Alternate Class for Sevens

[MichaelD]

The recent protest in DM at nationals this year have underscored the need of new class for Sevens or another class that accepts Sevens. I am starting this thread as a place for those of us that are interested to discuss our options.



Please chime in.



MichaelD

[bball7754]

I'm a pretty casual autocrosser, and wasn't aware of this. What was the nature of the protest?



Steve

[MichaelD]

Basically a car was challanged on six points. most of which were on structual changes that amounted to aerodynamic aids. The protest committe said no foul. An appeal was filed and the SEB did not address the claimed violations at all. Instead they said the car still looked like a Seven. basically they ignored the complain and the violation.



That is what occured through my eyes.



In the end I am not upset by the car dbuilder pushing the limits. But I am extreemly disapointed in the lack of action of the SEB.



They did not do their job.



As a result. I will push to have Sevens granted another class to run in. Possible XP since they have already approved FF cobras. A clone with a tube frame.



Anyone else interested?

[slngsht]

Michael, what does the D Mod / E Mod landscape look like currently? What else runs in these classes?

[bball7754]

I'd like another class to run in, but perhaps for different reasons. I run in DM here in St. Louis, but my Caterham is about as "stock" as you can get. I drive to the event, and run with my regular 14" 185/60 Michelin Pilots. The other Sevens in DM are trailered, running 10" slicks, etc., etc.



The closest I've come to their times was within 3.5 seconds. Normally I'm 4-5 seconds back. I would just enjoy being able to run in a class where I could be competitive.



I plan on upgrading tires next year (probably Yoko A032's), but it's not going to get me 4 seconds.



Steve

[calvin]

This is the car that was protested.



http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q307/fia289/IMG_1993.jpg

[locostv8]

Does aerodynamics have any real effect at the speeds the auto crossers see? What was told me was that if you can't find anything else to protest someone who beat you you use aerodynamics. Possibly the answer here is to drop the aerodynamics since my understanding is that Mod is supposed to be a silouette class.<edited><editID>locostv8</editID><editDate>2006-10-29 09:13:38</editDate></edited>

[SD-Jacks]

Good morning...thanks to one of your founders for an invite to this group..

I'm the 'nerd' who protested the above car:

1)I've run against this car many times..with the car in many 'dresses'

2) I was fortunate to the beat the car at Midwest Div. Heartland Park, Topeka in August 2006

the protest at Nationals was based on the 2006 Solo rules....the protest dealt mainly with changing the car for aeordynamic purposes...(the protest is long and this is probably not the format to post it..however, if you want it..send your e-mail address to &lt;lmabeejr@sio.midco.net&gt; and I'll send a zip file to you)--it will give you some insight to a protest..and an outcome that leaves no one happy

My major concern with SCCA, has been the lack of a competive class to run a: Lotus7/7A, Caterham,,etc in, unless, you are willing to cut up the frame,,move the motor to the right,,add aerodynamic aids ,,etc..

There are a large number of particularly Seven owners..who treat their car as a person(child) and are unwilling to cut them up to compete. In my opinion, it is the reason that more 7's are not seen at National events.. a 2nd area has been the yearly changes in the rules for D-Mod..the most recent have required adding wt to make the car weigh 1420#s..with driver for 2.0l car...this has resulted in competitors who have had to add almost 300#s to a 950+/Caterham/Zetec...to make the class wt 1420's

It would be great if there were SCCA, classes..that would allow original 7's ie motors &lt;1000cc,,,then classes to accomodate 1600-1700cc non-BDA motors,,, and next a 2000cc BDA,Zetec class (to run at manufactures wt. when delivered)

sorry for the long post...



Lee Mabee (1994 Caterham 1700cc and 2001 Superlight R)

both in need of a better driver...

[MichaelD]

D/E Modified is for Production cars modified in excess of SCCA SOLO II Prepared rules.



2006 D/E Mod cars are devided into "stock tub" and "mod tub."



Stock tub must keep all stock parts between front and rear firewalls/bulkheads.



Mod tubs must keep the original length and width floor pan between front and rear bulkheads.



Both stock and mod tubs may make alterations to the floor pan, frame/subframe for the instalation or relocation of the engine, transmission and exhaust as long as the engine remains in the same half of the car as it was originally.



See current SOLO II rules document.



At Nationals DMod is has a tube frame Lotus Europa, a few Lotus Elans, alot of Sevens. The most modified cars seem to be the Euorpa, two locost Sevens and an Elan Most of the other Sevens are basically stock. If ther is such a car as a stock seven. I guess that is a Seven that has all the parts in their original location and all parts are from a seven manufacturer with a standard set of assembly instructions.



It seems that there are two factions in the class.



1. those that wanr to experiment and modify their cars looking for that extra competitive edge.



2. those that are happy driving a car without making structual or design changes.



Hence the search for other options.

[yellowss7]

I've always wondered why the Caterham was classed as a Modified car, since as bball(steve) pointed out, most of us run "Stock" cars. The engine choice is fairly limited, Crossflows, Zetecs, Rover K series,and now Duratec. All "factory spec" motors.



A Street tire'd car can't compete with a Slick no matter how good the driver, IMHO. Once you start moving the engine, adding aerodynamics, etc. you have a true MOD car.



Question is are there enough "stock 7's to have their own class? Although I think there should be a weight penalty for those Huge 2.0 Liter engines. Those of us with little 1.8 liters and less need a big handicap to equalize things out. http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/lol.gif&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tom <edited><editID>yellowss7</editID><editDate>2006-10-29 10:26:24</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

I guess at 5.7 Liters, I'll have to tow a sled behind my car http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/lol.gif.



Seriously though, I see the point about sevens as defined in Tom's post above having a place to run.

[MichaelD]

Tom,



I think a sliding scale displacement vs weight for all of DM or a Sevens class would be fine. I also feel the aero changes that some people have made generate little if any advantage.



The biggest difference is still driver ability.

[SD-Jacks]

Didn't answer Lococtv8's aerodynamic question....I'm not an aerodynamic expert...so I had previously asked one,,,PhD. Mech Engineering,Aeordynamics..he uses the same Fluent software the big dogs like Ferrari racing use....two of the six protests on the car above.. were the scuttle ( which was raised 2 inch )taller than the 'factory'Locost scuttle...engine bay sealed,,radiator moved to the side..exit ports to create a 'tunnel' and the 2nd was the hood (acting as a spoiler) using the increased angle of attack of the hood...these two combined give only 25#s of downforce at 30mph..but double every 15mph..so at 60mph you get almost 100# of aero (not mech) downforce..so yes it is worth the effort...when you look at the fenders and nosecone air management on the new CSR Caterham...they claim alomost 100#s of downforce..the portion on the wheels is really 'sweet' is this all unsprung

when you watch the SCCA SM classes with the bigger rear wings..you really can see the benefit of aerodyanamic aids...even at relatively slow autocross speeds, check out the times of SM SM1,,SM2,,these guys are hard...at least for me to catch....Lee

[yellowss7]

Michael, I agree, driving skills(and slicks) make the difference. Since you kicked my butt last sunday, I have to bow to your superior skills.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/cheers2.gif Looking forward to competing against you next season. Tom

[MichaelD]

Should there be a street tire class and a slick class?

[yellowss7]

I'm not going back to street tires. Slicks are too much fun. Unless it rains that is. You could spec r compound DOT tires, but if you run CR500,ACB10's or 032 Street tires you still won't compete with the R compounds.



My thoughts are that a basic seven, unmodified frame, engine placement, are the "Class we're talking about. I don't care if they run a 4,5,6 or sequential gearbox. In Autox one shift is usually it. As for Power/torque to weight ratios, I still think driver skill is the critical factor. Look at the guys that competed last sunday. Did you beat Sam strano's time? He was driving a Camaro BTW.



Most "stock 7's" have either 135-150 or 200-220 hp. Putting the power down is the critical factor, I have 195 hp and I've driven sevens with 135 and personally I think it is easier to drive the lower powered one, since you don't have to worry about breaking the back end loose when you apply the power. Again, skill vs power. Autoxing is not drag racing or top end dependent. Just my opinion. Tom

[locostv8]

Good morning...thanks to one of your founders for an invite to this group..

I'm the 'nerd' who protested the above car:

1)I've run against this car many times..with the car in many 'dresses'

2) I was fortunate to the beat the car at Midwest Div. Heartland Park, Topeka in August 2006

the protest at Nationals was based on the 2006 Solo rules....the protest dealt mainly with changing the car for aeordynamic purposes...(the protest is long and this is probably not the format to post it..however, if you want it..send your e-mail address to &lt;lmabeejr@sio.midco.net&gt; and I'll send a zip file to you)--it will give you some insight to a protest..and an outcome that leaves no one happy

My major concern with SCCA, has been the lack of a competive class to run a: Lotus7/7A, Caterham,,etc in, unless, you are willing to cut up the frame,,move the motor to the right,,add aerodynamic aids ,,etc..

There are a large number of particularly Seven owners..who treat their car as a person(child) and are unwilling to cut them up to compete. In my opinion, it is the reason that more 7's are not seen at National events.. a 2nd area has been the yearly changes in the rules for D-Mod..the most recent have required adding wt to make the car weigh 1420#s..with driver for 2.0l car...this has resulted in competitors who have had to add almost 300#s to a 950+/Caterham/Zetec...to make the class wt 1420's

It would be great if there were SCCA, classes..that would allow original 7's ie motors &lt;1000cc,,,then classes to accomodate 1600-1700cc non-BDA motors,,, and next a 2000cc BDA,Zetec class (to run at manufactures wt. when delivered)

sorry for the long post...



