Jump to content

2010 Rules - Silly Season <<Requests Due 10/26>>

Recommended Posts

If spending $100 k is fine with an individual, then why not just add the big motor and go extreme?


I want a thundering V8 pony car to race

I like the idea of having the "Big 3" pony cars squaring off against each other.

I want a car that I can modify and makke handle very good.

I want a car that stops great

I want some HP, but don't need 500 plus.

Aero is good, but should be minimal.

I think the cars should closely resemble their stock versions in appearance.

I want to be able to put parts on that will increase reliabilty.

I'm happy to have the option of using aftermarket parts that will help me achieve one of the items listed above, and help manufacturers market their stuff, and the contigent money that is included.

I want driver skill , car set up and preperation to rule the day.

I like the idea of a spec tire

I like the hp / tq to weight limits, but would like to see more dynos at the track.

I don't want trick parts that will temporarily give me an andvantage until eveyone else runs out and buys said part. (waste of money and time). This includes electronic gadgets

I don't want to have to continuely upgrade my car to keep up with the next guy, but I'm happy to make improvements within the rules to better my car.

I don't want to spend $50K plus on a car, and additional thousands to maintain.

I don't want to spend thousands on testing, dyno tuning, wind tunnel, etc...



So, is AI the series for me? I'm hoping it is.


Algozine, hit the nail square on the head.

No more diversification ie. AI light, CMC Heavy, AI2 AIX4..

Thats some more of the same shit we saw in SCCA.

30 cars on the track and all of them in a different f*ckin


I also agree with TJ this ain't PC soccer league, we all won't get a

$10.00 plastic trophy.

If you wanna build a $100K car we have class's for you AIX, SU, ST


I gotta go drive nails now!!!


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • tacovini


  • Pat L.


  • ST#97


  • D Algozine


  • Members

OR consider this. We used to have AIV (AI Vintage) and it was recognized at the national level. Yes, it went away because of low counts but maybe now is the time to think about it again and tweak it a bit. This class could use the AI rule set but be limited by year of car - say 1993 and older only (or whatever the last year was for the 3 gen Camaro). Or this could be for anything 15 years old or older (this would actually let it move with time)... Whatever. Anyway, these cars "could" run in AI if they wanted to but they wouldn't have to. Anything newer "would have" to run in AI. I'm not fan of splitting classes either but just throwing out ideas. This would at least help with the desparity of technology. I know we have several guys in the SE who are building 60's cars and we are again discussing the possibilty of bringing AIV back regionally.


Just thought I'd throw the idea out here...



Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole discussion about unobtainium parts is crap.


1. You are all running the same exact contact patch on the track. If 18" wheels makes your car faster, your 17" setup needed more spring or a shock adjustment. In fact they are heavier.


2. Power and Torque to weight rules all. All the little driver aids we think putting on our cars to make them faster rarely does anything noticeable. I tried a bunch of them on my AIX cars, it basically came down to power to wieght when I went faster. It seems like everything will help a ton but real world lap times did not change noticably.


3. A good driver will beat a less talented driver, even without all the unobtainium parts. Driver coaching will go further than all the unobtainium parts. Boris Said or Tommy Kendal could jump in half the AI cars and whoop most of our asses. Sad but true.


4. You do NOT have to spend a ton of money to have a very competitive car. It is still power to weight, if you have a decent suspension.


5. Power to weight can be affected by: Flat torque curves (area under the curve), and close ratio gear boxes. Most every AI car could gain an advantage here. I have seen a lot of dyno sheets that give up a ton of power under the curve. I am also amazed there is not more discussion on the close ratio gear boxes that are out there.


6. 14" brakes: I had 13" on the old AIX, 14's on the new. I don't notice much difference. What a bunch of crap. I don't see the big deal, I could lock up a tire with the best of them with the 13's, the 14's seem very similar.


7. ABS- A huge advantage in the wet, debatable in the dry. Hard to control the systems and the costs on this one. I don't know of an easy, painless solution here.


8. Adding ANY more classes is bad for the series.


9. The Ford / chevy swap motor thing is stupid. The fans (all three of them) will NEVER know the difference. I may actually build a chevy with a Ford in someday just because DSS is a major sponsor to me. I would like the freedom to do that so I can keep DSS as a sponsor.


I still say it is way more car prep, driver talent and power to weight than the ghosts you guys are chasing with the unobtainium parts. Carry on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still say it is way more car prep, driver talent and power to weight than the ghosts you guys are chasing with the unobtainium parts. Carry on.



I just wanted to repeat that and put a little emphasis on it.

Well said Chris.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The smartest thing NASA could do is combine CMC 1 & 2 and AI/AIX into ONE American Iron 1-2-3-4 class and establish clear performance and preparation delineations between the classes. Keep AI1 the same as CMC1, AI3 the same as current AI and AI4 the same as AIX. AI2 would present an opportunity to expand the current CMC2 concept (more HP, tire and brakes than CMC1 but less than AI) to more platforms and give the current mid-pack AI cars that have not desire to keep up with the arms race in that class a place to settle into.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Griswold, you're absolutely right. Nothing offsets a prepared car and a good shoe. I think there are a few advantages to having an SLA front as opposed to a strut, but in terms of qualifying speed I'm sure it's moot. I think capping things like shocks would be a good idea. I know on my car we could gain a nice little bit out of a better set of dampers.


I would hope that whatever we do to encourage the grassroots racer to join the AI ranks, we also welcome the "other" guys who would like to give AI a shot. They're usually more attracted to series that give the perception of being professional (i.e. expensive "looking" cars and nice rigs). And it's always a great thing to have professional drivers run in AI because it gives the series more clout. I don't know about anyone else, but if asked the question, I'd rather run top ten against pros than walk away from a field of first-timers.


Mr. White, thanks for your concern over my car's legality. I had a quick phone convo over a question that was raised post nat's, but it was nothing that should concern you. When we were in Utah, Plenty of officials, competitors and spectators had opportunities to notice anything that might have been out of compliance... nothing came up. Like I said before, we were and are an open book. You have an open invite to crawl all over the car anytime you're out west. And I didn't even think about the track record, but not to worry as I'm sure someone will take care of that next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know about anyone else, but if asked the question, I'd rather run top ten against pros than walk away from a field of first-timers.

As long as the pros stick around with the joes after the races and add to the comradarie I'd be happy to enjoy the company on and off track from amateurs and pros alike.


I will say though that I'd MUCH prefer the range in between the two scenarios you mention which is what I have enjoyed the crap out of in Texas...a group of 20 or so AI/CMC racers every race - a majority of those are amateur and ALSO seasoned racers with a few rookies every year in a series that's growing and everybody knows my name. Yep..I want Cheers on wheels


Do I mind it when Mr-Two-Time-National-CMC-Champion walks past me in a braking zone (Hey it was a damn nice pass!)...or MFW finishes the race so far ahead of me that he's already out of his driver's suit by the time I finish? yes I do. And I'd not like it any more or less if it was a pro - I do think I have a slightly better chance of evening the score against an amateur who has more money in his wife's daily driver than his race car and and his "pit crew" hasn't finished elementary school yet - but maybe I have no damn chance and just need to shut up and drive


I would definately enjoy shooting the shit with pros and learning along the way too. Pat, Dean all you guys bring a ton to the series and I hope you continue to do so for years to come and hope to get the chance to race against you some day.


So let's help keep the series attainable. Keep the rules stable for a few years. Make it so that the only thing better than the on track racing is the off track fun and games.


Damn...sorry for the story. Rookie out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still say it is way more car prep, driver talent and power to weight than the ghosts you guys are chasing with the unobtainium parts. Carry on.



I just wanted to repeat that and put a little emphasis on it.

Well said Chris.


I'm pretty sure that we are all in agreement to the above statements. Anyone with any type of experience knows this is very true.

However, I think it's pretty obvious that making modifications, has been proven to increase the performance of a race car. At least the correct modifications can. If this wasn't true, then non of us would do anything to our cars, which is not the case. So, if these modifications aren't necessary then scaling some of them back should make no difference. If these mods aren't needed then lets just get rid of them. They must just be a waste of time and money. Beside we all have the same contact patch and power to weight, which is true, but it is a little more involved then that. In reality, it's just not that simple or that black and white. Most of us realize that any one part or modification is not going to create the class killer. But, someone is always going to go farther with modifications then the last guy, and thats just the nature of racing. However, the rules dictate just how far anyone can go. And we are talking about tenths of seconds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Midnight tonight is the deadline for Rule Change Requests (RCR's)!


A lot of RCR's have been received to date and I now have a large spreadsheet to review with the AI Leadership Team.


Mid-week - I'll post a summary here of the general areas of the rules which are being reviewed. (Not changed...REVIEWED.)


Thursday PM - We have a conference call tentatively scheduled for all the regional AI directors to work thru specific RCR's and come to final decision. On that call, we'll also talk thru our 5 year plan and get more input from each of the regions from their lea


Saturday PM - is Halloween...be sure to partake in the festive holiday and have plenty of candy available for the door knockers.


Sunday Nov. 1 - pending NASA HQ final review/approval, I'll release the:

+ AI State of the Union

+ 5 Year Plan

+ 2010 Rules package.


We've got a long way to go, and a short time to get there!!!!


Todd Covini

Link to post
Share on other sites
Midnight tonight is the deadline for Rule Change Requests (RCR's)!



So what time zone does that Midnight deadline correspond to......there is a 24 hour window available if you don't specify.


I hope you close these types of loopholes in the rules.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tone....everyone knows that Texas is the center of AI/CMC Racing in the USA, and the world revolves around our time zone, right?!?!?


Micky...as in years past, we'll have a summary of the changes listed out...as well as highlighted...and a clean copy. No changes there.


-=- Todd

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with mstngrcr on page 8 about forced induction. But splitting classes to make a AIX1 AIX2 should not even be considered due to small class sizes allready. I would rather see no forced induction but the guys who can afford it arent breaking the rules so banning it is also out. I do believe this class will die due to non participation because off the expense of being competitive. (I hope I'm wrong)I have switched to running SU(more cars than AIX west coast) and have been slowly converting back to an AI car to run in a bigger class because thats why we race is to have fun. Also I would like to see a rule change that says the qualifying races for the nationals should all come from the class you are going to run in for the nationals. This would also help car counts since people wont be able to qualify for the nationals by racing only in one weekend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...