Suggested 2014 changes to ST classes

[kbrew8991]

Apparently this isn't the case in your region, but at least in TX the "Blitz" race group all runs under GTS's modified 13/13 rule. GTS, SU, ST, STR, and sometimes PTA/B. Seems to work out fairly well, I've yet to hear or know of any complaints.

 

Perhaps this is something other regions could look at incorporating...

[Biggie]

Perhaps this is something other regions could look at incorporating...

It wouldn't matter, the GTS guys still wouldn't want/let none German cars in their group?

[erioshi]

- Eliminate any modifications or special formulas to the competition weight (scale numbers and noting else)

 

Agree with this completely.

Just to be clear, that's not actually a quote from me. It was something said by HAL-9000 in his post where he quotes something else I had said. (viewtopic.php?f=18&t=107351&start=130#p456063)

 

I do believe there will probably need to be some form of balancing.

 

Per Greg's post, as far as tire points in ST & STR go, I haven't thought enough about the specifics to feel comfortable offering a strong opinion. As an off the cuff, perhaps scale tire width points based on weight alone? With control over two of the three elements in the formula, that would still offer a way for NASA to effectively manage tire width.

 

My point with weight system was that it effectively acts as a double tax on light-weight cars; the first hit is the reduced power given by a power to weight formula itself. Light car = less power just based on weight alone - before the weight table is even brought into play. The second is that the current weight table system adds an additional penalty onto light cars even after the formula cuts their power. On top of that double hit, not considering torque when looking at light cars with small displacement engines feels even more punishing. I do recognize that there is now a bonus for small displacement engines; it seems to be a step in the right direction.

[D_Eclipse9916]

GTS is far less about competition and actual racing than it is about stroking egos, being elitists and getting a coveted $5 plastic trophy for being the only driver in your class.

 

Funny because ST/STR is the one with only one driver in class and GTS on the entire East Coast has large fields in GTS.

 

Way to only look at it in your own bubble.

 

As I said before, stop the bashing, evaluate what brings them to run seperately and figure out how to bring them in the fold. If you have a valid point for bringing them in the fold, the GTS guys can switch over classes with NO RULE CHANGE (because we can go to your class already).

[Biggie]

GTS is far less about competition and actual racing than it is about stroking egos, being elitists and getting a coveted $5 plastic trophy for being the only driver in your class.

 

Funny because ST/STR is the one with only one driver in class and GTS on the entire East Coast has large fields in GTS.

 

Way to only look at it in your own bubble.

You are correct sir, I will retract the last portion of my comment and agree with you on the first two.

 

As I said before, stop the bashing, evaluate what brings them to run seperately and figure out how to bring them in the fold. If you have a valid point for bringing them in the fold, the GTS guys can switch over classes with NO RULE CHANGE (because we can go to your class already).

How about we stop trying to bring GTS cars into ST and allow all cars into GTS. It would be pretty simple, basically just drop the "G" (2013 German Touring Series (GTS) Rules: Section 3/Car Eligibility). This would eliminate the need for PT, ST, STR, AIX, HC and a few other classes. And it would basically give any car a place to race competitively with NASA.

 

That would leave us 6 or 7 Spec Classes (Spec Miata, Spec Z, 944 Spec, Spec E30, etc.) and 6 open classes: T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, TU(or whatever you want to call them). Bringing 20+ overlapping classes down to only 6.

[kbrew8991]

there are plenty of people outside of spec classes that are woefully disinterested in getting into a money-spending-contest type class that's goverened only by hp/weight ratios. See also: any disgruntled former PTA Corvette owner in ST3 so that's just simply not going to fly axing all of PT, HC, CMC and other similar classes that limit the amount and type and extent of modifications. Also, how many GTS1 cars do you really see prepped to the limit of that ruleset? Why spend all that money on aero, crazy suspension parts, etc and only run at 18.5 to 20.0 lbs/hp?

 

Folding ST the other direction towards GTS you may be able to sell a little easier Both are definitely more open classes with pretty similar approaches when you really squint and take a look at things... or sell it the other way. Still in the end seems strange to have the rulesets so close to each other, yet so far apart at the same time. Goes double for ST vs STR

[rpoz27]

Apparently this isn't the case in your region, but at least in TX the "Blitz" race group all runs under GTS's modified 13/13 rule. GTS, SU, ST, STR, and sometimes PTA/B. Seems to work out fairly well, I've yet to hear or know of any complaints.

