Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Monday November 24, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Motorsports > Autocross

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-23-2009, 09:18 AM   #1
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default SCCA April Fastrack

http://scca.com/documents/Fastrack/0...pril-final.pdf

Things I find interesting...
1) Feedback for 2010 change of Sunsetting of Stock cars.
Quote:
The SAC continues to seek feedback regarding the following rule change proposal, which would be incorporated into next year’s rule book, becoming effective 1/1/2010: Add new second paragraph to 13.0 as follows: “A car will remain eligible for Divisional, National Tour, and National Championship events through the end of the 30th calendar year after the manufacturer-designated model year of the car.”
Which means any car that was made in 1980 or earlier would no longer be eligible for stock. Think about this 10 years or 15 years from now how this will effect stock. With cars lasting longer than ever right now. Would it matter?

2) Feedback for updated stock re-org proposal.

3) Submitted to the BOD: Move the Mini Cooper S from GS to DS. YAY!!!!

4) Tech Bulletin Street Touring: Per the STAC, 14.10.6 should read as follows: “All vehicles must comply with the EPA tail pipe emissions test requirements as a minimum.” How does one make sure they comply if there is no way to test in the area?

5) Tech BulletinStreet Touring: Due to performance potential, the ‘09 Lancer Ralliart (turbocharged) is added to the STX exclusion list. It is legal for the ST category only in STU.

6) Tech BulletinStreet Touring: The ‘08-’09 Cobalt SS (turbocharged) is no longer being considered for exclusion from STX, and may compete there.

--kC
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 09:37 AM   #2
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default

So, trying to find more about the emissions testing to continue this discussion

1) http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22EPA+tailpipe...equirements%22
Only lists references to the SCCA rules.

2) http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22EPA+tailpipe+emissions+test%22
You'd think I can get somewhere with this as it's just the EPA Tailpipe Emissions Test... right? Wrong. Again... only references the SCCA rules.

Tell me this, how can one be sure they're in compliance with the rule, as written, if it can't even be found on the web? IMHO, if there is no result of EPA Tailpipe Emission Test when googling, can one simply say "it does not exist?".

--kC
Edit: PS, the rule didn't really change. They just took out "ST" from the original after I actually looked it up and finding out that 14.10.6 doesn't really exist (but 14.10.F.6 does).

Last edited by KC; 03-23-2009 at 10:35 AM.
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 11:11 AM   #3
piknockout
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 192173
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Maryland
Vehicle:
2006 STU prepped STi
Sponsored by Agile Auto

Default

3. About time. Anyone else noticing the reduction in GS entries it seems? Also FS entries. Having one car be "the car" is not good for competition IMO, just look at AS, HS, and DS entries for proof.

4. Screw the tailpipe crap. In my book, and I believe most of ST*'s, as long as you have the required cat and you're not throwing codes, you're good to go. And in my own personal book, if you have the required hardware I could care less if you're throwing a code...I'm not going to protest.

5. Interesting on the Ralliart, but I really wonder how competitive it would be given it's weight. I think they should have let it try, but I doubt many would have been built to matter.

6. Makes sense to me.
piknockout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 12:32 PM   #4
Caelaorn
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 88141
Join Date: May 2005
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Vehicle:
01 White Canyonaro
01 stook,loud broken kart

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by piknockout View Post
5. Interesting on the Ralliart, but I really wonder how competitive it would be given it's weight. I think they should have let it try, but I doubt many would have been built to matter.
Yeah, I hadn't seen any complaints about this (much unlike the 09 wrx in esp issue).

Even if they were able to make a fair bit more power than an stx wrx I'd still think the weight (~3500lbs IIRC) would make them pretty uncompetitive.
Caelaorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 02:17 PM   #5
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default

The Ralliart thing... I can see it. The 2.5L WRX is already in STU. The EVO, even though it's only 2.0, is also in STU. The Ralliart is the 2.5L WRX competition... it would run circles around the 2.0L WRX.

I think it's a fair call. If it shows to not do well in STU, like the RX8, move it down. (Not saying moving down the RX8 to STX was the right call either... but it was moved).
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 02:19 PM   #6
piknockout
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 192173
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Maryland
Vehicle:
2006 STU prepped STi
Sponsored by Agile Auto

Default

I haven't even seen one on the road, let alone at an autocross. I agree, if it's that bad move it down. But I doubt it will really matter either way.
piknockout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 02:56 PM   #7
Scooby South
Subtly Outspoken
Moderator
 
Member#: 238
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: 2013 Limited SWP BRZ and a
Vehicle:
99 Ver6 Recreation
JDM Speedwagon 3 LSDs..:)

Default

and.........Here we go again....weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Scooby South is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 03:01 PM   #8
Chiketkd
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71634
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: C-Ville, VA
Vehicle:
In hibernation...

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
3) Submitted to the BOD: Move the Mini Cooper S from GS to DS. YAY!!!!
+12345 'bout bloody time the move occured! I'm sure GS will be healthier than ever in 2010 (when the rule takes effect), despite what the mini guys would have us believe...
Chiketkd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 03:05 PM   #9
moxnix
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 123798
Join Date: Aug 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Vehicle:
Any Mazda

Default

In a fastrack sometime last year they mentioned that they would be keeping an eye on the ralliart in STX classing and might exclude it based on performance.
moxnix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 06:31 PM   #10
flyboymike
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 83765
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: The modern Yellow Peril
Vehicle:
2005 WRX wagon
WR Blue

Default

1. Does anybody rock 30 year old cars in stock? Just the nature of advancing car technology makes it seem like the stock guys kind of have to buy the car du jour. What does this rule buy you? Is it just so you don't have to keep sliding obsolete cars into slower classes?
flyboymike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 07:02 PM   #11
racerjon1
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 43612
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Columbia, SC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboymike View Post
1. Does anybody rock 30 year old cars in stock? Just the nature of advancing car technology makes it seem like the stock guys kind of have to buy the car du jour. What does this rule buy you? Is it just so you don't have to keep sliding obsolete cars into slower classes?
I think it is more the fact of some very good cars coming up with questionable documentation, or parts availability. Who is to say what's "OEM" when you can't get OEM? things like shock lengths start to come into play amung other things.

We went through a little of this in 2001 when Carpenter won E-Stock in a 1985 CRX - there were some questions about the difference between what actually came on the car and what you could get at Honda, and what was going to make the determination. At the time I was told, "we will just 914 the thing" - refering to placing the 914 so far out of competition it didn't matter.

Now, they don't have to worry about one of the multitudes of 1980s cars that are light, have good suspension geometry, etc sneaking it's way in to be a class-killer. (Because the only thing worse than a brand-new car-du-jour is to have a very old, can't-buy-it anymore car as the "car-du-jour")



Jon K
racerjon1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 07:44 PM   #12
Butt Dyno
Street's closed, pizza boy
 
Member#: 17301
Join Date: Apr 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Why do they always say the Evo
Vehicle:
is the "dark side"
06 Evo #7 STU, 03 IS300

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
So, trying to find more about the emissions testing to continue this discussion

1) http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22EPA+tailpipe...equirements%22
Only lists references to the SCCA rules.

2) http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22EPA+tailpipe+emissions+test%22
You'd think I can get somewhere with this as it's just the EPA Tailpipe Emissions Test... right? Wrong. Again... only references the SCCA rules.

Tell me this, how can one be sure they're in compliance with the rule, as written, if it can't even be found on the web? IMHO, if there is no result of EPA Tailpipe Emission Test when googling, can one simply say "it does not exist?".

--kC
Edit: PS, the rule didn't really change. They just took out "ST" from the original after I actually looked it up and finding out that 14.10.6 doesn't really exist (but 14.10.F.6 does).
You figured it out (not a new clarification), but if you want to see attempts at explaining what it means, here you go...
http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/301633.aspx

Cliff's notes: The EPA pretty much said there was no such thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy who actually works for the EPA I/M emissions program
I/M cutpoints tend to vary from test type to test type, and from state to state. States don't even use the same unit of measurement in performing their tests. For example, some states use tailpipe tests that measure percent or part-per-million, while others measure grams-per-mile. There is no federal, minimum cutpoints based upon test types, however.
I would say we are pretty much stuck with it.
Butt Dyno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 08:55 PM   #13
flyboymike
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 83765
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: The modern Yellow Peril
Vehicle:
2005 WRX wagon
WR Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjon1 View Post
I think it is more the fact of some very good cars coming up with questionable documentation, or parts availability. Who is to say what's "OEM" when you can't get OEM? things like shock lengths start to come into play amung other things.

We went through a little of this in 2001 when Carpenter won E-Stock in a 1985 CRX - there were some questions about the difference between what actually came on the car and what you could get at Honda, and what was going to make the determination. At the time I was told, "we will just 914 the thing" - refering to placing the 914 so far out of competition it didn't matter.

Now, they don't have to worry about one of the multitudes of 1980s cars that are light, have good suspension geometry, etc sneaking it's way in to be a class-killer. (Because the only thing worse than a brand-new car-du-jour is to have a very old, can't-buy-it anymore car as the "car-du-jour")



Jon K
That makes sense. Making this rule specifically for Divisional and higher events keeps a place for these cars to play.
flyboymike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 11:42 PM   #14
Mind
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 109216
Join Date: Mar 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: PA
Vehicle:
08 STI DGM
76-77 Lancia Scorpion(s)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
The Ralliart thing... I can see it. The 2.5L WRX is already in STU. The EVO, even though it's only 2.0, is also in STU. The Ralliart is the 2.5L WRX competition... it would run circles around the 2.0L WRX.

I think it's a fair call. If it shows to not do well in STU, like the RX8, move it down. (Not saying moving down the RX8 to STX was the right call either... but it was moved).
Along with the 2.5L WRX.
Mind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2009, 11:47 PM   #15
Butt Dyno
Street's closed, pizza boy
 
Member#: 17301
Join Date: Apr 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Why do they always say the Evo
Vehicle:
is the "dark side"
06 Evo #7 STU, 03 IS300

Default

I think the Ralliart has the Evo's fancy diff setup - that may be a part of why people are afraid of it.
Butt Dyno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2009, 09:50 AM   #16
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboymike View Post
1. Does anybody rock 30 year old cars in stock? Just the nature of advancing car technology makes it seem like the stock guys kind of have to buy the car du jour. What does this rule buy you? Is it just so you don't have to keep sliding obsolete cars into slower classes?
SP and ST have a gem of a rule that would need to be changed if they do go with a sunsetting rule...

14.1 AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS
A. All Solo Rules Stock Category allowances, plus all allowances contained in 14.1 through 14.10.

They would have to add in a line to avoid confusion that the sunsetting rule applies also to those classes.

--kC
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2009, 11:01 AM   #17
moxnix
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 123798
Join Date: Aug 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Vehicle:
Any Mazda

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
SP and ST have a gem of a rule that would need to be changed if they do go with a sunsetting rule...

14.1 AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS
A. All Solo Rules Stock Category allowances, plus all allowances contained in 14.1 through 14.10.

They would have to add in a line to avoid confusion that the sunsetting rule applies also to those classes.

--kC
I am more worried about appendix A with the ST rules.

STREET TOURING CATEGORY
Vehicles eligible for this category must meet the Stock category eligibility requirements, as a minimum.
moxnix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2009, 11:18 AM   #18
steverife
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 96749
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Knoxville, TN
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboymike View Post
1. Does anybody rock 30 year old cars in stock? Just the nature of advancing car technology makes it seem like the stock guys kind of have to buy the car du jour. What does this rule buy you? Is it just so you don't have to keep sliding obsolete cars into slower classes?
I think last year it was proposed at 25 years. That would put things like the '85 CRX, early C4's, and 944's real close.

I like the 30 year deal better, but I'm not sure if it is needed...
steverife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2009, 01:53 PM   #19
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moxnix View Post
I am more worried about appendix A with the ST rules.

STREET TOURING CATEGORY
Vehicles eligible for this category must meet the Stock category eligibility requirements, as a minimum.
I sent in my letter regarding this to make sure that the sunset rule will not in any way effect ST *or* SP.

--kC
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2009, 01:57 PM   #20
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moxnix View Post
I am more worried about appendix A with the ST rules.

STREET TOURING CATEGORY
Vehicles eligible for this category must meet the Stock category eligibility requirements, as a minimum.
14.1 and 15.1 having a line that negates the sunset rule should be just fine. The Appendicies aren't really a 'rule' but a reference guide for car classing, and can be changed by local regions.

--kC
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2009, 04:43 PM   #21
subydude
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 80649
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Columbia, SC
Vehicle:
2000 2.5 Auto-X RSTi
What's A Head Gasket?

Default

I'm waiting for the year they sunset 89 civic si's. No one will know what to do in ST!
subydude is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SCCA Dec Fastrack Scooby South Autocross 24 11-26-2009 02:27 PM
SCCA Oct Fastrack KC Motorsports 186 11-21-2008 01:30 PM
April Fastrack is up... turboICE Motorsports 13 03-20-2006 10:41 PM
SCCA March FasTrack is out. Club racers be sure to read H&N updates. turboICE Motorsports 13 02-24-2006 04:09 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.