You cant compare TT to W2W. A 30-45 minute sprint race is all about strategy and endurance. I can be a second slower than the leader, be 10-12 seconds behind, and make it all up if he makes a mistake. Yea its one race but it takes more than one fast lap to win. It isnt a 3 lap shootout like TT is. A 40 minute race at Sebring is about 15-16 laps. Its more than just car endurance, its driver endurance. 40 minute stints arent much, but when the adrenaline of the w2w kicks in, it seems like an eternity. It definitely takes getting used to.

 

Dyno it on a md chassis dyno... Easy.


I think you guys are underestimating the power that can be made with e85 on the stock turbo. English racing has done a 540 whp evo9 turbo car... Pf course that's a high compression highly modified engine, but your goals of high 300 whp are more than attainable. Being a hp junky that I am, I still think you'd be a fool not to maximize grip rather than hp.

I made just under 360 hp on 92 octane with a TBE, intake, and a tune. E85 will allow you guys to dominate. Get after it

 

Were here to share our thoughts and to help each other out. It doesnt matter that youre new to road racing. We can all learn from each other. Besides, youve done more in autox than most of us here have done in road racing.

With (6) 50-60 second runs i can see why you think 4 timed sessions at Nationals is plenty. The TT format may change someday, but i dont think they will limit it to 4 timed sessions. Besides everything else i noted, i want to stress the part about the racers that supersize. If you limit it to 4 timed sessions its highly likely that some, if not a lot, of racers will not supersize. Theyre already going to miss a few of their TT sessions because of the extra work theyll need to figure out how to undertake. And if people decide to not supersize due to lack of timed sessions, NASA will lose money on those entry fees. On top of that, the TT drivers will lose competition. TT classes can double or triple in size with racers who supersize. And some classes sometimes depend on the racers that supersize.

 

Yeah, even without cams, the numbers we're talking about sound fairly attainable on e85. Haha, their stock turbo beast doesn't count for anything we're talking about here. Yes you could build one of those, but you'd be limited to crappy power/weight because you'd get a custom reclass.

I know we've talked a lot about hp, but we certainly aren't talking about skimping on grip. There's only so much you can do to an Evo in a points class like PTA/TTA. You could give up bunch of bolt-ons to run aero, but at a track like VIR that isn't going to get you very far. And there's not much point to run anything larger than a 275 in PTA/TTA.

 

I think TT should come down to one lap. Not a group session but you, a open track, with one warm up and 2 timed laps. A timer display should show in real time the lap time for all your competitors to see in pit lane. That's basically how I ran the the first (ever?) BMW club time trial event. In conjunction with the 2cd BMW club race held at Lime Rock Park back in the 90's. Everybody loved it. We had no accidents and it ran like clockwork. It offers each driver to be in the spot light! Not just a random timed lap in some session that nobody saw or will remember. 8 - 20 minute sessions is a little ridiculous for practice. When I do a qualifying session I try to nail a fast lap within 3 laps, then save the car for the race. 55 gallons is plenty for a 3 day race weekend.

 

Disagree.
They have that format - it's called Time Attack. I've ran it - it's really boring and develops none of the skills needed to jump into w2w like track awareness, car awareness, ability to navigate traffic, feeling comfortable with traffic, sharing the track, etc.

In addition to that, maybe I'm the only one that believes in making changes to the car setup in TT? That's the bueaty of it - strategy in setting up the car over the course of a day or a weekend along with actually learning the track and perfecting your lines. You have to get the suspension and aero right, the right tires at the right temp, and do it in the best conditions possible to get that best lap.
Especially in the July heat, those 4pm laps at 95 degrees aren't going to be optimal conditions...

 

Hey Nate, why don't you share with everyone how much hp you made on 100 octane.

 

Sorry, but i dont understand what youre saying, or who youre noting this towards. Why dyno on a md chassis dyno? And why say its easy? Im confused.


540whp on a completely OEM 9 turbo? How is that possible?

Are you familiar with NASAs TT series? Sorry, but i dont know who you are. Maybe thats the reason why im confused with your overall post. Because it doesnt sound like you read the entire thread if you think were focusing on HP. I initiated the discussion partly about HP due to our limitations with the point system. I was trying to illustrate what we can/cant do with what we have. And that just because ones setup works for TT doenst mean it will work for racing. I said a lot more than that, but thats part of it.

 

Ed,
I was stating the MD dyno due to the fact that it reads lower. How do they test horsepower? Do they use use a MD or DJ? They read almost 13% different... by paying attention to how they are measured you can use the rules to your favor.

540whp on a ported 9 turbocharger. yes it was a stock 9 turbo.

Point is... people can make over 400whp on a DJ with a TBE, intake, E85, and a tune... With bigger cams and more mods of course more is possible. The OP was stating that he thought it was a far cry to hit 400, and stated he didn't have a copious amount of experience with Ethanol.... I'm here to say that you CAN and WILL hit those targets. The power numbers are the least of your problems.

IF you have a link to the rules I'd be glad to read and interpret them to see what your true-realistic power potential could be.

 

When using a MD you have to multiply your numbers by 1.1, so can't exploit much there. No matter what dyno you use to get your numbers, you still have to give yourself a buffer. I don't know what they've used at Nationals in the past, but I wouldn't want to push the limit and end up reading higher on whatever they have.

If you change internals of an engine you have to get a custom reclass. The same goes with changing turbos, or modifying stock ones. The problem with that is the national director gives out bs hp and weight limits you must stick to. For PTA/TTA these numbers are horrid, and the TTB power/weight limit is better than some cases.

But yes, reaching the PTA/TTA limit is easily doable with e85.

Read up:
http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/Time-Trial-Rules.pdf

 

Hmmm. . . you know, I have always thought of TT/TA as the Japanese-style Time Attack with multiple 3-lap individual sessions throughout the day. Redline Time Attack was pretty close to that idea. I never really considered that Time Attack and Time Trials could be two very different types of racing. I can see now that they each have their merits and I shouldn't necessarily want to turn NASA TT into TA.

Being a spectator at both NASA and Redline events - I can say HANDS DOWN RTA events are MUCH more exciting and fun for spectators. I never got to run an RTA event so I can not comment on their style of racing as a driver.

 

Oh I have plenty to comment on.

 

As noted in the preceding, you cant just find some low reading MD in an effort to use that to your advantage. Im sure some people have tried that in the past, but NASA has been making changes gradually to do a better job of regulating all that. You can try if you please, but is it really worth it? Besides, the rules say that your car has to be compliant on any official dyno. As for MDs, NASA requires you to add 10%. If youre knowingly using a MD that reads lower than 10%, its in your best interest to be honest about it. Its probably not going to sit well with NASA, and especially your competitors, when they find out.


In case you missed it, im the OP. I posted this thread. If youre really interested, go back and read my posts in detail. Also read what everyone else has shared. Part of what i was trying to say is that there is a difference between making power on paper and making it work where it matters for us, at the track. Furthermore, building a car for TT/TA is not the same as building a car for racing. What works in TT/TA for us may not work in a 45min race. So this is meant for the guys who want to transition from TT to racing.

And the rules link thats posted in the above is not the current TT rules. Here is the current one:

- 2011 NASA TT Rules

The PT rules should be the same.

 

Bringing this thread back from Jan/2011. We had a good discussion going on how to build a TTA/PTA or TTS/ST2 car.

My question is, is anyone actually thinking about PTA in 2012? Because nobody said so this year! Cause I'm debating w2w...

Here's the final registration counts

• 2011 TTA Nationals - 13 (9 Vettes, 2 Evo)
• 2011 PTA Nationals - 8 (4 Vettes)
  .
• 2011 TTS Nationals - 7 (4 Vettes, 1 STi)
• 2011 ST2 Nationals - 21 (7 Vettes, 3 Boss Mustangs, 3 Evo, 1 STi)

 

Nathan, what are you thinking up in your head? I thought the car was for sale?

I think the biggest thing you have to think about when building your car for racing in any class is how to build it safety wise. (and how much that really cost) You can go bolt in cage and be cheap. (and only legal for some classes) or build a good cage. (which has different rules between clubs).

Im from the camp that says to spend good money to have a really good cage built. And do one that is as universal as possible. (the really hard part)