Results 1 to 20 of 48

Thread: Mustang in STU

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Oakville, Ontario,Canada
    Posts
    106

    Default

    WOW, , what a rapid progression and thanks for setting it down for me. It seems that calling it a lower power Super Prod class makes the most sense. It seems like the class is really eally fluid right now. I just don't philosophically understand where in that large mix of cars, my actual ex-WC 2.5L Cougar is not allowed to run with it's 2009 VTS. To run in the class I have to add 150 lbs, reduce the aero, run smaller tires, get rid of the in-car adjustable bars and drop .5 of a point of compression, all versus my approved 2009 VTS.

    I understood the original discussions where my car didn't meet the intent of the class and you could drive a truck through the opening my VTS gave me, but that seems a bit moot when you allow ITR V8 Mustangs/ Turbo cars/ AWD in to the STU class. What is the class philosophy? It seems all over the place. I really don't want to have to build 2 new motors just to run a few races south of the border and slow the car down a ton.

    Where are all the STU cars from last year going to run? It seems like the class rules are extremely fluid but if you actually have an ex-WC Car you have to turn it back to almost a super-IT car to run. Thats not very fun. Anybody know of a class where I would be allowed to run my car at the prep level it is in? I am not asking for the world to change just for me, but I would like to experience a few races, for the heck of it, at Mid Ohio, Watkins Glen, Beaverrun etc..... and not having to worry about getting DQ'd if I happen to win.

    Eric
    Last edited by 23racer; 01-06-2011 at 02:33 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    I believe the current theory is that cars built to the class rules (generic or from the table) are suppsoed to be at the pointy end, and the other cars from IT etc.. are just "allowed" in , and not expected to run competitively. ex WC TC cars are really lost in the mix. with the changes in WC last year (GTS being old TC, new TC being much more like T/IT and some of them, like the SC tC, showing up in STU) I think this will only get worse before it gets better. GT->STO still seems like a clear transition. at least a lot of the allowances of TC, like moving the pickup inboard pickup pints of the suspension, are still present in STU. having to make soem motor mods doesn't seem like a deal breaker, but major chassis changes could completely remove the option of running the car.

    I think the idea of building an equitable rule set for club racing is at odds with building a manufacturer pleasing rule set for the WC pro series. if WC settles on a long term rule set, then maybe ST will start to mirror it? still, I feel for all of you who laid out the cash to get an ex-pro TC. sounds like you are REALLY men without a country.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    hampden,ma.usa
    Posts
    3,083

    Default

    I think that when this class was proposed it sounded good to a lot of people because it was an empty vessel. It was just a shell and each of us filled in the blanks with our own prejudiced imagination. The powers that be understand this and know the class needs to be defined fast. That is the challenge for the STAC.

    By the way if I owned an ex WC car I would not do anything rash for a couple of months.
    dick patullo
    ner scca IT7 Rx7

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sunnyside, NY
    Posts
    1,197

    Default

    23racer - you may want to run ITE, that is, if the region allows you to. ITE rules vary from region to region. Check out their web site for more details and/or contact their stewards/chief of tech. Doing so and if allowed, would provide a race and track where you can run with others w/o having to change anything on your car other than meeting safety regs.
    Demetrius Mossaidis aka 'Mickey' #12 ITA NESCCA
    '92 Honda Civic Si
    STFU and "Then write a letter. www.crbscca.com"
    2013 ITA NARRC Champion and I have not raced since.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    So this is an interesting issue - especially when soliciting opinions from a group (IT) that largely screamed bloody murder when it was suggested that Spec Miata's be LEGALLY placed inside their respective IT class (ITA or ITS at the time).

    This is very similar in application. Follow the logic:

    All IT cars can compete in STU in legal IT-trim
    All IT cars fall 100% inside the performance envelope of STU
    MOST IT cars fall within the rules of STU

    So, as in the case of SM's in IT, you have an 'allowed' class, well within the performance envelope of said class, but with attributes that are not allowed by the classification process.

    To those who are in STU and don't get it - the 'philosophy' is to allow other, non competitive cars a chance to double dip and fill up your run groups. To those who had issue with SM's in IT - you should be against this allowance as well, no?
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Posts
    1,191

    Default

    I think one of the things you guys who are pointing at the ITR Mustang V8s are completely missing is one of the fundamental differences between ST and IT. ST is a displacement-based class, while IT is a HP-based class. Those V8 Mustangs (and did you miss the 5.0L Camaros?) aren't even going to be the class leaders in ITR; the S2000s, RX8s, 944s, and even the 3-series Bimmers are (in all likelyhood) going to be the cars to beat in ITR. And they're all under 3 litres...

    I also can't see what the big deal is in allowing IT cars (in their IT prep) to compete in ST (or SM cars to compete in IT for that matter); they aren't ever going to compete with real ST prepped cars, but they will help fill the fields, while at the same time allowing IT drivers a chance to race at the national level if they so desire. Win-win IMO.

    Now, I do see an issue when a WCT-legal car can't compete in STU; but I think that's a whole separate issue.
    Earl R.
    240SX
    ITA/ST5

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    This is my world...

    Any time a given policy is sold to different constituencies as meeting their individual needs we trade (1) greater support for (2) lack of policy (or program) coherence.

    SPx cannot be all things to all people, but it's trying to be something to a number of different groups - IT drivers who want to "go National" without changing their cars, owners of ex-WC cars without a place to play in Club Racing, folks who want to tinker beyond the allowances of IT (with new or upgraded builds), and Honda swap fans (who arguably represent a younger and hipper demo market for SCCA). We are seeing the inevitable result of that mushiness.

    I'd propose that greater support is super in the short run (i.e., getting the classes Nationally viable by car count), but coherence - a tightly defined mission, vision, and execution (rules set) - will become frustrating for participants over time. Spec Miata is an example of this as additional chassis have been integrated into the class, rules get added/complicated, etc.

    K

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •