Jump to content

2023 Rules Request: ST4 Allowances for a Mod Factor


mrgsquared
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello @Greg G. - I have attached a ST4 Allowance Request for the 2023 season. The ST4 class on the east coast has really struggled to gain traction unlike some of the regions farther west. These requests involve helping consolidate some of the classes so that there are LESS CLASSES, and MORE RACING. Please see attached.

ST4_ForumRequest_v1.pdf

Edited by mrgsquared
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Speed91 said:

FINALLY!!!!!!! This needs to happen my VW GTI is getting smoked in GTS3 All bc of a few minor mods. It’s getting really discouraging racing out of class. The GTS class is just to baller. I love the NASA family and want to continue racing with them. But if I’m preparing every month just to lose and race in the back what’s the point where’s the incentive. St4 is where this car needs to be, might not be a front runner but atleast I’d have a CHANCE to finish mid pack or hey just be in sight of the pack. 

15 hours ago, Aussiebj64 said:

Very well written rule proposal change ,

With the above forementioned changes, I would be interested in the move from GTS2 to ST4

Barry Smith

NASANE

GTS2 #567

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • mrgsquared changed the title to 2023 Rules Request: ST4 Allowances for a Mod Factor

Good luck w/ that. I have a 16:1 power to weight ratio car I have to run ST4 also because sequentially are disallowed from ST5 as blanket rule. It should be a weight penalty instead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very well written proposal, I hope it gets serious attention. I'm all for fewer classes and more cars per class.

SPEC classes is where things should be very uniform. ST is by nature highly varied, and I think nearly all reasonable mods should carry a penalty (points or extra required weight), not be completely banned. ST has massively evolved over time (ST4 did not exist a while ago, neither did ST5/6), so it's bound to keep morphing to find a solid way. I think it's the most successful non-spec class of NASA, and the more cars we have, the more fun everyone will have.

Edited by Olivier Bailly
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to try the move to ST4 from GTS2 but the cost in de modifying my car would be the limiting factor ..

I would like to add a modifier to the above rule ..

Majority of GTS2 cars run 10 inch wide wheels ,some 17 inch and some 18 ins ..

If we can run 10inch wide rims but limit tire size to 245 for 17s and 255 for 18s .. this would help more cars make the move

Looking forward to some changes in this class, as I can see exponential growth with some modifier concessions..

Barry

GTS2 NE

#567

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2022 at 8:48 AM, Aussiebj64 said:

I would like to try the move to ST4 from GTS2 but the cost in de modifying my car would be the limiting factor ..

I would like to add a modifier to the above rule ..

Majority of GTS2 cars run 10 inch wide wheels ,some 17 inch and some 18 ins ..

If we can run 10inch wide rims but limit tire size to 245 for 17s and 255 for 18s .. this would help more cars make the move

Looking forward to some changes in this class, as I can see exponential growth with some modifier concessions..

Barry

GTS2 NE

#567

Hey Aussiebj64! Similar to Time Trial where they use a tire width tool, I believe you can run a 245 hoosier on a 17"x10" or a 275 hoosier on an 18" x 10", but you would need to weigh at least 3000 lbs to fit into the 267-282mm category. This means that you'll need to make more power, but if the GTS aero request is approved, maybe you'll only need to fully uncork the motor if you run canards and other GTS aero bits? 

>> Even if you run a 245 Hoosier on a 9" wheel it measures right to the limit of 266mm (a 245 Hoho is more like a 265 tire). A 245 Hoho on a 10" wide wheel would be over the 266mm limit. Some guys run 10" wide wheels, but have narrower non-hoosier brand tires to "stretch" on the wheel that clears the tool. See below:

https://nasaspeed.news/tech/wheels-tires/the-how-and-why-of-nasas-new-super-touring-tire-measurement-system/

The 267-282mm bracket has been reduced to 3001+ lbs since this article was written.

Edited by mrgsquared
Added Tire Measurement Link
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2022 at 1:05 AM, mrgsquared said:

Hello @Greg G. - I have attached a ST4 Allowance Request for the 2023 season. The ST4 class on the east coast has really struggled to gain traction unlike some of the regions farther west. These requests involve helping consolidate some of the classes so that there are LESS CLASSES, and MORE RACING. Please see attached.

