Vorshlag 468x60 Banner
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 14 Jan 2015 01:04 PM by  OZMDD
C5s in STU?
 88 Replies
Sort:
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 4 of 5 << < 12345 > >>
Author Messages
gary p
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:2730


--
24 Sep 2013 12:46 PM

Posted By AustinTX on 24 Sep 2013 12:19 PM
I'm looking at it similarly to how I look at courses in the STI.  I went to 3rd gear 4 times per run on the east course at nats this year, and I would probably drive the vette similarly between first/second gear if the transmission allows it.  In that case, the vette should have PLENTY of accelleration when driving in first most of the time.  You guys are way too comfortable with simply leaving it in 2nd 

 

Not exactly apples to apples. In an STI you can use full throttle anywhere in second gear without wheel spin. It's an entirely different story for a Corvette in first gear on street tires.

hklvette
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:184


--
24 Sep 2013 12:53 PM
Posted By AustinTX on 24 Sep 2013 12:19 PM
I'm looking at it similarly to how I look at courses in the STI.  I went to 3rd gear 4 times per run on the east course at nats this year, and I would probably drive the vette similarly between first/second gear if the transmission allows it.  In that case, the vette should have PLENTY of accelleration when driving in first most of the time.  You guys are way too comfortable with simply leaving it in 2nd 

Depending on the course, I usually stay in first unless I need to consistently get above 60-63mph.  If the course speed range is between 40-65 it probably works out the same between toggling gears and leaving it in 2nd.  In ST trim with more torque from 2-4k rpm staying in 2nd will be preferable to keep wheelspin under control.

splash
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:960


--
18 Dec 2013 12:47 AM
So, a couple months since this has been sent to the BoD. Any word on whether it was passed or not?
marka
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:2258


--
18 Dec 2013 10:04 AM
Howdy,

I can't seem to get the Fastrack page on SCCA.com to launch to give you the direct link, but yes, the stuff proposed to the BOD passed. c5 non-z06's are in STU next year.

Mark
bstock05
New Member
New Member
Posts:13


--
23 Dec 2013 10:00 AM

Posted By <a href='http://www.sccaforums.com/user-profile/userid/41948' class='af-profile-link'>85rx-7gsl-se</a> on 04 Sep 2013 08:50 AM
Posted By <span class="af-profile-name">gary p</span> on 03 Sep 2013 09:46 PM

Posted By <span class="af-profile-name">85rx-7gsl-se</span> on 03 Sep 2013 05:11 PM

I am just trying to figure our how limiting a 2wd car to the same tire size as an AWD with what I would assume is roughly similar weight/power is anywhere near fair?



And I'm trying to figure how letting a car with similar weight,  much lower CG, much better F/R weight balance, and short/long arm suspension at all 4 corners have 40mm more tire width than the Evo and STi is anywhere near fair. 





So I guess your AWD means nothing? lol


No but the only way to say awd is worth anything is, would you rather prep an awd or rwd e30? I know there's a lot of what ifs and variables. It's hard to pinpoint exactly what's gained on awd. Everyone's perception is that awd corners so well, but they give up so much in corners due to balance and yes corner exit they have an advantage but not if the well balanced rwd car doesn't have to slow as much as the awd car. So it's pretty much a given that the balanced rwd will maintain more speed through the corners, so what's gained at all by awd other than the launch?
The Nebulizer
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:1819


--
23 Dec 2013 12:08 PM
AWD on street tires is a huge advantage with big power. This goes beyond perception and is clearly visible in the results of many classes from STU to Street.

A more appropriate question is whether you would rather an STU RWD e46 M3 or AWD e46 M3 (if it existed)? (Or even, an STI with front wheel power disengaged vs. normal AWD STi.)
An e30 is so low on power that the added weight of AWD overtakes any grip advantage. RWD e30s don't suffer from trouble putting power down since they have so little. As power level increases (>250hp or so), like in an STU e46 M3, putting the power down is much more difficult and AWD becomes increasingly advantageous. An e46 M3 with AWD would dominate STU - as would an AWD C5 Corvette.
bstock05
New Member
New Member
Posts:13


--
25 Dec 2013 04:11 PM
IF it retained its balance.
splash
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:960


--
26 Dec 2013 11:05 AM
Look at it another way.. Base Imprezas are also AWD and reside amongst our slowest classes... Not exactly dominating, are they?

No, AWD on its own doesn't make it a winner. Power is a prerequisite for it to work. Without it, AWD is just a bunch of dead weight

What's funny is that a lot of folks think AWD makes a car corner better, which is bunk. Any car with 60% of its weight on its nose is not going to handle that well (apparently, except for ST Civics). AWD and a bunch of power just makes getting out of the corners better. If you have a course that you don't have to slow down much for, that advantage is null, though there isn't much STI/EVO drivers don't have to slow down for.

The big thing I've noticed about people that normally drive good handling cars when they jump into a car like mine, they all do the same thing. They all barrel into corners WAY too fast and wash out. Why is this? Because that entry speed is normal in their cars... The better balanced the car they came from is, the worse this will be. No, the rally cars are not all roses and chocolates. Having unlimited power and mashing the gas wherever you want doesn't exist here either. Though I do admit that, as the surface deteriorates, the bigger the power-on-exit advantage gets. However, that is a GOING advantage, NOT a handling advantage. No matter the surface, our cars handle somewhat like Jettas with compromises to keep the inside rear wheel down.
The Nebulizer
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:1819


--
26 Dec 2013 01:44 PM
A few years back, after a less than mediocre showing at Nationals in STU with my M3, I had the opportunity to drive the National Champion STU Evo car (my first time in an AWD car). The first run I was plowing all over the place. I was expecting it to turn in like my M3 and it clearly didn't. It drove like a heavy front wheel drive into the turns. But out of the turns the power application was beyond my ability to even slam the gas pedal down fast enough. Overcoming my instinct to ease out of the corner was my big hurdle after taming the entry understeer. I struggled to take full advantage of it's abilities, but it seemed as long as you kept grip with the front wheels at least moderately, you could toss it any which way. I didn't drive the Evo well that day, but the result was better than I could do in my M3 with years of experience.
bstock05
New Member
New Member
Posts:13


--
26 Dec 2013 03:12 PM

Posted By <a href='http://www.sccaforums.com/user-profile/userid/31953' class='af-profile-link'>splash</a> on 26 Dec 2013 11:05 AM
Look at it another way.. Base Imprezas are also AWD and reside amongst our slowest classes... Not exactly dominating, are they?

No, AWD on its own doesn't make it a winner. Power is a prerequisite for it to work. Without it, AWD is just a bunch of dead weight

What's funny is that a lot of folks think AWD makes a car corner better, which is bunk. Any car with 60% of its weight on its nose is not going to handle that well (apparently, except for ST Civics). AWD and a bunch of power just makes getting out of the corners better. If you have a course that you don't have to slow down much for, that advantage is null, though there isn't much STI/EVO drivers don't have to slow down for.

The big thing I've noticed about people that normally drive good handling cars when they jump into a car like mine, they all do the same thing. They all barrel into corners WAY too fast and wash out. Why is this? Because that entry speed is normal in their cars... The better balanced the car they came from is, the worse this will be. No, the rally cars are not all roses and chocolates. Having unlimited power and mashing the gas wherever you want doesn't exist here either. Though I do admit that, as the surface deteriorates, the bigger the power-on-exit advantage gets. However, that is a GOING advantage, NOT a handling advantage. No matter the surface, our cars handle somewhat like Jettas with compromises to keep the inside rear wheel down.

Bingo!

Posted By <a href='http://www.sccaforums.com/user-profile/userid/15839' class='af-profile-link'>The Nebulizer</a> on 26 Dec 2013 01:44 PM
A few years back, after a less than mediocre showing at Nationals in STU with my M3, I had the opportunity to drive the National Champion STU Evo car (my first time in an AWD car). The first run I was plowing all over the place. I was expecting it to turn in like my M3 and it clearly didn't. It drove like a heavy front wheel drive into the turns. But out of the turns the power application was beyond my ability to even slam the gas pedal down fast enough. Overcoming my instinct to ease out of the corner was my big hurdle after taming the entry understeer. I struggled to take full advantage of it's abilities, but it seemed as long as you kept grip with the front wheels at least moderately, you could toss it any which way. I didn't drive the Evo well that day, but the result was better than I could do in my M3 with years of experience.

Awd definitely takes getting some use to, it's much easier going from awd->rwd than the other way around. I've experienced a few well balanced rwd sports car guys that after trying to jump in an awd car, get out and talk about how much hard they are to drive. But the grass isn't always greener on the other side. Hopefully we'll see a decent prepped c5 and maybe we'll be surprised.
85rx-7gsl-se
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:282


--
13 May 2014 08:13 AM
So what has come of this? Is anyone successfully campaigning a C5 in STU? I have been checking National Tour results and have yet to see a C5 in STU.
ratt_finkel
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:1650


--
13 May 2014 10:30 AM
Posted By 85rx-7gsl-se on 13 May 2014 08:13 AM

So what has come of this? Is anyone successfully campaigning a C5 in STU? I have been checking National Tour results and have yet to see a C5 in STU.


