Jump to content

2023 Proposed ST Rules Revisions--Comment Period through 11-20-22


Greg G.
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/18/2022 at 5:26 PM, JStutler said:

Like I said, I agree with you that the A-Arm penalty should be per axle. My point of contention was the number you chose. 
I do find it hard to see though where the GRS/BRZ needs a ton of help when you have drivers like Nick Dugdale and Jordan Hill blasting track records all over the place. For example Nick ran a very fast 2:18.0 at NCM in March, on cycled Hoosiers no less. This is a big track with long straights. Jordan ran something a 1:33.4 at Autobahn in October which is a very serious time.  Its not like the platform is languishing because others have different options. 

 

I am in utter congruence with splitting the a-arm penalty to per axle (-0.3 per F/R axle does sound fair) as many other's in TT5/ST5 have also previously lobbied for this change via facebook posts. That would be bring much more equality to class. @Greg G.

And to elaborate on this topic further. The TT5/ST5 (-0.5) suspension penalty stating; "replace or modify rear control arms / camber arms..." needs to be excluded from the massive (-0.5) penalty. Reason: Our primary competition in the Honda S2000 has the factory ability to adjust, optimize and dial in over -3.0 degrees of rear camber all while avoiding that massive penalty in class. The E36 and BRZ/86 are miles off from that rear figure, even with the implementation of eccentrics, which is a big detriment not only to lateral grip performance and ease of adjustment at the track but also the associated seasonal costs related to wildly uneven tire wear. Is the (-0.5) penalty really justified for only adjusting our rear camber less than -1.0 degree for optimized contact patch? 

@JStutler I would say the 14.5:1 is a good step in the right direction if we were on solid ground, but this change further penalizes the Hoosier R7 spec BRZ/86/MX5 chassis in unison to our competition. For example my current TT5 R7 season setup incurs a -0.3 total penalty for 2023 class ratio change, thus increasing my MCW by over 55 lbs to ~2,705.). As I can't max out on power, I depend on loosing weight to shrink the gap and make up for some acceleration. You also need to also reference tracks like (WGI, Summit Main, VIR and Road Atlanta, NJMP, AMP...) the gap is evident on the BRZ/86 if your strictly trying to form an valid argument using only "track records."

A: Mid range acceleration is single largest factor languishing the BRZ/86 chassis in TT5. The AIM data's acceleration delta vs the competition said it all for 2022 and there is no feasible way to cap on that power delta without spending over $10k for a complete swap. (Talk about class cost containment.) 

Here is a sample setup considering these class revisions remain permanent. --- If I was to run a (+1.6) 255/40/17 Maxxis RC1 my MCW would be (2,540 pounds) running a 4'' splitter penalty and rear wing, while taking the penalties for the a-arm with no bonuses. Tell me how I extract an additional 130 lbs. in order to max out an RC1 setup? I'm already risking my life in a fully gutted, AC deleted, cage-less tin can. XD It is fun though, id rather not loose my doors on the BRZ.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, daytonars4 said:

@dwesterwickpart of the reason I say no for ST1/2 is Bc the cars that are light weight there don’t even need/want a 345. With just a 315 alone many of them are already maxed out in grip level. For example, a Ginetta, Radical, LS Miata. This goes back to the weight/tire factor discussion. I believe the newer LMP’s may be on 335’s but that’s another extreme example. Most of the examples can’t even utilize a 315 yet alone a 335. And being tube non-production cars for many of my examples, they just don’t need any help to be competitive. It also serves as another decision making point for racers. If you want to constrain costs some drop to ST3. If you want to play with the big boys in ST1/2 go in knowing the gloves are off. 
 

(Also disclosure this is for selfish reasons) I race in ST3 and this change would not slow down 90% of the ST3 field. Which means that the on track challenges we have with the slower ST2 cars will become even worse if they are relatively even slower now with the new mod. Leaving ST2 out will help to create a larger gap between ST2 back markers and ST3 front runners. 

From a practical standpoint, I get what you're saying. However, I think the counterargument is that if the light prototypes are leading the field, the solution isn't to get rid of the -0.3 mod in faster classes; it's to further penalize those types of cars. I also agree that 90% of the field won't really be affected, but again that also serves as a counterargument. If the rule change is rather inconsequential, why not be consistent in the rules from a physics standpoint?