Lee Mabee (1994 Caterham 1700cc and 2001 Superlight R)

both in need of a better driver...



This would seem to reinforce the statement "If you can't beat then protest aerodynamics". If the problem is with the classes then maybe the protest should be with SCCA. It seems that if there was a tire limit and weight limit "Stock" 7s should be able to compete in at least a prepared class. I have been away from racing for many years and have debated returning to auto cross, but I'm sure what I'm considering for a mod class wouldn't be very popular.

[yellowss7]

Slngshot, 5.7 liters in a seven, WOW! We'll that's E Mod vs us under 2 liter D Mods. But from my point of view, you have a weight penalty anyway. And again, can you get the power down coming out of turns? It's the balance in the transitions that makes the difference. I feel I have more power than I can use so personally, I won't have any issues running against higher HP cars. So unless your car is as wide as a corvette with 18 inch slicks, I'm cool with it. Tom

[SD-Jacks]

Reply to Locostv8...sorry to spoil your "if you can't beat them..."theory... I had beaten the car in the Mid Div in August.....the protest was made during the Nationals...day #1 in Sept....prior to 2nd day ...as required by the rules...(6 line item rule infractions..that IMHO were out of compliance..).



IT MAYBE NOTEWORTHY; I OFFERED THE DRIVER OF THE PROTESTED CAR THE USE OF MY CAR PRIOR TO THE DECISION OF THE PROTEST COMM., SO IN THE EVENT HIS CAR HE WAS DRIVING WAS DISQUALIFIED,,HE WOULDN'T MISS THE CHANCE TO WIN THE EVENT.(this driver could beat me with a shopping cart).



sorry it wasn't about winning,,but about the rules of the class and how much you can push the envelope

you are right the protest is with SCCA...the D-Mod class had protested the rule changes in 2005 and 2006...the real complaint lies with lack of enforcement at National events...short of weighing the car...no other rules are checked....ie displacement,,compliance with safety ie driveshaft hoops..shut off switches..etc...so the only way to address any of the issues is unfortunately by a protest..the class has solicited SEB (solo events board)at SCCA.....I think it will take a bigger contingent of Sevens writing in to SEB to effect any change...

this sound like a fun group...hopefully can figure a way to make Tail of the Dragon...work....would be fun to run with this large a group of Sevens...Lee

[slngsht]

Slngshot, 5.7 liters in a seven, WOW! We'll that's E Mod vs us under 2 liter D Mods. But from my point of view, you have a weight penalty anyway. And again, can you get the power down coming out of turns? It's the balance in the transitions that makes the difference. I feel I have more power than I can use so personally, I won't have any issues running against higher HP cars. So unless your car is as wide as a corvette with 18 inch slicks, I'm cool with it. Tom



I definitely can not put the power down (not even going straight, let alone coming out of turns). I just run R compound tires (225 50 R 15s). My car is 16xx lbs. I haven't run head to head with any sevens yet, but I'm sure my car has a long way to go. There is just one advantage to 375 ft.lbs of torque. I start in 2nd gear, and don't need to shift at all - even in 2nd, I have to launch part throttle at about 1500 - 2000 RPM to get decent traction.



I don't think I have been able to crack the throttle 100% open in any autox yet, except <em>maybe</em> at the finish line, so the power is not usable with my tires.



Rotus made Sevens with anything from 4 banger Toyotas to turbo rotory to Rover and small block chevy V8. The LS1 in my car wasn't around when Rotus went out of business.



At what point do we propose the Seven is not a stock seven? Seems like a pretty clear line for the more mainstream Caterhams, Birkins, etc... No so clear for Rotus, or many variation of Locosts?



Michael D has seen my car. It is a very stockish looking Seven (other than the exhaust sound http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/biggrin5.gif ). If anything, it looks like a massive car compared to a Caterham, which is not a good thing for autox.



I can easily see my car not being considered a normal Seven, which is OK, since I basically autox for fun. I didn't build it for autocross.



The big distinction here to me (this is all new to me) is not even the significance of the aero aids on that car. The underlying issue is that everyone is lumped into a "Mod" category, but many are viewing their cars as not-so-Mod, since you're basically not doing any drastic changes to it.

[locostv8]

Not gonna get into flames enough said.

http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery/d/40496-1/donk_001.jpg

http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery/d/40498-1/Donkervoort_Nuerburgring_jpgdc_4675581961205569376 .jpg

This is an example of mods, though I believe these are "Production" Donks. If the car being protested truly had an uncompetitive illegal mod, though you beat him at another race so obviously it wasn't that much an edge, BIG wing for example, then protest that. If there were safety issues or you thought the engine was oversize then protest that. But if the issue was that you didn't like the class rules partly because they wouldn't let you have the advantage of your Superlight R then don't protest a competitor.



I would view your offer as an insult and we would probably have a discussion that could not be verbalized here.

<edited><editID>locostv8</editID><editDate>2006-10-29 22:49:22</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

Jim, let's not focus on the protest, flaming, etc... I'm sure when a protest happens, somebody gets bent out of shape - nature of life.



The question that needs to be answered here is where do run-of-the-mill sevens run?



Using your example above, the equivalent of what's happening in autox is a mass of people show up with basically stock cars to run the track, then someone shows up with with the car pictured above, and cleans the field. That type of difference in performance does not encourage more Sevens turning out for SCCA events.



When I take my vette autocrossing, I have choices of running in stock, prepared, or modified classes, depending on what I've done with the car. It encourages every vette owner to come out and enjoy the autox, and have a reasonably competitive car. When I take my seven, whether it's on street tires, slicks, whatever, I get lumped in with everyone else in either Dmod or Emod. So, unless I'm willing to put alot of $ into the car, and hack it a little, I can't hope to have a competitive ride.



Again, let's focus the discussion on a solution that benefits Seven owners, and encourages more turnout for Sevens, and not the particulars of last years' nationals.



Anything that comes out of this discussion will not prevent anyone from entering their car in DMod or EMod. It just gives people who really don't have "Mod" cars a place to run.

[locostv8]

That was my point. Focus on the problem which is with SEB (solo events board)at SCCA class rules, take the complaint there don't protest a fellow competitors car because you don't like the rules. "THE" Lotus 7 was itself a mod of the English ford sedan to produce a Hill Climb car. I'm not sure how you would come up with specs for the "true" Lotus 7 in that it was a kit car with some number factory produced, possibly Brit 750 rules?



http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery/d/39548-4/1958lotus1.jpg

This is a 58 Lotus 7 series 1



http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery/d/39546-4/LfFrQuarter.jpg

This is a Lotus 7 series 2



http://wrangler.rutgers.edu/gallery/d/37462-1/DSCF0059.jpg

This is a Westfield 7



The "true" 7 is probably the first pic and anything else is a Mod unless something is done to level the playing field. Running a 7 series 1 against a Charterham Superlight R as shipped?

[MichaelD]

I agree the problem is with the SEB and the current rules.



However I disagree with your logic that all sevens ar mods of a Ford.



To follow that logic then all 911s would be mods of the first Porsche. Not distinct modles.



There were four distinct variations of the Seven under Lotus and a few more under Caterham. Each modle could be recognised based on published standards from the manufacturer. That I think can be said of most other Sevensque cars like Birkin, Westfield, Stalker, Ultralite, robinhood, Tiger, etc.



It can not be said of the locost cars because there is no production standard or list of required components.



I think therein lies the problem with the rules.



Michael D.

[slngsht]

Same is true on the vettes.

C5 and C6 are superstock

C4 is A Stock

C2 and C3 are B Stock

C1 is F Stock



C6 Z06 and Callaway Corvettes are not eligable for stock categories.



I don't know how this classification system is arrived at. I would think trying to stick a 7 in any existing category will have those people up in arms.

It looks like we need a category with some rules to define stock, prep, and mod levels.

[MichaelD]

How about:



Sevens Mod or SMod.

We could have a street class - requires proof of registration and insurance; and a Mod class with some basic rules for both groups.









1. List of approved manufacturers that are included.

This list to include all manufacturers of Seven style cars that are or were eligible for street use and have or had a published list of components, specifications and a dealer network or sales and production site in the US.



2. A sliding scale displacement/weight minimum.



3. Cars to maintain original style fenders offered by their cars manufacturer.



4. No restriction on wheels ans tires, suspension, transmissions, R/L steering ...OTHERS?



5. Engine to remain in front but otherwisw unrestricted as to type or size.



6. Windshiedls are not required.



7. Seats not required beyond Solo safety requirements.



Just a start.



please chime in.





You know, if enough of us could come up with and agre on a suggested set of rules for a new class for Sevens to run in; maybe it's not that far fetched to present them to the Director of SCCA for consideration.



Along with signatures from the SCCA members on this list.

[slngsht]

Item 3- it's pretty common to switch from clamshell to cycle fenders. How about allowing these 2 styles? Do you see any advantage in autox for cycle style? We'd have to limit it to be basically shaped to hug the tire. don't know the wording. I guess if the manufacturer offered both, it's safe?



Any consideration for bike engined vs. car engined cars? if the scale is displacement / weight, bike engined cars may have an advantage (they typically have a higher output/displacement)? This is probably addressed elsewhere in SCCA - perhaps in CSR / DSR type cars?

[yellowss7]

Don't know if it matters since we're brainstorming here, but Current SCCA rules for DMod exclude motorcycle engined cars.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

[Al Navarro]

I don't auto-x or race, but this thread has been a good read so far. Can we loop any of the racers from the west coast and texas in if they haven't been contacted already?

[yellowss7]

Come on Al, it's time for you to really start driving that car and stop polishing it. http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/biggrin5.gif&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tom

[Al Navarro]

Ouch, that hurts! (But the truth generally does. doesn't it!) http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/wink5.gif



Tom, you must not have read my recent blog post entitled "A mint car vs. a loved car..." Next year I promise to try an auto-x, even if I have to wait until 7-7-7!



http://gardenstatesevens.org/wordpress/?p=66<edited><editID>Al Navarro</editID><editDate>2006-10-30 12:19:17</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

Don't know if it matters since we're brainstorming here, but Current SCCA rules for DMod exclude motorcycle engined cars.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;



Well, as long as we're brainstorming, we might as well think about this issue. There are a few bike engined cars running around.

[locostv8]

This is the problem. Before we even get into the discussion. What is acceptable for the street is highly debateable and somewhat depends on the state you live in. My first wife wouldn't even sit in my Corvair which was my DD for 2 years, had to do with doing a wheel stand putting it in the garage(mid mounted V8).



The very first item disallows the entire Locost group. I would say that most 7s are kits so even if there is a specified list of components there is a lot of component drift.



Limiting wheels/tires along with displacement/weight is probably the only way to include most Sevenesque cars.

[slngsht]

What is acceptable for the street is highly debateable and somewhat depends on the state you live in.



Yup, that is a problem. In my case, Michael and I live 20 minutes away from each other... in the same county no less. I don't have to meet any requirements at all. No emissions inspections, no safety inspections. None. Not even when I buy or sell it. My car is street legal with historic tags. On the other hand, a newer Caterham has to pass all the safty and emissions requirements.

[yellowss7]

Next year I promise to try an auto-x, even if I have to wait until 7-7-7!



http://gardenstatesevens.org/wordpress/?p=66



Al, the Philly SCCA region has an autox scheduled for this Sunday in Warminster Pa, Just off the Pa turnpike at the Willow Grove Exit. The weather forecast is good. You should try to make it. Even if you don't run your car you can ride with me. It's a great venue, an old airfield, that's basically a long slalom up and back. I run in the third heat which should start around 1-1:30. If you want to run your car you need to be there by 11 am to register and tech. Hope to see you there. Tom<edited><editID>yellowss7</editID><editDate>2006-10-30 12:51:06</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

To take this discussion further, we need to define a Seven (wish us luck...)



I'm going to throw out some basic bullet items... If you guys don't agree, point them out. These would apply to a "stock" class. Mod and prepped classes would be something less.



1- Front-mid engined (engine block has to be 100% in front of the windshield mouting point??

2- Rear drive

3- 2 Seater

4- No rear wing

5- Fenders... Rear: must be substantially round (follow contour of the tire. Front: Must be clamshell style, or cycle fender - again, follow contour of the tire only.

6- No front wing

7- Windshield?? this is an interesting one... there are full, half, or WCM style???

8- Flat or open bottom between the front and rear centerlines?? any sevens not meet this?

9- Min and Max numbers for track, width, wheelbase, overall length?

Please feel free to add and discuss.

[MichaelD]

Branded Sevens are defined by the manufacturer and are therefor included as Sevens. The only Sevens on the road that are not clearly defined are Locosts and other one ofs that people put together.



It would seem to me that a simple spec would be to take the specs from a Lotus & or a Caterham Seven and make them the minimal dimensions. I believe they are the same.



Lrger and heavier would be acceptable.

[Al Navarro]

Tom-that's too bad, timing wise. Mazda and I are headed down to Tail of the Dragon for a planning/recon trip. We've lined up a bunch of meetings and things, otherwise I'd take you up on the offer!-Al

[locostv8]

The easiest spec for engine setback is that the mounting surface of the block must not be behind the point of 50% of the wheelbase.



The only driven wheels can not be front only. 4x4 (DAX) or RWD with 4x4 having a reasonable weight penalty, 10% above class.



The windshield is optional but if present must be flat DOT approved glass.



Track/wheelbase minimum to be that of the Lotus 7 series 1



The tub must minimally be the same as the Lotus 7 series 1



Competativeness managed by weight/tires. "Street" DOT approved tires with maximun tred width and wear rating.

"Prodified" DOT approved tires with maximun tred width and no wear rating. "Mod" tires open.

[locostv8]

Wings, not the Brit deff, should be prohibited in all classes. To me the "Mod" class should be a bit looser on fenders and front spoilers, I think it adds interest. Safety equipment should match SCCA. Fenders even to the extent of the Donk where the shape of the original is a part of the overall shape. I'm still not completly convinced that at autocross speeds that aerodynamics play that much of a decisive advantage.

[MichaelD]

"Wings, not the Brit deff, should be prohibited in all classes."



Do you mean Clam Shells? If so, why? Clam shell front fenders (wings) were standard issue on the Lotus Seven and more importantly, over time came to symbolize the Seven. These are also the fenders that are approved in EP by the SCCA.



Michael D.

[yellowss7]

Michael, I think he means, rear overhead Wings that apply downforce. I'm sure everybody loves clams. Tom

[slngsht]

"Wings, not the Brit deff, should be prohibited in all classes."



Do you mean Clam Shells? If so, why? Clam shell front fenders (wings) were standard issue on the Lotus Seven and more importantly, over time came to symbolize the Seven. These are also the fenders that are approved in EP by the SCCA.



Michael D.



I think you're both saying the same thing. Clamshells OK, Fast and Furious, not OK http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/rofl.gif

[slngsht]

The windshield is optional but if present must be flat DOT approved glass.





If optional, then how about we don't have any rules for it. It doesn't make sense to allow windshields, and no windshield, but exclude these:



http://members.rennlist.com/tweedt/s2khoodup.jpg

[slngsht]

I posted a link at californiaCaterhamClub... Hopefully we'll get some viewpoints and input from there also.

[MichaelD]

Steve,



Your experience is almost exactly the same as mine. Right down to the wheels and tires. I stepped up to CR500 wheels and tires and cut their advantage to three seconds.



Then one day a buddy gave me his 13x10 slicks to try. It was like giving drugs to a junkie. I was hooked.



Now if I could only learn how to drive http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/smile5.gif



MichaelD

[chetcpo]

I could be wrong but after reading this thread, and the proposed "new rules" it seems to me that some of you are looking to get Locost or home-built cars out of your class.



Am I mistaken?

[slngsht]

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I could be wrong but after reading this thread, and the proposed "new rules" it seems to me that some of you are looking to get Locost or home-built cars out of your class.



Am I mistaken?



I don't think that's the case at all.



The objective is to get the traditional sevens (including traditional locosts) a place where they can compete. Right now, a miata based locost is in the same class as a purpose built autox machine. Even if you want to run DOT tires, and the other guy is running slicks.

[slngsht]

If you build a locost as the ultimate no compromise autocrosser, D Mod is still there for the taking.

[bball7754]

Michael - Ran the last autox of the season Sunday, and the formula held true. The 2 other Sevens ran 39.135 and 39.379, while my best time was 43.185.



As I said earlier, I'm a casual novice (this was my seventh autox ever, 3rd this season), but confess that the number of available classes is confusing. I've spent time looking at the rule book, and "Lotus 7, 7A" is listed under both C Stock and Class A Street Prepared.



Interestingly, Class D Prepared has both "Lotus 7, 7A (948cc, 997cc,1098cc)" listed, as well as "Super Seven (1340cc, 1498cc)".



Most, if not all, of the C Stock Miatas were running Kumho Ecsta V710 - those 2 grooves running around the tire mean it's not a slick? Winning time in C Stock was 39.835, followed by a low 40 and a low 41. Not sure anyone would care if I tried to run C Stock!



Definitely agree it comes down to the driver. I guess I just would like to have some way of knowing that I'm getting better - or not. I think it's hard to do that in autox, unless multiple people drive the same car. But when there is such a disparity in the cars in your class, it further muddies the water in terms of measuring how your driving is progressing.



Just some random random thoughts. But I do wonder what an LSD and a set of Kumhos on my 14" rims would do. http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/smile5.gif



Steve

[powderbrake]

I surely hope this discussion as to "What is a Seven" is for the purpose of advising SCCA as to classes, and does not spill over into "What is a Seven as it relates to USA7s"

They are all Sevens....



A Fable;

Three sevens are parked next to each other, the first one, a stock Lotus series 1. The second is a Caterham with slick Panasports wheels and Khumos with two little grooves, the third is a Viking with 12inch wide Hoosier slicks, and a 440 RWHP 3 rotor turbo wankel and a carbon fibre body with lots of downforce.



The first guys thinks to himself...."If only I had those Khumos, I might be able to beat him".

The second guy thinks to himself..." If only I had those Hoosiers and that engine, I might be able to beat him"



The third guy might be thinking..."It would be neat to have an original Series 1 Lotus."

[chetcpo]

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I could be wrong but after reading this thread, and the proposed "new rules" it seems to me that some of you are looking to get Locost or home-built cars out of your class.



Am I mistaken?



I don't think that's the case at all.



The objective is to get the traditional sevens (including traditional locosts) a place where they can compete. Right now, a miata based locost is in the same class as a purpose built autox machine. Even if you want to run DOT tires, and the other guy is running slicks.



I think I see where you are going with this, but truthfully I have no delusions that the SEB would permit me to run a car I built in my garage in a stock or street prepared class. It would be nice, but really isn't realistic based on what I know about the SCCA. The current residents in these "stockish" classes would be at my door with pitchforks, shovels, and other pointy ended thingys.

[slngsht]

I think I see where you are going with this, but truthfully I have no delusions that the SEB would permit me to run a car I built in my garage in a stock or street prepared class. It would be nice, but really isn't realistic based on what I know about the SCCA. The current residents in these "stockish" classes would be at my door with pitchforks, shovels, and other pointy ended thingys.



I totally agree with the pitchforks comment http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/lol.gif



That's the pickle we're in. As R1 mentioned on locostusa.com, it'd be ideal to fit in some prepared class, but honestly, who would want a bunch of Sevens ganging up on their class at the nationals?



The alternative is a new class.



I think everyone knows this is going to be an uphill battle (whether it's a reclassification or a new class), but if we don't even try, there won't be a better place for normal street sevens to run.



We should work together to at least come up with a well worded sensible solution to present, with signatures behind it. I don't know how this process works. Perhaps someone with insight into dealing with SCCA can chime in.

[slngsht]

I surely hope this discussion as to "What is a Seven" is for the purpose of advising SCCA as to classes, and does not spill over into "What is a Seven as it relates to USA7s"

They are all Sevens....



A Fable;

Three sevens are parked next to each other, the first one, a stock Lotus series 1. The second is a Caterham with slick Panasports wheels and Khumos with two little grooves, the third is a Viking with 12inch wide Hoosier slicks, and a 440 RWHP 3 rotor turbo wankel and a carbon fibre body with lots of downforce.



The first guys thinks to himself...."If only I had those Khumos, I might be able to beat him".

The second guy thinks to himself..." If only I had those Hoosiers and that engine, I might be able to beat him"



The third guy might be thinking..."It would be neat to have an original Series 1 Lotus."



http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/rofl.gif How true!



Agreed - the scope here is only to define areas where sevens from mild to wild can run competitively within SCCA Solo II classes.

[MichaelD]

FWIW:



First: This thread was created to discuss, in a Sevens site, what options we may have in Autocrossing with the SCCA. The current classing structure is not all that friendly to the basic Seven. It seems to be headed to custom built one ofs.



Second: DM is a Modified class. The rules keep changing to accomodate those that wish to build their own car to their own specifications without regard to any standard. That's fine if that is what you want to do. It is a modified class. This is the class for Locost and other one-ofs.



Third: Many of us do not feel we have modified cars and would like the opportunity to run in another class. That is what we are trying to accomplish.



I think there are enough of us that autocross. But how many of you would show up at Nationals is another question. Maybe we should find out before we have an exercise in futility.



When I look at the low number of people participating in this thread it, I wonder. It doesn't seem to be very well represented. More comments may lead to a better representation of ideas.



I am printing all of the comments to this thread for reference. As soon as I get the time I will begin to combine the ideas into a suggestion for further discussion.

[MichaelD]

None of us know the process. But we all need to try. The more imput we have the more likely we can come up with an acceptable plan. If there is a way to include locosts that would be even better.



We could start with the specs from the current Caterham (since they are readily available to all on the internet) Seven and say you can not be any smaller that that. You can be longer, wider, higher or heavier. But what about suspension, fenders, steering, aero devices, brakes, tops, hoods etc.?



I will try to review all the notes and compile a list covering all aspects that I can think of? Then you can all chew it up and offer improvements.



Michael D.

[chetcpo]

Here's a problem I see. If the goal is for a class where you can show up in a stock Caterham and compete against others in stock trim that would make it a "stock" class. (I know, Duh-huh, bear with me) Call it Seven stock, whatever. The SCCA permits race compound tires and damper changes etc. in stock classes so your Caterham on street tires is still going to be an underdog.



Your best bet may be to lobby to have them included in a street tire class like STS2. STS2 is a class for 2 seaters with 1.9 liters or less. Assuming of course your goal is to keep them on street tires for those who like "to run what ya brung."



<edited><editID>chetcpo</editID><editDate>2006-10-31 10:00:40</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

Here's a problem I see. If the goal is for a class where you can show up in a stock Caterham and compete against others in stock trim that would make it a "stock" class. (I know, Duh-huh, bear with me) Call it Seven stock, whatever. The SCCA permits race compound tires and damper changes etc. in stock classes so your Caterham on street tires is still going to be an underdog.



Your best bet may be to lobby to have them included in a street tire class like STS2. STS2 is a class for 2 seaters with 1.9 liters or less. Assuming of course your goal is to keep them on street tires for those who like "to run what ya brung."







chetcpo, carrying a set of wheels with slicks is probably within most folk's reasonable limits. Again, that's no different if you want to compete in a miata. Most stock folks draw the line somewhere before slapping an iron board wing in the back http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/biggrin5.gif



STS2 may be an option. I'm looking at the rules

>here (http://www.scca.com/_filelibrary/File/2006_solo_rules.pdf), and it's difficult to figure out why something is not allowed in STS2. For example all Triumphs are excluded http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/confused5.gif, as is Honda CRX.



MichaelD, is there a published process and guidelines SCCA follows in reviewing vehicle classifications? I'm totally ignorant regarding the process here.

[Locostdude]

This is the car that was protested.



http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q307/fia289/IMG_1993.jpg

Interesting discussion. What this photo does not show is the 330 pound steel plate that is bolted to the bottom of this car to bring the weight up to 1775 pounds. That's 350 pounds over D mod minimum weight.

Also, the transmission was broken so the whole event was run in high gear, starts and all. The protested car was second in D Mod, and second in E mod, with no changes except driver.

This car has been in develoment for 35 years.

One more thing. The motor is stock except for the after market cams.

Del Long

[Al Navarro]

Holy crap...Del Long is among us. I've read about you. Welcome to the forum Del.-Al

[slngsht]

Interesting discussion. What this photo does not show is the 330 pound steel plate that is bolted to the bottom of this car to bring the weight up to 1775 pounds. That's 350 pounds over D mod minimum weight.

Also, the transmission was broken so the whole event was run in high gear, starts and all. The protested car was second in D Mod, and second in E mod, with no changes except driver.

This car has been in develoment for 35 years.

One more thing. The motor is stock except for the after market cams.

Del Long



Del, welcome to usa7s (although this is an odd thread for a welcome http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/lol.gif )



Since the protestor, protestee, contestant, and bystanders are all here now http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/grouphug.gif , let's focus on the task at hand.



I'd love to hear your take on what to do with "stock" Sevens for a competitive place to run.

[locostv8]

Sorry bout the size but at a reasonable size the dimensions couldn't be read.



...

However I disagree with your logic that all sevens ar mods of a Ford.



To follow that logic then all 911s would be mods of the first Porsche. Not distinct modles....

Michael D.



Actualy the original was more like the Meyers Manx to the VW.



&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I could be wrong but after reading this thread, and the proposed "new rules" it seems to me that some of you are looking to get Locost or home-built cars out of your class.



Am I mistaken?



....It can not be said of the locost cars because there is no production standard or list of required components.....

Michael D.



Branded Sevens are defined by the manufacturer and are therefor included as Sevens. The only Sevens on the road that are not clearly defined are Locosts and other one ofs that people put together.



It would seem to me that a simple spec would be to take the specs from a Lotus & or a Caterham Seven and make them the minimal dimensions. I believe they are the same.



Lrger and heavier would be acceptable.



I agree with Chet. As long as the Locost fits within the specs IE is not smaller than the Lotus Series 1 then it should be every bit as elegable to run as a 7.

http://www.usa7s.com/forum/uploads/20061102_001014_sevencut.gif

http://www.usa7s.com/forum/uploads/20061102_001052_sevenm.jpg<edited><editID>locostv8</editID><editDate>2006-11-02 00:13:49</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

Sorry about the forum software cutting off the graphic... To view the full graphic, right click on the image, click here: >http://www.usa7s.com/forum/uploads/20061102_001052_sevenm.jpg (http://www.usa7s.com/forum/uploads/20061102_001052_sevenm.jpg)

[slngsht]

Chetco and LocostV8,

I have limited knowledge of Locosts...

Can you guys give a brief description of:

1. What a "book chassis" is?

2. The common variations of a book chassis? I have seen references to the +4, or the 442.

3. Who are the main vendors who make standard book chassis? I think Coveland does. Others? Do they really follow the book?



I think there has to be room here to separate locosts that are built to some specification, from locost that are really engineered on their own.

[Locostdude]

One of the most complete online sites available for Locost chassis information is &lt;http://mcsorley.net/locost/drawings/bookChassis.pdf&gt;

The McSorley Home page has 3d drawings and much more.

************************************************** *

As to defining a "Standard" seven for a new autocross class, I don't know for sure.

I don't know what the goal is.

Do you want a class for un-modified factory built Caterham 7's? Or do you want class for limited modified seven like cars?

The SCCA Modified Advisory Committee (MAC) went through a long laborious process trying to come up with a set of rules that would bring parity to different types of cars, from unibody, to body on frame, and include the Lotus 7 type cars.

At least your task is limited to only Lotus 7, tube frame, and body type cars.

The MAC eventually defined what were competition producing items: Minimum weight, low center of gravity, wheel base, track, and horse power (engine size) were some of the items. The Lotus 7 was one of the obvious leaders in every one of those categories, so many of the minimum dimensions chosen for D/E mod were based on the Lotus 7. The minimum allowed floor pan dimensions are those of the Lotus 7. The floor pan minimums limit the length and width of the smallest car you can build (for D/E Mod).

Do you want to allow "in excess" cars?

Do you want weight breaks for different engine displacements?

Do you want to regonize the different performance potentials of OHV, OHC, DOHC engines?

What tires will be allowed, race, street, high perfromance DOT R tires?

