kbrew8991 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 as he's said a buncha times (beating a dead horse mode on for me): you can tweak the points values to whatever - lets get a sense of a GENERAL idea that works, then hash out +1 vs +2, etc, etc the way it seems like I enjoy beating a dead horse maybe I should be racing a Mustang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrsideways Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 LOL So we should adjust points for people that don't run with NASA, just in case they show up? Your Sig says it all. Whatever class has 3 entrants. My thought is don't "TRY" to scare them off. There sure is a lot of them. They could easily come over and help make all the classes have 3 entrants.... or 30! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor57 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I am quite sure NASA does not "try" to scare anybody away. I am also sure that Greg and NASA have enough sense to worry about current participants needs before people that "might" come over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 (edited) Out of curiousity, why move away from the current policy of points-per-$$ on shocks? I can understand its not perfect, but it does seem to err in the direction of spending less money (i.e., properly-valved Bilsteins may not be much worse but are a lot better than triple-adjustable Motons). If you're going to err (and I think you're always going to err significantly with shocks) I think cheaper is the direction to do it in. NASA's classing system is much less scary than Solo2's overall. Those guys with Motons take 7 more points than someone with Bilsteins - oh noes! Thats a 1/3rd of a class. They may not be as competitive as a car built specifically for TT, but they'll be a hell of lot closer than if they brought the wrong parts to a SCCA race. I think by far the biggest barrier to Solo2 folks doing TT is how long it takes to get a license. I've raced sprint karts and done time trials in other venues for years and was told it could take 3-4 events before I got a TT license. I'm just getting a racing license to circumvent all that, but I can understand that many people might not want to. In Solo2 you just show up and drive. Edited September 3, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I'm one of those drivers who was attracted to NASA from another club, and I think it is a legitimate consideration. It's more fun when there are more people in a class to compete with. I know that I drive better from the competition. What distinguished NASA is that I can choose to use my points any way I want. I think shocks should be assessed points but not too differently from where we are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Out of curiousity, why move away from the current policy of points-per-$$ on shocks? because its unenforceable, its going away... question is what will replace it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I've raced sprint karts and done time trials in other venues for years and was told it could take 3-4 events before I got a TT license. I'm just getting a racing license to circumvent all that, but I can understand that many people might not want to. In Solo2 you just show up and drive. In Solo2, you're going 35mph and the hardest thing you'll hit is a rubber cone. In TT, you're doing 120mph through T12 at Rd Atl with a wall right next to your head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 In Solo2, you're going 35mph and the hardest thing you'll hit is a rubber cone. In TT, you're doing 120mph through T12 at Rd Atl with a wall right next to your head. and more importantly possibly pulling a pass on a little TTF MR2 going 95mph (horsepower limited) through the same turn that does *not* want to get caught up in your lack of talent if you happen to start ping-ponging between the walls. Its the open-passing stuff that requires stringent requirements. Drop back to point-by passing, or one-car-at-a-time style events and you can back off of that quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 In Solo2, you're going 35mph and the hardest thing you'll hit is a rubber cone. In TT, you're doing 120mph through T12 at Rd Atl with a wall right next to your head.I wasn't saying the licensing requirement didn't make sense; it does. Its just a very significant barrier to entry which overshadows what shocks you happen to have on the car. Anyone willing to shell out for cone-dodging Motons is probably not going to have any issues changing their setup to go TT racing if they get that serious. Its the open-passing stuff that requires stringent requirements. Drop back to point-by passing, or one-car-at-a-time style events and you can back off of that quite a bit.This is how NARRA and I think Redline conducts their time trials, with much easier entry. Of course their events are also able to spread out the TT people over multiple run groups, since they don't have as many other groups running. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krisa9977 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Ok, lets see it. Bring it to Road Atlanta and run a 35 in TTB. And if I run 35 you pay for shipping... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varkwso Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 ... In TT, you're doing 120mph through T12 at Rd Atl with a wall right next to your head. With Ken in front of you (getting lapped for the 3rd time), Jason on your bumper and the IMSA Light (which no one can see) blowing by all of us... TT is much closer to W2W then Solo2, Redline or Track Attack. We have had problems with crossovers which is why we reserve the right to check them out. BTW - Comp License is probably easier to get then a TT license. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drivinhardz06 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 BTW - Comp License is probably easier to get then a TT license. Jason did my TT checkride (my EMRA TT license several years expired, lol). How could it be any easier? I just slipped him a $50 between T2 & T3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomn29 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Its the open-passing stuff that requires stringent requirements. Drop back to point-by passing, or one-car-at-a-time style events and you can back off of that quite a bit.This is how NARRA and I think Redline conducts their time trials, with much easier entry. Of course their events are also able to spread out the TT people over multiple run groups, since they don't have as many other groups running. I've ran with Redline TA before and their practice days are sometimes just crazy. People out in the 'advanced' groups running 500whp and no idea how to control it or execute a pass. No licensing of anykind required. I was scared a few times and really make to sure execute passes extremely carefully assuming the other driver might be an idiot. And fwiw, Redline's rule structure is so completely wide open that it really lends itself to the deepest pockets. There's no limits on hp or weight so deep pockets.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I just slipped him a $50 between T2 & T3 6 checkrides = 1 Hoosier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drivinhardz06 Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I just slipped him a $50 between T2 & T3 6 checkrides = 1 Hoosier might be how we pay for them in 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 6 checkrides = 1 Hoosier might be how we pay for them in 2010 I've got a spare kidney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varkwso Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I just slipped him a $50 between T2 & T3 6 checkrides = 1 Hoosier might be how we pay for them in 2010 Good thing I get a kickback on all passing checkrides... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdisco69 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 In addition to the above, if your shock/strut/damper has any of these additional features you must take points for each.....remote reservior +5 There is a debate as to whether that feature means anything at all to the performance of a shock. It's certain that it doesn't directly correlate to a higher cost, as there are many examples of remote reservoir shocks costing less than single body shocks. It's not a good metric in controlling costs, as shock companies have begun making single bodied shocks that perform as good as or better than remote reservoir, but cost significantly more. The rest of that proposed point system seems reasonable, with some points tweaking of course. You obviously want to avoid the situation of someone using the current rules building their car to the limit of the class with reasonable shocks only to get bumped up due to a rule meant to reel other people in from screwing with the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RACER-X Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 In addition to the above, if your shock/strut/damper has any of these additional features you must take points for each.....remote reservior +5 There is a debate as to whether that feature means anything at all to the performance of a shock. It's certain that it doesn't directly correlate to a higher cost, as there are many examples of remote reservoir shocks costing less than single body shocks. It's not a good metric in controlling costs, as shock companies have begun making single bodied shocks that perform as good as or better than remote reservoir, but cost significantly more. The rest of that proposed point system seems reasonable, with some points tweaking of course. You obviously want to avoid the situation of someone using the current rules building their car to the limit of the class with reasonable shocks only to get bumped up due to a rule meant to reel other people in from screwing with the rules. I don't know much about shocks but isn't one of the purposes of remote reservoir shocks to keep the temperature of the shock oil down which would keep the oil viscosity more stabil thereby creating a shock thats more consistent. If so wouldn't that be a performance gain??? Or am I way off base??? Yes, the rules need to be finished way before the next season so people can adjust accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Anyone know when the new shock rules will come out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slammed_93_hatch Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I don't know much about shocks but isn't one of the purposes of remote reservoir shocks to keep the temperature of the shock oil down which would keep the oil viscosity more stabil thereby creating a shock thats more consistent. If so wouldn't that be a performance gain??? Or am I way off base??? Yes, the rules need to be finished way before the next season so people can adjust accordingly. WAY WAY off base. Think about it like a brake system. the "remote reservoir" is the Cup that holds fluid at the master cylinder. When you boil/cook/destroy brake fluid, the stuff in the MC cup is still perfectly fine. Actually after 3 to 4 bleeds of the caliper you have brand new looking fluid coming out of the bleeder. And the color of brake fluid is indicative of the condition it is in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slammed_93_hatch Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 here is something i put together for another class. this information comes from Lee Grimes, who works at Koni NA Quotes from Lee Grimes of Koni NA about the myths of RR being better than non-RR dampers All quotes were taken directly from www.roadraceautox.com in a discussion about why RR dampers shouldn’t be allowed. What does a RR do differently than a non-RR. Lee Grimes-“On the remote reservoir racing shocks, it is a different theory entirely and they meter the displaced oil as it travels into the reservoir and then put and adjuster at that point to change forces. From a KONI point of view (for information but not trying to lobby for favorable rules), we do not need or use remote reservoirs because those things inside the shock body that the other brands are going outside the body to accomplish.” A statement to one of the benefits of RR being extra cooling Lee Grimes-”Although everyone points to improved cooling as a prime stated reason for remote reservoirs, it is a total misconception. Yes, there is more oil in the whole package but it is not a circulating system like your radiator. The oil in the shock body at the piston (area where the most heat is generated) stays in the shock body by the piston except for the volume that is displaced by the piston rod entering and exiting the body (look at the volume of 1/2 or 1 inch of your pinky finger for an idea). The oil in the reservoir basically stays in the reservoir. Same situation as if your brake calipers are running hot so you put a bigger cup on your master cylinder. It doesn't work because the brake fluid doesn't circulating through the hot and cooler places” Down fall of RR: mounting and weight Lee Grimes- “What many people don't realize is that remote reservoir shock by design typcially weigh about 50+% more, have greater mounting issues for locating the reservoir (I can tell some funny stories), and especially add a great deal of signal lag and low speed compression loss making them inherently less reactive with longer lines making it worse.” Conversation between Jake Gulick (JG) and Lee Grimes (LG) JG-“ Lee, if I read between the lines, I think I hear you saying that Koni doesn't build RR units because they think they can build a better shock in a monotube design.” LG- “We can do it with mono-tubes and twin tubes. The only reason to go outside the body of the shock to add your bump damping adjustment is if you can't already add them inside the shocks body. Adding them outside the body on a reservoir adds weight and lag/signal loss and that is why many reservoir shocks added a second bump adjustment (low speed) as they are trying to gain back some of the low speed signal that was lost by having the reservoir there in the first place. If you can't have the bump adjustment in the shock body, go outside the shock body. KONI can do it inside the shock body so no need to go outside and add weight, lag and more parts.” Mid-Ohio test with TRG-Andy Lally JRZ vs Koni 2812 Lee Grimes- “We did testing at Mid-Ohio with two identical TRG cars, one on the JRZs that they had developed over time and were highly dedicated to and a brand new set of KONI 28s that they had never seen before. They made both cars as identical as they could to make it as much of a head-to-head comparison as they could. On the first day and with one basic valving change on the rear shocks, Andy Lally was just iunder two seconds per lap faster in the KONI equipped car and their paying gentleman driver was over two seconds per lap faster in the KONI car. From that single test, they ordered 28s for all of their cars and they ran KONIs exclusively on their cars the rest of the year.” Yes he is most likely biased, but the facts are still the facts. Koni could build RR shocks, they don't because there isn't a need to, for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdisco69 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 here is something i put together for another class. Man, I could swear I've seen all that somewhere else, on another forum, deja vu... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RACER-X Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Good to know about those things, thanks for posting that article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slammed_93_hatch Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 just to clarify IMO i don't think there is any way* to put points on shocks... Shocks are not like Cams/pistons/tires ect. *- by this i mean any correct and and according to performance.. 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.