Jump to content
muddy

NASA-X Classing Structure Ideas

Recommended Posts

Native
the way it's written, 205-225 is the sweet spot.

if this is a method of classing to be seriously considered then ya'll on the classing committee would get to do the work to figure out where the "fair" splits are...I was just guessing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Native
while I just admitted above I've never been to an SCCA event, this certainly seems to be the popular belief/stereotype. Now, I know not everyone at an SCCA event is gonna be ultracompetitive, blah blah blah, but I agree with Jeff's feeling about us not going that direction. It'd just be too serious.

It was brought to my attention that my sentiments about the SCCA "reputation" were not based on personal experience, were insensitive, and potentially offensive.

 

I was only trying to make a point that I'd like to not have people see our group as hypercompetitive and nit-picky. It was not my intention to hurt anyone's feelings, or disparage the SCCA - if that's all I succeeded in doing, my apologies. I"ll try to be clearer in my communication in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
muddy

I am not convinced that classing by tire size would be fair or effective. That would favor the lightest car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
impalanut

Using the pax indexed scca classes for a base is using data from thousands of runs and should represent the actual capabilities of the cars. With adjustments for mods I think this leaves the least speculation without reinventing the wheel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alizarin
PS: In the case of mis-matched tires, go with the worst case. IE, the car is classed to it's "best" tire.

In the case of mis-matched tires, I say go with whatever is on the front, since that is what does the turning. After all, without turning, its just drag racing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Loren
PS: In the case of mis-matched tires, go with the worst case. IE, the car is classed to it's "best" tire.

In the case of mis-matched tires, I say go with whatever is on the front, since that is what does the turning. After all, without turning, its just drag racing.

 

Bzzzzt! What if it's a RWD car with mondo power that needs... oh, say 245's in the back, but can run 225's in the front?

 

Class to the widest/best tire on the car. Wherever that widest tire is, it's there for a reason!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jblaine
while I just admitted above I've never been to an SCCA event, this certainly seems to be the popular belief/stereotype. Now, I know not everyone at an SCCA event is gonna be ultracompetitive, blah blah blah, but I agree with Jeff's feeling about us not going that direction. It'd just be too serious.

It was brought to my attention that my sentiments about the SCCA "reputation" were not based on personal experience, were insensitive, and potentially offensive.

Um, yours weren't at all offensive or insensitive and anyone getting on your case for replying in partial agreement with MY WORDS... needs to redirect their hurt feelings toward me.

 

I stand by what I said completely, regardless of the SCCA-ites present believing it's uninformed. That's their opinion. It's my opinion based on my experiences.

 

Loren: FWIW, that looks reasonable to me. Well, good enough for me to just agree to instead of remaining a part of this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy

The "tire only" structure kind of hurts the guy who comes out with a bone stock car. I am currently leaning toward....

 

under 3.0L "NASA" Stock/Street Tires

under 3.0L Unlimited Mods/Street Tires

under 3.0L "NASA" Stock/Race Tires

under 3.0L Unlimited Mods/Race Tires

3.0L and over + all FI "NASA" Stock/Street Tires

3.0L and over + all FI w/ Unlimited Mods/Street Tires

3.0L and over + all FI "NASA" Stock/Race Tires

3.0L and over + all FI w/ Unlimited Mods/Race Tires

Novice Street Tires

Novice Race Tires

 

Where street tires = 140 TW and higher.

and for a recent thought... "NASA stock" would be like a fuzzy version of SCCA stock.

IE

SCCA Stock= open shocks / NASA stock= same

SCCA Stock= open front swaybar / NASA stock= open front and rear swaybars

SCCA Stock= open catback / NASA stock= choose one(open catback, open cat, open header, or open air intake)

SCCA stock= wheels of same diameter / NASA stock= can go 1" wider.

or some variation of this.

 

And other than "wear items" that would be it.

This would cover the top 2 items in "Rob's Heirarchy of what's important at an autocross" as well as number 5 or 6, torque.

So this would cover tires/suspension/power.

