2014 PCA Rule Change Proposals for comment posted
08-19-2013, 01:58 PM
#2
Rennlist Member
WTF is up with the RSA weight and class change proposal???
Add 200 lbs...I weigh 230 and currently have 80-100 ballast lbs to make weight for enduros.
I have a full size batt,pass door with power window, factory spare installed.
Lets screw up F,G,H classes cause a couple guys are bitching they can't podium if a Cayman shows up?
Has anyone actually bothered to look at what car is leading the H class national championship.... RS America .
Caymans aren't the problem in H.
Alowing PCCB hybrid brake set ups in stock class, not mentioned though.
You already stick my *** in with GT car and cup car run groups... just what I need is 200lbs added to my car.
Last edited by flatsics; 08-19-2013 at 03:31 PM. Reason: So that maybe my entire car won't be disassembled at Road America;-)
08-19-2013, 02:13 PM
#3
Rennlist Member
Almost fell out of my chair when I read a 200 lb increase for RSAs. 2,760 (now 2,910) is like the remote reservoir shocks. Probably shouldn't have happened, but did a long time ago and too late to put that genie back in the bottle.
I do think H RSAs are the underdog in H (esp at power tracks) but this isn't the answer and maybe there isn't an answer. Most every class has a car that is better and a car that is worse. As time goes on so will technology and the older cars will be at a disadvantage even w/ similar p/w. This will be more apparent in G and above as the factory isn't producing cars with HP low enough for F and below.
H prepared RSAs can always add 271 lbs and run in prep G.
I do think H RSAs are the underdog in H (esp at power tracks) but this isn't the answer and maybe there isn't an answer. Most every class has a car that is better and a car that is worse. As time goes on so will technology and the older cars will be at a disadvantage even w/ similar p/w. This will be more apparent in G and above as the factory isn't producing cars with HP low enough for F and below.
H prepared RSAs can always add 271 lbs and run in prep G.
08-19-2013, 02:26 PM
#4
Rennlist Member
What's a RSA + 200lbs in G? A 993 without the allowed prepared mods 
I wished I only needed 80-100 lbs of balast in my 993 to make weight
Sorry Jim, I could not resist fanning the fire.
08-19-2013, 03:00 PM
#5
Rennlist Member
993 has bigger brakes.
Can have 4 chanel ABS with ABD option
6 speed transmission(stock gearing is bad and one of the 993's problems)
modern rear suspension design
MAF
96-98 Varioram intake
better flowing heads
08-19-2013, 03:19 PM
#6
Rennlist Member
Almost fell out of my chair when I read a 200 lb increase for RSAs. 2,760 (now 2,910) is like the remote reservoir shocks. Probably shouldn't have happened, but did a long time ago and too late to put that genie back in the bottle.
I do think H RSAs are the underdog in H (esp at power tracks) but this isn't the answer and maybe there isn't an answer. Most every class has a car that is better and a car that is worse. As time goes on so will technology and the older cars will be at a disadvantage even w/ similar p/w. This will be more apparent in G and above as the factory isn't producing cars with HP low enough for F and below.
H prepared RSAs can always add 271 lbs and run in prep G.
I do think H RSAs are the underdog in H (esp at power tracks) but this isn't the answer and maybe there isn't an answer. Most every class has a car that is better and a car that is worse. As time goes on so will technology and the older cars will be at a disadvantage even w/ similar p/w. This will be more apparent in G and above as the factory isn't producing cars with HP low enough for F and below.
H prepared RSAs can always add 271 lbs and run in prep G.
What really ticked me off was the fact that this is even proposed.
Seems the response should have been...
Nobody is forcing you to race in H prepared, change your car to stock G if you don't like H.
Seems like a very specific recollection of what happened nearly 20 years ago when the RSA weight was set, maybe somebody did not agree with it at the time...who knows.
08-19-2013, 03:56 PM
#7
Rennlist Member
Looking at the proposal, it looks like some with H prepared RSAs want to move to G without making the changes that you did. My speculation is that same drivers feel that running against stock RSA in G will also prevent them from getting on podium, if they have to run at C2 weight. As such the proposal is that all RSAs should be banished from G class unless prepared and heavy. I am starting to like this rule.LOL
Trending Topics
08-19-2013, 04:14 PM
#8
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In the pasture.
