Can we get some clarification on the intention for the rules governing allowed sensors?

Previously it was:

It is permitted to add Steering angle, Fuel pressure, coolant pressure, oil temp sensors only

Click to expand...

Now it is:

It is permitted to add data sensor packs only sold by RAW Aftersales

Click to expand...

Is the intention to control the sensor types, and that Rush will be expanding over time the types of sensors available for purchase? Or, is the intention going forward that none of those sensors should be used?

If those sensors will be allowed, and we already had them, are we required to remove them until Rush offers an equivalent, then obligated to purchase new ones?

It would be great to get some insight into the intended sensor suite.

David,

Its worthy of discussion for sure, so thanks for chatting about it, and its an age old debate in racing.

Just so you know, I don't have crew or a crewchief either. I use those terms to the refer to the roles one plays when not actually driving. I am doing crew chief things prepping the car in between outings and when adjusting it between sessions. In the past I have played that role for others alot tho. Most of my experience is only in spec classes.

I could back the idea of individualized setups if it was mandatory for it to be shared with the entire paddock, so that those who cannot afford a crew and crew chief can have the opportunity to make the same adjustments on the car themselves and try it out.

Otherwise, having setups and pads that are fixed or very narrowly adjustable is the best way to ensure that the series truly is about driver skill rather than who has more money to spend to buy pace.

Click to expand...

I confidently can say that spec cars' performance envelopes are from the physics of the car. Grip, HP, drag, weight, weight transfer, and CG. The RUSH concept has done excellent defining these. I also will say that executing lap times from said package is all about the car interacting with the driver in a way that the drivers brain makes sense of. You can see this everywhere from Red Bull in F1 to SM in club racing. So, the point of my post is that I do not think RUSH should go down the slippery slope of mandating the feel of the car. To me, drivers skill is about feeling the grip and making the most out of it by tuning the feel to your preference, then executing a lap at a high level.

For example, Braking is 1/3 of the inputs a driver has control over, some like light touch brakes and some like the opposite. Some like a very high initial bite, some don't. But either way, the braking limit of the car is the same.

A steering example is some drivers like a pushy car, some like a pointy or loose car. But either way, the cornering limit of the car is the same.

I have seen over and over again, close racing where the front runners are at the opposite ends of the tuning window for feel, ( If they had to run each others car, they slow way down, that experiment has been done, alot). So, I am encouraging RUSH not to mandate that out of this relatively new class that is just getting momentum.

My .02
Kyle

Sam Reed updated Technical Regulations for Rush Auto Works Race Series with a new update entry:

2026 Rush SR Spec Series Regulations

Technical Regulations for the 2025 season.

Click to expand...

Read the rest of this update entry...

Sam Reed updated Technical Regulations for Rush Auto Works Race Series with a new update entry:

2026 Rush SR Race Series Technical Regulations (v1.6)

Technical Regulations for the 2026 season.

Click to expand...

Read the rest of this update entry...

Thx so much for the replies and clarifications. Please keep them coming!

Kw78 said:

The RUSH cars can run in SCCA/NASA this year. NASA requires the new fuel cells that come with new rush cars now, so if you buy a used one you will have to update to the new cell.

SCCA, last I knew, is allowing the old cells and the new cells. Perhaps Sam here can correct or clarify.

Neither organization has a dedicated pure RUSH run group. You only get that running in the RUSH series as put on by Grid Life.

Your local chapters of both NASA and SCCA have the latitude to create regional class to accommodate the RUSH, and where I am at (Colorado) the local SCCA is classifying RUSH as a regional class and to run in the SRF run group. You will be on track with SRF and RUSH but the results reflect you are racing other rush cars. This is what I have been told but I have not read this in print yet. (it may be tho)

In NASA however, currently the RUSH car fits into ST2 class. You will be racing other ST2 cars and in a mixed ST run group (ST1-ST6 is possible) against mostly sedans currently. However, our local NASA chapter is working on creating a "low profile" group where we will be running RUSH and other sports racers such as the NPO1s.

Many people worry about the little RUSH running next to sedans, but previously this has not been a problem in my area. The rush is visible, especially with the roll bar strobes invented to help this. I have purposely asked many sedan drivers on practice days if they could see me well. Basically we are about as visible as a miata it seems. But, since we out corner most sedan cars at the track, you have more control than you tnink navigating traffic.

As always, if enough cars show up, they can influence the schedule and the run groups - so it is a fluid process. The Rocky Mountain region NASA expects 10+ rush cars, and I have personally chatted with 6 of them and seen 3 more, so I think it will be more like 12-14. Should be a really fun group.

Hope you get out racing. This thing is as fun as a YZ250 or an IT465 was, and I have yet to break a helmet or a bone in this... knock on wood....

Click to expand...

Not Sam lol, but I can answer regarding SCCA.

SCCA will only allow the Rush with the new tanks.

I did my Comp School with SCCA in Houston in December, and they allowed the old tanks because the school was put on by the track and accredited by SCCA, not provided by SCCA itself.

Can't speak to SCCA as a whole, but in the Houston Region (which is basicially all of TX), they mentioned putting us with the formula fords and formula regionals etc, but said that if we show up with 20-30 cars regularly (like what was happening down here with NASA before the whole tank debacle) that they would have a very stong case to give us our own run group.

Kw78 said:

Thanks for the Reply Sam, I appreciate it!

I understand the problem with the original system and applaud the further development.

I too arrived at a much more aggressive pad, and a weak-ish rear pad. I also appreciate there is no support for an abs driver aid, love that! The car is stopping damn good.

I just resist the trend to make it mandatory, and the trend for the rulebook to squash crew chief adjustments for driver feel. Engagement of the brakes is a huge piece of the puzzle. For example, I've recently had one Porsche driver tell me they can't stop their car, and a teammate under the same tent take the car out for a few laps and report back they are the best brakes he's felt. They raced the same cars in the same class, just wanted different feels. (One of the drivers in this example just got a RUSH! Ironic!)




This is excellent to address. ABS used to be a luxury in a race car, but now it is so common that I think the RUSH class has lots of participants that have always had ABS. Feeling a lockup is a learned skill of course and people will get there, but I understand helping them along with design updates!

Kyle

Click to expand...

Kyle,
I was just reading this thread and wanted to weigh in with a different perspective.

While I understand the desire and benefit to allowing for a range of tweaks and adjustments to suit driver preference, I also have issues with it.

Sometimes drivers and teams will guard the secret like it's the difference between life and death, and they maintain a massive pace advantage because of it.
In my opinion, that is against the spirit of a spec series because those who have the crew and the money to pay the crew to develop a setup for them have a massive advantage over those who are by themselves or only have one or two volunteer helpers.
I could back the idea of individualized setups if it was mandatory for it to be shared with the entire paddock, so that those who cannot afford a crew and crew chief can have the opportunity to make the same adjustments on the car themselves and try it out.

Otherwise, having setups and pads that are fixed or very narrowly adjustable is the best way to ensure that the series truly is about driver skill rather than who has more money to spend to buy pace.

The RUSH cars can run in SCCA/NASA this year. NASA requires the new fuel cells that come with new rush cars now, so if you buy a used one you will have to update to the new cell.

SCCA, last I knew, is allowing the old cells and the new cells. Perhaps Sam here can correct or clarify.

Neither organization has a dedicated pure RUSH run group. You only get that running in the RUSH series as put on by Grid Life.

Your local chapters of both NASA and SCCA have the latitude to create regional class to accommodate the RUSH, and where I am at (Colorado) the local SCCA is classifying RUSH as a regional class and to run in the SRF run group. You will be on track with SRF and RUSH but the results reflect you are racing other rush cars. This is what I have been told but I have not read this in print yet. (it may be tho)

In NASA however, currently the RUSH car fits into ST2 class. You will be racing other ST2 cars and in a mixed ST run group (ST1-ST6 is possible) against mostly sedans currently. However, our local NASA chapter is working on creating a "low profile" group where we will be running RUSH and other sports racers such as the NPO1s.

Many people worry about the little RUSH running next to sedans, but previously this has not been a problem in my area. The rush is visible, especially with the roll bar strobes invented to help this. I have purposely asked many sedan drivers on practice days if they could see me well. Basically we are about as visible as a miata it seems. But, since we out corner most sedan cars at the track, you have more control than you tnink navigating traffic.

As always, if enough cars show up, they can influence the schedule and the run groups - so it is a fluid process. The Rocky Mountain region NASA expects 10+ rush cars, and I have personally chatted with 6 of them and seen 3 more, so I think it will be more like 12-14. Should be a really fun group.

