Spec Twin?
 

Rumours abound that the SCCA is contemplating a "Spec Twin" class for FRS and BRZ solo cars. Thoughts and ideas?

The suggestion is very intriguing to me. Now four years in, I am getting quite bored with my CS... no wait DS car, but have too much love for my car as a quiet comfortable daily driver, to seriously think about STX.

I understand the proposed idea of a Spec Twin would fall somewhere in the middle of the Street and STX classes.

I sure would be excited for something like:

1. 8J wheels
2. TRD or Eibach Pro Kit springs
3. Bilstein B8 or OTS Koni yellow
4. Optional oil cooler, brake ducts and/or braided brake lines for those of us who like lapping days
5. A durable spec front lip/splitter... because it looks more interesting, and because I just replaced a cone smashed undertray.
6. Two sway bars?
7. Real camber bolts up front? Adjustable rear LCAs?

If there was a $3000 package purchase along these lines available at Tire Rack... would that feel like a reasonable value for the added performance.

Would it suck people backwards out of STX?

Having less diversity than any solo class ever has, would the class be unattractive to those who are not already twin owners?

A more likely build would be:

shocks/coilovers with camber plates or reasonable camber gain
spec wheels and tires (tires because of contingency)
swaybars* possibly up to the competitors/open
headers/exhaust with spec tune (or spec tune)
allowance for oil coolers, ducts, and brakes (similar to STX for track guys)

I'm thinking that this class would be an STX clone but with spec parts and/or more uniform/economical limits. The other option is to import the Spec 86 class, similar to how the spec miata class is allowed into a specific class even though they are slightly outside the scope of the original rules.

The top guys will swap for contingency, local guys without much competition or who aren't yet fully prepped will swap, and it would be a great place for new people.

The main issue I already see is the 13-16 and 17+ divide. The new cars are already orphaned in CS, but if they are moved into spec 86, they could have an inbuilt advantage (or possible disadvantage depending on rules, but I can't really see how that'd play out).

I wouldn't be against switching from STX to spec 86 if the rules, pax index, and contingencies were appealing; however, jumping classes costs money and I've already invested a fair amount prepping for STX (the value of the modifications/parts would also take a hit with the new class, since the market for performance parts would contract while suffering a glut of similar parts for STX competitors across the country).

I'm afraid that the class will be short lived and poorly supported (it's already at least a year too late to be economical for me and a half dozen of my STX friends).

Our local STX class has grown and prospered thanks to twins, a new class could work but only at the expense of STX. They are already moving cars to the new STH. The only beneficiaries will be the DS/CS guys who can escape the 4 cylinder turbo pony cars and ND Miatas, respectively (which means a lower prep than STX, which is already very daily driver friendly, or a higher prep without going full forced induction).

I would sit back and wait a couple weeks. Might hear more than mumbles and grumbles.

Oil Coolers/Brake Lines...etc IMO are not in the spirit of a Spec Class and only offer additional cost and a perceived value that it's needed. Same goes with the lip.

I'm not a big fan of headers and/or tune, as it adds complexity to something "Spec". IE - If the spec was going to be Sealed Konis (they would not be OTS). You could physically examine to see if the seal has been tampered with and thus easily tell if compliance has been maintained. A tune, while possible is more involved. As well, a 2013 tune vs 2015 tune are different in how the ECU adapts and accepts that tune. No tune is 100% identical on these cars, and a Spec Class would have to be such.

In addition, IF a header and tune are allowed. It becomes a slippery slope. People will start asking for an overpipe..etc etc.

As for me, I'm sticking in STX

For a spec class, I think a DS/CS hybrid with a couple of allowances to make the car better suited for HPDE too would be ideal.

All DS allowances, maybe allow the TRD springs or some other spec spring kit (RCE?) for both cars, keep shock rules the same as they are for DS/CS, 8" wheels, power mods stay the same as DS/CS (essentially non-existent), and oil coolers.

An argument for more camber could easily be made too. With the options being to either allow camber plates fitted for OEM style suspension setups, or simply opening up the camber bolt options. For a spec type class, and in the interest of making this a more affordable hybrid to ideally suit those who do both solo and HPDE, I'd be more in favor of opening up the camber bolt rules. For rear camber LCAs, or maybe a specific spec class LCA, could also be an option.

The idea has a lot of potential, I think the focus just needs to be kept on making the setup one that will work well for both a competitive solo class and reliable track day participation.

People were already working on a spec class for NASA. I'm not sure how far it has progressed though.

http://spec86.com/wp/

- Andrew

It never took off because the cost of entry is rather high for the performance.

Spec-Vette (started this year) has a lower cost of entry for a much faster car, and Spec E46 has the same cost of entry for a much faster car.

That's definitely true, and unfortunate. Might take a few more years for a series to take off with the 86.

- Andrew

This is basically my hope, and the idea excites me.

If it comes to a slightly lighter version of STX where we have to torture ourselves everyday with tiny batteries, fixed buckets and low down ride heights, I'm not as keen.

Power is certainly the cars weakest point, but I don't think there is a great way to address it.

A few more torques for the kouki cars is arguably offset by a lower final drive while doing solo. I wouldn't strongly favour the newer cars if all else ends up equal.

Agreed. I think the focus should be on reliability (oil coolers), cost effectiveness (limited power mods), safety (retention of OEM safety systems, i.e. no bucket seats), and minor handling performance improvements suited to both autox and track days (spec shock/spring combo, open camber bolt rules, and 17x8" wheels).

This keeps costs relatively low, allows for safe/reliable track days, and still makes for a fun/competitive setup in both HPDE and autox that compliments the natural characteristics of the car. It solves the problems of STX being too expensive for most people to build a fully-prepped car and CS/DS being camber limited and not allowing oil coolers or wider wheels that are favored for track days.

I agree on the extra power of the kouki cars being negligible given the gearing. I'd be fine running with new 86s/BRZs, even the brake kit on the PP BRZ likely wouldn't be much of a bother to me in an autox environment.

If there's a hole in SCCA classing for 86's I don't think it's between Street and Street Touring, a mild prep for STX doesn't break the bank at <$5k for 90% of the fun. Everybody knows it doesn't take long to put together a parts list for CS/DS that sails past $3k, it's not that much more expensive to switch to 17x9's and toss some alignment parts onto the car and get what you're missing from STX. Hell I hit $3.6k just chucking RPF1's, RE71R's, Koni's, and a pair of Eibach sways into the cart on Tirerack's website, add in an alignment and install time and you're over $4k then start thinking about a revalve on those Koni's (or Bilstein) to get them dialed in just right...

vs. a set of <$2k coilovers w/ camber plates and <$2k on 17x9 wheels and tires, ~$250 RLCA's, align and go. Add power when budget frees up, ~$1k for budget header and OFT and for the price of a prepped DS/CS car you've got yourself a basic STX prep to build on as time and funds allow.

Devil's advocate,
If there's a gap in classing it's above STX as the only place to go is SM, being able to compete with off the shelf FI without having to gut your car and cut the fenders to fit ~300 width slicks would be pretty cool for this chassis. You'd be looking at a ~$9k-$12k mod budget instead of a ~$20k budget (built engine, gutted, flared, slicks, drivetrain strengthening, tow vehicle and trailer etc.)

But that's a silly hypothesis, how many boosted 86's are there really? And those interested in autox are a minority of a minority, but just a nifty idea. Could keep it street legal too by using off the shelf CARB kits/tunes/approved tuners.

My only gripe about current classing is that "Street touring" is not street legal with the emissions equipment tampering, but that seems to only concern ~10% of SCCA's membership (if that) so I doubt that'll change anytime soon.

The two are mutually exclusive.

My dream is to prove you wrong someday on this point.

I can make it not mutually exclusive, if the budget is large enough, but that defeats the purpose.

I think Mike hit it on the head.

Oil Coolers are not needed or required for a "Spec" Class. Remember guys, SCCA is not out to satisfy HPDE requirements.

