SCCAForums.com

reallybluegti:

Perhaps.  Regardless, my letter has been re-sent.  (originally sent 2/4)  And I'll send it again till it gets a log number.

Thanks,

Just a quick comment on log numbers: they are assigned to new requests for proposal.  Member comments sent in response to published proposals will only receive a confirmation letter without a log number.

This was noted recently on several other boards I view.

Mike

I think if we are going to move the m3 to STX then we should move the Cooper S into STS. Asking for a log number now.

BlueMaxx9:

Question for Fair, or Hanchey, or McCall, or whomever has all the data logger info from all that STU testing. Did you ever test the same type of tire (bridgestone, falken, yok, whatever) in a 245 on one of the rally cars and a 265 on the M3? I'm curious how much the peak lateral g-force differed between the two tire widths. I know the car's they would be on are different as well, but if one of you folks has this info, could you post it? I'm just curious how much of a difference there was between a car on 245's and 265's of the same type tire, even if it wasn't the same car.

- Bret 

 Oops, where have I been?  :)  Yes, we had several times where the cars had the same tires.  One time at TMS we had new Yoks on the M3, new Yoks on AtomicRacer's STI and ONE YEAR OLD (and cracked, almost bald) Yoks on my STI.  The winner?  My STI.  It was faster in the slalom and pulled the same g's at the M3.  It was 1.2g or so I think peak.  We always see 1.1 to 1.2g peak.  We'll probably change our testing to not look so much at the peak from now on, but that's what we put together at the time.  McCall's Evo pulled about the same as well on Bridgestones.

---

Brian Hanchey
Vorshlag Motorsports
vorshlag.com

msimanyi:

reallybluegti:

Perhaps.  Regardless, my letter has been re-sent.  (originally sent 2/4)  And I'll send it again till it gets a log number.

Thanks,

Just a quick comment on log numbers: they are assigned to new requests for proposal.  Member comments sent in response to published proposals will only receive a confirmation letter without a log number.

This was noted recently on several other boards I view.

Mike

altiain (from February 6 in this thread):

I also submitted a proposal to move the RX-8 down to STX. I'll leave the E36 M3 proposal to one of the resident Bimmerphiles, since I'm not that familiar with the marque.

Slightly off-topic, but it seems that half a dozen people (at least) have submitted proposals over the course of this thread, and NONE of them have received log numbers nor confirmation letters, myself included. Am I the only one who thinks my $80 a year ought to buy me a slightly better communication format with the people who make the rules?

What a joke.
 

---

Iain

2004 Mazda RX-8 - former B Stock autocrosser, now daily driver and HPDE car
2005 Honda CR-V EX AWD - alphabet soup family truckster

hancheyb:

BlueMaxx9:

Question for Fair, or Hanchey, or McCall, or whomever has all the data logger info from all that STU testing. Did you ever test the same type of tire (bridgestone, falken, yok, whatever) in a 245 on one of the rally cars and a 265 on the M3? I'm curious how much the peak lateral g-force differed between the two tire widths. I know the car's they would be on are different as well, but if one of you folks has this info, could you post it? I'm just curious how much of a difference there was between a car on 245's and 265's of the same type tire, even if it wasn't the same car.

- Bret 

 Oops, where have I been?  :)  Yes, we had several times where the cars had the same tires.  One time at TMS we had new Yoks on the M3, new Yoks on AtomicRacer's STI and ONE YEAR OLD (and cracked, almost bald) Yoks on my STI.  The winner?  My STI.  It was faster in the slalom and pulled the same g's at the M3.  It was 1.2g or so I think peak.  We always see 1.1 to 1.2g peak.  We'll probably change our testing to not look so much at the peak from now on, but that's what we put together at the time.  McCall's Evo pulled about the same as well on Bridgestones.

You're talking pretty vague changes.  Got another decimal point in there somewhere?
 

---

Jesse
-2002-2006 E-stock 93 MR2 (sold)
-2007-2008 XP Spyder

129STS:

hancheyb:

BlueMaxx9:

Question for Fair, or Hanchey, or McCall, or whomever has all the data logger info from all that STU testing. Did you ever test the same type of tire (bridgestone, falken, yok, whatever) in a 245 on one of the rally cars and a 265 on the M3? I'm curious how much the peak lateral g-force differed between the two tire widths. I know the car's they would be on are different as well, but if one of you folks has this info, could you post it? I'm just curious how much of a difference there was between a car on 245's and 265's of the same type tire, even if it wasn't the same car.

- Bret 

 Oops, where have I been?  :)  Yes, we had several times where the cars had the same tires.  One time at TMS we had new Yoks on the M3, new Yoks on AtomicRacer's STI and ONE YEAR OLD (and cracked, almost bald) Yoks on my STI.  The winner?  My STI.  It was faster in the slalom and pulled the same g's at the M3.  It was 1.2g or so I think peak.  We always see 1.1 to 1.2g peak.  We'll probably change our testing to not look so much at the peak from now on, but that's what we put together at the time.  McCall's Evo pulled about the same as well on Bridgestones.

You're talking pretty vague changes.  Got another decimal point in there somewhere?
 

What I meant was, on some surfaces we'll see the cars reach 1.11, 1.10, 1.13.  On other surfaces, temps etc. they'll peak at 1.25, 1.23, 1.26.  So within a few hundredths of each other every time.

 

---

Brian Hanchey
Vorshlag Motorsports
vorshlag.com

msimanyi:

Just a quick comment on log numbers: they are assigned to new requests for proposal.  Member comments sent in response to published proposals will only receive a confirmation letter without a log number.

This was noted recently on several other boards I view.

Mike

I got a log number from Doug today (08-59) for my comments about the STX tire width proposal, and another NASIOC'er got four separate log numbers (08-76 through 08-79) for one letter that touched four issues. So... this does not appear to be true.  

---

John W: 2003 WRX (#7 STX) | 1998 ///M3
Washington, DC Region

Butt Dyno:

msimanyi:

Just a quick comment on log numbers: they are assigned to new requests for proposal.  Member comments sent in response to published proposals will only receive a confirmation letter without a log number.

This was noted recently on several other boards I view.

Mike

I got a log number from Doug today (08-59) for my comments about the STX tire width proposal, and another NASIOC'er got four separate log numbers (08-76 through 08-79) for one letter that touched four issues. So... this does not appear to be true.  

Correct.

Looking at it from the other side, I see every feedback letter getting unique log #'s.

It appears that Doug is getting majorly caught up from the convention and then the trip to GA for the Tour and is now digging through the backlog.

--Andy 

After 4 tries in a month, I just got log numbers for my letter. 

 Thank you,

---

-Paul Andrews
# 42 STU Philly Region
98 Mostly White M3/4

me and my white 4 door m3 support this too. 

---

http://m3kerry.blog.myscca.com

me and my white 4 door m3 support this too. 

---

http://m3kerry.blog.myscca.com

m3kerry:

me and my white 4 door m3 support this too. 

 Heh, white M3 4-doors unite!!    Small demographic, there. 

Did you send a letter? 

---

-Paul Andrews
# 42 STU Philly Region
98 Mostly White M3/4

The problem: Many STX cars can NOT fit 245 and larger tires.

 

The solution: Limit STX cars to 245s for 2WD and limit AWD STX cars to 225s (My 535is will be running 235s regardless of the larger limits)

 

...and just because the RX8 has a token back seat and 2 rear half -doors ....DOESN'T make it a typical 4 passenger STX car. It a freakin sports car and it belongs in STU! As for the E36 M3, it sounds like you guys need to LOBBY HEAVILY for a REDUCTION in tire size for the AWD STU cars instead of trying to get larger tires for your M3s. A BALANCE can be found and the tire allowances can be made more fair than they are now. Putting a 2wd car against a awd car on the same tire sizes sounds one sided to me.

 

It's just really hard to have any sympathy for cars with more HP and larger tire sizes, then listen to the whining about being in STU. Remember not everyone doing this has deep pockets, and increasing tire sizes makes many older cars obsolete for their current class, not to mention it increases the cost for everyone in that class if they want to COMPETE!

 

This is a case where a little logic goes a LOOOOONG WAY! 

---

1987 BMW 535is - 3300 Pounds Of Flaming Dynamite - STX, AZ Region- #17

Appliance Racing (yeah, like your refrigerator....only louder) ;-)

1984 BMW M635 - #408

Otto Krosse:

Remember not everyone doing this has deep pockets, and increasing tire sizes makes many older cars obsolete for their current class, not to mention it increases the cost for everyone in that class if they want to COMPETE!

 

 

And most of those cars have been "obsolete" in their class since it's inception, if that is the way you want to look at it. Every car cannot be competitive, so if being competitive is your goal, go buy a car with that in mind. I don't think the rule changing either way would have a whole lot of effect on your car.

---

00' 328Ci
01' Tahoe LT
98' Camaro Z28 - dead
95' 325is - STX 182

Otto Krosse:

...and just because the RX8 has a token back seat and 2 rear half -doors ....DOESN'T make it a typical 4 passenger STX car. It a freakin sports car and it belongs in STU! As for the E36 M3, it sounds like you guys need to LOBBY HEAVILY for a REDUCTION in tire size for the AWD STU cars instead of trying to get larger tires for your M3s. A BALANCE can be found and the tire allowances can be made more fair than they are now. Putting a 2wd car against a awd car on the same tire sizes sounds one sided to me.

sir, i think some crazy may have fallen out of your mouth.  i know you told us you've just gotten back into autox, but get up to speed a bit on the nuances of ST* classing before going off half cocked.  6 foot folks have sat my rx-8's 'token' back seats comfortably.  yes, the tire rules need to evolve and they are (hopefully) in that process although it sure is taking a good long while.

---

Doug #81 STS2
1990 Mazda Miata
STU 2000 Audi S4 (retired)
STU 2005 Mazda RX-8 (retired)

Mooobunnny:

Otto Krosse:

Remember not everyone doing this has deep pockets, and increasing tire sizes makes many older cars obsolete for their current class, not to mention it increases the cost for everyone in that class if they want to COMPETE!

 

 

And most of those cars have been "obsolete" in their class since it's inception, if that is the way you want to look at it. Every car cannot be competitive, so if being competitive is your goal, go buy a car with that in mind. I don't think the rule changing either way would have a whole lot of effect on your car.

I wasn't talking about my car specifically. FYI, my 20 year old 535is is doing very well and it has taken NV3 in the last 2 events (and 3rd in the last event out of 33 cars in the novice classes) all this on RT615s in 225/50/16. I agree, not every car can be competitive but there are plenty of newer cars that can't compete BECAUSE of the goofy tire size rules. Since there are only a few other STX cars that run I won't be sweating anything until I get beat on a regular basis.

I believe most of the current problems could be cured by putting all the AWD cars in their own class (STA and/or STA2), and leave STU to 2wd cars. There are plenty of AWD models being made these days that at some point the SCCA will be forced to do this.

Your comments about buying a new car to be competitive perfectly illustrates my point of pricing people into a different hobby! Tires are expensive enough, I will not buy any $25-$30K car and dump another $3-$5K into it just to be competitive....especially with some of the crap out there, including some BMWs. I would take up knitting before I give up my old BMWs.

 

Shinronin 

OK I may have used the word "token" a little too loosely , but compared to the rest of the STX/STU field I would be guessing that the RX8 has one of the smallest rear seating areas. Has your 6 foot friend ridden back there for a few blocks or a few hundred miles? Remember "comfort" is a relative term. A serious question for you, are there other STX/STU cars with a smaller back seat than the RX8? Since I've only run in 4 official events I haven't seen the full array of STX/STU cars yet, but I will be sure to take a much closer look at one of the RX8s at our 3/9 event.

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

1987 BMW 535is - 3300 Pounds Of Flaming Dynamite - STX, AZ Region- #17

Appliance Racing (yeah, like your refrigerator....only louder) ;-)

1984 BMW M635 - #408

Otto Krosse:

Your comments about buying a new car to be competitive perfectly illustrates my point of pricing people into a different hobby! Tires are expensive enough, I will not buy any $25-$30K car and dump another $3-$5K into it just to be competitive....especially with some of the crap out there, including some BMWs. I would take up knitting before I give up my old BMWs.

+1 Otto.  I feel the same way (and I have an E36 M3).  But I do feel that if the tire restrictions were tighter in STU then perhaps the populare E36 M3 will have a more level playing field.  Until then I'll enjoy the car at driving schools and autocrosses for fun, but to be competitive, I can co-drive someone ELSE's car that's THE car for the class (better than buying the hot car for <fill in the blank> class).  Not faulting the rules of the sport, but "it is what it is".  Nothing to do about it.

---

Gio
SCCA-Cal Club Region Solo Membership Chairman
BMWCCA-SD Chapter
AMSOIL Dealership
2002 BMW M3

Otto Krosse:

Remember not everyone doing this has deep pockets, and increasing tire sizes makes many older cars obsolete for their current class, not to mention it increases the cost for everyone in that class if they want to COMPETE!

Except the rules are written to be equal with the best national drivers driving the most prepared cars. They are not intended to equalize all manner of differences between car prep and driver experience. That is why you see nationals results referenced so frequently in these discussions - until we get the most highly prepped cars and the best drivers in em, it's hard to be scientific, because you can say car X would have been faster if it were better prepped, or was driven by a faster driver.

This is not to comment on the merits of your ideas, just trying to frame them :)

And I don't exactly see the difference between the M3 coupe having a token back seat and NO rear doors, and an RX8. I would think it would be a hell of a lot easier to get into the back of the RX8. I've sat in the back of an E36 before. It's not exactly spacious! Same thing for the WRX/Evo/STi...

John
 

---

John W: 2003 WRX (#7 STX) | 1998 ///M3
Washington, DC Region

Otto Krosse:

Your comments about buying a new car to be competitive perfectly illustrates my point of pricing people into a different hobby! Tires are expensive enough, I will not buy any $25-$30K car and dump another $3-$5K into it just to be competitive....especially with some of the crap out there, including some BMWs. I would take up knitting before I give up my old BMWs.

I think you misunderstood what he meant by a 'new car'. A better phrase probably would have been a 'competitive car', since most of the winning ST cars aren't actually new. I'll bet you could pick up a well-prepared STS or STS2 car for under 10K, already built and everything. You could probably pick up one that has won nationals for not much more. My 325 only cost me about 8K and that was a few years ago. You could get one for $4K-5K easily, and less if you find a beater. Stock E36 M3's and 2.0L WRX's are in the teens right now. The Evo and STi are really the only NEW cars that are winning in ST right now. Everything else is used to some degree or another.

As for the RX-8, well someone call me when they ditch the rotary and drop in the 2.3L turbo motor that has been going into all the Mazdaspeed cars.

- Bret