in it were the opinions of the IT racing community. I just pointed out that there are other view points. Some see it one way, others see it another way.

Didn't mean to offend. Sorry about that.

[mossaidis]

...I suggested that we do away with the two tier system and treat all classes the same and send them all to the national championships.

I agree. How can someone argue that IT is not a nationally recognized class? It is... therefore it should be included into the Runoffs.

[Knestis]

I heard the lynch ropes being pulled out when, as a point of argument in the runoffs qualifying debate, I suggested that we do away with the two tier system and treat all classes the same and send them all to the national championships.

I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

[lateapex911]

I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

Me, for two. The world has changed a lot since the implementation of that system, and it's antiquated now. With racing series being run by all the marque clubs, Porsche, BMW etc), the SCCA needs to get in tune with the times. While it will be argued that it might/might not be good for IT drivers, the club as a whole would benefit.

[tnord]

even this guy is in favor of IT "going national" if it means doing away with the regional/nat'l structure and the top TWENTY classes go to the runoffs.

actually....i might have to adjust that view....we need to get rid of some classes on the whole.

[Greg Amy]

Travis, I'm with you as long as it results in twenty GROUPS at the Runoffs.

The real issue with limiting classes is time available for groups...I like what they're doing this year, in that they're combining classes into groups for the last xx lowest-attended classes. They didn't make the numbers? Fine, let 'em run, just don't decrease the track time for the groups that did.

I used to be against IT going National...not so much any more. There's just no way I.T. woulda gotten much more expensive for me when I decided to do it "right"...now, eh...

[shwah]

I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

+1 here

This is why I dropped the whole IT national thing before. I realized that there was a bigger issue. Running two separate club racing series dilutes driver attendance and competition, dilutes worker attendance and/or increases worker burnout, and creates additional financial exposure to regions. All the while making the whole program that much more confusing to potential new members.

[JeffYoung]

I am about as anti IT going national as they come. This I would agree with. Do away with the distinction all together (which gets rid of the one big problem I see on having IT go national and that is the dilution of regional fields) and I support it. Hell, I might even make the trek to RAmerica one year if they do it right -- top twenty classes go to the RuleOffs.

I'm confident that you'd find some support among IT drivers for that idea. Me, for one.

K

[trhoppe]

I am about as anti IT going national as they come. This I would agree with. Do away with the distinction all together (which gets rid of the one big problem I see on having IT go national and that is the dilution of regional fields) and I support it. Hell, I might even make the trek to RAmerica one year if they do it right -- top twenty classes go to the RuleOffs.

Exactly here. Instead of having a "regionals" and "nationals" split, you just have a ton of SCCA classes. Top 20 classes go to the RubOffs and bam, done. Maybe as Greg said, you could do a few more and combine groups, split starts, etc.

I personally want to run the Runoffs, I want to race in the "top amateur" class, its just that none of the SCCA "national" classes fit me and what I want to do to a car. I tried SSC, not fun for me, I tried T2, great idea, but was a bad time in my life, too young, to spend so much $$ so it didn't happen.

I would also support SSB and SSC going away and getting turned into T4 T5 or something, then I'd go that route. Right now, none of the T2 or T3 cars excite/inspire me enough to sell my ITA car and go there. Hell, SM is actually one way I've been leaning

-Tom

[gran racing]

What would be the difference between SSB and SSC vs T5 &T5 beyond a name change? (I'm not familair with the rules differences if there are many.)

[JoshS]

T allows a bunch of things that are not allowed in SS. The most significant ones would be shocks/struts and diffs.

This proposal was shot down by the membership (and loudly) 3 years ago, due to, among other things, the perceived costs of the allowed mods.

[trhoppe]

Meanwhile SSB and SSC are way struggling with car counts. I can totally see how the current SSC guys are arguing against it though. That truly is "rules creep" in that you'd need to drop $5k to keep your car competitive. Oh well.

But Josh nailed it, you don't have to drive a stock suspensioned race car, which in my mind, was fun, but for a few laps, and then sucked

[Bill Miller]

T allows a bunch of things that are not allowed in SS. The most significant ones would be shocks/struts and diffs.

This proposal was shot down by the membership (and loudly) 3 years ago, due to, among other things, the perceived costs of the allowed mods.

Actually Josh, it was shot down by the mfg's. They threatened to pull support for racers running their cars if the SCCA turned SSB and SSC into T4 and T5. There was a letter circulating that was signed by several of the mfg reps that pretty much stated that (I may still have a copy of it somewhere). The CRB pulled the recommendation.