2017 GTS Rules.

[Michael G.]

Thank you to All who participated in the discussion!

 

As it was mentioned before, our strong intent was to leave the Rules unchanged for the 2017. We appreciate the submitted proposals and the discussion, but felt that at this point, leaving the Rules as is would serve the Series the best.

 

Out of all proposals, the removal of the penalty for non-DOT tires and change in the GTS2 ratio were the most discussed with clear difference in opinions on the subject. Many indicated that more data must be collected first, which we fully agree with. Also, removal of the tire penalty would trigger the issues of penalties for gearbox and tube frame among others.

 

Essentially, we need to discuss and agree (hopefully) on a general direction of the Series first - do we head in the direction of further restrictions and attempts to balance the performance, or try to keep it as open as possible and consider to remove some of the restrictions in place. None of the answers would be valid until we have a predictable, universal compliance tool or system in place that can cover the entire Series in All Regions. We hope to make a step forward with new Black Boxes and will most likely engage in the decision making towards 2018.

 

Regarding the changes in class ratios - we need to take a broader look at the ratios across classes, not just GTS2, and if any adjustment to be made - must carefully consider a variety of cars, models, engines through out Regions and see what are the consequences and impacts. Most of the opinions reflected personal standpoints or Regional views, with no assessment of the bigger impact. Again, we need more time, more data and bigger picture view prior to making a call one way or another.

 

The updated Rules will be published shortly. The changes are marked in red. The two changes to pay attention to -

 

1. We will begin mandating the Dyno uploads to the GTS site as soon as it becomes available (hopefully shortly).

2. It is Driver's responsibility to acquire about possible changes of the minimum weight after the Dyno impound (sometimes it may take a while to analyze and calculate the new minimum weight and driver should expect it to be different). Also, drivers must bring the attention of the officials to any deviations from the dyno protocol or inconsistencies if any observed immediately at the time of the Dyno (not to complain that the car was not tied down correctly or too cold few hours later).

 

Outside of that, aside of the few grammar corrections and clarification to the fixed windows - everything will remain the same for the duration of the 2017.

 

We know that few engines were caught in unintended consequence by the CC Rule last year (for example S62). Instead of creating a list of exceptions to the Rules or changing the rules again, we agreed that the drivers can apply for re-classing with the Regional GTS Director (or National Director - in case Regional Director is not available). We hope that will help for the duration of the 2017 until we can revisit the issue for the 2018, once we are better equipped in handling the compliance.

 

Regards to All,

 

Michael Gershanok,

GTS Nat. Dir.

[scottbm3]

That was quick. The proposal period was supposed to be open until Nov 8th followed by a discussion period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-Scott B.

[Michael G.]

I know, but we observed that the discussions pretty much stopped. In addition, all of the Regional Directors agreed on the stars quo.

 

We felt it is only better for all to deliver the outcome a week earlier, especially for the Regions down South where the 2017 starts as early as January. The discussion following the proposal would of been among directors, which we held alongside this time around.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.

[mjmccoy]

None of the answers would be valid until we have a predictable, universal compliance tool or system in place that can cover the entire Series in All Regions. We hope to make a step forward with new Black Boxes and will most likely engage in the decision making towards 2018.

 

The parameters of the universal compliance tool should be the focus of the discussion it would seem.

 

The "black box" should be black in color only. The schema should be open for peer review, as all of the prior proposals I have heard on the topic sound "great", but ignore the most basic principles of physics. We cannot normalize peak acceleration as the metric. (at least if we are still letting people pick their power and weight and classing on the ratio of the two.) Ad absurdum, we cannot say that a 10,000 lb E46 with 1,000 hp will accelerate the same as a 1,000 lb E46 with 100 hp. At the same weight/power, one will have more forward bite than the other on corner exit, and the other will have better power/drag.

 

Per the above, until we get a good compliance tool, we won't have balanced rules. With the current direction of the compliance tool, we won't have a compliance tool.

 

The black box, as proposed, would nullify the dyno procedure, but we are making an effort to push towards more dyno transparency at present. I would like to see *a* direction with the rules.

 

I would prefer to see "simple" rules that are easy to follow without any obscurity in the matter. I would not like my weight to be constantly changing based on the particular dyno present on a given weekend. I would like to build it once and drive it in roughly the same configuration for as long as I like, with the classing remaining as constant as the car.

[Michael G.]

Michael,

 

This is what we know - I actually thought it was already mentioned - the new Black Boxes are much more powerful and capable in data collection and interpretation. The units were developed by AIM for the FIA to be used in a spec series in Europe, where the beta testing is undergoing as we speak. We hope to see the samples at PRI. The boxes will have ECU connection, RPM, TPS, external satellite, power, etc. The challenge is that we will need to develop the math channels to adapt to our Rules, measuring HP/TQ or we may need to engage in the discussion of adapting the Rules to the capability of the device - measuring acceleration rates, etc. All of this is a premature speculation until we will get the actual devices in hand and will start working. The devices will have the wi-fi capability for live transmission to the tower during the races as well as if mandated for each GTS car - should be able to work in a self compliance mode, that each driver can self test the car. Boxes will have no screen to cut the cost down. That is as much as we know (or expect).

 

The goal is to have the device which will give us a quick and reliable pass / fail answer immediately at scales and in case of fail - we will need to look further. Do we eliminate the dyno or still use it as an additional tool at impound - remains to be seen, depending on many conditions still to early to discuss.

 

What is clear is that we have a lot of work to do and will need as much constructive help as possible - unlike FIA we do not have a budget - only desire to make it better.

 

In regards to the wish of building the car once and not to keep changing to adapt to a variable dyno - aren't we all wish the same? Aren't we all be happy with simple Rules? Unfortunately, life seems to be more complicated than that...

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat. Dir.

[Zach H.]

Any update on the rules?

[Michael G.]

All the final drafts were submitted long time ago. I would guess it is a matter of a few days or hours... Could be that all classes to be posted at once. I will try to get more info tomorrow.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat Dir

[Michael G.]

2017 Rules are posted! We are working on the new website enabling mandated Dyno uploads, expecting to be completed and implemented by January 2017.

 

Michael G.

GTS Nat Dir.