| Duo | 11-21-2005 04:21 AM |
[QUOTE=Arnie]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![/QUOTE]
well i guess there is only one way to find out. I think the people making the rules should set up a quick course or just a regular one. And have the same car with the same setup run a kdws type tire, and then a rally tire and see if they are not the same times. Then the next day run it in the opposite order of the tire arragement(if you ran street tire then rally tire, then run rally tire then street tire). And take them both days into account and really see if it doesnt make a difference. And i always miss having good isntalls at matts place:)
:p you missed a great install today at matt's![/QUOTE]
well i guess there is only one way to find out. I think the people making the rules should set up a quick course or just a regular one. And have the same car with the same setup run a kdws type tire, and then a rally tire and see if they are not the same times. Then the next day run it in the opposite order of the tire arragement(if you ran street tire then rally tire, then run rally tire then street tire). And take them both days into account and really see if it doesnt make a difference. And i always miss having good isntalls at matts place:)
| AngryBlueRS | 11-21-2005 07:20 AM |
[QUOTE=Duo]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. [/QUOTE]
As someone who has been arguing this point, let me throw in a couple of caveats to this statement. ;)
The advantage of rally tires is going to vary with the surface. For example one of the sites we run on is grass over tightly packed dirt. Rally tires seem to make a minimal performance difference over snows or all seasons. We have another site we run that is more loose clay. When it rains the folks without proper rally tires are lucky if they can make it to the finish. So surface conditions are going to drive the performance gain.
Also, we are talking about rally tires like there is only one option. Really this is about making tires free. Most of the folks in our region that run our modified class have multiple sets of tires, each to fit varying conditions. When this happens the argument about rally tires being cheaper goes out the window.
So maybe we need another class level. How about a zero points option which is production, a 5 point option (which includes rally tires) that is street prepared, and an open class that meets the current specification under consideration? On the downside we've added 3 more classes. On the up side everyone goes home happy. :D
Thoughts on this?
As someone who has been arguing this point, let me throw in a couple of caveats to this statement. ;)
The advantage of rally tires is going to vary with the surface. For example one of the sites we run on is grass over tightly packed dirt. Rally tires seem to make a minimal performance difference over snows or all seasons. We have another site we run that is more loose clay. When it rains the folks without proper rally tires are lucky if they can make it to the finish. So surface conditions are going to drive the performance gain.
Also, we are talking about rally tires like there is only one option. Really this is about making tires free. Most of the folks in our region that run our modified class have multiple sets of tires, each to fit varying conditions. When this happens the argument about rally tires being cheaper goes out the window.
So maybe we need another class level. How about a zero points option which is production, a 5 point option (which includes rally tires) that is street prepared, and an open class that meets the current specification under consideration? On the downside we've added 3 more classes. On the up side everyone goes home happy. :D
Thoughts on this?
| akuhner | 11-21-2005 09:14 AM |
One thing that you are all missing is that rally isn't always fair and equal, nor should it be. The surfaces are different from event to event, so a tire that will gain you time at one location will lose time at another. And sentiments from region to region will vary too - people in the North East will have snow tires and want to run them, while Californians don't have them, don't need them, and don't want their fellow competitors getting them just for rally-x. Once you exclude something that's it, it's out, why not let regions that don't want snow tires ban them in the supps? Those same competitors could still get them for nationals if they wanted, but then you don't end up with a bunch of Californians with snow tires they don't really need, while those of us above the snow line can get our snows out.
Hey wait, if you ban snow tires from production class what are they supposed to do at snow events?!?! If I host a snow event I will actually be banning summer and probably even "all season" tires in my supps.
Angry Blue - it's pretty much general consensus that more classes would be bad, many people like me would revolt against anything more than what's in the draft now.
Alex
Hey wait, if you ban snow tires from production class what are they supposed to do at snow events?!?! If I host a snow event I will actually be banning summer and probably even "all season" tires in my supps.
Angry Blue - it's pretty much general consensus that more classes would be bad, many people like me would revolt against anything more than what's in the draft now.
Alex
| cowapult | 11-21-2005 10:03 AM |
[QUOTE=Car #187]
Angry Blue - it's pretty much general consensus that more classes would be bad, many people like me would revolt against anything more than what's in the draft now.
Alex[/QUOTE]
agreed
Angry Blue - it's pretty much general consensus that more classes would be bad, many people like me would revolt against anything more than what's in the draft now.
Alex[/QUOTE]
agreed
| Porsche914boxer4 | 11-21-2005 11:05 AM |
[QUOTE=Car #187]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?
Alex[/QUOTE]
so what you're saying is that because some guy you know never broke an engine mount everyone else should be forced the same rules?
Alex[/QUOTE]
so what you're saying is that because some guy you know never broke an engine mount everyone else should be forced the same rules?
| greg donovan | 11-21-2005 11:51 AM |
[QUOTE=Porsche914boxer4]so what you're saying is that because some guy you know never broke an engine mount everyone else should be forced the same rules?[/QUOTE]
dont think i have ever heard of an engine mount breaking at a rallyx.
that being said my brothers AWD 1.8 impreza coupe felt tons better after the GN engine/tranny mounts were installed.
dont think i have ever heard of an engine mount breaking at a rallyx.
that being said my brothers AWD 1.8 impreza coupe felt tons better after the GN engine/tranny mounts were installed.
| Porsche914boxer4 | 11-21-2005 12:00 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]dont think i have ever heard of an engine mount breaking at a rallyx.[QUOTE]
talk to some VW guys
talk to some VW guys
| akuhner | 11-21-2005 12:37 PM |
[QUOTE=Porsche914boxer4]so what you're saying is that because some guy you know never broke an engine mount everyone else should be forced the same rules?[/QUOTE]
You missed a sentence I had in there:
"I do agree with your other logic - it's not enough of an advantage to make a difference, so why exclude them?"
I don't think that uprated engine mounts should be excluded, and I'm sure as heck not checking them when I'm doing tech. If they exclude them it will have to be competitor monitored.
You missed a sentence I had in there:
"I do agree with your other logic - it's not enough of an advantage to make a difference, so why exclude them?"
I don't think that uprated engine mounts should be excluded, and I'm sure as heck not checking them when I'm doing tech. If they exclude them it will have to be competitor monitored.
| Got Pink? | 11-21-2005 12:40 PM |
I like the new rules much better than the old ones for sure and dont mind running rally tires if I am going to pick up a 2.2L impreza as a daily driver / production class car.
I have only been to a single rallyx in my STi (before it was setup for STU autox with coilovers, huge front sway etc now it would be way too much work to convert it back to stock or risk ruining my double adjustable KW's at a rallyx) so I am more or less an informed novice.
I also take issue with the stock sized wheels and tires mod and don't know if that means even a different tire size on the stock rims counts a limited mod? Just allow any wheel and tire size and it does make it cheaper to fit rally tires in a size offered.
So for those that think this ruleset will make production expensive:
This is what I am considering to do for next season
Spend ~3000 on a 2.2L AWD Impreza
~400 bucks for a set of rallly tires mounted on the stock rims
~300 bucks for a set of used wrx wheels and re92s for the street
~500 Koni single adjustable dampers
~200 set of camber plates
Spending under 5k for a competitive car that also doubles an all weather daily driver with a ride much better than an STi with stiff springs, priceless!
I have only been to a single rallyx in my STi (before it was setup for STU autox with coilovers, huge front sway etc now it would be way too much work to convert it back to stock or risk ruining my double adjustable KW's at a rallyx) so I am more or less an informed novice.
I also take issue with the stock sized wheels and tires mod and don't know if that means even a different tire size on the stock rims counts a limited mod? Just allow any wheel and tire size and it does make it cheaper to fit rally tires in a size offered.
So for those that think this ruleset will make production expensive:
This is what I am considering to do for next season
Spend ~3000 on a 2.2L AWD Impreza
~400 bucks for a set of rallly tires mounted on the stock rims
~300 bucks for a set of used wrx wheels and re92s for the street
~500 Koni single adjustable dampers
~200 set of camber plates
Spending under 5k for a competitive car that also doubles an all weather daily driver with a ride much better than an STi with stiff springs, priceless!
| mrmodular | 11-21-2005 12:49 PM |
[QUOTE=Car #187]You missed a sentence I had in there:
"I do agree with your other logic - it's not enough of an advantage to make a difference, so why exclude them?"
I don't think that uprated engine mounts should be excluded, and I'm sure as heck not checking them when I'm doing tech. If they exclude them it will have to be competitor monitored.[/QUOTE]
In order to keep this from being a legislative nightmare, similar mods have been lumped together, thus, all bushing material will only get you one limited item.
The enforcement issue isn't one that has ever fallen to tech inspectors. This is expected to be a competitor declaration. For someone showing up for the first time, take a few extra moments and run through the list with them. Technically, the event steward is responsible for classing issues, but this will always be on the honor system.
"I do agree with your other logic - it's not enough of an advantage to make a difference, so why exclude them?"
I don't think that uprated engine mounts should be excluded, and I'm sure as heck not checking them when I'm doing tech. If they exclude them it will have to be competitor monitored.[/QUOTE]
In order to keep this from being a legislative nightmare, similar mods have been lumped together, thus, all bushing material will only get you one limited item.
The enforcement issue isn't one that has ever fallen to tech inspectors. This is expected to be a competitor declaration. For someone showing up for the first time, take a few extra moments and run through the list with them. Technically, the event steward is responsible for classing issues, but this will always be on the honor system.
| greg donovan | 11-21-2005 01:44 PM |
[QUOTE=Porsche914boxer4][QUOTE=greg donovan]dont think i have ever heard of an engine mount breaking at a rallyx.[QUOTE]
talk to some VW guys[/QUOTE]
i will concede thant point. the VW engine mounts are crappy and they are a standard upgrade and using metal isnt all that uncommon on them.
talk to some VW guys[/QUOTE]
i will concede thant point. the VW engine mounts are crappy and they are a standard upgrade and using metal isnt all that uncommon on them.
| greg donovan | 11-21-2005 01:52 PM |
[QUOTE=Got Pink?]I like the new rules much better than the old ones for sure and dont mind running rally tires if I am going to pick up a 2.2L impreza as a daily driver / production class car.
I have only been to a single rallyx in my STi (before it was setup for STU autox with coilovers, huge front sway etc now it would be way too much work to convert it back to stock or risk ruining my double adjustable KW's at a rallyx) so I am more or less an informed novice.
I also take issue with the stock sized wheels and tires mod and don't know if that means even a different tire size on the stock rims counts a limited mod? Just allow any wheel and tire size and it does make it cheaper to fit rally tires in a size offered.
So for those that think this ruleset will make production expensive:
This is what I am considering to do for next season
Spend ~3000 on a 2.2L AWD Impreza
~400 bucks for a set of rallly tires mounted on the stock rims
~300 bucks for a set of used wrx wheels and re92s for the street
~500 Koni single adjustable dampers
~200 set of camber plates
Spending under 5k for a competitive car that also doubles an all weather daily driver with a ride much better than an STi with stiff springs, priceless![/QUOTE]
and if you are friends w/a rally team you can cut the rally tire bill to under 200 if not closer to 100 by purchasing their old rally tires. a tire that is too worn to be a rally tire is a fine rallyx tire.
I have only been to a single rallyx in my STi (before it was setup for STU autox with coilovers, huge front sway etc now it would be way too much work to convert it back to stock or risk ruining my double adjustable KW's at a rallyx) so I am more or less an informed novice.
I also take issue with the stock sized wheels and tires mod and don't know if that means even a different tire size on the stock rims counts a limited mod? Just allow any wheel and tire size and it does make it cheaper to fit rally tires in a size offered.
So for those that think this ruleset will make production expensive:
This is what I am considering to do for next season
Spend ~3000 on a 2.2L AWD Impreza
~400 bucks for a set of rallly tires mounted on the stock rims
~300 bucks for a set of used wrx wheels and re92s for the street
~500 Koni single adjustable dampers
~200 set of camber plates
Spending under 5k for a competitive car that also doubles an all weather daily driver with a ride much better than an STi with stiff springs, priceless![/QUOTE]
and if you are friends w/a rally team you can cut the rally tire bill to under 200 if not closer to 100 by purchasing their old rally tires. a tire that is too worn to be a rally tire is a fine rallyx tire.
| Got Pink? | 11-21-2005 03:22 PM |
Another thing you need to clairfy regarding the wheel and tire size limited allowance is what do you do if for cars in which there are multiple wheel and tire size options for a model? Allow any car from that year to use any stock size or just the one that literally came on your car and then how can you prove your car came with that size?
| MoDrift | 11-21-2005 03:54 PM |
[QUOTE=AngryBlueRS]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.
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]
Exactly.
I'm blown away rally tires would be allowed in a stock/production class. We're talking about RallyCross - not Rally. We ran 88 cars at our last event earlier this month, and 95% of the cars were daily driver, street vehicles, with street tires.
Rally tires are a huge advantage in the dirt. This would be like proposing the auto-x folks allow slicks in all stock classes [edit: er, so you can. Never mind then. :)]. Saying person X with street tires can beat person Y in rally tires so "let's just allow rally tires in a stock class" isn't really a useful argument. Adjustable supension automatically bumps someone to modified, but rally tires do not? I don't understand.
Exactly as AngryBlueRS said, this means that people need to purchase rally tires and wheels to be competitive in a [b]stock, entry level[/b] class. What is "stock" about rally tires? That is a discouraging class structure for people newbies or even regulars who want have fun in the dirt without feeling there isn't a chance to be competitive unless they start shelling out more $$.
Also, this is not a professional series. Money is an issue for some folks. If we don't keep that in mind we end up with fewer registrations which means less money to run the program.
Absolutely! A number of folks have recommended "Hey if you don't like it make up your own rules". Not sure this is the best attitude to have because then someone competing between difference regions has to deal with different class structures. It also mean you could end up running nationals on a different setup than you are allowed in your own region. Obviously its impossible to create a class structure that everyone is happy with. Let's just do the best we can and then go from there. I honestly think we'll be missing out on potential competitors if we don't create some form of intro class for people to get their feet wet.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
I'm blown away rally tires would be allowed in a stock/production class. We're talking about RallyCross - not Rally. We ran 88 cars at our last event earlier this month, and 95% of the cars were daily driver, street vehicles, with street tires.
Rally tires are a huge advantage in the dirt. This would be like proposing the auto-x folks allow slicks in all stock classes [edit: er, so you can. Never mind then. :)]. Saying person X with street tires can beat person Y in rally tires so "let's just allow rally tires in a stock class" isn't really a useful argument. Adjustable supension automatically bumps someone to modified, but rally tires do not? I don't understand.
Exactly as AngryBlueRS said, this means that people need to purchase rally tires and wheels to be competitive in a [b]stock, entry level[/b] class. What is "stock" about rally tires? That is a discouraging class structure for people newbies or even regulars who want have fun in the dirt without feeling there isn't a chance to be competitive unless they start shelling out more $$.
| dowroa | 11-21-2005 04:13 PM |
[quote]
Rally tires are a huge advantage in the dirt. This would be like proposing the auto-x folks allow slicks in all stock classes. Saying person X with street tires can beat person Y in rally tires so "let's just allow rally tires in a stock class" isn't really a useful argument. [/quote]
Um.. yea. They do allow any tire in the Stock classes. The only place you get away from R-Compounds are Street Tire classes. ;)
Man, if it wasn't so difficult to [b]FIND[/b] used rally tires (in 14" sizes), I would have some right now making this whole thread useless!! :D
I say make tires unrestricted OR make it a RM only mod. Tires are THE single most important mods you can ever do in ANY racing event... minus making the driver better :)
- dow
Rally tires are a huge advantage in the dirt. This would be like proposing the auto-x folks allow slicks in all stock classes. Saying person X with street tires can beat person Y in rally tires so "let's just allow rally tires in a stock class" isn't really a useful argument. [/quote]
Um.. yea. They do allow any tire in the Stock classes. The only place you get away from R-Compounds are Street Tire classes. ;)
Man, if it wasn't so difficult to [b]FIND[/b] used rally tires (in 14" sizes), I would have some right now making this whole thread useless!! :D
I say make tires unrestricted OR make it a RM only mod. Tires are THE single most important mods you can ever do in ANY racing event... minus making the driver better :)
- dow
| MarkA | 11-21-2005 04:15 PM |
[QUOTE=MoDrift]Exactly.
I'm blown away rally tires would be allowed in a stock/production class. We're talking about RallyCross - not Rally. We ran 88 cars at our last event earlier this month, and 95% of the cars were daily driver, street vehicles, with street tires.
Rally tires are a huge advantage in the dirt. This would be like proposing the auto-x folks allow slicks in all stock classes. Saying person X with street tires can beat person Y in rally tires so "let's just allow rally tires in a stock class" isn't really a useful argument. Adjustable supension automatically bumps someone to modified, but rally tires do not? I don't understand.
Exactly as AngryBlueRS said, this means that people need to purchase rally tires and wheels to be competitive in a [b]stock, entry level[/b] class. What is "stock" about rally tires? That is a discouraging class structure for people newbies or even regulars who want have fun in the dirt without feeling there isn't a chance to be competitive unless they start shelling out more $$.[/QUOTE]
Awww, c'mon Skylar, don't you know we should let regions that don't get that many cars at three of their events tell us what to do... :rolleyes: :lol:
Besides, why would we want to change from the CRS rules (how can you beat simple but fair rules that take all of three sentences to lay out...) anyway? It�ll only really become a problem for us in SoCal/SFR/LVR if they institute a qualifying format for SCCA RallyX Nationals where'd we have to dual-score all our events under our CRS classes and whatever they finalize so people could go to Nationals.
I'm blown away rally tires would be allowed in a stock/production class. We're talking about RallyCross - not Rally. We ran 88 cars at our last event earlier this month, and 95% of the cars were daily driver, street vehicles, with street tires.
Rally tires are a huge advantage in the dirt. This would be like proposing the auto-x folks allow slicks in all stock classes. Saying person X with street tires can beat person Y in rally tires so "let's just allow rally tires in a stock class" isn't really a useful argument. Adjustable supension automatically bumps someone to modified, but rally tires do not? I don't understand.
Exactly as AngryBlueRS said, this means that people need to purchase rally tires and wheels to be competitive in a [b]stock, entry level[/b] class. What is "stock" about rally tires? That is a discouraging class structure for people newbies or even regulars who want have fun in the dirt without feeling there isn't a chance to be competitive unless they start shelling out more $$.[/QUOTE]
Awww, c'mon Skylar, don't you know we should let regions that don't get that many cars at three of their events tell us what to do... :rolleyes: :lol:
Besides, why would we want to change from the CRS rules (how can you beat simple but fair rules that take all of three sentences to lay out...) anyway? It�ll only really become a problem for us in SoCal/SFR/LVR if they institute a qualifying format for SCCA RallyX Nationals where'd we have to dual-score all our events under our CRS classes and whatever they finalize so people could go to Nationals.
| AngryBlueRS | 11-21-2005 04:44 PM |
[QUOTE=Car #187]Angry Blue - it's pretty much general consensus that more classes would be bad, many people like me would revolt against anything more than what's in the draft now.
[/QUOTE]
Here's my quandry. Talking to random RallyX folks both within my region and on other boards, it seems like the biggest point of contention is RallyX tires in production. Sure there are little gripes here and there (like the motor mount discussion), but nothing that can't be worked out easily. The only really passionate point for many folks is the tires.
I agree that having a ton of classes makes the whole process insane. I'm not asking about mirroring AutoX, simply adding 3 more classes. This resolves the tire issue and makes everyone happy. If you think its too many classes or that rally tires should be permitted, no problem. Simply drop the production classes from your region and you are cooking with gas. Problem solved all the way around as everyone can follow the same set of regs and be happy.
