Jump to content

For Your Consideration - A new look at rules


Recommended Posts

Serious question to OP, 
Since the rules would be "open" and no assigned car list, could I race a Spec Racer Ford with a light bar and tail lamps and other required safety items on 200TW tires? 
What would be the plan for a "Max" vehicle cost? Could I show up with a Porsche GT3 and just detune the crap out of it? 
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dwendel said:

Serious question to OP, 
Since the rules would be "open" and no assigned car list, could I race a Spec Racer Ford with a light bar and tail lamps and other required safety items on 200TW tires? 
What would be the plan for a "Max" vehicle cost? Could I show up with a Porsche GT3 and just detune the crap out of it? 
 

 

GT2 RS with the new @Racing Radios connection harness here I come! 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hotchkis23 said:

Lost me at the "stock suspension mounting locations(slotted towers ok)"  That is a joke that panders to one specific model that is very popular.  Didn't the individual that created this start off by racing e30's?

I did find that odd.

 

And wouldn't camber plates be legal under the proposed rules? I'd run camber plates before slotting strut towers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dwendel said:

Serious question to OP, 
Since the rules would be "open" and no assigned car list, could I race a Spec Racer Ford with a light bar and tail lamps and other required safety items on 200TW tires? 
What would be the plan for a "Max" vehicle cost? Could I show up with a Porsche GT3 and just detune the crap out of it? 
 

 

thats why lots of these race in WRL... i mean.. the car is technically all stock.

download.jpg

Edited by MoparBoyy
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, hotchkis23 said:

Lost me at the "stock suspension mounting locations(slotted towers ok)"  That is a joke that panders to one specific model that is very popular.  Didn't the individual that created this start off by racing e30's?

Also rx7s....  or any macstrut car really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, forcing our car to use the stock suspension mounting points will cost Real money, we re-drilled a hole to get camber, Going back to stock points would require aftermarket adjustable control arms.

And that’s just the front, the rear would require a replacement sub frame and adjustable control arms.

 

Horsepower, 75 per 1000, is that rear wheel horsepower? With or without Driver? With or without fuel? With or without China cobra rim copies?

Edited by Team Infiniti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Team Infiniti said:

Honestly, forcing our car to use the stock suspension mounting points will cost Real money, we re-drilled a hole to get camber, Going back to stock points would require aftermarket adjustable control arms.

And that’s just the front, the rear would require a replacement sub frame and adjustable control arms.

You'd need to build a Miata (or similar lightweight, RWD platform) under these rules like everybody else to be competitive, lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Snorman said:

You'd need to build a Miata (or similar lightweight, RWD platform) under these rules like everybody else to be competitive, lol. 

Trying to build a light  e30 With infiniti power and BMW automatic transmission, lots of hours trying to build something Within the current structure that becomes irrelevant in a couple of years.


I understand the intent of the proposal but....

If we were looking for a spec series, we’d be racing in one....
 

do I personally have an answer for the staff workload or problems that we have currently etc.? No and that’s why we stick to racing rather than administrating, some are better at one than the other.

Edited by Team Infiniti
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Team Infiniti said:

 

do I personally have an answer for the staff workload or problems that we have currently etc.? No and that’s why we stick to racing rather than administrating, some are better at one than the other.

Except @Bill Strong.  He's awesome at everything!

  • Like 3
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Team Infiniti said:

I understand the intent of the proposal but....

If we were looking for a spec series we’d be racing in one....

That's exactly what this does. It locks in PWR, which is one step toward a spec series. If people don't believe that just about every team on the grid will work towards 75 hp/1k#, they are crazy. Straightline speed will be equalized between cars and those that already had cornering/handling and braking advantages will continue to have those advantages all the way around the track. And with 22 gallons of fuel, they'll do it for 2 hours with ease. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Team Infiniti said:

Horsepower, 75 per 1000, is that rear wheel horsepower? With or without Driver? With or without fuel? With or without China cobra rim copies?

It has to be rwhp. WRL uses rwhp. There is no real way to account for variable drivetrain losses between platforms (FWD, RWD, manual, automatic, etc.). It has to be as-measured on the chassis dyno, not with some arbitrary drivetrain loss figured into the final number. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Team Infiniti said:

I understand the intent of the proposal but....

If we were looking for a spec series, we’d be racing in one....
 

do I personally have an answer for the staff workload or problems that we have currently etc.? No and that’s why we stick to racing rather than administrating, some are better at one than the other.


This, if I wanted spec racing, I'll stick to karting. 


The current staff workload could be solved by defining the current rules further and make them less ambiguous. Change from do what ever in this box which is actually an oval, to the box is 10feet 0 inches by 7feet 6 inches, no deviations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Snorman said:

Straightline speed will be equalized between cars and those that already had cornering/handling and braking advantages will continue to have those advantages all the way around the track.

 

I'd think with straightline speed equalized and the CC rules for completing a pass responsibility into and through corners, it might just drastically decrease the ability to pass and reduce passes overall.  Might even create more problems with people getting desperate to get around someone that they just can't quite make it and then start taking chances and that could lead to more shunts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI. The staff workload is not an issue.

I don't know about the BOD, as that is not my department.

But the rest of the operations staff is doing ok. 
As for the openness of our rule rook that rewards teams that think outside the box while not explaining to you how to build a race car; I like this. I always will like it, and I will keep pushing for ChampCar to maintain that. This is why this series was started. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dwendel said:


This, if I wanted spec racing, I'll stick to karting. 


The current staff workload could be solved by defining the current rules further and make them less ambiguous. Change from do what ever in this box which is actually an oval, to the box is 10feet 0 inches by 7feet 6 inches, no deviations. 

 

The current rules aren't that bad really.

 

Is it possible that the real problem is that some people are too lazy or unwilling to sit and think and understand and design themselves?  Is it that some just want to have very simple constraints that they do not have to spend time thinking about?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, 67Mustang said:

 

The current rules aren't that bad really.

 

Is it possible that the real problem is that some people are too lazy or unwilling to sit and think and understand and design themselves?  Is it that some just want to have very simple constraints that they do not have to spend time thinking about?

 

^This!!!
 

I can't tell you how many times car owners have come up to me and just told me point blank... "Just tell me how to build the car!"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bill Strong said:

 

 

^This!!!
 

I can't tell you how many times car owners have come up to me and just told me point blank... "Just tell me how to build the car!"

 

Exactly, if your unwilling to think and figure it out, and the next guy is willing to figure it out and take a chance or try something, he deserves to win and you deserve to lose, it's that simple.  It's always been that way in upper level racing series.

 

Spec driven series will never have that at least not with any diversity.

 

If CC was to change to spec type rules, I'd rather go race in AER with their classes based off lap times, at least there you can still build the car you want even though it could get way expensive due to open engine swaps etc.

 

None of those other series offer the diversity of platform and creativity as CC and I'd like to think that is a great thing.

Edited by 67Mustang
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Snorman said:

It has to be rwhp. WRL uses rwhp. There is no real way to account for variable drivetrain losses between platforms (FWD, RWD, manual, automatic, etc.). It has to be as-measured on the chassis dyno, not with some arbitrary drivetrain loss figured into the final number. 

 

Does AWD get a free pass?  I doubt the portable dynos will work for that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, 67Mustang said:

Is it possible that the real problem is that some people are too lazy or unwilling to sit and think and understand and design themselves?  Is it that some just want to have very simple constraints that they do not have to spend time thinking about?

 

23 minutes ago, Bill Strong said:

I can't tell you how many times car owners have come up to me and just told me point blank... "Just tell me how to build the car!"

 

Some of this could be caused by our less than consistent application of the rules - take the IRS swap value as the latest example.  I know I've frustrated @National Tech asking questions through the tech desk that would seem to have obvious answers.  Given what I've seen elsewhere I feel like I have to ask just to be sure.  I can see why someone would throw their hands up and just ask for a build spec.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Bill Strong changed the title to For Your Consideration - A new look at rules

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...