Jump to content
J.R. Smith

Suggested 2014 changes to ST classes

Recommended Posts

jerrytx

ST1/ST2 Vette racer here and I love the idea, lets combine ST and STR!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nascarracer288
Gets too complex to start limiting aero for certain cars. A fully prepped C5 Corvette can run with a tube chassis cup car all day long no issue. It's this mystical custom tube chassis car that they're planning against. Or maybe somebody buying a ex Rolex or ALMS vette and stuffing a stock LS6 in it?

 

I keep reading how people think that an ex-Cup or Nationwide car seems to be the benchmark for tubeframed cars and that they need to be restricted somehow to be in the same class as the ST1 cars. I run two ex-Sprint Cup cars with crate motors and let me be the first to tell you that there is no advantage to running that car against the likes of a Viper or Corvette. It's a big box with a solid rear axle and archaic front suspension geometry at best, and I drive my a$$ off to stay competitive with the Corvettes. We don't have the luxury of having a Pfadt or LG to do finely tuned suspension setups. What we've got is something more akin to what they used to run in the 70s and 80's, not what is being offered on the Corvettes or Vipers in 2013. Brakes are a whole different topic...and we don't have any!

 

Secondly, I know what it's like to run against a car equivalent to an ex-ALMS Corvette. We have one here in Utah that is about as close to a C5R as you can get. It won the National Championship in STR1 this year and it wasn't even close! Congrats to George Smith for building such a fine, fast car, but my point is that there is SOOO much more that you can do with a good Corvette or Viper platform than I will ever be able to do with a tube-framed Nascar chassis!

 

Bottom line, forget all this little nit-picky stuff about deduct for this, add for that, just get out there and race with a baseline HP/WT ratio. If Nasa feels like someone has an advantage, leave a clause in the rules that allows a ''Balance of Performance Modification" whereby Nasa can impose a slight change on an individual car in the event that someone is running away from their competition.

 

Just keep it simple!

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nascarracer288
Baby steps...

 

1. Roll STR back into ST with a modifier like it used to be.

 

2. Ditch the modifiers for side exhaust and floor pans etc.

 

3. Announce 2014 Nationals at VIR or Road Atlanta

 

Watch the car counts go up!

 

#1 +1

#2 +1

#3 -1 For the same reason that a National on the West coast doesn't get any East coast cars, that applies to the East coast too. My suggestion would be to have a separate East Coast and West Coast National, that way more people could participate. They do it in baseball, football and basketball with separate divisional championships, so why not Nasa?

 

I know, I know, each of those sports have a final championship for the divisional champions, but we are just amateurs racing on a slim wallet so some things will have to give.

 

I applaud the East Coasters who came out to Miller this year. I can't go to VIR or RA, but I will certainly travel to a venue West of the Rockies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zigspeed10

Just throwing this out there for discussion. There seems to be a hole in the tire size adjustments. Currently it looks like this:

 

275 to 250 = add 0.4

245 or smaller = add 0.8

 

Here is my suggestion.

 

300 or greater = subtract 0.4

285 to 295 = no adjustment

275 to 250 = add 0.4

245 or smaller = add 0.8

 

My reason for this is because the current rules reward running 245's, 275's or monsters like 345's but nothing in between. What are your thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jerrytx
Just throwing this out there for discussion. There seems to be a hole in the tire size adjustments. Currently it looks like this:

 

275 to 250 = add 0.4

245 or smaller = add 0.8

 

Here is my suggestion.

 

300 or greater = subtract 0.4

285 to 295 = no adjustment

275 to 250 = add 0.4

245 or smaller = add 0.8

 

My reason for this is because the current rules reward running 245's, 275's or monsters like 345's but nothing in between. What are your thoughts.

 

285-305 no adjustment, 315 and greater could use a small adjustment to avoid the incentive to wide body a corvette.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bnjmn

The tire modifiers have been in place for a while and I'd rather not see any changes unless necessary. I would like to see a modifier for 18" wheels

 

How about this for an ST-STR compromise:

 

Year 1:

- regional events - mix the classes, maintain separate rule sets

- national event - leave the class structure in place

 

Offseason:

- determine if a modifier is necessary

 

Year 2:

- regional events - mix the classes (with separate rule sets), with modifier if applicable

- national event - mix the classes (with separate rule sets), with modifier if applicable

 

Year 2 offseason:

- determine if modifier is needed/correct

 

Mixing the rule sets is a big (and potentially expensive) move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hakeem

Kill ST3, return ST2 to 8.7:1 and fold STR and ST together.

 

Result: two classes, ST1 (5.5:1) and ST2 (8.7:1). Figure out various weight penalties or modifiers as the season progresses as needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B
Kill ST3, return ST2 to 8.7:1 and fold STR and ST together.

 

Result: two classes, ST1 (5.5:1) and ST2 (8.7:1). Figure out various weight penalties or modifiers as the season progresses as needed.

Sounds good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MSP608

Nooo, gotta keep ST-3! It's the only way guys like me can still play. The only reason I ran ST-2 in the past was because nooo one ran PTA and I also got screwed on a BS re-class.

 

I think the lack of participation in ST-3 this year is because 1) it's brand new and 2) too many people thinking "well my car isn't set up competitively yet"

 

I love the idea of combining ST and STR though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mhoward1

Agreed, keep ST3. If STR was rolled in you would have more cars in that class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B
Nooo, gotta keep ST-3! It's the only way guys like me can still play. The only reason I ran ST-2 in the past was because nooo one ran PTA and I also got screwed on a BS re-class.

