New NASA Rule: Stop those turbos!

[Greg Collier]

Guys, keep in mind the Dr. Greenbaum is running a SRT "TURBO", he's totally aware of the plight, being in the same boat. I've even heard rumors he might be driving an STI in the near future that would make him AWD too, (but what do I know)? I've had many a discussion with him after a race about his wanting a bigger platform (turbo) for his car. I think what's going to happen in the end is that everyone will dyno or GPS and do a weight to HP ratio in the higher hp classes. I think that the GPS will be the only "fair" way to go and that's why he did so much research with it during the Nationals...

 

[Slow old poop]

Guys, keep in mind the Dr. Greenbaum is running a SRT "TURBO", he's totally aware of the plight, being in the same boat. I've even heard rumors he might be driving an STI in the near future that would make him AWD too, (but what do I know)? I've had many a discussion with him after a race about his wanting a bigger platform (turbo) for his car. I think what's going to happen in the end is that everyone will dyno or GPS and do a weight to HP ratio in the higher hp classes. I think that the GPS will be the only "fair" way to go and that's why he did so much research with it during the Nationals...

He seems to be a very fair guy. Nevertheless, Mike (StealthTT) and I know when we are being shat upon, or when we see the potential for being shat upon, and we felt the need to speak up before such shatting might happen. What the Good Doctor is doing is best for the sport; what we are doing is watching our back. Or, as Mike so eloquently put it, "If you don't speak up at the opportune time, you can't cry later."

Rich

 

[Greg Collier]

He seems to be a very fair guy. Nevertheless, Mike (StealthTT) and I know when we are being shat upon, or when we see the potential for being shat upon, and we felt the need to speak up before such shatting might happen. What the Good Doctor is doing is best for the sport; what we are doing is watching our back. Or, as Mike so eloquently put it, "If you don't speak up at the opportune time, you can't cry later."

Rich

Nobody is saying don't speak up... I'm just saying that Greg (a turbo guy, and a AWD want-a-be) is going to be realistic when it comes down to it. If he drove a Z06 I think it would be more of an SCCA consciousness, and we all know were that leads to! WTF

 

[asian312]

So the basic plan is to have all cars with upgraded turbo's provide dyno sheets
- base classification based on power to weight ratio (no points assessed for engine/drivetrain)
- sounds like they will settle on a particular type of dyno to avoid calibration differances and engine\chassis dyno

Question: Does PTW ratio apply differently for base lighter and heavier cars?
Example: Based on manufacture specs for simplicity, we see this:

Miata: 2299lbs / 140HP = 16.4
S2000: 2809lbs / 240HP = 11.7

So the Miata would need to either increase HP to 196HP or loose 661lbs to make an 11.7 PWT ratio. It seems that decreasing the weight would achive the goal to meet the S2000, but the weight differance would also affect other performance aspects of the car. How can this be accounted for?

 

[stealthTT]

So the basic plan is to have all cars with upgraded turbo's provide dyno sheets
- base classification based on power to weight ratio (no points assessed for engine/drivetrain)
- sounds like they will settle on a particular type of dyno to avoid calibration differances and engine\chassis dyno

Question: Does PTW ratio apply differently for base lighter and heavier cars?
Example: Based on manufacture specs for simplicity, we see this:

Miata: 2299lbs / 140HP = 16.4
S2000: 2809lbs / 240HP = 11.7

So the Miata would need to either increase HP to 196HP or loose 661lbs to make an 11.7 PWT ratio. It seems that decreasing the weight would achive the goal to meet the S2000, but the weight differance would also affect other performance aspects of the car. How can this be accounted for?

They claim they address the advantage of being lightweight in the classification of the car. They say they take into account the relevant stock measurements. Here's some I can remember from the post by Greg Greenbaum:
weight to power ratio, curb weight, tire width, aero, proven performance, etc.

I think they do a pretty good job to figure out all the cars as well as they do. Then every year, they re-evaluate and also have the task of classing all the new cars they think people will race. Then someone comes in and wants to race a Trailblazer SS.

The S2000 was underclassed in my opinion because they considered the limited powerband a bigger hindrance than was proven on the track. They've since hinted that they will bump the S2000 a class or assess points. I would assume this re-classification would fall under the "proven performance" category because of re-consideration of what was thought to be a detrimental powerband. A honda S2000 with a big wing, wide tires, and suspension in the hands of a capable driver was faster than modified ZO6's. That had several people at the nationals going WTF

 

[asian312]

A Trailblazer SS? Guess racing is racing....did they let it compete?

 

[stealthTT]

A Trailblazer SS? Guess racing is racing....did they let it compete?

It ran HPDE's, but I think the owner was politely asked to not run in TT or PT. I think they were worried about safety. Just mathematically it's scary to think about a 4800lb truck going wheel to wheel in a run group with a <2000lb miata (not to mention the ride height and bumpers). Just doing some rough collision analysis math on my calculator, the change in velocity and resultant G-forces imposed on the driver for the lightweight car would be .

I believe they'd call that a PUNT INTO NEXT WEEK.

Oh man, I'd have scary dreams the night before racing of sitting sideways on the track after a spin, trying to get the car restarted, while watching a 4800lb Blazer laying 4 stripes of tire trying to brake as it beared down on me at 100mph.

 

[drivemusicnow]

true, however there are run groups (none that I would be in) that put 3000lbs cars on track with 1000lb formula/oversized go-karts. That is the same danger, however not quite as extreme.

As far as the rules go, I think we'll be okay. Just have to wait and see, and like I said before, I'm sure there are ways to work around the rules too.

 

[Slow old poop]

A Trailblazer SS? Guess racing is racing....did they let it compete?

This is our old pal, Rudy, from the 3000GT world. He's a NASA muckety-muck instructor, wealthy beyond measure. This particular Trailblazer has a new Corvette LT6 (or whatever the new one is) transplant, making 500 hp or so. He claims it is vastly superior to the Porsche Cayenne, handles flat, and goes like stink. He ran it in HPDE at Road America.

He plans to run it in One Lap next year.

Rich

 

[GSTinCO]

This is our old pal, Rudy, from the 3000GT world. He's a NASA muckety-muck instructor, wealthy beyond measure. This particular Trailblazer has a new Corvette LT6 (or whatever the new one is) transplant, making 500 hp or so. He claims it is vastly superior to the Porsche Cayenne, handles flat, and goes like stink. He ran it in HPDE at Road America.

He plans to run it in One Lap next year.

Rich

That would be crazy. Hopefully he swapped the suspension or upgraded or else I couldn't see it keepping up with the porsche SUV (if thats what you want to call it). Hopefully the rule changes work out for you guys, it would be nice not to get assesed points for a turbo upgrade I'm sure.

 

[Slow old poop]

That would be crazy. Hopefully he swapped the suspension or upgraded or else I couldn't see it keepping up with the porsche SUV (if thats what you want to call it). Hopefully the rule changes work out for you guys, it would be nice not to get assesed points for a turbo upgrade I'm sure.

As far as I know, it's stock except for the Vette motor. He claims it got great reviews in the Yurpean press, and blows the doors off all other "sport' SUVs, like the Porsche and whatnot. With Rudy, though, you never know...

Rich

 

[GSTinCO]

Like said before I sure wouldn't want to see that thing comin' at me layin on the brakes or not.

 

[stealthTT]

http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/suvs/0509_chevrolet_trailblazer_ss/

"Despite new springs, dampers, antiroll bars, and the one-inch-lower ride height, the TrailBlazer SS still bobs around too much on its suspension; Chevrolet apparently was unwilling to suffer the stiff ride necessary to achieve BMW X5 levels of body control. The steering is also depressingly mediocre, despite a faster rack and other new components. Saving the dynamics are the 50-series Goodyear Eagle RS-A tires, which are very progressive at the limit and ride well.

We're also impressed with the brakes (four vented discs), which put in a fade-free performance in our time at the track. "

 

[asian312]

Great work on the NASA forums (Slow and Stealth). Looks like quite a healthy revision coming in 2007. Just some updates.

- ECU rules are changing anyway. And, you are correct that with the larger turbos, you will get re-classed with all of your engine mods in place, so no points for any of them.

- Hmmm, I am SURE somewhere Greg said camber is free (no points) in 2007.

- Yes, brake pads will be free

Only concern is this that TT is turning away from being a stepping stone into basically a money/mod race.

 

[drivemusicnow]

Great work on the NASA forums (Slow and Stealth). Looks like quite a healthy revision coming in 2007. Just some updates.



Only concern is this that TT is turning away from being a stepping stone into basically a money/mod race.

Yeah the EVO guys started freaking out about the ECU mod, because a generic reflash was costing them the same # of points as a full standalone.

Makes sense though, While a full standalone does cost more, and work better, Its ability to make power is only slightly above that of a very experienced tuner using the stock ECU.

I think the extra classes will have me take a look at maybe doing a few fewer modificaitons than I had originally planned to the suspension and engine. We'll see though.

 

[asian312]

Makes sense though, While a full standalone does cost more, and work better, Its ability to make power is only slightly above that of a very experienced tuner using the stock ECU.

I'm not familiar with how the EVO's ECU are done, but if it's anything like DSMLink compared to AEM then I see Greg's point. Although DSMLink requires a different EPROM, it's still a base ECU. And we all know the potential of that unit as compared to just a chip.

I think 2007 will clear alot of the gray areas such as 'reflash' or differance between a coilover compared to a purpose built race suspension. Speaking of which, where do the turned JICs from RRE fall in the pecking order? Are they just classified as a +7 coilover?

 

[stealthTT]

I'm not familiar with how the EVO's ECU are done, but if it's anything like DSMLink compared to AEM then I see Greg's point. Although DSMLink requires a different EPROM, it's still a base ECU. And we all know the potential of that unit as compared to just a chip.

I think 2007 will clear alot of the gray areas such as 'reflash' or differance between a coilover compared to a purpose built race suspension. Speaking of which, where do the turned JICs from RRE fall in the pecking order? Are they just classified as a +7 coilover?

A purpose built race suspension is determined by the cost. If the cost is, I believe, $750 per corner, it is considered a full race suspension. JIC's are still coilovers in their eyes, even though they've been optimized and are highly adjustable. Ground controls, etc. with simple struts get the short end of the point stick under the 2006 rules.

I love that I'm going to be able to tune my car to a specific horsepower to fall into almost whatever class I want per the new turbo upgrade rules. I could make tons of torque with a low horsepower peak using a programmable boost controller, timing corrections, etc. I could make NA or Supercharger type power delivery maximizing my average horsepower under a similar peak horsepower. That's what AMS did this year. They're power delivery was very linear due to the AEM tuning to keep them under the 500hp cap for TTU.

Now I just want to know how they're measuring horsepower with GPS. I made a post on the NASA forums:
http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=74529#74529

 

[asian312]

Sweet deal. Can't wait to play with the new rules.

I love that I'm going to be able to tune my car to a specific horsepower to fall into almost whatever class I want per the new turbo upgrade rules. I could make tons of torque with a low horsepower peak using a programmable boost controller, timing corrections, etc. I could make NA or Supercharger type power delivery maximizing my average horsepower under a similar peak horsepower. That's what AMS did this year. They're power delivery was very linear due to the AEM tuning to keep them under the 500hp cap for TTU.

I second you on that. 14B, DSMLink, and 210HP here I come!

 

[Caithness]

210hp= A torque curve that slopes from 310 lbft at 3500 rpm to 160 lbft at 7000 and a horsepower curve that's a straight horizontal line in that same range . Just a good electronic boost controller and basic fuel and timing control and it's easy as pie.