prodracing.com

Unofficial SCCA Production Racing Forum
It is currently Tue Sep 22, 2020 3:11 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:12 am
Posts: 165
Location: Boston, Ma
This is a "one person" or "one vehicle model" argument, and I think it should be taken care of on the vehicle spec line, not a class wide rule.

The bigger issue for this proposal is class philosophy and direction, especially considering the number of different models and the time span of the cars classed in Prod.
I also think the options presented in other, existing classes, need to be heavily considered.

_________________
Anthony Parker
NER 373024
E-Prod. Wanna-be


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2020 1:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:54 am
Posts: 2089
GT6 wrote:
This is a "one person" or "one vehicle model" argument, and I think it should be taken care of on the vehicle spec line, not a class wide rule.

The bigger issue for this proposal is class philosophy and direction, especially considering the number of different models and the time span of the cars classed in Prod.
I also think the options presented in other, existing classes, need to be heavily considered.

Is there another class you recommend reviewing?
ST and GT classes all have alternate calipers/ brake kits allowed. T2 has spec line allowances for nearly every car using some sort of brake kit whether a higher spec OE or StopTech/AP/Brembo/similar aftermarket setup. T3 has several spec line allowances for alternate/upgraded brakes as well.

Instead of making it a horrendous job for tech shed to police which car is allowed what, why not simplify things and keep the rules basic? i.e. the proposed ruleset seems "adequate as written" to me.

_________________
Matt Blehm
Houston Region
EP 1st Gen RX7
STU Scion FR-S


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2020 1:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:12 am
Posts: 165
Location: Boston, Ma
Running PRODUCTION (aka stock) brakes seems pretty basic to me.

I understand, that from time to time, supply issues will require a spec line allowance.

Which set of rules do you think are, "adequate as written"? The ones from 1960? 1980? 2005? January 2020? Someone always thought those were adequate.

_________________
Anthony Parker
NER 373024
E-Prod. Wanna-be


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2020 1:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:54 am
Posts: 2089
GT6 wrote:
Running PRODUCTION (aka stock) brakes seems pretty basic to me.

I understand, that from time to time, supply issues will require a spec line allowance.

Which set of rules do you think are, "adequate as written"? The ones from 1960? 1980? 2005? January 2020? Someone always thought those were adequate.

The problem I see is that cars built in 1960 are still racing with cars built in 2020. "stock" brakes and the vehicles have changed a LOT in that time.
One car may be running 200% or more power than originally designed, while others have bone stock engines and brakes larger than the wheels of those 1960s cars.

my suggestion is that the philosophy of the proposed rule package is adequate. give everyone the option to improve brakes (at a weight increase), or run the stock stuff. nobody says you HAVE TO modify the brakes. if you feel your brakes are sufficient as they currently are, then continue running them.
The FRS (at least on DOT tires) has really nice brakes from the factory and 200HP in a 2400lb package. but it also has ABS and traction control which have to be dealt with..

_________________
Matt Blehm
Houston Region
EP 1st Gen RX7
STU Scion FR-S


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2020 1:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:39 pm
Posts: 475
This is what is in the preliminary October minutes. I removed the strikeouts, so this should be how the rule reads.

Recommended Items
The following subjects will be referred to the Board of Directors for approval. Address all comments, both for and against, to the Club Racing Board. It is the BoD’s policy to withhold voting on a rules change until there has been input from the membership on the presented rules. Member input is suggested and encouraged. Please send your comments via the form at www.clubracingboard.com.
Prod General

1. #27417 (Jesse Prather) Alternate Brakes for Production
In Production, GCR section 9.1.5.E.7., Brakes Level 1 and 2, make changes as follows:

a. Stock brake calipers and stock-size brake rotors may be used without penalty, as defined in the “Brakes Std.” and “Brakes Alt.” columns of a vehicle’s spec line.

b. Any other non-stock brake calipers and/or non-stock-size brake rotors may be used with a penalty of 2% of the base weight.

1. Non-stock brake calipers must have a max of 4-pistons and the caliper body must be made of ferrous or aluminum material. Calipers must be mounted in the same location and orientation as the stock positioning. Mounting brackets are unrestricted, but must be made of ferrous or aluminum material. Stock caliper mounting tabs may be modified or removed to facilitate caliper installation. In all other regards, non-stock brake calipers are unrestricted.

