2008 TSM Rule Change Proposals

[Scott231]

If you have raced in TSM competition, you may make proposals for rule modifications here. If you have not raced in TSM (but intend too), your proposal will not be considered as a legitimate proposal. If you would rather not have your proposal or name made public, you can e-mail me at scott231@wowway.com . The registered participants of the 2007 TSM Point Series will vote on accepted proposals. An “accepted proposal” is one that is conveyed to me by more than one personand doesn't violate the stipulations below.

I may, or may not, contact you do discuss your proposal but I will discuss any changes with Lonnie before decided on whether the modification warrants being voted upon.

As I stated last year – “Weights are not going to change, turbo sizes will not increase, and you will not be allowed to run engine blocks other than the 109 - these are what defines the class. We went around and around a few years back to come to the current limits with their 150# iron/aluminum differential, it is a done deal. Consistency is good when the system works.” Consider this: if we change weights, all the existing ‘records’ will have to be wiped clean.

The “S” in TSM stands for Street. I do not want to entertain a bunch of proposals that will further distance these cars from what they are intended to be – cars that could be driven on the street legally (sans the ’glass bumpers).

Last year the following proposals were voted upon –

• Any size downpipe – did not pass
• Allow aftermarket intakes – did not pass
• And as previously posted (#39 from the 2007 TSM Rule Changes thread) (http://www.t6p.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15709&referrerid=686)

There are three changes for 2007 as voted “IN” by the registered TSM Point Series Racers -

1. After market fuel rails are allowed
2. Maximum throttle body size is now 70mm.
3. Compressor wheel sizing to be checked by “Turbo Plug” and/or “Turbo Measuring Rings.” It was agreed that the maximum size of the exducer size of the compressor wheel is that of the PT70-GTQ. This wheel is also the same size as the piece utilized on the Innovative 70 "X-trim" unit.

As Lonnie pointed out earlier in that thread, the exducer size limit is 102.5mm. If you read the official rules as posted, (again in post #39) the exducer rule is “less than 103mm” simply because I wanted the ring to be made such that it does not touch the actual compressor wheel of a legal turbo when checked. Due to a lack of effort, Lonnie and I did not get the rings made for 2007 nor did I ensure that the exact language in the official rules as posted on T6P.com was reflected in the Rules posting at the TSM Point Series website. I will do everything I can to have the rings ready for the first race of 2008.

[KevinB]

I would like to have a rule change on the exhaust. Require the use of a muffler but do not require the pipe to exit in the stock location. Turndowns and tail pipes in front of the rear wheels would be legal.

[V6RACER]

...

[HighPSI]

Subscribed

Scott: What was Kereny's payout this year?

[Kip]

Cal, you seems to be asking this question alot. Is it part of your pay day for helping Dick or something?
Thanks, Kip

[V6RACER]

Cal, you seems to be asking this question alot. Is it part of your pay day for helping Dick or something?
Thanks, Kip


Dick doesn't get on the inet so Cal keeps him informed...

[HighPSI]

Jason is correct.

I obviously haven't asked it to the right person. Since I haven't gotten an answer, yet. Just hoping to avoid a repeat of last years payout fiasco.

Dick's car trailer was stolen last week with over $10K worth of stuff in it. Obviously, he's pretty upset about it. This money won't cover his losses, but every little bit helps.

[MAX PSI]

Cal, I was sorry to hear about Dick's misfortune. The last time I talked to Scott he was waiting to collect from some of the sponsers.
I was going to propose a rule change to allow aftermarket blocks but after reading Scott's post I don't think it will be considered.

[Otto J]

That sucks for Dick,Thats twice his trailer has been stolen.

So how are you feeling Phil?

[NUTS4LC2]

That sucks for Dick,Thats twice his trailer has been stolen.



Damn !!! Twice ??????:confused: There's a possibility it could've been the same person...

[Otto J]

2 different places though,Could be the same guy

[SGRIM]

Man that does suck, sorry to hear that Mr. K!

[10SecGN]

Sorry to hear about the trailer DK. :mad:

I think the points for low et and high mph at each event should be changed to a yearly thing. You beat the best of the year for points not best at each event. Makes the focus more on racing.


Sully

[HighPSI]

I think the points for low et and high mph at each event should be changed to a yearly thing. You beat the best of the year for points not best at each event. Makes the focus more on racing.


Sully

That would probably make the Reynolds race worth more than the others. If you do that, then maybe points should be awarded for qualifying position, otherwise the drivers could just make one soft qualifying pass and save the car for eliminations. Not much for the spectators when the drivers go out and make just one half pass.

I know, I only ran one race and didn't register as a point racer, but I say "Don't change a thing".

[KevinB]

Sorry to hear about the trailer DK. :mad:

I think the points for low et and high mph at each event should be changed to a yearly thing. You beat the best of the year for points not best at each event. Makes the focus more on racing.


Sully

I like this too. This could make the series closer instead of the big margain there was this year.

[10SecGN]

That would probably make the Reynolds race worth more than the others. If you do that, then maybe points should be awarded for qualifying position, otherwise the drivers could just make one soft qualifying pass and save the car for eliminations. Not much for the spectators when the drivers go out and make just one half pass.



Not really. First the yearly record ( I really think it should be the series record but yearly would be better than nothing) could be beaten at each event which would leave things just like they are now. Second BG always has more rounds than any other event which makes it worth the most. I don't think one event should be worth more points than any other event. This may give another event the chance to score as many points as BG. It could certainly make reynolds more exciting than it already is.

I also like the idea of points for qualifing position. That would make the whole series more exciting in my opinion.

Besides everyone would still want #1 qualifier for the 1st round bye.

[Quickt]

I also like the idea of points for qualifing position. That would make the whole series more exciting in my opinion.

Besides everyone would still want #1 qualifier for the 1st round bye.

If you went off qualifying position. In this case Dick was number 1 qualifier and top et and mph at every race he raced. Would be the same points outcome. I would also like to see the per events low ET and top MPH go away. It would tighten up points a little.

[HighPSI]

Not really. First the yearly record ( I really think it should be the series record but yearly would be better than nothing) could be beaten at each event which would leave things just like they are now. Second BG always has more rounds than any other event which makes it worth the most. I don't think one event should be worth more points than any other event. This may give another event the chance to score as many points as BG. It could certainly make reynolds more exciting than it already is.

I also like the idea of points for qualifing position. That would make the whole series more exciting in my opinion.

Besides everyone would still want #1 qualifier for the 1st round bye.


Not sure I follow you on the yearly record when everyone runs their fastest time at Reynolds.

If you take away the extra points, it will certainly change the way we look at qualifying. Especially in a 5, 9, or 17 car field.

Just food for thought.

[10SecGN]

If you went off qualifying position. In this case Dick was number 1 qualifier and top et and mph at every race he raced. Would be the same points outcome. I would also like to see the per events low ET and top MPH go away. It would tighten up points a little.


But if it is 2 point increments for qualifing like 20 18 16 14 12 10... it could be made up with a round win. Take a scenario where the #3 qualifier and beats the #1 qualifier in finals. The #3 qualifier would get more points for the event than #1 would. I think this is not the case under the current system. Seems like this would focus it more on racing but not diminish the need to qualify good.

[10SecGN]

Not sure I follow you on the yearly record when everyone runs their fastest time at Reynolds.


At first I was thinking that at the 1st event the record for that year would be set and if that was broken at another event then points would be awarded. After discussion here I thiink it should just be the series record (That Dick currently has) and use a qualifing points ladder.

[Scott231]

Here is some food for thought. If we removed the 80 points that Kereny earned by getting Low ET and Top MPH at the three events he kept plus the 30 for year-end bests (10 points were awarded to Phil for his Low ET at Norwalk), then he still would have beaten Phil by 40 points. Using the existing Qualifying points system, Kereny would have had another 3 points above Phil because Dick always qualified number one at the races where it counted. (Presently, the qualifying points are only used for breaking ties.)

What people need to do, is win races.

