BlkGt3 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 E36M3's need to be able to drop 175#'s to compete with the S2000 in TTC. Stirs pot. Peter LOL I brought it up earlier in this thread when the s2000s wanted less weight. I know just trying to get parity with the S2K and keep the Pot Boiling. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I know just trying to get parity with the S2K and keep the Pot Boiling. Peter Uh, the last time I looked, your E36 M3 (with another driver) handily beat an S2000 at Sebring a couple of weeks ago... Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlkGt3 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I know just trying to get parity with the S2K and keep the Pot Boiling. Peter Uh, the last time I looked, your E36 M3 (with another driver) handily beat an S2000 at Sebring a couple of weeks ago... Mark Yeah but if he climbed into that S2K he would have been faster. He has done it before. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clydesdale Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Last post on Friday? This is unacceptable. I motion that we allow non OEM hardtops for s2000s. *stirs pot* Randy - why don't you go start your own thread. You have managed to single handedly drag this one into the mud when we had a pretty good thing going. There were some very valid points made and all you've managed to do is bog it down with your whoa is me dyno re-class entitlement attitude. C'mon guys this is a serious thread. Woe is me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 (edited) To go back to the dyno classing topic. What about everybody runs on a wt/hp ratio with a max tire width for the class example TTD 14.25:1 with a max tire width 235 TTE 16.50:1 with a max tire width 205 AWD would use a different wt/hp ratio but same tire width If you want a wider tire, you bump up a class If you want to modify your tub, sequential gear box etc (outside realm of normal bolt on mods) race in unlimited class Edited October 17, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 how you spend your points shouldn't be limited (within reason). Not a fan of capping tire width like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Why? It would be the ultimate limiting factor in lap times. Everyone is on tire size x with equal hp in theory. Now it comes down to the better driver in the better mousetrap. Instead of the mousetrap with wider tires and more available grip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 how you spend your points shouldn't be limited (within reason). Not a fan of capping tire width like that. Neither am I. A 14.25:1, 2400 lb car on a 235mm tire is very different than a 14.25:1, 3300 lb car on a 235mm tire (with identical compounds). Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Neither am I. A 14.25:1, 2400 lb car on a 235mm tire is very different than a 14.25:1, 3300 lb car on a 235mm tire (with identical compounds). Mark But the 3300lb car would have more HP and Torque and could sacrifice corner speed for acceleration Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 But the 3300lb car would have more HP and Torque and could sacrifice corner speed for acceleration One would think, but I'm confident that it's not that simple. The 2 examples that I gave were actually very specific ones of cars in our region, and while the 2400 lb car runs on a 225mm R6 and the 3300 lb car runs on a 255mm R6, I can say that putting a 235mm tire on the heavy one will not reflect well on its lap times. Many people have told me lately that they like the PT/TT format because it lets you pick and choose all of your modifications, and I have to agree with them. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 But the 3300lb car would have more HP and Torque and could sacrifice corner speed for acceleration One would think, but I'm confident that it's not that simple. The 2 examples that I gave were actually very specific ones of cars in our region, and while the 2400 lb car runs on a 225mm R6 and the 3300 lb car runs on a 255mm R6, I can say that putting a 235mm tire on the heavy one will not reflect well on its lap times. Many people have told me lately that they like the PT/TT format because it lets you pick and choose all of your modifications, and I have to agree with them. Mark If the heavier car was able to do more suspension work without the worry of points "could" it make better use of smaller tires? Maybe there is an ultimate wt/width ratio. I don't know. I think the format is ok. Certain aspects work and others don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Picking your tire size is not one aspect that's broken - why monkey with it? (PS, out of all the actual smart people about the ruleset you come up with some of the most hairbrained suggestions ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Picking your tire size is not one aspect that's broken - why monkey with it? (PS, out of all the actual smart people about the ruleset you come up with some of the most hairbrained suggestions ) Sometimes the box is an octogon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedengineer Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 E36M3's need to be able to drop 175#'s to compete with the S2000 in TTC. Stirs pot. Peter LOL I brought it up earlier in this thread when the s2000s wanted less weight. DJ correct? First off, congrats for the win at Nationals! Never got that chance to say it in person. Now, to my point - you and your M3 beat 4 S2000's to get 1st place at Nats for TTC, 3 of whom are local Great-Lakes/Mid-Ohio drivers. One of three scenarios exist: Either you are a God-like driver and somehow overcame the unfairly classed S2000's, the cars are fairly classed but your driving skill allowed the win, or the M3 is classed favorably which allowed the win. I don't think it is the last case, but not the first either. In my opinion, the cars seem classed pretty darn fairly. Don't be a sore winner! ...if that makes sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 wrong section Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 I like how the GL people always tout "we're Mid-O regulars we're all awesome there!". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D_Eclipse9916 Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 E36M3's need to be able to drop 175#'s to compete with the S2000 in TTC. Stirs pot. Peter LOL I brought it up earlier in this thread when the s2000s wanted less weight. DJ correct? First off, congrats for the win at Nationals! Never got that chance to say it in person. Now, to my point - you and your M3 beat 4 S2000's to get 1st place at Nats for TTC, 3 of whom are local Great-Lakes/Mid-Ohio drivers. One of three scenarios exist: Either you are a God-like driver and somehow overcame the unfairly classed S2000's, the cars are fairly classed but your driving skill allowed the win, or the M3 is classed favorably which allowed the win. I don't think it is the last case, but not the first either. In my opinion, the cars seem classed pretty darn fairly. Don't be a sore winner! ...if that makes sense? Hey hey hey hey, we are all family here. I SAID I brought it up when the S200s wanted less weight. Let me repeat that, the s2000s asked for less weight and I replied to that. I even talked about how the s2000 guys on the forums said I would get "destroyed" before I ever even showed up Honestly? I took full advantage of the TT rules to about 95%. I had a caged, full aero, watched my engine points extremely carefully, even used freaking stock swaybars with stock endlinks so I could use A6s instead. (and one other point). Weeks before I made sure to swap back to my stock subframe as my usual subframe had tabs welded on to prevent the sway bar from ripping out. But apparently that was illegal so I made sure it was out. Yeah I still could have done a bunch of aero stuff as hood vents, lightweight flywheels, and a few other free things. But I was mostly to the limit of the rules. My friend that used to dominate TTC in Mid-Atlantic in his M3 that is prepped like the s2000s (but not crazily prepped like mine), got demolished by the s2000s. Either way, I loved how the s2k guys think they need even less weight when they are only 7 points ahead of us, but already 320lbs lighter with superior chassis' and suspension design. I do think it would be a mistake to reduce the s2000 weight even more. I would argue to keep it the same as I cant explain why the M3 is so freaking fast despite the specs on the car. (I am a dsm guy, and wanted an s2000 but the M3 had more classes to race in). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clydesdale Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Does anybody know why tire sizes can both have additive points and subtractive points but weight is only additive? I imagine there is a good reason to do it that way, but it seems to me that if the weight points work fairly when reducing weight they would also work fairly when adding ballast-- up to the ballast limit of course. A dyno reclass with higher comp weight would accomplish the same thing and conventional thought around here would have me believe that points are equivalent to reclassing. Couldn't you just allow negative points for additional weight? I ask mostly out of curiosity. After doing a brief search I didn't find anything that would be characterized as an actual reason for it or any specific concerns if it were allowed. Please enlighten me with your speculations, opinions, links or facts if you've got them. Also, it would be nice if you could do a reclass and then take weight points as well if necessary. Given that weight is the only spec that is checked at every event in any consistent way, there seems to be little risk in allowing the adjustments if points are available. The best argument against this is that the reclassing hp/wt curve is non-linear and the lower your weight the worse your hp/weight ratio gets (and vice versa for higher weight) but only when reclassing. A strict base class doesn't have that restriction and the points are linear with respect to weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWeber Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 is this thread really still going? So how many people will hate me when I state that MidO is not my favorite track (especially the pro-course). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 is this thread really still going? We're 20 pages shy of the hardtop thread...we must keep going! Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWeber Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 lol I met the guy who started that hardtop thread too.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 I met the guy who started that hardtop thread too.. So did I, but only after some fairly unfortunate circumstances at the Championships last month. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 So how many people will hate me when I state that MidO is not my favorite track (especially the pro-course). Mid-O is an autox with a long backstraight. RdAM, RdAtl, VIR, WG would all be better for East Coast Nats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWeber Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 ^ WG? I got all of 'em except that one I highly doubt Road America would ever happen since SCCA runnoffs are there already I sure wouldn't mind the short commute there though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Who wants it on the east coast? I say lets hold it in Austin at the F1 track 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.