Jump to content

ST3 Re-visited


Greg G.

Recommended Posts

I just find it funny that the Corvette is being targeted as "too well engineered" from the factory so as to have an "unfair" advantage. As a Corvette owner for years the auto mags and owners of other marques constantly bash the car for antiquated technology, a crap interior, and "plastic" body panels. Yet now when we put the car to good use and take advantage of the inherent simple/smart engineering GM put into the car people complain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 320
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Cobra4B

    41

  • kbrew8991

    33

  • Greg G.

    22

  • sperkins

    22

It's not like the C5 is some trick new car that the manufacturer released to stomp everyone (Boss & GTR). It's 15 freaking years old.

 

which I think is why you see so many of them, they are cheap now. Brand new BOSS 302 vs a $13-18k 2001 Z06.

 

I have driven some pretty nice S197 mustangs, and I think one of those taken to a pretty high level could be pretty fast in PTA. It would cost a bunch of $$ though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like I'm in the minority, but I like the idea of ST3. Move ST2 ~7.5-8.0 and ST3 ~ 9.0-9.5

I like the idea of ST3 as well, but not as a repalcement for PTA.

 

The people in TX that tried to get ST3 off the ground ended up either adding more power to get to ST2 levels (built engine$, more boo$t, etc) or swapped back to HC, GTS, or wherever else they came from

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am all for an ST3 class. Not just because PTA is struggling, but because it opens the Hp/Wt classes up further and allows a lot of other cars like AI, CMC, GTS etc. to play in that arena.

 

In the last 10 minutes I can not define the exact paramaters for ST1, ST2 and ST3, but I love the concept.

PT works well for a moderately developed car, but poorly for highly developed race cars designed for different rules sets. And when I say high developed I do not mean big $$. I mean home made aero, replacement body panels, custom intakes, widening.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I have not raced seriously in years, I can understand the reasons behind changing the st formulas. I agree with the newer sports cars being classed into st1 because of the power they make. This makes the cars VERY expensive to build, maintain etc etc.

 

While the guys in PTA have a great set of rules I can see the "need" for st-3. However, why not change the st-3 rules a bit and remove the high dollar item's (aero, serious chassis modification, etc) and keep the rest? Yes, that may confuse the guy that is trying to build a car for whatever class, but it may make the PTA guys happy to run in ST-3, and not have wings and things to make their cars fast in st-3? just a thought, but if you want to simplify the rules, add competitors and make sure people are not spending tens of thousands of dollars. if after a year or two with those rules, st3 is clamoring for wings and aero, then change them again.. then.

 

It seems like the overwhelming complaint about the move to st-3 isn't really the classing structure, its the cost associated with the jump from PT to ST. Being an ST-2 guy, I'd have no problem removing some weight from my car, adding a touch of power and running 8.0 or 7.5. My car (while not prepped to the nines) has been developed over years with all the fun parts that cost an arm and a leg... so increasing power to weight is as simple as unbolting some ballast and a tune.... not so for the PTA guys that would move int ST-3 where wings and all of that is required (yes, I'm repeating myself..)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people in TX that tried to get ST3 off the ground ended up either adding more power to get to ST2 levels (built engine$, more boo$t, etc) or swapped back to HC, GTS, or wherever else they came from

 

And that's exactly what they would do when the C5 sheds its warts in PTA and comes to ST3 on huge brakes, drop spindles, monoball, aero, close ratio, and Penskes.

 

Then what?

 

Just seems crazy to me that the only place to run a C5/C6 is gonna be ST3 or ST2 (remember we don't have AI or GTS or HC) with some ballast changes. There's gotta be some place for a stockish C5 to play, the paddocks are littered with them at every event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seems crazy to me that the only place to run a C5/C6 is gonna be ST3 or ST2 (remember we don't have AI or GTS or HC) with some ballast changes. There's gotta be some place for a stockish C5 to play, the paddocks are littered with them at every event.

 

The C6 is already classed out of anything but STx, and the C7 is right around the corner. And don't even try classing a C4. Certainly not as prolific as a C5, but there were about 6 competing at Mid-Ohio last month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seems crazy to me that the only place to run a C5/C6 is gonna be ST3 or ST2 (remember we don't have AI or GTS or HC) with some ballast changes. There's gotta be some place for a stockish C5 to play, the paddocks are littered with them at every event.

 

The C6 is already classed out of anything but STx. And don't even try classing a C4. Certainly not as prolific as a C5, but there were about 6 competing at Mid-Ohio last month.

 

the C6Z51 cars (LS2 anyway) are classed the same as the C5Z. If there is no competition adjustment to them (why should there be, nobody has done anything with one?), that would be the next A "ringer"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would most likely compete in an ST3 class if there was one. Frankly I don't really care if I do it alone as I'm the only one competing in PTB in the midwest region as it is. The 10.25:1 limit seems fine though I would also consider something along the lines of the GTS3 limit as a good alternative. With small fields for PT it only leaves inter-class racing and I always felt somewhat like a fish out of water with the GTS2 and GTS3 cars in my race group. I'd have more HP than the GTS2 cars but they had substantially more tire and aero. The GTS3 were always faster. If you set the ratio at 9.7 (I think?) then the ST3 cars could also race the GTS3 cars in the smaller fields, an overlooked but beneficial side effect.

 

ST3 would also help me to solve some technical challenges that I've run across this past year. One problem that I've run across in my car (STI) is the inability of the car to run fast laps through a race without killing the brakes. I'm going to try SRF at the next event as a band-aid, but the advice I get in the paddock (from ST2 drivers by coincidence) is to put better brakes on the car-- but alas no points for that in PTB. Another problem which just came up is rain tires-- Toyo no longers sells the 225/45r17 tire, which was my tire of choice the past couple of years. There is a 225/40 but the 255/40 is a better choice and a cheaper tire (a full $400 cheaper than a set of Hoosiers). Of course I could use the points from a move to PTA to put on brakes and bigger tires but ST3 would allow the same thing and I wouldn't need to complain about being classed 100hp short for PTA. Which brings me to my last point-- an ST3 class would take the base class and reclass out of the equation. Everyone has opinions on those one way or the other but they would become non issues-- and I would much prefer that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the idea is to get more TTA cars, but if ST3 becomes the new class, and TTA changes to the higher pwr to wt ratio, it will be cheaper and easier to convert my stock street Z28 to a CMC car than de-mod/upgrade the Vette to fit one of the new classes. Im sure there are others who would just seek a different class as well, which is the opposite of what you are trying to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not just crate a REAL Spec C5Z class to get rid of all those pesky Corvettes and that will leave all others to run in whatever class they want to run in.

 

Quite frankly, this constant rule instability is what drives people away. I tried building an ST2 car only to find myself being a victim of the latest round of rule changes rendering my car uncompetitive. Now I'm running GTS and couldn't be happier.

 

I'm sorry for you Corvette guys, maybe you can figure something out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am almost certain I would be in underdog on ST2. I have been preparing to move to ST2 anyway due to so much rule uncertainty around PTA/TTA and low car counts in my region in those classes.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am almost certain I would be an underdog on ST2. I have been preparing to move to ST2 anyway due to so much rule uncertainty around PTA/TTA and low car counts in my region in those classes.

 

Well that's exactly why there were low car counts in TTA/PTA (especially TTA) in 2012, a lot of us were expecting to go to TTS/ST2 so we all started testing various parts and ran TTS/ST2.

 

In 2010 and 2011 SE had huge TTA fields, and PTA was just starting to grow with new caged cars coming around. When we all got our schedules aligned (June?) I think our PTA field was bigger than ST2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think PTA is a good concept... it keeps costs down and especially for the corvette crowd, it limits the amount mods that we can do to our cars and focus on our driving with making minimal changes. I really like it, but the problem that I couldn't run the class was that I was going to have to buy 2-3 sets of rims just so I could run skinny enough tires to be in the class. I already had 3 good sets of rims to run 295/315 wide tires and didn't see the point in buying rims for that class for there to be very few cars to compete against. At that time (mid 2010) ST2 seemed to be gaining much attention and was starting to get really popular. I didn't want to run a class with 2-3 cars in it... I wanted to compete against 7-10 car fields. Plus with all the uncertainity that PTA/TTA has been in with rule changes, I decided not to prep for that class.

 

ST2 is a good class... if you got the money for it. There really are few cars right now (I would say less than 5 total) that have prepped to the max of that class. James Forbis has his car setup really good and it shows... he's consistently 4-5 seconds faster PER LAP than most of us here in the Southeast that has run against him in ST2. Nothing wrong with that, but I just can't put the kind of money into my car to even come close to what he's done with his. I even had all intentions of putting aero on my car and really go all out for ST2 next year... but I don't have deep enough pockets for it.

 

If I had to pick, I would probably go with ST3 ONLY IF the rules didn't allow aero. It wouldn't take me much to go back to 9.5 anyways and aero is just beyond absurd expensive. Also, my thought on aero is if you go off track... just makes it that much more expensive to repair.

 

But I'm building my car back and putting it up for sale this fall/winter anyways. I've decided to go into dirt late model racing because I can still get my racing fix on and do it closer to home and cheaper. So if anyone wants a C5Z to play in ST2/ST3/TTS... it'll be available late October or early November.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and I wouldn't need to complain about being classed 100hp short for PTA. Which brings me to my last point-- an ST3 class would take the base class and reclass out of the equation. Everyone has opinions on those one way or the other but they would become non issues-- and I would much prefer that.

base classes allow for platforms to be put on similar footing. Without those you're either fighting a money spending contest as you completely re-engineer your car or you're still at a deficit if the rules don't allow you to fix your particular platforms weak areas.

 

the more posts I see like this, the more I feel the easiest and best solution is to re-evaluate some base classes, weights, etc for common TTA/PTA cars

Link to comment
Share on other sites

brings up an interesting point, how do you compare cars in terms of relative performance? do you compare bone stock cars (say 2 different cars classed exactly the same) with the same compound tires on the same track/same day with the same (a good) driver?

 

or do you compare the same cars AFTER an array of the free/open mods (which, many of the free mods benefit one car much more than the other?)

 

I would think it's very possible to have one car quicker in stock form, and have the other car quicker in "free mods" modified form. So which trumps for base classing purposes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There isn't a single AWD turbo car base classed as PTA. I have no compassion for someone that cannot upclass a car and compete. That would be like me whining that I can't compete with an base classed ST2 car. I either need to spend the money and do it right, or shut up and stay in my own class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Ken's 10.0, 8.0 and 6.0 for the classes, it is too bad that they want to get rid of PTA/TTA because it's a "Corvette" class, there are other cars that can run with them but they are just not out there. The Boss Mustang and 911 should be good "A" cars but as soon as it comes to W2W those cars run GTS and AI they don't stick around for PTA because there's no one running there. If the idea is to attract the T1 Corvettes that are trying to find a place to race how about this for an idea -

Keep the ST2 rules as the are but no aero stock bodies only - the current ST2 with aero get bumped to STR2 - now you have two different classes and you would have 2 classes with good car counts.

 

Personally I don't see the big deal with aero - you can get a bumper cover for under $500 and make a splitter out of alumalite for under $300 and you can find wings for around $1000 - that totals up to just under $1800 a little more than 1 set of Hoosiers and it's a 1 time cost. The pricey bits IMO for the ST classes are suspension, brakes, monster tq motors and close ratio trannys - all of those pieces are over $5k a piece! It's really no that tough for the current T1 cars to throw $1800 worth of aero on the car retune and go run ST2. They already just got done buying headers and brakes so $2k in aero can't be that big of a deal and no one is forcing them to spend the money they can run without it.

 

If anyone is at Nationals we would love to have some of us sit down on Friday night and talk about this a little - come by the Sawtelle/Alsberg trailer around 7:00 we'll supply the beer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say we utilize the existing PTA rules with a few small tweaks for safety and an allowance for C6's. Same PW/WT rules as PTA with a TQ limit. Our PTA cars are already as fast or faster than most T1 cars at most tracks anyway. Just make a name change to something that sounds cool and let's race. It'll be the easiest, cheapest way to do it and would be the closest thing to a stock class that we could dream up ourselves.

The T1 and ST2 guys could de-mod their cars and make a crap load of money selling their expensive wheels, suspension parts and aero stuff.

 

Any GM shocks/springs/sway bars with adj end links

Any non-metallic bushings

I like the idea of aftermarket clutches from a safety standpoint, but maybe spec in the clutch to use if not stock.

18x10.5 max wheels, any width/compound tire with an adjustment for running skinnies.

MN6/M12 transmission only

Stock 3.42 diff

Brake upgrades allowed

Stock GM (model specific) body panels

No drop spindles, bump steer kits etc (in the PTA rules)

 

Everything else is open.

 

We need to nominate one NASA member and one SCCA member to be the spokeman from each club. Those 2 individuals will communicate directly with each other and draft the initial class rules and post them publicly for critisicm. Then the final rule set will be offered to each sanctioning body. Otherwise, these threads will be endless and we'll end up with nothing.

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...