If this is an SCCA class all cars will need to meet the minimum safety requirements of section 3.3 of the SCCA rule book. (roll bars, seat belts, etc)

Good luck, the SCCA has been working this problem (the Lotus 7) for ever. It all started when the Lotus 7 was approved as a "Production" car. Probably a bad idea.



Del Long

[locostv8]

http://mcsorley.net/locost/#Building%20a%20Sevenesque%20Sports%20Car

http://locost7.info/mirror/mirror.php



Actualy the "BOOK" chassis is closer to the original than the chassis produced by some of the vendors, Robinhood in particular. Again the "7" is by it's origins a Hill climb Special built on the components taken from production cars(race car built to racecar specifications of 50 years ago, MOD) with most being built from kits as one offs.



What the Dude said.<edited><editID>locostv8</editID><editDate>2006-11-02 07:12:51</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

Do you want a class for un-modified factory built Caterham 7's? Or do you want class for limited modified seven like cars?



Del, Great observation. THIS is the first question we all need to agree on. I'm pretty sure that on this question everyone is not on the same page.

[yellowss7]

Is it safe to assume that in regional events, the DMod class is not a highly populated one? For competition purposes it is great to have someone to compete against. While I have not run across any of the "Super Modified" 7's, I still believe that Tires and Driver skill make the most difference. A slick shod 135hp seven with a competent driver will beat a street tire shod, 200 hp seven. IMHO&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;And putting both on Slicks, or Street tires, I still think driver skill will determine the winner. Or is that over simplifying it?



Granted I have never competed at the national level. Seperating 7's by tire type at the local level, would possibly end up with one in each class.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;



Ergo, to compete you need to be on the same tires as your competitors, and then you need skill to win. Tom<edited><editID>yellowss7</editID><editDate>2006-11-02 07:30:03</editDate></edited>

[Locostdude]

We, IOWA REGION SCCA, are very fortunate to have 3-4 D/E Mod cars with at least 2 drivers each that compete at most local events. Really keeps you on your toes trying to keep up, BUT, leads to continual improvement programs on each of the cars.

Del Long

[slngsht]

Is it safe to assume that in regional events, the DMod class is not a highly populated one? For competition purposes it is great to have someone to compete against. While I have not run across any of the "Super Modified" 7's, I still believe that Tires and Driver skill make the most difference. A slick shod 135hp seven with a competent driver will beat a street tire shod, 200 hp seven. IMHO&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;And putting both on Slicks, or Street tires, I still think driver skill will determine the winner. Or is that over simplifying it?



Granted I have never competed at the national level. Seperating 7's by tire type at the local level, would possibly end up with one in each class.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;



Ergo, to compete you need to be on the same tires as your competitors, and then you need skill to win. Tom



K. I'll chime in as another non-competing autocrosser. Del, Michael D, or any of the others who run the nationals have more valuable input than me.



I think in a broad sense you are right that the 2 biggest factors are tires and driver skill. Those amount to 1 (or many cases more) seconds in run times.



However, margins of victory are much smaller. When a tenth of a second seperates the first few positions, can we say for sure that the giant spoiler on one car didn't make a difference? And if we honestly believe it didn't, why was it installed? Just food for thought.



As Del pointed out, his car and probably many others in DMod are results of many years of optimizing, changing, etc... At that level, every improvement is there for a reason. Common sense tells me a Caterham in stock trim that was purchased 10 years ago, and is setup properly, will still be slower than a winged car optimized for autox, given equal drivers, tires, power to weight ratio.

[Locostdude]

I'll add one more thought then I'll go back to lurk mode.

This years SCCA National was an anomoly, I think that's how you spell it, in that it was the first time we've all run on that asphalt surface. We, the SPRINTO team, made a good guess by thinking there wouldn't be as much grip as there was on the old concrete surface we've run on for the last few years. We correctly guessed extra weight would probably help our tires get up to temperature faster. The 350 pounds the car was over minimum in D Mod trim made a big difference in grip.

The front and rear spoilers were BIG psycological advantage.

If you can't out run them, distract them.



Back to lurk mode.

Del Long

[Al Navarro]

Del-I hope you won't be too much of a lurker, as I think your experience would be invaluable to any attempts at codification/standardization of a class. At the very least, check your Private Messages to see if anyone has reached out to you directly. Thanks again for visiting.-Al

[Locostdude]

I'm in enough trouble already, from people thinking I wrote the D/E Mod rules to fit my car, which I did not do. I just try to keep up the the latest revision.



Del Long

[SD-Jacks]

The recent protest in DM at nationals this year have underscored the need of new class for Sevens or another class that accepts Sevens. I am starting this thread as a place for those of us that are interested to discuss our options.



Please chime in.



MichaelD



This thread was started as a search for new class for Sevens. A new class would have rules and likely conflicts. A remedy will be needed to resolve conflicts.

The SCCA has set up rules in an attempt to create a level playing field. Unfortunately, no ‘scruttineering’ is done (as it is in SCCA Club Racing), and the only challenges allowed are through protests. Competitors will differ in their personal interpretation of the rules.



Because protest is the only enforcement tool SCCA offers, the D-Mod rules have been contested several times. A few years ago, Del Long protested a fellow D-Mod competitor. That competitor was disqualified and the next year returned with corrective changes—and has run uncontested since then. This protest, although, clarifying one point, left other areas of prep unanswered.



Differences of opinioin, will naturally occur, and as long as SCCA only offers a “protest” as the remedy to rule interpretation, it takes on an element of being personal. The impound and mandatory scrutiny that occurs in SCCA Club Racing..to confirm rule compliance, engine displacement, etc would be less contentious,less personal, more equitable, and likely to encourage compliance.

[Locostdude]

Differences of opinioin, will naturally occur, and as long as SCCA only offers a “protest” as the remedy to rule interpretation, it takes on an element of being personal. The impound and mandatory scrutiny that occurs in SCCA Club Racing..to confirm rule compliance, engine displacement, etc would be less contentious,less personal, more equitable, and likely to encourage compliance.



http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/coolgleamA.gif Good point. One thing that might work, for both D/E Mod, and the "new 7" class would be a compliance comittee made up of fellow competitors. They could review all the cars in impound, make suggestions, and ask questions.

Del Long&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/coolgleamA.gif

[BrianGT]

I don't see the point of creating a new class in the hopes to have a class that the "standard" 7 can be competitive in. I think that it would be better to just have the DM rules redefined, and separate from the prepared rules. With any class beyond the stock classes, there will always be possibility of someone building a purpose built autoX car, taking advantage of all of the allowances allowed by the rule set. I don't see how it would be possible to define a rule set that would allow sevens/locosts/caterhams, and not allow a purpose built car. If you truly want a competitive car and don't want to hack up your seven, leave the seven at home, and drive a competitive stock class car.



As for tires, if you create a new class and restrict it to DOT legal tires, then the tire choice is quite limited in the smaller sizes. The DOT legal tires like v710s favor large cars with large diameter tires when it comes to sizing. There are no wide v710s (&gt;225 width) that have a diameter less than 24.6". If you allow real slicks, then there are plenty of tires choices out there for the sevens.



I don't intend or expect the locost that I am building to ever be competitive in DM on a pax basis/class winning basis, but this won't stop me from building it, autocrossing it and having a good time.



--

Brian

[MichaelD]

Brian,



I tend to agree with you.



I started this thread here and on the DMEM site in an attempt to find out:



1. Why Sevens are primairly stuck in DM



2. How they got there.



3. Was there enough interest in a new Sevens class.



I have learned alot about all three points.



Sevens are the SCCA's bastard child because in the beginning they were just to fast for other classes and it is to hard to establish a standard for the car. There are way to many variables between different types of Sevens to create a standard for a "Stock Seven". Rules and excuses have always been established to keep various cars out of other classes. The Sven just happens to be one of them. It would seem to me that there is way to little interest for the SCCA to ever allow Sevens in another class yet alone create a class for Sevens.



Michael D.

[MichaelD]

Steve,



The biggest time difference in tires seems to be with Hoosier slicks. Most cars at Nationals run 13x10 Hoosiers.



This year it was much cooler than usual and the surface was sandy. Many drivers felt that narrower slicks or possibly the DOT radials may have supplied more traction. That discussion is still ongoing.



My bet is that in cooler weather (45 - 65 degrees) the 13x 7s or 8s will be faster while the 13x10s will still be faster in warm weather. That's where my money will go this year.



Then practice, practice, practice.



Have a great off season.



Michael D.

[manik]

Since the real differentiation between a 'Seven' and a 'Regular' car is the power-to-weight ratio, wouldn't it make sense to have a weight classification, and then subcategories based on engine displacement?



All this talk of windshields, fenders, wings, tires, etc., really doesn't have too much bearing on performance between Sevens (Westfield, Caterham, Birkin, or Locost). Trying to define a 'stock' Seven sounds impossible, so why not classify them under weight, then power (or vice-versa)? Stipulate that all cars must run street tires, or under the assumption that the lightest cars are track-specific cars to begin with and allow slicks in their category?



The biggest obstacle, from my point of view, is getting any participants to force the SCCA to create a special class.



NASA already has a Se7ens Challenge, no?



And yes, I realize NASA racing is not autocross! http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/smile5.gif





tm



<edited><editID>manik</editID><editDate>2006-11-10 15:03:13</editDate></edited>

[Boxologist]

http://www.motorsportsne.com/



has a list of classes by power to weight ratio.

[slngsht]

Since the real differentiation between a 'Seven' and a 'Regular' car is the power-to-weight ratio, wouldn't it make sense to have a weight classification, and then subcategories based on engine displacement?







Secondary to this discussion, but...



For autocross purposes, the real difference between a 'Seven' and a 'Regular' car is not power-to-weight. It's really weight and size.



