All those great cars and none racing.

[Toyzda]

^^ Good theory, and well practiced in drag racing. The issue for me is your example of Toranaracer; to get his car light enough and keep to the ROPS rules, the rest of the car would be wet spaghetti and unsafe. I believe the intial weight limits were to encourage safer building practices and to even out the field. Another issue is, with that many classes in one race the spectator can't follow the leaders in class. A good example is to think of anyone you know that watches the production car racing... and enjoys it. I believe the three SS classes are easy to distinguish and follow throughout a race. SS needs be assumed by the public as a simple class (big engines, big tyres and big wings) to maintain the existing appeal that has helped it survive for many years, but evolve with the technologies and trends in racing avaliable to competitors and spectators alike.

[Htc Motorsport]

Point taken on the production car racing, i hate it. Good if your in it, but watching it.........I was sort of thinking along the lines of my car. I have only 3.2 litres turbo charged and that makes 188 c.i x 1.7 = 3196 c.i or 5.440 litres. Its the engine i had and sort of fits in between the 5.0litre and 6.0 litre weight breaks so i have to carry the full 6 litre weight i believe to be 1125kgs. Most cars i know are in the same boat carrying more than they have to. For me i just dont have the extra money to change things and seeing my car only weighs around 880 kgs and having to run that much extra weight kills me.

[Phast Phil]

Under 3500NA is meant to be a class within the Kerrick series that is a) affordable b) reliable c) competitive d) enjoyable.

The moment you add a turbo to the equation then you pretty much lose a,b,c & d.

Any 2000cc car with a turbo that is built with the same effort, professionalism and budget as any of the 6 leading cars would be competive in the open class, as is any turbo rotary.

These are the rules so build something to the rules and go and enjoy yourself and stop trying to change (or talk about changing) what is a good thing and can become even better with more competitors.

If you had a class to suit every sports sedan that was built without consulting the rules there would be 120 classes and everyone would win their class.
I cannot see anything significant changing as the rules committee is committed to stabilisation of existing rules.

[Toyzda]

HTC,

That extra weight should be put into extra chassis stiffness. You wouldn't carry as much ballast, your corner speed will improve and your car would be safer. All positive points.

It sounds like you are trying to compare a moderately budgeted turbo car to the elite Audi? If the same funds and development were put into a 3.5L Turbo car it would be similar speed. In NSW the Smith calibra runs a 3.5L turbo and is dicing with the (what appears to be) similarly funded 6L Jackson calibra.

I hear your theory, but I just can't see how it would help the class or, infact, your situation with the 3.2L turbo. The ratio multiplyer for turbo engines would have to assume the engine is funded and developed to the same standard as the 700+HP 6L cars.

PS: is your engine multivalve? If so you would have to be 1200kgs....

[Htc Motorsport]

I dont want to change the rules the racing is great the way it is. It was just a discussion point. The engine is single cam. The car is a monocoque design form the 80's and wouldnt handle the power the engine has and being a monocoque cannot add to many bars.
Im happy to run in the 6 litre class. I was thinking more along the lines of the older sports sedans (light weight cars) corollas, escorts etc. that are sitting in sheds here. i guess at the end of the day if they wanted to run they would.

[Toyzda]

The older little cars will come out when the others do. I think time will tell....

Phil,

I don't holey agree with your critisism of turbo cars. Un-restricted, history will show you are completly correct. Boost and revs typically mean money and unreliability. Along with that goes undrivability.

However, restrictors don't allow boost and revs. The engine cannot breath enough. A well tuned IPRA turbo car has a big flat torque curve lending itself to an easier car to drive, unlike a peaky boosted car. They are also quite reliable can be more reliable, with less rebuilding costs as a highly tuned NA engine.

I am in no way suggesting a rule change is necessary for the growth of SS. I am suggesting consideration should be given to the new (and excellent) u3500 class to add a proven rule that has lead to the growth of IPRA making it one of the most populated club class. The class was dying out as it was only rx-7's and rx-3's at the front. Now there is a fwd turbo Starlet that people are chasing....

I do think that the u3500NA should stay as it is, but forecasting future improvement is just good business.

[toranaracer]

Please come and play with me...............please.........

FYI our engine is 3310cc and we weigh 1050kg :(

If only we could "economically" loose ~100kg and NOT compromise safety or reliability...............

toranaracer

[Toyzda]

knowledge of how to loose 100kg without comprimising safety, reliability or investing the value of the car in lightweight exotic parts would be applied to my fatty first! I have even roughed in a new chassis criteria for u2L to get to weight, but thats WAY down the track... we will play one day, I promise.

[Phast Phil]

Recent viewings of Torana racers drivers suit has seen a full body figure. Maybe you can shed 10-20 kilos there? Hahaha

[toranaracer]

Too true, too true :(
As they say, I may be overweight but you will be ugly forever :p

toranaracer