JohnnyV Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 I guess I'm the most vocal defender of CCC at this point. Quote As its name shows, Spec Miata is a "specified" class. This means that the rules for allowable modifications to the car are very strict. The class intends to put drivers on a very even footing by making their cars as identical as possible. The rules are far more conservative than the Improved Touring category, but provide equivalent safety measures. Because of the support of Mazda through Mazdaspeed, the wide availability of the car on the used market, plentiful and inexpensive parts, and the simplicity of maintenance on the cars, Spec Miata has become a very popular class. Also adding to the appeal is the fact that A Spec Miata can be raced in both SM and ITA/ITS in SCCA Regional Competition. A typical race-ready spec miata can be purchased on the market for $8000–$35,000 depending on race win history and specific modifications. Let's swap the content for CCC Quote As its name shows, Club Civic is a "specified" class. This means that the rules for allowable modifications to the car are very strict. The class intends to put drivers on a very even footing by making their cars as identical as possible. The rules are far more conservative than the PTE category, but provide equivalent safety measures. Because of the support of Honda Civics through a large amount of veteran WSCC racers, the wide availability of the car on the used market, plentiful and inexpensive parts, and the simplicity of maintenance on the cars, CCC has become a very popular class. Also adding to the appeal is the fact that A Club Civic can be raced in both CCC and PTF/PTE in NASA Regional Competition. A typical race-ready club civic can be purchased on the market for $4000–$8,000 depending on race win history and specific modifications. Tired or rusty Club Civics make great ice racers. 4 CCC prohibits the expensive parts in PTE. It can't cost more. Based on learnings from last year: CCC should have a spec tire – we really only had 3 different tires represented last year anyways a minimum weight – just base it on the heaviest reasonably prepped car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Eh. Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 Want to really even it out ... toss all the car numbers into a hat and have a draw at the beginning of the day ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 44 minutes ago, Jim Eh. said: Want to really even it out ... toss all the car numbers into a hat and have a draw at the beginning of the day ... After 1 or 2 laps it doesn’t matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 So can we agree that one of the options we will vote on is: CCC+ Minimum Weight Spec Tire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsurzyshyn Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 Makes sense to me. Is it basically between Falken and the $100 tires? If it's Falken would it be 14 or 15? I think Minimum weight shouldn't be the heaviest car/driver package but a more typical car weight (say 2200 or whatever is sort of standard for an ef with a cage) + 190 for the driver and gear. Damon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 I continue to recommend #2286. IT3 minimum weight. Easily attainable for rookies and first year builds. It also doesn’t penalize the older race cars built to run in “this class” years past. Not to mention more inclusive for newer civics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coach Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 4 hours ago, Mat said: I continue to recommend #2286. IT3 minimum weight. Easily attainable for rookies and first year builds. It also doesn’t penalize the older race cars built to run in “this class” years past. Not to mention more inclusive for newer civics. Min weight 2286lbs sounds like a great place to start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyV Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 12 hours ago, coach said: Min weight 2286lbs sounds like a great place to start. Can a 95-2000 civic hit that target easily? 89-95 should be no problem. Quote Makes sense to me. Is it basically between Falken and the $100 tires? If it's Falken would it be 14 or 15? Don ran Hankook RS-3 – the most expensive of the bunch, but they did last him quite a while Westlakes @ $100 per tire, smallest size available is 15 Falken Azenis, more expensive but also more size options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 16 minutes ago, JohnnyV said: Can a 95-2000 civic hit that target easily? 89-95 should be no problem. Don ran Hankook RS-3 – the most expensive of the bunch, but they did last him quite a while Westlakes @ $100 per tire, smallest size available is 15 Falken Azenis, more expensive but also more size options There are a few members pushing for a lower weight. Somewhere around #2200-2250. Schteeve is probably best to advise weight for 95-00. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ianfromduff Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 I have a 99 civic hatch I'm slowly prepping for ccc. My understanding is that these year civics are aloud to run vtec to make up for the heavier weight of the car. Is there an option to just set a power to weight ratio limit for the cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsurzyshyn Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 2286 makes sense to me for driver and car weight. I'd probably push for Azenis as I'm interested in running 14s but I'm willing to go with the pack on this one. Damon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 I feel I need to clarify this. Your BASE WEIGHT as defined in your performance touring group can not be raised to compensate for a points deficit. For example if you are assigned a base weight of #2500 you can not add 25 pounds to gain an extra performance point. Some members seem to be under the impression that you can add weight to allow more mods/points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVOXR4STi Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 96-00 Civic = EK Chassis My car, 97 Civic Hatch with a 1.75" cage, ran a competition weight of 2190 last year. I have no carbon fiber, rear hatch glass replaced with lexan. I removed 200lbs from my IT3 weight, simply by removing selective bits and pieces, cost was nearly nothing other than my time. Everything on my car is bigger and heavier than the EF chassis, so weight reduction can be had. I expect my competition weight for next season will be 2250, I will be adding additional cage support to the A-Pillars, roof and floor. Removing weight is the biggest bang for buck mod you can do. My car become much more competitive and enjoyable to drive, with less tire and brake wear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVOXR4STi Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 4 hours ago, Ianfromduff said: I have a 99 civic hatch I'm slowly prepping for ccc. My understanding is that these year civics are aloud to run vtec to make up for the heavier weight of the car. Is there an option to just set a power to weight ratio limit for the cars. Yes, because my car has an engine swap (Vtec in a 97 CX hatchback) it is classed using the Wt/HP Ratio. Totally legal within the NASA rules. My car dyno'd 115HP at the wheels, using a completion weight of 2100lbs, put me in PTE class. You could class your car similarly, based on Weight/HP for either PTF or PTE. Ian... plug a similar HP number for your car into the spreadsheet on the "Adj WT-HP" Tab, pick a competition weight, check the appropriate boxes. You may be pleasantly surprised. NASA works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVOXR4STi Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 3 hours ago, Mat said: I feel I need to clarify this. Your BASE WEIGHT as defined in your performance touring group can not be raised to compensate for a points deficit. For example if you are assigned a base weight of #2500 you can not add 25 pounds to gain an extra performance point. Some members seem to be under the impression that you can add weight to allow more mods/points. Correct. For example, CRX Si 88-91 Base Weight = 2174, Honda Civic Si 89-91 Base Weight = 2291. If you are below these base weights you may apply unused modification points to compensate. If you are over your base weight, you do not get additional points to use for other modifications. I'm not sure everyone completely understands the NASA classing system. It seems very well thought out, in regards to having various car configurations and manufactures competing on a level field, Everyone should spend some time trying to understand it. https://www.nasaproracing.com/rules https://nasa-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/document/document/4271/PT_Rules_2017_v12.1--12-27-16.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVOXR4STi Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 I found some time to have a thought about Club Class. I'm not completely sold on the spec tire idea. I think it would work if every car was the same, running a true spec class, but we are not that. I would suggest the following three options. 1- The current NASA rule set, exactly as written, running in class PTF. For most PTF would allow a total of 19 modification points, current CCC competitors may be required to remove modifications. 2- Club Class which follows the NASA rule set, but simply limits the points allotment for PTE. (no arbitrary minimum weight, NASA includes base or competition weights for each competitor). 3- No change, NASA rules, full PTE points. $$$ Proposal: Create a Club Class which reduces the NASA points allotment. Reducing the points allowance would eliminate the purchase of expensive motor mods, there is simply no points allowance for it. It solves the issue of unrealistic competition weight, there is no longer unused points available to apply drastic weight reduction. Maintaining the current NASA rules would allow for a more inclusive club class, hopefully a larger group, other makes and models would "fit". Rather than a strict spec class, there is room for some modification, you can tinker, but need to be very selective as your points allotment is limited. If everyone currently in CCC uses a base class from NASA of PTF. This allows a points allotment of 39 to move from bottom of PTF to the top PTE. Everyone should have the WCMA/NASA spreadsheet used to class their car. What if we limit the points total to a maximum of 30? Of which only 11 may be used in PTE class. You would get your full allotment of 19 to use in PTF, at which point you are bumped up one class to PTE where you are allowed a further 11 points. If your car is classed by NASA with a base of