| elgorey | 08-26-2003 08:27 AM |
2.5RS in SCCA Showroom Stock Road Racing
�
�
There is discussion over on sccaforums.com about letting the 2.5RS into Showroom Stock C (SSC)
It is just very informal discussion at this point, but the fact that the discussion is being led by one of the top national SSC drivers Joel Lipperini means that it should hold some weight.
[url]http://www.sccaforums.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/000198.html[/url]
I personally think it is a great idea. The car should be competitive but isnt in danger of being ruled out for being too dominant due to its weight and lower whp. What do you guys think? I know if it gets allowed, I would drop this silly Spec Miata thing and jump in a 2001 RS right away. :)
When the RS is submitted for recommendation (which should be in the next week or so) it will then be our job to write SCCA to express our support of the car, and show that there is ample demand.
Evan
It is just very informal discussion at this point, but the fact that the discussion is being led by one of the top national SSC drivers Joel Lipperini means that it should hold some weight.
[url]http://www.sccaforums.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/000198.html[/url]
I personally think it is a great idea. The car should be competitive but isnt in danger of being ruled out for being too dominant due to its weight and lower whp. What do you guys think? I know if it gets allowed, I would drop this silly Spec Miata thing and jump in a 2001 RS right away. :)
When the RS is submitted for recommendation (which should be in the next week or so) it will then be our job to write SCCA to express our support of the car, and show that there is ample demand.
Evan
| Matt | 08-26-2003 10:38 AM |
I think it would be a great idea. I've always been curious to see how the car would perform on track in a class with similar cars.
Cool link too. :)
Cool link too. :)
| kfoote | 08-26-2003 10:46 AM |
Having driven both an SSB Miata and a stock 99 2.5 RS on the track, I think the 2.5RS would be better placed in SSB than SSC. The 2.5RS would fare quite well against the SSB crowd, and I think it would destroy everything in SSC. That is, unless SCCA continues its push to try to get cars that would have originally been classed in SSA 5 years ago in SSB (such as the BMW Z4 2.5), and the subsequent SSB cars in SSC. 5 years ago, having any car with 150+ HP in SSC would have been considered absurd, and now there are several SSC cars over that mark.
| elgorey | 08-26-2003 11:14 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by kfoote [/i]
[B]I think the 2.5RS would be better placed in SSB than SSC. and I think it would destroy everything in SSC [/B][/QUOTE]
hrm, I would have to disagree, at least in a paper comparison.
One of the top current SSC cars is the '99,'00 Civic Si. 160hp, 2600lbs, double wishbones. The RS only has 5 more crank hp, and is going to have considerably less hp at the wheels due to drivetrain loss. Add that to the extra 200+ lbs the RS has to carry around and the "inferior" strut suspension and I think the RS is by no way a class killer. I think with the torque it has, it would be competitive, but by no means would it dominate.
[B]I think the 2.5RS would be better placed in SSB than SSC. and I think it would destroy everything in SSC [/B][/QUOTE]
hrm, I would have to disagree, at least in a paper comparison.
One of the top current SSC cars is the '99,'00 Civic Si. 160hp, 2600lbs, double wishbones. The RS only has 5 more crank hp, and is going to have considerably less hp at the wheels due to drivetrain loss. Add that to the extra 200+ lbs the RS has to carry around and the "inferior" strut suspension and I think the RS is by no way a class killer. I think with the torque it has, it would be competitive, but by no means would it dominate.
| kfoote | 08-26-2003 02:01 PM |
One of the top SSB cars is the Mazda Miata at 145 HP and 2430 lbs, 20 HP less than the 2.5 RS, and the handling and ability to get the power to the ground of the 2.5RS is quite a bit better than the Civic due to the AWD and the far superior weight distribution. The handling of the Miata is better than the 2.5RS, though the power would more than make up for it. Though I don't have the GCR in front of me at the moment for the weight of the Civic, I think that at 2650-2700 lbs, the 2.5 RS would be a very competitive SSB car outside.
