What is a "touring car?"
- Thread starter Knestis
- Start date
ST has taken that job over, considering ST allows engine swaps, turbo charged and supercharged cars and allows different levels of engine and drivetrain modifications.
Nedless to say, it's not easy, and the lack of strong full-build true ST cars running regularly against each other - and the resultant lack of head to head competition and onboard data - is not helping.
THAT said, can we move the ITAC issue from 5 years ago or whatever to a different thread and keep this one on ST "DEFINITION OF A TOURING CAR"
agreed, BUT... weren't they an ITS car (ISC / Mike VS) and an SM, not proper STL cars? agreed that they were equally WELL prepped and well driven, and that they appeared to be well balanced with you overall (lap times and observation support that statement) but they weren't "equally prepped" as it were. separate but equal and all that... 
infamously bad miata aero revealed itself on the banking, somewhere around middle backstretch Pete's car gained legs on the miatae who stayed in a 2 car drafting pack on his bumper to that point for the first few laps. once there was a separation between the 3 cars by SRF traffic the miatae fell back sooner. was very cool to watch.
This is not to take away from the good drive by you, PK - we saw you in the "west hairpin" sliding the snot out of the car and the poor decision by a SRF driver to divebomb when you slid a bit too much. congrats on the win and, I assume, the championship. condolences to Deuce, too breaking with a commanding lead - was it driveline? he's had rough luck the past few years.
infamously bad miata aero revealed itself on the banking, somewhere around middle backstretch Pete's car gained legs on the miatae who stayed in a 2 car drafting pack on his bumper to that point for the first few laps. once there was a separation between the 3 cars by SRF traffic the miatae fell back sooner. was very cool to watch.
This is not to take away from the good drive by you, PK - we saw you in the "west hairpin" sliding the snot out of the car and the poor decision by a SRF driver to divebomb when you slid a bit too much. congrats on the win and, I assume, the championship. condolences to Deuce, too breaking with a commanding lead - was it driveline? he's had rough luck the past few years.
Last edited:
I do not know what engine package Mike Van was running ITS or STL, but it was equal to Raymond's power. Raymond car has been in STL for a long time and has a Rossini built STL engine. SM do not run 140 mph through the tri-oval. In the second qualifying session I could not draft up to Raymond his car is that strong. As I would start to gain on him entering the tri-oval I was running out of gear. We bumped up the rev limit for the race and jeopardized my motor.
When they drafted past me going down the back straight, I knew I was in for a long day. If they did not race each other I was done. I got lucky to draft back past them, Raymond was not trying to draft Mike, I got a run on Raymond coming out of the Bus Stop. When I side drafted off of Raymond, I was then one car behind Mike and that gave me a run on him. Mike left me enough room on the bottom to put my left side tires on the first yellow line and beat him down into turn one. I might have seen that move on "Days of Thunder" or "Talladega Nights". I guaranty they would not let me do that again. Even with my good run, I did not get past Raymond until I between turn 4 and the tri-oval. I got past Mike after Start Finish.
The re-start was key as well, I put a bunch of SRFs between us going into turn one. I think at one point I was five wide going through the tri-oval. Racing SRFs stinks and I felt bad I was in the middle of the top three, ok leading the top three. I needed them as a buffer if the Miatas got back to me. I apologized to the SRF guys in impound and they where all smiles because they knew what I was doing and thought it was good racing.
My STL assessment, the Miatas are not as slow as people think on the outside and the Integra not as bad as people think in the infield. I also think the three of us are 4 to 5 seconds off the pace when the show comes to town. I will admit that my engine is ITS+, but not as good as the I blew up in Sebring. I'm sure the two Miatas can gain HP, because they do not have Drago power. I also think you will need a partner to win next year.
Deuce broke the left front hub with two to go.
When they drafted past me going down the back straight, I knew I was in for a long day. If they did not race each other I was done. I got lucky to draft back past them, Raymond was not trying to draft Mike, I got a run on Raymond coming out of the Bus Stop. When I side drafted off of Raymond, I was then one car behind Mike and that gave me a run on him. Mike left me enough room on the bottom to put my left side tires on the first yellow line and beat him down into turn one. I might have seen that move on "Days of Thunder" or "Talladega Nights". I guaranty they would not let me do that again. Even with my good run, I did not get past Raymond until I between turn 4 and the tri-oval. I got past Mike after Start Finish.
The re-start was key as well, I put a bunch of SRFs between us going into turn one. I think at one point I was five wide going through the tri-oval. Racing SRFs stinks and I felt bad I was in the middle of the top three, ok leading the top three. I needed them as a buffer if the Miatas got back to me. I apologized to the SRF guys in impound and they where all smiles because they knew what I was doing and thought it was good racing.
