Talk to me about 5th Gen Camaros

[cozog1548534733]

I may be misunderstanding Todd but I think he is talking about and I agree, bringing the new cars down to our numbers, with comarable lap times, and add them to CMC. Not increase our cars to those stock levels.

 

I don't want to have to chase a moving target either.

 

More cars = more fun

More classes = dilution

 

You got it Bryan.

[ShadowBolt]

For example the bumper structure....who cares? Just make sure the car looks stock from the outside and they are not gutting it so it is unsafe or huge competitive advantage.

Bob

 

Bob for King.

 

JJ

[Houstonnw]

The problem that I see with unlimited update/backdate is that there might be one combination that is significantly better. This drives up the series cost as drivers feel pressure to change to that combination.

 

I would rather allow the 300hp six cylinders with a possible weight advantage (like the Fox Mustang) since they will be down on torque.

 

Edit to add: Series cost increases every time you relax the rules, such as the bumper covers.

[Waco Racer]

I submitted the idea of a new CMC type class over a year ago for the newer cars with higher HP, bigger brakes, bigger wheels, etc. to a Series Director. It was swept under the rug. I guess I should have brought it to the masses first. The chain of command seems to be broken.

[Den341548534727]

I just want to make things clear. I am by no means proposing a new CMC class. What I am suggesting is a gradual refinement over the next few rule cycles to end up with what I have posted.

For the record.

1) I do not want another class or the class to split,

2) I do not want to raise the HP limit.

3) I do not necessarily agree with a HP to weight rule.

 

My post is for the sake of discussion and idea generation of where we think we need to go as a class.

[cmc79]

...

For the record.

1) I do not want another class or the class to split,

2) I do not want to raise the HP limit.

3) I do not necessarily agree with a HP to weight rule.

....

 

Round 1 of upgrades is still going on. We're going through the curve now, about to hit the straight.

The next corner is coming. Round 2 will require either number 1 or number 2 from above... whether its sooner or later.

[Tommy551548534728]

I think there are a lot of people on the sidelines in AI as well as CMC to see what direction they are going. I am one of them. Taking a year off is too long. I want to race next year. alot of people do. Yes times are bad. But this is still grassroots racing, and we need to keep it affordable and competative. To let one class of car dominate a series is ridiculous. The powers to be are listening as they know we have to fix it now, not later. I agree that we should just reel in the dominating cars to keep the class an even playing field. I hope they figure it out soon so I can start a build. CMC should cost about 15-20k to build a car. AI should be about 30-35k to build a car and be competitive. This 80k to 130k is a little bit too much for grassroots racing. reel it in now and establish some rules that will allow a majority of platforms to run and be competitive. To make it a 1 platform field kinda sux and defeats the purpose of all intents to the rules. We need to do address this now before it gets even further out of control. The time is now. 2012 should let the 5th gen camaro platform in cmc and see what happens. You let the new mustang in. Whats the difference. You are letting a superior platform mustang run with no testing or data. Why not the camaro. We already know it is an inferior platform to the ford racing products. How can you say not to let the 5th gen in because it has irs. Really...... What data proves it is a superior platform. It is really looking like politicians have taken over NASA and things are pretty biased. I want to race in a drivers class, not a biased checkbook class. Please fix it. there are a lot of racers on the sidelines waiting to see what happens, me included. I can't afford AI no more and refuse to race a mustang to only prove what we are trying to say without spending 85k for a competitive car. Just my .02

[Glenn]

