yeah, it's probably too soon to call STU "done" but the class did drop from last year's 27 entries to 18 this year. Seems to me that adding sports cars to the group to try and bolster numbers didn't really work that well.

 

He probably meant that STU is done racing for the event.

Lets, see what happens with STU after this…but my guess is; nothing
Again we all understand that Brian P wins are definitely way more driver than car…

 

Eh, the last few years of STAC/SEB decisions has been enough for me to leave, on top of losing some great competitors (luster/shane, jon/robert, john wolf, marx's & Others). but I'll have a fund part out here before long.

 

Yeah, a few Z's were added, zero "great dual purpose car (with 2 seats and no cargo space and a huge hood)" Vettes were added, and a lot less boost buggies showed up. Not a ringing endorsement.

(To be clear, I'd be there if I could be, I am not staying away due to some sort of protest. It's a big commitment of time and $$ and we have a youngn; if I went every 3 years I'd be good with that.)

I am a little less scared of the C5's after seeing how Lane did in BS. He was ~3.7 seconds off of Brian in STU, and that's with approximately STU-legal wheels and tires. And he is clearly also an awesome driver.

For me the key data points are all those national events on the left coast, in particular the Pros where the buggies should have had a huge advantage, like Crow's Landing and El Toro. STU is an old class and has allowed 285's forever but this year was really the first time we saw someone seriously campaign and drive the wheels off a car that could really use them. It's also the first time I ever remember a 2WD car winning a Pro against a well driven buggie.

I just hate the amount of course dependency we have now. But I am sticking with it for at least another year and I'll reassess things then.

 

You mentioned the same thing about the course dependency on the other forum and I asked about what courses did you consider favoring AWD cars over Z, but got no response...care to do it here?

 

are the current STU drivers still a resounding no on allowing one diff mod for awd cars? stu awd cars already have a huge handicap tire width wise, just seems like we need something back in the drivetrain department.. not a great year for evos in general it seems, they've done a lot (not just in solo) to really push down turbo awds

 

buy fresh rear end plates, re-stack and put redline no slip in. You will have plenty off diff to handle then ; )

Some of my statistics:

2013: 2 national events and over 20 local autox events.

2014: 1 national event, maybe 4 other autox events. (one was the shootout and shouldn't really count).

When you know you're at a disadvantage before you show up to a national event, it makes it tough to be as serious about the class. I'm waiting one more year to see what happens, then maybe jumping ship too. Maybe I'll buy a diesel truck and trailer and build an asp or SM car.

 

i've actually got an aftermarket rear diff. i'm unabashedly trying to sway people in agreement to getting it legal for stu not sure what else would even the playing field, save for the wider tires. if people are getting over the turbo-awd fear, one side diff allowance would be natural given the 2wd cars can

 

were there any evo's at nationals this past week? I'd love to hear some results.

 

Yes - that's what I meant. Sorry I wasn't clear. I probably should have said "I'm not sure if all runs have been completed for STU."


Concerning course dependency -- having Autox'd my Evo since 2008 I have plenty to say in that department. Here's the summary.

Cases where the Evo will have an advantage
- If the course is slippery, smooth, wet, or any other low traction scenario. You can rocket out of turns while the other 2WD cars have to come out easy.
- When the course is open with some nice long straights and short quick transitions like cone offsets or short high-speed slaloms.
- When the turns are long sweeper turns with few to no sharp turns.

Cases where the Evo will had a DIS-advantage
- If the surface is high grip. For some reason, when this happens, it works in the favor of 2WD cars. The AWD doesn't give any advantage here.
- When the course has short straights where you can't spool up or top out 2nd gear.
- When there are lots of tight turns and/or Chicago boxes, or numerous U-turns. The more turns you have, the more time you lose on each one.

 

You're drunk if you think an Evo has an advantage on long sweepers vs a C5/Z....

 

this

 

I don't think he means sweepers, I'm guessing he means more along the lines of an Arc. In an Arc an Evo can hold 100% throttle without any worries, not sure a C5 will like that as much.

Long sweepers where its not acceleration driven, sure the C5 should kill an evo, along with any car that doesn't have 65% of its weight up front and terrible front roll centers.

 

yeah, that's almost completely backwards.

low grip is an awd advantage but so are u turns and short straights.

sweepers, long straights (and topping out 2nd gear), and transitions are all disadvantages for an evo vs a c5/z.

 

Ok I got you. First, I forgot I should have kept the comparison relevant to STU classed Evo versus other STU classed cars. In those cases, I won't argue. I know an STU Evo isn't super fast in a straight line. I've run in different classes, particularly in SM, where a high-boost tuned Evo on E85 is quicker than most RWD cars. On an open course and with the right suspension and aero, it can be a monster in quick transitions and held at full-throttle in sweepers. When I say sweepers I mean a large arc turn. So that's where my mind was when I was writing that.

Sorry about any confusion.