CNAC and Ont Region [Archive] - CASC Ontario Region Message Forums

tanney

01-27-2004, 09:52 AM

Why do we have to change the fundamental rule book to bend to the CNAC rules. Can they not adapt to our system? First, most other regions in Canada are using the CNAC rules or at least a minor variation (including Quebec).

Second, ASN Canada FIA MAY require all regions to run under one rule set to keep better track of insurance related issues.

I am sure that everyone understands the problems with insurance in our post Sept 11th climate.... the insuarnce companies are looking for ANYTHING to deny coverage or substantially increase premiums.

I am trying to be pro-active by moving in the CNAC direction before being told to and then having no where to go and no control over it.

I am hoping that all competitors, whether they like the changes or not, will except the coming changes. Yes there have been a number of comments that slightly modded cars will be bumped into SP classes because of things like short shifters for the regional rules, but each club will have the option of changing car classifications and mod levels for "Club Events" (at least this year).

I am trying to make a smooth transition in the next two years that may or may not work and I do realize that there are going to be people who won't like the changes and may not come out because of them. That will be the community's loss, but hopefully only a temporary loss.

Not what you wnat to hear, but.....

Gord

01-27-2004, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by tanney

I am hoping that all competitors, whether they like the changes or not, will except the coming changes. Yes there have been a number of comments that slightly modded cars will be bumped into SP classes because of things like short shifters for the regional rules, but each club will have the option of changing car classifications and mod levels for "Club Events" (at least this year).

Sorry to state the obvious, but if people don't like some of the changes that are coming, and we already recognize that some things are problems (ie. short shifter on an otherwise stock car bumps you to SP), and we are suggesting that clubs can use thier own classing rules....

why not just fix the problem and be done with it?

Each club using their own classing makes things more fragmented than before, but I know we are looking at it here to fix problems like the ones stated above.

I don't think anyone (that I have heard from) has any real problems with the "rule" changes (the stuff that matters to insurance) about how events are run, etc. It is all centered around classing and mods.

-Gord

gatherer

01-27-2004, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by Gord
Sorry to state the obvious, but if people don't like some of the changes that are coming, and we already recognize that some things are problems (ie. short shifter on an otherwise stock car bumps you to SP), and we are suggesting that clubs can use thier own classing rules....

why not just fix the problem and be done with it?

Each club using their own classing makes things more fragmented than before, but I know we are looking at it here to fix problems like the ones stated above.

I don't think anyone (that I have heard from) has any real problems with the "rule" changes (the stuff that matters to insurance) about how events are run, etc. It is all centered around classing and mods.

-Gord

because if we do that then those competitors that go to national competitions will have to re-prep their car for a second set of rules ... it gets complex... I've been all for a single set of rules that way I know what class I'll be in regardless of whether I race here or in Calgary or Vancouver.... or Montreal or Halifax.... so if I want to take a road trip and have some fun I can and not worry about read a second set of rules and figuring out where I fit in

tanney

01-27-2004, 11:00 AM

why not just fix the problem and be done with it? Then they won't be CNAC rules, will they.

Let's change the classification of thirty car (as suggested) allow up to forty mods to stock classes (as suggested) and listen to the complaints then........

STANDARDIZATION........... I have changed some things (why do I keep repeating myself) to allow for an easier transition for this year, but just because there are new people coming out that modded their rides for the cool factor doesn't mean the entire rule set needs to be changed for them.

If someone puts springs that are not race of performance related, should they not have to claim the spring points? Springs are springs..... a short shifter is a short shifter, a strut brace is a strut brace, etc., etc., etc.....

I don't want to come right out and say, these are the rules, live with them, but it is getting close to that.......I am trying to passify some of the requests, but some.......

rmicroys

01-27-2004, 11:21 AM

?Originally posted by Gordwhy not just fix the problem and be done with it?
Originally posted by tanney
[B]Then they won't be CNAC rules, will they.

I used to Solo2 but I road race now, so I have nothing at stake here other than looking at the sport as an outsider...

If there is a NATIONAL set of rules, why are we patching it on a regional basis, and why aren't all the regions using them as is (CNAC)?

The bandaid solution isn't "Well, the CNAC rules don't quite cut it, let's make regional versions of the CNAC rules" which don't satisfy all the clubs, so that "the clubs then can patch the Regionalized CNAC rules so that all clubs have different rules!"... so that when people go to Regional or National competitions they have to do all sorts of work on their cars or be put in strange and/or uncompetitive classes that make no sense?

Doesn't that defeat the entire purpose of having a national set of rules? :rolleyes:

Like Gord says, fix the problem with the National rules, make the rules accommodating to help market the sport. I don't know why one would make the rules so restirictive to make Joe Rice Sticker Wannabe Racer Boy go to SP just because he has a short shifter. The National committee should have a tad more insight than that, and should be open to restructure the rules to market the sport.

Lord help us all if Canada ever decides to make a proper set of National Road Racing rules...

Gord

01-27-2004, 11:22 AM

Originally posted by tanney
Then they won't be CNAC rules, will they.

I'm saying, fix the CNAC rules. If we are adopting them as a "national" ruleset, then as the largest body of slalomers in the country, Ontario should have some say in what the rules look like.
Originally posted by tanney

STANDARDIZATION........... I have changed some things (why do I keep repeating myself) to allow for an easier transition for this year, but just because there are new people coming out that modded their rides for the cool factor doesn't mean the entire rule set needs to be changed for them.

Standardization is a great thing, and something I wish we had. It doesn't however preclude a flexible ruleset that works for both experienced and novice entrants alike.

Plus my understanding of CASC's direction is to reach out to new people and promote involvement. It seems like we don't want to try to create an enviroment condusive to doing so with a lot of the anti-street car modded comments that I have been reading...

Originally posted by tanney

If someone puts springs that are not race of performance related, should they not have to claim the spring points? Springs are springs..... a short shifter is a short shifter, a strut brace is a strut brace, etc., etc., etc.....

I haven't seen anyone suggest that we have a free for all, mod as you like and still stay in stock.

Why then allow people to run R's but not a shifter? No one would ever choose the shifter over the R's, so it's not a performance reason.

:confused:

-Gord

gatherer

01-27-2004, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by Gord

Why then allow people to run R's but not a shifter? No one would ever choose the shifter over the R's, so it's not a performance reason.

:confused:

-Gord

People that are new to the sport could have .. (and I've seen it) picked up and installed a short shifter while still riding on cheap rubber... people do make the mistake of getting a short shifter before R's .... the R's yes add alot more performance to the car ... but are we going to switch to only allowing stock rubber that comes on the car to be run.... in that case H stock class is going to very very slow this year .....

for stock classes the cars should be close to stock .... I mean that is the whole Idea isn't it? and R's are a point in the stock class for CNAC...you only get 2 points and the other one is likely taken up with different sized wheels...

