Cobra4B Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 My father has been driving our Panoz in HPDE 3 (when not blown up, which it currently is as of Saturday at VIR). We prepped the car around TTS back in '09 and I ran it that summer. Now the rules have pushed the car into STR2 and it's not clear on the forms which TT class it falls into. Note: It is anticipated that the remaining tube-frame vehicles on this list will be deleted in the 2013 TT Rules, leaving the tube-frame vehicles to compete in TTR and TTU (if an STR2 crossover) So does this mean a 8.7:1 STR2 car has to compete with 5.5:1 TTU cars? IMO this really screws the Panoz as the chassis isn't anything special. Yes it's square tube and yes one could build some super awesome tube car, but this isn't it. The car makes a perfect ST2/TTS car. Reason I ask all of this is my father is trying to decide what engine to put in the car and really wants to have it set up for a TT class it could actually compete in. He doesn't want a 5.5:1 car. Could a wiaver be given on a case-by-case basis to run the car in TTS? Thanks, Brian Quote
Cobra4B Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 Yeah that sucks.... makes a 8.7:1 car have to compete with 5.5:1 cars. The tube chassis isn't worth anything in this case other than making the car somewhat light (2700 lbs) and somewhat easy to work on. It doesn't flow with ST2 to STR2. I.e. any ST2 car can run STR2 if they wanted to, but you'd never see a TTS car willingly go compete wtih TTU cars. Why not continue to keep the power/weight classing consistent but with modification factors for the tube chassis cars in TT? The car used to get a +0.2 modification factor to run TTS/ST2. Quote
sperkins Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Yeah that sucks.... Yes it does. I wonder what Tal plans on doing with his new to him Panoz.... Quote
Cobra4B Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 Yeah that sucks.... Yes it does. I wonder what Tal plans on doing with his new to him Panoz.... We were discussing Tal today... Last I heard he and Mark were planning on building a competitive TTS/ST2 car. Quote
sperkins Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 We were discussing Tal today... Last I heard he and Mark were planning on building a competitive TTS/ST2 car. That's not an option anymore though - right? Quote
drivinhardz06 Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Yeah that sucks.... Yes it does. I wonder what Tal plans on doing with his new to him Panoz.... uncorking the hot cam LS3, dumping weight, and letting it eat in STR1 or SU Quote
Cobra4B Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 We were discussing Tal today... Last I heard he and Mark were planning on building a competitive TTS/ST2 car. That's not an option anymore though - right? Correct... which is the issue. Would be better for car counts if it could compete in ST2 and TTS like it used to with a modificatioin factor for being tube chassis. Quote
kbrew8991 Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I bet $5 that for WTW Greg will say that you should just talk all the guys in ST2 to run STR2 with the Panoz and other tube-framers since you can't make the switch the other way (tube framer in ST2). Not sure what the right solution would be for the TT side of things though.... Quote
Cobra4B Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 At this current stage in the NASA life-cycle the entire STR concept just dilutes the fields for ST. Quote
cucamelsmd15 Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 I dont have a dog in this fight, but if I may... Reason I ask all of this is my father is trying to decide what engine to put in the car Might I humbly suggest... not a Ford? Didnt he have another major mechanical when we were at VIR in October too? Quote
PushinTheLimit Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 Just my opinion on this... but I think either ST2 or STR2 needs to go away and only have one class between those two and just have some sort of modification factor on the tube frame cars to be fair. It would not be good for those of us in that class be seperated and dilute the car class counts. As for TT... the only way for it to work out would be for STR to go away I would think. Quote
Cobra4B Posted February 21, 2012 Author Posted February 21, 2012 The engine that just shit the bed has been problematic from the start: March 2011 VIR - First event with the new engine. Filling up the catch can each session. Dipstick gets stuck in the pan/tube. June 2011 VIR - Second event. Valve springs breaks in the 2nd session Saturday, weekend over. Old springs had been reused. October 2011 VIR - Third event. Water pump pulley comes off the car in the 3rd Session Saturday, weekend over. Didn't know water pump bolts on SBFs are known to come loose and should be checked regularly or safety-wired. February 2012 VIR - Fourth event. Engine fails catastrophically on the back straight in the 2nd session Saturday. Had very little use and started ticking between the June and October event. New engine will most likely be a FRPP 347 crate motor that a few other AI racers have had great success with. It uses a Boss block with 4-bolt mains. Quote
TurboShortBus Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 New engine will most likely be a FRPP 347 crate motor that a few other AI racers have had great success with. It uses a Boss block with 4-bolt mains. Do you have the width for a new 5.0 in there? It's definitely worth considering, if it will physically fit. You'll need to monkey with the bellhousing, exhaust, engine mounts, wiring, and gas pedal, though. http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=11829 Mark Quote
jason Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 . You'll need to monkey with the bellhousing, exhaust, engine mounts, wiring, and gas pedal, though. Other than that, it's a perfect fit. Quote
TurboShortBus Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 Other than that, it's a perfect fit. While he's spending, he might as well do it right, right? Get with the 1990s; there is better stuff out there...lol In general, it is best to e-mail Greg directly about topics like this, instead of starting threads. Replies are generally quicker that way. Mark Quote
TWI Posted February 23, 2012 Posted February 23, 2012 Other than that, it's a perfect fit. While he's spending, he might as well do it right, right? Get with the 1990s; there is better stuff out there...lol In general, it is best to e-mail Greg directly about topics like this, instead of starting threads. Replies are generally quicker that way. Mark Brian - if you email Greg please copy me on it as I would like to be able to run in TTS/ST2 if possible, othewise like Mark said I'll have little choice but to uncork the motor (and my wallet). Tal Quote
Cobra4B Posted February 23, 2012 Author Posted February 23, 2012 Brian - if you email Greg please copy me on it as I would like to be able to run in TTS/ST2 if possible, othewise like Mark said I'll have little choice but to uncork the motor (and my wallet). Tal Will do... I'm pretty sure my dad's going to get the same FRPP crate engine regardless, but I'm going to email Greg and will CC you when I do. Quote
kbrew8991 Posted February 23, 2012 Posted February 23, 2012 if you're at STR2 power levels (what you need to be to convert to TTU currently) then uncorking will put you over that, right? Shooting for real live actual TTR power then? Quote
Z06 Posted February 23, 2012 Posted February 23, 2012 Other than that, it's a perfect fit. While he's spending, he might as well do it right, right? Get with the 1990s; there is better stuff out there...lol In general, it is best to e-mail Greg directly about topics like this, instead of starting threads. Replies are generally quicker that way. Mark @Mark...I thought you poo poo'd on the new Mustang in a previous thread concerning their reliability. Maybe that wasn't you. Quote
kbrew8991 Posted February 23, 2012 Posted February 23, 2012 TTU is 5.5:1 The way things are written now: The Panoz can run there using STR2 to TTU conversion per the ruleset. Exceeding the 8.70:1 of STR2 doesn't let you do that conversion anymore - straight to TTR since it's tube frame / non-production I've yet to see a Panoz out there that really doesn't fall in line with the rest of the TTS cars though, and there should be some sort of way to "homologate" or "TSB" those cars into TTS / TTU depending on power (possibly with a slight correction factor if warranted) so they don't have to use the unfair STR2 to TTU conversion, or get sent straight to TTR if they exceed STR2's limits. We don't need more classes (as in STR1 & 2 equivalents) - just a way for these cars to fit the existing structure better IMHO. Quote
jason Posted February 23, 2012 Posted February 23, 2012 [We don't need more classes as in STR1 & 2 Fixed. Quote
ILIKETODRIVE Posted February 23, 2012 Posted February 23, 2012 TTU is 5.5:1I've yet to see a Panoz out there that really doesn't fall in line with the rest of the TTS cars though Yup. There's one that runs here locally. Would be competitive with local ST2 cars. Gets @$$%@#&!!! in ST1. Quote
TurboShortBus Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 @Mark...I thought you poo poo'd on the new Mustang in a previous thread concerning their reliability. Maybe that wasn't you. Really? Maybe? I dunno...send me a link if you can find it. Mark Quote
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.