Jump to content

UPDATE ST4/TT4 and other for 2017


Greg G.

Recommended Posts

If we do have a rule that allows "canard-like structures" built into aftermarket front fascias, doesn't that essentially "force" all competitors to go and get one (as opposed to the few that have them now getting rid of them)?

 

possibly. but what about newer cars with oem canard like structures?

assuming a lotus elise will run tt4, the fascia forward of the front wheel well flares out and is squared off, this produces the vortex barrier down the side of the car.

the pic of the scion frs trd front bumper shows a little piece along the edge of the wheel well that serves the same purpose. same with the 370z.

how do people with older cars level the front fascia playing field if we can't update?

 

and yes, I would be happy with the m3 front fascia, would love the side skirts even more. but I don't have a bmw and would be disappointed to see a rule built around one example.

hopefully the rule will be written in a way so all competitors won't be forced to go out and get an e36 or a late model car with aero built into the oem front fascia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 413
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Greg G.

    83

  • Mrsideways

    26

  • Snowmants

    20

  • Jon B.

    18

Greg, wouldn't it be simplest to just allow the OEM components? If the car comes with it, allow it. If you're allowing a splitter, this entire discussion is pointless. Even the CR's canard like bumper will do nothing in comparison to the added splitter. The extra width (tire blocking drag reduction) of the CR bumper would likely have more of an effect than the canard shaped portion. I would be more apt to disallow fender flares or tire flicks than care if they had a full set of canards. To reinforce the purpose of this class, why would we cause a competitor to add an expense to remove a component that came stock, like the CR and M3 examples mentioned previously?

 

A TT4 car is not going to be fast enough or have any other significant aero allowed where canards are going to make any difference in lap times. It seems like we're wasting way too much brain power on something that is not going to make any difference. My .02.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying that we are working on this, and should have a final decision by Thursday, but it is obviously a complicated issue that we would like to get right, and as usual not everyone will like the decision no matter what it is.

 

Just to be double sure, is this change going to affect any modification factors, or is it just a change to the wording of section 7.3.2.D.2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

the 'aero elements acting as tunnels' could be a problem. many new cars and newer splitters for old cars are using a stepped design where the middle is 40mm higher allowing air under the car to drive the rear diffuser. I tested this with a garden edger air dam, cutting out a center section produced better results than a solid air dam.

The current rules only permit a single flat, horizontal front splitter, no tunnels (unless OEM).

 

 

 

So are you saying there is no way the CR lip will be allowed on base model S2000's

 

I just want a solid yes or no. I currently have a CR front lip on my S2000 and plan to run TT4 in 2017

I'm saying that we are working on this, and should have a final decision by Thursday, but it is obviously a complicated issue that we would like to get right, and as usual not everyone will like the decision no matter what it is.

 

 

Wonderful, cant wait to hear what today brings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

D) ST4 and ST3 Production Vehicle Aerodynamics

1) “OEM Aero” Modification Factor:

 

ST4 and ST3 Production vehicles that maintain the unmodified base trim model body

lines, do not have non-OEM aerodynamic aides or modifications, and do not have a rear

wing or rear spoiler may assess the Modification Factor for “OEM Aero” in calculating

the “Adjusted Wt/HP Ratio”. Under this specific rule, an aerodynamic aide is

considered non-OEM if it did not come configured on the base trim model (BTM) of the

vehicle from the manufacturing factory. Except for those vehicle-specific higher level

trim models (non-BTM) listed in Appendix B, there is no updating or backdating across

trim models or the addition of dealer installed OEM options permitted.

 

The following are permitted allowances for vehicles taking the Modification Factor

assessment for “OEM Aero”:

 

a) Flat undertray/belly pan forward of the centerline of the front axle.

b) Removal of a convertible soft top/frame and/or adding a hardtop to a convertible

provided that the hardtop uses a sealed rear window and is either OEM, an OEM

option, or the same shape and size of an OEM/OEM option top.

c) Lexan front, rear, and rear side windows without uncovered holes.

d) Front wing window/frame removal and replacement with Lexan.

e) Hood replacement/modification for venting and/or weight reduction (“aero” hood

pins are permitted).

f) Removal/cutting/drilling of the fascia for engine cooling, air intake, and brake

ducting purposes.

g) Removal of rain gutters/drip edges, windshield wipers, and mirrors.

h) Flared and/or rolled fenders.

i) NACA ducts, air ducts, or air hoses placed in a side window frame solely for the

purpose of driver cooling.

j) Headlamp, headlight covers, and fog lights may all be removed. The holes may be

left open, used for brake ducts or engine air intake, or must be covered with material

that replicates the shape of the OEM light/cover, leaving the shape of the OEM

fascia intact.

