Jump to content

2006 TT RULES published 1-5-06


Greg G.

Recommended Posts

  • National Staff

No, being able to (only) decrease your power output is not a performance mod, except maybe if you're running in the rain, but, then again, that's what your right foot is for. The car is fairly assessed for the power gained with those mods. Now, if you add an electronic or manual boost controller on top of the kit (which could actually increase your boost, especially if you modified the wastegate actuator more), then you would have to take the points for the boost controller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Greg G.

    47

  • GAC

    16

  • raysingh

    10

  • firehawkclone

    8

2. I have the exact same Wilwood/TCE brakes as you, (Greg) the 13.0" x 1.10" with FSL calipers.

 

I think I understand the BBK rule rationale now...

 

mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow what a bunch of rubbish. Those are the worst rule revisions I have ever seen in my life. Just kidding! Great job - I really appreciate the time and effort that was put into this! I think that this is a fair, comprehensive ruleset that will help take the Time Trials program even further.

 

Just a couple of general questions/clarifications:

 

Slick vs Tread R-Comps

Maybe add Hankooks, Nittos and Avons to this list then all of the main tire options people are considering right now would be covered. IE, slicks include Hankook Z214 and Avons. Treaded include Hankook Z211's.

 

Engine swap

I have a 1991 Miata that came with a 1.6l engine, after it blew I swapped in a 1995 1.8l engine (only a difference of +8hp or so, forget the exact #). Since both the 1.6l and 94-97 1.8l Miatas are the same base class line TTF* I am interpreting this as I don't accrue any additional points for the swap (which is the way I feel it should be).

 

 

Points events & Nationals eligibility

From the rules "a NASA weekend would generally count as two separate TT events" and "a driver must participate in a minimum of six points events to be eligible". Last year the OH/IN events were scored per weekend vs. per day. Since there are only six OH/IN event weekends before Nationals this means that a TT driver would have to attend all of them - unless each day is counted as a points event. Can you strongly encourage the regions to score TT events per day? This seems only fair to me since each day counts as a separate event for the race groups.

 

Once again - great job! If that is the only stuff I can find that needs clarification or nitpicking in 23 pages life is good!

 

- Mark

1991 TTE Miata

 

PS - Hey who is the VW Skirrahko TTE guy on here? Is it too early to start placing wagers on MidOhio finishing position?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick question here guys

 

Eagle Talon Turbo* - mine's fwd no differentiation between awd and fwd here?

 

also

Mitsubishi Eclipse Turbo*

Mitsubishi Elcipse Turbo AWD

 

So the fwd's get penalized 7 points for not having as much traction or is this some sort of weight thing?

 

I've done work to lighten my fwd, but from the factory there's about a 500lb difference, but also a big change in suspension componetry on the 90-94 cars and obviously the grip issues coming out of slow corners. in 90-94 only the awd's had independent rear suspensions, the fwd's (whether it was a 1.8, 2.0 non turbo, or 2.0 turbo) all had a stupid solid rear axle with a torsion bar setup (I think that's what they called it).

 

edit- also my car was originally the 2.0 4g63 nt chassis, but I've installed a complete 2.0 4g63 turbo engine and transmission setup into it. There is no benefit from using the nt chassis other than cheaper cost to pick up, so am I correct in classifying it as the stock eagle talon turbo or should it be classed as a non-turbo with an engine swap.

 

edit #2 Boost controllers, I'll be using two manual boost controllers in a two stage setup switched off of a small toggle switch by the shifter, does this count as a manual boost controller, electronic boost controller, two manuals??

 

intercooler - my fmic is three stock cores welded together by me and a friend, not aftermarket, but then again the nt chassis didn't come with one of course so does this count as an oem/modified fmic?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. The trunk carpet is attached to the back seat on the Integra; do I get penalized the extra 1 pt. for the trunk if I remove the back seat?

2) A sharp utility knife will fix your problem I would have to look at it to see how we'll deal with it.