What you guys have all listed and wanted to far too close to STX ruleset. It's rule creep. You don't create a divide between STX and Spec class besides 1" of wheel width, camber plates, and some springs.

I have a bit more information than others, but I've been told a package is going to be sub $3k minus wheels/tires. You're not obligated to do full prep to run in the class.

Like I said, sit tight.

Idk that I'd consider them mutually exclusive, but I'm more than willing to admit that Mike is tremendously more experienced in this than I. Like not even comparably so.

I suppose "competitive" in both is the wrong word. Rather able to do both reliably, cost effectively, and making it fun. I think that's a fairly easy goal to accomplish. Afterall, we see it echoed over and over that it's best to track as close to possible until you find that something is limiting you. And i know people who are pretty skilled at HPDE, with room to grow still, who are running similar setups to what I proposed.

I certainly don't think an oil cooler is necessary for a Spec solo class, but I also don't see it adding any real benefit either. But having the allowance might make some people more inclined to participate in both activities though. It'd be a good way for the SCCA to encourage participation in both their Solo and PDX programs. Most guys I know that do both want an oil cooler for track days, which is a good idea, but are conflicted because of solo classing. You can always ask the people in your class if they don't mind, but it'd be nice to not have to deal with that.

I just think it makes sense in terms of the SCCA encouraging growth in as many of their programs as possible, especially seeing how many people take the path of autocross -> PDX -> club racing over time.

I know my notion of what a spec class would look like is probably far from perfect, but I think it makes decent sense. :)

P.S. typed this on my phone, and only half-assed on proofreading it, so please ignore any grammatical errors or seemingly rambling trains of thought.

I don't imagine cutting up Corvette's and STI's with a Spec Twin... I just want it to be a little better suited to 30 hot laps at my slow ass pace.

Mild prep is just that... mild prep. It's very easy to spend $20k on a more complete STX build.

I think your mild prep that is so simple and easy to do, would be a great class of its own. I just don't see any need for threaded spring perches...

Mild prep?

Here's my idea of mild prep for a spec class

White list:

- Any oil cooler
- Any camber plate that does not alter spring or damper stroke/position
- Any rear lower control arm
- Any tranmission cooler
- Any differential cooler
- Any intake/exhaust components
- Any tune
- Gasoline only
- 180whp maximum, on a standardized dyno.
- 17x9 wheel
- 245/40/17 spec tire of sorts
- Open brake pads

2750 Minimum Car weight, including driver
- Includes gutting, standard safety provisions
- Up to 50 lbs ballast allowed, passenger side footwell only

Not mentioned = not allowed.

So stock springs and dampers and sways?
No springs and dampers = weird class with wheels and tires that wide and suspension that soft
Free springs and dampers = STX + more money and incentive to make the car unstreetable

this spec class is for Solo, not road racing.
thanks for playing.

While I'm no pro on this topic, what about having a set standard for this rather than leaving it open?

Like:
-OFT Header and Stage 2 tune + OEM air filter + Nameless single exit axleback exhaust
-SPC LCAs + Toe bushings

I would think this would bring more of a level playing field and have a set standard to have less difference between the vehicles. I know the Miata Cup cars use the same brake/wheel/tire combo and have sealed engines. Hell, everything is exactly the same on those cars, aside from the seat and colors/livery.

Swing and a very big miss. I'm glad you're not involved in making autocross rules.

For spec twin to work, it needs to be accessible (read: easy/cheap to have a competitive car) and it needs to be fun (read: fix some of the warts of the car). That's going to look something like "go to Tire Rack, buy this kit, install it, you're good." Something like this: https://www.turnermotorsport.com/p-3...it/?pdk=AQADAQ

Spec twin probably also means dealing with the torque dip somehow - again, in a cost effective way where nobody has any real advantage by spending money on extra parts or testing. That's either specific header/tune or just specific tune. Hopefully SCCA sacks up and moves past their fear of technology they don't understand in that respect.

I'm far more experience in balancing and game theory than you think. The proposed spec was for a track class, not an autox class, as a response to a "crossover" class.

A realistic "spec twin" Autox class?

- Camber bolts
- Tires
- Open dampers
- Open sways
- "street tires".

No other mods. If you're so insistent on a "spec" damper, then make OEM spec. As you said, make it accessible. Less mods, more accessible.

Sounds eerily familiar doesn't it?

Torque dip doesn't need to be eliminated; everyone is subject to it. It's a "feature", not a "bug".

As always, deeper pockets mean larger advantage. If you want to eliminate the "deep pockets" advantage as much as reasonable, you can even:

- Spec alignment
- OEM 17x7 wheels only
- Spec tire (and size)

:word:

That class already exists

Idea from Spec is to let everyone onto the same playing field and thus eliminate the players that spend $4k on MCS or JRZ suspension.

If I was to take a stab at it...

17x8 Wheels, +- 5mm offset with a min weight the wheel must weigh
Eibach Springs/Swaybars
Sealed Koni Yellows - Dyno'd to maintain spec standards
Camber Bolts
RCAs
200tw Tire, later to be one spec manufacture

This right here is more in line with what I think they'll do, I think they're going to have some sort of catback allowance though. Remember the SCCA is all about being able to take your car you already own and making it fun/competitive, they know pretty much everybody already has an exhaust and that it's such a common mod that catback I think will be in there.

I highly doubt headers will go in there unless it is a standardized one. Because a tomei vs an ACE has a pretty big power difference.

Even that can be gamed. Spec dampers are virtually impossible to enforce, and can be designed to "degrade differently" if you know what I mean.

Custom wheels can be made to meet a minimum weight while minimizing inertia.

Without a hard spec part that is common, you cannot eliminate the spenders. Even then, there's always the guy that will show up with sticker tires to every event.

If they're sourced through 1 manufacture, and sealed by that manufacture...AKA Koni of America. Then I would see it being very difficult to game that system.

Yes, someone could elect to have quicker rebuild intervals, thus having a "fresh" damper. But not like you can get said damper through multiple vendors and have shim inside one cater to your preference.

Sure, custom wheels will and can exist, but if a reasonable weight is determined and you can source a wheel that's within 1 lb of that, does that other person really benefit? I'd doubt that.

Lastly, depending on what tires are offered and what exist, "sticker tires" aren't really a thing anymore.

I just corded a set of Rival 1.5s with about 150 runs, and won Oscoda ProSolo on them by close to a second. Most tires also need a couple heat cycles to come in.

Claimer rule at big events, cough up the money and you buy the fast guys dampers. 16 nuts and they're yours, bring a spare set of stock suspension to get you home. If the cost of the claim is the same as retail for the dampers it's more expensive than getting your own rebuilt, theoretically the person getting bought out hasn't lost anything (except maybe a fresh rebuild) and gets to buy a fresh set.

Edit: I think I'd prefer that over a sealed/spec/regularly dyno'd damper. Much cheaper overall on the sport to regulate than paying for damper dyno time, allows freedom to pick Koni, Bilstein, or alternative (like OE). And despite what you may think (oh no the top 3 cars are going to have their dampers stolen every big event!) claims are rare. As a kid when someone claimed an engine there were whispers coast to coast of what happened. Before everyone put everything online so it was literal word of mouth.

Yes someone with big pockets can go out and get dyno time and custom rebuilds and dyno a hundred dampers to find the best set, but when the risk exists that all that effort will be wiped out it keeps people from pushing the envelope too far beyond the costs.

And of course if anything is found illegal during teardown (i.e. slotted bolt holes or perches at the wrong height) the claimer gets refunded and the parts either confiscated, branded, etc. as any other tech inspection failure.

Edit 2: Yes this doesn't prevent people from blowing thousands of dollars, it just raises the risk in the risk-reward equation and typically keeps people from going bonkers. For example, claim is ~$900 enough for a set of new Koni Yellow or Bilstein B6's, but that probably wouldn't prevent me from paying ~$600 to send a set of Bilsteins to Poway to have a custom valving done on them. If I do well and get claimed I suck up the loss and repeat the process, cost of doing well in the class. But it would probably prevent 99% of competitors from going out and paying someone like FCM for a fancy rebuild because at that point the returns are minimal.

Vendors will likely put together packages like a matched set of Koni Yellows for $200 more than off the shelf, but I don't think that's a bad thing.

I guess the rules depend on the "problem" they want to fix.

If the SCCA just wants a place below STX for all twins, then just allow the BRZ's to run the TRD parts and use the 17+ stock wheel allowance. (7.5" ?)

I think coolers should be open in all stock classes in a sort of "comfort/convinence" way. (I don't see them shaving time for the short runs we do in autocross)

If they want to call it a "spec" class so as not to open the flood gates for other stock classes to start interchanging parts, that's fine.

I think the 86 platform has enough participation to warrant such a class and hope something like this happens.

CS is not the class in which I'd want to place all twins. Unless that pesky ND gets moved elsewhere. haha

I agree on the oil coolers allowance.

I agree that CS won't work because other classes would want to start swapping parts between cars. This would have to be something other than "street". It would effectively be a street class called something else like "spec". (And just have twins in it...I think there are enough of us to make good participation numbers)

I think it's a great idea, but I doubt I'll move to the class in my car only because I want to eventually get the fancy MCS stuff. However, I'd definitely look for a co-drive in the new class or maybe buy another car as the used prices slowly creep lower.

The rules should keep costs to a minimum, but I would like to see stock shocks still be an option if you cannot immediately afford the Koni/Bilstein/etc. I think there should also be one tire and size chosen for the class and perhaps try to get that tire manufacturer to support the class, even if it may not be the fastest tire brand out there.

I hate adding more classes, but I hope this class doesn't kill too much participation from DS or STX.

I'd be okay with a spec class tire, especially if it received some manufacturer support.

I don't think it would kill DS since it's such a diverse class. You'd still have the WRX, E36 M3, Turbo 'Maro, and EcoStang, among others.

STX might be tougher, since the Twins are pretty much the go-to car there. But perhaps them exiting would encourage greater participation by other platforms that tend to stay out of the class because of Twin dominance.

Although, I really don't expect too many people to de-mod STX cars to run in a spec class. I think you'd more likely see a convergence of CS/DS twins that want to upgrade a bit more without going into STX. Depending on rules, you might also see more consistent participation by HPDE focused Twins that don't do much autox since they can't really fall into any class "competitively."

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4400/3...d5fda80d_b.jpg

Hey it IS happening! From RRAX... see vendor 5.

Claimer rules are a non-starter in solo, so I'm not real sure why the suggestion keeps getting made. You seem to think that claimer rules only benefit the little guy. It's just as easy to be a big guy and bully the scrub who "shouldn't have beaten you."

How much fun would that be? You drive well above your average and do well, big spender is not amused that he couldn't buy his win. So, he snags your shocks. Yours weren't special, but that doesn't matter. It's spite, now. Just to make your day long and crappy. Only, this is also your DD, and it's not like you actually had the money to have a full set of shocks on-hand at all times. Much less, the tools to do that job don't really fit in with the rest of everything. Oh, and the sunlight is fading.

If you can't enforce something, don't restrict it. No one is going to sign up for the threat of at-a-whim teardown work (which is what claiming is, it's not a protest, well-founded doesn't apply there) being a real possibility everywhere you go.

Everybody sells their OE when they buy aftermarket?
You don't have the ~6 wrenches and sockets and jack and jack stands? Bet there's at least a few dozen sets on site that can do the job.

I made the caveat of big events, yeah it'd be totally unreasonable to have your dampers bought out at local events 1-12, but you run the big shows you have to be ready to tear your car down to prove it's legit. But I've got a different mentality from a different time, I will totally accept that claiming has no place in Solo.

I agree, if you can't enforce, don't restrict, they're not going to have a damper dyno at an event to prove damping isn't modified from off the shelf (even if the supplier manages to hold tight enough tolerances for that to be legit), but hell maybe I'm wrong and SCCA is saving up for a NASCAR level tech inspection workshop trailer ;)

throwing out silly ideas sometimes fishes out the right ideas, I never would pitch this with the exception of a 'spec' item that's extremely hard to inspect that has a noticeable impact on performance

:drinking:

Spec Miata engines come to mind, all sealed, all supposedly legit, except that time a few years ago...

I actually do still have all my OE stuff, but I'm of the impression that I'm more the exception than the rule. It's not like the STX drivers that carry around a spare axle remove it from their trunk in giddy anticipation.
That's where the disconnect is for me on claimer rules. Protest me, forcing me to pull a corner off my car to measure things to prove legality? Absolutely. With a loser-pays bond. I can exercise lots of control over that by simply bringing a legal car. But in claimer rules, we're not assessing legality.

And if it was an effort to use a claim rule to ascertain legality, well then that's just a loser-pays protest. Otherwise, how can one claim "illegal" shocks to then install on their car?

:cheers:

Thankfully, solo has a much different view on compliance than club racing with regards to that "Tech Shed Legal" tomfoolery. We won't need to claim a cheater's parts. Protest them successfully, put them on blast to the club, and watch mob justice do its thing.

Sealed struts might work at least sort of. With warts that might be worth accepting.
Street class damper rules are easier to comply with and enforce though.

Whatever this ends up being, I would expect it to be designed to have only the barest minimum of administrative resources required. Things like "You shall use part number xr3478" and we accept whatever mfr variation that comes with it.

I would also expect it to be at the performance level of an all-dealer-accessories TRD twin. This might be overly cynical (thinking TRD/SPT will end up the primary commercial influence, not necessarily TR):

-TRD intake, catback (probably w/o header, unless TRD/SPT makes one)
-7.5" or 8" wheels
-Cam bolts instead of crash bolts
-Street class shock rules, including the rules on spring perches
-TRD/Series.whatevercolor springs and bars
-Defined tire size, not sure if mfr would/should be spec'd
-Either factory or canned tune
-Street category rules on everything else. Batteries, seats, etc.

All easily verifiable things, none of which are super-prohibitively-expensive to do and be considered a srsbzns entry. I don't think that car would suck to drive, and it could still be a DD.

Which probably deflates the idea for some.

I think the simplest way to give the twins a place to play without stepping on STX is a special "street" class that just gets named something else. Allow all twins in the class to use the "street" parts from other models (TRD + 7.5" wheel allowance from the 17+ twins) and we have our "spec" class that will probably be well-attended. The policing of such a class should not be any more difficult than the current street classes.

It's just all too damn close to the Street class, I don't know why I'd spend slightly more to not compete in a field with a big variety and well known drivers elevating the competition in the class. That's the fun of Solo imo and I hope DS grows as different cars prove competitive. I think it's cool that Camaros run against WRX's and 86's and M3's and Mini's, yeah there might be some overdogs (time will tell) but the fact that it works out that they're close at all is cool.

I don't think there's that many people sad about not having an inbetween for Street and Street Touring, and there's too big a difference driver to driver as to what is missing from street and what's 'too much' in street touring. Personally I want full alignment capability, someone else probably wants headers and tune, someone else wants wider wheels and tires, someone else wants lowering springs, someone else wants to have full aero.

can't please everybody

Cost controlled fun is likely the goal, the three biggest costs that I've seen in solo is suspension (dampers and tuning), tires, and power. Street class limits most of that cost with the exception of tires and dampers. Spec tire makes sense but dampers are tricky and something that's hard to control costs on without spec'ing a unit, but if you can't enforce...

Really, I'd be perfectly happy with an oil cooler allowance for DS, to alleviate worry for track day participation.

Open camber bolt rules would be a preferable inbetween too, but otherwise I'm happy with what street allows for a dual (or triple, if DD) purpose car. Lowering springs would be nice, but I don't HAVE to have them.