Again, we all have preferences based on personal experience. That's totally cool. National level regs however should be flexible enough to let everyone do their own thing.
[/QUOTE]
Here's my quandry. Talking to random RallyX folks both within my region and on other boards, it seems like the biggest point of contention is RallyX tires in production. Sure there are little gripes here and there (like the motor mount discussion), but nothing that can't be worked out easily. The only really passionate point for many folks is the tires.
I agree that having a ton of classes makes the whole process insane. I'm not asking about mirroring AutoX, simply adding 3 more classes. This resolves the tire issue and makes everyone happy. If you think its too many classes or that rally tires should be permitted, no problem. Simply drop the production classes from your region and you are cooking with gas. Problem solved all the way around as everyone can follow the same set of regs and be happy.
Again, we all have preferences based on personal experience. That's totally cool. National level regs however should be flexible enough to let everyone do their own thing.
| MoDrift | 11-21-2005 05:58 PM |
[QUOTE=dowroa]Um.. yea. They do allow any tire in the Stock classes. The only place you get away from R-Compounds are Street Tire classes. ;)
- dow[/QUOTE]
Oops... yeah. Thanks for the clarification. :)
- dow[/QUOTE]
Oops... yeah. Thanks for the clarification. :)
| MoDrift | 11-21-2005 06:17 PM |
[QUOTE=MarkA]Awww, c'mon Skylar, don't you know we should let regions that don't get that many cars at three of their events tell us what to do... :rolleyes: :lol:
Besides, why would we want to change from the CRS rules (how can you beat simple but fair rules that take all of three sentences to lay out...) anyway? It�ll only really become a problem for us in SoCal/SFR/LVR if they institute a qualifying format for SCCA RallyX Nationals where'd we have to dual-score all our events under our CRS classes and whatever they finalize so people could go to Nationals.[/QUOTE]
I don't know that we'd need to dual-score ALL of our events if we decide not to run with National classes, but it may turn out that a couple of our events next year will be billed as "National" events where I imagine you'd earn "National" points (in addition to the normal regional chamipionships points). I'm unclear if these National points will be used to determine who can go to Nationals or what. In an effort to keep growing RallyCross at the national level I would hope not. Might as well let anyone who wants to race, race.
Maybe other regions have mostly rally cars that show up, or everyone already owns snow and/or rally tires so it's not an issue, but I can't see being able to find anyone in the San Francisco Region SCCA that would agree that rally tires make sense in a stock RallyCross class. I do see it as a good way to make most competitors angry if we showed up with these classes. :) Everyone except those who already have rally tires that is. :)
Besides, why would we want to change from the CRS rules (how can you beat simple but fair rules that take all of three sentences to lay out...) anyway? It�ll only really become a problem for us in SoCal/SFR/LVR if they institute a qualifying format for SCCA RallyX Nationals where'd we have to dual-score all our events under our CRS classes and whatever they finalize so people could go to Nationals.[/QUOTE]
I don't know that we'd need to dual-score ALL of our events if we decide not to run with National classes, but it may turn out that a couple of our events next year will be billed as "National" events where I imagine you'd earn "National" points (in addition to the normal regional chamipionships points). I'm unclear if these National points will be used to determine who can go to Nationals or what. In an effort to keep growing RallyCross at the national level I would hope not. Might as well let anyone who wants to race, race.
Maybe other regions have mostly rally cars that show up, or everyone already owns snow and/or rally tires so it's not an issue, but I can't see being able to find anyone in the San Francisco Region SCCA that would agree that rally tires make sense in a stock RallyCross class. I do see it as a good way to make most competitors angry if we showed up with these classes. :) Everyone except those who already have rally tires that is. :)
| mrmodular | 11-21-2005 06:38 PM |
California unter alles
�
�
[QUOTE=MarkA]Awww, c'mon Skylar, don't you know we should let regions that don't get that many cars at three of their events tell us what to do... :rolleyes: :lol:
Besides, why would we want to change from the CRS rules (how can you beat simple but fair rules that take all of three sentences to lay out...) anyway? It�ll only really become a problem for us in SoCal/SFR/LVR if they institute a qualifying format for SCCA RallyX Nationals where'd we have to dual-score all our events under our CRS classes and whatever they finalize so people could go to Nationals.[/QUOTE]
The big question you west coasters need to ask is why nobody from your region would volunteer to be a national steward (thus, no representation).
On the whole, folks usually play by the rules that are laid out. The whole "oh my gosh whay can't anyone else see how simple this is" approach goes away pretty quickly if you are actually talking with representatives from around the country, and you need to reach a comprimise.
Besides, why would we want to change from the CRS rules (how can you beat simple but fair rules that take all of three sentences to lay out...) anyway? It�ll only really become a problem for us in SoCal/SFR/LVR if they institute a qualifying format for SCCA RallyX Nationals where'd we have to dual-score all our events under our CRS classes and whatever they finalize so people could go to Nationals.[/QUOTE]
The big question you west coasters need to ask is why nobody from your region would volunteer to be a national steward (thus, no representation).
On the whole, folks usually play by the rules that are laid out. The whole "oh my gosh whay can't anyone else see how simple this is" approach goes away pretty quickly if you are actually talking with representatives from around the country, and you need to reach a comprimise.
| MoDrift | 11-21-2005 07:24 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]The big question you west coasters need to ask is why nobody from your region would volunteer to be a national steward (thus, no representation).
On the whole, folks usually play by the rules that are laid out. The whole "oh my gosh whay can't anyone else see how simple this is" approach goes away pretty quickly if you are actually talking with representatives from around the country, and you need to reach a comprimise.[/QUOTE]
Well, speaking for SFR, we've never been contacted about anything to do with RallyCross at a national level (other than an email I received from Pego two weeks ago regarding the 2006 schedule) - or even found that there was an actual communication channel for SCCA RallyCross at a national level. If the SCCA was really interested in having a discussion at a National level, more needs to be done rather than an online post here and there hoping that the word spreads. These new classes have been in progress for how long now?
The 2005 "National" rallycross classes fell out of the sky at, what, "revision 31" at the end of last year, and we only knew they existed at that point because someone noticed the thread on Special Stage. We are certainly interested in cooperating at the National level (we have a lot of competitors who would be happy to to chime in), but with zero communication or organization it's hard to guess when/if such things even exist, or to expect a decent number of regions would even take place in discussions.
Overall though, it's great to see any kind of progress at the National level. :)
On the whole, folks usually play by the rules that are laid out. The whole "oh my gosh whay can't anyone else see how simple this is" approach goes away pretty quickly if you are actually talking with representatives from around the country, and you need to reach a comprimise.[/QUOTE]
Well, speaking for SFR, we've never been contacted about anything to do with RallyCross at a national level (other than an email I received from Pego two weeks ago regarding the 2006 schedule) - or even found that there was an actual communication channel for SCCA RallyCross at a national level. If the SCCA was really interested in having a discussion at a National level, more needs to be done rather than an online post here and there hoping that the word spreads. These new classes have been in progress for how long now?
The 2005 "National" rallycross classes fell out of the sky at, what, "revision 31" at the end of last year, and we only knew they existed at that point because someone noticed the thread on Special Stage. We are certainly interested in cooperating at the National level (we have a lot of competitors who would be happy to to chime in), but with zero communication or organization it's hard to guess when/if such things even exist, or to expect a decent number of regions would even take place in discussions.
Overall though, it's great to see any kind of progress at the National level. :)
| AngryBlueRS | 11-21-2005 07:35 PM |
[QUOTE=MoDrift]Well, speaking for SFR, we've never been contacted about anything to do with RallyCross at a national level (other than an email I received from Pego two weeks ago regarding the 2006 schedule)[/QUOTE]
Drop Pego a note and tell her you want in. I've known her for a while and she's big on community invlovement. If your region wants to pitch in, I'm sure she would appreciate it.
Drop Pego a note and tell her you want in. I've known her for a while and she's big on community invlovement. If your region wants to pitch in, I'm sure she would appreciate it.
| mrmodular | 11-21-2005 07:48 PM |
[QUOTE=MoDrift]These new classes have been in progress for how long now?
>I got involved this summer. The real progress started right before Hastings.
The 2005 "National" rallycross classes fell out of the sky at, what, "revision 31" at the end of last year, and we only knew they existed at that point because someone noticed the thread on Special Stage.
>Many people like us raised the same question. I was lucky enough to get in as an advisor in someone's absence. I influenced the process heavily, but had no vote. My region, Colorado, is also in a funny position. We have a strong program that's been around for a while, but or rep is in New Mexico and doesn't come to our events or have any of his own. As you may have read, at the beginning of the meeting that finalized the class structure for '06, I asked which person on the call was representing CA. That's when I found out there was nobody.
We are certainly interested in cooperating at the National level (we have a lot of competitors who would be happy to to chime in), but with zero communication or organization it's hard to guess when/if such things even exist, or to expect a decent number of regions would even take place in discussions.
>Take this up with Tom Nelson, the national RX steward, or just go straight to Pego.
Overall though, it's great to see any kind of progress at the National level. :)
>thanks
[/QUOTE]
responses inserted above
>I got involved this summer. The real progress started right before Hastings.
The 2005 "National" rallycross classes fell out of the sky at, what, "revision 31" at the end of last year, and we only knew they existed at that point because someone noticed the thread on Special Stage.
>Many people like us raised the same question. I was lucky enough to get in as an advisor in someone's absence. I influenced the process heavily, but had no vote. My region, Colorado, is also in a funny position. We have a strong program that's been around for a while, but or rep is in New Mexico and doesn't come to our events or have any of his own. As you may have read, at the beginning of the meeting that finalized the class structure for '06, I asked which person on the call was representing CA. That's when I found out there was nobody.
We are certainly interested in cooperating at the National level (we have a lot of competitors who would be happy to to chime in), but with zero communication or organization it's hard to guess when/if such things even exist, or to expect a decent number of regions would even take place in discussions.