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What? No passenger seat removal in stock classes? I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you! Seems like people, all too often, get trapped in the pass and become blinded to the present, which is different.
I'm not sure I understand the slider rule. The Motorsport slider is the only unit that could be used for all cars if the rule is adopted? I seriously doubt that unit will fit in older cars. I have to use a slider, otherwise I can't get in and out and still reach the pedals. What gives?
I'm not sure I understand the slider rule. The Motorsport slider is the only unit that could be used for all cars if the rule is adopted? I seriously doubt that unit will fit in older cars. I have to use a slider, otherwise I can't get in and out and still reach the pedals. What gives?
08-19-2013, 05:03 PM
#9
Rennlist Member
I have always thought the 993 is heavy in G and should be reduced, but it should not weigh the same as a G RSA.
993 has bigger brakes.
Can have 4 chanel ABS with ABD option
6 speed transmission(stock gearing is bad and one of the 993's problems)
modern rear suspension design
MAF
96-98 Varioram intake
better flowing heads
993 has bigger brakes.
Can have 4 chanel ABS with ABD option
6 speed transmission(stock gearing is bad and one of the 993's problems)
modern rear suspension design
MAF
96-98 Varioram intake
better flowing heads
Jim, your definitely more level headed than I am
What really ticked me off was the fact that this is even proposed.
Seems the response should have been...
Nobody is forcing you to race in H prepared, change your car to stock G if you don't like H.
Seems like a very specific recollection of what happened nearly 20 years ago when the RSA weight was set, maybe somebody did not agree with it at the time...who knows.
What really ticked me off was the fact that this is even proposed.
Seems the response should have been...
Nobody is forcing you to race in H prepared, change your car to stock G if you don't like H.
Seems like a very specific recollection of what happened nearly 20 years ago when the RSA weight was set, maybe somebody did not agree with it at the time...who knows.
Maybe the H prep RSA is a G.5 with no good home but that shouldn't affect G class RSAs. If something were to happen to improve H RSAs then I would vote to do that in that class...meaning a weight drop of some sort. That still won't help (much) getting passed at the end of a long straight by a new car w/ more power and better aero.
Looking at the proposal, it looks like some with H prepared RSAs want to move to G without making the changes that you did. My speculation is that same drivers feel that running against stock RSA in G will also prevent them from getting on podium, if they have to run at C2 weight. As such the proposal is that all RSAs should be banished from G class unless prepared and heavy. I am starting to like this rule.LOL
It was somewhat easy for me to move back to G since I never go the R&P....still lost a good bit of $ on the other stuff though.
08-19-2013, 06:21 PM
#10
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I wonder why we can't, as a club, at least comment on this rule proposal that has been proposed over and over and over again for at least the last 3 years. I'm terribly vexed.
08-19-2013, 07:15 PM
#13
Rennlist Member
What? No passenger seat removal in stock classes? I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you! Seems like people, all too often, get trapped in the pass and become blinded to the present, which is different.
I'm not sure I understand the slider rule. The Motorsport slider is the only unit that could be used for all cars if the rule is adopted? I seriously doubt that unit will fit in older cars. I have to use a slider, otherwise I can't get in and out and still reach the pedals. What gives?
I'm not sure I understand the slider rule. The Motorsport slider is the only unit that could be used for all cars if the rule is adopted? I seriously doubt that unit will fit in older cars. I have to use a slider, otherwise I can't get in and out and still reach the pedals. What gives?
E Class Boxster to D? I don't care, i'm moving to E anyway.... that or GTS2 in NASA.
Performance effect - 0, have to meet weight
Effect on the 1% that drive their cars to the race - 0, leave it in if you want
Safety effect - BIG. Egress improved, side/rear vision improved
08-19-2013, 07:54 PM
#14
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In the pasture.
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the slider and Boxster proposals:
‐CHANGE SEAT MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS FOR NO SEAT BACK BRACE
The current system is cumbersome to enforce, and assumes that all makers of FIA approved seats also make a
seat mount and a slider. However, most do not make both, and the FIA does not approve mounts or sliders.
The FIA does have a specification for the mounts. And the current rules requires the purchase of a new mount
and slider when a new seat is purchased if the driver wishes to continue to race without a seat back brace.
Only those who use a slider have a need not to use a brace, but where two drivers vary greatly in size, or
where a containment seat and roll cage members make exiting from the driving position very difficult, a slider
can be important. The slider used on Porsche's race cars is robust, and has stood the test of years of
professional racing. No testing is known to be done on any other type of slider to insure it can withstand the
same forces an FIA seat can withstand.
Here is the proposed rule, to take effect in 2015 if approved (so everyone has plenty of time to make a
change).
In order to race without a complying seat back brace or other exception, all the following conditions must
be met:
Page 2 of 6
1) An FIA approved race seat, within six years of its manufacture, and installed in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions.
2) A metal seat mount, with each separate side formed from a single sheet of steel 4mm thick minimum, or
aluminum 5mm thick, commercially available as a race seat mount, and mounted in accordance with the
FIA's specifications and the manufacturer's instructions.
3) If a slider is used, it must be the slider used on the Porsche Cup cars (part number to be added), and the
mount attached to the slider with at least two 8mm bolts.
4) The seat mount, or the slider if used, must be attached to the chassis by at least one 10mm diameter
bolt at each end of the mount or slider. The chassis mount must be modified if not made to take a 10mm
bolt, and in any event must also be reinforced by additional steel welded around the mount so it cannot
flex, and the sheet metal holding the chassis attachment is reinforced to prevent pull through.
STOCK CLASSIFICATIONS
‐Move 2.5 liter E class Boxsters to D. The proponent points to the fact that other cars in E, which do not have
OBDII, are allowed to change chip settings, or otherwise increase their horsepower in ways not available to
the 2.5 liter Boxsters. Those in D might want to look at race results and lap times from events to see if such a
class change would be unfair.
‐CHANGE SEAT MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS FOR NO SEAT BACK BRACE
The current system is cumbersome to enforce, and assumes that all makers of FIA approved seats also make a
seat mount and a slider. However, most do not make both, and the FIA does not approve mounts or sliders.
The FIA does have a specification for the mounts. And the current rules requires the purchase of a new mount
and slider when a new seat is purchased if the driver wishes to continue to race without a seat back brace.
Only those who use a slider have a need not to use a brace, but where two drivers vary greatly in size, or
where a containment seat and roll cage members make exiting from the driving position very difficult, a slider
can be important. The slider used on Porsche's race cars is robust, and has stood the test of years of
professional racing. No testing is known to be done on any other type of slider to insure it can withstand the
same forces an FIA seat can withstand.
Here is the proposed rule, to take effect in 2015 if approved (so everyone has plenty of time to make a
change).
In order to race without a complying seat back brace or other exception, all the following conditions must
be met:
Page 2 of 6
1) An FIA approved race seat, within six years of its manufacture, and installed in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions.
2) A metal seat mount, with each separate side formed from a single sheet of steel 4mm thick minimum, or
aluminum 5mm thick, commercially available as a race seat mount, and mounted in accordance with the
FIA's specifications and the manufacturer's instructions.
3) If a slider is used, it must be the slider used on the Porsche Cup cars (part number to be added), and the
mount attached to the slider with at least two 8mm bolts.
4) The seat mount, or the slider if used, must be attached to the chassis by at least one 10mm diameter
bolt at each end of the mount or slider. The chassis mount must be modified if not made to take a 10mm
bolt, and in any event must also be reinforced by additional steel welded around the mount so it cannot
flex, and the sheet metal holding the chassis attachment is reinforced to prevent pull through.
STOCK CLASSIFICATIONS
‐Move 2.5 liter E class Boxsters to D. The proponent points to the fact that other cars in E, which do not have
OBDII, are allowed to change chip settings, or otherwise increase their horsepower in ways not available to
the 2.5 liter Boxsters. Those in D might want to look at race results and lap times from events to see if such a
class change would be unfair.
08-19-2013, 08:06 PM
#15
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
STOCK CLASSIFICATIONS
‐Move 2.5 liter E class Boxsters to D. The proponent points to the fact that other cars in E, which do not have
OBDII, are allowed to change chip settings, or otherwise increase their horsepower in ways not available to
the 2.5 liter Boxsters. Those in D might want to look at race results and lap times from events to see if such a
class change would be unfair.
‐Move 2.5 liter E class Boxsters to D. The proponent points to the fact that other cars in E, which do not have
OBDII, are allowed to change chip settings, or otherwise increase their horsepower in ways not available to
the 2.5 liter Boxsters. Those in D might want to look at race results and lap times from events to see if such a
class change would be unfair.