I think the plan is to have Pete run a parallel points class system during 2011 to see how it shapes up and maybe change as needed. Possibly vote on it for 2012.nateh wrote: Are you proposing changing to that for 2011?
The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Moderators: Boondocker850, blindsidefive0
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Les.
COM Instructor
NA Miata D-TYPE
#77
Drive it like you stole it!
COM Instructor
NA Miata D-TYPE
#77
Drive it like you stole it!
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
That was also my understanding.Stynger wrote:I think the plan is to have Pete run a parallel points class system during 2011 to see how it shapes up and maybe change as needed. Possibly vote on it for 2012.nateh wrote: Are you proposing changing to that for 2011?
I guess we have what we have, but I have still seen no justification for the Civic SI and Neon ACR remaining in SSB when they meet SSC requirements.
Sam
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Sam -
Good observation on those two cars. I'll move them down.
- Nate
Good observation on those two cars. I'll move them down.
- Nate
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
blindsidefive0 wrote:Has any thought been given to regulating tires? By this I mean beyond just the rule that puts you in Prepared with racing slicks.
Just for reference, NASA breaks up tires into several categories:
-Treadwear >130 (street tires)
- Treadwear 50-130 (ex. RA-1s)
- Treadwear 40 or less (ex. R6's)
- Hankook c214 and A6's
- Full slicks
For the exercise Pete is undertaking for 2011, I feel we should not complicate things. Assume all cars are running the BEST tire they are allowed per the current class rules. If they are not, they are handicapping themselves. Checking each car at events for tires is not practical, as some guys change two or three brands at an event. Right Gordy, Fred, Sam, etc. etc.
Perhaps, as the model takes place, we can add points for full slicks if ya want to run them and they don't put you up a class
Sam
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
- blindsidefive0
- Moderator
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:00 pm
- Location: Boston, MA
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Sam - I didn't mean in the analysis that Pete is going to do...that sounds complicated enough, I fully agree with you.chaos4NH wrote:blindsidefive0 wrote:Has any thought been given to regulating tires? By this I mean beyond just the rule that puts you in Prepared with racing slicks.
Just for reference, NASA breaks up tires into several categories:
-Treadwear >130 (street tires)
- Treadwear 50-130 (ex. RA-1s)
- Treadwear 40 or less (ex. R6's)
- Hankook c214 and A6's
- Full slicks
For the exercise Pete is undertaking for 2011, I feel we should not complicate things. Assume all cars are running the BEST tire they are allowed per the current class rules. If they are not, they are handicapping themselves. Checking each car at events for tires is not practical, as some guys change two or three brands at an event. Right Gordy, Fred, Sam, etc. etc.
Perhaps, as the model takes place, we can add points for full slicks if ya want to run them and they don't put you up a class
I just meant in general with the current rules, specifically for Showroom Stock. I know that a lot of class competitors and winners have actually run street tires (Dan Baldwin in SSA, Richard Noonan in SSGT, Dave Lemoine in SSA). I'm not sure if I have an opinion either way (I already have a set of relatively fresh v710s for the 325i), but it is interesting that basically the single most effective modification is allowed in Showroom Stock - tires. I think SCCA Showroom Stock allows for any DOT tire sold over the counter (whatever that means...but I assume includes r-comps), but it's not like any of these cars actually came from the showroom wearing that kind of tire.
Just food for thought...
- Nick
nicholas.fontana@gmail.com
1999 Mazda Miata - T50
FS: 1997 Green BMW M3 - T80/SC
RIP: 1994 White BMW 325i - SSB
nicholas.fontana@gmail.com
1999 Mazda Miata - T50
FS: 1997 Green BMW M3 - T80/SC
RIP: 1994 White BMW 325i - SSB
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Kind of hijacked from the ST4 discussion, but it should be a rules consideration.
I think the current ST4 rules married to the discussion of reducing weight and enhancing performance through drivetrain improvements are getting us awfully close to the intent of SPC.