>Take this up with Tom Nelson, the national RX steward, or just go straight to Pego.
Overall though, it's great to see any kind of progress at the National level. :)
>thanks
[/QUOTE]
responses inserted above
| MoDrift | 11-21-2005 07:52 PM |
Thanks for the input, guys.
| 10th Warrior | 11-21-2005 09:05 PM |
who's going to be the first to replace all their body panels with carbon fiber and go for a pair of kirkey seats for stock class :lol:
| cowapult | 11-21-2005 09:58 PM |
[QUOTE=AngryBlueRS]simply adding 3 more classes. This resolves the tire issue and makes everyone happy. If you think its too many classes or that rally tires should be permitted, no problem. Simply drop the production classes from your region and you are cooking with gas. Problem solved all the way around as everyone can follow the same set of regs and be happy.[/QUOTE]
I'm on your side about the rally tires, but 3 more classes is not acceptable. We already compromised by having what I would call roughly "3 too many" classes in the system. I am guessing WDC region will already have to drop some of those classes for local events.
There's always a lot of reasons to add "just 3 more classes" as a compromise to make every one happy. Sometimes a compromise is the worst solution. Personally, I would rather have 4 terrible classes than a great compromise of 10 classes. Next thing you know you wake up at night screaming and sweaty when you realize that we've become SOLOII!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek:
Now, I flip it back on you, your region can always run 10 classes if you like.
I'm on your side about the rally tires, but 3 more classes is not acceptable. We already compromised by having what I would call roughly "3 too many" classes in the system. I am guessing WDC region will already have to drop some of those classes for local events.
There's always a lot of reasons to add "just 3 more classes" as a compromise to make every one happy. Sometimes a compromise is the worst solution. Personally, I would rather have 4 terrible classes than a great compromise of 10 classes. Next thing you know you wake up at night screaming and sweaty when you realize that we've become SOLOII!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek:
Now, I flip it back on you, your region can always run 10 classes if you like.
| Fred | 11-21-2005 10:35 PM |
[QUOTE]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. [/QUOTE]
You and anyone who agrees with you are smoking crack. :lol:
Our club has allowed only street tires thus far due to concerns about ruts. We'll be allowing rally tires next year - as well as the event on Dec. 3rd. (see [url]http://www.thscc.com/rallycross/prereg_rallyx.html[/url] for more details :cool: )
I have taken overall FTD on all of our courses this year, including the one where I switched to rally tires for a "fun run" during the lunch break and finished 5 seconds quicker. This is on a 60sec course. We do 6 runs. 5 seconds X 6 runs = 30sec, in case you were wondering. :) ;)
I agree with whoever said that the advantage is course-dependent, though. Up at Oakland Acres, VA the rally tires have a huge advantage in the AM, but the advantage gets smaller as the course gets swept (it's hard-packed clay underneath - almost like asphalt). With the STi on RE070's yesterday, I was about 6 seconds slower single run than the fastest guy on rally tires, but then I beat his morning time by a second when the grip level increased for me in the afternoon (not sure whether his times improved or got worse, though). But that's the cool thing about tire choice for the modified classes - we can run rally tires when rally tires have the advantage, then run tarmac tires when tarmac tires have the advantage. Last time I was there, I ran the 2.5RS on rally tires and developed a decent lead in the morning, but was pretty even with the fastest guy on street tires in the afternoon. The plan for this next time was to take the 2.5RS and run rally tires AM, tarmac tires PM, but then the STi came along and plans changed. :lol:
I whole-heartedly disagree that rally tires should be allowed in all classes, but as for solo2 classing, I don't think that R compounds should be allowed in "stock" classes either. :)
And when the rule makers say things like "feel free to run whatever rules you want to locally, totally disregarding these rules altogether blah blah blah" :confused: Why the Hell would you even attempt to put together a ruleset for national competition if you're going to say something like that? :lol: Listen to what your target audience has to say, and maybe something good will come of it. :)
You and anyone who agrees with you are smoking crack. :lol:
Our club has allowed only street tires thus far due to concerns about ruts. We'll be allowing rally tires next year - as well as the event on Dec. 3rd. (see [url]http://www.thscc.com/rallycross/prereg_rallyx.html[/url] for more details :cool: )
I have taken overall FTD on all of our courses this year, including the one where I switched to rally tires for a "fun run" during the lunch break and finished 5 seconds quicker. This is on a 60sec course. We do 6 runs. 5 seconds X 6 runs = 30sec, in case you were wondering. :) ;)
I agree with whoever said that the advantage is course-dependent, though. Up at Oakland Acres, VA the rally tires have a huge advantage in the AM, but the advantage gets smaller as the course gets swept (it's hard-packed clay underneath - almost like asphalt). With the STi on RE070's yesterday, I was about 6 seconds slower single run than the fastest guy on rally tires, but then I beat his morning time by a second when the grip level increased for me in the afternoon (not sure whether his times improved or got worse, though). But that's the cool thing about tire choice for the modified classes - we can run rally tires when rally tires have the advantage, then run tarmac tires when tarmac tires have the advantage. Last time I was there, I ran the 2.5RS on rally tires and developed a decent lead in the morning, but was pretty even with the fastest guy on street tires in the afternoon. The plan for this next time was to take the 2.5RS and run rally tires AM, tarmac tires PM, but then the STi came along and plans changed. :lol:
I whole-heartedly disagree that rally tires should be allowed in all classes, but as for solo2 classing, I don't think that R compounds should be allowed in "stock" classes either. :)
And when the rule makers say things like "feel free to run whatever rules you want to locally, totally disregarding these rules altogether blah blah blah" :confused: Why the Hell would you even attempt to put together a ruleset for national competition if you're going to say something like that? :lol: Listen to what your target audience has to say, and maybe something good will come of it. :)
| mrmodular | 11-22-2005 12:50 AM |
[QUOTE=Fred] Listen to what your target audience has to say, and maybe something good will come of it. :)[/QUOTE]
Was there a consensus I missed?
The funny thing about this (tire debate) is that it could be solved with a point system. Unfortunately SCCA members apparently only function in digital. Either yes or no. Yes you can, or no you can't. It's on the the list, or it's not on the list. What generated this "limited mod" concept was taking the conversation of allowed modifications from "definitely ok in stock or definitely not ok in stock" (which creates a long list of things that are ok, and thus ok to do ALL of them), to a conversation of "how can we avoid a 'you must do all these things to be competitive' scenario?". The unlimited list was one that was agreed to be either not an advantage or a safety mod. The limited list was all those things on the fence. The idea of pick three was arbitrary, but mutually agreed upon.
If you put point values (yes, another can of worms) to each mod, they add up immediately, and you can be more restrictive while allowing the competitor more freedom to choose his weapons. I believe all competitors should be allowed to run proper tires for the sport in any class. Just make rally tires point value equal to the max stock point allowance...The new system is close to this.
And points systems are stupid because_________________________
Was there a consensus I missed?
The funny thing about this (tire debate) is that it could be solved with a point system. Unfortunately SCCA members apparently only function in digital. Either yes or no. Yes you can, or no you can't. It's on the the list, or it's not on the list. What generated this "limited mod" concept was taking the conversation of allowed modifications from "definitely ok in stock or definitely not ok in stock" (which creates a long list of things that are ok, and thus ok to do ALL of them), to a conversation of "how can we avoid a 'you must do all these things to be competitive' scenario?". The unlimited list was one that was agreed to be either not an advantage or a safety mod. The limited list was all those things on the fence. The idea of pick three was arbitrary, but mutually agreed upon.
If you put point values (yes, another can of worms) to each mod, they add up immediately, and you can be more restrictive while allowing the competitor more freedom to choose his weapons. I believe all competitors should be allowed to run proper tires for the sport in any class. Just make rally tires point value equal to the max stock point allowance...The new system is close to this.
And points systems are stupid because_________________________
| MoDrift | 11-22-2005 01:36 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]Was there a consensus I missed?
The funny thing about this (tire debate) is that it could be solved with a point system. Unfortunately SCCA members apparently only function in digital. Either yes or no. Yes you can, or no you can't. It's on the the list, or it's not on the list. What generated this "limited mod" concept was taking the conversation of allowed modifications from "definitely ok in stock or definitely not ok in stock" (which creates a long list of things that are ok, and thus ok to do ALL of them), to a conversation of "how can we avoid a 'you must do all these things to be competitive' scenario?". The unlimited list was one that was agreed to be either not an advantage or a safety mod. The limited list was all those things on the fence. The idea of pick three was arbitrary, but mutually agreed upon.
If you put point values (yes, another can of worms) to each mod, they add up immediately, and you can be more restrictive while allowing the competitor more freedom to choose his weapons. I believe all competitors should be allowed to run proper tires for the sport in any class. Just make rally tires point value equal to the max stock point allowance...The new system is close to this.
And points systems are stupid because_________________________[/QUOTE]
I'd be all for a points system if rally tires were equal to "max allowed points in stock + 1" ;) I think I do like the general concept of the "three allowances" layout though.
[quote] I believe all competitors should be allowed to run proper tires for the sport in any class.[/quote]
I don't really understand this statement, since isn't a hydraulic handbrake the proper hand brake for the sport? Or aren't adjustable Tein HGs the proper suspension setup for the sport, or a the addition of any non-open differential? Shoot, isn't aftermarket forced induction a proper mod for the sport since the key is to go fast? All these things would move you immediately to modified under the proposed system, but not rally tires. Also, this approach requires that any stock vehicle off the street has a buy-in (ie rally tires) before they can be competative in a "stock" class. I think part of the attraction (at least for a lot of our participants) is an effectively no-cost (beyond the entry fee), fair and competative opportunity to play in the dirt. Beyond that, there is plenty of room for rally tires and any other mods in the non-stock classes.
Also, I think most everyone would be in agreement that a Solo II class system is the ultimate nightmare.
