STL - what's going to be hot?

Matt93SE said:
Still waiting on rules to stabilize before I come out of the closet.......
Click to expand...
A very reasonable position to take...

However, I can tell you with confidence that there are ZERO major rules changes afoot in STL except for consideration of two requests from me, one to allow alternate brakes in STL and one to allow the MX-5 in STL in SM5 trim (I'm such a Miata hater! ;)).

GA
 
Greg Amy said:
A very reasonable position to take...

However, I can tell you with confidence that there are ZERO major rules changes afoot in STL except for consideration of two requests from me, one to allow alternate brakes in STL and one to allow the MX-5 in STL in SM5 trim (I'm such a Miata hater! ;)).

GA
Click to expand...

Do you feel there is a big need for alternate brakes? These cars are so sttractively light that I wonder if there is a need...but also can't think of much of a downside except for cost issues.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
Do you feel there is a big need for alternate brakes? These cars are so sttractively light that I wonder if there is a need...but also can't think of much of a downside except for cost issues.
Click to expand...

I would LOVE big brakes. The miata will be the same weight as my ITA car but have WAY more straight line speed. Chassis wise they will be virtualy identical except for downforce, slow speed corners following a long straight will require much more brake force. Good race pads for Wilwood calipers are also significantly cheaper then pads for the OE brakes.

I also dont consider the cars to be "so sttractively light", I will need to carry around 300# of ballast and the car is not undergoing a major weight loss program.
2100 to 2200 pounds would be a better more attractive weight for a 1.8L car, the reason I might still abort and switch to EP or STU.
 
Last edited:
tyler raatz said:
I would LOVE big brakes. The miata will be the same weight as my ITA car but have WAY more straight line speed. Chassis wise they will be virtualy identical except for downforce, slow speed corners following a long straight will require much more brake force. Good race pads for Wilwood calipers are also significantly cheaper then pads for the OE brakes.

I also dont consider the cars to be "so sttractively light", I will need to carry around 300# of ballast and the car is not undergoing a major weight loss program.
Click to expand...

I for sure get they would be 'better' but wonder if they are needed as all. I glossed over the 300lbs when we talked earlier. At about 2450lbs of car why would you need to add that much?
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
Do you feel there is a big need for alternate brakes?
Click to expand...
"Need"? No, certainly not in terms of performance or safety as some would suggest. My desire for brakes is purely that - a desire - and a recognition that alternate brakes fits right in with a philosophy of Lexan "glass", carbon fiber panels, lots of rollcage points, and seam welding (my request to disallow that last point was "not recommended").

GA
 
the brake thing has a few huge potential upsides.

1 - increased partiy. currently chassis can be chosen as much for their handling characteristics as they can for their ability to bolt on stoppers and drop in motors. 2.0L cars will be HEAVY and bigger brakes will make them more attractive - more cars become "competitive", at least in theory. Also, you will have a good variety of pads available no matter what car you choose, and they will be lower cost. no more shipping pad backings to carbotech for custom rears on the fugizit. just get the superlight compound of your choosing.

2 - simplification. and it's not expensive after the buy in. pretty much like everything else in the class.

3 - category cohesiveness. STL DOESN'T LOOK like ST. it looks like IT. this will take it a step towards matching its bigger brothers and not looking like the mailman's kid.

4 - speed. we're looking at a LOT more speed than factory binders are made to slow. we all recognize that all motors of similar displacement are not created equally, even within the class allowed mods. what is certain is that speeds will be a lot higher than similarly bodied IT cars. give them the mass in the braking system to cope with that.

downsides:

some work. less IT-ish if you care about that. other than that...
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
I for sure get they would be 'better' but wonder if they are needed as all. I glossed over the 300lbs when we talked earlier. At about 2450lbs of car why would you need to add that much?
Click to expand...

The weight is actually 2398.5#
To make ITA weight 2380#, I have between 150-180 punds of ballast depending on fuel load, cool suit etc.
Build lighter tub, remove HVAC system, remove all excess wiring, remove all the BS parts required by IT, lighter hood, lighter trunk, lexan, etc.
Yea, I'm gonna have 300# of ballast.
 
Matt93SE said:
Still waiting on rules to stabilize before I come out of the closet.......
Click to expand...

Don't blame you there, but I hardly sat in a race car last year so it's time to get on track. I was the one who wrote the request for the headlights as I have an S2000 that both headlights were smacked up in the last accident the car had as a Touring 3 car. At $500 a light it was a tough pill to swallow. I've got some jerry rigged replica lights in there now to get it by till that passes.

But come race anyway, help build numbers. We have 22 in the class this weekend at sebring. That's gotta almost make the southeast numbers in one weekend.

STL looked to have the potential to be faster then STU. I was thinking K20 in a CRX, but I've heard that the K20 will be a banned motor. I think that 2zz in the Celica should be banned to as over on the celica forum there are a ton of them all stock to almost stock making near 180whp. Imagine a built one in a mid engine'd car. It's gonna put the power down far better then a FWD car, it's got much better weight distribution so it'll use the tires less. It's gonna be better under braking. I still think a K20 CRX could dominate STU. 240-250whp isn't very hard in one of those motors. I wish it were legal because I want to do a K24 in a 2nd Gen MR-2 as a daily driver.
 
Last edited:
Oh I'm still running (In STU, with a 130k mile stock engine). I'm just waiting on STU and STL to figure out what they're going to do before I dump any cash into the car.
If the SR20DET is allowed, then I may go that way. Otherwise it's dump $10k into a KA to get the same power I can by dropping in an SR w/ appropriate inlet restrictor for $2500.

If they don't allow the SR20DET, then I'll see about an SR20DE (non turbo version) and run in STL. problem there is I've already got the bigger brakes and a few other minor things that would have to go away. I'd spend money to go slower. not what I want.

I'm sitting with money in the bank to buy the engine, dog box, and aero. But I'm not spending a penny until STAC makes up their mind what they're going to do. I'm not willing to throw $15k in the trash.


On the brakes note..
Front Hawk HT-10 for Wilwood Dynalite= $59. They last me a season. $85 2-pc Coleman rotors have been on for 2 seasons and still have lots of life left. custom machined hats cost me $100 each at a local fab shop. Caliper mounting bracket took me a couple hours in the garage with a drill press, digital calipers, and a sharpie.

Total investment in TONS of front brake: $725. that's for rotors, pads, calipers, hardware, brake lines, everything. My expendables are now under $150 per year.

Hawk HT-10 brake pads to fit 300ZX rear (2 piston) calipers. $120 a set.
Hawk HT-10 pads to fit front 300ZX (4 piston) calipers: $150 a set.
Hawk Blue for stock S14 240SX: $120/set.

throw in 3 sets of front rotors and a set for the rear $100/set and I'm looking at roughly $700/year in brake parts to keep the stock brakes on the car.
 
Last edited:
Im currently working slowly on my Honda for this class and will be going non vtec.

Im just hoping for larger brakes to be approved like my current ITR oem brakes I have on my civic. I would want everyone to have better braking options as mentioned with increased speeds, its somewhat of a safety concern I would think outside of making more cars more attractive (attractive as in more vehicles).
 
Last edited:
Now for a stupid question.. How much faster will your car be than the same weight car in Prod prep? the *current* STU cars are running EP lap times, and Prod requires stock calipers and rotors.
So will an STL car be faster than an EP or STU car? If no, then it doesn't really NEED larger brakes, does it?

That said, I'm all in favor of larger brakes from a reliability and longevity perspective- but will the CRB and STAC see it that way?
 
the last time I saw corey run he was putting down a lot more power than you would likely see in EP.. more than STL rules would allow too (based on mods). either way - I'm sure there will be a nice big B series in that EH hatch so it's not directly comparable to prod.

hondas are one of the cars that have brake compounds available. what if you don't have options for your car? you can spend less on pads with an STO car. that's just stoopid
 
there are some good reasons for a brake allowance, but 'safety' isn't one of them. brake earlier. overheating? manage it.

IF the class were further along, I'd be dead set against it. But, as it's early in it's infancy, fine.

Just don't do it because it makes the car "look" more like a race car or 'safer"....
 
Arent we racing cars like as in race cars?

I don't see why all the fuss over a bigger braking setup.

@Chip
Thanks. I doubt this motor will put down the same type of power but within the given rules I have done everything almost I can. The only thing I didn't do was os pistons incase of a future rebuild. I'm shooting for 150-170whp/120-130trq which I think is pretty doable from the 1.8 non vtec. Higher trq numbers would be nice, the last motor only made around 130.
 
coreyehcx said:
Arent we racing cars like as in race cars? ...
Click to expand...

Yup. So what really matters is that everyone is running to the same rules - racing one-another - not whether they're going a couple seconds a lap faster than they would with stock brakes.

Thousands and thousands of fans go to horse races every year. Nobody - not even the jockeys - ever seem to argue that all horses should all get rule allowances to be faster.

K
 
FWIW.

My BBK has saved me (my sponsor) a fortune. I'd burn up a set of OEM ITR pads in two weekends with the stock set-up. Now, with the BBK 4 piston unit, pad wear is almost nill. A good BBK is the easy button.

Larger brakes are the norm in a SUPER Touring type class, worldwide. This isn't Improved Touring.
 
Knestis said:
Yup. So what really matters is that everyone is running to the same rules - racing one-another - not whether they're going a couple seconds a lap faster than they would with stock brakes.
K
Click to expand...

but the rules make it so that everyone is running with different brakes. even the stuff expected to be popular, say a 96-00 Civic hatch. small front brakes, rear drums. only way it came in this country. STL has a problem here, because people are going to be putting big, ~200whp motors into little economy cars while others have cars equipped for much sportier intentions. but they could have the same motor.

STU and O allow alt brakes to a maximum diameter and piston count - you can get around it with OE brakes IF you are lucky enoguh to have soemthing bigger. everyone running to the same rules. STL should have a simillar allowance. IT rules work, for IT. and as someone said above, this is not IT.
 
JohnW said:
I'd burn up a set of OEM ITR pads in two weekends with the stock set-up. Now, with the BBK 4 piston unit, pad wear is almost nill. A good BBK is the easy button.
Click to expand...
THIS.

new class - use the rules that make sense on a balance and cost basis in these times. done.
 
Chip42 said:
but the rules make it so that everyone is running with different brakes. even the stuff expected to be popular, say a 96-00 Civic hatch. small front brakes, rear drums. only way it came in this country. STL has a problem here, because people are going to be putting big, ~200whp motors into little economy cars while others have cars equipped for much sportier intentions. but they could have the same motor.

STU and O allow alt brakes to a maximum diameter and piston count - you can get around it with OE brakes IF you are lucky enoguh to have soemthing bigger. everyone running to the same rules. STL should have a simillar allowance. IT rules work, for IT. and as someone said above, this is not IT.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. My point - not well made - was that "they are race cars" is a lousy reason, in and of itself. If the view is that ST(whatever) warrants bigger brakes, the easy answer is to spec a maximum diameter and thickness, front and rear, for each class, and let folks go nuts. That's consistent with the first assumption re: engine size.

The idea that alternatives will be "considered" on a case-by-case basis, or some such, is pretty dangerous.

K
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top