nasaforums.com

Official Forums of the National Auto Sport Association
It is currently Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:48 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Proposed changes for '18
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:30 pm 
Offline
Postmeister in Chief
Postmeister in Chief

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 4229
Location: Southern California & AZ
Hi Folks,

We are planning on expanding the Avg HP formula to include 6 data points in '18, instead of 4.

For ST4, we are planning on limiting size 275mm tires to only those cars weighing more than 3000 lbs (might be more than 3100 lbs--to be decided).

There will be new rules that permit vehicles like BMW's to reinforce problem areas of the chassis, such as the RTAB pocket mounting location, as long as there is no other performance benefit or geometry change (without requiring a Non-Production Vehicle Mod Factor assessment).

There will probably also be a new Mod Factor for tires that don't perform as well as the best "R" tires on the market (those in lines 6, 7, 8 of the PT Rules). It is not decided which classes this will be included in (or all classes).

ST5 (? PT5)/ TT5 might still be coming...stay tuned. :D :mrgreen:

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:27 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:40 pm
Posts: 33
Thank you and the committee/board for the work in getting these details wrapped up. At the same time I am sure a lot of competitors want to know for sure what the details are... I understand that doing it right to provide the most equitable competition within a class is the most important part.

I am glad to hear that the tires will have some differentiation within the rules based on actual performance. Unfortunately, you are somewhat forced to figure out how to level the playing field when you can't trust a manufacturers posted width or TW.

Has the weight to HP ratio been nailed down for TT5?

Thanks again for the updates.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:12 pm 
Offline
Postmeister in Chief
Postmeister in Chief

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 4229
Location: Southern California & AZ
Knowing the final Adjusted Wt/HP Ratio won't be of much value, without having the Mod Factors, since they will be more extensive in ST5/PT5?/TT5 than in the higher classes by necessity to keep costs down and attempt to level the field for the various models (instead of ending up with a class with only 5 model types that are competitive). Again, if we can't knock something out for you guys quickly, we will just defer to '19 (but, my plan is to get this done ASAP).

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:18 pm 
Offline
Forum Hot Lapper
Forum Hot Lapper

Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:34 pm
Posts: 62
Location: Lexington, KY
Greg G. wrote:

There will be new rules that permit vehicles like BMW's to reinforce problem areas of the chassis, such as the RTAB pocket mounting location, as long as there is no other performance benefit or geometry change (without requiring a Non-Production Vehicle Mod Factor assessment).


I don't own or drive a BMW, but I'm really glad this is finally happening.

_________________
Jeff Preston
TT/PTE Miata #417


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:24 pm 
Offline
Forum Hot Lapper
Forum Hot Lapper

Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:59 am
Posts: 94
Any planned review of the ABS rules? The e46 MK60 is a very effective and affordable ABS option that as of now only BMW's are being allowed to run. Why not allow all cars to be able run that specific system while keeping race ABS systems limited? It's become a very popular upgrade for e36's so keep the playing field level.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:54 pm 
Offline
Postmeister in Chief
Postmeister in Chief

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 4229
Location: Southern California & AZ
daytonars4 wrote:
Any planned review of the ABS rules? The e46 MK60 is a very effective and affordable ABS option that as of now only BMW's are being allowed to run. Why not allow all cars to be able run that specific system while keeping race ABS systems limited? It's become a very popular upgrade for e36's so keep the playing field level.

Please submit the request by e-mail, and include additional details (like whether the system can really be used by "all" cars functionally--what exactly is required--what is the cost of adding to a non-BMW, etc.).

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:05 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2012 7:49 am
Posts: 7
Location: Ohio
Greg G. wrote:
We are planning on expanding the Avg HP formula to include 6 data points in '18, instead of 4.


Will there be any adjustment to base HP/weight, or just adding the 2 extra points? For some like myself, this will cause a lot of spending. To make more power, I have to build a new engine. This may push me into a no mans land if PT5 doesn't happen.

I spent all last winter cutting weight out of my car when the 4 data points were kept. I knew I was on the limit of what I could do with my car, but it fit. Now I have to undo a years worth of work and tuning or look for another series/sanctioning body to run with.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline
Forum Time Trialer
Forum Time Trialer

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:22 pm
Posts: 227
Location: redwood city, california
fully agree with this one, otherwise we are increasing cost and creating unreliability.
this may leave cars in no mans land.
the 6 point should be followed by an adjustment in base hp/weight for the class.
Lets figure this one out sooner than later please.

this should also be consider when making adjustments for the slower tires, if this means allowing higher horse power then this basically is of no use to many people who are maxed out in horse power.
so maybe the base horsepower would have to be based on the slowest tire available.



JHo wrote:
Greg G. wrote:
We are planning on expanding the Avg HP formula to include 6 data points in '18, instead of 4.


Will there be any adjustment to base HP/weight, or just adding the 2 extra points? For some like myself, this will cause a lot of spending. To make more power, I have to build a new engine. This may push me into a no mans land if PT5 doesn't happen.

I spent all last winter cutting weight out of my car when the 4 data points were kept. I knew I was on the limit of what I could do with my car, but it fit. Now I have to undo a years worth of work and tuning or look for another series/sanctioning body to run with.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 9:48 pm 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 8:22 pm
Posts: 24
Thank you for trying to get this stuff done Greg!
I think the ST4/5 classes are going to draw a good crowd. ST4 is already a good sized class in NorCal.

At some point we should address rim width for the slower classes.
A 245 A7 can fit a very large wheel. Some cars like my 944 require expensive custom wheels to take max advantage of that. A limit of wheel width can slow down a tire war. A lot of older cars just can't fit the larger wheel sizes.
I think most of us will buy the best tire we can.

Thanks again!

_________________
2015 WSC GTS1 Champ
2014 WSC 944Spec Champ
2010 National GTS1 Champ
2009 National 944Spec Champ


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 2:21 pm 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 5:33 pm
Posts: 32
+3 - It's easier and less costly for people with excess power to detune than it is for those of us with max'ed out NA engines to add power

esr wrote:
fully agree with this one, otherwise we are increasing cost and creating unreliability.
this may leave cars in no mans land.
the 6 point should be followed by an adjustment in base hp/weight for the class.
Lets figure this one out sooner than later please.

this should also be consider when making adjustments for the slower tires, if this means allowing higher horse power then this basically is of no use to many people who are maxed out in horse power.
so maybe the base horsepower would have to be based on the slowest tire available.



JHo wrote:
Greg G. wrote:
We are planning on expanding the Avg HP formula to include 6 data points in '18, instead of 4.


Will there be any adjustment to base HP/weight, or just adding the 2 extra points? For some like myself, this will cause a lot of spending. To make more power, I have to build a new engine. This may push me into a no mans land if PT5 doesn't happen.

I spent all last winter cutting weight out of my car when the 4 data points were kept. I knew I was on the limit of what I could do with my car, but it fit. Now I have to undo a years worth of work and tuning or look for another series/sanctioning body to run with.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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