2017 Rules Changes Proposals Period Open

[Michael G.]

We just finished with both Eastern and Western Nationals and look forward for the 2017.

As always, we enter the period of discussions about the changes to the GTS Rules for the upcoming season.

 

I must be up front with everyone - our strong intention is to keep the GTS Rules intact for the 2017.

 

We are working on the mandatory dyno uploads to the GTS website and as soon as we work through some technical issues - we expect it to be enforced for the 2017. That seems to be the biggest change to come. Yea re also working on some minor clarifications, like exit from the car with fixed windows, etc.

 

Even though, we are not planning on big changes - everyone is still welcome to submit here at the GTS Forum. Please, make a new thread for each proposal. Also, identify yourself - Name, GTS class and the Region you are running with. We simply want to make sure proposals come from active GTS racers.

 

Will keep the period for the submissions open for 3 weeks - till November 8th - Election Day! That will be followed by a short period of discussion among Regional Directors and we hope to finalize everything by December 1st.

 

We are working on the Black Boxes with AIM and we expect big developments during the 2017, which may require bigger revisions of the Rules for the 2018.

 

Michael Gershanok,

Nat GTS Dir.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Guest

[mcdonaldsracing]

How about adjusting the cc limits so I at least have the option to run gts4? Not sure what they should look like yet, but I'll take a look at it later and update. It just makes absolutely no sense that a cup car can run in 4, yet my e46 and 14 year old s62 can't.

[JVR127]

How about adjusting formula for the n54 and n55 engines so they don't have to run in GTS4. This particular case I'm referring to one of my customers car. Car completely maxed out makes the HP but it is almost impossible to make the weight for it. Minimum weight with the HP that it makes is about 2800lbs and the car comes off the track at 3200lbs. Already has carbon fiber fenders, bumper, hood and trunk. Nowhere else to remove weight. So the option is to spend a ton of money to upgrade turbos and to do a wide body so it can fit the right tire so it can be competitive. So now we're talking about spending a ton of money for no reason.

[Michael G.]

John and Jonathan,

 

Please submit your proposals as a separate thread - otherwise it is difficult to keep track of those.

 

Make it with the heading - 2017 Rule Change Proposal - ...

 

Also, forgot to mention - we would require everyone who submits proposals to identify themselves by stating the name, class and the Region they participate. We simply want to make sure the proposal comes from the active GTS Racer.

 

Thank you.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.

[7VO-VOM]

Also, forgot to mention - we would require everyone who submits proposals to identify themselves by stating the name, class and the Region they participate. We simply want to make sure the proposal comes from the active GTS Racer.

Michael,

You know many rules proposals are likely come from people who are inactive GTS racers, because we were chased out by the 2016 rules changes. Limiting it to active GTS racers would be self-serving and hypocritical. We were chased out by rules meant to encourage participation by people who had never been active in or invested in GTS, and now you are saying you would not consider our input due to recent inactivity after significant investment and activity.

[Michael G.]

For years we used to allow proposals to be submitted on the secure site, where each driver was required to identify himself, including name, class and the Region. that requirement is not new. All the proposals were discussed by the regional Directors prior to releasing those for the general discussion. This time, for the reasons of transparency, we decided to open the submission on the general forum to begin with. I believe the courtesy of signing the name under the proposal still stands.

Yes, there are few drivers who left the series for one reason or another, and I believe, if they identify themselves properly and explain their position - there is no reason why they shouldn't be heard. I guess, if you are submitting something - you have vested interest and want to contribute to the series and consider yourself part of it at least in spirit.

 

On another note - there might be someone who never raced GTS, never raced NASA, or never raced period - those opinions we are least interested in.

 

I hope that clarifies.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.

[daytonars4]

Just out of curiosity, with the new CC limits was there an increase or decrease in total participation in GTS for 2016 compared to 2015.

[Michael G.]

We don't have exact data, since it is simply not made available to us. We can only judge by responses and observations from Regions.

Some Regions had a healthy growth, few kept the same and couple decreased. The Eastern Nationals were significantly larger than prior years, meanwhile Western - smaller. What we did see is the influx of 325i E36s and E30s into GTS2 and that S54 powered E36 is the strong competitor in GTS3 and even 4. We saw a big growth of GTS4 with many E46/S54s migrating up and Cup Cars coming down.

That is the very preliminary assessment. but we will certainly study the numbers once will get those.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.

[7VO-VOM]

We saw a big growth of GTS4 with many E46/S54s migrating up and Cup Cars coming down.

At ESC the 'migrating' Cup Cars were GTS5 cars that did not make the 5 car minimum. Outside of a GTS director's customers in GL, how many Cup Cars do you see in GTS?

That is the very preliminary assessment. but we will certainly study the numbers once will get those.

So, the rules changes last year were made based on 'perceived cheating', not reality. The rules change requests will be immediately dismissed this year based on 'preliminary' perception not real 'numbers'?

[Michael G.]

In between MW/GL, Utah, Fl and few others we see some Cup Cars around... GTS5 actually had 5 cars count for WGI, but 4 cars from GL decided to de-tune to GTS4 regardless.

 

We dismissing the proposal to reverse back to 2015 rules not because we need justification by car counts, but because we believe the changes helped GTS.

 

By the way, don't forget to sign the future proposals, if any.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.

[focusedintntions]

We don't have exact data, since it is simply not made available to us. We can only judge by responses and observations from Regions.

Some Regions had a healthy growth, few kept the same and couple decreased. The Eastern Nationals were significantly larger than prior years, meanwhile Western - smaller. What we did see is the influx of 325i E36s and E30s into GTS2 and that S54 powered E36 is the strong competitor in GTS3 and even 4. We saw a big growth of GTS4 with many E46/S54s migrating up and Cup Cars coming down.

That is the very preliminary assessment. but we will certainly study the numbers once will get those.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.

 

 

I don't understand how you guys decide to make changes to things w/o getting factual data. Just make stuff up on the fly and go with it? You'd think if you're serious about trying to get a series to grow you'd want to know exactly what the trends are and be finding as much data as you can. Not just "what i saw at this one event".

[Michael G.]

Again, kindly remind to sign the posts, so we can see your relation to GTS.

 

We actually had good amount of participation data an the trend in using certain power plants back in 2015, which took an effort to collect, since there is no National data base which would be one click away. We didn't gather the data yet for 2016, but will certainly do it soon. That is why my reply was based on the preliminary observations.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.