A typical 150 hp Seven has pretty much the same power/weight ratio as a 400 hp C5 Z06. Z06 has really no chance against a Seven in an autocross.



Watching Sevens go straight through offset gates is frustrating when in a regular car you have to tap the brakes and flick the wheel from side to side to clear the same cones.

[manik]

http://www.motorsportsne.com/



has a list of classes by power to weight ratio.





Very nice, thanks for that. Remind me not to bring a Ford Fiesta or Aspire to any event...



Now with a 250HP engine and an 1,100 lb curb weight, one could do a lot worse. (0.227 ?)







tm

[sb427f-car]

I'll add one more thought then I'll go back to lurk mode.

This years SCCA National was an anomoly, I think that's how you spell it, in that it was the first time we've all run on that asphalt surface. We, the SPRINTO team, made a good guess by thinking there wouldn't be as much grip as there was on the old concrete surface we've run on for the last few years. We correctly guessed extra weight would probably help our tires get up to temperature faster. The 350 pounds the car was over minimum in D Mod trim made a big difference in grip.

The front and rear spoilers were BIG psycological advantage.

If you can't out run them, distract them.



Back to lurk mode.

Del Long



HAHA, that's old school right there (unless you're not admitting to everything). But I take it Smokey Yunick was a childhood hero?

[Locostdude]

[/QUOTE]



HAHA, that's old school right there (unless you're not admitting to everything). But I take it Smokey Yunick was a childhood hero? [/QUOTE]

http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/cheers2.gif Who, me?

Del Long http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/coolgleamA.gif

[whittlebeast]

I would realy like to see D and E split by D-Mod is street capable homebuilts including all "stock 7s" and all the others. The class could have commerically available DOT 200 tires and 5" ground clearance from the front tire CL to rear tire CL. 50-50 weight dist with driver or less rear. Bring all of the Cobras and "Cobra Clones" Leave E-Mod for the slamed hombuilts running the existing rules on any tire and lets go race.



In America, a "wing" is a device that produces downforce by providing a longer airflow path under the device as compared to the air going over the device. A splitter or air dam will not work at our speeds, a wing does work. We would have to deal with tunnels in this new devision of classes. Windshields ar not worth defining and regulating in D-Mod/Street class. It's all about CG height and CoF. All of us can make "enough" HP.



Lastly, I know of no car that is 25 years old technology in all of autocross that is still competive without serious mods.



AW

[slngsht]

and 5" ground clearance from the front tire CL to rear tire CL. AW



By the time my oil pan is 5" off the ground, my seven will look like an offroad vehicle http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/biggrin5.gif

[whittlebeast]

Ok



5" excluding the oil pan.



AW

[Grintch]

For autocross purposes, the real difference between a 'Seven' and a 'Regular' car is not power-to-weight. It's really weight and size.



A typical 150 hp Seven has pretty much the same power/weight ratio as a 400 hp C5 Z06. Z06 has really no chance against a Seven in an autocross.



Watching Sevens go straight through offset gates is frustrating when in a regular car you have to tap the brakes and flick the wheel from side to side to clear the same cones.



As Del posted in the DMOD forum, a typical 7 is comparable to most small cars (the Miata was Del basis of comparison) in width and wheelbase. We have less front and rear overhang, so our overall length is shorter but that is the only size advantage.



It is not at all uncommon for a well driven Super Stock Z06 to beat a 7 in an autocross. Look at the Solo Nationals results.



Bruce F.

[Grintch]

To take this discussion further, we need to define a Seven (wish us luck...)



1- Front-mid engined (engine block has to be 100% in front of the windshield mouting point??

2- Rear drive

3- 2 Seater

4- No rear wing

5- Fenders... Rear: must be substantially round (follow contour of the tire. Front: Must be clamshell style, or cycle fender - again, follow contour of the tire only.

6- No front wing

7- Windshield?? this is an interesting one... there are full, half, or WCM style???

8- Flat or open bottom between the front and rear centerlines?? any sevens not meet this?

9- Min and Max numbers for track, width, wheelbase, overall length?





#5 would outlaw real Lotus 7's, the series 4. Where the rear fenders are not "substantially round".

#7 there are a wide variety of windscreens run on even street driven 7s. I would not be in favor of any windscreen or glass requirement (I am am planning to install a small aeroscreen soon).



Why are we stuck in DM/EM? We have too much variation in engine types, power, suspension, and wheel and tires sizes to be easily classified in Stock, ST, or SP (plus we don't meet the requirement for a production car). Look at almost any other class where we would seem to have a chance at fitting (SM2, DP, XP), and you find that we would have to add 300-600lbs of ballast to meet the minimum weight requirements. Thus we end up in DM or EM. While we may not be fully prepared for the class, you can be reasonably competitivive in it, have a lot of fun, and not have to do the unthinkable (to the Lotus fan) of adding a ton of weight to our cars.



Bruce F.

<edited><editID>Grintch</editID><editDate>2006-11-20 12:28:57</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

5- Fenders... Rear: must be substantially round (follow contour of the tire. Front: Must be clamshell style, or cycle fender - again, follow contour of the tire only.





#5 would outlaw real Lotus 7's, the series 4. Where the rear fenders are not "substantially round".





What is it about #5 that would exclude a Series 4? http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/confused5.gif EDIT: I see what you mean about the rear.



<edited><editID>slngsht</editID><editDate>2006-11-20 12:48:07</editDate></edited>

[MichaelD]

Bruce,



I started this thread trying to see if there was enough interest to warrant a seperate class for "Stock" Sevens and to find out why Caterham Sevens were only allowed in either D or E Mod.



I think your post perty much provides the answers.



1. We have too much variation in engine types, power, suspension, and wheel and tires sizes to be easily classified in Stock, ST, or SP.



2. maybe we could enter or apply for (SM2, DP, XP), but who wants to add another 300-600lbs of ballast to meet the minimum weight requirements.



3. There isn't enough interest. Just count the number of names that have commented on this topic from both sites.



Thank you all for your comments. I guess I will stay in DM and learn how to drive faster. Like you said it's all about having fun anyway.



Michael D. http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/cheers2.gif

[yellowss7]

That's good news Michael, we'll continue our rivalry then. Would have hated to lose you from DMOD just because you have that heavy old Zetec. See you in the Spring. Tom

[BrianGT]

The 2007 PAX numbers are out:





Class 2006&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2007&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Change

DM&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.885 0.889 0.004

EM&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;0.881 0.879 -0.002









This means that for 2006 on a 60 second run in an Dmod car, a 60.683 sec run in an Emod would be equivalent, as opposed to 2006 where a 60.272 run would be equivalent.



Also equivalent to a 66.127 second run in a Mini Cooper S in the stock class on R-compound tires http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/smile5.gif



Full PAX list:

http://scca-chicago.com/solo/indexes/rtp2007.html



Excel sheet comparing the 2006 vs 2007 numbers:

http://scca-milwaukee.org/Solo/2007/RTP06vs07.xls



--

Brian<edited><editID>BrianGT</editID><editDate>2006-11-22 20:15:17</editDate></edited>

[slngsht]

For autocross purposes, the real difference between a 'Seven' and a 'Regular' car is not power-to-weight. It's really weight and size.



A typical 150 hp Seven has pretty much the same power/weight ratio as a 400 hp C5 Z06. Z06 has really no chance against a Seven in an autocross.



Watching Sevens go straight through offset gates is frustrating when in a regular car you have to tap the brakes and flick the wheel from side to side to clear the same cones.



As Del posted in the DMOD forum, a typical 7 is comparable to most small cars (the Miata was Del basis of comparison) in width and wheelbase. We have less front and rear overhang, so our overall length is shorter but that is the only size advantage.



It is not at all uncommon for a well driven Super Stock Z06 to beat a 7 in an autocross. Look at the Solo Nationals results.



Bruce F.



If I read the link that Brian GT just posted, typically DM cars are faster than SS, even though on any given autox, it is possible for a Z to beat a 7... The time indices I see are 56.24 for DMod vs. 58.96 for SS.

[Grintch]

If I read the link that Brian GT just posted, typically DM cars are faster than SS, even though on any given autox, it is possible for a Z to beat a 7... The time indices I see are 56.24 for DMod vs. 58.96 for SS.







So why bother to drive if the index determines how fast we are? The index got faster for most cars in the new '07 Pax (DM was one of the big movers), does this mean my car is faster now?



Looking at the 2005 National Tour & Nationals results (I didn't do detailed tracking for 2006):



SS beat DM 3 times, DM beat SS 6 times

SS beat EM 6 times, EM beat SS 5 times

(DM & EM didn't have competitors for 3 and 1 events respectively)



In general Nationals competitors have cars fully prepared to the limits of the rules. However this thread is about "stock 7's", which are not fully prepared. Thus the likelyhood of getting beat by a Stock class Z06 is much higher for a stock 7. Especially when you consider that a 7 is tricker to drive than a Stock class car.

[Boxologist]

i hate to bump old thread w/o good reason, but congrats shoudl be passed along to Del Long and Jeff Cashmore for driving the YC-3 to its national championship this year!

[yellowss7]

Having just returned from a great day autoxing, I have a few observations.

My seven, on Three year old slicks and 45 degrees temps does not make for an easy run.:ack:

A new Z06, has anitlock brakes and 7's don't.:cry:

Tires make a huge difference. I now understand that just because they have not hit their wear marks, doesn't mean they haven't reached the end of their life due to heat cycles.

I had a co-driver for the AM runs. He Turned the same times in a raceprepared 3 series turbo. He said my tires were crap. No way should he have equaled his own times in the BMW.