Where as the other would only cover tires.

I think it's still pretty simple, but yet splits up cars that would be obvious overdogs, since many potent cars (Elise, s2000, sti, evo, m3?, rx-8, 350Z?) could run 225's without much of an issue.

 

What about if I also add the all Super Stock, A stock and B Stock(?) cars automaticallly bump up to the 3.0L and above class. That would mean that none of the overdogs mentioned above would be in the small displacement OR small tires class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Loren
The "tire only" structure kind of hurts the guy who comes out with a bone stock car. I am currently leaning toward....

 

It really doesn't seem to be hurting Tod Byram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy
The "tire only" structure kind of hurts the guy who comes out with a bone stock car. I am currently leaning toward....

 

It really doesn't seem to be hurting Tod Byram.

True, but an (Elise, s2000, sti, evo, m3?, rx-8, 350Z?) on slicks will eat him alive with even a moderate driver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
impalanut

I still think four classes for race tires are too many. Using the last race or two, see how many carts are in each category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy
I still think four classes for race tires are too many. Using the last race or two, see how many carts are in each category.

I already did that, but I only knew the top 18 people, and was unsure about 4. It appears that 9 out of the top 18 were on race tires for the 9/9/06 event.

 

We could combine the classes. But I don't see a way that wouldn't create unfair matchups.

 

under 3.0L NASA Stock/Race Tires

6. Todd Byram (1st F) Neon

7. Bob Tamandli (1st E) Miata

13. Jamie Sculerati (4th D) Miata

 

under 3.0L Unlimited Mods/Race Tires

2. Scott Levengood (1st D) S2000

3. Loren Williams (2nd C) (R tires?) Miata

8. Ken Schuffert (2nd D) S2000

 

3.0L and over + all FI NASA Stock/Race Tires

10. Alan Gross (3rd D) Mini

 

3.0L and over + all FI w/ Unlimited Mods/Race Tires

1. Brian Hientzman (1st C) Miata

5. Ken Gardner (4th C) WRX

 

UNSURE...

14. Rob Edwards (5th D) (R tires?) Mustang

11. Russell Morgan (1st B) (R tires?) WRX

3. Loren Williams (2nd C) (R tires?) Miata

4. David Wilsey (3rd C) (Street tires?) STi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Loren
We could combine the classes. But I don't see a way that wouldn't create unfair matchups.

 

The SCCA has something like 58 different classes in an effort to create "fairness", and they STILL don't have it. It's certainly not going to happen with less than 10 classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy

Allright, well now that I look at it, these two could definitely be combined...

 

under 3.0L Unlimited Mods/Race Tires

2. Scott Levengood (1st D) S2000

3. Loren Williams (2nd C) (R tires?) Miata

8. Ken Schuffert (2nd D) S2000

 

3.0L and over + all FI w/ Unlimited Mods/Race Tires

1. Brian Hientzman (1st C) Miata

5. Ken Gardner (4th C) WRX

 

^Pretty much all SM or SM2 cars. Since I already proved earlier (:)) that an NA Civic is capable of hanging with a supercharged M3, both with Street Mod prep, this shouldn't be a big deal.

 

However I still don't feel comfortable combining my "NASA stock" classes together. So 3 race tire classes wouldn't be too bad, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jamie
and for a recent thought... "NASA stock" would be like a fuzzy version of SCCA stock.

IE

SCCA Stock= open shocks / NASA stock= same

SCCA Stock= open front swaybar / NASA stock= open front and rear swaybars

SCCA Stock= open catback / NASA stock= choose one(open catback, open cat, open header, or open air intake)

SCCA stock= wheels of same diameter / NASA stock= can go 1" wider.

or some variation of this.

I don't think you need to force the "pick one" aspect of I/H/E...almost anything built in the last 20 years is pretty insensitive to I/H/E (10-15%, if that) unless you either modify the head to make it breath better and/or modify the fuel delivery system to use the extra airflow.

