2011 STU Discussion
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
From: Arkansas
2011 STU Discussion
2010 STU Discussion , for reference purposes
Well it's the new year, and I bet I'm not the only one ready for the 2011 autocross season to get underway!
Both the 2011 National Tour, and 2011 ProSolo schedules have been released...
National Tour- http://www.scca.com/contentpage.aspx?content=56
ProSolo- http://www.scca.com/contentpage.aspx?content=57
Also, a recent FasTrack update outlined the 2012 rule changes everyone was nervous about and they don't look like they will hurt the Evo's competitiveness in STU. But feel free to make your own conclusions; here's the link...
FasTrack- http://cms.scca.com/documents/Fastra...k-feb-solo.pdf
Happy discussing, everyone
Well it's the new year, and I bet I'm not the only one ready for the 2011 autocross season to get underway!
Both the 2011 National Tour, and 2011 ProSolo schedules have been released...
National Tour- http://www.scca.com/contentpage.aspx?content=56
ProSolo- http://www.scca.com/contentpage.aspx?content=57
Also, a recent FasTrack update outlined the 2012 rule changes everyone was nervous about and they don't look like they will hurt the Evo's competitiveness in STU. But feel free to make your own conclusions; here's the link...
FasTrack- http://cms.scca.com/documents/Fastra...k-feb-solo.pdf
Happy discussing, everyone
Last edited by GoTopless; Jul 31, 2011 at 10:39 PM.
OK... well I guess I will go first, prepping an 06 MR to run this year with SCCA. So my question is this, pull the rear wing and net the 7-8 lbs, or leave it on and hope it does some good.
Disclaimer, I'm not a engineer, suspension guru, and have only been autoxing for 4-5 years. Also we just bought the Evo back in September, and only did one event in it. So I have no real data, or knowledge on this wing subject. I'm mostly curious which way drivers are leaning.
Thanks
Disclaimer, I'm not a engineer, suspension guru, and have only been autoxing for 4-5 years. Also we just bought the Evo back in September, and only did one event in it. So I have no real data, or knowledge on this wing subject. I'm mostly curious which way drivers are leaning.
Thanks
So the new rule changes for STU seem to be:
- Aftermarket rotors lighter than stock are not allowed.
- No aftermarket wings, can delete the stock wing.
- Check engine light can be disabled. If anyone is interested in running a 100cell race-cat, LMK.
Rick
- Aftermarket rotors lighter than stock are not allowed.
- No aftermarket wings, can delete the stock wing.
- Check engine light can be disabled. If anyone is interested in running a 100cell race-cat, LMK.
Rick
Last edited by SS RX7 r2; Jan 24, 2011 at 04:20 PM.
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,733
Likes: 154
From: Why do they always call the Evo the Dark Side?
Anyway - I will be building an STU car this year too - 06 IX MR SE. The plan is just wheels/suspension for this year, since the car still has a warranty, and next year add all the bolt ons and get tuned.
I ran a 2003 WRX in STX for the last 8 years (8 years!). I went to Solo Nats in 2009 (got killed
) and have run a few other national events. Planning on two tours this year but can't go to Nats (it conflicts with a wedding).I can't wait for the season to start!
The big ST* changes (including rotors and CEL) won't take effect until 1/1/2012.
Worth mentioning that #1 and #3 are still just proposals.
Anyway - I will be building an STU car this year too - 06 IX MR SE. The plan is just wheels/suspension for this year, since the car still has a warranty, and next year add all the bolt ons and get tuned.
I ran a 2003 WRX in STX for the last 8 years (8 years!). I went to Solo Nats in 2009 (got killed ) and have run a few other national events. Planning on two tours this year but can't go to Nats (it conflicts with a wedding).
I can't wait for the season to start!
Anyway - I will be building an STU car this year too - 06 IX MR SE. The plan is just wheels/suspension for this year, since the car still has a warranty, and next year add all the bolt ons and get tuned.
I ran a 2003 WRX in STX for the last 8 years (8 years!). I went to Solo Nats in 2009 (got killed
) and have run a few other national events. Planning on two tours this year but can't go to Nats (it conflicts with a wedding).I can't wait for the season to start!
