Zach H. Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 With all the talk about people switching over from GTS/merging GTS and ST, I was wondering if there is any foreseeable future for an ST4 class that say a GTS2 car could compete in? I guess the real question(s) is, is there even a need for another class? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ32 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Absolutely, but only if GTS agreed to consolidate. From there I think AI and honda would follow. Further segregating ST 1-3 without some kind of guarantee of increased car count would just lead to us being spread out over too many tiers. I don't think enough people would make the effort to switch to ST4. Most if im correct are just hoping the directors will reach out to each other, discuss a rule set, and tiers of ratios. Once an announcement of some sort is made, or a feeler at one NAT event, is set into motion things could change. Until then ST guys are left with one option and thats to recruit ppl into 1-3... SMH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKBITN Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It would take one hell of a salesman and a lot of work to get that many people to all change over to ST.I'm not saying I wouldn't do it cause it would be a ton of fun to race against that many cars in class,but still a lot of work for somebody! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox4life Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It would take one hell of a salesman and a lot of work to get that many people to all change over to ST.I'm not saying I wouldn't do it cause it would be a ton of fun to race against that many cars in class,but still a lot of work for somebody! I don't think anyone is saying everyone would start running ST, or strictly st rules. A merger between classes would mean a merger of rules to make it work. So its not necessarily a sales pitch to join st, but a pitch to unite the classes so there would be increased competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKBITN Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 American Iron has Ford contingencies that would probably be lost going over to ST.So you also have to consider that.SI is a new class that flies under the AI banner and is starting to get traction in area's.In the SE the car counts are getting strong for this really only being the 2nd year and the cars are going to get even cheaper to build.In other regions it might be an easier sale with only 1 or 2 cars, but hey my ears are open! It wouldn't take much to run ST3 in these car's looking at the track records.A couple of grand and we should be close.If theirs an ST4 it would probably fit right in. But remember this,American muscle cars loves to run over the imports.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marlonco Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 New Street Tire Class: Watched some really bad racing this summer, and internet surfed some vintage racing, and came up with an idea. Approach a tire manufacture (Cooper, Goodyear, Firestone). Pick out a common street tire with lots of sizes. Run that tire in mixed class racing for wheel to wheel, skill to skill, tire management racing. Vehicle weight determines tire width. High horsepower. No advantage. Limited traction. Light weight momentum car gets skinny tires. Extreme tire set-ups with camber, and toe-in. Too much heat again. Aggressive driving. Late braking. Drifting. Dive bombing. Can your tires take the heat? And for how long before you are on slimy, squealing little piggies? Aero adds down force, and down force adds weight. No help. The smooth fast guy with good skills, and good feel for his car wins. A pocket book won't count for much. It's a driver's class. The sponsor gets to advertise the "fastest car on X tire" at the end of the season. NASA brings in some big sponsors with big money. Goodyear spent $50 million per year for Indy tires, and probably $250M over all. The Firestone 500 tire was available at dealership, and advertised as the same tire that won Indy. Pirelli is still doing it with the Pirrelli Challenge, and Formula 1. The sponsor gets "the only tire approved" by the North Auto Sport Association for all types of sportscars. The "Goodyear NASA Eagle" as opposed to the Dayton Daytona 500 tire. NASA racers get a neat class with sponsor money. In fact, tire management is the only thing that makes Formula 1, and Nascar interesting. I hate ST3. It's a pocket book class. ST2 is worse. I want a driver's class. Marlon Thunder Roadster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Doc Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Boy, I wish it were so simple to equalize things. Horsepower still matters - traction issues are only briefly limiting. Using whatever tire you have well means a good setup, better shocks, etc. Anything but (maybe) a Spec class has real potential to get expensive. That said, doing your own work, and being creative can make it a lot less painful. That said I love the idea of consolidated classes. I get the class nationalism/pride thing, but on track, it's all about the racing, and more people/cars to race against, the better, IMO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeski38 Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 There