need to class a car

[LittleLiner]

Two seater? Four seater?  Interesting.   This brings to mind cars that were sold both ways.  One example was the Chevette Scooter.  That was an ?economy? version of the Chevette sedan that came with only front seats.  Since the rules allow the removal of rear seats anyway, it would be interesting to see someone slap a ?Scooter? decal on a Chevette and enter it as a GT.  Of course it gets a bit more confusing when you take into account that you could order a back seat as an option in the Scooter.

I don?t see a problem when someone tries to run a sedan type car in GT.  Where is there an advantage in that?  Why would the sports car guys be upset with that?  Generally speaking you would expect a sports car to have better areo than a sedan.  

However if someone wants to run a 350z or a 911 as a sedan ? well, that might not be considered fair . . .

[JackD]

What configuration was approved for sale by the various agencies, and in the US it would be the DOT.
The insurance industry is also a clue.
A single seater El Camino with a big block runs with the sedans and a sinle seater Corvette is a GT.

[Seldom Seen Slim]

A hnadful of years ago I owned an LN7.  The front had a pair of "bucket" seats, and the rear seat area was just a deck.  I eventually removed the deck - so I could make room for my daughter's car seat -- and found, IIRC, there were wells where the seats would have gone if they were to have seats back there and even vestigial seat belt attaching holes.

Disclaimer:  I have no further interest in this discussion and do not stand to make a profit from it.  Just thought I'd make a comment in the "car' part of the bb for a change!

[JackD]

The floor pan was the same stamping for an EXP, Escort, and an LN7.
The feature he mentions in the LN7 was called the package tray.

[dwarner]

The general criteria used to determine if a car is a coupe/sedan or GT is the manner in which it was/is marketed. If it is sold as a sports coupe with a rear seat then it is a coupe. Most sedans have four doors. If the car is sold as a sports car with just two seats then it is a GT. If you have a Porsche 2+2 it is still a GT. The use of common sense will generally dictate where a vehicle is placed. There are hundreds, if not thousands of combinations out there. I certainatly am not going to catalogue in my tiny head all the possibilites. If Miler Mike Stewart and Jim Dincau fit in the back seat you have a coupe/sedan.

Do your homework like our EXP/LN7 friend and show us the proof of purchase seal. You'll probably end up in the correct class. How many of these esoteric cars are going to be built anyway? If each person that mentioned car from this thread alone were to actually build one then we could add maybe 30 more entries.

Build it, race it, have fun - things will take care of themselves. Call 811 for a good time.

DW

[JackD]

I still remember Mike laughing when I put the Comp Coupe package together. He fits the back less now than he did then.
The expression on Elmo's face when he found he was inspecting another car becaus I did not unload the other one yet.
When Wendy set the first record at El Mirage by a women and scored both first ans second place in the Roadster Club , the old guard could be heard falling on their swords.
If it was easy----------well you know what I mean.

433 views, it must be a real hot button.

[jacksoni]

My comment about the board was about the lack of response to a rules queston.  I can see how it might have been circular filed.  No offense to the board as a whole intended.

As far as Mr JackD's comments  I did not post to start a "mine is bigger than yours pissing contest" which he seems to want to do.  I don't care if he built a car with smaller engine that went faster than I did.  Happens all the time.  I don't care if he has built a car that can go faster now.  I don't care how SCCA classifies a car nor the DOT.  I care how SCTA-BNI sets the rules for classification at Bonneville.


The Ford EXP ( check out www.fordexp.com) (and LN7) were marketed as sporty 2 seat compacts.  They were identical except grill sheet metal and hatch contour.  They were built on the Escort pan so had footwells under the carpet and shelf but no back seat.  Ford promoted that it was the first 2 seater since the 56-57 TBird ( which is not legal to run production).  I imagine you could bolt in a seat but doesn't make it legal, whether Mike S can get in it or not. As Dan points out how the car was marketed is determining.  A LN7 ran at Bonneville in 1981 and set 2 records-  IN GT CLASS. (Hot rod sponsored).

Mr JackD indicates he had only one EXP at Bonneville.  In 1986 it set 3 records in GC and Gas and Fuel Alt.  No problem.  Easy to cover headlights.  In 1987 it set 4 records.  Gas and Fuel CC.  Belly pan and Nose stretch.  OK.  Engine setback???  Why in world do that with a transverse mount FWD car.  Would hurt rather than help.  OK.  Problem for me was the records in 87 in MS and GT classes. Can't have it both ways. Mr JackD suggests he left 15mph (10%) on the table.  The records were all within 7-8 mph and if you throw out the lowlier were within 5mph (interesting the CC records slower than the MS and GT- so much for streamlining).  Considering the folks who would sell their first born for even a few mph, I have to take this statement, along with the others, and consider he has been smoking something funny or expects that we are if we are to believe this.

And as I am wrong now as well as then, I guess he thinks the board is a bunck of skunks looking out for themselves and their own interests in stead of the racers, the salt and the meet.

[JackD]

The LN7 you mention from Hot Rod was 1 of the cars I ran.
The documentation I provided from Ford and the DOT established the suitability of the cars for a particular class.
I did my homework and prepared to set records.
It did attract a lot of attention as I expected it would and I was prepared and did provide suitable information. The fact that I took least advantage of the changes allowed is your problem.
Honda and Chrysler were part of My competition and you are not. I suspect they knew what they were doing and so did I.
I can see what you are doing and as you say"I don't care".
 

[jacksoni]

Ah yes.  LN7 running  both GT and Modified classes.   And 2 of the records you broke happened to be mine so that makes me not your competition?

[JackD]

Not if you don't pay attention to the documenthation  that establish the EXP.

512 viewa

The lesson for the day is "Prepare your documentation and your entry."

[Stan Back]

So far, what I've got out of this is that we might be able to start new Roadster classes -- Production Roadster.  You'd have to have one with a rumble seat (4 passenger total).

And then maybe, if you used that gasoline that's readily available to the public with ethanol in it, we could start Fuel Street Roadster classes!

Think of the creative possibilities with a little documentation when you show up in impounds!

[JackD]

At least there would be no minimums to cause embarrassment.

[JB]

I am just trying to understand.  a 911 is a 4 seater, classified as such by dot etc.....  so is lets say an exp.  neither can fit an adult for sustained time, why then can't a 911 run pro or alt?  I have seen a mitsubishi 300 running pro, a 240 2+2 (not a 4 seater, back seat less than 911) and many other 2 door sport cars with minimal back seat.  If the rule is DOT then that is what it should say.  

I still wonder the answer to my question Jack.  could you sit in the back seat of an exp from SLC to Wendover?  (I too thought it was identical to ln7 but for grill.

[JackD]

I could if I was not already stuck in the back seat of the Crosley. Did I mention the Honda AN600, I think I had 4 of them over the years ?
Was that Venom or Hooten that had the 300mph Crusley ?
Was it all the same car /

[jimmy six]

If you all hadn't figured it out.

Question #1. What do you want to know about any SCTA, BNI, FIM, FIA, rule etc:  car or bike?

 Answer.. Ask JackD he's never wrong

Question #2. Any other question?

Answer.. See answer to question #1