Brian P

I completely agree with you, which is why I think we should get the data and publish it and let somebody with too much time on their hands to put together some algorithms that try to equalize the cars.

For an example of what can be done with published data and a bit of free time, take a look at http://www.rennpoints.com. This is a prototype of what a season points championship could look like for PCA. It also has cool things like class records and lap time predictions for the upcoming races.

hdemas

Larry: I am in complete agreement on the 3.4 L 996 versus the air cooled cars as well. A well prepared 996 is goes more like a cup car, and with a wider track, longer wheelbase, better aero, more modern suspension and water-cooled horses, it has huge advantages over the air-cooled cars.

I think we are in agreement here. The ditching carpets and allowing weights to be adjusted for real power to balance the cars would do about 80% of what is needed. Then there are other things such as those that Larry mentioned in his original post:
- allowing cars in "stock" to use a chip--chips are so common and make such a small difference in newer normally aspirated cars that it makes sense
- allowing camber plates in "stock"--they cost a lot less than the tire wear you will get otherwise
- keep remote-reservoir shocks in "prepared"

Actually, it is more complicated as "stock" really shouldn't allow race springs if the idea is that the cars are driveable to the track.

To me the stock rules, if they are to be made to function correctly, would require the rules to be tailored individually for each car and each class that it gets put in (both stock and prepared). As Brian said, this would take somebody with too much time on their hands. That is indeed somewhat the case, but it is not really an unrealistic objective and could be done with all the data PCA has from years of racing in the stock classes. It could then get adjusted each year and within a few years it would probably work really well. Given that we are talking about club racing and not professional racing, it would only have to be close for it to work quite well.

Because the stock/prepared classes aren't being adjusted properly, people are looking to other ways to get classes of cars that are relatively equal and competitive...Boxster spec, 911 spec, 996 spec, Cayman spec, etc. If the PCA stock/prepared classes were updated to keep cars relatively equal in each class, I think there would be a lot less interest in these spec classes. Because the stock/prepared classes aren't getting updated, they are getting in effect replaced with these spec rules through various grassroots efforts.

Harry

BrandonH

Scanning this thread makes me think once again that motorsports can be divided into two kinds of racers: 'Owners,' and 'drivers.' The drivers want a spec series. The owners want formula libre.

The drivers yearn for a level playing field where they can measure their skill against the next guy.
The owners love the mechanical, strategic, logistical battles where they can know they've beaten most of the field before the racecar has left the trailer.

If you are in the 'driver' camp, sell your Porsche and get in a well governed spec series (easy to find; most of racing is converging on spec racing, from F1 down to SM, passing through all of US oval racing enroute)

If you are in the 'owner' camp, you're in luck: PCA club racing GT classes must be one of the last sanctioned 'open' classes on the planet where you can build the most outrageous fire-breather your balance sheet will permit.

Of course all of racing embodies various elements of both halves. Personally I think there was a purity to the original PCA intent: get Porsche Marque aficianados together for a good time out on the track.

Does anyone else feel it is amazing that no matter how many different racing series exist (there must be 1,000), everyone in each series seems perpetually dissatisfied!

M758

Of course. That will always be the case. Being involved with builing 944 spec for the last 7 years I can say that we have had drivers come and go. However the first goal is to sell the drivers on the formula we present. Sell them that formula is good and drivers will flock to it. Now when selling them you need to be honset and straight forward. You must realize that some drivers will never be happy with a certain formula. There will be those that want it tighter and other that want it looser. So to stick your ground and move on. That is why yo need to have different formulas as well as different classes. PCA's basic concept is sound with two 3 divisions. 1) limited mods, 2) spec classes, 3) free for all classes with high level classing. Each of those classes should appeal to a certain type of driver. Now within each division there needs to be some breakout of classing and no break out will be perfect. The key however is to get back to the fundementals of WHY a division exists.

PCA stock was based on the concept of driving a street car to the track and driving home. Well I just don't know if that concept is sound. Maybe it is, but rules creep makes it hard especially if there is such a gap between racing "street cars" and the techinal free for all of GT. If PCA wants to keep a "street driven" race car idea then the rules should be clamped down to allow for that. Then some greater allowance shoudl be make for lighly prepped race cars where they run with nice suspension, stock engine power, and modest weight reductions interior removal with classing weights adjusted to create some parity between the cars in each class. I think there is room in PCA for that, but if PCA stock = street driven race cars it will aways create too much gap between that and all out GT machines.

ninjabones

I strongly support the movement to re-establish the 993 as a viable racing platform in PCA. There are more and more 993s coming on the market recently at reasonable prices for potential donor vehicles. They can be modified relatively easily to become reliable race cars (as can be verified by the number of these cars found at any PCA DE). Unfortunately, the common perception is that the 993 is too heavily handicapped in PCA to make it a viable platform in G.

I understand that most drivers need to add tons of ballast to meet minimum weight requirements (3214 lbs for '96-'98 and 3170 for '95) and are strongly handicapped against the lighter and similarly powered 964s (2910 lbs) in class. It is common knowledge that the 964, with simple and allowed modifications (headers, cat-bypass) can achieve comparable HP numbers to similarly equipped 993s; yet, the 993 carries a whopping 304 lb penalty (260 lbs for the '95 MY). This is ludicrous. PCA should drop minimum weight for 993s by 200 lbs (3014 for '96-'98 and 2970 for '95 non v-ram cars). This would still allow for some handicapping for the 993's somewhat better rear suspension, as well as compensate for the '95 MY lack of v-ram.

Mark in Baltimore

Glen, if you send in a proposal, would you mind emailing it to me? I'd be happy to back up a proposed weight drop for the 993.

hdemas

Glen:

I completely agree with everything you said. Mark and I have talked about this before. I would also send in a proposal. When I was discussing the rules before, I was trying to focus on the larger issues with the stock classes and not get into the weight issue with the 993 that I find very frustrating personally with my 993 in H prepared. There are other cars that have been inappropriately classed that I think should be addressed, though the case of the 993 which you so succinctly described is truly Exhibit A to how the club racing rules have gone wrong.

Harry

jscott82

Already sent that one..... everyone please pile on....
also sent camber plate (did that really need to be said?) and gt uprights.....

ninjabones

I copied my post directly to an email to the rule change committee... so please keep piling it on.

hdemas

jscott82...agree with you on the other two things as well. The GT2/EVO/RS uprights haven't been mentioned in this post before but should be allowed for the 993s (and arguably should be allowed for the 964s as well). The earlier cars had other ways of dealing with the changes to the front suspension geometry when you lower the car to race-car ride height, but in the 993s (and 964s) the GT2/EVO/RS uprights is the only way to restore proper geometry and get rid of the bump steer that will result otherwise.

At a minimum they should be allowed in prepared since they are less expensive of a change than, say, ring and pinion, LSD and adjustable shocks. Since cars in stock class also use race springs and run low ride heights as well, though (since stock isn't really "stock" anyway...none of the cars is driven to the track), it makes sense there as well the way the rules currently are.

When I was talking about how the rules need to be tailored more specifically to individual models, this is one of those modifications that falls into this category as it is specific to 964s and 993s.

Harry

Brian P

This certainly isn't true. I've seen a few cars that were driven to the track and by guys that do very well within their class. If not for missing airbags and a non-functioning horn, (and the fact that I like to camp at the track in my truck), I could drive my car to the track.

Astroman

... with a helmet on.

Brian P

I don't think a cage would make you fail inspection. Granted, it wouldn't be the best idea in the world to drive around on the street with a cage, but it could be done. Also, my cage is bolt-in, so if I needed to, I could have someone else bring the cage up to the track, and I could put it in there.

Larry Herman

Brian, you are proving my point about Club racing. You want to have the rules accomodate the couple of people who drive their cars to the race instead of the vast majority who trailer. Same with the rules and the classes. It should favor the majority.

Brian P

No offense Larry, but you really don't know what I want and what I don't want. All I have said is that I have a car that could still be useable on the street. I do, however, think it's a really slippery slope when people start making the argument that XYZ rule should be allowed since most cars are no longer street cars.

If it were up to me, I'd allow carpeting to be removed. I'd allow camber plates. I'd allow passenger seats to be removed. And, even with these changes, I'd still have a car that is useable on the street.