| Arnie | 11-17-2005 07:49 PM |
RallyX rules for 06
�
�
Here are the basic new rules for nationals and we'll see if the the regions adopt them. The exact wording is not yet set in stone.
[url]http://www.coloradorallycross.org/rules-2006.htm[/url]
further discussions:
[url]http://www.awdpirates.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6911&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0[/url]
discuss.
[url]http://www.coloradorallycross.org/rules-2006.htm[/url]
further discussions:
[url]http://www.awdpirates.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6911&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0[/url]
discuss.
| cowapult | 11-17-2005 11:14 PM |
can of worms <- opened :D
| Fred | 11-17-2005 11:15 PM |
Well that looks pretty simple, unlike the current rules. :lol:
| pcowan | 11-18-2005 01:05 AM |
A few comments (Since I'm sure I'm not the only one that doesn't want to sign up on another forum):
* A '99 2.5RS will be competing against a '06 STi in 4A?
* Is this something created by the SCCA or by Colorado RallyX?
* so this basically says the following are not allowed ever, right?
Fully Ajdustable shocks (DMS, Tein HG, etc)
Seam welding
Quick steering rack
Turbo plumping (or do those fall under "Hoses")
...Any stage rally car above Production class
Its sad that the cars that are always fun to watch (Open/RM4/etc) won't be allowed to play at all. Further, you're allowing people who can shell out for rally tires in the same classes as stock cars. i.e. within my allowed and limited modification, I can put 15" rally tires (and required brakes) on a 06 STi with a piggy back ECU and turbo back exhaust (lets say ~350ft/lb) and be racing against stock 02 WRXs on RE92s. I hardly count that as fair or even.
Is there an open request for comments anywhere?
* A '99 2.5RS will be competing against a '06 STi in 4A?
* Is this something created by the SCCA or by Colorado RallyX?
* so this basically says the following are not allowed ever, right?
Fully Ajdustable shocks (DMS, Tein HG, etc)
Seam welding
Quick steering rack
Turbo plumping (or do those fall under "Hoses")
...Any stage rally car above Production class
Its sad that the cars that are always fun to watch (Open/RM4/etc) won't be allowed to play at all. Further, you're allowing people who can shell out for rally tires in the same classes as stock cars. i.e. within my allowed and limited modification, I can put 15" rally tires (and required brakes) on a 06 STi with a piggy back ECU and turbo back exhaust (lets say ~350ft/lb) and be racing against stock 02 WRXs on RE92s. I hardly count that as fair or even.
Is there an open request for comments anywhere?
| mike270 | 11-18-2005 01:49 AM |
You will be allowed to play with basically whatever you want, you will just be moved up into the Modified class. To stay in the stock classes you must have 3 or less of the mods. With all those mods you listed you wouldn't be in stock class anymore so you wouldn't be competing against a stock WRX.
It actually seems pretty fair to me. That way a full rally prepped PGT car won't be up against a stock RS.
It actually seems pretty fair to me. That way a full rally prepped PGT car won't be up against a stock RS.
| Fred | 11-18-2005 08:44 AM |
I still think that non-metal alternate mounts and bushings should be allowed in the lowest classes -- without having to choose between them and say rally tires for example. They're not going to be a huge performance advantage, but they will increase reliability - and breaking an engine mount or suspension bushing should not be something that should determine whether you win or lose. :rolleyes:
| akuhner | 11-18-2005 09:33 AM |
[QUOTE=Fred] breaking an engine mount or suspension bushing should not be something that should determine whether you win or lose. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
You've broken engine mounts at a rally-x?!? Wow. People in the northeast might remember the days when Otis Dimiters won every rally-x he went to in his beat ass nearly stock 98 RS. After over 40 rally crosses the thing is the biggest POS RS you'll ever see, but the engine mounts are still original, and he still wins events in it. I do agree with your other logic - it's not enough of an advantage to make a difference, so why exclude them?
[QUOTE=pcowan] * A '99 2.5RS will be competing against a '06 STi in 4A?[/QUOTE]This past weekend at the Rally NY Rally-x I beat 2 STIs, one fully rally prepped, and 4 or 5 WRXs in my '98 RS with minimal power mods. I was against this rule too at first, but I've accepted it now (mostly because my coilovers put me in modified anyway!). My only question is, how many cars are really going to be in 4B? 2.2L Imprezas and Legacies, but what else? A 2.2L Impreza could be just as fast as an RS in the right hands, but you don't even see many of them at rally-x anyway.
Alex
You've broken engine mounts at a rally-x?!? Wow. People in the northeast might remember the days when Otis Dimiters won every rally-x he went to in his beat ass nearly stock 98 RS. After over 40 rally crosses the thing is the biggest POS RS you'll ever see, but the engine mounts are still original, and he still wins events in it. I do agree with your other logic - it's not enough of an advantage to make a difference, so why exclude them?
[QUOTE=pcowan] * A '99 2.5RS will be competing against a '06 STi in 4A?[/QUOTE]This past weekend at the Rally NY Rally-x I beat 2 STIs, one fully rally prepped, and 4 or 5 WRXs in my '98 RS with minimal power mods. I was against this rule too at first, but I've accepted it now (mostly because my coilovers put me in modified anyway!). My only question is, how many cars are really going to be in 4B? 2.2L Imprezas and Legacies, but what else? A 2.2L Impreza could be just as fast as an RS in the right hands, but you don't even see many of them at rally-x anyway.
Alex
| cowapult | 11-18-2005 09:35 AM |
"not allowed" means "not allowed in stock class"
The three lists of mods go something like this:
list 1) mods allowed in stock class
list 2) mods you can run in stock class as long as you don't have more than 3 of them. If you have more than any 3 of these - you're modified.
list 3) mods that immediately bump you to modified if you have even 1 of them
These are not Colorado's, these are the national rules we have been working on all year. That said, each region can take it or leave it.
I've never seen an STI outperform an RS in a rallycross. Could that be because I've never seen STI driver come out who knew how to drive? Maybe. But you also have to admit that an RS weighs 500 lbs less. And, what on earth are you going to do with that extra 140 hp when you are in 2nd gear with no traction? Nothing productive, just make cool rooster tails.
The three lists of mods go something like this:
list 1) mods allowed in stock class
list 2) mods you can run in stock class as long as you don't have more than 3 of them. If you have more than any 3 of these - you're modified.
list 3) mods that immediately bump you to modified if you have even 1 of them
These are not Colorado's, these are the national rules we have been working on all year. That said, each region can take it or leave it.
I've never seen an STI outperform an RS in a rallycross. Could that be because I've never seen STI driver come out who knew how to drive? Maybe. But you also have to admit that an RS weighs 500 lbs less. And, what on earth are you going to do with that extra 140 hp when you are in 2nd gear with no traction? Nothing productive, just make cool rooster tails.
| Fred | 11-18-2005 10:02 AM |
[QUOTE]You've broken engine mounts at a rally-x?!? Wow.[/QUOTE]
You're reading too much into what I said - I didn't say I had broken anything, and I didn't say I was talking about Subarus. :)
[QUOTE]I've never seen an STI outperform an RS in a rallycross.[/QUOTE]
Hopefully that will change after this weekend. :devil:
You're reading too much into what I said - I didn't say I had broken anything, and I didn't say I was talking about Subarus. :)
[QUOTE]I've never seen an STI outperform an RS in a rallycross.[/QUOTE]
Hopefully that will change after this weekend. :devil:
| mrmodular | 11-18-2005 10:52 AM |
limited mods
�
�
[QUOTE=Fred]I still think that non-metal alternate mounts and bushings should be allowed in the lowest classes -- without having to choose between them and say rally tires for example. They're not going to be a huge performance advantage, but they will increase reliability - and breaking an engine mount or suspension bushing should not be something that should determine whether you win or lose. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
As a key player in the writing of the new rules, I'll share the logic on this one and one other:
The deal with bushings (and some of the other debateable items on the limited list) is to not automatically bump a vehicle that shows up with, in this case, aftermarket bushings. I pushed very hard to be realistic about what enthusiasts tend to do to their cars. From a regular competitor point of view, the Limited list may seem "limiting," but it still allows more creativity than anything to ever come out of SCCA.
Someone else was questioning the early 2.5RS in 4A. I personally insisted that 2.5s were the cutoff for the top 4WD class. Most people agree that it is completely competitive in RX.
Finally, the class 4B should be an excellent grassroots AWD class. 2.2 Imprezzas, AWD Civics, Justies, older 1.8 Subies, etc.
As a key player in the writing of the new rules, I'll share the logic on this one and one other:
The deal with bushings (and some of the other debateable items on the limited list) is to not automatically bump a vehicle that shows up with, in this case, aftermarket bushings. I pushed very hard to be realistic about what enthusiasts tend to do to their cars. From a regular competitor point of view, the Limited list may seem "limiting," but it still allows more creativity than anything to ever come out of SCCA.
Someone else was questioning the early 2.5RS in 4A. I personally insisted that 2.5s were the cutoff for the top 4WD class. Most people agree that it is completely competitive in RX.
