Printable View
Made my quarterly trip to the nat forum and saw two threads about a couple C5 pilots wanting to come into AI. I won't go into details but I am completely opposed to this..no amount of rationization would keep me from moving out of AI if that happened. Thoughts? Marshall, Todd..anyone? is this even being seriously considered?
Someone trying to kickstart silly season into full swing? That forum is pretty dead all year except right about now until next year's rules come out....
I wouldn't worry too much about it. Plenty of places for Vett's to race and completely against the intent of AI. Plus, they could sell the vetts for Mustangs (S-197's) and have plenty left over to race on. No reason to allow. Post your thoughts there and be sure and email Todd and NASA HQ your feelings on the subject.
I posted there before I posted here...really wasn't going to post either place but I think the AI class needs years of stability (yeah yeah and CMC too ;) to allow it to peak. I spent a fair amount of effort promoting NASA AI/CMC locally and nationally where I could (and hope to resurrect that in full next year) and got a great deal of interest because, despite the angst that appears from time to time, AI/CMC has the potential to be branded as "the" representation of American amateur racing..not to exclude other classes, but the American V8 pony car is pure and immediately hits a spark with people world-wide. I'm really annoyed at people watering down AI/CMC for their own clearly selfish whims.
...sux to have not raced this year....all I get to drive is this damn keyboard....2013 is how far away?
I really like your thought on how to settle it...just sell the 'vettes and buy AI cars...perfect!
Glenn - name the places they have to race with NASA. I can't get anything past $T2, $T1, and $U.
And no where with limited mods now that they're getting PTA taken away from them.
But I'm with you in that I don't see that getting much traction, even if they ask them to run super duper stock...
So that tells me that the ST (U, 1, 2) rules are not written w/ enough restrictions to limit spending. So why not address that problem instead of making a new problem in AI?Quote:
Originally Posted by kbrewmr2
Have you met/talked to Mr. Greenbaum before? ;)
there wouldn't be a problem if they weren't getting PTA taken away from them. PTA *was* the place for them to play with lower costs. I've been on him already to retain the classes and just tweak the models that need it to no avail. These changes will trickle down and hurt my two biggest TT classes after all....
What was purposed is that they could have an option to move to AI but with PTA type restrictions (stock springs, shocks, bodies, etc) and also run Toyos, etc. Any decent AI car would be able to edge them out fairly easily as even now with the 'vettes on Hoosiers stuff like Cobetto's car and Dean Martin's car is faster, but they'd at least not be in a spending war.
It's a purposal in its infancy at the very farthest (that's really being quite generous imho but whatever) and like I said before, I doubt it'd go very far beyond that anyway so no need to panic really. But it must be nice to be in your shoes where your classes don't get messed with much and if they do you still have options beyond accepting getting screwed or just plain quit (either NASA or racing entirely). Be sure to count those blessings next time you see some rules tweaks come about for your class....
I can assure everyone that there has been ZERO discussion amongst the series directors in AI about this... Nada, zip, zero... No worries at this point.
I have delt w/ Greg. No comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by kbrewmr2
Asking them to use stock springs is useless in a class where spring rates are not restricted and therefore the Directors have no means of tech'ing those items.
And yes, the "messing" w/ our class stuff happens in CMC too. It was NASA HQ that forced the S-197 and LS1 4th gen to be allowed into CMC. The Directors were tasked w/ making it work. There was alot of other demands from HQ that the Directors stood their ground w/ and would not accept. Here we are a few years later and the class as a whole has not recovered from the temporary split (CMC and CMC2) and the class has not drawn the new cars in the number expected, much less enough to offset the loss we suffered due to the change. So, yes, my class got messed w/.
just saying it could be worse - at least it wasn't all canned and taken away completely and even if it was you still had fallbacks of PT, ST, etc along with accepting being screwed, quitting NASA or quitting completely - the last 3 are all that exists for these guys.
and sounds like I can teach you a thing or two about how to tech a car ;) been looking under all sorts of cars like this looking for stock stuff and non-stock stuff for years...
in the grand scheme of all NASA classes CMC and AI outside of Toyo changing their mind with tires all the time has been relatively (and I used the word relatively for a reason) stable when compared to many others...
Start a new off shoot, let the s-197, the new camro, the Vette and others in! You can call it"AA" for American Aluminum :)
Then you can really freak your wife out when you tell her where you're going for the weekend :)
Great, then teach them how to tell the difference between the stock S197 ABS unit and the FR500 ABS unit.Quote:
Originally Posted by kbrewmr2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsmith350
I like a twist on this idea. Kick the S197's out of AI into a new group with the Vettes, etc. Give AI back to the folks that built their cars to the intent of the class and didn't just buy a turn key race car...
Richard P.
I agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by RichardP
"AIV" and "Spec S197/Vette Challenge". I like it.. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
+2Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardP
American Sport Series........Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardP
Kinda like the GRM ultimate track car challenge - have a class for turn-key / professionally developed cars and another for those of us who slapped a cage in a street car and are "developing" it over many years as the budget permits. If it's not practical to move either group out of AI, maybe regions like ours should consider a split points system. Guys who built their own car could compete for a season "constructor's" championship and the turn-key guys could compete for a "manufacturer's" championship, at least at the regional level. Doesn't establish parity but it at least acknowledges the gap...
Where's fhe F' you emoticon?Quote:
Originally Posted by marshall_mosty
Just so its clear to everyone (should be, but there's some shit I keep reading btw the lines) - my S197 is a street car with a cage and I am "developing" it over many years as the budget (and just as importantly the time and talent) permits. Kyri and I were wanting to start the build on our second car and to run both in AI in which case its planned to be a salvaged S197 with a carb'd 351 5 speed, $1500 suspension, $2k brakes and home brew aero. We had planned to take the same approach as with the #404 (keep it a couple days work from CMC for a variety of reasons) but now the S197 fear/hate is full on in CMC and apparently creeping around in AI so I am really starting to rethink whether NASA is worth the effort....I'll surface again in December before I pull the trigger. Have fun at NOLA...see some of you in Austin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Casey_SS
I'll not address your comments about AI, but for CMC, there is no "fear/hate". There is however data to shows the need to slow down that platform. At some point it is just not worth it to keep it. 235's in place of the 275 were not enough by themselves, yet some S-197 owners left CMC because of that change. And just so we are clear, Ford backed the 235 tire change. They agreed it was warrented. If you think CMC should be OK w/ having the S-197 as is, then surely your OK w/ AI having the C5/C6, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueFirePony
As for turn key cars vs home built cars....... So the ones from Ford go in another class. What about Rehagin built cars? How about those built (turn key) from a no name shop? Seems kinda hard to determin where the line is drawn there. Not sure of the point when the rules are written the same for all no matter the source of the finished product. Sounds like a nightmare to police.
Isn't a late model T-bird AI legal?
AI 2?
Progress? Progressives crack my ass up.
You cut the limb of which you stand.
jb
It's all Mark Smith's fault for buying a Boss 302S and destroying the ECR record twice... :)
Damn that guy / car.
Huge congrats to Mark on his track record and his accomplishments this year. I have been blown away at his progression at the regional events and at Nationals. It is crazy to think Mark hasn't even been doing this for 1 year, you AI guys are in trouble. :^)
Bottom line is though, the track was crazy fast this past weekend with the cool air. James, Dan, and I all broke the previous track record and I was personally 1.2 seconds faster than my previous best time there.
If anyone thinks this started with Mark, they _really_ haven't been paying attention...Quote:
Originally Posted by marshall_mosty
Richard P.
Was more of a rub on the rookie...Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardP
The reason why an AI car with someone like Martin or Cobetto driving is faster than the average PT or even ST vette has nothing to do with performance capability of the cars.
who said the other drivers were average :)
Maybe not but shaker rigs and ford factory development go a long way compared to the average home garage racer. Btw....Dean ain't Superman. Average at best in a continental race. Jumped start and all... I beat him in rolling shitbox that did a dukes of hazzard 36 hours prior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
Matt, you are still my hero. In case you were wondering. Thanks for keeping it real.