If you don't think we have close finishes, just ask Keith Egan who won the first year of the Point Series...:add_shit:

[10SecGN]

Here is some food for thought. If we removed the 80 points that Kereny earned by getting Low ET and Top MPH at the three events he kept plus the 30 for year-end bests (10 points were awarded to Phil for his Low ET at Norwalk), then he still would have beaten Phil by 40 points. Using the existing Qualifying points system, Kereny would have had another 3 points above Phil because Dick always qualified number one at the races where it counted. (Presently, the qualifying points are only used for breaking ties.)

What people need to do, is win races.

If you don't think we have close finishes, just ask Keith Egan who won the first year of the Point Series...:add_shit:


40 points sounds like a tighter more fun class to me. Do the same math on last year's results :laugh:

[HighPSI]

Dick asked me to post that he is against changing the low ET and high MPH points. Also, thanks for the email about his payout money.

[Quickt]

Here is some food for thought. If we removed the 80 points that Kereny earned by getting Low ET and Top MPH at the three events he kept plus the 30 for year-end bests (10 points were awarded to Phil for his Low ET at Norwalk), then he still would have beaten Phil by 40 points. Using the existing Qualifying points system, Kereny would have had another 3 points above Phil because Dick always qualified number one at the races where it counted. (Presently, the qualifying points are only used for breaking ties.)

What people need to do, is win races.

If you don't think we have close finishes, just ask Keith Egan who won the first year of the Point Series...:add_shit:

Closer points race for sure.
Phil would have needed to go 1 round further than Dick and would have a shot at the points.

[MAX PSI]

I would like to propose the use of tublar contol arms for the front suspension.

[tsm3089]

ok by me!!!!!!

[Quickt]

dont forget to send to Scott's listed address to add to the ballot

[10SecGN]

I propose we drop the west coast nationals from the schedule. We can never even get a list of particpants, a list of results or times. Plus there are very few regular racers that attend.

[Scott231]

I propose we drop the west coast nationals from the schedule. We can never even get a list of particpants, a list of results or times. Plus there are very few regular racers that attend.

Personally, I would like to change the payout procedure to only inlcude races of 6 cars or more. Points awarded at races with 8 cars or less typically do not help anyone advance in the point series...

[KevinB]

Personally, I would like to change the payout procedure to only inlcude races of 6 cars or more. Points awarded at races with 8 cars or less typically do not help anyone advance in the point series...

Would that be 6 or more points cars or just 6 or more TSM cars (not all points cars?)

[EightSecV6]

I propose we drop the west coast nationals from the schedule. We can never even get a list of particpants, a list of results or times. Plus there are very few regular racers that attend.

Not trying to start a shlt storm but wasnt that the event from a year or so ago when there were RUMORS of 13 second cars running in the field just to make the car count higher:dunno: ?

[10SecGN]

Not trying to start a shlt storm but wasnt that the event from a year or so ago when there were RUMORS of 13 second cars running in the field just to make the car count higher:dunno: ?


And a car that didn't have turbo regal body or something too. I can't remember but it was a mustang or station wagon or something.

[Kip]

I remember it being a truck. At least that was what I was told.
Take care, Kip

[Scott231]

Not trying to start a shlt storm but wasn't that the event from a year or so ago when there were RUMORS of 13 second cars running in the field just to make the car count higher:dunno: ?
Cars of ANY ET range are welcome to run in TSM as long as they are legitimate according to the TSM rules. The illustrious "11.99" notation is only a requirement for a Point Series car to earn points for competing.

[Scott231]

Would that be 6 or more points cars or just 6 or more TSM cars (not all points cars?)

Six entrants - point series participants or not. A race with so few cars would mean preactically nothing when it comes to earning enough points to place 1, 2, or 3 in the year-end point sreies standings. So why penalize the other point series racers by paying out the same per-race payout when there is, for example, only 4 cars???

[EightSecV6]

Cars of ANY ET range are welcome to run in TSM as long as they are legitimate according to the TSM rules. The illustrious "11.99" notation is only a requirement for a Point Series car to earn points for competing.

My bad Scott, I thought the 11.99 rule was to keep low 9 second cars from running away with the class. I really dont think I have personally seen any cars slower than 10.30's in the field at any race but I could be wrong

[GN/GTO]

Maybe just from a safety stand point, it might be time to allow wheelie bars on TSM cars. NHRA allows them on Stock Eliminator, and the fastest Stock Eliminator class being A/S and A/SA national records are 9.88 for the stick and 9.93 for the automatic. TSM has far surpassed that.
Just a little adult supervison from one of the old guys...LOL

[MAX PSI]

Maybe just from a safety stand point, it might be time to allow wheelie bars on TSM cars. NHRA allows them on Stock Eliminator, and the fastest Stock Eliminator class being A/S and A/SA national records are 9.88 for the stick and 9.93 for the automatic. TSM has far surpassed that.
Just a little adult supervison from one of the old guys...LOL

Me too.

[EightSecV6]

Maybe just from a safety stand point, it might be time to allow wheelie bars on TSM cars. NHRA allows them on Stock Eliminator, and the fastest Stock Eliminator class being A/S and A/SA national records are 9.88 for the stick and 9.93 for the automatic. TSM has far surpassed that.
Just a little adult supervison from one of the old guys...LOL



to heck with that!!! The crowd would diminish if they thought there would not be a chance to see one of those bumber dragging Mcgloin or J. White bumper dragging wheelies!

[30+PSI]

I think everything should stay the same. If Dick Kereny can run 9.14 with these rules & regulations with the stock block webbing hanging on by merely a thread and a new motor every race. We have seen the wall with this 109 block. I'm way out here in CA so what do I know? If I want to have a good time and race TSM with you guys I need to drive 2.5k miles. :frown: I wish there was a meet in TX.

[Mike10secv6]

I would like to see the exhaust rule changed to allow it to end at the rear diff.

[Scott231]

I think everything should stay the same. If Dick Kereny can run 9.14 with these rules & regulations with the stock block webbing hanging on by merely a thread and a new motor every race. We have seen the wall with this 109 block. I'm way out here in CA so what do I know? If I want to have a good time and race TSM with you guys I need to drive 2.5k miles. :frown: I wish there was a meet in TX.

I tried that for 2007 but never got any feedback from John N. that runs the show there.

[30+PSI]

I tried that for 2007 but never got any feedback from John N. that runs the show there.

Do you mean TX? :nixweiss:

[Kip]

I would like to see coil overs in the rear allowed.

See ya, Kip

[southern boost]

I think that the allowance of exhaust changes shouldn't be allowed or rear coilovers simple reason everyone wants to keep this a "streetable class" ,if you allow such changes you just further this class away from it origin .I also have to agree with bill on the wheelie bar issue, it would take away from the class because the stock suspension classes always draw crowds i.e. "TSM".
This just my .o2 ,and I dont wish to get flamed over it I look foward to runnin tsm this year and hope we have a great year. Finally I say ,if where goin to do all the changes above, drop the weights and turn them into gutted race cars cause that where it goin . just my .o2

[10secv6]

I think that everyone can just about agree that the TSM class was originally set up to be a cross between street and race. If the class begins to allow coil overs wheelie bars and the like, it makes it more of a TSO car with a 109 block and 70 turbo. If the cars are too fast, why not look at a smaller turbo to slow the cars down a few tenths? I'm not saying 10.90's maybe back to 9.90 range. This would aleviate many of the issues people are having. Just a thought.

[KevinB]

I think that the allowance of exhaust changes shouldn't be allowed or rear coilovers simple reason everyone wants to keep this a "streetable class" ,if you allow such changes you just further this class away from it origin .I also have to agree with bill on the wheelie bar issue, it would take away from the class because the stock suspension classes always draw crowds i.e. "TSM".
This just my .o2 ,and I dont wish to get flamed over it I look foward to runnin tsm this year and hope we have a great year. Finally I say ,if where goin to do all the changes above, drop the weights and turn them into gutted race cars cause that where it goin . just my .o2

On the exhaust issue....I don't think a chopped exhaust makes a car less of a street car. But thats my opinion. Race vacuum pumps and fuel cells are allowed. To me, those are more race car items than an exhaust system that is turned down before the rearend.

