2022 rules period?

[tcdesign]

Greg, will there be a rules discussion time period this year?

 

-tony colicchio

TC Desgin

[MWC]

Was wondering the same thing. As I got into further developing my car this year I've run into a few rules that don't make sense. 

[Greg G.]

We accept rules requests all year long.  We are already finalizing the rules revisions for '22 based on the requests we have gotten. 

[flier129]

Any ETA on when 2022 rules will be released? I know it's the off-season for a lot of drivers, but some regions have January events. 

Should we hold off on buying tires until 2022 rules are released?

[stevensa]

On 11/9/2021 at 6:21 PM, Greg G. said:

We accept rules requests all year long.  We are already finalizing the rules revisions for '22 based on the requests we have gotten. 

Hey Greg,

I was going to create a new post for this, but this thread seems as good as any to reply. 

I would like to propose removing the following text from page 22 of the current ST1-4 rulebook 
"Note that it is a procedural violation (8.4.3) any time that a Dyno test results in a higher Avg HP than that listed on the Car Classification Form, regardless of the calculated Adjusted Wt/Power Ratio."

I personally have not been caught out by this issue, but I have seen a number of competitors get dinged by it over the past year or so. In all of the cases that I am aware of, the cars were still at a legal power/weight ratio per class based on their post race weight, however they were 1.8-4 avg hp over on their dyno when compared to their paperwork. Talking in the paddock with some other racers of various ST classes, the general consensus is that as long as your post race weight/dyno avg HP is legal, the racer should not be penalized.

Thank you for your consideration,
Andrew Stevens 

[JStutler]

1 hour ago, stevensa said:

Hey Greg,

I was going to create a new post for this, but this thread seems as good as any to reply. 

I would like to propose removing the following text from page 22 of the current ST1-4 rulebook 
"Note that it is a procedural violation (8.4.3) any time that a Dyno test results in a higher Avg HP than that listed on the Car Classification Form, regardless of the calculated Adjusted Wt/Power Ratio."

I personally have not been caught out by this issue, but I have seen a number of competitors get dinged by it over the past year or so. In all of the cases that I am aware of, the cars were still at a legal power/weight ratio per class based on their post race weight, however they were 1.8-4 avg hp over on their dyno when compared to their paperwork. Talking in the paddock with some other racers of various ST classes, the general consensus is that as long as your post race weight/dyno avg HP is legal, the racer should not be penalized.

Thank you for your consideration,
Andrew Stevens 

As someone who has been on both the winning and losing side of a minor Dyno infraction DQ, I agree with Andrew. There should be an allowance for “as raced” power to weight. 
For example I was disqualified at an event this year for less than 2hp over my stated hp despite being 60+ Lbs over minimum weight. Later in the season one of my competitors had a similar issue. I don’t think either DQ was reasonable. 
With the amount of variance that I personally had over three trips to the impound dyno this year, I don’t think it makes sense to not consider the as raced power weight.

Thanks,

Jeff Stutler

Edited November 16, 2021 by JStutler

[Greg G.]

On 11/14/2021 at 8:22 AM, flier129 said:

Any ETA on when 2022 rules will be released? I know it's the off-season for a lot of drivers, but some regions have January events. 

Should we hold off on buying tires until 2022 rules are released?

We hope to have them out before Dec 1st.  We are waiting on something a bit beyond our control.  Yes, I would wait to buy new tires if possible.  But, if supplies are an issue, then just proceed with making sure you have tires for at least your next event.  There will be time to figure out your tire plans throughout the year.  However, anyone that runs on Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar 3R needs to have the ability to give up the 100 TW Mod Factor.  I may just post that as a TB in a few days.  

[Brian Clarke]

On 11/16/2021 at 2:20 PM, Greg G. said:

We hope to have them out before Dec 1st.  We are waiting on something a bit beyond our control.  Yes, I would wait to buy new tires if possible.  But, if supplies are an issue, then just proceed with making sure you have tires for at least your next event.  There will be time to figure out your tire plans throughout the year.  However, anyone that runs on Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar 3R needs to have the ability to give up the 100 TW Mod Factor.  I may just post that as a TB in a few days.  

I have a stack of these for my subaru.  You need to be more proactive about this type of stuff.  As a TT'r that's a couple G spent on a rule you might propose.  What stinks is 100TW development stopped.  Heck 200TW tires are faster than the other 100TW the rule is for.  Why not just start adapting the rule itself?  Give a mod for 200TW?  Max TT and Racing Cheap again.

[CRallo]

Speaking of rules requests: I realize this may be a bit late, but... limiting transmission options to original or came behind(or next to) swapped engine is very limiting, un NASA like IMHO, ignores transmissions that literally bolt on and therefore drives up the cost and difficulty of some swaps, especially FWD only engines. I see no harm in having trans swap rules match the engine swap rules. This can also help some source a stronger trans which will drop long term cost and increase participation.

Should this be emailed also?

A rules proposal thread would be helpful, good for engagement and help NASA assess interest and need for requested changes. SE46 has a pretty organized process, what's our's?

[Greg G.]

On 11/16/2021 at 9:37 AM, JStutler said:

As someone who has been on both the winning and losing side of a minor Dyno infraction DQ, I agree with Andrew. There should be an allowance for “as raced” power to weight. 
For example I was disqualified at an event this year for less than 2hp over my stated hp despite being 60+ Lbs over minimum weight. Later in the season one of my competitors had a similar issue. I don’t think either DQ was reasonable. 
With the amount of variance that I personally had over three trips to the impound dyno this year, I don’t think it makes sense to not consider the as raced power weight.

Thanks,

Jeff Stutler

Hi Jeff,

Correct, you should not have been DQ'd.  You should have had a one position place repositioning.  For TT is would have been the fastest timed session DQ, but not the entire day. If you are going to run 60 lbs over minimum, then give yourself more room for Dyno variance.  The rule is the same for everyone, and we encourage drivers to leave enough room so they will not be DQ'd, while getting rid of this rule encourages running on the ragged edge. 

[Greg G.]

On 11/25/2021 at 8:11 AM, CRallo said:

Speaking of rules requests: I realize this may be a bit late, but... limiting transmission options to original or came behind(or next to) swapped engine is very limiting, un NASA like IMHO, ignores transmissions that literally bolt on and therefore drives up the cost and difficulty of some swaps, especially FWD only engines. I see no harm in having trans swap rules match the engine swap rules. This can also help some source a stronger trans which will drop long term cost and increase participation.

Should this be emailed also?

A rules proposal thread would be helpful, good for engagement and help NASA assess interest and need for requested changes. SE46 has a pretty organized process, what's our's?

Yes Chris, too late.  But, we have no desire to open up the can of transmission worms in the lower ST classes.