Members Shawn M. Posted January 3, 2009 Members Share Posted January 3, 2009 and really what I don't like the most out of this whole thing is the precedent we keep setting by saying "oh we can't catch you for this so we're going to let everyone have it points-free". Please guys - lets fight to keep the size of the free mod list smaller, keep your ears and eyes open for ways to catch things like this before they're forced onto the free mod list. Im curious Ken, what methods and how effective were you able to verify stock ECU's in variously manufactured cars that didnt claim points for a reflash/chip and how were you able to keep people from changing the tune of their cars while on track at all of your events? I suspect your methods must of been extremely effective so then I have to ask why didnt you share these foolproof methods with the rest of the NASA directors so they could also easily enforce the rule and therefore keep one more thing off the free mods list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 oh get the hell off it already Shawn - we all get that there wasn't a way this time - does NOT change the need to be vigilant against it in the future. esp stuff thats already on the list that really need not be - flywheels, final drives, seam welding, strut tower bars, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Shawn M. Posted January 3, 2009 Members Share Posted January 3, 2009 oh get the hell off it already Shawn - we all get that there wasn't a way this time - does NOT change the need to be vigilant against it in the future. esp stuff thats already on the list that really need not be - flywheels, final drives, seam welding, strut tower bars, etc. You brought it up my brutha. thats great advice. Get off it already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 I'll take it if you will Mr. Sarcasm doesn't look very good on you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Shawn M. Posted January 3, 2009 Members Share Posted January 3, 2009 I'll take it if you will Mr. Sarcasm doesn't look very good on you I simply asked a question inspired by your comment. I didnt think you could answer it. Thats the only point I was making my good man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 and you know full & well that THAT was not what I was getting at this time. I guess inability to read simple statements such as: Please guys - lets fight to keep the size of the free mod list smaller, keep your ears and eyes open for ways to catch things like this before they're forced onto the free mod list. is a requirement for being a National Assistant for this class apparently We missed big on the ECU thing and set in place a dangerous precedent, lets do what we can - all of us, directors, regional people, participants because some of this stuff is so complex Greg can't do it alone - to stay in front of the next thing. Reading is fundamental. Do they still teach it out west? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 3, 2009 National Staff Share Posted January 3, 2009 oh get the hell off it already Shawn - we all get that there wasn't a way this time - does NOT change the need to be vigilant against it in the future. esp stuff thats already on the list that really need not be - flywheels, final drives, seam welding, strut tower bars, etc. Ok, here we go again. Ken, how were you able to check final drive ratios in front wheel drive cars without removing and tearing down transmissions? Do you think it would be wise to have to check flywheel weights on cars that would require a full lift and 4+ hours to do the job of removal and replacement of the transmission? Do you think that it would ever get done? And, where would you find the references of exactly how much a 1960-1980 (name your model--especially esoteric ones) flywheel is supposed to weigh? Strut tower bars are free because 1) almost everyone has them either bolted in or part of the cage, 2) we have been pestered for years by your friends coming from other organizations that don't think it is fair to assess them for the rear strut tower bar in their cage, 3) we are tired of arguing with competitors about whether their car came stock with an STB or not, and also arguing with them that another competitor gets their's for no points, etc....(and no, a STB is not factored into base classing), and 4) they are a cheap mod that can be bolted in within a few minutes, so why not make them free. Seam welding is free because of the same folks with their cars previously built for other classes (including those that we deleted when we started PT), along with the problem with teching the cars. If we had a 1, 2, or 3 point assessment for seam welding, what would the actual definition of seam welding be? If it was any weld that was not part of the OEM construction, we would end up with issues and complaints. If it allowed some welding for cage structure, etc, the wording would ultimately be taken advantage of. If there was a car with a five inch section of some body part that was seam welded for extra strength, we would get complaints that they shouldn't have to take points. Ultimately, those that write and approve the PT and TT Rules decided that in a caged car (with a fairly unlimited cage design), that seam welding assessment wasn't worth the headaches listed above. Do we really need to keep going down the list. You talk like we just write whatever pops up in water cooler discussions. Guess what, we actually have thought about the rules that get approved. And, we even have intelligent people (like lawyers, doctors, and professional race organization executives, all with extensive racing personal experience) that write the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Graber Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Well, I agree with a lot of what has been said here, although I certainly question several's logic and tact. Having participated for four years in TT and all three Championships I have a pretty good idea how things are working. Here are my comments: 1) TT Rules #3 "vehicle legality is the sole responsibility of the driver." 