“SCCA doesn’t need Mazda and Mazda doesn’t need SCCA"

[crackler]

I know this is a Nissan website, but I thought that any of the SCCA?NASA guys living under a rock might be interested in this. . .

http://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.ph ... /2....aspx

[Slappy]

"This is frickin' great. SCCA desperately needs somebody to bitchslap them into reality, and it looks like Mazda's doing it, bigtime."

But whats this talk about a "trunk kit"???

[crackler]

It has to do with dealer installed factory options. There was a big blow up over the MSR miata and the ZOK(I think) Solstice. I don't know all the details, but it involved several miatas getting dis-allowed after being allowed, and the solstice which supposedly is even more illigeal than the mazda was left legal.

Here are some threads that deal with it from the solo side mainly, the Club racing fiasco was a slightly diffrent set of events and out come.

http://mokanmotorsports.com/fo...+kits

http://mokanmotorsports.com/fo...+kits

Tim Buck and Jim Dainiels exsplain it better in the spec miata thread in the first post.

[Slappy]

Thats crazy , since Mazda is pretty much the soul and back bone of the SCCA.

"Some of you may have recieved a survey from Mazdaspeed Motorsports asking you about your involvement in Club Racing and Solo II and whether or not you would entertain running with another sanctioning body - NASA"

Jesus dude!
Modified by Slappy at 3:18 AM 11/21/2007

[nismoautoxr]

Well I wont even get into the SCCA requiring membership to go to a friggin autox or rallyx, I think that the person that said that should seriously consider laying off the booze .Thankfully the person who motioned for the membership is out .I hope that the REs of the respective SCCA regions can attend their divisional conventions and voice their disaproval to this broad statement about Mazda .Thats just stupid to diss Mazda in any context.I dont drive one but I am a BoD member of a SCCA region and cannot fathom any reason other than anebreation that would have coaxed such dribble.

Ricky-

[AceInhole]

Well I wont even get into the SCCA requiring membership to go to a friggin autox or rallyx, I think that the person that said that should seriously consider laying off the booze .Thankfully the person who motioned for the membership is out .

My understanding of the membership is that it has more to do with site insurance than anything else. It's more of a step up from the "Trial memberships" into day/event-specific memberships. The way it was discussed at our region's (NER) solo board was that it would have a minimal impact on non-members, and actually give more incentive into becoming full fledged members. I recall it even being discussed if event-specific membership could be used as credit later on for annual ones.

Quote »I hope that the REs of the respective SCCA regions can attend their divisional conventions and voice their disaproval to this broad statement about Mazda .Thats just stupid to diss Mazda in any context.I dont drive one but I am a BoD member of a SCCA region and cannot fathom any reason other than anebreation that would have coaxed such dribble.

Ricky-[/quote]I'd agree that the statement should have held a different tone altogether, however the MSR debate itself is sketchy, as was the Z0K packaged Soltices. From what I've heard about it, I could see the statement coming off as more from a "stop whining" attitude than anything. Hell, the factory team Z0K incident had Solstice owners ranting about it being legal at a Solo Tour event. Coming from a standpoint where you simply can't "win" no matter what you do, it could easily get aggravating.

[skylndrftr]

I used to be an SCCA member.

However after a few weekends of NASA track days and working as a grid worker, I will never go back. So much friendlier, so much more approachable.

[nismoautoxr]

However after a few weekends of NASA track days and working as a grid worker, I will never go back. So much friendlier, so much more approachable.[/QUOTE]

I do a fair amount of corner working with SCCA and NASA .I also enjoy plenty of HPDE ,TT,and autox.I have to say that SCCA is still the only way to go for professionalism and a rock solid flag condition format .NASA is up and coming and I see them being a very good thing for grassroots motorsports. Im not diehard for any one club .I have reached a time in my life where it dont make a rats backside to me which one ends up on top as long as I enjoy myself.I like NASAs TT program with its F1 like transponder format .The downside is you may never get a clean lap and there is the big potential for major contact.The upside is door to door style open passing and adrenaline you wouldnt believe.I like both clubs and I think we all win in that aspect.

The membership program that SCCA is pushing is inevitably going to tax the already taxed solo and rallyx chairmen who already struggle for _free_to excel only to do yet _more_ paperwork as a part of their_volunteer_ duties.Its not cool and I say they are screwin the pooch.It will be interesting to see what impact it has .Since I am our regions solo chair for 08 ...I am optimistic yet prepared.

As far as the BROAD statement the Nat BoD guy made...it probably was something that was totally taken out of context and if you really think about it ....the statement"SCCA doesnt need Mazda and Mazda doesnt need SCCA"is absolutely true.Think about it...is Mazda going to cease without SCCA?Is SCCA going to cease without Mazda?I think no on both counts .Do they both benefit greatly from one anothers existance?.....YES.

I was taken back at first by the news that someone said that. but now I say who gives a shart.Mazda makes automobles for the masses who buy them ...not SCCA and to me ...if they think they are any more important than any other automakers product that our MEMBERS choose to buy ,totally pervert from their original form ,and race ...theyve lost their mind and deserve to be totally pissed on!!

Mazda makes a good product and just happens to have had the monopoly on the lightweight nimble 2 seater sportscar in the Miatas market ...untill LATELY!With the infusion of the opel platform of the Opel GT/Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky,they no longer hold that monopoly and it looks like to me they are just a little insecure .They are fighting as they are rightful to for legality and rank in that class.Makes no differance to me ,because,it only means more fun for all of us since their bickering is going to result in affordable sports cars O'plenty.

My .02

Ricky-

[AceInhole]

The membership program that SCCA is pushing is inevitably going to tax the already taxed solo and rallyx chairmen who already struggle for _free_to excel only to do yet _more_ paperwork as a part of their_volunteer_ duties.Its not cool and I say they are screwin the pooch.It will be interesting to see what impact it has .Since I am our regions solo chair for 08 ...I am optimistic yet prepared.

Within our region, I don't think our chair has done anything with membership or registration. It's pretty much all on Cheif of Registration, as far as I've seen (I'm our regions Novice Cheif, and have worked a bit with the temp memberships). I'm not sure how that would go with smaller regions, but it shouldn't be too much over having to do waivers.

Quote »I was taken back at first by the news that someone said that. but now I say who gives a shart.Mazda makes automobles for the masses who buy them ...not SCCA and to me ...if they think they are any more important than any other automakers product that our MEMBERS choose to buy ,totally pervert from their original form ,and race ...theyve lost their mind and deserve to be totally pissed on!![/quote]It was brought to my attention that the MSR package wasn't "generally available", and that "no new performance kits" (GCR 9.1.7.E.28) is the ruling that disallowed it. It was also said that previously, a Mazda exec had pushed for a similar ruling to disallow BMW Z4 hard tops. There are strong arguments from both sides, but generally its all rumor. In the end, if Mazda had done as they said and "followed the GCR", the MSR package would be legal.

[skylndrftr]

I tend to agree with ricky on most of his points.

I was really surprised to see this happening and in the end don't think its good for amateur auto racing. The saturn sky type proucts from GM are fantastic in that they provide a car that really competes against the Miata and do so with a different dynamic envelope. Unfortunately all the manufacturers are working on winning. Part of the complain as I understood it was that not only where the GM folks using some questionable parts (as the miata folks were) but that the GM factory team had even more specialized parts. I think its great to see the manufacturers gettign involved I just have a hard time accepting a factory run team competing against amateurs out of their garages. It doesn't seem like a fair fight and will only end in hurt feelings and people not having as much fun. Thats what this is about is fun, even when it gets really competitive, because everyone is amateurs most don't do this for a living (although a few do) and all do it for their love of cars.

[Shift_Kouki]

If only they would sell us the really nice questionable parts to the amateurs at a loss...