[prt1983]

I'm glad to see some care, I thought when I posted about getting together a petition for any rule change, no one replied and that's why this board was started, there was a lot of concern at that time about rules and that's why this board came about.
I have gone thru the proper channel to submit a rule, I do agree that weight for ajustable sway bars and adjustable third link, is not worth it, I just thought if we have group cars at 2900#-3000#, it would be areas that weight could be added, but again, none of it is going to pass because the person that is close to the CRB, they have been told to follow more of the TransAm rules. I know it presents problems for the CRB to try to balance between the two groups and they thought their job was made easier when TransAm was going to follow GT1 rules, then changes started to happen and it's back to balancing between the two.
So as members, is it fair to go thru a procedure such as rules and find out it doesn't matter what the members want, like when CRB shelved the weight changes because they heard back from members and 2 months later got changed. That someone on the inside in SCCA is telling the CRB that GT1 is to follow more in the way of TransAm. Maybe Racer14 your right, but too me, someone has SCCA's ear and it's not any GT1 member, I will continue to believe someone like Derhagg who has been a big part of SCCA and for the good, have SCCA's ear, it just takes some chat at some of the races.
On what "roadraceparts" said about the genie out of the bottle, I talked with a racing parts manufacturer, he said racers and owners were their own worse enemy in a way, wanting parts to go faster and owners that can pay for it, prime example is "heads", back in the mid 90's chevy's had 23 deg. heads but Ford had better valve angle heads and that's why there was a 75# addition weight for them, then it started and drove costs up, 18 deg., 15 deg., even 12 degree and then SB2, not just us but for all of racing. My belief is that it drove cost up so much, it made racers leave, my opinion, then a couple of NASCAR lower divisions changed to the Crete engines and now SB2 are a dime a dozen, AFR has dropped their different degree heads and raised runner, now it's all 23 degree, Dart is mainly 23 deg., All-Pro has a couple of different degree for bigger engines and Brodix does have a couple of different degree heads one can buy. So to me, the genie has been cut down in size, because of cost and it drove racers out, the manufacturers were not selling all that high buck equipment and have somewhat cut back. To me the one rule for "Club" that would have been a way to keep the lid on, all cars to run OEM valve angle heads, just for club, would have kept from pushing out racers with so much cost. (I know, if you can't afford it, leave GT1, which they have, I heard that GT1 was one of those groups that could have been hit by the 2 1/2% rule, hope I heard wrong but the main body of GT1 racers were in the Central division).
I'm glad Racer14 that your selling Gt1 cars but it can't be like it was in the 90's, there where a lot of cars being bought and sold, a lot of racers hitting both regionals and nationals, my belief is it was a lot of people buying cars in the $20,000 - $60,000 range, then engines started to change with the different degrees and saw cost go to the moon, I hear now it's nothing for a engine to cost $60,000, don't know if I heard right, but how many amateurs can afford engines even at half that price, am thinking that more SB2's will be bought, to "club" racers if they are going as cheap as what I hear. (again, how are those chassis's from the 90's going to compete with the $200,000 rolling chassis's in TransAm that are coming into GT1, a amateur "club" racing group).

As to the Hans Device, let me point out a couple of my beliefs why they shouldn't be mandatory, should have been recommended, racing is paralleling the real world, where we are told what bulbs to use, what toilets to put in, what our kids should eat at school and take away their lunches that parents make or all in the name of safety, feeling people's crotches. Racing is doing the same, controling people and madating every little thing, I fall back on common sense;

First, racer's shouldn't be treated like children and have everything dictated on how to be done, racers need to take responsibility for themselves, the five items I do deemed important to be mandatory, Driver's Suits, Helmets, Drivers left side Window Nets, Fire Bottles and Fuel Cells. If someone wants to wear leather shoes like Dave Marcus, fine, if like Dale Earnhart only wanted to wear the helmet that he was comfortable with and knew of the danger, he took responsibilty but like you, I wish it didn't happen. We sign waivers, has anyone seen a lawsuit.

Second, look at history, road racing in general within the "club" has a excellant record since the early 80's that I know of, one death up at RA when a GT5 car spun and was T-boned by a GT1 car, in TransAm at the Glen I think, car came out of the pits, spun and was T-boned. Want to know the single biggest development that came about to prevent more serious injury then any other, the gravel traps at the corners, cars can't go sliding thru the grass and hit the concrete barriers.
So to me the point is, road racing in "Club" is different then Nascar or Indy cars doing 200-200 mph and hitting the concrete wall, we are up and down in speed and have runoff areas, so mandating to be like Pro series for "club", well we don't need to follow everything because our type of racing is somewhat different (let me stress again, Indy and Alms to my belief doesn't have 2 yr rules on belts or fire bottles, SCCA has gone way overboard, but with the belts, because one wanted to sell more product).

Third, SCAA needs to quit this overkill of rules that "one size fits all", really, do production cars (stock) within SCCA need to wear Hans Devices, I'm picturing Neon cars running in a straight line up at RA and wondering how cars like that can get into trouble. I know someone will say, they can get off the track and flip.

The bottom line to me, is we do not need to become a "nanny state" within SCCA, if you feel you shouldn't be on the track without the Hans Device, your FREE to buy and wear one, if others don't want too, they have right to voice their concerns. I will still hold to my belief that a lot of what SCCA is doing, is for the few to sell more product to racers and SCCA can keep their sponsorship money flowing in, now that they have lost members, cancelled races and lost revenue, we all agree because part of it is the economy, but I believe and will continue to do so, that SCCA catered to more of the minority because of money, then most of it's amateur members.

So again, the rule to go back to weight in 2010 is not going to happen, but I can at least say, I did not do it to benefit me, it would have hurt me, I know someone will say, why do it then, because as a amateur group we were going along okay, until I heard that someone is telling the CRB to go more towards TransAm rules, really fair to the members in "club" that pay dues and go by the procedures, to only find out "Chrony Capitalism" at work (my opinion) and now overkill on so-call "safety" rules, belts and such. (amateur race group now hit with Pros coming in with their $200,000 chassis and $60,000 engines, businessmen who can afford it and want to race, but sure doesn't help the amateurs with older, heavier cars that can't afford a new $200,000 car, so I'm sure there are quite a few older GT1 cars under tarps and maybe for good).

I do care about our group, about fairness and I now everything in life isn't fair or in racing, but I'm afraid we have seen the decline of amateur racing and it might be for good.

[racer14]

Hi Mitch,
You are indeed passionate about GT1 and rightly so and certain safety products are required and
are really neccesary. Most states require that you wear a motorcyle helmet if you ride one and they
do it because they feel it saves lives and protects from serious head injuries- i don't beleive this is politically motivated even though you still have the right to"not" wear one you just pay the penalty! so now in "CLUB"
racing you wear one or pay the penalty- don't race.
Now back to car weights/sway bars/ third links and any other rule that there is-RULES DON'T WIN RACES -DRIVERS DO.
You build or buy a car and run it with what you have -if you run well-great-if not you look for the problem and
fix it. No offense to anyone but it could be the "nut behind the wheel".
Tony Ave has replied to this discussion and i am using him as an example and hope doesn't mind but go to any track
where he is racing and don't go talk to him or spend time "gleaning" his car-just go watch him on every corner
and watch closely the line that he uses-if you can duplicate his line when you run you will be amazed at your lap times-yes he does get "a lot and i mean a lot" of track time but you can learn a lot by watching him.

As for motors and heads-use what you can afford-for years we have raced with suspect parts and motors
and have done fairly well both regionally and nationally-we outqualified and finished well against "ROUSCH/YATES"
358's Mustangs with a local brewed 310-93 R/S Mustang at Charlotte so don't believe everthing you hear about-this is better than that when it comes to 23 vs canted or whatever-trust a good engine builder and i mean a good one-tell him your budget and "use what you can afford and above all have a good time -kick back-drink a beer!

[tom stanford]

It would be my preference to return to the 2010 weight rules. I have been running 310ci for many years and have constantly worked to get my car balanced and at the minimum (2010 rules = 2680#'s). My car is 2730#'s with driver and I plan to eventually get it to 2700#'s with some more money and time. My car will never be 2585#'s (new rule for 310), but I am sure I will be running against some that are.

[test driver]

Guys,

Please write in to crbscca.com with your requestes re: weights (or anything else). While these forums are helpful, they are essentially meaningless when it comes time for us to count votes for rule requests. Whatever the majority wants on this matter will happen.

As to GT1 and Trans Am rules growing apart, where do you guys get this?? Because somebody instituted head nets in TA? So the weights are a bit different (or might be), you mean to tell me that bolting (or unbolting) some lead blocks is outside the scope of running a GT1 car? C'mon man, besides, how many people complaining about this stuff actually get out and run with Trans Am? We are doing all we can to keep the rules as streamlined as possible, trust me.

