2012 Speed Ventures S2k Challenge Rules Feedback
11-17-2011, 02:45 PM
#1
Thread Starter
2012 Speed Ventures S2k Challenge Rules Feedback
Hello everyone,
SV and the committee will be having some more conference calls to discuss any potential changes to the current ruleset.
In the meantime, please make ONE post with your suggestions/feedback on the current rules, preferably in bullet format. Please only post your own thoughts, not comment on posts by others (to keep things nice and concise). This also lets us see what common opinions are.
As always, posts/feedback with solid data backing them will carry more weight.
I will update this post with feedback gathered from participants.
Thanks everyone!
SV and the committee will be having some more conference calls to discuss any potential changes to the current ruleset.
In the meantime, please make ONE post with your suggestions/feedback on the current rules, preferably in bullet format. Please only post your own thoughts, not comment on posts by others (to keep things nice and concise). This also lets us see what common opinions are.
As always, posts/feedback with solid data backing them will carry more weight.
I will update this post with feedback gathered from participants.
Thanks everyone!
11-17-2011, 03:07 PM
#2
Thread Starter
My feedback:
S2000 CR is overweighted in points.
1.00 - CR suspension
0.25 - 2.2L
0.25 - CR lip
0.50 - CR wing
0.25 - OEM hardtop
Evidence:
https://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/867...#entry20583400
2:06.00 with a stock 04 AP2 on 215/245 RE-01R (yes, OLD tires), hot weather, conservative alignment vs 2:03.5 on a CR with exhaust, 235/255 RE11/NT05, Charles Ng driving, track alignment.
Broken down into points, we are looking at a 0.25 (2.2L) point car vs a 2.75 (2.2L, hardtop, suspension, front lip, rear wing, catback exhaust, 235 front tires). Factoring in alignment and weather differences, we would expect the CR to be faster, given the points. For this purpose, we'll assume both drivers are of equal skill.
The time gap is 2.5 seconds.
The CR had a proper track alignment. The CR also ran in cooler weather. We all know the effects of having extra camber and ~20-25 degree lower temperatures. I believe the drivers to be of roughly equal skill.
Proposal:
0.50 - CR suspension
0.25 - Aftermarket springs up to 400 lb/in (~7k)
0.50 - Aftermarket springs 400-600 lb/in (~7k-11k)
0.75 - Aftermarket springs stiffer than 600-800 lb/in (~11k-14k)
1.00 - Aftermarket springs stiffer than 800 lb/in (14k+)
0.50 - Aftermarket shocks (no adjustments, no custom valving)
0.75 - Aftermarket shocks (single adjustmentable, no custom valving)
1.00 - Aftermarket shocks (double/triple/quad adjustable, custom valving allowed)
Debatable "static" values:
1.50 - Adjustable coilover suspension up to 600lb/in
2.00 - Adjustable coilover suspension stiffer than 600lb/in
2.2L does not make more power than the 2.0L
Evidence:
https://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/876...t-power-output
Proposal:
0 points for 2.2L
GTC200 is undervalued
Evidence:
It is the "de facto" wing in street class. If everyone is using it, it can be extrapolated that it is "too good" for its point value. It is further evidenced by the fact that most GTC-200 users do not use a highly aggressive angle.
Proposal:
1.25 or 1.50 points - Level 2 wing.
Level 1 and level 3 wing remains unchanged.
ECU is overvalued
Evidence:
My dynos (and countless others I have seen at Church). The ECU accounts for 1/3 of my power gain, while the other 2/3 is done by the headerback alone (0.50 points). This is evidenced by comparing my stock dyno vs exhaust only vs exhaust + tune. Adding the tune adds power, but that power comes primarily from the increased redline, not from tuning changes.
Proposal
0.25 - ECU
Level 1 R-Compound tires
Unsure if 1.5 points is undervalued. 2.0 point too much?
1.75 points? Undecided.
S2000 CR is overweighted in points.
