⚠ Forum Archived — The THSCC forums were discontinued (last post: 2024-05-18). This read-only archive preserves club history. Visit thscc.com →  |  Search this archive with Google: site:forums.thscc.com your search terms

THSCC Forums

Tarheel Sports Car Club Forums
It is currently Tue Apr 07, 2026 10:06 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 2:50 pm 
Offline
My stiffness is only an illusion
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:49 pm
Posts: 4658
Location: on line looking at car ads
Let me go ahead and officially ask the question here..... in regard to the new proposed SCCA CAM class, will THSCC support this class? I saw where James stated "yes" we'll support this class. So a few questions before I create new magnets...

> I see this is in the proposed and draft state of the 2014 SCCA solo rules. Whats the general rule for SCCA to issue a final version of their rules from a date standpoint? Since this is Jan, I'd think we'd see something cast in stone by next month.

> Assuming this is approved, will we offer the subclasses as suggested by SCCA? The proposed manual states loosely that regional clubs can choose to run one CAM class or subdivide by either CAM-A and CAM-B with the split being either pre73/post73 or pre83/post83.

> If this is approved we need to hawk this on faceplace, other forums and make sure we add this as a selectable class in the drop down list when registering a car.

> If the CAM class is approved, who in the club would run it? I certainly would if there's enough competition, but I don't want to run in a 3 car class, there's no "push" in a small class. The mustang is somewhat prepped for STU and Woefully under prepped for CAM, but it would fun running against like cars. If this starts getting filled by vett's then I'll have to rethink this, there's just no comparison of my mustang to a nicely prepared corvette.

This would certainly allow the addition of a procharger on the bullitt. I could dig running 400+hp at the wheels on that car!

_________________
Rodney

'08 Bullitt mustang, CAM 7
Autox VP '09-'10, President '11-'12, interim President 2nd half of ‘14
proud recipient of the Bowie Grey service award '12
Now just a guy driving a mustang....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:41 pm
Posts: 3172
Location: Seattle, WA
Without it being discussed, my gut is we will support 1 CAM class (no year split). And of course it will be a selectable class in MSR.

_________________
2011/2012 Autox VP
2013/2014.5 President
2013 Top Gun

2015 Fit

22R-EC => 4G63 => D16Y7 + D16Y8 => EJ255 + K24Z2 => K20Z3 + K24Z2 => K24Z2 + M54 => L15B


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 2028
Location: Raleigh, NC
I guess it depends on how many of these cars come out, but one class could be problematic as one could theoretically put a class-killing late model Corvette in there and ruin everyone's day. Looking at the Goodguys autocross rules, they have four sub-classes: Street Machine (1955-72), Hot Rod (pre-1954), Truck (pre-1972), and All American Late Model (post- 1973)

I am not saying that four classes is the best choice, but there are big easy obvious ways to cheat the rules (and ruin the fun) when the intention is to get more people to come out and drive. An easy option could be to exclude all 2-seat post-1983 sportscars from the CAM class, and then split by year if it becomes an issue with modern Mustangs beating up on old Camaros.

_________________
Steve Carter
1972 Datsun 240Z-- resto pics at http://picasaweb.google.com/srcartermd
2007 GPW Honda S2000-- STR 86


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 4:30 pm 
Offline
I err on the side of being stupid
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 10:15 pm
Posts: 4743
Location: Greenville, NC
RodneyWright wrote:
Whats the general rule for SCCA to issue a final version of their rules from a date standpoint? Since this is Jan, I'd think we'd see something cast in stone by next month.


Seeing as this is supplemental class SCCA can do whatever they want, when they want with the rules of this class. Currently as configured, lots of folks smarter than me feel the class is a weee bit too open and someone could try and build a AM esque car under a 32' Ford Chassis. The rules are that wide open. Goodguys subscribes to the benevolent dictator type of rules management as they can toss anyone they feel is too "race car" like. SCCA can't and won't do that.

That said, I don't see that being a problem in our pond but looking to the SCCA for this to be cast in stone is folly at best.

There are lots of these hurdles that the staff have to decide on that will be a major PITA.

_________________
02 Focus SVT
STF 9


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 5:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:41 pm
Posts: 3172
Location: Seattle, WA
I want use to have as few a classes as possible, so if we adopt something 'CAM'-like I don't want numerous permutations, because let's face it, if we look back 5 years, I bet the sum of cars that would compete in this class is less than 20-25. I'd say at THSCC autox the most likely participant would be SM late model mustangs (one street tires and yet SM due to FI).

However, I wouldn't be opposed to having the THSCC flavor of this class exclude 2 seaters to specifically avoid Corvettes from dominating.

_________________
2011/2012 Autox VP
2013/2014.5 President
2013 Top Gun

2015 Fit

22R-EC => 4G63 => D16Y7 + D16Y8 => EJ255 + K24Z2 => K20Z3 + K24Z2 => K24Z2 + M54 => L15B


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:28 pm 
Offline
My stiffness is only an illusion
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:49 pm
Posts: 4658
Location: on line looking at car ads
been thinking about this class some more. In regard to 2 seaters and 'vettes, I'd be good with allowing up to C4's, but nothing later. That would allow protouring cars w/ rear seat deletes and trucks to come out and play.

I still haven't heard back from other club members, but is ANYONE going to run this class? If not, I'm going STU. Stephen, where are you running this year? I know Art is staying street class. Not sure if Jason M is going to run this year....

_________________
Rodney

'08 Bullitt mustang, CAM 7
Autox VP '09-'10, President '11-'12, interim President 2nd half of ‘14
proud recipient of the Bowie Grey service award '12
Now just a guy driving a mustang....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 3:10 pm 
Offline
Official Mustang Tire Corder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:51 pm
Posts: 2226
Location: Raleigh, NC
RodneyWright wrote:
Stephen, where are you running this year? I know Art is staying street class. Not sure if Jason M is going to run this year....


I'm either stuck in STU, ESP, or this CAM class. I'm buying new tires of the non R-comp variety and I assume CAM will have a tougher PAX, so it seems like STU is the logical choice with no intention of spending more money on other go fast parts.

_________________
Stephen Westerfield
2009 Infiniti M35 | 2007 Honda Fit Sport | 2005 Ford Mustang GT |2000 GMC Sierra |1992 Acura Integra LS | Super Westerfield Bros Acura Integra


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 3:44 pm 
Offline
My stiffness is only an illusion
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:49 pm
Posts: 4658
Location: on line looking at car ads
Stephen Westerfield wrote:
I'm either stuck in STU, ESP, or this CAM class. I'm buying new tires of the non R-comp variety and I assume CAM will have a tougher PAX, so it seems like STU is the logical choice with no intention of spending more money on other go fast parts.


I hear ya on the money spend. I've just sold a bunch of old wheels and tires I had under the house. I just had new 275 Dunlop ZII's installed at Jeb's, not cheap. I'm also going back to a set of Vogtland springs. I seem to remember having a set, but sold them to someone =) Hope to have those installed next weekend and then it will time to lineup the car back at Marks. I'll sell the Steeda springs after I have them removed to recoup a little money.

After that I'm done spending money on the car.

Someone please quote that and let's see how long that lie lasts :roll:

_________________
Rodney

'08 Bullitt mustang, CAM 7
Autox VP '09-'10, President '11-'12, interim President 2nd half of ‘14
proud recipient of the Bowie Grey service award '12
Now just a guy driving a mustang....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 8:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 9:30 pm
Posts: 1205
Location: Wilmington, NC
RodneyWright wrote:

After that I'm done spending money on the car.

Someone please quote that and let's see how long that lie lasts :roll:



Over under on 4 months?

8)

_________________
2005 Mazda RX8 STX 11

NCR Solo Chair & Cape Fear Chapter Coordinator
http://www.ncrscca.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 20, 2014 10:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 5:25 pm
Posts: 1458
Location: Durham, NC
Under, before the first autocross.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 4:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:41 pm
Posts: 3172
Location: Seattle, WA
I think STU (ie M3, STI, Evo) will be faster than CAM and someone mentioned .830 for CAM which corroborates my claim.

_________________
2011/2012 Autox VP
2013/2014.5 President
2013 Top Gun

2015 Fit

22R-EC => 4G63 => D16Y7 + D16Y8 => EJ255 + K24Z2 => K20Z3 + K24Z2 => K24Z2 + M54 => L15B


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 8:54 am 
Offline
My stiffness is only an illusion
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:49 pm
Posts: 4658
Location: on line looking at car ads
JamesShort wrote:
I think STU (ie M3, STI, Evo) will be faster than CAM and someone mentioned .830 for CAM which corroborates my claim.


Are you sure that's right? STU PAX is .846 and CAM PAX is .83, so I'm thinking CAM is faster PAX wise....

_________________
Rodney

'08 Bullitt mustang, CAM 7
Autox VP '09-'10, President '11-'12, interim President 2nd half of ‘14
proud recipient of the Bowie Grey service award '12
Now just a guy driving a mustang....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:51 am 
Offline
You're just jealous

Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:14 pm
Posts: 2553
Location: Raleigh, NC
RodneyWright wrote:
JamesShort wrote:
I think STU (ie M3, STI, Evo) will be faster than CAM and someone mentioned .830 for CAM which corroborates my claim.


Are you sure that's right? STU PAX is .846 and CAM PAX is .83, so I'm thinking CAM is faster PAX wise....


CAM would be a better PAX time since the lower PAX index assumes a slower real time than the best STU cars/drivers would do, correct?

Coincidentally, FSR (the final year :( ) also has .83 PAX.

_________________
Dick Rasmussen

FS 50 2018 Mustang GT


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:55 am 
Offline
I HATE hatchbacks!

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 11:03 am
Posts: 11818
Location: Carolina Beach, NC
Rodney, I'm going to try to do more events. However, two out of the first three events are already booked. :evil:

If you run in CAM. I will too.

_________________
In need of car.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CAM class proposed by SCCA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:56 am 
Offline
You're just jealous

Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:14 pm
Posts: 2553
Location: Raleigh, NC
RodneyWright wrote:
Stephen Westerfield wrote:
I'm either stuck in STU, ESP, or this CAM class. I'm buying new tires of the non R-comp variety and I assume CAM will have a tougher PAX, so it seems like STU is the logical choice with no intention of spending more money on other go fast parts.


I hear ya on the money spend. I've just sold a bunch of old wheels and tires I had under the house. I just had new 275 Dunlop ZII's installed at Jeb's, not cheap. I'm also going back to a set of Vogtland springs. I seem to remember having a set, but sold them to someone =) Hope to have those installed next weekend and then it will time to lineup the car back at Marks. I'll sell the Steeda springs after I have them removed to recoup a little money.

After that I'm done spending money on the car.

Someone please quote that and let's see how long that lie lasts :roll:


Maybe you should do a cost comparison with quickly finding a Boss 302 and trading. The Boss might be faster out of the box than anything you can do with the Bullitt. I wonder if a stock Boss is eligible for STU or CAM? I think it is A Street.:lol:

_________________
Dick Rasmussen

FS 50 2018 Mustang GT


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group