Turbo's sweep STU....

Matt93SE said:
...... and the engine build goes on hold for another year.....
Click to expand...

Last night I was chatting with a Runoffs STU competitor who blew his NA engine up very early in the week. Even though he built the car with the NA powerplant in mind, he is planning on putting a turbo engine in the car over the winter.

He also said it appeared that the Solstice maybe had a load of sand in the trunk, particularly during the race. :shrug:
 
Rabbit07 said:
Allow me to make sure that everyone is clear on this. I did not say the Turbo and NA cars were matched. What I said was that they are closer in performance to each other than what seems to be the impression.

We are not permitted to allow the masses to see the data. What I can tell you from what I have taken to time to look at is this; The cars that were up front be it NA or Turbo at the runoffs were set up to handle well and they were driven well. Which really only leaves the power output in question. Two of the Turbo cars that where out front were "very well" driven maximizing speed in places like the Kink and Carrousel.

The STAC has every intention of adjusting the class for Parity. Parity does not come from slowing cars down too much. We must tread lightly and swiftly.

my $.02.......
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight ; it's your opinion that 1 2:24 flat is a good target time for this class??!

Last time I checked, the standard for what this class should run was E prod. Have we changed that ?

Chris, while I applaud your work and Robs driving, I think even you can admit that this years race was a walk for your cars. Is it because of the level of prep, or driving? Partly. But the car as it is is simply an over dog. And I think it is safe to say that unless you prep and bring a boosted car to RA next year, chances are damn slim, based on the current rules, that you have much of a chance. And frankly I'm not hearing any viable idea here for fixing is. Infact if I read right you think the solstice's times should be the benchmark???
 
JIgou said:
Last night I was chatting with a Runoffs STU competitor who blew his NA engine up very early in the week. Even though he built the car with the NA powerplant in mind, he is planning on putting a turbo engine in the car over the winter.

He also said it appeared that the Solstice maybe had a load of sand in the trunk, particularly during the race. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Oh I would agree. We came right back and started working with Bosch to develop the stand alone so we could install the DISI turbo engine in the world challenge Mazda 6 chassis for next year
 
jmac36 said:
So let me get this straight ; it's your opinion that 1 2:24 flat is a good target time for this class??!

Infact if I read right you think the solstice's times should be the benchmark???
Click to expand...

What? Where did you get that from what I said?

Sorry Joe, I don't know where we are getting our wires crossed here?

I don't like to put laptimes at RA on table for specing out a class.

Since you asked, I would say in my own opinion (Not the STACs or CRBs) that a time in the 27s-28s makes sense. That would put this class right in line with older W/C laptimes when they were on RA1s. We have NA cars right now that are capable of these times for sure.
 
The STAC has every intention of adjusting the class for Parity. Parity does not come from slowing cars down too much. We must tread lightly and swiftly.

Ahh right there.
 
JIgou said:
Even though he built the car with the NA powerplant in mind, he is planning on putting a turbo engine in the car over the winter.

He also said it appeared that the Solstice maybe had a load of sand in the trunk, particularly during the race. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I've gone out with a socket set in the trunk... OMFG that sucked. Sand? that would just be evil... :018:

I was going to request approval of the SR20DET over the winter. Instead of ricking having the car choked down to nothing in March, I'm thinking about selling the car and going to GTL instead. Ruleset is more stable. :(
 
Matt93SE said:
I've gone out with a socket set in the trunk... OMFG that sucked. Sand? that would just be evil... :018:

I was going to request approval of the SR20DET over the winter. Instead of ricking having the car choked down to nothing in March, I'm thinking about selling the car and going to GTL instead. Ruleset is more stable. :(
Click to expand...

Forget it....
 
Last edited:
Z3_GoCar said:
Here's an idea to make a boost limit, how about a manditory pop-off section in the intake with seals to detect anyone messing with it's settings.
Click to expand...
A removable one with a standardized mount that you could remove and fasten into a pressure tester.
 
Eagle7 said:
A removable one with a standardized mount that you could remove and fasten into a pressure tester.
Click to expand...

...or be swappable by a tech official on grid right before the race....

(That only leaves about 150 other ways to "improve" the boost system....)
 
For starters the Solstice needs to get moved over to STO, too much potential for STU.

I like the ‘restrict the size of front mount intercooler’ idea
 
prodogdriver said:
For starters the Solstice needs to get moved over to STO, too much potential for STU.

I like the ‘restrict the size of front mount intercooler’ idea
Click to expand...

Please explain how a 4cyl 2.3L turbo engine (with the same restrictor sizes as every other turbo car in the class) is an overdog?
 
The Solstice has some nice advantages,

275mm tires fit the wheel well front & rear

They are light, 2877 right out of the box

Parts right from the GM get you to 29psi
http://www.gmpartshouse.com/19212670-lnf-turbo-upgrade-kit


I was told the 37mm restrictor only chokes it’s turbo 6mm ( I can’t confirm)

I was thinking that if the Honda S2000 is too much for STL then maybe the GXP has shown itself as too much for STU

I know it’s not all the motor, I saw the runoffs time card pdf
 
prodogdriver said:
The Solstice has some nice advantages,

275mm tires fit the wheel well front & rear

They are light, 2877 right out of the box

Parts right from the GM get you to 29psi
http://www.gmpartshouse.com/19212670-lnf-turbo-upgrade-kit


I was told the 37mm restrictor only chokes it’s turbo 6mm ( I can’t confirm)

I was thinking that if the Honda S2000 is too much for STL then maybe the GXP has shown itself as too much for STU

I know it’s not all the motor, I saw the runoffs time card pdf
Click to expand...
I can easily fit 275s in my wheel wells, but it doesn't do any good when you're fitting it onto an 8" wheel. (I know AutoXers that fit 315s under stock fenders..) the benefits you gain from more rubber are offset by the 8" wheel width and the rounding of the tires. wider rubber with more unsprung rotating weight and higher rolling resistance don't necessarily equate to faster lap times.

ALL of the turbo cars are limited by the same physics. i.e. inlet restrictor size. so what if the stock turbo is "only" restricted by 6mm. it's still restricted, and that "only 6mm" is still a 25% reduction in total area.

As for the GM turbo upgrade kit? It's a sensor replacement and ECU reprogram.. That's perfectly legal for any car within the rules since ECU is open and sensors may be replaced.

Light? not really. my car weighs about 2700 stock. In current trim, it's 2450 w/o driver, and I can easily get the car down to 2200 if I switched to CF hood, trunk, and replaced windows with Lexan. It's just money (and I don't have it.)

Even if the car is that light, you're still going to have to bolt an entire gym's worth of weights into the floor to get the car to min weight.

I simply don't get what you're barking about???
 
Matt93SE said:
I simply don't get what you're barking about???
Click to expand...


I think he is making argument that the Solstice is a car like the Miata in that the car/chassis is just better. Following that argument, it certainly had its day in SS.

However, given the additional allowed modifications in STU, this argument is mostly, if not completely invalid.


And in regards to classifying the car in STO, it already is... No reason that it can't run in both, if STU is managed appropriately.
 
Exactly. It's well designed- doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed. There will always be cars better suited for the class because of specific engine output, chassis design, factory aero advantages, etc..

I *could* race a Camry in STU if I wanted.. but it just wouldn't be smart. Choosing a car that handles well and has a great engine package would be smart. Heeeeyy... lookie at this Solstice thingy over here? It's got a good chassis and a good engine, and it only overheats a couple times a race!
 
Matt93SE said:
Exactly. It's well designed- doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed. There will always be cars better suited for the class because of specific engine output, chassis design, factory aero advantages, etc..

I *could* race a Camry in STU if I wanted.. but it just wouldn't be smart. Choosing a car that handles well and has a great engine package would be smart. Heeeeyy... lookie at this Solstice thingy over here? It's got a good chassis and a good engine, and it only overheats a couple times a race!
Click to expand...

Ahh Matt, I think the big issue is the fact the gm showed what it could do, abet without a huge amount of development, right out of the box. And frankly your wrong on this score. In the form it was in at the runoffs, the car was a HUGE overdog. And Rob drove the car very well, so you can't take anything away from him!


Yes, Chris found a grey area on the restrictor rule, and exploited it,(bravo)but the fact remains we have a MAJOR issue of non parity between the turbo and non turbo cars. And the folks that recommend the rules to solve this problem, are the same ones reading the data from all our cars, and making rules that are going to solve the issue, right! With a few exceptions, I have some major issues with how the rules process, and the people make said rules work.

For instance; all of us with a bit of snap tuning FI cars understood the loophole in the restrictor area, but the guy on the STAC that could have closed said rule loophole actualy used it to his advantage. Now, please don't get me wrong, I would have done the same EXACT thingLike I said before, inmates running the asylum

So far, from what I hear, we will now have a tire size rule, and some work on the restrictors as to the wording of the placement. There is still nothing that I have seen that will stop a turbo car from being the car to have at RA in September. There are some voices of reason on the CRB, so it might get fixed, but I'm just not seeing the response from STAC aimed at giving the CRB the direction and view.

I'm sure this all sound like sour grapes, and to a certain extent it is. But as one who has invested his life in SCCA racing, and a huge chunk of cash in STU betting that it will be the class to resurrect our failing club racing program, I am more than a bit sour when I see the lack of stewardship thats being exibited.
 
Care to fill the rest of us in that weren't at runoffs what these 'exploits' of the rules were?
the rulebook gives a restrictor diameter, and says that it must be placed in the inlet of the turbo. unless one strains the rules to call the inlet something several feet away from the rule, then it's pretty clear what the intent is.
....If you're looking for ways to get around the rules as intended, you can always find one....


so the guy built a car within the rules, drove the piss out of it and beat everybody's pants off. Now others are complaining its an overdog? Where were all these people the rest of the season during the qualifying races? Why was this loophole not checked/discovered until Runoffs? You hear this in every other class.

Guess everyone should just suck it up. :P
 
No, I'm not going to explain the restrictor on an open forum. If you wanna know about it as me at the next race, I'll be happy to explain

I'm not bitching that the car WAS an overdog, but that it needs to get adjusted going forward. If your not able to understand that a 4 second gap back to second is a huge gap that shows the performance potential of this car, then I'm not quite sure how to explain it to you. Remember that the next 4-5 cars in that grid were not junk, but some of the best prepped , best developed cars in the class. And there is some healthy talent driving those cars, at least 3 former national champions, and several pro drivers. So 4 seconds? That's in the over dog category.

Btw, you asked about why nobody spotted it earlier I the season? Good job of sandbagging?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top