2) Different cars get different benefit levels from almost every penalty points assessment. Stacking these assessments can widen the gap even further. 3) There are like 1000 car types with base classifications. 4) There are over 100 points assessable upgrade options. 5) Ultimate success will come from someone picking the right car, targeting the right competition class, and assessing their points wisely. As opposed to almost everyone else who takes "their" car and inserts it into the TT system. 6) The rules will continue to evolve based on driver and car prep and further analysis upgrade analysis. This is just a fact of reality, even though no one wants the rules to change. 7) A tremendous amount of work goes into creating, researching, analyzing, and ultimately implementing the rules set. The potential prep options are virtually unlimited. I have never seen a car fully prepared to take advantage of the rules set. For instance; new Hoosier A6's every session, $10k Penske shocks, custom designed/built cams, heads, aero...... 9) I haven't seen any former TT Drivers get picked up by any F1 teams. Although I'm still wiating. 10) The Nasa TT program is an extremely unique competition. No other sanctioning body has even come close to matching the sophistication or participation levels. 11) TT Drivers have the best commraderie of any series in the Nasa program. TT probably (I'm sure it does but I don't have concrete evidence) has the highest level of Natoinal participation of any series. It affords almost everyone an avenue to compete, regardless of their car or wallet. I'm sure there will always be people who dissagree with the rules, and I know there will be many who will lobby for changes to benefit themselves. This is no different than any other competition, on or off the track. Lets try and handle things in a more positive way so we can continue to grow and refine this tremendous series. If you have a real issue with someone, take it offline. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Well, I agree with a lot of what has been said here, although I certainly question several's logic and tact. Hey come on at least the Evo guy isn't in this thread....I kid, I kid. Seriously - must just be silly season or something, I wouldn't mind having a beer with Shawn, Greg, John and heck maybe just even maybe Ken in person. Hopefully we can all remember and get back to that. So - I get the basic theory of "if we can't reasonably inspect it make it no points" and how that effects ECU's. I still might not mind just a quick response from Greg on how this effects aftermarket systems though. Thanks, - Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 3, 2009 National Staff Share Posted January 3, 2009 Nice post, John. Mark, a Motec or other multi-thousand dollar aftermarket computer system is not the same as a chip or reflash. If they were, then Motec (and others) would be out of business and wouldn't sell any of them (when you can buy cheaper systems like Megasquirt--that still do more than most chips and reflashes that can be purchased on the retail market). For N.A cars, they cost just 3 points--the same as a subframe brace, an aftermarket exhaust, etc. It is less than one-sixth of a class bump upward. If it is not worth the points for you, then don't put it on the car. It will be worth the points to many, and they will take the assessment. Ultimately, if someone thinks that they are spending too many points on power mods for what their getting, they can attempt to get a Dyno re-classing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alonso Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 I was wondering why the SR20, both FWD and RWD, was removed from the pre approved motor swap list. Too much variability in chassis and engine generations maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Shawn M. Posted January 5, 2009 Members Share Posted January 5, 2009 I was wondering why the SR20, both FWD and RWD, was removed from the pre approved motor swap list. Too much variability in chassis and engine generations maybe? It hasnt been removed exactly. It just needs to be resubmitted as a motor swap to Greg. (dyno, car info, motor info ect.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 5, 2009 National Staff Share Posted January 5, 2009 I was wondering why the SR20, both FWD and RWD, was removed from the pre approved motor swap list. Too much variability in chassis and engine generations maybe? You got it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakisoba Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 But... I can't seam weld my Corvette! It's plastic! I'm being persecuted! just kidding, of course. There's always more than one way to skin a cat, and a previous poster said it correctly: If you want to win time trial, and have the driver ability, you need to pick the car that does best in that class (TTG to TTU) and pick your mods accordingly. The division seems to be built so that you can take any car off the street and class it into TT. The really driven folks will never do that, but will pick the car that's best for the division they target. What's the word on tires? What's in the 5 point slot for TT? The RA-1 is about gone. Happy to be TTA #41, Texas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varkwso Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 NASA TT is the best group of people to hang out at the track with I have seen - the Michelin girls come to mind as far more pleasing, but I digress... Not to disagree with Ken - but.... I like free mods - it allows more people to play since most cars are bought used and have some mods/lack of pedigree. To be honest most free mods are in a well prepped car anyway and really do not make the car faster. Also it makes the job of the check guy a lot easier. The driver is ultimately responsible - but some things are omitted by ignorance and others by intent. Free mods allow the checker to spend time on the "big hitters". Checking the flywheel/clutch on a C5/6 will take a bit longer by the way then 4 hours.... Some of the free mods are worth more to some cars them others - seam welding is useless on my car but the LS motors love the aluminum flywheel/clutch (once you learn to live with the noise) - so it works out. The ECU mod is worth more to FI then NA. But any ECU car can have multiple ECU settings controlled by a switch. And there is no easy way to enforce it. Eventually, GPS data, physics and loose lips will catch the ones who dial the power up and down to beat dynos. Also 5-10 seconds a lap quicker then a known "reference driver/car" gets attention. In the end the rules are the rules. There will be some cars who will flat dominate based on them and there will be some who will need to be driven well to beat the cars who get a few "breaks". I already know of some people building torque monster motors since PT/TT is based on HP/Wt.....I ,however, do not have that available to my budget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H4CRXSi Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 I already know of some people building torque monster motors since PT/TT is based on HP/Wt.....I ,however, do not have that available to my budget. Same here. We have already proven that our car can be competitive in TTE/PTE at the 16.5:1 adjusted "minimum" pwr/wt ratio, but in that where we are making 145hp with 120tq and I know some of the other cars are making 155hp and 150tq and the weight difference is less than 150lbs. When you're dealing with "momentum" cars such as these, that extra 30 ft/lbs of torque can definitely be the deciding factor. Regards, Sam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monTTana Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 100% NASA noobie here. After reading the TT rules, in 6.4.1 it says that if forced induction vehicles have been classed based on dyno testing they are exempt from the +5 point assesment. So if I take my car and have it dyno tested, I have those 5 points to use elsewhere. That is how I read it. Since I do not know anyone in NASA to confer with, could someone let me know if I am reading this rule correctly? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vpnwiz Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 100% NASA noobie here. After reading the TT rules, in 6.4.1 it says that if forced induction vehicles have been classed based on dyno testing they are exempt from the +5 point assesment. So if I take my car and have it dyno tested, I have those 5 points to use elsewhere. That is how I read it. Since I do not know anyone in NASA to confer with, could someone let me know if I am reading this rule correctly? Thanks If you follow the rules (make sure to read them closely) and class your car based on dyno & your chosen comp weight, correct. You should call/email/speak to your local NASA people though, they won't hurt you. Really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vpnwiz Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 ...There's always more than one way to skin a cat, and a previous poster said it correctly: If you want to win time trial, and have the driver ability, you need to pick the car that does best in that class (TTG to TTU) and pick your mods accordingly. ... Some would say that no one has really "picked" a car that is the best in class - yet. I think that Loch Ness is still lurking. IMO there hasn't been a dominator yet in the B-F classes. Time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 so long as there is the "horses for courses" phenomenon (ie a car that does a little better at one track relative to its class, a different car in that class that does better at a second track, etc.. ), that works for me and with the ability for you to pick an choose modifications one could in theory even iorn that out - ie - have a different mod package for each track they visit or we can all shut up and drive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vpnwiz Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 ...or we can all shut up and drive You can say that because you have warm weather! We are finally getting spring up here... nothing to do but bench racing and work on the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 my first race weekend this year was Jan 31st - KB, nationals qualified by this Sunday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 my first race weekend this year was Jan 31st Our first race in Florida was Jan 10-11, and we ran Dec 13-14 before that. Ah, I love year-round shenanigans... Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZELISE Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 What? You haven't qualified for Nationals yet? I got my fifth event already. However, we only do two NASA days between the end of May and Nationals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted March 11, 2009 National Staff Share Posted March 11, 2009 100% NASA noobie here. After reading the TT rules, in 6.4.1 it says that if forced induction vehicles have been classed based on dyno testing they are exempt from the +5 point assesment. So if I take my car and have it dyno tested, I have those 5 points to use elsewhere. That is how I read it. Since I do not know anyone in NASA to confer with, could someone let me know if I am reading this rule correctly? Thanks If you are thinking that YOU will re-class the car by Dyno testing by maxing the car out at the limit of Adjusted wt/power ratio for any given class, then you are mistaken. If you choose to re-class by Dyno and minimum competition weight, then you will submit those numbers to the National Director by e-mail, and you will be given a new base class. You will then not have to take the additional +5 points. However, the only cars that I have seen get re-classed at or near their limit of Adjusted wt/hp ratio were re-classed with two asterisks, leaving them only a few points for any other mods. In general, re-classing WILL NOT benefit forced induction cars that gain a lot of power for the number of points they spend on power mods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.