What Kool-aid are you drinkin'?! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Waco Racer
Printable View
What Kool-aid are you drinkin'?! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Waco Racer
There you have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
jb
Hallett needs to get here fast so we can all hug it out. :lol:
David ... it gets old to you and me and others. But the folks asking the questions are new. They've never seen the questions or the answers.
Responding to questions with "it is what it is" and "you don't get it" is a cop out. If a leader is too lazy or unmotivated to mentor the new guys, THAT'S what drives them away, not mindless internet banter.
This is the internet, not real life.
Ross ... I think your motivation was to have a constructive discussion about rules, implementation and intent.
But what you are reading is every bit as important as the actual rule base.
I stand by my impression that at some point in time, the Mom & Pop mentality of running an organization has to evolve. and maybe this series is there.
As equating AI and CMC in any way is ludicrous. AI rules seem to mimic building a car from the ground up like every other organization out there.
CMC rules are based on building a car down from the street ... 180* out of phase from the rest of the organized racing world. If it's your only exposure, it seems normal.
That's an interesting way of looking at it Mitch. When you really think about AI, it's essentially a clean sheet of paper that starts with a tub, firewall and shocktowers and a few other minor max/min items...The rest is a "sky is the limit" thing which IS frustrating financially when you want to remain competitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
CMC on the other hand is just a natural progression of a track car to race car one part at a time like an old school hot rodder...
i dont really agree w/ that Matt. my "Street/Track" is not even close to CMC rules.
hell, i had problems keeping my car legal for ESP for many years.
to me CMC is showroom stock as you can get w/out being showroom stock.
I will say this Ross. If CMC and -2 are kept seperate, you'll have running mates for quite a while. Run that third gen long enough, and I'm sure you'll WANT to build another car. Building up a car is half the fun!
I was being OVERLY general...Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
Don’t go there Jeff, there is no reason to take my words out of context to try and stir this up any more than it is. Two pages back and its referring to the third gen in CMC, not CMC2, nice try!Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffburch
How convenient you left off the part where I ask you to let me know what I was missing!
Thanks for the great feedback and conversation!
The sad part is I had more respect for you than many others in the group, and here you are taking cheap shots. Very sorry to see that from you, I would have expected more from our National Champion. :(
Mitch, Ross and others, I agree with 90% of what is going on here, again…
I’m S o r r r y for trying to help get a better organized discussion started.
I know exactly what you are talking about, I’m tired of the “it is what it is” and the later from TG, I have heard it and seen it way to many times. Sometimes you can’t even talk to him without him just shutting you down before you finish your question.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Exactly!Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Ross, no issues here, I was just trying to help the discussion move into a different direction… this is third time I have tried it with this group… and the third time I have gotten the exact same reaction. I get the impression that they would rather keep the discussion among a select group here and not try to invite someone in who might be able to explain to all of use what the future looks like from a director, or national director’s perspective. Either I’m a slow learner… or maybe I care too much about the series.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
You are new around here and all the question are great, keep them coming. I certainly don’t want you to think you can’t ask questions… I encourage lots of questions and I always have. The difference is that when a simple discussion turns into what it has here I try to get key people involved… I would rather have seen some of the senior members of the CMC crew make an attempt to do that, but like I said they seem to like the internal struggles.
DD
That was EXACTLY my intention.Quote:
someone who might be able to explain to all of use what the future looks like
Thanks for that.Quote:
all the question are great, keep them coming. I certainly don’t want you to think you can’t ask questions… I encourage lots of questions and I always have.
Couldn't have said it better myself.Quote:
Ross ... I think your motivation was to have a constructive discussion about rules, implementation and intent.
But what you are reading is every bit as important as the actual rule base.
I stand by my impression that at some point in time, the Mom & Pop mentality of running an organization has to evolve. and maybe this series is there.
My intention was never to get ANYONE in the group fighting among themselves. I'm going to go work on my car now and try to get it finished.
If I was closer I would come give you a hand!!!
8)
DD
For the record, I have not hacked DD's account! :lol:
David, you have typed more in the last few posts than you have in 2 years combined! Rrrreeelaaaaxxx!!! 8)
DD,Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffburch
How do you run me off in the ditch for what's quoted above?
I don't deserve it.
Not one derogatory comment.
They are all from you.
jb
On The High Road
I have not try to stop any discussoion going on here and never have... but I have tried to get more information on the table and tried to get folks talking among themselves to get info from the upper managment, mainly for the sake of the new folks that are the ones asking the questions and have not heard it all yet.
It was more than a pros and cons discussion, people are reading more into what is going on, or speculating on what is going to happen.
The "Free Conunty" line I felt was a jab... I want the discusion as much as anyone else, I just want more info brought into it and more facts from above!
Then the "Maybe we need segregated topic categories, CMC AI..."
I took that as you thought the AI guys "Me" need to go talk somewhere else! or not so politley, Shut the F up!
Did I take it the wrong way?
DD
No matter what we all know we get a group hug at the next event!!! :D
Just as I would not assume your above statement is an apology, you should not have put words in MY mouth.
If I resort to that type of language, it will be perfectly clear and fro good reason.
jb
in the ditch
Then I do applogise for all of the above, I made assuptions that were not correct.
DD :oops:
I have a tooth ache and no meds... can I use that as an excuse!Quote:
Originally Posted by AI#97
I still think there is some needed direction from national on what there plan is.
I would love to see a 5 year plan for the series with regards to CMC/CMC2... and how they plan to get there.
Anyone want to see if they can get that out of the West Coast?
thats the problem David, even the West Coast does not know how/if CMC and CMC-2 will get combined. its a goal, but they just do not know how to get there. it will take solutions provided and tested by folks from w/in CMC.
my message was clear (i hope), that the plan is to not leave any one platform out. if that is a possibility, they will most likely keep the 2 class's separate.
It's been discussed more than once since I've been here. During the SPIR event in a few weeks, I plan to bring it up with the entire group, directors and all, with the hope to get it out on paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
Simply put - CMC/CMC2 needs a "Road Map" that allows folks with existing CMC cars, as well as new folks building cars, to make informed buying decisions.
I was wondering who threw the sand in your panties! Just didn't sound like you at all!Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
You guys are all looking for a map that will never exist. There is no plan and I don't think they intend to ever have one...just prep your car the best you can afford and if that isn't good enough, sell and go to a cheaper class to run. Seriously, are we racing wallets or cars... If national fucks up the rules and car counts suffer...things will change back. The only constant is YOUR wallets will fund all the changes and mistakes along the way that THEY make. Welcome to racing...something about playing in a sandbox that isn't yours...? :cry:
maybe I am missing something here. but why call it CMC 2? why not just another step/jump? CMC is the king in Texas today, but tomorrow will hold a different set of racers, some old and experienced some new and crazy.
(like ross and I) (shouldn't put words in Ross's mouth, but I am sure he will agree)
"CMC2" will grow. as kids come up and their dream car was not a fox or third gen, but a 5th gen or SN97. Guys will still build cars on the cheap to go out and compete. And it will still be a favorite to watch!
The directors are busy with other stuff, including their own families and lives, why take up their time figuring out how to get a 1986 third gen and a 2008 GT mustang to be equal, just give it a different name and save them the trouble. We will still take the same green, on the same track, on the same weekend, in the same pit, sharing the same homebrew with the same group of badass guys.
Sure the classes won't be even, but would the effort by our directors be better spent testing telemetry on cars spanning 25 years or researching ways to get 15+ cars per class each weekend?
edited for Glennism's :shock:
That's what I'm talkin about!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Gunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Damn ... Jeremy, for a Ford guy, you're pretty sharp. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Gunter
Thanks for the reality check!!!!!!
Pretty much a sad reality that they are spinning their wheels jerking around trying to homologate cars that don't exist in the series all the while pissing off their existing core racers....AND fail to build the series through marketing and such.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Gunter
Oh, that's right, this is their hobby job done on the side... Until NASA can generate enough money that the 8 or 10 "players" that run the show can do this full time, we are just going to have to settle with what they can dedicate to it.
Besides, Jeremy was right, it's not about the winning and glory, it's about hanging out at the track and shootin' the shit with ya'll!
one thing to remember is the SCCA and T2 cars have a life span. after a number of years (5 or 6) they are no longer legal for T2. NASA is smart to do their best to give those guys a place to race. that place is CMC-2.
you guys are correct that it would be nice to have 15+ car fields in CMC and CMC-2. but i would rather see 30 car fields in CMC or CMC-2. i wish we had so many cars that only the top 50 qual times were allowed to race.
if i were you guys w/ the 5.0 cars, i wouldnt worry about it.
i think Adam is on the right track getting w/ Tony and looking to get some info out there about this. dont think it hasnt been done, but he may get farther than others. one thing to remember is to not get emotional about this. present your thoughts to Tony in a civil manner. he will listen if you just talk w/ him.
Right on... also keep in mind that if they only hear it from Adam "We need a road map and a plan for _____________" that is just one voice... I suggest that if you are conserned and you want that map... or whatever you want to call it, ask them as well. The more people that contact then and ask the more they will become concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
DD
All I am concerned about is whoopin everyone's ASS at Hallett!! :twisted:
i would be too if it was you. you dont have a chance in hell and your record there sucks! :P
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsmith350
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelmosty
Full circle ... 8)Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
The only thing I'll add is to keep in mind that we ALL have to spend money "to make the number" regardless of platform.
We've all had to spend money to keep the power trains alive regardless of platform.
We've all had our share of internet glory regardless of platform.
I really do think all the hoopla about spending mega-dollars is a non-issue. I honestly think that if a formula that is REASONABLY cost effective is discovered, then the 2 classes will merge. If not, then it will be CMC/CMC2 till does happen.
But, to make it happen, there are gonna have to be some paradigm changes, like aftermarket engine components, ECM alterations, weight penalties, etc.
Evolve ...
This is all very interesting to me as I just spent upwards of $3,500 on my 5 liter. $1,800 plus on a full rebuild and an additional $1,600 plus on Cobra parts. I haven't dyno'd it yet but my set-up reportedly barely makes the numbers in TX. I say TX because CA cars seam to magically make 20 HP more with the same set-ups.
I've heard of the goal to eventually have a single CMC class again but I just don't see it as possible without a negative impact to the series as a whole. CMC was built on cost containment and the formula works well. There is just too much delta between 20 years of cars in some 6 or 7 plateforms. It's impossible to equalize an LS1 and 302/305 without costing somebody a fortune. Not to mention wheels, brakes, and other factors that would probably make building older cars cost prohibited.
Keeping the classes seperate would allow for the most cost efficient racing within each as opposed to certain guys having to spend much more based on platform of choice. Do you force the LS1 guy to down grade wheels, engine, brakes, ect to fit in or do you force the 5 liter guys upgrade the same? Either way, there's too much delta present and trying to equalize the them all is a very expesive proposition. As I see it, CMC has evolved into 2 classes. It's simply where Detroit forced us to go and it's probably best left that way for the health of CMC now and in the future.
rb
its the Fords that are the problem w/ the 17" wheels and 13" brakes.
the LS1 4th gens all came w/ 12" brakes and 16" wheels.
but i hear what your saying.
Yes, semantics dude. semantics. Main point being that merging CMC and CMC2 will only move it in the opposite direction of being a cost effective series. If someone did figure out a cost effective way to do it, I would be truly interested in reading the implementation plan.
Currently it takes 10 pages of crap to get parties to agree that something should even be looked at for possible adjustment. The idea for adjustments only seems to sit well with the party asking for the changes. Simply human nature, nothing more. With that said, just how in the world would after market parts and weight penalties be implemented? How are after market parts be tested for allowance? Which ones become legal? Blah, blah... <---- Rhetorical questions to provoke thought, not arguement. Any adjustment recommended for one gets profusely protested by the other as not needed and nothing gets accomplished. I just think it's better left alone.
rb
I love the rules the way they are :roll:
Next subject (do some of you guys have too much time on your hands..).
Tony Guaglione
Taken from this thread
http://www.camaromustangchallenge.co...r=asc&start=45
Here are a few threads from the nat. site that may be of interest.
http://www.camaromustangchallenge.co...=cmc2&start=15
http://www.camaromustangchallenge.co...highlight=cmc2
Man-all this drama over my little aluminum engine. I like Mosty's attitude. My rookie plate is coming off and I'm going to break out at Hallett :lol:
Lots of posts to touch upon so I will work backwards.
Boudy-good to hear you are fixing the car up as you are missed around the track. I find it interesting that you spent $3,400 on a rebuilt 5.0. What if you could have just bought a new Ford crate motor (if there was such a motor approved for CMC2) for the same price and sold your old stuff? Might have been nice to have that option if you wanted to run CMC 2.
I agree that everyone would like to know what the long term plans are but I wouldn't worry about CMC going away unless the powers that be screw up the rules. I don't think the directors really know what is going to happen and are using the current CMC2 rules to have some data that can be used to develop the class.
I'm looking forward to hearing Mitch's experience at hallett with the 275's.
I think the upgrading brakes is a little overrated. It was added to the CMC2 rules because of the weight we are required to run. I believe they made it legal to upgrade brakes as a cost effective measure over the long haul.
Ok-I'm tired of typing-take over Mitch.
Timing is everything .... :lol:
Semantics and perspectives ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Boudy
As the owner of a Fox, yes, it might cost a few zeros to be percieved as competitive.
But the owner of an LSx based car has to choke his platform down to the point of it not running right and cause potential problems.
I can see where you and Adam DON'T want it because it's money form YOUR pocket. I can see where Bryan is coming from because it's money coming from HIS pocket.
So, main point being, if it costs a person cash, it's a bad thing to do.
I think what is happening is not what is good (or bad) for a specific group of racers, but what is good (or bad) for the series, long term.
Well-well look. I already told you: I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don't have to! I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?
:D
Yeah! What they said...
I didn't want to feel left out.
Glad to see you got some scripts DD. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by donovan
Mitch, I'm just another dumb Ford guy... ask Boudy!
I understand why CMC2 was built, but why not change the name of it... (if they decide not to join the two)... Only reason I say this is because CMC2 is burned into our minds as a temporary class name. Although that sounds childish, it is a solution that would ease some of the pain of splitting... again if they decide it's not financially possible to group both classes.
Something like CMC G2 for generation two or American Muscle Challenge, or CMC 2K or CMC-M for millenium or GDM, for Glenn's Da Man!
On a lighter side, I sure am glad I have a car that can run both classes!
All you hosers just need to quit your bitch'n and just run AI!!! :lol:
You are all fighting to make things equal...in AI, we don't care about equal, just don't make us spend more money for no reason! :wink:
Don't think i don't know what you meant by that......A$$!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Gunter
Correct, I'm in for what's good for CMC's long term.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
I just believe that a major reorg driving up the cost of a few and/or all platforms in CMC for the sake of a single class is bad for CMC in the long run. It's not about Adam, Bryan, myself, or any other racer at this point, it's about the big picture.
Bryan: Actually I spent about $1,800 on a rebuilt 5.0. The rest was spent on Cobra crap to close the gap between 208 HP and 230 HP due to a rules change. In reality, a $250 Ford Motorsports camshaft would have done the same thing. But that's a different thread...
Today is travel day. I hope to be home for a few weeks as I've only spent 8 days there in the last 10 or so weeks. I'm hoping to make Hallett.
Got a plane to catch. Later,
rb