When we built the TR6, we kept the 38 pound iron flywheel. After we sheared on of the retaining bolts at Mont Tremblant, we replaced the flywheel (and the bolts) with a 12 pound aluminum mated to a Porsche 930 clutch and reduced rotating mass from 54 pounds to 27 pounds. Let me tell you how much faster that engine spools up, and how fast I have to be on the heel-toe because of how fast it drops down. There's no question it makes a performance difference there, so I suspect the outcome can be projected mathematically into a Miata swap.
At VIR last week, our ST4 Miata was pulling on Spec Miatas on the straight - very measurably. So, if we've built cars within class rules that outperform cars that are required to cage and fire supress.... and once I remove the AC unit, I'll be very close to SM weight.
We probably should consider tires as part of the equation, having watched some of my class compatriots drop 2 or 3 seconds a lap with a tire change/upgrade.
So to me this speaks to a point-based system. For a lot of this we would have to rely on the integrity of the driver/builder, but hey, we do that now. We're running for fun and comraderie and collegial prestige rather than cash, right? The challenge is the time, effort and human tasking to obtain the real, track-day weights.
I am in awe of Nate for digging into this.
I think the current ST4 rules married to the discussion of reducing weight and enhancing performance through drivetrain improvements are getting us awfully close to the intent of SPC.
When we built the TR6, we kept the 38 pound iron flywheel. After we sheared on of the retaining bolts at Mont Tremblant, we replaced the flywheel (and the bolts) with a 12 pound aluminum mated to a Porsche 930 clutch and reduced rotating mass from 54 pounds to 27 pounds. Let me tell you how much faster that engine spools up, and how fast I have to be on the heel-toe because of how fast it drops down. There's no question it makes a performance difference there, so I suspect the outcome can be projected mathematically into a Miata swap.
At VIR last week, our ST4 Miata was pulling on Spec Miatas on the straight - very measurably. So, if we've built cars within class rules that outperform cars that are required to cage and fire supress.... and once I remove the AC unit, I'll be very close to SM weight.
We probably should consider tires as part of the equation, having watched some of my class compatriots drop 2 or 3 seconds a lap with a tire change/upgrade.
So to me this speaks to a point-based system. For a lot of this we would have to rely on the integrity of the driver/builder, but hey, we do that now. We're running for fun and comraderie and collegial prestige rather than cash, right? The challenge is the time, effort and human tasking to obtain the real, track-day weights.
I am in awe of Nate for digging into this.
Jeff Baker
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Just for the record, a well prepped ST4 car should be faster than a Spec Miata, especially if the Spec is running with the restrictor plate and weight in it.The Spec Miata kit is definitley not the best suspension package available that is legal, and there are other mods that are allowed in ST (getting additional camber, for example) that are not legal or easy to install in a SM.
Kevin Foote
#64 SB Nissan 350Z
1998-2003 Chief of Tech
1998-2002 BOD member
SSB Track Record Holder at LRP
#64 SB Nissan 350Z
1998-2003 Chief of Tech
1998-2002 BOD member
SSB Track Record Holder at LRP
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
You're right, Kevin. Hmm, maybe a points system would allow our car to be competitive in some class or other again. I guess I better dig into that!
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
I like the idea of a points based system. When I first had my miata the quick changes were 15" rims, Falken Azenis tires. That moved me out of stock class and into st4, yet newer NB miatas were available stock with 15" rims and tires. I never ran the car that year. I can see that being pretty discouraging to a new potential member with a pretty tame but not stock street car.
Paul G.
#12
#12
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Points-based system would require a classification form from each competitor at each event.boltonite wrote:....
Even assuming we can address enforcement issues, how members classify their cars is a huge problem. Given what I've seen with the current classing system, I shudder to think how a points-based system would work for either a veteran or a newbie....
I would imagine that the form would be completed and signed by each competitor, and submitted with time cards.
The forms only come into play during protests and track records. If the modifications on the car do not follow exactly what the form says, the car does not pass inspection. I would think this would make tech-ing cars EASIER for stewards, as the steward would be presented with a checklist (the classification form) of the mods that should (and should not) be on the car.
This can't possibly happen for 2011 unless we just decide to use someone else's system.
We've kicked this around for years without much to show for it. I'm so happy that Pete has stepped up to push this along! Sorry for the thread-drift. Perhaps someone should start a new thread discussing 2012 rules.
The current system is not perfect, but it isn't terrible either. Nate is doing a commendable job at trying to make our rules better for 2011. The power-to-weight strategy is a reasonable metric to use. What else are we to use? It is not like we can hire the Stig to drive every car we have classified!
96 Miata #72 SC
PRA 4
PRA 4
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Who knows where the Stig drives...
Seriously, I know that setting up for 2011 is probably too steep a hill to climb this late in the effort. So perhaps that speaks to moderating some classification changes for 2011?
Seriously, I know that setting up for 2011 is probably too steep a hill to climb this late in the effort. So perhaps that speaks to moderating some classification changes for 2011?
Jeff Baker
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
You obviously have not seen my My Facebook icon.6PAK72 wrote:Who knows where the Stig drives...
Sam
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
I do not understand how using r-compound rubber in a showroom stock car without any penalty makes sense. Call me odd, but I do not see the point of allowing r-compound rubber in the showroom stock category to begin with. Very few cars are shipped with r-compund tires from the factory (usually with a street derivative of Cup tires), and even then, usually as an option.blindsidefive0 wrote:Sam - I didn't mean in the analysis that Pete is going to do...that sounds complicated enough, I fully agree with you.chaos4NH wrote:blindsidefive0 wrote:Has any thought been given to regulating tires? By this I mean beyond just the rule that puts you in Prepared with racing slicks.
Just for reference, NASA breaks up tires into several categories:
-Treadwear >130 (street tires)
- Treadwear 50-130 (ex. RA-1s)
- Treadwear 40 or less (ex. R6's)
- Hankook c214 and A6's
- Full slicks
For the exercise Pete is undertaking for 2011, I feel we should not complicate things. Assume all cars are running the BEST tire they are allowed per the current class rules. If they are not, they are handicapping themselves. Checking each car at events for tires is not practical, as some guys change two or three brands at an event. Right Gordy, Fred, Sam, etc. etc.
Perhaps, as the model takes place, we can add points for full slicks if ya want to run them and they don't put you up a class
I just meant in general with the current rules, specifically for Showroom Stock. I know that a lot of class competitors and winners have actually run street tires (Dan Baldwin in SSA, Richard Noonan in SSGT, Dave Lemoine in SSA). I'm not sure if I have an opinion either way (I already have a set of relatively fresh v710s for the 325i), but it is interesting that basically the single most effective modification is allowed in Showroom Stock - tires. I think SCCA Showroom Stock allows for any DOT tire sold over the counter (whatever that means...but I assume includes r-comps), but it's not like any of these cars actually came from the showroom wearing that kind of tire.
Just food for thought...
For me, that rule simply defies the spirit of running a showroom stock car on the track. It forces you to get another set of rims and tires and haul them to the track. You can’t just bring your “stock” car if you want to be competitive.
Simple example is what I experienced at NHMS in October when I showed up in my bone stock Z4M (with the original contis) to see how a stock car does in a TT. (Well, OK, I swapped pads, but that's more of a safety issue for the practice sessions, and it doesn't bring lap times down in a 3 lap event). I didn’t check the entire field, but several other cars in my group were running r-compound tires and I was 0.7s down from the winner.
So did I handicap myself? I guess technically so, but IMO I was more in the spirit of “showroom stock” than my competitors (I am not blaming them for doing what the rules allowed them to do). My point is that experience not only contradicts the showroom stock principle, but also discourages people from bringing their stock cars to COM TTs; I don’t see the point of bringing my Z4M to the TT day again.
Having said that, I understand it might not be easy to draw a line and say, “these are appropriate street tires, and those are not” since the line between street and track rubber is getting blurrier every year. I disagree that enforcement is an issue though (given there would be some guidelines). It’s just like any other type of modification, and whatever honor system principle and checks/balances apply to other rules would apply to this as well.
Again, I am probably an odd voice on this issue, but I wanted to voice my perspective regardless…
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Well, tires are a wear items, as are shocks, mufflers, etc. We allow after market shocks, after market exhaust (CAT back only) and after market tires (as long as they are DOT approved).
You are correct, the line becomes blurred. You can spend more for high performance street tires than for DOT tires such as RA1s, V710s, Hoosier R6s, if you choose to. In any case you are upgrading tires, and few people buy the same tires that the car was delivered on when replacing worn tires. So, by your reckoning, if I replaced the RE 050 Bridgestone tires that came on my car, with an Ultimate Summer perfomance tire, I should not be allowed to run in Showroom Stock?
Hey, we are giving you a chance to find the ultimate capablility of your mechanically stock Bimmer!
You are correct, the line becomes blurred. You can spend more for high performance street tires than for DOT tires such as RA1s, V710s, Hoosier R6s, if you choose to. In any case you are upgrading tires, and few people buy the same tires that the car was delivered on when replacing worn tires. So, by your reckoning, if I replaced the RE 050 Bridgestone tires that came on my car, with an Ultimate Summer perfomance tire, I should not be allowed to run in Showroom Stock?
Hey, we are giving you a chance to find the ultimate capablility of your mechanically stock Bimmer!
Sam
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread
Hi Sam. I wasn't suggesting one needs to mount the tires the car came with. I was suggesting the use of "street" tires. Anything you wouldn't consider driving on a daily basis is not a street tire and does not belong to showroom stock IMO. If you won't drive to the Glen on them on a day with chance of rain, they are not street tires. One should arrrive at the track on them as opposed to hauling wheels around, which becomes a huge pain.
There sure is performance variability among street tires, but the point is the variability increases drastically when you switch to DOT rated competition tires. Too illustrate, my crappy OEM contis are probably ~1s slower than the dunlop star specs at NHMS. That seems reasonable. A low grip competition tire such as the NT-01 will have 2s+ on it, and a high grip one such as R6 will have 3s+. That does not seem reasonable. You don't get anywhere near that with an exhaust or just shocks (unless springs are allowed too, and then you'd be upgrading the entire suspension, and again, what does that have to with showroom stock). A treadwear rating system as suggested by Nick above can be used although that might not have too much to do with actual performance. It would still be better than nothing. Or competition dot tires can simply be disallowed (there are that many products that fall under that category so it would be simple to list them).
I don't mean to sound like sour grapes here. I just like discussion when I see something I think is worth discussing. I actually have a track car, so the Z4M thing was a one off thing. But I did want to bring this issue up because it might come across as a barrier to others who have recently joined the club. Folks should not be forced to invest and haul an extra set of wheels to be competitive in this category IMO. If I didn't have the track car, I would feel pretty strongly about it.
There sure is performance variability among street tires, but the point is the variability increases drastically when you switch to DOT rated competition tires. Too illustrate, my crappy OEM contis are probably ~1s slower than the dunlop star specs at NHMS. That seems reasonable. A low grip competition tire such as the NT-01 will have 2s+ on it, and a high grip one such as R6 will have 3s+. That does not seem reasonable. You don't get anywhere near that with an exhaust or just shocks (unless springs are allowed too, and then you'd be upgrading the entire suspension, and again, what does that have to with showroom stock). A treadwear rating system as suggested by Nick above can be used although that might not have too much to do with actual performance. It would still be better than nothing. Or competition dot tires can simply be disallowed (there are that many products that fall under that category so it would be simple to list them).
I don't mean to sound like sour grapes here. I just like discussion when I see something I think is worth discussing. I actually have a track car, so the Z4M thing was a one off thing. But I did want to bring this issue up because it might come across as a barrier to others who have recently joined the club. Folks should not be forced to invest and haul an extra set of wheels to be competitive in this category IMO. If I didn't have the track car, I would feel pretty strongly about it.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 0 guests