 

I have a Civic hatchback with the same problem. If I were to cut the carpet behind the rear seat in order to remove the seat and leave the carpet, then I would have a hunk of carpet flopping around over the spare tire well.

 

BTW, I've already removed the whole seat/carpet combo, but I don't think the whole arrangement weighed 15 lbs...

 

Thanks, Greg and everyone else who worked on the revised rules

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

I think I understand the BBK rule rationale now...

mark.

Mark,

1) We tried to keep safety items cheap. And an the continuum of performance items that are also safety items, brakes are arguably closer to the safety side than most, with only cage and harnesses beating them. So, in order to encourage brake upgrades (to help keep you from getting rear-ended in a high speed braking zone), we made them relatively cheap. If everyone upgrades them, then it doesn't matter how many points they cost. For those that choose not to upgrade because their cars came OEM with great brakes, it was not high on the list of priorities when we gave base classes to the cars, so they have probably not really been assessed for their OEM "big brakes" anyway.

2) It would be hard to make defining points that were logical regarding points for bigger rotors or calipers. As you mentioned once before, there are no track data that I know of that list a specific improved lap time per rotor size,directional vanes, rotor thickness, slots, etc. How much of a difference is there between an 11 inch rotor that is 0.8 inches thick, and one that is 1.1 inches thick? I guess that depends on what lap we are talking about, and at which track, right. Probably no difference on the first few laps at any track, but maybe a big difference in fade by lap 20 at Buttonwillow. Also, how many points is it worth to have 6 piston vs. 4 piston calipers, but the same size rotors (or 4 piston vs single piston?) How many points is it worth to have 12 inch rotors vs 11 inch? Tire grip often is the real determinant of braking performance for many of our cars anyway, the bigger stuff just give more time before fade occurs. Heavier cars are at a disadvantage right from the start, do we now need to take that into account? Brake ducts are free, I suppose you think we should now charge for them too? It's just a big can of worms that isn't worth it, because the bottom line is that I want everyone behind me to have the best brakes possible heading into turn 3 at Cal Speedway--preferably ones that will last the entire session. Now, go get your 3 point BBK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

2. The trunk carpet is attached to the back seat on the Integra; do I get penalized the extra 1 pt. for the trunk if I remove the back seat?

2) A sharp utility knife will fix your problem I would have to look at it to see how we'll deal with it.

 

I have a Civic hatchback with the same problem. If I were to cut the carpet behind the rear seat in order to remove the seat and leave the carpet, then I would have a hunk of carpet flopping around over the spare tire well.

 

BTW, I've already removed the whole seat/carpet combo, but I don't think the whole arrangement weighed 15 lbs...

 

Thanks, Greg and everyone else who worked on the revised rules

If they are really lightweight items, then you might want to check the alternate method to see if you come up with less points. So, here is my question: Why should others get charged for trunk carpet and rear seat removal if they take both of them out if you guys don't? This might just be one of those, "Sorry guys that you have one of those speedy little Hondas/Acuras. You're welcome to leave the rear seat and the trunk carpet in it, and get no points." deals. If the rear seat and trunk carpet together weighed 15 lbs, and it's going to bump you up in class to remove them because you only have 2 points to spare, then why not leave them, and find a better use for your remaining two (2) points? Seems like a waste of points if they are that lightweight. And, once again, they may end up being only +1 under the alternate method anyway.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they are really lightweight items, then you might want to check the alternate method to see if you come up with less points. So, here is my question: Why should others get charged for trunk carpet and rear seat removal if they take both of them out if you guys don't? This might just be one of those, "Sorry guys that you have one of those speedy little Hondas/Acuras. You're welcome to leave the rear seat and the trunk carpet in it, and get no points." deals. If the rear seat and trunk carpet together weighed 15 lbs, and it's going to bump you up in class to remove them because you only have 2 points to spare, then why not leave them, and find a better use for your remaining two (2) points? Seems like a waste of points if they are that lightweight. And, once again, they may end up being only +1 under the alternate method anyway.

