What is a "touring car?"

[Andy Bettencourt]

Are we talking about the same thing? I'm not talking about field-filling, slower-than-real-STL SM's, I'm talking about the fear of Miata's. Solve the issue by breaking up STL into FWD and RWD. This allows the original concept to vet itself on one side while the other side provides a place to play for the other 80% of the entries.

It makes comp adjustments easier. It lets Miata eat their young on that side of the fence while the STAC concentrates on balancing the FWDers and facilitation the original idea.

Truly a win/win.

[backformore]

Let's pretend for a second that Miatas don't exist. The reality is that it has no real impact on Kirk's initial post.

The question was whether a class whose name includes the word "touring" should be limited to "touring" cars, and if so, what are they and how are they defined. It seems to me the question is mostly aimed at STL, which I think removes the issues of the original intent being to give ex-World Challenge cars a place to play which I believe was originally part of the STU rules. If I recall correctly, the STL rules came about after that.

So let's look just at STL and pretend Miatas don't exist. Kirk is suggesting that STL cars should be "touring" cars and suggests an interior volume method for defining that. I personally like the idea of a class specifically for small engined "touring" cars. I like the idea of a field made up of "daily drivers" that include cars that almost everyone can identify with. The FWD vs RWD is really not Kirk's argument. I think the rules currently do a pretty good job of addressing that, just as they do with strut vs. DWB. I actually like the variety since each car will make it's speed in a different way.

Just thought I'd try to drag this discussion back a little closer to the original post.

Carry on.

Rory

[Flyinglizard]

2731lbs for the 13B powered Miata-- heavy but the streetdriven swaps that run the track days with me pull as hard as my turbo jett, 200hp or so it seems.
2635lbs for a BP powered 1.8 Miata-- Thats a lot of weight
2430 for a 1.8L double wishbone FWDer- needs another 50# over the FWDstrut car based on Roll center height and camber gain
2370 for a 1.8 strut FWDer- needs 70# off cuz it has all of the wrong items. Box on struts. try 2250 until it wins.

IMHO you need to run the data for Hp to weight/ and lateral power. No way that any FWD box is going to match lateral with the Miata- within 200#, maybe 300#

[Andy Bettencourt]

2731lbs for the 13B powered Miata-- heavy but the streetdriven swaps that run the track days with me pull as hard as my turbo jett, 200hp or so it seems.
2635lbs for a BP powered 1.8 Miata-- Thats a lot of weight
2430 for a 1.8L double wishbone FWDer- needs another 50# over the FWDstrut car based on Roll center height and camber gain
2370 for a 1.8 strut FWDer- needs 70# off cuz it has all of the wrong items. Box on struts. try 2250 until it wins.

IMHO you need to run the data for Hp to weight/ and lateral power. No way that any FWD box is going to match lateral with the Miata- within 200#, maybe 300#

I am willing to bet the street driven rotards are street-ported, significantly improving power.
The BP may seem heavy but at the claimed power outputs I would say they are dang close.
The DW/strut debate is about to heat up. Greg is calling out the newer Civic's struts as very advanced and they are categorized with some really crappy stuff. What to do there? Line item exception on how good we think the suspension design is or go to a 'warts and all' philosophy? Tough to do that in the big-leagues of National racing in the SCCA where trying to balance everything on the head of a pin is the norm.

Maybe DW, Advanced non DW, and strut. Cars with complex multi-links may fit the middle category. Spitballin.

[Chip42]

I'd wager that getting specific on cars with known outlier setups is a good idea. They specline specific engines, no reason they would not specline specific chassis, too. So generic strut car gets generic weight, F code civics get this adder (probably as a %), rx8 chassis gets this, and so on. The current recipe of generic weights based on displacement and architecture is cool because you can run anything and not have to bug the rulesmakers to get it approved first. Adding a but wait, there's more... Section handles the outliers cleanly.

Agree with Kirk's assertion about touring vs sports cars not being on equal footing, and I think blurring the old sedan and roadsters lines was a shame given that ramification. Dealing with it by driving out "proper sportscars" Is not likely to happen, so regulations are the best way to rebalance things.

[JamesL]

There either needs to be car/chassis spec lines for everyone or for no one... Singling out specific makes/models like the Miata/F-Civics is ridiculous. All that will happen is the cars get lead trophies/restrictors to the point of no longer being competitive, then someone will find the next fastest thing. After a year of winning, that car will magically get its own spec line. And so on and so forth.

Having the new Civics weigh more than a VW of the same displacement because Honda actually took the time to engineer a decent strut-based front suspension for the car? What is the deciding factor here? Camber-curve? What qualifies the Honda F-series struts as too-good?

I thought the whole point of finally having a weight/displacement class was to let the cream rise to the top?

[Chip42]

I thought the whole point of finally having a weight/displacement class was to let the cream rise to the top?

well, if it's done well, the added weight just equalizes and does not sink the car. if "the cream rises to the top" is your thinking, then yeah - you WILL have a very limitte dnumber of entries that are viable. you know why? because most car companies exist to make money, and they do that by making platforms they can sell cheaply (or relatively so) to everymen that fit 4 fat people, a dog, and a shitload of luggage or groceries and get good economy and tolerable ride and handling. on occasion they take a page from the muscle car era and drop in a motor and some dampers that make us touring car wierdos all excited, but it's still a massively compromised chassis. then every now and then you get an MRS, a Miata, an FRS, or a Civic Si. short lists mean small numbers and the attraction to this type of racing is diversity. if a VW doens't stand a chance (and be honest, it doesn't - outside of a VW motor in a Porsche) then why would anyone build one? what, then, is VW's incentive to help out the club, the club racers, the class, the market of good touring cars, etc...?

[Andy Bettencourt]

All that will happen is the cars get lead trophies/restrictors to the point of no longer being competitive, then someone will find the next fastest thing. After a year of winning, that car will magically get its own spec line. And so on and so forth.

This is National racing in every class. Spec lines are dynamic based on results.