Call for Zone 8 Rules Change Proposals for 2017

[rshon]

Now that we've got 4 months of 2016 club activities under our belt, it is Rules Proposal Season in Zone 8. If you have been participating in a Zone 8 Autocross, Time Trial, Concours, or Rally, now's your chance to submit rules change proposals for 2017.

The current Zone 8 Rules can be found here:

http://www.zone8.org/events/rules/current.php

The Zone 8 Rules Proposal process can be found here:

http://www.zone8.org/events/rules/proposed.php

It is important to include the following in your proposal:

1) A brief summary of the change you are proposing.
2) A brief excerpt of the existing Zone 8 rule that you are proposing to change.
3) A marked up version of the above excerpt with the new rules language you are proposing.
4) Rationale/supporting data for your proposed change.

Please send your submission to ruleproposals@zone8.org. The deadline for submitting proposals is June 30, 2016.

[rshon]

The first handful of proposals (3 Driving, 1 Concours) have been posted here for review and comment:

http://www.zone8.org/assets/docs/2016/Rules/RuleProposals2017%2005-13-16.pdf

Please send all comments to ruleproposals@zone8.org

[Ryan McClune]

I really don't get the 1st two driving proposals.

1. Sub 240 treadwear rated tire ban in SS: Porsche delivers new cars with sub 240 treadwear tires, as showroom stock. For example, Pirelli P-Zero's are rated at 220. Are we really suggesting that a factory SS car should have to run in a CC class if they show up during their first week of ownership? If anyone is playing in the grey area of SS rules, you should be up in CC and deep down you probably know it.

2. Points penalty for ESC/PSM during timed runs: First, how is this rule realistically enforceable? Secondly, when my PSM system is activated, my times are consistently slower. Not sure how that is a benefit.

[JayG]

I really don't get the 1st two driving proposals.

1. Sub 240 treadwear rated tire ban in SS: Porsche delivers new cars with sub 240 treadwear tires, as showroom stock. For example, Pirelli P-Zero's are rated at 220. Are we really suggesting that a factory SS car should have to run in a CC class if they show up during their first week of ownership? If anyone is playing in the grey area of SS rules, you should be up in CC and deep down you probably know it.

2. Points penalty for ESC/PSM during timed runs: First, how is this rule realistically enforceable? Secondly, when my PSM system is activated, my times are consistently slower. Not sure how that is a benefit.

And Potenza S-02's which is sometimes a factory tire are 140 TW

Me thinks it was someone trying to prevent RE-71's in SS

[ScandinavianFlick]

Agree with Ryan. Additionally, PSM/PTV/etc do not correct for entering a corner too quickly or slowly, nor for driving a poor line, and from what I've seen of launch control, it allows far too much wheelspin and is significantly slower and less consistent than an experienced driver with a clutch pedal and good technique. Not that I have a horse in this race, but I think people overestimate the computers' driving "skills" and would do better to focus on their own driving and not try to legislate their competitors out of contention.

[jbrennen]

If you want to exclude the RE-71R in SS classes, just do that instead of trying to regulate it through TW ratings (which are admittedly easy for a manufacturer to fudge). The RE-71R doesn't come stock on any Porsche, so it won't affect anybody who comes right from the dealer. There's plenty of evidence, not just locally, but all over the web if you look for it, for the idea that the RE-71R is more like a 100 TW tire with regard to performance.

I happen to think that it's okay for the RE-71R to be SS legal, but I'm probably a bit tainted by the fact that I started autocrossing with the SCCA in 2003, when being competitive in Stock class meant buying Hoosiers... Having the RE-71R available seems like a godsend to most of the SCCA folks. In addition, just about everybody who has tried the RE-71R tires loves them; if you want to encourage tire manufacturers to make tires like these -- and I do want that -- then make sure that your autocrossers can buy them so they keep making them, and even improving them!

That being said, and I brought this up last year when we were discussing this -- with the possible exception of GT3/GT4 models, I don't think Porsche really delivers any of their cars with autocross-ready tires. It's not that they're not competitive; it's more an issue of the tires not being able to stand up to the demands of autocross, especially on a somewhat abrasive lot like the one we run on. My factory-delivered tires lasted 4 events (1 SCCA weekend, 1 BMW event, and 2 PCA events). They would have probably failed tech if I had tried to bring them out for a 5th event. My RE-71R tires were faster than the OEM tires and they lasted longer: 6 events, and I mainly switched them out because the season was over.

As much as I'd like to think that it's a noble goal to have cars be competitive for autoX as delivered from the dealer, I don't see it happening -- and it's not because of our rules, but because Porsche delivers tires for the sweet spot of their market. (Competitive autoXers probably make up what, 3% of all Porsche owners at the most?) The only cars delivered in a reasonably decent shape to go autoX are the GT3/GT4, and the proposal to restrict SS to 240 TW or greater would essentially eliminate the GT3 and GT4 from SS. If I owned one of those, I certainly wouldn't put 240 TW tires on it.

