DriverGT5 Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 (edited) Robert, thanks for the input. We would definitely like to see the Roadsters competitive again. We were definitely not aware that the newer body style has turned out to be a "drag". I'm not sure what you mean by "you can add a wing in ST3 without a penalty", though. The older body style Roadsters cannot add a wing without a penalty unless it was a factory "original manufactured configuration". Otherwise, the driver would have to decide to become a "Non-Production" vehicle, which would be a -0.7 Mod Factor in ST3. So, the older body style is most likely best to run as-is. We would have to do more research regarding the new body styles, and whether your assessment is correct. As you can see, we have basically brought a bunch of similar type car models that have tube-frame construction into Section 7.5, and applied similar Mod Factors to them. So, the Aero version Roadster has the same Factors as the Baby Grand, Allison Legacy, Factory Five (with aero). However, we can start now, by adding "aero ok" to the newer body style approval line, which would allow them to remove the wing if the car is faster without it. We need to be careful, because that also allows them to do whatever other aero they want to change or add. We can also move the ST3 Mod Factor to -0.4, to line up with the 7's and Stalker, and the same assessment that every Production car gets for Aero in ST3. Please send an e-mail or have the interested drivers send an e-mail regarding this if further changes are requested, along with some hard data. Often, NASA will run their own comparison tests for a situation like this (two identical cars except for the body style, one top-level driver, and run some TT in both on fresh tires). Thanks for pointing out the wing. I read... " Production Vehicle Aerodynamics1) 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) ....As you can add a rear wing without penalty but now I see the working underneath that says you cannot modify the factory aerodynamics without getting the aero penalty. Makes more sense to me now. It's been many years since I ran ST2 and I have to get back into the hang of things. I added some more information to my original post referencing times from two of our events this year. Rob Hall and Jordan Anderson have both run faster lap times in the old body Roadsters at CMP and Road Atlanta, beating very well prepared and seasoned drivers in the "aero" bodies. My suggestion would be to allow the "aero" body Roadsters to remove the rear wing without a penalty as it seems it really just depends on the drivers preference and chassis setup. Some guys run them, most don't. See May at CMP and September at Road Atlanta for lap time comparisons. I would also suggest making the bodies even. If you feel the old body style is fair with the 0 point factor, they should both be allowed to run at that level. I did a lot of research before buying my Roadster this year and the feedback I got from every driver I asked said the body doesn't matter. I just happened to get a good deal on a newer body but I would have happily gone with the open wheel version. I just don't want to spend $2000 on an "old" body to salvage the .5 point production aero correctly. I do not believe the "aero" body was designed with any actual performance gains intended. I would certainly not place it in the same category as an aero Lotus 7. From what I have heard from people involved in the design of that body style, it was just to make it legal as a "closed wheel" car. The only real advantage is not having sand and rocks thrown up from the front tires onto your face... I suspect all the Roadsters will need to come up with a competitive aero package including full under trays and some type of ground effects to make up for the lack of HP on the straights. By making the bodies equal, all would take the standard aero penalty for any modifications done. I would let them run either body, and let them run the "aero" body with our without the factory wing without penalties. Modifying/replacing the factory wing, or modifying the body in any way (splitter, front lip, under trays, etc) should take the standard aero penalties as would any car. Edited December 18, 2013 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heavychevy Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 That's how I read it. Over 2900 lbs no mod factor. That puts a sock in my mouth. It's about time. Have fun this year! Will do, hope to make both National events, so long as doing well in said events does not lead to more penalties. Speaking of which, I heard JR Gordon actually has a mid engine in his 911 so his results do not count (against us). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 5/18/13 - CMP best official lap during race Rob Hall (Old Body) 1:46.706 Randy Suddreth (Aero Body) 1:46.713 Jordan Anderson (Old Body) 1:46.735 Mike Rea (Aero Body) 1:47.221 9/14/13 - Road Atlanta best official lap during race Randy Suddreth (Aero) 1:41.312 Jordan Anderson (Old) 1:41.328 Darrel Hamilton (Aero) 1:41.666 Robert Summers (Aero) 1:41.929 9/15/13 - Road Atlanta best official lap during race Brandon Pantas (Aero) - 1:40.724 Darrel Hamilton (Aero) - 1:40.728 Jordan Anderson (Old) - 1:40.869 Robert Summers (Aero) - 1:41.435 They are very close.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 SE has a large field of those things, should be a great data source. I've got a beta version of the new Excel sheet for the combined ST series, just getting a "cool!" type approval from Greg before I release it to the general population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balroks Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Not to rat anything out as it woulda been noticed eventually, but this looks like a typo. Thunder Roadster ('08+ aero body/wing type) = -0.2 (ST1 & ST2), and = -.04 (ST3) Seems like an odd number lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted December 19, 2013 Author National Staff Share Posted December 19, 2013 Not to rat anything out as it woulda been noticed eventually, but this looks like a typo. Thunder Roadster ('08+ aero body/wing type) = -0.2 (ST1 & ST2), and = -.04 (ST3) Seems like an odd number lol. Just a little odd. Fixed--might be tomorrow before it is posted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brkntrxn Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 5/18/13 - CMP best official lap during raceRob Hall (Old Body) 1:46.706 Randy Suddreth (Aero Body) 1:46.713 Jordan Anderson (Old Body) 1:46.735 Mike Rea (Aero Body) 1:47.221 9/14/13 - Road Atlanta best official lap during race Randy Suddreth (Aero) 1:41.312 Jordan Anderson (Old) 1:41.328 Darrel Hamilton (Aero) 1:41.666 Robert Summers (Aero) 1:41.929 9/15/13 - Road Atlanta best official lap during race Brandon Pantas (Aero) - 1:40.724 Darrel Hamilton (Aero) - 1:40.728 Jordan Anderson (Old) - 1:40.869 Robert Summers (Aero) - 1:41.435 They are very close.... I do NOT run a Thunder Roadster, but I would HIGHLY encourage some actual data on engine power outputs and weights on those cars before making blanket changes based upon lap times as they relate to ST3 competitiveness. -Kevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brkntrxn Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Honestly, in the words of a famous politician (or close to the words). We knew that there were going to be further repercussions when merging these rules, and we knew that we didn't know what we knew would occur, so we knew that we would have to wait to find out what we know now that we knew would happen. Savy? Nancy Pelosi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgordonsenior Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Where is V 8.4? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Where is V 8.4? I did the same thing. Clear out some recent history/cookies/etc and V8.2 will be magically replaced by V8.4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted December 19, 2013 Author National Staff Share Posted December 19, 2013 Honestly, in the words of a famous politician (or close to the words). We knew that there were going to be further repercussions when merging these rules, and we knew that we didn't know what we knew would occur, so we knew that we would have to wait to find out what we know now that we knew would happen. Savy? Nancy Pelosi? It definitely sounds like a Pelosi quote, but this one was actually from Rumsfeld, "There are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know." I think that it was in relation to terrorism intelligence. Pelosi: "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." Biden's are always the best, though: "I promise you, the president has a big stick. I promise you." "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.... I'm not joking." "This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgordonsenior Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Where is V 8.4? I did the same thing. Clear out some recent history/cookies/etc and V8.2 will be magically replaced by V8.4 Tried all that and rebooted still pulling up 8.2. Weird... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted December 19, 2013 Author National Staff Share Posted December 19, 2013 You might have to clear the Cache also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I do NOT run a Thunder Roadster, but I would HIGHLY encourage some actual data on engine power outputs and weights on those cars before making blanket changes based upon lap times as they relate to ST3 competitiveness. -Kevin Well, all of those cars have to run under Spec Thunder Roadster rules meaning they must all fall under three categories.... 1500 lbs 120whp max 1600lbs 130whp max 1700lbs 140whp max Verified with yearly dyno sheets and weighed at the track. The cars in that example are all very similar minus the body style. I'm not trying to get Thunder Roadsters reclassified for ST3. I'm just pointing out the "aero" body doesn't make any difference. All Thunder Roadsters should be classified equally and take "aero mods" from that point forward, regardless of the body they start out with. It doesn't make sense to give a penalty to the "aero" body when they run the same lap times as the old body style. At the end of the day I can just change to the old body and run another 10whp, but I don't know how many Roadsters will do that just for Nationals. I seriously doubt a Thunder Roadster will even run with the ST3 Vette's and STi's due to the lack of top speed at Road Atlanta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Just saw the changes in 8.4 after refreshing the link. Thunder Roadster ('08+ aero body/wing type) = -0.2 (ST1 & ST2), and =-0.4 (ST3) (may have additional Aero mods including wing removal) Does this mean any additional aero modifications (under trays, splitters, wing changes) do not incur additional penalties? Example, I have the new body on my car, so I automatically take the aero penalty but any additional aero modifications from that point on are "free"? If that's the case and we don't get double dipped for -.4 aero body and -.4 ST3 aero modifications then it really shouldn't matter how the cars are classified initially. All Roadsters will need to take the aero penalty to have any hope of being competitive in ST3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nascarracer288 Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Greg, Why is ST3 hit with aero penalties, but not in ST1 or 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted December 19, 2013 Author National Staff Share Posted December 19, 2013 Well, all of those cars have to run under Spec Thunder Roadster rules meaning they must all fall under three categories.... 