SCCA Trans-Am

[Jonerz]

It's back! http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...turns-in-2009/

It's not much to start with, but... it is a start! How many Trans-Am heads do we have here? I've been to my fair share of Victoria Day Trans-Am Speedfests (not to mention a couple TA races back when it was featured as a support race at the 12 Hours of Sebring), and I'm stoked to see them back again. My Dad will be too, and at least one ten-tenth-er will be back at Mosport Victoria Day!

Chris

[Zurbert82]

Why start a new series during a recession, not to mention when Speed GT/Touring already exist?

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Zurbert82

Why start a new series during a recession, not to mention when Speed GT/Touring already exist?

Because a bunch of older drivers, needed a place to race their tube frame cars, and Greg Pickett put up the money. See Muscle Milk sponsorship. There is no real corporate interest, manufacturer interest... or much of anything. But there are a few cars around, and they've made a series. It will be a shadow of what the Trans Am name once was, and will die off after a few seasons...

[Jonerz]

WOO! Such optimism! Ideally, SCCA will realize that "Trans-Am" has much greater meaning than "World Challenge" and the GT cars will replace the current crop of tube framers. Of course, as I understand it, there is quite the underground industry still building the GT-1/Trans-Am spec cars so perhaps it won't die off. Perhaps my initial reaction is a little romanticized, but I do have great memories of Trans-Am and it bugs me a few times a week that Trans-Am had to die off while other series are still kicking around. I will love to see, hear, and smell Trans-Am cars again.

Chris

[cmk]

If all you want is for them to rename World Challenge to Trans-Am, why not just stick to watching the former and be happy? Who cares what it's called?

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Because a bunch of older drivers, needed a place to race their tube frame cars, and Greg Pickett put up the money. See Muscle Milk sponsorship. There is no real corporate interest, manufacturer interest... or much of anything. But there are a few cars around, and they've made a series. It will be a shadow of what the Trans Am name once was, and will die off after a few seasons...

Well, Trans-Am in my lifetime has never been worth much of anything, so it's hard to say it'd be a shadow of that. All I remember was Tommy Kendall winning every year, it's where Gentilozzi came from, Ron Fellows raced there awhile, and the cars when it ended were Jaguar XKRs (what's that?) and Qvale Mangustas (no, seriously, what's that?).

[Dani Filth]

the Qvale is in fact a De Tomaso .. and well . i much rather see a Qvale than a Camaro or a Firebird

[Aslak Vind]

An offtopic noob question.

The Callaway Corvette, with Memo Gidley (I think), which series did it take the title years ago?

[AU N EGL]

This is what I recieved from the SCCA

SCCA® Trans-Am® Series Returns In 2009
Pro Racing12/11/2008

LINK OT ORIGINAL SCCA.COM PRESS RELEASE http://www.scca.com/newsarticle.aspx?hub=4&news=3541

A series Web site is being established at www.sccatrans-am.com. Future announcements will be placed there and at www.scca.com.

2009 MUSCLE MILK SCCA TRANS-AM SERIES SCHEDULE*

Date Venue With
March 21-22 Road Atlanta, Braselton, Ga. Atlanta National
April 17-19 VIRginia International Raceway, Alton, Va. North Carolina National
May 15-17 Mosport International Raceway, Canada SPEED World Challenge
June 12-14 Portland International Raceway, Portland, Ore. Oregon Region National
July 11-12 Watkins Glen Int'l, Watkins Glen, N.Y. Finger Lakes National

* - Three additional dates to be announced

Four races on the east coast. Basically using the current SCCA GT1 rules. ( cars are faster then SWGT cars) but NO EFI engines, carberators 800-900 bhp old Stock cars and tube frame sports cars. Unless some of the rules change.

SCCA numbers in the club and semi pro races have been dropping. SCCA-PRO with the VW Jetta Cup has gone up up that is from VWs help.

as the VW Jetta was not competitive in SW touring, so they made their own races.

SCCA has also or will allow NASA members to come race with them as well The SCCA also made some tech rule changes too allow the NASA cars. Not sure how this will pan out.

I guess the good thing about TRANS-Am return is the name and possible TV coverage. Building a competive car is out of my budget.

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by Dani Filth

the Qvale is in fact a De Tomaso .. and well . i much rather see a Qvale than a Camaro or a Firebird

Okay. Romanians prefer the Cue-vell. Americans, the people that would actually be watching on TV and buying tickets at the track without which the series disappears as it already did partly because no one had any clue what the heck those allegedly stock-based cars were on the track, prefer Camaros and Firebirds.

I forgot, there was also the Panoz Esperante.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Flyin Ryan

Okay. Romanians prefer the Cue-vell. Americans, the people that would actually be watching on TV and buying tickets at the track without which the series disappears as it already did partly because no one had any clue what the heck those allegedly stock-based cars were on the track, prefer Camaros and Firebirds.

I forgot, there was also the Panoz Esperante.

Wish I have the 1976 camero I raced back in 1978.

The NEW Trans-AM is just SCCA GT1 rules IIRC Would be great if it was a pony car race again. Mustang, Camero, Challenger

[Jonerz]

They weren't "allegedly stock-based" for the last twenty years of the series at least. I think it died more as a result of naming rights issues between SCCA, SCCA Pro and Paul Gentilozzi (OWRS/CCWS?). These things are crazy racecars. It may be a "you had to be there" thing, but they are incredible to watch. I was at an "AGT" race at Mosport in '06 where it was hailing during qualifying and watching those boys (admittedly amateurs for the most part) tiptoe around Quebec corner in those beasts was fantastic. They are quite the spectacle! I challenge you all to go watch a race, come back, and tell me that you don't think they are brilliant.

Chris

[veeten]

Well, looks like all that purposing on sites and chats have paid off.

Most of the groundwork was laid with the new Mustang, and has picked up speed with the Dodge Challenger. Now, just in time for the new Camaro, SCCA has decided to revise the Trans Am series.

While present conditions might be a little hard, establishing the basis for this series may work well when things are a bit better. Personally, I say use a rules package similar to that when the series started in '66; a two-tiered system with a 3.5L & under and a 5.4L class. There are plenty of cars that fit that 3.5L engine base, and the 5.4L works with the Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger, since all have, or will have, engines that are available in or near that size.

[JHamilton]

I always go to the local SCCA regionals and nats and this will just add to the show. In my mind, this is good news!

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Jonerz

I think it died more as a result of naming rights issues between SCCA, SCCA Pro and Paul Gentilozzi (OWRS/CCWS?). These things are crazy racecars. It may be a "you had to be there" thing, but they are incredible to watch. I was at an "AGT" race at Mosport in '06 where it was hailing during qualifying and watching those boys (admittedly amateurs for the most part) tiptoe around Quebec corner in those beasts was fantastic. They are quite the spectacle! I challenge you all to go watch a race, come back, and tell me that you don't think they are brilliant.

Chris

I've seen various iterations of Trans Am since the seventies. Yes, some incredible, and incredibly fast cars. That being said, the series may have had the final nail driven into the coffin by the factors that you mention, but they aren't the real reason. The bottom line is that the series ran out of funding sources. The factories lost interest, then the fans lost interest, TV went away and sponsors lost interest. Missteps along the way certainly accelerated that though.

There will be no factory involvement, name sponsors, name drivers... or much of anything.

Can-Am cars were brilliant, and GTP... but the bottom line is that they have been binned to Historic Racing, where Trans Am really belongs too.

While present conditions might be a little hard, establishing the basis for this series may work well when things are a bit better. Personally, I say use a rules package similar to that when the series started in '66; a two-tiered system with a 3.5L & under and a 5.4L class. There are plenty of cars that fit that 3.5L engine base, and the 5.4L works with the Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger, since all have, or will have, engines that are available in or near that size.

The reason that Trans Am has been raised from the dead, is that people with existing cars, have some money and recreated the series. The rules will continue to be close to the old Trans Am, and SCCA GT-1. It is unlikely that there will be many, if any new bodied cars. This isn't a spectator sport, it is for the entrants, by the entrants.

[Bob Riebe]

This piece was just written about NASCAR but one can put SCCA Trans-Am or IMSA GT in its place.
I removed the parts that are more alined with NASCAR alone.

Let's do this right. Let's knock the bottom out. Let's envision the worst kind of economic scenario for NASCAR …

All the carmakers have pulled out entirely. There is no technical, let alone financial, support from them.
Several major team owners have gone away. NASCAR is no longer a profitable venture for big businessmen.

Of the teams that are left, only about 10 percent have adequate sponsorship to run a full season, and even they are down to one-car operations. The rest are vagabonds, racing week to week, hand to mouth.

Race fields usually are 30-something cars -- or whatever number might show up.
Fuel shortages are so dire that there is fear the federal government might shut down auto racing altogether.

Job layoffs have been so massive nationwide, and gasoline prices are so high, that attendance is less than half that of the 1990s and early 2000s.
During this, the worst global economic downturn since the Great Depression, the Dow is in the process of shedding nearly half its value.

In the garages, between practices, the top drivers sit on the workbenches near their cars with nothing to do but talk to what few media people come around. There are no TV commercials to be done, no public appearances to be made. They are not mobbed for autographs.

Maybe a third of the teams can even afford uniforms for crewmen, who are paid week-to-week in handwritten checks that might or might not bounce.

There are no catered meals at the tracks. Lunch is Vienna sausage, bologna sandwiches, Beanee Weenee.
One thing about these conditions: Now we know who the real racers are. They're the only ones left.

I don't have to imagine the above scenario. I need only remember it.

Welcome to the NASCAR I began covering, during the hard times of 1974-76, the first global recession after the global depression.

Even before the terrible downturn, Detroit manufacturers had pulled out of NASCAR, and nobody expected them to come back. Ever.

Sponsorships were rare and lean, $100,000 a season tops, and only two were multiyear -- STP for Richard Petty, and Purolator for the Wood Brothers and their driver, David Pearson.

Multitasking?
Bobby Allison and Buddy Baker usually managed to scrape together a little backing, a season at a time.
Cale Yarborough and his car owner, Junior Johnson, started the 1975 season with no sponsorship at all.

Was it dreary? Depressed? Depressing?
Hell, no.
It was wonderful -- wild, colorful, candid, the garages reeking of rugged individualism, roguish innovation, rowdy can-do spirit.

And for the general public, legends and folk heroes arose from those garages, because the rough-hewn men would all talk to us in the tiny press corps. They would tell us the truth about their lives and careers, about how they saw the world.
If some publicist or marketing expert had come around advising Junior Johnson that he shouldn't talk about his moonshine running or his prison term, Junior would have told that person to kiss his backside, and wouldn't have cared if we quoted him.

I had a recurring thought during the TV ratings boom for NASCAR through the past 20 years: If America thinks it likes these drivers and this racing, it should have seen those guys and that racing when there was little TV to speak of.
Ratings would have gone through the roof for the hard-knocks boys, who were real before reality shows were cool.

There were no drivers who got there on money alone, no pretty boys, no sissies, no whiners, no hucksters, no marketing people, no rapacious car owners, no venture capitalists, no prudish corporate sponsors, no PR hustlers, no image-makers.

This industry, when times get tough, has proven that it can get tough. Some of the best car owners in the garage know what a good bologna sandwich tastes like.

From '76 through '78, Yarborough won three straight championships on sponsorship of less than $300,000 a year -- or less than 1 percent of the $30 million a year Jimmie Johnson, likely to be the first threepeat champion since Yarborough, has raced on.

The inflation in the general economy these past 30 years cannot nearly account for the more than 100-fold increase in the cost of a driver's winning championships.
NASCAR and its teams, as any addictive medicine specialist would say, have steadily increased their tolerance for a substance -- money -- to near insatiability.
NASCAR needs rehab, painful as withdrawal may be.

I grow weary of entire marketing/advertising campaigns being built around drivers who rarely if ever win a race. I never take fabricated stars seriously.

Lower attendance? Well, the track owners never should have overbuilt their grandstands so vastly in the 1990s. If 100,000 people in 150,000 seat grandstands -- check out Texas Motor Speedway this Sunday -- draws bad press, the promoters brought this on themselves.

Are the manufacturers about to go? Oh, well. NASCAR did fine without them. Since they came back, beginning with Ford in 1981, they've created such a zoo of one-upsmanship on engineering, corporate whining and generally wagging the dog, that when NASCAR finally put its foot down, it shot itself in the foot with the ill-advised "new car."

When NASCAR vice president Jim Hunter, one of the few who remember as far back as I do, tries to explain to this generation of media that NASCAR's fortunes are "cyclical," he is telling the truth -- but few have been here long enough to know he's right.

"This industry, when times get tough, has proven that it can get tough," Hunter said the other day at Atlanta to a gaggle of journalists. "Some of the best car owners in the garage know what a good bologna sandwich tastes like."

[juicy sushi]

it's essentially club racing, with club racers. i like the cars, but it's still just club racing. if the name trans-am wasn't being used, there would be no attention whatsoever, and no press release...

[AU N EGL]

Funny when ppl talk about 'club racing and club drivers' many of those "club" drivers are much better then the so called pros.

These club drivers just did not have the money to go FIA pro. or did not get to be a good driver, until THEIR business made enough money for them too afford to race.

Besides club racing, which is also not inexpensive by any means.

To run Trans Am or SCCA GT1 or GTA is still several $100K a year. So if that is club racing so be it.

In other words dont knock CLUB racing until you have done it for a year or more on your dime.

[juicy sushi]

i'm not knocking the drivers, or the costs of doing it. but it's just another few GT-1 races under another name. as i said, i like the cars, but the trans-am series is dead, and should stay that way. these attempts to resurrect the name are pretty useless, and just devalue the "brand"...

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by juicy sushi

i'm not knocking the drivers, or the costs of doing it. but it's just another few GT-1 races under another name. as i said, i like the cars, but the trans-am series is dead, and should stay that way. these attempts to resurrect the name are pretty useless, and just devalue the "brand"...

Yes and No. great Name and history.

In North America there are so many different GT type races, series and cars.

Which is OK as there are many racers.

Many of the older trans Am / GT cars are now racing in central America.

For 2009 I tentative have 18 weekends or 36 races, between Feb and Dec 2009. and that is with just NASA between the Mid Atlantic and South east.
Unless I want to add in Mid-Ohio and the out side chance of Sebring, Watkins Glen and Road America.

In the SE US there are quite a few SCCA GT1, SPO, SPU, B-Production, AGT and old Stock Car high HP racers already.

Dia hard racers and Trans-Am GT1 and AGT teams may love it. Too attract new intestate their may have to be start moneies, prize money or other insentives.

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

The reason that Trans Am has been raised from the dead, is that people with existing cars, have some money and recreated the series. The rules will continue to be close to the old Trans Am, and SCCA GT-1. It is unlikely that there will be many, if any new bodied cars. This isn't a spectator sport, it is for the entrants, by the entrants.

Well, again, Trans-Am wasn't a spectator sport of any note at least in my lifetime.

As far as just giving people with cars a chance to race, it's a good starting point. As long as that is kept in mind by the competitors, that creates good racing, which is what racefans like. Baby steps and all that. Must first learn to crawl before walking.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Flyin Ryan

Well, again, Trans-Am wasn't a spectator sport of any note at least in my lifetime.

Ryan, are you ten or less? Not a dig...

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Flyin Ryan

Well, again, Trans-Am wasn't a spectator sport of any note at least in my lifetime.

Say What?

Even when Paul Genelosi ( Sp?) had the Trans AM name, it had lots of specators. PPL love the big noise V8s

And Trans AM back in 70s was unbelievable when I first watched it.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Say What?

Even when Paul Genelosi ( Sp?) had the Trans AM name, it had lots of specators. PPL love the big noise V8s

Gentilozzi.

By the time he owned it, the series was a support series, and the spectators were primarily there for other things.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Gentilozzi.

By the time he owned it, the series was a support series, and the spectators were primarily there for other things.

Not easy to start a new seires on its own. putting the new race on the dance card with another BIG name is a great ides.

Making Trans AM the Main feather during SCCA National weekend wont be a draw for spectators.

Personally I think Milk Muscle should have been lead sponsor the SWGT and called that TransAM