I got a letter from a somewhat confused SCCA Marketroid yesterday, wondering why
it was I was talking about a new Super Street Touring class when STU appeared to
be pretty well what I wanted.
I confess that trying to work out the STU rules was difficult (they must have
been written by a computer programmer, with all the code reuse going on - "see
SP 14.10.U") and I missed a couple of key points behind the STU rules. It seems
I have indeed re-invented the wheel.
So I went back, took a closer look, and tried to work out the differences
between my proposal and that which already exists. Here's what I found:
1) The STU rules need to be written out in full, just like the rules for all
the other classses - even when the STU rules steal an SP rule verbatim. All that
flippin' flippin' around in the rulebook makes it tough to keep straight what
rule goes to what class. If nothing else from this post is adopted, this should
be - OR - make STU a superset of ALL the existing SP rules, like SP is to Stock.
(more on this later)
2) Vehicle Eligibility: ST is open to all non-turbo, 4 seat,
non-sportscar-based cars under 3.1l that don't have non-viscous LDSs. STU allows
turbos and superchargers, and any drivetrain - so does that increase the number
of vehicles eligible to include factory-turbocharged/supercharged cars, and/or
cars that come with the "wrong" LSD from the factory?
PROPOSAL: State STU vehicle eligbility as: "All front-engine, 4 seat, hardtop
cars under 3.1l displacement are eligible for STU"
Note: This lowers the entry displacement from 4.0l (in SST) to 3.1, cutting out
the Pontiac folks. :( Bump STU displacement limit to 4.0l?
3) Engine: The STU rules are in some ways much more liberal that what I had
proposed. As I read the STU rules, the engine and driveline is completely open
season, as long as you remain under the displacement limit. Cool! Doesn't
Ferrari make a sub-3.1l motor? I wonder if it will bolt up to my Talon trans. :)
But there's a serious gotcha lurking in there - the emissions requirement. The
rules state that everything you do must be either CARB certified OR pass a state
emissions test. Holy can o'worms, Batman! The cars in class have different rules
depending on what _state_ you're in. Live in a strict state like CA, and you're
hosed. Live in a state with more liberal emissions law, and it's a licence to
print money. And what do you do with states (or Provinces... hey, look, another
worm!) that don't do emissions testing? Is a car that is ostensibly illegal that
makes it through a emissions test (say a well-tuned car with no cat that passes
the sniffer test) considered legal? How do you resolve protests, if my car -
registered and certified in Alaska, thank you very much - is protested in
Florida? What about a car that was tested immediately before a race (and found
legal) that is tested immediately afterwords (on a protest) and found slightly
illegal, because of weather/altitude/calibration issues?
Yeccch. You've now got a signifigant portion of the rules no longer under SCCA
control, with different standards applying to the same car, and 60+ (50 states,
10 provinces, Porto Rico, Mexico?) sets of rules to learn.
Besides, a true street-driven car has already jumped trough all the state's
hoops to get the car licenced in the first place. From talking to friends in CA,
this is not a fun process. Having to go through it again before/after every race
- or the possibilty of having to go through it again after every race - is sure
to discourage attendence and encourage weenies. This is exactly counter to the
spirit of the class.
PROPOSAL: Toss the emissions requirement as unenforcable.
4) CHASSIS: There's a bunch of stuff in here that's a little vague. Are
Momo/Sparco one-piece race seats allowed? Can I change my airbag steering wheel?
This is more of a "clarify the wording issue" than anything else.
PROPOSAL: Adopt the chassis wording from my proposal - it seems to be pretty
well the same thing, but stated a little more clearly.
5) Brakes: STU appears to be allowed any pads, any rotor of stock diameter,
and any 2-circuit master cylinder. Al lot of the target demographic cars have or
want aftermarket brakes.
PROPOSAL: Allow any brakes, but require a park brake capability
6) When you get to this point, STU looks a lot like SP with open engine,
brakes, and suspension, and a little more allowence for body kits/wings/hoods,
plus the requirment that the vehicle be licenced.
PROPOSAL: Write it that way. Make STU a superset of the complete SP rules.
7) SST sounds cooler than STU. :) (and may be more marketable)
PROPOSAL: Rename STU to SST.
Comments?
One final observation - we're not going to get the hard-core, dedicated drag
racers. We _are_ going to get the occasional (or ex) drag racer looking for more
seat time and a better challenge - with his already-modded car.
DG
|