Boxster Spec Racing
#46
Nordschleife Master
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by 944Cup
But Colin, not sure if that's a realistic standard. If 10 were used to gauge each PCA class, many PCA classes at many club race weekends would fall short.
Sebring
E: 16
F: 21
G: 12
H: 2
I: 8
Lime Rock
E: 10
F: 11
G: 5
H: 4
I: 5
Watkins Glen
E: 21
F: 29
G: 16
H: 6
I: 13
Mosport
E: 10
F: 15
G: 6
H: 3
I: 10
Road America
E: 15
F: 21
G: 4
H: 4
I: 5
Daytona
E: 20
F: 31
G: 13
H: 5
I: 11
Averages:
E: 15 (92 total)
F: 21 (128)
G: 9 (56 total)
H: 4 (24 total)
I: 8 (52 total)
So, H is defintiely thin, but the other are all pretty well attended. And these are the classes where 944s and boxsters fit.
I do agree there are some classes that are rarely attended (J, K, GT6). One thing I would do it get rid of the S/R difference in the GT classes. That alone would make a difference.
I just see the sp[ec thing as easy to get out of control: boxster spec, Carrera spec, SC spec, RSA spec, 911 turbo spec, etc, etc. Where does it end? And what do you do with all the cars currently built for the letter classes?
I can definitely understand the appeal of spec classes (heck I now run in one!). BUt i'm just not sure how to integrate BSR/BSX into the existing classes without diminishing the E & F fields.
#47
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by 38D
I do agree there are some classes that are rarely attended (J, K, GT6). One thing I would do it get rid of the S/R difference in the GT classes. That alone would make a difference.
__________________
Larry Herman
2016 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
2018 Tesla Model 3 - Electricity can be fun!
Retired Club Racer & National PCA Instructor
Past Flames:
1994 RS America Club Racer
2004 GT3 Track Car
1984 911 Carrera Club Racer
1974 914/4 2.0 Track Car
CLICK HERE to see some of my ancient racing videos.
Larry Herman
2016 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
2018 Tesla Model 3 - Electricity can be fun!
Retired Club Racer & National PCA Instructor
Past Flames:
1994 RS America Club Racer
2004 GT3 Track Car
1984 911 Carrera Club Racer
1974 914/4 2.0 Track Car
CLICK HERE to see some of my ancient racing videos.
#48
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by 993944S2
We may start to see more SP1,2,3 in PCA this year. If people set cars for this class they can also race in 44cup. I considered building my F car as an SP3 but will wait one more year to see how the classes fill up. I am betting more F & E guys with 944's will go to the SP classes so they have more races and venues to choose from.Don
I think you're correct. By running in SP3 instead of "F" this year I can make some permitted changes to my 968 that I need to do for '44Cup (Supercup) - performance chip, big red brakes, rear hatch lexan (a safety mod), bigger wheels & tires, delete rear torsion bars, a/c and passenger's seat delete.
This year I can campaign the same car with PCA/SP3 and in 944 Cup. I can't say whether that will save me some money or not. With the permitted changes I'm considering, it looks like it will cost me more than I will save.
![banghead](https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/banghead.gif)
See you out there.
#49
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by 38D
Averages:
E: 15 (92 total)
F: 21 (128)
G: 9 (56 total)
H: 4 (24 total)
I: 8 (52 total)
E: 15 (92 total)
F: 21 (128)
G: 9 (56 total)
H: 4 (24 total)
I: 8 (52 total)
CMP: 3 cars per class
NP: 3 per
RR: 2 per
Daytona: 7 per
Summit: 3 per
RA: Under 5 per.
Adding SP classes worsens the average and adds to class bloat, but by PCA standards , 5 cars for SP classes per would be in line by comparison to the other classes. Then again, here on the East Coast, PCA events are a very well attended overall and have been for a long time, so PCA is doin' somethin' right.
#50
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Dave,
Also, 1/2 of the cars in "F" are 944 S2's or 951's (with an occasional 968 in there), and nearly all of the "I" cars are 944's and 924's. At Watkins last June, Chris Brady - alone in SP2 - had a nice little competition going with an "I" class 944 during the sprint race. And I was having fun with a Canadian Rothman's 944 (until he broke something).
