2015 STU Discussion!
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,733
Likes: 154
From: Why do they always call the Evo the Dark Side?
IIRC Marshall has said that 285-30-18s would fit with an ST legal fender roll, but with the 255s and 265s being taller, what are the odds we are going to need to roll the fenders to run these?
Submitted this:
Submitted this:
I already wrote a really long letter supporting 265's for AWD's in STU (#15076). I won't repeat it here, but the data from 2014 definitely supported such a move.
In 2015, not much changed. Some data points:
* At the New Jersey Pro, Martin Kriz (06 STi) beat Nick Barbato (350Z) by 1.1 seconds. There was a huge straight at the beginning, multiple digs, and Martin did not have to use 3rd gear - basically this was a best case scenario for the STi. And if you ignore the 60 foots, it was about a tie; if you ignore the entire launch, the Z was probably faster. Since this was a Pro, it would tend to indicate that the Z would have a substantial advantage at a tour.
* Crow's Landing Pro: Jon Lugod won by .02 over Doug Mikko (in the car that won the 2011 STU championship w/ Geoff Clark driving). As before, ignoring the 60 foots you do not have parity between the two cars.
I point this out because everyone involved is a very good driver driving an established well prepped car. The only caveat to that is that I'm not sure Nick Barbato was ever 100% happy with the setup on the Z and that I would expect it to be faster in 2016 if he runs it again.
Yes, Nick/Jon are national champs, but at a Pro, it is (compared to a Tour) more about the car since everyone gets lots of cracks at it and there tends to be more power sections and less elements in general.
Furthermore, 265's for the AWD cars will help but there are still limitations:
a) the buggies will likely be somewhat limited by wheel width (fitting more than a 10" is hard/impossible on the Evo 8-9/04-07 STi; easier on the newer but heavier cars)
b) the cars will take a gearing/acceleration hit since the 265's will be taller.
tl;dr - I think 265s for AWD cars will restore some lost parity between them and the newer 2WD cars.
Thank you for your time and your service on the STAC.
In 2015, not much changed. Some data points:
* At the New Jersey Pro, Martin Kriz (06 STi) beat Nick Barbato (350Z) by 1.1 seconds. There was a huge straight at the beginning, multiple digs, and Martin did not have to use 3rd gear - basically this was a best case scenario for the STi. And if you ignore the 60 foots, it was about a tie; if you ignore the entire launch, the Z was probably faster. Since this was a Pro, it would tend to indicate that the Z would have a substantial advantage at a tour.
* Crow's Landing Pro: Jon Lugod won by .02 over Doug Mikko (in the car that won the 2011 STU championship w/ Geoff Clark driving). As before, ignoring the 60 foots you do not have parity between the two cars.
I point this out because everyone involved is a very good driver driving an established well prepped car. The only caveat to that is that I'm not sure Nick Barbato was ever 100% happy with the setup on the Z and that I would expect it to be faster in 2016 if he runs it again.
Yes, Nick/Jon are national champs, but at a Pro, it is (compared to a Tour) more about the car since everyone gets lots of cracks at it and there tends to be more power sections and less elements in general.
Furthermore, 265's for the AWD cars will help but there are still limitations:
a) the buggies will likely be somewhat limited by wheel width (fitting more than a 10" is hard/impossible on the Evo 8-9/04-07 STi; easier on the newer but heavier cars)
b) the cars will take a gearing/acceleration hit since the 265's will be taller.
tl;dr - I think 265s for AWD cars will restore some lost parity between them and the newer 2WD cars.
Thank you for your time and your service on the STAC.
bah - wrote my letter... supporting a diff allowance for awds in STU lol.
I think I'm the only one who would rather see us stay at 245s and drop the rwd's down to 265... and maybe mr's at 235. just don't think slapping on more and more tire to add speed is all that fun
another unpopular thought: we are getting STP? what are the cam classes for then? wasn't that for pony cars that weren't competitive in STU? put the ponies back in STU, split off STA for street touring awd - we have STF and STR now anyway
I think I'm the only one who would rather see us stay at 245s and drop the rwd's down to 265... and maybe mr's at 235. just don't think slapping on more and more tire to add speed is all that fun
another unpopular thought: we are getting STP? what are the cam classes for then? wasn't that for pony cars that weren't competitive in STU? put the ponies back in STU, split off STA for street touring awd - we have STF and STR now anyway
Last edited by kyoo; Oct 2, 2015 at 10:20 AM.
bah - wrote my letter... supporting a diff allowance for awds in STU lol.
I think I'm the only one who would rather see us stay at 245s and drop the rwd's down to 265... and maybe mr's at 235. just don't think slapping on more and more tire to add speed is all that fun
another unpopular thought: we are getting STP? what are the cam classes for then? wasn't that for pony cars that weren't competitive in STU? put the ponies back in STU, split off STA for street touring awd - we have STF and STR now anyway
I think I'm the only one who would rather see us stay at 245s and drop the rwd's down to 265... and maybe mr's at 235. just don't think slapping on more and more tire to add speed is all that fun
another unpopular thought: we are getting STP? what are the cam classes for then? wasn't that for pony cars that weren't competitive in STU? put the ponies back in STU, split off STA for street touring awd - we have STF and STR now anyway
CAM was more of a way to dig into the Pro-Touring/GoodGuys groups, I believe.
I think making an AWD-only ST class would basically be what STU was a few years ago, and numbers at Nationals were steadily declining over the years. The most popular and competitive STU AWD cars (Evo 9 and 04-07 STi) are starting to creep past 10 years of existence - its getting harder and harder to find good, clean examples of these cars to prep for autocross and that's not even accounting for the prices that good, clean examples would command on the market. Raising the AWD limit to 265mm tires is a good step to try and incorporate newer AWD cars into the competitive mix, as well as try to establish a more competitive balance between the current AWD cars and the 350Z/C5.
CAM was more of a way to dig into the Pro-Touring/GoodGuys groups, I believe.
I think making an AWD-only ST class would basically be what STU was a few years ago, and numbers at Nationals were steadily declining over the years. The most popular and competitive STU AWD cars (Evo 9 and 04-07 STi) are starting to creep past 10 years of existence - its getting harder and harder to find good, clean examples of these cars to prep for autocross and that's not even accounting for the prices that good, clean examples would command on the market. Raising the AWD limit to 265mm tires is a good step to try and incorporate newer AWD cars into the competitive mix, as well as try to establish a more competitive balance between the current AWD cars and the 350Z/C5.
I think making an AWD-only ST class would basically be what STU was a few years ago, and numbers at Nationals were steadily declining over the years. The most popular and competitive STU AWD cars (Evo 9 and 04-07 STi) are starting to creep past 10 years of existence - its getting harder and harder to find good, clean examples of these cars to prep for autocross and that's not even accounting for the prices that good, clean examples would command on the market. Raising the AWD limit to 265mm tires is a good step to try and incorporate newer AWD cars into the competitive mix, as well as try to establish a more competitive balance between the current AWD cars and the 350Z/C5.
Hopefully with the Focus RS and Golf R new blood (if they join the STU class) and the tire size help, the AWD guys will get back to competitive with the other front runners.
Last edited by Dallas J; Oct 2, 2015 at 01:46 PM.
It has changed as newer AWD cars have come out, but there aren't many of them showing up at the National level, at least with the current STU ruleset. Wider tires should make them more competitive and hopefully encourage current/prospective owners to run nationally. Personally, I like class diversity
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,760
Likes: 22
From: Reading, MA
Even though, it will be helpful to run bigger tires for heavier cars (like EVO X in particular), the same tire would benefit lighter cars as well, so the balance we have today between EVO 8 and 9 vs. EVO X will not be changed that much...
I would argue the extra tire is more beneficial for heavier cars - i.e., the X would gain more going from 245 to 265 than the 9 would, though bought would gain. anyway, discussion is moot, I doubt we would get our own class based on the reasons stated above by jim. it just surprises me they're considering an STP class, haven't really heard much clamoring from pony cars looking for that
So for a bit of history, I think the Pony car guys asked to get moved to STU because they had to run smaller than stock tires in STX previously and were getting killed. So they decided they'd rather lose in STU than in STX so they could at least run a real tire daily.
So for now they really have no street tire class to run in and its a huge car market. If the goal is to attract more members, then catering to a huge market (arguably far bigger than the AWD evo/sti community is) makes sense.
I do see CAM-C as being redundant and have no clue what the plan is for it. I would guess they'd get rid of CAM-C and keep CAM-T and CAM-S which doesn't have STP eligible cars anyways.
Looking around the muscle car forums and this does seem to be a favorable class, enough so that I'd even consider after next season hoping into a new Camaro for a change of scenery.
So for now they really have no street tire class to run in and its a huge car market. If the goal is to attract more members, then catering to a huge market (arguably far bigger than the AWD evo/sti community is) makes sense.
I do see CAM-C as being redundant and have no clue what the plan is for it. I would guess they'd get rid of CAM-C and keep CAM-T and CAM-S which doesn't have STP eligible cars anyways.
Looking around the muscle car forums and this does seem to be a favorable class, enough so that I'd even consider after next season hoping into a new Camaro for a change of scenery.
that said they can run 285s in stu right now can't they? it's not like they ever left stu, though I didn't really see any cars in the class. idk about the vettte but surely they can take down the 350z on 285s..? the cam classes do look a little redundant with an STP class. I guess we'll see. if you class it, they will come
The STP worry is that it'll cannibalize ESP, especially now that they pull anything AWD from it and buried the WRX and DSMs in ASP. I agree that it certainly will pull from ESP, possibly quite a bit in the early years.
But it really feels like the general feeling is that hoosier costs are too high when you get what 10 really fast runs, up to 30 really good runs, then to 50 pretty good runs, and finally dead at 80-100. A bunch of the street tire classes were won at 100 or more. Don't get me wrong, I love running hoosiers, but if they made a street tire street mode class I would be the first guy on the list for some new treaded tires.
Anyways, back to the STU topic...
But it really feels like the general feeling is that hoosier costs are too high when you get what 10 really fast runs, up to 30 really good runs, then to 50 pretty good runs, and finally dead at 80-100. A bunch of the street tire classes were won at 100 or more. Don't get me wrong, I love running hoosiers, but if they made a street tire street mode class I would be the first guy on the list for some new treaded tires.
Anyways, back to the STU topic...
?350Z won this year.
Reason that Marshall and I think Evos need 285s for parity, is that the top 350Z and C5 Vette is in our region. Both those cars have less than a season of development, where as my Evo has been in STU for over 10 years. Also note that as the newer tires grip better, the AWD advantage diminishes, especially on high grip surfaces like Lincoln.
Reason that Marshall and I think Evos need 285s for parity, is that the top 350Z and C5 Vette is in our region. Both those cars have less than a season of development, where as my Evo has been in STU for over 10 years. Also note that as the newer tires grip better, the AWD advantage diminishes, especially on high grip surfaces like Lincoln.
http://cdn.growassets.net/user_files...pdf?1445609295
looks like STP is a thing and the tires/wheels is up for review? can 8-9s fit 265s without rolling fenders?
looks like STP is a thing and the tires/wheels is up for review? can 8-9s fit 265s without rolling fenders?