The 7 is the most fun car to drive period. At the end of every run we were a) out of breath as I think we held our breath for the whole run each time. and b) we were laughing hysterically at the end of each run because it was so much fun.

Still can't understand why everyone doesn't drive a 7. Everyone that rides with me gets out saying, " I've got to get me one of these" :yesnod: Tom

[Davemk1]

Having just returned from a great day autoxing, I have a few observations.

My seven, on Three year old slicks and 45 degrees temps does not make for an easy run.:ack:

A new Z06, has anitlock brakes and 7's don't.:cry:

Tires make a huge difference. I now understand that just because they have not hit their wear marks, doesn't mean they haven't reached the end of their life due to heat cycles.

I had a co-driver for the AM runs. He Turned the same times in a raceprepared 3 series turbo. He said my tires were crap. No way should he have equaled his own times in the BMW.

The 7 is the most fun car to drive period. At the end of every run we were a) out of breath as I think we held our breath for the whole run each time. and b) we were laughing hysterically at the end of each run because it was so much fun.

Still can't understand why everyone doesn't drive a 7. Everyone that rides with me gets out saying, " I've got to get me one of these" :yesnod: Tom


I had my last event of the season yesterday and had a ball. It's rare that we can have an event here in October and despite overnight rain and cold temps (40*) in the morning the sun came out and it was a great day. It warmed to about 60* so there was at least some grip.

As for tires....... I've been running Hoosiers for a few years now and they work very well as long as they are reasonable fresh. I buy a new set for each season after struggling through using a set until the rubber is gone. You are right that the amount of rubber left is not an indicator of the status of the tire. Heat cycles and age are the real deal. In fact I find that the newer they are the better they are even if they have lots of runs. Age is the enemy. I'll bet your 3 year old tires make the car a handful.

One thing that I've found works well for me is bagging the tires when ever they are not in use. I of course bag them through the winter but I also put them in sealed bags after and event even if they will be used the following weekend. Every time you open the bags you get that new tire smell indicating that they are still gassing out. It's this gassing out and the dying that takes place that kills them over time.

My big event of the season is the NORPAC divisionals in late July and I buy a new just before then and then run them for the rest of the season and then the following spring to be replaced again before that event. I't funny how mind blowing it is when you go from the old tires with lots of rubber left to the new ones. It's worth a second or two and each season it surprises me.

It's almost ski season here and there's snow in the hills and as much as I love ski season I'll miss the car time.

Stay well.

Dave

[basudec1509]

hello guys ... :leaving:

its really nice and informative post.... :bs:

i just liked it.... :seeya:

thanks for your information guys ........... :auto:

[Peahioi]

Hi,
Just learned of this site and of your posts regarding 7's and SCCA... Judging by the dates of the posts, I'm led to believe that nothing happened.
I was a one of the founders of the San Francisco Region Solo ll program in 1973 and have fought many of the "good fight" with National over the years... Some successful, others not so... In point of fact, rules exist which were in response to some of my rule observations and subsequent executions.
I'm now running a Caterham Superlight-R in SFR-SCCA class OSP (Open Street Prepared... a regional class). I choose (at the present) not to run E-Mod as I have issues with the rules... I prefer to run D-Mod but am not eligible as my engine is 2287cc...
I am looking into options which would equalize my entry into some national class... Again, fight the "Good Fight"...

I agree wirh a number of your observations but, not all...
I'd like to solicit input to an update to your 2006 posts, if they exist...
Any and all input will be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,

Dave

[DaveD]

Wow! What a thead.
But it sounds like :deadhorse:
Has anyone considered a time handicap class system? They had something called PAX when I last ran in 2005. But it sounded like a car based handicap and was not broken up into classes. I was thinking more of a time based handicap, like bracket racing in drag racing

(drag racing tracks are always straight and the same length, autox courses are not)

, but your handicap would be calculated and averaged everytime you ran instead of you picking it. It would need to be based on the driver/car combination (with the car in a specified configuration). You would have to establish a handicap time to run the car in different brackets base on the configuration. eg. street tires vs. race tires. If the times were broken down fine enough say 1-2 second increments, then everyone would be competing with other competitors that average very close times to what you run. I think this would give everyone a chance to win every now and then. As you get faster you would move up into faster time classes leaving those others behind in the slower time classes to still be able to complete in those classes.

Under this arrangement you get to have fun (which is why I autox) and also get to have a chance of doing well each time you run. I ran a few of those autox's in 05 where I was the only car running. In a time based class I would have always had other cars to run against. To me that would be more fun than watching my class competitor blow my time away while he runs a time that is only a couple tenths of a second off of FTD or me doing the same to someone else. Which both happened a couple of times to me in 2005.

Dave D.

[TSuppa]

FWIW:



First: This thread was created to discuss, in a Sevens site, what options we may have in Autocrossing with the SCCA. The current classing structure is not all that friendly to the basic Seven. It seems to be headed to custom built one ofs.



Second: DM is a Modified class. The rules keep changing to accomodate those that wish to build their own car to their own specifications without regard to any standard. That's fine if that is what you want to do. It is a modified class. This is the class for Locost and other one-ofs.



Third: Many of us do not feel we have modified cars and would like the opportunity to run in another class. That is what we are trying to accomplish.



I think there are enough of us that autocross. But how many of you would show up at Nationals is another question. Maybe we should find out before we have an exercise in futility.



When I look at the low number of people participating in this thread it, I wonder. It doesn't seem to be very well represented. More comments may lead to a better representation of ideas.



I am printing all of the comments to this thread for reference. As soon as I get the time I will begin to combine the ideas into a suggestion for further discussion.

I actually live 20 minutes from the Lincoln AirPark (nationals site). I own a Locost and would not consider running in the nationals. I consider my car a very stock 7. 150hp, street tires etc..... Even "local" events here are becoming less attractive for stockish 7's due to the problems listed in previous posts. The highly modified 7's show up at even local events, probably because of the venue. When possible I show up for local events, with no illusions about being competative. It would be nice to compete in a class where my car had a chance of being competative with a good driver(not me.:blush:)

[pi7ot]

I don't autox my Birkin due to the classing.
My 125hp road legal, road tyred car against a gutted, 10" wide wheeled 250hp machine on slicks? I reckon not.
I also ran into a similar problem with the Midwest Council of sports car clubs and their High speed autox. My Birkin was classed in superstock with Vettes, Gt3 Porsches, while the Caterham was classed in A stock with Mustangs and M3 E46 vintage.

I use it for HPDEs with the Lotus Club and use an E30 M3 for BMW events as they don't allow open top cars to participate..


m

[Tedzilla]

This thread is kind of like listening to somebody complaining about showing up with a pogo stick for a hockey game and not being able to compete because of the bad rules...:nopity:
In racing you build the car to the rules and use the best parts if you want a chance of winning or you drive for fun.

[DeanG]

Entered my 1958 Seven in the local SCCA auto-x last weekend. I entered it in CS street tire. Even if I were a good driver there isn't much chance of placing high. I figure if I can be 10 to 12 seconds slower than FTD on a 30-40 second course I am doing well.

Dealing with the SCCA is about the most political thing most car enthuasiasts ever do. They seem to hate dealing with Lotus cars. They are too few cars and too many poorly documented varients and too fast. Also Lotus doesn't seem to support them. On the other hand they love Porsche with their Germanic mania for standardization and documentation coupled with their support of the club.

[Mondo]

I've raced motorcycles & bicycles.. got the serious competitor bug out of my system a while back (too intense & too much $$$ for me).
I've only done a couple track days so far, but for me it's just seeing how fast I can get my car around. Don't really care about the rules, just want to drive fast! As far as auto-x, everyone sees your time anyway... that's all that really matters (as some can be glad your not in their class).
Guess if I was really good, it might make a difference... though that gets back to Tedzilla's comments. Just about every type of racing's organization has ticky-tacky rules that don't seem right (for some). It's sadly part of any "race experience" and if you want to win you have to know the rules inside-out.


,

[speedwagon]

there are really very few true sevens and very hard to classify. Most racing organizations are good old boy, life is not fair, I personally have never went to the starting line when i didn't think that i had an unfair advantage,(sometimes i was confused). I have access to open roads without traffic that can be played on, but would consider track day or autocross just for fun and to run against my own time. What is really unfair that these wonderful cars are wasted on old folks, if only i could have had one when 30 maybe it would have been used to it's full potential. doubt that i will live long enough to learn how to press this car. I f you are going to compete; pick a class and build to that class, otherwise be happy running with the big boys who do. life is a trip the destination is not the goal. was thinking about Yellowstone trip but am still learning car, just discovered that the metering pump was disabled and it should have been on premix- the pitfalls of buying rather than building. john canning- Ticaboo, ut

[pi7ot]

This thread is kind of like listening to somebody complaining about showing up with a pogo stick for a hockey game and not being able to compete because of the bad rules...:nopity:
In racing you build the car to the rules and use the best parts if you want a chance of winning or you drive for fun.

You're missing the plot.
This is not racing.
It is supposed to be an affordable entry level activity using an automobile.
Not everyone is willing to modify their 7 into a Non streetable trailer queen.
Not everyone can be bothered to spend Thousands of dollars for three track(sorry, parking lot) sessions that last 90-130 seconds each.


m

[DeanG]

...Not everyone can be bothered to spend Thousands of dollars for three track(sorry, parking lot) sessions that last 90-130 seconds each.

More like 30-40 seconds at many venues. At my previous auto-x I believe that I was the slowest or slowest non-novice. I had 44 - 47 second runs. The FTD was in the 32 - 33 second range.