 

I'd be willing to allow bolt-in chassis stiffening in "nonmodified" as well -- tower bars, and even bolt-in subframe connectors -- since they're pretty common, and without changing the springs the benefits are within the big circles we're drawing around performance.

 

What about if I also add the all Super Stock, A stock and B Stock(?) cars automaticallly bump up to the 3.0L and above class. That would mean that none of the overdogs mentioned above would be in the small displacement OR small tires class.

Why? If we're going to worry about separating out cars to that degree, we may as well go back to an established class structure. Run 'em were they fall, and let driver skill sort out the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy
and without changing the springs the benefits are within the big circles we're drawing around performance.

Yeah, no springs and no aftermarket camber adjustment are the big ones. I didn't really want to get too carried away with "NASA stock" allowances. My goal was to have a class where a bone stock car on good street tires could be somewhat competitive.

 

What about if I also add the all Super Stock, A stock and B Stock(?) cars automaticallly bump up to the 3.0L and above class. That would mean that none of the overdogs mentioned above would be in the small displacement OR small tires class.

Why? If we're going to worry about separating out cars to that degree, we may as well go back to an established class structure. Run 'em were they fall, and let driver skill sort out the rest.

Yes, this is the only part of the structure that is not simple, we would have to have a list of cars in those classes available. But without it, you would be pitting SS (Elise), AS (s2000), and BS cars(RX-8) against HS cars. I am sure there are probably other low cc, NA cars in those top tier classes that also would not be fun to compete against every month, even if your name is Todd Byram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
impalanut

Those nine of the top cars on race tires are probably the only cars on race tires. Do you really want 9 cars in three categories. That means its likely that at least one class will have two cars. I still think two classes for race tires is enough. I also don't know why people don't want to use the pax times from

SCCA as a guide. Everything else we have been discussing is speculative. The pax times are proven performance of what these cars are doing in competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy
Those nine of the top cars on race tires are probably the only cars on race tires. Do you really want 9 cars in three categories. That means its likely that at least one class will have two cars. I still think two classes for race tires is enough. I also don't know why people don't want to use the pax times from

SCCA as a guide. Everything else we have been discussing is speculative. The pax times are proven performance of what these cars are doing in competition.

I don't really like the bumping classes for points though. Maybe it's just me.

How about split the SCCA classes in half and then run the "NASA Stock"/modified scenario.

Something like

 

Class 1

ss 0.848 (Elise)

as 0.838 (C5 Vette)

bs 0.828 (RX-8)

fs 0.809 (Camaro)

ds 0.804 (Integra Type-R)

 

Class 2

es 0.812 (MR2)

cs 0.822 (Solstice)

gs 0.803 (Cooper S)

hs 0.789 (Cooper)

 

Only reason I put DS with Class 1 is that it also has the BMW 330's and Lexus IS300's in it. A honda just happened to win this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy
Those nine of the top cars on race tires are probably the only cars on race tires. Do you really want 9 cars in three categories. That means its likely that at least one class will have two cars. I still think two classes for race tires is enough.

Honestly, what's the problem with only 2 cars in one class? I think the NASA A class averaged 0 and NASA B averaged 2 competitors this year. I don't think it really bothered anyone.

 

Separating race tire cars into 2 classes would yield some outrageous matchups. One of the SCCA regulars from Gainesville has a 350HP MR2 Spyder with a V6 swap and 10" wide slicks. MR2's start out in CS, so that means he would be racing against Jamie in his CS Miata?

 

I don't think I will be running race tires, so it won't bother me either way. I just want to see good matchups.

 

edit: or a more familiar matchup. Brian Heintzman vs. Jamie Sculerati. Unless you say that CS goes against the pax rating listed and is actually in the bottom half of classes, then Brian could bump into the next class leaving Jamie alone. But according to pax, CS is the fourth fastest class. Thus he would have no where to bump with only 2 classes for race tires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
impalanut

When you class with SCCA stock as a base you would need to bump for points. Don't forget that at SCCA events these aren't the only classes. They allow for mods with a lot more classes. The proposal for SCCA stock class as a base is a starting point with no mods. Using the pax points but not grouping similar numbers together just makes it a random mix. Saying that they aren't valid just because a certain model car beat others that should have been faster just ignores the facts. The pax times represent the actual racing capabilites in actual races, not just guessing. I agree that no one cares if there are no cars in a class, but I would care if I was the only car in a class or there was only one other. The point of classing is to have groups of cars together, otherwise just use the 56 SCCA classes and everyone can be a winner. Ideally I would like to see balanced groups of 5-10 cars so there is good competition for people at all levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
impalanut

If you don't have a point bump my EP CRX will be in GS. According to the pax times I should be faster than SS and all Street Prepared. (assuming I can get the most out of it With a points bump at least I will be in with the faster group, and with the other modded cars. Really, for the small number of race tire cars we should make sure we get the street tire groups done right. With my mods I really only worry about FTD. I wonder if the rest of the race tire folks feel the same. If so than I wouldn't worry too much about the race tire classes and make sure the street tire classes are balanced and competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeremy
When you class with SCCA stock as a base you would need to bump for points. Don't forget that at SCCA events these aren't the only classes.

Are you saying you would try to incorporate other paxes like street prepared or something into this system?

 

Use your CRX for example, it starts in HS or GS, but when modded it goes to CSP, with cars from the top half of the SCCA pax. Not every car responds to mods the same way, that's why NASA points bumping doesn't work. You'll be sitting in the back beating up on other modified G and H stock cars when you should be up in the top half fighting with modded Miatas and MR2 Spyders.

 

Saying that they aren't valid just because a certain model car beat others that should have been faster just ignores the facts.

That's actually not what I meant. I meant that it just looks funny to have a front wheel drive honda grouped up there with all the sports cars. The Honda won because it was the best DS car that day, no question.

 

The pax times represent the actual racing capabilites in actual races, not just guessing.

They are still all estimations of what fully prepped SCCA cars would do on National style courses. We have neither at NASA events. I don't believe that everyone views the pax as a factual index. I am pretty sure pax is almost meaningless at Brooksville, as you won't see that type of course at any National events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alizarin
I don't think you need to force the "pick one" aspect of I/H/E...almost anything built in the last 20 years is pretty insensitive to I/H/E (10-15%, if that) unless you either modify the head to make it breath better and/or modify the fuel delivery system to use the extra airflow.

Am I to understand that I/H/E = Intake/Header/Exhaust?

 

Turbo cars will definately benefit from having a larger diameter and/or free-flowing exhaust post-turbine. Its not exactly advised without a tune for a WRX/STi (boost creep issues) but it can net an untuned STi 20+ hp by going with a 3.5" turboback, while it is recommended that intake be left alone. Maybe I'm reading that wrong or something. Ok yeah, its within your 10-15% statement, but don't we agree that 20 hp (or more!) is a decent increase?

 

 

With my mods I really only worry about FTD. I wonder if the rest of the race tire folks feel the same. If so than I wouldn't worry too much about the race tire classes and make sure the street tire classes are balanced and competitive.

I don't "worry" about FTD, knowing I'll never get there. I do compare my times to certain people, a few of which happen to compete for FTD at pretty much every event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
impalanut

That was my point. With the NASA points added I would be up with the faster cars where I belong. I start in GS but I have enought points (around 45 I think) to bump to the next level which would put be with the SS/AS/BS/CS cars. We would have to decide how many points jump to the next level but I think 15 would be enough since we have already seperated the race and street tire cars. In street tire we would have more classes so it would be more spread out. As far as FTD, I asked becouse I don't know how people feel, but I don't think too many street tire cars are competing for FTD, and I suspect all the race tire cars have fairly similar times despite what class they are in. Pax times were calculated using over 200 events only about ten are true national events. Although I don't know for sure, I would bet that many are just like our events since most venues are more like ours than the big national events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KAILUAZ

I hate to think of the questions raised if I bolted non-stock sized race rubber on the Black Beast.... or added any mods at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...