2. Non-stock-size brake rotors are unrestricted, provided they fit inside the max wheel limitations on a vehicle’s spec line.

c. All brake rotors must be made of ferrous material, and can be cross-drilled and/or slotted. A two-piece hat and rotor design may be utilized, but the hat must be made of ferrous or aluminum material.

d. Alternate drums can be used, but must be made of ferrous or aluminum material, and be the stock diameter, width, and design.

e. Cars fitted with rear drum brakes, can convert to rear disc brakes without penalty. Note that the “Brakes Std.” and “Brakes Alt.” listings on a vehicle’s spec line do not prohibit a car that was fitted with rear drum brakes stock, from converting to rear disc brakes under this rule. When converting from rear drum brakes to rear disc brakes:

1. Rear brake rotors must be solid and can be no larger in diameter than the largest permitted front brake rotor, as defined on the vehicle’s spec line.

2. Rear brake rotor hats can be made of a ferrous or aluminum material.

2. Rear calipers and mounting brackets are unrestricted but must be made of a ferrous or aluminum material.
The standard and alternate brake listings on a vehicle’s specification line, does not prohibit a car that was fitted with rear drum brakes as stock from converting to rear disc brakes under this rule.

f. Dual braking systems are required. Any dual brake master cylinder(s) and pedal assembly can be fitted. Pressure equalizing and proportioning valve devices are unrestricted.

g. Servo assists are unrestricted.

h. Drum brake wheel cylinders are unrestricted.

i. Brake pads and brake linings are unrestricted.

j. Brake lines are unrestricted.

k. The hand brake and its operating mechanism can be removed.

l. Brake air ducts can be fitted. Front duct inlet(s) cannot extend to the side beyond the center-lines of the front wheels, or beyond the forward most part of the front bodywork/air-dam. Rear duct inlet(s) must face forward, cannot extend to the side beyond the center-lines of the rear wheels, or be located more than 24” forward of the rear axle center-line.

m. Backing plates and dust shields are unrestricted."

_________________
Chris Schaafsma


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 6:53 am
Posts: 638
Location: Holland, MI
I think that restricting the rotor size with the wheels is a mistake. It's exactly the kind of rule writing we want to avoid because it invites experimentation and expenditure...not only on brakes, but now on wheels.

And since you can't bitch without offering an alternative, here's an idea that would at least keep a lid on some of that:

EP = 13 inch max or stock diameter if larger

FP/HP = 11 inch max or stock diameter if larger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 655
Location: Stow, OH
Tom Feller wrote:
I think that restricting the rotor size with the wheels is a mistake. It's exactly the kind of rule writing we want to avoid because it invites experimentation and expenditure...not only on brakes, but now on wheels.

And since you can't bitch without offering an alternative, here's an idea that would at least keep a lid on some of that:

EP = 13 inch max or stock diameter if larger

FP/HP = 11 inch max or stock diameter if larger


Or, allow the 4 piston calipers and upgraded rotors, but only up to the maximum rotor size indicated in the standard or alternate brakes currently on the spec line? I agree rotor size should be explicitly limited and not limit it with the wheel size.

_________________
Jason Stine
#37 HP Sprite
Goodyear/Red Line/Scott Young Enterprises/Stinnett, Padrutt & Aranyosi/AllState


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 2:52 pm
Posts: 2034
Location: Just south of Indianapolis
I also think there should be some allowance if only front or rear are done. The rear of the s2000 heats the wheel bearings and causes failures, there are nice vented rotors that help the issue.

Needs to be a max rotor size and limiting to 4 pot seems odd as that doesn’t provide a huge advantage and limits the calipers to older technology in brake calipers. If we are doing this why, the true race kits that are reasonable priced for the Honda are all 6 pot fronts utilizing the wilwood 6r caliper but are also bigger than a 13” rotor.

If this is the case then I also think that rears should be free to change for every car regardless of whether they came with rear drums or not provided they are not larger than the stock front size or rear size of larger than front

_________________
Aaron Johnson
#08 EP Honda S2000
Member #310579


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 8:08 am
Posts: 778
Location: Atlanta, Ga
How about a $5000 limit on what you can spend? Yep, it's out there. And you're going to need bigger frontal openings to get enough air to cool them. Another can of worms opened.

_________________
Jim Creighton
CARS Tour DoR
SEDiv SARRC Administrator
V8 Road Racing Series Administrator
Runoffs Line Chief Tech Prod cars


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 5:08 am
Posts: 125
Location: Dubuque, Iowa
There is still time to write a letter.

_________________
#38 EP BMW


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group