Hope you get out racing. This thing is as fun as a YZ250 or an IT465 was, and I have yet to break a helmet or a bone in this... knock on wood....

Thanks for the Reply Sam, I appreciate it!

I understand the problem with the original system and applaud the further development.

I too arrived at a much more aggressive pad, and a weak-ish rear pad. I also appreciate there is no support for an abs driver aid, love that! The car is stopping damn good.

I just resist the trend to make it mandatory, and the trend for the rulebook to squash crew chief adjustments for driver feel. Engagement of the brakes is a huge piece of the puzzle. For example, I've recently had one Porsche driver tell me they can't stop their car, and a teammate under the same tent take the car out for a few laps and report back they are the best brakes he's felt. They raced the same cars in the same class, just wanted different feels. (One of the drivers in this example just got a RUSH! Ironic!)

A strong motivation of mine for the 2026 series has been to reduce full-course yellows. This, and some other reliability changes we've made and are making, will go a long way toward that goal.

Click to expand...

This is excellent to address. ABS used to be a luxury in a race car, but now it is so common that I think the RUSH class has lots of participants that have always had ABS. Feeling a lockup is a learned skill of course and people will get there, but I understand helping them along with design updates!

Kyle

Sam Reed said:

Just noting the response in the FB group here for reference - we have seen intermittent issues with throttle position sensors that are as easy to remedy as simply unclipped the harness from the pedal, plugging it back in, then restarting the car.

Click to expand...

I didn't realize this got posted. I fixed the 303 car and was going to do a thread about it.

On most fly by wire throttles, once a code is set, you have to reset the code before the system will try again, EVEN AFTER THE ISSUE IS PHYSICALLY FIXED. I presume this is the same for the Suzuki per norms.

So, I am not sure that cycling the master switch resets the codes on this. I may induce a TPS code again and find out and report back.

But in this case, my scan tool communicates with the suzuki. It had several codes for the TPS and specifically called out "tps circut d" and "tps circuit E".

So I actually initially reset the codes and the throttle worked again for a little bit, but then it failed again shortly, and the codes were back. A new tps sensor failure is very suspect, (I actually originally thought it was more likely the dogbone that actuates it came off). But that was ok, so I went hunting for a bad circuit.

There is a 6 cavity Duestch connector on the TPS sensor pigtail that has been used for the RUSH car wiring harness. The root of the problem is that the locks for the male pins did not get engaged properly when building the plug. So, plugging it in once, stuff works because the pin might be touching the other half of the connector but then shortly there is an open circuit creating the behavior that was reported, which is due to a open circuit from the pin being pushed back.






So the middle pin on that side, and also one you cant see in the pic on the near side, were pushed back in.

If you are having TPS problems, this is worth a look.

Altho this is an easy mistake to make (I have done it myself building race car harnesses) that is no consolation if you have to DNF with the car just idling!!



Once you get them clipped, that orange block keeps the lock engaged to hold the pin firmly. Note in this application only 4 pins are used of the 6 available cavities. I forgot to get pic of final assy fix.

Also for future reference, for anyone coming across this chasing a problem, the wire colors do the following.

Brown - Sytem 5 volt reference, should be solid. (5.3 on mine)
Blue - System Ground.
Black - Voltage signal that follows the pedal sweep. I presume this is a secondary signal. Mine went from .2-3.6 on pedal going from off to full throttle.
White - Voltage signal that follows the pedal sweep. I presume tis is the primary signal. Mine went from .53 - 4.86v on pedal going for off to full throttle.

Many FBW systems have multiple signal to confirm logic. Again, I don't know the suzuki design specifically, but I would expect norms.

Anyway, yes its all good now. Took an afternoon to run down tho.

Hope this helps in the future.

Kyle

Per my note on FB - the clip was fine but the wires going into the clip were not installed correctly. They just weren't pushed in and snapped. Fixed them. All good.

Okay. Please call the shop on Monday we’ll get you taken care of.

Thanks Sam - wasn't sure if Facebook was the right place to post issues like that, I suspect it's ok for the group. I tried that this morning, followed the directions explicitly, and to no avail. My AiM dash is listing an accelerator pedal figure of 148.6 so maybe this is electrical as you noted but not remedied by the harness itself. Will keep trying and report back. Appreciate the note.

Kw78 said:

I don't think this is good news. What is the point of this? If it is to get the proceeds from a consumable, then is RUSH going to offer quite the variety of pads that is out there?

Click to expand...

We understand this. The reasoning is:

• The stock pads that were shipped from 2022-2025 were inadequate for the car. There was too much rear braking and not enough front. Practically, everyone needed to run brake bias as far front as the adjustment bar would go. This is not a great way for the car to ship.
• Unequal-sized master cylinders helps alleviate that problem, but it is best in combination with unequal pad compounds.
• Development of this solution took time and money. Additionally, a design review of the brake calipers showed that there was some small deviation from the intended shape and the d961 pads had some overhang. The new spec pads fix this problem and maximize available pad area, wear more evenly, and fit the actual driving profile of the car.
  • To be clear, the new spec pad is *not* the D961 shape - it is slightly different. There is no other way to get this corrected shape, meaning that any non-spec pad is going to be inferior in wear.
• So it became clear that an OEM change was necessary, and that a fair number of incidents we've seen in the car due to more amateur drivers locking up, could have been avoided by this solution. Compelling them to change was easiest done by mandating a spec pad, which also helped cover some of our sizable internal development costs.

Among drivers who have tried the new solution, even the among most elite in the series, the feedback has been very positive. I understand your resistance and it's legitimate. Every decision we make has trade-offs; we decided the trade-offs fell on the side of mandating the pads this year.

A strong motivation of mine for the 2026 series has been to reduce full-course yellows. This, and some other reliability changes we've made and are making, will go a long way toward that goal.

Just noting the response in the FB group here for reference - we have seen intermittent issues with throttle position sensors that are as easy to remedy as simply unclipped the harness from the pedal, plugging it back in, then restarting the car.

JChapman said:

Brake pads used to be open but 2026 regulations now require pads sold by RAW. This change is not included in the changes document. Is it an oversight in the changes document or mistake in the 2026 regulations?

Click to expand...

I don't think this is good news. What is the point of this? If it is to get the proceeds from a consumable, then is RUSH going to offer quite the variety of pads that is out there?

If it is to force the brake feel to suit a certain style of braking, then this is bad news.

RUSH, part of the attraction of this car is it is tunable to the feel that the driver works with best. SPEC cars ultimate performance are dominated by the physics of the car. IE, HP to weight, ride height, dimensions, tires.

Driver performance is dominated by the feel of the car. Spec Miata made this mistake long ago and then recovered. They tried spec alignment, spec brake pads etc. All this does is narrow the field to one driving style. I have been part of this expirement before and all it does is reduce the field.

Years ago we took two championship drivers from the same class and had them test a spec car from their class with the other drivers setup. Each was respectively WAY off in lap time compared to driving their own setup, while producing nearly identical lap times in the same vehicle when allowed to drive their preferred setup. One driver was only adept at managing a pushy car, and the other liked a very pointy or loose car, but both drivers were national champions. I stress that no parts were changed on the car, just adjustments to sway bars, shocks, alignment etc.

The point of the exercise was to teach how the feel of the car working with the drivers brain is a more important requirement than the root ability of the car, to promote close racing.

The 2026 rules for RUSH appear to be going down that path of dictating driver style versus just keeping a collection of parts at the same performance potential. Physics of tire, ride height, hp to weight, and spec aero should be kept in spec, but not camber, rake, brake bite, and shock forces. Those are all driver feel. Those are all things that change track to track possibly, as well as in different conditions.

I hope RUSH will focus on the reliability of the car running a reasonable race distance (that's not 20 min btw) and letting the club racers develop and adjust the car to suit their style and feel.


My .02
Kyle

JChapman said:

Brake pads used to be open but 2026 regulations now require pads sold by RAW. This change is not included in the changes document. Is it an oversight in the changes document or mistake in the 2026 regulations?

Click to expand...

Please see the new doc - thanks for pointing this out.

Sam Reed updated Technical Regulations for Rush Auto Works Race Series with a new update entry:

2026 Rush SR Race Series Technical Regulations

Technical Regulations for the 2026 Season.

Click to expand...

Read the rest of this update entry...

Sam Reed updated Technical Regulations for Rush Auto Works Race Series with a new update entry:

2025-2026 Technical Regulations

PDF with updates between the 2025 and 2026 seasons.

Click to expand...

Read the rest of this update entry...

Eric H said:

Thank you for the detail. Best of luck to you on sale so you can move on!

Click to expand...

Thank you Eric.