SLS 2018 - End of year thoughts/discussion

[AK]

Its not end of year yet, but I think there are several points needing discussed. Usual end of year meeting at R6 would be best bet...

Can folk list points they would like addressed/brought up? Please also remember to speak up in these meetings - if you dont voice your concerns, how can series organisors improve the series

My personal issues to discuss (i'll state this again.... to discuss. These are NOT rule changes)

- New lower class: Class G <115 or 110whp/ton or there abouts
- Discuss eligibility of 4x4 turbo cars in lower classes (think G/F)
- Discuss processes of shoehorning cars into classes with torque maps and such like - unsure how to approach this. I dont agree with it, but its within rules.
- Revise minimum ballast? Reduce again?
- Slicks n wings addition to Pro class?
- 3 strikes rule? Set cap laptime for each class. If driver beats that time (or even winning time from class above), they get a strike. I'm not overly keen but can see it leveling the field
- Mandatory in car camera. Provides addition evidence for map change/control if required in case of protest.

i think the Classes still work, just F is pretty quick for 'entry level' now
_________________
Impreza Race Car - SLS/SMRC
Mini Race Car - SMRC
911 - 1981 Air Cooled 3.0
500 - 1969 Fiat 500 L
Toureg 262 RLine
Track Scotland

[David Long]

I thought it all works quite well and expanding class at the lower end seem to make sense..

As for 'out of class' times, I think the rules should include a speed trap maximum for each class. If you exceed that maximum speed you would be liable to a time penalty, or moved to a higher class in the next event. That would encourage better driving skills ie higher corner speed, and not higher straight line speed.

I think Pro should be open to slicks and free aero
_________________
R600 Dubaru
website
PB @ KH
Duratec in Detail

[Fee]

I don't agree with the penalty point....
Power to weight based classes....get your car set up for a class....do well and boom, you're essentially penalised.

I do think there should be some sort of rule around running a lower boost to fit in a lower class.
Something like if you choose to run less than your max boost to get in a lower class, then you need to have the ability to prove that that is the boost you are running (i.e. some sort of logging).
If you can't prove it, then you run in the class as dictated by your max boost.

Make sense?
_________________
2010 Time Attack AWD Club Challenge Champion
2013 Rolly Polly Champion

R32 GTR: TimeAttack - Track Scotland

[AK]

[Jackstrath]

Agree with:
The lower power class, you can see the speed diffrance in the chase race with the minis and clios...
Slicks and wings in pro

The penalty point system doesnt seem very fair at all. Veiws like fiona on that one.

Its sad to think that people could potentualy be cheating, theres ways around high low boost settings swtichs, i remember back in the day andy forrest used to use the rear window heater switch as a high low boost switch, i mean how can you enforce that? The camera would be handy to a degree but can you map an over boost function into the likes of a kick down button on a throttle pedal ? youd never know then.

As for davids point for speed trap time im not sure on that one ether, the base cars aero dynamics have a massive effect on its ability to punch though the air, should Marshall's fairly slick RX8 get penalised for being able to punch though the air better than ians honda civic? both doing 57's laps but 7mph between them on the SF speed trap.

The running of lower max boost is a hard one, define someones max boost, they could easly say somethings been changed and it no longer able to run a so called high boost, like my focus's turbo will run 3 bar of boost.... engine would prob manage a lap before lifting the head but you get my point hopefully.

I for one next year are going to run less power and in turn boost if im home for the dates , currently the car doesnt like running big power as it got to hot (like everything lol) and my lap times bar the 1 off 55.6 were all 6 and 2 /3's if i was on high or medum boost but the car could do medum boost lap after lap.

The cars with torque maps is a hard/messy one.... your rulling out diesel cars (although i dont think much compeat anyway) but is it fair to shoehorn them due to engine charchteristics?
And then theres people like me that potentualy dont want to run to there engines max power rating but instead want to cap power and raise torque to have more constant grunt to use. As im not going to lie it had crossed my mind... (but why shouldnt it as currently nothing says other wise) - it might sound non sportsman ship but then i feel the power messured at the wheels and not the fly is a handycap for 4x4 cars... (and looking at the S3 speed trap for round 5 final you can see the 4x4's on the whole have a few mph up on 2wd cars) and i know others disagree with that. I feel this is only going to effect turbo cars as theres not much NA motors that you can map to have a much larger torque figure than bhp.

Where do you draw the line? manual box's over sequentials ect ect ? Could get messy quick
[/b]

[David Long]

OK, I see the the arguments against penalties, so maybe just have a more general ruling such as:

''At the discretion of the organisers, cars that record speed trap times consistent with another power-to-weight class may be re-classed accordingly''

That could apply to both faster and slower competitors.
_________________
R600 Dubaru
website
PB @ KH
Duratec in Detail

[Fee]

They pretty have that discretion just now
_________________
2010 Time Attack AWD Club Challenge Champion
2013 Rolly Polly Champion

R32 GTR: TimeAttack - Track Scotland

[AK]

yup, they have a rulling to cover moving folk if required


Another suggestion for me (make it every year) - An away round Croft or Oulton.... anywhere really. Be good to try and fit a round in with NSSCC like they do with KMSC.
_________________
Impreza Race Car - SLS/SMRC
Mini Race Car - SMRC
911 - 1981 Air Cooled 3.0
500 - 1969 Fiat 500 L
Toureg 262 RLine
Track Scotland

[s2t]

Agree with a round at another venue and amalgamating with NSSC seems sensible.

Proposal... allowing Radicals, Spires Westfield XTR2 to compete on a full basis rather than at discretion.

Proposal... allow 1c tyres in classes A to C especially if Pro are allowed slicks

[AK]

[s2t]

[AK]

good point - and I wish most were as pragmatic as you A lot see the licence requirement as a mountain to climb!
_________________
Impreza Race Car - SLS/SMRC
Mini Race Car - SMRC
911 - 1981 Air Cooled 3.0
500 - 1969 Fiat 500 L
Toureg 262 RLine
Track Scotland

[Erik]

I'd stuck most of my thoughts in to a discussion which was happening on Facebook, so probably nothing i'm saying here is anything which hasn't already been mentioned elsewhere, but i'll stick them down here (as someone who doesn't compete in SLS at this time) for completeness sake.

- would agree with addition of a new 'Class G' on the basis that we're at the stage of Class F cars getting close to going under a minute, which in my opinion is in no way a reflection of an 'entry level' lap time of knockhill.
- would also agree with perhaps limiting G, F and maybe E(??) to 2wd and perhaps even potentially N/A only at these levels.
- the real messy one is changeable maps and the flatline power delivery type maps. Very hard to police and even harder to keep everyone happy. Realistically, the only way to properly police this would be to make datalogging compulsory, and make every single car take a weight test and rolling road test at the end of each session. The time and cost constraints associated with that make it a complete no go.

As I've said elsewhere, I'm certainly glad i'm not the person tasked with coming up with a fair solution.

- finally, my suggestion elsewhere, which Renny made some good points on why it might not work, would be to equalise things in each class by essentially running each car to the lowest power to weight ratio entered for that class in a weekend.

ie if at one round you had 4 class F entries, running 110, 115, 120 and 125 whp/ton, you'd add weight to the three more powerful cars to bring everyone in class down to 110.

If at the next round, the guy running 110 doesn't enter, then the three cars would run at 115 instead.

In my head it then becomes more about driver ability than it is about the cars. But, as Renny pointed out - it would potentially mean pretty massive weights being added to cars which might make it in-doable.

On the whole, things generally work pretty well as they are in SLS - its impressive things have come this far without any real need to revise things or look at alternatives.

Unfortunately, things have gotten much more serious over the last couple of years and folk now have sponsors to consider and incentives to be doing well and getting results. With the added competitiveness comes the desire to bend rules or find ways to interpret them to your benefit etc. While the ethos might have been 'you're only cheating yourself' a couple of years ago - these days its become a lot less about good faith and a lot more about getting results.

[crayons]

[s2t]

Erik
I am a relative newcomer to SLS so dont have the knowledge of looking back over the years.
I think there are 2 aspects, the guys that can drive very quick through the twisties and the cars capable of high top speed and acceleration. If talking power/weight ratio then acceleration from hairpin to either the start/finish line (clockwise) or the S3line (anticlockwise) gives a perspective on relative p/w, with a dry circuit then one would expect all cars in the class to be close together as being dry there are no traction issues and most people can drive fast in a straightline!. Top speed is more likely to be impacted by body shape and final gearing. Personally I know I will be down on top speed in some cases by as much as 20mph but as my car is so much lighter and if I had the talent I would make that up around the twisties
Looking at the recent speed tables then yes there are some figures that raise eyebrows, interestingly the 'higher' the class viz A,B then it would appear to be less of an 'issue'

Within the paddock it is my observation that everyone wants to do the best they can, most just want to improve their PB's I would venture. It would be a shame if as you suggest some guys are motivated to errr cheat to satisfy commercial obligations. Maybe nievely I dont think there are entrants with large sponsorship packages supporting them. If there those that are tempted to bend the rules I would suggest that is more likely to be ego motivated and indeed if the individual has invested large sums of personal money and time then they would want to see a return

I am not convinced this can be policed acurately for example my car was weighed 3 times in a day at the last SLS meeting and with the same approx fuel load there was a 10kg variance and I didnt have any pies for lunch

I have just had a whimisical idea. We get Rory to drive everyones car, say 5 laps and the fastest lap is a target time. Everything is then sealed and points are scored dependant on the % differential