My STL assessment, the Miatas are not as slow as people think on the outside and the Integra not as bad as people think in the infield. I also think the three of us are 4 to 5 seconds off the pace when the show comes to town. I will admit that my engine is ITS+, but not as good as the I blew up in Sebring. I'm sure the two Miatas can gain HP, because they do not have Drago power. I also think you will need a partner to win next year.
Deuce broke the left front hub with two to go.
so an admittedly not full tilt STL integra, a full tilt ITS miata (99-00), and a less than East Street spec STL 99-00 miata are all roughly on par at a specific track. groovy. I agree with your assessment in general but just want to point out that the BOP observed is not actually representative of the rule set. it was a good race though. I also agree that when K20 powered FA or later civics hit the joint at the runoffs next year 4-5s will fall from the lap record. and I still like kirk's general idea that there ought to be a class for actual touring cars among the myriad classes with the name of touring, currently being won by a select few, non touring, cars.
What's the skinny on the "concorde agreement" and in what way will STL, Prod, GT, and Touring (IT??) be merged, killed off, or otherwise affected? arguing about category rules now might be a moot point with that in the distance.
What's the skinny on the "concorde agreement" and in what way will STL, Prod, GT, and Touring (IT??) be merged, killed off, or otherwise affected? arguing about category rules now might be a moot point with that in the distance.
I'm a bit bummed that this forum has been down during a very critical point in our evolution. The STAC/CRB has been in deep discussions regarding "sports cars" and how to define them, and what, if anything, to do about it. We solicited feedback from members (see Fastrack note below); we were looking for assistance in defining "sports car" and how to deal with it. We received several letters but most simply expressed support for, or disagreement with, the idea.
Given the "rules year" we are at the final opportunities to do anything for 2015; once the January GCR is approved we can only change weights, tires, and restrictors. The STAC is looking to create a "placeholder" in the GCR, with maybe a token weight number in there just to save the place and give us the opportunity to adjust later. In our meeting last night, there was support for this idea, and we are looking to recommend something to the CRB for their next meeting.
It's almost really too late to send an email to the CRB with input - we have to submit something by next week - but if you have ideas for defining a "sports car", now is the time to do it. Don't bother sending letters "for" or "against", we're well past that stage... - Greg
October Fastrack WDYT: Instead of adding more weight to all rear-wheel drive cars, the CRB is considering a performance equalizer in STU and STL specifically for "sports cars", as opposed to standard "touring cars".
The definition of "sports cars" include such features as:
1. Engine location (front, front-mid, rear-mid, rear),
2. Number of doors,
3. Suspension design,
4. Overall dimensions, and/or
5. Manufacturer-published interior volume.
Among the equalizers being considered are (for sports cars) are:
1. Smaller tire section width,
2. Additional weight(with or without reducing overall class base weights), and
3. Restrictors.
The CRB would like membership input on the general idea, as well as thoughts on definitions/characterization of a sports car as well as suggested performance equalizers. Please send your feedback through the SCCA letter system at crbscca.com.
Given the "rules year" we are at the final opportunities to do anything for 2015; once the January GCR is approved we can only change weights, tires, and restrictors. The STAC is looking to create a "placeholder" in the GCR, with maybe a token weight number in there just to save the place and give us the opportunity to adjust later. In our meeting last night, there was support for this idea, and we are looking to recommend something to the CRB for their next meeting.
It's almost really too late to send an email to the CRB with input - we have to submit something by next week - but if you have ideas for defining a "sports car", now is the time to do it. Don't bother sending letters "for" or "against", we're well past that stage... - Greg
October Fastrack WDYT: Instead of adding more weight to all rear-wheel drive cars, the CRB is considering a performance equalizer in STU and STL specifically for "sports cars", as opposed to standard "touring cars".
The definition of "sports cars" include such features as:
1. Engine location (front, front-mid, rear-mid, rear),
2. Number of doors,
3. Suspension design,
4. Overall dimensions, and/or
5. Manufacturer-published interior volume.
Among the equalizers being considered are (for sports cars) are:
1. Smaller tire section width,
2. Additional weight(with or without reducing overall class base weights), and
3. Restrictors.
The CRB would like membership input on the general idea, as well as thoughts on definitions/characterization of a sports car as well as suggested performance equalizers. Please send your feedback through the SCCA letter system at crbscca.com.
Note: I spent the last 5 months building a "true" STL car so was too busy to read this and the threads is too long now to read every post...
I'm a "new" STL guy that just found this thread. This summer I built a 90%-95% build 95 Civic Coupe with a B18 GSR motor with the goal of playing in STL and seeing how well I can do at the Runoffs the next 2 years. I built the Civic knowing that there are combinations of chassis/motors out there (mainly RWD sports cars) that should be much faster - but I did so counting on "performance adjustments" that are continuously re-examined & tweaked so that cars like mine won't be relegated to Mid-pack status. We will see. If after 2016 this is the case then I'll take the car to IT or Prod somewhere....
That said - I see the class as a non-sports car class. One where Miatas, RX-7s, Porsche 944 type vehicles aren't overdogs and quite honestly slight underdogs. IF it turns into a Miata/Porsche./RXT/Must have a RWD class then I'm gone. My hope of that the "powers that be" realize that if it does indeed turn into a "sports car class" then people like me that are starting to build "true" STL cars will leave for other pastures. IMHO the rules must be written to allow a wide variety of chassis/engine combos to have a shot at running near the front if the class has a chance at thriving.
I'm a "new" STL guy that just found this thread. This summer I built a 90%-95% build 95 Civic Coupe with a B18 GSR motor with the goal of playing in STL and seeing how well I can do at the Runoffs the next 2 years. I built the Civic knowing that there are combinations of chassis/motors out there (mainly RWD sports cars) that should be much faster - but I did so counting on "performance adjustments" that are continuously re-examined & tweaked so that cars like mine won't be relegated to Mid-pack status. We will see. If after 2016 this is the case then I'll take the car to IT or Prod somewhere....
That said - I see the class as a non-sports car class. One where Miatas, RX-7s, Porsche 944 type vehicles aren't overdogs and quite honestly slight underdogs. IF it turns into a Miata/Porsche./RXT/Must have a RWD class then I'm gone. My hope of that the "powers that be" realize that if it does indeed turn into a "sports car class" then people like me that are starting to build "true" STL cars will leave for other pastures. IMHO the rules must be written to allow a wide variety of chassis/engine combos to have a shot at running near the front if the class has a chance at thriving.
Last edited:
dropkick317
New member
So I sold my FP Civic and bought a Z4 with the intent to build an STU car... Should I just stop?
adamjabaay
New member
my guess is you'll be fine
My perception is that STU suffers from a completely different - or at least bigger - challenge, that being reconciling turbo/blown and NA engines. I got very excited about the potential of the Jetta TDI I drove 2 years ago, and the tuners seemed to think we could get it to where it needed to be, power-wise, if we were willing to compromise the endurance and/or smoke expectations we'd set for the project. However, I had a realization that if I had any interest in being competitive in Majors or the Ruboffs, the second it was competitive - as the ONLY example of a forced-induction diesel in the crowd - it was going to have a huge target on it for a lead or inlet diameter screwing. That didn't sound like a good use of money.
K
K
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
I sent my letter two days ago. Touring classes in the SCCA were never meant to exclude Sports cars. People need to understand it's just a name, not a philosophy. The 2014 results from Majors and the Runoffs clearly show me that the current system of weight penalties for RWD etc is working.
Edit: If I were king for a day I would actually EXPAND the class to include older chassis and super cool iterations.
Edit: If I were king for a day I would actually EXPAND the class to include older chassis and super cool iterations.
Last edited:
SM Field Fillers: I like them. Sure it takes a well prepared and driven STL car to beat a national caliber prepped and driven SM - so if I;m getting beaten by them then I KNOW that I have to step up my game. Good to have decent yardsticks to race with. IMHO of coarse.
Competitive Adjustments: If the goal is to have a many chassis/motor combos that can win then I see no way that a pure displacement/drive configuration/suspension type formula that adjusts weights will work. The spread of performance potential is greater than within an IT class, and if I understand the IT regs then more than a few cars have additional weight adjustments to the "formula weight". The K20 already has a restrictor -right? is this proof that there will be overdog motors, chassis, and motor/chassis combos? I think so. So the door is open to "line item" adjustments. Why not do that for chassis as well once they prove to be overdogs? IMHO if the Miata starts "dominating" then it should get adjusted with added weight, less tire, etc. - as should any other Frankenstein that someone dreams up.
Competitive Adjustments: If the goal is to have a many chassis/motor combos that can win then I see no way that a pure displacement/drive configuration/suspension type formula that adjusts weights will work. The spread of performance potential is greater than within an IT class, and if I understand the IT regs then more than a few cars have additional weight adjustments to the "formula weight". The K20 already has a restrictor -right? is this proof that there will be overdog motors, chassis, and motor/chassis combos? I think so. So the door is open to "line item" adjustments. Why not do that for chassis as well once they prove to be overdogs? IMHO if the Miata starts "dominating" then it should get adjusted with added weight, less tire, etc. - as should any other Frankenstein that someone dreams up.
Last edited:
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
No issues. 'How' can be 'nothing'. To make a change now, with the results we saw in 2014, is total BS. Unless you split the classes and give the two types of cars separate places to play.
