Where'd the S197 go?

[Sidney]

Hence the reason why the S197 was so over the top compared to older CMC cars.

 

Todd,

 

You need to go back and review the results from the Midwest & Great Lakes when Anders was running his S197. Kent, Bob, and others all had their day beating him. For Christ sakes I even beat him at Putnum with an underprepped 3rd gen. Anders was a fast driver in a brand new build but he did not run away with every race.

 

Sidney

[BADVENM]

I purchased a used 09 S197 three years ago with the purpose of driving it for a few years and then converting it to my next CMC car. I was extremely frustrated when the rules were changed to super skinny tires, then back to normal tires but super heavy with low HP. I didn't think these drastic measures needed to happen.......until I drove my street car on track.

 

I have a 99% stock S197 (has flowmasters!!) and with a worn out set of bald RA1's ran 4 seconds off the CMC lap record at our local track in Fort Worth, TX. Lap record was a low 1:24 and I ran consistent 1:28's. This was at 3700 lbs, stock shocks, stock alignment, stock brakes / fluid, etc.

The platform clearly is the weapon to have, unless major changes were made to the rules.

 

I now have no clue what the future is for my car. I'll continue to race my Fox in CMC and see how SI grows.

 

Whats the base horsepower and torque? I'm guessing more then your CMC car thus faster lap times? Or was the hp per pound about the same as your CMC car?

[suck fumes1548534743]

Base power avg is 270ish HP and 290ish tq bone stock.

[CMC#11]

I purchased a used 09 S197 three years ago with the purpose of driving it for a few years and then converting it to my next CMC car. I was extremely frustrated when the rules were changed to super skinny tires, then back to normal tires but super heavy with low HP. I didn't think these drastic measures needed to happen.......until I drove my street car on track.

 

I have a 99% stock S197 (has flowmasters!!) and with a worn out set of bald RA1's ran 4 seconds off the CMC lap record at our local track in Fort Worth, TX. Lap record was a low 1:24 and I ran consistent 1:28's. This was at 3700 lbs, stock shocks, stock alignment, stock brakes / fluid, etc.

The platform clearly is the weapon to have, unless major changes were made to the rules.

 

I now have no clue what the future is for my car. I'll continue to race my Fox in CMC and see how SI grows.

 

Whats the base horsepower and torque? I'm guessing more then your CMC car thus faster lap times? Or was the hp per pound about the same as your CMC car?

I have never dyno'd it but almost all stock S197's I have heard make around 265 hp.

[Den341548534727]

OK I will take the bait and be the contrarian but this is the way I see it.

Boil it down to a 2010 Camaro and a 84 Camaro, These cars are miles apart Horsepower,IRS, engine technology, Suspension technology and 18 pound wheels ......the same goes for the Fox and the S197... CMC came to a cross roads about two years ago and the choices where bring the old cars up to higher competitive levels or bring the few new cars down to current levels...The choice was made to handicap the newer cars and it really did not work out. So now we have chosen to eliminate the newer cars and I am just fine with that.

 

CMC no longer has to worry about getting new cars to "Fit" and the old cars no longer have to worry about upgrades to keep up with the newer cars that would keep coming into the class. CMC now has its boundaries 1978-2004 Mustangs and 1982-2002 F bodies. There are lots of classes that have boundaries. Spec miata, Spec E30, Spec 944.

I realise that CMC is not a Spec class but it may evolve in that direction. With multiple models it will never be a true spec class and that is what makes CMC so great. From here on out I think the rules will become much more stable. Stable rules will make for a healthy class. With boundaries we will be much easier to tweak the rules for healthy and even competition between the platforms. With the new rules additions it will allow the competitor some sensible and lower cost solutions to getting a competitive car on the track. Keeping the costs down and the cars reliable is the key. Continue to do that I think CMC will be just fine.

[aschroeder]

OK I will take the bait and be the contrarian but this is the way I see it.

Boil it down to a 2010 Camaro and a 84 Camaro, These cars are miles apart Horsepower,IRS, engine technology, Suspension technology and 18 pound wheels ......the same goes for the Fox and the S197... CMC came to a cross roads about two years ago and the choices where bring the old cars up to higher competitive levels or bring the few new cars down to current levels...The choice was made to handicap the newer cars and it really did not work out. So now we have chosen to eliminate the newer cars and I am just fine with that.

