BillB Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 A blanket X point rule is not the solution either. Its should read like the spoiler rule, ... You mean this one: "Add, replace, or modify rear wing and/or spoiler +4" I agree a set point value is the best solution for policing and allowing someone to run one if they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacob300zx Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 PT/TT are classes that don't ban anything, unless it's safety related. This should remain so for the continued health of the TT/PT program. I can not find any sound and unassailable logic in favor of banning non OEM shapes unless NASA also bans non OEM shape fender, side sills, noses, windshield frames. It is clear that an aerodynamic advantage could be realized with a non OEM shape so it should be treated the same as a nose or fender shape change. Proposal G 13) Replace or modify OEM Hardtop shape or features with non-fastback. OEM hard top shape herein defined as within 1/2" of external OEM dimension. (note: Additional points must be assessed for any spoiler, vertical fins or vortex inducers integrated/attached into hardtop, see G.3),G8),G.10) +1 14) Add fastback hardtop that covers any portion of OEM trunk opening. (note: Additional points must be assessed for any spoiler, vertical fins or vortex inducers integrated/attached into fastback, see G.3),G8),G.10) +3 Bravo 949racing. Your rule is even better than mine. It realizes the differences between a hardtop and fastback. Thanks for posting a well thought out rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 A blanket X point rule is not the solution either. Its should read like the spoiler rule, ... You mean this one: "Add, replace, or modify rear wing and/or spoiler +4" I agree a set point value is the best solution for policing and allowing someone to run one if they want. everything from a factory option ducktail type spoiler to a big badass Fulcrum Aero wing is all +4. Very easy, very quick, very clean = winner winner chicken dinner. 949's isn't bad though, could work as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) OEM hard top shape herein defined as within 1/2" of external OEM dimension. IMO, this comes back around to this: find me the exact 3d dimensions for an S2000. We'll start with that and go to more obscure cars from there If you can pull it off for every listed car then maybe you'd have a point. I suppose that the volunteer tech officials and directors should carry around a set of NASCAR-esque body templates for every convertible that was offered as a hardtop from the factory. Maybe a 3D scanner? To jacob300zx: Do you compete in TT in a car that is affected by the current convertible/hardtop rule? Mark Edited February 21, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patinum Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 PT/TT are classes that don't ban anything, unless it's safety related. This should remain so for the continued health of the TT/PT program. I can not find any sound and unassailable logic in favor of banning non OEM shapes unless NASA also bans non OEM shape fender, side sills, noses, windshield frames. It is clear that an aerodynamic advantage could be realized with a non OEM shape so it should be treated the same as a nose or fender shape change. Proposal G 13) Replace or modify OEM Hardtop shape or features with non-fastback. OEM hard top shape herein defined as within 1/2" of external OEM dimension. (note: Additional points must be assessed for any spoiler, vertical fins or vortex inducers integrated/attached into hardtop, see G.3),G8),G.10) +1 14) Add fastback hardtop that covers any portion of OEM trunk opening. (note: Additional points must be assessed for any spoiler, vertical fins or vortex inducers integrated/attached into fastback, see G.3),G8),G.10) +3 This. As an S2000 owner with an OEM hardtop, I never felt my competitors had an advantage due their aftermarket tops. I would hate to see any competitor leave because their only option, after several years of competition, is a minimal (if not 0) advantage, rarely available part that costs thousands more than the part they've been competing with for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 As a follow-up to this discussion, per my conversation with an experienced Spec Miata driver (who I believe may have already posted in this thread), removing the OEM Miata hardtop and running without one (folding top down) costs approximately 4 mph in the 100 mph neighborhood. Another experienced Spec Miata driver claimed a lap time difference of nearly 2 seconds around Sebring between having and not having a hardtop (with the hardtop being quicker than having the folding top down). Additionally, per my conversation with a CMC driver about his convertible Mustang, the lack of any roof started to restrict his top-end speed starting at 100 mph. I see an advantage for convertible cars that run removable hardtops. In light of the above statements, I would consider lobbying for modification points if any hardtop, OEM or otherwise, was installed on any vehicle whose base configuration is as a convertible (S2000, Miata, etc.). I'm not saying that I will, but I'm saying that convertible drivers should be thankful to have the "no-points" OEM hardtop option that they currently do. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
949Racing Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 OEM hard top shape herein defined as within 1/2" of external OEM dimension. IMO, this comes back around to this: find me the exact 3d dimensions for an S2000. We'll start with that and go to more obscure cars from there If you can pull it off for every listed car then maybe you'd have a point. I suppose that the volunteer tech officials and directors should carry around a set of NASCAR-esque body templates for every convertible that was offered as a hardtop from the factory. Maybe a 3D scanner? Mark This is a good point but in practice, it is no different the requirements for say pistons, windshield or suspension bushings. There are no templates for those items and their never will be. If a component is protested, legality is the sole discretion of NASA to determine whether it meets the letter of the rules. As with the aforementioned components, the honus is still on the competitor to understand both the spirit and letter of the rules as written. Should that competitor have any doubt, they should contact the appropriate party within NASA for clarification. I send pictures of various components to Greg quite often, just to be sure. After one or two emails, Greg will decide what point value to assign the Mugen top and any others for say, Camaro, Solstice, Boxster, Miata. This is relevant to me as a Miata we're building already has a fastback and it's a key component to meet our weight target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsytracklife Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 949Racing wrote: PT/TT are classes that don't ban anything, unless it's safety related. This should remain so for the continued health of the TT/PT program. I can not find any sound and unassailable logic in favor of banning non OEM shapes unless NASA also bans non OEM shape fender, side sills, noses, windshield frames. It is clear that an aerodynamic advantage could be realized with a non OEM shape so it should be treated the same as a nose or fender shape change. Proposal G 13) Replace or modify OEM Hardtop shape or features with non-fastback. OEM hard top shape herein defined as within 1/2" of external OEM dimension. (note: Additional points must be assessed for any spoiler, vertical fins or vortex inducers integrated/attached into hardtop, see G.3),G8),G.10) +1 14) Add fastback hardtop that covers any portion of OEM trunk opening. (note: Additional points must be assessed for any spoiler, vertical fins or vortex inducers integrated/attached into fastback, see G.3),G8),G.10) +3 Im Newer Here, But I cant believe there will be total close-mindedness on this... I totally agree with just assign some points - really Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Will this allow guys with non convertibles to take points to alter their roof line? I don't have a wing, but if I did I wouldn't mind the extra airflow to increase efficiency for a few points. What do you say? Give roof mods to coupes and sedans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
949Racing Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Will this allow guys with non convertibles to take points to alter their roof line? I don't have a wing, but if I did I wouldn't mind the extra airflow to increase efficiency for a few points. What do you say? Give roof mods to coupes and sedans? I do believe that question, though relevant, is best saved for a new thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I do believe that question, though relevant, is best saved for a new thread. I disagree. This whole thread is about altering rooflines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
949Racing Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I do believe that question, though relevant, is best saved for a new thread. I disagree. This whole thread is about altering rooflines On aftermarket hard tops, yes. But it's a free country, drift away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The point is if you allow it for one car (convertibles) it should be allowed on all cars. If other cars cannot have the same modification, then it should not be legal for the convertibles. If you allow the convertible to increase the efficiency of a rear wing and not allow it for naturally born hard tops... Advantage Convertible. I believe this is the reason the rule was changed to reflect only OE or similar hardtops. Ultimately Greg would know for sure. Then again he said he would make it legal for 5 points. The S2000 guys could take the 5 points and it's a non issue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpreston Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 As a follow-up to this discussion, per my conversation with an experienced Spec Miata driver (who I believe may have already posted in this thread), removing the OEM Miata hardtop and running without one (folding top down) costs approximately 4 mph in the 100 mph neighborhood. Another experienced Spec Miata driver claimed a lap time difference of nearly 2 seconds around Sebring between having and not having a hardtop (with the hardtop being quicker than having the folding top down). Additionally, per my conversation with a CMC driver about his convertible Mustang, the lack of any roof started to restrict his top-end speed starting at 100 mph. I see an advantage for convertible cars that run removable hardtops. In light of the above statements, I would consider lobbying for modification points if any hardtop, OEM or otherwise, was installed on any vehicle whose base configuration is as a convertible (S2000, Miata, etc.). I'm not saying that I will, but I'm saying that convertible drivers should be thankful to have the "no-points" OEM hardtop option that they currently do. Mark The TT rules give a fixed-roof mustang and a convertible mustang the same base class. Why would the convertible mustang need to take points for a modification that basically does nothing other than even it out with the fixed-roof mustang? The hardtop'd vert mustang has an advantage over the non-hardtop'd one, but where's the proof that it has an advantage over a non-convertible, fixed roof mustang? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
949Racing Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The TT rules give a fixed-roof mustang and a convertible mustang the same base class. Why would the convertible mustang need to take points for a modification that basically does nothing other than even it out with the fixed-roof mustang? The hardtop'd vert mustang has an advantage over the non-hardtop'd one, but where's the proof that it has an advantage over a non-convertible, fixed roof mustang? Miata and S2000 are in the same boat. S2000 with soft top up is about as fast as one with an OEM hardtop, ditto the Miata. As you have all seen, there are plenty of both running with soft tops up. The Miata gains much needed headroom as well as a small measure of additional safety by replacing the soft top with a hardtop. Weight is about the same. S2000 also gains headroom but loses a few pounds by ditching the soft top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacob300zx Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) Will this allow guys with non convertibles to take points to alter their roof line? I don't have a wing, but if I did I wouldn't mind the extra airflow to increase efficiency for a few points. What do you say? Give roof mods to coupes and sedans? The cost of doing this alone would deter 99% of TT racers and 50% of forum trolls. The next issue is a safety issue due to the roll bar requirments of fixed roof cars. I would be willing to bet that 80% of all TT cars are daily drivers/weekend toys/street legal. That being said a hardtop on an S2000 or Miata is more about security/head room/noise. We are not here trying to pull one over on NASA, we are trying to get to our next business meeting with our seats still in the car. The funny thing is that if a "ebay mugen copy" hardtop offered so much of an advantage why would anyone run the factory hardtop @ 3k used? The advantage is in your mind. The added safety is real. This isn't SSM, all the cars are different and have advantages at certain tracks. There is an advantage to running the fastbacks with a molded spoiler. How much compared to a hardtop/ free stand spoiler combo? Not as much as a flat under pan. I'm trying to figure out how it has come to be that 3-5 TT Directors have decided to stick it to the convertible sports car guys? Fastback>Slightly different shape hardtop...big difference Edited February 22, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpreston Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 [Miata and S2000 are in the same boat. S2000 with soft top up is about as fast as one with an OEM hardtop, ditto the Miata. As you have all seen, there are plenty of both running with soft tops up. That's mostly what I was getting at, but I don't have a dog in this fight and am mostly trying to post as little as possible in this thread... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacob300zx Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I like you Jeff, keep posting. Half the guys in here have no dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Will this allow guys with non convertibles to take points to alter their roof line? I don't have a wing, but if I did I wouldn't mind the extra airflow to increase efficiency for a few points. What do you say? Give roof mods to coupes and sedans? The cost of doing this alone would deter 99% of TT racers and 50% of forum trolls. The next issue is a safety issue due to the roll bar requirments of fixed roof cars. I would be willing to bet that 80% of all TT cars are daily drivers/weekend toys/street legal. That being said a hardtop on an S2000 or Miata is more about security/head room/noise. We are not here trying to pull one over on NASA, we are trying to get to our next business meeting with our seats still in the car. The funny thing is that if a "ebay mugen copy" hardtop offered so much of an advantage why would anyone run the factory hardtop @ 3k used? The advantage is in your mind. The added safety is real. This isn't SSM, all the cars are different and have advantages at certain tracks. There is an advantage to running the fastbacks with a molded spoiler. How much compared to a hardtop/ free stand spoiler combo? Not as much as a flat under pan. I'm trying to figure out how it has come to be that 3-5 TT Directors have decided to stick it to the convertible sports car guys? Fastback>Slightly different shape hardtop...big difference I am only following the thread because it affects PT. What doesn't make a difference for a street car TT makes a world of difference for a proper race car. Anybody willing to pay for wind tunnel time to determine how little the effect of the roofline between stock and mugen is? Also I would like to do a back up test with a rear wing (this is where the roofline will become apparent) Nothing is being stuck to the "convertible" guys. There are 3 options for the convertibles guys. No matter what you need a roll bar. You can run with the top down. You can run with a soft top up You can run with an OE hard top. That is three different options to chose from (more than a coupe or sedan). The first two would not cost anybody a dime. It only costs money if you want the hard top. Why should a convertible be able to alter the roofline of their car? Why are the guys with convertibles trying to "stick" it to the guys without? The way the rule is written, it is equal to all competitors. Everyone has a stock roofline. If you really want the Mugen top. Ask Greg to make it legal for 5 points as he stated he would. Then you can run the top and be legal. Otherwise remove it or purchase an OE top for 0 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
949Racing Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 If you really want the Mugen top. Ask Greg to make it legal for 5 points as he stated he would. Do you really think 5 pts is appropriate for a modification that has arguably zero aerodynamic benefit over an OEM top? Or do you not care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 If you think we wouldn't take a sawzall to our roofs for a .1s you're not racing hard enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 If you really want the Mugen top. Ask Greg to make it legal for 5 points as he stated he would. Do you really think 5 pts is appropriate for a modification that has arguably zero aerodynamic benefit over an OEM top? Or do you not care? I think on a street car without a rear wing, you are correct. It is not worth 5 points. As soon as that wing is added it is a whole different story. You have to look at ultimate potential and not what someone in a street car will gain. Remember these rules are the same for the race group. If you think that a racer won't find every little advantage you are mistaken. Someone that is serious has absolutely zero problems cutting off the top and redesigning it. The problem with this thread is that is about the cost of the top for someone in a street car and not what the ultimate performance/ advantage the top has Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 If you think we wouldn't take a sawzall to our roofs for a .1s you're not racing hard enough. 100% correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hustler Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 If you really want the Mugen top. Ask Greg to make it legal for 5 points as he stated he would. Do you really think 5 pts is appropriate for a modification that has arguably zero aerodynamic benefit over an OEM top? Or do you not care? I think on a street car without a rear wing, you are correct. It is not worth 5 points. As soon as that wing is added it is a whole different story. You have to look at ultimate potential and not what someone in a street car will gain. Remember these rules are the same for the race group. If you think that a racer won't find every little advantage you are mistaken. Someone that is serious has absolutely zero problems cutting off the top and redesigning it. The problem with this thread is that is about the cost of the top for someone in a street car and not what the ultimate performance/ advantage the top has Then everyone with an S2k buys a cheap, eBay Mugen-copy hardtop and points are added accordingly. The competitive guys are already spending $1000+ for rubber, so the cost of running this hardtop is not big deal and the playing field is leveled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Then everyone with an S2k buys a cheap, eBay Mugen-copy hardtop and points are added accordingly. The competitive guys are already spending $1000+ for rubber, so the cost of running this hardtop is not big deal and the playing field is leveled. What happens when someone decides to build a competitive S2000 and that car has an altered roofline? Why is this so complicated for you guys? 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.