I think there are a lot of people on the sidelines in AI as well as CMC to see what direction they are going. I am one of them. Taking a year off is too long. I want to race next year. alot of people do. Yes times are bad. But this is still grassroots racing, and we need to keep it affordable and competative. To let one class of car dominate a series is ridiculous. The powers to be are listening as they know we have to fix it now, not later. I agree that we should just reel in the dominating cars to keep the class an even playing field. I hope they figure it out soon so I can start a build. CMC should cost about 15-20k to build a car. AI should be about 30-35k to build a car and be competitive. This 80k to 130k is a little bit too much for grassroots racing. reel it in now and establish some rules that will allow a majority of platforms to run and be competitive. To make it a 1 platform field kinda sux and defeats the purpose of all intents to the rules. We need to do address this now before it gets even further out of control. The time is now. 2012 should let the 5th gen camaro platform in cmc and see what happens. You let the new mustang in. Whats the difference. You are letting a superior platform mustang run with no testing or data. Why not the camaro. We already know it is an inferior platform to the ford racing products. How can you say not to let the 5th gen in because it has irs. Really...... What data proves it is a superior platform. It is really looking like politicians have taken over NASA and things are pretty biased. I want to race in a drivers class, not a biased checkbook class. Please fix it. there are a lot of racers on the sidelines waiting to see what happens, me included. I can't afford AI no more and refuse to race a mustang to only prove what we are trying to say without spending 85k for a competitive car. Just my .02

 

Can I ask you why you can't run an already legal platform in CMC instead of the 5th gen? Are you just dead set on racing a 5th gen and want to find a place for it to fit?

[Tommy551548534728]

Because I want to race on a national level, not just a regional level. I don't think my best bang for buck is building a 4th gen AI or CMC car under the current rule set

[mitchntx1548534714]

Happy Birthday, Tommy.

[Tommy551548534728]

Thanks Mitch. What do you think about all this S197 stuff. PM me

[mitchntx1548534714]

Don't know enough about either platform to comment.

 

I will say this, though ... I'm giving serious thought to selling the CTS-V and buying a new Boss Mustang. That's how seious a weapon I personally think this car is.

 

But your points about how the series has had to abandon its roots in order to accommodate a single platform is valid and disheartening.

 

Its as if NASA at some level wants CMC to be the now defunct Mustang series based out of Barber.

 

While I have no personal knowledge, I think TonyG knew this was coming, fought it and was sumarily dismissed in order to get him out of the way.

 

While Tony was PITA, I think he genuinely wanted the series to stand pat, see where things fell and then move forward. Some one some where wanted to go "all-in". And now the fall out is the guy who marched diligently along during the lean years. Typical corporate mentality. Loyalty and a conscience is non-existent.

 

I will comment on the term "class dilution".

 

In a given race, how many cars do you actually race? I see 4, 5, maybe 6 ... depends on bad I mess up. But we all get after it and race each other and have a blast and then bench race aftrwards. Fun

 

Those who advocate not splitting the series to accommodate different performance platforms are looking to stroke their own ego by bragging to their buddies that they competed against 30 cars.

 

BFD ...

 

Three years ago, CMC had options. A guy could take what he had, apply the rules and go racing.

 

Today, you have to build a purpose built car or spend $40K at a Ford dealership. One you can finance through FMC and the other has to be paid for out of pocket. Some option ...

[FBody383]

CMC should cost about 15-20k to build a car. AI should be about 30-35k to build a car and be competitive.

Using your numbers, my CMC buy-in would have been double and there's a good chance I'd be doing something else.

 

Under my understanding of the CMC philosophy, a car should/could cost $7-$10k and, driver dependent, be at the front of the mid-pack slackers.

 

I want the adjectives "low-cost" to be usable in conjunction with grassroots.

 

I do understand your desire to have car for broader use, but should it be a CMC legal car? When the choices were more limited, 5 litre engines and 5 speeds, it was easy. The platform choices and availability is certainly impacting the class at this point. I don't think that's automatically bad, but it does need to be reivewed and addressed.

 

I just want to race a relatively inexpensive and durable/reliable car in a congenial series with as many cars as possible.

 

To be blunt, it's easier to decide that I trust the guys running the series to keep the platforms near parity and worry about keeping my car on track and pointed in the right way than worry about whether the 197 or 3rd gen/LT1 is the "killer" combo.

 

When does the next green wave?

[cozog1548534733]

Those who advocate not splitting the series to accommodate different performance platforms are looking to stroke their own ego by bragging to their buddies that they competed against 30 cars.

