wanna911

I think you would be illegal for TT/ST1 unless you use avg Hp method. You need to be at 500 whp exactly for 3250 lbs With slicks (if the mod penalty is still .50) avg hp will bring your Hp classing number down by 10-15 hp likely.

if you have the original Dyno file I can send you the printout with the exact numerical values you would need.

I want to make COTA, but got rear ended doing TT last weekend. Not sure how much damage yet. A Corvette spun in front of me and I had to slow down because he crossed the track twice. A clown in a garage built kit car who had earlier passed under red and divebombed on first green ignored all of the dirt and debris and hit me at full speed right in the back. If it wasn't a pissant little car, mine would be totaled for sure.

Thundermoose

Should be good under average hp calc. As mentioned get the file in 50 rpm table.

z06801

I hate hearing that, hopefully it doesn't turn out to bad and you can get it back on the track. I knew I was close with the slicks. I should get it dynoed again as I think it's down from that a bit now. I have never tried the A7s, might actually be faster with them as opposed to the takes off Pirellis I've been getting. I'll try to find the file.

z06801

I know I was good before for ST1/TT1 was unaware of the new rules, I'll go talk to JDP Motorsports and see if I can get the file.

Thundermoose

I think A7's might actually be better than slicks for TT. They come up to temp pretty quick.

wanna911

Maybe not for COTA....?

At VIR you get can slicks up to temp in one full lap. All the steady state turns at COTA should build heat nicely. 2nd lap should be good to go.

Kevin Fennell

Back to the topic at hand. Does anyone think it is fair that a small high revving engine that uses low boost gets penalized, when a small high revving engine that uses high compression and $$$$$ does not?

wanna911

Fair, lol. See the rear engine penalty they came up with a few years back. Fair is irrelevantant.

They unjustly categored all FI cars. Even though hp for hp, NA is most always faster. Every year there is some rule of this nature. This is tame by recent standards.

mark kibort

i was involved in the early days with nasa and helping them with the HP/weight ratio classifications and rules what do you think is unfair about the rules.
its a way of HP averaging.
interesting, if you ever look at HP curves, even ones that are very broad, they all seem to produce average HP of near 92% of max. (based on gear spacing)

the good thing about the rules is that they finally almost completely got rid of the effects of "more torque than HP" as factor, numerically, which had NO significance and was only used before that confusion was corrected.

mark kibort

i didnt see the rule changes on the link that show any unfairness, but i did find a rule change that was unfair.. over 4.95 Liters, and you need to run in GTS5. how unfair of that, when you have 370rwhp, weight 3000lbs and you dont get to run with the CUP cars with over 400rwhp and 2800lbs. real fair NASA ! just when they start making me think they get it, then they do something like this!

wanna911

essentially they gave low to mid range revving NA cars about a 50 lb or 10hp advantage. That doesn't make sense for upper classes as you can tune big displacement v8's to have more torque than hp too. Limit revs to 7k and you'e golden. This does screw over the SC lotus cars though. However boost can be tuned by rpm so the smaller sample size helps. But is biased to na.

docwyte

What's unfair is them deleting an entire class! Everyone has to play under that same average HP rule, so no, its not unfair.

wanna911

But its not the same rule, it's different calculations. Less egregious than deleting classes but nevertheless biased and unfair to some, namely the OP.

docwyte

The 250 rpm calculations aren't fair to me either. It gives me "more power" compared to the old 500rpm calculations. It's not unfair, all of us have to deal with it. There are always going to be some cars that are more favorable than others, this isn't Spec Racing.

wanna911

You are missing the point. Some cars have 8 data points to average vs 3. That is a discrepancy.