1.00 - CR suspension
0.25 - 2.2L
0.25 - CR lip
0.50 - CR wing
0.25 - OEM hardtop
Evidence:
https://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/867...#entry20583400
2:06.00 with a stock 04 AP2 on 215/245 RE-01R (yes, OLD tires), hot weather, conservative alignment vs 2:03.5 on a CR with exhaust, 235/255 RE11/NT05, Charles Ng driving, track alignment.
Broken down into points, we are looking at a 0.25 (2.2L) point car vs a 2.75 (2.2L, hardtop, suspension, front lip, rear wing, catback exhaust, 235 front tires). Factoring in alignment and weather differences, we would expect the CR to be faster, given the points. For this purpose, we'll assume both drivers are of equal skill.
The time gap is 2.5 seconds.
The CR had a proper track alignment. The CR also ran in cooler weather. We all know the effects of having extra camber and ~20-25 degree lower temperatures. I believe the drivers to be of roughly equal skill.
Proposal:
0.50 - CR suspension
0.25 - Aftermarket springs up to 400 lb/in (~7k)
0.50 - Aftermarket springs 400-600 lb/in (~7k-11k)
0.75 - Aftermarket springs stiffer than 600-800 lb/in (~11k-14k)
1.00 - Aftermarket springs stiffer than 800 lb/in (14k+)
0.50 - Aftermarket shocks (no adjustments, no custom valving)
0.75 - Aftermarket shocks (single adjustmentable, no custom valving)
1.00 - Aftermarket shocks (double/triple/quad adjustable, custom valving allowed)
Debatable "static" values:
1.50 - Adjustable coilover suspension up to 600lb/in
2.00 - Adjustable coilover suspension stiffer than 600lb/in
2.2L does not make more power than the 2.0L
Evidence:
https://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/876...t-power-output
Proposal:
0 points for 2.2L
GTC200 is undervalued
Evidence:
It is the "de facto" wing in street class. If everyone is using it, it can be extrapolated that it is "too good" for its point value. It is further evidenced by the fact that most GTC-200 users do not use a highly aggressive angle.
Proposal:
1.25 or 1.50 points - Level 2 wing.
Level 1 and level 3 wing remains unchanged.
ECU is overvalued
Evidence:
My dynos (and countless others I have seen at Church). The ECU accounts for 1/3 of my power gain, while the other 2/3 is done by the headerback alone (0.50 points). This is evidenced by comparing my stock dyno vs exhaust only vs exhaust + tune. Adding the tune adds power, but that power comes primarily from the increased redline, not from tuning changes.
Proposal
0.25 - ECU
Level 1 R-Compound tires
Unsure if 1.5 points is undervalued. 2.0 point too much?
1.75 points? Undecided.
11-17-2011, 04:07 PM
#3
Registered User
I'm a CR owner and I agree with Mike's assessments and proposals. I also like the proposals made by the other S2k guys below me. 2012 will be much more exciting than this year! 
Due to one post rule:
(1) Reworking the "OEM" sizing aftermarket wheels to 0.25 pts: Front wheels should allowed to be up to 7.5" in width with a front tire no larger than 225/45/17 and rear wheels should be allowed to be up to 9" in width with a rear tire no larger than 255/40/17. I still believe stock class should only be for truly stock vehicles with a little modification using OEM components to go faster (Doug), but this rule may entice more people to run in stock class.
(2) Combine Mod-S and -R together with a maximum point allowance of 10 points like in 2010. Street should be 4 points and stock should be left with 0.5 points (which is fair for a stock vehicle anyways).
(3) R-comp must be kept to at least 1.5 points, but the arguments made with other driver's data seems to prove that it's better to be at least 1.75 to 2 points.
(4) Address the AP2 motor and AP1 transmission issue. This swap may be grounds for a 0.25 point assessment.
(5) Alex (momo) should address if the LSD and FD actually did anything to improve times. I think the assessment is fair.
(6) APR GTC-200 wing has similar wing dimensions as some of the Voltex wings. It is larger than the 1S, but smaller than 2 through 7. It is probably similar in size as the Voltex Type 1 wing yet the Type 1 wing is assessed higher points. Maybe the GTC-200 is supposed to be assessed as 1.5 to 1.75 and the Level 3 wing may be closer to 2.25 to 2.5? Maybe the current system is good enough with Level 2 being bumped up to at least 1.5 points.