We should prob write a letter if we want to keep the lighter rotor allowance. Also of interest is the LSD allowance for all ST classes to follow STU/X. I'd also like to see a LSD allowance for STU/X AWD. Tuning the rear diff may help the WRX to be in the mix again in STX. It would help the Evo's to have a "like new" feel to the handling balance.
Rick
Trending Topics
Looking forward to all the big events in SoCal this spring/summer. 
Thinking I might try to go to either the Tour or Pro in Colorado, but probably not both.
Might be nice, but I think you'd have a hard time getting a change through that made Evos faster. 
The Evo/STi balance is pretty good right now, and there's already the perception that the BMWs can't keep up.
Thinking I might try to go to either the Tour or Pro in Colorado, but probably not both.Also of interest is the LSD allowance for all ST classes to follow STU/X. I'd also like to see a LSD allowance for STU/X AWD. Tuning the rear diff may help the WRX to be in the mix again in STX. It would help the Evo's to have a "like new" feel to the handling balance.
The Evo/STi balance is pretty good right now, and there's already the perception that the BMWs can't keep up.
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, CO
Looking forward to all the big events in SoCal this spring/summer. Thinking I might try to go to either the Tour or Pro in Colorado, but probably not both.
Might be nice, but I think you'd have a hard time getting a change through that made Evos faster. The Evo/STi balance is pretty good right now, and there's already the perception that the BMWs can't keep up.
Thinking I might try to go to either the Tour or Pro in Colorado, but probably not both.Might be nice, but I think you'd have a hard time getting a change through that made Evos faster.
The Evo/STi balance is pretty good right now, and there's already the perception that the BMWs can't keep up.I keep seeing discussions popping up about STU BMWs... It's making me nostalgic. I miss mine. If the fender rolling rule was more friendly I think it would be a very competitive car. As it is, it's definitely a right day/right course/right driver contingency.
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 441
Likes: 33
From: Seattle
Is there any consensus on 245/45-R17 vs. 245/40-R17 for Autocross purposes?
I'm leaning toward 245/45-R17 (25.7" dia) to help stretch 2nd gear out a little longer than the 245/40-R17 (24.7" dia) would.
Although I've read several posts where people insist the better turn-in of the shorter 245/40-R17 makes up for the shorter gearing. On short courses, I could definitely see this being the case.
Dunlop lists the section width of the 245/40-R17 as being 0.1" wider than the 245/45-R17, although I'd imagine this difference is negligible.
Finally, the 245/45-R17 are slightly cheaper at the moment. Now that's one advantage I can quantify myself.
Any suggestions?
I'm leaning toward 245/45-R17 (25.7" dia) to help stretch 2nd gear out a little longer than the 245/40-R17 (24.7" dia) would.
Although I've read several posts where people insist the better turn-in of the shorter 245/40-R17 makes up for the shorter gearing. On short courses, I could definitely see this being the case.
Dunlop lists the section width of the 245/40-R17 as being 0.1" wider than the 245/45-R17, although I'd imagine this difference is negligible.
Finally, the 245/45-R17 are slightly cheaper at the moment. Now that's one advantage I can quantify myself.
Any suggestions?
Is there any consensus on 245/45-R17 vs. 245/40-R17 for Autocross purposes?
I'm leaning toward 245/45-R17 (25.7" dia) to help stretch 2nd gear out a little longer than the 245/40-R17 (24.7" dia) would.
Although I've read several posts where people insist the better turn-in of the shorter 245/40-R17 makes up for the shorter gearing. On short courses, I could definitely see this being the case.
Dunlop lists the section width of the 245/40-R17 as being 0.1" wider than the 245/45-R17, although I'd imagine this difference is negligible.
Finally, the 245/45-R17 are slightly cheaper at the moment. Now that's one advantage I can quantify myself.
Any suggestions?
I'm leaning toward 245/45-R17 (25.7" dia) to help stretch 2nd gear out a little longer than the 245/40-R17 (24.7" dia) would.
Although I've read several posts where people insist the better turn-in of the shorter 245/40-R17 makes up for the shorter gearing. On short courses, I could definitely see this being the case.
Dunlop lists the section width of the 245/40-R17 as being 0.1" wider than the 245/45-R17, although I'd imagine this difference is negligible.
Finally, the 245/45-R17 are slightly cheaper at the moment. Now that's one advantage I can quantify myself.
Any suggestions?
Rick
