STX Rules and Setup Questions

[e1_griego]

Originally Posted by jbailey8748

I've got a sparco Evo2. Fits perfectly

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Interesting. I couldn't get mine centered up the way I wanted, or quite the right angle.

Glad it worked for you.

[justinco]

Originally Posted by jbailey8748

I couldn't find a reliable weight anywhere. And mixed reviews about buddy clubs durability.


Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

They are light, 9lbs. I've been using them for 2 years in autox. Would not recommend for regular track use though.

[ame]http://youtu.be/RvNsPgkUyg8[/ame]

[jbailey8748]

Originally Posted by justinco

They are light, 9lbs. I've been using them for 2 years in autox. Would not recommend for regular track use though.

I didn't need or want sliders and the mounts I've got have a lot of material in them that I can cut out to bring weight down.
I'm assuming that's your video, it's a good video.
You and I spoke in the comments.


Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[jbailey8748]

Originally Posted by e1_griego

Interesting. I couldn't get mine centered up the way I wanted, or quite the right angle.

Glad it worked for you.

Plenty of adjustment in this seat mount. Getting the Evo 2 perfectly centered is a bit tough because the seat is so wide at the opening where your legs are. If you like to be close to the wheel the trans tunnel is in the way and with the seat pushed all the way over it's a little off center.
The further back you go the more centered you will be able to get it,
It's really a seat size problem an not the brackets.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[e1_griego]

Oh the mount is great. You're right that it's just a matter of seat width. I didn't want to pound out the tunnel to get it perfectly centered.

[jbailey8748]

Originally Posted by e1_griego

Oh the mount is great. You're right that it's just a matter of seat width. I didn't want to pound out the tunnel to get it perfectly centered.

Even as close as I sit I don't notice it while driving

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Silver Ignition]

Have we heard back from SEB about the SPC toe links yet? Mine just came in, considering just running them until I'm told not to.


I was always under the impression reading the rules that they're not allowed but they're part of the SSC package, which is supposed to be a lower trim class, a Diet STX if you will, so why would they allow it in SSC but not STX?

[cjd]

Originally Posted by Silver Ignition

Have we heard back from SEB about the SPC toe links yet? Mine just came in, considering just running them until I'm told not to.


I was always under the impression reading the rules that they're not allowed but they're part of the SSC package, which is supposed to be a lower trim class, a Diet STX if you will, so why would they allow it in SSC but not STX?

Based on the redaction of SSC childing on street, I think it's just a special class... And SPC wouldn't get on board unless they could sell the whole shebang.

I think whether they're allowed is nothing to do with SSC, everything to do with whether they constitute part of lower arms. I'm still tempted, I'm dreading setting rear toe.

[bslate3]

I’m gonna beat the dead horse. 245 vs. 255 tires.

Last year I started on 255 RE71’s and had decent success. Went to 245 RE71’s for Nationals and struggled for grip the whole time even though the tires had 20 runs on them.

I want to give the Rivals a try and still on the fence with 245 vs 255.

[M0nk3y]

Originally Posted by bslate3

I’m gonna beat the dead horse. 245 vs. 255 tires.

Last year I started on 255 RE71’s and had decent success. Went to 245 RE71’s for Nationals and struggled for grip the whole time even though the tires had 20 runs on them.

I want to give the Rivals a try and still on the fence with 245 vs 255.

Do you think it's a function of tires or car setup at that point? I'd personally argue and say it wasn't the tires.

FWIW - I think non-17 cars should be on 245s. By all means if you want to campaign a 255 go for it, but I don't think you do yourself any favors.

[justinco]

Originally Posted by M0nk3y

Do you think it's a function of tires or car setup at that point? I'd personally argue and say it wasn't the tires.

FWIW - I think non-17 cars should be on 245s. By all means if you want to campaign a 255 go for it, but I don't think you do yourself any favors.

I was going to say the same, check setup before tires. Going to a 255 isn't going to change anything there (significantly).

I only ran the 245's on my FRS, seemed ok. However, I've had this convo with @trippinbillies40 a few times and he ran 255's on his FRS the year he placed 3rd in STX, so

[trippinbillies40]

Originally Posted by justinco

I was going to say the same, check setup before tires. Going to a 255 isn't going to change anything there (significantly).

I only ran the 245's on my FRS, seemed ok. However, I've had this convo with @trippinbillies40 a few times and he ran 255's on his FRS the year he placed 3rd in STX, so

I always had better success on 255's than 245's. I know people put together spreadsheets of thrust curves and gearing ratios and crap like that. WAY above my head. And my driving varies wildly, so to say that I benefited from 255's over 245's would probably be a stretch. I do know that '15 nats has a LOT of rev limiter for me even raised to 7800, so the taller tire may have helped? I dunno.

[bslate3]

It could be setup issues. Now that I have the Mann Engineering rear bar, the car is super easy to drive. I think my front suspension is still a little too stiff though.

[trippinbillies40]

Lincoln concrete =/= other concrete. It matched up well with Wilmington (RIP...), but I got my butt royally handed to me at '16 Spring Nats driving a car set up on asphalt in Colorado.