Jump to content

2012 rule change proposals NEW THREAD


jcindric

Recommended Posts

If you want to propose rule changes to Greg, knock your self out and e-mail them to him

 

just don't say "we agreed to these on the forums",

 

 

1.) Add note, "Hoosier 255/35ZR18 (A6 & R6) to be treated as 275mm tire for points", to "TIRES" section

 

2.) Add aftermarket ECU to free mod list (with OEM ECU re-flash)

 

3.) "Power" used for compliance testing shall be defined as one of the below formulas:

 

a) Power = whp (cars with higher horsepower than torque)

 

OR,

 

b) Power = (whp + wtorque) / 2 (cars with higher torque than horsepower)

 

4.) Add sway bar end links to free mod list

 

5.) Lower or remove +2pts for street tires

 

6.) Consider adding a modification line in the drivetrain section for these newer optional equipment “flappy-paddle” type transmissions when run in an as-delievered configuration (or separate the car listings between normal trans & fancy trans)

 

7.) Consider an additional factor when doing a custom base reclassification for motorswap, aftermarket forced induction, etc. – the ability to shape the power curve and/or create a flat horsepower line with said modifications. This would be superior to automatically assessing peak torque which may or may not occur outside of the car's usable powerband on track. Might be a tough one, but possibly we could add one more item for people to send in and one item for us as directors to check in the field – the general type of engine (rotary, 4cyl, V8, etc – not necessarily the specific engine) and power adder (turbo, supercharger, both, or none) they plan to run with.

 

8.) Remove Inverted strut +1pt from Suspension section

 

9.) More of a general request than something specific - Is there a way we can get some lines added to the Aero Points Mod sections that we can use to charge less points for some of these OEM optional equipment bumpers, side skirts, and wing type stuff?

 

10.) Reconsider rewording F.4 (chassis stiffening/subframe brace/etc) so that a subframe brace that does not connect more than 2 points does not apply.

 

11.) -0.2 for front tires 245 or smaller and -0.4 for rear tires 275 or smaller (same)

 

12.) Remove the "multipliers" for TTA-TTF. I think the layout of a car (coupe, sedan, etc) and drivetrain (FWD, AWD, RWD) is already considered in the initial base class.

 

13.) Start tires sizes at 295 for TTA and drop 10mm per class with TTF getting 245

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Rob S.

    17

  • TurboShortBus

    11

  • cucamelsmd15

    9

  • Varkwso

    8

If you want to propose rule changes to Greg, knock your self out and e-mail them to him

 

just don't say "we agreed to these on the forums",

 

Nope.....just a summary of proposals from people that would like them reviewed by NASA.

 

Of course everyone doesn't agree on the proposals.....what fun would that be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the overwhelming majority agree, they should be free.

 

 

Actually I think that the overwhelming majority think that a suspension should be set up without interference that causes things to break.

 

Until it's proven that this is a safety issue and not an interference issue I think the rule should stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have requested end links be added to the free mod list so that proposal is on the summary. Along with the rest, it's just a proposal. Ultimately it's up to Greg and the other officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE PROPOSALS HAVE BEEN SENT TO GREG AS WELL AS THE REGIONAL DIRECTORS ! Time to close this thread so you guys can hit 200 pages on the next one. Thanks, make sure you send your comments directly to Greg.

 

Jon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, need to get this one in. Dyno Dynamics needs a modification factor. PERIOD. In most cases Dyno Dynamics are the lowest reading dyno's out there, and they have zero modification factor under the current rules. My car dyno'd 438 on a Dyno Dynamics and 523 a few weeks later on a Dynojet. I turned in the 438 whp because it was the first dyno I ever had on the car and I didn't know any better at the time, and on top of that, my car wasn't anywhere near the limit for the class and I could have made 650 whp at the time so it didn't matter.

 

At the very least they should get the 10% added like the mustang if not 12-15%.

 

 

 

That needs to be fixed as it's a glaring deficiency in the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

email Greg with your dyno suggestion, thanks

 

Thanks to all the positive posts and any post, I know we all want TT to be great

 

I have to thank Rob for his technical work, I just like to lead any way I can to help and facilitate change, Jon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dyno dynamics are the most lyingest dyno's ever!

my car made 219 on one and 197 on a dynojet the next week

 

Only thing that lies more then a dyno is a racer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Add another TT class. Somthing between TTU and TTS. As you know TTU is 5.5lb. and TTS is 8.7. How about somthing in the middle, say 7.0, 7.1 or 7.2?

 

-Troy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add another TT class. Somthing between TTU and TTS. As you know TTU is 5.5lb. and TTS is 8.7. How about somthing in the middle, say 7.0, 7.1 or 7.2?

 

-Troy

 

I wish the numbers supported it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add another TT class. Somthing between TTU and TTS. As you know TTU is 5.5lb. and TTS is 8.7. How about somthing in the middle, say 7.0, 7.1 or 7.2?

 

-Troy

 

I wish the numbers supported it.

 

What numbers? Maybe we don't have the numbers because there is no option. As for me, my 11RS' is not competive in TTU and will never to be able to get down to the 5.5lb. min. If I go TTS it requires Lots of detuning and max ballast to make it work.

 

Just saying not everybody drives a Corvette that can fit in many many places with simple changes.

 

There are lots of high horsepower N/A cars that are not Corvettes that don't fit the formula.