 

Perhaps this is something other regions could look at incorporating...

 

Actually Ken, the 13/13 rule was abolished in TX blitz in 2012. I too thought we still ran it but that is not the case. GTS may choose to run it within GTS (unknown?) but the rest of the ST group runs according to the CCR. Makes sense as it is too difficult to deal with two sets of rules within the race group.

 

 

 

So back on topic. It's November 19th, we have our first race the second weekend in January. When will all this be resolved so I know who to expect to be racing against and how much "ammunition" I need to bring to the party so I can get TWO cars armed in the short off season?

[LJ32]

I'll take that, going from ST to TS by the GTS rule set... they seem to be more open than ST after reading through there rules. But I mean it's the same either way really. Doesn't matter much which rule set we go by. Do it!

[kbrew8991]

My point with weight system was that it effectively acts as a double tax on light-weight cars; the first hit is the reduced power given by a power to weight formula itself. Light car = less power just based on weight alone - before the weight table is even brought into play. The second is that the current weight table system adds an additional penalty onto light cars even after the formula cuts their power. On top of that double hit, not considering torque when looking at light cars with small displacement engines feels even more punishing. I do recognize that there is now a bonus for small displacement engines; it seems to be a step in the right direction.

You need to take into consideration the narrow or narrower tire credits (with 275s cars as light as 2450lbs have a net zero between weight and tires, and 245s cars as light as 1650lbs have a net zero) since light and running less tire and getting away with it go hand in hand (less power and less weight to tax the tire with), as well as the fact that somewhere you do need to (or at least imho should somehow) account for the fact that lighter cars tend to handle and stop better than their heavier counterparts.

 

Now as to if the current tables are a little too agressive on accounting for lighter handling and stopping better, that's certainly debatable and better done by people that have the data to compare which excludes me

 

I will say that the fact that the GTS National Director guy always seems to give new people the advice of "build the lightest car you can" is evidence against dropping the extra weight and tire factors for ST - adjust maybe, but drop no. GTS does not have either of those factors as it's pretty much straight up simple division for their formula, and the winning one over there seems to lean hard towards build light & low(er) power...?

[erioshi]

I don't believe I ever suggested completely removing the weight tables or weight penalty in ST or STR.

 

That said, I recently took a look at the 2013 GTS rules, and I did notice they they use a power to weight system that does not include a weight penalty table, or even tire width penalties. They also look at torque in their power to weight calcs if a car's torque exceeds its horsepower. Also worth noting is that almost every other modification type is unrestricted, aside from being limited to a very few specific marques of car and having the engine manufacturer restricted to the marque. It makes a very interesting counter-point to the current rules-trend in ST & STR. Based on a quick read of their sub-forum, the series is doing alright, but they seem to be having participation problems (low car counts) in the lower power to weight categories of their class structure. That seems to make sense, when a high level of preparation and modification is required to be competitive, most racers will tend towards doing that work on the platform they feel has the most potential performance for their budget. Racers who are more concerned about cost containment seem to migrate more towards spec classes or a lower PT class.

 

GTS seems to use a noticeably different method for arriving at their competition packages, but it seems to mostly work for them. And after a read of their rules, I'm thinking my next NASA car may actually end up landing in GTS .. assuming I can bring myself to go back to owning something German again. After having owned four of them, I'm over the whole P-car thing. Good cars, just not quite what I'm into.

 

So, tongue in cheek, how about adding WTS? The idea of a NASA World Touring Series sounds like fun .. and dropping the rule preventing cross-marque engine swaps would make some very interesting cars possible, lol.

[C.Plavan]

When are we going to know something? I'm building a car now for ST. It's in the garage, I should finish in 1.5 months. However, I need to make some decisions now. All I am reading is great ideas, but my question is when, what will take place? Do we have a time frame?

[Lemming]

When are we going to know something? I'm building a car now for ST. It's in the garage, I should finish in 1.5 months. However, I need to make some decisions now. All I am reading is great ideas, but my question is when, what will take place? Do we have a time frame?

 

Agreed, the sooner the better. Our first race in the SE is mid-Feb.

