I tried posting this from home, and it seemingly didn't take - so here it is
again. Sorry if it's a double post.
--------------------
Yurk! Subscribed at home to keep in touch with this thread! I'm not an addict!
Incidently, y'all can stop sending Digests now thanks. I got 5 of 'em. :)
Phil Osborne <posborne@minuteman-ups.com> wrote:
> Dennis, you left out one of my questions, that being:
> Why do we want to perpetuate another class under the guise of Street
> Touring that is not a street legal car? If STU is to be a
> derivitive of ST, then all those rules that apply to ST in terms of > street
legal, licensed, and insurance if the state requires it,
> should be carried over to STU. Otherwise, trailered only STU cars
> become a further bastardized Street Prepared class, which is the
> real reason (as I understand it anyway) for Street Touring to begin > with.
[snip...] if the car is NOT street legal, it should not fall
> under STU rules...
> but still question why we need
> another class of all out race cars, and especially question why it
> would fall under rules meant to entice the folks with modded out
> street legal cars. All I am saying is the rules should be written
> to allow a car to remain legal for street use, and indeed licensed
> for street use if it is to be considered ST or any derivitive
> thereof...Anything less should carry an appropriate name not
> associated with ST.
OK, there's a valid question in there that needs answering, and a couple of
misconceptions that need clearing up.
Firstly, STU as I've laid it out here _is_ street legal in a great many states
& provinces. In Ontario and Michigan, there are no emissions tests, and in
Ontario at least (and I think Michigan, and maybe Ohio too) there's not even an
annual vehicle inspection - just an inspection before the car is registered.
In Kentucky, there's not even that. You could register a soapbox derby racer
with a 2X4 rubbing against the wheel for a brake if it had a valid 17 digit VIN
and clear title.
I think this is the majority of cases, at least for now - but let's be on the
conservative side. Let's say half of all states and provinces have no emissions
requirements at all.
The happy folks that live in these parts of the country can and do take full
advantage of that. I just got back from the Diamond Star Shootout in Ohio -
low-11-second 400 HP daily drivers, and not just one or two - LOTS! These guys
already have the "full race cars" you describe, and they drive them on the
street. Hell, my SP car is my daily commuter, I only trailer it to events
because it's the only way 1 person can carry all the crap I do. :) My car is
concidered UNDER PREPARED by these guys. (Except for my wheels, which they all
think are just nuts. :)
Ok, the other half of the country has some sort of emissions test policy,
ranging from "we don't care what you've done to your car, as long as it passes
a sniffer" to "Is that an aftermarket hose clamp boy? Enjoy your jail time."
It is flatly NOT FAIR to hold these guys to their state's emission requirements
when the other half of the class can do whatever they want.
What's more, they typically ignore the emissions laws anyway. Go to a dragstrip
in CA. Count the cars as they come in. Examine them. I'd bet less than 25% are
still CA street legal. I have a couple of friends who routinely - like once a
year - take all their smog-illegal stuff off their cars, retune their fuel
computers, and hide whatever thay can, to pass the CA emissions tests to
re-register their cars. And they day after the test, all the go-fast stuff goes
right back on.
They do this _on their own_, without any concern about the SCCA rules. They do
it because they WANT TO.
Now, if we try and enforce an emissions/street legal rule for these guys, then
the word is going to go out pretty quick. They will assume that the SCCA has
smog check equipment on site (nobody would make rule they weren't prepared to
enforce, right?) and they will assume that there are packs of weasels ready to
inspect their cars for the slightest infraction so they can get protested. (No
kidding, that's the message we send out. Our image is that of a bunch of
armchair lawyers)
And they will stay the hell away. Who wants to put up with the hassle?
And as a further kicker, the rule is for all intents and purposes unenforcable
anyhow, for reasons I have already detailed.
It is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE that STU have as open-ended a set of rules as we
can, because our target audience are building open-ended cars. Where we draw
the line is basically race slicks, tube frame cars, and total strippers - stuff
that is so "out there" that the odds on a riceboy showing up with one are
practically null.
Note though, that slicks, strippers, and tube frames are the very definition of
Modified cars....
Now your other point - Joe Newbie Riceboy shows up and gets spanked by Ace
Ex-SP Driver and gets pissed off and never returns - is also valid. The
solution to this is to have Ace Driver _actively looking for and helping the
Joe Newbies whenever possible_. Ol' Ace has to act as a mentor, ACTIVELY. If
one or two Ace's perRegion start doing this, helping Joe Newbies get over the
initial shock, then they'll stick around. Regional competition does not (and
should not) have to be cutthroat. That's what Divisionals, Nationals, and
ProSolo are for. :)
You see, the other big myth is that the kids have to win in order to keep them
coming back. That's simply not true. Do you know how hard it is for one of
these guys to win a bracket race, especially in a large field? I know guys that
have raced for years, and never made it past the second round, but they keep
coming back. Why? Because they know that it's physically possible that one day
they will win. They know they have a _chance_ of winning, and so they keep
trying.
When you _do_ lose them is when they hit a rules limitation that they really
want to not-do. "I know I could go faster if I just had that boost controller
or that big-ass turbo, or that wing or that camshaft etc. etc. etc." We force
them into making the decision between building their car the way they want, and
playing by our (really restrictive) rules. Guess which way they go?
I _suppose_ we could keep the "you gotta have current plates" rule, but there
could be no protests based on what it takes to get those plates. If the Facist
State of CA decides that all (say) headers are illegal, and someone shows up
with CA plates and headers, then those headers are non-protestable. To do
otherwise is to invite madness.
DG
|