1LikesU.S. Vintage Trans-Am Racing
THANK U 
dress up a pig in a dress, and it's still a pig
04-11-2008, 12:14 PM
#726
Where do you draw the line? X-Ray T2 007 is a "Previous Model Car".
In the recent World of Wheels, MN State On Road Champs race, I used my Serpent S400 rubber tire chassis run at the Onroad Nats, (setup professionally for rubber, thanks to Billy Easton and Andrew Mowery) and my son stomped on me in the Trans Am race, using his carpet foam setup, just changing tires, body and battery. He TQ'd and won.
Was it luck, 11 yr old hand/eye skill, or something else? The chassis is only 10% of the whole picture. Tire management and skill on and off the throttle are 90%.
I bet my son can trade cars with anyone at the track, take 15 minutes to fine tune setup and still beat that driver heads-up. The chassis cost is irrelevant to who is in the winner's circle.
IMO
Allan
In the recent World of Wheels, MN State On Road Champs race, I used my Serpent S400 rubber tire chassis run at the Onroad Nats, (setup professionally for rubber, thanks to Billy Easton and Andrew Mowery) and my son stomped on me in the Trans Am race, using his carpet foam setup, just changing tires, body and battery. He TQ'd and won.
Was it luck, 11 yr old hand/eye skill, or something else? The chassis is only 10% of the whole picture. Tire management and skill on and off the throttle are 90%.
I bet my son can trade cars with anyone at the track, take 15 minutes to fine tune setup and still beat that driver heads-up. The chassis cost is irrelevant to who is in the winner's circle.
IMO
Allan
04-11-2008, 12:29 PM
#727
Suspended
Has there been any thought as to making rules for an entry level class? I personally like the idea of brushless and lipo. But there should be a class set up with the budget or newbie racer in mind. When a budget racer looks at the ending total of $800+ to compete in the Trans am class they may turn and go to something else. I personally have seen alot of racers leave the sedan class just because of the money investment. In my opinion, that is what is killing the rubber sedan class.
My suggestion would be to only allow previous model cars, silver can motors, 4 cell batteries and treaded tires. This would allow the budget racer to compete for under $400.
If we want sedans to exist into the next decade or longer, we need to help the newbies get in and experience the fun without being out gunned from the start.
Our future doesn't only rely on the existing racer but adding new racers to our group.
My suggestion would be to only allow previous model cars, silver can motors, 4 cell batteries and treaded tires. This would allow the budget racer to compete for under $400.
If we want sedans to exist into the next decade or longer, we need to help the newbies get in and experience the fun without being out gunned from the start.
Our future doesn't only rely on the existing racer but adding new racers to our group.
I'm with you there - that there is really no entry-level (with spare parts readily available) or a classification for the guy that doesn't want to dump a lot of cash into to be competitive.
I'm not bashing or trashing the whole concept, but I think some of you are a little closed-minded about "what's in" and "what ain't" and "what you're saying, compared to what you're actually doing."
And I think it's a good opportunity to open TransAm up to 1/10th pan cars. Keep 'em as 4-cell and keep 'em within the motor limitations, but give a guy that doesn't have the cash to dump into a worthy TC from turning his back; and give a new guy, that knows little about car set-up (way too important in tc), and chance to throw some tires on a cheap, simple to run car, a chance to thrash it around.
Call it a "Lights" class if you must; but jeez, having just another TC class - albeit with different bodies - is still just another class looking to get a foothold in a rather tight field of TC racers and tracks.
I think someone here said something about - "Racers need to spend more of their efforts on promoting and finding more people to race with, rather than a personal quest to form a class that they can win at." And to me, that means being a little more open minded...IMHO.
04-11-2008, 01:44 PM
#729
Suspended
Well if you really want to race touring cars, the guys (any manufacturer here) are doing it with sedan bodies and touring cars.
04-11-2008, 04:15 PM
#730
1) A way to race cool, retro-styled cars
2) A simple, controlled rules system to make sure that the playing ground was more or less even by specifying a limited number of bodies, tires, and powerplants.
Of course it's not going to satisfy everyone's desires, but no one ever promised that it would. Adding cars, classes, motors, etc. will just result in another 200 page rulebook, layers of subtlety and the same complex and expensive environment that is leading to the open TC demise. Especially once you talk about 2WD cars, pan cars, anything that will fit under one of the approved bodies.
Not to be a jerk, I just find it amusing when people come in and pick apart a class because it's not how they would have done it. That's fine - start your own class the way you want it run and see if it takes off. That's what this guy did!
04-11-2008, 06:36 PM
#732
yeah i dont understand how people can come in here and say that pan cars need to be included or how this rule is bad or they dont like that rule...if you dont like the class the way it is go race another class this is a class made to make TC cars on a even playing field, teach a novice driver to become a better driver, teach a novice how to setup a car, and provide people like myself that have been running rc's for a long time a cost effective class that wont break the bank like the way open TC has been going
04-11-2008, 06:38 PM
#733
Suspended
Adding cars, classes, motors, etc. will just result in another 200 page rulebook, layers of subtlety and the same complex and expensive environment that is leading to the open TC demise. Especially once you talk about 2WD cars, pan cars, anything that will fit under one of the approved bodies.
All I was trying to suggest was a more user-friendly platform, that's cheaper to acquire, that's easier to work on, and - if they're truely trying to garner new racers - is something someone with limited experience can get into without breaking the bank or blowing their mind trying to figure out a complex vehicle.
As far as what was set out by the current TA organizers it is quite clear what they were looking for - a class they could win at. Otherwise they'd have kept TC racing. The current rules would only attract a limited field of drivers, using a limited choice of car (TC's), and I was just trying to open people's eyes to additional options,
I said nothing referencing anything that would require a 200-page rulebook or anything any different that what's already planned other than adding a "Lights" or pan car class. Seems pretty simple: 1 class (TC) + 1 class (pan) = 2 TOTAL classes.
The current "TC demise" you mention has little to do with anything other than the fact that they are expensive to maintain and operate - nothing the TA organization is doing anything to address as they have adopted all current and future platforms. Sure they've addressed the motor and battery issues that affect all racing, but that's it and is only part of the picture relative to the platform's "demise" - and that being TC itself as being a very complicated racer.
And look, I got chased onto this thread by someone on the other thread announcing the first big race - so how about laying off.
I wasn't trying to pick a fight, just trying to point out what (IMHO) was a foolhardy approach -and I didn't know there was anything wrong with voicing an opinion.
I was just trying to point pan cars as a growth opinion instead of watching as the organization eventually imploded because of lack of competitors and the fact that the "expensive environment" still existed, albeit with "cooler-looking bodies".
04-11-2008, 07:19 PM
#735
Suspended
yeah i dont understand how people can come in here and say that pan cars need to be included or how this rule is bad or they dont like that rule...if you dont like the class the way it is go race another class this is a class made to make TC cars on a even playing field, teach a novice driver to become a better driver, teach a novice how to setup a car, and provide people like myself that have been running rc's for a long time a cost effective class that wont break the bank like the way open TC has been going
Yeah, what I don't understand is how people can come in here and so happily accept anything without question, follow the lead buffalo off the cliff, and yet proudly proclaim their Amerian heritage yet have the nerve to hammer anyone that dares suggests something simple and easy as wrong just because they questioned authority.
How you ever could rationalize that this class "puts everyone an even playing field any more than any other TC "class" is beyond me. Exactly how is it equal?
And how you could ever think this would "teach a novice driver to become a better driver" or "teach a novice how to setup a car" tells me you either know something that I don't -- or that you are going to mystically impart knowledge via some Vulcan mind-meld technique while strolling around the pits. Good luck with that.
But what you are doing is supporting a new idea for a class of racing while intentionally attempting to justify taking to your own new playground while telling others they can't play too.
Is it because you're on a personal quest to form a class that you can win at instead of looking for ways to add more racers - or what?