**APRIL FASTRACK NEWS**

[Gen52SS]

New ST information

http://cdn.growassets.net/user_files/sc ... 1490029181

[thrdeye]

I just can't get over the Celica to HS thing. What is the issue in moving it?

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

[steverife]

Not that I agree/disagree, but...

I think they fear that would be the top car in HS and that having a dated/explodey top car isn't ideal.

[thrdeye]

makes sense. maybe I underestimate how good they are

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

[MARKP]

I don't think they are that good.

[flier129]

What's the typical turn around time on "change proposals" ? I'm mainly interested in if and when this little guy from January Fastrack will get put into place for ST*

Change 14.10.F as shown:
Engine management is open including standalone engine management systems.
Standalone control modules must be plug-and-play. Model year 2005 and older
vehicles may use piggyback systems that splice into the wiring. Wiring harnesses
may not be shorter or lighter than the original. The resultant system must retain
OBDII functionality if present in the original. Additional sensors may not be used.


That last sentence of "Additional sensors may not be used." kills my idea of running a MSM in STU. There's not really a way to control the boost via the OEM boost control solenoid

[John Brown]

They are adding yet another class?? STH ?

[steverife]

They are adding yet another class?? STH ?

STF goes away.

[John Brown]

I like that idea....

Like the Trump Regulation plan..

Every time SCCA adds a new class... 2 go away!!!

[MARKP]

The wording says the STAC is recommending the changes. Was this proposed before and I just overlooked it? That's a whole bunch of shakeup in ST. Looks like STS is effectively dead for the current cars too.

[John Brown]

The wording says the STAC is recommending the changes. Was this proposed before and I just overlooked it? That's a whole bunch of shakeup in ST. Looks like STS is effectively dead for the current cars too.

What do you mean by this Mark? I know all the Mazdas pulling out made a difference,but dead?

[thrdeye]

I think he meant that with this proposal, STF would become STS.

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

[John Brown]

I think he meant that with this proposal, STF would become STS.

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

unless, a lot of RWD cars return... your right, it already is STF.

[MARKP]

Sorry, read through all of that really quickly and I apparently misunderstood what they were proposing. Looks like STF is the only class that got totally bent over with no lube.

If they are going to do this major shakeup, they should fix some things that, IMO, are inherently screwed up with ST. This whole different prep levels for different classes should be addressed. I understand that larger cars need wider wheels to make them work well but why not just simplify it and say you can run up to a 10" wide wheel as long as all your stuff fits under the fenders? It will self limit. They need to allow all of ST to run differentials. Some get crappy ones, some get good ones, some don't get any? Standardize the prep rules then build the classes around that.

[JohnSmith]

I agree it is way past time to standardize the ST* rule set. The way they have created classes in the past is not something I understand. A class just because things are roadsters? Seriously? This putting all turbo cars together doesn't seem like a fully baked idea. They won't have the same performance. A fwd turbo car isn't going to get nearly as much from opening up boost as a nice AWD car. I wish they would just class cars similar to how street and street prepared do and have one set of prep rules. As it stands now if your car got reclassed it would need a different prep.