2013 Rules Consideration--Bump of +13 Point Tire Category

[Fixxxercask]

Thanks for clearing that up Greg. I was unaware of that.

[clydesdale]

I then reclassed to a TTE base class. PTW 17:1, minimum comp weight 2350lbs.

 

You didn't list your reclassed HP. I count +6 for your engine mods which would make you TTF+13 so the remaining 7 points compared to both your actual HP and your reclassed HP would be interesting to see.

138 maximum whp. I made between 135.5 and 137 on 6 pulls on two dynos on the same day.

 

I couldn't remember how many points I was taking for weight but math will solve that: +7 for *, +6 for power mods, +13 for other mods, +4 for tires...so +9 for weight loss.

 

Now with RA-1s being +7 I couldn't even pull that off without adding a bunch of weight lol. Heck I have to ballast about 20lbs just to be at 2350lbs with about 2 gallons of gas in the car.

 

(BTW: car had most of the interior and 4-point roll bar before which made it easy to make 2400+ lbs)

 

I'd say you got 12 points of weight for only 7 points. [edit faulty premise]

Edited February 2, 2012 by Guest

[Fixxxercask]

Randy, I do know of one 350Z that got dyno re-classed at TTD* which is lower than it's normal base class of TTC.

 

I think his weight was around 3300lbs and hp max was 235hp (which is pretty much stock)

He ran 225's and got points back to run coilovers and R6's. He shattered TTD records down south.

...

Dyno Reclass TTD* @ 3195lbs/235hp

 

 

How did you go from 3300 to 3195? His TTD* reclass would need to have been a higher weight not lower.

 

I was trying to re-call from memory. I then found the post on the 350Z forum and corrected it.

[clydesdale]

You guys might want to check the base model listing for the 350Z's. It says (Enth. ok). This stands for the Enthusiast model, which comes with an LSD. Update/backdate allows a base trim 350Z to use that LSD because they are grouped together in the same model group in the Rules. Then, that LSD can be switched out for any LSD for +1 point. The 350Z has other warts, like requiring points for control arms and/or metallic bushing replacement in order to get decent camber changes.

 

Thanks Greg. You just gave my competition 2 more points to use.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

Your TTF* base class at 2529/96hp = 26.3 doesn't look so good

 

96?

 

I think they were rated at 140hp at the crank by Honda/Acura from the factory. I have the JDM version of the same base model engine that is rated at 142ps (basically 140hp).

Edited February 2, 2012 by Guest

[Fixxxercask]

You guys might want to check the base model listing for the 350Z's. It says (Enth. ok). This stands for the Enthusiast model, which comes with an LSD. Update/backdate allows a base trim 350Z to use that LSD because they are grouped together in the same model group in the Rules. Then, that LSD can be switched out for any LSD for +1 point. The 350Z has other warts, like requiring points for control arms and/or metallic bushing replacement in order to get decent camber changes.

 

Thanks Greg. You just gave my competition 2 more points to use.

 

 

[clydesdale]

Your TTF* base class at 2529/96hp = 26.3 doesn't look so good

 

96?

 

I think they were rated at 140hp at the crank by Honda/Acura from the factory. I have the JDM version of the same base model engine that is rated at 142ps (basically 140hp).

 

 

Correct, not sure where I came up with 113hp at the crank (the 1986 integra had 113). 140 would yield about 120 which would be 21.1 hp/wt. A bit more consistent.

Edited February 2, 2012 by Guest

[Greg G.]

No problem, Randy....here to help.

 

That's what happens when a thread goes way off topic.

 

And, Randy, the answer to your question about weight points equaling re-classing base classes/asterisks is that re-classing goes back to the system that the car was originally classed upon, which is based on an adjusted Wt/Hp ratio. Points for weight reduction are a constant (at 1pt = 15 lbs), regardless of how much a car weighs or the HP that it puts out. So, the two can never be equivalent for all cases--mathematically impossible. So, in a sense, re-classing is a more "pure" classing method.

 

Now, as Scott would likely recommend , back to the next 80 pages on the +13 point tire category. And, for whoever said that this thread or any potential change in the tire rules, or this +13 point category is a hit on Hoosier, that is just plain wrong. Any change would effect all of the tires in that category, with the possible exception of the BFG R1 that was bumped for global size issues, and not compound.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

Correct, not sure where I came up with 113hp at the crank (the 1986 integra had 113). 140 would yield about 120 which would be 21.1 hp/wt. A bit more consistent.

Yup. That old D16A1 was terrible lol.

 

(Typical FWD drivetrain loss is 10%-15% (let's call it 12%) puts a stocker at approx 123whp. [i picked up 15whp with I/H/E/tune but my choice in parts was to keep my actual whp lower so I could squeeze into E with that weight; stock intake arm with upgraded intake box, OEM Type-R exhaust manifold, OEM Type-R exhaust.])

[clydesdale]

That's what happens when a thread goes way off topic.

 

I think you should perhaps tell us what you're prepared to do. If you've made a performance assessment of the +13 and have come to the conclusion that 13 points is not enough then I think you're in the better position to make the change without any outside opinions. The only competitors you need to convince are the ones using that tire. Everyone using it will complain and everyone not using it will cheer, that much you know is true.

[Fixxxercask]

I honestly would not care if it went to 20 points. I would just run R6's and use all my extra points in suspension and weight reduction. Ever seen a Z with a 2950 comp weight. That's about where I would be at. The problem is getting the car that light....LOL It's possible with CF parts.

 

16 points however, I would probably still try to run them. Remember, it effects everyone that ran A's before though, not such a smaller group of the 255 tire. A lot more people run A's.

[TurboShortBus]

I wonder how the other TTD competitors in the Florida region feel about that re-class.

The previous TTD record holder (turbo Miata) was walking around all weekend with a poopy-face on after getting his time bitchslapped.

 

As for my TTD car, I'm looking at backing it down to TTE when I get back to driving it, since there are already 4 Hoosier-shod drivers in a 5-driver TTD class, so it makes no sense to have a 5th (for a total of 6), as only 2 are going to be taking home tires on a regular basis (and chances are good that I won't be one of them).

 

Mark

[Bnjmn]

Ever seen a Z with a 2950 comp weight. That's about where I would be at. The problem is getting the car that light....LOL It's possible with CF parts.

 

What parts are you thinking of? Other than a free sunroof plug, everything else either costs points or is not permitted.

[Fixxxercask]

Ever seen a Z with a 2950 comp weight. That's about where I would be at. The problem is getting the car that light....LOL It's possible with CF parts.

 

What parts are you thinking of? Other than a free sunroof plug, everything else either costs points or is not permitted.

 

CF hood, CF hatch with lexan window, CF hood and CF doors. I don't have the money for all that anyway. The CF hatch with lexan is a 50lb weight savings. None of those should cost points because they all will be same shape and design of OEM. Strictly weight savings, no aero gain.

[Bnjmn]

Not sure how CF body parts avoid this:

 

6.6 BTM (Base Trim Model) Definition, Updating and Backdating Rules

For the purposes of NASA TT points assessments, the term BTM will be defined as follows:

Any part that is identical in size, shape, and functional characteristics compared to the part that

originally came on the vehicle, from the manufacturer, as a standard feature of the base model as

it is listed in section 6.3.2 Base Classifications (factory options and specialty model parts are

considered non-BTM) or is listed as a standard replacement part by the OEM manufacturer.

Some parts that are produced by aftermarket manufacturers as generic replacement parts may not require a points assessment provided that: they are the same size and shape, and have the same

functional characteristics as the BTM part, and that they provide no significant improvement in

performance, longevity, or reliability. If it is determined in impound that such a part does not

meet the above description, the driver may be disqualified. Consultation with the Regional TT

Director prior to competition is advised for any driver using a vehicle with replacement parts that

fall under this exception.

[Fixxxercask]

Not sure how CF body parts avoid this:

 

6.6 BTM (Base Trim Model) Definition, Updating and Backdating Rules

For the purposes of NASA TT points assessments, the term BTM will be defined as follows:

Any part that is identical in size, shape, and functional characteristics compared to the part that

originally came on the vehicle, from the manufacturer, as a standard feature of the base model as

it is listed in section 6.3.2 Base Classifications (factory options and specialty model parts are

considered non-BTM) or is listed as a standard replacement part by the OEM manufacturer.

Some parts that are produced by aftermarket manufacturers as generic replacement parts may not require a points assessment provided that: they are the same size and shape, and have the same

functional characteristics as the BTM part, and that they provide no significant improvement in

performance, longevity, or reliability. If it is determined in impound that such a part does not

meet the above description, the driver may be disqualified. Consultation with the Regional TT

Director prior to competition is advised for any driver using a vehicle with replacement parts that

fall under this exception.

 

That's why.

 

I have asked my local TT director and he said it is fine, just so long it is the exact same shape and size of the OEM part.

[speedengineer]

If the A6 goes to +16, I don't think I would run them next year and do R6 or similar instead. I'm not saying they're not worth the points - maybe they are, I have no idea. But regardless, there's no way I would easily fit them in points wise without taking off the rear wing or dumping the ECU I'm about to purchase.

 

Now if Greg makes ECU's free even for cars with no stock tuning, then I could fit them in! Eh, eh?

