|
I took my FR-S to the BSCC novice event that was on Saturday and had the time of my life. Learned a poo poo ton and it was a blast. I think I managed to run the complete course once or maybe twice hahaha, next time i'm gonna bring a pad or something so I can draw the track out and remember it better. Hopefully i'll be at the next actual event, didn't realize a lot of you (two people) are around the area too.
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 07:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
I got an HJC CL-16. Good helmet for the price
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
Muffinpox posted:Typically we get 8-10 runs at high 60s/low 70s for the fastest cars Do you go to the NER ones they have at Devons? That's a pretty good amount of runs and I was thinking about doing it this year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
Bumming Your Scene posted:I got an HJC CL-16. Good helmet for the price I've got the same. Great price for a Snell M and it works really well with my glasses for a closed face.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
Billy Tully posted:Do you go to the NER ones they have at Devons? That's a pretty good amount of runs and I was thinking about doing it this year. Nah, BSCC/TCUSA/NESVT are the ones that get the most seat time. BMWCCA is fun too, they have more SCCA like course design. I got in 8 runs last time with them on a low 70s course, but I think you only get 8 every event whereas I've gotten 12-14 at the other 3. NER I've heard isn't really that fun at all unless you're there to compete.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
Muffinpox posted:Nah, BSCC/TCUSA/NESVT are the ones that get the most seat time. BMWCCA is fun too, they have more SCCA like course design. I got in 8 runs last time with them on a low 70s course, but I think you only get 8 every event whereas I've gotten 12-14 at the other 3. NER I've heard isn't really that fun at all unless you're there to compete. Ah ok, I'm definitely not there to compete except with myself. I'll check out the other ones, close to CT would be the best.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Mat_Drinks posted:Hah, that sure sounds like the Bremerton group. Some really fast people run with them in really unusual cars. For a while they had a guy running a Pantera that was pretty darn fast. They also have a guy with a Syclone that I rode along in once... It was scary going that fast while sitting up that high. I was surprised to see the same super stock C5 [thanks Kimbo I meant to type Z06, not C6.] vette I used to see running 10+ years ago when I ran my RX-7. I saw that (or a) Pantera coming in for the afternoon session while I was packing up. Speaking of unorthodox autocross cars, there was a guy about 10 years ago who would come out to Bremerton with his Olds Calais 442 in the rain and set best times. I'll be there on 4/14 morning session. Helmet-wise, I run my Shoei Qwest motorcycle helmet. In my experience with motorcycle helmets, you get better build quality and aerodynamic characteristics with a slightly more expensive model. The wind rattled my old cheap Bell apart pretty quickly, but my Shoei holds together and is a lot quieter in the wind than the Bell ever was. clutchpuck fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Mar 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:I was surprised to see the same super stock C6 vette I used to see running 10+ years ago when I ran my RX-7. C6? That came out in 2004 as a 2005 model year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Brigdh posted:I'm currently running a HJC AR10 II (SA2010) that I got from Soloracer.com Bumming Your Scene posted:I got an HJC CL-16. Good helmet for the price Crustashio posted:I've got the same. Great price for a Snell M and it works really well with my glasses for a closed face. I somehow had never heard of HJC until now, but I like the look of both of those helmets a lot. Thanks for the recommendations. I'm leaning towards the CL-16 because while the AR10 features would be nice, if I'm honest with myself I don't know that I'll be doing anything that requires HANS or those nicer features anytime soon and the pricing of the CL is really hard to argue with. It sounds like the HJC's run big so a large will fit my 7 3/4" head. gotchobo posted:next time i'm gonna bring a pad or something so I can draw the track out and remember it better. They have maps on paper available at normal sessions... Since the novice schools are often big courses made to try to show you all of the possible features of an auto x course, they sometimes don't have maps. clutchpuck posted:...with his Olds Calais 442 in the rain and set best times. He was still out there double running with someone as recent as three years ago. I remember the weird look of the car and the fact that the exhaust wasn't attached to the car at the midpipe so you'd often see it flexing away from the car in tight corners. I'll keep an eye out for you and say hi, assuming I go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
Brigdh posted:I'll state my bias here, I'm safety certified by the SCCA and a member of my local region's board that puts on the Solo events, so I get a "behind the scenes view" of much of what goes into a SCCA event. A few of our board members also run the local BMWCCA chapter, so theres some local collaboration between the two clubs. I was a safety steward in SCCA for a while and let it lapse because my region was just a joke when it came to safety. Cars running at each other, cars doing flat out toward "non-participants", braking zones in front of the timing trailer. Then a browbeating from the fat redneck assholes in corvettes who ran the club if you pointed this out. Sacramento SCCA can kiss my rear end. They basically kept losing all their venues too. At some point when they kill someone, they will lose the club too. I didn't want to be responsible. San Francisco and Fresno SCCA were much better, though in SF you got very few runs, but on awesome courses against the best drivers. I think the cost was fairly reasonable as long as you were a member. (MOWOG in Minnesota was still the best) As someone said it is highly regional. If your club is run by assholes, you'll have a bad time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 06:15
|
|
|
nm posted:I was a safety steward in SCCA for a while and let it lapse because my region was just a joke when it came to safety. Cars running at each other, cars doing flat out toward "non-participants", braking zones in front of the timing trailer. Then a browbeating from the fat redneck assholes in corvettes who ran the club if you pointed this out. Sacramento SCCA can kiss my rear end. They basically kept losing all their venues too. At some point when they kill someone, they will lose the club too. I didn't want to be responsible. Sounds like the Cheif of Safety wasn't doing their job. Visiting Safety Stewards have been known to cause the NAtional Office to yank a clubs sanction and put them on probation. nm posted:(MOWOG in Minnesota was still the best) As someone said it is highly regional. If your club is run by assholes, you'll have a bad time. This is true, there are bad apples everywhere, although in my experience that in general SCCA clubs tend to be the most inclusive and have a good eye on safety. I've personally seen a AW11 MR2 go head first into a concrete wall-barrier only 15 feet off course while spectating at a non-scca event. Luckily, no one was hurt, but the general consensus from the event organizers was that the driver should have been more careful in the slalom because it was close to the barrier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 07:00
|
|
|
Pics are popping up from the Bremerton event last Sunday. This one is great; I knew I saw this guy tripodding everywhere, but it looks like he was even coming up on two.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:Pics are popping up from the Bremerton event last Sunday. This one is great; I knew I saw this guy tripodding everywhere, but it looks like he was even coming up on two. What level of prep is "PS"? I've seen a few FSP cars go up higher than that on two wheels, until the owner decided it was too much grip and went to narrower tires
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
PS is "Prepared Sedan":BSCC Rules posted:Extensive modifications such as:
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Looks like SCCA wants to really change things around. Specifically changing the "Stock" classes into "Street" classes. Here are some snippets: quote:The section likely to get the most attention in the proposal is 13.3, Tires. The proposal would set a 2014 treadwear minimum of 140 and a 2015 minimum of 200. Part of the logic behind this is reducing cost per run. Some will claim that testing and optimizing 200+ treadwear tires will be just as costly as current R-Compound tires. There will always be a faction of our sport that will invest heavily in achieving the greatest pace and it is possible that the treadwear limitations will not result in significant savings for them. However, for the average competitor, the per run cost of autocrossing would be greatly reduced with the higher treadwear ratings as the number of on pace competition runs a tire could produce would meaningfully increase. quote:In all of this the Board also decided it was time to move past the name Stock and adopt “Street,” as Stock was no longer reflective of the level of preparation in the category. http://www.solomatters.com/2013/03/street-catagory-proposal-explained/
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 00:07
|
|
|
G-Mach posted:Looks like SCCA wants to really change things around. Specifically changing the "Stock" classes into "Street" classes. I just read it. It makes sense to me, and I think its a good move that was clearly coming (RT was advertised as an experiment about shaking up Stock). However, I think its going to get a lot of resistance from people currently running stock (I'm already hearing that a set of tires and shocks isn't that expensive), and apparently no one on the SAC knew about this, the SEB kinda did it on their own. We'll see what actually happens...
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
I never understood why slicks were standard for the stock classes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
Beach Bum posted:I never understood why slicks were standard for the stock classes. Because they were not slicks, they were DOT approved for road use, you just never wanted to actually drive on the road with them (and many were labeled not intended for highway use). The rule came from the 70s when tire technology sucked compared to today's standards and never evolved. Actual slicks are only allowed in Prepared and Modified
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 00:38
|
|
|
"DOT Slicks" are still slicks. I don't care about that one little groove in the tread. You can call a rose a sunflower all day long but it's still a rose.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 01:02
|
|
|
Beach Bum posted:"DOT Slicks" are still slicks. I don't care about that one little groove in the tread. So, a Yokohama A048 is ok then? Or a Kumho W710? Both of those are basically "DOT slicks" with a bit more tread...
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
Also; NT-01s, RA1s, R888s, Hoosier Wets. There are a lot of treaded R-comp tires.Brigdh posted:I just read it. It makes sense to me, and I think its a good move that was clearly coming (RT was advertised as an experiment about shaking up Stock). However, I think its going to get a lot of resistance from people currently running stock (I'm already hearing that a set of tires and shocks isn't that expensive), and apparently no one on the SAC knew about this, the SEB kinda did it on their own. LP *SP is there for the people currently running stock and want to stay on r-comps. They get to add another sway bar and some camber plates. Beach Bum, you're ignoring the fact that these rules were created int he 70s. The tire landscape then was no where near what it is like now and sure as hell didn't have manufacturer support for making 'competition grade' street tires for AX and Time Attack. FatCow fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Mar 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
I read the whole thing and personally, I think it's awesome. I've been autocrossing on and off for the past five years and while I really enjoy it, the barrier of price for the more prepared classes and the hassle of dealing with an extra set of tires for the 'stock' classes has prevented me from actually wanting to run a full season. In fact, when I compete, I do so as 'time only' because I don't want people that have sunk money into tires and crazy shocks thinking I am trying to compete with them and that they're winning. Looking at 200 wear tires, of which star specs are one, this means that a car with summer street tires, sway bars, and koni yellows will be able to drive there, compete at a not laughable level, and drive home. Without a tire change! Seems like 2015 may be the year I actually make a go at an autocross season (assuming these rules are final). edit: also, I'm SO glad they'll allow for two sway bars... I've always thought that running a huge front bar only is retarded and that's one more thing that has acted as a barrier... I don't want that poo poo on my DD!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 03:56
|
|
|
Stock class? Like the ones with 32-way Ohlins, Hoosier A6s, and the biggest FSB you can find?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
Phone posted:Stock class? Like the ones with 32-way Ohlins, Hoosier A6s, and the biggest FSB you can find? I had a great time in my "F-stock" 99 Mustang Cobra running A6s. I'd typically destroy my class and the rest of the stock classes and make a lot of EVO and WRX owners mad when I would run a faster time. So I can see where the SCCA is coming from and I approve of the changes they are proposing. I just think they are brushing aside the fact that recession really put racing in a lot of people's minds on the back burner. Here in the upper midwest I don't necessarily think this will lead to a lot of newbies coming in, but people who have autox'ed in the past that might now autox again. I know a guy that sells me take offs of A6/R6s/R-comps with around 70% treadwear left for $200ish. (It's awesome.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 06:59
|
|
|
Brigdh posted:So, a Yokohama A048 is ok then? Or a Kumho W710? Both of those are basically "DOT slicks" with a bit more tread... You're just being pedantic at this point. Or trolling. I care not which. Phone posted:Stock class? Like the ones with 32-way Ohlins, Hoosier A6s, and the biggest FSB you can find? Pretty much this. Ironically the National Level NA's and NB's in CS were some of the most blatant indicators of what was wrong with Stock. Remote reservoir shocks in "stock class" is laughable. I never knew about that one until I read the article. Getting my E30 into STX was the best thing I ever did for being regionally competitive. I realize that tires were different back in the day, but this rulechange has been long overdue and will bring out a LOT of new blood in my region. There are several dudes out there that want to come out and race, but don't want to modify their car to bring it up to ST levels to get out of the hell-for-newbies that was the old "Stock" class, and became frustrated at never pulling a trophy or even getting close to the guys with $8000 shocks and Beach Bum fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Mar 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 14:46
|
|
|
FatCow posted:LP *SP is there for the people currently running stock and want to stay on r-comps. They get to add another sway bar and some camber plates. Yeah, thats bringing out a whole other bitchfest. My general feeling is its mostly the current SS drivers that hate it because "a vette is too powerful for any tire", and feel that limited prep will just add more classes which seems to be whatthey point out as is killing Stock instead of R-comps Beach Bum posted:You're just being pedantic at this point. Or trolling. I care not which. You claim that "DOT slicks" are silly, yet don't draw a line on what that means since apparently the DOT classification isn't enough. Since your argument was that two tread valleys wasn't enough, I pointed out two tires that have near the same performance for being R-compound, yet had more tread. Fatcow pointed out more. Tire manufacturers have told the SCCA that they can maneuver around nearly any rule that's put down, but they currently don't because Autocross doesn't factor into their balance sheet at all. Andy Hollis and a number of the other experienced old timers just had a public discussion about how to regulate tires in Stock, and the discussion concluded that the only way to do it was either mandate DOT tires (which is the current rule) or enforce treadwear. No other system works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
Or they can just kill a tire like they did to the magic pixie dust 195 R1Rs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
Phone posted:Or they can just kill a tire like they did to the magic pixie dust 195 R1Rs. Eh, that's not really a good way of doing things. The pixie dust tire actually met all off the rules, so banning it opened a can of worms. It would have been more appropriate to ban the entire R1R line, but again, it meets the requirements as currently stated. Also, there is nothing preventing Toyo from re-releasing it as the R2R, other than the fact that autocrossers are not even a blip on the bottom line of a tire company, so there's no benefit for the cost that would incur on Toyo. Also, the exclusion list is reactive. If the goal is to get rid of R-comps, its better to define the tire qualification rules in some way to make that happen, rather than throw every R-comp line on the exclusion list, since the list needs to be updated every time a new one comes out, and typically rule changes don't take effect until the next year, so when a new tire comes out, you'd have a whole year people could take advantage of it before it gets banned, and people will.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
Being new to Seattle, I've been meaning to check out Bremerton and fart around the course with my Z28; looks like I just missed the first novice day?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
Brigdh posted:Eh, that's not really a good way of doing things. The pixie dust tire actually met all off the rules, so banning it opened a can of worms. It would have been more appropriate to ban the entire R1R line, but again, it meets the requirements as currently stated. Also, there is nothing preventing Toyo from re-releasing it as the R2R, other than the fact that autocrossers are not even a blip on the bottom line of a tire company, so there's no benefit for the cost that would incur on Toyo. The 195mm had a special construction and banning the entire line didn't make sense. It's also why the rulebook spun ST into a few smaller classes and created STC (god's chariot class).
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
Dubious posted:Being new to Seattle, I've been meaning to check out Bremerton and fart around the course with my Z28; looks like I just missed the first novice day? You missed the novice school/practice, but novices are always welcome to the events. You'll be able to get an experienced passenger in your car if you want.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
Phone posted:The 195mm had a special construction and banning the entire line didn't make sense. It's also why the rulebook spun ST into a few smaller classes and created STC (god's chariot class). And where in the current stock rules do you see a provision for banning a tire based on special construction? I just reviewed them, and I don't see it unless you feel pixie dust differs from standard specification, in which case, please point out the standard specification it violates. I know there's a huge perception that pixie dust automatically makes you a class winner, but a couple national caliber drivers evaluated the alternatives and it basically comes down to cost. You can get the same performance out of a Z1 star spec or RS3, but it costs more. And splitting up ST made sense for other reasons than just the spec civic. ST is a decent concept, but its a terrible execution. I don't view it as a true upgrade from Stock because many Stock cars are not classed, and have no place in ST. ST would be great if it was a full upgrade from Stock for all clars, like SP is, but that means increasing the class count, which many argue is too high already. For my current car, I didn't like the current Stock rules, and really wanted to run ST, but I couldn't even think of where to propose classing it, so I just moved up to BSP instead. If I wasn't so invested in BSP right now, I'd seriously consider a move back to Street as its currently proposed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
People didn't run 195/50R15 R1Rs shaved to the belts because it was $10 cheaper per corner. E: it isn't in the stock section, but the scca rulebook has precedent of banning specific tires Phone fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Mar 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
Phone posted:People didn't run 195/50R15 R1Rs shaved to the belts because it was $10 cheaper per corner. That happens to be the reason why the Nationals guys in my region (many of which have won) chose to run it in the past. I can't speak for Average Joe, simplext explination I can think of is they saw the R1R being run by national champs and decided that was the tire to have. Shocks seem to be the same thing. Seems like most people see the Nationals guys running a $10k set of Penskes with remote resavors and decide they have to emulate that, even when a $1k set of Konis would work just as well and has been used to win. Do you have specific examples of banned tires? The only one I current see is the Pirelli P Zero Corsa ban in ST, which is an entire line, not a specific size, and it doesn't even meet the tread wear minimums so I'm not sure what its even listed unless it happened to be OEM on something
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
2013 Road Tire pdf.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
Phone posted:2013 Road Tire pdf. You mean this: Excluded tires: Pirelli P Zero Corsa ; Toyo Proxes R1R (195/50/15 size only) So, the tire line and tire that was already banned in ST. That does not make a precedent, that's following one. Try again?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
I don't know what you're even arguing about now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
Phone posted:I don't know what you're even arguing about now. Autocross competition.txt
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
Phone posted:I don't know what you're even arguing about now. You stated that the rule book has/had a precedent for banning specific tire. I took that to be a response to my comment that banning the 195 R1R was unusual, and that you had evidence that such a ban had been done before. I asked for an example. You pointed to the 2013 RT rules, which ban the same tires that are currently banned, which occurred after those tires were banned in the main rule book, therefore not setting an example, ie unless you have another example, the 195 R1R is still the first time a specific tire size has been banned instead of banning an entire line. So, basically I'm still waiting for you to back up your statement that banning a specific tire size such as the 195 R1R was done sometime in the past, before the 195 R1R ban. Muffinpox posted:Autocross competition.txt Could be said about anything. Driving a semi.txt perhaps? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
I've been phone posting, so I may have said something weird; however, I was intending to say that there is now a precedent for banning specific tires because of this year's ban on the 195 R1R. I never meant to say that the R1R ban was inline with previous SCCA actions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 20:32
|
|