Jump to content

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


Greg G.

Recommended Posts

After another season of racing and seeing how cars are performing, here are my thoughts for ST.

 

1. Leave ST1 alone, it's fine. You can be competitive in ST1 with a wide range of power/weight so there's no real need to change it from 5.5:1.

 

2. Leave ST2 alone, it's fine. A lot of cars can reach 8:1 with relatively inexpensive power plants and it's far enough from ST1 for a good separation. Speeding up ST2 will hurt the class and cost people a lot of money.

 

3. Leave ST3 at 9:1 for non-aero cars and change the aero penalty to 1.0 bringing ST3 aero cars to 10:1. This will better reflect the actual performance advantage of aero vs. non-aero. Changing an existing aero ST3 car from 9.4 to 10:1 will be very easy by adding a small amount of ballast or cutting roughly 20 hp from your tune. It's always easier and cheaper to slow a car down than speed them up. In addition, by getting to the 10:1 ratio we will open up ST3 to more cars that couldn't quite get to the 9.4 ratio thus potentially growing the ST fields. In addition, you might start seeing more non-aero cars being competitive in ST3. For a corvette at 3200 lbs we would be looking at 355 whp non-aero vs. 320 hp with aero. The other option is to just eliminate the aero penalty altogether and make the class 10:1 period. Either way, these changes will create greater separation between ST2 and ST3 and likely bring in more cars to ST as a whole.

 

Finally, eliminate the rear engine penalties in ST which is unnecessary and only serves to prevent porsches from joining the class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 283
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Balroks

    19

  • Grintch

    14

  • Mrsideways

    14

  • Greg G.

    12

Why don't we just come out and say it. Ban Corvettes from ST3 altogether. There's no way a 10:1 non-aero anything is going to show up to compete against a 10:1 Corvette with aero. It's just not going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't we just come out and say it. Ban Corvettes from ST3 altogether. There's no way a 10:1 non-aero anything is going to show up to compete against a 10:1 Corvette with aero. It's just not going to happen.

 

Why do the Corvette's get free aero?

 

I like the suggestion of increasing the ST3 aero penalty to 1. I never understood why it went from 0.5 to 0.4.

So to get even steps, I would jump on the 6 - 8 - 10 (with aero) bandwagon.

 

I would keep the (small) rear engine penalties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't we just come out and say it. Ban Corvettes from ST3 altogether. There's no way a 10:1 non-aero anything is going to show up to compete against a 10:1 Corvette with aero. It's just not going to happen.

 

Why do the Corvette's get free aero?.

Didn't mean 10:1 aero corvette. You know what I mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't we just come out and say it. Ban Corvettes from ST3 altogether. There's no way a 10:1 non-aero anything is going to show up to compete against a 10:1 Corvette with aero. It's just not going to happen.

 

Why do the Corvette's get free aero?.

Didn't mean 10:1 aero corvette. You know what I mean.

8570175.jpg

"Aero"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the .2 for rear engine train, may as well drop the .4 for AWD while your at it. Like he said, the results speak for themselves.

 

You might as well ask for aerial refueling to be allowed while you're at it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

3. Leave ST3 at 9:1 for non-aero cars and change the aero penalty to 1.0 bringing ST3 aero cars to 10:1. This will better reflect the actual performance advantage of aero vs. non-aero. Changing an existing aero ST3 car from 9.4 to 10:1 will be very easy by adding a small amount of ballast or cutting roughly 20 hp from your tune. It's always easier and cheaper to slow a car down than speed them up. In addition, by getting to the 10:1 ratio we will open up ST3 to more cars that couldn't quite get to the 9.4 ratio thus potentially growing the ST fields. In addition, you might start seeing more non-aero cars being competitive in ST3. For a corvette at 3200 lbs we would be looking at 355 whp non-aero vs. 320 hp with aero. The other option is to just eliminate the aero penalty altogether and make the class 10:1 period. Either way, these changes will create greater separation between ST2 and ST3 and likely bring in more cars to ST as a whole.

 

Ill leave nasa If the ST3 aero gets bumped up to 1.0 That's about the dumbest thing Ive heard! You are taking away the only benefit light weight smaller cars with aero have against the corvettes on tight tracks. There should not be an aero factor in ST at all in any of the tiers 1-3!!! Super Touring is an unlimited modification class so stop trying to regulate it. If you don't have the money to make or buy aero then get out of ST and into a Spec class. Detuned big a$$ engines is whats causing the unsettlement in our classes. THE ONLY WAY to obtain closer racing in ST2 and ST3 is to factor HP AND TQ in the ratio. Doing so will push cars into their appropriate tier by the size of the engine and weight of the car. Stop shifting the ratios and add some simple MATH into them. I can't even believe you suggested that is an option!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how we'd factor in torque unless your saying TQ cannot exceed HP, or can't by a % like 10%, which is doable but we all know that's just for a dyno sheet. Others will continue to say run what you brung and build to the rules. Every year SCCA bias's the rules towards a particular platform because it got the most backing and the repeat champions all suffer until they build that car, then it repeats itself again and again. You're at a particular disadvantage because you're 4 holes, NA and RWD so your not getting a bonus from anywhere really unless you can get that thing down to 2200 lbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For other series (FFC for one) with w PW/WT ratio, a HP/TQ/Weight matrix is used.

 

I guess if that could be boiled down to simple formula like:

 

Lbs/((WHPxWTQ)/2)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Balroks, yes, thats where I was going with calculating torque. You can't cheat the dyno... maybe i'm not understanding what you meant tho. BTW I was FI not NA this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

.... If you don't have the money to make or buy aero then get out of ST and into a Spec class. Detuned big a$$ engines is whats causing the unsettlement in our classes. THE ONLY WAY to obtain closer racing in ST2 and ST3 is to factor HP AND TQ in the ratio. Doing so will push cars into their appropriate tier by the size of the engine and weight of the car. Stop shifting the ratios and add some simple MATH into them. I can't even believe you suggested that is an option!

 

You could also say the same thing about motors. If you don't have the money build your motor to the current rules (torque focused turbo, SC, etc.), go home. It is self serving to want the rules to change to meet the handicaps of the car you chose to build, and not to modify to be competitive. It's only money...

 

The issue that I have with aero is that in some way it makes the cars less fun, and a lot more fragile. Aero is all or nothing - long splitters, flat bottoms, huge diffusers sticking out the back, and canards, combined with a ride height deep in the weeds all make the car go faster, but they make the car fragile, and less tolerant of driving the wheels off the car. Relatively big power with the ability to take curbs aggresively, and drop a wheel off without losing your splitter sounds like fun to me. Just last weekend I saw all the canards cleand off of a car with contact that was so light that they would have missed without the canards sticking out there. Then I got to drive over the carbon fiber shards...

 

The cost, and huge amount of development that aero entails also keeps new cars and platforms out. The Corvettes dominate not only because of their motors, but by the huge amount of off the shelf areo available to them.

 

That said, there should be a place for aero in a very limited rules class, but many of us would love to run cars without it, and be reasonably competitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a bit of a blanket statement... I drive my sh!t into the ground , grass, curbs and all and I literally have everything mentioned above. I also turboed my car and its still not near enough straight line speed to be competitive with a detuned engine in anything. I was tuned on 12 lbs tapered to 7 to build as much torque as I could on a 2.0L. These are the facts, detuning is bringing a gun to a knife fight. People will just keep running away from the guy with the gun. Measure torque and leave the aero and engine modifications open and you will have better racing.

 

There is no self serving here... Ill do anything and everything to be competitive regardless of cost EXCEPT swap an engine from GM. Surely you can come up with something better than telling everyone that they should swap an LS into their car to be competitive...

 

Listen. dont confuse my suggestions with complaining. I entered ST so I have the freedom to do whatever i can come up with. Bottom line is, Fluctuating class ratios to try and bring better racing wont work unless all three variables are monitored. It happens in st2 just like it does in st3.

 

Ive said this before and ill say it again. If the ratio rules don't change soon I'm going to be the first one to swap a V6 turbo diesel once I find one that will fit. My luck they will change the rules the following year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since we all have different ideas i'll just +1 torque. Any tuner worth his salt can put the number exactly where you want it. I take it the GPS thing didn't work out and that the VIR dyno was quite a bit more reliable since I didn't see a peep about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Lj32 100%. I think we have to increase the gap between st 1/2/3. the aero needs to be left alone and the hp needs to be set and declared. this detuning stuff needs to stop, it is very easy to detune using one cdi box and just change over to another cdi box and vala you got another 200 hp. and once you come to the dyno test to check hp just switch back to the cdi with slower tune, it is possible and it is being done. the tq of the engine has to be brought into the formula, a 330 hp in a corvette can make 600 ft pounds of tq, game over, just pack up and go home, and they will and they will not come back. I have seen it......

guys simply put if we want to grow the st group the detuning and stump pulling tq engine need to run in the unlimited class and do what ever they want. those racers with so called detune engines with mega tq engines (which never gets checked) cherry pick on a lower class to win I do not see much glory in that. example there is a st3 corvette in Texas region which is a true st3 car completes very well in the st3 class and he is getting faster and more competitive each and every race ( no he does not detune )and that is because he is driving better and setup his car better every event . going fast on straight away takes nothing but hp/tq.

 

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad more people are escalating the tq thing, and totally agree, we need some sort of check/balance so people don't put down massive gobs of tq with little HP.

 

Again, my point before, make ST a home where FI'd importance can compete too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad more people are escalating the tq thing, and totally agree, we need some sort of check/balance so people don't put down massive gobs of tq with little HP.

 

Again, my point before, make ST a home where FI'd importance can compete too...

 

Just to keep things technically accurate before Scott and the others chime in - you can make just as much torque with a FI 4cyl setup done the right way. But it's not the same torque for nearly as long or as reliable which is why there are dozens of LS examples and 0 FI examples currently competing. We know that, just focus on starting to measure it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how much torque do you people think the typical V8 has? Let's start with the ones in ST3 and ST2.... like mine. I'm a big boy, let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Corvettes dominate not only because of their motors, but by the huge amount of off the shelf areo available to them.

 

I said this from day1 when the C5 was going from TTA to essentially unlimited. No other car has as much readily available, real race world tested aftermarket parts (run in grand am, IMSA, WC, GT3, etc) as the C5/C6. Ie, if you thought they were hard to beat in TTA, they would be nearly unbeatable with a call to the candy store. REAL race tested parts, not ebay wings and splitters.

 

The funny thing is, is nobody has really built a REALLY good car yet. Ben Lesnak is getting close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Corvettes dominate not only because of their motors, but by the huge amount of off the shelf areo available to them.

 

I said this from day1 when the C5 was going from TTA to essentially unlimited. No other car has as much readily available, real race world tested aftermarket parts (run in grand am, IMSA, WC, GT3, etc) as the C5/C6. Ie, if you thought they were hard to beat in TTA, they would be nearly unbeatable with a call to the candy store. REAL race tested parts, not ebay wings and splitters.

 

The funny thing is, is nobody has really built a REALLY good car yet. Ben Lesnak is getting close.

 

^ This . Jim McKamey is getting close as well. Here is a pic from last year:

 

80-mckamey2_b1b1cc7251f6378abeeafa3383923f8bebf46302.jpg

 

Anyone want to price out some wind tunnel time?

 

My 2.0 L GTI can make 380 Ft./lbs of torque with just a flash tune from APR. But then again these are only turbo torques, and not V8 torques . V8 torques sure sound better!

 

Some in this thread are confusing detuning with swapping tunes at the dyno (i.e cheating). These are two very different things, and have nothing to do with the V8 discussion. Having written rulesets, there is no way to make simple, actionable rule/legislate detuning. GTS has has tried, but do we raelly want that rule (and ahas it changed who wins?) Adding torque in the equation would change things, but not outcomes for optimally developed cars (IMO). Turbos should be the ideal method to make monster torque. Boost=Torque - add where needed.

 

We all got into this class with a simple rule book, and knew what we were getting into. Greg has been pretty clear about his thoughts on HP vs. torque in the past. The aero modifier has always been a part of that, and has been changed in the past, but I'll keep playing if it stays as is, or goes away.

 

I know that I fight an uphill battle to develop aero in my garage that can have a prayer at competing, and I chose a car with 40+ year old suspension design, but I'll do my best and enjoy the process of making it the best I can. If torque gets added, I'll tune approriately, and move on, too. This whole racing thing is too expensive to not let it be fun.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
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...