robbodleimages Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 My bet is some S197 cars with aero mods will show up and be impressive. Keep in mind the tire mod factor lets you keep your brick accelerating. i bet not unless they have no ai competition to race with. with aero the 9.5 to 1 is straight ai. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted October 10, 2012 Author National Staff Share Posted October 10, 2012 Based on the comments here, my own thoughts, and our discussions throughout NASA, here is what is on the rough draft so far: 1) Aerodynamic modifications are unrestricted with the following exceptions: a.) Active aerodynamic modifications (including, but not limited to, computerized, cockpit adjustable, self-adjusting, etc.) are not permitted. b.) ST1, ST2, and ST3 only (not applicable to STR1 and STR3) A rear wing (or rear spoiler for wagon-style bodies) may not exceed a height of eight ( inches above the roof-line (or OEM windshield height for convertibles). c.) ST3 only The addition of non-OEM aerodynamic aides or modification of OEM body lines (unless specifically stated otherwise in these rules), will be assessed via a Modification Factor to the “Adjusted Wt/Hp Ratio”. In this case, non-OEM is defined as any part that does not come from the vehicle manufacturer either as a standard feature, a factory option, or on a factory optional trim model/package of that generation of the street-legal (in the U.S.A.) version of the vehicle. Later in the rules is the inner/inboard fender rule, that permits the fender vents. And, there will be an exception written for hood venting, and any necessary opening/cutting of fascias for cooling and brake ducting purposes, and removal of rain gutters and mirrors. Ok, start over from here. Suggestions are still welcome. While this rule is still a nice compromise and will help participant retention, as well as help to bring in new models, it is fraught with peril. I like the keep it simple principle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted October 10, 2012 Author National Staff Share Posted October 10, 2012 My bet is some S197 cars with aero mods will show up and be impressive. Keep in mind the tire mod factor lets you keep your brick accelerating. i bet not unless they have no ai competition to race with. with aero the 9.5 to 1 is straight ai. Rob, no it isn't. On 275's, it is 9.1:1. Then, add in whatever Mod Factor for weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted October 10, 2012 Author National Staff Share Posted October 10, 2012 Greg what's the weight table going to be for ST3? The current ST2 table or the PT table? It will be the ST1/2 table. ST3 is the same as ST1 and ST2 with just this one exception of the non-OEM Aero Mod Factor. So, if we change the ST table for ST3, we are changing it for ST1 and ST2 also. STR still has its own table to deal with sports racers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbodleimages Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Rob aren't you looking at ST2? There's no aero factor there... just ST3. If it is ST3 and if you feel you need aero to hang, go whole-hog on it and prep to that ratio... it's not rocket science. i was looking at st2 before there was an st3. as my cars sits today at 9 to 1 hp to wt, i thought, it made some sense. i might still consider taking the little wing off and racing st3. that doesnt mean i am going to agree that a c5 and an s197 at 9 to 1 hp to wt are equal packages. i am not a whole-hog budget racer. i scratch and scrape to save for anything. i have an all white car because i cant afford to paint it and was saving the paint budget to afford a rear wing. i was hoping to get the wing this off season but we had to spend the wing budget on body repair after june road atlanta. i still only have 2 sets of wheels and need three and i if i was serious about st2 i need long tube headers too. so...i need $1k for one set of used wheels that match what i have. $2k for the wing. $1200 for the headers. i wont be able to afford any of that stuff til most of the way thru next year now....unless i want to skip racing and spend the money on the upgrades. in short going whole-hog isnt as easy for some of us than others. if it wasnt a big deal for me, i'd have the parts already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbodleimages Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 (edited) My bet is some S197 cars with aero mods will show up and be impressive. Keep in mind the tire mod factor lets you keep your brick accelerating. i bet not unless they have no ai competition to race with. with aero the 9.5 to 1 is straight ai. Rob, no it isn't. On 275's, it is 9.1:1. Then, add in whatever Mod Factor for weight. its 9.1 to 1 WITH aero? 8" above roof line? remember the chaparrel? Edited October 10, 2012 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted October 10, 2012 Author National Staff Share Posted October 10, 2012 Rob, if you are running on 275's, and your car weighs 3350 lbs or more, you are right back at 9:1 with the Steeda wing (+0.4 for the 275's, and + 0.1 for the weight). That is why is is called the "Adjusted Wt/HP Ratio". There are a few factors that change your ratio. Us rocket scientists don't understand the simple math of AI or GTS---needs more complication Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obzezzed350 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 What about a 911 at 9:1 with your S197? What about a M3 at 9:1 vs your S197? What about a civic at 9:1 vs your S197? etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra4B Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Based on the comments here, my own thoughts, and our discussions throughout NASA, here is what is on the rough draft so far:1) Aerodynamic modifications are unrestricted with the following exceptions: a.) Active aerodynamic modifications (including, but not limited to, computerized, cockpit adjustable, self-adjusting, etc.) are not permitted. b.) ST1, ST2, and ST3 only (not applicable to STR1 and STR3) A rear wing (or rear spoiler for wagon-style bodies) may not exceed a height of eight ( inches above the roof-line (or OEM windshield height for convertibles). c.) ST3 only The addition of non-OEM aerodynamic aides or modification of OEM body lines (unless specifically stated otherwise in these rules), will be assessed via a Modification Factor to the “Adjusted Wt/Hp Ratio”. In this case, non-OEM is defined as any part that does not come from the vehicle manufacturer either as a standard feature, a factory option, or on a factory optional trim model/package of that generation of the street-legal (in the U.S.A.) version of the vehicle. Later in the rules is the inner/inboard fender rule, that permits the fender vents. And, there will be an exception written for hood venting, and any necessary opening/cutting of fascias for cooling and brake ducting purposes, and removal of rain gutters and mirrors. Ok, start over from here. Suggestions are still welcome. While this rule is still a nice compromise and will help participant retention, as well as help to bring in new models, it is fraught with peril. I like the keep it simple principle. This sounds good... time to go into the laboratory and start concocting the next iteration of Overdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PushinTheLimit Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Based on the comments here, my own thoughts, and our discussions throughout NASA, here is what is on the rough draft so far:1) Aerodynamic modifications are unrestricted with the following exceptions: a.) Active aerodynamic modifications (including, but not limited to, computerized, cockpit adjustable, self-adjusting, etc.) are not permitted. b.) ST1, ST2, and ST3 only (not applicable to STR1 and STR3) A rear wing (or rear spoiler for wagon-style bodies) may not exceed a height of eight ( inches above the roof-line (or OEM windshield height for convertibles). c.) ST3 only The addition of non-OEM aerodynamic aides or modification of OEM body lines (unless specifically stated otherwise in these rules), will be assessed via a Modification Factor to the “Adjusted Wt/Hp Ratio”. In this case, non-OEM is defined as any part that does not come from the vehicle manufacturer either as a standard feature, a factory option, or on a factory optional trim model/package of that generation of the street-legal (in the U.S.A.) version of the vehicle. Later in the rules is the inner/inboard fender rule, that permits the fender vents. And, there will be an exception written for hood venting, and any necessary opening/cutting of fascias for cooling and brake ducting purposes, and removal of rain gutters and mirrors. Ok, start over from here. Suggestions are still welcome. While this rule is still a nice compromise and will help participant retention, as well as help to bring in new models, it is fraught with peril. I like the keep it simple principle. This sounds good... time to go into the laboratory and start concocting the next iteration of Overdog I agree... sounds reasonable to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 What about a civic at 9:1 vs your S197? etc. I know of a soon-to-be-when-the-supercharger-is-added TT3 Civic that will be at 9.5:1 adjusted w/aero. His raw PTW will be roughly 8.2:1 (2225/270) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Greg, I like the draft of the rules and think it is very reasonable. As soon as it is no longer a draft and the final deal I can finish my car. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 4 things: 1 - It looks like wider fenders/flares are an aero mod. I don't think this is helpful as they don't produce downforce or reduce drag (just the opposite) but they seem to be prohibited by the aero rule. 2 - C6s get an unnecessary cookie with the rules as written. 3 - Evo and STi wings are not "aero" somehow? Do 996 and 997s really get to run RS aero w/o the mod factor? 4 - OEM active aero is free? I'm sure there are more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 #4 - nope, active aero is specifically banned no matter of origin the way things are currently written. #3 - the Evo & STi wings aren't that good, even with the add-on vortex generators. I'd rather have a slick body 'vette OR take the hit and put stuff that works on the car(s). What I'd be worried more about is Viper ACR-X stuff and the like... #2 - intriguing, explain? #1 - good Greg question... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 #4 - nope, active aero is specifically banned no matter of origin the way things are currently written. --- OEM aero is not a "modification" so how is that picked up? #3 - the Evo & STi wings aren't that good, even with the add-on vortex generators. I'd rather have a slick body 'vette OR take the hit and put stuff that works on the car(s). What I'd be worried more about is Viper ACR-X stuff and the like... --- Every little bit helps. ACR-X is not street legal. ACR is and that has real aero, so add that to the list. #2 - intriguing, explain? ----- free wide fenders, free working front aero, free rear spoiler #1 - good Greg question... see above Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varkwso Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 A viper at 9.0 one will not be the ACR. C6 and Porsches need to make a beeline to the OEM parts counter. It is still not true aero. Warts.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubs Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Fender flares or cutting the fenders for tire clearance are a free mod in PT so I would think if it is for tire clearance only that it would not count as aero in ST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 A restrictor can fix any excess power on the ACR. Here are numbers on the "not true" Porsche and Lotus Aero: http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/997-gt2-gt3-forum/581969-gt2rs-downforce-numbers.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Exige Any non-aero competitor would kill for less lift, let alone another 100++ pounds on the tail through a fast turn. Why does OEM aero not count as "aero?" With a straight face you are going to forbid that bump on the rear of Michael's poster child "aero" C5 but freely allow OEM aero, that works (to the tune of 150+lbs at 120mph)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 1) Aerodynamic modifications are unrestricted with the following exceptions:a.) Active aerodynamic modifications (including, but not limited to, computerized, cockpit adjustable, self-adjusting, etc.) are not permitted. Doesn't say "OEM ok" it says "active areo is NOT PERMITTED". Period. Do we have to make Greg add "OEM" to that list? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpoz27 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Boss 302 turn key race cars are sold from Ford dealers.....I'd say that is OEM. Legal? Ken, the 2000r Aero works very well. On my car at 2800lbs it would work even better. Too many what ifs out there to write guidelines (rules) for the non-aero mod factor. Personally I think it would be easier and cheaper to leave the mod factor out, collect actual data outside the secret Kali test center and then determine if there is even a need. For the price of a sheet of plywood, a used wing and some mounting materials, say 800 bucks....anyone can have working Aero......why is that so hard to figure out? That is less than a set of brake pads for some cars and saves 9 million headaches trying to define OEM or whether or not your fenders are mounted right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted October 11, 2012 Author National Staff Share Posted October 11, 2012 There are a lot of "what if's", but without it, there are some certainties. We want to see multiple Marques competing against each other in close competition. We don't want to lose the great competitor hold-outs that we had in PTA and TTA in C5's, we want to enhance their experience by giving them something to work for with real car counts and competition. So far, it sounds like this may turn out to be a rule that helps accomplish that. Again, we are making a few compromises here so that we can get something done that helps to build car counts right from the start. If a Mustang needs a Boss wing w/o a splitter or other Aero to compete against a Corvette more evenly, then fine. If a Porsche needs a bit more handling to make up for the weight Mod Factor and not being able to have a Dyno curve that looks like the top of Mesa Verde, then so be it. I'm guessing, like many of you, that most will opt for full Aero and the -0.5 Mod Factor, and mostly it will be the C5 Vettes and maybe new TT cars fresh off the dealer lot like the Boss that won't. Over time, the class and competitors may make the rule obsolete for anyone with a built car. Let's not forget where a lot of NASA's racers come from--->TT, starting with a street car with no Aero. I agree with the flared fenders. I had it written down and forgot to put it on the post here. Any Aero that is free in PT, must be free in ST. The cars must be able to transition upward without crazy reverse engineering and scouring over junkyards for obsolete parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJM Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Let's not forget where a lot of NASA's racers come from--->TT, starting with a street car with no Aero. I think if you are trying to "convert" TT'ers into W2W racers they mod factor for aero will need to be larger. 0.5 is roughly 20 HP at 3300lbs race weight. Aero will drop your lap times much more than adding 20 HP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted October 11, 2012 Author National Staff Share Posted October 11, 2012 Compromises.... And forget about 20 hp. What about 140 lbs of weight! It is all going to be track dependent, vehicle dependent, setup dependent, OEM Aero dependent, driver dependent, tire dependent, wind and weather condition dependent, etc, etc, etc. At some tracks it may be a huge advantage, at others, it may just be a drag on the car. And, I was talking about getting TT'ers into racing, not handing them ST Championships without putting in the work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJM Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 And, I was talking about getting TT'ers into racing, not handing them ST Championships without putting in the work. My point is if you have 3 equal drivers starting with 3 equal cars and each one goes a different route: Driver A adds 20 HP Driver B drops 140 lbs Driver C run full aero And you run a season long championship at different tracks.....driver C is going to win. I really like the idea of attempting to balance aero vs non aero cars and you're right, it's different for every track. I would argue the mod factor needs to be higher overall. What is the lap time difference between a T1 C5 and an aero ST2 C5 at say.....VIR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drivinhardz06 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 What is the lap time difference between a T1 C5 and an aero ST2 C5 at say.....VIR? about 4-5 seconds you're also comparing crappy gearing vs excellent gearing, wider wheels, far more suspension upgrades, 35 lb lighter clutch, etc. yes a lot of it is aero, but it's more than just that 140 lbs would be 2+ sec/lap at VIR, I would take 140 lbs over 20 peak hp all day long 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.