Jefé's Rides

[stripethree]

So you want a spec class for a single chassis niche car that's been on the market for < 5 years? The twins are not the Miata, they do not have a following to merit this kind of special treatment.

Also, you can do most of that in C Street provided the camber bolts are a factory fix or whatever the term is. The port installed TRD package, which includes springs, puts the FR-S/86 back in C Street instead of D Street and achieves this. Add the Whiteline bar up front per Street rules. Done. You also don't need 17x8s for 225 tires as that will stretch most of the tires you'd likely consider, which for autocross is stupid.

You want a push button racing solution, which does not exist, anywhere, ever. Except maybe Spec Miata, but that's a different price range than this, way different. It sounds like you should go to K1 for spec racing every Sunday if you don't already, but you'll probably find something to complain about there also.

[goIftdibrad]

So you want a spec class for a single chassis niche car that's been on the market for < 5 years? The twins are not the Miata, they do not have a following to merit this kind of special treatment.

Also, you can do most of that in C Street provided the camber bolts are a factory fix or whatever the term is. The port installed TRD package, which includes springs, puts the FR-S/86 back in C Street instead of D Street and achieves this. Add the Whiteline bar up front per Street rules. Done. You also don't need 17x8s for 225 tires as that will stretch most of the tires you'd likely consider, which for autocross is stupid.

You want a push button racing solution, which does not exist, anywhere, ever. Except maybe Spec Miata, but that's a different price range than this, way different. It sounds like you should go to K1 for spec racing every Sunday if you don't already, but you'll probably find something to complain about there also.

Spec miata is one of the most expensive classes to run competitively too

[troyguitar]

So you want a spec class for a single chassis niche car that's been on the market for < 5 years? The twins are not the Miata, they do not have a following to merit this kind of special treatment.

Also, you can do most of that in C Street provided the camber bolts are a factory fix or whatever the term is. The port installed TRD package, which includes springs, puts the FR-S/86 back in C Street instead of D Street and achieves this. Add the Whiteline bar up front per Street rules. Done. You also don't need 17x8s for 225 tires as that will stretch most of the tires you'd likely consider, which for autocross is stupid.

You want a push button racing solution, which does not exist, anywhere, ever. Except maybe Spec Miata, but that's a different price range than this, way different. It sounds like you should go to K1 for spec racing every Sunday if you don't already, but you'll probably find something to complain about there also.

Fuck off. That's not my proposal - but it is being announced at Lincoln.

I don't like front engine cars in general. I'm getting an FM car eventually. In the meantime I'd like to run whatever class costs the least amount of money for the most competition+fun... right now that's ES, but spec twin would be an improvement.

How much do you want to bet that an FRS doesn't win CS at Lincoln? Besides, they only get -1.8ish degrees in CS trim which still destroys front tires... and spend more money than they'd spend in spec twin to go slower and have no chance of winning.

[troyguitar]

Karts are pretty much spec racing in every class too... KM isn't allowed at half of autox sites though so FM is the next best option. Ain't no got time/money to go back to wheel to wheel racing, autox is it.

[stripethree]

Fuck off. That's not my proposal - but it is being announced at Lincoln.

Oh, I seemed to have touched a nerve. Good fun. So, you're right, it's not your proposal, but...

I want a class where everyone runs on the same cheap, fun shit. ST*-lite if you will. I want a car that handles like an ST* car but doesn't require the investment, development, or compromises of actually being competitive in ST*

So are you still an advocate for it, for making classing more complex for new, and experienced, people to understand and navigate. Just so a very small group has a place to play and feel good about themselves. You're advocating down a path for classes for everything which I am strongly opposed to. Having run registration for large events for a handful of years, fuuuuuuuck that.

Also, if you're really that adamant about it, go make a local class for it. The classing structure as defined Nationally can be modified and expanded upon locally. Go get involved in your local region and see if you can drum up support for it.

