http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastra...strack-nov.pdf
Printable View
is the comment regarding the "restrictions" have to be remain in place the question or the response?Quote:
ITC1. #2616 (Brody Saari) Request rules explanation/reasoning
All air restrictions from the original fuel injection system must remain in place, although air metering devices may be added to support aftermarket ECUs.
if it is the response, just what does that mean? i consider the OEM air filter and inlet hose to be restrictions and they can be replaced.
Nothing has changed, don't worry. The letter was specifically asking why the original air metering device had to stay in place if one was added.
I am very glad to see my fellow pgh'er Brett Mars got the Focus ST classed in ITA. In my opinion this car could dominate the class. This car should be capable of putting down between 160 and 165 at the wheels and at a weight of 2680. I like the package :)
Requests for "clarification" or "explanation" should *not* be handled through Fastrack. That's like asking a senator for an opinion about whether a particular law passes legislative muster. More words are almost never the right answer...
That official Fastrack item just opened up the rule - "A MAP or MAF sensor and its wiring may be added" - by saying that "air metering devices may be added." More than one and any type. While at the same time stipulating, as Tom points out, that we now have to worry about something called "air restrictions." Neither of those terms is in the GCR Glossary, btw.
Why can't we just leave well enough alone and let the systems work the way they are supposed to?
K
I agree with kirk.. leave well enough alone.. should of done that awhile ago. *cough* open computers and spherical suspension joints *cough*. IF we kept fatory computers there would be no need for aditional sensors. yes the newre cars have better designs, but thusly they are expected to be able to adapt to changes better and should be calculated in their expected gains.
Josh am I correct about these air restrictions rule. Does force the addition of new AFM's to to run in series to the orignal pieces? Meaning does all air have to go through both the factory and additional meters one after the other?
Well, if Kirk was still on the board......
Annnnnyway, LOL.
Josh, can you explain the current practices of weighting cars? How did all the Honda adjustments come to be? What's the internal policy about actually changing existing weights?
The Honda adjustments came about because of two letters asking us to clarify the Del Sols, and their inconsistency vis-a-vis their mechanical siblings, the Civics. In addition, splitting up the Sis across the two different engines is analogous to what we did with the ITR Z3s. Wholly different engines, slightly different stock HP, identical chassis.
Perhaps we didn't need to answer the ITC question in Fastrack -- the author had already gotten his answer privately. But I disagree with Kirk that the answer changes anything, as nothing changes with respect to the actual rules, and certainly all the context isn't present in Fastrack (such as the actual question.) I agree with Travis that the answer there is a side effect of the desire to be more verbose and explanatory with every letter that comes in.
Josh, keep the clarifications coming... great work. I am being a little selfish as well, since my 92 Civic Si just dropped another 35 lbs. :) With that, the 92-95 Civic EX will need to drop weight as well... i.e. since the EX has the same suspension, engine, etc (except that it's a coupe/sedan).
What is the stock HP on this car?
(Edit - did the research: 151hp. Interesting that the ST in 2006 is the only version of the Focus that has the 2.3L according to Edmunds.)
It would need to make 160whp to be 'at process'. HP in ITA is really creeping up. Mazda 3, this car...you got a big home track? These could be the ticket.
Yeah I owned a 2006 Focus ST as my daily driver a couple years ago (had an '04 SVT Focus immediately before it).
The ST was a great car; you could keep the SVT. I would not concern myself with HP; it has torque and good gearing.
At the weight, it should be a great ITA car.
OK, IF that's true, and IF we accept the "top dog" (bla bla bla, in everyone's minds, never really 'proven', bla bla bla) Miata puts 138 down at the wheels , we get 16.54 lbs/hp for the Focus, (using 162) and 17.25 for the Miata.
So, indeed, the Focus looks like it has potential...
But....
That said, 150 stock hp to 162 at the wheels is a just bit more than the standard 25%, (my math shows 160.4 at the wheels expected.)
Initial math 151 x .25=37.35, = 188.75 crank, x 14.5= puts it at 2736lbs, minus 2% FWD, (54.73) = 2680.
No additional adders appear to come into play, right?
IF you get 165 out of it, that's 14.5 x 4.5 =65.25 -1.3 (FWD) = 64. So, you'd have an advantage of 64lbs. ...
To me, it looks like a good listing, one that could threaten/win at certain tracks, but not necessarily all tracks....
Remember Jake, the power to weights are going to be off a bit because the FWD subtractor is taken off AFTER the P/W calc is done.
yea, that's why I said, "but".....then did the math with the FWD adder, and concluded it looked like a "Good" listing. Pretty much right on.
Did I read it correctly that the ST class will be a regional class only as of next year? I guess IT drivers wanting to run a national race and the runoffs is a dead issue.:shrug:
Correct. That's a class I didn't even know existed until I saw it on the Runoffs schedule!!!
STO (over 3 liters) and STU (3 liters and under) will still be National classes in 2011; STL (2.0 liters and below; see August Fastrack) will be introduced in 2011 as a new Regional class.
GA
It never "was" National, Steve; it's a new class for 2011. Are you maybe thinking about STU? STU will retain its National status in 2011 (it was the 10th most-entered National class in 2010). There was a short handful of us that ran Nationals and the Runoffs in 2010 in STU, though we got our asses handed to us by full-up World Challenge cars...
If you build a car to STL rules, you can run Regionals as STL and/or STU, and the car would be legal (but not competitive) to run Nationals and qualify for the Runoffs in STU. That is my plan for 2011 (though I will likely not go to the Runoffs.) I know that Kolin Aspergren is planning to run Nationals-Only in the southeast with his ITA Neon...
GA
STL comes in as a regional class. A regional class can become a notional class based on criteria C below. Many expect that STL will have a big leg up on making the numbers because I addition to people building cars for the class Miatas and IT cars can use the class for double dipping. STL cars can also run in STU at nationals until this happens.
9.1.12. NATIONAL CLASS PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS
A. A class retains its National status as long as its annual average
number of entries achieves 2.5 or higher per National event.
B. Should that annual average number of entries fall below 2.5, the
class will have one additional year to bring the participation level
above the current requirement. Alternatively, it may be immediately
consolidated into an existing class. If the class does not exceed the
current average requirement during the grace year, it will either be
consolidated into existing classes or become a Regional Class.
C. Based on member input, a Regional Class (except Improved Touring)
meeting or exceeding the participation requirements outlined in
paragraph 9.1.12.A. for 1 year may be reviewed to become a
National Class.
D. Based on member or manufacturer input, the CRB may recommend
creating new National classes for BoD approval. National classes
created under this section have 5 years to achieve an average of
2.5 cars per National event before being consolidated or redefined
as a Regional Class, according to 9.1.12.B.
Well, that was the original intention when it was proposed. However, the Club is going through a lot of strife right now about how to handle "legacy" classes and categories that aren't making their numbers; general competitor sentiment at the CRB town hall meetings at the Runoffs made it clear that the club is not ready for any new classes.
The problem is that while everyone wants all the lesser-participated classes to go away, they want "their" class waived (of course). So you get all these folks arguing back and forth (while the Spec Miata and SRF guys just smile and wave... ;)). So the BoD decided to bring STL in Regional-only, and it will be up to us, the competitors, to prove that it will be a viable class. Once we demonstrate that STL can bring in the required numbers (see Dick's post, above) then we can request it be considered for National status. As Dick noted, I have all confidence that we'll easily hit that target this coming season.
GA
Yes with IT and SM guys double dipping in STL the class will be popular.
9.1.12. NATIONAL CLASS PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS
A. A class retains its National status as long as its annual average
number of entries achieves 2.5 or higher per National event.
B. Should that annual average number of entries fall below 2.5, the
class will have one additional year to bring the participation level
above the current requirement. Alternatively, it may be immediately
consolidated into an existing class. If the class does not exceed the
current average requirement during the grace year, it will either be
consolidated into existing classes or become a Regional Class.
C. Based on member input, a Regional Class (except Improved Touring)
meeting or exceeding the participation requirements outlined in
paragraph 9.1.12.A. for 1 year may be reviewed to become a
National Class.
D. Based on member or manufacturer input, the CRB may recommend
creating new National classes for BoD approval. National classes
created under this section have 5 years to achieve an average of
2.5 cars per National event before being consolidated or redefined
as a Regional Class, according to 9.1.12.B. All classes are eligible for
divisional and regional championships, as determined by those bodies.
The [however many] most highly subscribed classes in any year will be
eligible for the RunOffs the following year.
Problem. Solved.
K
is there a stated goal or strategy with regards to adding STL?
is it to increase fees due to double dippers?
is it make a good home to attract drivers back from NASA?
is it to increase car count by more people building cars?
it seems that most classing is a zero sum game except for the double dippers. that is, having a driver build or enter STL instead of ITA or ITS does not increase overall membership or entries.
mostly just curious.
And therein lies the problem, Prof (and you know this): everybody in the club agrees with that philosophy...right up to the moment it detrimentally affects them.
To do something like this would require resolve and leadership that we - collectively - are not willing to support. So we go through these arguments time and time again...
GA
On edit: For reference, National Class Participation numbers for 2010.
Yes
No, but it will happen
Yes
Yes
I think there are racers who are in SM or IT who are ready to move on to something else. To many of these the culture and rule set in Production may not be so popular.
STO, U & L is designed with the people in mind. The fact that is may be attractive to some current Nasa racers is not a bad this either.
STO is probably what GT2 or 3 should have evolved into.
STU and L may be what Production should have become.
I respect your point however this is not really IT racing going national. STL is a bit higher prep level than IT and STU is even higher. I look at these classes as a great place to go if you are tired of IT.
I recognize the changes are being done with good intention but once again I fail to understand how these and some of the past adjustments are being allowed? Hopefully when the BOD reviews the rule to allow other classed cars to be reviewed it'll resolve this ever confusing lack of consistency. I do find it quite puzzling among other words.Quote:
........How did all the Honda adjustments come to be? What's the internal policy about actually changing existing weights?
It's not really hard to comprehend IMHO. The CRB is on (at least was on) a 'if it looks like a duck' kick. These are changes that are probably being made under errors and ommisions. Making the classifications 'make sense'. Same engine, different chassis (assuming no core design is different like suspension design or driveline, etc) then teh weight should be the same given the grainularity with have in IT. It's a correction based on clear data.
What they aren't allowing yet is a re-do of cars using the process. The CRB doesn't (didn't when I was there) believe in it enough to allow it. We been through it a million times. Th etime will come when they do it I am sure, but not when I was Chair and not in the next month or so, but I bet it will get done. The sh!t storm that played out last year opened enough eyes to allow this to happen. Some just had to fall on the sword.