(7) Mike's (psychoazn) assessment on suspension seems plausible. CR suspension is heavily weighed and should be brought down to 0.75 points. Even Mike (dipstick) agrees to this assessment as well. Springs appear to be properly assessed based on Mike's (psychoazn) proposal.
(8) I have done some assessments as well comparing AP1 vs. AP2 motor and the power under the curve is greater on the AP1 after tuning, thus, it's better to assess the AP2 motor to be 0 points. ECU should be assessed as 0.25 points as it did not yield any significant gain in lap times.
Due to one post rule:
(1) Reworking the "OEM" sizing aftermarket wheels to 0.25 pts: Front wheels should allowed to be up to 7.5" in width with a front tire no larger than 225/45/17 and rear wheels should be allowed to be up to 9" in width with a rear tire no larger than 255/40/17. I still believe stock class should only be for truly stock vehicles with a little modification using OEM components to go faster (Doug), but this rule may entice more people to run in stock class.
(2) Combine Mod-S and -R together with a maximum point allowance of 10 points like in 2010. Street should be 4 points and stock should be left with 0.5 points (which is fair for a stock vehicle anyways).
(3) R-comp must be kept to at least 1.5 points, but the arguments made with other driver's data seems to prove that it's better to be at least 1.75 to 2 points.
(4) Address the AP2 motor and AP1 transmission issue. This swap may be grounds for a 0.25 point assessment.
(5) Alex (momo) should address if the LSD and FD actually did anything to improve times. I think the assessment is fair.
(6) APR GTC-200 wing has similar wing dimensions as some of the Voltex wings. It is larger than the 1S, but smaller than 2 through 7. It is probably similar in size as the Voltex Type 1 wing yet the Type 1 wing is assessed higher points. Maybe the GTC-200 is supposed to be assessed as 1.5 to 1.75 and the Level 3 wing may be closer to 2.25 to 2.5? Maybe the current system is good enough with Level 2 being bumped up to at least 1.5 points.
(7) Mike's (psychoazn) assessment on suspension seems plausible. CR suspension is heavily weighed and should be brought down to 0.75 points. Even Mike (dipstick) agrees to this assessment as well. Springs appear to be properly assessed based on Mike's (psychoazn) proposal.
(8) I have done some assessments as well comparing AP1 vs. AP2 motor and the power under the curve is greater on the AP1 after tuning, thus, it's better to assess the AP2 motor to be 0 points. ECU should be assessed as 0.25 points as it did not yield any significant gain in lap times.
11-17-2011, 04:47 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: SoCal...
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm putting my stock suspension back on so I can run the stock class next year, and the only question/suggestion I have concerns the following:
0.50 = Any deviation from original OEM staggered wheel setup up to 9" wide front and/or rear.
I can understand a 9" square setup being worth .50, however I run a staggered setup with 7.5's in the Front and 9's in the back, which is only .5 wider each than AP2 sizes (7's Front and 8.5's Rear) that are allowed, is this really worth .50? I'd like to see a staggered setup like this be dropped down to .25
Would an Apexi AFC / NEO etc... be considered an Aftermarket ECU, or are they free to use? I didn't see anything in the rules pertaining to them.
If it would get more people in the stock class it might help to raise the points to 1.00, or if they have more than .5 up to 1 point, you have to add .5 second to your lap time, that way guys that have full exhaust and an intake could run in the stock class where they could be more competitive than in the street class.
0.50 = Any deviation from original OEM staggered wheel setup up to 9" wide front and/or rear.
I can understand a 9" square setup being worth .50, however I run a staggered setup with 7.5's in the Front and 9's in the back, which is only .5 wider each than AP2 sizes (7's Front and 8.5's Rear) that are allowed, is this really worth .50? I'd like to see a staggered setup like this be dropped down to .25
Would an Apexi AFC / NEO etc... be considered an Aftermarket ECU, or are they free to use? I didn't see anything in the rules pertaining to them.
If it would get more people in the stock class it might help to raise the points to 1.00, or if they have more than .5 up to 1 point, you have to add .5 second to your lap time, that way guys that have full exhaust and an intake could run in the stock class where they could be more competitive than in the street class.
