Street Touring Pony (STP) - It's here!

[Whiskey11]

Right, but you cannot update backdate through years in ST. Correct? or did I miss a rules change. So, I cannot build a clone car unless I trade in mine to buy a '08.

I don't see why you couldn't as the 05-09 cars are all functionally the same?

 

[Thinkkker]

Same reason you couldn't run mine in fs built as a bullitt. VINS don't lie and people will protest for less....

I wanna make sure I'm 100% legal cause if I win or do well I don't want to have a protest to undo that. No matter how dumb rules is rules.

 

[Chenthorne]

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but, section G-1 shows where the watts link is approved?

G. Solid axle rear wheel drive (RWD) suspension allowances:
1. Addition or replacement of suspension stabilizers (linkage connecting
the axle housing or DeDion to the chassis, which controls lateral
suspension location) is permitted.
2. Traction bars or torque arms may be added or replaced.
3. A Panhard rod may be added or replaced.
4. The upper arm(s) may be removed, replaced, or modified and the upper
pickup points on the rear axle housing may be relocated.
5. The lower arms may be replaced or modified and the lower pickup
points on the rear axle housing may be relocated.
6. Differential covers and attaching hardware may be replaced.
7. Methods of attachment and attachment points are unrestricted but
may serve no other purpose (e.g., chassis stiffening). This does not
authorize removal of a welded on part of a subframe to accommo-
86 — 2015 SCCA® National Solo® Rules

 

[modernbeat]

Item 1 allows a Watts link.
Item 6 allows alternate covers for Watts links like Griggs and Whiteline.
Item 7 allows any extra parts needed for attachment to the chassis or axle.

And it could be argued does not allow bridge style (chassis mounted) Watts links like the Fays or BMR that have a stiffening beam that spans the frame rails. That said, there are a lot of Fays Watts links banging around on ST and SP cars.

 

[Chenthorne]

Item 1 allows a Watts link.
Item 6 allows alternate covers for Watts links like Griggs and Whiteline.
Item 7 allows any extra parts needed for attachment to the chassis or axle.

And it could be argued does not allow bridge style (chassis mounted) Watts links like the Fays or BMR that have a stiffening beam that spans the frame rails. That said, there are a lot of Fays Watts links banging around on ST and SP cars.

Thank you Jason! Just wanted someone to clarify that for me.

 

[Whiskey11]

And it could be argued does not allow bridge style (chassis mounted) Watts links like the Fays or BMR that have a stiffening beam that spans the frame rails. That said, there are a lot of Fays Watts links banging around on ST and SP cars.

Have you measured (since you guys measure everything) chassis deflection before and after installing a Fays2, BMR, or other chassis mount version?

The bar it replaces is intended to only take forces in one direction and I'd argue, accurately, that the load paths through the frame on a chassis mount don't change any and that it does nothing more for chassis stiffening than the stock piece does. That is, it keeps the lateral forces from ripping out the mounting point for the watts link/PHB. If that bar didn't already exist on the S197, or the cars that have said Watts links, I'd be more inclined to agree (see SN95/Fox cars).

By the way, I'm 99.99% sure the bar that the WL, Cortex, Griggs, etc uses to support the driver side tower of the WL adds as much stiffness to the rear as the frame on a Fays2/BMR does which would make those just as illegal.

 

[csamsh]

I don't think you're interpreting what Jason said in the correct manner. Rather, think of the main component of the chassis mount watt's link- it's triangulated and spans the frame rails, or in the case of the BMR, is a giant boxed beam. It could probably be successfully argued that it gives more chassis rigidity than the stock piece, or the single-bar type pieces with the diff mount style. That being said, there are a lot of chassis mount watt's out there, and I personally think you get to kick your protester in the dick for protesting that, but, by the letter of the rule I can see how a chassis mount watt's could be construed as chassis stiffening.

The large red piece is much more substantial than the same piece on a WL,

Fays2

BMR

WL

GR

Cortex

 

[Whiskey11]

Have you looked at the loadpath through that bar if you apply a twisting load (the only load this would "stiffen" a chassis on)? They do nothing for rigidity that the stock bar doesn't already do. The only reason he brings it up is because BMR and Fays2 are competitors with the product he is attempting to sell. He presents this information as fact with nothing concrete to back it up. If he wants to make the claim, he should present the evidence to support it.

 

[white86hatch]

Have you looked at the loadpath through that bar if you apply a twisting load (the only load this would "stiffen" a chassis on)? They do nothing for rigidity that the stock bar doesn't already do. The only reason he brings it up is because BMR and Fays2 are competitors with the product he is attempting to sell. He presents this information as fact with nothing concrete to back it up. If he wants to make the claim, he should present the evidence to support it.

It'd probably be easier to just admit you hate vorshlag and anyone that works there.

 

[Speedboosted]

It'd probably be easier to just admit you hate vorshlag and anyone that works there.

I thought we all already knew he did?

 

[white86hatch]

I thought we all already knew he did?

Touché. He just hates them so badly that he can't even see that Jason was just playing the devil's advocate in regards to people protesting the chassis mount watts. Not that they would. But in a chicken shit move that they could.

 

[I am Legend]

This argument is as old as the chassis. People need to get over it. Choose the products YOU think will work and f"ing drive already. Everyone is going to defend (apparently to the death) the components they chose, I mean no one is going to admit they made a poor choice right? That said I think we can agree that every part has its pluses and minuses. If your winning races, setting track records, winning autocrosses than obviously something is working.

 

[DILYSI Dave]

So, who's going to be at the Dixie Tour?

 

[kona302]

Wouldn't it be funny if an IRS car wins STP this year making all the SRA talk moot.

 

[Whiskey11]

It'd probably be easier to just admit you hate vorshlag and anyone that works there.

I don't hate Jason, I'd just like to see his data to support his opinion.

Also, the rule states "serves any other purpose" so if you want to be a dick and protest it, then I'll gladly protest any other company's Watts that changes that bar since it is "stiffer" than the stock piece. If you want to be a dick and interpret rules in the most strict and narrow of senses because a clarification didn't go your way and left a competitor's product as the only viable option outside of custom, then prepare to have the same apply to your "chosen" part out of interest in being fair.

 

[Pentalab]

Wouldn't it be funny if an IRS car wins STP this year making all the SRA talk moot.

This.

Even if the IRS car doesn't win, the IRS cars will do pretty good overall.

 

[DILYSI Dave]

Like STP? Want it to stick around? Participation matters. Right now, there are only 2 of us signed up for the Dixie tour. This is compared to 9 for STU, 14 for STR, and 20 for STX. Come on out folks!