The reason for keeping the mod factor in ST1/2 isn't because many light cars might want to use a 335/345; it's because they'd be at a disadvantage compared to heavier cars that do use tires that large. Honestly, it's the same reason for why you supported this change for ST3 in the first place.

I'm not super concerned about how the rule is implemented for ST1/2 because it hardly affects me, but I'd rather try to make it correct/fair now then have to change it later and piss more people off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dwesterwick it’s not inconsequential Bc that 10% of the field who are able to exploit the no tire mod with 335’s while exploiting the weight mod at 3400-3600lbs with a modern car are winning 90% of the races they attend in Midatlantic 😂. My region seems to be where all the “new” equipment shows up. We were the first to see the TCR’s come and wreck ST3. Took 2 years for the rest of the country to see it when they finally showed up to a Nats and went 1/2. Then of course after that the rules got changed. To be direct, that 10% in ST3 is able to put 2-3 car lengths on the other 90% on every straight. While also being on 335’s with the rest of the field on 275’s. It’s miserable 😂

Edited by daytonars4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Greg for giving us more aero choices in ST4. Please confirm that fender extensions or flares are still permissible (provided they have no louvers or vents) with no areo modification points.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, daytonars4 said:

@dwesterwick it’s not inconsequential Bc that 10% of the field who are able to exploit the no tire mod with 335’s while exploiting the weight mod at 3400-3600lbs with a modern car are winning 90% of the races they attend in Midatlantic 😂. My region seems to be where all the “new” equipment shows up. We were the first to see the TCR’s come and wreck ST3. Took 2 years for the rest of the country to see it when they finally showed up to a Nats and went 1/2. Then of course after that the rules got changed. To be direct, that 10% in ST3 is able to put 2-3 car lengths on the other 90% on every straight. While also being on 335’s with the rest of the field on 275’s. It’s miserable 😂

Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant by "not slow down 90% of the ST3 field". Either way, it doesn't change my point. I think we both agree that the -0.3 tire mod should exist because it addresses exactly what you're talking about. However, that "exploit" exists in all classes, not just ST3, so I think it should be applied across the board. The other tire mod factors already exist for all ST classes, so let's at least be consistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2022 at 3:14 AM, Greg G. said:

Neither fender venting nor wide body fenders are permitted in ST4, so sure, we can say "and/or" if it makes it easier to understand.   Thx.

But they will be for 2023 no?

7) With the assessed Modification Factor in section 6.5 - Fender venting and non-OEM wide body fenders to the extent permitted in section 6.2.1.3.”

6.2.1.3:

”The front, top, and rear aspects of the fender well may have modifications to allow vent holes for aero and/or cooling purposes…”

Is fender well and fender not the same thing?

If it’s not, what’s even the point of the rule change?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2022 at 8:56 PM, daytonars4 said:

@hispanicpanic having to modify an “old” car to be wider, heavier, and higher displacement engine in order to add 300-400lbs to properly exploit the weight mod isn’t all that practical. Sure, “everyone can do it.” But the reality is people would rather just leave and race elsewhere. Almost ever other race series is based on trying to make your car light. ST is the reverse now. It’s a choice to turn a modern heavy car into a race car. Rewarding the “newest tech” with extra power is just a rather strange BOP system. Maybe when a 992 GT3RS (with DRS disabled) at 3600lbs shows up and starts wrecking shop things will be reassessed. 

If that's the environment that the rules committee has decided to address, then perhaps the answer lies in modifying the weight factor instead of penalizing the technology?  As someone who is adding a modern engine to a honda because old technology sucks balls, I guess i'm in the minority? Honest question, if the weight mod factors have been so favoring to heavy cars with power, why hasn't anything been done about it? People have been ballasting up in Texas since as far as i can remember, even in cars that are already heavy. Not sure how other regions do it.  The only track in Norcal that doesn't favor power and weight is Sonoma. Would still love to run a championship event at that track tho.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Stubz said:

But they will be for 2023 no?

7) With the assessed Modification Factor in section 6.5 - Fender venting and non-OEM wide body fenders to the extent permitted in section 6.2.1.3.”

6.2.1.3:

”The front, top, and rear aspects of the fender well may have modifications to allow vent holes for aero and/or cooling purposes…”

Is fender well and fender not the same thing?

If it’s not, what’s even the point of the rule change?


I could be wrong, but i believe fender well is the inside, and fender is the outside. 

