Grintch Posted December 4, 2014 Share Posted December 4, 2014 So how are the s550 Mustangs going to be classed? Power to wieght is pretty much unchanged, so pretty much like the 2011+ s197's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheelhopper Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 With the addition of IRS and track tests showing the new GT is faster than the old Boss, I would expect to see a star added to the base class. Mustangs always get a tough road in TT anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Letostak Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 TT3 is my guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grintch Posted December 7, 2014 Author Share Posted December 7, 2014 And some people wonder why everyone chooses the Miata for their track car. It might have something to do with the fact the traditional US performance cars like the Corvette and now Mustang have to run in full race car classes in stock form and/or run restrictors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 I submitted a request back in October and haven't heard anything yet. In a pinch, without a TTB-TTF base class, the S550s could run in TT1/2/3 with the proper documentation or in TTU with no paperwork. And some people wonder why everyone chooses the Miata for their track car. It might have something to do with the fact the traditional US performance cars like the Corvette and now Mustang have to run in full race car classes in stock form and/or run restrictors. So, newer cars are improving; that is to be expected. We can either bump up the newer, more improved cars a few at a time as they come on the market, or take EVERY older car in the rules and bump them down whenever something better comes along. Note that only one of these options is realistic. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troyguitar Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 And some people wonder why everyone chooses the Miata for their track car. It might have something to do with the fact the traditional US performance cars like the Corvette and now Mustang have to run in full race car classes in stock form and/or run restrictors. So, newer cars are improving; that is to be expected. We can either bump up the newer, more improved cars a few at a time as they come on the market, or take EVERY older car in the rules and bump them down whenever something better comes along. Note that only one of these options is realistic. Mark or have a class above TTB and below TT3 for some of these cars... I don't know, maybe call it TTA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKRBMW Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Mark - but there comes a point where that line of thinking has to change. You. Are correct - new performance cars are really stepping up in terms of real world capabilities. If you think of an average HPDE driver they like to buy fast cars - new M3/4, Mustang GT or the new 350, Corvettes, etc. many of these are becoming very affordable - used M3s are in high 20s, Corvettes are similar, with C6Zs touching 20s as well. Those are valuable participants you can be picking up. You run TT in FL - I looked at participation. Cars in E and D, handful further up - than nothing in TT3 and few full out race cars in 2 and then U. In the mean time you've got a bunch of high dollar machinery in DE3 and 4. Anyways, it doesn't change anything for me but these guys may have a point. Sometimes the difficult process is the correct one instead of pushing everything that comes out in the next 5 years straight in to TT123. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fair Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 And some people wonder why everyone chooses the Miata for their track car. It might have something to do with the fact the traditional US performance cars like the Corvette and now Mustang have to run in full race car classes in stock form and/or run restrictors. Exactly. Someone is confusing FAST with FAT. That "S" makes a big difference, hehe... A lot of these late model "fast" pony cars are also HEAVY. Here's a few numbers to consider: That's with virtually no fuel and all of the trunk junk removed. I weighed them both myself - the top 2015 GT was a "premium" with leather and power seats", while the lower car was a "base" interior car. Both had the performance package, with 15" 6-piston Brembos and 19x9F/19x9.5R wheels. That's a TT3 car??? The SCCA has similar problems distinguishing between sports cars and pony cars, too. I've poked that ants nest as well. The new Z/28 is another one, but with some good magazine reviews. It is "fast" on OEM form.... because it has 19x11F/19x11.5" wheels and comes wrapped with 305mm tires that are 60 treadwear race tires. Yes, it is CCBrakes, and plenty of power (440 whp), but at the end of the day its still a 3800+ pound pony car. Put it in TT3 or TT2 and its going to be going up against some real race cars, on real race rubber. Not to mention most of the late model cars are as aerodynamic as an ACME brick. Sticking the 2015 GT into TT3 as the base class is a terrible idea. They should be a TTB car. edit: I have tracked a new performance package 2015 GT, and then drove a 2012 Boss302 right after, last weekend at ECR (video should be done soon). The 2015 GT was a few seconds "faster" than the Boss302, but a lot of that came down to better OEM tires. They were both 15+ seconds slower than my TT3 prepped 2011 GT on the same track, which I run with 335F/345R Hoosier A6s. Tires make a lot of difference, and looking at "OEM" cars you have to factor in the "OEM" tires. Often they will throw a ringer tire onto a hot new model to make a car look better than it really is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 I'm just here for the bring back TTA parade (....off to browse AutoTrader for C5 Z06s....) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
427R Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Great points Terry. Thats what I'll be facing next season when I go into TT3. Its not a race car by a long shot, but most of what I'll be up against are and setup accordingly. I looked at some times posted by TT3 cars at a few events this past season to see where how I might fare. I'll do ok, but may never see top 3 results without lots of work to the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 or have a class above TTB and below TT3 for some of these cars... I don't know, maybe call it TTA? While I thought the idea of adding TT3 to align with AI weight/power limits was a good one, I wasn't a fan of eliminating TTA. At least the lettering system didn't move up, so A could still be added back without changing too much documentation... Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsmtnbiker Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 or have a class above TTB and below TT3 for some of these cars... I don't know, maybe call it TTA? +juan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fair Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Click the image above to see ECR track testing from a 2015 Mustang GT 5.0 Perf Pack car - BONE STOCK Finally got the video up, with some data. The 2015 was remarkably well behaved on track, and it ran a 2:06 on the stock tires at ECR. That's not bad, and about 2 seconds quicker than any other bone stock Mustang I've ever driven there... but that's a far cry from TT3. To make it competitive in TT3 would require a LOT of changes and unless you added more power, a lot of weight removal (at least 100 pounds). TT3 track record at ECR, sent in 2013 with a less prepped car The TT3 track record I set a full year ago (we missed NASA @ ECR in 2014) was a 1:55.2 with a lot of mistakes. That was on the "skinny" 315mm tires, poor rear wing, and with less power. In 2014 we have been beating our 2013 records by 3+ seconds, and I could see a 1:52 at ECR in our TT3 car as it sits in 2014 on 335/345 Hoosier A6s, massive rear wing and other improvements. And our TT3 car has a bone stock engine, A/C and full interior. That's how far off the pace a modern pony cars are from TT3, if not more. 11-15 seconds per lap is a huge margin to make up. Great points Terry. Thats what I'll be facing next season when I go into TT3. Its not a race car by a long shot, but most of what I'll be up against are and setup accordingly. I looked at some times posted by TT3 cars at a few events this past season to see where how I might fare. I'll do ok, but may never see top 3 results without lots of work to the car. Sadly there are not many (if any) "competitive" TT-numbered class cars left that are still street driven. Its a category for race cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 And some people wonder why everyone chooses the Miata for their track car. It might have something to do with the fact the traditional US performance cars like the Corvette and now Mustang have to run in full race car classes in stock form and/or run restrictors. So, newer cars are improving; that is to be expected. We can either bump up the newer, more improved cars a few at a time as they come on the market, or take EVERY older car in the rules and bump them down whenever something better comes along. Note that only one of these options is realistic. Mark or have a class above TTB and below TT3 for some of these cars... I don't know, maybe call it TTA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grintch Posted February 10, 2015 Author Share Posted February 10, 2015 And why are 2013-2014 Mustangs TT3 while 2011-2012 cars are TTB. Is 8 hp really worth 20 points? A minimum weight bump or star I could understand, but bumping a nearly idential car a whole class for a 2% change in power seems excessive. The government/EPA is already doing it's best to kill off the American Musclecar, I don't understand why the American club racing sactioning bodies want to pile on. If we want them to survive they need a place to play where they don't need to instantly do $20,000+ worth of mods to compete or add weight and/or restrictors. Or do we not want cars like Corvettes, Mustangs, or Camaros to be built. Or especially track oriented versions like the Boss 302, Z06, ZL1 or even "track pack" equiped GTs, SS's, or R/T's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houstonnw Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 And why are 2013-2014 Mustangs TT3 while 2011-2012 cars are TTB. Is 8 hp really worth 20 points? A minimum weight bump or star I could understand, but bumping a nearly idential car a whole class for a 2% change in power seems excessive. The minimum weights for the 2005+ Mustangs vary a lot for what are essentially identical cars. I noticed it with the 2006 - 2007 minimum weight which I was told was based on the manufacturer's data. Now why there is a 300lb difference between 2012 and 2013, I have no idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grintch Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 The minimum weights for the 2005+ Mustangs vary a lot for what are essentially identical cars. I noticed it with the 2006 - 2007 minimum weight which I was told was based on the manufacturer's data. Now why there is a 300lb difference between 2012 and 2013, I have no idea. Ford claims 3483 lb for both. The min weight make some sense to get the TTB & TT3 power to weight (though why we even need minimum weights for TTx cars I am not clear on). But why a 2013 can't run in TTB with a bit more weight I don't understand. It gets even more screwy if you look at a '65, which is a TTF* car with a 11:1 lb/hp although TTF has a 19.5:1 limit. And do we really need 24 different spec lines for V8 Mustangs? Wasn't NASA founded partially because SCCA rules and classing had gotten too complicated and political? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vettedoctor Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 There is no "minimum weight" for ST3 - strait hp/wt. Also you may be able to get a dyno reclass if you shoot Greg and e-mail, it's worth a try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAS-43 Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 And why are 2013-2014 Mustangs TT3 while 2011-2012 cars are TTB. Is 8 hp really worth 20 points? A minimum weight bump or star I could understand, but bumping a nearly idential car a whole class for a 2% change in power seems excessive. Sorry in advance for being wordy here but I might can help. I recently made the jump from the HPDE3/4 ranks to TT and while jumping through all the hoops to class my car, I too came across the base classing issue referenced by Grintch above. Not only is there just an 8HP difference but the '13 GT is 12lbs heavier than the '12 GT essentially negating any advantage. Otherwise, it's an identical car. After conferring with various NASA-SE TT officials and racers and getting a progressively standard blank look after explaining my issue, I was advised to contact the national TT director about the issue and see what the response was. The following is verbatim the response I received: "Technically, since the car is designated to run in TT123, I shouldn't even consider a Dyno Re-class, but I took a look at the numbers. The numbers just don't work out for a Dyno Re-class at your power levels and weight, even for TTB* (seven points). As well, you need to remember that the Adjusted Wt./HP Ratio formulas for TT123 and TTB-F are different. Yes, that makes things a little more confusing, but it is because of the changes we made to the ST Rules that we didn't want to make to the PT Rules. So, at 3770 lbs and 388 rwhp, you are at 10.5:1 using the TTB-F Adjusted Wt/HP Ratio---completely max'd out, with no room for Dyno variance, and no room to use any fuel. Furthermore, we generally do not Dyno Re-class cars at the base class without asterisks when they are close to the limit on Adjusted Wt/HP Ratio, unless perhaps it is a 1978 Mustang, etc." In short, and unless I read that incorrectly, the TT classification changes were for the benefit of those who are also running in the PT and ST classes. With fully prepared race cars. So the question remains, what are we to do who are effected by the TT classing by way of PT/ST race classing, who are running a largely stock street car in TT123? I don't know the answer but it is kind of discouraging knowing that from the drop of the first green flag in TT, I'm already at a large disadvantage only remedied by lots of $$ put in the car, which is certainly not in the racing budget. No chance for contingencies either... Hope this helps shed some light for those with similar base classing questions as me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FormulaRedline Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 I'm late to the party here, but let me also add support for bringing back TTA. And maybe even higher points based classes (or dyno reclass + points, but not TT1/2/3 open mods). What to call them is not particularly relevant. Having classes that new sports/pony/muscle cars can compete in Time Trials without being stripped out race cars is the point. A policy that excludes new cars to the benefit of old cars isn't exactly the most forward looking one... 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.