Jump to content

RULE PROPOSAL CHANGE " Balance of Performance Modifiers " for GTS 2


Recommended Posts

The following proposal for Balance of Performance Modifiers is being made to help keep with the spirit of the GTS2 rules to maintain balance and competitiveness as non-German marquees and newer vehicles are introduced into the field.
Proposed Rules 
  • Competitors with Non-German marquee cars as noted in section 4 of the GTS CCR:   +0.25
    • Example: Ford Mustang, Chevrolet Camaro, etc.
  • Competitors with cars having double A arm or multi-link front suspension:  +0.25
    • Example: Subaru, Mercedes, Honda, etc.
  • Competitors with cars having an engine made by a differing manufacturer than the vehicle's chassis (as described in GTS CCR section 6.4):  +0.25
    • Example: Chevrolet LS, Ford 302, etc.
  • Competitors with cars having mid-engine design:  +0.25
    • Example: Porsche, Audi, etc. 
Barry Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the proposal makes sense given the new marquees that have been placed into GTS2 this year.  If opening the field is an ongoing experiment in our region, perhaps this proposal should be as well to help balance the competition.

In the Northeast this year, the same new marquee won 6 of the first 6 races they attended.  The fact that the car could not be checked for compliance until August due to lack of a dyno at the track compounds the question of performance balance.


- Brian
#593 GTS2 NASA Northeast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with rule proposal if as a group we want to keep the the GTS rule book open to non-German marquees. Even within the German Marquees I think this rule proposal helps level the playing field so we are all as competitive as each other.  

#428 GTS2 NASA Northeast


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree with these suggestions. In the past we have seen that creating new rules without data to support it ruins the class. What I want to see is AIM data showing Michael Sousa vs S2000 vs current NE e36 racer. I have heard many complaints from NE about an S2000 being dominate. I want to see something on paper that shows the car has an advantage, and confirm it’s not just simply that driver being better than the rest. Sousa was dominate for years in NE so he will serve as a great data “control.” 

I think some of you should take a deeper look in the ST ruleset compared to GTS to understand why there is no need for these mods. In MA, Camaro’s are currently dominate. The reason for that is ST power calculations does not factor torque. It also rewards V8’s. A perfect example is my S54 car with a 9.4 mod in ST3 has to race at a higher weight than my car with the same exact tune in GTS3. While a Camaro with a massive torque advantage would be 250lbs heavier in GTS3. This alone balances out the 3-4 car length advantage they have on BMW’s on straights, starts, and restarts. 

I see the A-Arm mod as complete garbage. I have yet to see an “A Arm” car dominate any of the top level e36 drivers. So once again, let’s show some real data to support this concept. Not just thoughts and feelings. If there is a desire to do something like this in NE then you all just do it there. We don’t need to make these changes nationally. 

Edited by daytonars4
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.

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...