 

-Troy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a common set up for TTU (one I've seen a lot anyway) is a car that runs between 8.7 and 5.5 and then just runs slicks and takes the mod factor because they can afford to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add another TT class. Somthing between TTU and TTS. As you know TTU is 5.5lb. and TTS is 8.7. How about somthing in the middle, say 7.0, 7.1 or 7.2?

 

-Troy

 

I wish the numbers supported it.

 

What numbers? Maybe we don't have the numbers because there is no option. As for me, my 11RS' is not competive in TTU and will never to be able to get down to the 5.5lb. min. If I go TTS it requires Lots of detuning and max ballast to make it work.

 

Just saying not everybody drives a Corvette that can fit in many many places with simple changes.

 

There are lots of high horsepower N/A cars that are not Corvettes that don't fit the formula.

 

-Troy

 

Careful tiger - not many OEM cars fit the formula - including all OEM C6Z. I am all for lowering TTU down to 7.2 so more factory power cars can be competitive and pushing the top tier TTU cars to TTR (NARRA has this class breakdown btw). But the facts are TTU/TTR numbers are pretty low at all events and spotty at most events but I do have 10+ of them at Road Atlanta this next weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Careful tiger - not many OEM cars fit the formula - including all OEM C6Z. I am all for lowering TTU down to 7.2 so more factory power cars can be competitive and pushing the top tier TTU cars to TTR (NARRA has this class breakdown btw). But the facts are TTU/TTR numbers are pretty low at all events and spotty at most events but I do have 10+ of them at Road Atlanta this next weekend.

 

 

OK then, thats a great idea. Lower TTU to 7.2 ASAP and bump anything less than 7.2 to TTR. Sign me up, make me a sponsor, were do I send my donation?

 

What does it take to make this happen?

 

-Troy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Careful tiger - not many OEM cars fit the formula - including all OEM C6Z. I am all for lowering TTU down to 7.2 so more factory power cars can be competitive and pushing the top tier TTU cars to TTR (NARRA has this class breakdown btw). But the facts are TTU/TTR numbers are pretty low at all events and spotty at most events but I do have 10+ of them at Road Atlanta this next weekend.

 

 

OK then, thats a great idea. Lower TTU to 7.2 ASAP and bump anything less than 7.2 to TTR. Sign me up, make me a sponsor, were do I send my donation?

 

What does it take to make this happen?

 

-Troy

 

That would be a National call and would impact ST1/SU also. Regionally those have low turnouts for most events also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I think that the overwhelming majority think that a suspension should be set up without interference that causes things to break.

 

Until it's proven that this is a safety issue and not an interference issue I think the rule should stand.

 

Sure thing, just let me fire up my internet way-back machine so I can send an email to 1988 to let Mazda engineers know they need to redesign the stock suspension so the endlink doesnt interfere with the upper control arm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure thing, just let me fire up my internet way-back machine so I can send an email to 1988 to let Mazda engineers know they need to redesign the stock suspension so the endlink doesnt interfere with the upper control arm.

And I'll fire up my way-back machine as well, and set it for the mid-1970s so that I can tell Ford not to make the 1978 Fairmont (aka 2004 Mustang) with a rear suspension design that completely sucks huevos.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I'll fire up my way-back machine as well, and set it for the mid-1970s so that I can tell Ford not to make the 1978 Fairmont (aka 2004 Mustang) with a rear suspension design that completely sucks huevos.

 

Mark

 

Further evidence that we should ban Mustangs.

 

Listen, Im all for dealing with your cars warts, but when you have a vast majority of people across different platforms (Mustangs, Corvettes, MR-2, Miata etc) asking for the same thing, its time to put some serious thought into it.

 

Its rather ironic that items that have vastly more performance benefit (for instance, seam welding and final drive) are in the free mods, but yet endlinks arent. One of these things is not like the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its rather ironic that items that have vastly more performance benefit (for instance, seam welding and final drive) are in the free mods, but yet endlinks arent. One of these things is not like the other.

Just my unofficial guesses:

 

1. Seam welding cannot be un-done (in the case of somebody who buys a used race car).

2. Final drive cannot easily be measured or confirmed (similar to flashing an OEM ECU).

 

If you feel that revisions to these items are in order, then you need to send your concerns to Greg ASAP, as the wheels are in motion for 2012 revisions.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Final Drive isn't too hard to check for most cars - or at least get in the ballpark to see if a teardown is nessecary. What caused the issue (IIRC) was figuring out what was "OEM" for really old cars that are listed. I say de-list them, but...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Sure it can. Angle grinder, and done.

 

2. Sure it can. Turn driveshaft, turn wheels. Count number of turns. Done.

 

Obviously, I dont feel revisions are due to those items. I just find it ironic that two major performance increase items are in the free mods, when endlinks that dont provide near the same benefit, are +2. Additionally, swaybars are +2 which provide far more benefit than endlinks.

 

Again, if youre (not you in particular) to assert that endlinks provide the same performance benefit as swaybars that they warrant a +2, you might as well make a Hoosier radial slick a +10 tire with the Hoosier R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You aren't getting enough penetration on your welds if it's that easy.

 

2. How do you do this with a FWD or rear/mid-engine car? Put in gear, turn crankshaft with a wrench, count tire rotations. Good luck doing this with an automatic transmission, though.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...