Thanks.

 

Maybe even less then one. If you can use up to 30 pounds of ballast without a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need to remove the rear seat to haul all my junk to the track. Will show you and see what you think. Either way, don't think the alternate method will work for me since with low fuel, no spare and jack, etc., I'm probably close to, if not over, the 100lb penalty. Either way, we'll figure something out.

 

mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff
Wow what a bunch of rubbish. Those are the worst rule revisions I have ever seen in my life. Just kidding! Great job - I really appreciate the time and effort that was put into this! I think that this is a fair, comprehensive ruleset that will help take the Time Trials program even further.

 

Just a couple of general questions/clarifications:

 

Slick vs Tread R-Comps

Maybe add Hankooks, Nittos and Avons to this list then all of the main tire options people are considering right now would be covered. IE, slicks include Hankook Z214 and Avons. Treaded include Hankook Z211's.

 

Engine swap

I have a 1991 Miata that came with a 1.6l engine, after it blew I swapped in a 1995 1.8l engine (only a difference of +8hp or so, forget the exact #). Since both the 1.6l and 94-97 1.8l Miatas are the same base class line TTF* I am interpreting this as I don't accrue any additional points for the swap (which is the way I feel it should be).

 

 

Points events & Nationals eligibility

From the rules "a NASA weekend would generally count as two separate TT events" and "a driver must participate in a minimum of six points events to be eligible". Last year the OH/IN events were scored per weekend vs. per day. Since there are only six OH/IN event weekends before Nationals this means that a TT driver would have to attend all of them - unless each day is counted as a points event. Can you strongly encourage the regions to score TT events per day? This seems only fair to me since each day counts as a separate event for the race groups.

 

Once again - great job! If that is the only stuff I can find that needs clarification or nitpicking in 23 pages life is good!

 

- Mark

1991 TTE Miata

 

PS - Hey who is the VW Skirrahko TTE guy on here? Is it too early to start placing wagers on MidOhio finishing position?

 

Mark,

 

1) We purposely did not list the rest of the tires, because giving just one or two examples makes it clear enough. If we listed all of them and missed one, or a new one comes out (etc.), we've created a potential loophole. Also, there is a thread somewhere back in this forum about 6 months ago I think that we started listing all of the R-Compound tires, and the list was a lot more than the number of tires you have shown above.

 

2) Engine swap. Not so fast, grasshopper. If the 1991 and the 1995 had weighed the same amount, you would be correct. They are in the same class because the cars have almost all of the same features, and the wt/hp ratio comes out close enough to put them together. The later model has a lower ratio, but the earlier model weighs 110 pounds less, so it can corner and brake a little better. The hp difference is actually 116 vs 128, but I also need to consider that the '97 is 133 and in the same base class. This is the reason that all engine swaps must be assessed individually by the National TT Director. The '95 has some suspension bracing that your car doesn't have worth one (1) point, but you can use the update/backdate rule to add that if you want. And you can upgrade to the later model's brakes (slightly larger ? 2 points) with the update/backdate rule if you want also. So, the bottom line is that you end up with a car with a better wt/hp ratio than any of them in the class (even the 133 hp). The 8 point * jump to the next class of Miata is for another 9 horsepower (14 more than your engine), and 2000 technology upgrades in the rest of the car. So, here is the ruling. You do not get the swap for free--not a fair deal for the other guys. I won't charge you the full five points for 100 lbs. wt. reduction since someone else can do the 133 hp swap and have you bested. So, if someone swaps the 133 into the 116 hp OEM body, they will get +5 for wt. reduction. I'm going to give you +3 for the swap. Thanks for playing the Time Trial version of "The People's Court"

 

3) There are 6 weekends before Nationals in Oh/Ind, and one after Nats. To be eligible for Nationals, you only need 5 event days. It's 6 to be eligible for your regional Championship (out of 14 in your region). And, yes, one of the main tenents of 2006, is that all regions must be uniform in the way things are done. This is a National program now. There is no reason for one region to do things differently than another. We have found what works over the past few years, and we've chosen carefully how we want things done going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

If they are really lightweight items, then you might want to check the alternate method to see if you come up with less points. So, here is my question: Why should others get charged for trunk carpet and rear seat removal if they take both of them out if you guys don't? This might just be one of those, "Sorry guys that you have one of those speedy little Hondas/Acuras. You're welcome to leave the rear seat and the trunk carpet in it, and get no points." deals. If the rear seat and trunk carpet together weighed 15 lbs, and it's going to bump you up in class to remove them because you only have 2 points to spare, then why not leave them, and find a better use for your remaining two (2) points? Seems like a waste of points if they are that lightweight. And, once again, they may end up being only +1 under the alternate method anyway.

Thanks.

 

Maybe even less then one. If you can use up to 30 pounds of ballast without a point.

Nice try Ted, but ballast must follow the ballast rules--

All ballast must be made of solid metal, and installed securely within the passenger or trunk compartments. A maximum of 200 lbs is allowed. All ballast must be secured using at least one (1) 3/8-inch grade-5 bolt, two (2) “fender” washers, and a locking nut system for every fifteen (15) pounds of weight.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to give you +3 for the swap. Thanks for playing the Time Trial version of "The People's Court"

 

Can I get further deliberations on this before we reach a final verdict? If this is best carried on offline thru pm's let me know, don't want to clutter up this thread.

 

My concerns:

1) Weight - My car is heavy, came fairly loaded, I added a rollbar and other safety equipment. What weights are you using for the 100lbs weight reduction? If my car is similar in weight to a 1995 would the penalty be less? Or if I have to take the whole 3 point penalty what target weight should I be shooting for?

2) Suspenion Bracing - I'm unclear here, how does the update/backdate work? Can I add suspension bracing under update/backdate for no points or will it cost me a point? Note if I add this it will add to vehicle weight slightly. I don't plan on changing the brakes, but same situation - would add weight, would it add points?

3) Ruling stability - Once a final decision/clarification is made on all of this, can you say it stands for two or three years barring any other major rules changes or modification additions? I went thru this last year....going thru it again now...don't want to do it again in 11 months. I want to know my car has a stable classification.

 

Thanks again,

 

- Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No cars were classified into TTB? I see TTB referenced throughout the rules so I know it still exists...

 

I think I'm still in TTA by about 7-9 points (quick math). Are you guys going to put together a TT-Calculator?

 

BTW, Greg, et al. GOOD JOB! The rules seem very fair and thorough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Pat - second column, page 5 of the new rules - lists a bunch of TT cars like some Corvettes, Mustangs, Evos, etc.

 

Also they mentioned that a new TT calculater is forthcoming but will take a little bit longer. Lord knows I wouldn't want to program that sucker, should be a challenge!

 

Hope that helps,

 

- Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) We tried to keep safety items cheap. And an the continuum of performance items that are also safety items, brakes are arguably closer to the safety side than most, with only cage and harnesses beating them. So, in order to encourage brake upgrades (to help keep you from getting rear-ended in a high speed braking zone), we made them relatively cheap. If everyone upgrades them, then it doesn't matter how many points they cost. For those that choose not to upgrade because their cars came OEM with great brakes, it was not high on the list of priorities when we gave base classes to the cars, so they have probably not really been assessed for their OEM "big brakes" anyway.

2) It would be hard to make defining points that were logical regarding points for bigger rotors or calipers. As you mentioned once before, there are no track data that I know of that list a specific improved lap time per rotor size,directional vanes, rotor thickness, slots, etc. How much of a difference is there between an 11 inch rotor that is 0.8 inches thick, and one that is 1.1 inches thick? I guess that depends on what lap we are talking about, and at which track, right. Probably no difference on the first few laps at any track, but maybe a big difference in fade by lap 20 at Buttonwillow. Also, how many points is it worth to have 6 piston vs. 4 piston calipers, but the same size rotors (or 4 piston vs single piston?) How many points is it worth to have 12 inch rotors vs 11 inch? Tire grip often is the real determinant of braking performance for many of our cars anyway, the bigger stuff just give more time before fade occurs. Heavier cars are at a disadvantage right from the start, do we now need to take that into account? Brake ducts are free, I suppose you think we should now charge for them too? It's just a big can of worms that isn't worth it, because the bottom line is that I want everyone behind me to have the best brakes possible heading into turn 3 at Cal Speedway--preferably ones that will last the entire session. Now, go get your 3 point BBK.

 

I am far from being convinced...as we say in Guyana, "you are drinking your own Kool-Aid." Increasing rotor diameter has everything to do with brake torque and there's plenty of quantitative data on BBKs that reduce stopping distances, un-sprung weight, and fade. Anyway, in the spirit of NASA, friendship, and us completing the rules discussion before the first event, I will leave this alone and move on. Perhaps we can debate it over a beer (at this rate it may take a case of beer) sometime, but what the hell, I'll buy.

 

mark.

 

PS. Anybody want to buy me a BBK and a set of 17" wheels?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than everyone ask separately, can you publish the curb weight of those cars that are in your database?

Otherwise, what weight do you show for a Neon SOHC? How about the Shelby Lancer?

So I know, is the published curb weight with or without A/C. Since some cars in a given model line never had A/C, including it in the base curb weight could allow two otherwise identical cars to run with the same number of points even though one is 50+ pounds heavier.

Although it is obvious that a lot of work went into this revamp of the rules, the complexity may actually scare a few people away.

 

I'm not going to post any of my databases. There is just way too much work put into those to put them out there. Also, the way I would like to work it is for each driver to list there curb weight on their classification sheet. If they are not going to use or look into using the alternate method of calculating weight reduction points, then fine, leave it blank.

Otherwise, a driver can learn a little about their own car if they don't already know the answer. Then, once I have the classification sheets, I will cross-reference them to the database to ensure there isn't a problem that needs to be researched further. Now, if I go and tell you (well, not you, but someone else that isn't quite as upstanding as you) what number I have for them, and it turns out that the number is low, I imagine there would be a small percentage of guys that would "forget" to tell me that they think their OEM curb weight is much higher than the number I have. So, there is no reason to entice anybody into making that error.

 

The curb weights are the ones published by the manufacturers and then spread around the world since then. So, I imagine that all cars that had standard AC have it included, and cars without standard AC don't have it included. We can work that out later if we find a specific issue with a car.

 

Frankly, since build/mod decisions may be based on the anticipated weight loss with or without safety equipment (e.g. roll bar or cage), I don't understand the need for keeping the lid on this information. After all, at least ostensibly, it is published information. My concern centers on three issues:

 

First, is the manufacturer's published curb weight based on a specific model, a representative model, or an "average" of all models. Since most cars are now equipped with A/C and auto trans, I would suspect that the published information may not be entirely applicable to cars with manual trans and without A/C.

 

Second, it assumes that all manufacturers use the same criteria to arrive at a published curb weight. I don't know whether this is true or not, but assuming for the sake of discussion, a foreign manufacturer published curb weight by reference to a manual trans car while the American manufacturer published curb weight by reference to a car equipped with auto trans, the latter car would start incurring a weight penalty at a point where there has been a lower overall reduction in weight.

 

Third, to the extent there are several free weight reductions available (e.g. light weight battery; A/C removal, jack and spare tire), it seems that using the alternate weight reduction method would put some people into the penalty area simply by removing these items (assuming 20 lbs for battery, 50 lbs for A/C, and 30 lbs. for jack and spare).

 

I don't have any problem with weighing my specific car, before and after, to determine the "actual curb weight" for purposes of determining the overall reduction.

 

FWIW, the static weight of my Spec Neon (95 DOHC coupe) was 2443 with slightly less than 1/2 tank of fuel. Carpet in intereior and trunk were removed. OEM seats removed and two light seats installed in front. A/C removed. Battery weighs about 10 lbs. less than stock. Side glass still in place.

 

By comparison my 95 SOHC (sedan) with A/C in place weighed 2450 with slightly more fuel on board (about 5/8-3/4), and with about 16 extra pounds attributable to the wheels and tires (I had 15" wheels and tires on this car when weighed). Published information that I have seen says 2470 for the 95 sedan. So, that is the number I will use for the sedan.

 

As for the Shelby Lancer, I don't recall ever seeing any published information on this car. Of the 800 made, half were auto tran, and the other half were manual trans. All had A/C as I recall. Again, I know that I can find one to weigh, although mine would not be a proper candidate for establishing curb weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff
Quick question here guys

 

Eagle Talon Turbo* - mine's fwd no differentiation between awd and fwd here?

 

also

Mitsubishi Eclipse Turbo*

Mitsubishi Elcipse Turbo AWD

 

So the fwd's get penalized 7 points for not having as much traction or is this some sort of weight thing?

 

I've done work to lighten my fwd, but from the factory there's about a 500lb difference, but also a big change in suspension componetry on the 90-94 cars and obviously the grip issues coming out of slow corners. in 90-94 only the awd's had independent rear suspensions, the fwd's (whether it was a 1.8, 2.0 non turbo, or 2.0 turbo) all had a stupid solid rear axle with a torsion bar setup (I think that's what they called it).

 

edit- also my car was originally the 2.0 4g63 nt chassis, but I've installed a complete 2.0 4g63 turbo engine and transmission setup into it. There is no benefit from using the nt chassis other than cheaper cost to pick up, so am I correct in classifying it as the stock eagle talon turbo or should it be classed as a non-turbo with an engine swap.

 

edit #2 Boost controllers, I'll be using two manual boost controllers in a two stage setup switched off of a small toggle switch by the shifter, does this count as a manual boost controller, electronic boost controller, two manuals??

 

intercooler - my fmic is three stock cores welded together by me and a friend, not aftermarket, but then again the nt chassis didn't come with one of course so does this count as an oem/modified fmic?

 

Good questions--The Eagle Talon AWD costs about 250 pounds of weight. In general AWD cars were assessed for their AWD in base classing. In this case, all of the performance data that I could find showed the FWD to be as good, or better than the AWD. So, the AWD can stick in the same class as the FWD.

 

Unless I have bad data, I show the AWD Eclipse as being about 400 pounds heavier than the FWD. That puts it down by an * (might be more if it didn't have AWD, though)

 

Is there a weight difference between the turbo and non-turbo chassis? If there is, we need to figure out if there is a weight reduction point assessment for your swap.

 

The spirit of the electronic vs. manual boost controller rule is for a controller that can be operated inside the driver's compartment (electronic) to be +1 more than a manual controller under the hood. So, you should probably take the extra point. But, I'm curious why you have it like this anyway--for street use? Is there ever a reason for you to not be running full boost on the track?

 

If we are allowing you to "swap" to the turbo's base class, then the OEM turbo car's intercooler would be free. Your modified one will cost +2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About Car Weight

 

It is important to remember that Base Classifications were determined based highly on Horsepower to Weight ratios. Be careful what you wish for:

 

Example: You are upset that the curb weight used to classify your car is 3,000 lbs. You believe it should be closer to 2,900 lbs. You are upset because you will be penalized because after mods, your car now weighs 2,800 lbs.

 

If you insist that your base weight should be 2,900 lbs, you would not be penalized for being underweight. HOWEVER........... now your base H.P./Weight ratio has changed for the better. Therefore, now your base class will need to be bumped up any number of points.

 

In essence, you break even. This example also works in reverse.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff
I'm going to give you +3 for the swap. Thanks for playing the Time Trial version of "The People's Court"

 

Can I get further deliberations on this before we reach a final verdict? If this is best carried on offline thru pm's let me know, don't want to clutter up this thread.

 

My concerns:

1) Weight - My car is heavy, came fairly loaded, I added a rollbar and other safety equipment. What weights are you using for the 100lbs weight reduction? If my car is similar in weight to a 1995 would the penalty be less? Or if I have to take the whole 3 point penalty what target weight should I be shooting for?

2) Suspenion Bracing - I'm unclear here, how does the update/backdate work? Can I add suspension bracing under update/backdate for no points or will it cost me a point? Note if I add this it will add to vehicle weight slightly. I don't plan on changing the brakes, but same situation - would add weight, would it add points?

3) Ruling stability - Once a final decision/clarification is made on all of this, can you say it stands for two or three years barring any other major rules changes or modification additions? I went thru this last year....going thru it again now...don't want to do it again in 11 months. I want to know my car has a stable classification.

 

Thanks again,

 

- Mark

Mark, while one way to deal with engine swaps would be to individually and completely classify each car with a swap, including everything that the specific driver's car has modified, and give a final competition class--then hold the car to no further mods (ever); the other way is to take the approach that you may not be the only guy to do this swap, and try to find a fair, reproducible way for another guy to do the same swap and have some parity. I'd rather go with door # 2, whenever I can. That way, you can later decide to add the '95's suspension bracing, or update to the '95's brakes, or do any other mod that will be assessed points, and I don't have to go through and completely re-class the car. We just add up the points, and see where you land.

 

The curb weight for your '91 is 2182 lbs, and for the '95 it's 2293 lbs (very reproducible data in multiple legitimate sites). So, after you take the three point swap assessment, your car can weigh in at 2082 pounds competition weight (fuel tank filled as low as you will ever run it on the track). Also, think about it this way, you are paying one point for every 4 extra hp you got on the swap. If you had increased your horsepower by 80, don't you think you should move up a whole class? These things really do tend to end up being pretty fair, although there is absolutely no perfect way of equalizing different cars. The only way to have equal cars is to have a completely spec car series, with even alignment specs the same, and then have competitors switch cars every session by lotto. (any takers? )

 

Yes, you can update to the '95's suspension braces and brakes for no points. Those are great examples of where the update/backdate rules take effect to make some resolve some equity issues. Once we start talking about the added weights of these items, we are probably talking about fractions of a point.

 

I sure hope that these rules and rulings are stable for a few years. One of the reasons that so many things were changed this year was to try to avoid making changes every year. I, you, and just about everyone else wants some stability in the classing. We haven't had it so far, but the goal is to try for 2007 (and beyond).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The spirit of the electronic vs. manual boost controller rule is for a controller that can be operated inside the driver's compartment (electronic) to be +1 more than a manual controller under the hood. So, you should probably take the extra point. But, I'm curious why you have it like this anyway--for street use? Is there ever a reason for you to not be running full boost on the track?

 

 

Greg,

 

FYI, there ARE manual boost controllers that have a hardline and a manual dial that allow adjustment from inside the cockpit. Fun stuff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good questions--The Eagle Talon AWD costs about 250 pounds of weight. In general AWD cars were assessed for their AWD in base classing. In this case, all of the performance data that I could find showed the FWD to be as good, or better than the AWD. So, the AWD can stick in the same class as the FWD.

 

Unless I have bad data, I show the AWD Eclipse as being about 400 pounds heavier than the FWD. That puts it down by an * (might be more if it didn't have AWD, though)

 

That's fine, and I had figured that was the reason for the ruling.

 

Is there a weight difference between the turbo and non-turbo chassis? If there is, we need to figure out if there is a weight reduction point assessment for your swap.

 

The fwd turbo chassises and fwd nt chassises are identical in weight and equipment. In fact the only change in weight between the two is related to the additional weight of the stronger turbo transmission and turbo components which I've installed as well. That said, my car is a fwd turbo model for all intents and purposes outside of the actual vin number.

 

The spirit of the electronic vs. manual boost controller rule is for a controller that can be operated inside the driver's compartment (electronic) to be +1 more than a manual controller under the hood. So, you should probably take the extra point. But, I'm curious why you have it like this anyway--for street use? Is there ever a reason for you to not be running full boost on the track?

 

As it sits the car is more than capable of spinning 2nd gear on pump gas and were I to run the 100octane pump gas I can get locally in the car and more boost I may run into issues in third. In reality the system is there more for autocross and drag racing to control wheelspin in the first two gears.

 

If we are allowing you to "swap" to the turbo's base class, then the OEM turbo car's intercooler would be free. Your modified one will cost +2.

 

Understood as well, thanks for taking the time to answer my questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg,

 

FYI, there ARE manual boost controllers that have a hardline and a manual dial that allow adjustment from inside the cockpit. Fun stuff!

 

Very true. Look into the Hallman evolution series mbc's. They essentially use a flex cable not too unsimilar to those on a dremel tool attachment to mount the manual controller's knob inside the cockpit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

Frankly, since build/mod decisions may be based on the anticipated weight loss with or without safety equipment (e.g. roll bar or cage), I don't understand the need for keeping the lid on this information. After all, at least ostensibly, it is published information. My concern centers on three issues:

 

First, is the manufacturer's published curb weight based on a specific model, a representative model, or an "average" of all models. Since most cars are now equipped with A/C and auto trans, I would suspect that the published information may not be entirely applicable to cars with manual trans and without A/C.

 

Second, it assumes that all manufacturers use the same criteria to arrive at a published curb weight. I don't know whether this is true or not, but assuming for the sake of discussion, a foreign manufacturer published curb weight by reference to a manual trans car while the American manufacturer published curb weight by reference to a car equipped with auto trans, the latter car would start incurring a weight penalty at a point where there has been a lower overall reduction in weight.

 

Third, to the extent there are several free weight reductions available (e.g. light weight battery; A/C removal, jack and spare tire), it seems that using the alternate weight reduction method would put some people into the penalty area simply by removing these items (assuming 20 lbs for battery, 50 lbs for A/C, and 30 lbs. for jack and spare).

 

I don't have any problem with weighing my specific car, before and after, to determine the "actual curb weight" for purposes of determining the overall reduction.

 

FWIW, the static weight of my Spec Neon (95 DOHC coupe) was 2443 with slightly less than 1/2 tank of fuel. Carpet in intereior and trunk were removed. OEM seats removed and two light seats installed in front. A/C removed. Battery weighs about 10 lbs. less than stock. Side glass still in place.

 

By comparison my 95 SOHC (sedan) with A/C in place weighed 2450 with slightly more fuel on board (about 5/8-3/4), and with about 16 extra pounds attributable to the wheels and tires (I had 15" wheels and tires on this car when weighed). Published information that I have seen says 2470 for the 95 sedan. So, that is the number I will use for the sedan.

 

As for the Shelby Lancer, I don't recall ever seeing any published information on this car. Of the 800 made, half were auto tran, and the other half were manual trans. All had A/C as I recall. Again, I know that I can find one to weigh, although mine would not be a proper candidate for establishing curb weight.

 

It's not a matter of keeping a lid on the information, it's a matter of not publishing a complete database, that's in a very user friendly format, that took over 175 hours to produce, and was not available anywhere else that I could find. Curb weights are for manual transmissions (when data is available to separate them). There are different weights between different model years in the same class. Cars of the same model, with no substantial changes to susp, body, etc., that maintained a reasonably close Wt./hp ratio, were put in the same TT base class. So, there has already been some accounting for the different weights of the different model years in the same base class. The alternate system is not perfect. The regular system is not perfect. We have two to choose from. If one doesn't seem fair for your car, use the other one, etc. My numbers are very similar to yours for the Neon. I found one or two references to the Shelby Lancer as being approximately 3000 pounds, so I used that. BTW, are you planning on actually driving in TT this year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...