Streak

Here they are!

http://www.pca.org/Activities/ClubRa...singForms.aspx


Not a fan of the SPB stuff. Not at all. Add cooling OK. Add $$$$$$$ not OK.

jrgordonsenior

You're talking about the 'Mid Year 2012 Rules Changes' I assume. What specifically don't you like?

http://www.pca.org/portals/cr/2012%2...%20Changes.pdf

dougdep

doesnt look like anything really different or earth shattering to me as far as mid year changes. this is interesting for Stock Boxsters: Boxsters may run with NO TOP, with the factory hard top, or with an aftermarket fiberglass hardtop replica secured to the roll cage. If a fiberglass top is used, the rear window may be lexan of stock configuration with no venting.

flatsics

2013 rule change proposals


http://www.pca.org/portals/cr/2013Ru...eProposals.pdf

Streak

^^Thank you. My link kept getting a 404

sbelles

I like that one but why not SPB?

Paul 996

Copy n pasted from the PFD:

PCA Proposed rule changes for SPB in 2013...

SPB

2. Engine. Exhausts free after the heads. Reasoning presented: Improve performance of the car.
Engine. AKA: Headers allowed

D: Power steering coolers are allowed. Reasoning presented: Even with the under drive pulley, with the allowed wide front wheels the power steering system can still overheat. Coolers are relatively low cost, don’t improve performance directly, and racers who have not had an overheating issue won’t be disadvantaged if they don’t do it..

3. Transmission. Limited slip differentials are allowed.. Reasoning presented: This would benefit the car in both cornering and trail braking and minimize abrupt handling changes when an unloaded tire spins or locks. It should also saveon tire wear.

4. Suspension/Wheels/Tires. Revalving of the spec shocks is allowed. (please also comment on alternative:, any shock –or any shock without an external canister – is allowed.) Springs are free. Reasoning presented: Improve the handling and
performance of the car.

Comments may be sent to crrule@pca.org until October 1, 2012.

Edit: The PDF contains an incorrect email address for Club Racing Rules: the one I have always used and get responses from is : CRrules@pca.org

Edit: These are not my proposals or suggestions ie from NASA, this is from the PCA, about the only thing I agree with is cooling/relability improvements. Send your comments to the PCA.ORG email address above.

racing916

I guess they are not going to review the horrible classification system of GT cars based on "their" formula. It may be time to go race somewhere else.

Astroman

Dang it's a little light. Looks like the Rules Committee is not going to consider very much this year.

jrgordonsenior

I don't believe that these few items are the only ones under consideration. I think they're just the specific items they've asked membership for comments on. They should be clearer about that....

jdistefa

Ugh, more money. I totally agree with the LSD and cooling option but why not just leave headers and PSS9s the same. If you want to run different springs and revalve the shocks, fine. This is going to get unnecessarily complicated for a spec class car IMHO.

jdistefa

This is what I sent to crrules@pca.org:



Feedback about the SPB proposed rule changes for 2013:

1) I totally agree with the LSD from the standpoint of both handling/performance and rear tire wear. Will the LSD brand of choice be free?

2) Any cooling options should be allowed, especially for those that run in hotter climates and/or the larger front tire option. I also strongly recommend you allow an aftermarket upgrade to the stock radiators. Note I don't have any financial interest in the company but GSR has an excellent all aluminum replacement radiator that is left-right exchangable, and safer from the standpoint of catastrophic fluid loss. The increased cooling efficiency can negate the need to add a central Boxster S radiator for the SAME PRICE. This is as much as safety issue as anything else. Please see here: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/6/prweb9648924.htm

3) Speaking of safety, lockout plates should be allowed for the inboard mounts of both the rear lower control arms and toe arms. The stock eccentrics can and do slip under heavy load. This is a safety and not performance issue. Tarett makes a lockout plate.

4) Keep the PSS9s as the spec shocks but allow revalving re. spring rates. Let's not get too complicated with shock/spring combinations.

5) Leave the headers stock. Why have people spend more money here? If we're all the same, we're all the same.

Gary R.

No dog in the fight but allowing headers, allowing shock changes, allowing LSD's just turns it from a Spec class to an E car without Hoosiers...

bsztanko

I agree, dumb fuking ideas. Leave it alone. If you want those changes go run it in E stock.

Horus2000

+1
As someone building a spec car now (996) these kind of proposed rule changes scares me. I'm investing a lot of $ into building the best spec car I can under the existing rules. The concept of those rules changing significantly from year to year is frightening.

Caveat being that these are just "propsed" rules, not passed.