Jump to content
ooldguy

'08 TT Rules part 2

Recommended Posts

kbrew8991
Miatas are fine--Spec Miatas are TTE with room for mods. E30 BMW is a consideration, but not on the top ten list.

 

SpecE30s fit in TTE and can take out their ballast, go with more tire, and still stay in "E". They run TTD times in the Southeast in spec form, and I imagine its the same or similar elsewhere. I've run against a few stockish E30s in TTF, and they've got waaaayyyy too much straightline speed to be an "F" base imho.

 

Where's the guy with the relatively stock 1.8l Miata supposed to compete if their base class is "E" if they're running against tweaked up SMs and SE30s, as well as stuff like IS300s, Mazdaspeed Proteges, and maybe even 944 Cup cars (need to run the points, but they run about as fast as SE30). TTE seems pretty out-of-whack from the view I've got..... I guess you're looking at another Thats why I think Miatas need moved down a star so that the guy with a stock car has a chance to compete in "F" with just a modification or two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roadracetransam

How about baseing tire size on vehicle weight? Havier cars need bigger contact patch to turn, stop, ect... It would be very easy to police, since the scales are always set up anyway.

How about

195s under 1999#s

205s 2000#s

215s 2200#s

225s 2400#s

235s 2600#s

245s 2800#s

255s 3000#s

265s 3200#s

275s 3400#s

285s 3600#s

295s 3800#s

305s 4000#s

315s above 4200#s

 

If your size is different pay or credit points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg G.

Overall weight is already accounted for in the base class assignments. (lighter cars are in higher classes, heavier cars are in lower classes.) Those differences in class levels are more than enough to account for the extra assessment for wider tires. Once you take a heavier car, and give it wider tires and better brakes, a lot of the disadvantages of having a heavier car are gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IS300
Where's the guy with the relatively stock 1.8l Miata supposed to compete if their base class is "E" if they're running against tweaked up SMs and SE30s, as well as stuff like IS300s, Mazdaspeed Proteges, and maybe even 944 Cup cars (need to run the points, but they run about as fast as SE30). TTE seems pretty out-of-whack from the view I've got..... I guess you're looking at another Thats why I think Miatas need moved down a star so that the guy with a stock car has a chance to compete in "F" with just a modification or two

 

Personally, I think that the classes are pretty close. Yes, the higher horsepower cars are a little faster in TTE, but I have yet to see anyone stretch a 225 on an 8 inch rim and put it on a Miata. Ken I haven't met you yet, but a relatively stock car is not going to be competitive in any TT class, the class has evoleved enough that set-up i.e. spending money, is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slink

i am fine with the rules but coming from a nascar dirt track back ground where liberial intertpetation was allowed until written other wise. i know it is difficult to think of everythging when writing the rules. nascar seems to add new deffinition to the rules weeky just to keep up with the chad knaus of racing. to me part of racing is to get the best out of the car legally. if i can read something in the rules, i like to get the best that i can from ecah area. part of the fun in the off season is to check out the rules and get the most out of each. just like the "free" points mod's. i budget $$ for them accordingly. now if i can only capitalize on them is a different story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991
Ken I haven't met you yet, but a relatively stock car is not going to be competitive in any TT class, the class has evoleved enough that set-up i.e. spending money, is required.

 

have you been watching TTF at all? keep an eye on it then... it'll likely be a scrap between Skillcorn's nearly stock car with RA1s and my nearly stock MR2 with V710s. Marquart and Hayes might be able to spoil it as well with minimally modified cars, hell Bill will be running *gasp* street tires.

 

F and E can be low budget classes if the rules are setup right (ie how they're supposed to be) or at the very least places for momentumn cars to play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kgobey

..

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cosm3os

I'll be hard-pressed to touch Allen's TTD time from last year and he was running the chicane!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Markus

Before this goes too far off topic again...my two main requests:

 

1) We don't need major changes, but some minor asterick adjustments need to be made now that there is more real-world data on what type of power cars are ending up with. I thought part of the major rules revision last year was at least coming up with some rough weight/power guidelines for each class. After all, isn't this what is used to judge engine swaps, etc? Well it seems that those guidelines might be too wide or might need reviewed for some classes.