PTG (it's a heavy under powered slug), you would use the 19 points for PTG, 19 for PTF, and 11 for PTE. Below I built a model around the CRX Si ('88-'91), base weight is 2174, 205mm tire size with the following modifications. I think the standard setup for all the Honda's with small variations. I set a minimum competition weight of 2174lbs, chosen because it is already assigned by the NASA table of vehicle weights for CRX. If you don't have a CRX and can't get to 2174, you then have a few weight reduction points to use elsewhere. No Club Class car would be allowed a competition weight below 2174lbs. I suspect actually requiring a set lower limit would not be required, as there simply will not be excess points available to apply. Honda CRX Si 88-91 Base Class - PTF Asterisk Points +7 (because you showed up with a CRX, we don't like you) I think NASA rules give CRX +7, because base weight is 117lbs less than 89-91 Civic, 89-91 Civic is allowed to remove 117lbs using a points allotment of +8. A8 - DOT-Approved (non-R-compound) tires with a UTQG treadwear rating of 120-200 +2 Section B - WEIGHT REDUCTION Base Weight 2174 - Min Comp Wt 2174 = 0 lbs reduction = 0 points C4 - Modification of the BTM air intake/box +1 C22 - Modification, porting, or replacement of the BTM exhaust manifold or header(s) (includes any/all other exhaust and catalytic converter modifications) +5 D5 - Added limited slip differential or welded/locked differential +3 E3 - Non-BTM or modified/re-valved shocks/struts/dampers +3 E5 - Non-BTM or modified coil springs, bump stops, leaf springs/spacers/brackets, or torsion bars +2 E7 - Add, replace, remove, or modify anti-roll bars (swaybars - front, rear, or both). +2 E9 - Replace, modify, or remove control arms +4 Total modification points = 28 Honda Civic Si 89-91 Base Class - PTF A8 - DOT-Approved (non-R-compound) tires with a UTQG treadwear rating of 120-200 +2 Section B - WEIGHT REDUCTION Base Weight 2291 - Min Comp Wt 2174 = 117 lbs reduction = +8 points C4 - Modification of the BTM air intake/box +1 C22 - Modification, porting, or replacement of the BTM exhaust manifold or header(s) (includes any/all other exhaust and catalytic converter modifications) +5 D5 - Added limited slip differential or welded/locked differential +3 E3 - Non-BTM or modified/re-valved shocks/struts/dampers +3 E5 - Non-BTM or modified coil springs, bump stops, leaf springs/spacers/brackets, or torsion bars +2 E7 - Add, replace, remove, or modify anti-roll bars (swaybars - front, rear, or both). +2 E9 - Replace, modify, or remove control arms +4 Total modification points = 29 Honda Civic HB 96-00, Classed as Wt/HP Base Class - PTF A8 - DOT-Approved (non-R-compound) tires with a UTQG treadwear rating of 120-200 +2 Section B - WEIGHT REDUCTION Base Weight 2350 - Min Comp Wt 2174 = -176lbs reduction = 13 points D5 - Added limited slip differential or welded/locked differential +3 E3 - Non-BTM or modified/re-valved shocks/struts/dampers +3 E5 - Non-BTM or modified coil springs, bump stops, leaf springs/spacers/brackets, or torsion bars +2 E7 - Add, replace, remove, or modify anti-roll bars (swaybars - front, rear, or both). +2 E9 - Replace, modify, or remove control arms +4 Total modification points = 29 Apply to Spec Miata... Base Class - PTF Asterisk Points +14 (because Miata's are awesome, but everyone hates you, here's some points) A8 - DOT-Approved (non-R-compound) tires with a UTQG treadwear rating of 120-200 +2 Section B - WEIGHT REDUCTION Base Weight 2185 - Min Comp Wt 2300 = 0 lbs reduction = +0 points C4 - Modification of the BTM air intake/box +1 C23 - Any modification to the BTM exhaust piping and/or catalytic converter (includes muffler modification or replacement) +3 D5 - Added limited slip differential or welded/locked differential +3 E3 - Non-BTM or modified/re-valved shocks/struts/dampers +3 E5 - Non-BTM or modified coil springs, bump stops, leaf springs/spacers/brackets, or torsion bars +2 E7 - Add, replace, remove, or modify anti-roll bars (swaybars - front, rear, or both). +2 Total modification points = 30 Apply to 2010 Toyota Matrix Base Class - PTG/PTF Asterisk Points +7 A8 - DOT-Approved (non-R-compound) tires with a UTQG treadwear rating of 120-200 +2 Section B - WEIGHT REDUCTION Base Weight 2770 - Min Comp Wt 2480 = 290lbs reduction = +19 points C4 - Modification of the BTM air intake/box +1 C22 - Modification, porting, or replacement of the BTM exhaust manifold or header(s) (includes any/all other exhaust and catalytic converter modifications) +5 D5 - Added limited slip differential or welded/locked differential +3 E3 - Non-BTM or modified/re-valved shocks/struts/dampers +3 E5 - Non-BTM or modified coil springs, bump stops, leaf springs/spacers/brackets, or torsion bars +2 E7 - Add, replace, remove, or modify anti-roll bars (swaybars - front, rear, or both). +2 E9 - Replace, modify, or remove control arms +4 Total modification points = 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 Wow Schteeve. Great work, as always. I have to disagree on your options a bit however. I feel option 1 and 3 are basically the same. That being said I’d like to consolidate them into one. There’s another option that’s keeps coming up and I feel we need to offer it as a voting point. I propose the options as follows. 1- The current NASA rule set, exactly as written, members can choose either performance touring group and we dissolve CCC for 2018. It allows any car to compete within the guidelines and lay the groundwork for more inclusive racing. 2- Club Class - which follows the NASA rule set, but simply limits the points allotment for PTE. (no arbitrary minimum weight, NASA includes base or competition weights for each competitor) Club Class not limited to Honda Civic. 3- CCC, Minimum weight, Spec tire. I would appreciate cooperation with our group to have this decided for our next meeting on Thursday evening. If anyone has any points to make or feels that this needs to be delayed please make yourself heard ASAP. I plan on offering a vote in person at the meeting. If you will not be attending you can contact me via pm to cast your vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsurzyshyn Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 OK I had some good discussions and thought about it a bit. I'm going with Option 1 and will run my car in PTF. Damon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottMcD Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 Hi Mat. I'm still not sure I should be having a vote on this but if I have one I would say option 1. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 Ok we will leave your vote for a tiebreaker if necessary. You watched CCC and it’s progression over the years. I think you deserve a vote in the best interest of the club and beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVOXR4STi Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 21 hours ago, Mat said: I have to disagree on your options a bit however. I feel option 1 and 3 are basically the same. That being said I’d like to consolidate them into one. There’s another option that’s keeps coming up and I feel we need to offer it as a voting point. Yes, my option 1 and 3 use the same rule set. The only difference would be, for option 1 everyone agrees to run PTF, rather than splitting the class into two groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 Looking at Steve's calculation examples it seems apparent that most cars will be challenged to all go PTF without removing modifications. Obviously running PTF is possible for all our cars however I strongly suspect many won't "un modify" their car by removing a LSD or going back to stock suspension. This will inevitably break the group into some PTF and some PTE. Then comes the aspect of being PTE with 39 points to spend (for the civics) which will result in a broad range of options that inevitably costs much more money. I'd be curious to know many cars last year were running at the max points allowed. I like the idea of the structured points and hp/weight classing system developed by some very knowledgable and experienced people at NASA. I do however suspect our group is just stuck between the 2 classes. One a bit too hot and one a bit too cold.... For these reasons my vote would be to fully utilize the NASA classing however with a limited points cap (10?) for PTE. (Option 2) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyV Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 Option 1 – PTF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRX Don Posted January 18, 2018 Author Share Posted January 18, 2018 Quote 11 hours ago, Mike said: I strongly suspect many won't "un modify" their car I agree with what you have said about PTE and PTF but I want to say that I will unmodify if that's what it takes to run with the rest of the field. Hopefully more competitors will feel the same. In my opinion it makes the most sense to take something off my car (free or nearly free) to run with a larger group. More fun and cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 Thank you to every one who voted. Option 1 - 11 Votes Option 2 - 3 Votes Option 3 - 0 Votes We have overwhelmingly voted to dissolve CCC and follow the Performance Touring Rules exactly as written. I may have eluded to certain members leaning towards a certain group within these rules. It is now my understanding that most everyone will try and follow the group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 Good to hear we are one step closer to racing as a group. This is the reason I got a crx! Several racers have already indicated their preference towards PTF however is it possible for others to weigh in to confirm that this will be the predominant group? I'm starting my car from scratch so I need to know what to build or budget for. I'll throw my hat in for PTF as having only 12 penalty points to play with will keep it simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 Car #5 PTF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keen12a Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'll be running PTF in car 21. I was well within the bounds of PTF last year and will continue to be this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRX Don Posted January 19, 2018 Author Share Posted January 19, 2018 PTF for me too. Minor changes needed to bring it down to PTF, easy to do. I count 6 in PTF so far. Thanks Mat for getting a decision, and thanks to all who participated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nopistons Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 #17 RaceTrix was/is a PTF car as built. No changes required. This decision should work out nicely for others who want to join in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.