Are PASM equipped cars allowed to run in SS "Street Sto

[UKAYMAN]

That said, until recently, it was a 'Please Save Me' button, now it provides a better suspension to start with, so if you can completely turn it off AND have the better suspension, the rules may need to be looked at.

I think there may be some confusion now with what I originally asked. I'm asking if PASM (Porsche Active Suspension Management) which is a factory order option on all 987 models, is allowed in Street Stock as a no points factory modification. It is effectively a different suspension set up with stiffer, lower springs (enabling more front camber too I suspect) and firmer dampers which can be switched from normal (soft ride) to sport (firmer ride).

PSM which is Porsche Stability Management is standard on all 987 models. They are two different things.

The reason I ask the PASM question is, is if I were modify my suspension in any way I would have to move in MS from MSS. With PASM as it stands now, you can have a modified suspenion set up and stay in MSS with no penality of points. Porsche says PASM is a performance enhancement, and certainly people who have used it, say it is.

So, if this factory order option enhances performance, then isn't it considered a modification which is now no longer makes the car a base model, as per the definition of stock in the rules?

[CSROCKT]

Hassan ,


This is my take on PASM. But first here are a few excerpts from some studies and descriptions’ I found.

“The Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM) system is available as an optional extra. The system is capable of lowering the body by ten millimeters, and automatically adapts the shock-absorber system to each particular driving situation. The driver can choose between the “normal” and “sport” programs by pressing a button on the center console.”

“As a third transmission variant, a six-speed manual transmission, available in conjunction with the Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM) system, is optional. The PASM system automatically adapts the shock-absorber system to the particular driving situation, and allows the driver to choose between "Normal" and "Sport" programs by pressing a button on the center console.”

“With the Porsche Stability Management (PSM) system fitted as standard, the chassis makes an impressive impact in terms of driving dynamics and active safety. The Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM) system is available as an optional extra. The system is capable of lowering the body by ten millimeters, and automatically adapts the shock-absorber system to each particular driving situation. The driver can choose between the “normal” and “sport” programs by pressing a button on the center console.”

“Our test car was equipped with the optional PASM adaptive shock-absorber system, which greatly increases the car's versatility by buttoning up the suspension for high-speed work, then softening appreciably for the highway commute.”

“Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM) allows the driver to select either the still-dynamic-but-slightly-more-cushy Normal mode or the I’m-going-to-thrash-this-road Sports mode”

“the optional Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM) which allows the driver to select two suspension setups. According to Porsche, PASM Normal offers a smoother ride for rough roads than the standard suspension, but automatically firms up when the driver makes aggressive inputs, while PASM Sport activates much firmer damper control for more dynamic handling.”

Note that when they say it is capable of lowering….probably means it doesn’t, at least not that much. The modification it provides to the suspension is not the same/much as it would be if you were to go out and modify it on your own. Also it doesn’t enhance the performance, just the ride. That’s my take on it and why I choose not to have it on my car when I purchased it. Of course that doesn’t mean I’m not looking at a better suspension in the future, it just means that I want it on my terms…..

As I said before this is just my take on it all……

[UKAYMAN]

Haha.. All these takes, so below is Porsche's sales pitch from their site.

PASM:

For the ultimate in comfort and control, both Cayman models can be equipped with Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM). This advanced option continuously adjusts the damping force at all four corners of the car to suit your driving style and changing road conditions.

With PASM installed, the Cayman’s ride height is lowered by 10 mm versus that of its standard steelsprung suspension. The driver can select one of two setup modes—”Sport or Normal”—with the press of a button. Normal offers an ideal mix of performance and comfort, while the Sport setup features a firmer range of settings for even greater performance capabilities.

In either mode, PASM reacts to both changes in the road and your driving style by varying damping force at each wheel.

A series of sensors is used to monitor all movements of the car’s body. The PASM control unit then evaluates this data and modifies the damping force on each of the wheels to reduce pitch and roll for more consistent road-holding.

Should road-surface quality drop below a certain threshold while in Sport mode, PASM immediately shifts to a softer rating within the Sport setup band to restore grip and traction. When road conditions improve, the firmer Sport settings are automatically restored.