Having raced against Joel Lipperini on a couple of occasions this year, it seems that the Civic is at its fastest when the car is really thrown around (typical FWD), where the 2.5RS rewards smoothness more.
Having raced against Joel Lipperini on a couple of occasions this year, it seems that the Civic is at its fastest when the car is really thrown around (typical FWD), where the 2.5RS rewards smoothness more.
| elgorey | 08-26-2003 02:19 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by kfoote [/i]
[B]and the handling and ability to get the power to the ground of the 2.5RS is quite a bit better than the Civic due to the AWD and the far superior weight distribution. [/quote]
that is definately debatable. While we love our AWD, in road racing its effect is minimal. "getting the power to the ground" is only ever a problem on very tight corners. AWD saps considerable amounts of power from the drivetrain. IIRC I have heard people saying ~115whp for a RS. The weight difference between an Si and RS is substantial, and a wishbone suspension is superior to a strut on a roadcourse.
Top SSC times are usually around mid-pack for SSB anyway, and I am 100% confident that an RS would get murdered in SSB.
regardless, you have taken the discussion entirely off-point. The RS is being recomended for SSC, based on the observations of people more in the know that you or I. (Joel even drives an RS as his daily.)
So I am drumming up support for the RS in SSC, and to get people to start writing SCCA when it is proposed.
[B]and the handling and ability to get the power to the ground of the 2.5RS is quite a bit better than the Civic due to the AWD and the far superior weight distribution. [/quote]
that is definately debatable. While we love our AWD, in road racing its effect is minimal. "getting the power to the ground" is only ever a problem on very tight corners. AWD saps considerable amounts of power from the drivetrain. IIRC I have heard people saying ~115whp for a RS. The weight difference between an Si and RS is substantial, and a wishbone suspension is superior to a strut on a roadcourse.
Top SSC times are usually around mid-pack for SSB anyway, and I am 100% confident that an RS would get murdered in SSB.
regardless, you have taken the discussion entirely off-point. The RS is being recomended for SSC, based on the observations of people more in the know that you or I. (Joel even drives an RS as his daily.)
So I am drumming up support for the RS in SSC, and to get people to start writing SCCA when it is proposed.
| Paisan | 08-26-2003 04:07 PM |
Count me in. I'd love to see more subies in road racing! I might even get enough money someday to get an 00 or 01 setup for it :)
-mike
-mike
| kfoote | 08-26-2003 05:02 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by elgorey [/i]
[B]
While we love our AWD, in road racing its effect is minimal. [/B][/QUOTE]
In every major professional road race series in the US that does and has allowed AWD, the effect is NOT minimal. In SPEED World Challenge where AWD is legal, the advantage of the AWD cars is negated in other areas; The Audi RS6 is 300+ lbs heavier than the other cars and runs on the middle of the three tire sizes allowed (I believe the RS6 is 3300, which Champion have had a difficult tome getting down to, the Corvettes are 3000, Porsches are 2800, and the BMW is up to 2850). In Touring Car, the A4 is a bit down on power to start with compared to the others, in addition to only the BMW's being heavier. Previously, in the mid-late 80's, (the last time I can remember that AWD was legal in a US professional road racing series) the Audi Quattros won handily and eventually got banned from Trans Am and IMSA GTO. AWD was banned from the BTCC in the mid 90's due to the sanctioning body not wanting to put even more than the 100 lb weight penalty (more than 5% of the total vehicle weight) on the cars. I am less familiar with the A4's running in Grand Am Cup, but I'm sure they're among the heavier cars and restricted on tire size as well. In ALMS, Grand Am DP and GTS, and every open wheel series, it is written into the rules that AWD is not legal. AWD is a huge advantage coming off slow corners and in non-ideal conditions (including track temperature induced slipperiness). Losing an extra 10% of drivetrain horespower isn't so bad if you can get full on the gas 20 feet earlier in a 40 MPH corner.
