New Super Touring Philosophy

Greg Amy said:
Coincidental that you should bring this up; I've actually been thinking the last week or so that it's more appropriate to have this date limit rule move forward with time, something along the lines of "current year plus 25 years).Yeah, it'll exclude cars eventually, but if the goal is to keep the category "fresh", it's needed.

GA

...
Click to expand...

I really don't think that's a good idea.

IT cars (going back to '68 apparently) would still be able to run, so all that would do would hurt people who built older, (lighter, inexpensive to acquire) cars specifically for ST.

If the idea is to somehow require people be building modern touring cars - for what it costs to build one of these things, they can go buy a seat in a pro car for a year for less money. That's not going to grow the class.

Also, my car is 25 years old as of this July. It is a perfectly good, competitive STU car. It was not inexpensive to build for this class either. I would be... less than excited... if I had to sell it or find another venue to race it next July.

I think it would be perhaps better to focus on getting the class participation up amongst pure ST cars (what are the numbers when you take out the crossover SM/SSM/IT/T2/T3 cars) there's what, appx 14 STU cars for next weekends race at Sebring, and only 3 of them are true STU cars? I thought the Easy Points National was at NHMS in April, not Sebring in January. Too bad it's such a long cold tow for me.

freshness will come from people buying ex WC-TC cars, not from kicking out current competitors.
 
Last edited:
Greg Amy said:
On edit: since IT is now allowing V8 engines into ITR, and the first gen was in production through 1973, and since the 1968 carburated 302 put out about 230hp/300tq, sounds like a nice fit for ITR...
Click to expand...

Or the 69 Z28 with the 302 DZ engine at 290/290, JL-8 4wheel disc brakes and factory spoilers. Guldstrand still sells road racing leaf springs and shocks for them.
 
Last edited:
Greg Amy said:
Coincidental that you should bring this up; I've actually been thinking the last week or so that it's more appropriate to have this date limit rule move forward with time, something along the lines of "current year plus 25 years).Yeah, it'll exclude cars eventually, but if the goal is to keep the category "fresh", it's needed.
Click to expand...

I could not be more against that. Where would these cars go once they age out? Just looking at a couple of cars (so admittedly this may be a general statement), you can't take an STL car to FP or an STU car to EP without building a completely new motor because STU and STL use all new engine rules that allow greater cam lift and compression than in Prod.

Also, if STU, STL, and STO were created to welcome cars in from the likes of NASA and other competing organizations, we shouldn't go chasing them back a couple of years later.
 
Last edited:
Actually, no they would not go to Prod. There are allowances in ST that do not fit in Prod. For example - ST allowances for inner fender pannel changes are not legal in Prod. So aged out ST cars might not have anywhere to go.

Put me down as strongly against changing the age limit in ST. I am building an 83 RX7 and all of the fab work is done. It took me two years to get to this point.

One of the reasons I selected ST over Prod is that I felt that the engine swap rules would allow me to keep an old chassis competitive.
 
lateapex911 said:
So how competitive are you expecting the package to be?? What weight does the car run at?
Click to expand...

2300lbs as of the last weight adjustment....it magically keeps decreasing. In MiDiv I expect this package to be competitive. At the Runoff, which is not a goal of mine, probably not unless Justin Pritchard drives the car :)!

STU has been my focus all along. When I started down this road STL didn't exist and when it did, the early STL rules were decidedly aniti-rotary. If I were starting this project now, I think I wold give STL a serious look. But I have gone way past that now.

To my original objection to a change in age limits, ST is not about the chassis it is about the engine. Engine technology will advance and ST gives the competitors a chance to use it. Does it hurt the club if I evently put a 21st century power plant in my 20th century car?

Who benefits from a "fresh" crop of cars in ST? What is the goal here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top