Finally, the class 4B should be an excellent grassroots AWD class. 2.2 Imprezzas, AWD Civics, Justies, older 1.8 Subies, etc.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 11:09 AM |
the excluded (from production) modifications all seem to make sense. but the limited modifications seem a bit vague at times to me.
however, i see what you are trying to do w/them. you are truying to keep a kid w/a CF hood and some springs and a accessport from being pushed into the mod class and thus scared away from rallyx.
are non adjustable shocks/struts a "free" mod? like the KYB GR-2 or any other non adjustable unit like a tockico or bilstien. or are they a "limited" mod?
what is the appendix note regarding rally tires? i dont see the appendix anywhere.
not sure how i feel about wheel dimensions being a limited mod, they have always been "free." that being said, a smaller diameter tire can be a huge advantage by slightly changing the final drive ratio in a favorale way.
it could be argued that the interior trim panels and the door panels are the same thing.
so what defines an interior trim panel?
i see no mention of the dash. is that considered a trim panel?
what about the headliner, is that a trim panel?
you mention underdrive pulleys. what about stock diameter light pulleys? they are not underdrive pulleys but they do reduce rotating mass a bit and give just as much of a minimal benefit as a underdrive pulley.
if i am reading this right it would seem that a front and rear sway bar would count as one limited mod. is that correct?
if so, does that mean that a ground control coil over conversion kit w/springs and adjustable perches would count as one of the three mods as well? or would the springs be one and then the coilover sleeve kit be another?
also if the manufacturer of the harness says that the harness should be mounted to a harness bar can that be added and not considered one of the 3 limited mods? because that is technically not a chassis stiffener but it would also have that added effect.
i think i need to find a old corolla fx-16 GTS for P-2B. then strip the interior trim panels (1st limited mod), pull the carpet (2nd limited mod), put one some good camber/castor plates (3rd limited mod), get some nokian hakka Qs, swap in a lightweight set of racing seats w/a good harness, do all the other "free" mods and have one killer little production based rallyx machine. a car like this could probably be put together for under $2,000 (probaly closer to $1500) and be an absolute blast and in the right hands probably take an overall win at most rallycrosses. light weight and traction are key. i am torn between camber plates and rally tires. on a car that small the rally tires may just add too much rotational mass and end up hurting the car more than helping. so i am leaning more towards camber plates. i would pull the AC as the 3rd mod but i think you can get these cars w/out AC.
or, i could replace the hood fenders and rear hatch w/CF panels rather than put camber plates on and have a VERY light [I]and[/I] legal P-2B car. granted it would be VERY expensive as well but it would be legal and light as hell. i would guess under 2,000 pounds. hell, even w/out using CF i bet this car would be close to 2,000 pounds anyway.
however, would the factory mounted strut tower/firewall bracing (that is on all old GTS toyotas) bump the car into the 2M class? i would hope not.
however, i see what you are trying to do w/them. you are truying to keep a kid w/a CF hood and some springs and a accessport from being pushed into the mod class and thus scared away from rallyx.
are non adjustable shocks/struts a "free" mod? like the KYB GR-2 or any other non adjustable unit like a tockico or bilstien. or are they a "limited" mod?
what is the appendix note regarding rally tires? i dont see the appendix anywhere.
not sure how i feel about wheel dimensions being a limited mod, they have always been "free." that being said, a smaller diameter tire can be a huge advantage by slightly changing the final drive ratio in a favorale way.
it could be argued that the interior trim panels and the door panels are the same thing.
so what defines an interior trim panel?
i see no mention of the dash. is that considered a trim panel?
what about the headliner, is that a trim panel?
you mention underdrive pulleys. what about stock diameter light pulleys? they are not underdrive pulleys but they do reduce rotating mass a bit and give just as much of a minimal benefit as a underdrive pulley.
if i am reading this right it would seem that a front and rear sway bar would count as one limited mod. is that correct?
if so, does that mean that a ground control coil over conversion kit w/springs and adjustable perches would count as one of the three mods as well? or would the springs be one and then the coilover sleeve kit be another?
also if the manufacturer of the harness says that the harness should be mounted to a harness bar can that be added and not considered one of the 3 limited mods? because that is technically not a chassis stiffener but it would also have that added effect.
i think i need to find a old corolla fx-16 GTS for P-2B. then strip the interior trim panels (1st limited mod), pull the carpet (2nd limited mod), put one some good camber/castor plates (3rd limited mod), get some nokian hakka Qs, swap in a lightweight set of racing seats w/a good harness, do all the other "free" mods and have one killer little production based rallyx machine. a car like this could probably be put together for under $2,000 (probaly closer to $1500) and be an absolute blast and in the right hands probably take an overall win at most rallycrosses. light weight and traction are key. i am torn between camber plates and rally tires. on a car that small the rally tires may just add too much rotational mass and end up hurting the car more than helping. so i am leaning more towards camber plates. i would pull the AC as the 3rd mod but i think you can get these cars w/out AC.
or, i could replace the hood fenders and rear hatch w/CF panels rather than put camber plates on and have a VERY light [I]and[/I] legal P-2B car. granted it would be VERY expensive as well but it would be legal and light as hell. i would guess under 2,000 pounds. hell, even w/out using CF i bet this car would be close to 2,000 pounds anyway.
however, would the factory mounted strut tower/firewall bracing (that is on all old GTS toyotas) bump the car into the 2M class? i would hope not.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 11:17 AM |
[QUOTE=cowapult]I've never seen an STI outperform an RS in a rallycross. Could that be because I've never seen STI driver come out who knew how to drive? Maybe. [/QUOTE]
Mark Utecht has a stock 04 STi for rallyx and he is nearly unbeatable in it w/the Nokian WRs on the 17s. and we have some skilled drivers in a RS as well. however, he would proably beat himself in the STi if he drove a RS at the same event.
the only vehicle that occasionaly beats him is Jim Cox's crazy rally truck. unless the course is VERY tight then the rest of us have a chance to get close to him. or if he gets abit to throttle happy and takes out a couple cones. but that doesnt happen very often.
Mark Utecht has a stock 04 STi for rallyx and he is nearly unbeatable in it w/the Nokian WRs on the 17s. and we have some skilled drivers in a RS as well. however, he would proably beat himself in the STi if he drove a RS at the same event.
the only vehicle that occasionaly beats him is Jim Cox's crazy rally truck. unless the course is VERY tight then the rest of us have a chance to get close to him. or if he gets abit to throttle happy and takes out a couple cones. but that doesnt happen very often.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 11:20 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]
Finally, the class 4B should be an excellent grassroots AWD class. 2.2 Imprezzas, AWD Civics, Justies, older 1.8 Subies, etc.[/QUOTE]
i agree w/this.
i think that is awesome. that will be a very fun AWD classs. i wish stage rally would do that.
Finally, the class 4B should be an excellent grassroots AWD class. 2.2 Imprezzas, AWD Civics, Justies, older 1.8 Subies, etc.[/QUOTE]
i agree w/this.
i think that is awesome. that will be a very fun AWD classs. i wish stage rally would do that.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 11:37 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]As a key player in the writing of the new rules, I'll share the logic on this one and one other:
The deal with bushings (and some of the other debateable items on the limited list) is to not automatically bump a vehicle that shows up with, in this case, aftermarket bushings. I pushed very hard to be realistic about what enthusiasts tend to do to their cars. From a regular competitor point of view, the Limited list may seem "limiting," but it still allows more creativity than anything to ever come out of SCCA.[/QUOTE]
i agree w/this too. despite what my previous long winded post might lead people to believe. i was looking at the rules from a analytical/clarification point of view.
the most limiting thing in rallycross is the dirt surface we choose to compete on. it changes throughout the day and no matter how modified and powerfull a car is it really doesnt matter if you cant put the power to the ground.
personally i really liked the 3 level rule concept from last year it had a nice middle gound between rally cars and production cars.
production-no mods.
modified-some mods. i liked this level the best.
rally/open-anything goes.
but i agree that there were too many classes in that system. we dont have the numbers to fill that many classes yet.
no rule set will be perfect for everyone. but hey, thats just how it works. and it is our job as competitors to give feedback and to try and fit our cars to the rule provided.
i am not totally thrilled that my car will go into the mod class based on the things we did to conform to the short lived rules from last year. we have rally tires, pulled the carpet, the rear seats, the trunk interior trim and carpet, as well as most of the interior trim. but oh well. i will still be competing against the same cars as before.
i wish that the mod class had a distinction between G5 ande G2 though.
my hypothetical FX/16 doesnt stand a chance against a well built G5 Omni GLH-S.
However, the argument could be made that it is my own damn fault for building an uncompetitive car so...
The deal with bushings (and some of the other debateable items on the limited list) is to not automatically bump a vehicle that shows up with, in this case, aftermarket bushings. I pushed very hard to be realistic about what enthusiasts tend to do to their cars. From a regular competitor point of view, the Limited list may seem "limiting," but it still allows more creativity than anything to ever come out of SCCA.[/QUOTE]
i agree w/this too. despite what my previous long winded post might lead people to believe. i was looking at the rules from a analytical/clarification point of view.
the most limiting thing in rallycross is the dirt surface we choose to compete on. it changes throughout the day and no matter how modified and powerfull a car is it really doesnt matter if you cant put the power to the ground.
personally i really liked the 3 level rule concept from last year it had a nice middle gound between rally cars and production cars.
production-no mods.
modified-some mods. i liked this level the best.
rally/open-anything goes.
but i agree that there were too many classes in that system. we dont have the numbers to fill that many classes yet.
no rule set will be perfect for everyone. but hey, thats just how it works. and it is our job as competitors to give feedback and to try and fit our cars to the rule provided.
i am not totally thrilled that my car will go into the mod class based on the things we did to conform to the short lived rules from last year. we have rally tires, pulled the carpet, the rear seats, the trunk interior trim and carpet, as well as most of the interior trim. but oh well. i will still be competing against the same cars as before.
i wish that the mod class had a distinction between G5 ande G2 though.
my hypothetical FX/16 doesnt stand a chance against a well built G5 Omni GLH-S.
However, the argument could be made that it is my own damn fault for building an uncompetitive car so...
| akuhner | 11-18-2005 12:22 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]Finally, the class 4B should be an excellent grassroots AWD class. 2.2 Imprezzas, AWD Civics, Justies, older 1.8 Subies, etc.[/QUOTE]
Do you see these cars out at rally crosses already? I don't see that many. At least not as often as RS'.
Thanks for putting the effort into the rules! I'm planning on using them unmodified when Philly has another rally-x. I will add my own tire and cage restrictions to my supps, but I'll use the classes the way they are (I require tires to have enough tread depth, and I require that all cages conform to some legitimate governing body rules).
Alex
Do you see these cars out at rally crosses already? I don't see that many. At least not as often as RS'.
Thanks for putting the effort into the rules! I'm planning on using them unmodified when Philly has another rally-x. I will add my own tire and cage restrictions to my supps, but I'll use the classes the way they are (I require tires to have enough tread depth, and I require that all cages conform to some legitimate governing body rules).
Alex
| mrmodular | 11-18-2005 12:40 PM |
[QUOTE=Car #187]Do you see these cars out at rally crosses already? I don't see that many. At least not as often as RS'.
Yes, the 2.2s and Civc AWDs are pretty common out here. My main race car is the Civc AWD, but it is heavily modified. I did, however, post fastest overall time in a bone stock Civc AWD in a recent RallyCross.
Yes, the 2.2s and Civc AWDs are pretty common out here. My main race car is the Civc AWD, but it is heavily modified. I did, however, post fastest overall time in a bone stock Civc AWD in a recent RallyCross.
| mrmodular | 11-18-2005 12:52 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]the excluded (from production) modifications all seem to make sense. but the limited modifications seem a bit vague at times to me.
however, i see what you are trying to do w/them. you are truying to keep a kid w/a CF hood and some springs and a accessport from being pushed into the mod class and thus scared away from rallyx.
>exactly
are non adjustable shocks/struts a "free" mod? like the KYB GR-2 or any other non adjustable unit like a tockico or bilstien. or are they a "limited" mod?
>free
what is the appendix note regarding rally tires? i dont see the appendix anywhere.
>basically the tire list from the 2005 rules
not sure how i feel about wheel dimensions being a limited mod, they have always been "free." that being said, a smaller diameter tire can be a huge advantage by slightly changing the final drive ratio in a favorale way.
it could be argued that the interior trim panels and the door panels are the same thing.
>the intent here is to make it impossble for a stripped car to qualify as "stock"
so what defines an interior trim panel?
>the gist of this draft is "intent." If we can avoid over-writing them, we will. If you see gross loopholes and have suggestions for tbetter language, let us know.
i see no mention of the dash. is that considered a trim panel?
> If I had to choose, I would call that an excluded mod
what about the headliner, is that a trim panel?
>yes
you mention underdrive pulleys. what about stock diameter light pulleys? they are not underdrive pulleys but they do reduce rotating mass a bit and give just as much of a minimal benefit as a underdrive pulley.
>Tough to discern whether an aftermarket pulley is stock diameter or not. Might be good to add "lightweight" to that item.
if i am reading this right it would seem that a front and rear sway bar would count as one limited mod. is that correct?
>yes, each line item is an "any or all" situation
if so, does that mean that a ground control coil over conversion kit w/springs and adjustable perches would count as one of the three mods as well? or would the springs be one and then the coilover sleeve kit be another?
>springs and perches is one item
also if the manufacturer of the harness says that the harness should be mounted to a harness bar can that be added and not considered one of the 3 limited mods? because that is technically not a chassis stiffener but it would also have that added effect.
>correct
i think i need to find a old corolla fx-16 GTS for P-2B. then strip the interior trim panels (1st limited mod), pull the carpet (2nd limited mod), put one some good camber/castor plates (3rd limited mod), get some nokian hakka Qs, swap in a lightweight set of racing seats w/a good harness, do all the other "free" mods and have one killer little production based rallyx machine. a car like this could probably be put together for under $2,000 (probaly closer to $1500) and be an absolute blast and in the right hands probably take an overall win at most rallycrosses. light weight and traction are key. i am torn between camber plates and rally tires. on a car that small the rally tires may just add too much rotational mass and end up hurting the car more than helping. so i am leaning more towards camber plates. i would pull the AC as the 3rd mod but i think you can get these cars w/out AC.
or, i could replace the hood fenders and rear hatch w/CF panels rather than put camber plates on and have a VERY light [I]and[/I] legal P-2B car. granted it would be VERY expensive as well but it would be legal and light as hell. i would guess under 2,000 pounds. hell, even w/out using CF i bet this car would be close to 2,000 pounds anyway.
however, would the factory mounted strut tower/firewall bracing (that is on all old GTS toyotas) bump the car into the 2M class? i would hope not.[/QUOTE]
>the party line on model crossover parts is that the parts must match the VIN. No updating or backdating. As far as your FX goes, most old cars end up in Mod classes to make them competitive. The exception in the new classes is 4B and 2C. Glad to see the creative juices flowing.
however, i see what you are trying to do w/them. you are truying to keep a kid w/a CF hood and some springs and a accessport from being pushed into the mod class and thus scared away from rallyx.
>exactly
are non adjustable shocks/struts a "free" mod? like the KYB GR-2 or any other non adjustable unit like a tockico or bilstien. or are they a "limited" mod?
>free
what is the appendix note regarding rally tires? i dont see the appendix anywhere.
>basically the tire list from the 2005 rules
not sure how i feel about wheel dimensions being a limited mod, they have always been "free." that being said, a smaller diameter tire can be a huge advantage by slightly changing the final drive ratio in a favorale way.
it could be argued that the interior trim panels and the door panels are the same thing.
>the intent here is to make it impossble for a stripped car to qualify as "stock"
so what defines an interior trim panel?
>the gist of this draft is "intent." If we can avoid over-writing them, we will. If you see gross loopholes and have suggestions for tbetter language, let us know.
i see no mention of the dash. is that considered a trim panel?
> If I had to choose, I would call that an excluded mod
what about the headliner, is that a trim panel?
>yes
you mention underdrive pulleys. what about stock diameter light pulleys? they are not underdrive pulleys but they do reduce rotating mass a bit and give just as much of a minimal benefit as a underdrive pulley.
>Tough to discern whether an aftermarket pulley is stock diameter or not. Might be good to add "lightweight" to that item.
if i am reading this right it would seem that a front and rear sway bar would count as one limited mod. is that correct?
>yes, each line item is an "any or all" situation
if so, does that mean that a ground control coil over conversion kit w/springs and adjustable perches would count as one of the three mods as well? or would the springs be one and then the coilover sleeve kit be another?
>springs and perches is one item
also if the manufacturer of the harness says that the harness should be mounted to a harness bar can that be added and not considered one of the 3 limited mods? because that is technically not a chassis stiffener but it would also have that added effect.
>correct
i think i need to find a old corolla fx-16 GTS for P-2B. then strip the interior trim panels (1st limited mod), pull the carpet (2nd limited mod), put one some good camber/castor plates (3rd limited mod), get some nokian hakka Qs, swap in a lightweight set of racing seats w/a good harness, do all the other "free" mods and have one killer little production based rallyx machine. a car like this could probably be put together for under $2,000 (probaly closer to $1500) and be an absolute blast and in the right hands probably take an overall win at most rallycrosses. light weight and traction are key. i am torn between camber plates and rally tires. on a car that small the rally tires may just add too much rotational mass and end up hurting the car more than helping. so i am leaning more towards camber plates. i would pull the AC as the 3rd mod but i think you can get these cars w/out AC.
or, i could replace the hood fenders and rear hatch w/CF panels rather than put camber plates on and have a VERY light [I]and[/I] legal P-2B car. granted it would be VERY expensive as well but it would be legal and light as hell. i would guess under 2,000 pounds. hell, even w/out using CF i bet this car would be close to 2,000 pounds anyway.
however, would the factory mounted strut tower/firewall bracing (that is on all old GTS toyotas) bump the car into the 2M class? i would hope not.[/QUOTE]
>the party line on model crossover parts is that the parts must match the VIN. No updating or backdating. As far as your FX goes, most old cars end up in Mod classes to make them competitive. The exception in the new classes is 4B and 2C. Glad to see the creative juices flowing.
| mrmodular | 11-18-2005 12:59 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]Mark Utecht has a stock 04 STi for rallyx and he is nearly unbeatable in it w/the Nokian WRs on the 17s. and we have some skilled drivers in a RS as well. however, he would proably beat himself in the STi if he drove a RS at the same event.
the only vehicle that occasionaly beats him is Jim Cox's crazy rally truck. unless the course is VERY tight then the rest of us have a chance to get close to him. or if he gets abit to throttle happy and takes out a couple cones. but that doesnt happen very often.[/QUOTE]
I'm still tickled that folks still identify one vehicle beating another. These impressions go away quickly when you get your top drivers to pilot all types of cars on the same course. We run RX schools pretty regularly, which gives the instructors a chance to sample and compare a lot of different vehicles. We also trade cars from time to time, which is a great eye-opener.
the only vehicle that occasionaly beats him is Jim Cox's crazy rally truck. unless the course is VERY tight then the rest of us have a chance to get close to him. or if he gets abit to throttle happy and takes out a couple cones. but that doesnt happen very often.[/QUOTE]
I'm still tickled that folks still identify one vehicle beating another. These impressions go away quickly when you get your top drivers to pilot all types of cars on the same course. We run RX schools pretty regularly, which gives the instructors a chance to sample and compare a lot of different vehicles. We also trade cars from time to time, which is a great eye-opener.
| cowapult | 11-18-2005 01:03 PM |
Yeah, I think it's all moot. A faster car or a more modded car helps, but not much. We will still get cars from the "slowest" class taking overall wins.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 01:51 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]I'm still tickled that folks still identify one vehicle beating another. These impressions go away quickly when you get your top drivers to pilot all types of cars on the same course. We run RX schools pretty regularly, which gives the instructors a chance to sample and compare a lot of different vehicles. We also trade cars from time to time, which is a great eye-opener.[/QUOTE]
to continue the theme of the day i would also agree w/that.
at one course i layed out utecht raced his GN WRX and also ran in his old G5 omni GLH-S. he ran alot faster in the omni. it was a very tight course.
surprisingly one of the quickest rallyx cars to have shown up at our events was a stripped 4spd FWD justy w/no rear hatch. this car has been driven by several different drivers. before the owner sold it it was dubbed the rally go kart. he now wants to build a mid engined RWD justy powered by a snowmobile engine w/a CVT used from the snowmobile. not sure if that will get past the parts scavenging level it is at now or not but if it does it will be awesome.
i too think the dash should be an excluded mod. once the dash is gone you no longer have a street car.
so the headliner and centerconsole and trim around the doors (A,B,C pillars)and what not all count as one mod? on a sedan would the trim in the trunk be included in this mod?
the door cards then count as a second mod?
and then the carpet would count as a third? does this include carpet in the trunk as well?
to continue the theme of the day i would also agree w/that.
at one course i layed out utecht raced his GN WRX and also ran in his old G5 omni GLH-S. he ran alot faster in the omni. it was a very tight course.
surprisingly one of the quickest rallyx cars to have shown up at our events was a stripped 4spd FWD justy w/no rear hatch. this car has been driven by several different drivers. before the owner sold it it was dubbed the rally go kart. he now wants to build a mid engined RWD justy powered by a snowmobile engine w/a CVT used from the snowmobile. not sure if that will get past the parts scavenging level it is at now or not but if it does it will be awesome.
i too think the dash should be an excluded mod. once the dash is gone you no longer have a street car.
so the headliner and centerconsole and trim around the doors (A,B,C pillars)and what not all count as one mod? on a sedan would the trim in the trunk be included in this mod?
the door cards then count as a second mod?
and then the carpet would count as a third? does this include carpet in the trunk as well?
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 01:54 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]>the party line on model crossover parts is that the parts must match the VIN. No updating or backdating. As far as your FX goes, most old cars end up in Mod classes to make them competitive. The exception in the new classes is 4B and 2C. Glad to see the creative juices flowing.[/QUOTE]
i didnt mean take the bracing from a GTS and put it on another non GTS car. i was wondering if the brace, as installed from the factory, would count as a mod.
i could come up w/a mild to wild car for every class you have.
in fact i just may do that.
i didnt mean take the bracing from a GTS and put it on another non GTS car. i was wondering if the brace, as installed from the factory, would count as a mod.
i could come up w/a mild to wild car for every class you have.
in fact i just may do that.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 01:58 PM |
one other thing that i am not sure about is having a big motor NA stock car and a small motor stock car in the same FWD production class.
under this ruleset a rx-7 and a FWD impreza w/a 1.8 are in the same class.
that could be a bit unfair.
but as i said before it is the builders choice to build an uncompetitve car so the rules shouldnt try to make it fair for every car.
yet again i have argued both sides.
under this ruleset a rx-7 and a FWD impreza w/a 1.8 are in the same class.
that could be a bit unfair.
but as i said before it is the builders choice to build an uncompetitve car so the rules shouldnt try to make it fair for every car.
yet again i have argued both sides.
| cowapult | 11-18-2005 02:46 PM |
Those cars wouldn't be in the same class.
And yes, you have definitely contradicted yourself ;)
And yes, you have definitely contradicted yourself ;)
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 02:54 PM |
[QUOTE=cowapult]Those cars wouldn't be in the same class.
And yes, you have definitely contradicted yourself ;)[/QUOTE]
oops forgot about the RWD class.
:o
And yes, you have definitely contradicted yourself ;)[/QUOTE]
oops forgot about the RWD class.
:o
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 03:00 PM |
the more i look at the classes the more i like them. this requires alot of thought.
where i get some doubts is the limited mods. but even they are begining to make sense the more i think about them.
i actually had a hard time coming up w/a third mod for the hypothetical FX-16 GTS that wouldnt be a waste of time or money that would actually make a big difference.
where i get some doubts is the limited mods. but even they are begining to make sense the more i think about them.
i actually had a hard time coming up w/a third mod for the hypothetical FX-16 GTS that wouldnt be a waste of time or money that would actually make a big difference.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 03:03 PM |
just had another mod question:
what about a turbo back exhaust?
is that a free mod or a limited mod?
the free mod is listed as cat back and the limited is listed as port back.
a TBE is niether a port back nor a cat back.
what about a turbo back exhaust?
is that a free mod or a limited mod?
the free mod is listed as cat back and the limited is listed as port back.
a TBE is niether a port back nor a cat back.
| greg donovan | 11-18-2005 03:09 PM |
[QUOTE=cowapult]Those cars wouldn't be in the same class.
And yes, you have definitely contradicted yourself ;)[/QUOTE]
not really contradicting myself as playing devil's advocate against myself.
And yes, you have definitely contradicted yourself ;)[/QUOTE]
not really contradicting myself as playing devil's advocate against myself.
| solo2wrx | 11-18-2005 10:45 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]just had another mod question:
what about a turbo back exhaust?
is that a free mod or a limited mod?
the free mod is listed as cat back and the limited is listed as port back.
a TBE is niether a port back nor a cat back.[/QUOTE]
I would take a turbo back as a port back because it is in front of the last cat. This is just coming from previous experience with similar rules and my interpretation. As for the 4B class, I will love to have a class like that. My 2.2 Legacy gets beaten up by the RS and WRXs I run against. But I could just prep my WRX for rally when the Legacy dies.
what about a turbo back exhaust?
is that a free mod or a limited mod?
the free mod is listed as cat back and the limited is listed as port back.
a TBE is niether a port back nor a cat back.[/QUOTE]
I would take a turbo back as a port back because it is in front of the last cat. This is just coming from previous experience with similar rules and my interpretation. As for the 4B class, I will love to have a class like that. My 2.2 Legacy gets beaten up by the RS and WRXs I run against. But I could just prep my WRX for rally when the Legacy dies.
| mrmodular | 11-18-2005 11:41 PM |
so the headliner and centerconsole and trim around the doors (A,B,C pillars)and what not all count as one mod? on a sedan would the trim in the trunk be included in this mod?
>yes, yes
the door cards then count as a second mod?
>yes
and then the carpet would count as a third? does this include carpet in the trunk as well?
>yes, all carpet and padding, but not the 20 lbs of tar stuck to the floor
>yes, yes
the door cards then count as a second mod?
>yes
and then the carpet would count as a third? does this include carpet in the trunk as well?
>yes, all carpet and padding, but not the 20 lbs of tar stuck to the floor
| mrmodular | 11-18-2005 11:44 PM |
Hastings?
�
�
pcowan, were you at Hastings in the black STi?
I was racing the S4.
-Ken
I was racing the S4.
-Ken
| mrmodular | 11-18-2005 11:48 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]i didnt mean take the bracing from a GTS and put it on another non GTS car. i was wondering if the brace, as installed from the factory, would count as a mod.
>only adding, changing or removing one
>only adding, changing or removing one
| mrmodular | 11-19-2005 12:01 AM |
rally tires
�
�
I've talked with folks, mostly from the coasts, who think there absolutely must be street-tire-only classes in RallyCross. I can't imagine racing RX for very long without wondering what a good set of tires would do for me. I've been using Kumho R700s for years, which have saved me a lot of money for not needing new street tires twice a year. I also can't imagine travelling to a national RX event and racing on street rubber.
Open fire.
Open fire.
| pcowan | 11-19-2005 03:07 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]pcowan, were you at Hastings in the black STi?
I was racing the S4.
-Ken[/QUOTE]
Yeah, ...broken black STi. That was the reason I bought up the mod list I did: brakes (free), rally tires (free), turbo back and ECU (2 points) and the car cleaned up this season (mostly due to the tires).
In our region we have a .22" tire groove rule that automatically bumps you into modified that we'll probably stick with. Since traction is the key item it keeps all the stock people a little more even.
Thanks for clarifiing the restricted mods, it makes a lot more sense as "automatically puts you into modified" as opposed to "not allowed".
I was racing the S4.
-Ken[/QUOTE]
Yeah, ...broken black STi. That was the reason I bought up the mod list I did: brakes (free), rally tires (free), turbo back and ECU (2 points) and the car cleaned up this season (mostly due to the tires).
In our region we have a .22" tire groove rule that automatically bumps you into modified that we'll probably stick with. Since traction is the key item it keeps all the stock people a little more even.
Thanks for clarifiing the restricted mods, it makes a lot more sense as "automatically puts you into modified" as opposed to "not allowed".
| AngryBlueRS | 11-19-2005 07:57 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]I've talked with folks, mostly from the coasts, who think there absolutely must be street-tire-only classes in RallyCross. I can't imagine racing RX for very long without wondering what a good set of tires would do for me. I've been using Kumho R700s for years, which have saved me a lot of money for not needing new street tires twice a year. I also can't imagine travelling to a national RX event and racing on street rubber.
Open fire.[/QUOTE]
Not trying to open fire, just maybe explain some of the reasoning. :)
For many folks stock class is considered to be an intro class (think novice class requirements within rally). When folks new to RallyX start showing up to run they do it with the tires they already have on the car, namely street rubber. For an event that meets national guidelines (45 MPH max, which usually works out to be 18-26 MPH average based on calcs I've performed) tires are [B]the[/B] number one performance mod you can make. Throw in a bigger engine, add nitro, bigger turbo, IC coolers and it does not mean squat if you can't put the power down.
There are a number of mods that are being perceived as acceptable in stock. This is not being done to boost performance so much as let folks that have made some typical street mods walk into this intro class instead of being bumped up to mod to run with the big boys. I think this is an awesome idea, as it allows folks to be competitive from day one if they know how to drive. If the mod does not create a big performance gain, let it slide. Everyone on street tires will normalize this out. This helps to keep people coming back for more, makes the sport more popular, grows events so regs fees can be lowered, and all sorts of other positive stuff.
Now throw in rally tires and you introduce a number of problems. First, those stock level mods may actually make a difference as you have better traction to put the power down. Also, take two identical drivers in two similar cars, one is street modified trim on stock tires and the other in factory trim on rally tires. Obviously this will vary a bit depending on surface conditions, but on average the car with rally tires is going to totally dominate. So now our good driver is no longer as competitive, gets tired of ending up at the bottom of the results list, and is forced to choose between investing in new rims and tires or just packing it up and sticking with AutoX. My fear is that many will choose the latter, thus hurting the growth of the sport.
The other concern is safety. Look at AutoX and the majority of the insurance claims are caused by production cars running R compound or stock �cheater� tires. In other words, sticky tires in the hand of a novice on a typically soft stock suspension is a recipe for disaster. If we start having safety issues (like the roll at the national event) this may cause insurance problems which makes RallyX go the same route as rally within the SCCA. At that point rules become a non-issue. :(
Should there be a middle class between production and mod that permits experienced folks who don't want to go mod crazy run rally tires? Maybe so. Letting them into production however can cause more problems than its worth. I honestly think its going to hurt our sport if this rule change is allowed to pass.
HTH,
Chris
Open fire.[/QUOTE]
Not trying to open fire, just maybe explain some of the reasoning. :)
For many folks stock class is considered to be an intro class (think novice class requirements within rally). When folks new to RallyX start showing up to run they do it with the tires they already have on the car, namely street rubber. For an event that meets national guidelines (45 MPH max, which usually works out to be 18-26 MPH average based on calcs I've performed) tires are [B]the[/B] number one performance mod you can make. Throw in a bigger engine, add nitro, bigger turbo, IC coolers and it does not mean squat if you can't put the power down.
There are a number of mods that are being perceived as acceptable in stock. This is not being done to boost performance so much as let folks that have made some typical street mods walk into this intro class instead of being bumped up to mod to run with the big boys. I think this is an awesome idea, as it allows folks to be competitive from day one if they know how to drive. If the mod does not create a big performance gain, let it slide. Everyone on street tires will normalize this out. This helps to keep people coming back for more, makes the sport more popular, grows events so regs fees can be lowered, and all sorts of other positive stuff.
Now throw in rally tires and you introduce a number of problems. First, those stock level mods may actually make a difference as you have better traction to put the power down. Also, take two identical drivers in two similar cars, one is street modified trim on stock tires and the other in factory trim on rally tires. Obviously this will vary a bit depending on surface conditions, but on average the car with rally tires is going to totally dominate. So now our good driver is no longer as competitive, gets tired of ending up at the bottom of the results list, and is forced to choose between investing in new rims and tires or just packing it up and sticking with AutoX. My fear is that many will choose the latter, thus hurting the growth of the sport.
The other concern is safety. Look at AutoX and the majority of the insurance claims are caused by production cars running R compound or stock �cheater� tires. In other words, sticky tires in the hand of a novice on a typically soft stock suspension is a recipe for disaster. If we start having safety issues (like the roll at the national event) this may cause insurance problems which makes RallyX go the same route as rally within the SCCA. At that point rules become a non-issue. :(
Should there be a middle class between production and mod that permits experienced folks who don't want to go mod crazy run rally tires? Maybe so. Letting them into production however can cause more problems than its worth. I honestly think its going to hurt our sport if this rule change is allowed to pass.
HTH,
Chris
| greg donovan | 11-19-2005 09:39 AM |
[QUOTE=pcowan]Yeah, ...broken black STi. That was the reason I bought up the mod list I did: brakes (free), rally tires (free), turbo back and ECU (2 points) and the car cleaned up this season (mostly due to the tires).
In our region we have a .22" tire groove rule that automatically bumps you into modified that we'll probably stick with. Since traction is the key item it keeps all the stock people a little more even.
Thanks for clarifiing the restricted mods, it makes a lot more sense as "automatically puts you into modified" as opposed to "not allowed".[/QUOTE]
rally tires are one of the limited mods (1st mod).
the only part of brakes that are "free" are the pads and swapping to stainles steel braided lines. if you change rotors to a different size or change the calipers (which is needed to fit 15s and rally tires) that would count as a limited mod(2nd mod).
it has been said that a TBE would count as a limited mod like a "port" back(3rd mod).
ecu is limited(4th mod).
that car would be a 4M car.
In our region we have a .22" tire groove rule that automatically bumps you into modified that we'll probably stick with. Since traction is the key item it keeps all the stock people a little more even.
Thanks for clarifiing the restricted mods, it makes a lot more sense as "automatically puts you into modified" as opposed to "not allowed".[/QUOTE]
rally tires are one of the limited mods (1st mod).
the only part of brakes that are "free" are the pads and swapping to stainles steel braided lines. if you change rotors to a different size or change the calipers (which is needed to fit 15s and rally tires) that would count as a limited mod(2nd mod).
it has been said that a TBE would count as a limited mod like a "port" back(3rd mod).
ecu is limited(4th mod).
that car would be a 4M car.
| Arnie | 11-19-2005 11:41 AM |
re: tires. I'm all for the use of rally tires at all levels. Look at it this way, in any class of racing people are going to choose/buy tires that perform the best in their class. Look at an autox, everyone is running 615's or hankooks. Are people protesting these tires in stock classes because some guy rolls in on RE92s? The 615 is worlds different in traction levels. there is always going to be a dominant tire that people are going to be willing to spend money on to get an advantage. heck, there are snow regions where people are on snow tires all year long, if its a run what ya brung, are you going to have them switch out to the stock tires in the dead of winter?
Being able to run rally tires in all classes will allow people the chance to actually experiment and learn to drive on an appropriate tire. heck, in the long run, you will actually save money on tires as they last longer than your average snow tire used. Plus you can actually start playing with tire pressures and not just have them cranked so as not to roll them.
Besides, at a beginner level, who is going to care about having the perfect setup to get the best time? One's driver's skills are still being honed and it won't make a difference what the setup is. Being out there is just such a blast. Optimizing setup is just such a non-issue compared to an autox at the beginner level. As an example, national champ mrmodular beat out all the open class cars in his bone stock AWD civic wagon on crappy regular all season tires at a recent event. This is the colorado region where the top 3 placed drivers at nationals all compete. These are not slouch drivers.
Being able to run rally tires in all classes will allow people the chance to actually experiment and learn to drive on an appropriate tire. heck, in the long run, you will actually save money on tires as they last longer than your average snow tire used. Plus you can actually start playing with tire pressures and not just have them cranked so as not to roll them.
Besides, at a beginner level, who is going to care about having the perfect setup to get the best time? One's driver's skills are still being honed and it won't make a difference what the setup is. Being out there is just such a blast. Optimizing setup is just such a non-issue compared to an autox at the beginner level. As an example, national champ mrmodular beat out all the open class cars in his bone stock AWD civic wagon on crappy regular all season tires at a recent event. This is the colorado region where the top 3 placed drivers at nationals all compete. These are not slouch drivers.
| cowapult | 11-19-2005 12:45 PM |
I think it is silly to run rally tires in stock. I don't understand the motiviation.
Rallycross is a young sport. Our priority, above all else, should be getting newbs involved. But, allowing rally tires makes in stock is a recipe for turning them away. I often hear discouraged excuses from newbs along the lines of "well, he's on rally tires". They look at it as having to pay to play, and some of them end up not rolling out of bed next time.
Look at solo's example. They created street tires classes that turned out to be hugely popular becauase they recognized that shortcomings of the exact same approach being proposed here - allowing R-compounds in the stock classes.
Rallycross is a young sport. Our priority, above all else, should be getting newbs involved. But, allowing rally tires makes in stock is a recipe for turning them away. I often hear discouraged excuses from newbs along the lines of "well, he's on rally tires". They look at it as having to pay to play, and some of them end up not rolling out of bed next time.
Look at solo's example. They created street tires classes that turned out to be hugely popular becauase they recognized that shortcomings of the exact same approach being proposed here - allowing R-compounds in the stock classes.
| Arnie | 11-19-2005 12:58 PM |
then I think its up to the more experienced racers to take the newbs under their wing and explain to them that driving skills are tantamount to putting in fast times and not equipment.
There are always going to be people who bitch about car prep and use that as an excuse as to why them didn't run well. look at nationals, there were people insinuating that the only reason mrmodular won the driver's challenge is because he drove last. well there was an almost 2 second spread between his time and 2nd place, compared to just tenths between the rest. people are always going to make excuses.
believe me, I understand the "advantages" of running a rally tire, but people are going to complain that a guy has DMS suspension compared to some guys stock suspension and that's why he posted crap times. seriously, rally x is a really fun sport and a great way to learn car control, encourage newbs by showing them how to drive and not mask their mistakes with "better" equipment.
There are always going to be people who bitch about car prep and use that as an excuse as to why them didn't run well. look at nationals, there were people insinuating that the only reason mrmodular won the driver's challenge is because he drove last. well there was an almost 2 second spread between his time and 2nd place, compared to just tenths between the rest. people are always going to make excuses.
believe me, I understand the "advantages" of running a rally tire, but people are going to complain that a guy has DMS suspension compared to some guys stock suspension and that's why he posted crap times. seriously, rally x is a really fun sport and a great way to learn car control, encourage newbs by showing them how to drive and not mask their mistakes with "better" equipment.
| mrmodular | 11-19-2005 01:11 PM |
Novices
�
�
[QUOTE=AngryBlueRS]Not trying to open fire, just maybe explain some of the reasoning. :)
For many folks stock class is considered to be an intro class...
>This seems to be a regional paradigm. In Colorado, we have been allowing rally tires in all classes for five years. To me the difference between a stock class and a mod class is basically daily driven vs. trailer queen. There is no way to use equipment regulations to make a novice competitive. Our solution has been outreach: make them feel welcome, ride with them and give advice, hold school events.
The other concern is safety...
We have plenty of cars on stock suspension and rally tires. We have never had a roll over in 60ish events.
I honestly think its going to hurt our sport if this rule change is allowed to pass.
>Realize that we each have our regional paradigms of what works. This rules proposal is for the sport as a whole on the national level. Keep your tire restriction in your regional supps and give the rest a chance.
For many folks stock class is considered to be an intro class...
>This seems to be a regional paradigm. In Colorado, we have been allowing rally tires in all classes for five years. To me the difference between a stock class and a mod class is basically daily driven vs. trailer queen. There is no way to use equipment regulations to make a novice competitive. Our solution has been outreach: make them feel welcome, ride with them and give advice, hold school events.
The other concern is safety...
We have plenty of cars on stock suspension and rally tires. We have never had a roll over in 60ish events.
I honestly think its going to hurt our sport if this rule change is allowed to pass.
>Realize that we each have our regional paradigms of what works. This rules proposal is for the sport as a whole on the national level. Keep your tire restriction in your regional supps and give the rest a chance.
| mrmodular | 11-19-2005 01:13 PM |
As an example, national champ mrmodular beat out all the open class cars in his bone stock AWD civic wagon on crappy regular all season tires at a recent event. This is the colorado region where the top 3 placed drivers at nationals all compete. These are not slouch drivers.[/QUOTE]
Actually, bone stock on rally tires.
Actually, bone stock on rally tires.
| mrmodular | 11-19-2005 01:17 PM |
[QUOTE=cowapult]I think it is silly to run rally tires in stock. I don't understand the motiviation.
>I'd like tires to be my only mod: totally reliable, stock car and all I need to do is swap tires. Cake!
They created street tires classes that turned out to be hugely popular becauase they recognized that shortcomings of the exact same approach being proposed here - allowing R-compounds in the stock classes.[/QUOTE]
>Did any of these so-called street tire classes at Topeka include anyone driving in on their race tires? These classes have just created a new set of dominant tires. The real beauty and appeal of those classes has been their non-SCCA, realistic allowances of popular mods and keepng out the trailer queens. This is exactly the spirit of the proposed RX classes.
>I'd like tires to be my only mod: totally reliable, stock car and all I need to do is swap tires. Cake!
They created street tires classes that turned out to be hugely popular becauase they recognized that shortcomings of the exact same approach being proposed here - allowing R-compounds in the stock classes.[/QUOTE]
>Did any of these so-called street tire classes at Topeka include anyone driving in on their race tires? These classes have just created a new set of dominant tires. The real beauty and appeal of those classes has been their non-SCCA, realistic allowances of popular mods and keepng out the trailer queens. This is exactly the spirit of the proposed RX classes.
| AngryBlueRS | 11-19-2005 01:18 PM |
[QUOTE=Arnie]re: tires. I'm all for the use of rally tires at all levels. Look at it this way, in any class of racing people are going to choose/buy tires that perform the best in their class.
[/QUOTE]
So its OK to make it expensive to be competitive for someone starting out in the sport? Don't think I agree with that.
[QUOTE]
Look at an autox, everyone is running 615's or hankooks. Are people protesting these tires in stock classes because some guy rolls in on RE92s? The 615 is worlds different in traction levels.
[/QUOTE]
Couple of differences. First, there is far less of a difference in traction between RE92's and 615's on tarmac, than there is between RE92's and rally tires in the dirt. A good driver will still be competitive, although the tires might keep them out of the top podium spot.
Further, 615's are street tires. You can mount them up and run them as your regular tire all season (I do this in my STi). You can't do that with rally tires, so the cost is obviously higher.
Finally, in AutoX a novice has choices. If their production class is all street tires they can run in that. If everyone else is on R compounds, they can move to a stock tire class. If we permit rally tires in production, a novice has no options. Its either pay up, stay at the bottom of the results list, or find another sport. Its that last option I think we should be working hard to avoid.
[QUOTE]
there is always going to be a dominant tire that people are going to be willing to spend money on to get an advantage.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed, although folks who choose not to make that choice should not be expected to run in the same class. If we force them to, its back to the three options I listed above.
[QUOTE]
heck, there are snow regions where people are on snow tires all year long, if its a run what ya brung, are you going to have them switch out to the stock tires in the dead of winter?
[/QUOTE]
Its not about running only the tires that shipped with the car, its about running street tires. Snows obviously fit this description. Does this mean you'll have some folks running snows and other running RE92's? Sure you will. There is far less of a traction difference however between street and snow tires in the dirt than there is between street and rally tires.
[QUOTE]
Being able to run rally tires in all classes will allow people the chance to actually experiment and learn to drive on an appropriate tire.
[/QUOTE]
How is that different than having to bump up a class to do the same? The only real difference I see is that now you may be competing against similar skilled drivers with a slightly better setup than just beating a bunch of novices that are outclassed.
[QUOTE]
heck, in the long run, you will actually save money on tires as they last longer than your average snow tire used.
[/QUOTE]
Here I totally agree. Rally tires hold up better and will cost less in the long term. I have no doubt that folks that really get into it will want to go here at some point. The problem is if we outclass them when they get started people may not stick around long enough to get to this point.
[QUOTE]
Besides, at a beginner level, who is going to care about having the perfect setup to get the best time?
[/QUOTE]
Its human nature. Folks are competitive and want to be good at what they do. If we create a class structure where they start off feeling defeated, they are less likely to want to stick with it. For example in our region we group all AWD production cars in the same class. I know its turned off a few folks running 2.2L Imprezas when they see they are competing against STi's. The proposed rule change would fix this which I think is cool. Letting rally tires in production just creates a similar situation.
Besides, "beginner" just means they are new to the sport. This does not mean they don't want to be as competitive as someone who has been at it for a while. For example I'm guessing you are arguing for rally tires in production because you run them now and feel it gives you an advantage. Personally I would rather see a set of class rules that gives everyone an equal chance, not just the folks who have been in it for a while.
HTH,
Chris
[/QUOTE]
So its OK to make it expensive to be competitive for someone starting out in the sport? Don't think I agree with that.
[QUOTE]
Look at an autox, everyone is running 615's or hankooks. Are people protesting these tires in stock classes because some guy rolls in on RE92s? The 615 is worlds different in traction levels.
[/QUOTE]
Couple of differences. First, there is far less of a difference in traction between RE92's and 615's on tarmac, than there is between RE92's and rally tires in the dirt. A good driver will still be competitive, although the tires might keep them out of the top podium spot.
Further, 615's are street tires. You can mount them up and run them as your regular tire all season (I do this in my STi). You can't do that with rally tires, so the cost is obviously higher.
Finally, in AutoX a novice has choices. If their production class is all street tires they can run in that. If everyone else is on R compounds, they can move to a stock tire class. If we permit rally tires in production, a novice has no options. Its either pay up, stay at the bottom of the results list, or find another sport. Its that last option I think we should be working hard to avoid.
[QUOTE]
there is always going to be a dominant tire that people are going to be willing to spend money on to get an advantage.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed, although folks who choose not to make that choice should not be expected to run in the same class. If we force them to, its back to the three options I listed above.
[QUOTE]
heck, there are snow regions where people are on snow tires all year long, if its a run what ya brung, are you going to have them switch out to the stock tires in the dead of winter?
[/QUOTE]
Its not about running only the tires that shipped with the car, its about running street tires. Snows obviously fit this description. Does this mean you'll have some folks running snows and other running RE92's? Sure you will. There is far less of a traction difference however between street and snow tires in the dirt than there is between street and rally tires.
[QUOTE]
Being able to run rally tires in all classes will allow people the chance to actually experiment and learn to drive on an appropriate tire.
[/QUOTE]
How is that different than having to bump up a class to do the same? The only real difference I see is that now you may be competing against similar skilled drivers with a slightly better setup than just beating a bunch of novices that are outclassed.
[QUOTE]
heck, in the long run, you will actually save money on tires as they last longer than your average snow tire used.
[/QUOTE]
Here I totally agree. Rally tires hold up better and will cost less in the long term. I have no doubt that folks that really get into it will want to go here at some point. The problem is if we outclass them when they get started people may not stick around long enough to get to this point.
[QUOTE]
Besides, at a beginner level, who is going to care about having the perfect setup to get the best time?
[/QUOTE]
Its human nature. Folks are competitive and want to be good at what they do. If we create a class structure where they start off feeling defeated, they are less likely to want to stick with it. For example in our region we group all AWD production cars in the same class. I know its turned off a few folks running 2.2L Imprezas when they see they are competing against STi's. The proposed rule change would fix this which I think is cool. Letting rally tires in production just creates a similar situation.
Besides, "beginner" just means they are new to the sport. This does not mean they don't want to be as competitive as someone who has been at it for a while. For example I'm guessing you are arguing for rally tires in production because you run them now and feel it gives you an advantage. Personally I would rather see a set of class rules that gives everyone an equal chance, not just the folks who have been in it for a while.
HTH,
Chris
| cowapult | 11-19-2005 01:18 PM |
There will always be people who make excuses, but it's our job to take them away. Make the sport look un-discouraging by creating a stock class in which the cars do not have hundreds of dollars of modifications. That means a lot more than trying to tell someone that and then going out and using rally tires to kick their butt.
Quite simply, it's a stock class. Seems like one of the more signifcant mods out there should not be allowed.
On the flip side, why WOULD you allow them? Lots of people have fun and compete without them. If you really want them, then step up to mod. I'm not really sure what disadvantage there is to that system.
Quite simply, it's a stock class. Seems like one of the more signifcant mods out there should not be allowed.
On the flip side, why WOULD you allow them? Lots of people have fun and compete without them. If you really want them, then step up to mod. I'm not really sure what disadvantage there is to that system.
| Arnie | 11-19-2005 01:21 PM |
ah, whoops! well, there goes that argument! ;) :p
| rupertberr | 11-19-2005 02:14 PM |
I ran PGT for two season's on street tires. Both times I was Colorado Champion even though there were many people running on rally tires. Went through four sets of tires and got tired of popping the bead off. I have just finished my second season on one set of Michelin Rally tires and they look like the could handle another one. Cost of two seasons on street tires $1920. Cost of two seasons on rally tires $520. Finished 2nd in the championship in 2004, won it for a third time this year.
Most of our new guys who show up and have done Solo racing like RallyCross better because all they have to do to be competitive is buy a set of rally tires. For Solo they have to do springs and struts and swaybars and exhaust AND buy tires.
As far as RE 92's, they are much better on dirt then they are on pavement.
As several people have stated, if you don't like the rules, do your own version for your region. These are the National Rules. Do you really expect or want newbs to show up at the National Championships?
Most of our new guys who show up and have done Solo racing like RallyCross better because all they have to do to be competitive is buy a set of rally tires. For Solo they have to do springs and struts and swaybars and exhaust AND buy tires.
As far as RE 92's, they are much better on dirt then they are on pavement.
As several people have stated, if you don't like the rules, do your own version for your region. These are the National Rules. Do you really expect or want newbs to show up at the National Championships?
| mrmodular | 11-19-2005 03:34 PM |
2 sermons
�
�
[QUOTE=cowapult]There will always be people who make excuses, but it's our job to take them away. Make the sport look un-discouraging by creating a stock class in which the cars do not have hundreds of dollars of modifications.
>I've enjoyed your comments thus far. I really just think that we, as a perfect cross-section of the national perspective, are just used to doing things our way and struggle to imagine doing it any other way.
That said, I have two huge gripes related to this thread (not anyone in particular). One of them goes back to my bicycle racing days. I used to get so frustrated with guys who felt that they were entitled to a sponsorship because they were so serious about their hobby. Guess what jocko, Trek is in business because they sell bikes to boy racers. Hobbies cost money. Get a job. Finish school first. Car racing is that and then some. I can't tolerate talk of limiting the cost of racing. It's an expensive hobby. It will always be subject to the pocketbook. Ban affordable rally tires, then a guy with a job such as myself will be buying a fresh set of whatever is on the ragged edge of legal every third event. What's next? Ban a second set of wheels and tires? As someone mentioned, this sport eats tires. If the newbs take a look at what's left of their tires after an event, they might find that discouraging as well. The only STis and EVOs we see are driven by novices. How will regulating the affordability of equipment affect them? Ban their cars?
#2. When I started racing, it was with an organization that spun off from SCCA. They ran a series of open-track autocrosses. Their classes were based on the performance of the vehicle with a point scale attached to each possible type of modification. I liked it because I could selectivley build my car to a given class level. A couple years later, I attended my first SCCA SoloII. Wow. The only mod I had done was a set of coil-over springs on stock shocks. You probably know what class my poor little Festiva was put in. Those trailer queen Civics are merciless. From that point forward, I have struggled to embrace what SoloII considers "stock." It's amazing the amount of money a stock class car can soak up in mods. The street tire classes emerged from confusion such as mine. Guys like me liked to bolt on performance parts, but were getting put into race car classes. The "street tire" name is an alias for "street driven." The more time and money I invest in tuning cars, the less it appeals to me, particularly in terms of reliability. I am starting to see the appeal of those SoloII stock classes: Take a stock vehicle, maybe put on some adjustable shocks and throw some race rubber in the trunk. Point here: there's more than one way to do simple racing.
The big issue with the national classes is to start the unification process. My guess is that something slightly different than any of us have done is better than trying to go one way or another.
>I've enjoyed your comments thus far. I really just think that we, as a perfect cross-section of the national perspective, are just used to doing things our way and struggle to imagine doing it any other way.
That said, I have two huge gripes related to this thread (not anyone in particular). One of them goes back to my bicycle racing days. I used to get so frustrated with guys who felt that they were entitled to a sponsorship because they were so serious about their hobby. Guess what jocko, Trek is in business because they sell bikes to boy racers. Hobbies cost money. Get a job. Finish school first. Car racing is that and then some. I can't tolerate talk of limiting the cost of racing. It's an expensive hobby. It will always be subject to the pocketbook. Ban affordable rally tires, then a guy with a job such as myself will be buying a fresh set of whatever is on the ragged edge of legal every third event. What's next? Ban a second set of wheels and tires? As someone mentioned, this sport eats tires. If the newbs take a look at what's left of their tires after an event, they might find that discouraging as well. The only STis and EVOs we see are driven by novices. How will regulating the affordability of equipment affect them? Ban their cars?
#2. When I started racing, it was with an organization that spun off from SCCA. They ran a series of open-track autocrosses. Their classes were based on the performance of the vehicle with a point scale attached to each possible type of modification. I liked it because I could selectivley build my car to a given class level. A couple years later, I attended my first SCCA SoloII. Wow. The only mod I had done was a set of coil-over springs on stock shocks. You probably know what class my poor little Festiva was put in. Those trailer queen Civics are merciless. From that point forward, I have struggled to embrace what SoloII considers "stock." It's amazing the amount of money a stock class car can soak up in mods. The street tire classes emerged from confusion such as mine. Guys like me liked to bolt on performance parts, but were getting put into race car classes. The "street tire" name is an alias for "street driven." The more time and money I invest in tuning cars, the less it appeals to me, particularly in terms of reliability. I am starting to see the appeal of those SoloII stock classes: Take a stock vehicle, maybe put on some adjustable shocks and throw some race rubber in the trunk. Point here: there's more than one way to do simple racing.
The big issue with the national classes is to start the unification process. My guess is that something slightly different than any of us have done is better than trying to go one way or another.
| akuhner | 11-19-2005 03:46 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]so the headliner and centerconsole and trim around the doors (A,B,C pillars)and what not all count as one mod? on a sedan would the trim in the trunk be included in this mod?
>yes, yes
the door cards then count as a second mod?
>yes
and then the carpet would count as a third? does this include carpet in the trunk as well?
>yes, all carpet and padding, but not the 20 lbs of tar stuck to the floor[/QUOTE]
Well, that makes those completely useless mods that nobody in 'production' should ever consider. If all interior lightening work counted as one mod it might be worth it, but taking out any single one of those things on it's own won't make much of a difference. Better to take a big dump before you go racing! ;)
>yes, yes
the door cards then count as a second mod?
>yes
and then the carpet would count as a third? does this include carpet in the trunk as well?
>yes, all carpet and padding, but not the 20 lbs of tar stuck to the floor[/QUOTE]
Well, that makes those completely useless mods that nobody in 'production' should ever consider. If all interior lightening work counted as one mod it might be worth it, but taking out any single one of those things on it's own won't make much of a difference. Better to take a big dump before you go racing! ;)
| mrmodular | 11-19-2005 04:05 PM |
Big dump.
�
�
[QUOTE=Car #187]Well, that makes those completely useless mods that nobody in 'production' should ever consider. If all interior lightening work counted as one mod it might be worth it, but taking out any single one of those things on it's own won't make much of a difference. Better to take a big dump before you go racing! ;)[/QUOTE]
10-4 on the BM. The point with that whole set of individual mods is to keep a totally stripped car from being considered stock. Think about the whole ruleset as "things that are more or less invasive to a street car" I don't mind encouraging a newcomer to consider a set of wheels and tires, but I wouldn't want them to think that gutting their car was required.
Story: We have a fellow who races a 2.2 in PGT. The guy is a tremendously talented driver. This was apparent from the moment he showed up. He was spanking WRXs routinely. He started to prepare his car to move on to rally. It took a while to actually get the cage installed, but putting in the racing seats and removing the interior happened right away. You can imgine the perception that the only reason he was so damn fast was that he was driving a shell.
I think the little dancing monkey icon just gave me the finger.
10-4 on the BM. The point with that whole set of individual mods is to keep a totally stripped car from being considered stock. Think about the whole ruleset as "things that are more or less invasive to a street car" I don't mind encouraging a newcomer to consider a set of wheels and tires, but I wouldn't want them to think that gutting their car was required.
Story: We have a fellow who races a 2.2 in PGT. The guy is a tremendously talented driver. This was apparent from the moment he showed up. He was spanking WRXs routinely. He started to prepare his car to move on to rally. It took a while to actually get the cage installed, but putting in the racing seats and removing the interior happened right away. You can imgine the perception that the only reason he was so damn fast was that he was driving a shell.
I think the little dancing monkey icon just gave me the finger.
| mrmodular | 11-19-2005 08:11 PM |
recount
�
�
[QUOTE=pcowan]Yeah, ...broken black STi. That was the reason I bought up the mod list I did: brakes (free), rally tires (free), turbo back and ECU (2 points) and the car cleaned up this season (mostly due to the tires).
[/QUOTE]
Brakes free (yes), rally tires (one mod), turbo back exhaust (second mod), ECU (chipped, third mod; replacement, bumped to Modified), change of rim size for rally tires (fourth mod, bumped to Modified if the ECU didn't do it). Haven't you taken interior out of that car? Any suspension work?
Did you guys make it home from Hastings without any trouble?
[/QUOTE]
Brakes free (yes), rally tires (one mod), turbo back exhaust (second mod), ECU (chipped, third mod; replacement, bumped to Modified), change of rim size for rally tires (fourth mod, bumped to Modified if the ECU didn't do it). Haven't you taken interior out of that car? Any suspension work?
Did you guys make it home from Hastings without any trouble?
| akuhner | 11-19-2005 11:22 PM |
There's as much worrying about perceptions as worrying about fair competition going on here... I think we are out-thinking ourselves, but I'll play along anyway and see how it goes. I do not think these 'perception minded' rules will hurt anything, so let's do it!
The only rule I take issue with is changing the wheel size. I ran my last rally-x on snow tires on 15 inch steelies, and that is no advantage at all over having to run snows on 16inch wheels, yet it would count against my mods. So I have to go buy more expensive snows and wheels for them? :confused:
Alex
The only rule I take issue with is changing the wheel size. I ran my last rally-x on snow tires on 15 inch steelies, and that is no advantage at all over having to run snows on 16inch wheels, yet it would count against my mods. So I have to go buy more expensive snows and wheels for them? :confused:
Alex
| AngryBlueRS | 11-20-2005 07:33 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]I can't tolerate talk of limiting the cost of racing. It's an expensive hobby. It will always be subject to the pocketbook. Ban affordable rally tires
[/QUOTE]
Reading through the thread, I don't see a single post looking to ban rally tires. If you are referring to my posts, all I'm saying is that it would be cool to have a single set of classes that someone can run in [B]without being forced [/B]to buy rally tires and a second set of rims in order to be competitive. Absolutely rally tires should be permitted in every upper class, but lets create just a single level where people can feel like they are competitive on their own street rubber (again, the truth of this statement will vary with the racing surface but we are talking the whole country so you have to keep a wide rage of conditions in mind).
Also, this is not a professional series. Money is an issue for some folks. If we don't keep that in mind we end up with fewer registrations which means less money to run the program.
[QUOTE]
The big issue with the national classes is to start the unification process.
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely! A number of folks have recommended "Hey if you don't like it make up your own rules". Not sure this is the best attitude to have because then someone competing between difference regions has to deal with different class structures. It also mean you could end up running nationals on a different setup than you are allowed in your own region. Obviously its impossible to create a class structure that everyone is happy with. Let's just do the best we can and then go from there. I honestly think we'll be missing out on potential competitors if we don't create some form of intro class for people to get their feet wet.
[/QUOTE]
Reading through the thread, I don't see a single post looking to ban rally tires. If you are referring to my posts, all I'm saying is that it would be cool to have a single set of classes that someone can run in [B]without being forced [/B]to buy rally tires and a second set of rims in order to be competitive. Absolutely rally tires should be permitted in every upper class, but lets create just a single level where people can feel like they are competitive on their own street rubber (again, the truth of this statement will vary with the racing surface but we are talking the whole country so you have to keep a wide rage of conditions in mind).
Also, this is not a professional series. Money is an issue for some folks. If we don't keep that in mind we end up with fewer registrations which means less money to run the program.
[QUOTE]
The big issue with the national classes is to start the unification process.
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely! A number of folks have recommended "Hey if you don't like it make up your own rules". Not sure this is the best attitude to have because then someone competing between difference regions has to deal with different class structures. It also mean you could end up running nationals on a different setup than you are allowed in your own region. Obviously its impossible to create a class structure that everyone is happy with. Let's just do the best we can and then go from there. I honestly think we'll be missing out on potential competitors if we don't create some form of intro class for people to get their feet wet.
| mrmodular | 11-20-2005 01:03 PM |
[QUOTE=AngryBlueRS]Also, this is not a professional series. Money is an issue for some folks. If we don't keep that in mind we end up with fewer registrations which means less money to run the program.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with you here, but there is a limit to this philosophy. Racing places your vehicle (and you) at risk. I'm not sure whether most people competing are aware of these risks and factor them in to their willingness to play. I don't know how many actually calculate the cost of competing for a season, with travel, mantenance, entry fees, and whatever may go wrong. I believe that debating over the cost of a set of rims and tires assumes that the subject competitor is not being realistic about these other factors. Remember, we're talking about a sport that requires the use of a piece of equipment that typically costs many thousands of dollars.
Coming from a region that has always run rally tires in all classes, it's hard for me to believe the speculation from those regions that insist a street tire class is needed. I don't hear newcomers complaining, nor do I hear seasoned competitors in the stock classes wishing we could do things simpler and cheaper.
All this talk is giving me the itch to race.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with you here, but there is a limit to this philosophy. Racing places your vehicle (and you) at risk. I'm not sure whether most people competing are aware of these risks and factor them in to their willingness to play. I don't know how many actually calculate the cost of competing for a season, with travel, mantenance, entry fees, and whatever may go wrong. I believe that debating over the cost of a set of rims and tires assumes that the subject competitor is not being realistic about these other factors. Remember, we're talking about a sport that requires the use of a piece of equipment that typically costs many thousands of dollars.
Coming from a region that has always run rally tires in all classes, it's hard for me to believe the speculation from those regions that insist a street tire class is needed. I don't hear newcomers complaining, nor do I hear seasoned competitors in the stock classes wishing we could do things simpler and cheaper.
All this talk is giving me the itch to race.
| dowroa | 11-20-2005 05:40 PM |
Something I would like to hear from you guys is how you maintain a course throughout the day with everyone using rally tires. Our local club generally has a small following, and 3/4 of the cars out there are FWD/RWD cars. As a result, we see lots of understeer/rutting on the 'typical' line.
Seeing as how rally tires have been used for quite some time, how to do you minimize course impact of the tires for those that just follow 'the line'?
Any and all tangectial input is welcomed.
Thanks!
- dow
Seeing as how rally tires have been used for quite some time, how to do you minimize course impact of the tires for those that just follow 'the line'?
Any and all tangectial input is welcomed.
Thanks!
- dow
| AngryBlueRS | 11-20-2005 05:51 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]I agree with you here, but there is a limit to this philosophy. Racing places your vehicle (and you) at risk. I'm not sure whether most people competing are aware of these risks and factor them in to their willingness to play.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. I think after their first event most folks are focusing on protecting the car. Mud flaps, skid plates, diff protectors, body tape, safety equipment, etc. Its after all that when they start focusing on upgrades which may make them more competitive.
[QUOTE]
Coming from a region that has always run rally tires in all classes, it's hard for me to believe the speculation from those regions that insist a street tire class is needed. I don't hear newcomers complaining, nor do I hear seasoned competitors in the stock classes wishing we could do things simpler and cheaper.
[/QUOTE]
Our region is relatively new (about 4 years). With that said, we've doubled in size in the last two years largely in part to our production class which restricts rally tires. The higher attendance has allowed us to grow to a level where we can run more events (12 total this year). While most events have more competitors in the modified classes, production works as a great seeder to get people hooked. Once hooked people usually just bump themselves up to modified.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. I think after their first event most folks are focusing on protecting the car. Mud flaps, skid plates, diff protectors, body tape, safety equipment, etc. Its after all that when they start focusing on upgrades which may make them more competitive.
[QUOTE]
Coming from a region that has always run rally tires in all classes, it's hard for me to believe the speculation from those regions that insist a street tire class is needed. I don't hear newcomers complaining, nor do I hear seasoned competitors in the stock classes wishing we could do things simpler and cheaper.
[/QUOTE]
Our region is relatively new (about 4 years). With that said, we've doubled in size in the last two years largely in part to our production class which restricts rally tires. The higher attendance has allowed us to grow to a level where we can run more events (12 total this year). While most events have more competitors in the modified classes, production works as a great seeder to get people hooked. Once hooked people usually just bump themselves up to modified.
| AngryBlueRS | 11-20-2005 06:02 PM |
[QUOTE=dowroa]Something I would like to hear from you guys is how you maintain a course throughout the day with everyone using rally tires. Our local club generally has a small following, and 3/4 of the cars out there are FWD/RWD cars. As a result, we see lots of understeer/rutting on the 'typical' line. [/QUOTE]
Comes down to planning in the course design. We tend to run a twister course in the morning. This keeps speeds down till people shake out the cob webs. As the course ruts up, you simply move the turns inward. This gives folks a little more speed to play with as well as moves the course out of the rut area. Obviously this should only be done between run groups so competitors in the same class are dealing with the same course. Till then break out the rakes. ;)
Comes down to planning in the course design. We tend to run a twister course in the morning. This keeps speeds down till people shake out the cob webs. As the course ruts up, you simply move the turns inward. This gives folks a little more speed to play with as well as moves the course out of the rut area. Obviously this should only be done between run groups so competitors in the same class are dealing with the same course. Till then break out the rakes. ;)
| akuhner | 11-20-2005 11:01 PM |
You do not have to get rally tires to be competitive with a similar car on rally tires! I don't see why everyone thinks that - on a rally-x course, where runs are usually under a minute and you usually only get 6 to 8 runs, it can't make that much of a difference. A good set of nobby snow tires (not all seasons or "performance" snows) will do just as well, the only advantage you get is the stiffer side wall.
When you feel that you have to get something like rally tires so you can keep up with a similar car, you are probably better off upgrading the nut behind the wheel first!
When you feel that you have to get something like rally tires so you can keep up with a similar car, you are probably better off upgrading the nut behind the wheel first!
| mrmodular | 11-20-2005 11:37 PM |
course maintenance
�
�
[QUOTE=dowroa]Something I would like to hear from you guys is how you maintain a course throughout the day with everyone using rally tires.[/QUOTE]
The key to success, which was missed in Hastings, is being vigilant and proactive. As was already mentioned, changes need to be made between run groups, unless a dangerous condition pops up.
First, you must set up the course in harmony with the surface. Some sections may handle tighter features, while others may not. The more familiar you are with your site, the better you will be at predicting its decay.
Second, as ruts will happen, the layout should have the adjustments built in. You should allow space to widen or tighten a turn. Do this gradually.
Finally, be aware of the driven line and use enough cones to get the drivers onto the new line. Make sure the drivers are notified as they start their run that the course has been adjusted.
One thing we are fond of is reversing the course for the afternoon session. Breaks up the monotony and memorization aspect. This can help with the rutting, but not always. If you do try this, look it over from a safety perspective when it's first set up. Sometimes the reverse direction just isn't safe, depending on surrounding features.
We've gotten better sites over the years as well as improving our set-up strategies. Good luck.
The key to success, which was missed in Hastings, is being vigilant and proactive. As was already mentioned, changes need to be made between run groups, unless a dangerous condition pops up.
First, you must set up the course in harmony with the surface. Some sections may handle tighter features, while others may not. The more familiar you are with your site, the better you will be at predicting its decay.
Second, as ruts will happen, the layout should have the adjustments built in. You should allow space to widen or tighten a turn. Do this gradually.
Finally, be aware of the driven line and use enough cones to get the drivers onto the new line. Make sure the drivers are notified as they start their run that the course has been adjusted.
One thing we are fond of is reversing the course for the afternoon session. Breaks up the monotony and memorization aspect. This can help with the rutting, but not always. If you do try this, look it over from a safety perspective when it's first set up. Sometimes the reverse direction just isn't safe, depending on surrounding features.
We've gotten better sites over the years as well as improving our set-up strategies. Good luck.
| mrmodular | 11-20-2005 11:45 PM |
[QUOTE=Car #187]You do not have to get rally tires to be competitive with a similar car on rally tires! I don't see why everyone thinks that - on a rally-x course, where runs are usually under a minute and you usually only get 6 to 8 runs, it can't make that much of a difference. A good set of nobby snow tires (not all seasons or "performance" snows) will do just as well, the only advantage you get is the stiffer side wall.
When you feel that you have to get something like rally tires so you can keep up with a similar car, you are probably better off upgrading the nut behind the wheel first![/QUOTE]
Agreed. The big problem, in terms of writing the national class proposal, has been that some folks don't think snow tires should be legal either. It comes down to where to draw the line, if you think tires are really a class breaker. The result was yahoos like me wanting unrestricted tire use and yahoos like them wanting rally and snow tires to be excluded to Modified classes coming to a comprimise and making them a limited modification.
When you feel that you have to get something like rally tires so you can keep up with a similar car, you are probably better off upgrading the nut behind the wheel first![/QUOTE]
Agreed. The big problem, in terms of writing the national class proposal, has been that some folks don't think snow tires should be legal either. It comes down to where to draw the line, if you think tires are really a class breaker. The result was yahoos like me wanting unrestricted tire use and yahoos like them wanting rally and snow tires to be excluded to Modified classes coming to a comprimise and making them a limited modification.
| Duo | 11-21-2005 02:25 AM |
[QUOTE=Car #187]You do not have to get rally tires to be competitive with a similar car on rally tires! I don't see why everyone thinks that - on a rally-x course, where runs are usually under a minute and you usually only get 6 to 8 runs, it can't make that much of a difference. A good set of nobby snow tires (not all seasons or "performance" snows) will do just as well, the only advantage you get is the stiffer side wall.
When you feel that you have to get something like rally tires so you can keep up with a similar car, you are probably better off upgrading the nut behind the wheel first![/QUOTE]
I disagree with you. From top driver to top driver in our open class that has rally tires and the street mod class that doesn�t have rally tires allowed, there is a difference of 6 seconds per run that is a huge amount. And the sm4 car had more suspension modifications then the open class car. So i think rally tires are huge in terms of performance. I also think that when you guys are talking about cost and such that rally rims and tires for any Subaru are close to 1200 new. And that could be put to a lot of rally cross�s (entry fee and gas). When you talk about maintenance I don�t think it�s fair to throw that amount in with the equation either. Because for most of us this is our street cars and we would have to do maintenance anyways. I think that rally tires should stay away from the bottom classes.
When you feel that you have to get something like rally tires so you can keep up with a similar car, you are probably better off upgrading the nut behind the wheel first![/QUOTE]
I disagree with you. From top driver to top driver in our open class that has rally tires and the street mod class that doesn�t have rally tires allowed, there is a difference of 6 seconds per run that is a huge amount. And the sm4 car had more suspension modifications then the open class car. So i think rally tires are huge in terms of performance. I also think that when you guys are talking about cost and such that rally rims and tires for any Subaru are close to 1200 new. And that could be put to a lot of rally cross�s (entry fee and gas). When you talk about maintenance I don�t think it�s fair to throw that amount in with the equation either. Because for most of us this is our street cars and we would have to do maintenance anyways. I think that rally tires should stay away from the bottom classes.
| Arnie | 11-21-2005 02:28 AM |
Ah, shut up Joel. What do you know! :p But are these two top driver's equal in skill? Would the lower classed driver click off the same times in the same open class car?
:p you missed a great install today at matt's!
:p you missed a great install today at matt's!
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét