The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Questions, comments, and discussions concerning COMSCC rules.

Moderator: blindsidefive0

bhoss
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:26 pm

The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by bhoss » Sat Oct 23, 2010 9:49 pm

The Board met Weds night to begin the discussion on proposed rule changes. Below are the minutes from this meeting. It is not too late to submit rule proposals - they will be discussed again at the November meeting on Weds - Nov 17th.

Review of Rule Submissions
All rule proposals were submitted via the club web site – discussed on the order that they were submitted. A motion was made by Bruce Allen that only members in good standing can submit rules. Second Will Martins – passed.

Rule #1
Engine swaps including ls1 rx7s should be allowed in street prepared given they run DOT tires, pass state inspection retain stock body lines (minus rolled inner fender lips) and retain the factory firewall. In addition the classification rules should only apply to the Time Trials day and everyone should be able to run regardless in the HPDE, as long as they pass a very basic safety inspection.

This rule submission was not reviewed as it was submitted by a non member. No board member was willing to sponsor this submission as well.

Rule #2
Rulebook Section: - CAR CLASSIFICATION
Old Rule:
SHOWROOM STOCK B (SSB)
BMW E30 325; E36 325, 328; E46 323, 325; E39 525, E28, E34 525
New Rule:
SHOWROOM STOCK B (SSB)
BMW E30 325; E36 325, 328; E46 323, 325; E39 525, E28, E34 525, 540

The board recommended that the Chief Steward review this request before discussion at next meeting.

Rule #3
Rulebook Section: - XI. Street Prepared 8. Tires
Old Rule:
Tires must be DOT approved, with no undertread showing (for safety reasons) and either be listed in THE TIRE GUIDE or available in 3 or more rim diameters. RECAPS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
New Rule:
Tires must be DOT approved (see exceptions below), with no undertread showing (for safety reasons) and either be listed in THE TIRE GUIDE or available in 3 or more rim diameters. RECAPS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
Exceptions: Grand-Am Continental Racing Slicks -
Reason: These tires have an endurance compound, and are known to be significantly slower then a DOT Hoosier R6, and are made from the same carcass as the R6. They are also very inexpensive.

Discussion on this rules proposal was tabled until the November Meeting

Rule #4
Rulebook Section: XI. Street Prepared 8. Tires
Old Rule:
Tires must be DOT approved, with no undertread showing (for safety reasons) and either be listed in THE TIRE GUIDE or available in 3 or more rim diameters. RECAPS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
New Rule:
In my opinion this rule has many flaws to it. The main problem being the fact that a major budget tire that is somewhat accessible to the public is the Continental slick used in the Continental Tire Challenge series. This slick is not DOT approved however, it is a radial tire and was created for endurance purposes and races (specifically for the CTC series). These are documented by many people/racers on the forums to be slower then Hoosier R6\'s simply because of the compound difference. They were built to last for many sessions and therefore are not as fast as an A6/R6 which heat up quicker and are great for sprint races/time trials.

There would be no advantage for people in classes to run this tire. The only reason I would like to see this tire accepted is because of the price. They are a fraction of the price compared to an A6/R6. They also stick out like a sore thumb so spotting them is not an issue. CONTINENTAL is painted in bright yellow on the sidewalls and to my knowledge no other tire has that same feature.

Discussion on this rules proposal was tabled until the November Meeting

Rule #5
Rulebook Section: SSA
Old Rule:
Subaru WRX 2001-2005, Legacy GT
New Rule:
Subaru WRX 2001+, Legacy GT

The board recommended that the Chief Steward review this request before discussion at next meeting.

Rule #6
Rulebook Section: IX. SHOWROOM STOCK
Old Rule:
New Rule:
Add BMW 135i to SSGT
Add BMW 128i to SSA

Motion to accept - Will Matins, second John Spain – passed

Rule #7
Rulebook Section: V Flags
Old Rule:
5. BLACK -- Pull into the pits immediately for conference with authorized personnel who will make themselves known to you. There is something wrong with you or your driving. This flag may be used to end a practice session.
New Rule:
5. BLACK -- A STANDING BLACK FLAG ENDS THE SESSION FOR ALL. A FURLED FLAG AND POINTED AT YOU MEANS Pull into the pits immediately for conference with authorized personnel who will make themselves known to you. There is something wrong with you or your driving. THIS FLAG WILL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CHECKER FLAG AT THE END OF A SESSION. Reason for change more than one member has asked for the black flag at the end of the session. I don\'t feel that a wave is sufficient.

The consensus of the board is that this does not need to be a rule change – it is operational in nature and in some cases track dependent.