Gord

01-27-2004, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by gatherer
People that are new to the sport could have .. (and I've seen it) picked up and installed a short shifter while still riding on cheap rubber... people do make the mistake of getting a short shifter before R's .... the R's yes add alot more performance to the car ... but are we going to switch to only allowing stock rubber that comes on the car to be run.... in that case H stock class is going to very very slow this year .....

I say go one way or the other, not an arbitrary line in-between. We have already gone down the path of "stock is slightly modified", so go the whole way down that path. Put everything on the schedual and treat it like a menu. You got 2 points in your wallet, you can have this or that. Want to do more, you gotta spend more and move up.

Originally posted by gatherer

for stock classes the cars should be close to stock .... I mean that is the whole Idea isn't it? and R's are a point in the stock class for CNAC...you only get 2 points and the other one is likely taken up with different sized wheels...
We've already choosen stock is not stock. You can do a whole lot of things in stock, and pretty much all of them are very racing performance oriented:

R's
different wheels
sway bars
cages
gutted interiors
removed cats (which is illegal BTW)
limited slip diffs
more I'm likely forgetting

Doesn't sound very "stock" to me. Yet at the same time, someone with a shifter and otherwise stock car shows up and goes to SP.

Give the people the choice of picking stuff off the menu within their buget. You can choose (wisely) to do R's and wheels, and someone that built their car as a daily driver that they want to have fun with on the weekends occasionally can run with a CAI and a strut brace, but still run against you. You have an advantage, but for them you're a lot closer than things are in SS/SP.

The CNAC rules appear to have been written with the serious competitor in mind only, rather than someone who builds a car as a fun daily driver first, and solo second.

Why not accomidate both?

:confused:

-Gord

Marc

01-27-2004, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by Gord
I'm saying, fix the CNAC rules. If we are adopting them as a "national" ruleset, then as the largest body of slalomers in the country, Ontario should have some say in what the rules look like.
-Gord

Along these lines may I quote a thread from dec 03:

Exst165,part of the problem of the rules used over the last few years is that they had nothing in common with the rest of canada,certainly nothing in common with the scca.
So now we can follow closely with the rest of north america in terms of a common rule set,

With this new set of CNAC/ONT rules we are no closer to SCCA rules as before. Their level of car preparation (SCCA SP and P)is still totally different. So we can not jump from CNAC to SCCA events and be competitive in both areas.

tanney

01-27-2004, 12:49 PM

I'll start writing the rule book all over....from scratch....with NO consultation.

I'll get right back to you.......

tanney

01-27-2004, 12:52 PM

Better yet, why change at all. Anybody that wants to go to a different region, the nationals, SCCA, Club events.......start reading!

Does your personal insurance company want to insure an autocross event? Didn't think so.

We can "debate" all these issues and not actually write a rule book.......that would save me a lot of time!

Gord

01-27-2004, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Marc
With this new set of CNAC/ONT rules we are no closer to SCCA rules as before. Their level of car preparation (SCCA SP and P)is still totally different. So we can not jump from CNAC to SCCA events and be competitive in both areas.

I hear ya. I've long ago figured out that the CNAC (in any variation) rules give you nothing in terms of parity with SCCA. Not even in stock.

If we have to adopt them, might as well at least try to make them workable...

-Gord

gatherer

01-27-2004, 01:35 PM

Originally posted by Gord
I say go one way or the other, not an arbitrary line in-between. We have already gone down the path of "stock is slightly modified", so go the whole way down that path. Put everything on the schedual and treat it like a menu. You got 2 points in your wallet, you can have this or that. Want to do more, you gotta spend more and move up.

We've already choosen stock is not stock. You can do a whole lot of things in stock, and pretty much all of them are very racing performance oriented:

R's
different wheels
sway bars
cages
gutted interiors
removed cats (which is illegal BTW)
limited slip diffs
more I'm likely forgetting

Doesn't sound very "stock" to me. Yet at the same time, someone with a shifter and otherwise stock car shows up and goes to SP.

Give the people the choice of picking stuff off the menu within their buget. You can choose (wisely) to do R's and wheels, and someone that built their car as a daily driver that they want to have fun with on the weekends occasionally can run with a CAI and a strut brace, but still run against you. You have an advantage, but for them you're a lot closer than things are in SS/SP.

The CNAC rules appear to have been written with the serious competitor in mind only, rather than someone who builds a car as a fun daily driver first, and solo second.

Why not accomidate both?

:confused:

-Gord

I understand what your saying here .... but....

if we did that the point "menu" would be huge .... take up a very very large portion of the rule book....

when I started with solo 2 this past year I had a cold air intake on my car ... I thought it was crazy that I'd be in BSS with that while still having all season tires on the car... would that move have been fair??? in my opinion (at the time) it wasn't R compounds gave so much better performance then any cold air intake would...esspecially with my all season tires... but in the end I bit the bullet woke up super early on a sunday morning after camping at shannon ville during the hada solo 1 day and put the stock intake back on the car ..... now that I look back at it ... it seems fair for the bump...there has to be limits... so what if a new comer gets screwed ... they arn't coming to win they are most likely coming to try it out ... just like I was at a WOSCA event I first attended.... if they decide after that point they like the sport they will most likely read the rules and put a stock shifter back into the car ... just like I changed back my stock intake.

the rules are not designed to accomadate a new comer ... but more to level the playing field for those that want tocompete against each other... my first few times out I was trying to better my skills I didn't care where I placed... the rules are for those that care where they place.

also you do get a menu in stock it's limited but it's suppose to be that way with a limited budget of preppoints it's hard to really do much to your car....

for example ... my 93 honda civic CX in stock class H and 2 points

I'm adding a roll bar 2 extra points
I'm adding an Fire Extingsher 1 extra point
removing rear seat 1 point
removing passenger seat 1 point
I'm changing the driver seat 1 point

then different wheel size 1 point
and using R compound tires 1 point.

I will also be doing the free mods ....

changing the air filter
changing the exhuast (cat back)
and changing the shocks.

and I still consider the car to be stock ... it might not look stock .. but I can't add springs and sway bars and a bigger engine and a short shifter and all that stuff...

personally I like the rules how they are. there might be inequalities but everyone has time to read the rule book and prepare their car for those rules before events. it's not like the rules are being hidden and no one can read them and change their cars to have an advantage they might see in the rule book.

Gord

01-27-2004, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by gatherer

if we did that the point "menu" would be huge .... take up a very very large portion of the rule book....

On the contrary, it would be smaller than it is now. There are currently two sections, one for stock and one for SS/SP. And they overlap.

Why not have just one with the things that are prohibited in stock and SS as items on the list so that people in these classes can do these items if it suits them?

It doesn't affect the order at the top since all the top people picked the "good" stuff already. It does put people driving "stock" cars together and keeps there from being a huge number of cars (and unbalance) in the higher classes.

So, you joined, realized that you had to change to be competitive and did. That's great. But why did we have to "penalize" you in the first place because you picked the wrong mod?

You stuck with it, but there are a lot that don't for this reason.

Originally posted by gatherer

the rules are not designed to accomadate a new comer ... but more to level the playing field for those that want tocompete against each other...

That's the problem! They should *try* to accomadate people that are new to the sport or who don't want to get real serious about it, especially since doing so will have no affect on the people who are serious about it.

Originally posted by gatherer

also you do get a menu in stock it's limited but it's suppose to be that way with a limited budget of preppoints it's hard to really do much to your car....

On the contrary, it's not very limited at the moment. Like you listed with what you can do to your car, it isn't even close to someone with the same car as when you started with no-seasons and a CAI.

What do you lose by having people prepared like this being able to run in stock?

:confused:

-Gord

P.S. My car is prepared pretty close to your plans. I have no interest in this other than making things better for new-comers.

Marc

01-27-2004, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by gatherer
they like the sport they will most likely read the rules and put a stock shifter back into the car ... just like I changed back my stock intake.

.

We have a couple of A/SS competitors who years ago took advantage of the "free brakes" rule in the SS class. Now they will have to run in SP. Not a pleasant downgrade or easy mod to reverse.

Gord

01-27-2004, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by Marc
We have a couple of A/SS competitors who years ago took advantage of the "free brakes" rule in the SS class. Now they will have to run in SP. Not a pleasant downgrade or easy mod to reverse.
Same for people who have taken advantage to "step-up" rules in lower stock classes (ex. B2 -> B1 by installing a CAI or similar).

And then there are clutch disks. No benefit in stock mostly (performance wise), but are now a one way trip to SP.

I suspect there will be some people "cheating" without even knowing it....

-Gord

gatherer

01-27-2004, 02:44 PM

I have nothing to lose but more money .... ok let me explain... I'm an experimenter I like to try stuff out so that means more options means more stuff I buy to try out in various combinations...

the rules limit my spending and thats a good thing :p

while I do like ability to accomadate more new comers with the wrong set of mods.... I also like the fact that rules are limited (as compared to other classes....) I also believe that most new comers and here to simply try it out....

and if we do want them to always come back lets invoke this rule

Gatherer proposed rule:

Everyone must go slower then a rookie failure to do so will result in a DNF...

there now the newcomers will always win and aways want to come back....

I don't think it's the competition that brings them back... I think it's the desire to do better on a personal level ... that is what kept me coming back....

personally I think the "menu" of options is large enough to accomadate lots of differently prepped cars in Stock class...

basically if you come out to an autocross with the intent being to win first time out you have the wrong idea...and it will result in you being disappointed. I don't see this as changing regardless of rule changes (save the one i just proposed :p ) even with a larger list of options in the stock class the end result will be the same for "Mr. newbie with the short shifter that wants to win first time out" it's a garentee that those that regulars will hand his ass to him regardless of class.

personally I like to encourage new people out ... last year I did it with a "I'll give you double your entry fee if you beat my fastest time provided it's your first time out." class didn't matter for that challenge... needless to say only one new person took me up on it .... (I only advertised it on one board) the car was more modified then my car ... shocks and springs and sway bars all done .. but did I worry ... no I was still a few seconds faster...

increasing the list of options just increases the time I spend experimenting and the money I put out to do so.... it also moves poorly modded cars to lower classes ... do I worry? nope ... I'll still be faster...then a new person their first time out. changing the rules to accomadate them will create bunching of current competitors into fewer classes... while great for competition we end up with the same B family issue of this past year ... while other families went by unnoticed...

also I welcome this change as I've always wondered how I'll do against Keith's 2002 Accord 4 cylinder.... since we'll be in the same class it'll be fun ... before we'd be in different classes and comparasion was alot harder...

I think these rules will be a refreshing change.

Keith-02Accord

01-27-2004, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by gatherer

also I welcome this change as I've always wondered how I'll do against Keith's 2002 Accord 4 cylinder.... since we'll be in the same class it'll be fun ... before we'd be in different classes and comparasion was alot harder...

I'll still kick your ass :D :D :D

Gord

01-27-2004, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by gatherer
even with a larger list of options in the stock class the end result will be the same for "Mr. newbie with the short shifter that wants to win first time out" it's a garentee that those that regulars will hand his ass to him regardless of class.

Except it will be someone in a "stock" car doing it instead of someone in a very highly prepared one. Appearance is everything, and this does matter.

Originally posted by gatherer

it also moves poorly modded cars to lower classes ...
And why is this worse than moving them to the higher classes???

:confused:

-Gord

haniforama

01-27-2004, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Keith-02Accord
I'll still kick your ass :D

And i'll still kicks yours :D :D :D

gatherer

01-27-2004, 03:16 PM

Originally posted by Gord
Except it will be someone in a "stock" car doing it instead of someone in a very highly prepared one. Appearance is everything, and this does matter.

And why is this worse than moving them to the higher classes???

:confused:

-Gord

yes exactly my point .. you come to an autocross for your first time expecting to win and get beat by a huge margin by a "stock" car that doesn't look "stock" (remember R compounds and roll bar in my car) and your going to wonder "WTF is up with this crap???" and leave....

if you come and get put in SP because of that short shifter and get beat by a higher modified car ... you'll walk away saying "WTFis up with that crap???" but what you might say is "WTF is up with that I guess I'll have to do more mods to my car" and you might come back....

trust me new comers don't want to have their ass handed to them by a stock car driver thats been preped to the max the rules allow... it's intimidating... more so then being beat by a car thats been prepped for a higher class... either way though if they don't enjoy themselves then they will leave with the "wtf is up with those stupid rules" comment in their head...

if they come to win and lose and get upset about it there is nothing the rules can do to change that .. unless we mandate that everyone with more then 20 events under their belt has to move on to solo 1 because they are too experienced for the sport of solo 2 ....

rules are there for the average veteran competitor ... not for a newbie. it's that simple a newbie just wants to try it out .. if they come expecting to win they will leave sorely disappointed regardless of class..

