nasaforums.com

Official Forums of the National Auto Sport Association
It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:38 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:04 am 
Offline
Postmeister General
Postmeister General

Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:13 pm
Posts: 2420
B Esquire wrote:
Lots of talk on here about people gaming a 6 point system. I wish we could all easily just go back to cable throttles and this would be a lot easier :).

To avoid people artificially lowering the bottom 1 or 2 points on a 6 point system, we simply write a rule that makes those points invalid if they deviate over a certain amount from the next higher point. The Honda's running in the class probably have the steepest natural curve? So we look at some data to make sure cars like this are not throwing out points, and we are good?


If you are worried about artificially lowering points, then you are taking too large of a sample.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
Postmeister
Postmeister

Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 6:44 am
Posts: 1345
Location: Mooresville, NC
Dover wrote:
As for tech... Drivers stack your tires, measure the total height and divide by 4, report the average width, and set your min weight by tire. If someone questions or protests, do it again in impound. No, it's not as quick and easy as going by the misleading designation on the sidewall, but it is faster and easier than loading a car on the dyno for compliance pulls. Just an idea...



Have you done that with the SAME tire on different width wheels? They will not measure the same even though the contact patch remains the same. I like your idea, but it would be arguable in reality.

_________________
Kevin
$T2/$T3 C5Z06 #01
2015 ST2 EC Champ, 2017 TT3 EC Champ
David Farmer Racing, G-LOC Brakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:44 pm 
Offline
Postmeister in Chief
Postmeister in Chief

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 4184
Location: Southern California & AZ
Hi Folks,

We are working on both the Avg HP formula and the potential loopholes that changes could unintentionally bring (the biggest being someone adding a few data points lower in the rpm range that are not used on track and only used to lower the Avg HP number), and we are working on the tire size issue that is prevalent from the 205 to 255 size range. We think we have a solution for the tire issue, and we are researching how our proposed changes will work out in reality at the track.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 7:12 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:31 am
Posts: 15
Greg G. wrote:
we are working on the tire size issue that is prevalent from the 205 to 255 size range. We think we have a solution for the tire issue, and we are researching how our proposed changes will work out in reality at the track.


interest level over 9000


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 6:26 am 
Offline
Forum Racer
Forum Racer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 3:57 pm
Posts: 436
Location: Concord NC
me too......

Matt@NCM wrote:
Greg G. wrote:
we are working on the tire size issue that is prevalent from the 205 to 255 size range. We think we have a solution for the tire issue, and we are researching how our proposed changes will work out in reality at the track.


interest level over 9000

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 9:17 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 7:36 am
Posts: 20
Greg--any general update on intentions for rolling out ST5 in 2018? I had a few people ask me about this at our AZ event this weekend--there is some interest here but people aren't sure if it's going to happen or not.

_________________
Drew Wadolny
ST Series Leader - NASA Arizona Region
#41 ST2 Mustang


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 11:33 am 
Offline
Postmeister in Chief
Postmeister in Chief

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 4184
Location: Southern California & AZ
AZBOSS wrote:
Greg--any general update on intentions for rolling out ST5 in 2018? I had a few people ask me about this at our AZ event this weekend--there is some interest here but people aren't sure if it's going to happen or not.

As of right now, we are still planning on rolling it out! We made a lot of decisions this past weekend. We are still waiting on some research being conducted, but while that is getting finished, we are working out actual rules verbiage.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 6:44 am 
Offline
Forum Racer
Forum Racer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 3:57 pm
Posts: 436
Location: Concord NC
please KIS....keep it simple.........

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:38 am 
Offline
Postmeister General
Postmeister General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:41 am
Posts: 2711
Location: Middle GA /:\
B Esquire wrote:
.....But we saw ST3 go the way of expensive builds that limited field parity.


Just like we all said that it would.
It's competition though. You don't think that's going to happen in every class? Someone will always build to the rule set. Nothing wrong with that.
Some of the ST3 rules designed to keep costs down make no sense at all. I'd just love to see some rule stability.

_________________
#27 '99 FRC
TT3/TT2/ST3/ST2


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:28 pm 
Offline
Forum Racer
Forum Racer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 3:57 pm
Posts: 436
Location: Concord NC
I agree with Scott, someone will always be willing to spend more money and/or time. I think arbitrary things like brake size, wheels, isn't the way to go. I think tire size, weight limits (within reason) etc make the most sense. I know people want to be able to race a 4000lb car against a 2000lb car, but that's really not practical. Build the classes for the cars that more-or-less fit. I can make a 200hp corvette, but I can't make a 2000 lb corvette. Same the other way, I can make a 600hp miata, but it would be stupid to make a 3800lb miata.

Good luck with the tough choices.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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