Rules Proposal 2009-01

Moderators: Mike Simanyi, Rick Brown, Michael Palero

User avatar
Curt Luther
Posts: 1070
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 9
Location: Lookin' in Mike's cooler for "water" ;)...and my underwear
Contact:

Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Curt Luther » Wed Oct 15, 2008 6:57 am

Add the following to APPENDIX A of the CSCC Supplementary Regulations:

CALIFORNIA STREET TOURING (CST)
Vehicles eligible for CST must comply with the rules of CSM, with the exception that all of the tires mounted on the car must have a TREADWEAR number of 140 or higher molded by the manufacturer on the sidewall.

SUPER STREET TOURING (SST)
Vehicles eligible for SST must comply with Para. 14 (Street Touring) and specifically Para. 14.13 (Street Touring Ultra) of the Solo National Rulebook but are not limited to the displacement, amount of seating and excluded vehicles rules of that paragraph. The class is open to all vehicles, including those that are not otherwise eligible for Street Touring classes, but are subject to Street Touring Ultra limitations.
Last edited by Curt Luther on Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:12 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Rev. Dr. Curtis J. Luther, Esq., M.D.

User avatar
Casey Brier
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 806
Location: Beaumont California
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Casey Brier » Thu Oct 16, 2008 7:19 am

sounds good to me. :)
"cars...you spend money you don't have, to buy the parts you don't need, to impress the people you don't like....."

User avatar
Curt Luther
Posts: 1070
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 9
Location: Lookin' in Mike's cooler for "water" ;)...and my underwear
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Curt Luther » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:55 am

See revisions in bold.
Rev. Dr. Curtis J. Luther, Esq., M.D.

User avatar
Jayson Woodruff
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 51

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Jayson Woodruff » Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:12 am

Curt Luther wrote:SUPER STREET TOURING (SST)
Vehicles eligible for SST must comply with Para. 14 (Street Touring) and specifically Para. 14.13 (Street Touring Ultra) of the Solo National Rulebook but are not limited to the displacement, amount of seating and excluded vehicles rules of that paragraph. The class is open to all vehicles that are not otherwise eligible for Street Touring classes but are subject to Street Touring Ultra limitations.

I stop paying attention to the discussion thread. Are we intending to limit tires to STU widths?

Also note the new verbage excludeds any car elgible for ST. So no running up a weight class, kind of like STS2 excludes any 4seaters. Is this intentional?

Jay W

User avatar
Mike Simanyi
Executive Board Member
Posts: 2096
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: No$
Car#: 6

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Mike Simanyi » Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:40 am

The intent of the class is to include cars not already classed in ST, allowing them to compete under the STU rule set.

For 2009, that means non-AWD cars will be limited to 285 tires on any width wheel they prefer. For example, S2000s and the new Miata can easily fit the 265s available from Yokohama, without flaring (ST only allows fender *rolling* of the inner fender lip.)

Mike

User avatar
David Avard
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 13
Location: Topeka, KS

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby David Avard » Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:11 am

Curt Luther wrote:Add the following to APPENDIX A of the CSCC Supplementary Regulations:

CALIFORNINA STREET TOURING (CST)[/b]


CaliforniNa?
David Avard
'89 Honda Civic Si
'07 Mazda 3
'99 Jeep Grand Cherokee
'88 UHaul

User avatar
Curt Luther
Posts: 1070
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 9
Location: Lookin' in Mike's cooler for "water" ;)...and my underwear
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Curt Luther » Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:41 am

David Avard wrote:
Curt Luther wrote:Add the following to APPENDIX A of the CSCC Supplementary Regulations:

CALIFORNINA STREET TOURING (CST)[/b]


CaliforniNa?

I was wondering how long... :)
Rev. Dr. Curtis J. Luther, Esq., M.D.

User avatar
Curt Luther
Posts: 1070
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 9
Location: Lookin' in Mike's cooler for "water" ;)...and my underwear
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Curt Luther » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:13 pm

Jayson Woodruff wrote:Also note the new verbage excludeds any car elgible for ST. So no running up a weight class, kind of like STS2 excludes any 4seaters. Is this intentional?

Jay W

No, "running up" would be allowed. I've changed the verbage, again, a bit to show this.
Rev. Dr. Curtis J. Luther, Esq., M.D.

User avatar
Steve Ekstrand
Solo Safety Steward
Posts: 7238
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 15
Location: This space left intentionally blank
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Steve Ekstrand » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:28 pm

Hmmm.... 275 Star Specs on 10" SSRs. A diff. A 3" down pipe and single hi flow cat to 3" Ti straight pipe. 100 octane tune. Moton 3-way with coilovers. Hotchkis bars. Lightweight front seats.
I wonder who has a 335 coupe these parts could fit on?

Nothing like a $68K quasi-STU car....
Dr. Conemangler
aka The Malefic One
2015 Wildcat Honda F600

User avatar
Mike Simanyi
Executive Board Member
Posts: 2096
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: No$
Car#: 6

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Mike Simanyi » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:30 pm

Steve Ekstrand wrote:I wonder who has a 335 coupe these parts could fit on?

You won't need SST for that. It's '09 STU-compliant. (Twin-turbos are disallowed in the current rules, but that's changing beginning in January.)

Mike

User avatar
Mike Simanyi
Executive Board Member
Posts: 2096
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: No$
Car#: 6

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Mike Simanyi » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:38 pm

Curt Luther wrote:
Jayson Woodruff wrote:Also note the new verbage excludeds any car elgible for ST. So no running up a weight class, kind of like STS2 excludes any 4seaters. Is this intentional?

Jay W

No, "running up" would be allowed. I've changed the verbage, again, a bit to show this.


I see what you did there. Nice!

Mike

User avatar
Max Hayter
Posts: 2007
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 31
Location: Powdering the boys...

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Max Hayter » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Just so I'm clear, can a currently legal STU car go jacket hunting in SST? Not that I would do such a thing of course!

Also, what happens if I own a Z06 and want to run SST - 285's would not fit on the car... too small!

I'm just sayin'!

User avatar
Aaron Goldsmith
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:22 pm
Club: CASOC
Car#: 32
Location: HB, CA
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Aaron Goldsmith » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:50 pm

Max Hayter wrote:Just so I'm clear, can a currently legal STU car go jacket hunting in SST? Not that I would do such a thing of course!

Also, what happens if I own a Z06 and want to run SST - 285's would not fit on the car... too small!

I'm just sayin'!


You run SST, i'll run CST. Rick can stay in STU. We can kill 3 with 1 blow. :lol:

User avatar
Mike Simanyi
Executive Board Member
Posts: 2096
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: No$
Car#: 6

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Mike Simanyi » Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:00 pm

Max Hayter wrote:Just so I'm clear, can a currently legal STU car go jacket hunting in SST? Not that I would do such a thing of course!

Also, what happens if I own a Z06 and want to run SST - 285's would not fit on the car... too small!

I'm just sayin'!


They'll fit.


And we'll laugh.

User avatar
Michael Palero
Rules Committee Member
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 18
Location: San Gabriel Valley & Long Beach
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Michael Palero » Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:28 pm

2009-01 cannot be split correct?

User avatar
Michael Palero
Rules Committee Member
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 18
Location: San Gabriel Valley & Long Beach
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Michael Palero » Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:38 pm

Michael Palero wrote:2009-01 cannot be split correct?

How about,
"Do SST and CST have both be passed? Can they be passed and voted on separately?"

User avatar
Michael Palero
Rules Committee Member
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 18
Location: San Gabriel Valley & Long Beach
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Michael Palero » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:14 am

aws\efwegdfgdfg

User avatar
Mako Koiwai
Posts: 6489
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 34
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Mako Koiwai » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:26 am

Could our '99 Miata, for which there is no National ST class ... run in either of those classes?

User avatar
Aaron Goldsmith
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:22 pm
Club: CASOC
Car#: 32
Location: HB, CA
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Aaron Goldsmith » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:28 am

Mako Koiwai wrote:Could our '99 Miata, for which there is no National ST class ... run in either of those classes?



I think we'd need to hear what happened at the meeting last night to know if it even matters.

User avatar
Michael Palero
Rules Committee Member
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 18
Location: San Gabriel Valley & Long Beach
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Michael Palero » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:37 am

So did 2009-01 pass or not?

or is 2009-01 a meaningless title and CST and SST were voted on separately?

Who do I have to blow to get an answer around here?

My post has been up since November 9
Last edited by Michael Palero on Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jason Isley BS RX8
Posts: 1129
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Car#: 0
Location: Coto de Caza
Contact:

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Jason Isley BS RX8 » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:37 am

Max Hayter wrote:Also, what happens if I own a Z06


Out of embarrassment all other Corvette owners dump their cars, killing the market. :lol:

Max Hayter wrote:285's would not fit on the car... too small!


It is only 10mm smaller. Depending on the brand, a 285 could be bigger, and it will certainly be better than the rocks they come on.

User avatar
Mike Simanyi
Executive Board Member
Posts: 2096
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: No$
Car#: 6

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Mike Simanyi » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:57 am

Michael Palero wrote:So did 2009-01 pass or not?

or is 2009-01 a meaningless title and CST and SST were voted on separately?

Who do I have to blow to get an answer around here?

My post has been up since November 9

CST and SST are local classes for '09.

Verbiage and indexes to be finalized...

User avatar
Mike Simanyi
Executive Board Member
Posts: 2096
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: No$
Car#: 6

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Mike Simanyi » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:59 am

Mako Koiwai wrote:Could our '99 Miata, for which there is no National ST class ... run in either of those classes?

Yes. You could theoretically prep the Miata for our local SST class and throw R compounds on it to run CSP at the Tour and Pro.

Mike

User avatar
Sebastian Rios
King of Fastrack!
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 397
Location: Out to lunch

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Sebastian Rios » Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:13 pm

I think the SST index should be only slightly higher than STU until we figure out what's doing. I propose .838, it follows the progression of .002 increments shared by ST, STS, and STX.

User avatar
Marshall Grice
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1489
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 21

Re: Rules Proposal 2009-01

Postby Marshall Grice » Thu Nov 20, 2008 3:17 pm

Sebastian Rios wrote:I think the SST index should be only slightly higher than STU until we figure out what's doing. I propose .838, it follows the progression of .002 increments shared by ST, STS, and STX.

I'd think something like scaling SST's index referenced to ASP by the same percentage as STU is to BSP. So something like .840 for SST.

for reference STU is about 97.3% of BSP's index.


Return to “Public Rules Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests