From: Paul Foster <pfoster@gdi.net>
Subject: RE: C4 Vette
Ben Thatcher wrote:
<<<I don't think SCCA should be in the business of supporting a single
marque class. SCCA will always run the risk of alienating strong
proponents of the "I" class masses in the process. You will find lots of
folks in the marque clubs who love to bash SCCA for taking this stance.
However, the very fact that EVERY marque club has people complaining
about SCCA is the strongest argument that, in fact, the SCCA IS doing
their job.>>>
<And what job is that? To provide a venue for a select few cars but
everybody else is at a huge disadvantage? This is total BS. The SCCA
should provide fair classes for _all_ cars, particularly for sports cars
that would turn up in very large numbers if they had a fair place to
play, as has been proven numerous times in the past.
My point is that giving Vette drivers their own class won't necessarily
increase their participation in SCCA events. Bear in mind that I love
SCCA competition but I know a bunch of Corvette drivers and talk to them.
So, here's some other reasons from their perspective.
1. Typical SCCA course design is more suited to Hondas, Miatas and Neons.
They typically channel the cars to follow a single line through every
corner and punishes any tail happy behavior. It's no secret that big cars
need a different line from little cars. Design line freedom into corners
and the big car guys and gals will be happy.
2. WAAAAAYYY too many pylons on course.
3. There seems to be some sort of unwritten rule against (shhhh, don't
say it) straightaways. Hey, I personally witnessed a total *fit* put on
by a National Champion (driving a sub-100 hp car) when a 200 foot
straight was added to a divisional course (horrors!!). He even BELIEVED
that straights are forbidden in Solo 2 rules (no self interest there)!
4. Why compete in a Corvette class in an SCCA event and get 3-4 runs when
they can run a Corvette class in a NCCC event and get 12 runs and not
have to work the event?
<Or don't you want
large turnouts at your autocrosses? Maybe you like things the way they
are. Maybe you have a problem with 200+ people at a local autocross
because it means you can't make 6 runs instead of 3. Maybe you don't
like having 15 or so cars in your class which would provide good
competition and a ladder to get better.
You obviously don't know me and have chosen to jump to some pretty
accusatory assumptions. I happen to co-chair a thriving and growing
autocross program in the Atlanta area. Having 200+ competitors would be
welcome and encouraged at our events. We had a high of 164 entrants at
one event in '99 and we are averaging more than 100 entries per event.
The more competitors I have in my class the better. Having fierce
competition is what I thrive on. I'd rather come in last in a top notch
class than win a single car class, any day.
I just don't happen to agree with your assumptions. How can you guarantee
every car will be competitive in a class? Frankly, in our sport, the
driver has FAR more to do with success than the car. I know of lots of
cars that won National Championships that have been sold and are now
back-markers in their local regions. Same cars different drivers. There
is far too much emphasis on equipment among team.netters. Top notch
drivers make mediocre cars shine. Mediocre drivers spend piles of money
trying to build an edge into their equipment and still populate the
bottom of their classes. Then they whine on team.net about how their cars
are misclassed.
Here's a challenge. Hire John Ames to drive your "misclassed" car and see
what happens.
I had the opportunity to see another master driver, John Thomas, take a
dead stock Mercury somethingorother, to second place in GS at the
Meridian National Tour earlier this year.
Ben Thatcher
Apex Benefit Services & Motorsports
Stockbridge, GA
Phone 770.474.1402
FAX 770.474.0938
|