nasaforums.com

Official Forums of the National Auto Sport Association
It is currently Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:57 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 317 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:53 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:44 am
Posts: 18
f1honda wrote:
E36 sedan is looking really good right now. +.2 for 4 door and .7 for non A arm. That's a .9 advantage over other chassis right off the bat.


Yeah, e36 sedan is definitely the car to have for this class. NC mx5 isn't that terrible either, because it has really good stock brakes and doesn't really need any camber mods.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:57 am 
Offline
Forum Hot Lapper
Forum Hot Lapper

Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 5:13 pm
Posts: 107
Location: Mid Atlantic (Bowie, MD)
My nc Miata daily driver has a fairly modest range of front camber adjustment and would need offset upper control arm bushings to get the desired camber, especially at reasonable ride height. It would also be way off the power to weight limit (I'd be lucky to have 160 WHP at 2600#)

_________________
2005 Mazda RX-8, TTD, Instructor
http://www.youtube.com/mchuffman/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:15 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:44 am
Posts: 18
hufflepuff wrote:
My nc Miata daily driver has a fairly modest range of front camber adjustment and would need offset upper control arm bushings to get the desired camber, especially at reasonable ride height. It would also be way off the power to weight limit (I'd be lucky to have 160 WHP at 2600#)


If it's low, then you can get a decent amount of camber out of the front. Btw. Mazda motorsports has an offset control arm bushing that IMO is better than the control arm bushing.

Even then, it's only a .02 hit.

And yeah, you would have to do aero or some more power. e85 with full exhaust, or maybe a 2.5 swap.

You're always going to have to "prep" something if you want it to run at the front.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:54 am 
Offline
Postmeister in Chief
Postmeister in Chief

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 4198
Location: Southern California & AZ
Charlienofun wrote:
Quote:
Non-OEM Transmission swaps are only permitted when used in conjunction
with an engine swap. Note--The transmission must come from the same donor
vehicle model as the engine, and that donor vehicle must be a model eligible to
compete in ST5 (section 4). Otherwise, the transmission must be OEM.


Whats the intent of this rule? I have a trans going into in my RX8 that fits within the stock tunnel. Its mated to a Honda engine but they are not from the same donor vehicle (I have a trans adapter plate - the motor and trans are both OEM Honda parts).

This car really won't have the power to compete in ST4 as I've envisioned it now - and I already have most of the components to take to completion. I think I can engineer my way around the restrictions to subframe / crossmember but that's irrelevant if I'm blocked on motor/trans not being from the same donor.

The same intent as to not allow transmission swaps for cars without engine swaps....lower level class with some cost containment restrictions, and to prevent the possible need for competitors to have aftermarket transmissions in order to be competitive.

Now, if the transmission you have chosen is simply because it fits, and perhaps does not even perform as good as the one that came from the engine donor vehicle, then that would possibly be something that you would take offline by e-mail with the National Director.

_________________
Greg Greenbaum
National TT, PT, & ST Director
Nat. Medical Director
greg@nasa-tt.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:55 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:12 pm
Posts: 4
Greg- Does an 86 have to take the -.5 hit for "watts link, panhard bar or torque arm" if we have upgraded traction arms? Like this: http://www.splparts.com/products/spl-ti ... s-brz.html

Obviously have to take the metallic bushing deduction.

Also, when a lot of the rules are supposed to keep costs down, why is there a deduct for big brake kits?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:43 am 
Offline
Postmeister in Chief
Postmeister in Chief

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 4198
Location: Southern California & AZ
jbjones wrote:
Greg- Does an 86 have to take the -.5 hit for "watts link, panhard bar or torque arm" if we have upgraded traction arms? Like this: http://www.splparts.com/products/spl-ti ... s-brz.html

Obviously have to take the metallic bushing deduction.

Also, when a lot of the rules are supposed to keep costs down, why is there a deduct for big brake kits?

Those appear to me to be parts that would fall under both control arm and spherical assessments--big hit, better be worth it (-0.7 total).

I'm not sure what you mean about the brakes--similar to the prior PT assessments, but now competitors can use the cheaper brakes from a next generation version of the same model (update/backdate) that may negate the need to get expensive aftermarket brakes (examples include the Miata, and maybe the BMW 3 series upgrading to M3 trim, etc).

_________________
Greg Greenbaum
National TT, PT, & ST Director
Nat. Medical Director
greg@nasa-tt.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:07 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:40 pm
Posts: 29
dizzy8085 wrote:
f1honda wrote:
E36 sedan is looking really good right now. +.2 for 4 door and .7 for non A arm. That's a .9 advantage over other chassis right off the bat.


Yeah, e36 sedan is definitely the car to have for this class. NC mx5 isn't that terrible either, because it has really good stock brakes and doesn't really need any camber mods.


I’m thinking a gutted 2749lb+ E36 328i Sedan with M3 brakes, aero (splitter&wing), shod with 245 R7’s will be a really strong option for TT5.

Right now I have a TTD E36M3 with 218hp peak weighing 3175lb. To run in TT5 I could literally just add a splitter and wing, swap the 225 RC1’s for 245 R7’s and run a little less fuel and be good to go with what I think would be a competitive car right at the lb/hp limit.

I could pick my poison based on which class is at contingency for any given weekend. Although, I will need to invest $3-4K total for some wider wheels for the fresh HoHo R7’s (need to buy first set to qualify for contingency), then a splitter and wing.

I am anxious to see how the tire modifiers work out. I am guessing the RC1 (and other 100TW+ Tires) will need a little modifier help and the 200TW+ get a little more... however, the abuse of the 200TW “label” might prevent the ability to give more allowance there. Depending on the surface, I think the RE71 is as quick (or maybe quicker) than the RC1.

Greg, I’m sure you have an “anomaly list” a mile long of things that don’t fit perfectly into a box. Thanks for all the effort that undoubtedly went into the ruleset.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 317 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group