I had a 99 2.5RS as my daily driver until last week, and have run it on the track, in addition to Miatas, a WRX, a C5-Corvette, a Porsche 944, and an E36 BMW M3, among others, and spent 5 years on the Board of Directors of a Northeast Time trial club where the 2.5RS runs in the same class with and is very competitive with Miatas. My point is, and the point of some others on the SCCA board that was mentioned, is that the 2.5 RS would be the most powerful and most expensive car in SSC, and would hurt those who can not afford to buy a new car every year. With the exception of the BMW Z4, the cost of a new 2.5RS is more consistent with the SSB cars than the SSC cars. I'm all for the 2.5RS being made legal in SCCA, just in SSB rather than SSC.
[B]
While we love our AWD, in road racing its effect is minimal. [/B][/QUOTE]
In every major professional road race series in the US that does and has allowed AWD, the effect is NOT minimal. In SPEED World Challenge where AWD is legal, the advantage of the AWD cars is negated in other areas; The Audi RS6 is 300+ lbs heavier than the other cars and runs on the middle of the three tire sizes allowed (I believe the RS6 is 3300, which Champion have had a difficult tome getting down to, the Corvettes are 3000, Porsches are 2800, and the BMW is up to 2850). In Touring Car, the A4 is a bit down on power to start with compared to the others, in addition to only the BMW's being heavier. Previously, in the mid-late 80's, (the last time I can remember that AWD was legal in a US professional road racing series) the Audi Quattros won handily and eventually got banned from Trans Am and IMSA GTO. AWD was banned from the BTCC in the mid 90's due to the sanctioning body not wanting to put even more than the 100 lb weight penalty (more than 5% of the total vehicle weight) on the cars. I am less familiar with the A4's running in Grand Am Cup, but I'm sure they're among the heavier cars and restricted on tire size as well. In ALMS, Grand Am DP and GTS, and every open wheel series, it is written into the rules that AWD is not legal. AWD is a huge advantage coming off slow corners and in non-ideal conditions (including track temperature induced slipperiness). Losing an extra 10% of drivetrain horespower isn't so bad if you can get full on the gas 20 feet earlier in a 40 MPH corner.
I had a 99 2.5RS as my daily driver until last week, and have run it on the track, in addition to Miatas, a WRX, a C5-Corvette, a Porsche 944, and an E36 BMW M3, among others, and spent 5 years on the Board of Directors of a Northeast Time trial club where the 2.5RS runs in the same class with and is very competitive with Miatas. My point is, and the point of some others on the SCCA board that was mentioned, is that the 2.5 RS would be the most powerful and most expensive car in SSC, and would hurt those who can not afford to buy a new car every year. With the exception of the BMW Z4, the cost of a new 2.5RS is more consistent with the SSB cars than the SSC cars. I'm all for the 2.5RS being made legal in SCCA, just in SSB rather than SSC.
| elgorey | 08-26-2003 07:50 PM |
it is interesting that you bring up the RS6, as that car has been a failure compared to expectations and budget.
Regardless, comparing a showroom stock car to a prepared world challenge car is outrageous. AWD when set up properly can be leveraged, but in stock made-for-commuter form the AWD does not overcome its dificiencies. I have also driven a miata and RS on track, and also an Si, and as much as it hurts your ego, an RS clearly belongs in SSC.
and a used RS is usually less than a used Si.
kfoote start another thread if you want to debate AWD in road racing, and start another thread if you want it in SSB, you can go off on your own and recommend it for SSB.
This thread is for the RS in SSC, as I have already said:
[QUOTE][b]The RS is being recomended for SSC, based on the observations of people more in the know that you or I.[/b][/QUOTE]
Regardless, comparing a showroom stock car to a prepared world challenge car is outrageous. AWD when set up properly can be leveraged, but in stock made-for-commuter form the AWD does not overcome its dificiencies. I have also driven a miata and RS on track, and also an Si, and as much as it hurts your ego, an RS clearly belongs in SSC.
and a used RS is usually less than a used Si.
kfoote start another thread if you want to debate AWD in road racing, and start another thread if you want it in SSB, you can go off on your own and recommend it for SSB.
This thread is for the RS in SSC, as I have already said:
[QUOTE][b]The RS is being recomended for SSC, based on the observations of people more in the know that you or I.[/b][/QUOTE]
| Kostamojen | 08-27-2003 12:46 AM |
What modifications are allowed in this race series?
| elgorey | 08-27-2003 08:17 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Kostamojen [/i]
[B]What modifications are allowed in this race series? [/B][/QUOTE]
Not much. Showroom Stock is meant to be racecars bone stock off the showroom floor.
cat back exhaust, tires, brake pads, and of course saftey gear including harness, full cage and race bucket.
Its a great economical way to get into racing, and if you are good enough, you can qualify for the SCCA Runoffs (national championships) and race on TV!
[B]What modifications are allowed in this race series? [/B][/QUOTE]
Not much. Showroom Stock is meant to be racecars bone stock off the showroom floor.
cat back exhaust, tires, brake pads, and of course saftey gear including harness, full cage and race bucket.
Its a great economical way to get into racing, and if you are good enough, you can qualify for the SCCA Runoffs (national championships) and race on TV!
| enduroshark | 08-27-2003 09:13 AM |
Well, it looks like the SCCA is paving the way for this to happen.
They are changing the GCR to allow AWD cars in SS and Touring.
[url]http://www.scca.org/news/tech/fastrack/03-10-fastrack.pdf[/url]
Page F-273 of the October Fastrack (page 17 of 32).
They are changing the GCR to allow AWD cars in SS and Touring.
[url]http://www.scca.org/news/tech/fastrack/03-10-fastrack.pdf[/url]
Page F-273 of the October Fastrack (page 17 of 32).
| trhoppe | 08-27-2003 05:50 PM |
Well it looks like my letter might get sent in. Like evan I might scrap the Spec Miata idea for a SSC 2.5RS. The 2.5RS would definetly be cheaper and I would actually be able to get sponsors for that!
-Tom
-Tom
| sdecker | 08-28-2003 07:16 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by enduroshark [/i]
[B]Well, it looks like the SCCA is paving the way for this to happen.
They are changing the GCR to allow AWD cars in SS and Touring.
[url]http://www.scca.org/news/tech/fastrack/03-10-fastrack.pdf[/url]
Page F-273 of the October Fastrack (page 17 of 32). [/B][/QUOTE]
Man, that was dry stuff! Ony, you planning on instructing in September at RA?
Scott
[B]Well, it looks like the SCCA is paving the way for this to happen.
They are changing the GCR to allow AWD cars in SS and Touring.
[url]http://www.scca.org/news/tech/fastrack/03-10-fastrack.pdf[/url]
Page F-273 of the October Fastrack (page 17 of 32). [/B][/QUOTE]
Man, that was dry stuff! Ony, you planning on instructing in September at RA?
Scott
| TV3WRX | 08-28-2003 10:35 AM |
Irish Mikes
�
�
Interesting thread. Along these same lines, (and certainly not to hijack): What is the latest status of the Irish Mikes team, who were running newer 2.5's in touring car the Speed WC? They were at the first few races of the year, way way way off the pace of the Mazdas, Acuras and BMWs. Like 8 or 10 secs a lap off the pace on average. I did not see them at Infineon or after that. Did they just give up on it? I know they were running heavy, using the GD body. Was this a car preparation issue? Down on power? Anybody know?
| kfoote | 08-28-2003 11:01 AM |
Last I heard, after the first Road Atlanta event, they were going to regroup and do some testing, and they were planning on running the last 2 races of the season at Road Atlanta and Puerto Rico. They figured teh money was better spent on development then hauling from their base in Florida back and forth across the country.
From what I observed, it was a combination of being down on power in conjunction with making them reliable. Mid season they got approval to run the DOHC engine, and they were working on developing that.
They were mighty quick in practice in the rain at Mosport in May, though.
From what I observed, it was a combination of being down on power in conjunction with making them reliable. Mid season they got approval to run the DOHC engine, and they were working on developing that.
They were mighty quick in practice in the rain at Mosport in May, though.
| TV3WRX | 08-28-2003 11:20 AM |
Thanks for that update. I hope they get it together......it had to be pretty embarrassing for them and for SOA. SO many people I know (BMW/Acura folks) thought they were running WRX's, and were giving me a ton of grief. I would not be surprised if SOA called them and asked them to stop until the car was properly developed. Come to think of it, that'd be an interesting way to "backdoor" some SOA sponsorship dollars....
| enduroshark | 08-28-2003 12:59 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by sdecker [/i]
[B]
Man, that was dry stuff! Ony, you planning on instructing in September at RA?
Scott [/B][/QUOTE]
No, I'm going to meet some friends from Texas for the Superbike races at Barber in Alabama that weekend.
Hopefully the BMW guys won't hold it against me and I'll still be able to instruct with them in the future.
[B]
Man, that was dry stuff! Ony, you planning on instructing in September at RA?
Scott [/B][/QUOTE]
No, I'm going to meet some friends from Texas for the Superbike races at Barber in Alabama that weekend.
Hopefully the BMW guys won't hold it against me and I'll still be able to instruct with them in the future.
| enduroshark | 08-28-2003 01:03 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trhoppe [/i]
[B]Well it looks like my letter might get sent in. Like evan I might scrap the Spec Miata idea for a SSC 2.5RS. The 2.5RS would definetly be cheaper and I would actually be able to get sponsors for that!
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
Yeah, start firing letters to get the 2.5 classified.
I also bet that soon (2005?) we will see WRXs, EVOs and STis in Touring along with Audi S-etc's.
[B]Well it looks like my letter might get sent in. Like evan I might scrap the Spec Miata idea for a SSC 2.5RS. The 2.5RS would definetly be cheaper and I would actually be able to get sponsors for that!
-Tom [/B][/QUOTE]
Yeah, start firing letters to get the 2.5 classified.
I also bet that soon (2005?) we will see WRXs, EVOs and STis in Touring along with Audi S-etc's.
| elgorey | 08-28-2003 02:40 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by enduroshark [/i]
[B]I also bet that soon (2005?) we will see WRXs, EVOs and STis in Touring along with Audi S-etc's. [/B][/QUOTE]
WRX and Audi TT have been classed in T-2 as of this year, although neither will be the least bit competitive.
Tom its good to hear that you are considering this as well.
Spec Miata has gotten stupid expensive, and at 6'3" they arent very comfortable.
I [i]really[/i] hope that this comes to fruition! :)
[B]I also bet that soon (2005?) we will see WRXs, EVOs and STis in Touring along with Audi S-etc's. [/B][/QUOTE]
WRX and Audi TT have been classed in T-2 as of this year, although neither will be the least bit competitive.
Tom its good to hear that you are considering this as well.
Spec Miata has gotten stupid expensive, and at 6'3" they arent very comfortable.
I [i]really[/i] hope that this comes to fruition! :)
| Tony | 08-28-2003 04:58 PM |
The thought of spending that much money on a race car that will handle really badly makes me shiver. An IT class, that I'd get excited over.
Tony
Tony
| trhoppe | 08-28-2003 05:21 PM |
Actually evan, after thinking about it and looking at the costs of it, the only way I would do it would be if we were given a front camber allowance. With -1.5 front camber you would use 2 tires per event and it would get REALLY expensive. We would need to be allowed crash bolts to pull -2.5 camber in the front. That with some "refreshed" factory shocks and some toe out, would make a fun SSC car. Definetly no one else would need to show up if it rained.
I estimated about a $15,000 build though. So its still a tossup for that or Spec Miata...
Car - $8,000
Cage - $1,200
Seat/Wheel/Safety Gear - $1000
Engine Rebuild - $1200
Bushings - $200
Wheel Bearings/Hubs - $200
Teardown/goop removal/buildup/misc - $2000
Wheels&Tires - $1000
Of course the way to go would be to rather buy a blown motor/wrecked car and that could cut like $4,000 off the price and make it a better deal then a Spec Miata.
-Tom
I estimated about a $15,000 build though. So its still a tossup for that or Spec Miata...
Car - $8,000
Cage - $1,200
Seat/Wheel/Safety Gear - $1000
Engine Rebuild - $1200
Bushings - $200
Wheel Bearings/Hubs - $200
Teardown/goop removal/buildup/misc - $2000
Wheels&Tires - $1000
Of course the way to go would be to rather buy a blown motor/wrecked car and that could cut like $4,000 off the price and make it a better deal then a Spec Miata.
-Tom
| elgorey | 08-29-2003 09:37 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trhoppe [/i]
With -1.5 front camber you would use 2 tires per event and it would get REALLY expensive. [/quote]
Actually you would be surprised I think. -1.5 is a [b]lot[/b] more camber than a lot of the other SS cars, and the tire consumption for them isnt too bad at all.
[quote]
Car - $8,000
Cage - $1,200
Seat/Wheel/Safety Gear - $1000
[b]Engine Rebuild - $1200
Bushings - $200[/b]
Wheel Bearings/Hubs - $200
[b]Teardown/goop removal/buildup/misc - $2000[/b]
Wheels&Tires - $1000
[/QUOTE]
no need for a teardown (in fact could be illegal), and IMO no need for bushings or a motor rebuild if the car is under 100k miles and all your safety gear can be had for a lot less than $1k
That brings the total to a more reasonable $11k
With -1.5 front camber you would use 2 tires per event and it would get REALLY expensive. [/quote]
Actually you would be surprised I think. -1.5 is a [b]lot[/b] more camber than a lot of the other SS cars, and the tire consumption for them isnt too bad at all.
[quote]
Car - $8,000
Cage - $1,200
Seat/Wheel/Safety Gear - $1000
[b]Engine Rebuild - $1200
Bushings - $200[/b]
Wheel Bearings/Hubs - $200
[b]Teardown/goop removal/buildup/misc - $2000[/b]
Wheels&Tires - $1000
[/QUOTE]
no need for a teardown (in fact could be illegal), and IMO no need for bushings or a motor rebuild if the car is under 100k miles and all your safety gear can be had for a lot less than $1k
That brings the total to a more reasonable $11k
| trhoppe | 08-29-2003 10:51 AM |
[QUOTE]-1.5 is a lot more camber than a lot of the other SS cars, and the tire consumption for them isnt too bad at all.[/QUOTE] They are a lot lighter and have multilink suspensions though....
I guess you have a good point about the motor rebuild. But if you are trying to build a national car, you will have to IMHO.
-Tom
I guess you have a good point about the motor rebuild. But if you are trying to build a national car, you will have to IMHO.
-Tom
| Paisan | 12-30-2003 05:17 AM |
Any new word on showroom stock legal RSes?
-mike
-mike
| mav1c | 12-30-2003 10:33 AM |
If this happens, I might actually consider getting a race license and picking up an RS. Keep us posted! :)
| 10th Warrior | 12-30-2003 10:59 AM |
my sources say no. actually, they said, "*** are you talking about? i haven't heard anything about that" we then went on and on about whether the STi will be competitive in T1 :)
| enduroshark | 12-30-2003 02:46 PM |
I told you to write the letters...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét