MJM

I would like to hear from those on the rules making boards or 'in the know' what the future holds for both NASA ST2 and SCCA T1 racing rules for 2010 and 2011. I realize no one has a crystal ball but best guesses, ideals the rules makers are striving for and even rampant speculation are welcome.

The reason I ask is that I won't be able to compete next season due to a deployment but I would like to eventually.

I would post this on the respective SCCA or NASA forum, but they tend to quickly devolve into Vette vs Viper vs Ferrari, C5 vs C6, and SCCA vs NASA arguements (not that it doesn't happen here) and my question is C5 vette specific anyway.

Thanks in advance,
Matt

RAFTRACER

I dont know what is going to happen with either sanctioning bodies as far as rules making is concerned.

I would like to see NASA start factoring in torque into their pwr/wt ratios in ST1 and ST2 before some really wierd combinations start occuring ie; duramax diesel in Corvette (300 hp/700 ft/lbs). This is already done in NASA's other pwr/wt governed classes. If not I may build a 500+in LS motor ,leave the torque alone and limit top end power. Monitoring horsepower and not torque is ludicrous. There are reasons why they implemented this in AI...............

I believe that NASA is concerned with rules stability , which is a good plan. I wouldn't look for anything drastic to change.......SCCA on the other hand just changed all sorts of stuff () . Dry-sump systems in T1........reduced wieghts which people in C5's couldn't get to anyways.... The dry-sump thing is the wierdest, fundementally the oiling systems are the same from 97-current barring the LS7. Dont know why a handful of LS3's are blowing up majoritily all prepared by the same people. I have two customers with LS3's that wail on their cars on roadcourses for long periods and no oil starvations yet......They both have certainly lived longer than a couple of initial laps before starting to have issues. They both however have no accusumps and LS7 oil coolers as the only oiling system mods. The pans are the same between LS2's and 3's I believe. I wander if the SCCA considered the extra horsepower that is going to be created by the dry-sump....engines love crankcase pressures to be negative vs. pressurized.

Get your body work done, that certainly will not be changing....Thanks for protecting our country , race-world will still be here when you return

96solo

New 2009 NASA Rules out.

varkwso

NASA intends to keep the rule set stable so racers do not have to rebuild basic setup every year. ST2 is still 8.7 to 1 limited and everything else is pretty much open and I do not see that changing. I agree with Danny on the torque issue since it is not regulated it will be exploited. I think AI type TQ tables have a chance of coming into play by the time you get back since they have put HP limits on all the lower PT/TT classes this year.

AU N EGL

they are now. Very minimal changes. 2009 ST rules: http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=25326

varkwso

I tended to order waay too much stuff (some of it I actually used, eventually) on deployment once we had internet available.....you are right to get a plan together first

ERND IT

per the thread originator, comments on oil issues legal in scca were moved here:

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/auto...l-in-scca.html

please just post your comments on 2010 2011 NASA SCCA rules

MJM

Thanks!

MJM

Some things I've heard people asking for recently.

What chance do you think these stand?

SCCA - replace the rubber suspension bushings.

SCCA - better front calipers (not necessarily a BBK, just the caliper).

NASA - kicking the tube frame cars out of Super Touring.

Rules already say "Any closed wheel/fendered PRODUCTION vehicle, approved for street use by the D.O.T., T.U.V., or Japanese government, that complies with all NASA safety requirements in the CCR, and all of the restrictions and limitations listed below in 7.2 and 7.3 is eligible to compete"

NASA - measuring more than just peak HP.


anything else you have heard or would like to see.

varkwso

Not likely since there are quite a few tube frame cars competing currently in NASA. They do not seem to be dominating so I have not seen any push.

ghoffman

What about non-tube frame cars? Here is the chassis of the new LS7 powered Arbitrage. I have been helping them for a couple of years, and I have a 100+ page aero analysis of it. It has pushrod actuated inboard Penskes, optional dog ring trans, very good downforce, carbon tub. The polar moment of inertia is very low so that turn in will be very quick, and about 2500 pounds.




And as far as torque goes, even that will not suffice IMHO. You could get an F430 to have peak LS7 numbers, but if you have ever driven a F430, it has a powerband of a 125cc Motocross bike, and that is why it has the super shifter. Perhaps an "area under the curve" per pound approach might be better.

AU N EGL

Damn Gary, just DAMN Is that cool or what?

ghoffman

Yes, it really is. It might be my new NASA SU car, if/when NASA ever decides to do something in the NE region other than Auto-X and 944's.

varkwso

Yep - I would say it falls under SU...

ghoffman

Really, you don't think I can run it in ST ? It dosn't have a tube frame! How many cars constitute "production"? Right now, NASA is basically non-existant in the NE for Road Racing, it is mostly DE's and A-X. Does anyone know the NE Directors (personally)?
Update:
I just heard from Joe Casella, Dir, NASA NE. There are some races later in the year, mostly at NJMP and Pocono, with a race in August at LRP.

Everett Ogilvie

Looks vaguely familiar, doesn't it Gary? . Sorry, couldn't resist. I still have not been able to get together with those guys here yet, but hope to do so.

ghoffman

Exactly, there are only so many variations on a theme. I think the suspension on the Arbitrage might be a little better and the downforce numbers are certainly an improvement. Do any Moslers run in NASA? Who, what usually runs in SU?

Everett Ogilvie

I doubt any run in NASA if there are only 15 in the country. There are more cars in Europe where they campaign regularly in GT classes. They never gave me any hard numbers for the Mosler (although I do have the Cd and frontal area, for the purpose of some HP requirement/speed calculations I did), but they claim the GT3 car makes enough downforce to support the car upside down at 150mph, which would be about 1900 lbs - again, just what I read somewhere, no hard numbers. I suspect they keep the numbers close to the vest.

MJM

SU was supposed to be the class for anything that doesn't fit in ST1 or ST2. Either because the HP/weight ratio was better than 5.5 or because it was a non-production or purpose built racecar.

So out west you see Radicals, Diasos, NASCARs, etc running SU.

One of the problems is that some non-production or purpose built racecars can't compete against the fast cars in SU so they have asked for and received exceptions to be classed down into ST1 and even ST2.

That is one of the big reasons I am holding off putting a cage in my FRC and going racing (other than the upcoming deployment). Why would I go to all the trouble and expense of converting a production car if someone else can show up with a purpose built racecar?

ghoffman

This is actually a street car, with a production of 350 cars. At how many cars does "production" apply in NASA rules? This is actually a "kit" car for some legal reasons, but is completely assembled except for the LS7. So, get the "kit", drop in the LS7 and drive.