 

Please don't make prejudicial statements about the people who think that splitting the series is a mistake. It's an opinion that many agree with. I am one of them.

 

I do not have any ego to stroke. I would simply rather race with 6-8 cars instead of 3-4 cars.

 

If you have a different view, then voice it. But there's no need to make personal attacks about people who think different than you do.

[mitchntx1548534714]

Those who advocate not splitting the series to accommodate different performance platforms are looking to stroke their own ego by bragging to their buddies that they competed against 30 cars.

 

Please don't make prejudicial statements about the people who think that splitting the series is a mistake. It's an opinion that many agree with. I am one of them.

 

I do not have any ego to stroke. I would simply rather race with 6-8 cars instead of 3-4 cars.

 

If you have a different view, then voice it. But there's no need to make personal attacks about people who think different than you do.

 

If you think that was a personal attack, then you probably here for the wrong reason

 

You are saying that the whole field, regardless of size, you have some sort of racing interaction with during a given race? Really?

 

If I can find two or three in a given race, I'm stoked. If you are passing or being passed by the whole field, then there are other issues.

[Steve91T]

As someone who is looking to get into CMC racing, maybe towards the end of next year, I'm a little nervous with all of the changes right now. I just hope that by the time I'm ready to join you guys, everyone is still getting along having fun.

 

I have one question. Someone said to just ballast up the 5th gen to get the proper power to weight. If a miata has a certain power to weight with 115 hp, and a Camaro has the exact same power to weight with 250 hp (examples here), wouldn't they be equal down the straights?

 

Why does the high hp, heavy car still have an advantage? It's ability to overcome drag?

[Houstonnw]

I don't understand the argument about field sizes.

 

Isn't it true that the more cars in a class the more chance there is of finding someone to race with?

 

Now 30 cars is the exception, but when the fields get below 10 it can become an issue.

 

In Texas we already have three distinct groups:

 

- "trophy girls"

 

- "mid-pack slackers"

 

- the slow guys (we don't really have a catchy name yet)

 

So I would argue that the field size is already divided by three.

[raybob92891548534723]

I agree with Tommy, Me and Cody can build a cheap 5th gen with a LS1 and a 6 speed from a wrecked 4th gen. If its faster than everything else then NASA can Ballast it up to whatever makes it compliant. This Series is called "Camaro Mustange Challenge" and there is S197 Mustangs racing in it. Not letting the chubby 5th Gen in CMC is stupid.

And Mitch I love ya man, but splittin up the class again is also stupid.

 

CMC Rules and AI is dead.....

[mitchntx1548534714]

And Mitch I love ya man, but splittin up the class again is also stupid.

 

Splitting up the class initially was stupid. Now its all damage control and trying to keep what you have.

 

I really don't see a workable alternative. Its ludicrous to even try and create parity between an S197 / 5G Camaro and a 3G / Fox.

 

The reason CMC1 died to begin with was that it was stated over and over that CMC was headed back to a single class based upon CMC numbers.

That is what killed CMC1.

 

I still believe that CMC1 is viable. Lots of cheap candidates and a sound, stable rule set.

 

Let CMC 2 go off into AI land. Oh well ... to quote the affable Adam Ginsberg - "It is what it is."

[Raging Aardvark]

I have one question. Someone said to just ballast up the 5th gen to get the proper power to weight. If a miata has a certain power to weight with 115 hp, and a Camaro has the exact same power to weight with 250 hp (examples here), wouldn't they be equal down the straights?

 

Why does the high hp, heavy car still have an advantage? It's ability to overcome drag?

 

Actually, forgetting drag, even assuming they both have the same acceleration characteristics (which they don't), they would only have the same speed down the straight if they had the same speed out of a turn - and there's a difference in how much speed you can carry through/out of a turn. This will be affected by a whole hose of things, including suspension (and a pile of other things).

 

Anyone want me to get back on the line with Danny Nowlan and see if he'll run some simulations of the different CMC models? (I sure don't have time to model the different cars)

[Glenn]

I don't see creating a new class for new cars to race a "class split". The only car we would lose would be the S-197. There would not be a new place for the current CMC cars to move to.

 

Lets say that we let the 5th gen in...... and after a couple years of trying to slow down the S-197 (if it is needed and is the car that is the reason we would let the 5th gen in) we realize it just cannot be done in a manner where anyone would be willing to build one to come race w/ us. So then what do we do w/ the 5th gen? Boot it out as well? Sounds like a better plan is to create a new class to allow these cars to develop and see where the performance falls w/out doing it in an already closely balanced class. A class where guys have been racing for years to reach ones personal goals. Goals that could be destroyed by the "high and to the right" hip shot from a group of Directors in guessing where the platform could fall performance wise.

 

Lots of our veteran CMC'ers raced for many years to develop the cars they have and prepared for a run at Nat's to only have a 2nd year legal car take 1-2. This generated allot of "WTF" type comments about the S-197. Seems a mistake was made in the cars capability and performance. It wouldn't be smart to follow up that move w/ a similar type move w/ the 5th gen.

 

And I'll say this for the record...

No way in hell will I even consider for one moment allowing/requiring any of the current CMC field to increase the modification level in order to keep pace w/ the performance of a newer car not currently legal in CMC. Been there, done that. I don't think we have seen the break-even point on that one yet.

 

Back on topic..

Best I can tell there is a number of folks who like the CMC approach to racing, but want to run a newer car than what CMC allows. Why can we not just take that and apply this philosophy to a new group of cars? None of us here are in love w/ the name Camaro Mustang Challenge. It's not the name, it's the mindset. It is the limits put in place. It is the racing of talent approach and not the racing wallets approach that draws us to CMC. Can this not carry over to a new class w/ a different name?

[Glenn]

Did I say something wrong?

[FBody383]

Did I say something wrong?

That's a given.

 

And I'll say this for the record...

No way in hell will I even consider for one moment allowing/requiring any of the current CMC field to increase the modification level in order to keep pace w/ the performance of a newer car not currently legal in CMC.

I can agree with that; what do we call the class between 2012 CMC and 2012 AI that the stock 5th gen Camaro, possibly the Mopars and maybe the S197 run in so we can all be on track and BBQ together as one big dysfunctional family?

 

As someone who is looking to get into CMC racing, maybe towards the end of next year, I'm a little nervous with all of the changes right now. I just hope that by the time I'm ready to join you guys, everyone is still getting along having fun.

The advice I took a couple years ago was, even before the car was done, to start hanging out at the track with the group. If you like being around the racers, the bickering will be highly muted.

 

If you absolutely, positively have to run up front then build the "best" platform to the extent of the rules. I think I'm a mid pack slacker and like the old formula.

[roadracerwhite]

Did I say something wrong?

 

Maybe...

 

I am not happy with what Mitch said.

 

I don't like your suggestions.

 

I tried to respond several times and I am not happy with what I started to write either.

 

 

 

More classes is not the right way to go.

Neither is making everyone else adjust.

[Glenn]

Did I say something wrong?

 

Maybe...

 

I am not happy with what Mitch said.

 

I don't like your suggestions.

 

I tried to respond several times and I am not happy with what I started to write either.

 

 

 

More classes is not the right way to go.

Neither is making everyone else adjust.

 

How many folks (current racers) do you think we will give up to a new class that allows only cars not legal in CMC? You can bet your ass I don't have the coin to build a 2005 or newer platform. My bet is not many of anyone else will either. We still see new Fox and 3rd gens all the time. So the class is still growing. Perhaps ST is a place for the new stuff, but that really is an AI type class.

 

I don't like more classes, but I also don't like treating the Fox and 3rd gen guys as expendable. But we would if we keep allowing more and more modern platforms. At some point those older cars will not be Fox Mustang’s and 3rd gen Camaro’s anymore. And yes, I know we are not far from it now.