Cal Club Autocross Forums

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.

sounds good to me.

See revisions in bold.

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

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

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

CALIFORNINA STREET TOURING (CST)[/b]

CaliforniNa?

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...

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.

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....

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

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

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'!

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.

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.

2009-01 cannot be split correct?

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?"

aws\efwegdfgdfg

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

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.

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

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

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

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.

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...

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

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.

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.