Jump to content
L98Terror

I'm proposing a new Super Touring/TT Class, Thoughts?

Recommended Posts

philstireservice
It's just a discussion and we were told anything and everything is on the table

 

I still think

 

5.5 or 6.0 ST1

 

7.5 or 8.0 ST2

 

9.5 or 10.0 ST3

 

 

TTA/PTA=8.7 ST2 should be a little better

 

IMO

 

 

This would be perfect !!! ST3 .........Excellent Ken !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varkwso
what kills me about this whole discussion is the number of people that think that NASA or SCCA should add classes fit the THEIR PARTICULAR CAR.

Thats bullsh*t. There are too many classes now that dilute the car counts.

There is no doubt about it that as you move to the 5.5 ratio it gets more and more expensive to build a competitive car. Okay.......so either spend the money or don't, that's your choice. I run ST-1 at a 6.3 ratio, I could spend a ton more money on HP to get to the 5.5 but I choose not to. Danny and Aaron have gotten their cars close to that number. Why should they be penalized by adding another class which takes cars away from ST1 and ST2 for that matter.

There are enough options now to fit anybodys budget..............pick one and go racing.

 

Since NASA has twin designations for ST and TT it is more then the current ST1/ST2 field - which will probably never be huge since it is a costly place to race. I believe the current racers should be "protected" but the cars in TT are mostly off the showroom (the winners are normally very well prepped). There are plenty that do not meet the 8.7 rule and are hopelessly outclassed by the current TTU rule (btw - I do not own one). NASA does give everyone's car a class to race in and but it does not guarantee it will win since some cars are better then others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David M. Pintaric
Ok Kevin:shock: ..................... whats wrong with doing that?????

my car in SCCA STO trim is 3150/417rwhp and I've run 29's at Road Atlanta

 

Bobby, how good of an STO car is your car?

 

The way I look at it, you seem to be way off HP/weight with those numbers. But is your car an optimized STO car?

 

Having a car that can run two programs would be great. ST1 and STO should be pretty close, although I haven't looked at the STO rules very closely. When I do, it sure looks as though my car in STO trim would fit right in the middle of ST1, but until wrenches start flying I am not so sure. If Mr. Meyer's car is STO optimized and is a 7.55 my theory is bunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Z06RACER

David......

I'm not sure any car is optimized. Mine certainly isn't. The car was built 5 years ago to the then current WC specs. To run my car in SCCA STO I have to run to the currentWC VTS sheet for the C6 corvette. The motor is way down on power compared to todays cars, probably down 80rwhp compared to current cars. I'm sure there are other things that have been developed on the car as well. I could spend the money at upgrade the engine...but it's just not worth it to me. Maybe as the class grows and gets more and more competitive, I will to do just that.

To run NASA ST1, I simply take the restrictor off and take out 150lbs and I'm ready to go at 6.3. I could run slicks and add some weight and get to 5.5.....but again...no need to yet.

I think if there was anyone who would favor another class, it would be me. But car counts in STO and ST1 are just now starting to grow in the Southeast, so I'd rather support those classes. To add more classes simply dilutes the car counts.

Just my $.02.........................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryan0
It's just a discussion and we were told anything and everything is on the table

 

I still think

 

5.5 or 6.0 ST1

 

7.5 or 8.0 ST2

 

9.5 or 10.0 ST3

 

 

TTA/PTA=8.7 ST2 should be a little better

 

IMO

 

nah... no more classes.

 

ST2 8.7 to still catch T1 cross-overs. ~360hp 3200 range

ST1 6.2 or even higher. ~475hp under 3000 range

STU 'spend all the money you want'

 

 

makes ST1 PLENTY of race car but not all out obscene... leave that to STU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B

I think that makes the most sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
philstireservice
It's just a discussion and we were told anything and everything is on the table

 

I still think

 

5.5 or 6.0 ST1

 

7.5 or 8.0 ST2

 

9.5 or 10.0 ST3

 

 

TTA/PTA=8.7 ST2 should be a little better

 

IMO

 

nah... no more classes.

 

ST2 8.7 to still catch T1 cross-overs. ~360hp 3200 range

ST1 6.2 or even higher. ~475hp under 3000 range

STU 'spend all the money you want'

 

 

makes ST1 PLENTY of race car but not all out obscene... leave that to STU.

 

 

nope you still need a ST3 class. Too much room between PTA and ST2...I think Ken Smiths idea is very valid.

 

SU is the spend all the money you want class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
clubracer6

From the view of someone who is looking to possibly come into the fray, I have to agree with the idea of not a new class, but move ST1.

 

I believe ST2 is really perfect right now.

 

My LS2 C6 - with a tune, headers, intake, and GHL's, put me just over 400rwhp. It would be nice to take, this or a C5 and mod it up a little more. But getting to that 5.5 deal makes ST1 too pricey for me.

 

The suggesting of having ST1 mirroring what's going on in STO would be ideal. Having a car that can run with multiple clubs is idea. Find a good home for the TCC cars would be nice too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orawiec

I don't want to see more classes either; However if there was a ST3 I'd be perfect at what I'm running now at 9.82. At my age and not knowing how long I'll still be racing , am not investing more $$ into raising my HP. I'm really out there just having fun.

 

2 cents worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David Fazzino

Changing rules has always been the most expensive and destructive result for racers and teams. Racing history is littered with cars prepared for series that never went back to the track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
davidfarmer

no more classes.........

 

Leave ST2 alone, it's perfect where it is. I'm OK with things like they are, although I wouldn't have a problem slowing down ST1 a bit so that SU truly is in a class of it's own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
L98Terror
It's just a discussion and we were told anything and everything is on the table

 

I still think

 

5.5 or 6.0 ST1

 

7.5 or 8.0 ST2

 

9.5 or 10.0 ST3

 

 

TTA/PTA=8.7 ST2 should be a little better

 

IMO

 

nah... no more classes.

 

ST2 8.7 to still catch T1 cross-overs. ~360hp 3200 range

ST1 6.2 or even higher. ~475hp under 3000 range

STU 'spend all the money you want'

 

 

makes ST1 PLENTY of race car but not all out obscene... leave that to STU.

 

FYI T1 cars are more like 8.0 not 8.7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991

... with adjustments, yadda, yadda... prob about 8.7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
L98Terror
Changing rules has always been the most expensive and destructive result for racers and teams. Racing history is littered with cars prepared for series that never went back to the track.

Changing a HP/lbs ratio slightly will not elimanate cars and it would be nice to have a place that T1 cars could just come over and play I would think that would increase car counts or at least let some T1 guys see what NASA is all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryan0

FYI T1 cars are more like 8.0 not 8.7

 

C5s?

 

all 7 of us out here average around 3250 (+/- 50lbs) and 375hp (and under)... 8.7ish

 

my car as of 3 weeks ago was 3230/362 ... 8.9

 

T1 weight is 3180 (which one on seems to be able to get to legally)... average crate motor is around 370 (without tearing it up, 'fine tuning' tolerances, 'decking' heads, etc)

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...