 

2) ST4 Specific Aerodynamic Modification Allowances:

 

Aerodynamic parts/devices/aides shall be limited in ST4 to the following:

a) All of the items listed above in section 7.3.2.D.1) “OEM Aero” Modification Factor.

b) Modified or replaced front fascia may have nothing attached to it other than

specifically allowed items (air intake, brake ducts, transponder, light hole covers,

and the below air dam and splitter (c. & d.).

Any item (excluding the permitted flat, horizontal splitter in d.) that is attached or

molded into the fascia that functions as an airfoil or deflector (such as a canard,

winglet, vortex generator) and extends 2" or more past the outline of the immediate

surrounding fascia is prohibited. A plumb line run across the entire surface of the

front fascia and bumper shall not have any such item that extends 2” past the line

when viewed from above. Note: This also applies to OEM configurations.

c) Vertical front air dam (5º tolerance) that follows the outermost edge of the front and

side bodywork/fascia.

d) Single flat, horizontal front splitter that protrudes no greater than 4” from the vehicle.

e) Single rear wing or spoiler that does not exceed a height of 8” above the roof line,

or width greater than the vehicle’s body width, or end plates greater than 12”.

f) Cutting/removal of the rear bumper cover/fascia where it does not cover the rear

frame/bumper cross beam.

 

 

 

Appendix B— ST3 & ST4 OEM Aero Modification Factor non-BTM approvals

 

The following vehicle higher level trim models are approved for the OEM Aero Modification Factor (Section 7.3.2.D.1):

 

BMW E30, E36, E46, E90/92/93 M3

Chevrolet Corvette C5 Z06

Chevrolet Corvette C6 Grand Sport, Z06, ZR1 (Front Fascia only)

Ford Mustang Boss 302 (’12-’13)

 

 

Note: To request approval of additional higher level trim models for the OEM Aero Modification Factor, send an e-mail request to the National ST Director, [email protected].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

So, yes, the CR lip is not permitted. Sorry. It just opens up a Pandora's box for all other kinds of mods that lead right down the slippery slope toward the DTM car. No matter what rules we brainstormed, it always ended up with the CR canard/deflector part of the lip being a problem. This is the only fair way, so that one (or a few-- Boss 302 Laguna Seca, Z07) car model trim types do not get to have benefits that are not permitted for anyone else. (FYI, I deferred the final content on this to the NASA Executives, and only edited the published wording). Hopefully the wording will accomplish the goals of preventing crazy Aero and aero expenses in ST4, allowing everyone to have the same modifications, minimizing the number of competitors that need to change their current setups, and allowing competitors with OEM/BTM aero that was not optimized by the factory specifically for track use to have the OEM Aero Mod Factor.

 

Like I said, not everyone will be happy--have never seen it, and never will. Those that aren't will likely post here, while the other 95% will send me e-mails telling us what a good job we are doing with the ST4 rules.

 

As usual, constructive comments are always welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Greg!! Did you guys also happen to get the PTC/TTC rules updated? Or will those come out later? Thanks!!

 

I was hoping for the 2017 PT rules as well.

 

Because once those are out.......we can then start a 40+ page thread on ST5/6 and what to do with random aero nuances on all of those cars

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff
Thanks Greg!! Did you guys also happen to get the PTC/TTC rules updated? Or will those come out later? Thanks!!

 

I was hoping for the 2017 PT rules as well.

 

Because once those are out.......we can then start a 40+ page thread on ST5/6 and what to do with random aero nuances on all of those cars

PT rules are done except for re-writing the car model table--so, didn't make it by today.

 

Highlights are:

 

5.1.2 Minimum Adjusted Weight/Power Ratios for each Class

 

Each competition class has been assigned a minimum “Adjusted Weight/Power Ratio”. Regardless of how many points a car has, or which base class it begins in, it may not exceed the minimum “Adjusted Weight/Power Ratio” for its competition class. Any vehicle found competing with an “Adjusted Weight/Power Ratio” less than the minimum level assigned below will be disqualified, and additional penalties (Section 6.4) may be assessed.

 

PTC 14.50:1 (using ST4 formula and Avg HP)

PTD 14.25:1

PTE 16.50:1

PTF 19.50:1

 

 

 

Tires:

6) The following DOT-approved R-compound tires: Toyo Proxes RR, Hankook TD

Pirelli Trofeo R +5

7) The following DOT-approved tires and those R-compound tires with a UTQG treadwear

rating over 40: BFG Rival S, Bridgestone RE071-R, Maxxis RC-1 (examples: Kumho V700,

Kumho V720, Michelin Pilot Sport Cup & MPS Cup 2, Nitto NT01, Pirelli PZero Corsa,

Toyo R888, Toyo RA-1, Yokahama A048, etc.) +4

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg, I don't drive a 350 myself, but please consider adding the Nismo bodywork to the approved OEM list to accommodate those Spec Z cars that already have this allowance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

an aerodynamic aide is considered non-OEM if it did not come configured on the base trim model (BTM) of the vehicle from the manufacturing factory.

 

Like I said, not everyone will be happy--have never seen it, and never will. Those that aren't will likely post here, while the other 95% will send me e-mails telling us what a good job we are doing with the ST4 rules.

 

I will be emailing you shortly to give you praises for this one! Don't tell the forum!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Tires:

6) The following DOT-approved R-compound tires: Toyo Proxes RR, Hankook TD

Pirelli Trofeo R +5

7) The following DOT-approved tires and those R-compound tires with a UTQG treadwear

rating over 40: BFG Rival S, Bridgestone RE071-R, Maxxis RC-1 (examples: Kumho V700,

Kumho V720, Michelin Pilot Sport Cup & MPS Cup 2, Nitto NT01, Pirelli PZero Corsa,

Toyo R888, Toyo RA-1, Yokahama A048, etc.) +4

 

[/color]

 

No change to tires above number 6 (Hoosiers)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Greg. First, thank you.

 

Can you please elaborate on which specific "ST4 formula" you are referring to? I understand avg hp vs peak, but what is 'ST4 formula' referring to? Thanks!

Does this mean that you adjust for tire width, weight, aero then still need to take points for those too to stay under the 19 to stay in class?

 

 

 

Greg, I don't drive a 350 myself, but please consider adding the Nismo bodywork to the approved OEM list to accommodate those Spec Z cars that already have this allowance.

If this is allowed and the CR is not, its a blatant bias's against the S2K and the CR should be allowed too IMO. Maybe im missing something but side aero and over fenders are not allowed in S/TT4 already so you wont see "DTM" style cars like you are saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

D) ST4 and ST3 Production Vehicle Aerodynamics

1) “OEM Aero” Modification Factor:

 

ST4 and ST3 Production vehicles that maintain the unmodified base trim model body

lines, do not have non-OEM aerodynamic aides or modifications, and do not have a rear

wing or rear spoiler may assess the Modification Factor for “OEM Aero” in calculating

the “Adjusted Wt/HP Ratio”.

 

The use of the word 'and' here is a bit misleading. Are we ignoring this statement for true OEM BTM wing models? For example Evo/STI/Older 911/etc. Or do those people have to 'remove' their wings to qualify (and leave gaping holes behind). Or are you considering these in your "exemption" list method instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My biggest issue is the feeling of lack on consistency. If you owned a CR previously it was considered a different model and you were not allowed to remove the CR items to class the car as regular AP2 BTM S2000 even if you removed the CR parts or took points for the things that you left like maybe the wing. Even when you came right down to it a CR would be replacing almost everything that made it one anyways but now with a points handicap. Now you are saying that anyone that infact owns a actual CR, VINs all over it and all but didnt just stick the factory parts on their car, has to run the car as a BTM car? What happened to pages of talk about "build a better mouse trap"? What about the guys in Honda Challenge that aren't CR's that are running them with spiltters under them now? I mean we are already going to have added cost of doing a K series in our cars to get close to the average HP if you really want to be competitive and you are saying that TT5 will exclude certain cars such as the S2000 so it doesn't really have a home elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sincerely hope TT5 is not going to exclude the s2000. I was hoping to ballast and leave my motor stock. A huge reason I bought an s2000 was for reliability. I REALLY hope that to run time trials competitively with my s2000 I am not going to be forced to swap/mod my motor. That would:

A. Not be in keeping with the goal of affordability

B. Not make time trials a viable path to Honda challenge as believe that requires stock motor...

Greg, we are counting on you!

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...