Jump to content
Varkwso

Why isn't the FRS killing TTD?

Recommended Posts

braknl8

how do they compare to boxsters in balance and handling? I've heard they are the new "driver's car"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sterling Doc

I traded an '02 911 for mine, and love it. It's a little like trading in a German Shepard for a fuzzy puppy. Less serious, but more fun in many ways. Make sure you get the base model - there is no performance to be gained on the options list - LSD is standard, etc. Also, the Limited has a spoiler you'd have to take points for, or remove.

 

As the basis for a future Spec class, it has a lot going for it:

 

- Relatively inexpensive (still pretty new)

- Cheap parts

- Simple - minimal electronics

- Decent production numbers (already approaching US production of 8V 944's). So far, no variations to equalize for.

- Great chassis - makes it an excellent tool as a driver's car (and fun!)

- Easy to service (that boxer arrangement puts all the ancillaries right on top of the motor - easy!)

-Huge aftermarket - lots of competition

- Roomy for larger drivers/cage (no sunroof option, too)

- Lightweight

- Lightweight

- Lightweight

- Easy on consumables

- Does not require large/expensive tires to go fast.

- Reasonable HP levels - faster than current entry level Spec classes, but still efficient, and cheap to run.

- Excellent speed vs. cost

- Engineered for roll cage & racing from the factory.

- Factory race series for reference.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sterling Doc
how do they compare to boxsters in balance and handling? I've heard they are the new "driver's car"...

 

Chris Harris sums it up well. Look here:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
braknl8

For many I believe it's a cost thing. They are still so new you have a decent initial investment. IF you're going to be serious about TT'ing or going w2w with it, it would be a bit hard to digest buying one and gutting/caging it...for me anyway. In 3-5 years I suspect they will be on tracks everywhere.

 

There are other platforms that could be a much cheaper, while faster, spec class but...I digress...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varkwso
For many I believe it's a cost thing. They are still so new you have a decent initial investment. IF you're going to be serious about TT'ing or going w2w with it, it would be a bit hard to digest buying one and gutting/caging it...for me anyway. In 3-5 years I suspect they will be on tracks everywhere.

 

There are other platforms that could be a much cheaper, while faster, spec class but...I digress...

 

 

They are way cheaper then a competitive TT3 car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varkwso
I traded an '02 911 for mine, and love it. It's a little like trading in a German Shepard for a fuzzy puppy. Less serious, but more fun in many ways. Make sure you get the base model - there is no performance to be gained on the options list - LSD is standard, etc. Also, the Limited has a spoiler you'd have to take points for, or remove.

 

As the basis for a future Spec class, it has a lot going for it:

 

- Relatively inexpensive (still pretty new)

- Cheap parts

- Simple - minimal electronics

- Decent production numbers (already approaching US production of 8V 944's). So far, no variations to equalize for.

- Great chassis - makes it an excellent tool as a driver's car (and fun!)

- Easy to service (that boxer arrangement puts all the ancillaries right on top of the motor - easy!)

-Huge aftermarket - lots of competition

- Roomy for larger drivers/cage (no sunroof option, too)

- Lightweight

- Lightweight

- Lightweight

- Easy on consumables

- Does not require large/expensive tires to go fast.

- Reasonable HP levels - faster than current entry level Spec classes, but still efficient, and cheap to run.

- Excellent speed vs. cost

- Engineered for roll cage & racing from the factory.

- Factory race series for reference.

 

 

Nice summary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
braknl8

 

 

They are way cheaper then a competitive TT3 car.

 

No argument there..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991
AP Racing Sprint BBK: +2

hello wasted 2 points - how's it going?

 

take that off for TT, spend the points elsewhere - put ducting on the stock stuff with quality components and the brakes outta hang in there until your tires get greasy enough to not put down quality times anymore that session.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991
Speaking of power/weight, am I understanding correctly that with the adjusted power/weight rules I would essentially be aiming for 13.45:1 instead of 14.25:1 by running 225 R6's?

My math comes up with 199 max allowable whp in TTD for an FRS/BRZ run at 2775 lbs, 245 or narrower DOT tires, no other adjustments. Squeaks in, 200th whp disqualifies you, which will suck. Probably want to hit 190 and leave that cushion for #@#$%& happening. YMMV though.

