2015 SCCA CAM Rules

[IndyDave]

APPENDIX B - CLASSIC AMERICAN MUSCLE (CAM)

Rationale: The purpose of CAM is to attract automobile enthusiasts who are currently interested and/or participating in Goodguys®, Ultimate Street Car Association®, or other similar events for “classic” vehicles manufactured in North America by “The Big Three” based in the US (GM, Ford, and Chrysler). These avid enthusiasts would largely be a new and different group to join us as SCCA® members and participants. Regions are encouraged to offer this program using a single CAM class or the National Solo® supplemental classes to encourage Classic American Muscle car enthusiasts to join the fun at your SCCA Solo® events!

Eligible Vehicles

•Vehicle must be either a domestic automobile of front-engine/RWD configuration or a “pick-up” truck.

•Vehicle must be licensed and insured and considered fully “street legal” (lights, wipers, etc.). Windshield and glass must be OE or equivalent except as subsequently allowed. Interior and exterior must have a “finished” look.

•Vehicle must pass the mandatory safety inspection (tech) and be in compliance with Section 3, Vehicles, of the 2015 SCCA® National Solo® Rules.

•Excluded: Chevrolet Corvette (1984-2015), Dodge/SRT Viper (all)

Body Allowances

•Body panels may be modified or replaced in the original standard locations.

•Rear seating may be removed or modified .If removed, seat bottom area
must be covered; seat back area must be covered with a panel.

•Interior panels (door panels, kick panels, etc.) may be replaced and must cover any opening(s) the original panel(s) concealed. A single panel may only be replaced by another single panel.

•Dash may be modifed or replaced, but must be complete and cover the original area.

•Headliner may be replaced or removed.

•Exposed metal interior surfaces must be covered, painted, and/or coated. (No “race car” interiors, please.)

•Fuel tank/cell may be modified or replaced and must be separated from the driver/passengers as originally manufactured or by a metal panel/ bulkhead. Fuel must not vent into the driver/passenger compartment directly or indirectly.

•Front splitter, air dam, and/or spoiler may be added below the bumper, but must not extend past the perimeter of the body.

•Rear spoiler may be added, but may extend no more than 8” from the original body nor past the perimeter of the body. No rear wings may be added except OE or equivalent.

Wheel and Tire Allowances

•Any metallic wheels are allowed. Non-metallic wheels are also allowed but must be certified / approved from an appropriate, recognized standards organization (e.g., FIA, SFI, SAE, TUV, etc.).

•Any DOT-approved tires with a UTQG Treadwear Grade of 200 or higher are permitted.

Body Electrical System Allowances

•Components and wiring are unrestricted.

Brake System Allowances

•Components, lines, and hoses are unrestricted.

Suspension and Steering Allowances

•Components and method of attachment are unrestricted.

Engine and Drive Train Allowances

•Components (internal and external) are unrestricted.

Supplemental Classes, as used at SCCA® National Solo® events:

CAM-T (Traditional) (body styles originating from 1954-72)

•Examples: Camaro (-1981), Mustang (-1973), Barracuda (-1974)

•Seating originally for 4 or more adults

•Wheelbase, minimum (inches) .................................................. ................................108

•Weight, minimum (lbs.) .................................................. ............................................3000

•Interior floor covering(s) may be replaced, but not removed.

CAM-C (Contemporary) (body styles originating from 1978-on)

•Included: Pontiac GTO (2004-06), Pontiac G8 (2008-09), Chevrolet SS (2014-15)

•Seating originally for 4 or more adults

•Wheelbase, minimum (inches) .................................................. ................................100

•Weight, minimum (lbs.) .................................................. ............................................3000

•Interior floor covering(s) may be replaced, but not removed.

CAM-S (Sports) (minimum wheelbase - 90”)

•Seating originally for 2 or more adults

•Wheelbase, minimum (inches) .................................................. ...................................90

•Weight, minimum (lbs.) .................................................. ............................................2600

•Weight, minimum (lbs.) w/ Lexan® windshield .............................................2750

Note: In 2016, OE or equivalent windshields will be required in keeping with CAM philosophy of “no race cars.”

•Side windows may be replaced with Lexan® or equivalent and operating mechanism may be removed or changed.

•Interior floor covering may be removed

[nokones]

I'm curious on why they will not allow the C4 Corvettes when they allow the C3 Corvettes. I would like to know what is the difference when the performance rules are the same and both generation Corvettes have IRS. It does not make sense to me. I would like to know what was the thinking behind this decision.

[IndyDave]

I'm curious on why they will not allow the C4 Corvettes when they allow the C3 Corvettes. I would like to know what is the difference when the performance rules are the same and both generation Corvettes have IRS. It does not make sense to me. I would like to know what was the thinking behind this decision.

Everything from a C-5 Corvette bolts under a C-4 so a C-4 effectively becomes a C-5. IRS had nothing to do with the decision.

[Gratefuldiver]

Now if they only enforce it. It bugged the **** out of me that 1990+ Camaros and Mustangs where allowed to compete in the CAM class. Im sorry, its not a muscle car. Its not even about me winning, Eric's Camaro is the fastest CAM car in STL, it was just the idea of it.

[SSLance]

1990+ Camaros and Mustangs are legal in the new CAM-C class. Eric's Camaro would run in CAM-T.

I would have preferred that the SCCA pit like modified CAM cars against like modified CAM cars regardless of make, model, or year...but they chose this route instead. I guess they'd rather see the older body styles race against the older body styles regardless of mods, and the newer cars against the newer.

I'll still race with the SCCA and will still have tons of fun. I hope the CAM class continues to grow, they really do put on a great show out on the course.

[Gratefuldiver]

Right, I was saying Eric's car was what I would have considered a CAM car. Im glad they broke up the CAM classes, but I see where your going with mods to mods and stock to stock regardless of year. Maybe a CAM T Mod class and a CAM T Stock class will come at a bigger events. I still new to all this and just like going out and running the heck out of my car vs going to car shows like I did in that past

[Z06vet]

My local SCCA did not run the CAM class at all last year because they said they had no PAX for it. I really dont care what class they put me in or who else is in it. I just want the seat time. Its close by, inexpensive, and well run. It would be cool to have the class and be able to run in it. Curious to see what happens this year

[dontlifttoshift]

There is a pax for all of the CAM classes this year.

[nokones]

Everything from a C-5 Corvette bolts under a C-4 so a C-4 effectively becomes a C-5. IRS had nothing to do with the decision.

Well, that is not true. So, what was the "real" reason why the C4 and newer Corvettes were excluded? What exactly do you mean everything from a C5 bolts under a C4. Please feel free to explain to me what will bolt on the C4 Corvette from the C5 with the exception of the front brake calipers, and the fact that would be of an performance dominating factor over other vehicles in the class. The trans and rear diff unit is different and so are the suspension attachment points. The rules allow you to drop in a LS engine with any amount of horsepower. You can use any shock or spring rate, you can modify any suspension component and the method of attachment is unrestricted. You can also put aftermarket 6 piston calipers on your car in accordance with the rules. Essentially, all modifications are free so, what is benefit by eliminating the Corvettes, especially the C4 Corvettes, have to do with trying to keep the usual SCCA thinking of leveling the playing field the same? The leveling of the playing field should be left/decided by the competitor and the modifications that he or she do to their cars in order to be competitive. The decision should not be with a regulatory committee.

According to the rules, all the performance enhancements and modifications that can be done to a C4 or newer Corvette can be done to a C3 or older Corvette and the C3 and older Corvettes are still eligible to compete in CAM. Please explain to me what would the performance difference would be in this case.

Honestly, a C4 owner would not take anything off of a C5 Corvette if theyw ant to be competitive in CAM. A C4 can be competitive with a just about any available aftermarket C4 performance product like what the Classic cars are doing with the front and rear suspension modifications that are offered by companies that specialize in these upgrades like Detroit Speed Engineering and Ridetechs of the performance speciality market.

What about the fact that you can bolt a C4 suspension under a C2 Corvette? Does that make a C2 a C4? No, it does not. It is still a C2 with a better suspension. That is what the Pro-Touring rules are all about, no performance rules, just simple rules that it has to be an american production car with body panels and a finish interior with registration and insurance in order to be a legal road worth vehicle. If you look at all of the performance and modification rules, they simply say, "Are Unrestructed".

If you read from the beginning of the Proposed CAM rule starting where it says, "rationale", in part it states, "The purpose of CAM is to attract automobile enthusiasts who are currently interested and/or participating in Goodguys®, Ultimate Street Car Association®, or other similar events", I believe the SEB missed the point in attracting all of these enthusiasts. They have excluded some of theses enthusiasts by eliminating the C4 and newer Corvettes and the Vipers. In my opinion, the Vipers are not of any advantage over other high horse power car with a very good suspension on an autocross course and the SEB still excluded the Viper from CAM. I have yet to find where the Viper has won a National Solo Championship even with Gary Thomason driving a Viper. If Gary Thomason can't make it happen, I believe it would be very tough for the Danny Popp and Dan Livezy's of the world to make it happen and that is probably why they do not compete in a Viper. I say, let them compete, bring them on, I like beating Vipers.