[southern boost]

All good points kevin and I agree, the exhaust i figure will go to vote and we will see my exhaust is there and will not be changed . I think there are issues evrywhere and some will be address and some will not that racin. All i can say is bring it and hope you got enough:firedevil

[KevinB]

All good points kevin and I agree, the exhaust i figure will go to vote and we will see my exhaust is there and will not be changed . I think there are issues evrywhere and some will be address and some will not that racin. All i can say is bring it and hope you got enough:firedevil

HAHA, I just hope I have something to bring. My car is a million pieces right now:stooges:

[30+PSI]

HAHA, I just hope I have something to bring. My car is a million pieces right now:stooges:

Oh Yea? Whatcha doing? :popc1:

Brent

[10SecGN]

If the cars are too fast, why not look at a smaller turbo to slow the cars down a few tenths? I'm not saying 10.90's maybe back to 9.90 range. This would aleviate many of the issues people are having. Just a thought.

I agree. A 66 Turbo max wouldn't be bad.

[GN/GTO]

For one thing putting wheelie bar on a car is going to decrease the crowd...
Yeah cause the stands are packed to standing room only now..The only people in the stands at any of our meets are the racers that are not racing at that moment and their familys. A real race fan doesn't want to see a car hit the wall or a driver get hurt. NHRA doesn't make saftey rules just cause they have nothing else to do... I only suggest this change for saftey...I for one don't want to see Jason or Phil or anyone else bouncing off the wall and getting hurt.

[Scott231]

Do you mean TX? :nixweiss:

I've tried both the Buick meet in Northern Texas and the southern Oklahoma Buick v. Mustang event without much luck. I don't have much time for organizing this stuff. Luckily, some event organizers call me with ideas. :rock:

We got something special in store for Norwalk this year. :headbang:

[Kip]

Not sure why people equate coil overs with being to much like a race car. Isn't the lack of AC and heat enough of a statement about what a car is being used for? With that being said maybe the rule should read coil overs allowed with AC and heater box present only.
See ya, Kip

[southern boost]

Well don I see your point about the wheelie bars but, the bottom line is if the driver wont keep the foot in the gas or try to drive through it that is his\her choice. I'm very good friends with jason and know phil I hope nothing ever happens to either one . Finally this is stock type suspension class so, in most stock type classes wheelie bars are not allowed basically tune car to do what you want.

Don you guys to have a fan base believe it or not :rock: and hope you are gettin your car straightin out .:rock:


Kip all I said was coilovers just step away from the stock style set-up that scott has try to keep in the class and,if that's the case i say lets slap on the ladder bars and have at it . I have a set hangin on the wall off my old drag car.

Bottom line some stuff will happen and some stuff won't. We will see how the votes go. I personally will go with the flow hope to see all of you soon and I hope we all have a great and safe year of racin.

[Spooled]

I've tried both the Buick meet in Northern Texas and the southern Oklahoma Buick v. Mustang event without much luck. I don't have much time for organizing this stuff. Luckily, some event organizers call me with ideas. :rock:

We got something special in store for Norwalk this year. :headbang:

Scott,

There is really not that many 1/4 tracks to choose from here in North Texas.

Texas Motorplex is very pricey and isnt a racer friendly facility to work with car clubs to set up an event and follow NHRA rules to a T!

Houston Raceway Park is roughly 4 hours away in SE Houston
San Antonio Raceway is 4 to 5 hours away from Dallas
Red River Raceway is 3 hours east of Dallas and North of Shreveport LA

There are two possibilities of tracks that we can work with to see about getting an event centrally located.

Thunder Valley Raceway Park south of OKC (3 hours north of Dallas TX)
14 to 16 hour drive from Cincy to give you an idea of driving time from back east.

We might be able to squeeze in a two day with test n tune on Friday night with their normal TnT program
3 rounds of qualifying and eliminations on Saturday with their bracket schedule.

The Buick vs Ford event is scheduled at this location the last weekend of October. It would be hard to run a TSM event the same time due to qualifying running from 10am to 2pm and eliminations running from 4pm to 7-9ish pending how many pairs of Buick and Ford we would have. On average we have 85 to 100 pairings to run in eliminations. We are always hurting for faster Buick's at this event so it would be hard to run qualifying and eliminations. They are also starting to get strict in rules as I almost got kicked out for not having a lic and chassis cert when I went 9.71 @ 140 in October.

Memphis Motorsports Park 8hrs from Dallas 4 hrs from Bowling Green

The National F-body club has held several events that I have attended at this venue and has been very friendly to the racer. I would like to attend their event again but BG Nats has been the same weekend for the past 3 years and again this year.

Gateway International Raceway 10 hours NE of Dallas TX in East St Louis IL.
National F-body club held an event here in 1999 and was a success and great venue but scheduling and pricing are hard to work with.

There are a couple 1/8 mile tracks here in Dallas that are very racer friendly and will more than welcome us if we wanted to bring a TSM event but I can tell I would get flamed for even mentioning 1/8 mile.

We might consider adding the TSO guys to any of these venues that we discuss to make any additional event even a bigger success and longer time frame.

John Martin

[Quickt]

I dont see a problem with coil overs as long as they are used with stock control arms and no ladder bars. Exhaust on the other hand I think needs to be full exhaust. Many guys had to switch over to full exhaust. These cars are limited street cars. Not saying they could not make a long trip but I would not want to drive one and a 500 mile hop. I would be one of the few that would support a smaller turbo like a 67 or maybe a 66. I am sure you will never see that happen.

[Kip]

My idea behind the coil overs in the rear is this, some guys may build their cars to be able to move up to TSO some day and it is already allowed there so why not make things easy for people. In an application/use like Lonnie laid out I do not see it as a advantage. Also would it not maybe help car count and I think that is what is need to keep sponsor interseted in the class as well as people in the stands.
See ya, Kip

[MAX PSI]

I would be one of the few that would support a smaller turbo like a 67 or maybe a 66. I am sure you will never see that happen.

We are using up a 70 turbo now. Imagine a 66/67 on our current engines. I "overspeed" the 70 now. I would be blowing up the 66's at every race. I would have to rethink my whole combo. Prolly go back to iron heads and take advantage of the weight break. Then there's the cost of everyone swaping turbos. I'm not for it but it would slow down the class.

[Louie L]

I would be one of the few that would support a smaller turbo like a 67 or maybe a 66. I am sure you will never see that happen.

+1

Also. If you guys set up a race in Dallas - Houston Tx or Louisiana somewhere Im willing to fly up there and help run it.

[turbogtq70]

i think kevin is right on the exhaust. i think we should change the rule on exhaust. we have allowed it before at certain tracks. the exhaust on t-type has a muffler but doesn't go all the back. i drive it on the street.
i also see kips point with the coil over shock. both are worth taking a look at.
art

[Scott231]

How about we state that proposals will be accepted through January 18. That's 10 days from now. A few items have arisen as potential rule changes. I will assess the proposals and come up with another "ballot" for the Registered TSM Point Series Racers to vote upon before the end of January.

[Quickt]

If you have raced in TSM competition, you may make proposals for rule modifications here. If you have not raced in TSM (but intend too), your proposal will not be considered as a legitimate proposal. If you would rather not have your proposal or name made public, you can e-mail me at scott231@wowway.com . The registered participants of the 2007 TSM Point Series will vote on accepted proposals. An “accepted proposal” is one that is conveyed to me by more than one person and doesn't violate the stipulations below.

Just so everyone knows. This is Scotts e-mail from the first post.

[Scott231]

Just so everyone knows. This is Scotts e-mail from the first post.

E-mails must now be sent to Scott231@columbus.rr.com (the folks at Wowway stumbled...)

[10SecGN]

E-mails must now be sent to Scott231@columbus.rr.com (the folks at Wowway stumbled...)

RoadRunner Rocks! I wish I still had it.

[Quickt]

Scott put me down for rear coil overs and clarifying tubular front control arms.

[Scott231]

Proposals are all in and being tallied.