Jump to content
J.R. Smith

Suggested 2014 changes to ST classes

Recommended Posts

Vettedoctor

I was talking with another ST racer and he sent me this simple classing structure

 

New ST1= ST1 rule set at 5.5 to 1 and STR1 rule set at 5.75 to 1

 

New ST2= ST2 rule set at 8.0 to 1 and Bring back the STR2 rule set and run at 8.25 to 1

 

New ST3= ST3 rule set at 9.0 to 1 (non-aero) and

ST3 rule set at 9.5 to 1 (with aero) and

STR3 rule set at 9.75 to 1

 

So yeah combine ST and STR cars but with a .25 modifier (this number could be changed at any time if it needs to), if anything try it regionally so we can see what happens to car counts, if they don't back to the drawing board.

 

Just another idea (actually it's a couple of your ideas put into one post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991
I was talking with another ST racer and he sent me this simple classing structure

 

New ST1= ST1 rule set at 5.5 to 1 and STR1 rule set at 5.75 to 1

 

New ST2= ST2 rule set at 8.0 to 1 and Bring back the STR2 rule set and run at 8.25 to 1

 

New ST3= ST3 rule set at 9.0 to 1 (non-aero) and

ST3 rule set at 9.5 to 1 (with aero) and

STR3 rule set at 9.75 to 1

 

So yeah combine ST and STR cars but with a .25 modifier (this number could be changed at any time if it needs to), if anything try it regionally so we can see what happens to car counts, if they don't back to the drawing board.

 

Just another idea (actually it's a couple of your ideas put into one post).

 

:like:

 

class consolidation and it makes decent sense too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ILIKETODRIVE
I was talking with another ST racer and he sent me this simple classing structure

 

New ST1= ST1 rule set at 5.5 to 1 and STR1 rule set at 5.75 to 1

 

New ST2= ST2 rule set at 8.0 to 1 and Bring back the STR2 rule set and run at 8.25 to 1

 

New ST3= ST3 rule set at 9.0 to 1 (non-aero) and

ST3 rule set at 9.5 to 1 (with aero) and

STR3 rule set at 9.75 to 1

 

So yeah combine ST and STR cars but with a .25 modifier (this number could be changed at any time if it needs to), if anything try it regionally so we can see what happens to car counts, if they don't back to the drawing board.

 

Just another idea (actually it's a couple of your ideas put into one post).

 

:like:

 

class consolidation and it makes decent sense too!

Ditto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bnjmn

This is what I have been proposing, so I am all for it.

 

I was talking with another ST racer and he sent me this simple classing structure

 

New ST1= ST1 rule set at 5.5 to 1 and STR1 rule set at 5.75 to 1

 

New ST2= ST2 rule set at 8.0 to 1 and Bring back the STR2 rule set and run at 8.25 to 1

 

New ST3= ST3 rule set at 9.0 to 1 (non-aero) and

ST3 rule set at 9.5 to 1 (with aero) and

STR3 rule set at 9.75 to 1

 

So yeah combine ST and STR cars but with a .25 modifier (this number could be changed at any time if it needs to), if anything try it regionally so we can see what happens to car counts, if they don't back to the drawing board.

 

Just another idea (actually it's a couple of your ideas put into one post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
z06tracker

This is not even close to solving the problem. It will make little difference in class car counts on any given weekend.

 

This is what I have been proposing, so I am all for it.

 

I was talking with another ST racer and he sent me this simple classing structure

 

New ST1= ST1 rule set at 5.5 to 1 and STR1 rule set at 5.75 to 1

 

New ST2= ST2 rule set at 8.0 to 1 and Bring back the STR2 rule set and run at 8.25 to 1

 

New ST3= ST3 rule set at 9.0 to 1 (non-aero) and

ST3 rule set at 9.5 to 1 (with aero) and

STR3 rule set at 9.75 to 1

 

So yeah combine ST and STR cars but with a .25 modifier (this number could be changed at any time if it needs to), if anything try it regionally so we can see what happens to car counts, if they don't back to the drawing board.

 

Just another idea (actually it's a couple of your ideas put into one post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ILIKETODRIVE
This is not even close to solving the problem. It will make little difference in class car counts on any given weekend.

negnan.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B
This is not even close to solving the problem. It will make little difference in class car counts on any given weekend.

 

This is what I have been proposing, so I am all for it.

 

I was talking with another ST racer and he sent me this simple classing structure

 

New ST1= ST1 rule set at 5.5 to 1 and STR1 rule set at 5.75 to 1

 

New ST2= ST2 rule set at 8.0 to 1 and Bring back the STR2 rule set and run at 8.25 to 1

 

New ST3= ST3 rule set at 9.0 to 1 (non-aero) and

ST3 rule set at 9.5 to 1 (with aero) and

STR3 rule set at 9.75 to 1

 

So yeah combine ST and STR cars but with a .25 modifier (this number could be changed at any time if it needs to), if anything try it regionally so we can see what happens to car counts, if they don't back to the drawing board.

 

Just another idea (actually it's a couple of your ideas put into one post).

Will it instantly increase car counts in MA? No. But I guarantee it will pull some of the folks that got screwed by STR back out on track. It will create simplicity which will allow the class to start gaining some momentum again. It's the proper first step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Falcon

I don't think we even have to apply a modifier to the STR cars. They haven't demonstrated in all cases a huge disparity in track times directly attributable to frame advantages since there aren't that many running. Bring them in even with the ST's. If later they show an advantage, modify them then.

 

I think we're letting the perfect (ruleset) be the enemy of the good (ruleset). Let the Panoz's, etc. run with the ST groups and let's see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B
I don't think we even have to apply a modifier to the STR cars. They haven't demonstrated in all cases a huge disparity in track times directly attributable to frame advantages since there aren't that many running. Bring them in even with the ST's. If later they show an advantage, modify them then.

 

I think we're letting the perfect (ruleset) be the enemy of the good (ruleset). Let the Panoz's, etc. run with the ST groups and let's see what happens.

I agree with this... KISS. There aren't any readily available tube chassis cars that have an inherent advantage over a well prep'd Viper/Vette etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
z06tracker

I agree 100 percent. I would love to see this, but I also think more class consolidation is necessary.

 

I don't think we even have to apply a modifier to the STR cars. They haven't demonstrated in all cases a huge disparity in track times directly attributable to frame advantages since there aren't that many running. Bring them in even with the ST's. If later they show an advantage, modify them then.

 

I think we're letting the perfect (ruleset) be the enemy of the good (ruleset). Let the Panoz's, etc. run with the ST groups and let's see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jason
I don't think we even have to apply a modifier to the STR cars. They haven't demonstrated in all cases a huge disparity in track times directly attributable to frame advantages since there aren't that many running. Bring them in even with the ST's. If later they show an advantage, modify them then.

 

I think we're letting the perfect (ruleset) be the enemy of the good (ruleset). Let the Panoz's, etc. run with the ST groups and let's see what happens.

This

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg G.
I don't think we even have to apply a modifier to the STR cars. They haven't demonstrated in all cases a huge disparity in track times directly attributable to frame advantages since there aren't that many running. Bring them in even with the ST's. If later they show an advantage, modify them then.

 

I think we're letting the perfect (ruleset) be the enemy of the good (ruleset). Let the Panoz's, etc. run with the ST groups and let's see what happens.

This

No.....This

viewtopic.php?f=18&t=107871

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg G.
I don't think we even have to apply a modifier to the STR cars. They haven't demonstrated in all cases a huge disparity in track times directly attributable to frame advantages since there aren't that many running. Bring them in even with the ST's. If later they show an advantage, modify them then.

 

I think we're letting the perfect (ruleset) be the enemy of the good (ruleset). Let the Panoz's, etc. run with the ST groups and let's see what happens.

I agree with this... KISS. There aren't any readily available tube chassis cars that have an inherent advantage over a well prep'd Viper/Vette etc.

Right, and if the rules were opened up so there were no body, chassis limitations, nobody would do anything to their currently well prep'd Vipers/Vettes. Or, rather, nobody would build one starting with a cheap old car, using every available mod, including partial tube frame conversion and completely re-worked suspension geometry, etc.

 

Ok, so you think that the guys who decide to take advantage of the new "open" rules that then are told in a year that they now have a new 0.X Mod Factor applied to their car because of XYZ mod that cannot be reversed are going to stay with the series and NASA, or will they just give up?

 

Many of us would like to merge these classes, but regardless of how it is done, someone is going to end up unhappy. If we go with a direct merge, it will be a huge change to the ST Rules that will be very costly for those who want to be on top. If we go with a Mod Factor and essentially delete the STR classes, then those that are in STR that are already getting beat by ST cars will complain that they are already slower than the ST cars and we just added more weight/less power to their setup. So, KISS cannot apply when it is not a simple issue. But, we continue to work on this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ILIKETODRIVE
Ok, so you think that the guys who decide to take advantage of the new "open" rules that then are told in a year that they now have a new 0.X Mod Factor applied to their car because of XYZ mod that cannot be reversed are going to stay with the series and NASA, or will they just give up?

I would hope not.

 

If someone beats me in qualifying and gets to Turn 1 during the race before me, I don't just throw in the towel and say, "Well, that's that."

 

No. I keep fighting. It's racing. But hey, maybe that's just me.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991

Alternative:

 

Regionally - don't allow regular ST as an option, re-add STR2, and have people regionally run STR1,2 or 3.

Nationals - keep them split for now so long as car counts are good enough

 

Were I a regional ST director, that's what I'd try and get my guys to do anyway...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brkntrxn

That works the other way as well for STR1 and STR3. Just move to those classes and run in them.... Except when the STR3 cars are small and they run in the Lightning group and no one will let you bring your monster sized plastic C5 to play with the "slow" cars. I understood the reasoning, just thought it was unfair to be blocked from running in a class in which I could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hakeem
If we go with a Mod Factor and essentially delete the STR classes, then those that are in STR that are already getting beat by ST cars will complain that they are already slower than the ST cars and we just added more weight/less power to their setup. So, KISS cannot apply when it is not a simple issue.

 

Can't these STR cars that are already slower than ST cars simply drop down a class? How many cars are we really talking about nationwide?

 

With all due respect, constantly working the rules around to accomodate edge cases or to satisfy very small minorities is never going to be a path to any serious growth. Make the most logical changes and continue to modify and accomodate as things shake out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vettedoctor
That works the other way as well for STR1 and STR3. Just move to those classes and run in them.... Except when the STR3 cars are small and they run in the Lightning group and no one will let you bring your monster sized plastic C5 to play with the "slow" cars. I understood the reasoning, just thought it was unfair to be blocked from running in a class in which I could.

 

This is a good point Kevin, in the past we would see that the Thunder Roadster guys running STR had absolutely no interest in running with ST cars. Sometimes they would jump into other classes to get away from us and I can't blame them 1500 lbs vs 3200 lbs is kinda rough. So if a blend were to happen what would these guys do? History has shown that they have no interest in running with ST cars, they went to STR because it gave them a place they could run with each other without bigger cars to worry about. I highly doubt that they will stick around if the classes were combined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobra4B

Then make Thunder Roadster it's own class and let them run with Lightning or whatever group they already run with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brkntrxn
Then make Thunder Roadster it's own class and let them run with Lightning or whatever group they already run with.

 

Already the case in the Southeast. At 5-15 entries at the typical event, it is hard to fault them for doing so.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mhoward1
Then make Thunder Roadster it's own class and let them run with Lightning or whatever group they already run with.

 

Already the case in the Southeast.

 

And it works well with 20+ car TR races.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991

the Texas TurdRoasters don't seem to mind running with real cars / real STR3 cars...??!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John Graber

So what does everything think about Torque?

Today it is free. A wise and well funded racer will build a torque monster. I've seen this in only about 25% of the cars where they have Torque far outpacing HP.

 

For reference, GTS averages Tq and HP if Tq is higher. Does that fix it? Not really, as it now focuses on tuning.

 

Now imagine a 320HP ST2 car.

320HP 310Tq peak

320HP 470Tq peak

320HP 320Tq flat

 

Hmmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
J.R. Smith

John,

 

If you can afford to build a 320 HP 470 Ft Lb torque car then your 15:1 compression 427 cu in monster or your diesel pusher wins.

 

Torque has not necessarily been an issue so far in ST.

 

I realize someone can always build a better or faster car with enough $ but Scott Tucker is now racing LeMans.

 

There is always a situation where cubic dollars wins but generally I think too many rules tends to kill participation. Look how quickly NASA has grown and SCCA dwindled with a simple solution for racers.

 

I think the "Pfadt car" is a very good example of a well developed high torque car but I think it can be competed against.

 

J.R.

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...