Too ugly? Too new?

[Ronh911]

So, September 15 of 2021 I submitted a VPI request on several vehicles I was considering building to replace my current cars that some Champcar members deem too ugly to race in this series; 15 months later I get a response!   All the cars on my list meet the 15 year rule, yet all were denied, and no reason was given why.  I was not expecting a VPI under 500 for any of them but I was at least expecting a reasonable, thought out, evaluation.   We have cars in this series with more than 240HP and 17-gallon fuel tanks with VPIs.  I'm at a loss with Champcar's direction.  If our 35+ year old cars are too ugly now, how do we move forward and replace these vehicles if we first off have to wait 15 months for a VPI request and then when we do get a response we are told "no VPI will be given"?   

 

 

 

Edited December 29, 2022 by Ronh911

[MichaelPal]

Ok, I’ll bite. To add some context: yes, this is too far compared to the stock silhouette. You pushed the boundaries and you created a new rule. Congratulations! Only a mother would not find this ugly. I would love to know the power to weight ratio you run in that car with that 3.0L motor and those adjustable dampers. 
 

As for the lack of approval, my ASSumption is that your proposed cars are faster than what champ wants given the current 2.5L boxter is super competitive. 

What’s wrong with the 2.5L, what is the reason to not build that? 
 

As for the delayed reply, that’s unacceptable x10.  But everyone is a volunteer. How can we as a community help Champcar perform this task quicker? 

[the5]

I am writing a petition to remove the 15 year rule, membership never had a chance to vote on that rule anyways and there are already models way less than 15 years old.

 

I would love to build a cayman, Nbut expect it to be 550 plus points

Edited December 30, 2022 by the5

[turbogrill]

14 hours ago, MichaelPal said:

Ok, I’ll bite. To add some context: yes, this is too far compared to the stock silhouette. You pushed the boundaries and you created a new rule. Congratulations! Only a mother would not find this ugly. I would love to know the power to weight ratio you run in that car with that 3.0L motor and those adjustable dampers. 
 

 

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I could not tell that is a 944

Is it too much work to add back some sheet metal to kinda make it look like a car? You would ofcourse  claim OEM replacement body panel
 

Edited December 30, 2022 by turbogrill

[JDChristianson]

14 hours ago, MichaelPal said:

Ok, I’ll bite. To add some context: yes, this is too far compared to the stock silhouette. You pushed the boundaries and you created a new rule. Congratulations! Only a mother would not find this ugly. I would love to know the power to weight ratio you run in that car with that 3.0L motor and those adjustable dampers. 
 

As for the lack of approval, my ASSumption is that your proposed cars are faster than what champ wants given the current 2.5L boxter is super competitive. 

What’s wrong with the 2.5L, what is the reason to not build that? 
 

As for the delayed reply, that’s unacceptable x10.  But everyone is a volunteer. How can we as a community help Champcar perform this task quicker? 

Yes. You are 100% correct here.   And then too Propose that the high performance version of a boxster gets put on the list.  not what the series needs.    
 

The response should have taken 16 minutes not 15 months.  The response should have been “not only no but hell no”

[mostmint]

17 hours ago, Ronh911 said:

 If our 35+ year old cars are too ugly now, how do we move forward and replace these vehicles ?   

 

 

Right now 2019 Miata, 2018 Focus, 2019 Cadillac ATS, and many others less than 10 years old are in VPI.

[JDChristianson]

14 minutes ago, mostmint said:

 

Right now 2019 Miata, 2018 Focus, 2019 Cadillac ATS, and many others less than 10 years old are in VPI.

Right it makes no sense those new cars shouldn’t be on there as far as I’m concerned 

[MMiskoe]

In speculation mode here - was it denied because even though it might be over 500 points, CC just doesn't want cars with that kind of potential on the track?  I don't miss sharing the track with cars doing 50mph closing speeds on me.  So far CC has managed to keep the cars with similar speeds.  Doesn't matter if the fast car is running E class, they are still too much faster than the others.

 

Out of curiosity, what cars fit the >240hp bill? 

 

And there are lots of things that get said about good looks, ugly ducklings and surface appeals.  It is all subjective.

[Voodoo Child]

These are over 240 hp (and too pretty), but unfortunately the West Coast participants are fickle and let Champcar down.  Go figure, they race where they pay higher entry fees just so they can get free tequila and tacos.

 

Hope everyone has a happy New Year. We hope to travel to at least one Champcar race this year!

 

PS: And yes, even as a past board member, I always voted against cut up "duct tape specials". The board has always been mindful (and tried to limit) of speed creep when evaluating new vehicles.  If I can find 50 year old cars and make them pretty (and competitive), I would think it would be possible for others.  I have a 1999 Boxster in my garage with 21,000 original miles if you need it (no hole saws or Sawzall work please).

[turbogrill]

You can still race those higher boxsters in EC?

[CoachMK21]

5 hours ago, turbogrill said:

You can still race those higher boxsters in EC?

 

Yes. Remember we did at Hallett this year.

[Rodger Coan-Burningham]

10 hours ago, JDChristianson said:

Right it makes no sense those new cars shouldn’t be on there as far as I’m concerned 

You are correct Jeff, I am not sure why the previous ceo decided to put some of those on the list but he must have had some vision of where he wanted to take the series by doing so. We decided not to remove the ones less than 15 and just not allow any more.

[mender]

1 hour ago, Rodger Coan-Burningham said:

You are correct Jeff, I am not sure why the previous ceo decided to put some of those on the list but he must have had some vision of where he wanted to take the series by doing so. We decided not to remove the ones less than 15 and just not allow any more.

Is anyone racing or building those cars?

[mender]

15 hours ago, turbogrill said:

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I could not tell that is a 944

Is it too much work to add back some sheet metal to kinda make it look like a car? You would ofcourse  claim OEM replacement body panel
 

Much easier than building another car...

[Rodger Coan-Burningham]

48 minutes ago, mender said:

Is anyone racing or building those cars?

We have no way of knowing what is being built which is one of the main reasons we grandfathered those in. 

[Racer28173]

On 12/29/2022 at 7:12 PM, MichaelPal said:

As for the delayed reply, that’s unacceptable x10.  But everyone is a volunteer. How can we as a community help Champcar perform this task quicker? 

I am always the guy that says "Don't forget that these people have day jobs and lives outside of Champ", but I have to agree that waiting more than a year for a reply to a "high priority" question is really bad.  What is the response time for a "medium" or "low"?  I would have expected "high" to be one week, "medium" to be two weeks, and "low" to be a month or so.  The answer to Ron's request seems like an easy one (more than 90% of us would have said "no" in about 3 seconds).  If there is something that makes a question more difficult, I hope that in the future the Tech Desk will provide an interim reply that says something along the lines of "The issue you have raised is a complex one.  It has been debated by the TAC and will be reviewed with management and/or the BOD.  Please bear with us while we work towards the best possible solution"

[hotrod]

2008 is the cut off year for a car being 15 years old. There are many cars on the VPI list that are newer than 15 years.

[petawawarace]

1 hour ago, hotrod said:

2008 is the cut off year for a car being 15 years old. There are many cars on the VPI list that are newer than 15 years.

When the 15 year rule was announced, they said that existing cars newer than 15 years old that were already on the list would be allowed to stay.  
It was meant to stop new cars from being added.  

[hotrod]

4 minutes ago, petawawarace said:

When the 15 year rule was announced, they said that existing cars newer than 15 years old that were already on the list would be allowed to stay.  
It was meant to stop new cars from being added.  

Do you recall when the 15 year limit was instituted? 

 

[petawawarace]

Just now, hotrod said:

Do you recall when the 15 year limit was instituted? 

 

Roughly 2/3 years ago. 

[petawawarace]

2 minutes ago, hotrod said:

Do you recall when the 15 year limit was instituted? 

 

 

[hotrod]

Thanks

[mender]

18 hours ago, Rodger Coan-Burningham said:

We have no way of knowing what is being built which is one of the main reasons we grandfathered those in. 

It would make sense to me to take them off the list now and "grandfather" ones that actually show up later rather than leaving them on.

[petawawarace]

1 hour ago, mender said:

It would make sense to me to take them off the list now and "grandfather" ones that actually show up later rather than leaving them on.

Then you could end up with one team being allowed to race a certain car and no one else able to? 

[mender]

1 hour ago, petawawarace said:

Then you could end up with one team being allowed to race a certain car and no one else able to? 

Deal with it when/if it happens.

 

The sooner they're taken off the list, the less likely that situation will arise. Proactive, not reactive.