March 2011 Fastrack

[Duc]

It's not a requirement, but it is a bit of a POOMA benchmark. This is easily inferred by the performance level set by the STAC between, for example, the Integra GS-R and the Integra Type R. The explicit reason that the GS-R (170hp stock) is allowed and the Type R (190hp?) is not is because the B18C5 engine exceeds the POOMA performance level set for the class.

With that in mind, you can pretty much expect that nothing much more powerful than 170/180hp will get approved for STL...

^^^ All personal opinion, not official positions of the STAC, and easily inferred by anyone via existing public information.


There's a few things that got missed in this month's Fastrack; I think this was one of them. I don't think I speak out of turn to reveal that unless something happened in the sausage factory after the STAC got it, we declined this request for the same reason as I describe above, that this would allow the performance level of the class to exceed the expected benchmark.

We've got our implied performance level for STL, and that's in the 170/180hp stock crank range. Anything more powerful than that is going to be pushed to STU. Keep that in mind as you consider the class going forward... - GA

Understood, the 2ZZ is on that boarder, stock. The stock cam gives a lift of .450 and I was hoping to get the extra .025 added then the car would be allowed in the class without a stock engine. I really don't really want to go STU. And it is the 180 HP stock range. Ah to have a car that is on the fringe of everything.

[Greg Amy]

...the 2ZZ is on that boarder, stock. The stock cam gives a lift of .450 and I was hoping to get the extra .025 added then the car would be allowed in the class without a stock engine....And it is the 180 HP stock range...

Were I in your position, I'd make a specific request to allow the 2ZZ engine into STL with stock cams, and include with that request detailed specs, including manufacturer-rated output numbers (and dyno charts, if you have them).

PLEASE NOTE: I am NOT NOT NOT implying that it would get approved. In fact, I highly doubt it would, given the STAC's focus is on STO/STU right now and the 2ZZ approval into STL with stock cams would require a specific deviation/allowance in the rules (and we're kinda sour on the idea of a lot of exceptions as a general guideline). But the STAC is a big proponent of STL and really wants to see it become successful (and, hopefully soon, a National class); the request could generate some internal discussions vis-a-vis STL philosophy and direction.

Food for thought. - GA