 

I think the lack of participation in ST-3 this year is because 1) it's brand new and 2) too many people thinking "well my car isn't set up competitively yet"

 

I love the idea of combining ST and STR though.

Huh? You couldn't compete at 8.3:1 on 275s? Or do those Subaru motors do better at 9.1:1?

 

I think there's too much invested in the new class to do away with it... and you need a place for all those cars that can make 9-9.5:1 but would have a hard time in the mid 8's or lower 8s. From a Corvette perspective it really splits us up... some guys doing ST2 and some in ST3. I think which ever one gains more participation will ultimately win out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toomchpwr

yes i agree - don't get rid of ST3/TT3. In the northeast, every ST2 car has aero.

For those of us in ST3/TT3, we already spent a boat load to be in this new type of class (new to us if we used the points before TTF-TTA). If you give free aero like ST2/TT2 gets, it would even more cost prohibitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hakeem

Another thought: If you combine STR and ST, the new ST1 could be pretty much in-line with SCCA GT2 performance which is basically 6.5:1 while running slicks. Could be some potential crossover vehicles from that class, I know several us on the West Coast are contemplating running GT2 next year due to the runoffs location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
z06tracker

Aren't you already running 8.6 to 1 because you run 245's?

 

Nooo, gotta keep ST-3! It's the only way guys like me can still play. The only reason I ran ST-2 in the past was because nooo one ran PTA and I also got screwed on a BS re-class.

 

I think the lack of participation in ST-3 this year is because 1) it's brand new and 2) too many people thinking "well my car isn't set up competitively yet"

 

I love the idea of combining ST and STR though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
z06tracker

I agree something has to be done to get car counts up. I am all for combining ST and STR, and I don't care if there is a modifier for the STR cars. A big ST2 field this year was 5 in SE. ST3 was even smaller, although TT3 had decent field sizes at times. I would also be in favor of combining AI and GTS classes, although drivers in those classes probably would not be.

 

I will be doing some soul searching over the winter and looking for a path to larger fields or just getting out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Billy Bass

I agree. Here are my suggestions:

 

1. Eliminate STR and let them run ST. Loosen up the rules for floor and frame mods in ST.

 

2. ST1 = 6:1, ST2 = 8:1, ST3 = 10:1.

 

3. GTS3 = ST3, GTS4 = ST2, GTS5 = ST1.

 

4. AI can stay where it is or mix with ST also. However, I really don't think there is a good reason for GTS and ST to be in separate classes. All the german cars in Socal race in ST while all of them in Norcal race GTS. Just combine them along with STR so car counts go up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bnjmn

Is anyone opposed to mixing ST and STR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B

Greg G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
topmover1

My vote would be to allow the STR cars in. I would love a shot at the GTS and AI cars however as Brian said baby steps.

 

I've come to the conclusion that the best approach is to optimize for a class/organization with the understanding that at times one will need to or want to cross class or organizations even if it means racing for 2nd or 3rd place some of the time.

 

Joe Moholland

ST1 and ST2 Corvettes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
davidfarmer

I agree, combine ST and GT for all production cars (and limited fab cars, like Factory 5 etc). Tube-frame/prototype/Formula cars should obviously run elsewhere.

 

and IF they combine, drop the weight penalty/bonus points if you are out of the 3150 target range.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
geerookie
Or maybe somebody buying a ex Rolex or ALMS vette and stuffing a stock LS6 in it?

 

We have one running SU in the NE. If you applied the .2ish mod for the tube frame and the .7 for slicks and .4 for the sequential an ST2 car would be right there or faster.

At the Glen he ran a 1:55.6 in the race and ST2 was running 2:01:4 with equal drivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B
I agree, combine ST and GT for all production cars (and limited fab cars, like Factory 5 etc). Tube-frame/prototype/Formula cars should obviously run elsewhere.

 

and IF they combine, drop the weight penalty/bonus points if you are out of the 3150 target range.....

I disagree on the tube-frame part... plenty of Panoz, NASCAR-type, and Cobra replicas that are worthy competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mhoward1

I think looking at the smaller classes with low car counts as examples for times would give you a good measure of how much the ST classes combined with STR could be. There are plenty of spec classes such as FFRC, Panoz WC, HC1/2, etc that could fit in the ST2 or ST3 classes as is (with small mods values). They would much rather run in a larger class if available, but a nice to have is not having to modify the car greatly so that on the rare times the spec class is larger they can still compete in that.

 

-posted via phone so I am sure the grammar and spelling sucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ILIKETODRIVE
Is anyone opposed to mixing ST and STR?
Greg G

LOL

 

...HC1/2, etc

I really wish this would happen:

Ditch HC1 and HC4 rules and make HC2 just plain Honda Challenge. HC1 could really be called FWD ST3 right now lol. HC4 cars are usually PTE/PTD cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bnjmn

Ok, I am reiterating my earlier suggestion of keeping the rule sets and mixing ST&STR locally in year 1 and then nationally in year 2 and keep all rules in place.

Start w/.25 modifier for STR cars.

I really would like to see the frame and floor mod prohibitions left in place for ST, as a cost control, though I would be open to allowing frame mods in front of the front shock towers and frame and floor mods behind the rear shock towers.

The Southeast is definitely is an ST black hole and I think the entire country is an STR black hole.

Fields of 0-2 cars are not much of an incentive for people to race with NASA, and with some rule tweaks that don't seem too controversial to the participants, it seems like a much better situation (or at the chance of one) can be had.

Share this post


Link to post
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...