One thing that has me thinking, at what point does an add on fender flare that takes no points, become a vented fender that is required to take points? Anyone know of any examples that has been approved/disapproved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

Folks, here is the update on the decisions that were made after your comments that differ from the original post above.  We appreciated most of your comments.  Some of FB were less than appreciated 🤣.   These will be incorporated into the '23 rules.


I'm busy working on the editing to get the rules published, so I don't have time to update the original post above now, but here are the highlights of the final decisions that differ from the first post.


All classes:
"Roll cage tubing may pass through the floor pan for purposes of chassis stiffening and/ or to tie into the sub-frame."

Removal of the Appendix -0.2 Mod Factor for Mustangs and BMW's for subframe connection through the floor.

 

Solid rear axle request for ST1-4----No changes, but new rule for ST1:

6.2.1.1c    For ST1, aftermarket tubular sub-frames that utilize the OEM mounting points are permitted (may also use additional non-OEM mounting points).

 

ST5/6 - Control Arm rule deleted and substituted with:

One means of aftermarket camber adjustment per wheel by replacement of a single suspension component (in addition to camber plates) is permitted without a Modification Factor. Rear suspension link replacement or modification for toe adjustment is permitted without a Modification Factor.   Any additional non-OEM or modified control arms or links beyond the above shall be assessed a Modification factor.

 

ST6 - Request for Aero with Mod Factors:

Front Air Dam =   -1.0

4" Front Splitter =   -1.0

 

MK60e1 in ST4?

MK60e1 is permitted, again with no motorsports flash

 

 

Some non-Production vehicles approved for Production use:

BMW M235 Cup (ST1-3)  -0.0 for non-Production

981 Cayman Clubsport  (GT4 cars) (ST1 & 2)  -0.0

718 Cayman Clubsport  (GT4 cars) (ST1)  -0.0       

Porsche 991 GT3 Cup (ST1 only) (may have additional Aero mods) = -0.0    This one was changed

And last but not least at all:

Tire Size:       DOT-approved:

                        NASA Section Width 266mm or smaller                                                  = +0.6

                        NASA Section Width 267mm to 282mm                                                  = +0.3

                        Tire size printed greater than 315 (ST2, ST3 Only)                                   = -0.3
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)

                             

                       

                        Non-DOT-approved:                                   

                        Size 9.5”/241mm/24cm or smaller                                                            = +0.6

                        Size 10.5”/270mm/27cm  to 9.6”/242mm/25cm                                       = +0.3

                        Size greater than 11.8”/300mm/30cm (ST2, ST3 Only)                            = -0.3  
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)


Yes, we reviewed this one in depth, including an analysis of the number of current NASA ST2/TT2 and ST3/TT3 drivers on tires greater than 315's and their weights.  We also reviewed the specs on the actual sizes of the 325's and non-DOT tires bigger than 300, that for the most part, showed them to be close to the 335's/345's in actual width.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/17/2022 at 11:19 AM, stewlemm said:

I know there were talks of the drop floor rule being revised. I have an st6 Miata and have a drop floor only to fit the seat. I am 5’6 and don’t need a drop floor. When the car was built this was done. Any help on this would be great because I am taking an unnecessary penalty here. 

@Greg G. did you look into this? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/17/2022 at 4:47 PM, RacecarCamp said:

Would love to get rid of drop floor penalty in ST5/6 as it's more safety issue to get big guys in small cars.  If someone wants to cut and reweld a floor to move a small person down a half an inch, I don't see much performance gained there but it hurts our ST5/6 small cars more than it helps even out any playing field. 

I also asked this question, would love some consideration here.  Even if the rule is "to fit safety equipment" or some such notation.  Unlike Stewart, I'm 6'1" and my only seat option is a Kirky today.  Not the safest nor most comfortable seat!

Edited by RacecarCamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff

Oops.  Sorry, forgot about that one.  
 

It is approved as written in the appendix for the Miata’s listed only.  No mod factor.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Greg G. said:

Folks, here is the update on the decisions that were made after your comments that differ from the original post above.  We appreciated most of your comments.  Some of FB were less than appreciated 🤣.   These will be incorporated into the '23 rules.


I'm busy working on the editing to get the rules published, so I don't have time to update the original post above now, but here are the highlights of the final decisions that differ from the first post.


All classes:
"Roll cage tubing may pass through the floor pan for purposes of chassis stiffening and/ or to tie into the sub-frame."
Removal of the Appendix -0.2 Mod Factor for Mustangs and BMW's for subframe connection through the floor.

 

Solid rear axle request for ST1-4----No changes, but new rule for ST1:

6.2.1.1c    For ST1, aftermarket tubular sub-frames that utilize the OEM mounting points are permitted (may also use additional non-OEM mounting points).

 

ST5/6 - Control Arm rule deleted and substituted with:

One means of aftermarket camber adjustment per wheel by replacement of a single suspension component (in addition to camber plates) is permitted without a Modification Factor. Rear suspension link replacement or modification for toe adjustment is permitted without a Modification Factor.   Any additional non-OEM or modified control arms or links beyond the above shall be assessed a Modification factor.

 

ST6 - Request for Aero with Mod Factors:

Front Air Dam =   -1.0

 

4" Front Splitter =   -1.0

 

 

MK60e1 in ST4?

MK60e1 is permitted, again with no motorsports flash

 

 

Some non-Production vehicles approved for Production use:

BMW M235 Cup (ST1-3)  -0.0 for non-Production

 

981 Cayman Clubsport  (GT4 cars) (ST1 & 2)  -0.0

 

718 Cayman Clubsport  (GT4 cars) (ST1)  -0.0       

 

Porsche 991 GT3 Cup (ST1 only) (may have additional Aero mods) = -0.0    This one was changed

 

 

And last but not least at all:

Tire Size:       DOT-approved:

                        NASA Section Width 266mm or smaller                                                  = +0.6

                        NASA Section Width 267mm to 282mm                                                  = +0.3

                        Tire size printed greater than 315 (ST2, ST3 Only)                                   = -0.3
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)

                             

                       

                        Non-DOT-approved:                                   

                        Size 9.5”/241mm/24cm or smaller                                                            = +0.6

                        Size 10.5”/270mm/27cm  to 9.6”/242mm/25cm                                       = +0.3

                        Size greater than 11.8”/300mm/30cm (ST2, ST3 Only)                            = -0.3  
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)


Yes, we reviewed this one in depth, including an analysis of the number of current NASA ST2/TT2 and ST3/TT3 drivers on tires greater than 315's and their weights.  We also reviewed the specs on the actual sizes of the 325's and non-DOT tires bigger than 300, that for the most part, showed them to be close to the 335's/345's in actual width.

THANKS. clarification : race weight more than 3750 or vehicle ( no driver ) weight?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The updated 5/6 changes look reasonable to me. It never made sense to penalize Miatas for what is essentially a safety issue (drop floors for tall drivers).

@Greg G. do these changes on this page apply ON TOP of the ones from the original post? Or is this the complete list now?

Edited by Digitalwave
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ale Sensoli said:

THANKS. clarification : race weight more than 3750 or vehicle ( no driver ) weight?

Min race weight is always with the driver.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, MarkIsOnFire said:

Min race weight is always with the driver.

Tire size printed greater than 315 (ST2, ST3 Only)                                   = -0.3
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)

because Greg talks about vehicle I just wanted to be sure . :) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Greg G. said:

Oops.  Sorry, forgot about that one.  
 

It is approved as written in the appendix for the Miata’s listed only.  No mod factor.  

Awesome! Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff
2 hours ago, Ale Sensoli said:

THANKS. clarification : race weight more than 3750 or vehicle ( no driver ) weight?

Minimum Competition Weight

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • National Staff
2 hours ago, Digitalwave said:

The updated 5/6 changes look reasonable to me. It never made sense to penalize Miatas for what is essentially a safety issue (drop floors for tall drivers).

@Greg G. do these changes on this page apply ON TOP of the ones from the original post? Or is this the complete list now?

The ones on the bottom that differ from the top are the final version.  The ones on the top that are not changed are also being implemented.  I'll try and post a final recap when I get a chance--spending time answering questions, editing, and working on the car classification forms.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Greg G. said:

Folks, here is the update on the decisions that were made after your comments that differ from the original post above.  We appreciated most of your comments.  Some of FB were less than appreciated 🤣.   These will be incorporated into the '23 rules.


I'm busy working on the editing to get the rules published, so I don't have time to update the original post above now, but here are the highlights of the final decisions that differ from the first post.


All classes:
"Roll cage tubing may pass through the floor pan for purposes of chassis stiffening and/ or to tie into the sub-frame."
Removal of the Appendix -0.2 Mod Factor for Mustangs and BMW's for subframe connection through the floor.

 

Solid rear axle request for ST1-4----No changes, but new rule for ST1:

6.2.1.1c    For ST1, aftermarket tubular sub-frames that utilize the OEM mounting points are permitted (may also use additional non-OEM mounting points).

 

ST5/6 - Control Arm rule deleted and substituted with:

One means of aftermarket camber adjustment per wheel by replacement of a single suspension component (in addition to camber plates) is permitted without a Modification Factor. Rear suspension link replacement or modification for toe adjustment is permitted without a Modification Factor.   Any additional non-OEM or modified control arms or links beyond the above shall be assessed a Modification factor.

 

ST6 - Request for Aero with Mod Factors:

Front Air Dam =   -1.0

 

4" Front Splitter =   -1.0

 

 

MK60e1 in ST4?

MK60e1 is permitted, again with no motorsports flash

 

 

Some non-Production vehicles approved for Production use:

BMW M235 Cup (ST1-3)  -0.0 for non-Production

 

981 Cayman Clubsport  (GT4 cars) (ST1 & 2)  -0.0

 

718 Cayman Clubsport  (GT4 cars) (ST1)  -0.0       

 

Porsche 991 GT3 Cup (ST1 only) (may have additional Aero mods) = -0.0    This one was changed

 

 

And last but not least at all:

Tire Size:       DOT-approved:

                        NASA Section Width 266mm or smaller                                                  = +0.6

                        NASA Section Width 267mm to 282mm                                                  = +0.3

                        Tire size printed greater than 315 (ST2, ST3 Only)                                   = -0.3
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)

                             

                       

                        Non-DOT-approved:                                   

                        Size 9.5”/241mm/24cm or smaller                                                            = +0.6

                        Size 10.5”/270mm/27cm  to 9.6”/242mm/25cm                                       = +0.3

                        Size greater than 11.8”/300mm/30cm (ST2, ST3 Only)                            = -0.3  
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)


Yes, we reviewed this one in depth, including an analysis of the number of current NASA ST2/TT2 and ST3/TT3 drivers on tires greater than 315's and their weights.  We also reviewed the specs on the actual sizes of the 325's and non-DOT tires bigger than 300, that for the most part, showed them to be close to the 335's/345's in actual width.

Congrats! You just destroyed ST2 in the Northeast!  If you think I'm BSing just watch our participation numbers throughout the year. Actually, I'll be sure to remind you! 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon could you just run in ST1 or STU as is? It happens, I am running ST3 next year with 158whp for rule compliance. I figured you are still running in the same session so it doesn't really matter what the trophy looks like. You can compete amongst other cars that match yours. It's still great race-craft training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jon G Racer said:

Congrats! You just destroyed ST2 in the Northeast!  If you think I'm BSing just watch our participation numbers throughout the year. Actually, I'll be sure to remind you! 

 

@Jon G RacerI get your frustration man, but ST2 isn’t destroyed, not if I can help it. You guys in ST2 put on a show each race weekend in the NE, so let’s keep that going even with these new changes. We can still have great racing even with a few new tweaks to the cars. Nothing is ever permanent either. 💪

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey there,

trying to make sense of this revision:

ST5/6:

"One means of aftermarket camber adjustability per wheel by replacement of a single suspension component not requiring modifications to the spindle or mounting points (in addition to camber plates) is permitted without a Modification Factor. Rear suspension link replacement or modification for toe adjustment is permitted without a Modification Factor.   Any additional non-OEM or modified control arms or links beyond the above shall be assessed a Modification factor."
 

 

Would this allow me to run aftermarket lower control arms in the front and rear, if the uppers and knuckle are still oem? Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2022 at 5:22 AM, Greg G. said:

 

And last but not least at all:

Tire Size:       DOT-approved:

                        NASA Section Width 266mm or smaller                                                  = +0.6

                        NASA Section Width 267mm to 282mm                                                  = +0.3

                        Tire size printed greater than 315 (ST2, ST3 Only)                                   = -0.3
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)

                             

                       

                        Non-DOT-approved:                                   

                        Size 9.5”/241mm/24cm or smaller                                                            = +0.6

                        Size 10.5”/270mm/27cm  to 9.6”/242mm/

                        Size greater than 11.8”/300mm/30cm (ST2, ST3 Only)                            = -0.3  
                          (Does not apply to vehicles weighing over 3750 lbs)

 

@Greg G., given the precedent now set for the minimum weight for the tire mod factor to be applied, can we expect this to be applied to the other tire size mod factors? I do not see a reason why it shouldn’t by this logic.

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...