I also think I made strong enough points that show that the idea isn't worthwhile, alas, I'm not on the SEB. You want to have fun? Great, have fun, don't look at times other than yours and see if you go faster. You want to be competitive? Great. Be ready to do work and spend money. If you equate fun with competitive 100% of the time, that's a "you" problem, not a classing problem. The system shouldn't bend because you or your car are snowflakes.

Lastly, I will absolutely not take that bet because an ND will almost surely win C Street. But that wasn't my point, at all. Just because the ND is the car to beat doesn't mean a TRD spec twin can't give it a run for its money. And also, while the suspensions aren't exactly the same, but close if I recall - both double wishbones up front, my S2K does fine with that same camber (ok, close, -1.7) as you say a twin can get. Flipping tires helps, but I understand if that's too much effort for you.

[troyguitar]

GRM tests among others have also proven that mild stretching is the way to go, assuming it's an option in your class. 225 actually works best on a 9" wheel.

[goIftdibrad]

Fuck off. That's not my proposal - but it is being announced at Lincoln.

Oh, I seemed to have touched a nerve. Good fun. So, you're right, it's not your proposal, but...

I want a class where everyone runs on the same cheap, fun shit. ST*-lite if you will. I want a car that handles like an ST* car but doesn't require the investment, development, or compromises of actually being competitive in ST*

So are you still an advocate for it, for making classing more complex for new, and experienced, people to understand and navigate. Just so a very small group has a place to play and feel good about themselves. You're advocating down a path for classes for everything which I am strongly opposed to. Having run registration for large events for a handful of years, fuuuuuuuck that.

Also, if you're really that adamant about it, go make a local class for it. The classing structure as defined Nationally can be modified and expanded upon locally. Go get involved in your local region and see if you can drum up support for it.

I also think I made strong enough points that show that the idea isn't worthwhile, alas, I'm not on the SEB. You want to have fun? Great, have fun, don't look at times other than yours and see if you go faster. You want to be competitive? Great. Be ready to do work and spend money. If you equate fun with competitive 100% of the time, that's a "you" problem, not a classing problem. The system shouldn't bend because you or your car are snowflakes.

Lastly, I will absolutely not take that bet because an ND will almost surely win C Street. But that wasn't my point, at all. Just because the ND is the car to beat doesn't mean a TRD spec twin can't give it a run for its money. And also, while the suspensions aren't exactly the same, but close if I recall - both double wishbones up front, my S2K does fine with that same camber (ok, close, -1.7) as you say a twin can get. Flipping tires helps, but I understand if that's too much effort for you.

i

[stripethree]

I don't like front engine cars in general. I'm getting an FM car eventually.

Wait wait wait. Hang on. You want an inexpensive spec class on one hand and on the other hand, you want an F Mod car? Please, tell me more about how it will be inexpensive and easy to be competitive in a Mod class. I can't wait.

[stripethree]

GRM tests among others have also proven that mild stretching is the way to go, assuming it's an option in your class. 225 actually works best on a 9" wheel.

Show me an article where GRM said a 9" wheel is best for a 225. That is not a mild stretch.

[troyguitar]

I don't like front engine cars in general. I'm getting an FM car eventually.

Wait wait wait. Hang on. You want an inexpensive spec class on one hand and on the other hand, you want an F Mod car? Please, tell me more about how it will be inexpensive and easy to be competitive in a Mod class. I can't wait.

The cars are fast enough that the driver matters a lot more than having the absolute best setup... plus they're awesome enough that they're fun even if you're DFL.

The rules not changing every year also means that long term costs aren't really that bad. FM has no aero, no shocks, and no engine/tune work allowed for the moto-powered cars. It's pretty simple.

...but you think an FRS has double wishbones up front and that a 225 is too much tire for an 8 inch wheel, so I'm probably wasting my time.

[goIftdibrad]

I don't like front engine cars in general. I'm getting an FM car eventually.

Wait wait wait. Hang on. You want an inexpensive spec class on one hand and on the other hand, you want an F Mod car? Please, tell me more about how it will be inexpensive and easy to be competitive in a Mod class. I can't wait.

i hear CAM-s is fun to play in

[goIftdibrad]

Wait wait wait. Hang on. You want an inexpensive spec class on one hand and on the other hand, you want an F Mod car? Please, tell me more about how it will be inexpensive and easy to be competitive in a Mod class. I can't wait.

The cars are fast enough that the driver matters a lot more than having the absolute best setup... plus they're awesome enough that they're fun even if you're DFL.

The rules not changing every year also means that long term costs aren't really that bad. FM has no aero, no shocks, and no engine/tune work allowed for the moto-powered cars. It's pretty simple.

...but you think an FRS has double wishbones up front and that a 225 is too much tire for an 8 inch wheel, so I'm probably wasting my time.

BUT, FM cars (can) have a CVT. you ever try to tune a CVT? Its a PITA. not to mention final drive gearing on a MC engine

[wap]

meets his doppelganger!

[stripethree]

...but you think an FRS has double wishbones up front and that a 225 is too much tire for an 8 inch wheel, so I'm probably wasting my time.

I did say if I recall and I'm fine admitting when I am incorrect, which in this case, I am. The rear is multilink and both Scion & Subaru use "double wishbone" in spec sheets for some reason, which is probably where that came from in my head. While I've driven the twins in several levels of prep, I haven't been under one in a very long time.

Also, you said 9" wheel above, not 8". Good job. If that's an earlier typo, great, but I still simply asked you to cite something you quoted from GRM or another publication because I disagreed with it. Go ahead, change my mind with some real data.

[troyguitar]

The cars are fast enough that the driver matters a lot more than having the absolute best setup... plus they're awesome enough that they're fun even if you're DFL.

The rules not changing every year also means that long term costs aren't really that bad. FM has no aero, no shocks, and no engine/tune work allowed for the moto-powered cars. It's pretty simple.

...but you think an FRS has double wishbones up front and that a 225 is too much tire for an 8 inch wheel, so I'm probably wasting my time.

BUT, FM cars (can) have a CVT. you ever try to tune a CVT? Its a PITA. not to mention final drive gearing on a MC engine

This is why I would never get one of the CVT cars. They also run a carbed 2-stroke snowmobile engine that's a PITA to go along with that CVT.

The moto-powered cars use a bone stock R6/GSXR600 engine and trans with stock ECU and fuel injection, will run forever on pump gas. The only "tuning" is final drive gearing which will be close to the same for most national autox courses... plus they sound like glorious little F1 cars instead of big weed whackers.

[Apex]

[troyguitar]

...but you think an FRS has double wishbones up front and that a 225 is too much tire for an 8 inch wheel, so I'm probably wasting my time.

I did say if I recall and I'm fine admitting when I am incorrect, which in this case, I am. The rear is multilink and both Scion & Subaru use "double wishbone" in spec sheets for some reason, which is probably where that came from in my head. While I've driven the twins in several levels of prep, I haven't been under one in a very long time.

Also, you said 9" wheel above, not 8". Good job. If that's an earlier typo, great, but I still simply asked you to cite something you quoted from GRM or another publication because I disagreed with it. Go ahead, change my mind with some real data.

Look up the tests yourself. It's been shown that 205 tires work best on 8" wheels, 225 on 9s, 245/255 on 10s, 275 on 11s, etc. The Maxxis VR-1 test most recently was testing 245/40/15 and it was faster and felt better on a 10 than a 9 inch wheel.

I did say 8" and 225, not because it's necessarily the best performance setup but because it's a good compromise (and that's what was in the rumored proposal). Going to a 9 can start getting into potential clearance issues on those cars with stock-size struts/springs, plus you have less wheel protection with the stretched tire. Bumping from the stock 7 up to an 8 helps a lot without causing any issues and sticking to 225's keeps the tires cheaper too.

[stripethree]

Look up the tests yourself. It's been shown that 205 tires work best on 8" wheels, 225 on 9s, 245/255 on 10s, 275 on 11s, etc. The Maxxis VR-1 test most recently was testing 245/40/15 and it was faster and felt better on a 10 than a 9 inch wheel.

Ah, no? You brought that info to the table, you can back it up. I've read plenty of tires tests please and thank you.

I did say 8" and 225, not because it's necessarily the best performance setup but because it's a good compromise...

And I'll quote you, ahhhhhgain:

225 actually works best on a 9" wheel.

You said 17x8 in your desired "spec" setup, then claimed some combination of GRM and your experience? opinion? that a 225 fits best on a 9" wheel. Sounds like you should get your shit straight. And I'll also disagree with my personal experience of running 255s on 9" wheels on the R32 a lot. They work fine and are nice and square (RS3s). Edit: and half that shit is bunk anyway given that a specified width of tire, say 255, can be vastly different in actual width across different brands.

But, that's okay, we all make mistakes. Perhaps another topic will ease this tension that seems to have been created. Tell me, do you prefer the styling of the FD RX7 or the C5 Corvette?

[stripethree]

Welcome Geoff. You'll do well here.

Howdy! I appear to be developing a reputation already, most excellent!

[Melon]

Wait wait wait. Hang on. You want an inexpensive spec class on one hand and on the other hand, you want an F Mod car? Please, tell me more about how it will be inexpensive and easy to be competitive in a Mod class. I can't wait.

i hear CAM-s is fun to play in

I heard brub class mentioned.

My brub alarm went off.

[stripethree]

I heard brub class mentioned.

Well hello blue sports car owner, how are you this fine blue sports car evening?

[troyguitar]

I copy/pasted the existing rumors for the spec proposal, none of that was my idea. I'd rather they start with a cheaper car in the first place (NB2 probably) and run 15x8's with 205/50/15 spec tires.

It seems a lot of the tire tests aren't publicly posted or easy to find, but here's the maxxis one:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/artic ... lass-2016/

VR-1 Rim Width: 9 Vs. 10 Inches: After setting out on 9-inch-wide rims, we learned that the VR-1 was a very responsive tire. It was similar in handling to the Yokohama Advan Neova AD08 R that we tested in 2015. It turned in crisply, offered good grip, and provided audible feedback as we approached the limits of adhesion.

A full 20-minute track session of hard driving caused it to lose some of that edge, but the falloff in lap times was minor. COTA’s long straights probably helped by giving the tires significant time to cool off between hard cornering. But long, hard sweepers like Turn 6 and the triple-apex carousel of Turns 16 through 18 did a number on the VR-1 late in each session.

When mounted on 10-inch-wide wheels, the 245mm VR-1 did everything a little bit better: Braking, cornering and forward bite were all improved. The tire was also less susceptible to heat soak because the tread surface was more evenly used. Lap times improved by 0.8 second.

Take a look at the fastest CSP cars sometime. You'll notice that they used to run 9, then 10 inch wheels and are now running 11s with the same 275 tires and getting faster every year. Next year a 295 hoosier and 15x12 6UL are supposed to be out to go with it.

[Devilchrono]

Welcome Geoff. You'll do well here.

Howdy! I appear to be developing a reputation already, most excellent!

Well, you are arguing with the person on here who thinks of himself as our resident racing god ( ) and if you don't agree with whatever he says, he'll just tell you to go fuck yourself and start shitting on everything you post. You seem to have thick skin though, so you'll do just fine here. Just be prepared for a new admirer for awhile.

[stripethree]

Dat R32 is the one Vee Dub I want to own. Much blue, very

This is for you. Just ignore the revving no-exhaust Subie in the background.

I could watch that video for a longer time than I'd like to admit.

[stripethree]

It seems a lot of the tire tests aren't publicly posted or easy to find, but here's the maxxis one:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/artic ... lass-2016/

Thanks for that. Still think we're going to have to agree to disagree. Until we live in a world where a 255 is a 255 is a 255, that's going to be extremely brand dependent. The test even notes different rim sizes as optimal for the Maxxis vs Rival S.