Official 2014 Street Prepared/Prepared/Super Class Thread

[dtlemoine]

I suppose we will need to agree to disagree (note that I spared this forum from another awesome movie quote meme).

[dradernh]

...with COMSCC no one has ever TT'd faster than 2:00-flat at Watkins Glen, including open wheel cars. However, several tin top cars have crossed that threshold with other clubs (e.g. 911 Cup Cars).

The circumstances during a 2:01.6 run there last October tell me we have a good shot at dipping under 2:00 at an event later this month. Needless to say, these runs take place with another driver - I'd be ecstatic with a 2:05.

[blazer178]

Well with the new rules and the p/w ratio I have that will not be a big deal Beside that the Grand Am could only get to the 2:05

[Brendan]

with COMSCC no one has ever TT'd faster than 2:00-flat at Watkins Glen, including open wheel cars.

Bill Washburn and the Maxi. There's my bet.

And I am an unabashed fan of the E30 M3 - but Fred's car is NOT the fastest. He just knows how to drive...

[dradernh]

And I am an unabashed fan of the E30 M3 - but Fred's car is NOT the fastest. He just knows how to drive...

That he does. He chooses rubber well, too.

[boltonite]

It seems weird to me that people would prefer to run a Touring class car in a Super class to be more "competitive". Has the "Street" vs "Prepared" philosophy fundamentally changed?

Under the old COM rules, an SS or ST car could run in a Prepared class, but it was not really a competitive option, nor was it intended to be.
FF

[naschmitz]

Under the old COM rules, an SS or ST car could run in a Prepared class, but it was not really a competitive option, nor was it intended to be.
FF

Not true due to the safety equipment mandated for the Prepared classes. I would have liked to run PA on non-DOT scrubs but could not.

[blindsidefive0]

It seems weird to me that people would prefer to run a Touring class car in a Super class to be more "competitive". Has the "Street" vs "Prepared" philosophy fundamentally changed?

Under the old COM rules, an SS or ST car could run in a Prepared class, but it was not really a competitive option, nor was it intended to be.
FF

There are likely cases of highly modified vehicles (with proper safety equipment, as Bert mentions) that are beyond the diminishing marginal return of each "point" used - in the case of these cars, a Super Class could allow these cars to be more competitive. However, given the entire lack of rules in Super related to suspension, aero, brakes, tires, and chassis, the performance potential is through the roof - unless not well attended, these classes should not be an "out" from Touring. I would guess that in the long-term COM would see a balance of mostly street cars/mild track cars in Touring, and very highly modified street cars or race cars in Super, without one being "better" than the other per se, except when talking about Super U/A, which should blow away even T100 cars.

[McMahonRacing]

Yep .. Foosh beat FF @ the Glen, funny, for an ST2 legal NASA car it seems to have a big advantage even over say an ST2 FFR Cobra, wonder why w/ such a fantastic hp/wt & factor ratio determining the NASA class ....it is called body style & design neither FF or I have great ones when placed next to a Vette.

Now ... How many other tracks has FF gotten beat at ? When as a club you run NHMS 3- 4 times a yr. that is the track should carry the majority of weight not a solo run out at the Glenn esp. given it is a hp/aero track and NHMS go kart track.

Honestly, I have been chasing certain cars ( my rabbits ) since 2005 .... Bert, FF, Cort, Johnathan, Dad, Butch and a few others so I have a pretty good handle on their perf. I think, I also think I have a pretty good handle on what they do & do not have in their cars, .... you really wanna know what it cots & takes to get ahead of them .... hence, my opinion why this fancy system doesn't work.

Curious, if you have done the 5yr comparision and it backs your caculations, how about you share it with us all, as it could certainly prove me wrong depending on what one see's as a fair spread in times ( Touring when I looked at the NHMS 1 was a minimum of 6 sec. from fastest to slowest in class with 7-8 sec. being more the norm and a couple outliers all the way up too 31 sec ), gaining 6 sec a lap is big and not easy if /even obtainable for the majority seasoned drivers, trust me, I am trying to find 4-6 to even become competitive w/ Foosh and we supposedly both have ST2 legal cars ( mine is right on the button @ 8.02 & 2820 lbs and Foosh's is actually closer to an ST3 car if I remember correctly - hard time keeping track as it was re-dyno'd, tuned & weighted again ).

Changing one set or rules for another when neither works doesn't seem to make sense, would keep thing status quo till it can really be resolved ... so what do I want, it really doesn't matter to me, I'm in NASA and plan to stay there for quite some time & at present have no plans to run COM (won't TT if I were to run anyway ), I just wish to make you aware that there are quite a few holes that should be addressed if you want to make a rule set functional & fair for all.

[boltonite]

There are likely cases of highly modified vehicles (with proper safety equipment, as Bert mentions) that are beyond the diminishing marginal return of each "point" used - in the case of these cars, a Super Class could allow these cars to be more competitive.

So if I understand correctly, Super - unlike Prepared - is intended to appeal to Touring cars that suffer from a "diminishing marginal return." This is a fundamental difference from the "Prepared" rules/philosophy:

XII. Prepared
This classification is for any car that does not fit into any of the more restrictive classes above

This seems significant to me -- Prepared cars do not fit into other car classes while Super is for [some] cars that have become less competitive in Touring...

[blindsidefive0]

So if I understand correctly, Super - unlike Prepared - is intended to appeal to Touring cars that suffer from a "diminishing marginal return." This is a fundamental difference from the "Prepared" rules/philosophy:

This seems significant to me -- Prepared cars do not fit into other car classes while Super is for [some] cars that have become less competitive in Touring...

My statement about touring car vehicles with diminishing marginal return from modifications is only speculation about "why" someone would want to run in Super instead of Touring, directly responding to your prior comment. However, I was not speaking to the general intent of Super classes, which is to provide a simple, unlimited-modification classing structure. More specifically, I think these classes meet two needs: 1) provide a home for cars that are not eligible for Touring, 2) provide a set of classes at the "top" of the performance range for those that do not want to "deal with" the more restrictive Touring classes. In a practical sense, I think you'll see the vehicles that show up in Super class like this:

- Cars that could never be in a Touring class (e.g. not a production car)
- Cars that could have been in Touring, but they have too many points (i.e. 110 or more Touring class points)
- Drivers that would rather not be bothered with lots of rules
- Cars that may be classed more favorably in a pure power-to-weight environment

In the old system, you basically saw the all of the above with the exception of the last bullet (except in cases of low attendance). However, with the addition of Touring, even if we keep Prepared, all 4 bullets could apply to Prepared as well as Super. For example, Brendan, who did not build his M3 for the Touring rules, would likely be more competitive in SPC compared to T90 or T100. If a few good drivers piloting GT-R's with aero, coilovers, and mild engine mods showed up in T100 next year, Chad's STi would probably be better off in Prepared B...although if I know Chad, he would want to take a shot at the GT-R's.

[chaos4NH]

From Pat: I am trying to point to specific cars that I am very familiar w/ to express the point that a straight hp/wt doesn't work fairly for all involved & a hp/wt w/ factors can't possibly work as we don't have the ability to do it correctly either ( I feel the same goes for the T classes, remember I disagreed w/ you then too when the discussion began going south, there are plenty of holes in those rules but that is for others to deal with now ).

Thank you Pat! I have been saying that since the first Touring class proposals. As I have said: IF I put all the parts in my car necessary to be NEAR the fastest T60 cars, I would no longer have a T60 car. I see the Super classes as creating MORE disparity among cars in a given class.

[blindsidefive0]

Thank you Pat! I have been saying that since the first Touring class proposals. As I have said: IF I put all the parts in my car necessary to be NEAR the fastest T60 cars, I would no longer have a T60 car. I see the Super classes as creating MORE disparity among cars in a given class.

Sam - when are we going to see the red carpet revealing of the MS3 in 2013?! It looks like you had some 1:22's at Chicane/Chicane back in the day which would have landed you 2nd place at NHMS1 this year...I don't think you are as far off as you might think.

However, I have to say that your classification situation this year in T60 with the MS3 is significantly better than it was under the SS/ST rules. The e36 M3 was SSA/ST2 where the MS3 was SSGT/ST1 along with the e46 M3. With a fairly common ST build and good tires on an e46 M3, you are looking at a car that points out to around 95-100 points, at the top of T90. This means that you are getting a 3 class advantage over what you could have faced under the SS/ST rules. Just look at what Joe Lu did to the ST1 record books when he has a moderate ST build, which is about ~92 points.

[Dtangard]

As someone who would consider a switch from Touring to Super, I'll put in my two cents. I agree and disagree with a lot of the statements that have been made so far in this forum.

First I disagree with a couple arguments being used to say the super class will not work. You can not definitively say a rule set is flawed based on the gap from the slowest to the fastest car in a class, or the fact that a driver in a lower performing class is faster than drivers in higher performing classes. This logic doesn't take into consideration driver skill and even car setup. There is a big difference in skill level and guts between the fastest drivers and the slowest in some classes. For example, when I started competing with COM my fastest lap in the first time trial was 1:30 at NHMS (chicane/chicane). Last year I was able to dip into the 1:21s and I attribute 90% of that to gaining experience on the track and 10% of it to tinkering with my suspension settings.

I agree it's impossible to have a "perfect" ruleset, but if you use logic and anticipate a little trial and error I think we can get close. I certainly believe adjustments will need to be made now and over time. Overall the competition has been very good in the Touring classes and I anticipate similar results in the Super classes.

In general, I think the Super classes could provide better competition for people who would be at the low end of the points in a touring class. Also a strictly hp/wt ratio classification system might even help bring in current wheel to wheel racers who don't want to deal with the touring rule set or the illogical street prepared rules. As far as open wheel cars competing with closed wheeled, I think a logical adjustment factor for formula cars has merit. If the adjustment factor is done right, a closed wheeled car should not be out-classed by a lower power/weight ratio formula car with equal drivers. As far as aerodynamics and handling factors between closed wheel cars (ff vs corvette), isn't the idea of the super class to be run what you brung? If the super class is complicated by handling factors, won't it be too similar to touring?

That's my 2 cents.

[dradernh]

NHMS go kart track

lol

Yes, it's a go-kart track - just don't bring a go-kart to it! Ask me how I know.