535 replies to this topic

[James York]

Therein lies the question.  What do WE (all of SM) want it to be?  I would say you and I probably disagree.

 

Hopefully we can have a good conversation in person next weekend at TWS.

 

mhiggens,

 

I can't speak for others, but myself why I don't race something other (MX5 cup, GT2, or whatever class).  Its costs and competition.  Can I afford to travel across the country and race MX5 cup serious enough to win.  No.  Schedule sucks and cost too high.  And then for what?  To race lesser caliber drivers? (or fewer as they do have some excellent drivers in mx5 cup).  Just look at the grid times in MX5 cup vs. a Major race in SCCA and see which has the depth of talent.

 

Why not SM5 or a Panoz you ask?, Not interested in a lapping class because I am the only one entered (or a few).  I race the class that is 1) A challenge, 2) I can afford, and 3) Where all the other best drivers run.  I know there all lots of drivers that could afford bigger faster cars, but run SM.  We run SM for the personal challenge of fierce competition.  If I just wanted a trophy or tire contingency I would be gone long ago.

 

You can't legislate out $$ from the class.  It will never work.  

 

Regarding TWS.  I might come up for the day to visit some friends, but I am presently without a car.  So I won't be driving.

[Mark McCallister]

While I like Marc's suggestion above (though I know nothing about aftermarket headers), and while I am loathe to split the class in any way, what if we just leave the SM rules alone (other than clarifying the compression and plunge cut rules to eliminate engine builder confusion), and create a regional-only class that's NA-only.  Call it SMRegional/SMR.  Perhaps switch back to a stock airbox on the 1.6s if that would reduce tuning requirements (there must be thousands of those on shelves for cheap).  Don't prevent me from running my 1.6 in SM, but give me the option of racing with other NAs in a regional class.  And no, not IT. 

 

I might even consider continuing to develop my 1.6 if I thought I would have a chance of contending for podiums in it (not a chance currently with all the top drivers/cars in the SE, even with 10X my budget).  I would be happy to spend a couple thousand on my 1.6 to give it some value in the marketplace again and make it competitive for me or a new/faster owner.  I have probably $17k in the car, not including labor, and it's worth maybe $6-7k on the market.  Nobody wants to race 1.6s now (outside a couple regional pockets) except in chumpcar/etc, and my 1.6 is too well prepped (minus pro motor) and shiny for that life.  As it stands, I have to consider that $17-6=$11k a loss (hey, it's racing, so be it..), and just start developing my '99 that's in the garage waiting for me to start turning wrenches on it.  Making NAs/1.6s more competitive, one way or another, will help everyone out.

[Waterboy]

Everyone wants to keep saying no but the easiest solution is two different classes.  SSM for the 1.6 or whatever you want to call it.  SM for the 1.8's.  You can still race your 1.6 in SM but don't bitch when you don't compete.  Everyone says it will diminish the class size, but at the same time everyone says 1.6's aren't racing because they aren't competitive.  Which is it?  If they aren't racing pretty hard to diminish the class size.  SSM in the DC region is VERY successful because people took the time to figure it out instead of whining.  There is a class rep that ensures the rules are followed and it is cheap/cheaper.  Uncork the 94-97 to whatever degree they need to be to compete with the 99+ and move on.

 

Or keep on filling these webservers for the next 20 years because you feel like bitching and no one at home will listen to you.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

A properly whistling vvt car should not receive any penalty right now. They currently have no clear advantage within the usable race range.

 

When has a vvt car not whistled properly?  They have all passed the whislte test at nasa nats as well as daytona!!!!

 

They should have rules adjusted unless those drivers want to come here and admit that their accomplishments of majors wiins and podiums were due to them cheating the whistler!

 

end of story...

[FTodaro]

When has a vvt car not whistled properly?  They have all passed the whislte test at nasa nats as well as daytona!!!!

 

They should have rules adjusted unless those drivers want to come here and admit that their accomplishments of majors wiins and podiums were due to them cheating the whistler!

 

end of story...

As i understand it there was confusion about the new rule at Daytona.

 

I think Chris's point is if you eliminate Whistle gate issues get the compression right, the trade off between a top 99 and a top 01+ is approximately this the 99 has +2 to +3 on HP and the 01 has approximately +2 over the 99 on Tq.

 

That makes them pretty close depending on if your talking short track or long track. So First off i think they should stay the same, if the 99 is the bench. if you have a 99 you are on the short end at short tracks and on the long end at long tracks.

 

Putting a significant wt penalty will only make the 99 better at short and long tracks.

[Jim Drago]

Here are both of my cars before leaving to California. Compression was never above the rule, heads both built the same with edge broke on STR. The 02 is better to 6000, basically the same/similar up to 6500 and the 00 is better above 6500. We don't spend as much time above 6500 as you would think. We spend zero time above 6500 in 4th at Laguna which is why the VVT car was a better choice there. Had I not had the braking issues and the car shutting off at the bottom of corkscrew, I would have run the 03 car at Laguna. However, I was always running the 00 at Road Atlanta at the NASA Champs. I believe the cars are very close and track dependent.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

As i understand it there was confusion about the new rule at Daytona.

 

I think Chris's point is if you eliminate Whistle gate issues get the compression right, the trade off between a top 99 and a top 01+ is approximately this the 99 has +2 to +3 on HP and the 01 has approximately +2 over the 99 on Tq.

 

That makes them pretty close depending on if your talking short track or long track. So First off i think they should stay the same, if the 99 is the bench. if you have a 99 you are on the short end at short tracks and on the long end at long tracks.

 

Putting a significant wt penalty will only make the 99 better at short and long tracks.

 

No vvt car has ever been found non compliant on compression to my knowledge, you can suspect in your favor all you want.  Those are facts!  there have been races won and podiums taken by vvt cars at even t he highest hp tracks.  Watkins, Road Atlanta, Daytona, etc...

 

Penalize the car as should be done, then adjust as proved to be to much, this is how we got the 99 to where it is today.  we suffered for a year under the RP rules of 2012 if i remember the year correctly the penalty was to much and was subsequintly adjusted the next year however not back too where it was 2 years prior.

[FTodaro]

That looks to be about 1 to 2 hp advantage 2000 from 6,000 on, I an not sure i see "basically the same". but that last 1000 rpm before the shift in 4th is all the straightaway stuff trying to pass.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Or the 99 just trying to catch back up???  ummmhummm

[Tom OPM]

When has a vvt car not whistled properly?  They have all passed the whislte test at nasa nats as well as daytona!!!!

 

They should have rules adjusted unless those drivers want to come here and admit that their accomplishments of majors wiins and podiums were due to them cheating the whistler!

 

end of story...

Kyle keep in mind all cars whistled at Daytona failed with VC off and passed with VC on, not just VVT cars. Some closer than others but all over. You think all 99 and VVT drivers should give up their accomplishments for compression ? How about STR problems, should all those drivers give up those results also. So far the VVT cars have shown NOTHING other than being competitive at certain tracks.

[James York]

No vvt car has ever been found non compliant on compression to my knowledge, you can suspect in your favor all you want.  Those are facts!  there have been races won and podiums taken by vvt cars at even t he highest hp tracks.  Watkins, Road Atlanta, Daytona, etc...

 

Penalize the car as should be done, then adjust as proved to be to much, this is how we got the 99 to where it is today.  we suffered for a year under the RP rules of 2012 if i remember the year correctly the penalty was to much and was subsequintly adjusted the next year however not back too where it was 2 years prior.

 

Just curious as to your thought as why you feel the VVT car needs a penalty?  Did they win a disproportionate number of races?  If they won a couple races and podium, isn't that about right for equally prepped cars that as very close in performance?  Or do you think that none should have ever been on the podium at any time?  

