The Turbo problem in STU

[Z3_GoCar]

I am building an all out engine, and so have several others. I know that the VAC car that finished 7th was with an all out built motor and chassis. Irish Mike was using his acutal World Challenge car. So, your insinuation that there are no fully built N/A cars is patently false. It's also false that a turbo car would be any less expensive build than a N/A build, it requires an additonal highly engineered part that stresses all other parts around it.

[Rabbit07]

My observations of the Result of the RunOfFs are that the only car that really needs an adjustment is the Lotus. There wasn't a single Turbo car there other than the one found to be non compliant that went any faster than the NA cars.

[JS154]

My observations of the Result of the RunOfFs are that the only car that really needs an adjustment is the Lotus. There wasn't a single Turbo car there other than the one found to be non compliant that went any faster than the NA cars.

Non-compliant, that sounds so nice.

I have a stronger opinion that I will keep to myself for now.

Chris is pretty right, except for one angle I think is "small FI cars" need to be adjusted. The rest of them were on par with where we expected them to be.

The Audi we knew was going to be a threat if it rained. It did.

Irish Mike and I were on par with where we were the last couple of years. The VAc car was a full build, but not fully sorted. Mike's car is built and sorted, and mine is built and (now) sorted too.

[Knestis]

I am building an all out engine, and so have several others. I know that the VAC car that finished 7th was with an all out built motor and chassis. Irish Mike was using his acutal World Challenge car. So, your insinuation that there are no fully built N/A cars is patently false. It's also false that a turbo car would be any less expensive build than a N/A build, it requires an additonal highly engineered part that stresses all other parts around it.

I didn't say either of those things.

I said that it's easier to get more bang for the first 90% of spending (against a theoretical all-in build) with a turbo than it is with an NA engine, and I stand by that assertion.

As to particular examples, I have exactly ZERO knowledge of what Flynn or anyone else spent on their engines. Whether it's his "actual" WC car (or not) has no bearing.

My general complaint is that this argument focuses on only one factor - and a binary one at that. Whether a car has a turbo (so code that"1" in the data) or no turbo (code it "0") simply is NOT a good predictor of lap times, in and of itself without considering other variables.

How about roof height for starters...? My PERSONAL druthers are that "Touring" cars should be defined by interior volume, before other factors get dealt with, to make sure that they are all starting on a more even platform. Lots of other variables (e.g., weight reduction potential, frontal area, parasitic drag, add-on wing efficiency, CoG, etc., etc.) are built on that foundation and "Lotus" and "Miata" don't seem consistent with first-principle understandings of what a Touring Car is (see also, "Grand Touring").

K

[Rabbit07]

K, I am with you brother. Cars such as the Miata, Solstice, Lotus really have no place in touring car racing. I noticed this when I first became aware of the class. I even had mentioned it to rules makers, but was dismissed. No surprise to me that cars such as this have an advantage regardless of them being boosted or not.

[Greg Amy]

Amen.

[Dano77]

I was always told a Tourng Car needed to have a back seat. These cars you speak of have no back seat. Certain exceptions have been made in the past, like the RX7 with the GI Joe sized rear seats.

Th Lotus and Miata punch a VERY small hole in the air. An Intgra or Jetta a Very Large hole.

Just sayin...

[Andy Bettencourt]

Observations:

• If it's really a Touring class then the 2 seaters need to go - but its not and never was
• Every single 'T' class in the SCCA has 2 seaters. STO, STU and STL. 4 seats was never part of the concept, 'Touring' was just a name when envisioning a place for ex-WCTC to land in SCCA amateur racing and giving other cars a chance to be built to those specs. It's right in the Purpose statement in the GCR
• Solo breaks their 'Street Touring' up every which way from Sunday - in a way I can't quite figure out but for sure RWD/FWD and 2 seats and 4+
• Using wet conditions for a 'look' at results is a tough call
• Forced induction is a freaking NIGHTMARE to get right. Even in Pro racing they can't get it right the first few years. It takes a mandatory $12K dollar Bosch ECU now so they can monitor every single output to get close

It's a great set of classes and STL is still ramping up. I really enjoyed seeing more FWD cars out there because of the creativity you can apply when building them. I still wish you could use any year chassis and modern powerplants. Maybe even total Frankenstein cars like an ITS-chassis 924/944 with a K20.


I thought about picking up a GA-spec ST RX-8, tune it a bit and do some Nationals but then realized Laguna was next. I think the cars with the best blend of power and handling with be the cars to beat until it hits Daytona...


Good stuff.

[JS154]

Observations:

• If it's really a Touring class then the 2 seaters need to go - but its not and never was
• Every single 'T' class in the SCCA has 2 seaters. STO, STU and STL. 4 seats was never part of the concept, 'Touring' was just a name when envisioning a place for ex-WCTC to land in SCCA amateur racing and giving other cars a chance to be built to those specs. It's right in the Purpose statement in the GCR
• Solo breaks their 'Street Touring' up every which way from Sunday - in a way I can't quite figure out but for sure RWD/FWD and 2 seats and 4+
• Using wet conditions for a 'look' at results is a tough call
• Forced induction is a freaking NIGHTMARE to get right. Even in Pro racing they can't get it right the first few years. It takes a mandatory $12K dollar Bosch ECU now so they can monitor every single output to get close

It's a great set of classes and STL is still ramping up. I really enjoyed seeing more FWD cars out there because of the creativity you can apply when building them. I still wish you could use any year chassis and modern powerplants. Maybe even total Frankenstein cars like an ITS-chassis 924/944 with a K20.


I thought about picking up a GA-spec ST RX-8, tune it a bit and do some Nationals but then realized Laguna was next. I think the cars with the best blend of power and handling with be the cars to beat until it hits Daytona...


Good stuff.

It's not a Touring class - it has nothing to do with Street Touring. It really is Super Touring - wI doubt anyone is going to pick a bone over a rear seat or 2+2er or no rear seat when we need cars and entries. Aside from all that what it really comes down to is it is an engine class.