I am sure curious why anyone would think that the C4 Corvettes would be a dominate car over any other car in this category?

[SSLance]

The newer Corvettes already have a SCCA class where they are competitive, several of them in fact depending on prep level.

The CAM classes were originally started to give those American cars that did not have any other SCCA classes available a class that they could run in competitively.

[nokones]

The newer Corvettes already have a SCCA class where they are competitive, several of them in fact depending on prep level.

The CAM classes were originally started to give those American cars that did not have any other SCCA classes available a class that they could run in competitively.

And what class would that be? Maybe in the Stock class a Corvette would be competitive but, we are not talking about stock Corvettes. BSP? That won't work. SSM? Nope, not this class either, not against the RX7 TTs and the Lotus The Corvette is too heavy to be competitive against the EVOs and RX7 TTs. That is why they went away, back in the 90s. Look what happened in SS back in the 90s when they merged the RX7 TTs from AS to SS. The entire class of 54 Corvettes stop coming to the National Championships and the class comprise of only about 12-13 RX7 tts. "AS" was a competitive class by itself with the 12-13 RX7 TTs and the 12-13 RX7 TTs drove away the 54 Corvettes from SS. That was not a very bright idea on the SEB.

When I was the Street Prepared Advisory Group Chairperson in the 90s, I was successful in reclassing the C4 Corvettes from ASP to BSP. The BSP Class was a very competitive class between the C2, C3, and C4 Corvettes at the time. After my tenure of being the Chairperson, they reclassed one of the all-wheel drive non-american cars into BSP. Again that drove away all the Corvettes. Again. that was not a very bright idea again.

Believe me, I am not for an all inclusive car class but, there is no way that a heavy Corvette and can equally compete against a very light car with high horsepower to weight ratio and better braking. In the CAM Class, those factors kinda go away when the performance enhancement modification rules are unrestricted and the fact that it has to be an american car.

I believe the SEB was premature in excluding the 1984 and newer Corvettes and Vipers from the CAM category without any hard facts and data as being a dominant car in the CAM – Contemporary sub-class. My suggestion is allow the 1984 and newer Corvettes and the Vipers compete in CAM until there are the facts and data dictate otherwise that they should be excluded. Maybe they should add a fourth CAM sub-class just for the 1984 and newer Corvettes and the Vipers and see what happens. Maybe the number of competitors may be low and may be they won't be low. I doubt that the numbers for the CAM-S will be overwhelming with Cobras. I can see a couple of Cobras but, not a lot of them will compete in that sub-class.

The CAM rules allow the late model GTOs and the Chevrolet SS compete so it can't be the fact that newer cars do not belong in CAM.

Over time the Corvette enthusiasts went elsewhere to run their cars in various events with the Corvette Councils and clubs. The various Corvette Councils and Clubs rules were a lot more liberal in performance enhancements than the SCCA rules allowed. Those enhancements and modifications are well outside the scope of the not only the Stock and Street Prepared Category rules, even the Super Street Modified rules may be questionable. The CAM rules that were adopted from the Good Guys and Ultimate Street Car Association rules are a perfect set of rules that will fit the modifications that were performed by the Corvette enthusiasts. The SCCA CAM Class gives those Corvette a place to compete just like the organizations has allowed. Why should the SCCA exclude them?

[Gratefuldiver]

[QUOTE=nokones;1107274]

The CAM rules allow the late model GTOs and the Chevrolet SS compete so it can't be the fact that newer cars do not belong in CAM.

Classic=25-30 years old

[IndyDave]

Kenny,

I'll admit my knowledge of Corvettes is limited, what I stated about them above is what I was told when I questioned why the C-4 got put on the exclusions list. As for the C-5 and newer Corvettes in CAM, what was learned from last year was that when those cars were allowed in a Region's CAM class, participation went down in the class. There are other places for Corvettes to play. My understanding is that most of the Corvettes that were being complained about would have easily fit in A Street and Corvettes do well there. It was a constant complaint from many competing in CAM this past year whether there were those Corvettes competing in their CAM class or not. If you want to voice your complaint the best folks to talk to are Howard Duncan, or Raleigh Boreen. They are the decision makers for CAM. They will listen. They're just trying to do what's best for the growth of CAM.

[dontlifttoshift]

sigh.......

Do you have a C4? Do you know someone who does? You were on the AC, you know the process, write a letter to Raleigh or Howard and let them know how you feel.

I wasn't there, but I am guessing that C4 vettes disappeared when the C5 presented itself as a _much_ better car in every single way.

[IndyDave]

[QUOTE=Gratefuldiver;1107280]

Classic=25-30 years old

Classic can have many meanings......... It's just a catchy name for the class. BTW: At the CAM Invitational the CAM/T cars had a lower index than the CAM/C cars which means the T cars were faster. In my own Region, one of the fastest cars in the class is a '77 Trans Am, contemporary cars are not superior, trust me. Yes they have anti-lock and traction control, but those things are designed to help idiots from killing themselves in an avoidance maneuver, not lower lap times. If you want to go fast in a new car you have to turn off or disable all that garbage.

[SSLance]

I think you have that backward Dave, the C cars had a lower index because Feighner brought his Fox body with wide tires on it and kicked the craps out of all of the rest of the C and T cars. The T cars got to leave the line a few tenths before the C cars...I know because Robbie Unser in his T Chevy II had a head start on me in my 1985 Monte Carlo.

This is what gets me...

None of these cars these classes are for are fast stock (except the Corvettes) and ALL of them can be made to be just as fast as the rest of them with the no restrictions mods allowed. I'm not sure why the T and C cars are separated at all, a better way to separate them and keep both sides competitive would be by front tire size...but that isn't the SCCA way.

[nokones]

[QUOTE=IndyDave;1107285]

Classic can have many meanings......... It's just a catchy name for the class. BTW: At the CAM Invitational the CAM/T cars had a lower index than the CAM/C cars which means the T cars were faster. In my own Region, one of the fastest cars in the class is a '77 Trans Am, contemporary cars are not superior, trust me. Yes they have anti-lock and traction control, but those things are designed to help idiots from killing themselves in an avoidance maneuver, not lower lap times. If you want to go fast in a new car you have to turn off or disable all that garbage.

I totally agree with the classic definition 25-30 years and that is why I think I should be able to compete my Classic 1989 Corvette in CAM. According to most states regarding the law in regards vintage cars, the threshold is 25 years. I believe I am well within that definition with my 26 year old 1989 Corvette.

I don't care which sub-class I am in. I just want to compete in the class and I don't care if my car would be an underdog because I will make it a competitive car for the sub-class.

[nokones]

I think you have that backward Dave, the C cars had a lower index because Feighner brought his Fox body with wide tires on it and kicked the craps out of all of the rest of the C and T cars. The T cars got to leave the line a few tenths before the C cars...I know because Robbie Unser in his T Chevy II had a head start on me in my 1985 Monte Carlo.

This is what gets me...

None of these cars these classes are for are fast stock (except the Corvettes) and ALL of them can be made to be just as fast as the rest of them with the no restrictions mods allowed. I'm not sure why the T and C cars are separated at all, a better way to separate them and keep both sides competitive would be by front tire size...but that isn't the SCCA way.

But, we are not talking stock in Pro-Touring. When you have unlimited rules that makes it a pretty level playing field to me. That allows you to put all the go-fast parts you want on your car for whatever level you want to compete in.

Now, be careful. You're asking for a performance rule to limit a performance enhancement, if you want to limit tire sizes. That is not in the spirit of Pro-Touring. Remember, there are no performance rules in Pro-Touring. That is what Pro-Touring is all about, you can do whatever mods you want without limitation of any rules.

[nokones]

sigh.......

Do you have a C4? Do you know someone who does? You were on the AC, you know the process, write a letter to Raleigh or Howard and let them know how you feel.

I wasn't there, but I am guessing that C4 vettes disappeared when the C5 presented itself as a _much_ better car in every single way.

Yes I do have a C4 Corvette. I know a gazillion people who have a C4 Corvette. Yes, I know the process. I did write a letter back in October. They obviously didn't consider my input regarding the C4 Corvette. Actually, the process is you don't write a letter to Howard or anyone when it is in regards to the rules, you write it to the Solo Events Board (SEB). Yes, I wrote another letter. It was mailed out this afternoon.

The C4 Corvettes disappeared way before the C5 Corvettes were ever made public. The C4s disappeared because the SEB merged the RX7 TTs in with the C4 class. in stock trim, the C5 Corvette is a much better car because of more horsepower, better braking, and it is a little lighter in weight than the C4 Corvette. The suspension on the C5 may look good on paper but not in action than the C4 Corvette.

[SSLance]

Kenny, would you be happy if the C4 was allowed to run in CAM-S?

To me, no way should the C4 or any Corvette for that matter be allowed to compete against the rest of the front heavy Muscle cars in T and C. S is the only place for them in this configuration.