[Surfbum]

Our first race is seven weeks away, Jan 11!!

Still trying to figure out ST or GTS

[kbrew8991]

fwiw this thread is much more of a wish list than anything...

[jerrytx]

There will be no change in ST2 or ST3 ratios. ST1 at 6.0 is under debate still.

 

At this point the ST1 guys need to hear about this quick! That is all we are holding on for in this thread unfortunately. First race is Jan 18 for NASATX.

[Greg G.]

There will be no change in ST2 or ST3 ratios. ST1 at 6.0 is under debate still.

 

At this point the ST1 guys need to hear about this quick! That is all we are holding on for in this thread unfortunately. First race is Jan 18 for NASATX.

After much debate, and some great input from the higher HP vehicle competitors (both here and those contacted directly), we will be leaving ST1 at 5.5:1 for 2014. Although a 6.0:1 ratio has the "chance" of attracting drivers that can put a crate motor in a car and avoid having to put in a high dollar, high strung motor, some of the other changes that are going to be made to incorporate STR back into ST (Yep!) will require the lower ratio to help the STR guys fold in. As well, it seems that most of the ST1 guys that we currently have would rather keep it where it is at, and avoid adding restrictors or weight. We can always look at this issue again for 2015 or 2016, and base it on real-world car participant numbers and setups once we have the data.

 

Unfortunately, I cannot release all of the changes that are coming yet, as some of the numbers are being finalized still. However, if you like your current plan, you can keep it (as long as you are not in STR, or have a lightweight car, or have a Cup car, or have a Comp Coupe, or have a Corvette or BMW, or have a gas pedal, or have a competition license

 

Just kidding. There are going to be some changes that should help out the lighter weight cars, allow the STR cars to merge into ST, simplify a few things, and hopefully encourage larger class fields. As usual, we cannot make everybody happy, but we will try to increase the number of competitors that are satisfied with the program, increase the number of potential future participants that like what they see, and decrease the negative effects of changes.

 

I'm guessing that we will have final decisions by the end of next week, possibly with the 2014 Rules posted.

[J.R. Smith]

After much debate, and some great input from the higher HP vehicle competitors (both here and those contacted directly), we will be leaving ST1 at 5.5:1 for 2014. Although a 6.0:1 ratio has the "chance" of attracting drivers that can put a crate motor in a car and avoid having to put in a high dollar, high strung motor, some of the other changes that are going to be made to incorporate STR back into ST (Yep!) will require the lower ratio to help the STR guys fold in. As well, it seems that most of the ST1 guys that we currently have would rather keep it where it is at, and avoid adding restrictors or weight. We can always look at this issue again for 2015 or 2016, and base it on real-world car participant numbers and setups once we have.

 

Unfortunately, I cannot release all of the changes that are coming yet, as some of the numbers are being finalized still. However, if you like your current plan, you can keep it (as long as you are not in STR, or have a lightweight car, or have a Cup car, or have a Comp Coupe, or have a Corvette or BMW, or have a gas pedal, or have a competition license

 

Just kidding. There are going to be some changes that should help out the lighter weight cars, allow the STR cars to merge into ST, simplify a few things, and hopefully encourage larger class fields. As usual, we cannot make everybody happy, but we will try to increase the number of competitors that are satisfied with the program, increase the number of potential future participants that like what they see, and decrease the negative effects of changes.

 

I'm guessing that we will have final decisions by the end of next week, possibly with the 2014 Rules posted.

 

_________________

Greg Greenbaum

National TT, PT, & ST Director

Nat. Medical Director

[email protected]

 

 

Greg,

 

Thanks for looking at these suggestions.

 

Making things simpler and incorporating STR into ST categories will hopefully increase car count and competition.

 

On a side note I really like the idea of East and West Nationals. I think this will really boost participation levels.

 

J.R.

[erioshi]

After much debate, and some great input from the higher HP vehicle competitors (both here and those contacted directly), we will be leaving ST1 at 5.5:1 for 2014. Although a 6.0:1 ratio has the "chance" of attracting drivers that can put a crate motor in a car and avoid having to put in a high dollar, high strung motor, some of the other changes that are going to be made to incorporate STR back into ST (Yep!) will require the lower ratio to help the STR guys fold in. As well, it seems that most of the ST1 guys that we currently have would rather keep it where it is at, and avoid adding restrictors or weight. We can always look at this issue again for 2015 or 2016, and base it on real-world car participant numbers and setups once we have.

