STL - what's going to be hot?

Andy Bettencourt

Andy Bettencourt

Super Moderator
SO what cars are people thinking have a chance? I have my idea...to be sprung mid thread!!!

Greg is thinking Teg with a what?
Ben likes a turbo and an SIR?

I am thinking its going to be Honduh-land. Specific output to cc's is their wheelhouse. If turbo cars dominate, expect SIR spec changes.
 
No turbos in STL...Ben's talking STU. That class will continue to be dominated by World Challenge cars, with likely very little mods required (if any) to be STU legal.

STL? Best power-to-displacement, easy enough, right? 'Cept there's always that wrench-in-the-works of a very good, greater-than-the-sum, balanced car coming in and doing well despite a power disadvantage...not all FWD get the 50# reduction in STL, only those with struts.

What size engine? Well, If you can get a modern chassis down to 2080 pounds then a good 1.6-liter might could do it, but I think you're pushing it to get weight down that low, and you'll have a significant torque disadvantage. 2-liters will give you a great torque advantage, but now you're weighing a porky 2600 pounds. IMO, the "sweet spot" for displacement will be 1.8 liters, at 2340#, or maybe a decent 1.7-liter at 2210#.

Best engine for the class is probably the Honda B18C1, the GSR engine. Toss that thing into a good-handling chassis (think: CRX Si) and you've got a winner. The Integra should be able to compete at faster course, but the short tracks will be the CRX. Hell, if you want to hit the "easy button" take a strong ITA CRX package with the D16, unbolt all the weight you've got in there, and toss in some cams. I bet that damned thing would rock in the right hands. Or, what about an ITS Del Sol at 2080#?

The Honda K20 is a dark horse. It's a much better engine design than the B18 series, but it's only been installed in strut cars (RSX, Civic). Legally you can probably install it in an earlier, better chassis but since the drivetrain rotates the opposite direction it's a major endeavor to install, and not clearly legal given engine re-positioning rules. Further, the "good" one, the K20A3, starts out at 200 ponies but the camshafts have a higher lift than allowed for STL and the stock compression is already at the class limit of 11:1; lower-output versions (160hp) have room to grow. But, I suspect that once you cut the cams down and allow the rest of the class to catch up with class mods, you may find that the K20 is probably not worth the additional 260 pounds a 2-liter has to carry.

Plus, the STAC is "skeered" of the K20, so it's possible it may get itself banned to STU-only. Until things shake out I'd not be "investing" in that option quite yet.

Other opportunities? The Nissan SR20DE could shine, especially if installed in an S13/S14 chassis. Our SR was putting out ~180 crank in IT trim; toss in there some cams and compression and it would be a torque and HP monster.

The Neon engine got tossed a bone with the alternate rods allowance: no more worries about availability and dependability of the cracked rods. Figure out how to get some serious torque out of that 4-valve with a good bottom-end, then drop 50 pounds for struts.

Then...there's the Miata. Think light '90 M1 chassis with '99 1.8L engine/drivetrain/suspension. I'm sure more than a few people know what that engine could do with STL mods. And it'll weigh the same straight-up as the CRX/Integra gang. And in the end...it's a Miata. 'Nuff said.

There's many other RWD engine/chassis combos I have in mind, from Honda and others. Open your mind and a few may come...

No, it's not just gonna be Honda-land. Yeah, to start with maybe, but if/when someone gets serious in one of these other packages, it'll be an crap shoot.

GA
 
If you ask me about STU I think hands down a 2.8l BMW E36,E46,E92 it really won't matter much. That is what I wanted to build if someone would just by the fastest ITA Neon in the country (shameless plug :D)

In STL I like the 240 sx with the SR20,or the BMW E30 1.8l is, maybe a BMW Z3 would be a good fit as well?
 
Rabbit07 said:
If you ask me about STU I think hands down a 2.8l BMW E36,E46,E92 it really won't matter much.
Click to expand...

I agree, although it will take serious effort to get the right hp/weight on later models. On the other hand cranking up the boost on a turbo is a lot easier.
 
Sorry - dumb question: Is the age cut-off for STL proposed to be the same as for STU...?

As I mentioned, I'm "intrigued" by STx, partially as a possible solution to my crossover rallycross/hillclimb/screwaround car question. A 1.8 VW 16v at something close to Pablo's ITB spec weight would be pretty entertaining. It's not ever going to have the specific output numbers of a Honda but it would be a truck up hills.

K
 
Well though there is alot or red line and print from the proposed ruleset that the BOD is reviewing. As of the current proposed ruleset, it makes little sense to build anything other than a honda in STL. However, the PTB have stated that they are going to do someting about that. :shrug:

Superior head design, amoung other things allow for high % gains compared to others. There was papers written to allow for non-usdm engines to allow for better options for nissan, ford, chevrolet, BMW, Toyota, and honda. However, the JDM v.s USDM isn't that big of a jump for honda compared to the other options in the lower displacement range.

Another option was written is to set almsot GT weights based on engines.

In my opinion choose a honda of your liking that has the best brakes and wheel base. Then build a B16 if your chassis can get down to weight, then build a B18. We will see what they do with the k20, but if that was me that is what I would do.
 
Last edited:
Rabbit07 said:
If you ask me about STU I think hands down a 2.8l BMW E36,E46,E92 it really won't matter much. That is what I wanted to build if someone would just by the fastest ITA Neon in the country (shameless plug :D)

In STL I like the 240 sx with the SR20,or the BMW E30 1.8l is, maybe a BMW Z3 would be a good fit as well?
Click to expand...

Key is to pick a BMW with a good intake manifold... The m-52 doesn't nor the M-44, M-54 is better, best would be a M-50 or the M-42. All should easily fit in a Z3.
 
Greg Amy said:
No turbos in STL...Ben's talking STU. That class will continue to be dominated by World Challenge cars, with likely very little mods required (if any) to be STU legal.

STL? Best power-to-displacement, easy enough, right? 'Cept there's always that wrench-in-the-works of a very good, greater-than-the-sum, balanced car coming in and doing well despite a power disadvantage...not all FWD get the 50# reduction in STL, only those with struts.

What size engine? Well, If you can get a modern chassis down to 2080 pounds then a good 1.6-liter might could do it, but I think you're pushing it to get weight down that low, and you'll have a significant torque disadvantage. 2-liters will give you a great torque advantage, but now you're weighing a porky 2600 pounds. IMO, the "sweet spot" for displacement will be 1.8 liters, at 2340#, or maybe a decent 1.7-liter at 2210#.

Best engine for the class is probably the Honda B18C1, the GSR engine. Toss that thing into a good-handling chassis (think: CRX Si) and you've got a winner. The Integra should be able to compete at faster course, but the short tracks will be the CRX. Hell, if you want to hit the "easy button" take a strong ITA CRX package with the D16, unbolt all the weight you've got in there, and toss in some cams. I bet that damned thing would rock in the right hands. Or, what about an ITS Del Sol at 2080#?

The Honda K20 is a dark horse. It's a much better engine design than the B18 series, but it's only been installed in strut cars (RSX, Civic). Legally you can probably install it in an earlier, better chassis but since the drivetrain rotates the opposite direction it's a major endeavor to install, and not clearly legal given engine re-positioning rules. Further, the "good" one, the K20A3, starts out at 200 ponies but the camshafts have a higher lift than allowed for STL and the stock compression is already at the class limit of 11:1; lower-output versions (160hp) have room to grow. But, I suspect that once you cut the cams down and allow the rest of the class to catch up with class mods, you may find that the K20 is probably not worth the additional 260 pounds a 2-liter has to carry.

Plus, the STAC is "skeered" of the K20, so it's possible it may get itself banned to STU-only. Until things shake out I'd not be "investing" in that option quite yet.

Other opportunities? The Nissan SR20DE could shine, especially if installed in an S13/S14 chassis. Our SR was putting out ~180 crank in IT trim; toss in there some cams and compression and it would be a torque and HP monster.

The Neon engine got tossed a bone with the alternate rods allowance: no more worries about availability and dependability of the cracked rods. Figure out how to get some serious torque out of that 4-valve with a good bottom-end, then drop 50 pounds for struts.

Then...there's the Miata. Think light '90 M1 chassis with '99 1.8L engine/drivetrain/suspension. I'm sure more than a few people know what that engine could do with STL mods. And it'll weigh the same straight-up as the CRX/Integra gang. And in the end...it's a Miata. 'Nuff said.

There's many other RWD engine/chassis combos I have in mind, from Honda and others. Open your mind and a few may come...

No, it's not just gonna be Honda-land. Yeah, to start with maybe, but if/when someone gets serious in one of these other packages, it'll be an crap shoot.

GA
Click to expand...

I like the analysis. Help me understand how a 99 1.8 Miata and a CRX with a 1.8 would weigh the same? 2340 for the CRX, 2400 for the Miata (+ 2.5% rounded up)?

She we get clarification on these things or did I miss it:

- Should it say minimum weight WITH driver?
- Are OEM engines with stock cam profiles outside the 'max' allowed or do you have to 'de-cam' them?
 
The rough target is 100 whp per liter.

On Edit: 100 flywheel HP per liter not WHP, sorry
 
Last edited:
Andy Bettencourt said:
... how a 99 1.8 Miata and a CRX with a 1.8 would weigh the same?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean. "For weight assignment purposes engine displacement will be rounded to the nearest 100cc" (G.1, the paragraph before the weight table). Don't both of these engine round to 1800cc?

She we get clarification on these things or did I miss it...
Click to expand...
These are valid questions.

On the weight, doesn't the GCR specify that all weights are with drivers?

On the cams, the rules state "maximum cam lift is .xxx". They don't state that you "may" replace the cams with one of this lift, it states - categorically - the maximum cam lift allowed for the class. In my mind, there's no question that stock cams that exceed that lift are illegal.

On the other hand, the "Purpose" paragraph states:
Unless a particular modification, or part, is approved in these rules, the vehicle and all of its relevant parts and assemblies shall be stock for the correct make and model of car.
​
This is a lesser version of IIDSYCTYC, which implies the legality of a stock cam. Given possible confusion, I have in the past weeks asked the STAC/CRB to clarify the rules to state that the cam lift limits also apply to stock cams. I did this primarily to alleviate their fear of the K20A3 so that we don't eliminate all 4-banger Hondas made from the 2002 onward...

GA
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
Yes on the base weight but the Miata gets +2.5% for being RWD.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but where is that specified? I honestly don't recall seeing that...

On edit: Sorry, just found it. That's in a terrible location in the rules, guys! Why is that buried in a rule about re-fabricated rear suspensions in STO and STU??? I see a line that starts with "STO and STU cars that come with a solid rear axle..." and it doesn't apply to me and I move on. Dropping in a coda that has nothing to do with that opening line is bad ju-ju...Seriously, move that rule to the the STL-specific section, like where the minimum weights are specified...? While you're at it, delete and move the .18 one to its appropriate class-specific area, too.

As a general rule-writing rule, if a line applies only to a specific class, move it to the specific class's rules section.

So, as you can tell, this 2.5% is truly news to me, I thought FWD and RWD were on equal weight parity. Being a FWD'er I'm OK with it, of course; after all, we've had many prior technical discussions about the relative value of FWD vs RWD, and I'm on record that FWD should get a weight break. On the other hand, 2.5% ain't that bad; it's only 62 pounds on 2500...

So scratch that sentence of mine you refer to, I see where the RWD'ers get a tad more weight. - GA
 
Last edited:
I saw the 2.5% adder as well,thats why a Rotary will not be Competitive in STL. 2600# plus 2.5% for rwd is a stout 2665. Whats the rolecage break point for bigger tubes?
No porting,polishing,carb allowance,nothing to help the power output at all.
STU Streetport,carb,efi with pnp megasquirt,fab the suspension parts. huh

The first gen is probably not the hot setup. Thats the only one I looked at. The second gen and third gen cars maybe. the RX8,who knows they already have that much weight on them.

Dan 77 IT7
 
Found it,the correct wieght for a 12a in STU is 2350 -50 for soild axle rear wheel drive
13b is 2400 with the same allowance. There is a fasttrack for the carb allowance for the 13b only. not the renisis. Thats stuck(ha)with EFI

12a in STL is 2600 +2.5%

Why is STL a good idea again if you dont have a FWD car under 2.0?

Dan
 
Knestis said:
Sorry - dumb question: Is the age cut-off for STL proposed to be the same as for STU...?

As I mentioned, I'm "intrigued" by STx, partially as a possible solution to my crossover rallycross/hillclimb/screwaround car question. A 1.8 VW 16v at something close to Pablo's ITB spec weight would be pretty entertaining. It's not ever going to have the specific output numbers of a Honda but it would be a truck up hills.

K
Click to expand...

Yes, the age requirement is 1985< unless a model run included cars from before and after 1985. i.e. Gen 1 RX-7
 
Dano77 said:
Found it,the correct wieght for a 12a in STU is 2350 -50 for soild axle rear wheel drive
13b is 2400 with the same allowance. There is a fasttrack for the carb allowance for the 13b only. not the renisis. Thats stuck(ha)with EFI

12a in STL is 2600 +2.5%

Why is STL a good idea again if you dont have a FWD car under 2.0?

Dan
Click to expand...

Depends on the weapon, inherently RWD is going to perform better than FWD, so instead of providing a weight break for FWD, there is a weight adder for RWD. essentially, the SLA front drive car is the basis with strut FWD getting a reduction in weight, and the RWD getting a addition in weight. We know that the non SLA RWD cars aren't adjsuted. The thought there is that most of them can get enough Caster to help them handle better that FWD strut cars usually can not attain.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
SO what cars are people thinking have a chance? I have my idea...to be sprung mid thread!!!

Greg is thinking Teg with a what?
Ben likes a turbo and an SIR?

I am thinking its going to be Honduh-land. Specific output to cc's is their wheelhouse. If turbo cars dominate, expect SIR spec changes.
Click to expand...
For STU a Mk2, Mk3 Golf or Corrado with a 1.8T and the 33mm inlet restrictor, 2100lbs and capable of 225+ whp with the restrictor. I like the Corrado for the aero, and better brakes (11" stock).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top