SCCA proposed rule changes

[nealb]

Mods, don't know if this is the right place, so move if appropriate

The new SCCA Fast Track proposes to eliminate the goofy wing and aero allowances in ST*

After seeing wings/spoilers/splitters on Miatas at Nats and their performance effect, I don't want to go there at all.

So I've sent my letter to the SEB endorsing the proposed deletion of rule 14.2.F as described below

Delete 14.2.F. Per the STAC: This removes the original allowance for aftermarket body kits, wings, spoilers and other appearance items, whose original purpose (i.e. attract Sport Compact enthusiasts) is no longer relevant, and which a number of competitors were using for performance advantage.

link to send your opinion here -- whether you like it or not, each SCCA member's opinion will count

http://www.sebscca.com/index.php

[jrj512]

Done.

[nomadtrash]

I thought the Street classes were crafted to allow ricer racers with the fart pipe, chrome wheels, body kit, and big wing somewhere to autocross and not be placed directly in A-Mod. However, now that serious competitors have exploited the intention of the rules and constructed purpose built race cars to the limits of the allowances, the average ricer racer might as well be in A-mod anyway.

[jrj512]

Wow, this argument just keeps going and going...

http://sccaforums.com/forums/1/416969/ShowThread.aspx

[altiain]

Sent in my letter. No wings for me, thank you.

[OZMDD]

I'd vote to ban all wings but these:

[Robert]

I don't think they need to ban all wings, some guys like wings. A single element under 4 sq ft. wing will make very little down force at autocross speeds. More than 1 element then you can get creative and make real down force at low speeds.

If you ban all wings the guy with a small dealer installed wing gets sent off to Street Mod, but a guy like me gets to keep his big ass factory wing (that does little).

No dog in the fight, I don't see me going to ST anytime soon, so no letter from me.

I did enjoy playing with aero when I was in STS2,

Owner of the original big ass STS2 (now STS) wing.

[nealb]

Robert

the buzz I heard at Blytheville was the most likely approach would be to allow any OEM part from a manufacturer

so, you can keep what came stock on your car, or put some other Honday OEM spoiler or wing on it

thinking as explained to me was that OEMs do appearance stuff only and don't want anything that would add drag and hurt fuel economy

and just got a form email from SCCA saying my input had been considered by STAC and the STAC had sent their recommendation to SEB

so time to send stuff to SEB

[miata_racer]

Neal I agree....the stupid $$$ being spent on $600+ apr GTC200 wings in a ST class on street tires is retarded. We need to curb this shit now.

[hancheyb]

This one has certainly generated some letters. I've had to read them! Generally the feeling is that while no one has done it yet, people are starting to develop aero that really does work. The general feeling is that real aero (expensive) would not be good for anyone.

[Robert]

Neal, I think it's good that they will allow any OEM wing. Are they going to allow the removal of OEM wings also?

miata_racer, What's another $600 when people are spending +5K for "stock" motors and +4K shock packages on a 3K car? I do understand people wanting to limit how effective wings are, and removing them all together may be the easiest way, but the cost of off the shelf wings is not a good reason. The wing I had was under $200.

[nealb]

that's the way I see it

another escalation that never fit the intent of the class

kill it now before there is a bunch of embedded base

yes, I can get with people in the know (like Dr Bob) and build/buy a wing and a splitter that meet the letter of the rules, but then it becomes another "must have" along with super light wheels, "the" tire (whatever that is these days), $5000 shocks, seats that save a few pounds, etc

we already have a lot of expensive items in ST_ and don't need another

and I think it is clear that even strick adherence to the letter of the current rule will have benefit

as has been pointed out in another forum, you set the car up really loose so it rotates in the slow stuff, then the aero plants the tail at speed

lots of testing to get it right, but people will

[nealb]

Neal, I think it's good that they will allow any OEM wing. Are they going to allow the removal of OEM wings also?

don't know Robert

it was speculation or guessing from a guy who seems to have a finger on the pulse but the logic made sense to me at the time

maybe wishful thinking too

[hancheyb]

don't know Robert

it was speculation or guessing from a guy who seems to have a finger on the pulse but the logic made sense to me at the time

maybe wishful thinking too

Hey guys, I'm actually on the STAC and yes, there will be more and there already was an announcement on wording about removal of OEM wings being OK.

"Modify 14.2.C to read as follows (ref. 10-127):
“C. Factory rub strips, emblems, mud flaps, wings, bolt on front valance lips/spoilers, and fog lights may be removed.
Fog lights that are an integral part of a main headlight or turn signal may not be removed”"


Brian Hanchey

[ken o]

Can I remove fog lights yet?

[Robert]

you set the car up really loose so it rotates in the slow stuff, then the aero plants the tail at speed

Very true, it's what makes aero so cool at AX speeds. Not sure I would say really loose just loose for the slow stuff, 5sq. ft. will only do so much.

I am surprised it's taken this long for aero in ST to catch on, and/or get outlawed.