[The Stig]

Sprint and Hillclimb classes in the UK do in fact take account of Sevens, Caterhams, Westfields etc and the classes work out pretty fairly in most cases allowing stock road Sevens ample opportunity to be competitive in varying weather conditions - the less modified cars do better in the rain!

The classes for the majority of the events are this and there are 5 highlighted classes exclusively for Sevens and similar cars:

A1. Road going Series Production Cars up to 1400cc
A2. Road going Series Production Cars over 1400cc and up to 1800cc
A3. Road going Series Production Cars over 1800cc and up to 2600cc
A4. Road going Series Production Cars over 2600cc
B1. Road going Specialist Production Cars. Car engines up to 1400cc & M/c engines up to 875cc.
B2. Road going Specialist Production Cars. Car engines over 1400cc up to 1800cc & M/c engines up to 1125cc.
B3. Road going Specialist Production Cars. Car engines over 1800cc and M/c Engines over 1125cc.
C1. Modified Limited Production Cars up to 1400cc
C2. Modified Limited Production Cars over 1400cc up to 1800cc
C3. Modified Limited Production Cars over 1800cc up to 2600cc
C4 Modified Limited Production Cars over 2600cc
C5 Modified Specialist Production Cars. Car engines up to 1800cc & M/c engines up to 1125cc
C6. Modified Specialist Production Cars. Car engines over 1800cc & M/c engines over 1125cc.
D1. Sports Libre Cars up to 1800cc
D2. Sports Libre Cars over 1800cc
D3 Rally Cars up to 1600cc
D4. Rally Cars over 1600cc
E1. Racing cars up to 1100cc
E2. Racing cars over 1100cc and up to 1600cc
E3. Racing Cars over 1600cc up to 2000cc
E4. Racing Cars over 2000cc

The primary difference in the Road Going and Modified classes is that Rioad Going must be road legal on street tyres and Modified is generally slicks and wings. In 9 years of competition in these classes, I have never known any particular issues.

Maybe the SCCA should look further afield for inspiration. Sevens make great Autocross cars and diversity dhould be encouraged.

BTW. I figured out once that minute for minute Sprint/Autocross events cost more than running a car at Le Mans!

[Tedzilla]

You're missing the plot.
This is not racing.
It is supposed to be an affordable entry level activity using an automobile.
Not everyone is willing to modify their 7 into a Non streetable trailer queen.
Not everyone can be bothered to spend Thousands of dollars for three track(sorry, parking lot) sessions that last 90-130 seconds each.


m
No, you've missed it...
You want to be classed so you have a chance of winning. If you want to win, it's competition. Timed automotive competition is racing.
If you're not willing to do what it takes to win, enjoy losing or at least lose quietly.
The yearly tire bill of serious local autocrosser is often in the thousands and that's just the tip of the iceberg of car prep. Multiply these expenses if you're doing track events. For a winning effort there's considerable time and travel expense. A person who runs 5-10 times a year can't reasonably expect to compete with drivers running 30-50 times a year.
You must also take a hard look at yourself... even if you do the work, spend the time, spend the money and take the lessons you still most likely won't win.
Some clubs give participation awards and if that's what you want you should join that sort of club rather than complaining about competitive clubs.

[DeanG]

No, you've missed it...

Actually I think you missed it. Auto-x has lost some of its appeal as it no longer is a grass roots sport. Sure it is supposed to be competitive but... Local auto-x now seems to be practice for national events. National level preparation (or regional level preparation) at local events seems wrong. It certainly discourages beginners and mid level competitors. Maybe local events need to class the national and regional level cars/drivers in a separate handicapped category. If they were true sportsmen rather than trophy hounds they could run for fun and not be scored at local events.

Two stories.

One of my friends gave up competitive pistol shooting when he went to the the Virginia state championships one year. He had the top score through most of the 2 day event. When the USMC national shooting team showed up he quickly fell down the ranking. He now refuses to shoot against professionals, especially those who are paid with his tax dollars.

At the other extreme one acquaintance of mine used to dominate the model airplane control line event - Carrier. He would often go to contests in order to practice and refuse to be scored, instead he would perform demonstrations.

[Tedzilla]

For every lap I drive on the track in competition I teach 40+ laps for SCCA. For every Autocross run I make I instruct 5-10 runs for the other clubs I run with. I put time and effort into my driving and help others do the same. I put time and effort into my cars and don't mind sharing. These are more productive ways to advance motorsports than whining about the injustices of every sanctioning body's racing rules to your personal situation/equipment.
I have no sympathy for those who want to win without doing what it takes to win. I am occasionally irritated when a mediocre driver in a very fast car beats me, but I'll bet they're way more irritated when I beat them. I honestly admire those who can beat me with comparable equipment. I read the rules, look at my discretionary funds and do my best.
If I'm hopelessly over-matched I select a car/driver combination not too much better and focus on beating them. If I beat them I raise the bar, if I lose I keep working on it.
Competition is not about how you want to feel. You've got to do what it takes if you want to earn a win. If driving with serious competitors is too much for you, drive around in your backyard then go to Staples and buy yourself a trophy.

[Kitcat]

I learned many things in my stint as an auto-X-er. I learned car control and vehicle dynamics. On some curves I learned I didn't have to apply the brakes to slow, just turning the steering wheel was enough. I learned the gas pedal was not an off-on switch, it would produce better results when modulated. I learned the car would go where I looked and I learned to look ahead, way ahead.

I also learned humility. In 10 years, I won one auto-x, tho I was usually in the top 1/3 in my class. I had no talent, tho practice made me better than the average driver.

I did have friends who had talent. They learned that other drivers in our stock class would buy 10 versions of a critical part and test them looking to see what part had a 1/2 hp advantage. Times as many parts as they thot wld make a difference. They learned that since shock absorbers were allowed to be re-valved, they could be jiggered to stay 1/2 compressed for the 30" run and then slowly return to normal height by "tech". This effectively lowered the car's ride height, which was otherwise illegal. Stock engines spent many hours on dynos looking for a coupla ponies that the scrutineers wouldn't realize were illegally gained. They bought high-end Hoosiers good for a few runs, towed to events, tested in the off season, etc., etc. Cheating was rampant, or at least believed to be rampant (made a convenient excuse for being creamed by another competitor).

Typically people, like me, got the auto-X bug, went nuts for a while, had a ton of fun (I know I did at least) and finally grew tired of being beaten by drivers with more talent, $, and or commitment and moved on. When I look at the local folks dedicated to racing auto-x, there are almost no old timers. Virtually everyone has gone on to other things. I don't consider that an indictment, I learned car skills, made great friends and spent too much money.

But anyone one getting in has to know that to be a top driver in auto-x takes amazing and non-stop effort. For some its worth it. One of the local guys who started when I did (Jason Saini-in '93) was a garage rat. He worked at a local tire shop as a gofor. When I bought sticky Hoosiers, he heat cycled them on the street for me as part of his duties. He ultimately became a national SCCA auto X champ in a Honda S2000. He lived breathed and slept auto-x. Now he's paid to road race. But for the rest of us, we have to find things about auto-x we love, besides winning.

Mike M.

[Boxologist]

For every lap I drive on the track in competition I teach 40+ laps for SCCA. For every Autocross run I make I instruct 5-10 runs for the other clubs I run with. I put time and effort into my driving and help others do the same. I put time and effort into my cars and don't mind sharing. These are more productive ways to advance motorsports than whining about the injustices of every sanctioning body's racing rules to your personal situation/equipment.
I have no sympathy for those who want to win without doing what it takes to win. I am occasionally irritated when a mediocre driver in a very fast car beats me, but I'll bet they're way more irritated when I beat them. I honestly admire those who can beat me with comparable equipment. I read the rules, look at my discretionary funds and do my best.
If I'm hopelessly over-matched I select a car/driver combination not too much better and focus on beating them. If I beat them I raise the bar, if I lose I keep working on it.
Competition is not about how you want to feel. You've got to do what it takes if you want to earn a win. If driving with serious competitors is too much for you, drive around in your backyard then go to Staples and buy yourself a trophy.

+1 internetz for u.

There are many different clubs to autoX with in your area if your lucky. I think I am since I have 2 SCCA , 2 BMWCCA. 2 PCA and 1 NASA region within a 1/2 hour drive in the morning. Plus a couple of other local unaffiliated other clubs.

So you go to an autoX. You woke up early on a weekend. You won't be home til the late afternoon. If you live close by to a site and you are not one of the volunteers that help an event run. Otherwise you do not live near the site or are one of the volunteers which the event depends on to run. Then you wake up a o'dark:30 and will be home late.

So why did you go? To have fun. Did you enjoy driving your car hard? did you like the people there? Did you earn a $2-5 dollar trophy that not autoX people will think is crap? if 2 of 3 are answered NO, then your not coming back. It's a waste of your time. Even a single NO is enough for people to go do something else on a nice weekend day.

Do you enjoy driving your car hard? If you don't then maybe you do car shows or you consider a car to be in the same league as a disher washer or air conditioner.

Do you like the people there? This is make or break for the day for most people. Someone at an autoX spends most of the day not driving. Can you enjoy yourself? If not, road racing and HPDEs are what coming your way hopefully. But the people who stick around autoXs for any length of time have a competetive streak in them. So they will drive hard, and want to drive faster than YOU.

Trophy time. Do you really need a class to win a trophy to make the day worthwile.


That's the crux of on whether a person will come back to another autoX. If you like autoXing, you'll autoX nearly anything. The rules arguement I find to be BS. Either someone has prepped there car to what they want so it's fun for them, or they will prep the car to the rules.