LVDell

Roger, those are close but IMHO still not quite there. I'd be happy to share my suggestions if you like.

TraqGear

Ok.

TIM COSTA

Rog,
What did you say your car weighed? Do you already have carbon doors and hood? I have all metal and aside from those things cant imagine where I can get 200+ #s out of my car.
Tim

LVDell

Here's what I think would be the MOST fair to all the combo's:

These are obviously min weight WITH driver.

996
3.4....2850
3.6....2950
3.6x51....3050

997
3.6.....3050
3.8......3125
3.8x51......3225

A couple notes about the weights. The 3.4 at 2850 would have the 200# driver get that car to 2650 which is going to take some SERIOUS work. 2800 is just too low in my opinion.

The 3.6 (996) at 2950 is actually 50# lower than the 996 koni weights.

The 3.6x51 and 997 3.6 have only a delta of 20hp which is negligible and is negated by the negligible differences between the rest of the components so the equal weight seems just fair and 125# lower than the 997 3.6 koni weights.

The 3.8x51 at 3225 would be EXACTLY on par with my 996 at the same horsepower and weight and was blazing fast and stable at that weight. The lack of cage in my car would be added back in by removing the interior.

So......do you want more hp or less weight?

Have you driven a RSA at 3000# (with driver) with 100 less horses than you and no power steering???

Now pass the popcorn

TIM COSTA

Dell,
Why would you suggest lowering the 996 3.6 Koni by 50#s and the 997 Koni/x51 by 125#s?

Tim

LVDell

The differences moving from 996 to 997. Hence the reason I also suggested that the 996 3.6x51 be the same weight as the 3.6 997. Small weight bump for the hp and small weight penalty for the 996 to 997 move.

The other thing I took into account was that these are not linear in relationship and some of the weight penalties in Koni were to allow "equal" competition with other marques. Now we are trying to cram 6 cars into 1 class and make it fair for all.

The numbers need to also make sense in such a way that you can honestly answer the question, would you rather have "X" less pounds or "X" more weight. The numbers need to be set up in such a way that equalizes that response set.

Bull

You need to have those racing set the weights...except that they need to be told "after you assign the weights for each car, we will tell you which one you will be droving". Kind of like betting on Football by agreeing "you set the points spread and then I will pick the teams".

LVDell

That will surely get the best weights out of everybody!

blakt out

Dell, I respectfully wonder if it's me missing the point, or you assuming you understand what the point is. Your first sentence and the first sentence in my last paragraph that you quote are very similar. I said, IF the goal is for them all to actually COMPETE (you said "be competitive" pretty close to the same thing) then I don't know what I'd do differently. However, I question whether or not this should be the goal. It's not missing the point, it's asking if the point misses the mark. From the angle I'm looking at this from, it's not purty. And if the governing bodies knew exactly what the point is supposed to be then we'd have a solution right now. Fact is, theoretically, you could take any two cars and weigh one down and lighten the other up enough to make them work into one class. And then you'd always have the justification out there that 'without this rule we're just out there checkbook racing'. PCA is supposed to have a good class for every kind of Porsche. Well, when the new 997.2 S out, i starts being prepped, it doesn't make sense that it would have to be SO CRIPPLED just so someone in a 3.4 can BE COMPETITIVE with it. You're right. That's checkbook racing from the start. But we don't put Carrera GTs with 914s either. This "all 996 and later based Carreras" is a VERY broad swath to cut. Yes, it has to be broad like this while the field thickens. But it'd be nice to know that we will be able to run 997S cars actually set up to be very good, not just as good as a 3.4 996 can be. I told Tim on the phone that I think that they have to have the rules open enough for the class to grow in the initial years, but with the obvious and stated intent for GTB to be broken up later on. I don't think it's right that I have to run at a near street car weight just so a 3.4 can be competitive with my car. They just shouldn't be in the same class in the end... That's my 2 respectful cents.

blakt out

Dell, could you tell us more specifically how? I had a certain shop give me a bid on building my car (not Synergy) and the price included putting a 3.8 X51 in my car. I know that Synergy has two cars with X51s in them and they have large stickers on the outside that say "SX51" so there's no mistaking it. But, if shops can just take an X51 and drop it in a non-X51 car, how is it that we can tell, other than just opening the engine lid? What would we see that let us know, in every case, that this car that just spanked me down the straight didn't have an X51 slipped in to it?

LVDell

Jared, you are still missing the point by coming at it from an egocentric point. You are wondering why YOU have to weight more just so somebody else can be competitive. Remember, THOSE cars were there first. Your car is NEW to the class.

Of course the logical solution is GTB-1 (996) and GTB-2 (997) but there are NOT enough cars. If you want the class to exist with more than 1 or 2 cars, this is the ONLY solution. And no, you car is not crippled running at 3225 with driver like I suggested. My car a NO TIME felt crippled. Would I have loved to shed a few pounds? Of course. But did it keep me from driving the damn car and drive it well? No.

Maybe the best thing to do is EXCLUDE the 3.4 996 and then lower each of the weights accordingly?

Remember, you are wanting to race a street car. That's why GTC has a much larger following and a much easier set of rules to create and follow. Those are RACE CARS.

First off, you would hope people are honest and classify themselves accordingly. Second, you can tell the 996 non-x51 and x51 apart visually by a few things. Headers, but then again those could be swapped. You can check to see if the intake manafold is alloy (x51) or plastic (non-51) but that will only tell you if they swapped it. So we are back at the honor system. As far as the 997, I assume these are the same visual identifiers.

TraqGear

Ok Dell. Not bad, but a little too heavy. 3.4 car is a little lighter to begin with and the weights ARE obtainable. Everyone isn't 200 pounds. 2650 is very doable. My 2720 is WITH my cool suit box and ice. I still have my ac fan, tons of wiring and other stuff that can reduce my weight if I put the effort into it. It doesn't take a huge effort to make some easy weight losses. Fiberglass hood, doors and the battery alone are huge losses. And it's not a ton of money if done right. My hood is a used $300 hood, my doors are aftermarket from Getty in CA and fit very well (both doors are less money than just one OEM cup door) and the battery was about $150. There are many other things to do as well that I won't go into here. These are just the most obvious and easiest IMHO.

Forget about Koni weights. They are weights without driver and standard Koni equipment all over the car. A Koni car is merely a good car to start with for GTB and GTS4. Lets stick to what's best for GTB.

Another point...the 996 3.6 STOCK class is 3060. Need to have enough weight difference to matter. If we are going to run heavier cars, then might as well stay with a stock class car.

Also, your GT3 is another animal altogether. Let's compare apples with apples and stay with non-gt3 cars. Your GT3 was unique and well-sorted and can't be used for comparisons here. I have yet to see a stock class GT3 as fast as my car in the turns. They are just too heavy which goes back to Jared's point.

GTB is a GT class. It requires work to get the cars set up, the weight reduced and proper mods. But, that's half the fun of it. If I had a 3.4, I would do whatever I could to get the weight down. That car needs to be light to compete and when it is light, it will come alive.

So, do I want more horsepower or less weight? Yes! (to both)

When you get through with your GTB car, it should handle similar to a cup with less power. If you have a 997 X51, the you have cup power that doesn't handle quite as well as the 3.4. The thing is, until you've built and experimented with one of these things, you won't completely get it. If you buy a koni off the shelf, don't expect it to handle like my car. Dell, you know you want to build one and get a little more power in your hands. Just do it! What are you waiting for? Call Cory at Autometrics and you'll be racing it in 2 months. They've builld several and we've worked closely together with my car to get it optimized. I save some cash by doing a few things myself and selling my interior parts. I'll help you with it and I'll help anyone here get their cars more in line with what a GTB car should be. But, I DO NOT want to be driving a pig around the track and I don't think guys with more power than my car should have to either. Heck Dell, come to roebling this Friday and I'll let you take my car for a spin. You'll see what I mean.

LVDell

Actually my GT3 is NOT a 'nother animal. Same horsepower as Gilberts car and several hundred pounds heavier and nothing that would have kept me from running GTB if that car hat a wet pumper 3.8 x51. Maybe Gilbert will let me take his around VIR and I can compare lap times for lap times. I am pretty sure I could get his car at or below my best at VIR.

So yes, that is an apples to apples comparison.

Anyway, back to the point. You are trying to make your car a cup and that is NOT what the car is. If you want a cup then run GTC. If you want to be able to make the car run as perfect as it can then it needs to run GT. If you want to run GTB, then there has to be a handicap imposed for those with the better motor packages. You have one of those.

You don't think that another 100# off stock class for GTB is enough? My model suggest roughly 100# lower than the stock class cars......and those cars are VERY similar to yours without a gutted interior.

Maybe the suggestion of getting rid of the 3.4 996 and then allowing the rest of the cars to be a bit lighter (in my model) is the best???

And while I would love to answer y´s to both (like you did ), you can't have both. If you want GTB to be a class that picks up steam and ALLOWS for competition with "like" cars, then you have to put hp and weight on an inverse relationship and find you happy spot. Want more hp? Give back some weight. Want less weight? Give back some hp.

And please, let's not get into discussions about every body's weight. I'm still hanging onto a little holiday weight I would prefer not to discuss

Once again, great input Rog! Let's keep the debate going. I am sure at some point there will be a great compromise that is agreed upon by all and makes the class a great one. Right now it's not.

ps. If classes didn't start this weekend, then I would definitely take you up on the offer to come take the car for a spin.

TraqGear

Dell. I see no one else comparing their cars to a GT3. If you want a comparison with a GT3, then it would be 996 GT3 vs 996 and 997 GT3 vs 997. Doesn't your car have a better tranny and other goodies not on a stock 996? Far from apples to apples. The ONLY thing your car has similar to the 997 X51 is power.

Not trying to make my car a cup. Making my car handle similar to a cup. If I wanted a cup, I would buy a cup. What exactly is wrong with wanting good handling cars?

You quoted 996 3.6 at 2950 and x51 at 3050. Stock class is 3060. Not quite the 100# spread you are talking about.

Just drive down and take a spin. Won't take much of your time. It will change your opinion about weight in a car...especially the 996 body style. Your drive home will be this...

Just to be fair, I should be lobbying for more weight. If I lost weight I would still be above 210. You have to feel the difference that a 100 pound loss makes for the car. Answer this question....why exactly would you want to drive heavier cars? Doesn't seem like the carrot for a guy to build a car or want to compete in this class.

LVDell

Roger, stock for stock, of course the 6GT3 will be better than the 997Sx51. However, Gilberts car is NOT stock. The major difference between the cars is the tranny. But that is from a longevity standpoint. So yes, this is a very close apple to apple comparo. Regardless, they won't compete so no use going on about it.

Back to the topic at hand.......

By the way, where does the x51 slot? I thought the x51 would move it up a class? I don't see it on the listing of classes (IIRC it makes it move from stock to prepared so your x51 996 competes now with the 996GT3! wanna talk about apples again ). The stock 996 3.6 is in I at 3060 so yes I agree with you that there should be a lower weight (got them mixed up...my apologies) BUT the PROBLEM is you are trying include ALL 996/7 cars. Like I already said, maybe drop the 3.4 from the mix and moving everybody down?

The weight issue thing is overrated. Sure, lighter is better but I have already said that with hp equal to Gilbert I was running at ~3220 with driver and did just fine. Chasis is just a 996 C4 tub and the parts are the suspension bits are the same parts y'all are putting on the GTB cars.

The place I would like to drive your car is CMP. Minimal risk on track and a track I know well and have posted times in both the GT3 and the RSA. Then I could compare them

ps. regarding my times at CMP. My car posted those times in J stock trim so to compare my car to Gilberts (his would be J prepared) is exactly an apples to apples comparison except he is running lighter than class allows! We would run the SAME class in stock/prepared and we turned the SAME times at CMP yet I had 300#+ on you guys.