Will the C5Z be Obsoleted in SCCA SS Class?
06-24-2008, 12:23 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2002
Location: Charleston South Carolina
Posts: 3,070
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Will the C5Z be Obsoleted in SCCA SS Class?
The July 2008 Fastrack includes the proposal to move the Elise SC and the Exige S into SS class in 2009. The N/A Elise has already won the SS championship and now they are proposing to add a supercharged version that will give it more torque down low where the current Elise is weak.
This will make, IMHO, the C5Z, the N/a Elise and Exige obsolete in SCCA Stock classes unless members write letters opposing this classing proposal.
What do you guys think? Should this be allowed for a light weight, low volume car like the Elise S and the Exige SC?
This will make, IMHO, the C5Z, the N/a Elise and Exige obsolete in SCCA Stock classes unless members write letters opposing this classing proposal.
What do you guys think? Should this be allowed for a light weight, low volume car like the Elise S and the Exige SC?
06-24-2008, 05:07 PM
#2
Melting Slicks
This is an absolutley absurd proposal and it further shows how stupid the present SEB really is. There is a place for the SC loti and it is in ASP. There are so few of them that it really upsets the classing...
The C5 is already obsolete in SS so why not move even faster cars into it and put the C5's into A stock... They aren't about to do it since the C5 is too fast for A/S, so we will be treated to annother stupid classing situation where a very fast very limted production car (like the GT3 an Exige) are required to be competitive.
Sorry, I will opt out if that happens.
The C5 is already obsolete in SS so why not move even faster cars into it and put the C5's into A stock... They aren't about to do it since the C5 is too fast for A/S, so we will be treated to annother stupid classing situation where a very fast very limted production car (like the GT3 an Exige) are required to be competitive.
Sorry, I will opt out if that happens.
06-24-2008, 05:50 PM
#3
Instructor
Member Since: Oct 2006
Location: Greensboro NC
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an absolutley absurd proposal and it further shows how stupid the present SEB really is. There is a place for the SC loti and it is in ASP. There are so few of them that it really upsets the classing...
The C5 is already obsolete in SS so why not move even faster cars into it and put the C5's into A stock...
The C5 is already obsolete in SS so why not move even faster cars into it and put the C5's into A stock...
But I don't agree at all that the C5 is obsolete in SS.
06-25-2008, 02:05 AM
#5
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Dec 2006
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 7,251
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
14 Posts
This is an absolutley absurd proposal and it further shows how stupid the present SEB really is. There is a place for the SC loti and it is in ASP. There are so few of them that it really upsets the classing...
The C5 is already obsolete in SS so why not move even faster cars into it and put the C5's into A stock... They aren't about to do it since the C5 is too fast for A/S, so we will be treated to annother stupid classing situation where a very fast very limted production car (like the GT3 an Exige) are required to be competitive.
Sorry, I will opt out if that happens.
The C5 is already obsolete in SS so why not move even faster cars into it and put the C5's into A stock... They aren't about to do it since the C5 is too fast for A/S, so we will be treated to annother stupid classing situation where a very fast very limted production car (like the GT3 an Exige) are required to be competitive.
Sorry, I will opt out if that happens.
SCCA 
06-25-2008, 12:58 PM
#7
Heel & Toe
Member Since: Jul 2006
Location: Milwaukee WI
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, lots of SCCA hate around here. 
#1 - these are only proposals, nothing is definite. It amazes me how people take this as a certain thing. Write the SEB a letter and tell them what you think (seb@scca.com)
#2 - I view this proposal as a contingency plan. Per our policies, all new proposals must be out by the July Fastrack. After that, anything new would be for two years later (as in 1/1/2010). There are those that think the C6Z is a vastly superior car to the C5Z, and we just haven't seen the right driver in the C6 yet. If that were to come to pass, it would make sense to put some faster cars in with it, vs. having a single car class.
#3 - I think the C5Z is still a very good SS car, and I will make every effort to personally prove that.
All, IMHO and unofficial.
-Steve, the stupid SEB guy
#1 - these are only proposals, nothing is definite. It amazes me how people take this as a certain thing. Write the SEB a letter and tell them what you think (seb@scca.com)
#2 - I view this proposal as a contingency plan. Per our policies, all new proposals must be out by the July Fastrack. After that, anything new would be for two years later (as in 1/1/2010). There are those that think the C6Z is a vastly superior car to the C5Z, and we just haven't seen the right driver in the C6 yet. If that were to come to pass, it would make sense to put some faster cars in with it, vs. having a single car class.
#3 - I think the C5Z is still a very good SS car, and I will make every effort to personally prove that.
All, IMHO and unofficial.
-Steve, the stupid SEB guy
06-25-2008, 01:27 PM
#8
Pro
Steve,
Thanks for the clarifications - good to see you on corvetteforum instead of some Honda forum
.
Unfortunately many don't understand the rather restrictive rulemaking process, but even for those who do there is often a perception that "proposals" in Fastrack are essentially decisions the SEB has already made that are simply wending their way through that mandated process with little probability that member input will have any effect.
Not saying that's right/wrong or true/false, just that it's a strong perception shared by many.
Regardless, given the nature of the current proposals and anticipation of potential broader class restructuring to come I can't believe the SEB expected anything less than the kind of response they're getting. Should make for some interesting emails.
My concern is the uncertainty generated by the proposals and all the discussion could well have a negative effect in 2009 on two of the largest national classes. I hope things will become clearer with the publication of the July Fastrack.
On the other hand, there's certainly a need for reconsideration of the class structures based on current and anticipated vehicles available and I for one appreciate the current SEB's willingness to step up to that daunting task. Thanks again - looking forward to the next piece of the puzzle.
See you in September.
Thanks for the clarifications - good to see you on corvetteforum instead of some Honda forum
.Unfortunately many don't understand the rather restrictive rulemaking process, but even for those who do there is often a perception that "proposals" in Fastrack are essentially decisions the SEB has already made that are simply wending their way through that mandated process with little probability that member input will have any effect.
Not saying that's right/wrong or true/false, just that it's a strong perception shared by many.
Regardless, given the nature of the current proposals and anticipation of potential broader class restructuring to come I can't believe the SEB expected anything less than the kind of response they're getting. Should make for some interesting emails.
My concern is the uncertainty generated by the proposals and all the discussion could well have a negative effect in 2009 on two of the largest national classes. I hope things will become clearer with the publication of the July Fastrack.
On the other hand, there's certainly a need for reconsideration of the class structures based on current and anticipated vehicles available and I for one appreciate the current SEB's willingness to step up to that daunting task. Thanks again - looking forward to the next piece of the puzzle.
See you in September.
06-25-2008, 01:51 PM
#10
Pro
Member Since: Jan 2007
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm more curious if it is true that a general reclassing of most (all?) of the stock classes is behind this. If so, I genuinely am interested to see how that plays out as I think its due.
One thing is the price point of SS is going up again. While you can find a competitive C5Z for mid to high 20's, the next competitive car to compare it to will be about twice that if not more.
In all honesty, this affects me very little. I only play regionally these days and from that standpoint even after you allow in the SC'd Lotus, I'll still be just as competitive unless some of you really fast SS guys move down here or Rick Ruth really changes the things around based on it.
FWIW, I don't feel the SEB is stupid. I just wish they could include some more info than just a blurb in the Fastrack about a proposed change. It leaves room for so much speculation it can be rather easy to come to those unfavorable conclusions on their mindset. While I understand them not wanting to perhaps influence the membership and get a "raw" feedback, not all of us have the collective wisdom what they and the SAC know to make these proposals. Hell, do it Supreme Court style with favoring and dissenting opinions if necessary.
One thing is the price point of SS is going up again. While you can find a competitive C5Z for mid to high 20's, the next competitive car to compare it to will be about twice that if not more.
In all honesty, this affects me very little. I only play regionally these days and from that standpoint even after you allow in the SC'd Lotus, I'll still be just as competitive unless some of you really fast SS guys move down here or Rick Ruth really changes the things around based on it.
FWIW, I don't feel the SEB is stupid. I just wish they could include some more info than just a blurb in the Fastrack about a proposed change. It leaves room for so much speculation it can be rather easy to come to those unfavorable conclusions on their mindset. While I understand them not wanting to perhaps influence the membership and get a "raw" feedback, not all of us have the collective wisdom what they and the SAC know to make these proposals. Hell, do it Supreme Court style with favoring and dissenting opinions if necessary.
Last edited by TommyBoy72; 06-25-2008 at 01:55 PM.
