Putnam Park recap from TTC... pics and vid...

[RACER-X]

So yeah, 2 pts over the limit for TTC. Easy enough one to make a simple mistake on

Yep. I don't think anyone is accusing Aaron of cheating. TT classing is not the easiest thing in the world!

 

One thing I would like clarification on for myself is that huge rear wing with the large vertical panels at both ends. I think those panels would get an additional +2 for rule 8 under Aero... "Add rear vertical panels in any location". I think the intent of that rule was to catch diffusers or vortex generators, but would also apply to this type of wing.

 

Greg, care to comment?

 

I agree! We've all been there.

I don't think the ends on the wing were ever meant to mean diffuser, which would go under the rear of the car. Yes a comment on all this would be nice Greg.

 

EDIT:

10) Add vortex generator to roof, rear window, or rear deck lid (note: additional points must

be assessed for any vertical panels incorporated into a rear diffuser that are greater than five

inches in height) +1

 

Now look at the wording in 3

 

3) Add, replace, or modify rear wing or spoiler +4 (a rear wing or spoiler may not exceed a

height of eight ( inches above the roofline (or OEM windshield height for convertibles),

or a width greater than the width of the car body.

 

Clearly a rear wing or spoiler is different than a vortex generator, so no +2 for the sides on the wing.

[vpnwiz]

I think those panels would get an additional +2 for rule 8 under Aero... "Add rear vertical panels in any location". I think the intent of that rule was to catch diffusers or vortex generators, but would also apply to this type of wing.

... Clearly a rear wing or spoiler is different than a vortex generator, so no +2 for the sides on the wing.

I agree in principle, but rule 8 (from the Jan 1, 2009 v6.1 TT rules) simply says rear vertical panels in ANY location (my emphasis).

 

Technically speaking a rear aerofoil/wing does not require vertical end panels to function. I can guess at the intent of rule 8 because it is referencing notes for diffusers and vortex generators as clarification ... but IMO as it is written it leaves the window open for a +2 for those panels.

 

Patrick

[RACER-X]

I think those panels would get an additional +2 for rule 8 under Aero... "Add rear vertical panels in any location". I think the intent of that rule was to catch diffusers or vortex generators, but would also apply to this type of wing.

... Clearly a rear wing or spoiler is different than a vortex generator, so no +2 for the sides on the wing.

I agree in principle, but rule 8 (from the Jan 1, 2009 v6.1 TT rules) simply says rear vertical panels in ANY location (my emphasis).

 

Technically speaking a rear aerofoil/wing does not require vertical end panels to function. I can guess at the intent of rule 8 because it is referencing notes for diffusers and vortex generators as clarification ... but IMO as it is written it leaves the window open for a +2 for those panels.

 

Patrick

 

The complete rule states...

8 ) Add rear vertical panels in any location (note: see 6) and 7) and 10)) +2

The reference to note 6,7,10 clearly indicates that adding vertical pannels to ANY of these areas is a +2, but not the wing, we'll let Greg decide.

Edited May 22, 2009 by Guest

[Greg G.]

Wing endplates are free with the wing assessment points. I may need to write a tech bulletin for clarity.

[vpnwiz]

Thanks Greg!

[RACER-X]

Yep, interesting. http://www.cardomain.com/ride/3297607" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

Last updated: Apr 14, 2009

 

- Saner 1.25” Adjustable front sway bar

SPC Adjustable upper ball joints

AST custom shocks

Spoon Monoblock Calipers

J’s Type-V intake duct

Turn-down exhaust

 

Looks like you must have taken off at least 8 points of mods since the cardomain was last updated. Also, what do you mean by "custom" AST shocks?

 

Looks like we're hidding something......

I just EM'd the shock company and here it is........

 

Ken,

 

Aaron is running a prototype set of AST 5100s that have steel bodies. The production AST 5000 series for the S2000 have aluminum bodies to reduce weight and they are modular in design. This allows you to upgrade your shocks from 5100->5200->5300 as your needs and budget changes. Here is some basic information on ours shocks: http://www.vorshlag.com/ast_models.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

Aaron is running off the shelf valving with the 700 #/in and 650 #/in springs. In addition, he is using the AST Spherical Top Mounts in the front and rear. The advantage to spherical top mounts is their ability to transmit reactions to shock forces instantly and directly instead of having a rubber bushing in the load path. If you make an online account with us, you can get different pricing quotes along with shipping quotes before entering any credit card information. Here is a link to the S2000 AST 5000 Series page: http://www.vorshlag.com/product_info.php?cPath=152_153_181&products_id=302" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

Let us know if you have any other questions.

 

Thanks,

Matt - [email protected] - 888.988.5868 - 972.542.1249

http://www.vorshlag.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; | http://www.ast-usa.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

 

 

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:21 AM, KEN FREY wrote:

 

I see Aaron Leichty has a set of the AST 4000 or are they 4100, and set a new track record at Putnam. Can I get a price on the same set for a 2000 Honda S2000. Will they need to be revalved, or are they just a standard set off the self? The springs on the front are 700# and 650# for the rear. Please send me a price brake down on these.

Thanks,

Ken

 

If you go to the site, Aaron writes.. http://www.vorshlag.com/product_reviews_info.php?products_id=302&reviews_id=20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These shocks are over $2400

[cuonice]

My receipt shows a retail price of $1685 for AST 4100 series shocks. Receipt is on file for any with a legitimate reason for me to produce it.

 

Keep up the good work Ken. See you at Mid-Ohio. Once again, thanks to all who have offered positive comments and constructive criticisms. They were all appreciated and I look forward to seeing most of you at the track!

 

-Aaron Leichty

Edited May 27, 2009 by Guest

[Trevor57]

How high is that wing relative to the roof?

[kbrew8991]

Aaron - don't take this the wrong way, but I'd go back through word by word though the rules and class sheet and make sure that car is fully legal by the next one you go to. Its obvious you've got some driving talent, and you may have to change one or two small things that'll cost you a few hundredths here or there max, but it'll keep *everyone* happy to know that yeah they really are getting smoked by a legal car, and not an almost legal one, with a good driver at the helm.

[ninetyfourintegra]

I am cheap so this was never really an issue that I thought much about.

 

Let's assume that the price for the shocks were greater than $2,400 list (we'll say $3,000) but you bought them used or on sale for $2,250 do you still take the points for the >$2,400 price tag?

[Trevor57]

Retail price is the only thing that matters.

[ninetyfourintegra]

Retail price is the only thing that matters.

 

doh , it says it in plain back and white right there in the rules now doesn't it.

[vpnwiz]

doh , it says it in plain back and white right there in the rules now doesn't it.

... wait for it... wait for it...

 

I guess you weren't looking far enough ahead, Ron.

 

Yeah, you knew someone was gonna say it!

 

Muahahahahaaaa!!!!

[RACER-X]

Keep up the good work Ken. See you at Mid-Ohio. Once again, thanks to all who have offered positive comments and constructive criticisms. They were all appreciated and I look forward to seeing most of you at the track!

 

-Aaron Leichty

 

 

Thanks, I will.

 

 

Note: This post was edited at the request of Vorshalg Motorsports.

Edited May 28, 2009 by Guest

[JamesL]

I forgot how embarrassing the behavior of some people on the internet could be...

[L98Terror]

I forgot how embarrassing the behavior of some people on the internet could be...

 

IMO there is nothing embarrassing about it, if there is no question about your car's legality then you should be flattered that people go to the efforts to make sure it is legal. It is better that all this come out now than later, at least Aaron now has the answers at his finger tips and it his his obligation to show the car is legal.

 

We all learn for this and get our questions answered that is part of TT learning and understanding the rules.

 

I've been through it but it is much easier with a Corvette since there are so few mods allowed. Now I'm TTS/ST2 so I'm just a scale and dyno away from knowing if I conform

[John Graber]

Nice job Aaron.

Please get your comp license and plan on going to Miller to run TTC and PTC. You should clean-up:)

[ninetyfourintegra]

... wait for it... wait for it...

 

I guess you weren't looking far enough ahead, Ron.

 

Yeah, you knew someone was gonna say it!

 

Muahahahahaaaa!!!!

 

I least I have been able to look up see a green flag this year... BTW you coming to Beaver on the 6th? Or are you doing Grattan?

[Greg G.]

Aaron is running a prototype set of AST 5100s that have steel bodies. The production AST 5000 series for the S2000 have aluminum bodies to reduce weight and they are modular in design. This allows you to upgrade your shocks from 5100->5200->5300 as your needs and budget changes. Here is some basic information on ours shocks: http://www.vorshlag.com/ast_models.php

 

Aaron, it says on the Vorshlag website that the 5100's are inverted as well. So, you should look at that as well as is another +1 for inverted shocks.

[phoenixR34]

The 5100s are probably inverted for the strut applications only.. as with most other shock companies. That would be my guess (S2000s don't have struts).

 

FWIW, it's ridiculous seeing all the nit-picking. Seriously.. +2 for the wing endplates as "vertical panels"? If that were the case, then 98% of all TT entrants would be adding +2 to their cars.

 

Canards.. yes, definitely +2. People get busted on that all the time, and that's the problem with all the Super Street Magazine front bumpers.. they're not designed to fit well with TT. Splitters, air dams and canards have to be clearly defined on the car. ie. splitters must be parallel to te ground, air dams must be perpendicular, and anything with an angle could potentially be a canard.

 

And if he has the ball joints, that means the car is into TTB by two points. The shock issue looks like a huge mess.. but shouldn't matter anyways since the car apparently isn't even in TTC to begin with.

 

I'm surprised the TTC record at Putnam still stands, knowing it's a TTB car.

[Trevor57]

I don't think that enforcing the rules as they are written is "nit-picking."

[phoenixR34]

I'm just curious why the wing side plates being considered a vertical panel hasn't come up before (excuse me if I'm wrong.. I don't read every thread in depth), especially considering nearly every carbon/aluminum wing has them. It's probably the most common modification after tires and shocks.

 

I guess at the end of the day, if you or anyone is breaking track records, be prepared to be heavily scrutinized by everyone, have a full understanding of the rules and have your classing sheet backed up with receipts, research and emails from NASA. Been there, done that.

 

It amazes me when someone comes out of nowhere, breaks a track record and is like, "I dunno anything about the car.. I just drive it. So and so classed it for me." Uh huh..

[Markus]

OK...I kind of see both sides of the coin here...

 

Yes it does look like nit-picking when a bunch of people jump on someone, go so far as to contact a supplier for parts info, etc. BUT the bottom line is - PT/TT is mostly self regulating. Regional inspections are sporadic and even at nationals there have been some enforcement issues. Which mainly leaves the competitors to police each other. And this isn't just a NASA problem, I have friends involved with IT classes in the "other club" and unless it's a major race like the IT*Fest or ARRC it's kind of the same thing - self police, throw paper if you think someone is non-compliant.

 

On the other hand, I feel this guy's pain as he is taking alot of points for stupid stuff that might not make him totally faster. IE, the front spoiler. It would be interesting to see if he could go back to the OEM bumper, still legally fit in TTC, and do well at Putnam or other tracks. Hopefully this mess doesn't discourage him and he decides to try again, as it does seem like there is talent there.

 

- Mark

[Trevor57]

This dude called the attention to himself. Start threads in every possible forum, and expect some input.

[Shawn M.]

It amazes me when someone comes out of nowhere, breaks a track record and is like, "I dunno anything about the car.. I just drive it. So and so classed it for me." Uh huh..

 

 

In some ways I can understand people not knowing what parts are exactly in the car they purchased. However, when one is buying a (heavily) modified vehicle, one usually has a complete list of mods done to the car. USUALLY but I guess not always can apply to some people. I would find it highly unlikely.

 

Ultimately the responsibility to properly class their car falls solely on the owner/driver.