SCCA is adding a class just for us!

[IndyDave]

Below is the final draft of rules to be presented to the SCCA BoD for a class targeted specifically at Pro-Touring cars. This was brought forth by Raleigh Boreen who's a member of my Region (Indianapolis) after much research and input from people in the Pro-Touring world as well as experience from Indy Region's SMC class. Raleigh and his wife Velma are working as paid consultants to the SCCA working on methods and ways to help regions improve and expand regions tools to put on better Solo (autocross) events. One of the things they were charged with is how to attract more of us to SCCA events.

Pending BoD approval (which is almost certain) the new class called CAM (Classic American Muscle) will be a Regional only class meaning the class won't be included in National Tour events, Solo Match Tour events, and the Solo Nationals. At least initially. There are already things I can't talk about that may happen that could expand class recognition. The class will be in Appendix B of the 2014 SCCA Solo Rule Book.



　CAM - Appendix BAPPENDIX B - CLASSIC AMERICAN MUSCLE (CAM)
<DIR>Rationale: The purpose of CAM is to attract automobile enthusiasts to SCCA who are currently interested in and/or participating in the Goodguys® Autocross events or other similar events for "classic" vehicles (e.g., Street Machine, Muscle Car, Hot Rod, Truck, Street Car, Late Model, etc.) built in North America by manufacturers based in the US (e.g., "The Big Three" – GM, Ford, and Chrysler). These avid enthusiasts would largely be a new and different group of folks to join with us as SCCA® members and participants.
However, many of these types of cars may not have a favorable classification at their local SCCA® Solo® events. By having a simple, single set of rules used across the country, these new autocross enthusiasts would be able to participate in multiple Regional Solo® events with a more consistent experience. Additionally, this gives SCCA and the Solo® Events Board an opportunity to see the viability of this type of participation at all levels of Solo® events. Therefore, Regions are encouraged to offer this program and to encourage Classic American Muscle car enthusiasts to join the fun at your SCCA Solo events!
Eligible Vehicles
</DIR>


Vehicle must be considered a "street legal" (lights, wipers, etc.), US-domestic automobile of front-engine/RWD configuration or a "pick-up" truck. Must be licensed and insured.
Vehicle must pass the mandatory safety inspection (tech) and be in compliance with Section 3, Vehicles, of the 2014 SCCA® National Solo® Rules.
Vehicles must weigh 3000 pounds or more.

　
<DIR>Body
</DIR>


All body panels must be present in the original standard locations and may be modified or replaced. Exc



eption: High-Boys (1954 and earlier), Roadsters (1954 and earlier), and Trucks (1940 and earlier) are not required to have fenders or hood sides.
All glass must be present. Side glass components may be replaced by Lexan®.
Interior must be finished and have minimum seating for two adults.
The fuel tank/cell must be separated from the driver/passenger compartment by a metal panel/bulkhead. The fuel tank/cell shall not vent into the driver/passenger compartment.

　
<DIR>Wheels and Tires
</DIR>


Any metallic wheels are allowed. Non-metallic wheels must be certified from an appropriate, recognized standards organization (e.g., FIA, SFI, SAE, TUV, etc.).
Only DOT-approved tires with a UTQG Treadwear Grade of 200 or more are permitted.

draft a

A

ppendix B - CAM2013 SCCA® National Solo® Rules— 281
<DIR>Body Electrical System
</DIR>


Electrical components and wiring are unrestricted.

　
<DIR>Brake System
</DIR>


Brake system and components are unrestricted.

　
<DIR>Suspension and Steering
</DIR>


Suspension and steering components are unrestricted. Method of attachment is unrestricted.

　
<DIR>Engine and Drive Train
</DIR>


Engine, drive train, and associated components (internal and external) are unrestricted.

　
<DIR>Classing Options, based on local demand:
</DIR>


A single CAM class for vehicles meeting the above requirements.
Two classes (CAM-A and CAM-B) split on a model year (e.g., pre-1973 and 1973-on or pre-1983 and 1983-on).
Two classes based on body style; muscle car and/or hot rod (alternate minimum weights may be considered).
Other methods of subdividing based on local CAM enthusiast requests.

[SSLance]

FANTASTIC!!!

This is great news Dave, I can't wait to see how the BOD reacts to this.

[IndyDave]

FANTASTIC!!!

This is great news Dave, I can't wait to see how the BOD reacts to this.

If you mean SCCA's BoD, my understanding that this is a done deal. Or are you talking about your Region's BoD?

[csouth]

Thats great news, more opportunities for seat time...

[SSLance]

SCCA's BOD... I thought it was pending based on your post?

I'm curious if our Region should adopt this class or just run with the Street Machine class we adopted last fall for the upcoming season?

I'd love to compete at Nationals in CAM. Can't wait to see how this takes off.

[avewhtboy]

Sounds pretty interesting to me but I would hate to need to ad 500lbs of balast to my car.

[SSLance]

lol... I could shave 500 pounds off and still be good... :)

[tommycomfort]

Excellent! We hope to make some time to run with the Indy and Columbus region in 2014.

[IndyDave]

SCCA's BOD... I thought it was pending based on your post?

I'm curious if our Region should adopt this class or just run with the Street Machine class we adopted last fall for the upcoming season?

I'd love to compete at Nationals in CAM. Can't wait to see how this takes off.

It is still pending but SCCA's BoD as of late has taken the view if something is presented by the program rules committees then they will approve it with little to no question. The BoD is taking the view that they are there as oversite but that the committees know best what is needed for their programs. So unless something is presented that's really out of line with the SCCA's mission, they'll approve it.

Here in Indy we will be adopting the CAM rules in place of our SMC rules. For CAM to be successful, everyone needs to support CAM.

[IndyDave]

Excellent! We hope to make some time to run with the Indy and Columbus region in 2014.

We'd love to have you run Indy events! For 2014 we have added 2 events at the Indiana State Fairgrounds and have one at the Indianapolis Speedrome. The rest of the schedule will be at grippy Grissom in Peru.

In addition to our Solo events we will be hosting at least 2, hopefully 3 Dragcrosses at Grissom. Dragcross is our local version of SCCA's Pro-Solo but it's simplified. We don't utilize a class structure instead we create eliminators via qualifying. Qualifying consists of 2 passes on each course with the sum of the best time from each course being the qualifying time. Cars are then placed in either 8 or 16 car eliminators based on their qualifying time. Eliminations are run with each pairing making a run on each course and the sum of the 2 runs determines a winner. The courses start side by side drag race style and peel off into separate autocross courses. One course is a longer, more open "fast" course while the other course is a shorter but slower and more technical "slow" course. In eliminations hitting a cone is an instant loss. Each eliminator produces a winner and the winners compete for Champions honors in a final eliminator that is run with handicaps. First round losers go on to compete in an all-run eliminator in which the winner also competes in the Championship eliminator. It's a ton of fun and everybody gets a minimum of 8 runs!

[IndyDave]

Sounds pretty interesting to me but I would hate to need to ad 500lbs of balast to my car.

The upside is you can add that 500# were it would do you the most good!

[dontlifttoshift]

This is pretty cool. I will contact Chicago and Milwaukee region and see if they are interested in running this.

Jason Rhodes had drafted up something similar, although far more in depth, that looked like it could have worked at a National level. He was calling it STP, admittedly, I didn't think there was a chance in hell of anything like this going through with SCCA.

Dave, I could not care less, but the SCCA types will want to know if anyone had though about a pax number for this class yet?

[SSLance]

It is still pending but SCCA's BoD as of late has taken the view if something is presented by the program rules committees then they will approve it with little to no question. The BoD is taking the view that they are there as oversite but that the committees know best what is needed for their programs. So unless something is presented that's really out of line with the SCCA's mission, they'll approve it.

Here in Indy we will be adopting the CAM rules in place of our SMC rules. For CAM to be successful, everyone needs to support CAM.


I saw a draft of the 2014 rule book and it's in there.

I agree that we should run CAM to support it. I'll start letting everyone know about it around here.

[IndyDave]

This is pretty cool. I will contact Chicago and Milwaukee region and see if they are interested in running this.

Jason Rhodes had drafted up something similar, although far more in depth, that looked like it could have worked at a National level. He was calling it STP, admittedly, I didn't think there was a chance in hell of anything like this going through with SCCA.

Dave, I could not care less, but the SCCA types will want to know if anyone had though about a pax number for this class yet?

PAX is still being figured out by people who know and care a whole lot more about PAX than me. I read Jason's thread over on RoadRaceAutoX and while it was well crafted, it was VERY SCCA-ized. I know that the decision was made early on to refrain from SCCA-izing any ruleset any more than was needed to satisfy SCCA safety rules. The goal was to give pro-touring folk another option to get seat time and get all the Regions on the same page rule wise.

[musclecarmatt]

very sweet!...I need the seat time!

[RAFTRACER]

I am glad that this appears to be moving forward. I had spoke to Raleigh about this on a couple of occasions and saw the initial rules outline and was asked my opinion. I think this is mutually good for both parties, although it doesn't really add "opportunities" to run SCCA events and there was always a place for muscle cars to run regardless, this just allows them there own playground as SSM,CP,EM were not good places for PT cars to run , especially on 200tw tires.

If Indy region SCCA is interested in promoting this class, there may be an opportunity the 1st weekend of May for Indy to put on an exclusive autocross for these cars as a large number of them will be in the area for the MWMCC , and are looking for a good autocross venue I believe on that Saturday in Indianapolis instead of heading back to Lawrenceville as they have in the past. I have heard that you guys have an event that Sunday, but would it be possible to run an event on the Saturday ??

~Danny

[IndyDave]

I am glad that this appears to be moving forward. I had spoke to Raleigh about this on a couple of occasions and saw the initial rules outline and was asked my opinion. I think this is mutually good for both parties, although it doesn't really add "opportunities" to run SCCA events and there was always a place for muscle cars to run regardless, this just allows them there own playground as SSM,CP,EM were not good places for PT cars to run , especially on 200tw tires

If Indy region SCCA is interested in promoting this class, there may be an opportunity the 1st weekend of May for Indy to put on an exclusive autocross for these cars as a large number of them will be in the area for the MWMCC , and are looking for a good autocross venue I believe on that Saturday in Indianapolis instead of heading back to Lawrenceville as they have in the past. I have heard that you guys have an event that Sunday, but would it be possible to run an event on the Saturday ??

~Danny

Well, Saturday we are hosting an autocross for One Lap of America. They come in around 11 and are out by 2. We could put on a CAM only or street tire only event after that. We just have to be off the site by sundown. Let me work on that......

[dontlifttoshift]

It would be awesome if Midwest Muscle could bookend the One Lap autocross!

[RAFTRACER]

Well, Saturday we are hosting an autocross for One Lap of America. They come in around 11 and are out by 2. We could put on a CAM only or street tire only event after that. We just have to be off the site by sundown. Let me work on that......

I am assuming that is in Peru at Grissom ?? If so that is as far as a drive as going to Lawrenceville. That would be awesome to run there , but a far drive and they are probably interested in an exclusive event.

Ill try to contact you next week, Dave...

[soloracerSD]

There is also CP and SM those are 4 seater class that allows you to run lighter. It's up to what you choose to do..Or just add weight and make it work.


I'm still wondering if this is a done deal or something suggested

[SSLance]

Our local Region's Solo Program Manager is under the assumption it is a done deal.

Here is the link to the 2014 rulebook draft

http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/2014%20Solo%20Rules%20Book%201%20draft%20a%20reduc ed.pdf

[j-rho]

PAX is still being figured out by people who know and care a whole lot more about PAX than me. I read Jason's thread over on RoadRaceAutoX and while it was well crafted, it was VERY SCCA-ized. I know that the decision was made early on to refrain from SCCA-izing any ruleset any more than was needed to satisfy SCCA safety rules. The goal was to give pro-touring folk another option to get seat time and get all the Regions on the same page rule wise.The problem is this class allows scratch-built tube-frame monsters with a tiny footprint, massive aero, and race car weight distribution (60%+ rear)...which is not anything like what P-T is about. It wouldn't have been that hard to exclude obvious ringers, while disallowing practically nobody.

I'm not complaining, but will be holding off on changing my car until they come up with a place where stock-bodied classic cars on street tires have a legitimate place to play.

This is just a "provisional" class - not a real one. There is no championship on the line.

