Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 38

Thread: STR is on the way

  1. #1

    Default STR is on the way

    The SEB has approved a new supplemental class as recommended by the STAC, to be added to Appendix A as “Supplemental
    Street Touring Class R” (Roadster), for competition in 2010.

    The approval comes after considerable member support to expand the ST category to include a class for modern roadsters.

    While many cars are eligible, member feedback helped establish the Honda S2000 and Mazda Miata as the class’ performance
    targets. Allowances will be tailored for eligible vehicles to establish performance parity.

    The class will have the following requirements and restrictions:
    - Two seat sports cars
    - Engine displacements up to 2.8-liters
    - No forced induction

    Eligible vehicles will include, but are not limited to:
    - All STS eligible vehicles per the requirements and restrictions, plus
    - Honda S2000
    - Mazda Miata
    - Mazda MX-5 Miata
    - Toyota MR2
    - Toyota MR2 – Spyder
    - BMW Z3 non-M
    - BMW Z4 non-M
    - Mazda RX-7 non-turbo
    - Porsche Boxster
    - Porsche 968 (removed)
    - Porsche 944 non-turbo
    - Pontiac Solstice
    - Saturn Sky

    Excluded vehicles due to performance potential:
    - Lotus cars

    Additional class notes include:
    - Tire Allowances (add to 14.3):
    - AWD – 225mm
    - 2WD – 245mm
    - Wheel Allowances (add to 14.4):
    - AWD – 7.5”
    - 2WD – 8.5”
    - Catalytic Converters (add to 14.10.E):
    - Same as ST, STS allowance.
    - Limited Slip Differentials (add to 14.10.K):
    - STR: Only standard LSDs allowed OR Allowance same as STX, STU

    The class will run with supplemental status in 2010, meaning that no National Champion will be crowned. Should the class
    show considerable interest, and meet participation requirements, it may be approved for full National status in future years.

    The SEB is seeking input on the following items. Members should send any input on these items to [email protected].

    1) OE LSD vs. Aftermarket LSD: All of the target vehicles are available with Limited Slip Differentials (or electronic
    equivalents) as standard equipment in some optional configuration. Restricting all cars to OE limited slips would reduce
    SCCA Fastrack News June 2009 Page 22
    costs. That said, not all factory LSDs are equal and an argument can be made that, for reasons of parity, aftermarket
    parts should be allowed.
    2) Inclusion of 2006-present Mazda MX-5: Is this car appropriate given the desired performance level of the class?

    http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastra...-june-solo.pdf

  2. #2

    Default

    I hope they include the NC.

  3. #3
    Obnoxious at any speed altiain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Far south Dallas (Austin)
    Posts
    10,458

    Default

    If they include the NC, it will probably become the car to have for the class. It is the lightest and best developed chassis that can run the maximum tire size.

    Ironically, a bone stock S2000 CR would be illegal for the class, since the car comes with 255/40-17 rear tires.
    Iain

    "We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing." - George Bernard Shaw

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by altiain View Post
    If they include the NC, it will probably become the car to have for the class. It is the lightest and best developed chassis that can run the maximum tire size.

    Ironically, a bone stock S2000 CR would be illegal for the class, since the car comes with 255/40-17 rear tires.
    I agree that the NC will be a great car for this class. A good 245 street tire is a lot of grip for this car and with a modified suspension you get rid of the big problems that the stock NC had.

    Ironically, nobody forces a CR driver to run 255 tires on the back of the car. A bone stock CR already has a place to play, ask Mr. Maxcy he won the Houston tour in one (great driving Stu!!!). After driving a few well prepped S2000s I think They shouldn't have a problem keeping up with the NC. You just need a very good driver.
    Thomas
    V-to-the-Dub

  5. #5

    Default

    I think the 2003 Club Sport Miata will actually be the car to have. The ST allowances improve the power a lot, it's fairly light weight in places that aren't touched by the ST rules and will take a fairly wide tire with a legal fender roll.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by modernbeat View Post
    I think the 2003 Club Sport Miata will actually be the car to have. The ST allowances improve the power a lot, it's fairly light weight in places that aren't touched by the ST rules and will take a fairly wide tire with a legal fender roll.
    Would the NC's increased braking (with ABS) and extra power (also benifits from ST allowances) override any weight savings offered by the 2003 CS?

  7. #7
    Obnoxious at any speed altiain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Far south Dallas (Austin)
    Posts
    10,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by modernbeat View Post
    I think the 2003 Club Sport Miata will actually be the car to have. The ST allowances improve the power a lot, it's fairly light weight in places that aren't touched by the ST rules and will take a fairly wide tire with a legal fender roll.
    I'm not sure that the Club Sport will be any more of a threat in STR than it was in C Stock. I'm not even sure why it would be a better choice than a '99 Sport or PEP.

    I'm pretty sure a 2003 Club Sport is still heavier than a minimum option '99 Sport, even with the soft top delete. The '99 Sport has the same fender clearance as a Club Sport and a better engine (no VVTi).

    The biggest problem with the NB chassis is going to be the inability to fit 245 tires with the right rolling diameter. Now if Bridgestone or someone decides to offer a 245/35-15, all bets are out the window, but I'll take an NC on 245s over an NB on 225s. I also think the NC will have better power/weight and torque/weight ratios than an NB when fully developed for the class, and there's no question that the NC has better brakes.
    Last edited by altiain; 05-29-2009 at 01:37 PM.
    Iain

    "We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing." - George Bernard Shaw

  8. #8

    Default

    This sounds like a fun class.
    "Racing makes heroin addiction look like a vague longing for something salty" - Peter Egan

  9. #9

    Default

    Yay, I can run my miata in STR instead of CSP now!


    Not that it matters with the preps on my car.....
    94 Miata R package RPF1 195 RS-R RB FSB FCM Bilstein Ebay Coilover 550/350
    91 Civic Si Daily Beater


    "Its more fun to drive a slow car fast, than it is to drive a fast car slowly".

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by altiain View Post
    I'm not sure that the Club Sport will be any more of a threat in STR than it was in C Stock. I'm not even sure why it would be a better choice than a '99 Sport or PEP.

    I'm pretty sure a 2003 Club Sport is still heavier than a minimum option '99 Sport, even with the soft top delete. The '99 Sport has the same fender clearance as a Club Sport and a better engine (no VVTi).

    The biggest problem with the NB chassis is going to be the inability to fit 245 tires with the right rolling diameter. Now if Bridgestone or someone decides to offer a 245/35-15, all bets are out the window, but I'll take an NC on 245s over an NB on 225s. I also think the NC will have better power/weight and torque/weight ratios than an NB when fully developed for the class, and there's no question that the NC has better brakes.
    I'm with Iain on this other than the '99 sport engine. It's going to be a matter of time before the Megasquirt guys are able to control the VVTi and they are already fitting them in 90-93 ECU boxes. The higher compression and VVTI (once controlled) will be an advantage over the better head design of the '99-00 sport. Guess what engine the top CSP guys are using.

    The extra torque, bigger tires, better brakes and ABS will definitely override the weight advantage of the NB. Non prepped NCs are probably around 2400 even and they will definitely save some weight in STR trim.
    Thomas
    V-to-the-Dub

  11. #11

    Default

    I think it will be a NC, S2000 battle.
    VW Bug in running shoes
    M Porcupine sedan
    M Porcupine coupe
    Crusty old e46 beater
    Battery Powered appliance car

  12. #12

    Default

    I think S2000. Know one for sale?

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by altiain View Post
    If they include the NC, it will probably become the car to have for the class. It is the lightest and best developed chassis that can run the maximum tire size.

    Ironically, a bone stock S2000 CR would be illegal for the class, since the car comes with 255/40-17 rear tires.
    Why does it matter what size stock tires are? Would it just follow the rules of the class?

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ken o View Post
    Why does it matter what size stock tires are? Would it just follow the rules of the class?
    I think Bone Stock were the key words.

  15. #15

    Default But not the Cockster?

    Quote Originally Posted by jrj512 View Post
    .
    .
    .
    - Porsche Boxster
    .
    .
    .
    Hummmm... the Boxster but not the Cayman. Same engine, same transmission, same lack of LSD. Wonder why they don't allow the 2.7 Cayman? Too bad, as it sounds like it could be a fun class.
    "That which does not kill us, just makes us madder"
    Cletus Nietzsche (Friedrich's half-brother on his sister's side)

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
    Hummmm... the Boxster but not the Cayman. Same engine, same transmission, same lack of LSD. Wonder why they don't allow the 2.7 Cayman? Too bad, as it sounds like it could be a fun class.
    Quote Originally Posted by jrj512 View Post
    Eligible vehicles will include, but are not limited to

  17. #17
    Obnoxious at any speed altiain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Far south Dallas (Austin)
    Posts
    10,458

    Default

    Yup. The way I read that, the 2.7L Cayman is eligible for the class. The only specifically excluded vehicle is the Elise/Exige.
    Iain

    "We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing." - George Bernard Shaw

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ken o View Post
    I think S2000. Know one for sale?
    Trade you mine for your M3 plus a pool table.
    VW Bug in running shoes
    M Porcupine sedan
    M Porcupine coupe
    Crusty old e46 beater
    Battery Powered appliance car

  19. #19

    Default

    Looks like the NCs are in and 255 tires on 9in. wheels. Also the 350Z and after market diffs.

    I wounder how much tire you can get under an MR2 Spider? 2195 lbs. stock!
    Last edited by Robert; 07-20-2009 at 05:01 PM.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
    Hummmm... the Boxster but not the Cayman. Same engine, same transmission, same lack of LSD. Wonder why they don't allow the 2.7 Cayman? Too bad, as it sounds like it could be a fun class.
    Also excluded the 987 (05 to present) Boxsters as well.
    Bobby

    RED RULES!
    90 Miata, 04 Rubicon, 05 Boxster

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •