Jump to content
Greg G.

2016 Rule Proposal--Decrease ST2 to 7.5:1 Adjusted Wt/HP

Recommended Posts

hakeem
I think ST3 should be at 10:1 and leave st2 at 8:1. I think that would make it easier for more cars to be competitive based on power to weight. It's always cheaper to add weight than remove weight or add power.

 

I agree with this as well. 10:1 is also a good crossover for GTS3 cars. If anything, it might make sense to move ST1 to 6:1 so that it is closer with the theoretical SCCA GT2 number.

 

We've already lost some racers in the 8.7 to 8 switch (BMW's and Porsche's for example) and the same would likely happen again from 8 to 7.5. It would also be nice to have some stability to the rules for a few years so peoples builds can catch up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
braknl8

Ahem.... xx3's not on trial here. Back to the class in question, please. 9:1 is plenty slow enough for the start of the ST classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Arca_ex

ST1 - 5.5

ST2 - 7.5

ST3 - 9.5 and get rid of the aero penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zigspeed10

Currently ST2 and ST3 are too close and they either need to be spread apart or combined into one class.

 

The current proposal of changing from 8.0 to 7.5 for a 3200lb car is only 26 hp. That might not be enough of a change to spread the classes out. I propose changing ST2 to 7.0, that gives the same 3200lb car a 57hp increase. The pw/wt ratio spread should be looked at in terms of hp and not the ratio.

 

3200lb car

ST1 - 5.5 = 581 hp

ST2 - 7.0 = 457 hp

ST3 - 9.4 = 340 hp

 

This gives about a 120 hp spread between classes for a typical 3200lb car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ILIKETODRIVE
Currently ST2 and ST3 are too close and they either need to be spread apart or combined into one class.

 

The current proposal of changing from 8.0 to 7.5 for a 3200lb car is only 26 hp. That might not be enough of a change to spread the classes out. I propose changing ST2 to 7.0, that gives the same 3200lb car a 57hp increase. The pw/wt ratio spread should be looked at in terms of hp and not the ratio.

 

3200lb car

ST1 - 5.5 = 581 hp

ST2 - 7.0 = 457 hp

ST3 - 9.4 = 340 hp

 

This gives about a 120 hp spread between classes for a typical 3200lb car.

 

...except you have cars like a local Civic that is 2300lbs and 238whp with tons of aero and 255s and FWD (obviously lol).

*Note - getting supercharged to get to the limit of TT3/ST3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zigspeed10

 

...except you have cars like a local Civic that is 2300lbs and 238whp with tons of aero and 255s and FWD (obviously lol).

*Note - getting supercharged to get to the limit of TT3/ST3

 

 

The logic still applies, here is the math to illustrate ST2 being 7.5 vs 7.0 with a 2300lb car.

 

2300lb car

ST1 - 5.5 = 418hp

ST2 - 7.5 = 306hp

ST3 - 9.4 = 244hp

 

The Difference from ST1 to ST2 is 112hp and from ST2 to ST3 is only 62hp

 

If we use 7.0, ST2 will have 328hp which give us a much more even spread, ST1 to ST2 is 90hp and ST2 to ST3 is 84hp.

 

That's how I see it, changing from 8.0 to 7.5 is not enough of a change, moving it to 7.0 puts the class more in the middle of ST1 and ST3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jimtway
Please place your comments here regarding the proposal to decrease the Adjusted Wt/Hp Ratio for ST2 to 7.5:1 (from 8.0:1 currently) for 2016 and beyond. Please stay on point, and only use this thread for discussion of this one issue. For those of you that participate in other series, please state whether this increases or decreases your ability to run in ST2 in the future.

 

Thanks.

 

My vote is to keep it at 8.0.

 

Its hard enough to meet 8.0. With my 390 rwhp Corvette at 3120 lbs, I need to either drop 195 lbs (impossible) or spend thousands of dollars to get to 416 rwhp. The classing for ST2 is great, leave it alone.

 

If the goal of this to separate the ST1, ST2 and ST3 classes more evenly, I suggest to make ST1 6.5 and leave ST3 at 9.5. 90% of the ST1 cars are not optimized at the current 5.5. Getting to 5.5 requires a ridiculous motor build. For example, a C6 Corvette Z06 puts down 500 rwhp with simple bolt-ons at can easily come in at 3200 lbs. That's 6.4 wt/hp. One would need to build a 581 rwhp motor for 5.5 wt/hp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jimtway
Hell at that rate why not ditch PT all together and do ST 1-5 just like GTS 1-5. The I suppose someone will comment why GTS, everything go ST. But getting back on topic - I like the idea of an even split ratio between the fields, like others said sometimes the out of class racing can get in the way.

 

On the west coast, our ST2 cars already drive right past the ST1 cars. So increasing ST2 7.5 wouldn't solve out class racing issues. That is a problem that the ratios can't solve.

 

Rules changes chase people away. We need stability and that is what ST has had for the past few years sans the 8.7 --> 8.0 change, which I believe chased away the BMW's and Porsches we had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jrgordonsenior
Rules changes chase people away. We need stability and that is what ST has had for the past few years sans the 8.7 --> 8.0 change, which I believe chased away the BMW's and Porsches we had.

 

Greg as you see the West Coast ST2 racers are firmly in support of leaving well enough alone. I've been looking forward to competing for my old ST2 track records with my new, more powerful 996 that's almost complete. The switch from 8.7 to 8.0 took my blue 996 out of competition even with the additional 15 or so WHP I managed to find at minimum weight. After losing 2 motors the past 2 years I don't want to tweak the bleep out this new motor to reach an even more unobtainable goal. We lost Isaac's BMW to the 8.0 switch along with all the Mazda GT's who tried ST3 then disappeared. I think the costs are too prohibitive....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sperkins

I have super light C5 with a really strong stock LS6 with an aggressive tune, 5" clutch and headers and there's no way I can make 7.0:1

I would be forced to go into the engine ($$$) to make that kind of power. So would every other LS1/LS6 Corvette in the world.

There are a ton of ST2 Corvettes in NASA and I dare say 90% of them are heavier than mine so they would need to make a lot more horsepower than me. Seems hard to justify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vettedoctor

I think Zig's numbers make a lot of sense it spreads the hp numbers very nicely.

 

However when it comes to real life it's still not going to change a thing - if the purpose of this rule change is to differentiate the classes and have less cross class racing.

 

The difference between ST1 and ST2 is huge - using the same 3200 lb car

ST1 - 581 hp

ST2 - 400 hp

 

The ST1 cars have 180 more hp and the fast ST2 guys are still chasing them down, all I'm saying is that cross class racing is never going to go away, it's the responsibility of the drivers to police themselves on the track.

 

Regionally you have to deal with cars that are slower, it's part of race-craft, catching traffic and using it to your advantage. I really don't think it matters what you change the number to, it's not going to change much - however if you constantly tweak the rule set every every couple years it's just going to keep chasing cars away from the class.

IMO right now a stockish powered Vette can run ST2 or ST3 (not that they are the only cars that matter but the majority of ST cars are currently C5/6's) if the number goes to 7.5 or 7 you may as well kill ST2. Either guys are going to build up for ST1 or detune for ST3, again that's just my opinion.

 

The only way it makes sense to change the number is if there are a bunch of cars looking for somewhere to race that need a home around 7 - 7.5, otherwise it's easy enough to ballast up or restrict (or both) to fit into the classes (and hp/wt) we already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Balroks

Call me crazy, but the current pw/wt's are NOT attracting more numbers, and as others said maybe making it "faster" isn't the whole answer. I feel ya vette guys who have developed over the years and don't want to change, however lets look at the real problem. Car counts. If I chase away 2 vettes but bring in 5 bmw's what's the lesser of two evils? Why don't we line up with the rest of the class's so that they can cross? The obvious ones are the GTS people who are pretty much exactly like ST minus "ze german stuff."

 

Minimum ratio for D.O.T. Approved Tires / Non-D.O.T Tires

GTSU No limit No limit

GTS5 6.6 7.2 -> ST1

GTS4 8.5 9.0 ->ST2

GTS3 11.0 12.0 ->ST3

GTS2 14.5 16.0 ->ST4

GTS1 18.5 20.0 ->ST5

 

Then the AI guys who we always race out-of-class with are in the 9.0 to 9.5 range. We've mentioned it many times, we aren't out to kill a class, but to seamlessly permit people to adjust without being "stuck." Improve counts per weekend, make the racing more enjoyable. *puts on fire suit awaiting flame*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sperkins
If I chase away 2 vettes but bring in 5 bmw's what's the lesser of two evils?

That's not going to happen because they already have a German series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zigspeed10

The GTS and ST merge discussion needs its own thread but the reality is it makes perfect sense to merge but the GTS crowd are too attached to their German only series that I don’t see it happening. Just imagine 10+ cars per class at every event.

 

The current ST3 ratio around 9.0 is a good ratio because it allows stock v8’s to be competitive and mildly built 6 and 4 cylinder cars to be competitive. ST2 at 8.0 is kind of in no man’s land, it requires a built v8 to be competitive and why tear into an engine for a small hp bump when you can leave it stock and be competitive in ST3. If you are going to tear into the engine for more hp, might as well go all the way and build for a 7.0 ratio. At 7.0 I suspect this will attract the back of the ST1 field who can’t quite make it to the 5.5 ratio.

 

ST3 = Built 4/6 cylinders and stock V8’s

ST2 = Built V8’s and radically built 4/6 cylinders

ST1 = Radically built V8’s

There are always going to be outliers that don’t fall into this but this represents the general population of cars out there. So looking at it this way pick the pw/wt ratio’s that best fit these scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vettedoctor

I honestly don't care what the number is but if you do change it leave it the hell alone for a while - 5 years minimum!

I will stress that unless there is proof that changing the number is going to bring more cars into the class - leave it alone.

Can anyone tell me one car that is currently not running in ST that will make the jump if 7.0 or 7.5 is adopted? For anyone who thinks that GTS cars will come a droves to run with us just because the numbers line up is completely fooling themselves.

The perception is (not necessarily the reality) that ST is a Corvette class and if you can't take down the mighty Vettes why even try? The majority of guys in other classes have enough competition in there current class that they don't want (or need) to mess with ST. The Vettes is ST are well built and well driven and it basically takes a top car in AI or GTS to compete in ST as it should be. Now when one of these cars does show up they do pretty darn well - Martin in his Stang showed us what a AI car can do in the right hands, Gordon in his P-car and the numerous well prepped and driven BMW's in ST3/TT3 have showed us that z-Germans have the right stuff too. But I think the only cars we are going to get from AI or GTS are top cars that are looking for a bigger challenge than beating up on there own kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Balroks
But I think the only cars we are going to get from AI or GTS are top cars that are looking for a bigger challenge than beating up on there own kind.

 

Ya Muller in his BMW and Dean in his Stang are no joke. Kinda my point, if we align the ratio's then there isn't a 100hp or 250# advantage or disadvantage WHEN they want to come over. I've been in many different pre-race meetings where we all chose what to "run that day" and the people who didn't have another tune or whatever just kinda shrugged but didn't like it. If we lined up, nobody would care especially if they only have say 2 GTS3's but we had 3 ST3's, then it gives chances for the ever stretching contingencies. If you wanna stay in class for points by all means, but even 1 or 2 being able to have fun elsewhere is why Nasa is such a great "run what you brung" org.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jimtway
ST2 at 8.0 is kind of in no man’s land, it requires a built v8 to be competitive and why tear into an engine for a small hp bump when you can leave it stock and be competitive in ST3. If you are going to tear into the engine for more hp, might as well go all the way and build for a 7.0 ratio. At 7.0 I suspect this will attract the back of the ST1 field who can’t quite make it to the 5.5 ratio.

 

This statement is erroneous. We do not need to build our V8s to be competetive. An OEM crate LS6 (C5 Corvette) can put down 390 rwhp with headers and tune. An OEM crate LS3 (C6 Corvette) can put down 435 rwhp with same headers and tune. When you talk about going to 7.0 is when you need the added cost of opening up the motor and spending additional large sums of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grintch

Having the ratio halfway between TT/ST1 & 3 (at 7.5) just makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zigspeed10
ST2 at 8.0 is kind of in no man’s land, it requires a built v8 to be competitive and why tear into an engine for a small hp bump when you can leave it stock and be competitive in ST3. If you are going to tear into the engine for more hp, might as well go all the way and build for a 7.0 ratio. At 7.0 I suspect this will attract the back of the ST1 field who can’t quite make it to the 5.5 ratio.

 

This statement is erroneous. We do not need to build our V8s to be competetive. An OEM crate LS6 (C5 Corvette) can put down 390 rwhp with headers and tune. An OEM crate LS3 (C6 Corvette) can put down 435 rwhp with same headers and tune. When you talk about going to 7.0 is when you need the added cost of opening up the motor and spending additional large sums of money.

 

 

While it's true that a mostly stock LS6 can make 390hp that is a peak number. To be at the limit of the rules you need to be at the peak number across the usable rpm range. A stock LS6 can't do that and a stock LS1 has no chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jrgordonsenior
The GTS and ST merge discussion needs its own thread but the reality is it makes perfect sense to merge but the GTS crowd are too attached to their German only series that I don’t see it happening. Just imagine 10+ cars per class at every event.

 

Not so on the West Coast where we had a healthy ST2 field for several years until the index was lowered to 8.0. The GTS series out here is non-existent....

 

As for merging, if you're running slicks then the numbers are very close. In GST4 I'm 9.0, in ST2 on slicks I'm 8.9. I would have run both series at the 2010 Nationals had my motor not grenaded leading the ST2 race...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Billy Bass

 

While it's true that a mostly stock LS6 can make 390hp that is a peak number. To be at the limit of the rules you need to be at the peak number across the usable rpm range. A stock LS6 can't do that and a stock LS1 has no chance.

 

A stock ls6 can win national championships in st2 at 380 - 400 hp. Making ST2 any lower than 8.0:1 will hurt a lot of racers and I don't know anybody that it would help. The only issue I see is ST3 was made way too close to st2 power to weight. It should be 10:1 or 11:1. Why do you need a class at 9:1 when you can run a stock old ls6, ls2, or ls3 in st2 and win championships? Making st3 a slower class is what would bring more cars into ST because many more makes of cars would have the ability to hit the higher weight to power ratio. Making st2 faster won't bring more cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg G.

 

A stock ls6 can win national championships in st2 at 380 - 400 hp. Making ST2 any lower than 8.0:1 will hurt a lot of racers and I don't know anybody that it would help. The only issue I see is ST3 was made way too close to st2 power to weight. It should be 10:1 or 11:1. Why do you need a class at 9:1 when you can run a stock old ls6, ls2, or ls3 in st2 and win championships? Making st3 a slower class is what would bring more cars into ST because many more makes of cars would have the ability to hit the higher weight to power ratio. Making st2 faster won't bring more cars.

Billy, not that I want the "C. mafia" to get all excited here, but the 9.0:1 (w/o aero) is the legacy of the death/murder/kill (T. Bell fans) of PTA/TTA. In reality, for most cars it is really 9.4:1 (w/aero).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zigspeed10

 

While it's true that a mostly stock LS6 can make 390hp that is a peak number. To be at the limit of the rules you need to be at the peak number across the usable rpm range. A stock LS6 can't do that and a stock LS1 has no chance.

 

A stock ls6 can win national championships in st2 at 380 - 400 hp. Making ST2 any lower than 8.0:1 will hurt a lot of racers and I don't know anybody that it would help. The only issue I see is ST3 was made way too close to st2 power to weight. It should be 10:1 or 11:1. Why do you need a class at 9:1 when you can run a stock old ls6, ls2, or ls3 in st2 and win championships? Making st3 a slower class is what would bring more cars into ST because many more makes of cars would have the ability to hit the higher weight to power ratio. Making st2 faster won't bring more cars.

 

 

Are you trying to say that a stock LS6 making 380 hp peak will have the same lap times as a built motor detuned to 380 hp with a flat curve??

 

Lets not base rule changes on the results of one race. Were there any well prepared, well driven ST2 cars with big cube detuned motors in that race?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vettedoctor

Dave,

 

Bill was running better times in Utah than Geff was so don't discount a well set-up and driven LS6 powered car. What do you think McKamey has under the hood of the batmobile? Sure it's TT3 but still shows you don't need the torque motor if the rest of the car is well sorted and driven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
braknl8

 

The only issue I see is ST3 was made way too close to st2 power to weight. It should be 10:1 or 11:1.

 

Respectfully, that is xxB power isn't it? Again, I don't feel the answer to the ST2 question is to modify ST3.

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...