On the issue of PSM and whether it's a competitive advantage -- I'm sorry that Ryan and Andrew haven't had the chance to drive a really good modern PSM implementation. I generally run at least one run at most events with PSM off -- and usually more than that -- and generally find that turning PSM off actually costs me about 0.5 to 1.0 seconds per run compared to driving with it on. The issue is that with PSM on, I can drive at 10/10ths and rely on the PSM to keep me from getting into any sort of nasty trouble -- when it does kick in, I'm usually pretty thankful that it did. With PSM off, I'm driving more at 9/10ths, because even though I can correct a loss of grip, it probably takes me at least half a second to react and correct it -- with PSM on, by half a second, the problem already got solved.

For me, the biggest issue with a point penalty for PSM as proposed is that it will be practically impossible to enforce a penalty for using it. If the Zone wants to change the base point value for modern Porsches to reflect the better PSM implementation, that might work.

As to Launch Control, I've taken both my Cayman GTS with launch control and my Evo 8 with a race clutch to the RaceLegal drag races at the stadium. My 60 foot time with the launch control Porsche was 2.192 seconds. My 60 foot time with the Evo 8, with no launch control, no traction control, everything manual, was 1.773 seconds. That's an eternity in drag racing -- 4/10ths of a second. Launch control is nice -- but it's not some sort of black magic that finds traction out of nowhere...

[ttweed]

The silly season has begun. Luckily, the rules committee and region presidents have a fairly good filter in place to evaluate the usefulness and fairness of proposals, so I will refrain from commenting on the current submissions. Instead, I would like to concentrate on the really serious issue confronting the AX series by submitting a new proposal:

"In order to level competition within the region, anyone with the initials of E.K. must have a 3-second penalty added to any and all runs."

That should fix it.

TT

[mrondeau]

The silly season has begun. Luckily, the rules committee and region presidents have a fairly good filter in place to evaluate the usefulness and fairness of proposals, so I will refrain from commenting on the current submissions. Instead, I would like to concentrate on the really serious issue confronting the AX series by submitting a new proposal:

"In order to level competition within the region, anyone with the initials of E.K. must have a 3-second penalty added to any and all runs."

That should fix it.

TT

Are you sure that's enough?

[jbrennen]

Anybody with the initials of E.K. must run with this handicap...

[rshon]

Three new Driving Event Proposals have been submitted. See the updated doc:

http://www.zone8.org/assets/docs/2016/Rules/RuleProposals2017%2005-25-16.pdf

Please send all comments to ruleproposals@zone8.org

[mrondeau]

Oh look, the RE71R now has it's own rule, much like Hoosier's have in the past. Can't wait to see how this plays out. Of course, there are other 200 TW tires that are close to this grip level and more will follow. BTW, is there any truth to the rumor that this is being called the "Rondeau Rule".

[jbrennen]

Oh look, the RE71R now has it's own rule, much like Hoosier's have in the past. Can't wait to see how this plays out. Of course, there are other 200 TW tires that are close to this grip level and more will follow. BTW, is there any truth to the rumor that this is being called the "Rondeau Rule".

I don't think the RE71R rule would have much impact. An RE71R driver could go 10mm narrower all around and keep the same point total. If you think RE71R tires *need* to be wide, just look at what E.K. has been doing with a 205F/225R setup. (I would switch from 245F/275R to 235F/265R and I probably wouldn't even notice the difference.)

I do agree that more tire models will follow.

The SCCA started this ball rolling a few years ago when they switched Stock class to Street class, with their tire rule changing from "DOT tires" (which included Hoosiers) to "200+ TW tires"... However, if that rule change brought us the RE-71R, I have no complaints at all -- it's a wonderful tire for autocross that has probably 95% of the performance of a Hoosier while still being a reasonable street tire.

[Andrew Raines]

SS vs. CC classes
I've heard the reason that we have the SS classes is so someone can drive from the dealership to the AX and can compete without knowing the rules. I would suggest, now that we require everyone to use the car classification system, that the SS classes are additional rules overhead that are no longer needed. I would like to hear others views on this. I have been thinking about this for a while but have limited historical reference, other than "too hard for new drivers to calculate points." That's no longer an issue. Are there other reasons? We want more classes / awards? That can be accomplished a different way such as number of events for inexperienced drivers. I'm thinking out loud and would be curious for other perspectives.

Regulating Specific Tires
Where does it end?

Andrew

[Gary Burch]

As for the RE71's, just buy a set next time...
SS classes, make it concours on the track, points for q-tips
Less classes would make awards ceremony shorter, not a bad thing...

[Cajundaddy]

We certainly tried Andrew.

Five years ago there were about 80 different car classes so everyone could effectively drive in their very own class with no competition at all. Guaranteed trophies all around but not a very competitive sport. Part of the rules re-structure goals were to greatly reduce the number of classes and bring back meaningful competition between cars with similar performance. 120 drivers into 16 CC classes meant 8-10 cars in each class and the spirit of competition would be restored. Alas this was shot down by widespread howling from the membership who apparently preferred as many different car classes as possible. And so it goes...

We sometimes get chided by other car clubs as being the wine and cheese club, not really serious about motorsport. A few of these rules proposals tend to reinforce this image. The rules committee is in place specifically to serve the membership so make your voice be heard.

Personally I think the RE71r tire is marvelous and wish everyone was using them. Excellent grip, rain worthy, and they hold up well to the rigors of both AX and TT motorsport. All of this at a very low cost to run per season. The day we penalize them out of use will be a sad day for PCA.

... A Rondeau rule... I like it!