[TurboShortBus]

Not sure how CF body parts avoid this:

 

6.6 BTM (Base Trim Model) Definition, Updating and Backdating Rules

For the purposes of NASA TT points assessments, the term BTM will be defined as follows:

Any part that is identical in size, shape, and functional characteristics compared to the part that

originally came on the vehicle, from the manufacturer, as a standard feature of the base model as

it is listed in section 6.3.2 Base Classifications (factory options and specialty model parts are

considered non-BTM) or is listed as a standard replacement part by the OEM manufacturer.

Some parts that are produced by aftermarket manufacturers as generic replacement parts may not require a points assessment provided that: they are the same size and shape, and have the same

functional characteristics as the BTM part, and that they provide no significant improvement in

performance, longevity, or reliability. If it is determined in impound that such a part does not

meet the above description, the driver may be disqualified. Consultation with the Regional TT

Director prior to competition is advised for any driver using a vehicle with replacement parts that

fall under this exception.

 

That's why.

 

I have asked my local TT director and he said it is fine, just so long it is the exact same shape and size of the OEM part.

That is correct.

 

We had a TTB driver go so far as to have a CF hardtop made for his Boxster that is identical in shape to the OEM hardtop, but it only has the outer shell; no extraneous inner layer was made for it.

 

Mark

[Greg G.]

That's what happens when a thread goes way off topic.

 

I think you should perhaps tell us what you're prepared to do. If you've made a performance assessment of the +13 and have come to the conclusion that 13 points is not enough then I think you're in the better position to make the change without any outside opinions. The only competitors you need to convince are the ones using that tire. Everyone using it will complain and everyone not using it will cheer, that much you know is true.

Randy, while Scott definitely gave me a chuckle with some of his posts, and he is right that I'm enjoying kicking back and watching the fireworks, especially when guys come to the realization how interconnected any changes in the rules are, this is a subject that was requested as a rule revision in 2012 by many drivers. So, we are interested in hearing the opinions of all of the competitors that want to state one. Our guys are always complaining when rules are "suddenly" changed without their input, and without a big lead time. So, since we know that this will be potentially a pretty big subject for the 2013 rules, we are getting it out in the open now. If we do decide to make a change of any kind regarding this category, I want to be able to announce it by June or July at the latest so our drivers can plan ahead for 2013 with their tire contingency management and car mod. points management.

[Cobra4B]

I think what Ben is getting at is the "performance benefit" part. Going to an all CF body will give one a performance benefit due to weight reduction.

[Greg G.]

I think what Ben is getting at is the "performance benefit" part. Going to an all CF body will give one a performance benefit due to weight reduction.

Weight reduction is generally covered under the weight reduction assessment, with the exception of engine parts, and the other parts listed that are to remain BTW, like frame rails, etc. The older rules used to have points assignments for removal/lightening of various parts (including all of those mentioned). We got rid of that system, and went to weighing everyone, and they became open be default (as many had CF hoods, roofs, etc). I suppose we might want to add them back in the No-Points section in the future for clarification.

[wlfpkrcn1]

It cracks me up that nobody complains about the no points seam welding, but will about bolt on composite body pieces. It takes way more time and effort to seam weld a car, especially if you are using a daily driver. It would seem someone would be far more likely to bolt on composite body parts than seam weld. But i digress back on topic

 

I think for PT the advantages are minimized between a 10 or 13 pt tire (pending length of race/ weight of car/ ambient temp etc). In TT there are definite advantages to the 13pt tire. Should those tires take a hit because it is the optimal tire in TT? I don't know, if someone wants to be competitive on 10pt tires there is nothing stopping them from moving to PT. If they want to stay in TT then suck it up and use the 13pt tires like everyone else.

 

I think the bigger problem is with tire credits for running smaller than max base class width. The cars that can get away with smaller tires are typically lighter/less hp and can get away with it. A heavier car with more HP has to use the bigger tire to stay equal on available grip, but now has less modification points to use to help it thru the corner.

 

Marks (turboshortbus) Mustang is a good example. He has a TTE/PTE base class, but has to run a 255 to keep it on the track. A Miata gets 3 credit points because they can run a 205. Not only is Mark in a big heavy car, but it pushes like a pig because he didn't have the points to spend on suspension mods. He is at a 5 point disadvantage to the Miatas he is running against compared to 2 points if they didn't get a credit. Now that Miata adds a turbo and gets a TTD/PTD reclass and now gains another point on tires. Mark moves up to TTD/PTD adds some suspension but keeps his weight/hp. He his now 6 points behind that Miata just on tire points and that is assuming they are running the same point tire and the Miata has a better wt/hp ratio.

 

I think we all agree Mustangs should be banned and this is a prime example, but that is a different thread

[jason]

How many Mustangs complete the pace lap?

[Varkwso]

How many Mustangs complete the pace lap?

 

Mine always does but it hangs out in a.stable of Corvettes.

[kbrew8991]

How many Mustangs complete the pace lap?

Mine always does but it hangs out in a.stable of Corvettes.

turkey amongst eagles