will always be someone who has a bigger budget, or in most cases is just better. There is no rule set that is without loopholes. I agree our rules could use a little tweaking, but we should be cautious...recurring rule changes can kill a class quickly. I saw norcal honda challenge go from 20+ cars to dead in just over a year. ST is growing with the current rules, I say leave it alone and let GTS come to us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Doc Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 LOL - leave our rules alone, and let the other guy "come to us" & deal with the rules changes. While I am with you in concept, if we are ever going to go down the road of consolidating these classes, a lot will be have to hashed out - 13/13 rule, include TQ, etc. Just changing how TQ is factored in made for quite the poopstrom in GTS this last year! Back to the concept of ST4, I think this only make sense if there is GTS/ST consolidation. Creating another overlap class further dilutes things. ST4 would overlap with GTS2 and PTB/C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeski38 Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Although ST4 would be perfect for my current car, I am not in favor of adding ST4. More classes means more complications and smaller fields. I am very much in favor of bringing torque into our power/weight somehow. Setting ratios on peak HP only is too big of a carrot to dangle for big displacement guys and turbos. I suggested and very simple calculation the worked fairly well years ago in another series. peak WHP+peak TQ/2 = power number. Then you set ratios based on the power number. It isn't perfect but it is a step in the right direction and a very simple calculation. (Just don't tell anyone it also adds a huge advantage for my little honda motors, LOL) But if GTS already did the hard work and weathered the poopstorm, maybe we just adopted theirs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Doc Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 The storm came when they abandoned the calculation you reference. They now have gone to a much more complex system. Adopting that would be an even bigger step/change. Even though I benefit from the HP only system, I'd go with with the TQ added system if it helped bring the classes together (pipe dream though it remains). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhoward1 Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 FFR already has a HP/TQ/LB chart as well. A simple matrix is sometimes all that is needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeski38 Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 The storm came when they abandoned the calculation you reference. They now have gone to a much more complex system. Adopting that would be an even bigger step/change. Even though I benefit from the HP only system, I'd go with with the TQ added system if it helped bring the classes together (pipe dream though it remains). Getting torque in there somewhere will really open the class up to smaller displacement guys. Especially with HC going away there are a lot of fast hondas looking for a place to run, and PT classing is not favorable for us to say the least. Imagine the interesting battles between a 6 liter corvette and a 2.4 liter honda running similar laps times! Sounds like fun to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcdonaldsracing Posted November 3, 2015 Share Posted November 3, 2015 What's the word on this? The GTS mass exodus could be upon us! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted November 5, 2015 National Staff Share Posted November 5, 2015 The changes in ST3 that I will post soon are going to be it for '16. However, assuming they work out, we will post a plan to have ST4 in '17 by the middle of '16, and give drivers time to make plans to switch to ST4. We don't need the half year lead out for the ST3 changes because they are not as significant as starting a new class (and deleting a class like PTB). We have not decided if we are going to be ready for ST5 in '17 yet, but we like the concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daytonars4 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 If you are serious about wanting an ST4 class waiting until mid 2016 isn't really going to cut it. It's seeming more and more likely that GTS is headed down the wrong path. An ST4 class with a power to weight at 12.5 or 13 to 1 would be a perfect fit for GTS2. I can't speak for all regions, but I'm pretty confident that in MA we'd have 6 to 10 cars to bring to the class every race weekend. With all the turbo cars ST is open to I think a calculation that take torque into consideration is important. This was my first year of racing and I was able to finish P2 at Nationals in GTS2. But with their desire to force me into GTS3 it's no longer a viable option for me. ST4 would at least give me the ability to stay with NASA along with the other GTS2 racers who feel as I do. I can get a firm commitment pretty quickly, but I know of the 10-15 GTS2 cars that raced in ma in 2015, 5 would definitely make the move with me. Another 3 very likely which would account for all the regulars. Then the rest would tag along just due to it being the only option to actually compete with other cars. In all honesty, beating up on some other types of cars would be kind of fun. GTS makes their final rules on Dec. 1. If they go forward with the plan we should be able to let you know by Dec. 2nd with the hope of having ST4 for 2016. ST in my region is extremely weak so unfortunately I think it would essentially end up being just a migration of GTS2. There are really only 2 standard rules for ST that I see as detrimental issues for GTS2 cars. The first is the penalty for cars with a rear mounted engine. We (the BMW guys) don't have an issue with racing them on a level playing field. There aren't any currently in GTS2 but we wouldn't want a rule like this to deter them or give them an excuse for "not being able to compete." The second is the penalty for not having a "production vehicle." We have a number of people with swaps which is essentially the core issue with remaining in GTS. Since in our class we have seen the power to weight being a leveling of the field, I don't think we would be in favor of a "swap penalty." Or at least if there was one, the -.7 I see for ST3 would be too excessive for swap cars to have any possibility of remaining competitive. Lawrence Gibson e36 S54 GTS2 #4 MIDATLANTIC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Doc Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 FWIW, the engine swap is not an issue with the production car wording. It's about tube frame type chassis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 More classes means more complications and smaller fields. the additional ST classes are replacing PT classes, no increase in total number of classes Hopefully there are more factors in these ST4,5,6,7 etc classes that end up with it being sorta PT-like towards the bottom, but with the freedom to not have to wait on an email back from Greg for your hp/weight reclass and that sorta good stuff. Budget racers matter too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 FWIW, the engine swap is not an issue with the production car wording. It's about tube frame type chassis. exactly - ST doesn't care how you make power really, you can even cross-mfg swap (which you can't do in GTS), but once you start modifying certain parts of the chassis or go full tube frame then you're "non-prod" and taking that hit. So once you are there, be sure to really go for it and make those mods work for you. On many tracks it seems to end up working out if you've really modified the car to take advantage of what the hit in the hp/weight ratio allows you to do (ride height, suspension relocation, etc) The rear engine stuff only kicks in for light weights and the more modern chassis 911s, I bet in practice most of those racers won't end up taking any hit. Mid-engine is exempt also. There's small details to watch in this ruleset fwiw. Each ruleset ever written has its oddities and exceptions and such that details matter, read carefully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpanther Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Getting torque in there somewhere will really open the class up to smaller displacement guys. Especially with HC going away there are a lot of fast hondas looking for a place to run, and PT classing is not favorable for us to say the least. Imagine the interesting battles between a 6 liter corvette and a 2.4 liter honda running similar laps times! Sounds like fun to me. Food for thought. Not sure it's been mentioned in the 30 pages on the topic, but what if we had factors for engine size just like we do for tire width. These factors are just random number to illustrate the example. >6L = 0 5L-6L = -0.1 4L-5L = -0.2 3L-4L = -0.3 2L-3L = -0.4 1L-2L = -0.5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Doc Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 How do you deal with turbos? 3.0 turbo = 6.0 NA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7VO-VOM Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Food for thought. Not sure it's been mentioned in the 30 pages on the topic, but what if we had factors for engine size just like we do for tire width. These factors are just random number to illustrate the example. >6L = 0 5L-6L = -0.1 4L-5L = -0.2 3L-4L = -0.3 2L-3L = -0.4 1L-2L = -0.5 With a system like that, you are giving an advantage to people paying for high strung built motors over more conservative or stock motors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpanther Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 How do you deal with turbos? 3.0 turbo = 6.0 NA? Same question for rotaries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpanther Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Food for thought. Not sure it's been mentioned in the 30 pages on the topic, but what if we had factors for engine size just like we do for tire width. These factors are just random number to illustrate the example. >6L = 0 5L-6L = -0.1 4L-5L = -0.2 3L-4L = -0.3 2L-3L = -0.4 1L-2L = -0.5 With a system like that, you are giving an advantage to people paying for high strung built motors over more conservative or stock motors. Im pretty sure we already award that tactic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daytonars4 Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 What would be the next steps for establishing ST4 as a National class for 2016? 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.