The proposal of the complete eliminination of Update/Backdate in the Street Touring classes has been officially submitted for member comment in the Aug 2003 Fastrack.
http://www.scca.com/news/tech/...k.pdf

"SOLO II STREET TOURING CLASSES
The following proposal, effective 1/1/2004, is being submitted for member comment: ITEM 19) Remove update/backdate allowances (17.1.B) from STS and STX. Comment: Drivetrain swaps and the resultant hybrid cars (a.k.a. "Frankenstein" cars) are not in the spirit of the Street Touring category. The only effective way to eliminate this type of allowance is to
remove Update/Backdate entirely."

If you have strong feelings either way on the proposal, write your letters to the SEB now.

Andrew - who won't be too sad if it goes away

 

If this goes through, i will be thoroughly disappointed with the SEB...


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Drivetrain swaps and the resultant hybrid cars (a.k.a. "Frankenstein" cars) are not in the spirit of the Street Touring category</TD></TR></TABLE>

Oh come on! Jesus, we're not talking about B20 VTEC swaps into an EF Civic here. The true spirit of this rule is to allow low-end trim models to update/backdate to performance model specs and remain competitive in the class. Of course the most serious racers will use that rule and dump the most potent drivetrain into the lightest trim and that's part of the game. But why penalize the poor competitor that just happened to buy that CX or DX hatchcrap cuz he didnt know better?

If SEB really wanted to stay within the spirit of the Street Touring category, they would basically allow ANY (same MFG) swap, kinda like SM. Now that would represent Street Touring market and what's popular out there. How much faster can a 200whp Civic go on street tires? Not much, imo...

Again, total bullshit if this goes through.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jsi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If SEB really wanted to stay within the spirit of the Street Touring category, they would basically allow ANY (same MFG) swap, kinda like SM. Now that would represent Street Touring market and what's popular out there. How much faster can a 200whp Civic go on street tires?</TD></TR></TABLE>


Hmm, sounds good to me. No point in bringing a Civic out anymore, I'll be running a 4AG powered 1600 lb Toyota Starlet... Open it up to street mod type swaps, and you will have street mod kinds of cars, only NO MINIMUM WEIGHTS!

Scott

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by celica73 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Hmm, sounds good to me. No point in bringing a Civic out anymore, I'll be running a 4AG powered 1600 lb Toyota Starlet... Open it up to street mod type swaps, and you will have street mod kinds of cars, only NO MINIMUM WEIGHTS!
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Big block Pinto will own you.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jsi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If SEB really wanted to stay within the spirit of the Street Touring category, they would basically allow ANY (same MFG) swap, kinda like SM.</TD></TR></TABLE>SM exists for the swaps. There's only one car that can take advantage of it and it happens to be a Civic. So of course Civic people will be up in arms.

I for one think it's a good move, but UD/BD should be anything but engines IMHO... stuff like drum to disc conversions, etc...

Sure, UD/BD has been there since the beginning, but the Civic move in SP is what opened a loophole in the ST ruleset. Of which, it'll be shut at the beginning of the year somehow.

ST is supposed the be bolt-ons. Swaps are not for this class, IMHO. Name another car that can shed weight and swap engines leagally useing the SP Lines in the Appendix.

 

boy, i'll really screw with the SEB when i beat all the frankencivics by 2 seconds out in topeka. oh yeah, and you WRX STX boys are in for a world of hurt this weekend too. it's time for the uber civic to lay the smack down and walk on the AWD grocery getters, rain or shine! kC, your rice ain't got nuttin on me!

nate

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by KC &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
ST is supposed the be bolt-ons. Swaps are not for this class, IMHO. Name another car that can shed weight and swap engines leagally useing the SP Lines in the Appendix.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Quick scan through the SP classes reveals a few potentially competitive candidates:

E36 323, 325, 328i, 4dr (the 4drs come without LSD, making them STS elligible i think)
How bout a Celica GT with a GTS motor? (00+ Celicas all on same line)
Hmmm not even Hondas... I'm sure there are some more interesting combos, i'm just not familiar with all the different chassis/mfgs.

as for more Honda swaps

92-95 CX with a DX motor?
How bout a DelSol base model with a B16 from the VTEC model?

Again, and the real point is that the spirit of the b/u rule was to allow base models to have a chance to compete with the performance oriented models... Removal of the allowance will just penalize a whole bunch of people with lesser trim level cars.

The SM engine swap in STS was just a sarcastic comment BTW. Dont take it literally...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by KC &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Name another car that can shed weight and swap engines leagally useing the SP Lines in the Appendix.</TD></TR></TABLE>

E36 BMW 323 gets E36 326 motor.

What engine options existed in the Nissan Maxima? They are all listed on the same line in DSP.

Early base Pinto recieves 2.3L motor

Base Protege revieces twin cam 2.0L

Stripper Saab 900 gets turbo motor

Stripper Saab 99 gets turbo motor

Deoptioned Beetle recieves whatever the latest iteration of the Beetle got

Early, base Volvo 240 recieves later 240 motors

(I don't know how much weight or power would be lost of gained with any of the above, they are simply examples of other places the UD/BD could be used)

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Crack Monkey &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

E36 BMW 323 gets E36 326 motor.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Only one of two decent canduidates in your list.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Early base Pinto recieves 2.3L motor</TD></TR></TABLE>

Anyone anywhere building these to run on street nights or is popular with the import crowd (ie: target demographics?)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Base Protege revieces twin cam 2.0L</TD></TR></TABLE>

Other decent candidate.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Stripper Saab 900 gets turbo motor
Stripper Saab 99 gets turbo motor</TD></TR></TABLE>

Is the SAAB turbo motor legal in STS?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Deoptioned Beetle recieves whatever the latest iteration of the Beetle got</TD></TR></TABLE>

1.8T. Is the 1.8T beetle and the N/A Beetle on the same SP line?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Early, base Volvo 240 recieves later 240 motors</TD></TR></TABLE>

Good candidate for a junkyard motor swap, if the body didn't rust away 1st.

There really aren't many cars that can take advantage of an engine swap in STS/STX. So why have it? Only one or two cars can at this time. Most of the other cars in STSS/STX are on separate lines from any other engine you'd want to throw in them. And that's SM territory.

--KC
Oscoda or leave.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by KC &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Anyone anywhere building these to run on street nights or is popular with the import crowd (ie: target demographics?)</TD></TR></TABLE>

It's legal and could benefit from UD/BD, taget demo be damned.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Is the SAAB turbo motor legal in STS?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Not yet. Even if not, the UD/BD applies to STX as well.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
1.8T. Is the 1.8T beetle and the N/A Beetle on the same SP line?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

I was thinking air-cooled.

 

Fine with me I'm happy with my car.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by KC &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">There really aren't many cars that can take advantage of an engine swap in STS/STX. So why have it? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Because the rule allows parts to be swapped between models, not just engines. As an example, how many STS Civics have done a drum/disc conversion? Without UD/BD, that would illegal. The point the SEB is making that they can't exclude engine swaps under UD/BD without excluding everything else.

Andy - who wishes there was a '91+ 2.0L Sentra in the classification so he could stop spraying power steering fluid all over his engine bay.

 

Yeah but now motor mounts (non-metallic), any seats that are upholstered are legal in STS/STX YEAH!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CivicSiRacer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Yeah but now motor mounts (non-metallic), any seats that are upholstered are legal in STS/STX YEAH!</TD></TR></TABLE>
But the seat must recline. Because it need to recline if you roll the damn thing.
BTW do reclinable seat recline (snap) when involved in a roll-over.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">But the seat must recline. Because it need to recline if you roll the damn thing.
BTW do reclinable seat recline (snap) when involved in a roll-over.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Re-read the FastTrack. Doesn't say anything about reclining now.

 

looks like there is gonna be a set of race buckets finding their way into the integra pretty soon

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CivicSiRacer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Re-read the FastTrack. Doesn't say anything about reclining now.</TD></TR></TABLE>


<u>Read this about Seats!!!!</u>

The rule proposed in the fastrack is *only* for STX. The STS seat rule is to remain as-is. There was a typo before printing and this should be cleared up next month. Do not run out and buy raceseats for your STS car!!!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">


<u>Read this about Seats!!!!</u>

The rule proposed in the fastrack is *only* for STX. The STS seat rule is to remain as-is. There was a typo before printing and this should be cleared up next month. Do not run out and buy raceseats for your STS car!!!</TD></TR></TABLE>

WTF is that all about?? Not that I'm going to swap out my Corbeau TRS but STX is a sub class of STS for different engine cars. I understand about the wider tires, due to the extra weight but I don't get this seat thing???? I like to believe that wasn't a typo.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by maxQ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

As an example, how many STS Civics have done a drum/disc conversion? Without UD/BD, that would illegal.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

Problem is NO Civic came with a rear disc set from 88-91. Only CRX's. I think even the 4dr EX's had drums in the rear.. The 92-95 Civics can UD/BD them.

I think motor swaps only should be removed. I think with a open final drive swap, many of the "lesser" powered vehicles may stand a chance if they can keep the weight off...2000lbs 90HP standard with an SI gearbox vs a 2140lb 120HP Si might be good competition.

Jeff

 

I think if the part was OEM then you should be able to bold that F'er onto your car. Other wise the idea of running a 99 Civic DX vs a 99 Civic Si in STS is just stupid. Yeah yeah better driver in all but your giving up 54 hp and rear disc brakes in the DX or CX. And some how any weight difference won't compensate enough to make the two cars equal. They aren't even in the same stock class listing but in STS they run side by side.

 

suspension tuning makes up for lack of power. add that to the light weight factor.

and todd00 don't worry, i wasn't plannin' on running out and buying race buckets, gotta get new azenis first

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jasyatz &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I think even the 4dr EX's had drums in the rear..
Jeff</TD></TR></TABLE>

100% Wrong. 4 door EX's had rear discs. Problem is finding one. I think in 1.5 years of looking for them on the road I have only seen one. Of course the parts on the CRX are identical...

 

In our region we run separate street touring classes that correspond to the street prepared classes. For instance, if your car would be in CSP you would go into STC with all of the STS rules intact. We don't run STS or STX but we do have STU that is an unlimited class running on street tires. We have a big region and it works out well. Maybe this is something that should be adopted nationally?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jsi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If this goes through, i will be thoroughly disappointed with the SEB...


Oh come on! Jesus, we're not talking about B20 VTEC swaps into an EF Civic here. The true spirit of this rule is to allow low-end trim models to update/backdate to performance model specs and remain competitive in the class. Of course the most serious racers will use that rule and dump the most potent drivetrain into the lightest trim and that's part of the game. But why penalize the poor competitor that just happened to buy that CX or DX hatchcrap cuz he didnt know better?

If SEB really wanted to stay within the spirit of the Street Touring category, they would basically allow ANY (same MFG) swap, kinda like SM. Now that would represent Street Touring market and what's popular out there. How much faster can a 200whp Civic go on street tires? Not much, imo...

Again, total bullshit if this goes through.
</TD></TR></TABLE>


They have a class like that--it's called Street Mod. If you want to swap motors, go play there. You're describing kind of a STU class (ST Unlimited). There may be a place for a class like this since cheap street tires are becoming popular to race on, and only a slight handful of big $$$ cars are going to actually have a shot at winning SM.

However, IT makes you run a real Si, so I don't see why ST should be any different.

As well, why penalize someone one because they bought the perfromance edition of the model? With swaps, you're forcing someone to go out an buy a 88 STD and put a 89-91 Si motor into it. That's what torques a lot of us off.

 

What about engine swaps without a displacement increase...and allow finial drive swaps. A DX motor into a Standard with an SI trans could be really fun.

1980 lbs with a 4.25....I think would be able to run really close to an SI..

The DX I don;t think you can "legally" get enough weight out of it to keep the power to weight ratio the same as the SI's.

So what now??? Make all SP cars run on street tires, or make 5 different ST classes??

Letter has been sent to the SEB with some ideas...

Jeff