 

I am having difficulty in seeing why they need to be slowed down today. 

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

[quote name="AJ Roderick" post="68363" timestamp="1414585931"]Buy my '99, its ready to go and you wont have to build anything. lol
 
 You never gave me an answer or price if your selling it.

You have my number !

[Tom OPM]

No vvt car has ever been found non compliant on compression to my knowledge, you can suspect in your favor all you want.  Those are facts!  there have been races won and podiums taken by vvt cars at even t he highest hp tracks.  Watkins, Road Atlanta, Daytona, etc...

 

Penalize the car as should be done, then adjust as proved to be to much, this is how we got the 99 to where it is today.  we suffered for a year under the RP rules of 2012 if i remember the year correctly the penalty was to much and was subsequintly adjusted the next year however not back too where it was 2 years prior.

And new track records by 99's at WG and Daytona. They need to be penalized also !!!!!. Do we have any real FACTS why the VVT needs to be penalized ? Or are we just upset at the VVT cars because at some tracks they can actually run and maybe beat a 99.

[FTodaro]

Edit, The tq advantage by Jims chart may be more than 2 i stated above,  but the 99 Tq curve is flatter and longer but lower. Does not change my mind.

 

Jim had his thumb on the dyno.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Kyle keep in mind all cars whistled at Daytona failed with VC off and passed with VC on, not just VVT cars. Some closer than others but all over. You think all 99 and VVT drivers should give up their accomplishments for compression ? How about STR problems, should all those drivers give up those results also. So far the VVT cars have shown NOTHING other than being competitive at certain tracks.

 

the vvt podium at Watkins, VIR, ATL, Daytona, Mid ohio.  So thats kinda like all tracks IMO. 

 

Armstong had to give back his yellow jersey...  even though he got through the tech shed.

[Jim Drago]

Edit, The tq advantage by Jims chart may be more than 2 i stated above,  but the 99 Tq curve is flatter and longer but lower. Does not change my mind.
 
Jim had his thumb on the dyno.

And Franks is 3/2 better than mine

[Caveman-kwebb99]

And Franks is 3/2 better than mine

 

another clear reason the car needs to be penalized!!!!

[Caveman-kwebb99]

 Do we have any real FACTS why the VVT needs to be penalized ? Or are we just upset at the VVT cars because at some tracks they can actually run and maybe beat a 99.

 

There is as many facts for penalizing if not more then those against penalizing.  

 

nasa penalized the 99-00 several years ago it proved to be right, although it was a bit to much on the adjustment.  I feel vvt need adjustment and if it is to large then give some back when it is proved down the road.

 

There is no reason why the 01+ should be car of year which it has become.  

 

I would much rather race all those good drivers that are racing in 01+ cars if they are in 99's.  That is a fact, although there is no data to support this fact.  

[Jim Drago]

I have a feeling this was lost since it was posted with dyno sheets of my cars.. Most were figuring max hp/tq numbers..
Jim


Here are both of my cars before leaving to California. Compression was never above the rule( with or without valve cover, heads both built the same with edge broke on STR. The 02 is better to 6000, basically the same/similar up to 6500 and the 00 is better above 6500. We don't spend as much time above 6500 as you would think. We spend zero time above 6500 in 4th at Laguna which is why the VVT car was a better choice there. Had I not had the braking issues and the car shutting off at the bottom of corkscrew, I would have run the 03 car at Laguna. However, I was always running the 00 at Road Atlanta at the NASA Champs. I believe the cars are very close and track dependent.

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

the vvt podium at Watkins, VIR, ATL, Daytona, Mid ohio.  So thats kinda like all tracks IMO. 
 
Armstong had to give back his yellow jersey...  even though he got through the tech shed.

Now you guys sound like us 1.6 guys complaining and it's only been 1 year for you guys !

Lmao !!!