[dontlifttoshift]

looks like .830 is the number

[Larry Callahan]

First off I haven't read the rules yet but, if I didn't care about points and just wanted to go out and have fun could I run pretty much anything as long as it passes safety?

[Ron Sutton]

Sounds pretty interesting to me but I would hate to need to ad 500lbs of balast to my car.

Are you thinking your car will weigh 2500# ?

[SSLance]

First off I haven't read the rules yet but, if I didn't care about points and just wanted to go out and have fun could I run pretty much anything as long as it passes safety?


The SCCA draws the line at Solo with vehicles with a high center of gravity, think SUVs, crossovers...I think they initially even banned the new Fiat 500s. Once you have something that won't rollover, is technically safe and sound, and find a class to run it in, only other requirement is to basically follow the safe event guidelines. They frown at burnouts, doughnuts, that kind of behavior (again, mainly safety related).

IF you can abide by all of that though, they really are pretty fun events to attend. We do about 1 a month here in the KC Region, typically on a Sunday and if you time it right you can get in and out in 3 hours or so...or you can spend all day out there depending on how you register and schedule your run and work groups.

[soloracerSD]

You can always run anything at a SCCA event...As long it isn't a high risk vehicle of tipping over and passes safety inspection.The suggested CAM class is open for regions to make adjustments.Our split in San Diego may be 78 and older.Maybe if it is a kitcar using a current Corvett chassis.WE would put it in later then 78.I don't see anything in CAM restricting bodies being separated from frames.Alot of gaps in the rules.So it's written in a way for regions to adjust.I look at it as a note to regions to take notice there is a new trend of cars coming that could be road going ESP, SM, CP,XP SSM class older Muscle cars on 200 tread ware .Not a National Class but could be used in your regional National Tour Solo 2 I think.I'm just a local San Diego Autocrosser.

Our next event in San Diego is 25,26 QUALCOMM stadium if anyone is interested. Half to 2/3 of a mile course.On slopes and flat area.25th is preregister practice.26 is walk up




First off I haven't read the rules yet but, if I didn't care about points and just wanted to go out and have fun could I run pretty much anything as long as it passes safety?

[Rod]

Sounds pretty interesting to me but I would hate to need to ad 500lbs of balast to my car.



Are you thinking your car will weigh 2500# ?

whoa! super race car, I need to find all those secret lighting tips! the faster my car gets the heavier it seems to become?

[Bryce]

I will have to add 300 lbs to the falcon, unless the weight is with driver??

[soloracerSD]

THe 3000lb isn't set in stone.(Alternate minimum weights may be considered)CAM is written that you can adopt other ways in your region. 3000lb and up is what is used in CP cars using more then 5.1 liters..2700 under 5.0..You could say live axle 5.0 liter and smaller none turbo push rod engines cars are at minimum of 2700lb with interior etc..These issues are being debated now in our region..and it's 3weeks to next event.
There is even a Tweeked SM formula that can be used.Bryce You have heard this all from me before...LOL Some peoples ears are burning after hearing it from me so many times..:) Will we see you next event and make some calls to see how things are laying out for CAM SD

You can also look at it as, Less reason for finding ways of losing weight and more time autocrossing it...:)
Tract time track time

BTW Some say you don't need so many rules but Competitive minded need them.Competition is in the details



I will have to add 300 lbs to the falcon, unless the weight is with driver??

[IndyDave]

With the SCCA the weight always includes the driver unless otherwise noted in class rules, so yes, CAM is 3000# including driver.

Remember that CAM's rules essentially mimic Goodguys and American Street Car Series rules so any "gaps or omissions" are there because that's what others are doing. The 3000# truly has come at the request of competitors from those series. It's really the only big deviation the SCCA has made in contrast to those other series. SCCA wrote into the rules flexibility so Regions can tailor CAM what their situations demand. My only suggestion to Regions would be to give the rules a chance as they stand at first. From chatter I've seen people are worried about situations that don't exist yet and given what is seen in current series hasn't been an issue.

[dontlifttoshift]

My only suggestion to Regions would be to give the rules a chance as they stand at first. .

Wait, we are supposed to try it BEFORE we say it sucks?? That's absurd, why do we have internetz for then?


Chicago region sounds like a go for CAM as it is currently written.....I will run there when I can.

[SSLance]

Kansas City Region is going to use CAM as well, as written no year split (for now). .830 is better than what I ran with last year in SM, guess that's the street tire factor.

[soloracerSD]

WE already have 7 to 15 pro-touring cars running with us per event. Closer to 20 if you count the ones that show up in 12 months that are 1976 and older.Thats without having a official PT class .But we have managed to always have them in a class together.They have asked for a class for over a year.Having CAM as a suggested class shown in the rule book has pushed that through.They have asked for things for a year we are meeting them with those requests.Most all came from GG events but overtime several wanted something more structured.Thats why they like the SCCA.You know the more people that get involved the more complicated it gets.And that's all good we have a growing PT group.

For a all in one year CAM.that allows Vetts.Well I'm thinking 2014 Stingray.with 170 entries per event we have a number of Vetts that would put the sting on even the 750hp DSE subframed Camaros at our event.Search our threads of San Diego, all come run with us sometime.

[SSLance]

A guy in our region brought that up as well, about the Vettes. He suggested making a split between the 2 seat CAM cars and 4 seat CAM cars.

I'd much rather do that than split the class up by model year.

[j-rho]

Stop SCCA-izing the ruleset you guys! ;-) You should all be thankful for the opportunity to run against an 80" wheelbase, 60" wide, AWD, 65% rear weight, giant-wing'd, giant-tired, formula-car suspended, "t-bucket", right?

[Nothingface5384]

MAy be stupid question but how would this effect cars with classic or antique plates??

I plan to switch mine to an antique using original 70s license plate but also plan to drive mine allot (theirs about 3 car shows in a given area code in a day ) so i can technically still drive it everday
technically car is still licensed and insured

[soloracerSD]

In responce to J-rho I forgot to click "Reply to Quote"

That sounds like the Roadster bodied Subaru at GG events.People have had issues of it being vintage...:) I don't know where that would fit if SCCA classed,XP,EM maybe only AM not American Based but has American replica body.CAM? I don't think so.It runs GG so that question will come up.The 3000lb rule helps there because the fiberglass body doesn't weight much.AWD is a awesome autocross platform.

Thinking back to reading CAM rules.This vehicle would be out,Only RWD allowed.That clears out that question.

[j-rho]

George, the point is, the rules are way too open. At present they allow for something way beyond what anybody in the Pro-Touring scene is actually doing. It would have been easy to exclude obvious class-killing elements (size, weight distribution, aero)...why they didn't is a mystery...but one that keeps an essentially perfect car/driver candidate for the class on the sidelines, until this thing returns from planet Clueless.

[Tomswheels]

George, the point is, the rules are way too open. At present they allow for something way beyond what anybody in the Pro-Touring scene is actually doing. It would have been easy to exclude obvious class-killing elements (size, weight distribution, aero)...why they didn't is a mystery...but one that keeps an essentially perfect car/driver candidate for the class on the sidelines, until this thing returns from planet Clueless.

Jason please don't take this the wrong way, but I think the fact there is a class, ANY class (however flawed in your eyes), to attract more pro-touring types to the Q, it's a good thing. We have been running at the Q all last year in our old cars in SU, so now that there are no winged Miatas in our class it's got to be better. We would love it if you would stop by one of these events in the Camaro, but even if you don't make it I know already we will have more cool old muscle in CAM than we had in SU.

[j-rho]

Our region can make any kind of Pro-Touring class it wants, don't need the national org to pave the way.

[IndyDave]

Jason,

The rules are written the way they are because it's a reflection of rules most pro-touring competitors already run under. The only place where the SCCA went off the reservation was with the minimum weight and that was added because of input from competitors running PT cars in PT series. The 2 major sanctioning bodies for PT autocross events are Goodguys and the American Street Car Series and those series rules weighted the SCCA's decisions heavily. Here's links to those rules:

Goodguys: https://www.good-guys.com/autocross-rules

ASC: http://americanstreetcarseries.com/rules/

Someone going through all the trouble of building a car like you describe just to become the Mud Creek Region SCCA CAM "Champion" is pretty slim. If it does happen then the officials at the Mud Creek region have the power to deal with it. Are the rules perfect? No. What rules are? But it is a starting point. If CAM takes off and there's demand to expand it then yes, the rules will have to tighten. For now, SCCA's rules are as imperfect as everyone else's rules where folks compete with PT cars and that's a good starting point.

Pro Touring cars are hot rods first and competition cars second. They are expressions of the owner's talents and vision of what the "perfect" car should be. They aren't built to rules like a racecar but rather to the owner's taste or trend that the owner finds to their liking.

[j-rho]

If CAM starts to succeed, winning it (at whatever scale) might become important to someone, which might lead them to build something resembling a full effort car. When people see what that looks like, they will freak out, and the rules will have to be tightened.
There are two ways to get to the same end state I think anybody who's been at this a while, knows it needs to get to. This route of gradual ratcheting-back involves the wasting of countless competitor hours and dollars expended in good faith, in the spirit of being the strongest legitimate competitor they can. There are a dozen other things just like the minimum weight that need to be put into effect and explained, I believe it better,and more honest to this new contingent of potential SCCA members, to do so from the start.
If I were in a position to dictate the path, not sure my conscience would allow me to so easily choose and defend the one that was so certain to waste so much honest competitor resources.

[timd38]

SCCA needs to do something. I have been going to the Run-Offs for several years, and membership is down and most of the cars also participate in the vintage events.

[mpozzi]

Dave ...

To save me having to go through reams of posts, will this class be Provisional for Tours and the Solo Nationals this year (2014)? I'm hoping so as I'll be there if it is. Support of these "new" classes at the Regional level is the main springboard to getting them added to our Divisionals, National Tours, and the big show in September in Lincoln, NE.

Through the years, we've all seen cars built to the gnats ass of the "rules" yet don't win. These cars must be driven and just the act (and $$$ thrown at the thing) of the build won't get it done.

Kudos to you and your Region in moving this class in the right direction and gathering the attention of the Solo Department. There are so many of our type of cars and builds that are still basically street cars and will never be competitive in CP, not to mention EM. Giving us our own class will get the owners away from the car shows and lawn chairs, and behind the wheel driving the snot outta them.

Mary Pozzi

[IndyDave]

Dave ...

To save me having to go through reams of posts, will this class be Provisional for Tours and the Solo Nationals this year (2014)? I'm hoping so as I'll be there if it is. Support of these "new" classes at the Regional level is the main springboard to getting them added to our Divisionals, National Tours, and the big show in September in Lincoln, NE.

Through the years, we've all seen cars built to the gnats ass of the "rules" yet don't win. These cars must be driven and just the act (and $$$ thrown at the thing) of the build won't get it done.

Kudos to you and your Region in moving this class in the right direction and gathering the attention of the Solo Department. There are so many of our type of cars and builds that are still basically street cars and will never be competitive in CP, not to mention EM. Giving us our own class will get the owners away from the car shows and lawn chairs, and behind the wheel driving the snot outta them.

Mary Pozzi

CAM can be added as a supplemental class by Regions hosting Tour events. Indy is adding CAM to the Match Tour we are hosting on the July 4th weekend at Grissom. Hopefully interest will be such in other hosting Regions that they will add CAM. The only way for that to happen is have enough involvement in CAM and interest in it being added to their Tour events.

Thanks for the vote of confidence Mary!

[soloracerSD]

Hello Mary

One thing I've noticed in a Past National SOLO 2 Championship results.What I think was a street legal car finished second in CP.Brian H's orange Camaro. If over 5 liters the weight rules are the some as CAM.Just saying CAM on Sticky tires can top three in CP in Nebraska finals.If your even legal in CP.If you are all you need is tires. Then I could be wrong about that car too.For a guy that plays with a WANKLE. I have a lot of Pro-Touring data stuck in my head..:)

[SSLance]

I've been told that the Kansas City and Kansas regions plan on running CAM at their Match Tours and possibly Champ Tours and Pr Solo as well.

[dontlifttoshift]

Yes, Brian's orange second gen took 2nd at nats in 2012 on goodyear slicks.

[73CPCAMARO]

Yes, Brian's orange second gen took 2nd at nats in 2012 on goodyear slicks.

I did finish 2nd in 2012 in CP with a car that would be legal for CAM except for the side window rule. Goodguys, So Cal Challenge, USCA, and ASCS do not mandate side windows. There are a few of us out there that would need to install side windows to run CAM.

The 3000 lb. rule should be without driver. All Prepared classes, including CP, and Street Mod, weigh the cars without drivers. Only Mod classes weigh with driver. Getting our large American cars under 3000 lbs. takes a lot of effort and really makes the cars not street cars anymore. My Camaro weighs about 3100 lbs. and is already pushing the envelope. Early Mustangs with light weight items are right around 3000 lbs.

This class should be fun and give a lot of people a class to play in. As it is now, guys show up and have to run Fun Runs or in CP, EM, or SM and have no chance on 200 TW tires.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2014/01/DSC09538-1.jpg (http://s80.photobucket.com/user/bdjhob/media/DSC09538.jpg.html)

[Nothingface5384]

yeah but cars like mavericks, can be around 2800 with a v8 swapped in all stock body/interior..probably lighter if you swap in a turbo 2.3 i4

[73CPCAMARO]

yeah but cars like mavericks, can be around 2800 with a v8 swapped in all stock body/interior..probably lighter if you swap in a turbo 2.3 i4

That makes it a good car to play with. You can add the necessary lead weight where you want it to get it up to 3000 lbs. This is very common in autocross. In order to get the cars on an equal playing field, the weight needs to be at least 3000 lbs without driver. No way to get an A body type car, Camaro, Firebird, etc without gutting the car or using way too much carbon fiber body panels and exotic materials to get close to 3000 lbs. and still be a "street" car.

[j-rho]

If you're reading this thread and thinking "Hmm I'd like to build a car to do well in CAM" - my suggestion - don't! If you already have a car come run it, but don't spend any more money to improve its chances in the class.
If the class begins to succeed (as we all hope it will) there will have to be many restrictions added. If I sound frustrated at all in this thread, it's because I don't wish to see honest good-faith competitors throw away money (not to mention time, energy) with anything they do in building for a class state they thought was there to last. We have a large pool of serious car enthusiasts here, that would make great potential long term SCCA members...but if their first few years are spent suffering the pain of relentless "takebacks", they are not likely to stick it out.

I fight for the people! Be careful everyone!

[j-rho]

That makes it a good car to play with. You can add the necessary lead weight where you want it to get it up to 3000 lbs. This is very common in autocross. In order to get the cars on an equal playing field, the weight needs to be at least 3000 lbs without driver. No way to get an A body type car, Camaro, Firebird, etc without gutting the car or using way too much carbon fiber body panels and exotic materials to get close to 3000 lbs. and still be a "street" car.Brian, my '67 is 2950 with a full interior, stock all-iron longblock, and a full tank of gas.

In CAM, would do an all aluminum engine, hack up firewall for maximum setback, and do a custom tubular front frame and all carbon panels. That'd allow for 500lbs. of ballast just ahead of the rear axle to get rear weight to about 60%.
Of course, even then, the car would be hopeless against a Cobra or Opel GT or whatever, that fits all the same stuff in a package 12" narrower and 3 feet shorter in length.
Oh, and don't forget the AM wings!

[Rod]

Brian, my '67 is 2950 with a full interior, stock all-iron longblock, and a full tank of gas.

don't worry it will get fatter, add a roll bar and harness bar along with harnesses a fuel cell and the support brackets for that and a rear firewall, its all fat to go faster

[mpozzi]

I see the opposite happening and people with "our type of car" WILL come out to more events as they now have a class that's more fair ... no Hoosiers, Kumho's or slicks, and they're actually street cars.

Not everyone has Nationals aspirations yet are willing to come out and have fun at local events and possibly a Tour. The Good Guys autox paddock is overflowing with these cars and there's often a wait line in place in case someone doesn't show up Sunday (rare but it happens). It would be great if SCCA could capture some of this interest as well.

Past history of Solo classes has shown growth of the sport ... period. I started competing Nationally in 1979 and this was the first or second year that parallel Ladies Classes were offered. There were Stock, Prepared, and Modified ... that was it. I think the total number of separate classes was around 24. Fast forward to 2013 and we've got a few (gazillion) more categories and classes. All of these were formed because of the type of cars that wanted a place to run and their level of modifications.

Will all Pro-Touring cars and builds be competitive at the Tour/Pro/National level? Absolutely not. Will everyone get a chance to have fun with what they built? Most definitely yes. And that is what it should be. There will be good competition and I can't wait.

Mary Pozzi


If you're reading this thread and thinking "Hmm I'd like to build a car to do well in CAM" - my suggestion - don't! If you already have a car come run it, but don't spend any more money to improve its chances in the class.
If the class begins to succeed (as we all hope it will) there will have to be many restrictions added. If I sound frustrated at all in this thread, it's because I don't wish to see honest good-faith competitors throw away money (not to mention time, energy) with anything they do in building for a class state they thought was there to last. We have a large pool of serious car enthusiasts here, that would make great potential long term SCCA members...but if their first few years are spent suffering the pain of relentless "takebacks", they are not likely to stick it out.

I fight for the people! Be careful everyone!

[71RS/SS396]

If you're reading this thread and thinking "Hmm I'd like to build a car to do well in CAM" - my suggestion - don't! If you already have a car come run it, but don't spend any more money to improve its chances in the class.
If the class begins to succeed (as we all hope it will) there will have to be many restrictions added. If I sound frustrated at all in this thread, it's because I don't wish to see honest good-faith competitors throw away money (not to mention time, energy) with anything they do in building for a class state they thought was there to last. We have a large pool of serious car enthusiasts here, that would make great potential long term SCCA members...but if their first few years are spent suffering the pain of relentless "takebacks", they are not likely to stick it out.

I fight for the people! Be careful everyone!

If they start making a bunch of rules they will kill the participation from this group guaranteed. I've not run in an SCCA event and likely won't because they have too many damn classes and too many rules.

[j-rho]

What I would have like to have seen from the outset:

A wheelbase minimum of at least 100"
A static front weight distribution of at least 52% (55% better)
A front tire max in the range of 275-295 on 10" wheels
A ride height minimum where the car has to be able to drive over a 55" wide 3-4" diameter pipe without anything touching
No wings


Hopefully that's not too overbearing? Yes, that would exclude some people, but I think it would do a ton to preserve the long-term chances of the class making it.

With this setup, I see people coming out at first, yes...but soon they'll see a Camaro, Mustang, Mopar or other 4-seat (CP) car that makes up the vast majority of the P-T scene, isn't as good a platform as a Corvette (BP car). This will be catalyzed by thing like Brian's recent win in the red car, and that top drivers like Danny and Junior are both building C3's. With more time we might see how the Corvette is second-fiddle to even more rare or distant-from-the-PT-core cars (AP, now XP, cars) that are even smaller and able to achieve better balance.

There are ways to accommodate a very wide variety of cars in a single class, with things like variable wheel/tire and weight allowances. By opening it up like this, the early adopters of CAM in non-core cars or with non-core mods that end up "too fast" are going to end up paying for it. Seasoned people like you Mary, I think will see it coming, and take the right steps, but there are others here who don't have the experience with how racing rules evolve, and I just don't want to see them get burned.

[GrabberGT]

I'll run in it if available locally. I usually just show up and say put me wherever anyway. (Usually ESP) If I were to tailor the class to my uneducated/new-to-scca expectations, the only thing I would change is request they define the term "Classic". It doesnt have to be 72 or older as GG does but I've always like the rolling 30 year cut-off.

[soloracerSD]

to 71rs

For your car it is as simple as ESP,CP or SM.ESP cars can run in SM and CP. so SM or CP to make it simpler....If subframe changed then that's the issue.XP or EM I guess then.

In short if you Want a CAM car to run in SCCA National SOLO2 Champion Nebraska this year.Then build a car that is both legal in CAM and CP.Street Legal CP=CAM pretty much or follow ESP or SM rules you have some firm ground to stand on then

Just following CAM and you will have issues as you may have heard.Only reason I see for CAM is Subframe changes & frame swapping ,forced induction200 tires.Maybe it will take off ,maybe they will change CP a little.I hope I didn't start another debate.?.This debate has been going on for a year plus in or region.

OUR SDR PT regulars are split on using SCCA SM rules Vintage SM others StreetLegal CP allowing subframe changes which fits CAM but not scca CP. on 200.(CORRECTION Subframe changes are allowed in CP, adding 300lb for the allowance)

Maybe after all this chatter.Some will read these SCCA classes in the rule book for the first time.It will start to make sense then.Maybe Not so bad after all.pages 81 to 113.then to prepared classes 2013.

Jason R.. I brought up the 4" pipe ground clearance rule at our first gathering of PTs in SDR 1.5 years ago.It also reduces fender clearing for tires.I wasn't getting much traction on it.Good to know I shared a unique idea with you...:)

[Damn True]

Will all Pro-Touring cars and builds be competitive at the Tour/Pro/National level? Absolutely not. Will everyone get a chance to have fun with what they built? Most definitely yes. And that is what it should be. There will be good competition and I can't wait.

Mary Pozzi

All the "this's"

[73CPCAMARO]

Here are the CP weights without driver:

The following weights apply unless a specifi c weight is indicated with
the model listing.
Minimum weight (lbs.):
V8 engines greater than 5100 cc .......................................... 3000
V8 engines equal to or less than 5100 cc ............................. 2700
6-cyl engines, maximum 4500 cc ......................................... 2450
Turbocharged 6-cyl engines, maximum 4500 cc .................. 2550
Turbocharged 4-cyl engines ................................................. 2450
Maximum weight on the rear of the car shall be 51% of the total
weight of the car. Exceptions to this rule: Corvair, Yenko Stinger.

F. For class CP, wheels up to 16” x 10” are allowed with no weight increase.
Wheels greater than 10” in width will receive a 50 lb. increase.

[howehot]

With the mods to my Monte they put me in EM. I know I can't compete and could care less. The fun factor is great and every run I gain experience. Also at $35 for the day the price can't be beat. The CAM class will help me judge on my improvements by letting me run with cars similar to mine. The IowaRegion will discuss CAM at the next meeting. Oh, and everyone loves it when I show up, I'm not the fastest but they enjoy the sights and sounds of GM muscle.

[soloracerSD]

Regions make classing mistakes.Thats why it's good to read the rules yourself after your first event or before,WE had a guy with a 63 Falcon that was put in XP at our SDR SOLO2 National Tour.It was stripped street driven CP car.It was is first SCCA event.He didn't know the difference between Local and National Tour.Baptism By Fire for sure.If classed correctly he would of been the only CP car.Which I tried getting our PT guys to do.No one runs CP down here.They could of had a National Tour class to themselves that weekend.I don't know why yours would be EM.Maybe you moved the motor back or subframe change.I'm curious to know.Jason and Brian are more expert on that.



With the mods to my Monte they put me in EM. I know I can't compete and could care less. The fun factor is great and every run I gain experience. Also at $35 for the day the price can't be beat. The CAM class will help me judge on my improvements by letting me run with cars similar to mine. The IowaRegion will discuss CAM at the next meeting. Oh, and everyone loves it when I show up, I'm not the fastest but they enjoy the sights and sounds of GM muscle.

[SSLance]

Dan's Monte has a complete aftermarket chassis under it...I would have guessed XP...

I agree though, it will be more fun for all of us to run together, competitive or not. The most fun I had at an event last year was when 3 of us that normally run 3 different classes all ran together in our new SMC class. A WS6, a 2011 Camaro and my car. I look forward to running against them all next year all year long...and anyone else that comes along and doesn't fit in with the rest of the regular autocross cars...

[avewhtboy]

Are you thinking your car will weigh 2500# ?

Not that it's that important, but it's possible, It's a Vega, they make every panel in fiberglass and lexan windows. If you look at the
weights of the drag cars it's quite possible. Of course this was by design to take advantage of no weight rule.

Rick

[soloracerSD]

Brian I'm interested in the CAM car that is C-Prepared legal.Question is.You have to use not stock but original subframe correct?.Can you make mounts for modern Corvette suspension on the subframe ?. or change a cross member? That would clear things up for me and others.



Here are the CP weights without driver:

The following weights apply unless a specifi c weight is indicated with
the model listing.
Minimum weight (lbs.):
V8 engines greater than 5100 cc .......................................... 3000
V8 engines equal to or less than 5100 cc ............................. 2700
6-cyl engines, maximum 4500 cc ......................................... 2450
Turbocharged 6-cyl engines, maximum 4500 cc .................. 2550
Turbocharged 4-cyl engines ................................................. 2450
Maximum weight on the rear of the car shall be 51% of the total
weight of the car. Exceptions to this rule: Corvair, Yenko Stinger.

F. For class CP, wheels up to 16” x 10” are allowed with no weight increase.
Wheels greater than 10” in width will receive a 50 lb. increase.

[IndyDave]

CP can be a very confusing class. WE have one CP competitor here in the Great Lakes Division running CP with a Howe tube chassis and a 5 Star Camaro body. There's an inclusion in one of the appendixes that allows GT-1 Club Race cars to run in CP so the car is built to GT-1 rules. It's been a very controversial car but he has run it in National Tours and has withstood protests.

Thanks Brian for clarifying weight rules in Solo, I misspoke. I've not had to deal with minimum weights in Solo, I was recalling how it works over on the Club Race side. That is something that really should be clarified. I'll pass that along.

[73CPCAMARO]

CP can be a very confusing class. WE have one CP competitor here in the Great Lakes Division running CP with a Howe tube chassis and a 5 Star Camaro body. There's an inclusion in one of the appendixes that allows GT-1 Club Race cars to run in CP so the car is built to GT-1 rules. It's been a very controversial car but he has run it in National Tours and has withstood protests.

Thanks Brian for clarifying weight rules in Solo, I misspoke. I've not had to deal with minimum weights in Solo, I was recalling how it works over on the Club Race side. That is something that really should be clarified. I'll pass that along.

I have run my friends car, Bill Maier's old Trans Am car, 1980 Ford Mustang, at SCCA Nationals and another friend drove it years ago and won the National Championship. It is a complete tube frame chassis. You can run a tube frame chassis as long as it complies to SCCA's road race rule book. You can also change out the subframe and add a 10% weight penalty.

D. Replacement of any chassis component (e.g., subframe) in its entirety by one of alternate construction, unless specifically permitted, shall result in the vehicle being “in excess” of these rules and weight penalties and/or competitive adjustments may apply.

Vehicles prepared in excess of Solo® allowances and prepared up to either the current Club Racing GT or Production Category rules are permitted to compete in their respective Prepared classes. Section 17.8.B.7 minimum track requirements apply. Minimum weight will be 110% of the Solo® minimum weight from Appendix A plus any Solo® weight additions (wheel size weight increases, etc.). Vehicles taking advantage of this allowance may use the Solo® Rules or the Club Racing GCR (General Competition Rules) allowances in whole, in part, or in combination

[soloracerSD]

So am I right to say the Monte Carlo Howehot can run CP. not be stuck in EM? If so that boost CP car #s.CAM could be a class that produces more of them.DSE subframe legal in CP? YES? NO?.

Monte Carlo has a completely different chassis?.More then a Subframe I guess probably outside of CP then.

[71RS/SS396]

to 71rs

For your car it is as simple as ESP,CP or SM.ESP cars can run in SM and CP. so SM or CP to make it simpler....If subframe changed then that's the issue.XP or EM I guess then.

In short if you Want a CAM car to run in SCCA National SOLO2 Champion Nebraska this year.Then build a car that is both legal in CAM and CP.Street Legal CP=CAM pretty much or follow ESP or SM rules you have some firm ground to stand on then

Just following CAM and you will have issues as you may have heard.Only reason I see for CAM is Subframe changes & frame swapping ,forced induction200 tires.Maybe it will take off ,maybe they will change CP a little.I hope I didn't start another debate.?.This debate has been going on for a year plus in or region.

OUR SDR PT regulars are split on using SCCA SM rules Vintage SM others StreetLegal CP allowing subframe changes which fits CAM but not scca CP. on 200.

Maybe after all this chatter.Some will read these SCCA classes in the rule book for the first time.It will start to make sense then.Maybe Not so bad after all.pages 81 to 113.then to prepared classes 2013.

Jason R.. I brought up the 4" pipe ground clearance rule at our first gathering of PTs in SDR 1.5 years ago.It also reduces fender clearing for tires.I wasn't getting much traction on it.Good to know I shared a unique idea with you...:)
I have an aftermarket subframe which as understand it will not allow me in CP. Which imho is flat idiotic due to the fact in CP you can chop the frame up to the point it has no suspension parts that resemble the factory in any way. Do you really believe that Brian's car is at any disadvantage to mine because he still has the highly modified subframe?

[j-rho]

You can run CP with a different subframe, you just incur a weight penalty...which won't affect most people, as their cars are already pretty heavy by CP standards.

[soloracerSD]

You might be legal in CP. That's what we are discussing right now.Just have to be over 3000lb maybe higher a couple hundred.

Jason just poped in with the answer.. :)Brian maybe will step in and back that up...That would be much better then EM or XP like I was thinking.I know some PT guys with DSE frames 750 hp LS7 69 Camaros that have both 200 tw and soft compound for track event.This will be good news to them..They have a choice now CAM and CP.Thats why we have these chats here ,Not to scare but educate and prepare for more fun


I have an aftermarket subframe which as understand it will not allow me in CP. Which imho is flat idiotic due to the fact in CP you can chop the frame up to the point it has no suspension parts that resemble the factory in any way. Do you really believe that Brian's car is at any disadvantage to mine because he still has the highly modified subframe?

[73CPCAMARO]

You might be legal in CP. That's what we are discussing right now.Just have to be over 3000lb maybe higher a couple hundred.

3000 + 300 (10% penalty) + 50 (wheels) = 3350

[soloracerSD]

For every Subframe changed car that shows up at a SCCA regional event this year and enters CP. I Want A Commission for sales.Just PM for mailing address...LOL


I'm going to have to find that info in my 2013 rule book and highlight it.Thanks guys ..Maybe I should ask if a bored LS7 is legal in a 69 Camaro CP.I think so.

[SSLance]

KC Region SAC voted to adopt the CAM class for us tonight. We decided to not split the class up by model year or sedan\coupe at least for 2014...we'll see how it goes after.

There was a lot of talk about what PAX to run, I really need to figure that out in "Lance speak" as most of what they talk about makes no sense to me at all. There's the PAX # and then the street tire modifier and the two added up shave X amount of seconds off of your time. I kind of get all that, but in practical sense and how it directly relates to me and how it will affect my PAX time I don't really understand.

Apparently I've made an impression though as there was a discussion about a .9775 or a .9800 modifier and several of them mentioned that .9775 was a bit generous and they don't want to give me anymore than they have to. :D

[71RS/SS396]

3000 + 300 (10% penalty) + 50 (wheels) = 3350

Brian, I'm not picking on your car, I'm just familiar with how it's constructed so it's easy for me to compare. I'm having a hard time understanding the fairness in the weight penalty. As I stated before, I don't see the significant performance advantage I have over your car in regards to the subframe. I guess if I ever want to run CP I shouldn't put the car on the diet I was planning since I'm already too light.

[dontlifttoshift]

looks like .830 is the number

This is what I read was going to be the pax number.

[71RS/SS396]

You might be legal in CP. I know some PT guys with DSE frames 750 hp LS7 69 Camaros that have both 200 tw and soft compound for track event.This will be good news to them..They have a choice now CAM and CP.Thats why we have these chats here ,Not to scare but educate and prepare for more fun

That's basically where I'm at, only with a second gen.

[73CPCAMARO]

Brian, I'm not picking on your car, I'm just familiar with how it's constructed so it's easy for me to compare. I'm having a hard time understanding the fairness in the weight penalty. As I stated before, I don't see the significant performance advantage I have over your car in regards to the subframe.

Tim,

Actually, my modified stock subframe is better than yours AND you have a weight penalty. Sorry :-)

Those are the rules SCCA has had for a very long time. There are rules and ways to take them to the limit.

Brian

[71RS/SS396]

Tim,

Actually, my modified stock subframe is better than yours AND you have a weight penalty. Sorry :-)

Those are the rules SCCA has had for a very long time. There are rules and ways to take them to the limit.

Brian

I know, that's what I find ridiculous about it and why I will likely never run an scca event. They claim all their rules are there to level the field but in fact they're not doing that, kudos to you for being smart and taking advantage of them. I suppose running a 315 street tire on the front will be penalized too?

[juniorjohnson]

I think the one thing I've learned now is that it's all about fun. In the end we are all playing for little plastic/wooden trophy's...

I'm building my new car for me. I don't care what class it runs in, no matter the club/series. I want to enjoy the car, and the people that love cars as I do. The big positive here is FINALLY the SCCA has seen some kind of light in terms of American Muscle Cars. I also like that there aren't a lot or rules. Let's face it, how much power can you really use on 200 tw tires anyway? I say build what you want, and have a ton of fun while you do it! :-)

[71RS/SS396]

I think the one thing I've learned now is that it's all about fun. In the end we are all playing for little plastic/wooden trophy's...

I'm building my new car for me. I don't care what class it runs in, no matter the club/series. I want to enjoy the car, and the people that love cars as I do. The big positive here is FINALLY the SCCA has seen some kind of light in terms of American Muscle Cars. I also like that there aren't a lot or rules. Let's face it, how much power can you really use on 200 tw tires anyway? I say build what you want, and have a ton of fun while you do it! :-)

I like to use all the power I have, it might not be the fastest way around the track but it sure is fun. :seizure::6gears:

[SSLance]

I think the one thing I've learned now is that it's all about fun. In the end we are all playing for little plastic/wooden trophy's...

I'm building my new car for me. I don't care what class it runs in, no matter the club/series. I want to enjoy the car, and the people that love cars as I do. The big positive here is FINALLY the SCCA has seen some kind of light in terms of American Muscle Cars. I also like that there aren't a lot or rules. Let's face it, how much power can you really use on 200 tw tires anyway? I say build what you want, and have a ton of fun while you do it! :-)


That is IT...in a nutshell. +1

[soloracerSD]

I think an adjustment to SCCA SM is needed.It's a 4 seater class allowing 100% of bolt on suspension replaced.That has all the streetable and body panel stuff like CAM It has a 4 seater exclusion list for 4 seater sports cars.The list of cars excluded are from the 80s and older.So 944s are out.In our region we have SC FRS a AUDI TT vs 1999 Mustang ,SC Pontiac G8 IRS and M3.FRS and AUDI TT are smaller then the SSM classed RX7 and 944.A wheel base rule might help.
The class has good mod and weight drop allowances for live axle cars.Just another Muscle Car possibility.
CAM can be their first choice.After seeing what sticky tires can do in other classes.They have other choices like ESP, SM,CP for the stickies.I think thats good for regional events.WE have already had deluting class warnings if we have CAM used from other Muscle Car members.So it can go both ways.

[soloracerSD]

[QUOTE=soloracerSD;1042168]I think an adjustment to SCCA SM is needed.It's a 4 seater class allowing 100% of bolt on suspension replaced.That has all the streetable and body panel stuff like CAM It has a 4 seater exclusion list for 4 seater sports cars.The list of cars excluded are from the 80s and older.So 944s are out.In our region we have SC FRS a AUDI TT vs 1999 Mustang ,SC Pontiac G8 IRS and M3.FRS and AUDI TT are smaller then the SSM classed RX7 and 944.A wheel base rule might help.Or add cars to the exclusion list.
The class has good mod and weight drop allowances for live axle cars.Just another Muscle Car possibility.
CAM can be their first choice.After seeing what sticky tires can do in other classes.They have other choices like ESP, SM,CP for the stickies.I think thats good for regional events.WE have already had deluting class warnings if we have CAM used from other Muscle Car members.So it can go both ways.So we satisfied what our vintage PT guys wanted for last year plus.A class for them.CAM says Classic cars and flexibility in rules for regions.Cars newer then 79 have to choose FS,STU,ESP,SM or CP if having 4 seats.Reducing possible deluting.

Your first couple of events classes won't matter to you.So ask to run without class in X.3 events later you will think class ,IT's Fun!

[IndyDave]

The latest issue of SoloMatters is out and it has a blurb on CAM, no turning back now! :D

http://www.solomatters.com/

[Damn True]

Many years ago when I first started planning my build there was no OUSCI, no Goodguys Auto-x, no RTT"x" events. Just local club auto-x, SCCA auto-x and open track days. I knew then that if I wanted to "race" I should build an actual W2W race car and if I wanted to be competitive in Auto-x I should buy a miata or something. Thing is, what I wanted was to build, drive and enjoy a 1968 Camaro. I didn't care then what class Id wind up forced to run in and I don't now because I'm doing it to enjoy the car I want in the way I want. I don't think I'm a rarity in that regard.

This class allows me to do that w/o some yutz protesting my car (whether it's actually faster than his or not....I've seen it happen) and allows me more opportunity to do so.

I think it's a net positive from damned near any perspective.

Will people spend cubic $ to build all out efforts for this? Probably, but not many more than are doing so in other classes or at GG & OUSCI....and if the do? So what. I'll still be having fun. Besides, what are the odds that a region is going to bone 99% of the participants in a class to "equalize" the 1% car?


Now....I just gotta get back to work on my car before my wife completely buries the darn thing in the garage.

As the great Phil Edwards once said, "Contests? Who cares? The guy who's having the most fun is the real winner."


.

[SSLance]

At our local Region awards banquet last weekend there was quite a lot of talk about CAM there and everyone seemed pretty excited about it. One veteran even said "I've never owned an American made muscle car...but this class has me thinking it's about time to".

This excitement level is the reason behind the class in the first place, something new and different to try to spark some interest. I said something to the effect that "as long as we can keep the SCCA types from mucking it all up" and got a big laugh from everyone. I guess it might happen eventually but for the meantime, the wide open run what you brung concept should be fun. I don't see many people building cars just for this class until it becomes national class eligible, then all bets are off.

[rustomatic]

For Nor-Cal people looking for some motivation, the American Auto-X series is supposed to start up in March . . . just in time for me to take my engine out again and put it back...

[IndyDave]

Talked to Raleigh last night. He said CAM is THE hot topic within the SCCA right now and it's all positive. People are very excited about the entire concept. One of the funny common themes is how astonished many are that the SCCA could write a set of rules that's only two pages long! LOL! I'm not kidding! Doug Gill has been fielding tons of calls from regions about the class. Really looking forward to this season.....

[Red67Mustang]

This is exciting, also appropriate when you consider how instrumental the original SCCA Trans Am series (67-72) was in the development of the muscle car movement in the first place...

[Derek69SS]

The problem is this class allows scratch-built tube-frame monsters with a tiny footprint, massive aero, and race car weight distribution (60%+ rear)...which is not anything like what P-T is about. It wouldn't have been that hard to exclude obvious ringers, while disallowing practically nobody.

I'm not complaining, but will be holding off on changing my car until they come up with a place where stock-bodied classic cars on street tires have a legitimate place to play.

This is just a "provisional" class - not a real one. There is no championship on the line.



If you're reading this thread and thinking "Hmm I'd like to build a car to do well in CAM" - my suggestion - don't! If you already have a car come run it, but don't spend any more money to improve its chances in the class.
If the class begins to succeed (as we all hope it will) there will have to be many restrictions added. If I sound frustrated at all in this thread, it's because I don't wish to see honest good-faith competitors throw away money (not to mention time, energy) with anything they do in building for a class state they thought was there to last. We have a large pool of serious car enthusiasts here, that would make great potential long term SCCA members...but if their first few years are spent suffering the pain of relentless "takebacks", they are not likely to stick it out.

I fight for the people! Be careful everyone!
It's great that they're thinking about us, but I'm with Jason 100% on this one.

I'll continue running my Miata in ES until some sort of sanity is brought into this CAM class.

One guy building a car "to the rules" would make the entire target audience outclassed to the point of not being worth entering with any hope of competition. I'm not going to travel long distances to run big SCCA events without hope of competition.

To those who don't care about competition or rules, you can already enter your car in classes that you're outclassed in... run CP or XP or whatever your car fits in. By trying to make the class "all inclusive" they're making 95%+ of the PT cars not viable for the class.

The current rules would allow someone to build something that looks like this, around a T-bucket shell with some carpet and headlights.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

There are already plenty of places for "race cars" to compete. What this class *should* be trying to achieve is to level playing field for the majority of PT cars. Solid rear axle, steel body, full glass, etc.

[IndyDave]

It's great that they're thinking about us, but I'm with Jason 100% on this one.

I'll continue running my Miata in ES until some sort of sanity is brought into this CAM class.

One guy building a car "to the rules" would make the entire target audience outclassed to the point of not being worth entering with any hope of competition. I'm not going to travel long distances to run big SCCA events without hope of competition.

To those who don't care about competition or rules, you can already enter your car in classes that you're outclassed in... run CP or XP or whatever your car fits in. By trying to make the class "all inclusive" they're making 95%+ of the PT cars not viable for the class.

The current rules would allow someone to build something that looks like this, around a T-bucket shell with some carpet and headlights.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

There are already plenty of places for "race cars" to compete. What this class *should* be trying to achieve is to level playing field for the majority of PT cars. Solid rear axle, steel body, full glass, etc.

You do realize that CAM is a REGIONAL ONLY class? Who's going to build a car "to the rules" or travel "hundreds of miles" just to win a regional event? You do also realize that the rules for CAM are pretty much a copy of Goodguy's Rod and Custom rules and the A-Mod T-bucket some are so fearful of hasn't materialized over there? If it were to happen it would happen there as there is a monetary incentive to winning. You do realize that according to CAM rules, that A-Mod T-bucket would have to have all street equipment, a finished interior, and be titled, licensed, and insured?

SCCA is reporting that they have been getting a huge response to CAM and it's all been positive and the people the class is trying to attract are contacting them thanking them for creating CAM. That's the whole point of CAM, give people with Pro-Touring cars another place to play with rules they are used to. No longer will they show up at an SCCA Regional event and be classed in a way where they have no hope of being competitive because their car wasn't built to a rule set. They're hot rods, street machines, customs. They don't follow rules other than those imposed on them by the BMV to allow them to drive their creations on public streets legally. If someone does build that A-Mod T-Bucket just make sure it has at least 2 seats, weighs at least 3000#, 200TW tires, has all it's street equipment in place and works, and has a valid title, registration, insured, and current license plates and you'll be welcomed. In the end this class is about having fun, all that's on the line is a $1.00 dash plaque.

[Derek69SS]

I own Model T's (original ones) a "finished" interior is a rubber mat on the floor and cardboard door panels. Lighting equipment is a pair of headlights and one taillight. No wipers, no brake lights, no blinkers, no heat, no defrost, no mirrors, etc. All legal to register, license, and insure in all 50 states without any of that equipment because it was never on it from the factory.

That may be an extreme example, but it's what the rules allow, and PAX will have to take into consideration.

A slightly less extreme example would be a Factory Five coupe with big tires and big HP.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2014/01/DSC_0010-1.jpg

Also, per the rules, a modified 2014 Corvette will be legal as well? Rick Ruth has already adjusted CAM PAX to account for that.
How is this a class "for musclecars" when anything resembling a musclecar will be the least competitive car allowed?

You guys have fun, I'll be competing elsewhere.

[SSLance]

There's always one or two of them around...aren't there...

There is a guy in our Region that races a real fast C6, he mentioned also that his car would be legal in CAM and jokingly considered trying to find some 200 TW tires to fit it and compete with us. Not sure if he was trying to get a rise out of me or what, but I told the group sure, bring it on. Him bringing that car to run with us in CAM will be seen as exactly what it is...and I'd rather deal with that than write 30 extra pages of rules to try to prevent that from happening and screwing up the class for the rest of us.

Right away he mentioned that while he could do that, he'll just keep running in the class he built his car for. I think that is the common sense approach and hopefully more will take that avenue than won't...but I'm not going to upset the apple cart just to prevent the few from doing just that.

Now if another guy that has never autocrossed before comes along with a basically stock C6 and is told about CAM and decides to give it a try running with us, I say bring it on as well and will take the guy under my wing and help him every way I can. It is my opinion that he'll have a better time running with and against us in CAM than the other fully prepped C6s with experienced drivers in their class and might be more apt to come back time and time again and become a regular.

Isn't that what this class is all about?

[IndyDave]

I own Model T's (original ones) a "finished" interior is a rubber mat on the floor and cardboard door panels. Lighting equipment is a pair of headlights and one taillight. No wipers, no brake lights, no blinkers, no heat, no defrost, no mirrors, etc. All legal to register, license, and insure in all 50 states without any of that equipment because it was never on it from the factory.

That may be an extreme example, but it's what the rules allow, and PAX will have to take into consideration.

A slightly less extreme example would be a Factory Five coupe with big tires and big HP.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2014/01/DSC_0010-1.jpg

Also, per the rules, a modified 2014 Corvette will be legal as well? Rick Ruth has already adjusted CAM PAX to account for that.
How is this a class "for musclecars" when anything resembling a musclecar will be the least competitive car allowed?

You guys have fun, I'll be competing elsewhere.

Not to be sarcastic, but with that attitude, no one will miss you.

[mpozzi]

Well said, Dave. And most regions will set a MY limit for CAM as well. I think SFR has theirs at 1978 or close.

As a start-up class for regional Solo events, CAM will work just fine. Over time and when CAM becomes so popular to gain SCCA's attention for Tours, Divisionals, and the Nationals, then the rules will need more limitations and definitions to keep things fair and equal.

Mary Pozzi

[Bryce]

In our region the rules read pre78 for CAM. Is that the national rule?

At the end of the weekend, we don't win ANYTHING except a great time with friends. And all the muscle cars get to run together. I was at the san diego region's first event today and had a blast with at least 10 muscle cars running CAM.

[Damn True]

Pics and video my man!

[Bryce]

Pics and video my man!

I just posted them in my build thread I will quote it over here.

[Bryce]

I just experienced the first SDR event with the CAM guys. What a great turn out. I had a blast running with the friends. The car felt great, the power steering felt great, still has feel.... The stiffer rear spring really balance the car out and the overall package was great to drive. I don't really have any other mods planned before the next SCCA event.

Here are the videos:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIjLmKEVl8Y


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vEPHQ_Bj9Y


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjWyNIH5kdQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ6R_uHNhnE

Pictures and results next week.

Quoted from my build thread

[Munssey]

And some of the pics from Sunday. https://plus.google.com/106191034810548667428/posts/Vx8KSqZLnik

Bryce, I have a bunch more of just the Falcon that I didnt post in the collection. I still need to do post on them but i'll make sure you get un-watermarked copies of them all.

[Bryce]

Great pics.

[Damn True]

And some of the pics from Sunday. https://plus.google.com/106191034810548667428/posts/Vx8KSqZLnik

Bryce, I have a bunch more of just the Falcon that I didnt post in the collection. I still need to do post on them but i'll make sure you get un-watermarked copies of them all.


LOVE the photos of the Abarth.

Do you know the guy with the winged mustang?

[Bryce]

LOVE the photos of the Abarth.

Do you know the guy with the winged mustang?

I know the guy. Brett. He just added 315 slicks on all 4 corners and was 7sec faster than me.

[SSLance]

In our region the rules read pre78 for CAM. Is that the national rule?

At the end of the weekend, we don't win ANYTHING except a great time with friends. And all the muscle cars get to run together. I was at the san diego region's first event today and had a blast with at least 10 muscle cars running CAM.


No, it is up to each Region to set the model year cut offs (if any) for their respective Region. In the KC Region we left it at just one class open to all model years.

That is fantastic that there were ten entries in CAM in your event. How many of those were regular attendees that might have been running in some other class and how many were newbies?

[Bryce]

I think everyone that occasionally showed up last year was there yesterday. We were still short a few cars.

[Tomswheels]

We had a total of 12 CAM drivers in 10 CAM cars yesterday, all 1978 and older. 5 drivers in 3 cars were regulars last year, another 4 were occationally there last year, 3 were brand new this year. My 67 Valiant isnt ready, nor was another drivers 65 Stang conv, so we really arent full strengh in San Diego until March...

[IndyDave]

That's cool guys!

[soloracerSD]

Then you will have ESP and SM.We have those already.GG did a great job of bringing Autocross to thousands.I know the rules were never intended for serious competitors.It was more exhibition.Once the cars show numbers at SCCA events.It will be the competitors that will ask for more limitations and definitions.The SCCA will then make changes.Thats how it works .That's correct you think Marry?In many regions ESP ,SM will be apart of that now.
Well said, Dave. And most regions will set a MY limit for CAM as well. I think SFR has theirs at 1978 or close.

As a start-up class for regional Solo events, CAM will work just fine. Over time and when CAM becomes so popular to gain SCCA's attention for Tours, Divisionals, and the Nationals, then the rules will need more limitations and definitions to keep things fair and equal.

Mary Pozzi

[soloracerSD]

Brett was fast enough to win in SM,SU and P1.Yes ! That means he beat the Carbon Fiber SC XP Miata with the PAX indexes Also Bryce 3 trophies in CAM will be out Ohh and Not slicks ,Hoosiers there is a difference
QUOTE=Bryce;1046645]I know the guy. Brett. He just added 315 slicks on all 4 corners and was 7sec faster than me.[/QUOTE]

[mpozzi]

CAM gives us with cars that qualify just one more class to compete in. I see this as being nothing but WIN for so many that have been class filler no-hopers in SM or CP. Once more people start competing and show their support, the rules will definitely be adjusted for a more even playing field. Your SCCA Solo Events Board handles this stuff and the committee looks at every letter and email sent their way. Discussions follow and changes usually are made after everyone looks at the proposals.

Give CAM a chance and be thankful there's one more place to play with our cars. The courses are better and more open than GoodGuys wants to do (remember, almost all entrants there do not wear helmets and the speeds are kept fairly slow as well). Also, most GoodGuys shows aren't given the real estate to allow a course for us to stretch a car's legs.

If no other conflicts happen and I'm in the SD area, I'd love to come drive with you all. The last time I was at Jack Murphy Stadium (that alone should be a clue) was in 1990.

Mary

[Tomswheels]

Mary, we would love to see you at the Q! We need someone to keep Alcala and Weishaars heads from getting too big...

[DTM Racing]

Hehehe

[66SuperSport]

Every time we bring our Chevelles to a SCCA autocross we just ask to be put in a class where there are no other cars. We wouldn't want to accidentally mess someone up that is running for points.
CAM will make it really easy for us to register and be able to have fun in our own class, hopefully with a bunch of cool muscle cars.
Haven't been to a SCCA event in quite some time and with this new class I am really looking forward to the 2014 season.

[lzdick]

Chris,
Got room for one more in your CAM class for an ol' red car?

[IndyDave]

Some thoughts:

I'm not sure I like a model year cutoff. I've seen 1978 mentioned by several but why? What's the difference between a 1978 and a 1979-82 Camaro / Firebird? What about A/G-Body GMs? They were the same 1978 to 1988? So a '78 Monte Carlo is legal but an '86 Monte isn't? My Region's experience with CAM's prototype class (SMC) saw a mix of older and newer cars that all were pretty competitive. Allowing later cars in took back-marker STX, ESP, BP, and CP cars and allowed them to be competitive in a class. Most of our events last year, the winner of SMC wasn't known until the last set of runs. The class has 5 different winners in 7 points events. We saw everything from a 427 Cobra replica to a new 1LE Camaro. I understand the fears of the class being overrun with late model Corvettes and other new "freaks of automotive nature", wouldn't a exclusions list be better? Part of CAM's appeal is supposed to be it's openness so why bar entry to so many potential competitors for the class?

If CAM were to become a national event class, I think the only thing that would need to be more clearly defined would be what cars are eligible (again exclusion list) and some limits on aero. I think it would destroy the intent of CAM if there were limits put on suspension, engine, and driveline.

I'm thinking of offering a championship within a championship here in Indy. My working title is the CAM Cup and in addition to a Solo championship, the CAM Cup would also require competitors to participate in a couple of our Regions' road rallies and dragcrosses. Running for the CAM Cup would also give competitors points for one of Indy Region's big awards, Competitor of the Year.

Just thinking out loud......

[mpozzi]

I think a MY cutoff IS good as this class is Classic American Muscle. Leaving it open will have this class being mostly Super Stock and F Stock cars competing with 200 treadwear tires and the ones that have cars which CAM was designed for will still be at square one.

As for the cutoff year, that will depend on what someone brings that meets the general spirit and criteria of CAM rules. Somewhere in the '80's might work.

Just an observation ...

Mary Pozzi

[Tomswheels]

We chose 1978 in San Diego as a pre-fox Mustang cutoff, after talking it over quite a bit. The one person who complained the loudest drives a 2008 Pontiac G8 with a supercharger, 580HP, independent rear suspension, ABS, and traction control. We had 10 cars in the class with none of that equipment. It seems more fun for us to run against other old cars...

[GrabberGT]

I still like the rolling 30 year cutoff. This would mean that the car would have to be 84 or older. Throw in some exceptions for model year carry overs like Fox body Mustangs (78-93) or 3rd Gen Camaros (82-92) and I think it would still be fair.

[mpozzi]

The "Rolling 30" works. As this class is named Classic American Muscle, leaving it open to everything American is dooming the class to failure. There's not much classic about a late-model Z06, GenV Camaro, or Mustang ... at least not today. In about 30 years, perhaps.

We'd see a lot of the Good Guys participants starting to enjoy what they built a lot more as sitting in a lawn chair watching a string of cars drive by for two or three days can get old. I'm betting SCCA might even get some aftermarket suspension companies putting some class sponsorship $$ behind this class if it does as well as I think it will.

Mary Pozzi

[NJSPEEDER]

Would there be any consideration for car generation? My example would be the 3rd gen f-bodies that are growing in popularity. If a strict rolling 30 based solely on production year is applied only 82-84 car would be eligible which leaves 85-92 owners hanging in the breeze. The Fox Mustang crowd would be in a similar boat.

-Tim

[SSLance]

That's the exact problem of the MY cutoffs, different models face different generation changes.

I prefer a 2 seater vs 4 seater split myself.

My contention is a fat street legal car weighing 3000+ pounds on 200 TW tires is going to be pretty competitive against another fat street legal car weighing 3000+ pounds on 200 TW tires, regardless of the model year, especially if the suspension and drivetrain components are left wide open as they are. A major difference might be the front to rear weight distribution that a 2 seater may have (Corvettes).

[Damn True]

There are a number of classes where a fox mustang or 3/4 gen camaro can be built to relevance......less so with actual Classic Musclecars.

[NJSPEEDER]

There are a number of classes where a fox mustang or 3/4 gen camaro can be built to relevance......less so with actual Classic Musclecars.

There are also classes that allow other cars, muscle and otherwise of all ages. If that is the best argument against it is a very weak one.

If the premise of the class is to give owners of modified, street legal American muscle a place to play then a closed ended cut off based on just a prduction year misses a lot of oppotunities. Thirdgens, Fox Mustangs, and G-body's are all vastly more available and affordable than a lot of older muscle cars. This would mean an opportunity to attract more cars and even better an opportunity to attract younger enthusiasts that don't have the scratch to build a 69 Camaro or other valuable classic.

-Tim

[Damn True]

That the rules for a given class might "allow" a '68 nova =/= to a class where that '68 nova can be built to relevance.

There are numerous classes where a fox mustang or 3/4 gen camaro can be built to relevance.

If you want to build/race an old Nova you pretty much have to do a max effort build like Mr Hobaugh did in order to compete against much more modern equipment in CP.

The premise is to allow the old cars that are running GG, OUSCI, RTT-X etc an opportunity to run with SCCA. Before this class your only choice was to get your a$$ handed to you in CP or something....which tends to discourage folks and causes them to not want to come back.

I don't think the premise has anything to do with providing more classes for cars that are already represented in numerous existing classes.

[NJSPEEDER]

Your position sounds a lot more based in having less of an affinity for the later model muscle cars than worrying about having a place to participate. There isn't any special savings in building a CP car out of a 3rd gen vs an older car. It's still a race car and it still requires the added expenses of truck and trailer in most cases. I would even go as far as saying there are a mountain of cars on this very forum that have as much or more money into them than a lot of the competitive CP cars I have seen.

So really what other class a car can possibly be developed for into doesn't change anything.

-Tim

[Damn True]

Try not to assume what I think. I assure you that you aren't good at it.

There are already numerous classes where the cars suggested can compete. The point is...for the third time... that you can build a newer car to relevance in a number of existing classes. What would the point be of giving Fox Mustang or 3/4gen Camaro owners another class to run in when they already have their choice of what 5-6 that already allow for that car and where that car can be reasonably relevant?

...and ask yourself this. If they were to allow in a Fox Mustang (built through 2004) or a 4th Gen Camaro (built through 2002) what do you tell the guy that shows up with a 2003 Corvette? Can he run in CAM as well? What sense does that make?

....especially given that there is already a gob of classes where that Corvette can be classed and where it can be competitive.

[NJSPEEDER]

You keep circling back to cars being able to be built for other classes, your can too.

There is also a giant leap between saying a car with in a generation of production is allowable vs a completely different generation. You are grasping at straws to propose the idea that a 92 camaro would have any great advantage over an 82 in the proposed class, 4th gens didn't start until 93 so that generation would have 9 more years to wait for eligibility. Even at that, is it any less silly sounding to allow an 84 Camaro in and tell an 85 Camaro owner to go kick rocks?

BTW, if I am not accurate in pointing to your clear affinity for older cars then explain your statement "actual Classic Musclecars."

-Tim

[DTM Racing]

I think the missing bit to this discussion is that regions can tailor the rules to the participants (always and option in SCCA). I would suggest if you want something for the mildly classic muscle, petition for a CAM 2 (which we elected to pass on due to low participation). We also have a bit of a gentlemans agreement in our area that if we feel the car is within the spirit of the class, no one will protest and we can amend the rules.

[soloracerSD]

The best reason for you having 78 and older is to avoid running against 2014 VETTS.I saw 2 of them circling CAM Bait ball last weekend...LOL DID you see them?

If CAM get a lot of attention.It will be divided by mods and 2seaters.Taking up 9 pages of the rule book.Three of the divided classes will sound a lot like ESP,SM and CP.for the 4 seaters.ALL vintage.. If not you will hear. WE already have those classes. That's what my palm reader told me. Yes and everyone will have to read a rule book or have it read to them..LOL

I do support CAM but this can be expected if it becomes popular.




We chose 1978 in San Diego as a pre-fox Mustang cutoff, after talking it over quite a bit. The one person who complained the loudest drives a 2008 Pontiac G8 with a supercharger, 580HP, independent rear suspension, ABS, and traction control. We had 10 cars in the class with none of that equipment. It seems more fun for us to run against other old cars...

[Damn True]

You keep circling back to cars being able to be built for other classes, your can too.

There is also a giant leap between saying a car with in a generation of production is allowable vs a completely different generation. You are grasping at straws to propose the idea that a 92 camaro would have any great advantage over an 82 in the proposed class, 4th gens didn't start until 93 so that generation would have 9 more years to wait for eligibility. Even at that, is it any less silly sounding to allow an 84 Camaro in and tell an 85 Camaro owner to go kick rocks?

BTW, if I am not accurate in pointing to your clear affinity for older cars then explain your statement "actual Classic Musclecars."

-Tim

Let me ask you this.

If you had one of these cars in question...(do you, I don't know)...what is the motivation for wanting to compete in CAM and not running in one of the many existing classes that your car is already eligible for?

I have an idea as to a number of possible reasons but I make a point of not putting words in other peoples mouths.

[Craig510]

I can't wait to run my car in CAM. They seem to love the classic muscle cars in the SFR, they put my car in the wheel twice last year. It will be nice to group all the vintage cars together. I was out classed running against EVO's in SM-T2, and way outclassed in CP. My car has too many mods for ESP so I usually just ran FUN. I don't mind running against other late model V8 rear drive American cars, I have to do that at GoodGuys anyways.

[soloracerSD]

I know SM what's SM-T2?

I can't wait to run my car in CAM. They seem to love the classic muscle cars in the SFR, they put my car in the wheel twice last year. It will be nice to group all the vintage cars together. I was out classed running against EVO's in SM-T2, and way outclassed in CP. My car has too many mods for ESP so I usually just ran FUN. I don't mind running against other late model V8 rear drive American cars, I have to do that at GoodGuys anyways.

[Craig510]

I know SM what's SM-T2?
Its a regional class that requires street tires. I think they go down to 180TW.

[mpozzi]

Reading through all of this banter, I am left wondering about one thing (maybe two ...). Where's all these 3rd-gen F-bodies and Fox-body Mustangs? GM and Ford made a gazillion of them and in my opinion, these are the best of the models. They were cheap, plentiful, and handled great. And there's quite a few Solo classes they can be built for and do well in.

So where are they?

Mary Pozzi

[IndyDave]

Let me ask you this.

If you had one of these cars in question...(do you, I don't know)...what is the motivation for wanting to compete in CAM and not running in one of the many existing classes that your car is already eligible for?

I have an idea as to a number of possible reasons but I make a point of not putting words in other peoples mouths.

I can answer that as I'm someone in that situation. The car I currently Solo is my 2005 Mustang GT, it's lightly modded and my 3 season DD. I have modified it to my tastes, not any class rules. S197 Mustangs are a strong contender in ESP on R-comps when prepped to the limit of the rules. The limit of ESP rules would make the car useless as a DD. I could also run it STX where no matter what, it is a back-marker against the several WRX's that populate the class locally. I ran it for 2 years in ESP locally with no competition so I was just making laps. There were a couple of event where prepped ESP cars showed and I was DFL. This past year to help populate SMC I ran it there with a mix of old and new street machines and I was instantly competitive but by no means any kind of overdog. The Mustang is a stop-gap car between my old car, a 1996 Dodge Neon built to SCCA ITA rules that I ran in DSP & FSP, and the car I'm currently building, a 1979 Dodge Aspen R/T. I'm building the Aspen as a street fighter style PT car that if CAM hadn't come along, would be an overweight, under-powered CP car built to GT-1 rules. But for the sake of the current debate, using the sited M/Y cutoff of 1978, my Aspen is still SOL and I get to go back to running by myself in ESP or getting my head caved in in STX.

The intent of CAM is two-fold: first is to indeed give PT car owners a single class to run instead of being placed in different classes based on modifications and level of understanding of the folks running the event. The second intent is to give late model muscle car owners a place to play where they can be competitive LOCALLY. Again, SMC, the prototype for CAM had a mix of old and new and the no one seemed to have an advantage. The class increased membership in the SCCA and my Region, it made competitors out of also-rans, and everyone in the class was having a ball. The class kept at least 2 people coming back as they were stating they were ready to find something else to do because they weren't having all that much fun. As someone who as an officer of the Region, anything the Region can do to keep people interested and coming back to my events I'm going to do. Is it possible for someone to roll in with a car set on kill and destroy everyone else in the class? Definitely. But that can and does happen in any class. Clemens Berger is an Indy Region member and makes all of Indy's events. He DESTROYS B Mod locally, it happens. A tool Regions do have with CAM that will help with overdogs is that there are other classes to move the overdog to. We've already discussed here is we start to have an influx of C5 through C7 Corvettes or Vipers in CAM and that is to ask those competitors to move over to SuperStock. That's where those cars belong anyhow. Someone in a C4 or earlier Corvette, those cars will not have any big advantage and should play well in CAM. If late model cars become a problem then we can split the class or create an exclusions list which allows us to target specific models instead of excluding years of cars.

[j-rho]

I can answer that as I'm someone in that situation. The car I currently Solo is my 2005 Mustang GT, it's lightly modded and my 3 season DD. I have modified it to my tastes, not any class rules. S197 Mustangs are a strong contender in ESP on R-comps when prepped to the limit of the rules. The limit of ESP rules would make the car useless as a DD. I could also run it STX where no matter what, it is a back-marker against the several WRX's that populate the class locally.
Dave, the S197 is a better platform than a 1967 Camaro, one of which trophied at the ProSolo Finale last year in STX.

[SSLance]

I can answer that as I'm someone in that situation. The car I currently Solo is my 2005 Mustang GT, it's lightly modded and my 3 season DD. I have modified it to my tastes, not any class rules. S197 Mustangs are a strong contender in ESP on R-comps when prepped to the limit of the rules. The limit of ESP rules would make the car useless as a DD. I could also run it STX where no matter what, it is a back-marker against the several WRX's that populate the class locally. I ran it for 2 years in ESP locally with no competition so I was just making laps. There were a couple of event where prepped ESP cars showed and I was DFL. This past year to help populate SMC I ran it there with a mix of old and new street machines and I was instantly competitive but by no means any kind of overdog. The Mustang is a stop-gap car between my old car, a 1996 Dodge Neon built to SCCA ITA rules that I ran in DSP & FSP, and the car I'm currently building, a 1979 Dodge Aspen R/T. I'm building the Aspen as a street fighter style PT car that if CAM hadn't come along, would be an overweight, under-powered CP car built to GT-1 rules. But for the sake of the current debate, using the sited M/Y cutoff of 1978, my Aspen is still SOL and I get to go back to running by myself in ESP or getting my head caved in in STX.

The intent of CAM is two-fold: first is to indeed give PT car owners a single class to run instead of being placed in different classes based on modifications and level of understanding of the folks running the event. The second intent is to give late model muscle car owners a place to play where they can be competitive LOCALLY. Again, SMC, the prototype for CAM had a mix of old and new and the no one seemed to have an advantage. The class increased membership in the SCCA and my Region, it made competitors out of also-rans, and everyone in the class was having a ball. The class kept at least 2 people coming back as they were stating they were ready to find something else to do because they weren't having all that much fun. As someone who as an officer of the Region, anything the Region can do to keep people interested and coming back to my events I'm going to do. Is it possible for someone to roll in with a car set on kill and destroy everyone else in the class? Definitely. But that can and does happen in any class. Clemens Berger is an Indy Region member and makes all of Indy's events. He DESTROYS B Mod locally, it happens. A tool Regions do have with CAM that will help with overdogs is that there are other classes to move the overdog to. We've already discussed here is we start to have an influx of C5 through C7 Corvettes or Vipers in CAM and that is to ask those competitors to move over to SuperStock. That's where those cars belong anyhow. Someone in a C4 or earlier Corvette, those cars will not have any big advantage and should play well in CAM. If late model cars become a problem then we can split the class or create an exclusions list which allows us to target specific models instead of excluding years of cars.


+1 On all accounts...

[IndyDave]

Dave, the S197 is a better platform than a 1967 Camaro, one of which trophied at the ProSolo Finale last year in STX.

I have to call you on that. You in your '67 Camaro finished 29th at the Solo Nationals yet the best finishing S197 Mustang was 53rd. You did indeed trophy in class at the Pro Solo Finale in 5th (congrats by the way) and there was no S197 Mustang competing in STX in that event.

Comparing results from national competition to what happens at most regional (local) events isn't fair. The guys running at the pointy end of any class aren't going to abandon their class to run a local class, there's no incentive.

[j-rho]

The car broke a pushrod first lap day 1, and had a catastrophic oil leak day 2. It has a total of 5 events under its belt since the rebuild.
BTW, these cars are all in STU now.

[1966longroof]

I can't wait to run my car in CAM. They seem to love the classic muscle cars in the SFR, they put my car in the wheel twice last year. It will be nice to group all the vintage cars together. I was out classed running against EVO's in SM-T2, and way outclassed in CP. My car has too many mods for ESP so I usually just ran FUN. I don't mind running against other late model V8 rear drive American cars, I have to do that at GoodGuys anyways.

Goodguys run the Late Models in there own class (on Super Sundays).
I do the Auto X strictly for fun. I have to, with only 215's on the front and 235's on the rear in a 3300+lb everyday family car. I love Goodguys, ASCS, and Power Tour Auto-X events. Everyone is having fun and relaxed. I will do my first SCCA event next month, as CAM seems to be a FUN place to play. I hope anyway.

[soloracerSD]

I know it would be costly maybe uncompetitive.But have you thought of putting a LS7 and as wide as you can get Hoosiers on the 67.Then try SM. or Prepared I know you like challenges Jason..:)

QUOTE=j-rho;1047881]The car broke a pushrod first lap day 1, and had a catastrophic oil leak day 2. It has a total of 5 events under its belt since the rebuild.
BTW, these cars are all in STU now.[/QUOTE]

[Craig510]

Goodguys run the Late Models in there own class (on Super Sundays).
I do the Auto X strictly for fun. I have to, with only 215's on the front and 235's on the rear in a 3300+lb everyday family car. I love Goodguys, ASCS, and Power Tour Auto-X events. Everyone is having fun and relaxed. I will do my first SCCA event next month, as CAM seems to be a FUN place to play. I hope anyway.

This is true at the National Events, but at the "Get Together" events, they allow late models both days and group any non-truck newer than 55 in Street Machine. All the Pleasanton events with an AutoX are Get Togethers. The late models don't seem to have an advantage on the small GG course.

[Bryce]

I think tom posted a top time in a relatively stock 13 mustang. The advantage is buy versus build.

[Matt@BOS]

I think tom posted a top time in a relatively stock 13 mustang. The advantage is buy versus build.

Bryce you're right. Tom came in very close to a top overall time in the Mustang. , I'm going to add in that I think there is actually a major advantage with the new cars on a Good Guys autocross out west, since they have ABS and a tighter turning radius. When Good Guys is constrained to a small parking lot their autocrosses really come down to the ability to brake and make U turns. I think the problem with a lot of the late models being uncompetitive is due to either driver or car set up. Most of the late model cars aren't built with track events in mind, and mis matched assortments of bolt ons and skinny front tires with big rear ones.

[struck by Lightning]

I'm also looking forward to the CAM class and will bring out the camaro. Last year we ran the truck in ESP and the competition was tough where many times we were competing against Camaros, Mustangs and Evo's however I'm proud to say we did very well. Our efforts yielded a second place finish in the Fresno / San Francisco Region Championship Series, not bad for a 4,800# truck as many of my competitors have said.
.
.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2014/02/izmgew-1.jpg
.

[Project92rs]

Reading through all of this banter, I am left wondering about one thing (maybe two ...). Where's all these 3rd-gen F-bodies and Fox-body Mustangs? GM and Ford made a gazillion of them and in my opinion, these are the best of the models. They were cheap, plentiful, and handled great. And there's quite a few Solo classes they can be built for and do well in.

So where are they?

Mary Pozzi

We've been known to bring 1 or 2 to events over the years. ;-)

[Derek69SS]

There WAS a movement to tailor a new NATIONAL Street Touring class specifically for PT cars, which would have addressed most of everyone's concerns listed here. Rules were specific, but open enough to include about 95%+ of the cars on this site. Only the extreme outliers would have not been class legal.

Someone's idea to push this poorly conceived regional-only non-competitive CAM exhibition class has effectively killed that proposal.

This class has set back the possibility of legitimate national classing for PT cars years... if ever now. :(

If my "attitude" towards it seems coarse, it's not without reason.

[dontlifttoshift]

That I agree with. I would much rather have STP than CAM, but I still don't think 95% inclusion the way it was written.

[Derek69SS]

I only saw a rough draft, and offered my opinion for a few changes to a friend who is on the STAC.
I do not know exactly what would have been different in the final proposal. Based on what I saw, most of the limitations were pretty generous to street-friendly bolt-on type modified cars. 95% may be high, but I think fairly accurate for the cars within the year range given.

I won't say much more, because I'm not sure how much I'm allowed to talk about it... The year range that I saw proposed was 1955-1978 and included any car outside that year limit which shared the same platform as a car within it. (Camaro up to 81 for example). There were other things that kept it "musclecar" rather than "sportscar" oriented, such as requiring a solid rear axle and the car had to be minimum 4-passenger (except trucks). Tire size limitations and engine/trans allowances were quite generous.

[IndyDave]

Oh brother.

A national class for PT type cars has not been killed. Before a national class to exist there has to be interest and a field of cars running in SCCA Solo at the regional level first. Traditionally, a national class develops from trends happening at regional and when it existed, divisional competition. Regions are seeing more PT type cars but have struggled to provide them consistent classing. So the goal in Topeka was to come up with a way to help regions who have these cars at their events and give those competitors some consistency in classing. SCCA looked at several options, all were taken seriously and weighed. It was decided that instead of bringing a detailed rule set that they would opt for a simple rule set that mimicked rule sets that already exist for PT cars running in other organizations. The thought is the people the class is meant to attract will be familiar with SCCA's rules because they already operate under similar rules. What's so outrageous about that? CAM's rules are Goodguy's rules with a minimum weight rule added. Goodguy's Autocross is the largest sanctioner of autocross events for PT cars. Simple. No skull-doggery, no conspiracies, no back door politicking, just decisions made by people who did a lot of footwork, attended a lot of PT car events and talked to a lot of people involved in the PT world on what they wanted to see SCCA do if it wanted to attract them to SCCA Solo events. For now, CAM is the answer. It's not a perfect answer but neither were any of the other options.

[dontlifttoshift]

So the STAC was involved?

[j-rho]

...The thought is the people the class is meant to attract will be familiar with SCCA's rules because they already operate under similar rules. What's so outrageous about that? ...
They are very different Dave. All the non-SCCA places have the "we reserve the right to exclude any car that doesn't fit in with the spirit of our event" - a car built just to maximize performance, could be excluded on a whim. That is the opposite of how SCCA rules work...SCCA wants people to prepare themselves to the (legal) limit of the rules, because that's what makes for good competition. In the P-T world, people are not accustomed to having "limits".

It'll be easy for parties to be happy during this honeymoon. It's when reality starts to settle in, and the foundation of the relationship gets tested, that its shortcomings come to light. As a basis for long-term success, there are some serious flaws in what's been proposed, and a lot of the heartache to come, could have been avoided with a just a few simple things that I've already presented.

I know everyone involved (including yourself!) is doing their best and acting in what they believe is the club and membership's best interest. Some of us still can't help but be disappointed in the way it's being handled though.

[j-rho]

So the STAC was involved?
Donny, I've spent the last 10 years in continuous service of either the STAC (Street Touring Advisory Committee) or the SMAC (Street Modified Advisory Committee) - both relatively new categories that were created around the time I started autocrossing (2001).

In both cases, the categories started off as too open in some areas, and a lot of the competitor pain around ensuing rules changes, were over takebacks. Recall the STAC update/backdate and aero debates, and the bevy of weight adjustments in SM.

The relatively unlimited nature of SM bears some resemblance to CAM. The understanding everyone should have is, when you are allowed essentially unlimited control over the chassis and can make enough power, the smallest (widthxlength), lowest, best balanced, and lightest (or at least lowest pounds-per-mm-of-tire) car will win. A lot of the SM adjustments were done to neuter platforms (like the Porsche 914) that had tremendous inherent advantages over target cars (Corvette, RX7) in these areas.

The takeaway for CAM is you can provide the unlimited modification stage you want, but you have to control the resulting values in those four areas to make sure the right cars end up on top. CAM already has a limited weight; add in something to limit rear weight bias (as was figured out decades ago in CP), ride height (these are supposed to be streetable cars?), and overall size (set minimums for wheelbase and track width that accommodate the meat of the target car base - classic pony/muscle cars - but nothing smaller) - and you have a winner. Oh, and allow period-correct stuff but otherwise no real aero.

You could easily expand inclusion for oddball (too small, too new, etc.) stuff by penalizing in raw weight, or pounds/mm-of-tire, and continue to use that as a tuning knob to keep that portion of the audience engaged, while ensuring your high-volume target vehicles remain perceived as the "cars to have".

That was the basis for a class called STP (Street Touring Ponycar) that I proposed...unfortunately CAM was already too far along and it got killed. If CAM is to make it, I suggest it will end up looking just like the STP I presented...but only after several years and lots of new-to-SCCA-person heartburn.

The question is, if CAM had been proposed as STP, with its extra 4-5 rules, would those few simple rules have created such a negative reaction, it never would have gotten off the ground and failed? I imagine that's what Dave and others believed. I get what's being tried here, but feel it's disingenuous of the club to present this to the largely non-initiated as a new place for them; they are not likely to understand the distinctions between regional and national classes, and may come to find out the hard way, after having expended personal resources in pursuit of increased competitiveness in a venue (the top of our sport) that doesn't actually yet cater to them.

[NJSPEEDER]

Let me ask you this.

If you had one of these cars in question...(do you, I don't know)...what is the motivation for wanting to compete in CAM and not running in one of the many existing classes that your car is already eligible for?

I have an idea as to a number of possible reasons but I make a point of not putting words in other peoples mouths.

The reasoning is simple, there are a lot of restriction in other classes that many later model muscle and pony cars are eligible for. SM is about the most wide open solo catagory but has a lot of engine limitations that would eliminate any number of otherwise legal cars. Also CAM allows for a much more suspension modification on a street car. While I understand suspension is wide open in CP there is also the distinction that CP is a gutted race car class.

Blind limitations, just like the class killers that you mentioned in one of your previous posts, are high on the list of reasons many of us stopped participating in SCCA events. If there were great leaps in ability made with in a generation I could see some reason to object but that simply isn't the reality. G-bodies, F-bodies, and Fox Mustangs all used the same suspension, are a similar stock weight, and can fit all the same engines through out the generation that would only be partially eligible under the closed ended 30 year cut off.

-Tim

[dontlifttoshift]

Jason, why didn't any of this go out for member approval like other rules changes then? I don't understand why seemingly simple things, like a steering wheel allowance, take months and months of public debate and letter writing but an entire new class was created under the radar and put into the rule book with out any member feedback. Even as a regional only class.

[j-rho]

To get into FT, has to go through SEB. SEB was handed CAM by their bosses... such is how it goes.

[dontlifttoshift]

Got it. Thanks.

[Whiskey11]

I have to call you on that. You in your '67 Camaro finished 29th at the Solo Nationals yet the best finishing S197 Mustang was 53rd. You did indeed trophy in class at the Pro Solo Finale in 5th (congrats by the way) and there was no S197 Mustang competing in STX in that event.

Comparing results from national competition to what happens at most regional (local) events isn't fair. The guys running at the pointy end of any class aren't going to abandon their class to run a local class, there's no incentive.

I figured because my car was being brought up I should jump in and provide some perspective on the disparity in prep level between J-Rho's car and my own. J-Rho maxed his car out to the best of the class rules for live axle cars. I don't think he could have tweaked it any further within the framework of STX to max it further but only he can truly comment on that.

My car? My car looks meaner and faster than it actually is! :)

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2014/02/img_5273-1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/whiskey_11/media/img_5273.jpg.html)

My car had at Nationals:

-Ground Control Coilovers - 440lbs/in front springs, 200 lbs/in rear springs -3.0º camber, -0.10º toe and +7.0º caster
-Strano Performance Parts 35mm front sway bar
-Fays 2 Watts Link
-Cortex Racing Torque Arm
-265/40/18 Hankook RS3's on Enkei PF01 18x9's
-Rebuilt Traction-Lok Rear Diff with the Carbon Fiber clutch packs (stock diff with different clutch packs)

The car weighed 3425lbs with an 1/8th tank of gas and no driver at Nationals. Unfortunately for me I made some substantial changes to the car 3 weeks prior to Nationals and while I got a ton of runs in with the two test'n'tunes, a divisional championship and a local event I could not get rid of the push in the car and fought it all through Nationals. To add insult to injury, it was my first Nationals (even though I run on that site all summer long with the Nebraska Region) and I was nearing the end of my third year of autocross. If you look at the results I coned away all 3 runs on day 1, and the day 1 course was the only course I was going to have an advantage over the rest of the class with the big braking zones and dragging the car out of the slow corners. Even without the cones my final position in STX would have been the mid 40's.

In terms of STX rules the only things left are going to fall in driver comfort (seats, harnesses), weight reduction (battery, seats, exhaust, other misc items), power (CAI + Tune, full catted exhaust, underdrive pulleys) and a better rear diff. In final trim it would put the car about 3300lbs with about 300 RWHP, 320 RWTRQ.

At the next local event after Nationals we ran the west course again (verbatim) and by adding my heavier rear swaybar and changing the stock rear lower control arm bushings out for poly bushings I dropped enough time that with clean runs on day 1 of Nationals I would have been 41st overall. Because I am a glutton for punishment I handed the keys over to CSP Winner at Nationals, John Hunter to toss my car around (he's been asking all year to do it) and the times he ran were consistent with folks in the mid to upper 20's in STX at Nationals. With all the caveats associated with different day comparisons, I don't think the car will ever make it to the trophies Nationally in STX trim. There is simply too much weight and not enough tire to make the car work correctly to do well.

If you are curious about my STX build, more info (the entire build log) can be found on my blog: http://stxs197.blogspot.com/


Back to CAM. This is one class I really look forward to because it allows me to do what I want with the car and stay on streetable tires. I know I'm not the only late model owner looking forward to CAM's SM like rules without the slicks against similar build and make cars.

What will really turn me off to CAM will be model year restrictions and weight balance restrictions that bias cars forward too much. My car as it sits has a 52.6/47.4 weight distribution and adding weight to the front of the car is a non-starter for me. I'd rather bump up to ESP and fight there or run SM locally on street tires and CP Nationally on A6's. I would support aero restrictions similar to CP though. The idea of huge wings is a bit of a turn off even if they are functional.

At the end of the day, I'm still not sure where I will end up with my car next year. A huge part of me wants to jump to CAM, part of me wants ESP and the remainder of me wants a 2015 Mustang which would mean putting my current car on hold.

[GrabberGT]

Texas Region SCCA's CAM rules:

• There will be a split in the classing (2 classes). CAM (Classic American Muscle) cars that are 1972 and older. MAM (Modern American Muscle) 1973 and newer cars.

• No weight restriction in either class.

• Exclusion list: C4, C5, C6 and C7 Corvettes are excluded from these classes.

All other restrictions, rules and safety requirements are as noted in the link and will apply for our 2014 TX Region CAM & MAM class.

…tell your local muscle car guy he’s got a place to autocross for 2014!!

[DTM Racing]

Very cool.
Unfortunately yesterday we had the issue with the rules as written that we knew we would. A driver who is normally not competitive in SS, tried to class his newer Z06 in CAM. Luckily a few of us caught it in grid and he was talked to by the regional chair, since our CAM is limited to pre-79. After speaking with the guy, he knew exactly what he was doing and had hope he could "slip by" and nab a trophy.
Other than that, we had a great 2nd event; with 10 Drivers and 8 (legal) cars.

[IndyDave]

Texas Region SCCA's CAM rules:

• There will be a split in the classing (2 classes). CAM (Classic American Muscle) cars that are 1972 and older. MAM (Modern American Muscle) 1973 and newer cars.

• No weight restriction in either class.

• Exclusion list: C4, C5, C6 and C7 Corvettes are excluded from these classes.

All other restrictions, rules and safety requirements are as noted in the link and will apply for our 2014 TX Region CAM & MAM class.

Seems like reasonable additions and deletions to the rules. Personally, the weight rule is going to be hard to enforce locally. Who's going to drag out a set of scales for one class? How many Regions even own a set of scales? Why exclude C4's? Those things SUCK! A lot of fun to beat up on though :)


Unfortunately yesterday we had the issue with the rules as written that we knew we would. A driver who is normally not competitive in SS, tried to class his newer Z06 in CAM. Luckily a few of us caught it in grid and he was talked to by the regional chair, since our CAM is limited to pre-79. After speaking with the guy, he knew exactly what he was doing and had hope he could "slip by" and nab a trophy.

And that's how you handle that situation. Even if you didn't have the model / year rule, there is nothing wrong with doing that. Just because the car may be "legal" for the class, Region officials have every right ask members to behave with good sportsmanship and not trophy raid a class just because they can. If the member wants to be a jerk about it, they can be asked to go away until they can exhibit good sportsmanship.

[SSLance]

This is pretty big news that just broke...


http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=51948

[Ron Sutton]

This is pretty big news that just broke...


http://www.scca.com/news/index.cfm?cid=51948

Oh wow! CAM as a National class at the finals :)

It just got real competitive. Game on!

[Gratefuldiver]

Texas Region SCCA's CAM rules:

• There will be a split in the classing (2 classes). CAM (Classic American Muscle) cars that are 1972 and older. MAM (Modern American Muscle) 1973 and newer cars.

• No weight restriction in either class.

• Exclusion list: C4, C5, C6 and C7 Corvettes are excluded from these classes.

All other restrictions, rules and safety requirements are as noted in the link and will apply for our 2014 TX Region CAM & MAM class.

…tell your local muscle car guy he’s got a place to autocross for 2014!!

Those are nice rules. There are no limits in the STL club and 95% of the cars that run that class are 1990 and newer. Not a fan of it but I don't want to be the guy that makes a big deal about it.

[SSLance]

I have updated my registration...looks like I'm first...

Who else will join me in the new CAM classes at SCCA Nationals?


Classic American Muscle Contemporary 1 ENTRIES
# Name Year Make Sponsor Hometown
24 Hamilton, Lance 1985 Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS Ridetech, Ron Sutton Race Technology, Exessive Engineering, Smithville, MO