Why a poll? I was just stating that Mr. Davison was quoting from an SCCA
source, and the info (as usual) was tainted and false.
The second point is - - why take a poll? Can't grocery getters like yours
autocross along with "vintage - - " etc? My point is that with the classing
structure as it is, it favors the grocery getters, i.e. Type R, BMW, Supra,
Neon, etc. The "vintage - -" cars are classed so that they do not have a
chance.
So what do you think a "poll" would accomplish? Are you looking for a
demographic base? Seems that the grocery getters would win, since the
classing structure favors them, that is what the majority have bought in
order to be competitive. So in that light, I yield.
It still does not preclude the fact that the SCCA has intentionally turned
their backs on their roots, and those roots are the sports cars, much as
their name implies.
The solution would be to re-structure so that the older cars have a place to
play that they CAN be competitive as well as the newer cars, not structure
so they have to play together (where the newer grocery getters DO have the
advantage, in most cases).
Or better yet, score and time the driver, and not the car. Of course, that
would take some forward thinking. And your club is incapable of doing that.
G
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan Pozner <apozner@ptd.net>
To: George Ryan <quad4fiero@webzone.net>; <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: "new" scca logo
> Why don't we have an informal poll?
>
> How many folks out there joined the SCCA for "classic sports cars from the
> vintage era". Or how many folks joined the SCCA to race or compete in
auto-x
> events. I joined for the latter reason.
>
> I certainly appreciate older classic sports cars but I have the following
> problems with them:
> 1) They require far too much maintenance to use as a daily driver.
> 2) In stock form the affordable ones are far slower than a KIA for G-d's
> sake.
> 3) The affordable ones provide a terrible creature comforts - no ride, no
> AC, no stereo, no rain protection, no protection from oil leaks :-)
> 4) Making an older car safe for competition can be far more expensive than
> working with a new "grocery getter"
> 5) I've ridden, driven or owned the following: Porsche 914, MGB, MGBGT,
Fiat
> 124 Spider, Lotus Europa, Triumph TR250. My Type R is a far more exciting
> drive than any of them (IMHO). It is certainly faster. I would be scared
to
> autocross any of them except the 914 or the Europa but both of those have
> been long gone -victims of terminal rust. Of course, even these cars are
far
> too new to fit into the definition of a classic sports car that George
> quotes.
>
> George, change is as inevitable in the SCCA as it is in the automotive
> industry. The various sports car clubs of the '50s were founded by folks
who
> wanted to drive and enjoy their cars - not polish and wrench a delicate
> museum-quality antique. In the '50s and '60s those "classic vintage sports
> cars" were only 10 or 20 years old and were close enough in technology to
> still be enjoyed as daily drivers. Check out Peter Egan's column in a
recent
> car mag - he laments that classic sports cars are now too expensive and
rare
> to drive in the snow but when he was a kid a friend took him for a winter
> ride in a side-curtained, oil-slinging SPORTS CAR. I suspect that the SCCA
> founders would not have been comfortable road racing a Stutz Bearcat (a
car
> that was only about 35 years old in 1950). Yet you complain that not
enough
> of us are focused on cars from the '40s, '50s and '60s (or 30-60 years
old).
>
> By and large the enjoyment of any type of auto in a driving environment is
> still the SCCA's mission. The only thing that has changed is the brands
and
> models of the cars that most of us enjoy.
>
> My view of the club is big enough to include those who choose to drive
> antiquated, SLOW cars because they seem to enjoy them. Is yours big enough
> to include those of us that drive FAST "grocery getters" ? In our region
we
> have parallel vintage auto-x classes for cars 25 years and older. Feel
free
> to come and play.
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: George Ryan <quad4fiero@webzone.net>
> To: Alan Pozner <apozner@ptd.net>; <autox@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 12:52 AM
> Subject: Re: "new" scca logo
>
>
> > Thank You for helping me prove my point.
> >
> > Instead of being a club to " preserve and maintain classic sporting cars
> > from the vintage era" as Mr. Davison states (which was the clubs true
> > purpose not so many years ago), the SCCA - Sports Car Club of America -
> has
> > become more FCAKCA - Family Car and Kart Club of America .
> >
> > The Type R and WRX you mention are little more than top of the line
> versions
> > of import grocery-getter imports. They certainly are not "classic
sporting
> > cars from the vintage era", now are they?
> >
> > Thanks again for helping me prove my point.
> >
> > G
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alan Pozner <apozner@ptd.net>
> > To: George Ryan <quad4fiero@webzone.net>; <autox@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 10:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: "new" scca logo
> >
> >
> > > George,
> > >
> > > Why does it surprise you that racers want to win and that newer cars
are
> > > faster? We all know the adage "speed costs, how fast do you want to
> go?",
> > > yet people constantly demand that rules be written that foster their
> > frugal
> > > race budgets.
> > >
> > > If you want something to complain about why not cry for the poor Type
R
> > > drivers, like myself, who bought the best ride in the class only to
have
> > its
> > > reign cut short by the WRX? :-)
> > >
> > > Alan "it's a full moon, I'd let my hair down if I had any" Pozner
> > >
> > > From: George Ryan <quad4fiero@webzone.net>
> > > To: <autox@autox.team.net>
> > > Cc: <info@speedvision.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 6:32 PM
> > > Subject: re: "new" scca logo
> > >
> > >
> > > > While checking this site for the logo, I noticed the following
> statement
> > > by
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > Yeah, and that is why the Porsches, 1st and 2nd generation Mazda
> RX-7's,
> > > > Pontiac Fieros, (you could plug in any vehicle over 10 years old
> > > here -even
> > > > early Corvettes) have fallen prey to the SCCA classing. When was the
> > last
> > > time
> > > > any of these cars won a National Championship in a stock, or even SP
> > > > category?
> > > >
> > > > What Mr.Davison wrote is probably the way it is meant to be in club
> > > racing,
> > > > but has not been the direction the Solo program has chosen for many
> > years.
> > > > They seem to be more inclined to cater to the latest/greatest cars
on
> > the
> > > > market, and not "classic sporting cars from the vintage era".
|