Possible rule idea's

[Phast Phil]

In racing as long as we have a set of rules to restrict then we all have to comply and therefore the racing should be relatively close. If we change the rules and everyone does the same then we still end up in the same place, race wise; albeit we may all be going a bit quicker or slower depending on the rule amendment. In the end any rule change generally causes one to spend more money to keep up.

Super taxis have limited aero, they beat SS at the mountain because of development since 1992 over all the major teams with talented drivers and engineers. I believe if we develop what we have got then we can produce better racing.

As Chris Donnelly said, move a motion at your state general meeting, vote on it and ensure it is worded correctly and then your state assn brings it to the next NSSC meeting. All this talk about it is only politicing, you won't get anything passed on this forum or on facebook, you need to get support at your state meeting and the NSSC then eventually at CAMS.

[John HENDERSON]

Gidday Phil,
I read that they had to be flat undertrays, not curved upwards like V8supercars. Is that correct??

[Toymax]

3.5 Aerodynamic aids:
(i) The use of undertrays, fairings, or other aids to aerodynamic form (including aerofoils) is not permitted unless
specifically provided for in these Regulations.
(ii) It is permitted to fit a spoiler or air dam on the front of the car such that no part of it is more than 100mm
ahead of the original coachwork at any point.
The bumper must retain its original appearance and location in relation to the unmodified area of the
coachwork. However, it may be integral with the air dam and surrounding coachwork.
The bumper or fascia returns may be spread horizontally to merge with the front mudguard flares. No part
of the bumper or air dam shall be wider than the widest point of the modified front mudguards (see diagram
2). The shape of the original bumper or fascia may be modified to merge with the air dam below a horizontal
plane passing through the centre of the front wheel hubs (see diagram 3).
Air dam undertrays may be installed and used as an aerodynamic aid. No part of the undertray may extend
further rearward than the leading edge of the front tyres and must be within the vertical projection of the
vehicle, including modified coachwork (tyres must be inflated to a minimum of 1.8 bar pressure).




No mention of limiting the angle of the undertray there John.

Perhaps you were thinking of the reference to the floor sections/underbody:




3.10 Floor pan:
(i) The floor pan may either:
(a) comply with a definition of a “floorpan vehicle” outlined in article 1.1, or
(b) be replaced by a component whose lower surface is flat and is mounted parallel to the bottom edge of the
sill, to be known as “spaceframe vehicles”, and complies with the following:
• It may extend no further forward than the leading edge of the sill panel.
• It may not extend further rearward than the trailing edge of the original sill panel.
• It may consist of a number of flat surfaces, all of which must be horizontal when viewed from the front
S p e c i f i c a t i o n s o f A u t omo b i l e s – G r o u p 3 D L a s t u p d a t e d : 0 1 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 3 6
© Confederation of Australian Motor Sport Ltd. All use subject to Conditions of Use at www.camsmanual.com.au
GROUP 3D – SPORTS SEDANS
and may only be joined by vertical sections.
Note: on vehicles where the bottom edge of the sill is not a straight line (see (b) above), the lower edge of any
replacement floor pan must be parallel to a straight line drawn along the lowest straight edge of the door/s on
either side of the vehicle.
(ii) In all cases (original or replacement floor pan), an additional flat surface may be fitted in addition to, or in place
of, the original panel work which would normally constitute the boot floor or rear hatch floor. If fitted, this
panel must:
• be added to the rear of the trailing edge of the original sill panel or cockpit bulkhead;
• extend no further rearward than the underside of the beaver panel or rear bumper bar assembly (at any point
across the width).
• Its leading edge must be parallel to the floor pan or any replacement surface from the side; its lower surface
must be parallel to the Note mentioned in 3.10(i).
• Rearward of the centreline of the rear axle it may be inclined at an angle, the maximum of which will
necessitate that it meets the underside of the beaver panel or rear bumper bar assembly.
• The lower surface must be the lowest horizontal (or near horizontal) panel of the vehicle.
(iii) It is prohibited to include any vertical or near vertical vanes or other aerodynamic devices into the flat surfaces
other than those mentioned in 3.5(vi), 3.10(i) or 3.10(ii).
The creation of any aerodynamic device in the floor pan is prohibited.
Holes are allowed in both the flat surfaces mentioned in 3.10(i) or 3.10(ii) only for mechanical or suspension
associated components or attachment purposes, or as otherwise provided in the relevant regulations.
The rear beaver panel and/or bumper bar, whichever is the lower, must remain original in shape and
position.
(iv) It is permitted to fit flat panels, parallel to the vehicle sills, to protect the engine and ancillaries from the
ingress of debris. Such panels must not extend forward of a vertical plane tangent to the leading edge of the
complete front wheel assemblies, nor rearward of a vertical plane tangent to the foremost points of the front
doors.

[John HENDERSON]

Thanks Guys,
I will go to the shed now and modify mine now. However, I would still like the latest front bar wind deflector thingo's added to the front corners. Like you see on GT cars & time attack. That and a longer wind splitter like Mr BOOST says would be on my wish list.

And to answer some questions I have been receiving, I have the Ex bailey Supra.

[toranaracer]

It would be interesting to see how many Time Attack cars with their current 1,000kw engine tunes would survive 10 laps of SMP at that lap time without breaking :o

toranaracer.

[FalconEL]

It would be interesting to see how many Time Attack cars with their current 1,000kw engine tunes would survive 10 laps of SMP at that lap time without breaking :o

toranaracer.

And whether their Semi-Slick "Qualifying Compound Tyres" would be any good after about 4 laps..... From what I understand, those blokes throw tyres at those rigs like nothing else....I'd be disappointed with a 25 if I had all the driving aids those cars had, ie. 4WD, traction control, ABS.

Most of the quick Sports Sedans lay black patches from here to next week because of the Medium-Hard compound slicks we run without driver aids and our general lack of aerodynamic development. Sometimes I think that's not such a bad thing! (Getting old I am!!!)

Despite that, if the Time Attack stuff is thriving and we are still the best kept secret in town, we need to be marketing ourselves better that's for sure and making it easier for guys to get into a proper Sports Sedan......

Back on topic though, good to see some discussion about Rules and some proactive suggestions for the future!

[Toymax]

About as many as Sports Sedans???? :p

[MrBoost]

awesome some good feedback from everyone

Falcon EL i wouldnt be dissappointed with a 25, it was as i said at about 500bhp as the 1000kw engine lunched itself
the week before the event. I really have to admit they are putting in more effort and alot more engineering thought
than any of us, even the likes of darren and tony.
Torana racer alot of the cars are actually extremely reliable even with the numbers they are making. Because of
the huge interest around the worlld companies like cosworth are making off the shelf parts for these things that
are rated at over 1000bhp, so the guys running them at 700odd hp have zero trouble (and thats 4 cylinder turbo cars)
For example guys like nik kalis, gools, the nemo evo, murray coote and co all have run there cars hard for long periods
of time in testing. Nemo is also currently gearing up to go and run pikes peak.
People are quick to jump to conclusions about these cars, but ive done a truck load of research on them in recent months
in regard to my new toy and they are definately not hand grenades (well some definately are)
If you get time jump on that link posted above about the nemo evo, its obviously the pinnacle car at the moment, but there
is definately at least 5 other cars right right on its heels.

And your very correct about the tyres, they are super sticky and anyone who thinks they will go faster on slicks is dreaming.
Ive spoken to the hankook dealer and he believes lap time wise it would almost be on par slick v semi slick.
The semi they use is very soft but yes doesnt have the same surface area as the slick. Drop off is in the order of 1-2 secs after
2-3 laps. but they can be run a second time and almost be on the same pace for those first two laps again.
After that they lose about 2 secs a lap but stabilise around there for a while.

If anyone has any thought on the rule ideas or wants to add to them send me a message. I have a draft copy now of the two
i have spoken about now that i will take to the next meeting. I realise talking on here wont get a rule amended or changed
but as i dont plan on flying to every state meeting this is the best medium to get a guage on whether others like it or not.
If you do think its a positive be active and talk to others and join your local clubs and vote on things. Its the only way that
you guys will get heard and be taken seriously.

[MrBoost]

stupid quick reply box, sorry for the weird spacings

[Phast Phil]

Input from Shane Bradford to me via email

Put this up on the forum

I don’t reckon the other cars are that close to that Nemo thing at all and remembering these are mostly international super heroes with massive budgets, I don’t put any credence in what Nick says about the cars being cheap, the body alone on that Nemo car would have cost more than Phil’s whole build. Dave Ferran ( who had a bit to do with fabricating parts for Nemo ) told Joey and I yesterday the car as run ( 4 wheel drive remember ) had 680HP at the wheels ( ours has 570, 2 wheel drive ). I reckon just looking at the build quality on that car it would owe them at least 600K. If the tyres drop off 2 seconds a lap after 2 laps they are definitely 1 lap screamers and I would just about guarantee you they give up more 1 lap grip than our 18’s do on their 3rd and best lap. Des and Kerry would have been in the top 6 or 7 and they can do it for 6 – 10 laps. Chris and I would have been in the top 10 and this is against mainly international competition. I rest my case.

http://racing.natsoft.com.au/635416283/object_22820096.87Z/View?5
http://racing.natsoft.com.au/635416283/object_22991888.87I/View?18

These guys with their opinions are all blokes who have absolutely no idea the commitment and dollars it costs to run a competitive sports sedan ( even at state level ) because they have never done it. I like the idea of the bigger wings and making the cars look more modern and aggressive but it needs to be done in a gradual and realistic fashion.
Regards
Shane Bradford