SCCA STR Class for BoxsterS
12-16-2011, 07:40 PM
#46
My experience didn't corroborate this -- I was only able to get about 0.8 degrees of camber in the front of my Boxster, and as a result I wore the outside shoulders of my fronts more quickly than the inside.
Wheelspin was an issue (albeit not a huge one) on my R-compound-shod Boxster S. I'm not sure how much street tires and the base car's lesser torque would reduce this, though.
I agree with your suspicion that this behavior is endemic to mid-engined cars; both my Boxster and my codriver's Elise offered a choice of low speed push or back end instability in transitions.
We disagree on whether the Boxster would benefit from more front camber. I think it would; if true, increasing front camber would increase its front-end grip and thus its overall speed potential, even if you had to increase rear camber as well to preserve the car's overall handling balance.
Wheelspin was an issue (albeit not a huge one) on my R-compound-shod Boxster S. I'm not sure how much street tires and the base car's lesser torque would reduce this, though.
I agree with your suspicion that this behavior is endemic to mid-engined cars; both my Boxster and my codriver's Elise offered a choice of low speed push or back end instability in transitions.
We disagree on whether the Boxster would benefit from more front camber. I think it would; if true, increasing front camber would increase its front-end grip and thus its overall speed potential, even if you had to increase rear camber as well to preserve the car's overall handling balance.
FWIW, I'm about to retire a 4yr old set of RE01's that show what I'd consider good wear across the tread / shoulders after 100+ runs & 10k street miles from my '97.
No doubt it'd be faster in STR trim, just not enough to become an overdog vs the S2000 or MX-5.
12-16-2011, 11:25 PM
#47
Having said that, the S2000 guys are running almost as much caster as you are, and have superior suspension geometry (double wishbone versus strut), yet are still running camber settings approaching three degrees, so we'll have to agree to disagree that the Boxster's stock front camber is sufficient.
12-17-2011, 08:58 AM
#48
I agree that R-compound experience is not necessarily relevant, thus my saying as much in my post.
Having said that, the S2000 guys are running almost as much caster as you are, and have superior suspension geometry (double wishbone versus strut), yet are still running camber settings approaching three degrees, so we'll have to agree to disagree that the Boxster's stock front camber is sufficient.
Having said that, the S2000 guys are running almost as much caster as you are, and have superior suspension geometry (double wishbone versus strut), yet are still running camber settings approaching three degrees, so we'll have to agree to disagree that the Boxster's stock front camber is sufficient.
12-17-2011, 12:01 PM
#49
Drifting
There was a FastTrack proposal with a catch-all that would have let all 3.2L and smaller Boxsters in STR for regional competitions, but it was withdrawn the next issue. No Boxsters of any year or model are presently permitted into any ST* class.
12-23-2011, 03:51 PM
#50
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
The latest word I heard "on the parking lot" was that the SEB was considering a new ST class that would allow "high powered" cars like the Boxster and Corvette to play with real street tires.
Just what I want - to be classed with a C6 Z06 'vette.
Just what I want - to be classed with a C6 Z06 'vette.
12-23-2011, 11:13 PM
#51
Drifting
Street tires would be a real equalizer of horsepower, though. Z06 really does need r-comps to take advantage of the car's full potential. It's much less of a handicap to a Boxster.
Also, not sure how to read this, but they have still not yet responded to the letter I submitted in May requesting 2.5-3.2L Boxster and Boxster S be classed in STR. This was consistent with the "3.2L NA (NOC)" regional allowance they had in the STR class list at the time, but would allow them for national competition as well. I got an email in Nov saying it would be in an upcoming Fastrack, but still nothing on #4992.
Also, not sure how to read this, but they have still not yet responded to the letter I submitted in May requesting 2.5-3.2L Boxster and Boxster S be classed in STR. This was consistent with the "3.2L NA (NOC)" regional allowance they had in the STR class list at the time, but would allow them for national competition as well. I got an email in Nov saying it would be in an upcoming Fastrack, but still nothing on #4992.
12-24-2011, 08:47 AM
#52
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Street tires would be a real equalizer of horsepower, though. Z06 really does need r-comps to take advantage of the car's full potential. It's much less of a handicap to a Boxster.
Also, not sure how to read this, but they have still not yet responded to the letter I submitted in May requesting 2.5-3.2L Boxster and Boxster S be classed in STR. This was consistent with the "3.2L NA (NOC)" regional allowance they had in the STR class list at the time, but would allow them for national competition as well. I got an email in Nov saying it would be in an upcoming Fastrack, but still nothing on #4992.
Also, not sure how to read this, but they have still not yet responded to the letter I submitted in May requesting 2.5-3.2L Boxster and Boxster S be classed in STR. This was consistent with the "3.2L NA (NOC)" regional allowance they had in the STR class list at the time, but would allow them for national competition as well. I got an email in Nov saying it would be in an upcoming Fastrack, but still nothing on #4992.
The SCCA never responded to my letter either - I thought it was just because they were picking and choosing what they wanted to consider or address. I have little knowledge of the inner workings of the SCCA, but it doesn't seem to be any kind of democracy.
Well, enough complaining - Merry Christmas / Happy Holidays all....
12-24-2011, 01:15 PM
#53
Why are you assuming incompetence on the SCCA's part? The class makeup of STR, for example, went through several iterations before being finalized, in part to ensure that there were no overdogs in the class. If a super ST class was formed, the STAC and the SEB would still carefully weigh whether the C6 Z06 would be too much for the class. Having said that, as sjfehr noted, it would be exceptionally hard to put down 500 hp in a front-engined car on street tires, and the C6 Z06 hasn't proven to be the car to have even in Super Stock.
Letters receive an acknowledgement in email, but not a response. Letters are acknowledged and sometimes responded to in Fastrack after the appropriate advisory committee has reviewed them. KJ has explicitly stated that he's researching the inclusion of the Boxster in ST.
It isn't, and you should be glad for that. The vast majority of people who write classing letters to the SEB are asking rules that benefit their particular cars -- if the SCCA were a pure democracy, getting the Boxster into ST would be a harder sell since so few people campaign them with the SCCA.
It isn't, and you should be glad for that. The vast majority of people who write classing letters to the SEB are asking rules that benefit their particular cars -- if the SCCA were a pure democracy, getting the Boxster into ST would be a harder sell since so few people campaign them with the SCCA.
12-26-2011, 08:01 AM
#54
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I never said that the SCCA was incompetent in any way. Prejudice yes – incompetent, absolutely not!.
Regarding STR, it looks like the top 4 positions at the Solo Nationals were all Honda S2000’s, and only 2 of the top 10 cars were something other than a Honda S2000. It looks like the SCCA really needs some competition to take the fight to the S2000, or STR will be a spec racer class. Of course, spec racer classes can still be quite popular, and Honda is a significant supporter of SCCA racing at multiple levels…
If there is a "Super ST" class, I certainly wouldn’t sell the C6 Z06 short. If you look seriously at the configuration, it is technically a front mid-engine with a rear transaxle, and the weight distribution is not that bad at all. Perhaps its’ success in such a class would depend on what width tire it is allowed. If limited to a 265 tire, perhaps the 986 can compete, but if the class is allowed to run the 305 RS3 – maybe not.
Regarding STR, it looks like the top 4 positions at the Solo Nationals were all Honda S2000’s, and only 2 of the top 10 cars were something other than a Honda S2000. It looks like the SCCA really needs some competition to take the fight to the S2000, or STR will be a spec racer class. Of course, spec racer classes can still be quite popular, and Honda is a significant supporter of SCCA racing at multiple levels…
If there is a "Super ST" class, I certainly wouldn’t sell the C6 Z06 short. If you look seriously at the configuration, it is technically a front mid-engine with a rear transaxle, and the weight distribution is not that bad at all. Perhaps its’ success in such a class would depend on what width tire it is allowed. If limited to a 265 tire, perhaps the 986 can compete, but if the class is allowed to run the 305 RS3 – maybe not.
07-24-2012, 06:46 PM
#55
In case anyone missed this in this month's Fastrack:
Street Touring
- #6234, Boxster in STR. The STAC believes this would negatively impact the competitive balance in the class.
- #6234, Boxster in STR. The STAC believes this would negatively impact the competitive balance in the class.
07-30-2012, 12:54 AM
#58
Instructor
It's hard to make a case when you've got one guy lobbying for it.
Do you really expect us to potentially upset a very popular class because one guy wrote a letter asking for his boxster to get classed?
Do you really expect us to potentially upset a very popular class because one guy wrote a letter asking for his boxster to get classed?
07-30-2012, 06:41 PM
#59
Regarding STR, it looks like the top 4 positions at the Solo Nationals were all Honda S2000’s, and only 2 of the top 10 cars were something other than a Honda S2000. It looks like the SCCA really needs some competition to take the fight to the S2000, or STR will be a spec racer class.
08-03-2012, 01:44 PM
#60
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Thanks for noting this. I believe that Letter 6234 was one that I wrote about a year ago. I had given up looking for a response, and was telling anyone who would listen that the SCCA had just ignored my request. Well, I guess they finally showed me.
It does look like in the past year that the Miatas have gotten their cars sorted and are now quite competetive. Too bad the SCCA want give the 986 an opportunity.
To add insult to injury, in the past year, the SCCA moved the Boxster from BSP to ASP, while the S2000's still compete in BSP. I think I'm done with the SCCA.
It does look like in the past year that the Miatas have gotten their cars sorted and are now quite competetive. Too bad the SCCA want give the 986 an opportunity.
To add insult to injury, in the past year, the SCCA moved the Boxster from BSP to ASP, while the S2000's still compete in BSP. I think I'm done with the SCCA.