 

I don't know where 13.45 or 14.25 is coming from...? Show your work

 

here's mine:

2775 / 199 = 13.945 raw hp/weight

-0.500 weight correction (from the tables)

+0.800 tire width credit (225 DOTs fall under this one)

14.245 corrected, rounds to 14.25, on the limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ja1217
Speaking of power/weight, am I understanding correctly that with the adjusted power/weight rules I would essentially be aiming for 13.45:1 instead of 14.25:1 by running 225 R6's?

My math comes up with 199 max allowable whp in TTD for an FRS/BRZ run at 2775 lbs, 245 or narrower DOT tires, no other adjustments. Squeaks in, 200th whp disqualifies you, which will suck. Probably want to hit 190 and leave that cushion for #@#$%& happening. YMMV though.

 

I don't know where 13.45 or 14.25 is coming from...? Show your work

 

here's mine:

2775 / 199 = 13.945 raw hp/weight

-0.500 weight correction (from the tables)

+0.800 tire width credit (225 DOTs fall under this one)

14.245 corrected, rounds to 14.25, on the limit.

 

Okay, I missed the weight correction portion for the adjusted ratio. My math was that the class limit was 14.25, so if you are trying to figure out the minimum possible PWR, its 14.25 - .8(for tires) + .5 (for weight), which leaves you at 13.95 being the minimum hp/weight for the FR-S running 225's. We were just starting on opposite ends of the equation.

 

As for the brakes, I like them and they help keep running costs down. Pads are cheaper and last longer, as do the rotors. Also dropped 20 lbs off the nose of the car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991

the extra point you've leaving out there (18 spent, 19 allowed before bumping) + the two you have on brakes = Hoosier As instead of Rs... and I bet you could find 20lbs (or more) in free mods off the nose too, though all of it may not be unsprung. Most people find the compound gets them farther ahead in the end. I get the costs angle though, and if you're still figuring the car & tracks out and running the entire session vs putting down a couple flyers each day then that does make a certain amount of sense....

 

No problems on the adjusted hp/weight math, some people make more sense of that going from adjusted -> raw instead of raw -> adjusted. Biggest takeaway is to separate the adjusted VS raw numbers, adjusted is all we care about in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhdinyuma

There was one FR-S at Nationals this year. The results speak for themselves and demonstrate how competitive this car is against other well prepared TTD cars. Interesting and predictable comments on handicapping the car already before it has even been proven to be a world beater! Time will tell. It doesn't take much to get this car set up as it is already awesome from the factory.

 

As far as adding points for E85 I say this: Everyone should be striving to maximize their power output. If you are not at 14.25:1 adjusted then you are not serious about competing in this class. The method you choose to get there and the options available to you vary from car to car and are part of what makes this class so much fun. Just because it might be cheaper or easier for one car to make horsepower over another should not be a factor in the classing decision. Also, it is certainly not "Free" to use E85. My tuning session was in the neighborhood of $1,400.00 out the door. And that was just the first visit, I am not done yet! That should buy a few new fuel system components for those that are not capable of using E85, assuming you are not already at 14.25:1 using more traditional methods.

 

Here's a look at the way I classed mine for anyone who might be interested:

 

+13 Hoosier 245/40/ZR17 Hoosier A6

+2 Muffler delete

+1 CAT Delete

+3 KONI Sport Shocks

+19 Total Modification Points

 

Listed 2800 Lbs as minimum competition weight (Actual weight at impound was 2823)

Dyno'd at 181RWHP on E85 in Utah.

As many free mods as I could afford.

 

Here is how I break down the "Adjusted Weight/Power Ratio Calculation":

 

2013 Scion FR-S on Hoosier 245 size tires at 2800Lbs and peak chassis dyno power of 201.5:

 

2800/201.5=13.896, plus .8 (tires), minus .45 (weight) = 14.246 (TTD) (Rounds up to 14.25/1)

 

 

 

The FR-S has the potential to be the next big thing in SPEC racing. It's awesome to drive, economical to own, and did I mention "AWESOME" to drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991

You're missing the point of the hp/weight caps and this classing system in general. A car that handles and brakes well should NOT be super close / on top of to the hp/weight caps, as the cars that suck in other arenas will need to use straightaway talent to catch up and level the playing field. This is how TTA was killed / how we ended up with TT3 / see also C5 Z06 in TTA vs the field. One solution was to adjust the classing of certian "offenders", and the other was to throw the classing system out entirely for that group and make everyone go full prep with just the hp/weight cap to govern things. If that keeps spreading down the ranks, I'm out...

 

Every stinkin' free mod isn't "free" - pick your frog, choose your warts. Be glad you gain that much with a tune and don't have to spend POINTS as well as cash to gain that power like most other cars you compete against have to do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ja1217
+13 Hoosier 245/40/ZR17 Hoosier A6

+2 Muffler delete

+1 CAT Delete

+3 KONI Sport Shocks

+19 Total Modification Points

 

Listed 2800 Lbs as minimum competition weight (Actual weight at impound was 2823)

Dyno'd at 181RWHP on E85 in Utah.

As many free mods as I could afford.

 

Just curious, but how many miles and track days did you have on your FR-S when you went to the dyno and what kind of dyno was it? How much power did yours make stock? Mine dyno'd at 181whp on 93 octane with the only mod being a K&N filter on a dynojet where stock cars were measured at ~160whp. My car had nearly 20,000 miles, 10 track days and about a dozen autocross events before I dyno'd it so the dyno operator thought that the reason I was making about 20whp more than other stock cars was because my engine was thoroughly broken in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kbrew8991

apples:apples if you can, SAE correction & smoothing per TT ruleset, correct model dynojet, etc... try measuring with the same/similar yardstick and same methods to get comparable results

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varkwso
+13 Hoosier 245/40/ZR17 Hoosier A6

+2 Muffler delete

+1 CAT Delete

+3 KONI Sport Shocks

+19 Total Modification Points

 

Listed 2800 Lbs as minimum competition weight (Actual weight at impound was 2823)

Dyno'd at 181RWHP on E85 in Utah.

As many free mods as I could afford.

 

Just curious, but how many miles and track days did you have on your FR-S when you went to the dyno and what kind of dyno was it? How much power did yours make stock? Mine dyno'd at 181whp on 93 octane with the only mod being a K&N filter on a dynojet where stock cars were measured at ~160whp. My car had nearly 20,000 miles, 10 track days and about a dozen autocross events before I dyno'd it so the dyno operator thought that the reason I was making about 20whp more than other stock cars was because my engine was thoroughly broken in.

 

 

Watch how the dyno is set up. Lots of operators know their customers want "big numbers" for the Tastee Freeze cruise night. Racers want just the opposite...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhdinyuma

This reply is a bit of mixed bag but here goes.

 

The car was almost stock (Filter element change only) and using 91 Octane when I had the tune installed. It had about 450 miles on it. The tuner also had an E85 tune that he had been working on so I had him flash the ECU in such a way that you can load the stock, 91 Octane, or E85 tune at engine start depending on what fuel I had in the car. The multiple maps, and method of selecting which tune was being used was, of course, declared on my classing sheet. Since the dynomometer used (AWD Dyno Dynamics) for the tuning session was not a dynojet I knew that the actual DynoJet HP would have to be verified by me prior to using the car in competition. The car baselined at 139.6 RWHP and 154.5 RWHP after the tuning session. Estimates vary, but I have heard that a variance of 15% is generally accepted to be the difference between a Dyno Dynamics and the Dynojet. This can only be used as a very general guideline and is definitely not sufficient to officially class your car. Probably the only relevant info here is I got a 10.7% increase over stock with a tune and re-flash using 91 Octane fuel. If you add the 15% variance between dyno types, you might expect the baseline to be about 161 RWHP and 178 RWHP after tuning. About what you saw on your car.

 

After the tuning and prior to Nationals at MMP I removed the CAT and Muffler and filled up with E85. Using the "official" dyno at nationals the car made 181 RWHP with only these changes and using the E85 tune. Since the car was pretty heavy (2823 lbs) I was at 15.6/1 Weight/HP ratio. Safely above the TTD cap of 14.25/1 but seriously missing out on performance opportunity. The car had 1100 miles on it when I arrived at Miller.

 

Can't tell if you are in line with the other cars you mentioned compared to yours since the type of dyno used, how it is set up, and the conditions make a huge difference. Personally I do not think break in would account for that much difference however, but I am not sure..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emmanuel B.
This reply is a bit of mixed bag but here goes.

 

The car was almost stock (Filter element change only) and using 91 Octane when I had the tune installed. It had about 450 miles on it. The tuner also had an E85 tune that he had been working on so I had him flash the ECU in such a way that you can load the stock, 91 Octane, or E85 tune at engine start depending on what fuel I had in the car. The multiple maps, and method of selecting which tune was being used was, of course, declared on my classing sheet. Since the dynomometer used (AWD Dyno Dynamics) for the tuning session was not a dynojet I knew that the actual DynoJet HP would have to be verified by me prior to using the car in competition. The car baselined at 139.6 RWHP and 154.5 RWHP after the tuning session. Estimates vary, but I have heard that a variance of 15% is generally accepted to be the difference between a Dyno Dynamics and the Dynojet. This can only be used as a very general guideline and is definitely not sufficient to officially class your car. Probably the only relevant info here is I got a 10.7% increase over stock with a tune and re-flash using 91 Octane fuel. If you add the 15% variance between dyno types, you might expect the baseline to be about 161 RWHP and 178 RWHP after tuning. About what you saw on your car.

 

After the tuning and prior to Nationals at MMP I removed the CAT and Muffler and filled up with E85. Using the "official" dyno at nationals the car made 181 RWHP with only these changes and using the E85 tune. Since the car was pretty heavy (2823 lbs) I was at 15.6/1 Weight/HP ratio. Safely above the TTD cap of 14.25/1 but seriously missing out on performance opportunity. The car had 1100 miles on it when I arrived at Miller.

 

Can't tell if you are in line with the other cars you mentioned compared to yours since the type of dyno used, how it is set up, and the conditions make a huge difference. Personally I do not think break in would account for that much difference however, but I am not sure..

 

Who did your tune? Looking at being able to switch maps as well for E85 and 93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ja1217
apples:apples if you can, SAE correction & smoothing per TT ruleset, correct model dynojet, etc... try measuring with the same/similar yardstick and same methods to get comparable results

 

Dynojet 224X

 

SAE Smoothing Level 5

 

Yzow4pC.png

 

This was without a tune on 93 gas from Costco. Totally stock exhaust. The green run was with a stock air filter. Everything else was with the K&N drop in filter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ILIKETODRIVE

Those are nice numbers. Torque graph is a little funny but for stock it's nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ja1217
Those are nice numbers. Torque graph is a little funny but for stock it's nice.

That is the infamous torque dip that is present on all stock FR-S/BRZ's. A good tune can cut it in 1/2 (3300rpm - 4000rpm) and supposedly a good header and a tune can pretty much eliminate it all together.

 

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47263

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41525

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sterling Doc

This has turned into a really interesting thread - learned quite a bit here.

 

Hal, 245 A6's are certainly the quick way to go faster, but I'd have to think that they'd overwhelm the stock mid 100's# spring rates pretty well, even with the help of Koni's. I think I'd give up a little width to be able to put coilovers on it - it'd only cost you a couple of points. Did you do any alingnment work on it?

 

It looks like you need about 3 seconds to challenge the highly tuned TTD Miatas.

 

I'll have to juggle points around some to see what options are out there. I am torn between a more dedicated (if temporary) TT build vs. trying out some potential "Spec builds", and letting the points fall where they may. For the record, I have no knowledge of any plans for a Spec class for this car, but I do think it would be cool.

 

I have a bunch of Toyo bucks, so the new 235/40/17 RR/coilovers/headerback exhaust/tune seems like a tempting recipe, if not optimal for TT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhdinyuma

The Dyno graph helps a lot. I think my car with 450 miles on it when the tune was installed is closer to what your guy said a stock FR-S was making at 160ish. Be interesting to see what happens as we get more data to use for comparison. Our cars were only different in terms of the number of miles with the only mod being an air filter. The computer in these cars is still a mystery to most tuner's so I am looking forward to seeing what happen as the secrets are unlocked.

 

I had my car tuned at HG Motorsports (William Knose) in San Diego. He used an ecutek programmer. He installed both tunes and set the system so that by depressing the throttle and pushing the defrost button before start selects which tune to use. I found this to be very difficult to manage at the track and a potential problem during impound. I was not comfortable or certain that I always had the correct map active based on the indications during start so I worried that either I was giving up HP or potentially causing damage if the wrong map was loaded since I was using E85. I have seen boosted cars that use the add on boost gauge as an indicator of which tune was installed so there might be better ways to set it up. The biggest problem is that the ECU seems to have been programmed by the factory to detect changes in the map's and will revert to what it thinks is best after a few runs. I reflashed the ECU before every session to be safe. Personally, I would only use the multiple tunes on the street or in a boosted car. I am having Bill break out each tune as a single loadable map for each type of fuel and load whichever one is appropriate.

 

The biggest problem at the track with this car is forgetting to turn the TCS "COMPLETELY OFF" the FR-S simply cannot be driven fast if you forget! Forgetting on the last run at Miller cost me a real shot at a podium spot this year. Also, the front brakes get smokin hot (think NASCAR!), I am going to install brake ducts in front to see if that helps. I am using DBA Rotors and Hawk DT70/60's.

 

Eric, Good point on the tires. I am still searching for the best combination. Had to make the decision pretty quick before nationals and the car had only been on track once at Laguna Seca for any real chance at evaluating setup. The car does have a little bit of roll but seems to respond pretty well to damper changes with no tendency towards understeer. I went with the conventional wisdom and used the widest , stickiest tire I could without additional points. I have run the car at CVR since Nationals and was very happy with the results as far as time goes (the track record is in sight Robert...). The biggest problem so far has been lack of camber. I had camber eccentric bolts in for Miller but only got about .8 degrees. At CVR I corded the outside fronts after one track day. Just ordered a set of the Hotchkis plates. They are supposed to be good for up to 3 degrees so I will see if that helps. I look forward to comparing setup with other FR-S cars as we get more on board. They are great cars and I am seeing more and more at each event. We had 2 at MRLS, 1 at MMP, and 4 a few weeks ago at CVR.

 

I installed bushings everywhere and the shocks camber bolts at the same time. I did the 944 thing and aligned in the driveway with toe plates/tape measure and camber gauge. Zero Toe and .8 degrees camber.

 

I am aiming for the highly tuned Miata's. I think they are starting to take notice. I was overweight and under powered at MMP and was still within 1/10th second of 2nd and 3rd place (2 good cars/drivers). The winner, in a Miata, was 3 seconds ahead of the pack and 3 seconds faster than the winning time at Miller at all 3 championships held there?

 

I am hoping we can generate enough interest in these cars to get the attention of NASA hoping they will consider a SPEC series. I am setting my car up in such a way that it will be able to be competitive in TTD and with a change to say a 225 Toyo RR run as a competitive Spec series car in the same weekend. I am considering a bolt in cage in order to try the car out in PTD this year if time/money allows. I am keeping my car streetable to see how well that works and to demonstrate that it can be done. I personally think that a dual purpose car has a lot of appeal for many NASA racer's. SPEC86 would Rock!!

 

I would love to hear how the coilover/RR's work on the FR-S. I think that setup would be very competitive!

 

Cheers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emmanuel B.

Visconti uses the cruise control stick to switch between maps. I prefer that tbh. I still have concerns about mixing the 2 fuels (93 end e85), and ultimately wear on the fuel system and lines. Any issues so far?

 

I've got Yellow Speed Dynamic coils on mine now. http://yellow-speed.com/dynamic-pro-sport.php. Installed at CMP 3 weeks ago and you can feel a touch more sensitivity in steering response even though I have only 1/2" drop all around. I was at NCCAR the weekend before and after installing the coils, so the slight change in steering feel was noticeable.

If I find some wheels, I'll run 235 RA1s at Road Atl in Dec just to see the change in feel from stock.

 

I'll dyno mine in Dec. Stock with a borla exhaust. Will be getting borla headers and an E85 tune early next year. It'll have 8 weekends, 7 autox events, 4 NC/TN mountain runs, and ~15000 miles on the odo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varkwso

Bolt in cages do not meet CCR I believe

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...