Re: TT Classification Rules--Neon ACR

[Greg G.]

Transferred from the SoCal Forum:

I Find the classes/rules a little confusing. Is the (1st Gen) Neon ACR considered to be in the same class as the regular sedan/coupe?

 

If so, are points added for adj shocks (or aftermarket springs) since the cars came with adj. shocks as original equipment? If the ACR springs and/or sway bars are added to the regular Neon, are points added?

 

What constitutes an "air intake system"? Cat back exhaust?

 

If you add a big brake system, do you add an additional point for performance pads?

 

If one were to swap a larger engine (e.g. 351 Ford in place of a 302, does he add 5 points (increased displacement), 7 points (engine swap), or 12 points (both)?

 

One more thing... it appears that there is no penalty for lightweight wheels; not even those extremely light Volk or SSR wheels. Is this an oversight?

 

These rules were developed by the NASA-X guys in the North East, then adapted for use with Time Trial on a national basis. Because of this progression, we have found over the year that there are issues that are pertinent to road race time trialing that are not covered under these rules. We all know that running your car through a bunch of cones for a minute is much different than driving at 140 mph on an Speedway, or making turns at over 125 mph. So, with that being said, it is now the appropriate time to look at the rules, and propose changes for 2005.

 

You have found a flaw in the rules. The ACR is clearly a superior track car to a regular Neon Sedan, and the classification should show this.

 

Now, as for your other questions, you must remember that each regional TT director is going to be the final judge of how many points and what classification a car ultimately gets. Although the rules are used on a national basis, the competition is still run at the regional level (for now--I would personally love to have a National level TT competition at some point).

 

If a car already comes stock with adjustable shocks, and the owner changed them out for a different adjustable shock, then I would give them 1 point for "performance shocks" instead of the 4 points. If the owner changes out the springs, then I would assign the standard 2 points for the new springs.

 

An air intake system is any change in the stock air intake other than changing out the filter element. (ie, CAI, Ram Air, etc).

 

A Cat-back exhaust is any change to the exhaust system (other than a new muffler), that occurs after the catalytic converter. The TT rules in this case seem to ignore more extensive exhaust system changes that could occur from the header or exhaust manifold to the catalytic converter, or even deletion of the catalytic converter for a non-street legal car.

 

If you add a big brake kit, then you get 3 points. You don't get assessed an additional point for performance pads (they are included in the big brake kit).

 

If you were to swap a larger engine into your vehicle, you would get 7 points, unless the vehicle that comes stock with the larger engine has a higher stock class than the recipient vehicle. For example, if you put the SRT4 2.4L turbo engine into your ACR, you would automatically jump up a class level from the base class of TTF to TTE. So, that would basically be a 15 point assessment. A Mustang owner that put a V8 into their previous V6 car, would jump from TTE to TTD base class.

 

You're right, no assessment for wheel swaps unless the wheels are large enough to stick out from the bodywork. There are other weight reduction items that are not listed as well. Maybe a consideration for 2005 rules?

 

One of the problems with this system is that you just have to stop somewhere, or these rules could get so complicated that nobody would be able to figure out what class a car belongs in. And, it would be even more difficult to determine if someone has sandbagged. This is not, and will never be a professional series, although our SoCal sponsors (Hotchkis Tuning, Porterfield Brakes, and Dave Turner Motorsports) have donated some prizes for our series winners. We go on the honor system for the most part, although I have no problem checking out someone's car if it seems that they are running unusual times for a given class. With a few exceptions, this system seems to work pretty well. Our classes have been very competitive this year. There have been days when the top five finishers in a class were all within 1 second of each other. The cars that run better at high hp tracks like Willow Springs often get beat at Buttonwillow by lower hp lighter cars that can turn better.

 

There are clearly some classification problems that should be addressed. For example, there were revised rules in the middle of 2004 that have placed the 2004 SRT4 an entire class above the 2003 SRT4. You and I both know that the only difference between the two cars is the Quaiffe limited slip differential, and maybe 10 hp due to slightly larger fuel injectors. The LSD should be only worth 3 points. And the 10 hp is negated anyway once someone adds a stage 1 or stage 2 kit. So, basically an 2003 SRT4 running Stage 1 and with an added Quaiffe, will be one class lower than an identical 2004 SRT4 running Stage 1. So, these type of discrepancies need to be identified and adjusted.

 

I believe that one of the things we should consider for the 2005 rules would be to classify all of our NASA Spec cars, and as long as they followed the spec rules for that vehicle, it should stay in it's spec car base class. For example, I think that a Spec SRT should never be classified higher than TTC, and a Spec Neon should never be classified higher than TTD. Under the current rules, my Spec SRT runs in TTD class. Under the revised rules, I may have to run in TTB class. This just doesn't make sense.

 

Everyone, please send any suggestions regarding the TT rules to me at [email protected] so that I can compile a list for submission and consideration for 2005.

 

Greg G.

NASA SoCal TT Director

[jp99gt]

Greg,

 

This is great, the rules need some updating and I appreciate the lead you are taking on this. I have some notes from this year's OH/IN region that I will condense and send on to you.

 

Again, thanks for taking the lead on this.

[Neon2dmaX]

Greg:

Thanks for your response. A couple points:

 

You make a good point about the Neon vs. ACR. I notice that the Nissan Sentra SE-R is bumped up one class from the regular Sentra. Perhaps that is what should be occurring with the Neon. Alternatively, you might consider a distinction between the SOHC and DOHC Neon... then add +5 points for the ACR option (which is essentially a spring/shock package).

 

By my calculations, a Spec Neon would add 26 points to the regular Neon.

 

It seems that if a point is going to be added for aluminum flywheel, at least one point should be added for light wheels (e.g. Team Dynamics Pro Race 1; Rota Slipstream, etc.) and maybe two points for those very light wheels (e.g. Volk TE-37; SSR Competition, etc.). I seem to recall a rule of thumb that states that removing 1 lb. of unsprung weight is the equivalent of removing 4 lbs. of sprung weight. Thus, for example, using the very light wheels on a Neon SRT-4 would probable reduce the weight by 5 lbs each or 20 lbs overall... almost like losing 80 lbs. of sprung weight. By comparison, the aluminum flywheel would cause a weight reduction of approximately 8-9 lbs. Of course, reducing the weight of either the flywheel and/or wheels offers additional advantages re: rotational weight. Thus, it seems that some points should be added for the light wheels.

 

If 1 or 2 points are going to be added for gutting the interior, 1 point should be subtracted for adding a roll bar and 2 points subtracted for adding a complete cage. I doubt that this issue has been considered by the AutoX guys, since roll bars are generally not required except in roadsters. Given the significantly higher speeds attained by NASA's TT cars, we should encourage the added safety element. Moreover, I rather suspect that adding a roll bar to my 1st Gen Neon is nearly equivalent to gutting the rear of the car while adding a full cage is nearly equivalent to gutting the interior.

[Neon2dmaX]

Looked at some of the classifications again. I notice that the Ford Focus ZTS/ZX3* is classed in TT-G (albeit with 5 extra points to the ZX3). In looking at the published data for the ZX3, I find that there are (were) multiple versions, a couple of which were equipped with a 2.0 engine and one of which is equipped with a 2.3 liter engine. The 2.3 is virtually identical in HP to the Neon DOHC and has about 10% more torque. It appears that the 2.0 ZX3 should be in G (perhaps with 5 point penalty as compared to non ZX3 Focus) while the 2.3 equiped ZX3 should be moved to F (without a 5 point penalty). If parity (or near parity) is th objective, the Neon (at least the Neon SOHC) should be moved to G with a 5 point penalty added to the ACR; Neon with DOHC = +5; DOHC ACR +10.

 

Alternatively, as you look at revising the classifications, consider a +5/+10 point rule to allow for some of the special editions that are being produced For example, a regular Focus is in F; add +5 for ZX3 or +10 for ZX3 equipped with the 2.3.

 

Neon2dmaX

[Vitor]

Idea was as Greg notioned to keep the rules compact, yet broad in reach.

 

The example used of the ACr coming from the factory with adjustable konis. Anyone that wants to campaign a neon and wants to be competitive will upgrade to adjustable or revalved struts. Why should the lucky fellow to find a ACR on the lot get special treatment, : no penalty for adjustable shocks.

 

Last MY (model year) ACr rolled off the assembly line sometimes in mid 98. End of 2004, if you been racing since you got your ACR, it has close to 5 years of abuse, err use on it. Chances are the konis that Chrysler put in on the assembly line are SHOT! So if you go out and buy the $250/each OEM strut should you enjoy fewer mod points then the wise rabbit that called up ModernPerformance.com and got them about $100 less per strut?

 

History on 97-99 ACr Konis: Stock ACR came with Koni identical in many aspect to aftermarket struts, except 97 came from factory with camber slots, 98-99 did not. Also, factory konis are black, aftermarket, yellow. Most places that revalve them paint them either koni yellow or some color representative of the state of tune of the strut (blue - stage 2 Truechoice??)

 

I would like for '05 season more emphasis be placed on weight (removal) and little fine tuning to the MOD Point system.

[Neon2dmaX]

Looked at some of the classifications again. I notice that the Ford Focus ZTS/ZX3* is classed in TT-G (albeit with 5 extra points to the ZX3). In looking at the published data for the ZX3, I find that there are (were) multiple versions, a couple of which were equipped with a 2.0 engine and one of which is equipped with a 2.3 liter engine. The 2.3 is virtually identical in HP to the Neon DOHC and has about 10% more torque. It appears that the 2.0 ZX3 should be in G (perhaps with 5 point penalty as compared to non ZX3 Focus) while the 2.3 equiped ZX3 should be moved to F (without a 5 point penalty). If parity (or near parity) is th objective, the Neon (at least the Neon SOHC) should be moved to G with a 5 point penalty added to the ACR; Neon with DOHC = +5; DOHC ACR +10.

 

Alternatively, as you look at revising the classifications, consider a +5/+10 point rule to allow for some of the special editions that are being produced For example, a regular Focus is in F; add +5 for ZX3 or +10 for ZX3 equipped with the 2.3.

Neon2dmaX

 

Prior to the time I added this post, Greg wrote:

 

"One of the problems with this system is that you just have to stop somewhere, or these rules could get so complicated that nobody would be able to figure out what class a car belongs in. And, it would be even more difficult to determine if someone has sandbagged. This is not, and will never be a professional series, although our SoCal sponsors (Hotchkis Tuning, Porterfield Brakes, and Dave Turner Motorsports) have donated some prizes for our series winners. We go on the honor system for the most part, although I have no problem checking out someone's car if it seems that they are running unusual times for a given class. With a few exceptions, this system seems to work pretty well. Our classes have been very competitive this year. There have been days when the top five finishers in a class were all within 1 second of each other. The cars that run better at high hp tracks like Willow Springs often get beat at Buttonwillow by lower hp lighter cars that can turn better."

 

 

Frankly, I see no reason to allow a clearly superior car such as the ZX3 equipped with the 2.3 engine to run in the same class as the base ZX3. Other cars that are offered in different configurations transcend the class lines: e.g. Mustang Cobra r = B; Saleen Mustang = C; and Mustang V8 (all others?) = D. If the regular ZX3 deserves a +5 points, then the ZX3 equipped with the 2.3 deserves at least another +5 (for increased displacement). Hardly an unjust penalty for a car which in base configuration is virtually identical to the 1st gen Neon which in all forms is classed one class higher (G for Focus & F for Neon).

[NeonJohn]

First, thanks to all for some really good input. I joined the Midwest region, and just completed my first TT event. I happen to run a 1997 Neon ACR, and I ran the car since new with Midwestern Council of Sports Car Clubs.

 

MCSCC gives you shocks without assessing a modification point(s). They seem to think that shocks aren't as helpful as spring rate changes. I tend to agree, except for the camber adjustment on the '97 Koni's. I can get nearly -3 degrees, just from the Factory!

 

The ACR isn't all that different from the stock Neon. http://WWW.neon.org has a great camparison. For example -- my STOCK spring rates are 150 in front, 120 in back. Mere mortal Neon's run a 140 in front, 120 in back. Of course I screwed that all up by installing race springs that knock my fillings out on the street.

 

The gear ratio is different, but only in fifth gear. The only time I've been in that gear on the track was at Road America in Elkart Lake, WI. There is a rumor that there is little or no sound deadening, and of course you save weight by not being able to obtain power locks, windows and radio with the ACR competition package.

 

There was another rumor going around that they put the motors with the most tolerances in the ACR's, thus ensuring the 132 and 150 horses depending on the number of cams you have.

 

My car was one out of 6,147 built through mid-1998 or so. Most of these are trashed because of the contingency MOPAR offered SSB and SSC racers in the late '90's. Who cares if you bent the body trying to win that $1,000? You could get a fender for $40 in the program! Seeing a Neon Challenge was like watching a grudge match between Tony Steward and Dale Earnhart -- more than a little traded paint. Also, most of these cars have cages, and that develops cracks in the firewall tunnel according to Eric the SSB racer who happened to be a MOPAR engineer. These cars are tired, but that shouldn't make a difference if someone is handy with a wrench. The bottom ends are indestructable, and the top ends are well -- let's put it this way, for $10,000 brand spanking new in 1997, my ACR is the Bic Lighter of racers -- disposable. It was cheaper to replace then repair back then. Now, times are different.

 

But if you're looking for an ACR for NASA-TT, try to find one that was run in SOLO II events -- they weren't run as hard as the Showroom Stock cars. 1997 was the best year in my opinon -- the OEM chip is fairly liberal -- you can do just about anything to the intake and exhaust and the chip will let you by just learning quickly and adjusting the fuel curves. It also had no speed limiter -- the rev limiter cut in at 7200 RPM by cutting off the fuel, and it's like getting punched in the chest by my Simpson Harness.

 

As to the 5 point assesment to the Neon ACR, I remain unconvinced that the cars really are that much better then other TTF cars to warrent that five points, but I'm not going to work to change that. The biggest issue I see is the 1.8 Miata in TTE -- that car should be competing with me in TTF.

 

Also, a roll cage should not be used to deduct points. Yes, it's heavy, but it also stiffens the chassis up a lot. I instructed in a 1997 ACR coupe like the one I have, but this guy had the SCCA cage and it out handled mine -- even if it didn't quite accelerate like my car. He just didn't need to brake as much because of the handling. It was a completely different car.

 

Thanks for the info, folks!