ST4_ForumRequest_v1.pdf 415.09 kB · 13 downloads

This is very similar to Mid-A, we have had several people looking to help slot in for our regions. There is no way in the current rules for some of our drivers to fit into the class without massive costs. Many of those coming up often are being driven away because of this. I would support this and would love to see a loosening of 4 rules (with penalty's) to allow groups to Grow for great racing. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These rule changes would make a huge difference in my build. I’m a hopeful ST4 driver for 23 and if I were able to use some of the mentioned changes on my mini I think I would be able to compete much more easily when compared to proven chassis’s and the proven drivers we have here in the Northeast region. These Mod factors would not only help me be competitive but also build a more fun car which is what this is all about right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

Nice write up Griffin.  We will take a serious look at your proposals.  Obviously, these proposals would also lead to an immediate cost to many current ST4/TT4 owners in order to keep up at -0.2 for each of those aero mods (only 50 lbs for a 3000 lb car). 

 

I do have to chuckle at how I developed the PT Series in 2005, and then tweeked it for years adding more assessments for certain modifications (many like you propose here), and listened to all of the bitching about how it was too complicated, with too many Mod Points, and "all we want are simple Wt/Power ratio classes and let us do whatever we want otherwise."   And, it seems that we are coming full circle back to what we were told was wrong with our builder classes back then.  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Greg G. said:

Nice write up Griffin.  We will take a serious look at your proposals.  Obviously, these proposals would also lead to an immediate cost to many current ST4/TT4 owners in order to keep up at -0.2 for each of those aero mods (only 50 lbs for a 3000 lb car). 

 

I do have to chuckle at how I developed the PT Series in 2005, and then tweeked it for years adding more assessments for certain modifications (many like you propose here), and listened to all of the bitching about how it was too complicated, with too many Mod Points, and "all we want are simple Wt/Power ratio classes and let us do whatever we want otherwise."   And, it seems that we are coming full circle back to what we were told was wrong with our builder classes back then.  

 

 

I think you are actually a tad off base.lol I think in general, at least in MA and NE, people would prefer ST4 to be more like ST3. Which actually means less mods and restrictions. But everyone has come to accept that you are unwilling to do that, therefore the only other option is to roll out yet another set of mods so these “banned” cars can at least participate. 
 

I certainly get the balance of “protecting” current car owners from having to spend a bunch of money. But at the end of the day is NASA happy with having a class that’s pretty much dead in half the country for the sake of “protecting” the current racers from these fairly low cost modifications. If that’s fine with NASA then so be it 🤷‍♂️. But I think it’s at least worth doing a legitimate survey to ask racers if they rather have ST4 rules more closely follow ST3. Or if they prefer taking the approach of even more mods in ST4 so at least the class has a chance. Remaining as-is just will keep the classes dead on the East Coast. 

Edited by daytonars4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Greg G. said:

Nice write up Griffin.  We will take a serious look at your proposals.  Obviously, these proposals would also lead to an immediate cost to many current ST4/TT4 owners in order to keep up at -0.2 for each of those aero mods (only 50 lbs for a 3000 lb car). 

 

I do have to chuckle at how I developed the PT Series in 2005, and then tweeked it for years adding more assessments for certain modifications (many like you propose here), and listened to all of the bitching about how it was too complicated, with too many Mod Points, and "all we want are simple Wt/Power ratio classes and let us do whatever we want otherwise."   And, it seems that we are coming full circle back to what we were told was wrong with our builder classes back then.  

 

 

Thank you Greg! I would be more than happy to continue talking with you about it and getting feedback from you. I am onboard to help any way I can. After seeing several racers express interest in other organizations due to large car counts, I felt this was something that I needed to request. 

The -0.2 factor for each of the 4 “upgrades” (-0.8 total) may not be enough, but certainly happy to discuss it more and test as well. Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mod factor makes sense for the added aero, but the first year should error on the side of a higher mod factor for each additional element.  The last thing you want is the blow all the current ST4 cars out of the water and end up with just GTS2 cars remaining.  That doesn't help anyone.  A little too much penalty might limit the spending spree the current ST4 legal cars need to go on to stay competitive.

As for tires widths, so slight modifications to the current limits could make the 245 Hoho fit in the rules

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rsotak said:

A mod factor makes sense for the added aero, but the first year should error on the side of a higher mod factor for each additional element.  The last thing you want is the blow all the current ST4 cars out of the water and end up with just GTS2 cars remaining.  That doesn't help anyone.  A little too much penalty might limit the spending spree the current ST4 legal cars need to go on to stay competitive.

As for tires widths, so slight modifications to the current limits could make the 245 Hoho fit in the rules

@rsotakI agree here. If these allowances do get approved, it's better to start higher with the mod factor and dial it back after the first year instead of implementing them and making further adjustments to increase the factor afterwards. That will just upset people and make them potentially regret joining the series. We don't want that. Maybe a higher factor for each aero bit would be better so the total for all allowances would be over -1.0. After speaking with MANY racers in other classes this past weekend, many actually have splitters that go to the center front wheels only so no factor is applied there. Having a canards allowance and rear diffuser seem to be the popular request from other class cars who want to join ST4, but just having that allowance will help them decide if they really want to keep that upgrade or not.

As for the tire widths, that may be a bigger discussion that Greg and the team could look into. However, I know we can't cater to every car and build. Many GTS2 run a 255 Hoosier on a 10" wide wheel. Last I checked the info, that won't fit in the 267-282 bracket, but a 275 on a 10" will? May just be a matter of changing to a 275 if that's the case and making it over 3000 lbs min weight.

Edited by mrgsquared
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mrgsquared I believe the 255 Hoosier does fit the 282mm for the 18x10 Apex. But most of the stuff like canards, splitter length, and diffuser are easy to remove if someone wants. The main issue preventing crossover has been the ban on aftermarket or vented fenders. Tires are already modded/limited so just doesn’t make a ton of sense to have that ban. If a stock e46 and C5 can fit 255/275’s and an e36 needs aftermarket fenders to fit the same 255/275, the ban just makes no sense. Not sure why there should even be a .2 mod for literally just balancing an older chassis with a newer one, but hey. If that’s what makes the mob happy so be it. 

Edited by daytonars4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been stated many times before, there is a big difference between a flared fender and an aero fender that also is wider.

Fender flares are legal, and free.  Because they serve no benefit other than to fit larger tires (and in fact they make your aerodynamics worse than stock).

 

But if you start allowing vented aftermarket fenders, then it opens a big box of potential aero development for everyone.

 

I would be in favor of specific aftermarket fender approval in the appendix, similar to how certain aftermarket bumpers can get approval.

 

Canards and diffusers are an unnecessary complication.  Just take them off your car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2022 at 6:54 AM, mrgsquared said:

Hey Aussiebj64! Similar to Time Trial where they use a tire width tool, I believe you can run a 245 hoosier on a 17"x10" or a 275 hoosier on an 18" x 10", but you would need to weigh at least 3000 lbs to fit into the 267-282mm category. This means that you'll need to make more power, but if the GTS aero request is approved, maybe you'll only need to fully uncork the motor if you run canards and other GTS aero bits? 

>> Even if you run a 245 Hoosier on a 9" wheel it measures right to the limit of 266mm (a 245 Hoho is more like a 265 tire). A 245 Hoho on a 10" wide wheel would be over the 266mm limit. Some guys run 10" wide wheels, but have narrower non-hoosier brand tires to "stretch" on the wheel that clears the tool. See below:

https://nasaspeed.news/tech/wheels-tires/the-how-and-why-of-nasas-new-super-touring-tire-measurement-system/

The 267-282mm bracket has been reduced to 3001+ lbs since this article was written.

Oh the 245 hoosier doesn't fit the gauge on a 10 inch wide wheel???? Someone told me it did last year..... dangit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
13 minutes ago, Digitalwave said:

I have no skin in the GTS/ST4 game, but just wanted to say that proposal PDF was very well done!

"Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs"

The reason im asking is because is mentioned vehicle. I assume is race.weight. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff
2 hours ago, Ale Sensoli said:

"Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs"

The reason im asking is because is mentioned vehicle. I assume is race.weight. 

 

 

Yes, Minimum Comp Wt

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.

Guest
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...