ST3 Re-visited

[mrc24x]

Just a suggestion :

 

 

SU=TTU

ST1=TT1

ST2=TT2

ST3=TT3

 

 

I'm sure a few would complain about buying new stickers.....

[robbodleimages]

be sure not to overvalue the aero and or the degrees of aero available. i watched a driver in american iron with a mustang in grand am trim( no splitter, small rear wing, no vented hood or fenders much less dive planes and engine bay ducting and rear defusers) run strongly in the top 5 and finishing 6th against a pack of world challenge equipped cars with full aero packages. that was a 19 car starting grid.

 

from all ive learned your aero can pick you up less than a second at best on the tracks where aero plays the biggest role. if you race in the southeast, its almost of no value at cmp.

 

personally, i know there is at least two seconds on the table in just my driving before is start adjusting the car. i want to find most of that two seconds before i add the aero to the mix and have to change the way i drive.

 

it might be that some limits on the amount of aero allowed might be a good idea.

[Sboxin]

I would like to offer a proposal:

 

1. Start ST3 classing in 2013

 

2. Continue PTA/TTA Classing for an evaluation period of a year or more to

see how the numbers around the country change.

 

What do you think?

 

Regards,

[Eric J.]

That ship has sailed.

 

Really? Great way to get buy in then. At least we have choices for who we run with. If the AZ PTA contingent isn't valued maybe we'll find another group to run with.

That's kind of the point of this discussion. At a national level PTA isn't working.

 

I think he meant a different group as in a non-NASA organization. There are a lot of options here for track time and competition.

 

PTA/TTA does work here (AZ), and we see a natural ebb and flow in participation numbers between classes all the time. A few years ago TTE was huge, now they're all in TTD and hardly anybody is in TTE for a while. Does that mean that TTE WTP limits need to be changed? No, it means people are moving around as they see fit. Likewise a couple of years ago many of our PTA/TTA cars and drivers were in PTB/TTB and they've since moved up. We see this sort of thing all the time, and it seems that a reduction in numbers in a particular class is natural and always temporary.

 

I think the creation of ST3 may be a good idea, but I think deletion of PTA/TTA is a bad idea. I don't think the two are incompatible, as I think ST3 can be created without disturbing PTA/TTA. It's being argued that there's not currently a lot of participating in PTA/TTA in many regions, so it's not like cars are needed from that class to populate the new one. In some regions, like ours, where we have a significant number of PTA/TTA participants, they'll have the option to continue unimpeded with their competition and development plans.

 

For me the bottom line is that we have a good ruleset that, in my observation, seems to be well constructed and fair, and that's a good thing to have. The motivation to create ST3 does not seem to come from a problem with the current ruleset but a desire to provide a landing spot for cars from other series. If ST3 provides that, then that's awesome and I hope it's successful, but I'm not seeing a compelling need to change the PT/TT formula.

 

Just my dos centavos.

[kbrew8991]

We pulled the PTA numbers, and there is no PTA in Tx. PTA is only significant in AZ, GL, SE.

btw - there probably still would be PTA people in TX if they hadn't committed to the failed first attempt at ST3.

[robbodleimages]

when does texas start racing in 2013? nasa se starts 2nd weekend of february

[kbrew8991]

1st weekend of January typically - whenever the dead weekend is between NFL Playoffs and Superbowl

[robbodleimages]

sounds like decisions need to be made pretty soon then. my last race for 2012 is the first weekend of december that leaves about 8 weeks between the end of 2012 and the start of 2013 with a chunk of that lost to the holidays.

[Bryancohnracing]

My only input on ST3 is this:

 

If you add ST3 please add STR3. Why?

 

There are numerous small semi-tube and tube frame chassis cars floating around the US that could easily fit into NASA and need a home. They've been run off from other sanctioning bodies due to consistently changing rules, lack of leadership and so on. It costs us little to nothing to add such a class designation and the STR concept is proving itself slowly but surely nationwide.

[Cobra4B]

My only input on ST3 is this:

 

If you add ST3 please add STR3. Why?

 

There are numerous small semi-tube and tube frame chassis cars floating around the US that could easily fit into NASA and need a home. They've been run off from other sanctioning bodies due to consistently changing rules, lack of leadership and so on. It costs us little to nothing to add such a class designation and the STR concept is proving itself slowly but surely nationwide.

NOOOOOO!!!!!

 

All STR does is dilute car counts. End STR and roll those cars back into ST with a generic mod factor.

[obzezzed350]

My only input on ST3 is this:

 

If you add ST3 please add STR3. Why?

 

There are numerous small semi-tube and tube frame chassis cars floating around the US that could easily fit into NASA and need a home. They've been run off from other sanctioning bodies due to consistently changing rules, lack of leadership and so on. It costs us little to nothing to add such a class designation and the STR concept is proving itself slowly but surely nationwide.

NOOOOOO!!!!!

 

All STR does is dilute car counts. End STR and roll those cars back into ST with a generic mod factor.

 

Agreed

[jason]

My only input on ST3 is this:

 

If you add ST3 please add STR3. Why?

 

There are numerous small semi-tube and tube frame chassis cars floating around the US that could easily fit into NASA and need a home. They've been run off from other sanctioning bodies due to consistently changing rules, lack of leadership and so on. It costs us little to nothing to add such a class designation and the STR concept is proving itself slowly but surely nationwide.

NOOOOOO!!!!!

 

All STR does is dilute car counts. End STR and roll those cars back into ST with a generic mod factor.

 

Agreed

Hallelujah, amen.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

x13587 about STR going byebye and getting them into ST.

[VtecRacer]

I am going to post my reply, although i run HC.. i do the points for AZ-region. Currently there are 9 cars running PTA in the AZ region. Those cars are NOT corvettes and are mix of porsche and Bmw. The battle is very good and the cars all are very equal with no corvettes dominating the class. Also in TT we have 17 cars in TTA for this season. Now not everybody runs all the time but that many cars is a huge percentage of our car counts that seem to be overlooked on this national scale. In fact i would venture our car counts for TTA and PTA are pretty high for the nation. I would like to agree and see ST3 introduced and see who fills the shoes and leave PTA/TTA alone for now as so many have built their cars or are building their cars for this class.

[zigspeed10]

PTA is a great class but could use some more car counts. One reason for this is if a car can make the 8.7 pw/wt then they may skip over PTA and go straight to ST2, or cars eventually evolve from PTA cars into ST2 cars because they naturally fit with the pw/wt being the same. There are a number of things to try and increase car counts in PTA but they would end up reducing car counts in other NASA classes. For instance, ST2 pw/wt could be moved down to say 7.5, that would make some people look in the mirror and realize they can't afford to run with the big dogs and move down to PTA. Another is the proposed option to replace PTA with ST3 at a higher pw/wt, this will steal some competitors from both ST2 and PTB.

 

To answer one of Greg's questions if creating ST3 would bring in new cars, I think there are enough classes in NASA that anybody with any type of car can find a class to race in currently. Creating ST3 will not magically bring in new cars that are out there trying to find a place to race. I think the answer is to eliminate one of the existing classes, or combine some classes. What if PTA and PTB were combined to create ST3? That would create a class with increased car counts. My worry is if ST3 is created to replace only PTA, then we will be in the same boat we are in now. Either eliminate PTA completely and replace it with nothing, or combine classes.

 

If PTA is eliminated and not replaced, all of the competitors with PTA base class cars will whine and cry, myself included, until we sell our cars to people who can afford to race them in ST2 or we will run at the back of the pack slowly building them up to ST2 specs. The benefit is that car counts in ST2/TTS will increase. On the other hand if PTA and PTB are combined, the same people will whine and cry for the same reasons, but in the end, car counts will increase.

 

My reality is PTA is a great fit for me, I can race a cool fast car and not have to take out a 2nd mortgage to be competitive. So I am for any rule changes that will keep PTA and increase car counts. One thing is certain, the sooner the rule change decision is made, the less painful it will be for 2013.

[Cobra4B]

PTA is a great class but could use some more car counts. One reason for this is if a car can make the 8.7 pw/wt then they may skip over PTA and go straight to ST2, or cars eventually evolve from PTA cars into ST2 cars because they naturally fit with the pw/wt being the same. There are a number of things to try and increase car counts in PTA but they would end up reducing car counts in other NASA classes. For instance, ST2 pw/wt could be moved down to say 7.5, that would make some people look in the mirror and realize they can't afford to run with the big dogs and move down to PTA. Another is the proposed option to replace PTA with ST3 at a higher pw/wt, this will steal some competitors from both ST2 and PTB.

 

To answer one of Greg's questions if creating ST3 would bring in new cars, I think there are enough classes in NASA that anybody with any type of car can find a class to race in currently. Creating ST3 will not magically bring in new cars that are out there trying to find a place to race. I think the answer is to eliminate one of the existing classes, or combine some classes. What if PTA and PTB were combined to create ST3? That would create a class with increased car counts. My worry is if ST3 is created to replace only PTA, then we will be in the same boat we are in now. Either eliminate PTA completely and replace it with nothing, or combine classes.

 

If PTA is eliminated and not replaced, all of the competitors with PTA base class cars will whine and cry, myself included, until we sell our cars to people who can afford to race them in ST2 or we will run at the back of the pack slowly building them up to ST2 specs. The benefit is that car counts in ST2/TTS will increase. On the other hand if PTA and PTB are combined, the same people will whine and cry for the same reasons, but in the end, car counts will increase.

 

My reality is PTA is a great fit for me, I can race a cool fast car and not have to take out a 2nd mortgage to be competitive. So I am for any rule changes that will keep PTA and increase car counts. One thing is certain, the sooner the rule change decision is made, the less painful it will be for 2013.

Well put... I like the idea of combining PTA/PTB at a 9.0 to 9.5 power/weight. Or, throttle ST2 back from 8.7 to 9.0 and just have the one class. AND KILL STR!!!

[sperkins]

I am going to post my reply, although i run HC.. i do the points for AZ-region. Currently there are 9 cars running PTA in the AZ region. Those cars are NOT corvettes and are mix of porsche and Bmw. The battle is very good and the cars all are very equal with no corvettes dominating the class. Also in TT we have 17 cars in TTA for this season.

Can you link to a MyLaps event or two? I'd love to see who those folks are.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

I am going to post my reply, although i run HC.. i do the points for AZ-region. Currently there are 9 cars running PTA in the AZ region. Those cars are NOT corvettes and are mix of porsche and Bmw. The battle is very good and the cars all are very equal with no corvettes dominating the class. Also in TT we have 17 cars in TTA for this season.

Can you link to a MyLaps event or two? I'd love to see who those folks are.

http://www.nasaaz.com/results/race-results/race-group-results/

Scroll down to PTA. In order: E36, E36, 911, E36, E36, 911, 911, E46, and ???

 

McIntyre set TTB Nationals record at Miller in 2010 in the same car. Him and Renshaw would both be nationally competitive in PTA/TTA.

 

http://www.nasa-tt.com/Arizona_Standings/p2040_articleid/84

Scroll down to TTA. In order: Miata, E36, E36, E36, 350Z, 911, 911, NSX, ???, ???, ???, supercharged Civic, ???, STI, 996, STI, and ???

 

All of our 'vettes run TTS/ST2 and TTU/ST1 with 1 or 2 in TTR/SU.

[Jim P.]

My only input on ST3 is this:

 

If you add ST3 please add STR3. Why?

 

There are numerous small semi-tube and tube frame chassis cars floating around the US that could easily fit into NASA and need a home. They've been run off from other sanctioning bodies due to consistently changing rules, lack of leadership and so on. It costs us little to nothing to add such a class designation and the STR concept is proving itself slowly but surely nationwide.

Bryan is correct - I have a ThunderRoadster (TR) that is a spec racer and it is classed in PTA or ST2/STR2. It clearly does not fit in either of those classes. Adding ST3/STR3 would bring in Legends, TR's, Baby Grands, GT-n and many tube framed cars that generally have no place to go in the standard NASA classes. Keep PTA the way it is and add ST3/STR3 for the cars that just don't have the power to weight needed to keep up in PTA.

 

FWIW: I also believe that ST and STR should be combined.

 

-Jim

This is only my personal opinion

[Cobra4B]

I am going to post my reply, although i run HC.. i do the points for AZ-region. Currently there are 9 cars running PTA in the AZ region. Those cars are NOT corvettes and are mix of porsche and Bmw. The battle is very good and the cars all are very equal with no corvettes dominating the class. Also in TT we have 17 cars in TTA for this season.

Can you link to a MyLaps event or two? I'd love to see who those folks are.

http://www.nasaaz.com/results/race-results/race-group-results/

Scroll down to PTA. In order: E36, E36, 911, E36, E36, 911, 911, E46, and ???

 

McIntyre set TTB Nationals record at Miller in 2010 in the same car. Him and Renshaw would both be nationally competitive in PTA/TTA.

 

http://www.nasa-tt.com/Arizona_Standings/p2040_articleid/84

Scroll down to TTA. In order: Miata, E36, E36, E36, 350Z, 911, 911, NSX, ???, ???, ???, supercharged Civic, ???, STI, 996, STI, and ???

 

All of our 'vettes run TTS/ST2 and TTU/ST1 with 1 or 2 in TTR/SU.

That's awesome... I would love to whoop up on all those Krauts Seriously... very cool to see. Interesting that all your Vettes go ST and up. Guess they're more baller than us east coast guys

[ILIKETODRIVE]

Interesting that all your Vettes go ST and up. Guess they're more baller than us east coast guys

 

I think a few of them went through the HPDE ranks with their 'vette, made a few mods, then decided to switch to Hoosiers, and then when they went to TT or w2w were semi-stuck in TTS/ST2.

[robbodleimages]

personally, ive thought for some time now that AI, ST2, PTA, GT3/4 are all so close in lap times that some slight adjustments would create 25 and 35 car single class races and wild points championships. nasa likes, however, to market german cars racing german cars, corvettes and vipers against each other and pony cars also with their seperate classes.

 

when i find myself in a thunder race dicing tooth and nail to get past a pta corvette or a gt3 bmw in order to get to the mustang i am racing for position, it just drives it home further.

 

frankly car count should not be an issue. the issue is the over division of the field into too many classes.

[Cobra4B]

Interesting that all your Vettes go ST and up. Guess they're more baller than us east coast guys

I think a few of them went through the HPDE ranks with their 'vette, made a few mods, then decided to switch to Hoosiers, and then when they went to TT or w2w were semi-stuck in TTS/ST2.

Not surprising. It's very hard to get the average Corvette enthusiast to de-mod their car. I.e. go back to stock exhaust, intake, shocks, and springs. "What do you mean I can go fast without $2000 in exhaust and $1800 in coilovers?" We see it time and time again when guys are asking for advice in the auto-x/road racing section of Corvetteforum.

 

personally, ive thought for some time now that AI, ST2, PTA, GT3/4 are all so close in lap times that some slight adjustments would create 25 and 35 car single class races and wild points championships. nasa likes, however, to market german cars racing german cars, corvettes and vipers against each other and pony cars also with their seperate classes.

 

when i find myself in a thunder race dicing tooth and nail to get past a pta corvette or a gt3 bmw in order to get to the mustang i am racing for position, it just drives it home further.

 

frankly car count should not be an issue. the issue is the over division of the field into too many classes.

100% EXACTLY!!! This has been mentioned in this thread before. I'm not sure why people want to stay in separate classes? Maybe "big fish in a small pond" syndrome? You could easily combine the classes mentioned above and have a Thunder group that was truly a blast to compete in.

[PushinTheLimit]

personally, ive thought for some time now that AI, ST2, PTA, GT3/4 are all so close in lap times that some slight adjustments would create 25 and 35 car single class races and wild points championships. nasa likes, however, to market german cars racing german cars, corvettes and vipers against each other and pony cars also with their seperate classes.

 

when i find myself in a thunder race dicing tooth and nail to get past a pta corvette or a gt3 bmw in order to get to the mustang i am racing for position, it just drives it home further.

 

frankly car count should not be an issue. the issue is the over division of the field into too many classes.

 

That's been my thought ever since I started paying attention to Nasa W2W racing. How cool would it be that almost the entire Thunder group be the same class?? Would make qualifying very important and interesting. 20+ cars in a class will always be better. I guess I just don't understand why some people are ok with running in a class that has few cars in them.

[robbodleimages]

part of it is the nasa culture. thats how they market themselves. for instance the cars are often paddocked in their groups. gts3 and 4 cars with spec e30s and ai cars with cmc.

 

part of it has to be contingencies. i race with 5 to 7 cars this year in class. i have a win and 3 second place finishes so far and have earned at least one new set of goodyear tires. i know some pta and tta guys live on that hoosier tire program. jumping into a 25 car race where a guy that wins on a regular basis in his current class could as easily finish 10th as on the podium costs contigency goodies.

 

we've talked about a touring series on and off. it would be a lot of hard work to manage the classes to create a reasonably fair field but a touring series where the regional directors add a race at the end of the saturday race day would be ideal.

 

we could run 4 or 5 such races in 3 or 4 regions and see how it works.

 

of course....this is a pipedream. i realize that.