None here in Texas Region.  Or the entire state that I know of.

Impala SS AutoXer
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:249


--
13 May 2014 05:38 PM
Scott Garriss here locally (SF Bay Area) bought the former Paul and Meredith Brown AS C5 and has been running it in STU. He's admittedly pretty early on the prep curve with the car though, coming out of an STX RX8.

Not sure if he is going to make it out to the Crows Landing events or not.
SS RX7 R2
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:223


--
13 May 2014 07:24 PM
Posted By Impala SS AutoXer on 13 May 2014 05:38 PM
Scott Garriss here locally (SF Bay Area) bought the former Paul and Meredith Brown AS C5 and has been running it in STU. He's admittedly pretty early on the prep curve with the car though, coming out of an STX RX8.

Not sure if he is going to make it out to the Crows Landing events or not.

I thought about buying that car for STU. Hope Scott can make it out to the Crows Landing Pro.

 


ltborg
New Member
New Member
Posts:87


--
15 May 2014 09:13 AM

I think the car will be fine in STU, but also won't be an overdog. Based on the Mineral Wells times in BS, Jerry and I would have been 5th and 4th in STU respectively. If I hadn't coned my fast run I would have been 2nd. While that may seem like it will be an overdog, there isn't that much that can be done to change the performance of the car. I already have the dampers, the suspension is already very light, the car can already run 285s in the back and it needs more rear grip, not front grip. The stock seats, while super sucky, aren't that heavy. I think overall I'd be looking at maybe 80-100 lbs off of a 3100 lb car. All the suspension changes would make the car feel better and the balance would be more easily tuned to the driver/conditions/etc. but I don't think there will be a huge amount of additional pace. That said, I've never done any extensive vehicle tuning like that before so if I give it a go one day, I might surprise myself...

 

As for the coupe/FRC debate, you'll be fine in either. I bought the coupe because it has a better cam and intake manifold for same power, but more torque than the FRC. The additional weight is all in the rear, so you end up with a better weight distribution than the FRC. Pulling the roof out can be used as a tuning element (not just weight reduction). In ST trim, the coupes have 4 cats and the FRC only has 2 so there might be more power to be gained in the coupe. Coupes are also newer and easier to find than the FRCs and make better daily drivers (in my opinion). My car (in AS trim) is 3080 lb. Paul Brown's, which was the lightest optioned FRC was right at 3000 lb. For the added torque throughout the power band, I'll take the 80 lb hit.

Haru
New Member
New Member
Posts:44


--
19 May 2014 01:38 PM
Posted By ltborg on 15 May 2014 09:13 AM

I think the car will be fine in STU, but also won't be an overdog. Based on the Mineral Wells times in BS, Jerry and I would have been 5th and 4th in STU respectively. If I hadn't coned my fast run I would have been 2nd. While that may seem like it will be an overdog, there isn't that much that can be done to change the performance of the car. I already have the dampers, the suspension is already very light, the car can already run 285s in the back and it needs more rear grip, not front grip. The stock seats, while super sucky, aren't that heavy. I think overall I'd be looking at maybe 80-100 lbs off of a 3100 lb car. All the suspension changes would make the car feel better and the balance would be more easily tuned to the driver/conditions/etc. but I don't think there will be a huge amount of additional pace. That said, I've never done any extensive vehicle tuning like that before so if I give it a go one day, I might surprise myself...

 

As for the coupe/FRC debate, you'll be fine in either. I bought the coupe because it has a better cam and intake manifold for same power, but more torque than the FRC. The additional weight is all in the rear, so you end up with a better weight distribution than the FRC. Pulling the roof out can be used as a tuning element (not just weight reduction). In ST trim, the coupes have 4 cats and the FRC only has 2 so there might be more power to be gained in the coupe. Coupes are also newer and easier to find than the FRCs and make better daily drivers (in my opinion). My car (in AS trim) is 3080 lb. Paul Brown's, which was the lightest optioned FRC was right at 3000 lb. For the added torque throughout the power band, I'll take the 80 lb hit.

I feel like you're convieniently forgetting your performance at the Texas Championship Tour...

You know, that one where you raw timed STR by 3 seconds? 

Bottom line, that kind of data point is hard to ignore. 

I recently just submitted a letter to the SEB requesting that the 370z be moved to STU.  After all, If you're going to have the C5 there... there isn't a reason to stop ANY 370z from being classed in STU.  The C5 is still better on paper....

MrAWD
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:880


--
19 May 2014 04:29 PM
Did you also added request to allow more tire for AWD cars too?

