cstreit

Truth! ...and my point is not that this is typical PCA modus operundi, but that isolated experiences shouldn't be used to judge the larger picture.

cstreit

This particular rule is applied for the duration of the weekend, beyond that would be extreme and the 13/13 takes over.. The idea was born in the Nationals because it's a 4-5 day event and kept by popular response.

TraqGear

I've started racing both (nasa and pca) this year.

NASA. Friendly atmosphere, different kinds of cars, laid back, 13-13 rule with GTS, always see a couple of really good drivers in or around my class, easy comp school..get your license and go race, always a couple of bad crashes and a few minor incidents, race weekends are packed full of HPDE's, time trials and races.

PCA. Friendly atmosphere, same kinds of cars, a little **** about certain things, 13-13 rule strickly enforced, usually really good drivers in most classes (only 2 cars at daytona in GTB ), pretty easy process to get your license, crashes and incidents are about the same thus far, race weekends geared mainly toward racing instead of DE mix.

Both clubs I've had to do quite of a bit of "defensive driving" to avoid a collision. At Daytona, I was in the ABS in a corner more than once to avoid a crash in a turn that I was already on the inside of.

I think a mixture of these two works out well...lots of racing in an area not too far from home if you shedule it right. I'm making a lot of friends in NASA and PCA and look forward to each race. I tend to overlook the politics of the groups, allow the power trip people to gloat and have their way and focus on what I'm there for...to race! See you all at CMP and RRR!

JSG1901

I raced PCA (F Stock, then) for two years before moving to a NASA. Pretty much everything people have said above is true but there are a few things left out. First, if you're just going to race and don't really have an expectation of winning, you'll probably find either one is fine.

PCA does have a bit more track time, NASA probably has a few more cars on the track but, as someone noted earlier, it is actually a lot more fun racing with more cars, particularly once you get into backmarkers. Very fun.

On the other hand, if you think you are good enough to seriously compete for the win, in my opinion you probably want to be with NASA, particularly if you can run in GTS. The GTS rules are elegantly simple: You run to a power-to-weight ratio AND THEY CHECK IT. I'm not saying it's impossible but there's not a whole lot you can do to cheat (because almost everything is legal). At PCA, particularly in the stock classes, they don't have any real way to detect cheating. As a result, unfortunately, people cheat, making it very hard to win if you don't.

NASA acts like it is run by racers who want to have a good (safe, but good) time. PCA feels more like it's being run by organizers who want to run a race.

For my money, NASA is the place to be and GTS has the classes to be there with.

Brian P

I don't believe this to be true. I've prepared my car to the limits of the rules and can confidently say that those who are ahead of me are doing so by being better drivers (ugh - it hurts to admit that).

Yes, there are a few isolated examples of people who are clearly cheating (for example, SP3 cars that are as fast as class leading GT3s on a straight) but those are far and few between.

Sterling Doc

Here's some of the fun we have with 944 Spec at NASA:

Brent getting a surprise rookie "baptism" when taking off of his "R"





Conan looking happy after everyone pulled together to get his car back on track when his brake caliper fell off




Bryan Cohn (welcome back!) going over the results of our "pursuit race" - which was great fun in itself!






Both organizations are fun to run with, but I've really felt I've found a home with NASA. As mentioned above, they really work with you to enhance the fun. Our regional director (Dave Royce) put our photographer in the back of his SUV to take some on-track pictures of our class during lunch touring, and got this arranged with one day's notice - no red tape, just helped us get it done. This is one example of many in how they go the extra mile.

38D

As a scrut I can assure you that is not true. We have the tools to check displacement, compression ratio, gears, cam timing, boost...pretty much everything. The people that run at front are checked, often.


I would like to try GTS, but I am waiting until the classes are more competitive. At the NASA WG race this year, the best times in GTS4 (my class) were in the 2:08s. At PCA, the top 5 drivers in C1 did 2:06s.

Sean F

I've never seen an engine checked, when does that typically happen? Is it post race, post event? Is that capability at every event? As a racer, can I request that another car have the engine checked for the things you mention?

For NASA, why not just convince some C1 guys to all go at once? Plus, with everyone being dyno'd maybe everyone won't run 2:06's

38D

Compliance checks happen when the scruts have time. At Barber last year, we checked some gears at lunch. But the larger checks typically happen at the end of the day. And yes, you can ask a scrut to check something, and they will certainly try to get it done.


I am 100% confident that the engines in C1 are all legal and exactly the same; they all go exactly the same speed down the straights, unless you can do the prior corner better. Actually, Burger's tired street engine is mildly slower, which is bad news for us when he finally builds a fresh engine!

Btw, a C1 car should not be competitive in GTS3: no rear wing, no monoballs, small tires, stock gears, etc. If a 964 was built to the limits of GTS4, it would be a 2:03 car.

bobt993

Colin, what tires are run in GTC to run 2:06s at VIR. GTS3 runs 2:09s on DOTs (M3's) I have not had a healthy car at a NASA race yet (still chasing an engine fault dropping power when warm), but I have seen some good driving. GTS3 cars have run 1:21 flat at Summit and that is pretty damn fast for a car that would class in "H". Agreed GTS4 is thin. I think you should try running with Midatlantic and have fun.

Sean F

Good point Bob. GTC1 run slicks where in GTS4 most/all run DOT tires (diff WT/HP for slicks versus DOT)

bobt993

Which according to Larry is 2 secs a lap. I have run with both and think the GTS2,3 fields are pretty good and competitive. The GTS4 group just needs more cars. Look at it this way, if the field is that much slower than Colin, then he can win some races and get free tires.

DrJupeman

I think the other thing that has held some of us back from trying NASA with our 964 Cups is they mandate "X" door bars in the cage? Ours only have one diagonal and I haven't wanted to modify my car just to run with NASA.

Gary R.

Charlie, I added a temporary bolt-in bar (universal from Stable energies) that met the NASA requirements of 2 driver door bars. Other than that they require a head restraint in the form of a net or Halo seat and a diagonal in the hoop from driver's head to the passenger floor upright.

jaje

Check out Oct 27, 2008 article on "alphabet soup" - SCCA or NASA. Pretty well written article of observations. SCCA has an aging clientele who like formal atmospheres and it becomes an impediment to change and growth of new members. NASA allows a lot more leeway in rules so that you can race what you really wanted to race.

2008 SCCA Runoffs had 130 less cars this year and almost fell below 500 total racers. NASA's national championships had almost 500 cars this year. A key indicator of the success NASA has been having versus the SCCA is the swing in the Spec Miata class championship - only 29 in SCCA this year and 60 in NASA (a major swing of SCCA Spec Miata racers moved over to NASA for 2008).