Thinking about racing NASA events.......
06-16-2010, 10:27 PM
#136
Rennlist Member
I'd love to make this event but the Summit point PCA race is the same weekend. Hope the Ct. stock boys make it this year with the newly paved track and local entertainment.
the Glen sounds good to me. I imagine NASA-MA will be represented as well 
06-16-2010, 10:45 PM
#139
Drifting
Well, it looks like the D/E boys are going to take the NASA plunge with me..............
Coooooool...........
In all honesty, I agree with Scott, the HP/Weight requirements sound more reasonable than just some vague rules left at the discretion of the famous engine shops.......
Coooooool...........
In all honesty, I agree with Scott, the HP/Weight requirements sound more reasonable than just some vague rules left at the discretion of the famous engine shops.......
Frankly Paolo, I think your comment is definitely ill-informed. There are not that many vague rules in PCA Stock Classes. Quite the contrary. What's vague is everything that is not specified in the simple hp/weight ratio quotient. I for one, am very interested to see how the different classification basis affects results. Hopefully there are more than 2 cars in GTS2 at the LRP race.
06-16-2010, 11:09 PM
#142
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Frankly Paolo, I think your comment is definitely ill-informed. There are not that many vague rules in PCA Stock Classes. Quite the contrary. What's vague is everything that is not specified in the simple hp/weight ratio quotient. I for one, am very interested to see how the different classification basis affects results. Hopefully there are more than 2 cars in GTS2 at the LRP race.
And I am still slow......what does that tell you?
That is not a very nice way to talk about Streak......
06-16-2010, 11:21 PM
#143
Rennlist Member
I attended Summit for two years, was told the pavement was fixed both times, was told there were hotties, etc..... all of this proved to be false. Summit for the Hyperfest, yes, there is "shine" galore, fistfights with drunk locals that have no teeth to lose, and (well, YMMV) "girls" to gawk at but the PCA Summit race? Low attendance and a bar that scans your license to steal your identity at a later date... nah.
06-16-2010, 11:38 PM
#144
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great theory, but in the real world there are wilda$$ed drivers in every class of car. Back in my NASA days there was a certain GTS series director who was totally unpredictable, and known to throw banzai moves on a regular basis. His BMW was highly prepared and probably in the $100K range.
We've got real close racing in NASA-MA. Fun atmosphere on and off track. And BobT... I WILL get my record back this weekend
06-17-2010, 12:02 AM
#145
Rennlist Member
Frankly Paolo, I think your comment is definitely ill-informed. There are not that many vague rules in PCA Stock Classes. Quite the contrary. What's vague is everything that is not specified in the simple hp/weight ratio quotient. I for one, am very interested to see how the different classification basis affects results. Hopefully there are more than 2 cars in GTS2 at the LRP race.
This would be a proper NASA GTS car:
http://www.topgear.com/uk/photos/aud...lery?imageNo=1
Just tune the engine to whatever class you wish...
06-17-2010, 01:29 AM
#146
[QUOTE=magnetic1;7663779]Olivier or Doug did not have a $100k BMW... if you are speaking about NASA-MA.
Steve, PM sent. OK, maybe not $100K, but not exactly a low budget banger either, eh?
Steve, PM sent. OK, maybe not $100K, but not exactly a low budget banger either, eh?
06-17-2010, 01:35 AM
#147
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-17-2010, 07:46 AM
#148
Rennlist Member
Bastard!! I kinda of figured that. I will take a shot at it in our next race and same with Tbolt. Good luck on your weekend.
06-17-2010, 08:44 AM
#149
Rennlist Member
I've only been racing with PCA since last season, but I'm already getting really tired of all the f'ing cheating talk. For crying out loud, in order to rescure morale and to put an end to the finger pointing, why don't we get the f'ing dynos to the PCA events.
No need to change the stock and prepared rules or overcomplicate everything, just make sure everyone conforms to the HP/weight ratios that are published int he rule book. For example, my car is a 1995 993. The rule book states min weight is 3170 and HP is 270 with a performance index of 11.74. I had my car dyno'd at summit point last month with the official NASA dynojet that was there (in preparation for running in GTS3). My car put down 254 hp at the wheels. Consequently, for parity, I should be able to drop some ballast and run at 2982 lbs.
Same thing would apply to let's say (hypothetically speaking of course) a 911 RSA in same class with stated horsepower of 247, 2910 lbs, and PI of 11.78. With headers and exhaust (legal as per the rules), these cars generally run close to that stated horsepower at the wheels or even above it. Consequently, they would run close to the stated weight and keep the same performance index. No need to change the rules and force people to reclass their cars, just adjust weight to maintain the stated performance index that is listed in the rule book for each car. If your engine starts getting tired, drop ballast; if you get a Dan Jacobs or Peter Dawe rebuild, you add some ballast....Problem solved (no more whining).
This is our club, why can't we get some momentum to get this done????? Who in their right mind would be opposed to this???? Can we start another thread to get the letter campaign going???
No need to change the stock and prepared rules or overcomplicate everything, just make sure everyone conforms to the HP/weight ratios that are published int he rule book. For example, my car is a 1995 993. The rule book states min weight is 3170 and HP is 270 with a performance index of 11.74. I had my car dyno'd at summit point last month with the official NASA dynojet that was there (in preparation for running in GTS3). My car put down 254 hp at the wheels. Consequently, for parity, I should be able to drop some ballast and run at 2982 lbs.
Same thing would apply to let's say (hypothetically speaking of course) a 911 RSA in same class with stated horsepower of 247, 2910 lbs, and PI of 11.78. With headers and exhaust (legal as per the rules), these cars generally run close to that stated horsepower at the wheels or even above it. Consequently, they would run close to the stated weight and keep the same performance index. No need to change the rules and force people to reclass their cars, just adjust weight to maintain the stated performance index that is listed in the rule book for each car. If your engine starts getting tired, drop ballast; if you get a Dan Jacobs or Peter Dawe rebuild, you add some ballast....Problem solved (no more whining).
This is our club, why can't we get some momentum to get this done????? Who in their right mind would be opposed to this???? Can we start another thread to get the letter campaign going???
Last edited by ninjabones; 06-17-2010 at 09:26 AM.
06-17-2010, 08:47 AM
#150
Rennlist Member
I attended Summit for two years, was told the pavement was fixed both times, was told there were hotties, etc..... all of this proved to be false. Summit for the Hyperfest, yes, there is "shine" galore, fistfights with drunk locals that have no teeth to lose, and (well, YMMV) "girls" to gawk at but the PCA Summit race? Low attendance and a bar that scans your license to steal your identity at a later date... nah.
http://www.loudouni.com/business/201...county-america