 

I'm most familiar with TTE since I compete there, but it does seem that TTE is too wide. TTE times (and entries) are almost making TTD obsolete. So it seems some of the higher powered cars might need to be bumped up a notch - then they could pick and choose their mods more carefully to stay in TTE, or do a little more and have fun in TTD. I don't think we need TTK or a really slow TT group, but it would be nice to see a little more room for cars to stay in TTF or TTE and not have to be superfast.

 

2) FI vs NA (super/turbocharged) - I like that NASA has tried to create a race/time trials PT/TT series where FI and NA cars can both compete - this hasn't really happened in other sanctioning bodies and I think it's a big plus for NASA. But the rules need to be minorly adjusted to recognize the difference between the two cars and the real-world documented bigger gains that the FI cars get in some areas. For example, we already have engine management +7 NA, +14 FI. I think this needs to be expanded to things like intake (+1 NA, +2 FI), header (+2 NA, + 4 FI), etc....

 

Beyond some minor tweaks like that, I think the base of the rules is pretty good and I'm looking forward to watching the series grow.

 

- Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveh

Hello, I'm here to make my annual argument for reconsideration of the +4 point rule for camber adjustment via modified control arms.

4 points is quite a hefty penalty for us wishbone suspension guys to be hit with considering most cars can use camber plates to adjust camber as a free mod.

 

As a competitor with a daily driven street car, I also like the idea of getting pts back for being overweight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991

I'd like to see the amt of ballast allowed to be lowered dramatically

 

right now, you could take your car 150lbs under its listed weight and ballast it back to the points-free minimum and have a much more potent car....

 

seems like a pretty big loophole to me

 

either tighten up the amt of ballast added, limit its location, or use some other metric to limit the amount of weight you can relocate

 

I think this points-for-being overweight issue could be used to the same effect, and am not in favor of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RACER-X

1 Point back for every 20 LBS over the min weight. No adding weight to make the car heavier!!!

 

The tire size could go up 10 mm for every class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AU N EGL

WOW, and I though DRIVER skill had more to do with lower times, then tire widths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shawn M.
WOW, and I though DRIVER skill had more to do with lower times, then tire widths.

 

 

You are correct, which is why they need MORE TIRE!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varkwso
WOW, and I though DRIVER skill had more to do with lower times, then tire widths.

 

You are correct, which is why they need MORE TIRE!!!

 

 

I really wish I had another 10-20mm.........of tire...

 

But to keep it on track - I would like to see the classes kicked up in tire size - though the TTA champ used 275s on his ZO6 this year...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
L98Terror
WOW, and I though DRIVER skill had more to do with lower times, then tire widths.

 

You are correct, which is why they need MORE TIRE!!!

 

 

I really wish I had another 10-20mm.........of tire...

 

But to keep it on track - I would like to see the classes kicked up in tire size - though the TTA champ used 275s on his ZO6 this year...

Shhh!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kgobey

..

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom A

Nationals are over, any ETA?

 

I have a car in pieces, I am waiting to spend money, don't want to do it before seeing new rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varkwso
Nationals are over, any ETA?

 

I have a car in pieces, I am waiting to spend money, don't want to do it before seeing new rules.

 

Both are mine are in pieces and there are still 2 regional events left...

 

I do hope they make a lot more things "open" next year so it makes compliance easier...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom A

Maybe a hint? "we are looking at..............."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg G.

Not sure yet, Tom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom A
Not sure yet, Tom.
Not sure of the ETA, or not sure what changes you are looking at?

 

We are building for the pointy end of PTE in points, to run E2 next year in the enduro series. Very little of what we have done/are doing can be undone if the points change. If we end up with 2 or 3 more points, we are screwed, and probably will get rid of the car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rob S.

I'm adding my thread about tire width in TTS/TTU classes to this thread since this is the 2008 TT rules thread. My point in a nutshell:

 

Current rules:

 

1. Light cars must run lower whp = higher weight to power ratio

2. Heavy cars just the opposite, higher whp = lower weight to power ratio

3. Tires less than or equal to 275 get to run more whp = lower weight to power ratio

4. Tires greater than 275 = no adjustment ??

 

So from 275 up to 345 there is no adjustment to weight to power ratio. 70mm wider tires make a HUGE difference.

 

http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=17894

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ooldguy

I'm getting " whacked " 16 points for the OEM 315's

 

also, we may want to ? providing an incentive ( getting additional points back ) by running a more narrow tire then came with the car as this could be a safety / liability issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...