Unfortunately, 356's and 914's are rarely seen at (non-vintage) club races anymore.
Getting back on point, there aren't many 986's competing in PCA. I feel that a Boxster spec would serve to change that. As the 944's and 911's begin to dwindle, we will see more boxsters and 996's on track (there's already plenty of 964's). To the extent that a boxster spec would result in increased participation and welcome new faces to club racing, I feel that's a good thing overall for the program.
Also, 1/2 of the cars in "F" are 944 S2's or 951's (with an occasional 968 in there), and nearly all of the "I" cars are 944's and 924's. At Watkins last June, Chris Brady - alone in SP2 - had a nice little competition going with an "I" class 944 during the sprint race. And I was having fun with a Canadian Rothman's 944 (until he broke something).
Unfortunately, 356's and 914's are rarely seen at (non-vintage) club races anymore.
Getting back on point, there aren't many 986's competing in PCA. I feel that a Boxster spec would serve to change that. As the 944's and 911's begin to dwindle, we will see more boxsters and 996's on track (there's already plenty of 964's). To the extent that a boxster spec would result in increased participation and welcome new faces to club racing, I feel that's a good thing overall for the program.
#51
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by richard glickel.
I feel that a Boxster spec would serve to change that. As the 944's and 911's begin to dwindle, we will see more boxsters and 996's on track (there's already plenty of 964's). To the extent that a boxster spec would result in increased participation and welcome new faces to club racing, I feel that's a good thing overall for the program.
#52
Race Director
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Guys the reason people pick spec classes to race in only partially about car count.
Years ago I when with 944 spec because firstly the class fit in my budget. Beyond that it also provided the racing experinece I was looking for.
That was racing equally prepared cars that allow the driver's skill to make the different rather than dollars or certain natual rules advantages.
If you look at PCA classing nothing really fits any of those objectives. GT classes are money pits and the stock class still have big tire bills. Even beyond that the Stock rules are not set out to make the cars equal in the class, but only "sort of close" One only needs to take a look at all the discussion we have had about classing the 3.4L 996, 3.6L996, 993, X51 cars,etc to see that there are clear "best cars" for each class.
In a spec class you pretty much know that if you spend XXX on the car doing YYY mods it will be competitive with all the other cars. Getting that way is the job of the driver. The rules makers also have the luxury of taloring the rules to the specific car thus potential improving the performance vs dollar ratio this making the car a little more fun. One major reason for allowing the 944 spec cars to be stripped (no interior, no a/c, no heat) is improve the performance vs dollar ratio. The cost is very little to strip the car yet provides a very nice performance & reliablity gain since we are dragging around some 350lbs less than PCA I weights. This means not just a faster car given equal mods, but less stress on components.
So Boxster spec is really no different. The rules can be tailored to the cars and a great example is the ECU. Boxster ECU's can be flashed so why not flash with a common program. This keeps everyone the same and makes compliance easy. In doubt flash them and be done with it. Of course if you want to flash to a "performance" vs stock map great. The one car class allows for this with ease thus increasing performance at a very marginal cost.
Also things like spec tire are very easy to do when you just have 1 tire & wheel size. If properly selected a spec tire can really low tire bills for the bulk of the racers.
So spec type classes have alot of things going for them. The major downsides are two. 1) Racing the same old cars is not something everyone wants to do. 2) No tinkering or very limited tinkering with performance. Spec classes are NOT places to innovate and come-up with creative performance enchancements. For some this IS their objective when racing. That is certainly a cool thing to do, but it has no place in spec class.
Now should PCA adopt boxster spec as SP4? At this time probably not. They have SP1, 2, 3 and might as well just see how the boxster thing takes off in POC. 944 spec (sp1) has shown to be a good formula as shown by the growth in NASA. The numbers in all 3 SP classes for 2006 were pretty good considering that they were introduced about 12 months ago.
Years ago I when with 944 spec because firstly the class fit in my budget. Beyond that it also provided the racing experinece I was looking for.
That was racing equally prepared cars that allow the driver's skill to make the different rather than dollars or certain natual rules advantages.
If you look at PCA classing nothing really fits any of those objectives. GT classes are money pits and the stock class still have big tire bills. Even beyond that the Stock rules are not set out to make the cars equal in the class, but only "sort of close" One only needs to take a look at all the discussion we have had about classing the 3.4L 996, 3.6L996, 993, X51 cars,etc to see that there are clear "best cars" for each class.
In a spec class you pretty much know that if you spend XXX on the car doing YYY mods it will be competitive with all the other cars. Getting that way is the job of the driver. The rules makers also have the luxury of taloring the rules to the specific car thus potential improving the performance vs dollar ratio this making the car a little more fun. One major reason for allowing the 944 spec cars to be stripped (no interior, no a/c, no heat) is improve the performance vs dollar ratio. The cost is very little to strip the car yet provides a very nice performance & reliablity gain since we are dragging around some 350lbs less than PCA I weights. This means not just a faster car given equal mods, but less stress on components.
So Boxster spec is really no different. The rules can be tailored to the cars and a great example is the ECU. Boxster ECU's can be flashed so why not flash with a common program. This keeps everyone the same and makes compliance easy. In doubt flash them and be done with it. Of course if you want to flash to a "performance" vs stock map great. The one car class allows for this with ease thus increasing performance at a very marginal cost.
Also things like spec tire are very easy to do when you just have 1 tire & wheel size. If properly selected a spec tire can really low tire bills for the bulk of the racers.
So spec type classes have alot of things going for them. The major downsides are two. 1) Racing the same old cars is not something everyone wants to do. 2) No tinkering or very limited tinkering with performance. Spec classes are NOT places to innovate and come-up with creative performance enchancements. For some this IS their objective when racing. That is certainly a cool thing to do, but it has no place in spec class.
Now should PCA adopt boxster spec as SP4? At this time probably not. They have SP1, 2, 3 and might as well just see how the boxster thing takes off in POC. 944 spec (sp1) has shown to be a good formula as shown by the growth in NASA. The numbers in all 3 SP classes for 2006 were pretty good considering that they were introduced about 12 months ago.
#54
Nordschleife Master
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I don't think cost control ultimately works in spec classes. Look at spec miata. What started as a cheap class now takes serious $s to be on the podium. Guys are buying new shaved toyos for every race, $10k special motors, trick parts. And then, everyone that is not on the podium whines that the top guys are cheating (even tho' they rarely are...). That seems pretty much exactly like PCA
.
There are plenty of pro series that are able to make different car models compeitive within the same class. In most cases, I think the different car models are competitive within a given class. There are certainly some issues such as D RSAs vs. D USA Cups, 964RSCSs in D, 993 RSCS in C, 3.4 996s in C, etc. But from F down, the classes seem pretty well sorted. With some evolution of the current rules, I believe these issues can be fixed as well.
I do agree that stripping a cars should be allowed without having to go to GT. Maybe a 2 class bump would be a good idea for allowing a ~10% reduction in weight.
For spec Boxster, I think the idea of racing boxsters is a great. They are getting quite cheap, and they handle very well.
![Wink](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif)
There are plenty of pro series that are able to make different car models compeitive within the same class. In most cases, I think the different car models are competitive within a given class. There are certainly some issues such as D RSAs vs. D USA Cups, 964RSCSs in D, 993 RSCS in C, 3.4 996s in C, etc. But from F down, the classes seem pretty well sorted. With some evolution of the current rules, I believe these issues can be fixed as well.
I do agree that stripping a cars should be allowed without having to go to GT. Maybe a 2 class bump would be a good idea for allowing a ~10% reduction in weight.
For spec Boxster, I think the idea of racing boxsters is a great. They are getting quite cheap, and they handle very well.
#56
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I am loving the idea of BSR. And im planning of buying a boxster making it ready for bs-X at first and later for BSR. At the beginning I was thinking of 944 but BSR attracts me so much more for many reasons. So I will follow the news on this closely