The funny thing about this (tire debate) is that it could be solved with a point system. Unfortunately SCCA members apparently only function in digital. Either yes or no. Yes you can, or no you can't. It's on the the list, or it's not on the list. What generated this "limited mod" concept was taking the conversation of allowed modifications from "definitely ok in stock or definitely not ok in stock" (which creates a long list of things that are ok, and thus ok to do ALL of them), to a conversation of "how can we avoid a 'you must do all these things to be competitive' scenario?". The unlimited list was one that was agreed to be either not an advantage or a safety mod. The limited list was all those things on the fence. The idea of pick three was arbitrary, but mutually agreed upon.
If you put point values (yes, another can of worms) to each mod, they add up immediately, and you can be more restrictive while allowing the competitor more freedom to choose his weapons. I believe all competitors should be allowed to run proper tires for the sport in any class. Just make rally tires point value equal to the max stock point allowance...The new system is close to this.
And points systems are stupid because_________________________[/QUOTE]
I'd be all for a points system if rally tires were equal to "max allowed points in stock + 1" ;) I think I do like the general concept of the "three allowances" layout though.
[quote] I believe all competitors should be allowed to run proper tires for the sport in any class.[/quote]
I don't really understand this statement, since isn't a hydraulic handbrake the proper hand brake for the sport? Or aren't adjustable Tein HGs the proper suspension setup for the sport, or a the addition of any non-open differential? Shoot, isn't aftermarket forced induction a proper mod for the sport since the key is to go fast? All these things would move you immediately to modified under the proposed system, but not rally tires. Also, this approach requires that any stock vehicle off the street has a buy-in (ie rally tires) before they can be competative in a "stock" class. I think part of the attraction (at least for a lot of our participants) is an effectively no-cost (beyond the entry fee), fair and competative opportunity to play in the dirt. Beyond that, there is plenty of room for rally tires and any other mods in the non-stock classes.
Also, I think most everyone would be in agreement that a Solo II class system is the ultimate nightmare.
| akuhner | 11-22-2005 09:46 AM |
[QUOTE=Fred]You and anyone who agrees with you are smoking crack. :lol:
[/QUOTE]
:lol: That's why I'm willing to go with anything people can agree on, other than additional classes, I just don't think tires are as big of a deal as everyone else seems to think. Oh, and I'd simply over-ride any rule excluding snow tires from production, not that anyone is taking that one seriously. In the end it doesn't matter to me personally, my car is modified no matter how it's cut up...
[QUOTE=Fred]And when the rule makers say things like "feel free to run whatever rules you want to locally, totally disregarding these rules altogether blah blah blah" :confused: Why the Hell would you even attempt to put together a ruleset for national competition if you're going to say something like that?[/QUOTE]
If you phrase it that way it does sound pointless. My supps would say "due to course conditions these supplemenetal regulations override section XXX of the national rules regarding tires in production classes." And then it would list my tire requirements. I will never allow someone to run my events on something like Falken Azines, I think it's plain stupid to allow that, much less encourage it. As a Safety Steward, with my name on the event paperwork - which ensures that I will be named in any lawsuit against the event - I will do what ever I see fit to keep my events safe. If competitors don't like that they'll have to step up and get certified themselves.
I help run the Philly SCCA region events (of which we've had one so far! I don't do scheduling) because no rally-x guys there stepped up in the 3 years since I moved out of the region. I live 3 hours from the event location in a different SCCA region, and yet I was the only one of the core organizers who had ever even been to a rally cross. I had pitched rally-x to the board almost 4 years ago, and we had our first event this spring. So I don't really have a target audience to listen to! ;)
[/QUOTE]
:lol: That's why I'm willing to go with anything people can agree on, other than additional classes, I just don't think tires are as big of a deal as everyone else seems to think. Oh, and I'd simply over-ride any rule excluding snow tires from production, not that anyone is taking that one seriously. In the end it doesn't matter to me personally, my car is modified no matter how it's cut up...
[QUOTE=Fred]And when the rule makers say things like "feel free to run whatever rules you want to locally, totally disregarding these rules altogether blah blah blah" :confused: Why the Hell would you even attempt to put together a ruleset for national competition if you're going to say something like that?[/QUOTE]
If you phrase it that way it does sound pointless. My supps would say "due to course conditions these supplemenetal regulations override section XXX of the national rules regarding tires in production classes." And then it would list my tire requirements. I will never allow someone to run my events on something like Falken Azines, I think it's plain stupid to allow that, much less encourage it. As a Safety Steward, with my name on the event paperwork - which ensures that I will be named in any lawsuit against the event - I will do what ever I see fit to keep my events safe. If competitors don't like that they'll have to step up and get certified themselves.
I help run the Philly SCCA region events (of which we've had one so far! I don't do scheduling) because no rally-x guys there stepped up in the 3 years since I moved out of the region. I live 3 hours from the event location in a different SCCA region, and yet I was the only one of the core organizers who had ever even been to a rally cross. I had pitched rally-x to the board almost 4 years ago, and we had our first event this spring. So I don't really have a target audience to listen to! ;)
| mrmodular | 11-22-2005 11:30 AM |
[QUOTE=MoDrift]I think part of the attraction (at least for a lot of our participants) is an effectively no-cost (beyond the entry fee), fair and competative opportunity to play in the dirt. [/QUOTE]
As per my earlier post on cost and risks, racing is a costly sport. Even this statement dismisses the cost of the vehicle (I always feel really bad asking those STi owners to spring for some tires), the enhanced wear and tear on the vehicle, the fuel costs, let alone having a mishap.
As per my earlier post on cost and risks, racing is a costly sport. Even this statement dismisses the cost of the vehicle (I always feel really bad asking those STi owners to spring for some tires), the enhanced wear and tear on the vehicle, the fuel costs, let alone having a mishap.
| cowapult | 11-22-2005 11:55 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]As per my earlier post on cost and risks, racing is a costly sport. Even this statement dismisses the cost of the vehicle (I always feel really bad asking those STi owners to spring for some tires), the enhanced wear and tear on the vehicle, the fuel costs, let alone having a mishap.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I read your earlier post and it disagreed with my experience. Lots of people arrive and drive with a stock car on the same all-seasons year after year - paying nothing other than admissions fees. I dismiss the cost of the vehicle because there were no damages, no repairs, no tires wearing out. I've seen a significant percentage of entrants do this at events at probably 8 venues in VA, NC, all over PA, OH, and all over New England.
Yes, you have to pay for gas and entry fees, but the other thing you miss is that it's a much lower barrier to entry for newbs if they only pay a fraction of the total investment each time. Imagine this thought process:
"Do I want to roll out of bed to try rallycrossing again today? Yes it's only $50"
instead of:
"Do I want to roll out of bed try rallycrossing again today? I dunno, I won't be serious unless I throw in $1k.... I'm not yet sure if this is my thing."
And you can't compare the cost of an STI to the cost of the tires. Obviously, an STI owner is getting a lot more out of his car than a couple sporting events which he's not even sure he will like. It is very logical to say "I am willing to pay 30k to get this car but I'm not willing to pay 1k to run a season of rallycross b/c I don't even know if it will be my thing."
Yeah, I read your earlier post and it disagreed with my experience. Lots of people arrive and drive with a stock car on the same all-seasons year after year - paying nothing other than admissions fees. I dismiss the cost of the vehicle because there were no damages, no repairs, no tires wearing out. I've seen a significant percentage of entrants do this at events at probably 8 venues in VA, NC, all over PA, OH, and all over New England.
Yes, you have to pay for gas and entry fees, but the other thing you miss is that it's a much lower barrier to entry for newbs if they only pay a fraction of the total investment each time. Imagine this thought process:
"Do I want to roll out of bed to try rallycrossing again today? Yes it's only $50"
instead of:
"Do I want to roll out of bed try rallycrossing again today? I dunno, I won't be serious unless I throw in $1k.... I'm not yet sure if this is my thing."
And you can't compare the cost of an STI to the cost of the tires. Obviously, an STI owner is getting a lot more out of his car than a couple sporting events which he's not even sure he will like. It is very logical to say "I am willing to pay 30k to get this car but I'm not willing to pay 1k to run a season of rallycross b/c I don't even know if it will be my thing."
| omahasubaru | 11-22-2005 12:04 PM |
I have to ask the obvious. Based on the exclusion list. My drivetrain swapped Impreza wagon can't rallycross at all. Since it is a normal Impreza OBS with a Version III STi drivetrain with a USDM STi short block and VF30 turbo on it, I'm SOL if I want to rally cross.
Seems there should be something of an open class or a catchall like SM for solo II.
That's really going to suck for me as I'm not about to buy a different car just for rallycross and we have other swapped cars in our region who need a place to play. I suppose we have to create supplimental local only classes then?
Other than that it looks like similar rules from a few years ago with the 2.4L break point.
Jon
NRSCCA RallyCross Chairman
Seems there should be something of an open class or a catchall like SM for solo II.
That's really going to suck for me as I'm not about to buy a different car just for rallycross and we have other swapped cars in our region who need a place to play. I suppose we have to create supplimental local only classes then?
Other than that it looks like similar rules from a few years ago with the 2.4L break point.
Jon
NRSCCA RallyCross Chairman
| omahasubaru | 11-22-2005 12:08 PM |
[QUOTE=10th Warrior]who's going to be the first to replace all their body panels with carbon fiber and go for a pair of kirkey seats for stock class :lol:[/QUOTE]
It doesn't allow body panel changes, unless I'm reading it wrong.
I think Kirkey's are a great idea though!
It doesn't allow body panel changes, unless I'm reading it wrong.
I think Kirkey's are a great idea though!
| cowapult | 11-22-2005 12:16 PM |
[quote="omahasubaru"]I have to ask the obvious. Based on the exclusion list. My drivetrain swapped Impreza wagon can't rallycross at all. Since it is a normal Impreza OBS with a Version III STi drivetrain with a USDM STi short block and VF30 turbo on it, I'm SOL if I want to rally cross.
Seems there should be something of an open class or a catchall like SM for solo II.
That's really going to suck for me as I'm not about to buy a different car just for rallycross and we have other swapped cars in our region who need a place to play. I suppose we have to create supplimental local only classes then?
Other than that it looks like similar rules from a few years ago with the 2.4L break point.
Jon
NRSCCA RallyCross Chairman
[/quote]
I didn't see an exclusion list unless I'm missing something. Are you, like many people, getting confused by this issue:
[QUOTE=cowapult]"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
[/QUOTE]
Seems there should be something of an open class or a catchall like SM for solo II.
That's really going to suck for me as I'm not about to buy a different car just for rallycross and we have other swapped cars in our region who need a place to play. I suppose we have to create supplimental local only classes then?
Other than that it looks like similar rules from a few years ago with the 2.4L break point.
Jon
NRSCCA RallyCross Chairman
[/quote]
I didn't see an exclusion list unless I'm missing something. Are you, like many people, getting confused by this issue:
[QUOTE=cowapult]"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
[/QUOTE]
| akuhner | 11-22-2005 12:47 PM |
[QUOTE=cowapult]"Do I want to roll out of bed try rallycrossing again today? I dunno, I won't be serious unless I throw in $1k.... I'm not yet sure if this is my thing."[/QUOTE]
Well, I have no respect for this guy and don't care if he shows up at my event or not. I don't care what sport you do, you spend money to be serious. But with Rally Cross it's plenty fun seeing what you can do without spending that money. Remember that guy who brought a junkard Accord on a flatbed to Oakland Acres and ran it with the huge dent in the side? He had fun. He came out without spending $1,000 on the entire car! And for having a bent frame he was pretty fast, from what I remember. So your hypothecial guy here who is put off by the cost can sleep in for all I care... ;)
Well, I have no respect for this guy and don't care if he shows up at my event or not. I don't care what sport you do, you spend money to be serious. But with Rally Cross it's plenty fun seeing what you can do without spending that money. Remember that guy who brought a junkard Accord on a flatbed to Oakland Acres and ran it with the huge dent in the side? He had fun. He came out without spending $1,000 on the entire car! And for having a bent frame he was pretty fast, from what I remember. So your hypothecial guy here who is put off by the cost can sleep in for all I care... ;)
| Fred | 11-22-2005 12:53 PM |
[QUOTE]I will never allow someone to run my events on something like Falken Azines, I think it's plain stupid to allow that, much less encourage it. [/QUOTE]
I don't understand your point - are all of your events on snow or something? :confused: I ran on RE070's at this event:
[url]http://www.thscc.com/rallycross/events/2005/2005-1119overall.html[/url]
and had no safety-related problems. I did have a lot of wheelspin, though. :lol: :devil:
[QUOTE]I help run the Philly SCCA region events (of which we've had one so far! I don't do scheduling) because no rally-x guys there stepped up in the 3 years since I moved out of the region. I live 3 hours from the event location in a different SCCA region, and yet I was the only one of the core organizers who had ever even been to a rally cross. I had pitched rally-x to the board almost 4 years ago, and we had our first event this spring. So I don't really have a target audience to listen to! [/QUOTE]
Keep at it - hopefully some other folks will step up soon and take on some responsibility. Carl & I have been the leaders in our rallycross program (just over 2 years and total of around 15 events so far), and recently we've had several people start volunteering a lot of their time to help us out. :)
I don't understand your point - are all of your events on snow or something? :confused: I ran on RE070's at this event:
[url]http://www.thscc.com/rallycross/events/2005/2005-1119overall.html[/url]
and had no safety-related problems. I did have a lot of wheelspin, though. :lol: :devil:
[QUOTE]I help run the Philly SCCA region events (of which we've had one so far! I don't do scheduling) because no rally-x guys there stepped up in the 3 years since I moved out of the region. I live 3 hours from the event location in a different SCCA region, and yet I was the only one of the core organizers who had ever even been to a rally cross. I had pitched rally-x to the board almost 4 years ago, and we had our first event this spring. So I don't really have a target audience to listen to! [/QUOTE]
Keep at it - hopefully some other folks will step up soon and take on some responsibility. Carl & I have been the leaders in our rallycross program (just over 2 years and total of around 15 events so far), and recently we've had several people start volunteering a lot of their time to help us out. :)
| AngryBlueRS | 11-22-2005 01:22 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]As per my earlier post on cost and risks, racing is a costly sport. Even this statement dismisses the cost of the vehicle (I always feel really bad asking those STi owners to spring for some tires) [/QUOTE]
Meow! Should have used a green font for that statement. ;)
For the record, you are not going to find rally tires that will fit the stock setup on an STi (or EVO, or a number of other high end cars that are shipping with big brakes and large rims). You need to spend additional money to swap out the calipers and rotors in order to make room for smaller rims.
Meow! Should have used a green font for that statement. ;)
For the record, you are not going to find rally tires that will fit the stock setup on an STi (or EVO, or a number of other high end cars that are shipping with big brakes and large rims). You need to spend additional money to swap out the calipers and rotors in order to make room for smaller rims.
| rupertberr | 11-22-2005 01:24 PM |
[QUOTE=omahasubaru]I have to ask the obvious. Based on the exclusion list. My drivetrain swapped Impreza wagon can't rallycross at all. Since it is a normal Impreza OBS with a Version III STi drivetrain with a USDM STi short block and VF30 turbo on it, I'm SOL if I want to rally cross.
Seems there should be something of an open class or a catchall like SM for solo II.
That's really going to suck for me as I'm not about to buy a different car just for rallycross and we have other swapped cars in our region who need a place to play. I suppose we have to create supplimental local only classes then?
Other than that it looks like similar rules from a few years ago with the 2.4L break point.
Jon
NRSCCA RallyCross Chairman[/QUOTE]
You are miss understanding the rules. The exclusion list is excluding you from the Stock Class and automatically puts you in the Modified Class where you should be.
Seems there should be something of an open class or a catchall like SM for solo II.
That's really going to suck for me as I'm not about to buy a different car just for rallycross and we have other swapped cars in our region who need a place to play. I suppose we have to create supplimental local only classes then?
Other than that it looks like similar rules from a few years ago with the 2.4L break point.
Jon
NRSCCA RallyCross Chairman[/QUOTE]
You are miss understanding the rules. The exclusion list is excluding you from the Stock Class and automatically puts you in the Modified Class where you should be.
| mrmodular | 11-22-2005 01:32 PM |
[QUOTE=cowapult]Yeah, I read your earlier post and it disagreed with my experience. Lots of people arrive and drive with a stock car on the same all-seasons year after year - paying nothing other than admissions fees. I dismiss the cost of the vehicle because there were no damages, no repairs, no tires wearing out. I've seen a significant percentage of entrants do this at events at probably 8 venues in VA, NC, all over PA, OH, and all over New England.
Yes, you have to pay for gas and entry fees, but the other thing you miss is that it's a much lower barrier to entry for newbs if they only pay a fraction of the total investment each time. Imagine this thought process:
"Do I want to roll out of bed to try rallycrossing again today? Yes it's only $50"
instead of:
"Do I want to roll out of bed try rallycrossing again today? I dunno, I won't be serious unless I throw in $1k.... I'm not yet sure if this is my thing."
And you can't compare the cost of an STI to the cost of the tires. Obviously, an STI owner is getting a lot more out of his car than a couple sporting events which he's not even sure he will like. It is very logical to say "I am willing to pay 30k to get this car but I'm not willing to pay 1k to run a season of rallycross b/c I don't even know if it will be my thing."[/QUOTE]
Very well articulated. As I've mentioned, in our unrestricted tire region, I've never encountered attitudes to support that perspective.
Yes, you have to pay for gas and entry fees, but the other thing you miss is that it's a much lower barrier to entry for newbs if they only pay a fraction of the total investment each time. Imagine this thought process:
"Do I want to roll out of bed to try rallycrossing again today? Yes it's only $50"
instead of:
"Do I want to roll out of bed try rallycrossing again today? I dunno, I won't be serious unless I throw in $1k.... I'm not yet sure if this is my thing."
And you can't compare the cost of an STI to the cost of the tires. Obviously, an STI owner is getting a lot more out of his car than a couple sporting events which he's not even sure he will like. It is very logical to say "I am willing to pay 30k to get this car but I'm not willing to pay 1k to run a season of rallycross b/c I don't even know if it will be my thing."[/QUOTE]
Very well articulated. As I've mentioned, in our unrestricted tire region, I've never encountered attitudes to support that perspective.
| greg donovan | 11-22-2005 01:57 PM |
[QUOTE=AngryBlueRS]Meow! Should have used a green font for that statement. ;)
For the record, you are not going to find rally tires that will fit the stock setup on an STi (or EVO, or a number of other high end cars that are shipping with big brakes and large rims). You need to spend additional money to swap out the calipers and rotors in order to make room for smaller rims.[/QUOTE]
the Nokian WR is an awesome rallycross tire for the 17" wheels.
For the record, you are not going to find rally tires that will fit the stock setup on an STi (or EVO, or a number of other high end cars that are shipping with big brakes and large rims). You need to spend additional money to swap out the calipers and rotors in order to make room for smaller rims.[/QUOTE]
the Nokian WR is an awesome rallycross tire for the 17" wheels.
| mrmodular | 11-22-2005 02:00 PM |
[QUOTE=AngryBlueRS]Meow! Should have used a green font for that statement. ;)
For the record, you are not going to find rally tires that will fit the stock setup on an STi (or EVO, or a number of other high end cars that are shipping with big brakes and large rims). You need to spend additional money to swap out the calipers and rotors in order to make room for smaller rims.[/QUOTE]
for the record, here they are:
[url]http://www.ears.co.uk/motorsport/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_17__Gravel_135.html[/url]
yes, expensive. yes, imported. But enough interest and maybe someone in the US would distribute them.
