IGZOSTD Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 To open a topic concerning the dot tire mod factor in str. I would like to see this dissolved. How many tube frame drivers run on a dot tire. This seems out of place in this class. I would like feedback if this might open up prospective competitors. Is this nessesary in STR ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra4B Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 The entire class is unnecessary. Roll STR back into ST and bolster field sizes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgordonsenior Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The entire class is unnecessary. Roll STR back into ST and bolster field sizes. In So Cal, the majority of the ST2 field the past few years has been tube framed Mazda GT's, a custom built spec car. They all run on R-compounds. This year they were bumped to STR2 so the remaining ST2 cars which included my Porsche, a M3, and several Corvettes all decided to join them in STR2 to qualify for the various tire contingencies. ST2 has been vacant all year, but our STR2 class is thriving.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Since tube frame cars are inherently safer than converted street cars, not to mention cheaper to operate, shouldn't NASA be encouraging more people to convert to them? The way to do this would be to let them compete against production cars straight up and start taking wins (I don't really feel an 8.7:1 stock car is going to be faster than an 8.7:1 aero vette, but apparently I am mistaken). If they are winning, people will build them. As the fields begin filling up with safe, cheap, tube frame cars, if the few hard heads that insist on racing street cars need their own class spun off, THEN see about creating a new class, or roll them into GTS, AI, Vintage, or Specwhatever. Right now we are spinning off a class for cars that aren't winning, then act surprised that no one is building them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra4B Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Right now we are spinning off a class for cars that aren't winning, then act surprised that no one is building them. This x 1000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlfpkrcn1 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Since tube frame cars are inherently safer than converted street cars, not to mention cheaper to operate, shouldn't NASA be encouraging more people to convert to them? The way to do this would be to let them compete against production cars straight up and start taking wins (I don't really feel an 8.7:1 stock car is going to be faster than an 8.7:1 aero vette, but apparently I am mistaken). If they are winning, people will build them. As the fields begin filling up with safe, cheap, tube frame cars, if the few hard heads that insist on racing street cars need their own class spun off, THEN see about creating a new class, or roll them into GTS, AI, Vintage, or Specwhatever. Right now we are spinning off a class for cars that aren't winning, then act surprised that no one is building them. What about a lead trophy for tube frames until a balance can be figured out? Obviously Grand Am has it figured out. The have tube frame RX8, Camaro, Vette (granted Sahlens stopped racing it), M3, Mustangs against Tub chassis Porsches, Corvette, Ferrari, Audi. Then again every car has different HP and weight. They may not always end up at the same pwr/wt ratio GT Regs for anyone interested http://www.grand-am.com/Portals/0/Images/PDF/GrandTouring%28GT%29SpecificCarRegulations2012_10_4.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IGZOSTD Posted October 5, 2012 Author Share Posted October 5, 2012 I don't think merging ST and STR is a productive move. Prod cars and framer's need their own place to play. My interest is not in equalizing ST with STR but in the STR class as a stand alone. Insted of a hit for non dot tire on a purpose built racer, have a mod factor + for a prod car on dots in STR only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 not interested in equalizing ST and STR... next sentence is ways to equalize ST and STR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra4B Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I don't think merging ST and STR is a productive move. Prod cars and framer's need their own place to play. My interest is not in equalizing ST with STR but in the STR class as a stand alone. Insted of a hit for non dot tire on a purpose built racer, have a mod factor + for a prod car on dots in STR only. You and the rest of NASA mgmt are wrong on this. We the consumers want people to race against. We don't want further class dilution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IGZOSTD Posted October 5, 2012 Author Share Posted October 5, 2012 Mr Brewski, That was added only for competetors wanting to Super Size as looks like Nationals, the STR program dominated by ST cars. Why do you think tube frame cars are not winning ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The logic made me chuckle was all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKRBMW Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Mr Brewski,That was added only for competetors wanting to Super Size as looks like Nationals, the STR program dominated by ST cars. Why do you think tube frame cars are not winning ? So help me understand this. The entire time we've been told about how much data is out there to show how much faster tube frame cars than production cars, which is why they were split. Now you're pointing out the fact that tube frame cars can't win because of production cars running against them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IGZOSTD Posted October 6, 2012 Author Share Posted October 6, 2012 No what Im saying is , STR should not take a hit for slicks. Its a class for tube frame cars and makes no sense to have a point hit for slicks. Others have voiced a need for eliminating STR to increase car count. I don't agree with that as an owner of both a tube frame car and a modified production car that both would fit STR1. Its easy to find somewhere other than STR to run both cars. I'm just making a suggestion to increase counts in STR. Personally, I think STR as it stands is too restrictive. Most tube frame cars have a dog box & slicks both which are prw/wt killers already, then take away more power for tires over 10". What ever the outcome is I'm ok with it as I have no problem finding other classes to run in. I'm trying to think as other tube frame owners might. How many tube frame cars ran in STR1 & 2 at the nationals ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWI Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Why do you think tube frame cars are not winning ? Perhaps because they have been left in their garages looking for more than 'a class of one' to run with? Class dilution is not in NASA's best interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IGZOSTD Posted October 6, 2012 Author Share Posted October 6, 2012 Like me, why should I come play in str, too many mod factors. No thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.