 

CMC no longer has to worry about getting new cars to "Fit" and the old cars no longer have to worry about upgrades to keep up with the newer cars that would keep coming into the class. CMC now has its boundaries 1978-2004 Mustangs and 1982-2002 F bodies. There are lots of classes that have boundaries. Spec miata, Spec E30, Spec 944.

I realise that CMC is not a Spec class but it may evolve in that direction. With multiple models it will never be a true spec class and that is what makes CMC so great. From here on out I think the rules will become much more stable. Stable rules will make for a healthy class. With boundaries we will be much easier to tweak the rules for healthy and even competition between the platforms. With the new rules additions it will allow the competitor some sensible and lower cost solutions to getting a competitive car on the track. Keeping the costs down and the cars reliable is the key. Continue to do that I think CMC will be just fine.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself. We had 23 Spec E30s at our NorCal season finale in Sonoma, those guys don't seem to care that the last eligible model year is nearly 20 years old now not to mention availability of a BMW versus a Mustang or Camaro. I think because we are not a spec series, rules stability is that much more important. How can we ensure close racing unless our sample size for analyzing platform parity is big enough to even mean something?

[Glenn]

Knowing the history of the class first hand from 2005 till now, I can say the rules have been very stable. The only major changes were a result of NASA HQ requiring the addition of the LS1 (resulted in a HP/TQ increase) and the S197(resulted in 13" brakes and 17" wheels). Other than that, its been a pretty stable class. Add in the Toyo yoyo w/ the changes fro RA1 to R888 back to RA1 and now RR and it can seem more unstable than it really has been.

 

The last couple years have included alot of "durrability" allowances.

 

 

New cars - there is just too much of a technology gap w/ the new Mustang (2005+) and Camaro (2005+). And the changes are coming faster and faster. I would like to see a CMC like class w/ those cars, but w/ the V6 cars instead. Big HP just equals big budgets.

But I don't want to see just Camaro's and Mustang's. Allow Dodge, Caddy, and Pontiac in the game as well.

[Dustin M.]

Those classes already exist as PTx.

[Steve91T]

I really don't get why spec e30 is so popular. I've ridden in a lot of those cars. They don't make the right noises, no power, and tons of understeer. And they are getting hard to find in decent shape. I guess they got a big car count from the start and that keeps attracting people.

[cozog1548534733]

I really don't get why spec e30 is so popular. I've ridden in a lot of those cars. They don't make the right noises, no power, and tons of understeer. And they are getting hard to find in decent shape. I guess they got a big car count from the start and that keeps attracting people.

 

Same reason we all run CMC... "cheap" racing. SE30 is the cheapest German car racing available. GTS1 cars can spend the same $$$ on upgrades that GTS5 cars can, except power. So why run a GTS1 car that costs more and usually has a much smaller field. Besides, as a spec series, getting help at the track and finding the parts needed to race becomes much easier.

[Steve91T]

I really don't get why spec e30 is so popular. I've ridden in a lot of those cars. They don't make the right noises, no power, and tons of understeer. And they are getting hard to find in decent shape. I guess they got a big car count from the start and that keeps attracting people.

 

Same reason we all run CMC... "cheap" racing. SE30 is the cheapest German car racing available. GTS1 cars can spend the same $$$ on upgrades that GTS5 cars can, except power. So why run a GTS1 car that costs more and usually has a much smaller field. Besides, as a spec series, getting help at the track and finding the parts needed to race becomes much easier.

 

Just curious, do you know how the cost if Spec e30 compares to CMC?

[cozog1548534733]

Just curious, do you know how the cost if Spec e30 compares to CMC?

 

It's pretty close. Building from scratch is $10k-$15k, buying an existing car is $7k-$12k.

http://spece30.com/classifieds/7-race-prepared-cars

[suck fumes1548534743]

Those prices are for mid pack/back marker cars

[Steve91T]

I thought I remember looking into it and CMC was the cheapest racing period. I'm side the E30 guys have cheaper expenses, but that's it. I'm surprised people would rather spend more money racing an old E30 over a V8

[Dustin M.]

I thought I remember looking into it and CMC was the cheapest racing period.

 

That's what I found too when I compared Spec Miata, Spec 944, and CMC (RM's 3 biggest fields).

 

I'm side the E30 guys have cheaper expenses, but that's it. I'm surprised people would rather spend more money racing an old E30 over a V8

 

Some people's kids man.