SNAIL Tuner and Team Series III - S15 RM Challenge - Sign-ups Open

  • Thread starter Vol Jbolaz
  • 778 comments
  • 34,898 views

What Shall We Do This Tuesday?

  • STaTS with the [url=http://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7590350#post7590350]FF RMs[/url]

    Votes: 3 37.5%
  • Parity Racing with the Alfa Romeo [url=http://www.mygranturismo.net/car_sheet.php?id=22]Giulia Sprin

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Parity Racing with the [url=http://www.mygranturismo.net/car_sheet.php?id=362]Jaguar E-Type Coupe '6

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • Parity Racing with the [url=http://www.mygranturismo.net/car_sheet.php?id=844]Shelby GT350R '65[/url

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • Not Ready for (or not interested in) STaTS so any Parity Racing would be fine.

    Votes: 3 37.5%

  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .
I say allow more drivetrains equalizing them, thus making the cars more varied.
 
I say allow more drivetrains equalizing them, thus making the cars more varied.
Sounds similar to making it "MR" instead of "FR" if you ask me.(Not that I have a problem with that, many of my favorites are MR, just saying)

What I'd really like to work out one day(maybe not today) is a system for 4WD, FR, MR, and FF to fit.
For example:
4WD 355/1450
MR 355/1400
FR 355/1300
FF 355/1200

Just an example, I've been meaning to look into something like that for months and just haven't gotten around to it.
Even if it only works for 4WD/MR/FR it'd be great.
 
I like the parity system but not sure about rotating classes. The ballast is also(in my opinion) a great idea(10-20-30).
 
I'll have to read it once or twice more for it all to sink in and form opinions, but this is what I have after first read:
1. Ballast - If you're doing it, probably 20-40-60. That's what we used in WSGTC before, and as long as it doesn't compile it's not a problem. Anything less (like 30kg) probably isn't quite enough. Of course if 60kg shows to be too much, you can change it to 10-20-30.
2. Attrition - Drop the second class. It's so much easier to fill one room than two it's unreal. Plus with 1 class, in the event you do have say, 24 drivers, you can run 2 rooms of 12. If you have separate classes, one room or two won't change the amount of drivers in a class, and everyone is split.
Keep all the drivers together - better racing, less domination, more fun. Oh, and less overhead, which it sounds like you could use.(GL with job btw)
3. I really like the "on deck" idea.
4. Ongoing events usually have poor attendance and get shut down quickly. I'd say let's work with what we've got, figure something out and finish the season as a season. Maybe 2 drivers, etc, etc, that's more into the part I'll think about before mentioning, just that the season structure has proven itself superior to open-ended events over time to me, by miles. People want/need a finish to aim for.

I've become very against 2 classes in racing series the past few months, I've seen it do nothing good for any series that tries it. No offense, it's a fun idea I know, I've had it too. It just doesn't appear to be practical.

  1. With the ballast, if you win ballast, should you ever lose it? Should it be cumulative, or an average. Not sure how that should work. If you win a race and get 60 Kg, and then someone else wins the next race and gets 60 Kg, then you are back to beating that person as soundly as you did the first week. When I ran the PP parity series, we sort of dialed in the handicap in 5 PP increments. Should we do that with the weight in 10 Kg increments?
  2. But if we have 20, I don't want to turn people away. If I limit it to 16, then we will drop back down to 10. And since we have enough for two rooms, might as well have the other room run a different car for variety. That does bring up a good point. If would be the first eight teams that want to be in that class.
  3. Thank you. It gives everyone time to build the next car, and keep the series running.
 
  1. With the ballast, if you win ballast, should you ever lose it? Should it be cumulative, or an average. Not sure how that should work. If you win a race and get 60 Kg, and then someone else wins the next race and gets 60 Kg, then you are back to beating that person as soundly as you did the first week. When I ran the PP parity series, we sort of dialed in the handicap in 5 PP increments. Should we do that with the weight in 10 Kg increments?
  1. Well it can't be just single race to single race, for the reasons you mentioned above.
    You could go 10-20-30 cumulative, or even 20-40-60. It's hard to say exactly, one would have to see how much 60KG slows these cars down. For the 1500KG class, we're only talking 4% mass increase with a full 60KG penalty.
    We put a maximum in JGTS at 100KG, and that helped keep the fastest guys from getting too loaded down as well. (100 KG on 1100, roughly 9% mass increase)


    [*]But if we have 20, I don't want to turn people away. If I limit it to 16, then we will drop back down to 10. And since we have enough for two rooms, might as well have the other room run a different car for variety. That does bring up a good point. If would be the first eight teams that want to be in that class.
    Right, if you have 20 each week.
    Say you have 20 this week, 15 next week, and 22 the following week. A single class makes all three weeks more enjoyable for everyone.
    You can split a single class exactly like 2 classes, but you can't combine 2 classes like a single class.


    [*]Thank you. It gives everyone time to build the next car, and keep the series running.
And I do, but keep in mind a ballast system might not be applicable if it's open-ended. (Depends if it's the same people coming back each week, etc,)
-OR- You could ballast-handicap the cars.
Open-ended car selection (can't use one currently used by another team of course) ballast given to winning cars each week. Meaning, for example, if the CSL/Camaro win this week, nobody can use those cars again at less than 1560/1360KG's.

So is this season going as planned or are the rules changing after this race?
IIRC this week's race will be as planned, anything after that is still undecided.
 
  1. With the ballast, if you win ballast, should you ever lose it? Should it be cumulative, or an average. Not sure how that should work. If you win a race and get 60 Kg, and then someone else wins the next race and gets 60 Kg, then you are back to beating that person as soundly as you did the first week. When I ran the PP parity series, we sort of dialed in the handicap in 5 PP increments. Should we do that with the weight in 10 Kg increments?
  2. But if we have 20, I don't want to turn people away. If I limit it to 16, then we will drop back down to 10. And since we have enough for two rooms, might as well have the other room run a different car for variety. That does bring up a good point. If would be the first eight teams that want to be in that class.
  3. Thank you. It gives everyone time to build the next car, and keep the series running.

Well it can't be just single race to single race, for the reasons you mentioned above.
You could go 10-20-30 cumulative, or even 20-40-60. It's hard to say exactly, one would have to see how much 60KG slows these cars down. For the 1500KG class, we're only talking 4% mass increase with a full 60KG penalty.
We put a maximum in JGTS at 100KG, and that helped keep the fastest guys from getting too loaded down as well. (100 KG on 1100, roughly 9% mass increase)


Right, if you have 20 each week.
Say you have 20 this week, 15 next week, and 22 the following week. A single class makes all three weeks more enjoyable for everyone.
You can split a single class exactly like 2 classes, but you can't combine 2 classes like a single class.


And I do, but keep in mind a ballast system might not be applicable if it's open-ended. (Depends if it's the same people coming back each week, etc,)
-OR- You could ballast-handicap the cars.
Open-ended car selection (can't use one currently used by another team of course) ballast given to winning cars each week. Meaning, for example, if the CSL/Camaro win this week, nobody can use those cars again at less than 1560/1360KG's.

We could do a scale like some racing series do;

1st +2.25%

2nd +1.5%

3rd +0.75%

4th–5th 0

6th 0.75%

7th -1.5%

So you can go up and down in weight depending on your finish.


I still like the idea of two classes, one class with big horsepower and weight, FR/MR/AWD, and adjustable downforce, and the other FF/FR, lightweight, and no aero. I think we can find a formula for different drivetrains to race together. I like the month long seasons and I think we should expand the championships to have individual monthly championships and a three month champion. The monthly champions would choose the track schedule and the quarterly champion would be able to adjust the classes and choose a track.
 
As I've told my team, I will be taking a back seat in this due to real life, but I am still competing as the tuner for Golden Hoe Racing.
 
I say we finish up this season with the original rules, and implement any big changes next season.

While I do like the concept of two separate classes, attrition makes it hard to keep alive. I think teams of 3 drivers and one tuner would be a nice fit. That would allow 5 teams to race simultaneously in one room. Also,if a team has a no-show, they still have two drivers (kinda like trying for a threesome and someone backs out, you're still getting some).
 
I say we finish up this season with the original rules, and implement any big changes next season.
I agree.
Changing everything now pretty much means starting over. The list of sign-ups signed up for 4 weeks of a championship, swapping everything out means it's a whole new event.
I'm not saying anyone already signed up won't participate in a totally different championship and/or structure, but it's certainly possible. It'd be a whole new ballgame.
 
Yes, we stay as we are for now, but the four weeks that we have planned will dove-tail into what is coming next.
 
Here is an idea to make this a little more close to fair, and yet remain true to tuning terms...

each season choose cars from the same country. Each country produces cars of similar power/handling/etc. Of course that is not always the case, but just a very vague idea.

Like have one season limited to Nissan/Honda/Subaru/Suzuki/etc

Then the next season be American tuner season Ford/Dodge/Chevy

Then European and so on.
 
Here is an idea to make this a little more close to fair, and yet remain true to tuning terms...

each season choose cars from the same country. Each country produces cars of similar power/handling/etc. Of course that is not always the case, but just a very vague idea.

Like have one season limited to Nissan/Honda/Subaru/Suzuki/etc

Then the next season be American tuner season Ford/Dodge/Chevy

Then European and so on.

Yeah, but...

American cars are crap. :P
 
Except for the fact that American cars won last year and will win this year :P
 
Is anyone else having major issues with trying to get into private lounges today? I've been attempting to practice at Laguna Seca and haven't been able to connect at all :/
 
It's been weird lately, not sure why. Probably in need of another patch or something.
Reset/clear your cache/PS3/modem?
Check your speed, at least for me, the main 3 times I've had trouble were when my internet crapped out and speeds dropped so low it was unbelievable.
 
I tried to do some practice last night to figure out lap times and thus number of laps. I got interrupted. I think the SC class will be about 25 laps. Not sure about the GT class. Anyone want to volunteer lap times?
 
I was running 1:32's in a GT Spec car, it wasn't the Corvette my team is running though.
 
Well, it seems that the lap times aren't that different. So, I guess we'll just go with 27 laps for GT.
 
Well, it seems that the lap times aren't that different. So, I guess we'll just go with 27 laps for GT.

I think we could do 30; my laps were not done with any precision.
 
Typo. 26/27 gets me to just over 45 minutes.

Ops bad math. 29.036 laps gets me to 45 minutes.
 
Back