I have being following this highly debated thread on SCCA forum with arguments from both sides.
http://sccaforums.com/forums/13/270208/ShowThread.aspx

It looks to me that the old BSP kings are not happy with the change in the status quo and want AWD (mainly the evo) out so they could regain their domination.

With all the whinning and "so called" solutions to fix the class, do you guys think that if their request for change succeed with SEB; that the evo can be competitve in ASP(with GT3 and the such)? Do you guys feel that having an AWD SP class is the ticket? I want to hear our own AWD biased opinions.
Thanks MR Berry for whipping them so bad that they would not stop crying.

 

screw them, just run SM

 

I think I said pretty much everything I'm going to say in the other forum. We stand no chance against a well setup GT3(or GT2). I think Tom might stand a chance against a C5Z if the conditions are right, but in general the rest of us would be screwed. I think AWDSP is a terrible idea. There just aren't enough cars to acutally make a class limited to only high HP AWD cars. I think a good solution would be to make a class inbetween ASP and BSP (or leave BSP as is...).

Personally I'm not even sure the fight from the 'old' BSP guys will last long enough to make it to an SEB decision. Sounds like most of them are going to quit running next year, which would take away their power with the SEB. I don't think the guys on the SEB give a crap about what people feel, they only care about class numbers. If all these guys go home and pout they're just shooting themselves in the foot.

We actually had a discussion about whether we( ok Tom) should sandbag at nationals so no body would get pissed off. Luckily we decided to stick it to 'em. This is way more fun.

 

like I said in the other forums, the driver makes the good times, not the car.

I don't think a C4 vette can compete against a newer C5 or C6 (not sure where the C6 is classed either) so why pick on the rally cars, easy target perhaps?

 

[/QUOTE]
We actually had a discussion about whether we( ok Tom) should sandbag at nationals so no body would get pissed off. Luckily we decided to stick it to 'em. This is way more fun.[/QUOTE]

Sandbagging would have made their complaints somewhat valid as it would show some kind of domination of our cars.
A single or two well prepped and driven cars on favorable conditions does not prove superiority of an entire platform however; to me it shows someone did the work and drove well.

 

I have no dog in this hunt so I havent posted on sccaforums but I have been following the thread.
I dont think the ASP or the AWDSP class options are good at all. I think evos should stay in BSP and the slower cars in the class should be moved to CSP, along with a couple cars moved from ASP to BSP. ASP has its own problems that need to be sorted out, it shouldnt be a dumping ground for everything faster than SS.
I think the SP classes should have a yearly maintenece program in order to keep it fresh. One of the biggest complaints you hear from those ex-BSP drivers is that their cars have been devalued because they are uncompetitive, with "SP upkeep", everybodys SP cars are constantly updated and kept competitive.

I think the vette and M3 still have a chance in that class with the right conditions (which rarely happen ). I also think that there are cars that havent been campaigned well/ or at all in BSP that could have a chance (with the right conditions ).
I think its really a lame cop-out for someone to claim they dont have a chance so they arent even going to go to nationals because of another car. I bought my evo with intentions of making it a killer BSP car but Iam going to go a second year in Astock, what the hell motivates me?

 

They sound like a bunch of spoiled girls (no offense to spoiled girls).

Is that what autocrossing is all about?

 

I think one could easily make adjustments that balance the table a bit better.

I would like to see someone make the point that unless there was a spec class there will always be a fast car/best chassis. Some folks are just mad that they are not in that car.

 

They are upset that there car costs way more and has 2 doors and still gets the beat down from a little 2.0 engine pushing a 4 door sedan. Sound like a bunch of Honda guys complaining about missing a shift or his Vtec not working.

 

The crying and complaining of the the "bimmer-vettes" is not the only that bogs me as some other AWD sell-outs are so quick to point the finger at the evo as the overdog that should be moved and that their car is not near as competitive as ours and deserve a spot in the class .
I know everyone is pleading their own cause but I could understand WRXs or DSMs saying the evo is different not STIs.

 

I had a good laugh at the STI guy that posted the pic of Evo vs sti turbo. "oh poor me, my turbo is soooo small compared to the evo". No mention of the additional half liter of displacement.

 

I have a evo ix and i am moving to bsp, today is a good day, LOL

 

I think this is the best option in this case. Compared to most SP cars, Evos have relatively little development time, and I do think that on average they'll continue to get faster. In addition, there are a lot of cool cars which are classed in ASP, but you'll never see them out just because they don't stand a chance as it is (E46 M3, non-Z06 C5, non-turbo/gt3 911's, etc). A class for the fast BSP and slow ASP cars would be pretty popular I think.

This would probably work if it were pro racing, but on an amateur level (and relatively amateur-level budgets), it's tough to do. The variation in driving skill and car prep is too great to know exactly why one car is slower than another, especially with the mere handful of national-level events we have each year IMO.

That said, I do feel sorry for those M3/C4 guys, as building an SP car is fairly expensive. Looking at it from the other side, how would the Evo drivers that built a pretty competitive BSP car feel if they were moved to ASP? Here you've spent probably $10k buying all the right parts, hitting lots of events for testing, and now you're not competitive anymore. Fortunately Evos have a number of competitive career paths, but most cars don't have that luxury.

Have you seen what a C4 Corvette or E36 M3 costs? Evos are the expensive ones!

 

I'm not exactcly sure that the evo is not going to be competitive is ASP, as we're still evolving in terms of preperation and the top BSP evo would have at least trophied in ASP for the past two years at nats.
The point is that it's not the case for the STIs and the whinners are making their case on AWD in general not fitting the class and dominating.

 

Interesting situation... well, not really. Happens a lot in classing.

A similar argument was formed by the "experts" against the Impreza 2.5 RS in STS back in the good old days. "AWD is not fair!" cried the masses. Turns out, somebody brought in an 89 Civic Si, set it up correctly, and now STS has become the spec-Civic class. Ironically, the cries for justice fell silent and no arguments were made against the Civic once it became the top dog. There are exceptions (the 240...), but perception being what it is, you don't see people putting their $$ into longshots.

There are a number of factors that have conspired for an AWD car to win in BSP at Nats. BSP has run Heat 1 for the past two years (has anybody asked why?). HPT is low-grip asphalt. Those two factors alone are significant. And neither are the fault of the Evo or STI drivers. I think the results would likely be much closer if BSP ran in Heat 3 and we were still at Forbes Field.

Which begs the question... do we need to reclass all AWD cars now that Nats is on low-grip asphalt? I mean, look at DSP where the 2.5 RS damn near took third (unfortunately a rotor broke...) That's a 1st for DSP.

What is most important in my mind, is the success of the SCCA. Which, naturally, depends on it's ability to recruit and retain new members. There are more "rally" cars and a larger following of said rally cars than the C4 vettes or the E36 M3s. That has just become obvious at this point. This generation of performance cars now happens to include boost and AWD. Either the SCCA will capitalize on this or they will fail to by classing these cars where they are not competitive to "save" the "throngs" of C4 owners. I honestly don't think it'll even put a dent in the E36 owners. They have more options than most do at this point in time for running a competitive setup in multiple classes.

So, pander to the the minority "old guard", or embrace the new generation of performance cars? As if that's even a hard decision. However, we are talking about the SCCA and stranger things have happened... (ST* "emissions" <- )

Afterall, we must realize there is no "planned" path for classing in the SCCA - we're talking about a number of disjointed committees, with volunteers determining the fate of the SCCA.

Based on the growth of NASA over the past few years these committees aren't getting a passing grade at this point in time.