Notices
Motor Sports If you like rallying, road racing, autoxing, or track events, then this is the spot for you.

2019 - SCCA Time Trials

 
Old Dec 13, 2018, 11:53 AM
  #16  
Evolving Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 132
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Originally Posted by kyoo View Post
i think that's just typical scca. they feel that unless every single aspect of every single car is somehow covered under a specific rule, people will go crazy building monsters and it's not fair, and thus would harm competition and participation.

nasa, gridlife, every other racing series: hold my beer...
I just want to point out that those are basically the only successful time trial series in the united states.......why would you throw all that away for this system?

Zack
wanabgts is offline  
Old Dec 13, 2018, 12:15 PM
  #17  
EvoM Moderator
iTrader: (28)
 
kyoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: US
Posts: 7,725
Thanked 75 Times in 75 Posts
Originally Posted by wanabgts View Post
I just want to point out that those are basically the only successful time trial series in the united states.......why would you throw all that away for this system?

Zack
i messed up that idiom lol, i meant to say that none of those racing series have had any harm in competition or participation due to the more "lax" rules that scca predicts will cause the downfall of any racing series
kyoo is offline  
Old Dec 13, 2018, 12:55 PM
  #18  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Dallas J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, Or
Posts: 3,624
Thanked 146 Times in 122 Posts
I am bummed my car doesn't fit well in both SM and Max2, Really seems like its more XP and Max2 better matched excluding stripped interiors. But like I said before, thin panels arent that heavy. Would have to read through the rules again but doesnt seem that far off from Zust or McKee running it other than maybe weight limits.

I do hope they find some parity between the series and the whole thing is successful. TA/TT is pretty much all I have interest in as a next stage from AutoX but the PNW has tried and failed everytime so far.
Dallas J is online now  
Old Dec 13, 2018, 01:28 PM
  #19  
kaj
Evolved Member
iTrader: (58)
 
kaj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 10,125
Thanked 260 Times in 248 Posts
Originally Posted by wanabgts View Post
The first thing that I see is that there are far too many classes, you will be lucky to have one other person in your class to compete with unless the series just explodes. Also, that is the worst organized set of rules I have ever tried to read online. Unless you read all the classes cover to cover it is a lot harder to get a feel for what is allowed and what isn't.

They have a Portland date, and I would like to participate. I feel however they are off on the wrong foot with have 5 levels of classification within every class......

Zack
Welcome to SCCA You have to start with the lowest class and work your way up the ladder of rules until you find a class where your mods aren't disallowed. It's pretty un-intuitive, IMO, but I'm sure there's a way they have been doing it all this time.
Have you seen how many classes they have for AutoX? It's nuts. Having a different badge on your car is enough to bump you from one class to a much higher one. It's kinda fun to see people scramble to figure it all out, though LOL
kaj is online now  
Old Dec 16, 2018, 07:08 PM
  #20  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 236
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Really? You find the TT rules not intuitive? In what sense? Or you just meant the way they have them organized?

I believe the rules are generally consistent with the Gridlife and GTA, so that's a good thing. I mean if you already have a competitive autox cars, anything beyond the Street Touring classes, you will be in the Max/Unlimited category but most likely be somewhat competitive until a dedicated entry comes in. Hard to be competitive in both IMO. Tuner is as far as I would go personally. Shooting for Thompson in July if all things line up by then.
white_turbo is offline  
Old Dec 16, 2018, 07:12 PM
  #21  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 236
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Talking

Originally Posted by rocknsnoboarder View Post
200TW tires in all classes but unlimited?
I actually like that. No mixing up Hoosiers and street tires like NASA does. Better yet, find a spec tire like WTA....just don't pick Falken Azenis.
white_turbo is offline  
Old Dec 16, 2018, 07:14 PM
  #22  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 236
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Anyone knows the ballpark cost of entry yet? I hope is not something silly like GTA.
white_turbo is offline  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 08:04 AM
  #23  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Meathooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 516
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
Originally Posted by ayoustin View Post
es.

I think it's possible to get an evo down into the high 2400lb range with a cage but that's the extreme far end requiring a fair bit of money .

its possible for sure unless your areo is crazy.
Meathooker is offline  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 08:13 AM
  #24  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Dallas J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, Or
Posts: 3,624
Thanked 146 Times in 122 Posts
I think Zacks car is in the 22xx range with no aero and ballast removed. I know pulling ballast would have terrible weight dist, but man that seems like its be a riot to drive a 2200lbs track evo.
Dallas J is online now  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 08:33 AM
  #25  
Evolved Member
 
ayoustin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,217
Thanked 87 Times in 78 Posts
I don't recall Zach's car having a cage. A good 8 point cage is 180-200lbs.
ayoustin is offline  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 08:37 AM
  #26  
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Dallas J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, Or
Posts: 3,624
Thanked 146 Times in 122 Posts
Cage was only required in Ultimate. Not saying its good to not have a cage, just not required
Dallas J is online now  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 08:41 AM
  #27  
Evolved Member
 
ayoustin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,217
Thanked 87 Times in 78 Posts
Haha yea I wouldn't go on track in a gutted car without a cage. Rather just add some power to make up for the extra weight.
ayoustin is offline  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 09:26 AM
  #28  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Balrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: North GA
Posts: 2,973
Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts
Weight distro has always been the bummer. There's a LOT of useless stuff to be pulled out of the back half of the car but that just makes things worse because then you had to re-add ballast as you said and then re-strengthen bits from where you took metal out. Worth it if the class had a HP limit and a 2.0L min weight like STU could have been. But people just aren't willing to do that if all the other factors aren't there like tire, car count, freedom on design, etc. I'd be happy with 2700lb race weight if that didn't require $$ in carbon and 3lbs of boost lol.
Balrok is offline  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 11:18 AM
  #29  
Evolved Member
 
ayoustin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,217
Thanked 87 Times in 78 Posts
I've always prioritized weight reduction over distribution, but I've also never had to worry about a minimum weight. I'm happy they're not imposing power limits, that's the biggest reason I'm not really interested in NASA stuff. Almost everyone I know/talk to that's successful in NASA series are cheating or "loop holing" in one way or another. I just don't care for dealing with stringent rule books, if there's an obvious disadvantage in favor of something then it's pretty easy for sanctioning bodies to adjust the rules the majority of the time.

Anyone who makes 600+ hp on a 4 cylinder doesn't last long, I mean look at how many engines the RS guys went through in just this past season alone, I think they were somewhere in the 3-5 range.
ayoustin is offline  
Old Dec 17, 2018, 12:17 PM
  #30  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Meathooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 516
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
Originally Posted by ayoustin View Post
I've always prioritized weight reduction over distribution, but I've also never had to worry about a minimum weight. I'm happy they're not imposing power limits, that's the biggest reason I'm not really interested in NASA stuff. Almost everyone I know/talk to that's successful in NASA series are cheating or "loop holing" in one way or another. I just don't care for dealing with stringent rule books, if there's an obvious disadvantage in favor of something then it's pretty easy for sanctioning bodies to adjust the rules the majority of the time.

Anyone who makes 600+ hp on a 4 cylinder doesn't last long, I mean look at how many engines the RS guys went through in just this past season alone, I think they were somewhere in the 3-5 range.

in my autox car all i cared about was weight. in the hillclimb car we tried super hard to get weight in the rear (center actually) of the car and i end we added and EASY 100-120lbs doing so. radiator alone was probably 30-40 and the oil cooler that much again.

cut the front of the frame off and made a tubular moly set and we were still 60% front weight bias! so disheartening
Meathooker is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.