How many STL cars for 2011?

[JoshS]

Oops. It does say "shall", not "may", implying that anything listed in the ITCS cannot compete in STL. Looks like this should have been updated when STL was added.

[Greg Amy]

Ive been finishing an STL civic with a b18b but was dissapointed to again see brake allowances unchanged in June. Im not removing my o.e. larger front brakes so I guess I will just run HPDEs until it changes.

Since it's a rule change, it will not apply until the 2012 racing season. It's not been voted on yet, but I suspect it will pass for 2012.

If you want to be legal, then feel free to run in STU until next year. I'm not suggesting you should cheat, but I do suggest that everyone involved, including the competitors, have a vested interest in getting the STL participation numbers "up" in 2011. As such, and given brakes are likely to pass for 2012, you may consider asking competitors to overlook your indiscretions in 2011. But, to be clear, it would be non-compliant to the STL regs to run alternate brakes in 2011.

So is this really saying that all IT cars (including my ITA CRX) have to run in STU for double-dipping purposes? This can't be right.

Oops. It does say "shall", not "may", implying that anything listed in the ITCS cannot compete in STL.

I disagree. Any car that is IT-legal but less than 2L displacement should be legal in STL, based on the mods allowed in each class. The STU note is to clarify, allow, and encourage participation in STU by IT competitors.

GA

[Chip42]

greg,

I have a small issue with the ITCS into ST rules: IT cars under 2.0L are not necessarily defacto legal in STL.

as written, a car conforming to the ITCS may compete in STU and thus may be in violation of STU specific rules so long as it is legal to the ITCS.

but the same is not true foe STL. the gotcha I keep going back to is the fire system, which is not required in IT but IS required in ST, just as it is in Prod and GT. Unless the rules change to allow IT cars under 2.0L conforming to the ITCS rules into STL, only those with such upgrades may legally compete there*. I don't think I'd make a big fuss about it myself, it makes more sense for the smaller cars to be in STL, and STL needs numbers, but that is how the rules read, currently.

*the exceptions being cars like the Integra type R, S2000, and Celica GTS or other Toyota with a 2zz-GE where the factory engine is specifically disallowed or violates the rules without modification.

[Greg Amy]

the gotcha I keep going back to is the fire system...

I've already made a request to the STAC/CRB to waive the fire system requirement for STL cars, a la SM, IT, SS, and Touring. We'll see how it goes... - GA

[coreyehcx]

Since it's a rule change, it will not apply until the 2012 racing season. It's not been voted on yet, but I suspect it will pass for 2012.

If you want to be legal, then feel free to run in STU until next year. I'm not suggesting you should cheat, but I do suggest that everyone involved, including the competitors, have a vested interest in getting the STL participation numbers "up" in 2011. As such, and given brakes are likely to pass for 2012, you may consider asking competitors to overlook your indiscretions in 2011. But, to be clear, it would be non-compliant to the STL regs to run alternate brakes in 2011.

GA

Thanks Greg.

I do not wish to cheat and have done every bit of my build out so far under all rules minus the brakes. I should be able to get out there in 2012 anyway after everything is completed. I will continue to watch the fast track.

[Matt93SE]

Oops. It does say "shall", not "may", implying that anything listed in the ITCS cannot compete in STL. Looks like this should have been updated when STL was added.

Could this not be fixed under an errors & omissions in a Fastrack?

As tGA says, the intent was to let those guys run in STL so they'd be more competitive vs. the 400hp beasts we're seeing show up in STU.

[Greg Amy]

I'll take care of it.

I can see your collective point from a rules nerd standpoint: it says if you're a legal IT car you "shall" go to STU. However, if you're a legal ITx car (below 2.0L) then with the exception of the fire system (as Chip pointed out) you're a legal STL car (correct? I can't think of anything else non-compliant). So, who's to say you're following ITx rules when you enter STL? It's not like someone can FORCE you into STU if you meet all STL rules. Maybe you made a change between sessions that's not compliant with ITx but is OK in STL...? Or you just claim that you did...?

So we can address this one of two ways: we remove the requirement for a fire system in STL (which I already have in process) or we specifically note in the rules that 2.0L-and-smaller ITx cars are explicitly legal in STL. I personally don't have a problem with non-fire system cars entering STL and I hope you don't either; I'll work to get this resolved by next STAC meeting and published next Fastrack. - GA

[Chip42]

I think the easier approach is to say all 1985 and newer ITCS compliant cars of 2.0L or under may run in STL. maybe even any legal ITC,B, or A car, or ITS or R car under 2.0L can run. this accomplishes the required goals, allows even more cars of the right general speed, and keeps the GCR rules as is.

personally, I like fire systems though I understand the evolution from SS to IT keeping the requirement out of that class. I don't think the same should be true for STL or STU, barring the alowances for IT/SM/etc... cars to run in the category.