do Camaros/trans am's make good auto-x cars? how do they compete?

Hey,

How do Camaros compete against cars like Miatas, MR2's and much smaller cars like that? Those smaller types of cars absolutely dominate from what i hear, and I wonder why you even have this part of the message board on here - most people I talk to say Camaros suck for auto-x.

Just wondering if anyone has proof of Camaros doing well in auto-x. So far I've seen no such proof :(.

thanks!

From my modest experience with a lightweight car so far, if they let go or start to get loose you have more warning time, plus those cars have IRS as well. Lets say your tires will allow for a certain corner to be taken at 60 MPH before they let go, to regain grip and control of the car you may have to drop down to 48 MPH before stop sliding, so once a tire loses its grip it will take awhile to get it back. This also varies by tire compound and etc

What I believe so far is that for a lighter car you will regain grip in the tires faster, but I'm sure there is a very clear answer by someone who knows about this. Since a lightweight car will exert less lateral stress on the tires, it plain makes sense.

IMO though for slow stuff like AutoX, small cars rule. Fast tracks with lots of straights is where HP cars may take the cake, if a cornering car can do no more than 130 MPH and the other guys are doing 160 then obviously the cornering car is not going to cut it UNTIL you start putting the corners in there.

I think my lightweight car is much more controllable and offers better feedback (well, no PSteering as well), better brakes, and being in a smaller car also seems to allow you to be in better touch with the road, almost like being in an open top car. Sam Strano and others do very well in 'heavy domestics', so there is no substitute for a good driver, but take me out of the Camaro and put me in the lighter car and its a whole new can of whup ass. Its an experience you have to live through first hand before you can write off another car as "not what you want".

I pretty much consider myself a convert to sportier cars as far as handling goes because I love cornering fast, when I can put some serious meats on the Camaro though I'm sure it will be a whole new experience all over again as well, 255x50 16" Yoko AVS Intermediates were better than stock but it still doesn't compare to the 240Z, not even close :eek:

Put some horsepower and meats on your little car, and you have a cheap "Cobra."

At our track, Miata's are fast, but not as fast as the newer Corvettes & BMWs. We do have one 4th gen f-body ('94 trans am) that is very quick--quicker than most corvettes. Funny thing about that Transam is that he has virtually no HP mods (275HP), is an auto, and has only a few bolt-on suspension mods + race tires. The fastest regular cars at our track is an older Lotus Elan--it always dominates, & a stock '96 LT4 C4 w/race tires.

I've been competeitive in my 93- thats with a 108,000 mile suspension, GSC's and a LSD that isn't worth a pinch of rat sh!t.


I really think its 80% driver (not that I am great). If you auto x with an open mind, willing to learn from others, and patience, it can be super fun.

I can't wait to get out there this year with my freshened suspension, and perhaps a set of Victoracers if I have the extra coin.

Basically, people who autocross F-bodies do it cuz they love the cars and love driving em.

We know we won't get the fastest lap time in autox, but it's still very fun to drive. You basically are keeping an eye on the times of the other heavy cars and if you can beat a few miatas or vettes, that just shows driving skill, but the fastest time of the day will always be a smaller, lighter, more nimble car.

we're all torque and hp junkies if you ask me.

Originally posted by pillagenburn
Just wondering if anyone has proof of Camaros doing well in auto-x. So far I've seen no such proof :(.


Well that depends on your definition of "well". In Auto-x you only compete with other cars in your class. So f-bodies compete with Mustangs and not Miata's and MR2's.

That said in autocrossing F-Bodies are alot more competative against smaller cars than most people give them credit for.

http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/nationals/2002/results/index.html

Those are the results from last years Auto-X Nationals. Stockish F-bodies run in FS while stockish MR2's run in ES. As you can see the fastest MR2 was quicker than the fastest Camaro but only by ~.6sec on a 50sec course.

I agree with the above comments. Folks who drive f-bodies just love them! In my experience (going on my 3rd season racing in a 3rd gen f-bod) it is a lot easier to drive smaller cars in autox or road race tracks with a lot of quick transitions.
It is also easier to drive a car in these situations with independent rear suspension or AWD. To drive an f-body at the limit and do it well presents a bigger challenge than the latter mentioned cars.

Yep, I like my 240Z and there are alot of things to like about the Camaro, the 240Z is alot smaller for one and that can be a pain after awhile. But, driving the Camaro on a track is like driving a taxi cab by comparison, or a boat.

The more interesting results come in the PAX index, which is a correlation index based on last year's finishing times of the various classes.

That is, it is a multiplier for each class that is designed to "even out" the times between classes.

In the above example of the MR2 in ES vs. the Camaro in FS, FS has a higher multipler (barely) of 0.806 to 0.804 in ES, so historically the Camaro is, indeed, faster than the MR2. This, of course, changes every year as new cars receive more development - "stock" isn't strictly stock, of course.

That's the 2003 PAX. What is interesting is the trend of the multipliers over time: in 2001 it was .807 FS to .786 ES, then .809 FS to .802 ES. Cars get reclassified, so the large jump in ES may be from a new car being inserted.

In 2003, FS is the fifth fastest out of 9 classes.
In 1999, it was fourth, so the competition is getting stronger (since FS has not changed at all, basically).

So stock for stock, the F-bod is relatively decent. By comparison, 2003 SS is 0.837, so we're still pretty far back from a Z06, but that's expected.

Also, on a fifty-second course, 0.6 seconds is a lot! I only expect the MR2 to get better, btw.

Finally, there's a huge difference in cars and driving styles - a small lighter car with a torque-less engine is much much different than the Camaro, and if they can be similarly competitive, it goes to show how effective the Camaro can be in the right hands.

So, in summation, the Camaro can be decently competitive at autocross, and those who say it can't either haven't looked hard enough or haven't tried hard enough themselves.

Dan
Who's looking eagerly to the Elise coming here, for which he is planning on selling the Camaro :)

The Elise has a Honda engine right? hmm...

Take a look at who is driving MR2s, are you confident there are good drivers in the mix? Or are they all "kids?"

Have you seen this MR2 driver?
http://12.224.138.56:8884/files/MR2/MR2crash.mpeg

LOL! At first I thought he was turning left and going up there on purpose. Pretty bizarre!:rolleyes:

If he was trying to do a burnout, he failed miserably, I'm not sure WHAT he thought he was doing, either way it looks like he forgot to use the brakes. :confused:

Originally posted by lincmarkv
The more interesting results come in the PAX index, which is a correlation index based on last year's finishing times of the various classes.

That is, it is a multiplier for each class that is designed to "even out" the times between classes.

In the above example of the MR2 in ES vs. the Camaro in FS, FS has a higher multipler (barely) of 0.806 to 0.804 in ES, so historically the Camaro is, indeed, faster than the MR2. This, of course, changes every year as new cars receive more development - "stock" isn't strictly stock, of course.

That's the 2003 PAX. What is interesting is the trend of the multipliers over time: in 2001 it was .807 FS to .786 ES, then .809 FS to .802 ES. Cars get reclassified, so the large jump in ES may be from a new car being inserted.

In 2003, FS is the fifth fastest out of 9 classes.
In 1999, it was fourth, so the competition is getting stronger (since FS has not changed at all, basically).

So stock for stock, the F-bod is relatively decent. By comparison, 2003 SS is 0.837, so we're still pretty far back from a Z06, but that's expected.

Also, on a fifty-second course, 0.6 seconds is a lot! I only expect the MR2 to get better, btw.

Finally, there's a huge difference in cars and driving styles - a small lighter car with a torque-less engine is much much different than the Camaro, and if they can be similarly competitive, it goes to show how effective the Camaro can be in the right hands.

So, in summation, the Camaro can be decently competitive at autocross, and those who say it can't either haven't looked hard enough or haven't tried hard enough themselves.

Dan
Who's looking eagerly to the Elise coming here, for which he is planning on selling the Camaro :)


Yeah what he said.

FYI The F body dominated stock class. Does very well in street prepared. (The best car to have, although there are some Mustangs thrown in) and in Prepared it is a tossup. Prepared cars are custom built race cars so at that point the only arguing point for or against a F body or Mustang is wheel base width and overall length.

One weekend last July I went to two different events. Sat. I was FTD except to FM cars and on Sunday FTD except two FM cars and an EM car. Local level an F body can be the best there is.

Mudge,

Whether the Elise will have a Honda engine is debatable. You can get it in the states right now with the 2.0, but that's through an importer that installs that engine - Lotus recently announced that they are bringing the Elise to the states, so it'll be interesting as to whether they make their engine match our standards or use a different one.

And as to the drivers? Please. I can find tons of Camaro clips that are equally as stupid. Thanks for tossing around the "Welcome to last month" clip. And that's the wrong generation MR2, to top it off. Suffice it to say that at Nationals you generally have the best autocrossers in the nation competing.

Originally posted by lincmarkv
And as to the drivers? Please. I can find tons of Camaro clips that are equally as stupid.

No arguments there, remember I drive an import so don't think I'm putting down an MR2 because of some kid driver who doesn't know where to put his feet.

