SCCA CAM-C Thread

[SteveW]

@TeeLew been seeing your posts about STU and CAMC and just to be sure...you do know that STU is faster than CAMC, right?

What I mean by that is the top dogs in STU are way faster than CAMC cars and the PAX factor reflects that despite the way more restrictive prep level in STU. Put another way: CAMC PAX is easier at .818 vs STU .828. In your same car you'd have to run .725 sec faster as an STU entrant vs CAMC on the same 60 sec course when considering PAX.

Anyway you look at it the 'best' class to run a modded Mustang on street tires is CAM.

Sponsored

 

[TeeLew]

I completely get that this is reality, but, of the two, CAM *should* be faster if you take the exact same car and build to the specifications which are available for each class. CAM is much, much more open. The openness of the rules has made me hesitant to go in that direction, but, apparently, no one builds the cars to the rules enough that it's an issue?

Let's take my car as an example. If I were to run 305's instead of 285's, add 100 HP, drop 200# weight, fit a monoball suspension and do some other CAM specific tweaks, you'd suspect it gets around a course faster than my car without these mods, no?

 

[strengthrehab]

I completely get that this is reality, but, of the two, CAM *should* be faster if you take the exact same car and build to the specifications which are available for each class. CAM is much, much more open. The openness of the rules has made me hesitant to go in that direction, but, apparently, no one builds the cars to the rules enough that it's an issue?

Let's take my car as an example. If I were to run 305's instead of 285's, add 100 HP, drop 200# weight, fit a monoball suspension and do some other CAM specific tweaks, you'd suspect it gets around a course faster than my car without these mods, no?

I would think so...

I would also think STU has cars in it that are faster than the best prepared STU Mustang, though. That is how I read the post above. Not that a CAM prepped Mustang would be slower than a STU prepped Mustang.

I could be wrong, though. I'm just a track guy switching to autocross without firm knowledge in other classes other than CAM

 

[kz]

I completely get that this is reality, but, of the two, CAM *should* be faster if you take the exact same car and build to the specifications which are available for each class. CAM is much, much more open. The openness of the rules has made me hesitant to go in that direction, but, apparently, no one builds the cars to the rules enough that it's an issue?

Let's take my car as an example. If I were to run 305's instead of 285's, add 100 HP, drop 200# weight, fit a monoball suspension and do some other CAM specific tweaks, you'd suspect it gets around a course faster than my car without these mods, no?

That would be true if Mustang was the car for STU - but it is not even remotely close to be one (IMO). Logically CAM-C should have much tougher pax given the allowances but the way it's going, it'll end up with softer pax with CAM-T. I'd let you figure out why ;-)

 

[TeeLew]

That would be true if Mustang was the car for STU - but it is not even remotely close to be one (IMO). Logically CAM-C should have much tougher pax given the allowances but the way it's going, it'll end up with softer pax with CAM-T. I'd let you figure out why ;-)

To this point, there has been no Mustang which has made much of an impact on STU, there's little argument on this point. This reality begs the question as to why? How many have really built to the rules? Is an Eco Mustang completely uncompetitive in this class or is it simply a case of no competitive efforts have been made with which to make an accurate assessment? I honestly don't know.

Street is pretty limited. A 'normal' guy that wants a better handling car might get F&R anti roll bars and now that's an 'STU' car, but no one would consider it a fair representation of what a car prepped to STU rules could be. It's entirely unprepared for the class. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this were a common story. It's either this or the Mustang has absolutely no business in the class. I've scrounged around quite a bit and have yet to come across anyone describing a Mustang in STU for which a real effort was made. I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm saying I haven't read about one.

I have no interest in turning my car into something that pushes the CAM rules. I want to build a car to STU rules because it's liveable on a daily basis and not exorbitantly expensive. It just so happens that CAM is the class I'll run, because that's where the competition is.

So, the conversations I've had concerning classes has been to try to understand what has already been done and the relative success of others. I'm trying to understand the lay of the land before strolling into a damn near unlimited class with a relatively mild street car. Does that make sense?

 

[Brian@BMVK]

There are probably 5-8 CAMC cars in the country that both 1) push to the rules limits and 2) have drivers good enough to use it all. Almost all the rest of us have the typical prep: bolt on power, coilovers, bearings and 11"+ wide wheels.

 

[Dana Pants]

To this point, there has been no Mustang which has made much of an impact on STU, there's little argument on this point. This reality begs the question as to why? How many have really built to the rules? Is an Eco Mustang completely uncompetitive in this class or is it simply a case of no competitive efforts have been made with which to make an accurate assessment? I honestly don't know.

Street is pretty limited. A 'normal' guy that wants a better handling car might get F&R anti roll bars and now that's an 'STU' car, but no one would consider it a fair representation of what a car prepped to STU rules could be. It's entirely unprepared for the class. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this were a common story. It's either this or the Mustang has absolutely no business in the class. I've scrounged around quite a bit and have yet to come across anyone describing a Mustang in STU for which a real effort was made. I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm saying I haven't read about one.

I have no interest in turning my car into something that pushes the CAM rules. I want to build a car to STU rules because it's liveable on a daily basis and not exorbitantly expensive. It just so happens that CAM is the class I'll run, because that's where the competition is.

So, the conversations I've had concerning classes has been to try to understand what has already been done and the relative success of others. I'm trying to understand the lay of the land before strolling into a damn near unlimited class with a relatively mild street car. Does that make sense?

you are overthinking the SCCA classing structure. Pretty much every class has 1 to 3 competitive cars and everything else is buried. The Mustang is buried in STU and that’s more or less the end of the story.

all of 2019 solo nationals was dry. Look at cams (133.2) vs STU (129.9) and form an opinion.

The other option is to bail on the idea of a build at all and compete in DS. The EcoBoost Mustang is also buried there under the civic type R and a few other more capable cars.

 

[TeeLew]

Is it over-thinking to assume, without knowing otherwise, that a car could compete in the class its placed? If so, guilty as charged.

Looking at the 2019 STU Nats, I see 1 car clear of everyone else by about 1.7 sec and then the next 5 fairly close together. 5 different cars (awd & rwd) in the top 10 and 7 in the top 15. It's a pretty scattered grouping and driving ability must be fairly varied.

In CAM-C, the field is much tighter, but the top 3 are different cars. The field itself is almost all Camaro & Mustang, but some of the cars are 20 years old, so there's definitely variety even if the IRS cars tend to dominate. These cars are slower than the rules would suggest. I'm trying to understand where the loss is. It appears that something pretty fundamental (maybe a larger track & wheelbase?) make our cars slower autocrossing.

I'm not leaving the car in Street class trim. That ship has already sailed. I'll run CAM, do what I can & accept the realities of the class. I'll have fun regardless, and that's pretty much the goal.

 

[Dana Pants]

Track width, overall mass, and polar moment of inertia are pretty big limitations for the Mustang in STU and DS.

 

[TeeLew]

Track width, overall mass, and polar moment of inertia are pretty big limitations for the Mustang in STU and DS.

CAM shows the same thing as well, huh? It's not for lack of tire or HP. I don't know that I'd blame overall weigh, as M3's and 370Z's can both be a bit porky, but wheelbase, track & polar moment must be a factor.​

 

[Brian@BMVK]

CAM shows the same thing as well, huh? It's not for lack of tire or HP. I don't know that I'd blame overall weigh, as M3's and 370Z's can both be a bit porky, but wheelbase, track & polar moment must be a factor.​

And better suspension setups out of the box before you even get to coilovers.

 

[NightmareMoon]

I'm not leaving the car in Street class trim. That ship has already sailed. I'll run CAM, do what I can & accept the realities of the class. I'll have fun regardless, and that's pretty much the goal.

Excellent. We’ll start forwarding you the CAM memes, you’ve got some catching up to do there.

I think you’ll like the RE71Rs, they’re great tires. I’m glad they’ve finally got some competition this year, which is probably the cue for Bridgestone to replace them with a new/better model next year (speculation)

 

[TicTocTach]

...I'm not leaving the car in Street class trim. That ship has already sailed. I'll run CAM, do what I can & accept the realities of the class. I'll have fun regardless, and that's pretty much the goal.

I came to this same conclusion in the last month. I was telling myself that I would stick to a stock class with some dedicated tires and not mess up my daily driver, but I really want to have more fun with my car than Stock will allow. I'm going to be at the bottom of whatever pack I land in, so I may as well enjoy the car for the 98% of the time it isn't anywhere near a track. Wheel spacers and camber plates arrived this week...

 

[kz]

Again - jpaulson with mild mods (described in this thread few good pages earlier) placed second in Nats last year (quote "I didn't even take the rear seat out") . No reason to think you'd have to be at the bottom of the pack and you will have more fun (and with some mroe camber and square wheel setup - it actually can be even somewhat cost effective)

 

[TeeLew]

Excellent. We’ll start forwarding you the CAM memes, you’ve got some catching up to do there.

I think you’ll like the RE71Rs, they’re great tires. I’m glad they’ve finally got some competition this year, which is probably the cue for Bridgestone to replace them with a new/better model next year (speculation)

By all means, I'm sure every CAM meme will apply eventually (give it 6 months). It's probably just a matter of time. If I were Bridgestone and had been sitting on a winner for a couple years, I'd have it's successor ready to go. I bet they do, too.

Sponsored