Rule #8 – duplicate to #7

Rule #9
Rulebook Section: XI Street Prepared, Article 8: Tires
Old Rule:
Tires must be DOT approved, with no undertread showing (For safety reasons), and either be listed in THE TIRE GUIDE or be available in three or more rim diameters. RECAPS ARE NOT ALLOWED. Wheel type and size is optional provided the tread fits within the stock fender configurations measured by a vertical line dropped down from the fender lip, while the car is at rest on level ground, with the wheels pointing straight ahead. The edge of the tread is defined as that point on the tire that intersects with a 45 degree angle drawn from a line perpendicular to the centerline of the wheel. This shall be measurable by placing one edge against the wheel sidewall of a template consisting of two straight edges having an included angle of 135 degrees.
New Rule:
RATIONALE: Practically speaking, could you really count on passing a NH State Inspection with Hoosier R6 DOT tires? The DOT designation would not be recognized because the NOT FOR HIGHWAY USE printed on the side of the tire would cause you to fail the inspection. From a competitive view point, I ran in SPA in 2010 and had four wins. If I had run in PA I would have had five wins and I would have set a NHMS lap record on 10-Oct-2010 on DOT tires. The point is that the DOT classification no longer has any safety or performance significance which would adversely affect the competition in the Street Prepared classification.
PROPOSED NEW RULE:
8. Tires must be safe -- no undertread showing and no recaps are allowed.

Similar to Rule #4 – no support by the board

Rule #10
Rulebook Section: 9
Old Rule:
SSU:
Chevrolet Corvette 1991+ NOC
SSGT:
Corvette C4 1985-91 except ZR1
New Rule:
SSU:
Chevrolet Corvette 1990-1995 ZR1, 1997+ NOC
SSGT:
Corvette C4 1984-96 except ZR1

The board recommended that the Chief Steward review this request before discussion at next meeting.

Rule #11
Rulebook Section: X Street Touring
Old Rule: n/a
New Rule:
I think wheel spacers should be legal in the ST classes. Any wheel is legal so someone with a large budget can buy custom wheels with the offset he wants but the small budget guy can\'t use a $50 set of wheel spacers. Does not make sense to me.

Currently any wheel is legal – no spacers allowed – referred to Chief Steward for review.

Rule #12
Rulebook Section: IX Car Classification
Old Rule:
e46 m3 in ssu
New Rule:
move e46 m3 to ssgt

The board recommended that the Chief Steward review this request before discussion at next meeting.


Rule #13
Rulebook Section: XI. Showroom Stock, Car Interior
Old Rule:
Drivers\' seat may be replaced with an aftermarket seat.
New Rule:
2. Driver\'s seat may be replaced with an aftermarket seat. If an aftermarket driver\'s seat is installed, the passenger\'s seat may also be replaced to match the restraint capability of the driver\'s seat. This is for the safety of instructors riding with not just students, but also licensed drivers and other instructors.

Allow equal safety equipment on both sides of the car. Good proposal - needs to be re-worded and discussed at November meeting

Rule #14 - Similar to #13

Rule #15
Rulebook Section: IV. TIME TRIAL POINTS AND GUIDELINES I & K
Old Rule: - Revision to I
Any car exceeding the maximum decibel limit of the track where the time trial is taking place shall be disqualified. No points shall be awarded to the driver(s) of disqualified vehicles. The driver may appeal this decision to the BOD prior to trophy presentation ceremony if the noise violation was that cars first offense/warning of the event

Board asked to have revision reworded


Rule #16
Rulebook Section: IV. TIME TRIAL POINTS AND GUIDELINES I & K
Old Rule - Add new rule after K
Once the run groups have been posted, the Chief of Timing and scoring may add car/drivers to new or existing run groups or may change to run group order at their discretion.

Wording changes suggested – new wording

K. The chief of T & S may add cars/driver to new or existing run groups or change run group order at its discretion.

Motion by John Spain, second Will Martins - passed


Rule 17 (taken from the floor)
Propose that the 1999/2000 NB Miata move from ST3 to ST4

The board recommended that the Chief Steward review this request before discussion at next meeting.
Bill Hosselbarth
COM Secretary 2011
1994 Mazda Miata
#49 PC

dinoracer
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 714
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:05 pm
Location: Hudson NH

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by dinoracer » Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:46 am

Added the following data for consideration regarding the floor submission for moving Miata 1999-2005 to SSC:

Mazda Miata 1999-2005 Classed as SSC

Justification:

Degree of difference in Factory HP/Weight figures when comparing 1990-1997 Miata vs 1999-2005 Miata, and 1999-2005 vs 2006 and up MX-5 (Miata)

Manf Model Year HP WT wt/hp Class ST Class Source
Mazda Miata 1990 116 2182 18.8 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1991 116 2182 18.8 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1992 116 2214 19.1 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1992 116 2214 19.1 SSC ST-4
Mazda Miata 1993 116 2223 19.2 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1994 128 2293 17.9 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1995 128 2293 17.9 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1995 128 2288 17.9 SSC ST-4
Mazda Miata 1996 133 2293 17.2 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1997 133 2359 17.7 SSC ST-4 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1996 133 2288 17.2 SSB ST-3

Mazda Miata 1999 140 2299 16.4 SSB ST-3 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 1999 140 2296 16.4 SSB ST-3
Mazda Miata 1999 140 2387 17.1 SSB ST-3 C & D
Mazda Miata 2000 140 2332 16.7 SSB ST-3 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 2000 140 2387 17.1 SSB ST-3
Mazda Miata 2001 142 2387 16.8 SSB ST-3 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 2002 142 2387 16.8 SSB ST-3 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 2003 142 2387 16.8 SSB ST-3 Miata.net
Mazda Miata 2004 142 2447 17.2 SSB ST-3 Miata.net

Mazda Miata 2006 170 2441 14.4 SSB ST-3
Mazda Miata 2007 167 2441 14.7 SSB ST-3
Mazda Miata 2009 167 2447 14.7 SSB ST-3
Mazda Miata Mazdaspeed 2004 178 2529 14.2 SSA ST-2

Range in Current SSC group is 19.2 to 17.2; however we already allow updating in the "next level" ST-4 class from 1.6 to 1.8 engine in early models, shrinking the range to 17.9 to 17.2. We'd probably allow the update in other-wise SSC Miatas also if anyone wanted to bother swapping the engine in a stock suspension/braked car.

The 1999-2005 Miata ranges from 17.2 to 16.4. Compare this to the 2006 and up MX-5 which is at 14.4-14.7

The 2004-05 Mazdaspeed Miata at 14.2 is classed in SSA

Since the 1990 thru 2005 cars share a lot of parts and design features, and the 2006- up cars are complete re-designs sharing no parts, grouping all the 1990--2005 cars ( save the turbo Mazdaspeed) makes more sense.


An alternative would be to move the 2006- up MX-5 to SSA with the Mazdaspeed, but most of the current SSA cars are at 12- 13.5 hp/wt now, so that may penalize that car. However, a quick look thru TT results from the past year show the 2006-up MX-5 would be competitive in that class (in ST trim), so it could be argued for...


Happy to hear any discussion for or against this change. Although this change would put me in a more competive class for my car, I didn't submit the original change request - I'm just adding information. I'm happy to play in whatever sandbox I'm plopped into.

Thanks Tom
Tom Cannon

COM Chief Steward (fka Chief of Operations, Chief of Tech, assistant BBQ cook, Club Secretary....I been around a while)
2000 Black Miata (sold) #26

jeffw
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 844
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:51 am
Location: Wilmington, MA

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by jeffw » Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:39 pm

Beyond HP, the NBs are known to have better suspension, and the SCCA is allowing retrofit of the NB front-end back to NAs.
Jeff Wasilko
On the Track: 1995 Miata #08
To the Track: 2007 Volvo 780
On the Street: 2017 Volvo V60 Polestar

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 554
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by nateh » Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:13 pm

It might be justifiably to move the 2003-05 Miatas to SSC, because they are heavier than the 1999-2002, and are just on the bottom end of the class after class other adjustments that I've proposed. However, there are many cars in SSB with worse numbers than the 1999-2002 Miatas. We can't consider the Miatas in isolation.

For purposes of comparing power and weight for later model cars, I have adopted www.internetautoguide.com/car-specifications. This is the most comprehensive site I've found, and it allows for some consistency in calculations. For older cars, I use Wikipedia and specialty sites as needed.

My working spreadsheet is at:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... l=en#gid=0
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

dinoracer
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 714
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:05 pm
Location: Hudson NH

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by dinoracer » Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:37 pm

Nate

That's a great spreadsheet, thanks for the link. I agree it's most useful to have the one source for data. I didn't mean to imply considering just the Miatas; just trying to stay on the topic of the proposed rule change.

I don't know if the weight difference in the NB Miatas is something that can be easily rectified - that is, is it possible the later cars just have a heavy spare tire or something.... Or did the structure get beefed up that 100 lbs, making it impossible to easily take out the weight to make it at least equal to the 1999-2003 car.

I didn't realize there was a large difference between the NA and NB suspension; In SS classes that would be an unfair advantage. In ST, I assume everyone's on coilovers so the difference would be much smaller? Or are there geometry issues/advantages at play also?

I think by looking at your sheet you're looking to eliminate most or all of the overlap that's developed between classes, which should be a good thing. But in doing it based on the hp/wt ratio "only", are we running the risk of not considering inherent advantages or disadvantages of a particular platform - for example FWD vs RWD vs AWD - and creating a different problem? I typed that and then went to find an example and found Subies/Lancers/Quattros plopped in the middle of each class HP /wt- wise, so maybe it really isn't an issue after all....
Tom Cannon

COM Chief Steward (fka Chief of Operations, Chief of Tech, assistant BBQ cook, Club Secretary....I been around a while)
2000 Black Miata (sold) #26

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 554
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by nateh » Mon Nov 15, 2010 7:45 pm

Tom -

I agree it would be wrong to depend completely on power to weight, to the extent that mitigating factors exist.

In mitigating factors, I would consider:
- high center of gravity (SUVs and trucks)
- incompetent suspension (some pony cars could qualify for this)
- intrusive software - e.g., "driver aids" that can't be disabled without illegal mods (Actually, this suggests a possible SS rule change. Something to noodle on.)
- or on the other side: huge torque advantage - e.g., a big diesel

I.e., only incontrovertible, big items. I don't think the suspension differences among Miatas qualifies.

- Nate
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

User avatar
boltonite
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:18 pm
Location: Bolton

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by boltonite » Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:02 am

Kudos to Nate (and his predecessors) for FINALLY getting the power:weight proposal approved. While not perfect, it is a huge improvement for classing new cars and represents a lot of thoughtful and often thankless work - so Thanks!

-FF

CP
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:19 pm
Location: West Simsbury, CT

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by CP » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:07 pm

The suspension differences between the NA and NB aren't huge, however the NB setup does have a bumpsteer advantage due to slightly different geometry. It is also heavier than all the NA cars (1.6L and 1.8L). The major change in 01 was the addition of variable valve timing to the motor which may account for the additional weight mentioned above.
-Cy
99 Spec Miata (SM/STU/STL/EP)
2011, 2013, 2014 NER STU Champion

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 554
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by nateh » Thu Nov 18, 2010 6:41 pm

As of last night's BOD meeting, here's where the classifications stand.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=CLrM-50B

It is a big step forward, but not perfect. In particular, there are a number of cars right on the margin between SSB and SSC that could easily be debated.

There will be more rules discussions at the next BOD meeting, Dec. 15.

Due to a server glitch, it appears that some of the proposals submitted since the October meeting have been lost. If in doubt about whether yours got through, please resubmit it.
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

User avatar
chaos4NH
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1894
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:58 pm
Location: NH

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by chaos4NH » Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:04 pm

Hi Nate. First off a public apology for my mis-stating the weight of the MS3. In fact, I checked my weight sheets and 3153 is almost right on the button. So, 12.0 lb/hp is correct on your spread sheet.

Why were the following cars in SSB with a lb/hp of 17.2 not moved to SSC along with the 2004-05 Mazda Miata with lb/hp of 17.2: The Honda Civic SI 2002-05, the Audi A4 V6 and the Neon ACR?

I don't see a class listing the Nissan GTR.
Sam
Chief of Operations

#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 554
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by nateh » Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:06 pm

Sam -

No harm done. Thanks for the input about the GTR - I'll look into it.

There are a lot of cars sitting on the borderline of SSB and SSC, and it could easily be that we should make some adjustments there. More research is called for, and I would welcome specific proposals (with quantitative rationale, I hope!)
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

nateh
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 554
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Vermont
Contact:

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by nateh » Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:42 pm

Nissan GT-R
3814 lbs
485 hp
7.9 lbs/hp

Puts it into SSU, which is where they are running. I'll propose a rule change.
Nate Hine
1985 driversupply Frankenspec
1995 Spec Miata #47(1) white-blue

dtlemoine
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:01 pm

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by dtlemoine » Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:48 am

Hi Nate - not that it matters for me, as this is a car I no longer own, but the E90 330i weighs 3400 lbs and the 330xi weighs 3616. Each have 255 hp. That model year (2006) seems to be misrepresented on alot of auto websites (autos.msn.com included). The xi was fairly competitive in SSA with sticky tires.
Dave

E36 328is | SD #14

dtlemoine
Speed Racer
Speed Racer
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:01 pm

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by dtlemoine » Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:53 am

Nick F and I will also be co-driving a painfully stock E36 325i next year - want to make sure thats represented. This past season it was considered SSB and at 3086 lbs & 189 hp I think it still falls into SSB for next year.
Dave

E36 328is | SD #14

User avatar
chaos4NH
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1894
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:58 pm
Location: NH

Re: The Board Rules Discussion Thread

Post by chaos4NH » Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:40 am

nateh wrote:Nissan GT-R
3814 lbs
485 hp
7.9 lbs/hp

Puts it into SSU, which is where they are running. I'll propose a rule change.
Thanks Nate. Please review the other 3 cars I mentioned. There were (are) 4 listed at 17.2 in SSB, but we only chose to move the Miata to SSC? I think the Miata would clean the clock of any of the 3 that remained in SSB, so I don't see the reasoning here. Certainly the Civic SI gives up a lot to the Miata, CG - frontal area - etc.
Sam
Chief of Operations

#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest