No pictures, but I could if you want. Imagine a bullet cam on top of a Modifry mount. Then a ludicrous birds' nest of wires in the secret compartment and the Aiptek camera inside a foam block I carved hastily at 2008 Nationals to keep the darn camera from shutting off tucked in the glove box.

Then the DL1 is velcroed where the spare tire normally sits, with some CAT5 cable running from the ECU area along the left side of the car and into the trunk to mate up with the DL1.

The hardest part of this is learning to efficiently use the DL1 software. It's a big complex program that takes a LONG time and a lot of experimentation to master.

 

Any updates with Nationals setups and what worked or did not work?

I'll go:
anti-roll bars F/R: Gendron 1.25"x0.25"x36" @6/stock
ride-height F/R: 13.5"/13.25"
springs F/R: 850#/750#, 7"x2.5" + helpers
toe F/R: 0"/1/4"
camber F/R: -1.7*/-2.0*
Hankooks at 35psi
intake, exhaust, and tuning stock

Shortcomings:
Initially, the car had a touch too much transitional oversteer. It was manageable, but required smoother inputs. Front rebound was reduced one click to resolve it. Saturday was just right for getting temp into the Hankooks, however, Sunday kept the Hankooks on the cooler side.

My car is setup to keep the rear in the back and progressively break away. This allows aggressive sweeper speeds, early throttle, and abrupt transitions. Exiting long corners induces understeer unless deeper trail braking is used.

On the West we blipped the limiter through the first few offsets and railed the limiter through the slalom. On East we blipped the limiter into and out of the walloms, into the pivot, then went to third through the high-speed transition. A higher limiter may have resolved all limiter hits except where we went to third. On the other hand, improving power may hit the higher limiter just the same.

I didn't drive horribly, but I wasn't aggressive enough and the times showed, especially on East.

 

What didn't work? Old Hankooks.

After looking at their wear I've got some good input and will be trying more camber all around and a LOT more pressure.


Our car sucked. Wouldn't put power down anywhere and never once "gripped" the surface. Was like driving on ice. Was better on Wednesday on newish Toyo's but it was quick to overheat the rear tires because the car was a very loose off throttle.

 

Anybody else send their letter to the SEB that STR should have full National status for next year?

 

I did already Andy.

 

With the way 4.8.A. is written currently I don't see how it could happen. The best you could hope for is a proposal for changing 4.8.A for the 2012 rules and that change allowing the SEB to make STR National then. Given that it looks like the ST re-org is likely to be a 2012 thing, I suspect that's what will happen.

Making STR National now would be in direct contravention of the current rule, and sets a horrible precedent for following the rulebook and the process for changing it, no matter how awesome the participation has been.

 

Do you think this could be because of the anti squat?
It seems better when the rear is lower than the front but it still gets loose on corner entry if off throttle. It's very annoying and I originally thought it was a rebound issue but don't think it's possible with the amount of rebound I'm running now.

 

Not trying to start an argument or anything, just IMO...

A-stock (a class forced upon us based on all the feedback on various forums, membership, local meetings, etc) already threw the rules out no matter how they are written. I already wrote my letter of support for STR and think everyone who supports this class should as well. The overwhelming popularity for this class alone should trump all the rules making it prove it's worth before becoming an official recognized class. It was one of the most exiting classes to watch as well. Keeping control of these cars on street tires is simply amazing and entertaining to me. I still can't believe how many showed up for Nationals knowing they would not get recognized as a National champion. While that may technically be true, Ken Motonishi is the 2010 STR National Champion in my eyes. Every nearby local region has huge attendance #s in STR as compared to all other local class participation, and NOT just people jumping classes either.

For those wishing to write a letter, you can go here...
http://www.sebscca.com/index.php

-Marc

 

STR is an awesome class and I would like to see it officially recognized ASAP, just as I am less than impressed with the number of people in AS this year. But technically moving cars from one stock class to another isn't creating a new class, and the proposal that resulted in the current configuration of AS went through the proper member feedback period.


The rules probably need to be clarified regarding what constitutes a "new class". Clearly when ST was created, it was a new class. So was SM. But expanding Stock, Street Prepared, or Prepared by one class doesn't seem like it warrants going through the 3 year trial period, especially if the class is made up of cars that were already included in that category and eligible for a national championship prior to the expansion.

One ambiguous point is when a category is large enough that adding classes to it becomes an expansion of the category rather than creation of a "new class". Each new ST class has added new cars that weren't included in the category before, so in that sense they were new. Each new ST class has also had its own specific group of allowances for tire & wheel size, differentials, catalytic converters, brakes, etc, so in that sense they are also new or different from the existing ST classes.

SSM (SM2) only added new cars, but did not change the rules beyond the minimum weight formulas. But it was only the second class in its category, so that was pretty new, too.

At this point, Street Touring has 4 National classes, so does STR really deserve to be treated as Supplemental, when it is simply adding more cars to the category with very minimal differences from an existing ST class (STX)?

There is a rumored upcoming re-organization of ST, to include all Stock-eligible cars, and provide enough classes for them all to feel at home. I wonder how that's going to be handled. If there are more than 4 classes in the new structure, then which of them will be considered "new classes"? Will the entire category have to revert to supplemental status?

My opinion is that 4.8 should only really apply to a new category, not a new class, and certainly not a new class in a well-established category. Otherwise, the upcoming ST reorg is on shaky legal ground. There is precedent for it as well. Creation of Super Stock. Super Stock was never a supplemental class, to my knowledge. Creation of GP. GP was never a supplemental class. The Board of Directors voted, and poof! there it was.

 

Drew: This just says that the class will be evaluated with respect to points 1 & 2. It does not say that point 1 is mandatory, just that it is evaluated. While STR does not meet 1, it overwhelmingly beats 2.