1500 lbs 120whp max 1600lbs 130whp max 1700lbs 140whp max That is not correct. Power and weight are not limited by the TR Rules when running in ST (or TT). The frame/chassis and body are (except as otherwise noted). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted December 19, 2013 Author National Staff Share Posted December 19, 2013 Just saw the changes in 8.4 after refreshing the link. Thunder Roadster ('08+ aero body/wing type) = -0.2 (ST1 & ST2), and =-0.4 (ST3) (may have additional Aero mods including wing removal) Does this mean any additional aero modifications (under trays, splitters, wing changes) do not incur additional penalties? Example, I have the new body on my car, so I automatically take the aero penalty but any additional aero modifications from that point on are "free"? If that's the case and we don't get double dipped for -.4 aero body and -.4 ST3 aero modifications then it really shouldn't matter how the cars are classified initially. All Roadsters will need to take the aero penalty to have any hope of being competitive in ST3. Yes, so a TR can run in ST3 with additional Aero mods, and just the -0.4 Mod Factor. Or, you can run a pre-08 body w/o aero for no Mod Factor. If you want to add aero to a pre-'08, that would be fine also with a -0.4 Mod Factor (by calling it a Modified aero/body/wing type). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted December 19, 2013 Author National Staff Share Posted December 19, 2013 Greg,Why is ST3 hit with aero penalties, but not in ST1 or 2? It is not being "hit". ST3 cars are just given the opportunity to run with OEM Aero and not be "functionally penalized" by running against cars that do have modified Aero that do not have a Mod Factor assessed. The reasons we allow this in ST3 and not ST1 and ST2 is that when we deleted PTA, we had cars that were running without non-OEM Aero, and we wanted to ease the transition to ST3 for them. As well, there are a fair amount of newer Production cars that come with decent OEM Aero (but not as good as a planned race build) that require few mods to run in ST3, and they slot well at 9.0:1, but would have to ballast/restrict at 9.4:1. None of this really holds true for ST1 and ST2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriverGT5 Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Well, all of those cars have to run under Spec Thunder Roadster rules meaning they must all fall under three categories.... 1500 lbs 120whp max 1600lbs 130whp max 1700lbs 140whp max That is not correct. Power and weight are not limited by the TR Rules when running in ST (or TT). The frame/chassis and body are (except as otherwise noted). I know that Greg. Kevin was saying we need to know the power/weight of the cars and the lap times I posted. I was telling him that those times were all spec cars and they follow the rules above. I was trying to show that in Spec trim, the Roadsters run very similar lap times regardless of what body is on them. When running as an ST3 car I understand they will fall under the ST rules for power/weight ratios. Yes, so a TR can run in ST3 with additional Aero mods, and just the -0.4 Mod Factor. Or, you can run a pre-08 body w/o aero for no Mod Factor. If you want to add aero to a pre-'08, that would be fine also with a -0.4 Mod Factor (by calling it a Modified aero/body/wing type). I was confused given the typo in the previous rule edition but now it makes more sense. I was reading the rules as getting hit with two mod factors, one for the new body and one for any aero mods on top of that. Now that I see the rules allow for additional aero without a second mod factor it seems more balanced/fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nascarracer288 Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Greg,Why is ST3 hit with aero penalties, but not in ST1 or 2? It is not being "hit". ST3 cars are just given the opportunity to run with OEM Aero and not be "functionally penalized" by running against cars that do have modified Aero that do not have a Mod Factor assessed. The reasons we allow this in ST3 and not ST1 and ST2 is that when we deleted PTA, we had cars that were running without non-OEM Aero, and we wanted to ease the transition to ST3 for them. As well, there are a fair amount of newer Production cars that come with decent OEM Aero (but not as good as a planned race build) that require few mods to run in ST3, and they slot well at 9.0:1, but would have to ballast/restrict at 9.4:1. None of this really holds true for ST1 and ST2. OK, fair enough. I guess "hit" was not the correct word for it. I was hoping there was an argument for reducing deductions for cars that had no aero compared to cars with aero in ST1 and ST2. 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.