prodracing.com

Unofficial SCCA Production Racing Forum
It is currently Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:40 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:57 am
Posts: 138
chois wrote:
Greg is so dramallama with his story telling.

:D

"I don't think anyone really likes adding a much slower car to their run group - whether its an under developed bugeye or an underdeveloped Fit"

Well, we can't have it both ways: you allow in other classes like ITB to help build the numbers (or "give them a place to play"), but you can't then complain that they're under-developed...or you don't.

Of course, until there's a minimum prep requirement for a class/category - highly unlikely to ever happen - then the allowance doesn't mean you can't bring an under-developed car in anyway. That car would be compliant to the regs by simply pulling a couple of ABS sensor wires.

I had a lot of fun driving that car as an STU car at PittRace Majors, in the T1/T2/T3/T4/STU/STL class...my pointing arm still hurtz...and yet, sadly, I didn't finish last...

"Pretty sure the 914 answer was that there is a place for that car in H and a place for that engine in Prod, which may well have missed your point, but it wasn't a needle moving event"

I don't think there was opposition to it per se in terms of performance performance/capability. The inference I got from it was "cause 2 liters." Which is silly, IMO.

"The ABS thing is a good idea, and should be requested again by anyone reading this who agrees with this"

<shrug> I thought so too, especially in context of the existing proposal for brake upgrades. Stock unmodified ABS with stock brake components, or you can do the upgrades. Maybe it'll get future consideration.

"Looking forward to seeing the next alternative."

Won't be secret for much longer...if it even still is...


Last edited by Greg Amy on Fri Sep 18, 2020 7:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2020 6:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 662
Location: Stow, OH
Greg Amy wrote:
- Requested my 2L 914 into HProd Limited Prep. Heads asploded.


I know the perfect place for the 2L 914... GP :D

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2020 8:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:39 pm
Posts: 487
Stiner0931 wrote:
Greg Amy wrote:
- Requested my 2L 914 into HProd Limited Prep. Heads asploded.


I know the perfect place for the 2L 914... GP :D


Yeah - GP would solve a lot of classing challenges. I wish that class hadn't been assassinated by the BOD.

_________________
Chris Schaafsma


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2020 9:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 662
Location: Stow, OH
100% agreed, even though my GP comment was purely for humor (that horse is long since dead). Yet, we had how many classes with less than 15 cars at the Runoffs last year? I think every open wheel class aside from FE2 had less than 15...

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:36 am
Posts: 24
It appears that as written the new brake rule would penalize those who have retained their stock calipers while utilizing a two piece rotor. That doesn’t seem right. Am I reading it right?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:12 am
Posts: 169
Location: Boston, Ma
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.

I'm interested in hearing the interpretation to your question from the rules writers, but the above makes me think you have no penalty for a "stock sized" two piece brake rotor with stock caliper.
You also can now go crossed drilled or slotted without penalty as I read it.

I'm still waiting to hear if they are going to reference anything other than the spec. line to define "stock size".

I also think hats (two-piece or integral) were never regulated which meant you could move the stock caliper around with a new mounting bracket. Waiting to see if this interpretation is correct.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:36 am
Posts: 24
You are right-the rotors are “stock-size” and therefore I should think that they would be allowed without the 2% penalty. Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:01 am
Posts: 294
Greg, did you build that Civic Si or buy it? The reason I ask is our 07 Civic Si was a brake eating death trap. There was a huge difference between the 06s that Honda ran in SSB and the 07 we ran in SSB and then in STL.

Plenty of power, ehh handling, sh*tty brakes. Honda swore they weren't having any issues but when I switched to STL (and thus was not racing against their guys in SSB) they offered up their SSB/Pro brake package to the tune of 3500 bucks. I would make sure you have the correct master cylinder and ABS ecu before you offer to run your car with "stock parts"...

The 07+ ABS ecu is for sh*t, Honda's words, not mine... but I won't disagree...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:57 am
Posts: 138
dhrmx5 wrote:
Greg, did you build that Civic Si or buy it? The reason I ask is our 07 Civic Si was a brake eating death trap...The 07+ ABS ecu is for sh*t, Honda's words, not mine... but I won't disagree...

Mine is/was an '08 ex-Lipperini T4 car that we converted to ITS (to run in STL at the '15 Daytona Runoffs*), then pseudo-STL specs in 2016, then ITR-competing-as-STU in '17 and '18, then EProd with some cams and weight reduction in '19 (where I lit it on fire on the second lap at the Runoffs. I really need to rethink this whole paradigm).

All through that, other than battling the lack of ABS and thus flat-spotting rear tires (regardless of bias valves and shitty rear pads) we had pretty decent luck with Hawk DTC-70s up front. I'd chew up rotors but rarely had any kind of massive failures.

It's why I requested factory unmodified ABS on the car in EP, just to keep from tearing up rear tires (and was cock-blocked on it). In the end, we simply blocked off most of the pressure going to the rear calipers (hey, brake lines are free, with no subsequent restriction against putting BB's or other restrictions in the lines to keep the rear brakes from locking...maybe someday Prod will embrace the concept.)

GA

*At the time, ITS allowed bigger (stock) brake rotors than STL, larger-lift (stock) cams than STL, more (1/2 point) compression than STL, larger wheels and tires than STL, and no intake restrictor (like STL). But the car weighed 3,000 pounds (we put "1.50 US tons" on the car, to much the scru's dismay). Had I had more time to develop that combo that year (mostly, put a LSD in it and learn to drive it) I'm pretty convinced it was a podium STL car for Daytona (I unofficially killed the ITS lap record). It also needed ABS, as we ate through rear tires every session into T1 and the Bus Stop due to pulling wheel sensors to disable the ABS...ITS/ITR allows ABS now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2002 6:52 pm
Posts: 2244
Location: Topeka, Kansas
GT6 wrote:
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.

I'm interested in hearing the interpretation to your question from the rules writers, but the above makes me think you have no penalty for a "stock sized" two piece brake rotor with stock caliper.
You also can now go crossed drilled or slotted without penalty as I read it.

I'm still waiting to hear if they are going to reference anything other than the spec. line to define "stock size".

I also think hats (two-piece or integral) were never regulated which meant you could move the stock caliper around with a new mounting bracket. Waiting to see if this interpretation is correct.



You've always been able to run stock diameter rotors with aluminum hats.
You're correct, you can now run stock diameter rotors that are drilled and slotted with no penalty. The spec line gives the size.
That didn't mean you could move or can move the stock caliper and bracket. In this case you're supposed to be running a stock caliper in the stock position with a stock diameter and thickness rotor, just like it's always been.
There's no penalty for this.

Don't overthink it.

_________________
jesseprathermotorsports.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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