I didn't know we were talking national events only, if you visit a regular old AutoX even there are many first and second timers, just as there are some who will once in awhile make it to the nationals, so I dont expect to be able to compare car to car directly at any point.

Thanks for tossing around the "Welcome to last month" clip.

I could be wrong, but that sounds like your tearing into me. Obviously not everyone has seen it, and I didn't post it to try and say anything about the MR2 being a crappy car, obviously that is not true and I know better than that, and again for those that dont understand my sig I DRIVE AN IMPORT.

You're right, that was a rip.

What the heck were we talking about if we take driver into account? Did the initial question say "Listen, I know that there are good drivers and bad drivers, so what's the best driver to be in any car?" No. It was whether the F-bods make good autocross cars, which they do.

The PAX index is set on last year's finishing times in each class. I'm sorry I didn't say "national". I suppose that a nation-wide accepted index would clearly be based on nation-wide data. I'm not just pulling numbers out of my rear.

And yes, I know you drive an import, and yes I know you weren't putting down MR2 drivers, and yes, I know that you were just spouting again because you weren't sure what you were talking about other than your anecdotal evidence.

I know I suck as a driver compared to some and I know I can help some. I know I have a lot left to learn and I know I have learned more than some. That's why, for the most part, I keep my mouth shut here unless I can actually contribute something. And that's why, I suppose, I get frustrated when I put effort into a post only to have someone say "yeah, well, i saw an mr2 the other day, look at the way people drive it!"

If you can never compare car to car directly...well...yeah. Not worth going there.

Dan
Apologies to the rest for this rant...it's been building up for...some time now...I'm sure some of you would understand.

And Dr. Mudge, no real hard feelings. It's just frustrating, because I see you post a lot, and sometimes you're on target and/or helpful, other times it seems like you're just trying to get your voice heard. I suppose that's what I'm doing right now, so whatever, i'm hypocritical. And I've heard from some that you are a good guy, so maybe you just always come across wrong to me on the net. That would be my fault, and if it is the case, I'm sorry.

Sorry you were bothered by my post, and your not the first so dont feel awkward about it. Some people may understand me, some may not, and my sense of humor doesn't always 'hit on target' either. The MR2 video is entertaining to me, in a "WTF was that?" kind of way.

I defend the Camaro to people who put it down, who have likely never ridden in one, just as much as I try to expand my own understanding of other cars, hence my finally moving to a real sports car, as opposed to a "muscle car" with some handling.

Fair enough, and thanks for taking what I meant as...criticism? I'm not even sure. It was a rant... - thanks for taking it well.

And I'm very happy you're enjoying the 240Z :)

Maybe its my formal and dry speaking manner, IRL (in real life :) ) I dont speak much at all, I add input where I see fit if people dont talk over me, and on the board I either dont come here at all for stretches or I will post-whore for weeks in a row, just depends on the mood and schedule. So, I am not trying to talk down to people or anything if thats how it seems, its just the way I type out my responses.

I'm not an english geek either, in fact if anything I'm a little annoyed at how "masterless" my speaking tongue is.

Enjoy the day :)

where'd that video come from??? with the MR2 crash....

that was absolutely retarded - I've driven MR2's, and that is *NOT* a beginner's car by any means.

peace

I really dont know, its made the rounds. It was a VW club meed in FLA so it probably hit a VW site first. I still dont know what the guy was trying to do, if he was trying to make noise he succeeded, but I first thought he was trying to do a burnout or something...

What do you mean not a beginners car? The only MR2 I've driven is an 88, it is TINY, but I'm sure the newer one is much much different. The 88 has just about no horsepower to speak of, its kind of neat but overall not my car, even though I used to like those and Fieros a bit more, they are even smaller inside than the 240Z is which is already a bit tight.

F-bodies are great autox cars if you are looking for easily competitive, fun cars to drive. They pretty much rule the roost in both F-Stock and E-Street Prepared. They are currently pretty competitive in Street Mod. They are great in CP, but those are not streetable by any means...... Make sure you know your rules!!! If you don't, you'll end up screwed faster than you can believe. :)

A 93 MR2 I setup (we do more than F-bodies here) PAX'ed, I think 2nd at Nationals overall on the way to winning E-Stock. I PAX'ed I think 11th or 12th (can't remember for sure) in the '82 ESP Camaro. That's out of some 30 open class winners and almost 1100 competitiors in total.

I'll be splitting time this year between my F-Stock 2001 Camaro and a BSP '95 M3. How's that for different? :-) Both are fun, in different ways. The M3 is more nimble, and more forgiving. The F-Stock car is obviously not as nimble and not as easy to drive.