Cal Club Autocross Forums

Solo Oct 2010 Fastrack
http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastrack/ ... t-solo.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oct 2010 Fastrack
STREET TOURING
- The pending proposals to change the ST bodywork rules, as previously published in earlier issues of Fastrack, are now
being considered for an effective date of 1/1/2012.

March 2010 Fastrack
STREET TOURING
- The STAC has provided the following rule change proposal, which is published here for member comment: Replace
14.2.F in its entirety with the following:
SCCA FasTrack News March 2010 Page 18
“F. Wings may be added, removed, or modified. Non-OE wings may only be attached to the rear deck/hatch area
behind the centerline of the rear axle. The total combined surface area of all wings shall not exceed 5 square feet as
calculated per Section 12.9. The number of wing elements is limited to 2.
Wings, and any component thereof, may not extend beyond the vehicle width, as defined by the outermost portion of
the vehicle doors, less mirrors, door handles, rub strips, and trim. In addition, no portion of the wing or its components
may extend beyond the rear most portion of the bodywork, above the roofline of the vehicle, or more than 6” forward
of the rear axle, regardless of body style. For convertibles and roadsters, the highest portion of the windshield frame
will be considered the highest portion of the roof.
Reinforcements to the wing mounting area may be used, but may serve no other purpose. Body panels to which a
wing mounts must remain fully functional (e.g. trunk lids and rear hatches must open fully). Wing endplate surface
area is limited to 110 square inches each ,and the total number of endplates is limited to a maximum of two.
Substitution or removal of rear wings must retain any original third brake light functionality unless otherwise equipped
(e.g back deck).”
Comment: This removes the original allowance for aftermarket body kits, spoilers and other appearance items, whose
original purpose (i.e. attract Sport Compact enthusiasts) is no longer relevant, and which a number of competitors were
using for performance advantage. Its replacement maintains the status quo on usage of aftermarket wings, while placing
restrictions on further escalation. In addition, per member input, complete removal of OE wings would now be legal in
many cases.


Does this mean those damn wings are staying???

Jeff Wong wrote:Does this mean those damn wings are staying???

You seem to be doing just fine not running one. Are they so ugly that you just can't stand the sight of them?

Personally, I think they look blah on the BMW, but good on the RX8.

Boo. I completely understand the bodykit "performance advantage" issue (cold air inlets, etc.) and the desire to eliminate that, but why not allow wing or spoiler?

Steve Lepper wrote: but why not allow wing or spoiler?

Just leave a small air gap between your spoiler and the deck and you have a wing.

Why eliminate spoilers? What am I missing in this concept if wings are allowed?

It sounds like 2011 will be my last chance to employ my awesome superlight bumper covers...

Craig Naylor wrote:Why eliminate spoilers? What am I missing in this concept if wings are allowed?

Comment: This removes the original allowance for aftermarket body kits, spoilers and other appearance items, whose
original purpose (i.e. attract Sport Compact enthusiasts) is no longer relevant, and which a number of competitors were
using for performance advantage.

KJ Christopher wrote:

Jeff Wong wrote:Does this mean those damn wings are staying???

You seem to be doing just fine not running one. Are they so ugly that you just can't stand the sight of them?

Personally, I think they look blah on the BMW, but good on the RX8.

Those Ciro Design end plates are dangerous.

Last weekend in S.D. I saw you adjusting your wing before your runs... Making the wing look better for the course workers while you are driving is priceless.

Sebastian Rios wrote:It sounds like 2011 will be my last chance to employ my awesome superlight bumper covers...

:barf:

Oct 2010 Fastrack wrote: Comment: This removes the original allowance for aftermarket body kits, spoilers and other appearance items, whose
original purpose (i.e. attract Sport Compact enthusiasts) is no longer relevant, and which a number of competitors were
using for performance advantage. Its replacement maintains the status quo on usage of aftermarket wings, while placing
restrictions on further escalation. In addition, per member input, complete removal of OE wings would now be legal in
many cases.

So wings are allowed because so many ST* competitors are already using them, while spoilers are not allowed because those aren't as popular? Am I interpreting the comment correctly?

Jeff Wong wrote:

<cling wrap>

:barf:

It's ugly either way.

Sebastian Rios wrote:It sounds like 2011 will be my last chance to employ my awesome superlight bumper covers...

Did you see the dude driving with us in STX at Nats who basically drilled a bunch of holes in his bumper? There was more negative space than plastic. Probably not as light as a layer or two of Saran, though.

So how about the side rub strips the Civie guys take off? Is that part of the body kit allowance?

Steve Ekstrand wrote:So how about the side rub strips the Civie guys take off? Is that part of the body kit allowance?

That is 14.2 C which isn't being affected. Only 14.2 F

Kurt Rahn wrote: Did you see the dude driving with us in STX at Nats who basically drilled a bunch of holes in his bumper? There was more negative space than plastic. Probably not as light as a layer or two of Saran, though.

Yeah, the Team Undercoat car. Took some weight off the back, but added more with that giant cow catcher in the front...not sure that's the right direction.

Jeff Wong wrote:Oct 2010 Fastrack
Does this mean those damn wings are staying???

Suck it Wonger. Wings are awesome. ;)

Doug Rowse wrote:

Jeff Wong wrote:Oct 2010 Fastrack
Does this mean those damn wings are staying???

Suck it Wonger. Wings are awesome. ;)

WINGS = RAD = TRUE

Sebastian Rios wrote:

Kurt Rahn wrote: Did you see the dude driving with us in STX at Nats who basically drilled a bunch of holes in his bumper? There was more negative space than plastic. Probably not as light as a layer or two of Saran, though.

Yeah, the Team Undercoat car. Took some weight off the back, but added more with that giant cow catcher in the front...not sure that's the right direction.

I think you are missing the subtle (or not so subtle) jab at the ST rules and players that is behind the Team Undercoat car modification program.

You should talk to Jason/Craig - they were very kind to offer Nicole their car for STL on the second day.

Aaron Goldsmith wrote:WINGS = RAD = TRUE

Maybe on a car where you don't have to consider a 1st gear downshift when the course turns upwind!

The Civic technically has a wing because there is a gap and air can go under it.

Jeff Wong wrote: Those Ciro Design end plates are dangerous.

Hey now !, they're not that bad.

Looks like the SEB went with the STAC Feb proposal. The effective wing changes are: limiting the the endplates to 110 sq", can't protrude beyond the rear bumper, and no higher than the roofline. This a good progression from the SM wing rule, as ST was more open in those areas than SM previously.

Some of the wings built a few years back, like what's on the BMWs and my car, will need to be changed. Luckily,the newer gen wings like on KJ's RX8 were built to the new rule specs.

Rick

Wings may be added, removed, or modified. Non-OE wings may only be attached to the rear deck/hatch area behind the centerline of the rear axle.

Thus ensuring maximum leverage and therefore potential effectiveness of the wing.

Does this mean that adding a Rowse/Peters style rear spoiler would be illegal on my car?

Greg Peng wrote:

Oct 2010 Fastrack wrote: Comment: This removes the original allowance for aftermarket body kits, spoilers and other appearance items, whose
original purpose (i.e. attract Sport Compact enthusiasts) is no longer relevant, and which a number of competitors were
using for performance advantage. Its replacement maintains the status quo on usage of aftermarket wings, while placing
restrictions on further escalation. In addition, per member input, complete removal of OE wings would now be legal in
many cases.

So wings are allowed because so many ST* competitors are already using them, while spoilers are not allowed because those aren't as popular? Am I interpreting the comment correctly?

So wings like Craig Kippel have on his car will be legal, because there for appearance only and have no competitive advantage
(can upload a pic, because all that I have are to big, and I don't have an editing program)

but my adding the factory spoiler available on R packaged cars will be a competitive advantage, and therefor now disallowed. but an aftermarket "spoiler" that has airflow under it would be legal Please explain in terms I can understand how that r package spoiler is a competitive advantage and the wing is not because I don't get it.

If you pour water on the deck will it flow under the spoiler?
If not then shim it tiny fractions of a millimeter until water flows.
Its a wing now.

Craig Naylor wrote:an aftermarket "spoiler" that has airflow under it would be legal
.

If air flows over and under, it is a wing.