DOUGLAP1

I didn't just write a letter asking to get classed. I presented an argument based on published performance data from GRM magazine and other sources demonstrating thet the 986S had similar performance and Hp/weight ratios to the S2000. SCCA did not respond to my argument at all - they just stated their autocratic opinion. So, game over.

PedalFaster

I like Porsches a lot -- I've owned five, including two Boxsters -- but I still think the STAC / SEB made the right decision here for all of the reasons listed above.

Also, there have been two significant developments since this thread started. Firstly, the new Road Tire classes have been created. The Boxster looks better in RT than it does in Stock for two reasons -- it's mid-engined, so it can make better use of street tires' limited traction; and it has relatively wide wheels, which is more important for street tires than for R-compounds.

Secondly, there's a proposal out to move the MS-R Miata and Z0K Solstice from C Stock to B Stock. The proposal hasn't yet been ratified, but if it is, the base 986 will be one of the fastest, if not the fastest, car left in C Stock.

These two developments are particularly interesting when combined -- a C Stock Boxster on street tires could be a fantastic car in RTR.

So: while you seem intent to take your ball and go home, things are looking very good for Boxsters in SCCA autocross next year.

sjfehr

At least you got an answer; I'm still waiting on a response to #4992, which proposed 2.5-3.2L Boxster and Boxster S be classed in STR. 16 months and counting...

PedalFaster

As an aside, if you really, really think the Boxster and/or Boxster S belongs in STR, a more effective way to make your point would be to build a mild- to moderate-prep STR Boxster and bring it to an event where there are some top national-level STR cars and drivers in attendance. Have everyone do runs in each others' cars to generate some real data; right now people on both sides of the debate are relying primarily on paper comparisons and hunches.

You could probably build a good-enough-for-comparison-purposes STR Boxster for under $3k -- buy four used rear wheels off of eBay (adjusting offset by adding spacers or machining material off of the mounting surface, as required), tires, camber plates, coilover adapters for the stock shocks, and some springs of the appropriate rate. Once set up, that car would probably be within a half second a of max prep car (the big missing pieces being weight reduction and engine tuning).

Sure, $3k isn't chump change, but you could recoup most of it reselling the parts afterward. Plus, if you proved your point that the Boxster isn't too fast for STR after all, you wouldn't have to sell them at all.

kjchristopher

HP/Weight is almost a meaningless stat in this sport. We look at other things (see the spreadsheet on the July 8th post at http://www.rhoadescamaro.com/build/ for a sample of some of the things we consider) to gauge performance. When we input the Boxster's (both 2.5 and 2.7) into the same models that predicted the tight performance we have in STR today, the Boxster was a pretty clear outlier. I was hoping to find a place for it and left it on the agenda for many, many months working different angles. In the end, even I could see it had a serious potential for upsetting everything else in the class.

Properly built and driven, it could probably take on STU on a good day.

sjfehr

Honestly, I don't care specifically of the Boxster is classed in STR or STU, I just want to be able to compete on street tires with a fair pax. STR seems on the surface to be the most appropriate place for it. I really don't think it will run away with the class as people think, as other factors (gearing, nannies, etc.) limit peak performance.

My car is unfortunately not the right car to use as a guinea pig; it's a tip with too many heavy luxury features. Great for a DD/regional car, but it's never going to be nationally competitive.

Earlydays

I fully appreciate the challenge of classifying cars and what the Solo Board faces, but I have to say that "pure parity" and "non-disruption" should not be the only criteria.
I have been involved with the SCCA since the late '60's and started autocrossing with them at the same time. What "parity" has created are basically "spec" classes that discourage new entrants, when they don't happen to have one of the "spec" cars that dominate.
The Solo Board should take some risk and introduce new cars and allow some diversity. This could re-vitalize some of the classes, get new participants and frankly make the competition that much more interesting.
If you make a mistake, then re-classify the following year.
My sense is that the SCCA does not like to "rock the boat" and I think that is one of the fundamental problems the club has today.

DOUGLAP1

My 986S is already prepared to the limits of STR. Let the SEB nominate a hot show to plug in, but they'll have to come to Atlanta, as no way I'm traveling umpteen hours for 5-6 minutes of race time in the middle of the country.

PedalFaster

If that's the case, then you guys should write letters asking for it to be classed in STU. As Earlydays writes, if that turns out to be a mistake, then it could be reclassified to STR the following year.

http://sebscca.com

grey ghost

Douglap1

if you really want I could come drive yours. Seeing as I have caused the Boxster to
show too much potential in the Past 2nd in SS in 2000, 3rd in 2001 againts the Zo6.
and 3rd in 2003, lost the lead on the second day.

I feel the S2000 has developed into the premier car. When I was on the Stock Advisory
Board I said the S2000 was faster than the Boxster in 2000. It just took a while for the
developmant to catch up.

thanks Rob Falkner

sjfehr

Might Boxster/Boxster S actually be a good fit in STU? I looked back over the specs today, and aside from having a .4s worse pax than STR, it otherwise looks pretty close to the mods desired by most boxster owners- desnorkel, ROW M030, sport seats, custom wheels, aftermarket exhaust, gt3 control arms, LSD- all legal! Is all this enough to make an STU boxster as fast as a stock boxster on A6s, though?

PedalFaster

I wrote a letter requesting that the Boxster be allowed in STU, which has now turned into a request for member comment on putting the Boxster into STU *or STR*. Looks like you guys have a second chance to make your points. I'd like to suggest again that any letter that does not address the Boxster's traction advantage due to its mid-engine configuration is unlikely to be taken too seriously, given that they explicitly mention it in their request.

http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/...k-feb-solo.pdf

ToSi

Easy, 'limited slip rear differentials may be installed, modified, or replaced only in vehicles which offered them as standard or optional equipment from the manufacturer, regardless of sub model. Vehicles which were not available with a factory installed limited slip differential (i.e., 97-04 986, all) may use their oem non-lsd only.'

PedalFaster

It would be a bummer to not be able to upgrade the diff in an STR Boxster. A change to the diff rule would also be a takeback for the few MR2 Spyders already running in STR. Not saying that's a bad idea, though; from the tone of the conversation up until now, I suspect the Boxster will have to accept *some* kind of prep limitation if it's going to get into STR (or potentially even STU).

sjfehr

I wrote letter #9146. It requested 986, 986S, 987 & 987S be classed in STU due to concerns about the Boxster being an overdog in STR, and to be further evaluated for eventual classing in STR. I see I wasn't the only one to write a letter. Interesting they ruled out all buy 986, but hey, at least we have a chance to get 986 classed. Small victory! If the 986 fails to turn into an overdog (which we know it won't), then the rest may be classed in a year or two. I still really do think they should all be permitted in STR.

Honda S2000 is mid-engine, too (front-mid), and actually closer to 50/50 than the Boxster, with way more power. I really don't see why base 986 needs to be handicapped to compete in STR aside from general OMGPORSCHE fear.

I'm honestly more excited about the likelihood of stock class going to street tire next year. Partially (ok, mostly) because even if this change does go through, my 986S is still excluded from ST*.