The STX thread!
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
I plan on attending the Dixie NT, Atlanta NT and Delaware NT along with Solo Nationals with my co-drivers -- most likely in a GS car (might do some events in either ES or STX though)
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
Its 913,000 square feet of space for just the course. It will be one of the biggest sites in the country that the SCCA uses. This site is really a premier site for Solo. Walking the site yesterday the macadam seems to have a lot of grip with no runoff from anywhere so it should be pretty grippy and is pretty smooth. The newer section is absolutely perfectly smooth, the older section has some bumps but, nothing major.
It also should be a really good spectator site. Not quite as good as Dover but, still very good. Courses here will be well over 1 minute in length
It also should be a really good spectator site. Not quite as good as Dover but, still very good. Courses here will be well over 1 minute in length
Registered
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 55
Likes: 1
You'll all have to put up with at least one extra BMW at Dixie and Atlanta. Most likely I'll do Blytheville. Toledo is a toss-up. Nationals is a must. Cline and I will be back next year with a vengeance, me thinks :-) Lots of Moton loving going around these days...
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
You'll all have to put up with at least one extra BMW at Dixie and Atlanta. Most likely I'll do Blytheville. Toledo is a toss-up. Nationals is a must. Cline and I will be back next year with a vengeance, me thinks :-) Lots of Moton loving going around these days...
You guys see this?
http://cms.scca.com/documents/Fastra...k-feb-solo.pdf
Looks like they will not make us run EPA-approved cats, but there is a take-back on 2-piece rotors. Anyone want to buy my Racing Brake BBK?
http://cms.scca.com/documents/Fastra...k-feb-solo.pdf
Looks like they will not make us run EPA-approved cats, but there is a take-back on 2-piece rotors. Anyone want to buy my Racing Brake BBK?
How unfortunate. They say the intent is to allow big-brake upgrades, but not save weight, but most big brake upgrades use aluminum centers to offset the added weight of the big rotor. 
But, you can put aluminum calipers on, as long as they have more pistons.
A great example of somebody thinking too much.
Another interesting point is the structural class changes. The civics get bumped to STS for '12, but, if I read the article right, all cars eligible for '10-11 ST are not allowed in STX for 2011. So if this goes through, no more Civics in STX in 2012.
But, you can put aluminum calipers on, as long as they have more pistons.
A great example of somebody thinking too much.
Another interesting point is the structural class changes. The civics get bumped to STS for '12, but, if I read the article right, all cars eligible for '10-11 ST are not allowed in STX for 2011. So if this goes through, no more Civics in STX in 2012.
Last edited by GeorgeH; Jan 21, 2011 at 03:25 PM.
only if the combined weight of the caliper & bracket isn't any lighter than OE
they should just eliminate the brake allowance in its entirety, it would make more sense than what is being proposed
they should just eliminate the brake allowance in its entirety, it would make more sense than what is being proposed
Ah, yes, I see that now. I agree, the brake allowance is pretty much nonsense as it currently stands. But I need new rotors, and at least this makes my path clear: Centric it is.
Cool. Thanks, I need to learn how to read all these rules 
Hopefully by 2012 the RX8 will finally get moved to DSP. If the 350z can go to ESP, I don't see why the RX8 cant be moved out of BSP.
Hopefully by 2012 the RX8 will finally get moved to DSP. If the 350z can go to ESP, I don't see why the RX8 cant be moved out of BSP.
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
Exactly. If the **** is considering moving the 350Z to ESP, they should look at the moving the RX-8. It's much more of an also-ran in the class.
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
Don't go selling stuff yet as your BBK is legal for 2011 (and this is just a proposal). Even if these kits go away, you should have no issues selling the kit to a track person.
I can't see a situation where someone would want to install a heavier brake caliper. I would assume most (all?) aftermarket calipers would be lighter than most (all?) OEM calipers. Maybe the STEVO's would want to replace their 4-piston Brembo's with 6- or 8-piston calipers for the bling factor, but otherwise the allowance seems useless.
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
I can't see a situation where someone would want to install a heavier brake caliper. I would assume most (all?) aftermarket calipers would be lighter than most (all?) OEM calipers. Maybe the STEVO's would want to replace their 4-piston Brembo's with 6- or 8-piston calipers for the bling factor, but otherwise the allowance seems useless.
It's interesting that they are considering making the STR/X/U Limited Slip allowance available to all classes. It seems to me that bolt-on lightweight brakes are more in keeping with the ST* philosophy than upgraded diffs.
I'd rather that they took back the diff allowance than the brake allowance, and I currently have neither. Note that I'm not saying the two mods are comparable from a performance standpoint. The diff upgrade is an interesting one, but it's benefits are less clear and require further suspension sorting once it's in, while the brake mod is truly bolt-on. I suppose you could argue the damping curves should be adjusted for the lighter unsprung weight but it's not strictly needed.
I'd rather that they took back the diff allowance than the brake allowance, and I currently have neither. Note that I'm not saying the two mods are comparable from a performance standpoint. The diff upgrade is an interesting one, but it's benefits are less clear and require further suspension sorting once it's in, while the brake mod is truly bolt-on. I suppose you could argue the damping curves should be adjusted for the lighter unsprung weight but it's not strictly needed.
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
I like the ECU proposal re: emission CEL's:
Engine Management (ECU):
Remove Appendix F clarification under Street Touring titled “Emissions System”.
Change 14.10.F to read as follows:
“14.10.F. The engine management system parameters and operation may be modified only via the methods listed
below. These allowances also apply to forced induction cars, except that no changes to standard boost levels,
intercoolers, or boost controls are permitted. Boost changes indirectly resulting from allowed modifications are
permissible, but directly altering or modifying the boost or turbo controls, either mechanically or electronically,
is strictly prohibited. Traction control parameters may not be altered. Any standard OBD communications port
functionality must remain. Check Engine Lights (CEL) may be disabled via software. Alternate software maps
which violate these restrictions may not be present during competition, regardless of activation.
Remove Appendix F clarification under Street Touring titled “Emissions System”.
Change 14.10.F to read as follows:
“14.10.F. The engine management system parameters and operation may be modified only via the methods listed
below. These allowances also apply to forced induction cars, except that no changes to standard boost levels,
intercoolers, or boost controls are permitted. Boost changes indirectly resulting from allowed modifications are
permissible, but directly altering or modifying the boost or turbo controls, either mechanically or electronically,
is strictly prohibited. Traction control parameters may not be altered. Any standard OBD communications port
functionality must remain. Check Engine Lights (CEL) may be disabled via software. Alternate software maps
which violate these restrictions may not be present during competition, regardless of activation.
Registered User
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
From: Minneapolis, MN
I agree that the BBK rule is a little wonky, I think it's fine as-is.
Guys, please write in with your support of cat rule #2, we want more placement flexibility, not less!!
Also, please ask them to increase the relocation distance allowance, or specifically state that the cat may be moved from the header to the exhaust section. Many more modern cars (such as the 330, the MX-5, and the MR-S) have the cats in the headers from the factory, which turns taking advantage of the header allowance from a simple bolt-on affair to a full custom fab job with cats, yuck!
Imagine a world where the RX-8 is updated with more power, but they put the cats in the header. Adding them to an aftermarket or custom exhaust section is *much* easier than trying to add them to headers!
Guys, please write in with your support of cat rule #2, we want more placement flexibility, not less!!
Also, please ask them to increase the relocation distance allowance, or specifically state that the cat may be moved from the header to the exhaust section. Many more modern cars (such as the 330, the MX-5, and the MR-S) have the cats in the headers from the factory, which turns taking advantage of the header allowance from a simple bolt-on affair to a full custom fab job with cats, yuck!
Imagine a world where the RX-8 is updated with more power, but they put the cats in the header. Adding them to an aftermarket or custom exhaust section is *much* easier than trying to add them to headers!
Registered User
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
From: Minneapolis, MN
It's interesting that they are considering making the STR/X/U Limited Slip allowance available to all classes. It seems to me that bolt-on lightweight brakes are more in keeping with the ST* philosophy than upgraded diffs.
I'd rather that they took back the diff allowance than the brake allowance, and I currently have neither. Note that I'm not saying the two mods are comparable from a performance standpoint. The diff upgrade is an interesting one, but it's benefits are less clear and require further suspension sorting once it's in, while the brake mod is truly bolt-on. I suppose you could argue the damping curves should be adjusted for the lighter unsprung weight but it's not strictly needed.
I'd rather that they took back the diff allowance than the brake allowance, and I currently have neither. Note that I'm not saying the two mods are comparable from a performance standpoint. The diff upgrade is an interesting one, but it's benefits are less clear and require further suspension sorting once it's in, while the brake mod is truly bolt-on. I suppose you could argue the damping curves should be adjusted for the lighter unsprung weight but it's not strictly needed.
Thread Starter
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville, VA
Guys, please write in with your support of cat rule #2, we want more placement flexibility, not less!!
Also, please ask them to increase the relocation distance allowance, or specifically state that the cat may be moved from the header to the exhaust section. Many more modern cars (such as the 330, the MX-5, and the MR-S) have the cats in the headers from the factory, which turns taking advantage of the header allowance from a simple bolt-on affair to a full custom fab job with cats, yuck!
Imagine a world where the RX-8 is updated with more power, but they put the cats in the header. Adding them to an aftermarket or custom exhaust section is *much* easier than trying to add them to headers!
Also, please ask them to increase the relocation distance allowance, or specifically state that the cat may be moved from the header to the exhaust section. Many more modern cars (such as the 330, the MX-5, and the MR-S) have the cats in the headers from the factory, which turns taking advantage of the header allowance from a simple bolt-on affair to a full custom fab job with cats, yuck!
Imagine a world where the RX-8 is updated with more power, but they put the cats in the header. Adding them to an aftermarket or custom exhaust section is *much* easier than trying to add them to headers!
Relocation placement is another ball 'o wax though. I definitely would prefer greater flexibility than 6", but then the question arises of where to draw the line in the sand. 7"? 8"? What if the BMW & MX-5 need 7" but the MR-S needs 8"?
More than anything else, I want rule stability in ST. Hopefully after this "re-org-mageddon" things will settle down for a few years...