At speedorama this weekend I had some young guys that drive mustangs come up and ask about solo 2 .. I gave out the informationand answered their questions and invited them to come out .. they left stating something along the lines of " we don't have to worry we have mustangs and will be the fastest out there" .... I didn't have the heart to tell them about the first time I came out and saw Wes manage a FTD in a stock honda... or that miata's are commonly faster on course... or that WRX's have some serious speed in the rain :p (had to include the scoobies :p ) I just answered with a "well at least it'll be nice to see some new people out at events" and I know that if they do come out they will be terribly schooled in the art of car prep for solo 2. but hey what can I do about it? everyone first comes to this sport with a different Idea in their head about what it's like . there is no such thisng as pleasing everyone. so why not have a rule set thats out that all regulars can see and prep their cars for and get ready... yes some will have to decide ... remove those mods or do more with this new class I'm in... but thats a part of car prep it's a part of the fun of this sport... and in the end after the car prep is done most will be pleased or enjny the day of racing. as for the newbies... maybe this rule....

Gatherer's second proposed rule

each regular veteran of the sport of solo 2 must take a newbie aside and inform them that they probably won't win their first few events.

I'll talk to the mustang guys if they show up. :p

you won't please all the new comers... you will not get all the newcomers coming back. they will or the won't it's their choice and I don't think the rules will change the percentage that come back.

and Keith.... we'll see I'm interested to see how works out youhave a longer wheel base and a heavier car ... but also more horse power. I have a shorter wheel base a lighter car and less horsepower I welcome the challenge and will enjoy it.

gatherer

01-27-2004, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by haniforama
And i'll still kicks yours :D :D :D

can't the yippers ever just duke it out?

miataboi

01-27-2004, 03:20 PM

you're a "veteran"???

gatherer

01-27-2004, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by miataboi
you're a "veteran"???

well I've done more then 3 events :p....

haniforama

01-27-2004, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by gatherer
can't the yippers ever just duke it out?

Hmmm - maybe i might be able to help out ..

Let me ponder. In the meant time, continue the yipping :D

Maybe Gord should be made an honourary yipper?

Gord

01-27-2004, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by haniforama

Maybe Gord should be made an honourary yipper?
Don't make me bring one of my girlie cars down there! :D

Marc

01-27-2004, 03:38 PM

I've been autocrossing since 1979 and have seen many rule changes over the years. In the early 80's we had a National SOLO rule book that every one used (loosely adapted from SCCA rulles) . Then Ont Region tried to change it and came up with our own set of rules. This was a big change from the National rules, our prep point system evolved from this. That lasted about another 5 yrs when SOLO Sport came around and "reinvented the wheel". So we change again. When that group died and SOLO2 was in dire straits Barrie Searle rearanged things to get solo 2 back, with minor changes (PAX not with standing).
Ever get the feeling that we will never settle a system of any description?
How many times has SCCA "reinvented the wheel"? It would be nice to have a set of rules that we could live with for a long time. We need a secure foundation to base our sport on, and not to be wasting time and effort on structural changes of our sport.
Why can't we just get it over with and pay SCCA a royalty and adopte thier rules?

Gord

01-27-2004, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by gatherer
trust me new comers don't want to have their ass handed to them by a stock car
On the contrary, it's been the other way around in my experience.

When a novice gets beat bad by someone driving a ratty old car, they automatically know it's the driver. They then develop a good deal of respect for them I have found.

I know that was the case when Wes showed up at one of our events. There were a lot of people taken aback after his first run. Respect man.

In the other case, people just feel they have no hope. I had a new guy this year tell me that after he ran his first event. He did stuff to make his car fun on the street. He didn't feel prepared enough (and he wasn't) for running in that class.

-Gord

gatherer

01-27-2004, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by Marc
I've been autocrossing since 1979 and have seen many rule changes over the years. In the early 80's we had a National SOLO rule book that every one used (loosely adapted from SCCA rulles) . Then Ont Region tried to change it and came up with our own set of rules. This was a big change from the National rules, our prep point system evolved from this. That lasted about another 5 yrs when SOLO Sport came around and "reinvented the wheel". So we change again. When that group died and SOLO2 was in dire straits Barrie Searle rearanged things to get solo 2 back, with minor changes (PAX not with standing).
Ever get the feeling that we will never settle a system of any description?
How many times has SCCA "reinvented the wheel"? It would be nice to have a set of rules that we could live with for a long time. We need a secure foundation to base our sport on, and not to be wasting time and effort on structural changes of our sport.
Why can't we just get it over with and pay SCCA a royalty and adopte thier rules?

because they keep inventing the wheel too ... like you said ...:p

although I like that idea....:p

as for reinventing the wheel I think so long as new cars get properly classed there shouldn't be a need to move from this rule set .... I think it's fair and was a real eye opener when I went to CNAC ... I was expecting the same style of mis classification we've had... this past year I learned quickly that a b3 car was the car to look for I didn't like the idea of a car moving up through other stock classes....I also didn't like the idea of cars starting out stock in a mildly modified class (BSS rings a bell)

the CNAC rules fixed those blaring "errors" (they are in my opinion using this word for lack of a better one) every car had a stock class to start with ... then moved up from there to SS and SP and then to mod.... I like that it seems fairer for the person that bought the MAZDASPEED protege get a stock class to start in (from my understanding) instread of having to compete against modified cars in BSS...and that makes it fairer for the newbie that bought a performance package from the dealer and comes out... they can enjoy a day in the stock class instead of being instantly grouped into a SS class and ending the day wtih "what's up with this???" left in their head.....

(using that as an example not trying to point anyone out it's just one car I remember)

gatherer

01-27-2004, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Gord
On the contrary, it's been the other way around in my experience.

When a novice gets beat bad by someone driving a ratty old car, they automatically know it's the driver. They then develop a good deal of respect for them I have found.

I know that was the case when Wes showed up at one of our events. There were a lot of people taken aback after his first run. Respect man.

In the other case, people just feel they have no hope. I had a new guy this year tell me that after he ran his first event. He did stuff to make his car fun on the street. He didn't feel prepared enough (and he wasn't) for running in that class.

-Gord

wes wasn't a newcomer to the sport just to your location... (I've heard the story from him :p )

you have a point about the no hope person.. but thats because tehre was a "want to win desire"

the other type of newcomer (me for example) just wanted to kill time on a saturday or sunday ... didn't matter if I won or not... I didn't care ... I didn't care about my class the only thing that mattered was that I was faster my second run then my first and that my third run was faster then my second...

I think there is a difference in every person that comes to this sport and not everyone would be pleased...

personally (since I have more free time then I like) I'd offer to help prep the car for a lower class if they wanted... thats how I'd respond to being toldthey didn't belong in a class...

but I doubt we will ever see eye to eye on this....I'm willing to agree to just disagree.

Gord

01-27-2004, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by gatherer
I'm willing to agree to just disagree.
Agreed. There you go, we just agreed on something! ;)

Hmmm, Marc you just got me thinking maybe I should just build to SCCA rules and be done with it. At least I could then run down there if I ever wanted...

-Gord

finboy

01-27-2004, 05:49 PM

times change rules change.. life isn't fair

if you guys want to have a standard rule/scoring system someone has to give.

in the process.. the people who've modded their brakes for the freebie.. "pass the soap"

what can you do??? nothing.. the rule changes are for the future, and growth of the sport to bridge the gap between all the regions.

if people don't like it.. they don't run the "regionals" and simply host their own club events....

that's why so many "club rules/classes" are different from the regional/national series.

if you want to bring your modified car to different venues.. unless there is a global scoring system..

you get classed with what you have according to their rules.

if you go to a different club.. you get classed according to their rules..

what's a "stock" bolt on.. is all realtive to the Hosting club.

instead of trying to deside what should be considered a free mod in stock, eg. a stb, or a short shifter, hello kitty vs snoopy..

keep them all in the same class, just have different start finish lines like in golf.

yellow tees
white tees
blue tees

Jason.. your still a newbie in this sport.. your comments are read by everyone on the board.. some of your comments have me

:confused:

Everyone has to agree the rule changes are NOT for newbies..

Yes.. NO??

If you are a newbie.. Nobody cares if you have a hot car, you smell like roses, or you took out a bunch of cones, didn't place a clean run..or whatever...

it shouldn't matter so much to the newbie either.

Most people see the pylon course, and think its a synch.

at best, they'll place mid of their pack.

if they get turned off because of the classing.. tell them to buy a mirror, or get one of the top drivers to drive their car.

its about seat time period.

once they realize that.. instead of just having fun driving around the cones..

they'll show up all the time.. get involved.. and learn that there's more to driving.. than just driving on the street in a "modified street car"

if they have a weak ego.. go buy them some roses and scratch their back.

if they love the sport for what it is.... they won't care where they placed.. they'll simply ask whens the next event.

Wes.. keep up the good work

Marc.. haven't seen you since you since you ran the 240z car
can't wait to hook up.. seen Burl a few times.. not many else from
st. lac

dave t

Chris P

01-27-2004, 07:09 PM

Gord, i think your getting some things mixed up. This is a regional series. The objective of this series is to provide an extremely competitive platform for the experienced driver to compete in a universal equitable environment. Appealing to new drivers is not the objective of this series. Currently Ontario or more specifically the GTA AutoX scene is in a boom period making discrimination valid and acceptable. I am very aware of the cyclical nature of our sport and its past and current location.
New competitors just experiencing the sport for the first time should attend club events. There is no shortage of these "fun" events occurring nearly every weekend of the summer. They offer more seat time and generally a better suited environment for the new driver to engage. Once this new driver feels they are ready and start accepting rules and classification a transition to regional events makes sense. It’s a ladder system.
I am still a supporter of the SCCA rules however it doesn’t seem to be in the cards this time around. Harmonization is important and in time I suspect will see more of it. CNAC is a slow but good start.

Krispy.......who believes change occurring because an evolving external environment gives warrant to positively correlating rules evolution.

Chris P

01-27-2004, 07:10 PM

bah, what Davey T said :p

silverwolfracin

01-27-2004, 07:33 PM

The following pictures shows what I competed with in Solo 1 and 2. I got dinged points for -3 degee camber to SS but didn't change it because I was planning on lowering the vehicle. I did add a homemade air intake with creative use of a toilet flange and a plastic office tray. Bench seat and two foot long shifter....
The point is that anything can compete and its up to the driver to make it better. I argued long and hard about the Solo 1 classification system because it was created under the premise of using the stats for the best year of a cars generation and penalizing you for building that car to the same trim yourself.
The philosophy is "run what you brung" and unfortunately in making things fair in a non "driver"series: everything doesn't fit into one rule set. I ran what I had and kicked ass in some events (4cyl fiero!) and fought hard for standings in others (MR2).
I looked at the times of all the other cars and decided myself on what I was happy with.
Another odd rule I remember was a set of springs changing a 300ZX non turbo from C to BSS.
The solution I see to make poor Wes's (esses?) job simpler is to not "bridge the gap" per say. Adopt the CNAC rules wholeheartedly and take a poll on which rules to fix. If the governing body is slow to agree, then implement the one or two changes of the silly rules for this year(really, in Solo 2 how much time is saved short shifting from first to second twice in a run?)
Everyone can't be happy, but it has been many years that we have all rolled up to a stoplight and asked the guy next to us, "nice car, but can you drive it?"
Maybe the street modders will understand that looks are not worth a thing and we could actually influence them that real performance mods are better than creating drag with 8 foot ironing boards.

silverwolfracin

01-27-2004, 07:43 PM

here:

Gord

01-27-2004, 08:44 PM

Chris, I'm very aware that these are regional rules. Problem is that these rules are to then be adopted by the clubs so that club members can build to run at both levels.

Unless the rules don't suit the needs of the clubs members, at which point they can go off and do what they want to suit their needs.

Harmonization? What's that again? SCCA != CNAC != local clubs rules (where it all starts). Let's put that reason to rest.

Ah it doesn't really matter now anyway does it? I think it's a waste of CPU cycles at this point...

-Gord

haniforama

01-27-2004, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by silverwolfracin
Wes's (esses?)

Wes' :D

exST165

01-27-2004, 11:26 PM

My beefs with the new rules are with the Stock/SS/SP/Mod classification:
- "Free" Mods in a class,
- how some mods are just not allowed in lower classes,
- sweeping definitions of modification in the preparation point schedule, and
- a complete lack of any stated vision as to what a given class is supposed to represent.

Dilbert-esque, but without any sort of broad vision for what is supposed to be in the various categories we can get 'Stock' cars with full roll cages, a completely stock car on street tires and a short shifter automatically bumped to SP, and my personal favorite:5.5 F i) where by emission control equipment and catalytic converters can be completely removed from a Super STOCK car without penalty or point cost.

What possible justification other than "those are the rules" is there for this? People can say that they don't care if newbies who don't read the rules get burned, fair enough. As a newbie I recognize that I'm cannon fodder and all the mods in the world aren't going to make me competitive against a veteran in a stock car, I just thought that the rules were to classify cars of similar performance and preparation (translation: cost) together and not some arbitrary or randomly picked criteria. Not having any allowances for cheap/popular modifications just doesn't make sense IMHO.

For example: modifications to the intake 5.8 4) include everything from " the air inlet to the orifice of the cylinder head port face". No differentiation between a cold air intake (which is cheap and easy to install) and a full port and polish of the head by a professional with a flow bench (kah ching$$$). Not to mention that if you are reading 5.8 you have completely free ECU and ignition mods to play with if you are normally aspirated. How much does it cost for the dyno time to get a custom chip burned?

So the message isn't "if you can't afford it stay in stock" because the stock rules allow for some pretty wild and un-streetable combinations for a daily driver. I guess the message is that if you aren't good enough that your car prep doesn't matter you will either have to be able to afford a dedicated track car or be willing to take your chances with the police.

I can't offer any alternative at this point other than getting in touch with CNAC and finding out why they have done the things they have and what the process/cycle is to review them.

As an aside about the removal of emission controls being 'free' for all but
Stock: wouldn't it be special if the local constabulary at some event decided to troll through the paddock making note of any car classified as Super Stock or above (courtesy those big letters we are all supposed to display on our cars), set up a check point just off the property and pulled them ALL over as they leave the event (unless they were on a trailer) to check their emission equipment? They now have all the probable cause in the world to do just that - our rules.

Have a nice night!

miataboi

01-28-2004, 01:05 AM

wtf?

Taylor

01-30-2004, 09:53 AM

Yeesh..

What Finboy and Chris P said is exactly right.

Here's the thing.. (aka my 2 cents)

SCCA Rules: We do not have the lot options (well, we don't CURRENTLY have the lot options). If we did, then we would be retarded not to adopt them because they are tried, tested and true and we could attract border cities to our events and vice versa. It woudl be the BEST thing for AutoX in North America. We could attend each others Nationals. Thereby grossly upping the attendance at ours.

CNAC Rules: The logicals reason to choose adopt these is the CEAC and CNAC. The problem is, a lot surrounding them (attendance, qualifications, etc..) is a joke. I mean, I won D/SP in a car that wasn't remotely setup for the class. But neither were the other 3 to 4 guys in the class. I was lucky. You think SCCA Nationals would let someone get lucky like that? Maybe in the underfilled Ladies classes. Of course the other (obvious) reason is a move to unification of rules across the country.

Last Years Rules: Unfair (sometimes grossly) with some exceptionally ugly classifications. Though I can appreciate their place as the lot selection has been comparitively small. The tighter the course the more emphasis certain aspects of a vechicles capabilities preside over the others. i.e. Handing over Power.

But at the end of the day we have maybe 2 or 3 guys that prep their AutoX vechiles to the max for their class. In comparison to SCCA we're not "serious" enough. This is a good argument to leave the previous system in place however this isn't the way I prefer to look at such things. The previous system was very flawed. The new system allows for growth of the series in many aspects, bigger lots, cross-border competitive competition and it can raise the seriousness of AutoX drivers.

I mean, this is the regional series. It should have the ruleset that's the most fair when properly followed. This is a step in the right direction. I'm not sure what the Ontario vs Current CNAC changes are, but as someone mentioned we are the largest body of competitors in the country, so if there is a flaw in CNAC right now and the changes don't grossly deviate from SCCA too much then I'd probably be for them, perhaps they will influence the other regions to adopt and therefore change the national ruleset.

Either way I'm pretty sure no one was going to adopt our previous system. The closer we all our, the better the sport can be.

If we have an issue with newcomers (especially on a club level) then create a new class for those guys to play in. When they get tired of beating the new poor drivers, they might move up with the big boys and start competing for real. That class can absorb a hit on the ego, give the driver some time to get used to the sport and learn from the other competitors so when they're ready to get serious they're equipped (mentally) to do so.

Marc

01-30-2004, 11:14 AM

Great points Taylor,
Your point about car not being preped to the max of thier allowed classes was especially well said. Do you not think if we did not change rules as often as we do, we may have some veteran cars running for years with only minor alterations over the years? This new rule book will defrag allot of our preped cars causing ill prepared cars to end up in new classes. I do mind change, in my case the new rules are better (I'll be in B/SS), but my real concern is that this rule change is just another interim or transition to a better set of National rules. Is that the case? Is the final rule change, or are Quebec and BC lobying for changes in the rule book as well? Have they seen the proposed 2004 book? I can apreciate how it is a VERY tough task to get all of our regions to agree on one set of rules.
Re: the SCCA lots sizes. That is another reason why I am concerned with the implementation of the PAX system. To use SCCA based PAX numbers to our events where the lots can be very small (ie Peterborough Arena) and yet use PAX numbers where the lots are mush faster. This does not make sense to me. We should base the PAX numbers on ONT events only, we must have enough data by now to get proper numbers. But if we change the rules we no longer have a daatbase of data to use to get the PAX indexes from.

Taylor

01-30-2004, 11:37 AM

There will never be a final change to the rules. The sport will evolve, automobiles will evolve, and lot availability will change. But you have to have a good foundation. The structure of the previous system was cluttered. This is one of the reasons why Solo 1's prep-point system is so beautiful. It's so neat and tidy it's not even funny. A tweak occurs in the system and any given driver may move up 1 class, down one class or stay within their class.

As for PAX. I agree. We shouldn't use SCCA PAX, and we should definately not use the PAX we had before (it was BS, our lot and course design varied so drasitcally that one event it was a breeze to make pax and other events, impossible to beat PAX). Personally I think the most fair thing to do is apply a series of PAX groups. Group A, B and C. And each group corresponds to an educated decision by the Cheif Steward of the event and it should be in relation to course speed/flow. If the course is tight (i.e. Mosport DDT parking lot, 1st gear stuff), Group C paxing applies for the day, if it's wide open (i.e. large SCCA type lot or Summerside PEI, then Group A should be used) and a Brampton Centre or Hershey center type event should be Group B.

And I think this is something we seriously have to consider. One of those groups will have to be CNAC Paxing.. but since we do run regional events at drastically different sized lots (Peterborough VS. Bronte Go Station) it's unfair to only have the one pax that assumes a totally different size and speed of course.

Sure you may have some people complaining that some Pax's are a little more difficult to achieve at some events, but it's better than it being impossible for everyone at 2/3rd of all the events. It's a little more fair without being too complicated.

Marc

01-30-2004, 01:11 PM

And what about a wet event? The PAX numbers can't apply to these as the lower HP/high traction groups will blow away the established fast PAX groups.

max attack

01-30-2004, 01:24 PM

Marc in the wet it won't matter a hoot as the fast guys will stomp the others regardless of higher or lower paxing.
The faster classes/guys are usually more serious and run tires for wet or dry and therefor will come out on top just fine.

Marc

01-30-2004, 01:42 PM

all the horsepower that made the A/SP class faster then the A/2 class gets vapourized by the rain. How can you maintain the status quo that the PAX numbers expect.

finboy

01-30-2004, 05:19 PM

pax is only good in perfect conditions, on a huge lot

lousy weather kills the pax factor for the "faster" classes

Marc

01-31-2004, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by finboy
pax is only good in perfect conditions, on a huge lot
lousy weather kills the pax factor for the "faster" classes

So how can a PAX index be applied fairly under these conditions? I beleive this is an unfair penalty put on the higher classes.
How do we create a PAX system that takes into account these factors and our unique (relative to SCCA) class/prep system? That's why I do not believe we can base the PAX system on the US system, we need to get our own CDN indexes. That is the only way that the indexes will be fairly used in Canada.
The PAX system is new to the CNAC in the 2004 rule book. How is it being recieved by the rest of the regions in it's existing format?

finboy

01-31-2004, 10:36 AM

i don't know marc-san :confused:

just that... i've seen as the season gets cooler.. the lower classes do much better with the pax system

our weather isn't as consistant with our usa brothers

its an artificial way to determine who the "best driver" is,
even if we had a SPEC class, the winner would again be the most tallented, and more imporantly have teh best prep'd car

from what i've been told, and what i've read our venues are not even close to the usa courses.

we're lucky enough to have the lots we have now!!

the topgun format appears to be the most fair method to see who
the top dawg is.

its toooooo much math for me...

the pax is to weather dependant for our Ontario climate.....

just my 1 cent

DanielForest

02-05-2004, 09:21 AM

Hi there,

1. Having a set of common national rules is a good thing.
2. Having a set of national rules as close as possible to the SCCA rules is a good thing.

1. Introduction
So now that I catched your attention, let me introduce myself. My name is Daniel Forest. I was CADL (montreal solo club) president in the early 90's before becoming Quebec Solo Director for 5 years. I was one of the first member of the CNAC board (and I'm still there) and I was recently asked to represent Quebec on the ASN SoloSport committee.

2. The past
And now a short history on Solo 2 rules in Canada. Many of you know, but some don't, there was a common Canadian set of rules in the 80's until early in the 90's. Those were the CASC rules. Since then, most regions, CACC (BC) WCMA (Prairies) and ARMS (Maritimes) stick close to those original rules with only slight variations. In the same time, Quebec and Ontario moved away more clearly, and probably in opposite directions (as usual!) In 1999 a committe (CNAC) was formed with the idea of building a national championship with a set of rules. When I jumped on the committe, my first preoccupation was to have at least one official rep from each region (Barry Searle was there for the Ontario region). Then we wrote the rules, starting with the CACC rules that were close to the original CASC rules. We tried to have rules were each competitors, no matter their regions would be in a fair competition. Hence we allowed big brakes in Stock at the beginning because it was allowed in Ontario, etc. Each regions agreed on the CNAC rules.

3. The situation now
Now, most regions are adopting CNAC rules or a variation of them... except Quebec. I'm sure you wonder why. The reason is simple. Two years ago when we planned some due changes to our Quebec rules the CNAC wasn't showing proof of a long life and I couldn't get any answer from the Ontario rep about your future intention. So Quebec had to choose to adopt a set of national (CNAC) rules with no evidence there were going to be in existence after a couple of years and no reason to believe Ontario will follow (being neighbors, having the same rules would be great). On the other hand we had some pressions (as you got) from many competitors wanting to have SCCA rules, especially since some of our guys were going to Topeka and bringing back trophies. So the actual Quebec rules are part SCCA (stock and Street Prepared) with our own interpretation of Prepared and Modified.

4. The future.
The future now look bright for the CNAC, even if it is in a different form. With the interest shown by ASN and the wider use of the rules, it seems logical to join, at least in part. My hope in the future would be to have a modified set of the CNAC rules, still with preparation points, but with a level matching the SCCA. That would allow competitors wanting to compete under both rules to be competitive in both. Actually, the guys running in SS here have a tough time going to SP in SCCA and the same for our SP guys that are no match for the Prepared Classes in SCCA. But this is still a battle to do...

5. Conclusion
So why did I bother you with all that? I think there were some constructive comments in that thread about the CNAC / CASC-OR rules, but there are also people just complaining. We should have a long term vision about our Solo 2 sport. And joining the CNAC rules is one good step. Quebec is now to deep in SCCA rules to go back to the actual CNAC rules but I wish in a near future we all could come to rules satisfactory for everybody.

In the meantime, have fun with wathever rules you got!

Daniel Forest
Montreal, Canada (yup! Canada!) ;-)
DSP X1/9

Marc

02-05-2004, 10:15 AM

Daniel, does PQ use any form of PAX system in the scoring of the events? Where could I see your rules, are they available on the Web?

tanney

02-05-2004, 10:17 AM

Daniel, as you probably noticed, the new Solo 2 Director in Ontario is stirring everything up, hopefully for the better in the long run.

I was told that this would be a long and trying process and would get a lot of resistance (among other things) and I will not be surprised when some long time competitors walk away from the series. But, I think that these changes are a step in the right direction, regardless of what some people think. Sure there are going to be "issues"........

I have lost a lot of sleep in the last two months and probably lost a few friends and have been extremely annoyed with some of the comments here and other places, but I except the fact that I may not be the most popular guy with some competitors, but I am sticking to my guns and we are trudging forward.

finboy

02-05-2004, 10:27 AM

the silent majority support you Wes-san!!

Keith-02Accord

02-05-2004, 10:46 AM

Geez Dave, you've been sucking up to Wes a lot lately!!! :eek:

Is that b/c you've finally realized that your Mazda is no match for our Honda's? :D

Bring back the old controversial Dave....his posts were more fun to read ;)

gatherer

02-05-2004, 10:52 AM

not all of Wes' supporters are silent.

by the way Wes thanks once again for the clarification with the roll bar stuff much appriciated.

DanielForest

02-05-2004, 10:58 AM

Hi Marc and all,

Unfortunately FAQ rules aren't available in english, but you could find them at:
http://www.autoquebec.ca/solo/reglements.php
and click on règlements 2003 (2004 aren't yet available). Main difference for 2004 will be the addition of a STREET TOURING category... (SCCA rules).

If you don't understand French and have any question, I will be please to answer them.

And Wes, the reason I posted first was because I was suprized by the opposition you encounter. In my early years as club president and after that, as solo director, I was GOD. Everything I said was taken as granted. But in more recent years, there were suddently some guys who showed interest in rules and beg to differs on my opinions. I LOVED it. It makes me aware of other points of view and forced me to support with more facts my proposals. I just hope those who are posting take time to make a good reflexion (many of them are) and aren't just whiiiiining. I got a few like that.

Keep up the good work.

Did I hear the Honda's are giving a tough time to the Miata's in Ontario? Strange. I was sure a Miata could do circle around ANY Honda... (and I haven't started talking about Fiat X1/9's...)

Daniel Forest
Montréal
DSP X1/9

AlienDNA

02-05-2004, 11:03 AM

Originally posted by DanielForest
Did I hear the Honda's are giving a tough time to the Miata's in Ontario? Strange. I was sure a Miata could do circle around ANY Honda... (and I haven't started talking about Fiat X1/9's...)

No, some Honda owners just need to have their cars checked for carbon monoxide leaks, I think.:rolleyes:

finboy

02-05-2004, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by Keith-02Accord
Geez Dave, you've been sucking up to Wes a lot lately!!! :eek:

Is that b/c you've finally realized that your Mazda is no match for our Honda's? :D

Bring back the old controversial Dave....his posts were more fun to read ;)

naw Keith-san.....

when it comes to people volunteering... and putting up/dealing with all the b/s.. i'm appreciative for the work that is done.

controversial dave??? who dat??

i just call it like i see it, dont' have time to fluff things up to be
politically correct.

you sell your (pig) accord yet?? get in to the bss class and whoop it up some

dt

Keith-02Accord

02-05-2004, 12:03 PM

Dave,

I know, I just wanted to raz you ;)

As for my pig..err, I mean Accord, Nope, haven't gotten rid of it yet, but I'll HOPEFULLY have something more agile for the start of the season...finances permitting of course! I need to keep the Accord regardless though.

gatherer

02-05-2004, 12:06 PM

run the accord Keith ... I'll enjoy beating it in H stock .... :p

finboy

02-05-2004, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Keith-02Accord
HOPEFULLY have something more agile for the start of the season...finances permitting of course! I need to keep the Accord regardless though.

Keith-san...

spend more time down town!!

and you'll get a S2000

:D

Cliffy

02-19-2004, 04:04 AM

Wes, you've lost alot of sleep? So have I in WRT the rules. I must say that I'm saddened to hear friendships suffering due to this. C'mon people, this is a hobby. Is this really worth losing a friend over not being able to install a short shifter?

I've just quickly scanned the thread and I'd like to make a few clarifications:

- a short shifter does not put you into SP. It's only when you start modifying the shift mechanisms underneath the car and on the tranny that bump you into SP. Dropping in a short lever to help shifting is an SS-legal mod.

- Stock cars w/ race type mods. I agree that this is silly. We've kept this in the rules so far as it is a legacy item that Showroom Stock road racers thought would help people transfer back and forth between solo events and road racing. Obviously this isn't happening in any great numbers. I'd eventually like to remove this kind of stuff and make Stock more stock...more like SCCA.

- PAX and lot sizes- Raw data for the SCCA PAX numbers come from a variety of sources not limited to just the huge-ass national events. Canadian PAX data is based on local numbers in relation (differential) to SCCA numbers. No, PAX doesn't work when it's raining.

- newbies and "wrong" mods. Unfortunately this happens everywhere. The most common case is the Mustang guys in SCCA who have sub-frame connectors and get punted straight into Prepared category. Rules are not for newbies because, for example, it would be silly to go and play hockey on figure skates and then lobby the ice hockey federation to change to figure skates. Not gonna happen. If newbies are to be accomodated, then there are other ways to do so.

- Overall Car classing/mods vision. Whereas each SCCA Solo2 car category is a standalone set of rules, Canadian rules have always been about progression and allowing a competitor to grow from Stock -> SS -> SP -> mod. I believe the old CASC-OR system had this intent as well. It only differed in execution.

Stock = minimal mods, air filter, exhaust, shocks, a sway bar, tires. Basically limited to "consumable " items.

Super Stock = mild bolt on mods, no internal engine mods, intake up to the head, headers and back for exhaust, ignition/ECM, suspension bolt-ons.

SP = internal engine allowed, full suspension alterations, stripping interiors, boost controls and addition of forced induction. gears/final drive.

Modified = everything else.

Then we have the Preparation points allowances. The only reason that prep. points exist is to allow those who've done "wrong" mods to play in certain classes for which they are otherwise underprepared. The other reason (excuse) is that Prep. points allow individuality when modifying car and gives people options and choices instead of holding them to rigid allowances. But you know what? Over time, people end up making the same types of modifications anyway so having options doesn't really make things different. Personally, I hate prep. points but the will of the people dictates that we keep 'em.

Over time I do see CNAC and SCCA rules moving closer. It is already happening w/ the growth of SCCA's Street Touring and Street Modified classes. Street touring was a class developed quite closely on SuperStock back in 1998. I was part of the original SCCA committee that submitted the initial proposal. Street Mod is much like CNAC SP. CACC is experimenting w/ allowing same manufacturer engine swaps to see how things shape up for a future SP rule proposal.

Why not just switch to SCCA rules. Sure why not? It'll save me and the other members of the CNAC Board and ASN Solosport a lot of grief in maintaining a set of national rules. The down side?.....

- Well if you thought you were uncompetitive or misclassed now, you'll be just as screwed under SCCA rules.

- No more rule change proposals. We'll just follow SCCA's Fastrack updates. The only way to influence rules is to join SCCA and submit proposals to the appropriate sub-committees on the SEB. Budget another $55US on the racing budget for SCCA membership.

- After all this, regions across the country will still be making their own supplements to the rules to accomodate their demographics.

Regional representation - Of course Ontario has the largest group of solo2 participants...you've got the biggest population. But do you average 100 - 120 entries per local event? Back in '99 when the CNAC Board was formed and we discussed which document was to form the basis of the CNAC rule book, I looked closely at the CASC-OR rules. I asked more than a few people how this document was working out. There were a lot of different answers, some not encouraging, and we found a significant Solo1 influence on car modification allowances. All the other regions were using the old CASC National book- CACC's version being the one that had been updated to accomodate newer items/technologies. So we chose that.

As for why it seems CASC doesn't get heard at the CNAC level. Please bear w/ Wes as he tackles his new role on the CNAC Board and as your Solo2 Director. He's got a lot to absorb. I'm very pleased w/ the fact that he's taking a much more active role in CNAC than his predecessors and pretty soon you'll see the fruits of his efforts as the next versions of the National Rule book appear in the coming years.

The next two years will be challenging as we try to evolve the rulebook for the Canadian competitor base. We'll also have ASN issues to deal with. We hope to keep things as stable as possible, but you all know that the automotive world changes a lot in 12 months.

I will tell you this though, upcoming rule books will be Solo2 rules and we'll be trying to get rid of Solo1 and road racing legacy items. Also, do not look for a national Solo1 car classing system any time soon.

Cliff Loh
CNAC Director