Mitch, $60,000 engines? Seriously? Fresh Yates stuff is going for $17K, my best SB2's are around 20K. And thats with new stuff in them. I have won Trans Am races in 2010 with an engine a customer of mine paid $12,500 for. All ridiculous claims like yours do is scare people away, which does a LOT more harm to GT1 and Trans Am than anything else. A little research is in order here.....GT1 falling below the 2.5 rule (which is no longer in effect anyway)? GT1 is consistantly in the top 7 or so classes in National participation.

A litte fodder to those who think our new cars are 'ruining' GT1, back in 2002 I ran a 2:08.8 at Road America in a Corvette Ray Irwin had built for Richard Anderson, it was a four link car (with no sway bar adjusters), powered by an ancient Katech 18 degree 310 that made a whopping 610 HP when it was new, so it was lucky to be making 580 at the time I drove it. (Kink was flat for me, it was that weak). This was on Hoosier Bias Ply tires.

My point is you can run sub 2:10s at Road America in any number of older technology cars, with 20 year old HP numbers, on less than the best tires. So, until you are running such times, may I suggest it is not the rules that are keeping you from winning.

For the record, I posted this at the request of more than a few calls/emails I got worried that GT1 was going to be 'turned inside out' because people, who don't yet race with us, were making inaccurate assessments of what the current GT1 racers want.

Tony

[gldiv#60]

Tony, thanks for your past replies. As you know we run a 1994 Weaver bodied Mustang, not the latest in technology, but way ahead of where some are suggesting the class should be. Our 19 year old car has both 3 and 4 link options, adjustable bars, and has made weight with a 310, 335, and now a 358. Let's not go backwards to satisfy a few. Hell, we want to run against the best, be it SCCA or Trans-Am. People like you, Ruman, Lewis, Gregg, Ebben, Lamers, Dittman, Bradley, and the like have helped make this a Great Class. Let's keep it going. As far as engines, I agree with you that 358's can be had for less than a new 310 or 335, I know, I have bought each over the years. The guy who built motors for Simms, Diaz, and Daniel R., built a 358 for us in the numbers you are talking about, one third of what another person posted. Finally, I also agree that statements made here need to be factual, not wild exagerations. Tony, thanks for your work to keep us all pointed in the right direction. Respectfully, Roger McManus owner of Car #60 Great Lakes Division.

[FlyingWrench 3GT1]

I agree w/ Roger......our latest car is also a 94 Weaver, and we have less invested in it than you can get a newer TA2 type car for (and ALOT less than a NEW TA2 build )...Even though we are a budget team, I also agree w/Tony regarding rules changes: the engines, sway bars, suspension, weight (especially with a 6'2" 270lb driver..lol) are not the issues here......it would, however, be beneficial to the smaller teams if there was some type of tire deal, but it is what it is...... We too, have an older 310 style engine and a ex ARCA 358 SB2, both for again ALOT less than the numbers mentioned. As far as a Hans Device or any other safety equipment goes, I wouldn't let my son out on the track without one....and there's always a market for two year old belts to the local circle track guys (if you don't send them in to be re-webbed and re dated)..... Although our season ended early last year due to some engine issues and a lazy economy work wise, we're getting our equipment in order, and planning on doing some racing again in 2012. Hopefully we'll see ya' all at the track................Stan Cisar

This post has been edited by FlyingWrench 3GT1: 05 March 2012 - 07:15 PM

[test driver]

I am looking for feedback on the following;

Do any of the current GT1 competitors feel it would be beneficial to limit GT1 to bias ply tires only? This of course to cut down on tire costs. Of course the point could be made they won't last as long also. What does everybody think? Also it would mean different ride height and gearing settings versus TA.

Tony

This post has been edited by test driver: 05 March 2012 - 09:07 PM

[racer14]

I suppose that would depend on whether the tire manufactuers will continue to supply bias tires from BOTH
companies but i feel most guys probably like the radials in spite of the cost as most cars seem to respond very
well to the update and they do seem to last longer when driven hard unlike the bias plies.
Not plugging them but if have not tried HOOSIER R75's radial they really are a lot better than the older
construction but are slightly heavier- also has anyone ever approached Goodyear or Hoosier about some special
pricing or consideration for relief on prices?-yes i know they are in the business of SELLING tires and making
money but a lot of business's do have to reduce prices during economic downturns! THANKS GUYS

[test driver]

Both still produce them and will continue to if we make such a rule. To be honest though they will push the radials for business reasons.
The only way to get the price down is to spec it, or if you prefer two brands then spec the compound.

Tony

[racer14]

Probably a spec compound would be desired if it did indeed reduce the price on both brands-what's everyones opinion that has been reading this forum??? Thanks Tony for all your input-Racer 14