Fedja
Haru
New Member
New Member
Posts:44


--
20 May 2014 09:44 AM

Posted By <a href='http://www.sccaforums.com/user-profile/userid/37506' class='af-profile-link'>Fedja Jeleskovic</a> on 19 May 2014 04:29 PM
Did you also added request to allow more tire for AWD cars too? <img src='http://www.sccaforums.com/DesktopModules/ActiveForums/themes/sf//emoticons/smile.gif' align="absmiddle" border="0" class="afEmoticon" />

Fedja


No. Although, this fear of the Peters 350z is hysterical. I watched Peters raw time Clark at the St George match tour when he was still in STR on 255's. It's just going to get worse my friends. Tire isn't the problem. He's just a exceptional driver. If you put him in an Evo with 245's he's still going to win.


SS RX7 R2
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:223


--
22 May 2014 05:56 PM
Posted By Haru on 20 May 2014 09:44 AM

Posted By Fedja Jeleskovic on 19 May 2014 04:29 PM
Did you also added request to allow more tire for AWD cars too?

Fedja


No. Although, this fear of the Peters 350z is hysterical. I watched Peters raw time Clark at the St George match tour when he was still in STR on 255's. It's just going to get worse my friends. Tire isn't the problem. He's just a exceptional driver. If you put him in an Evo with 245's he's still going to win.


I don't think you're giving Geoff credit. 3 years ago he was far ahead of the rest of the large STU class at Nats. Brian is a great driver for sure, but I've have some top drivers in my STU car on the same day, and they couldn't get close to the Z. 

So if the Z can already win on 255's, wouldn't that been an indication that it has an advantage on 285s? And that old AWD tire size handicap should be lifted?

Rick


Haru
New Member
New Member
Posts:44


--
22 May 2014 06:54 PM

Posted By <a href='http://www.sccaforums.com/user-profile/userid/25524' class='af-profile-link'>SS RX7 R2</a> on 22 May 2014 05:56 PM

Posted By <a href="http://www.sccaforums.com/user-profile/userid/37382" class="af-profile-link">Haru</a> on 20 May 2014 09:44 AM




Posted By <a href="http://www.sccaforums.com/user-profile/userid/37506" class="af-profile-link">Fedja Jeleskovic</a> on 19 May 2014 04:29 PM

Did you also added request to allow more tire for AWD cars too? <img alt="" src="http://www.sccaforums.com/DesktopModules/ActiveForums/themes/sf//emoticons/smile.gif" align="middle" class="afEmoticon" style="border-width: 0px;border-style: solid;" />



Fedja





No. Although, this fear of the Peters 350z is hysterical. I watched Peters raw time Clark at the St George match tour when he was still in STR on 255's. It's just going to get worse my friends. Tire isn't the problem. He's just a exceptional driver. If you put him in an Evo with 245's he's still going to win.






<p>I don't think you're giving Geoff credit. 3 years ago he was far ahead of the rest of the large STU class at Nats. Brian is a great driver for sure, but I've have some top drivers in my STU car on the same day, and they couldn't get close to the Z. </p>
<p>So if the Z can already win on 255's, wouldn't that been an indication that it has an advantage on 285s? And that old AWD tire size handicap should be lifted?</p>
<p>Rick</p>



Don't get me wrong... It's not my intention to discredit Geoff. I don't think anyone can. The guy is about 100 times the driver I am. He's proven himself to be the fastest boost buggy driver around for years now. He dominated nationals just last year where he raw timed Peters Z by 2 seconds over two days. If you want to use that data, National Results data, then the Z is severely handicapped on 255's.

We can bench race all day. Different surface, pro solo vs tour, etc.

The 350Z has no advantage on paper.

It's wider than an evo.
It's heavier than an MR Evo.
It has less HP and Torque than an Evo
It doesn't have three differentials and AWD

This discussion is about the C5 in STU.

The C5 is a far more capable car than the 350z. That's the car you should be worried about.

Just for kicks... I have some videos from the El Toro Pro Solo posted on YouTube showing Peters vs Clark. Draw your own conclusions.

http://youtu.be/geGUK2HJPoU
http://youtu.be/sTqY_WU7Q0M



You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 4 of 5 << < 12345 > >>


Sunoco 88x31 Button
Woodhouse Motorsports SPS 88x31 Button
G-Loc Button Vorshlag 88x31 Button

Advertise on SCCAForums.com and reach thousands of visitors per day!

SafeRacer FREE SHIPPING over $99

Shop for Pirelli tires at Tire Rack. blank




Sunoco Bottom 468x60 Banner