For the record, you are not going to find rally tires that will fit the stock setup on an STi (or EVO, or a number of other high end cars that are shipping with big brakes and large rims). You need to spend additional money to swap out the calipers and rotors in order to make room for smaller rims.[/QUOTE]
for the record, here they are:
[url]http://www.ears.co.uk/motorsport/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_17__Gravel_135.html[/url]
yes, expensive. yes, imported. But enough interest and maybe someone in the US would distribute them.
| mrmodular | 11-22-2005 02:02 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]the Nokian WR is an awesome rallycross tire for the 17" wheels.[/QUOTE]
As is the Hankook 404, which I used to win SSA at Hastings on my S4
As is the Hankook 404, which I used to win SSA at Hastings on my S4
| bjorn240 | 11-22-2005 02:46 PM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]for the record, here they are:
[url]http://www.ears.co.uk/motorsport/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_17__Gravel_135.html[/url]
yes, expensive. yes, imported. But enough interest and maybe someone in the US would distribute them.[/QUOTE]
Get off the internet and call them, and you'll find they say, "No longer in stock, no longer produced, can't get them."
- Christian
[url]http://www.ears.co.uk/motorsport/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_17__Gravel_135.html[/url]
yes, expensive. yes, imported. But enough interest and maybe someone in the US would distribute them.[/QUOTE]
Get off the internet and call them, and you'll find they say, "No longer in stock, no longer produced, can't get them."
- Christian
| 10th Warrior | 11-22-2005 03:01 PM |
[QUOTE=omahasubaru]It doesn't allow body panel changes, unless I'm reading it wrong.
I think Kirkey's are a great idea though![/QUOTE]
III.p-replace body panels with alternate material. one of the 'choose your fortune' mods. FWIW, there was a WRX at SEMA that had replaced all its body panels with CF. for only $2k, you can shave off >200lbs as well! I'm sure the newbs will still feel welcome because they don't get bumped out of stock for their strut bar :lol: seriously, those of you who are worried about the cost of rally tires in stock need to take a better look at what all is allowed in stock that is going to cost a fortune.
I think Kirkey's are a great idea though![/QUOTE]
III.p-replace body panels with alternate material. one of the 'choose your fortune' mods. FWIW, there was a WRX at SEMA that had replaced all its body panels with CF. for only $2k, you can shave off >200lbs as well! I'm sure the newbs will still feel welcome because they don't get bumped out of stock for their strut bar :lol: seriously, those of you who are worried about the cost of rally tires in stock need to take a better look at what all is allowed in stock that is going to cost a fortune.
| Prometheus_6k_rpm | 11-22-2005 03:05 PM |
[QUOTE=omahasubaru]It doesn't allow body panel changes, unless I'm reading it wrong.
I think Kirkey's are a great idea though![/QUOTE]
[I]p. Body panels of alternate material[/I]
Carbon fiber is allowed. So I could put on Seibon's full CF hood, door panels, & trunk and drop 200 lbs off my STi.
I think Kirkey's are a great idea though![/QUOTE]
[I]p. Body panels of alternate material[/I]
Carbon fiber is allowed. So I could put on Seibon's full CF hood, door panels, & trunk and drop 200 lbs off my STi.
| mrmodular | 11-22-2005 03:07 PM |
[QUOTE=bjorn240]Get off the internet and call them, and you'll find they say, "No longer in stock, no longer produced, can't get them."
- Christian[/QUOTE]
Drag. Thanks for looking into it.
- Christian[/QUOTE]
Drag. Thanks for looking into it.
| omahasubaru | 11-22-2005 03:30 PM |
[QUOTE=cowapult]I didn't see an exclusion list unless I'm missing something. Are you, like many people, getting confused by this issue:[/QUOTE]
Yes.. confusion and skimming seem to be my biggest problem with these rules.
Took some time to read them carefully and they're making more sense.
Jon
Yes.. confusion and skimming seem to be my biggest problem with these rules.
Took some time to read them carefully and they're making more sense.
Jon
| Prometheus_6k_rpm | 11-22-2005 03:44 PM |
Hmm.... I think I'll sell my STi and build me a mid-engine GC8 with a zz-502 chevy big block. Gut the car and I'll have a power to weight ratio of 5 lbs / hp. :devil:
Does cardboard count as an alternate material for body panels? Why spend money on carbon fiber if I can go the trash can route? :rolleyes:
Does cardboard count as an alternate material for body panels? Why spend money on carbon fiber if I can go the trash can route? :rolleyes:
| MoDrift | 11-22-2005 03:54 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]the Nokian WR is an awesome rallycross tire for the 17" wheels.[/QUOTE]
The problem I have with snow tires is the butter-soft sidewalls. Yeah the look pretty in pictures, but I'd need to run them at 40psi to keep from popping a bead, and at that pressure the grip is seriously compromised. Rally tires not only give you good tread blocks, but the rock solid sidewalls allow you to run lower pressures.
The problem I have with snow tires is the butter-soft sidewalls. Yeah the look pretty in pictures, but I'd need to run them at 40psi to keep from popping a bead, and at that pressure the grip is seriously compromised. Rally tires not only give you good tread blocks, but the rock solid sidewalls allow you to run lower pressures.
| greg donovan | 11-22-2005 04:16 PM |
[QUOTE=MoDrift]The problem I have with snow tires is the butter-soft sidewalls. Yeah the look pretty in pictures, but I'd need to run them at 40psi to keep from popping a bead, and at that pressure the grip is seriously compromised. Rally tires not only give you good tread blocks, but the rock solid sidewalls allow you to run lower pressures.[/QUOTE]
i have seen how well the WR works on the STi.
it has a stiffer sidewall than most snow tires. havent seen utecht pop a bead in his STi w/WRs on it yet. he is not easy on that car. others have popped all-seasons at the same events.
i have seen how well the WR works on the STi.
it has a stiffer sidewall than most snow tires. havent seen utecht pop a bead in his STi w/WRs on it yet. he is not easy on that car. others have popped all-seasons at the same events.
| Arnie | 11-22-2005 04:32 PM |
Probably helps a bit that they are, correct me if I'm wrong, a 45 series tire? a lot less leverage on the sidewall compared to the 55 series most run on 16's.
| AngryBlueRS | 11-22-2005 05:51 PM |
[QUOTE=bjorn240]Get off the internet and call them, and you'll find they say, "No longer in stock, no longer produced, can't get them."[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Found this link a while back and had no luck on running them down. They have them in 16" which does not do me a whole lot of good. ;)
Agreed. Found this link a while back and had no luck on running them down. They have them in 16" which does not do me a whole lot of good. ;)
| AngryBlueRS | 11-22-2005 05:58 PM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]i have seen how well the WR works on the STi.[/QUOTE]
They're OK. They are a good compromise that holds up well to abuse but don't seem to dig in well in lose dirt. I ditched mine for a set Snow Sports and was glad I did.
They're OK. They are a good compromise that holds up well to abuse but don't seem to dig in well in lose dirt. I ditched mine for a set Snow Sports and was glad I did.
| Got Pink? | 11-22-2005 06:24 PM |
While I am not against the idea of allowing rally tires in stock it really does up the ante for STi/Evos that need to switch brakes to run them. Since brakes are free under the rules someone is going to do this and have the ultimate 4A car. STi power, DCCD and great diffs with rally tires, two other limited mods carefully chosen vs youre average STi/Evo with at best snow tires on 17s is going to be crushed. I drove WR's at my one and only rallyx in my STi and thought they were pretty good but nothing like the grip I felt in ride alongs with people that had real rally tires fitted. If i was going to rallyx the car more often I would consider a brake swap but since I autox in STU that is not legal (no smaller than stock brake rotors).
Overall I really like the new idea and especially like a point system even more, the best would be a point system that works like an index so everyone could do whatever they wanted and the cars would be indexed by modifications and their affect on the performance.
Overall I really like the new idea and especially like a point system even more, the best would be a point system that works like an index so everyone could do whatever they wanted and the cars would be indexed by modifications and their affect on the performance.
| Got Pink? | 11-22-2005 06:28 PM |
As far as cost goes though I am smart enough to realize that its far cheaper to get a 2.2L impreza, rally tires, etc and just run it 4B than bother swapping parts on my STi plus with a beater i can drive it hard and not worry about dings and the potential for an expensive accident. WR's are at least 700 a set so even if they last as long as rally tires they are about double the price of new rally tires let alone used ones. Not to mention 15 inch rims are dirt cheap compared to 17s making it easy to afford multiple sets.
| akuhner | 11-22-2005 06:42 PM |
[QUOTE=Fred]I don't understand your point - are all of your events on snow or something? :confused: I ran on RE070's at this event:[/QUOTE]
Actually, Philly's only event so far was run on a NASCAR 1/3 mile dirt oval track! So I had a few motivations: 1) In the dry, a street tire could get up a lot of speed on the packed clay, but a dusty or sandy patch would easily induce a spin - with the wall only the minimum distance away. 2) In the wet, we [I]thought[/I] that you could only get around the clay with good treads - we were wrong, you can't move at all regardless of what tires you have. We found that out by wetting down the course for dust issues, you could barely walk on it! 3) I had a minimum tread depth requirement because I don't want guys showing up with auto-x beat tires with no tread, my only recourse would be if they had cords showing.
Additionally, I have been to muddy events where we had to wait for guys on street tires to plod their way around the course at jogging speed, which is something I'm not interested in waiting for. Turns out that our track is impossible on anything at all if it's wet, but I still stand by my logic.
When I first started rally-xing a lot I used to go to the DC Region events. There was a guy running an RS there (before WRXs came out) on RE92s. He did fine on the course, unfortunately he didn't pay attention to what came after the course. Ignoring a regional rule that you had to be under control at the finish he came through sideways, onto the grass, where the RE92s were as good as skis. He took a large tree to the B pillar, bending the frame. It was his own fault, but the worn RE92s sure as heck didn't help!
Here is everyone doing the drive through after the water down:
[url]http://www.plaftaphoto.com/gallery/album149/img_0079[/url]
And here is the rest of the galery:
[url]http://www.plaftaphoto.com/gallery/album149?page=1[/url]
[URL=http://www.plaftaphoto.com/gallery/album149/IMG_9621]Alex[/URL]
;)
Actually, Philly's only event so far was run on a NASCAR 1/3 mile dirt oval track! So I had a few motivations: 1) In the dry, a street tire could get up a lot of speed on the packed clay, but a dusty or sandy patch would easily induce a spin - with the wall only the minimum distance away. 2) In the wet, we [I]thought[/I] that you could only get around the clay with good treads - we were wrong, you can't move at all regardless of what tires you have. We found that out by wetting down the course for dust issues, you could barely walk on it! 3) I had a minimum tread depth requirement because I don't want guys showing up with auto-x beat tires with no tread, my only recourse would be if they had cords showing.
Additionally, I have been to muddy events where we had to wait for guys on street tires to plod their way around the course at jogging speed, which is something I'm not interested in waiting for. Turns out that our track is impossible on anything at all if it's wet, but I still stand by my logic.
When I first started rally-xing a lot I used to go to the DC Region events. There was a guy running an RS there (before WRXs came out) on RE92s. He did fine on the course, unfortunately he didn't pay attention to what came after the course. Ignoring a regional rule that you had to be under control at the finish he came through sideways, onto the grass, where the RE92s were as good as skis. He took a large tree to the B pillar, bending the frame. It was his own fault, but the worn RE92s sure as heck didn't help!
Here is everyone doing the drive through after the water down:
[url]http://www.plaftaphoto.com/gallery/album149/img_0079[/url]
And here is the rest of the galery:
[url]http://www.plaftaphoto.com/gallery/album149?page=1[/url]
[URL=http://www.plaftaphoto.com/gallery/album149/IMG_9621]Alex[/URL]
;)
| greg donovan | 11-22-2005 11:40 PM |
[QUOTE=Got Pink?]While I am not against the idea of allowing rally tires in stock it really does up the ante for STi/Evos that need to switch brakes to run them. [B]Since brakes are free under the rules someone is going to do this and have the ultimate 4A car.[/B] STi power, DCCD and great diffs with rally tires, two other limited mods carefully chosen vs youre average STi/Evo with at best snow tires on 17s is going to be crushed. I drove WR's at my one and only rallyx in my STi and thought they were pretty good but nothing like the grip I felt in ride alongs with people that had real rally tires fitted. If i was going to rallyx the car more often I would consider a brake swap but since I autox in STU that is not legal (no smaller than stock brake rotors).
Overall I really like the new idea and especially like a point system even more, the best would be a point system that works like an index so everyone could do whatever they wanted and the cars would be indexed by modifications and their affect on the performance.[/QUOTE]
i actually think having brakes as free as they seem to be under section II. C. is a HUGE mistake.
[QUOTE="section II. C."]
c. Brake calipers, friction material, rotors, drums, flexible lines and boosters may be changed [/QUOTE]
i agree that friction materials should be free but they should have to keep OEM equivalent rotors and calipers. that is actually how i read it to be but it seems to be a huge loophole for the STi and EVO to tromp all over the RS and the standard WRX.
what is the intent on that one? it doesnt seem to jive w/this statement made earlier in this thread:
[QUOTE="mrmodular"]the party line on model crossover parts is that the parts must match the VIN. No updating or backdating. [/QUOTE]
if RA wont allow a downgraded STi or EVO into PGT why should we allow downgrading the STis brakes as a free mod that would help keep the car in the production rallycross class.
changing the brakes to allow the fitment of 15" rally wheels should be a limited mod.
Overall I really like the new idea and especially like a point system even more, the best would be a point system that works like an index so everyone could do whatever they wanted and the cars would be indexed by modifications and their affect on the performance.[/QUOTE]
i actually think having brakes as free as they seem to be under section II. C. is a HUGE mistake.
[QUOTE="section II. C."]
c. Brake calipers, friction material, rotors, drums, flexible lines and boosters may be changed [/QUOTE]
i agree that friction materials should be free but they should have to keep OEM equivalent rotors and calipers. that is actually how i read it to be but it seems to be a huge loophole for the STi and EVO to tromp all over the RS and the standard WRX.
what is the intent on that one? it doesnt seem to jive w/this statement made earlier in this thread:
[QUOTE="mrmodular"]the party line on model crossover parts is that the parts must match the VIN. No updating or backdating. [/QUOTE]
if RA wont allow a downgraded STi or EVO into PGT why should we allow downgrading the STis brakes as a free mod that would help keep the car in the production rallycross class.
changing the brakes to allow the fitment of 15" rally wheels should be a limited mod.
| mrmodular | 11-23-2005 12:54 AM |
[QUOTE=greg donovan]i actually think having brakes as free as they seem to be under section II. C. is a HUGE mistake.
i agree that friction materials should be free but they should have to keep OEM equivalent rotors and calipers. that is actually how i read it to be but it seems to be a huge loophole for the STi and EVO to tromp all over the RS and the standard WRX.
what is the intent on that one? it doesnt seem to jive w/this statement made earlier in this thread:
if RA wont allow a downgraded STi or EVO into PGT why should we allow downgrading the STis brakes as a free mod that would help keep the car in the production rallycross class.
changing the brakes to allow the fitment of 15" rally wheels should be a limited mod.[/QUOTE]
The reality is that brakes don't amount to a significant RX mod. It is serendipity that making a performance-less change ("downgrade") will allow two good cars to put on some decent tires (and use up two of their allowances). Look at it in reverse. Would you put someone in Mod for aftermarket rotors? Calipers?
i agree that friction materials should be free but they should have to keep OEM equivalent rotors and calipers. that is actually how i read it to be but it seems to be a huge loophole for the STi and EVO to tromp all over the RS and the standard WRX.
what is the intent on that one? it doesnt seem to jive w/this statement made earlier in this thread:
if RA wont allow a downgraded STi or EVO into PGT why should we allow downgrading the STis brakes as a free mod that would help keep the car in the production rallycross class.
changing the brakes to allow the fitment of 15" rally wheels should be a limited mod.[/QUOTE]
The reality is that brakes don't amount to a significant RX mod. It is serendipity that making a performance-less change ("downgrade") will allow two good cars to put on some decent tires (and use up two of their allowances). Look at it in reverse. Would you put someone in Mod for aftermarket rotors? Calipers?
| greg donovan | 11-23-2005 01:48 AM |
[QUOTE=mrmodular]The reality is that brakes don't amount to a significant RX mod. It is serendipity that making a performance-less change ("downgrade") will allow two good cars to put on some decent tires (and use up two of their allowances). Look at it in reverse. Would you put someone in Mod for aftermarket rotors? Calipers?[/QUOTE]
yep, if you mean aftermarket in the sense of performance upgrades like putting the new WRX 4 pot/2 pot setup on a old RS, or LGT brakes or the nice vented rears from a old Legacy SS on a L. that would be backdating and updating and i dont think things like that belong in a production based class.
no, if you mean the oem spec rotors made by brembo that are to the exact same specs as what the car left the assebly line with. same goes for calipers.
the last 5 years that i have been rallycrossing has taught me that brakes do make a difference.
better brakes are more consistant and more reliable. that makes the driver more comfortable. that makes the driver faster.
courses should be designed so that the drivers need to use their brakes. it is a skill set that should be mastered. and isnt that the point of rallycross? competitive driver eduaction on low traction surfaces.
i hope you arent getting the wrong idea.
i like 90% of the new rules. especially the LSD non-LSD split. as well as the small NA AWD class.
my biggest beef is the rally tires and the brakes. given equally skilled drivers the driver in the STi w/smaller brakes, 15" wheels, rally tires, and whatever 3rd limited mod they choose will crush the equally skilled driver in a RS or a 02-05 WRX.
NASA has a special Super Stock class for EVOs and STis w/downgraded brakes for stage rally. maybe that is the answer here as well?
are these rules final?
i wish i had been able to keep my membership active this past year. circumstances have kept me away from the sport this past season. so i was unaware of a rules revision untill i saw this thread here. i would have loved to have participated in the process had i known. i plan on running my FWD legacy sedan in the modified 2wd class and having a good time doing it.
i am aware that no ruleset can be perfect for every competitor. and i think these are pretty close aside from the issues i have raised. and those things are pretty minor in the grand scope of the rules so...
yep, if you mean aftermarket in the sense of performance upgrades like putting the new WRX 4 pot/2 pot setup on a old RS, or LGT brakes or the nice vented rears from a old Legacy SS on a L. that would be backdating and updating and i dont think things like that belong in a production based class.
no, if you mean the oem spec rotors made by brembo that are to the exact same specs as what the car left the assebly line with. same goes for calipers.
the last 5 years that i have been rallycrossing has taught me that brakes do make a difference.
better brakes are more consistant and more reliable. that makes the driver more comfortable. that makes the driver faster.
courses should be designed so that the drivers need to use their brakes. it is a skill set that should be mastered. and isnt that the point of rallycross? competitive driver eduaction on low traction surfaces.
i hope you arent getting the wrong idea.
i like 90% of the new rules. especially the LSD non-LSD split. as well as the small NA AWD class.
my biggest beef is the rally tires and the brakes. given equally skilled drivers the driver in the STi w/smaller brakes, 15" wheels, rally tires, and whatever 3rd limited mod they choose will crush the equally skilled driver in a RS or a 02-05 WRX.
NASA has a special Super Stock class for EVOs and STis w/downgraded brakes for stage rally. maybe that is the answer here as well?
are these rules final?
i wish i had been able to keep my membership active this past year. circumstances have kept me away from the sport this past season. so i was unaware of a rules revision untill i saw this thread here. i would have loved to have participated in the process had i known. i plan on running my FWD legacy sedan in the modified 2wd class and having a good time doing it.
i am aware that no ruleset can be perfect for every competitor. and i think these are pretty close aside from the issues i have raised. and those things are pretty minor in the grand scope of the rules so...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét