Hi DG
I agree with taking a look at the 2 seaters.
If car size is a concern maybe we could consider engine cylinder number as
the filter factor, regardless of front/rear wheel drive + all the other
filters.
This could help in creating a "minimal" # of classes, for example:
ST1-8cyl, 6cyl turbos, ST2 6cyl, 4 cyl turbos, 4 cyl rotaries, ST3-all others.
Now 2/4/etc door, front/rear wheel drive, weight, mfg. year, etc. are
reduced as the class determining factors.
As I've said in previous posts, we've been running this grouping (cylinder
#) in our ST like classes of Improved Street 1-2-3. We've also kept down
modifications to focus on handling/suspension, leaving engine mods to those
wanting to go into street prepared.
For the sake of briefness I won't go into specific allowed mods yet. That
can come at a later time.
Hope this is of help.
Also, I've heard other regions are running something similiar to our IS
classes but not quite as close as the ST classes yet.
Well, this should be an interesting thread.
Judy in San Diego (IS2-1st gen.RX7) {:>}
At 09:51 AM 9/21/99 -0400, dg50@daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
>GSMnow@aol.com wrote:
>
>I'm going to answer a number of STU related messages from last night in
one post
>here so as to save some space.
>
>> I find it interesting that no one with comments on STU have actually
>> run STU.
>
>Well, that's not _entirely_ true. There have been comments from other '99 STU
>competitors.
>
>I went down the whole STU path when I started researching the rules so as to
>convert my car to STU - best to have all one's ducks in a row _before_
spending
>any money - and found the existing rules confusing and vague.
>
>Have you joined the STU mailing list yet?
>
>> Looking over the rules I did see the link back to the SP
>> open rim rule, but it seemed like a mistake as they were trying to
>> reference that the wheels could stick out
>
>Well, the SP open wheel rule is part of both the existing STU rules and the
>proposed changes. I'll be running either 255 40R17 on a 9", or perhaps 275
40R17
>on a 10" myself.
>
>> As it turns out the tires dies
>
>?? Which tires are you running?
>
>> The rules as printed in the SIIRB are pretty good, but it does need
>> clarifications.
>
>> Rather than a whole sale change of the rules I would like just a clean >
up of
>what they have and let it evlove with who actually runs it.
>
>Well, this is exactly what the proposal in front of the SEB is. 80% of it is
>just clarifications to the existing rules. All that has been added is the
>remainder of the SP rules (seats, steering wheels, roll bars, and fuel cells)
>and we made brakes open.
>
>> For one I think Front drive 2 seaters based on a legal coupe chassis
>> should be allowed.
>
>The problem here is weight/size. Two seaters are typically much smaller,
>shorter, and lighter than four seaters, and that adds up to a tremendous
>advantage - especially when you talk Miata and CRX. The DullSoul is actually
>pretty heavy for its size, but it is the exception.
>
>Having raced against 1500lb, 160HP CSP CRXen in Pro2 this year in my 3000lb,
>280HP ESP Talon, I have firsthand experience that that's just not a fair
fight.
>Let that CRX have an LSD and a turbo, and you've got a runaway overdog. STU
>would become an all CRX/Miata class.
>
>Weight and size count for far more than HP on an autocross course.
>
>Now it has been pointed out that there are small, lightweight 4 seaters out
>there too, and I guess those of us with heavier cars are going to have to
live
>with that. But there's no reason to make the situation any worse than it
is by
>letting the the 2 seaters in. By requiring 4 seats, the average weight of the
>class goes way up.
>
>If enough 2 seaters are out there that want to play by STU rules, they
need to
>write a letter and get "Street Sports Unlimited" (STU for 2 seaters) created.
>I'll even support it.
>
>DG
>
>
>
>
>
|