11-17-2011, 05:04 PM
#5
Registered User
(1) I too think that the low end r-comps (ie nt01) are undervalued. I was about 2 seconds faster on dustin's wheels on a hot day, running 255/40 fronts and 245/45 rears, and that was my first and only session on rcomps ever.
(2) I still don't agree with the .25 pts for an ap2 motor. Maybe assign the points for an ap2 motor + ap1 transmission? We should ask MIke T about his experience switching. He mentioned to me that the power is noticeable, but the extra shifting is not good. I also haven't seen his lap times improving since the switch.
(3) Speaking on the apr gtc 200, I think Doug was 3 seconds faster when he put on Dustin's wing at the BW ccw event.
(4) Personally, I think its more fun to have a lot of people in a few classes vs a few people in many classes. So I am in favor of shrinking the number of classes in any way. The drawback is that there are less prizes going to the participants. Or maybe SV can re-appropriate the wealth to those beyond 3rd place in the other classes.
(2) I still don't agree with the .25 pts for an ap2 motor. Maybe assign the points for an ap2 motor + ap1 transmission? We should ask MIke T about his experience switching. He mentioned to me that the power is noticeable, but the extra shifting is not good. I also haven't seen his lap times improving since the switch.
(3) Speaking on the apr gtc 200, I think Doug was 3 seconds faster when he put on Dustin's wing at the BW ccw event.
(4) Personally, I think its more fun to have a lot of people in a few classes vs a few people in many classes. So I am in favor of shrinking the number of classes in any way. The drawback is that there are less prizes going to the participants. Or maybe SV can re-appropriate the wealth to those beyond 3rd place in the other classes.
11-17-2011, 06:57 PM
#6
A couple of loop holes I wouldn't mind closed up...
1. Current-APR front bumper free Proposed 0.25 = Level 1 Front Aero: aftermarket front bumper or any aftermarket or CR lip (must not have splitter built-in). Ummm. its an aftermarket front bumper.
2. Clarification of the 9" wheel for non staggered set ups. I think we would get more stock class competitors if they can run in stock with aftermarket wheels.
3. Combine Mod S/R into one Mod class. Too diluted of a field, some events didn't even have enough for a full podium.
3.1 Compromise on the max points for Mod class to level the field if R-Comps are too fast.
4. APR GTC 200 is undervalued. By how much, thats up for debate. BUT if the point value increases dump the points for the Gurney flap...
5. NT01's are pretty close to the right points. Albert was 2 seconds faster with my set up and I was about 1.5 seconds slower when we swapped. (If someone wants to swap at streets to test my tires during the first session, be my guest)
I plan on jumping up to Mod next year. Not sure how competitive ill be but Im dying to put my coilovers on.
1. Current-APR front bumper free Proposed 0.25 = Level 1 Front Aero: aftermarket front bumper or any aftermarket or CR lip (must not have splitter built-in). Ummm. its an aftermarket front bumper.
2. Clarification of the 9" wheel for non staggered set ups. I think we would get more stock class competitors if they can run in stock with aftermarket wheels.
3. Combine Mod S/R into one Mod class. Too diluted of a field, some events didn't even have enough for a full podium.
3.1 Compromise on the max points for Mod class to level the field if R-Comps are too fast.
4. APR GTC 200 is undervalued. By how much, thats up for debate. BUT if the point value increases dump the points for the Gurney flap...
5. NT01's are pretty close to the right points. Albert was 2 seconds faster with my set up and I was about 1.5 seconds slower when we swapped. (If someone wants to swap at streets to test my tires during the first session, be my guest)
I plan on jumping up to Mod next year. Not sure how competitive ill be but Im dying to put my coilovers on.
11-17-2011, 09:04 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago / ATL / Tallassee, TN
Posts: 2,818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm watching this thread even though I don't participate. I've though about trying to get something similar started in my region. I think it would be fun.
Trending Topics
11-18-2011, 09:39 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i read the rules a few times before i purchased my05 and have tracked a decent amount of s2k's... have not tested parts back to back very much yet
my limited opinion being in one s2k challenge event recently..(happy to finish 1.0 sec from first place in street class in my 2.5 point car)
changes i suggest
* Two level coil-over points system...
coils should have different points above a certain cost or a certain spring rate .. maybe over 650 and under 650 - maybe over/under $2500
900lb springs on appropriate dampers have an advantage over 515-550lb springs(especially going over the chicane at streets full bore or other bump stop situations)..
currently you have to pay to play shelling out 3k for src's or better otherwise you have a disadvantage on track .. why not even out the gap by adding this two level coil proposal, its the STREET class and keeping the costs down while making it easier to live on the street is enough reason
myself and many others wont have to run a full race suspension in our dd street class cars!
**updating or back dating suspension parts should not be free of points, results may prove this plausible.. it makes sense a measurable advantage would be shown if tested and i bet it has been done
***koni adjustable shocks on aftermarket springs shouldn't be the same as a set of tein src's or motons for that matter. is that how the rules are written or am i missing something?
maybe it should read:
-adjustable shocks on lowering springs - 1.75 or 1.5
-cheap/mid level coils which might be overvalued already 2.0, or move to 1.75
-expensive coils on stiff springs - 2.0 or 2.25 if your not changing mid level coil overs rating
****ap2 motor and trans in stock config = no advantage or maybe a disadvantage .. its obvious why if you have driven both cars at the tracks we drive.. if you lower the vtec and raise the rev limiter 300 revs on the ap2 and have a similar set up ap1 im not so sure but it seems others agree the ap1 has a better curve
*****ECU
we should have different points for different computer mods
maybe we can have different points if you lower the vtec point/raise redline vs not doing so... or if you have the ability to change the a/f ratio vs not... maybe this will help ease the pain of my05 which costs a ton to mod the motor safely.
am i correct that an aem ecu is currently the same points as a vtec controller?
******location of wing makes a large difference in effectiveness.. i know a low trunk mounted gt200 wing is less effective than a gt200 mounted in line with or above the roof line, or is everyone mounting them high
jeff
my limited opinion being in one s2k challenge event recently..(happy to finish 1.0 sec from first place in street class in my 2.5 point car)
changes i suggest
* Two level coil-over points system...
coils should have different points above a certain cost or a certain spring rate .. maybe over 650 and under 650 - maybe over/under $2500
900lb springs on appropriate dampers have an advantage over 515-550lb springs(especially going over the chicane at streets full bore or other bump stop situations)..
currently you have to pay to play shelling out 3k for src's or better otherwise you have a disadvantage on track .. why not even out the gap by adding this two level coil proposal, its the STREET class and keeping the costs down while making it easier to live on the street is enough reason
myself and many others wont have to run a full race suspension in our dd street class cars!
**updating or back dating suspension parts should not be free of points, results may prove this plausible.. it makes sense a measurable advantage would be shown if tested and i bet it has been done
***koni adjustable shocks on aftermarket springs shouldn't be the same as a set of tein src's or motons for that matter. is that how the rules are written or am i missing something?
maybe it should read:
-adjustable shocks on lowering springs - 1.75 or 1.5
-cheap/mid level coils which might be overvalued already 2.0, or move to 1.75
-expensive coils on stiff springs - 2.0 or 2.25 if your not changing mid level coil overs rating
****ap2 motor and trans in stock config = no advantage or maybe a disadvantage .. its obvious why if you have driven both cars at the tracks we drive.. if you lower the vtec and raise the rev limiter 300 revs on the ap2 and have a similar set up ap1 im not so sure but it seems others agree the ap1 has a better curve
*****ECU
we should have different points for different computer mods
maybe we can have different points if you lower the vtec point/raise redline vs not doing so... or if you have the ability to change the a/f ratio vs not... maybe this will help ease the pain of my05 which costs a ton to mod the motor safely.
am i correct that an aem ecu is currently the same points as a vtec controller?
******location of wing makes a large difference in effectiveness.. i know a low trunk mounted gt200 wing is less effective than a gt200 mounted in line with or above the roof line, or is everyone mounting them high
jeff