[Jon Bogert]

I've been giving a lot of thought lately to the huge disparity in cars and technology that has been trickling down into ClubRally. Lately, the SCCA has tried to slow down the cars with restrictors, minimum weights, etc. These are restrictions that make perfect sense in a ProRally world dominated by manufacturers and well-supported teams, but do nothing to level the playing field in ClubRally.

Has anyone considered the idea of implementing a cost cap--enforced by claiming rights? It seems to me that this is the most certain way of making sure that someone can't just buy a win by showing up with a vastly superior car.

It would reward true "clubman" ingenuity and innovation, and effectively prohibit someone coming in with an ex-Group A (or newer Group N) car and mopping up. No complicated rules would be required, just stipulate that by entering a ClubRally, you agree to sell your car for a fixed price of, say $20-30,000 (in Open, maybe less for G2 or PGT) to any other competitor at the conclusion of the event.

What do you think?

 

[jay streets]

you agree to sell your car for a fixed price of, say $20-30,000 (in Open, maybe less for G2 or PGT) to any other competitor at the conclusion of the event.


Sign me up! I want to sell. I have never paid half that much for a car.

 

[Jon Bogert]

Hey, we could set the limits wherever you want!

The cool thing about a claimer series is that you don't really need many other rules. Let's say you had a $5000 Golf or RX-7 series. That would limit engine and transmission mods pretty effectively, once you pay for a shell, cage and suspension. Who needs a big thick rulebook when you can say, "Run whatever you like, but if your competitors think your car's faster, they can buy it out from under you!"

 

[Steve Nielsen]

I have raced series with claiming rules.
There are many problems with claims.
A couple examples:
I claim your pgt car after Ojibwe. You then have no car. I go to
LSPR and win the Pgt championship for the year.
The other reason that it doesnt work is that if you claim my car
I will have at least 20 other competitors who are my friends also
filing a claim on my car.
Then after the event i just buy it back from my buddy for the claim
price.
Back when the AMA was doing claims racing it was standard to blow up
your superbike engine after you crossed the finish line. At least if you lost
the claim, they didnt get your engine.

 

[adam]

I agree there should be something done to keep cost down and fun up, but claiming the whole car will not work. I have helped construct a car for the past year and we don't have much money, but a ton of time into the car and do very well. Claimer rules work great in stock car where the engines are all the same and all you claim is the engines. I have seen low budget cars whoop up on men of money. If you know Nate and the Saab, you can figure this out.

 

[Bruce]

SCCA Road Racing's Showroom Stock class was originally a claiming class (may still be, for all I know.) I heard that nobody ever claimed another car.

BW

 

[Mad Mike]

I haven't seen many instances of that kind of plan working. In the early days of Showroom Stock road racing there was a claimer rule (something like Blue Book plus $700 or some such) but about the only story I remember about a claimed car involved an SSB Alfa Spyder. It was claimed at the last divisional race before the RunOffs because the guy who had gotten outrun couldn't accept he was getting beat by a better driver. The guy who lost his car went to a used car lot, bought a Spyder, bolted the safety equipment in, went to Road America and promptly outran his old car!

Halley ...
http://www.realautosport.com

 

[Widget Codriver]

Difficulties

>SCCA Road Racing's Showroom Stock class was originally a
>claiming class (may still be, for all I know.) I heard that
>nobody ever claimed another car.

I heard of someone trying to use Showroom Stock's claiming rule years ago at Riverside Raceway. The owner of the car didn't agree. When someone tried to enforce the rule, he called law enforcement. He kept his car.

SCCA rules do NOT take precedence over California's Vehicle Code, so apparently no one can force you to sell your car. Moral: claiming rules work only if everyone absolutely agrees to it, even when actually called on.

Maybe claiming rules are easier to apply if you're dealing with unregistered things.

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[Jon Bogert]

I see this as a two part solution:

On the high end, in Open class, you set the dollar amount so high that most competitors (like Jay said) would be thrilled to sell the car for that much money. It's just an insurance policy for the integrity of the series against someone who comes in with a fresh off the boat monster car.

It could also be the foundation for a very low end spec class, where competitors run inexpensive beaters, and everyone knows it's a run-for-fun class. You don't dare spend 1500 hours scraping the shell to save 30 pounds--and that's part of the appeal.

I agree that it wouldn't work in the middle, where competitors have their heart and soul wrapped up in their car and would never want to risk having it claimed for less than they've put into it.

 

[wvonkessler]

Doesn't the California Rally Series have a low cost class?

A spec series with something like an A2 Golf would probably be a better idea . . . 2.0 liter block ($350.00), 8V head ($100.00), stock tranny with LSD ($600.00 - $800.00) * 4.25 R&P ($325.00), Bilstein Group A suspension ($1100.00 including springs & hardware), spec safety equipment. The car could still be competitive in Group 2 with this set-up, and probably can be built for $5K.

Just my .02

Wilson

 

[Jonesi]

RE: Difficulties

>>SCCA Road Racing's Showroom Stock class was originally a
>>claiming class (may still be, for all I know.) I heard that
>>nobody ever claimed another car.
>
>I heard of someone trying to use Showroom Stock's claiming
>rule years ago at Riverside Raceway. The owner of the car
>didn't agree. When someone tried to enforce the rule, he
>called law enforcement. He kept his car.
>
>SCCA rules do NOT take precedence over California's Vehicle
>Code, so apparently no one can force you to sell your car.
>Moral: claiming rules work only if everyone absolutely
>agrees to it, even when actually called on.
>
>Maybe claiming rules are easier to apply if you're dealing
>with unregistered things.
>
>[hr]
>
>[p align=right]John Dillon
>John @ WidgetRacing.com
>www.WidgetRacing.com

There was a "Gentleman's Agreement" not to use the claimimg rule, which held for several years, but once it was broken, all hell broke loose! The first one was a Porsche 924S that was claimed at the last race before the runoffs, torn apart to find out what was illegal, put back together, won at Road Atlanta, and was disqualified for a mod he hadn't found. Only to have Porsche come in and say that neither driver knew that the car had once had a sunroof, they had sealed it over for the showcar circuit, and the win was reinstated.
I believe the story you are refering to was at Sears Point around '81-82. The racer called in the Sheriff's office, and said they were forcing him to sell HIS WIFE'S car! The stewart's said he didn't have to sell the car, however since he had agreed to, in order to compete in Showroom Stock class, he was disqualified from his win, and his compitition license was suspended for a year. It only got worse the next year, since the hot car in SSB the Mazda RX3XP was in the last year of eligibility (5 years) and Mazda only sold 200 of them in '78.
The claiming rule went away shortly after this.

Anyone who thinks that either age restrictions or a claiming rule are good ideas should be required to sit down with a stack of SportsCar mags ('80-83) and read all the crap that went down.

Bill

 

[dan ph]

>Doesn't the California Rally Series have a low cost class?
>
>A spec series with something like an A2 Golf would probably
>be a better idea . . . 2.0 liter block ($350.00), 8V head
>($100.00), stock tranny with LSD ($600.00 - $800.00) * 4.25
>R&P ($325.00), Bilstein Group A suspension ($1100.00
>including springs & hardware), spec safety equipment. The
>car could still be competitive in Group 2 with this set-up,
>and probably can be built for $5K.
>
>Just my .02
>
>Wilson


The National Auto Sport Association as a spec A1 cup. Is is/was sponcered by Neuspeed. Nearly identical what you mentioned.They also have a claim rule, but is only on the motor, and I think it was like 500 bucks.

I personally would like classes that would allow smaller displacement cars be competetive. Or something between Production and Open. But I don't anything about setting up classes so that's all I'll say about that.

 

[randyzimmer]

one make series

I'd suggest getting a friendly manufacturer to back a one-make series for rally.
I ran in Rabbit-Bilstein which wasn't immune to big bucks winning (Gary Benson out-spent everone by 2x and won a few championships) but it wasn't impossible to beat him.
Dirt makes a big difference and dollars don't make as much of an impression in the woods as on pavement.
VW used to help with parts, updates at season end, make cars without VINs available for pennies, Bilstein made their shocks warrantable for the life of the series with free rebuilds.
Both supplied a meger purse, PR and rules enforcement help by paying SCCA to have a series steward and tech guy.
When all the cars are the same - the manufacturer can't lose.
If the cars all have open diffs, low HP or other problems they all suck the same.
The budget should include parts compliance checking.
I know someone I could ask, chances are you know someone too.
rz

 

[wvonkessler]

RE: one make series

>I'd suggest getting a friendly manufacturer to back a
>one-make series for rally.

Ford Focus? Better yet, VW Polo (personal bias) (VWRacing makes these available fully prepped for under $20K). But now we are getting away from the beater/grassroots start of this thread.

Ah, I've got it, the Festiva/Aspire spec class. Monroe shocks from Autozone, etc. If you break it, its real easy to replace (parts or car).

I like the idea of different classes for different small engine displacement. Canada does it, why can't we?

 

[Adrian Wintle]

RE: small displacement class

>I like the idea of different classes for different small
>engine displacement. Canada does it, why can't we?

If US rallying were to consider a small displacement class, I'd suggest looking at the old rules for Canadian Production 1750 (use the same multipliers as Production, but with a 1750cc maximum - or pick your number depending on which cars you want in the class). The current P1/P2/P3/P4 setup gives two classes for small displacement cars, neither of which gets many entries.

Adrian

 

[mgpsmith]

Oh Boy!

The MG is for sale, $30,000 cash firm, after LSPR......

 

[daphne]

Don't laugh...

I'm sure most of us would be happy if someone offered $30K for our cars!

 

[Team_Harco]

>The guy who lost his car went to a used car
>lot, bought a Spyder, bolted the safety equipment in, went
>to Road America and promptly outran his old car!
>

I love a happy ending
Was this the folowing season, or did you mean Road Atlanta? Road America would be a great venue for the Runoffs - but I don't think it has ever happend.

Scott
www.teamharco.com
Team Harco Motorsports
"Win on Sunday, Sleep on Monday"

 

[Foghorn]

Scott,

You'll probably have to ask Mad Mike over a beer at the Library. I would guess he's on the road to Houghton by now.

How many different sets of tires did you say we're taking?

Kent Gardam

 

[Jerry Brownell]

RE: Don't laugh...

You could have my 2 rally cars, my parts car, all of my spares, my daily driver, and my beater pickup for less than that!