PASM is equally responsive to your style of driving. If Normal mode is selected and the car is driven in an assertive manner, PASM will switch to a firmer rating within the Normal setup band. Stiffening the dampers makes the car more stable and more responsive to driver input. In either case, the result is a driving experience that instantly adapts for optimal performance and enjoyment.

[944 boy]

I have 2 buttons. One is PSM that is the traction control, fake lsd and is the killjoy.

I also have a button that has a shock on it. That button turns the PASM on, which adjusts the dampening effect and stiffens the ride. You can turn the PSM off and the PASM on.

I just re-read the Porsche site, PSM works with the ABS to mimic LSD, traction control and keeps the car from spinning.

PASM only adjusts shock dampening.

So PSM keeps you from spinning and also limits the amount you can toss the car around the corner. But if you turn it off you loose pseudo LSD. Standard on all 987/987c.

PASM seems to be only an advantage. But if were going to all the fuss, what about sport chrono? That increases throttle response and increases shock stiffness even more.

I see this going the same way as the M030 debate. If it is deemed OK for SS, then you would have to upgrade to the factory setup. And it would have to be the whole package, anything that is unique to PASM. Anything aftermarket would not be allowed in SS because it might not be the same as the factory setup.

[UKAYMAN]

I understand what you are saying about sports chrono package, but i'm interested solely in understanding if the PASM option is regarded as a performance enhancement, or as a modification to stock set up, just like M030 is considered. I looked at the situation simply like this.

1) Porsche says PASM rides 10mm lower than the standard suspension set up.

2) PASM springs are stiffer than the stock springs.

Based on those two points, I thought to myself, I wonder if PASM is allowed then in SS as the definitions for modifications do not allow this sort of change?

I understand it is a factory fitted option, and you pay your money, and you get the option. I would be extremely disappointed if it didn't make the car easier or nicer to drive on the limit. If it doesn't, why pay the extra for it?

All i'm seeking though, is this clarification. I think everyone has their own opinion on this, and that is great. My opinion is it is fine to run with PASM factory fitted to your car in SS class. The rules committee will clarify this to me one day.. I hope.

I'm not trying to open up a debate about M030 suspension etc etc.

Alrighty, so onto my next question.. Hmm, why is the BRI factor calculated for a base 2.7 Boxster/Cayman, the same as the Boxster S/Cayman S when the S versions have more power, and bigger brakes? hehe

[harnishclan]

These are cool questions and great answers and in large part the reason I enjoy this forum!

My guess is the primary objective is to keep things reasonably competitive and simple at the same time. Otherwise we would have a myriad of points to contend with like sport chrono, S versus base, PASM, 19" or 20" versus 18" or 17" wheels. In the end it would hard for us to keep up with the changes and their respective competitive advantages.

The REAL question is does PCM (navigation) have points? Actually I think the real question is: "Are you having fun?"

[Krokodil]

The issue of how to treat PASM on all cars, not just the Cayman and Boxster, seems to be a hot topic as of late in SDR and by extension OCR. This is an important issue for both the current year, as governed by the Zone 8 rules, and for the future as it is likely to affect our ability to recruit and retain new members.

For full disclosure, I drive a 2007 Cayman S without PASM in class NS (car 142 NS in PCAOCR and 241 LI in POC) and serve as the unofficial Chief of Rules for the OCR AX program.

While I drive a standard car, my position is that PASM cars should not be assessed penalty points nor moved to the S class as such a move is detrimental to the long-term health of the AX program and against the spirit of the SS class (run it like you bought it).

My current interpretation of issue is that current 2008 Zone 8 rules DO NOT assign points for PASM nor do the rules through exclusion prohibit a PASM car from competing in the SS classes. Any desired change to these rules must be submitted through the rules change processes (currently underway) for consideration as an amendment in the 2009 rules. Only then should any change be implemented.

I understand that SDR is considering (or has already put in place) a “decision” to not allow PASM cars in SS. If this is the case this is in conflict with the 2008 Zone 8 rules and is also not consistent with our treatment of PASM cars in OCR. While PASM is an option and may provide some performance advantage it is no less “stock” than any other option on the car (e.g., 19 in wheels, sport exhaust, sport chrono, sport seats, Bose, etc.) so where do we draw the line.

Whether a PASM provides any performance advantage in AX is open to debate. While someone offered evidence that the fastest Caymans at parade all had PASM, this may be coincidental with a more capable driver who is performance oriented seeking out what is believed to be a performance suspension package. As a counter argument, the fastest Caymans in the OCR region do not have PASM (e.g, Chris Grivas is a stone stock standard suspended car, Lou Hudyman, and me). To extend the argument, the fastest Caymans in the POC are also standard suspended. To summarize, correlation does not imply causation.

Additional empirical evidence suggests that while PASM in sport mode makes the car feel faster (less pitch and roll) it may not actually be faster in AX in the hands of most drivers, as a car with more roll usually has more total traction as long as camber is reasonably maintained. I have tested this with several students who insist on using sport and without exception have run slower than with the car in standard mode. While this does not mean that PASM does not provide some benefit in standard mode, as it may, I am not sure it is so substantive that we must so severely penalize a PASM car (SS to S is a big jump).

My biggest fear in moving PASM cars from SS to S is that a new member who just went to the dealer and bought a new 987 or 997 shows up at an AX and finds that they are immediately thrust into a class with much more experienced drivers in cars on R-compound tires with adjustable sway bars, PSS9 coilovers, etc. How likely are they to come back to the next event after just getting spanked by 10 seconds and believing that the only way they can be competitive is to spend thousands of dollars on modifications? Not likely in my opinion.

POC already made a similar change and forced all PASM cars into the Improved class (similar to Stock) which I believe was a mistake. The change caused quite a bit of frustration and anger and forced many regular participants to spend significant money to stay competitive. This may be fine for the POC where most folks are more committed to serious tracking, but I do not think this is what we want for the PCA AX program.

The SDR rules officials may take exception to my position (I hope not), but the current rules do not distinguish between PASM and non-PASM cars so let’s just tighten the nuts behind the wheels and go racing.

Cheers,

[Irksome]

My current interpretation of issue is that current 2008 Zone 8 rules DO NOT assign points for PASM nor do the rules through exclusion prohibit a PASM car from competing in the SS classes.

My interpretation of that is different. The exlusion list for SS includes this line (C.1.d):
Any non-stock suspension improvement (i.e.: shocks, springs, torsion bars, etc)

Non-stock is defined as anything not delivered stock, including all factory options. A specific call-out is made in the examples for the M030 factory option suspension package, which PASM is very similar to.

Based on this, my interpretation is that PASM is illegal in SS for any car model that did not ever deliver PASM in the base model. However, if the car is delivered with PASM always, then PASM is free of points and is not excluded.

I think PASM is an option for all models, not standard, correct? Ie, is it possible to get a Cayman S without PASM? Or a 997S without PASM? If so, for the same reason M030 factory suspension packages are disallowed in SS, PASM would be disallowed in SS. However, if PASM is standard on all Cayman S models, or on at least one model year of the Cayman S, then PASM would be allowed and cost no points.

I don't have PASM, and it isn't even an option on my car. I did want to upgrade my suspension with an M030, but since that is disallowed (I think that changed for 2008?), I have not done so. There are rules proposals for 2009 that talk to this issue.

I'm hoping Tom Tweed or Paul Young will come clarify here... They were both very useful in the discussion regarding Hoosiers...

And as several people above have pointed out, PSM is completely different than PASM. PSM is an excellent traction control system that is typically turned off on the track (but is incredibly valuable for street driving). PSM is not disallowed by any rule, and in most cases is a performance REDUCER.

[kurquhart]

I think PASM is an option for all models, not standard, correct? Ie, is it possible to get a Cayman S without PASM? Or a 997S without PASM? If so, for the same reason M030 factory suspension packages are disallowed in SS, PASM would be disallowed in SS. However, if PASM is standard on all Cayman S models, or on at least one model year of the Cayman S, then PASM would be allowed and cost no points.

All 997S in US (all NA?) have PASM. There is a Sport suspension option in ROW with steel springs, LSD, and more lowering, but that is not available here. At least this is how it was in 2005 model year; it could have changed.

[Irksome]

All 997S in US (all NA?) have PASM. There is a Sport suspension option in ROW with steel springs, LSD, and more lowering, but that is not available here. At least this is how it was in 2005 model year; it could have changed.

In that case, PASM is available for PSS with no points. As long as the 997S was delivered for at least one model year (in the base class) with PASM standard, then any year where it was optional gets to have it as well.

The answer for NSS will depend on the answer to this same question for the Cayman S--Is PASM standard or optional on the Cayman S?

[Krokodil]

My current interpretation of issue is that current 2008 Zone 8 rules DO NOT assign points for PASM nor do the rules through exclusion prohibit a PASM car from competing in the SS classes.

My interpretation of that is different. The exlusion list for SS includes this line (C.1.d):
Any non-stock suspension improvement (i.e.: shocks, springs, torsion bars, etc)

Non-stock is defined as anything not delivered stock, including all factory options. A specific call-out is made in the examples for the M030 factory option suspension package, which PASM is very similar to.

Based on this, my interpretation is that PASM is illegal in SS for any car model that did not ever deliver PASM in the base model. However, if the car is delivered with PASM always, then PASM is free of points and is not excluded.

I think PASM is an option for all models, not standard, correct? Ie, is it possible to get a Cayman S without PASM? Or a 997S without PASM? If so, for the same reason M030 factory suspension packages are disallowed in SS, PASM would be disallowed in SS. However, if PASM is standard on all Cayman S models, or on at least one model year of the Cayman S, then PASM would be allowed and cost no points.

I don't have PASM, and it isn't even an option on my car. I did want to upgrade my suspension with an M030, but since that is disallowed (I think that changed for 2008?), I have not done so. There are rules proposals for 2009 that talk to this issue.

I'm hoping Tom Tweed or Paul Young will come clarify here... They were both very useful in the discussion regarding Hoosiers...

And as several people above have pointed out, PSM is completely different than PASM. PSM is an excellent traction control system that is typically turned off on the track (but is incredibly valuable for street driving). PSM is not disallowed by any rule, and in most cases is a performance REDUCER.

I do not think it is a correct approach to state that all optional items are “non-stock”. This will be impossible to police, especially on the cars of new members. Most of these folks believe (in my opinion correctly), that since they have not made any changes to the car then it must be street stock. I believe that if you state that all options are non-stock then nearly every car entered will be wrongly classified completely defeating the point of the rule.

Even if you limit (in my opinion inconsistently) your argument to suspension components you will still have a significant problem. Are wheels are part of the suspension? I believe so (less/more unsprung weight) and if this is the case then any car with 19 inch OEM or any aftermarket wheels will need to be moved for SS to Stock. This is not sound.

What about aftermarket replacement shock absorbers (e.g., Bilstein HD). Under the current rules these are allowed without penalty because they are allowed by the rule that only excludes externally adjustable shock absorbers. With the proposed interpretation they are “non-stock” suspension components and would be disallowed from SS and expose a contradiction in our rules.

Regarding the argument that PASM is the same as the M030 option: it may be similar, but it is not the same (M030 includes sway bars, etc.). M030 is also specifically called out in the rules this year (it was not last year), so if folks are interested in adding PASM to this category they need to submit the proposal for consideration in the 2009 rules. Changing the rules mid-year is not good practice as it adversely affects a competitor’s ability to run for a season championship, creates uncertainty, and reduces confidence in event organizers. This is again not sound practice.

If we are going to consider an option approved for SS if it is standard on any version of the car then the NSS argument is over, as the Porsche Design Edition 1 (PDE 1) Cayman S is delivered stock (standard) with PASM. With the position forwarded above then this should make it OK for any Cayman S to use PASM in SS. Correct?

I want to come back to my main concern. The SS ranks are mostly made up of newer members in newer cars (certainly not exclusively, but primarily) and these are exactly the folks we want staying with the program or we are going to become the Porsche Vintage AX Club. We need to make it easy and fair (within tolerance) for these folks to competitively run what they bought in an entry level class (SS). Coming down hard on a new 987/997 driver because he/she bought a PASM car is just not friendly. We are a club first, right?

Cheers,

[mrondeau]

In regards to whether or not PASM is a performance advantage. It is. My 2006 Boxster S does not have PASM and I have driven 987's with and without PASM and it provides a definite handling advantage. The Cayman S is a better handling car then the Boxster S anyway. That being said, I can see Duane's point regarding NSS. I don't feel that I am at a disadvantage by not having it and I would not want to discourage novice members from coming out and driving in NSS. Putting them in NS with just PASM could leave them at a major disadvantage unless they changed tires, etc.

This is something for the Zone 8 rules committee to address. IMHO any rule changes should take place at the start of the year and not mid-season.

I believe that all we can do is try to make the playing field (AX track) fairly level. The rules committee does the best it can with the information available at the time they make a decision. I appreciate their hard work and am confidant that the decision they make will be in the best interest of the club.

[Jad]

After having actually read the rules, it is very clear that PASM is NOT allowed in SS. If you read the rules you will see that as well. The SS rules say any option that changes a list of items, shocks being one of the items, are not allowed. Whether this is a performance advantage or not is not really relevant to whether it is currently allowed.

Hope that answers your question. I think this may be a poor rule, but it is the rule.

Does anyone have an opinion on the merits of completely changing SS next year to be a class in which any car purchased from the dealer with factory options would be allowed. Yes, this means X50 package cars run SS, but I think the SS is the least competitive and anyone should be able to buy their car and bring it down to run. The higher classes are more likely to build cheater cars.

[UKAYMAN]

This is something for the Zone 8 rules committee to address. IMHO any rule changes should take place at the start of the year and not mid-season.

Agreed, it should be something if considered to be changed for the start of next season. However, my original question was with the rules and tech committee. I had emailed them just expecting a quick response with a simple yes or no, and that would have been it for me. However, i'm still awaiting a response of the current situation of as it stands today.

To add to this, with what Duane has mentioned, with the likes of the new limited edition models of Boxsters and Caymans coming on sale with standard PASM, it does seem pointless now trying to force this out of "street stock". I do believe it does give some sort of advantage as I have stated previously, but then I am sure I would have ordered my Cayman with it had mine been an ordered model. However my reasoning is more with aesthetics in mind with the cooler looking lower stance it has over the base model.

[Irksome]

I do not think it is a correct approach to state that all optional items are “non-stock”.

I don't state it that way. The Zone 8 rules do.

Even if you limit (in my opinion inconsistently) your argument

I'm not making an argument. I'm reading the rules.

Are wheels are part of the suspension?

I think you would be alone (or nearly?) in defining the suspension (as described at length in the Zone 8 rules) to include the wheels or tires.

What about aftermarket replacement shock absorbers (e.g., Bilstein HD). Under the current rules these are allowed without penalty because they are allowed by the rule that only excludes externally adjustable shock absorbers. With the proposed interpretation they are “non-stock” suspension components and would be disallowed from SS and expose a contradiction in our rules.

The POINT value for shock absorbers is as you mention. However, Street Stock specifically and clearly prohibits any changes to the the base model stock suspension. I wish it didn't, but it does.

Changing the rules mid-year is not good practice as it adversely affects a competitor’s ability to run for a season championship, creates uncertainty, and reduces confidence in event organizers. This is again not sound practice.

I agree completely. However, it appears that perhaps some people have misunderstood the existing rules for 2008. There already are several rules proposals for 2009 that deal with the definition of Street Stock.

If we are going to consider an option approved for SS if it is standard on any version of the car then the NSS argument is over, as the Porsche Design Edition 1 (PDE 1) Cayman S is delivered stock (standard) with PASM. With the position forwarded above then this should make it OK for any Cayman S to use PASM in SS. Correct?

*corrected* Actually, it says 'base model', and a special edition is not a base model. If, for any model year, the Cayman S came with PASM standard, then all Cayman S cars in NSS could have it. But as I (re-)read the rules, this special edition car would be automatically forced to NS. But I defer to a Zone 8 rules body member to confirm. *end correction*

I want to come back to my main concern. The SS ranks are mostly made up of newer members in newer cars (certainly not exclusively, but primarily) and these are exactly the folks we want staying with the program or we are going to become the Porsche Vintage AX Club. We need to make it easy and fair (within tolerance) for these folks to competitively run what they bought in an entry level class (SS). Coming down hard on a new 987/997 driver because he/she bought a PASM car is just not friendly. We are a club first, right?

I agree. There are several 2009 proposals that are intended to fix this stuff, I suggest you go comment on them if the comment period is still open.


I think I'm pretty happy that no car in OSS had PASM as an option.