Turbo's sweep STU....

Efforts to equalize blown and NA engines in the same class have been pretty much a losing proposition ever since the Duesenbergs first ran at Indy in the '20s. In the case of an SCCA National class, where people pretty much make decisions about "competitiveness" from just one race each year, this will never be adequately resolved.

But at the end of the day, the dumbest thing that i can imagine doing in this situation would be going 4 seconds faster than the competition...

K
 
prodogdriver said:
The Solstice has some nice advantages,

275mm tires fit the wheel well front & rear

They are light, 2877 right out of the box

Parts right from the GM get you to 29psi
http://www.gmpartshouse.com/19212670-lnf-turbo-upgrade-kit


I was told the 37mm restrictor only chokes it’s turbo 6mm ( I can’t confirm)

I was thinking that if the Honda S2000 is too much for STL then maybe the GXP has shown itself as too much for STU

I know it’s not all the motor, I saw the runoffs time card pdf
Click to expand...

Don't forget it's direct injected, that means only air goes through the intake valve, and everything in the intake manifold acts as if it's about 8% larger.

Also, the turbo motor's a 2.0 liter that makes 290hp/340ft-lbs with the factory warrenty. If he's running a 2.4 liter Ecotech with a turbo, that means the turbo was transplanted from the 2.0l motor onto a 2.4l N/A motor. :018:

We ban a 330hp/260ft-lb NA motor because it's 46cc too large and would have to weigh 3500lbs, but we allow this to run at any weight it wants to, as long as they stick an ineffective plate somewhere around the turbo. Maybe I was wrong, maybe there's no way this class isn't screwed.
 
Again, not enough changes to make for parity. Even if you toss out the over dog Pontiac this year, it is quite evident that the turbos have the edge. Look at Marc's car, and Joel's. both of them were on 245s both this year and last, and they ran away from the atmo cars.

Greg, what does it take for you guys to see the same picture that everyone else is seeing? As I told you when I left Road America, unless you guys do something to achieve some reasonable semblance of parity, your going to kill the class. As it stands now, you can count us as one of those folks gone to race with NASA.
 
jmac36 said:
Greg, what does it take for you guys to see the same picture that everyone else is seeing?
Click to expand...
Joe, I sincerely doubt you possess some kind of Divine insight; we "see" exactly what you "see", for the most part (except we have access to everyone's data). The fact that we're actually making changes should indicate to you that we're working toward the same direction you wish, we just apparently don't agree with the extent that is needed.

- We addressed the restrictor "loophole" you implied;
- We addressed the ability for higher-torque cars to put down big power on big rubber;
- We're open to the idea of reducing restrictor sizes/increasing weight.
- We've already discussed how boost restrictions, RPM restrictions, blow-off valves, and/or dynos on-site are wholly impractical within SCCA Club Racing, given they are impossible to enforce during the year with current staffing and technology.
- What we DIDN'T do was knee-jerk throw 1000 pounds on any car with forced induction, "just cause".

I'm not quite clear what your Vision suggests we do within our current limitations. But we're listening...

GA
 
Last edited:
Greg, I'm sorry, but you are correct, I do not have a divine insight, just simple 20/20. Funny thing is, there were more than a few folks that saw exactly the same thing I saw. And frankly I'm just not sure how you can see this any other way; there is a parity issue between the turbo and non turbo cars.

Btw, your data is not that secret. Interesting that at least two competitors in STU get to see the info from the other cars in the class.

To your points;

I did not imply shit, the loophole was there in plain sight. We saw it last year when we ran the mazdaspeed 3, but we chose not to play that game. Again, bravo to Chris for spending the time to understand turbo dynamics, and find the proper ratio. No sour grapes there.

If your wonderful new tire rule is the answer, then please explain the results from the year before to me. Marc's car does not run huge tires, nor did Joel's , and they flat ran away from the fastest atmo cars there. Mike is not a hack, and Eric certainly has the goods to get it done, so tell me how that result displayed anything approaching parity.

As been explained over and over, restrictors ain't gonna hack it. All your doing is lowering the torque peak in the rev limit, and widening its powerband.Easy to fix, just gear the car like a diesel and short shift.

And please, don't tell me that there is not a way to police boost. With the state of logging now, simple monitors could be used to check and adjust during the season. And please don't tell me it's too expensive, remember what it is I do day in day out, and don't insult me with that argument. With the front running STU cars at RA this year averaging 40-50k in value that argument ain't gonna fly.
 
Last edited:
jmac36 said:
.don't tell me that there is not a way to police boost. With the state of logging now, simple monitors could be used to check and adjust during the season. And please don't tell me it's too expensive, remember what it is I do day in day out, and don't insult me with that argument.
Click to expand...
Joe, since you do this for a living, and since it's so "simple" (and by inference, cheap), then if you're willing to spearhead and manage the boost monitoring and policing project of all turbocharged Super Touring Under cars at all National events - free of charge, of course, given we have no budget - I am 100% behind your idea...I'd even consider 115%.

Don't forget you'll need to create a boost requirement for each engine that is eligible for STU (and/or based on flat displacement), and we'll certainly consider your compliance team's recommendations after each race based on your detailed reports of the resultant data you collect.

It's really a kinda an interesting project, actually...kinda stuff I'd like to do, assuming I didn't have "a job"...

"grega at pobox dot com". Call me, maybe...?
 
jmac36 said:
Again, not enough changes to make for parity. Even if you toss out the over dog Pontiac this year, it is quite evident that the turbos have the edge. Look at Marc's car, and Joel's. both of them were on 245s both this year and last, and they ran away from the atmo cars.
Click to expand...

Wrong and Wrong.

Audi 255s
Miata 275s rear.

No one and I mean no one has stepped up and quantified the Solstice being an overdog. Do it or shut the F up.

Joe, I to do this stuff for a living. The cars that did well at the runoffs happen to be turbos yes. That is exclusive of the the fact that they were well set up and well driven. The Solstice that everyone is saying is such an overdog also tested for 5 days prior to the runoffs. How many test days did you do Joe? Or are you so super human that you didn't need the test time?

Given the proper amount of money and the right driver we could have just as easily won with an NA car. The decisions to reduce tire size was based off of the delta "we" the STAC saw under braking and mid corner. Joe be careful if you choose the start throwing stones.
 
Rabbit07 said:
Wrong and Wrong.

Audi 255s
Miata 275s rear.

No one and I mean no one has stepped up and quantified the Solstice being an overdog. Do it or shut the F up.

Joe, I to do this stuff for a living. The cars that did well at the runoffs happen to be turbos yes. That is exclusive of the the fact that they were well set up and well driven. The Solstice that everyone is saying is such an overdog also tested for 5 days prior to the runoffs. How many test days did you do Joe? Or are you so super human that you didn't need the test time?

Given the proper amount of money and the right driver we could have just as easily won with an NA car. The decisions to reduce tire size was based off of the delta "we" the STAC saw under braking and mid corner. Joe be careful if you choose the start throwing stones.
Click to expand...

Chris, are you F ing serious??? 4 second in the first session and you think nobody was saying overdog??? Were you at the same meeting I was??? As I recall I was the guy in the back saying wait and see. Well Chris we saw didn't we?

And as far as casting stones, I think you will not that I have said time and again that you did an excellent job finding the grey areas in the rules and exploiting them. That's the nature of the game, so again, BRAVO! GOOD JOB!

But we need to fix this going forward, and the fact is your restrictor rules just ain't hacking it.

Btw Chris, yes I know what you do for a living, but then do understand what it is I do?And yes,Chris,I do think I'm as qualified or more on some parts of this topic.

Regardless, I believe you are wrong in the direction you are headed, and it sounds like nothing will change.
 
Rabbit07 said:
Wrong and Wrong.

Audi 255s
Miata 275s rear.

No one and I mean no one has stepped up and quantified the Solstice being an overdog. Do it or shut the F up.

Joe, I to do this stuff for a living. The cars that did well at the runoffs happen to be turbos yes. That is exclusive of the the fact that they were well set up and well driven. The Solstice that everyone is saying is such an overdog also tested for 5 days prior to the runoffs. How many test days did you do Joe? Or are you so super human that you didn't need the test time?

Given the proper amount of money and the right driver we could have just as easily won with an NA car. The decisions to reduce tire size was based off of the delta "we" the STAC saw under braking and mid corner. Joe be careful if you choose the start throwing stones.
Click to expand...

Chris, you can’t tell us we are crazy to think the Solstice is too much for STU.

The empirical evidence is that the car runs 5 races this season, 5 days Runoffs testing and then proceeds to slaughter everyone.
The Fall Line effort that has developed the Audi over the last 3 or 4 years and the other pro level prep guys that where at the big dance in force. Granted they are not pro drivers but not slouches either.

You and your shop have proven you can beat anyone but 4 seconds a lap… wow

I came from the SS/touring ranks so I have seen the Z4/CooperS/F430 situations so maybe I have a jaded eye.

I’m still not convinced that STU allowances totally negate big engineering advantages enjoyed by the Solstice. In this case a dedicated FI sports car which has a LOT going for it.

Now that STO is gone & we are all on 245mm tires I don’t think its unreasonable to give this car a little something extra on a spec line if it repeats dominance at next years RO

Carry on
:024:
 
Last edited:
Looks like all the N/A guys are bailing for EP. Since I'm not cutting my windshield frame, EP's not the place for me. STL's out because there's no good under 2.0 liter motors, the four valve lift limits are so low that oe cams are the only option availible, and at 140hp how's that going to be competitve?

Maybe I'll sit next season out, and save my pennies, and think about my options...
 
Matt93SE said:
you've been stalking me, haven't you? B)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm primarily a lurker on the P-board (BTW congratulations and good luck on the new race car.) But I was also approched by both John Norris and Phil Royle about going EP, so let's say there's some local pull too.
 
Thanks. Given the uphill battle I see with making my car fast enough to even finish second around here, it was easier to go EP than to dump $15k into my 240 and still not have a chance to win.

For the history and price of this car, I just couldn't pass it up. Right car at the right time, and EP is quite strong in SOWDIV.

.... Back to STU..
 
It's not a top-shelf build, but it's supposedly *one of* the fastest RX7s in the country. good deal from a racer that lost interest. buying the car and spares for about what it would cost to put a moderately-built engine in my car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top