 

Unfortunately, I cannot release all of the changes that are coming yet, as some of the numbers are being finalized still. However, if you like your current plan, you can keep it (as long as you are not in STR, or have a lightweight car, or have a Cup car, or have a Comp Coupe, or have a Corvette or BMW, or have a gas pedal, or have a competition license

 

Just kidding. There are going to be some changes that should help out the lighter weight cars, allow the STR cars to merge into ST, simplify a few things, and hopefully encourage larger class fields. As usual, we cannot make everybody happy, but we will try to increase the number of competitors that are satisfied with the program, increase the number of potential future participants that like what they see, and decrease the negative effects of changes.

 

I'm guessing that we will have final decisions by the end of next week, possibly with the 2014 Rules posted.

 

_________________

Greg Greenbaum

National TT, PT, & ST Director

Nat. Medical Director

[email protected]

 

 

Greg,

 

Thanks for looking at these suggestions.

 

Making things simpler and incorporating STR into ST categories will hopefully increase car count and competition.

 

On a side note I really like the idea of East and West Nationals. I think this will really boost participation levels.

 

J.R.

Agreed, thanks Greg!

 

I'm really looking forward to seeing the new rules update.

[UKRBMW]

+1

 

Can't wait to hear the new adjustments!!

[rmj951]

Greg G. Can we please put the side exhaust for ex Grand Am/World Challenge cars with fuel cells to bed?

 

The frame channelling for the side exhaust is a safety concern not a performance advantage. These cars have side exhaust as to not run the exhaust under the fuel cell. If we are to merge STR into ST I do not believe a weight penalty is warranted. We have a few cars in Texas sitting on the sidelines due to this one issue.

 

I built a new engine to get me close to STR-1. I did this as STR-2 went away so I had no choice build a bigger engine or sell the car. Please let us know as the Texas season starts in just 6 weeks.

[J.R. Smith]

by rmj951

Greg G. Can we please put the side exhaust for ex Grand Am/World Challenge cars with fuel cells to bed?

 

 

I agree

[Greg G.]

Greg G. Can we please put the side exhaust for ex Grand Am/World Challenge cars with fuel cells to bed?

 

The frame channelling for the side exhaust is a safety concern not a performance advantage. These cars have side exhaust as to not run the exhaust under the fuel cell. If we are to merge STR into ST I do not believe a weight penalty is warranted. We have a few cars in Texas sitting on the sidelines due to this one issue.

 

I built a new engine to get me close to STR-1. I did this as STR-2 went away so I had no choice build a bigger engine or sell the car. Please let us know as the Texas season starts in just 6 weeks.

The frame channelling for the side exhaust is a safety concern not a performance advantage.

 

Rene, I think many of us at National agree that it is a safety concern, but flipped 180 degrees from what you are thinking. We think that it is a safety concern that box frame rails are being cut and channeled by folks who don't have any idea of what weaknesses they may be creating in the structure of the frame. It is permitted in the STR cars because there are an unlimited number of ways of strengthening the frame. Yes, some of these mods were made by professionals, but many are not. Also, many have side exhaust so they can lower the car more as well---performance advantage.

[rmj951]

So what should this of us with these cars do?

[Greg G.]

Rene,

 

Well, those that have modifications to their frames that are not legal currently in ST become "non-Production" cars in ST in 2014. So, that includes tube-frame, partial tube-frame, modified frame, floor pan modded, etc. vehicles that would have been in STR in 2013. There will be a Mod Factor for these cars, but once it is taken, they are almost unlimited in terms of the possible modifications that can be made (including any mods necessary to make a car with channeled/cut frame parts to be strengthened appropriately).

 

 

Not everybody can be happy merging the STR cars with the ST cars, because most ST competitors would NOT be happy if we opened up the rules like GTS, significantly ramping up the monetary and time costs of building/rebuilding a car. And, most STR competitors won't be happy taking a Mod Factor. But, we are going to see what we can do on compromising so that everyone can play in the same sandbox.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

Well, those that have modifications to their frames that are not legal currently in ST become "non-Production" cars in ST in 2104.

That's a heck of a waiting period.