2010 Autocross Rule proposals

[crossthreaded]

There are a lot of new rule proposals out there. I'm surprised there are so few comments. Perhaps people would be more interested in a thread discussion than actually submitting a comment? I'm curious what people think...

You can read the proposals here:

http://zone8.pca.org/rules_prop.php

[LUCKY DAVE]

It looks like we have the "tire compound wars", revisited

I favor the current "Here's how many points you get, use them as you see fit" rules. If the points for the various treadwear ratings need to be revised, I'm fine with that, but please don't tell the tuners among us how to use their points.

Too many rules limit intelligent choices, stifle innovation, and penalize tuning prowess. These are fundamental racing skills that should be encouraged, not demonized.

[Michael Dolphin]

Don''t forget that the Zone 8 Committee does not make the rules. We present those proposals for the votes of the Region Presidents after we try to review for clarification and presentation.

Those proposals are from some of your colleagues. Your input counts - put it in the basket for our review.

[Cajundaddy]

Some thoughts:

1. I agree that fire extinguishers in stock classes is outdated and does not improve safety. Modern cars are very fire safe. I am a believer in relative risk. In an on track incident I believe the risk of injury from a "loose cannon" fire extinguisher outweighs the risk of injury from fire that could be doused with a 2.5lb halon. Background: I have been in a rollover collision and a few car fires in a former life. Two car fires were doused with rags, one fire laughed at our application of 2.5lbs ext. and required several ice chests of water to douse. No cars were lost or drivers harmed in the process.

2. I agree that S/S class should be kept pure Porsche with no aftermarket goodies or mods allowed. Wheels, tires, alignment and skill baby.

3. Tire compounds are under-rated in terms of performance. An increase in points is warranted relative to other mods in terms of points. A good set of 50 tires might be worth 5sec on a 90sec course. I can't think of any other 4 pt mods that would come close to this.

4. Should we reconsider the 8 event requirement to participate in a DE? I think in Zone 8 we are losing the purpose of a DE. By PCA definition it is designed to be Driver Education. Teaching novice drivers performance driving in traffic situations should be part of the program. A driver with 8 events is often in the program 2 years before being allowed on the track. Perhaps a Novice run group for drivers with 3-6 events, first session lead/follow, limited 1 zone passing. Currently drivers looking for track experience are forced to drive with clubs outside PCA Zone 8 to get in their first year. This 8 event restriction also hinders participation in PCA Time Trials events. Other clubs have offered entry level track day DE events that fall outside Zone 8 DE rules but they have been done safely and promote the intent of a PCA DE event.

Questions and comments are welcomed.

[galis]

Some thoughts:

4. Should we reconsider the 8 event requirement to participate in a DE? I think in Zone 8 we are losing the purpose of a DE. By PCA definition it is designed to be Driver Education. Teaching novice drivers performance driving in traffic situations should be part of the program. A driver with 8 events is often in the program 2 years before being allowed on the track. Perhaps a Novice run group for drivers with 3-6 events, first session lead/follow, limited 1 zone passing. Currently drivers looking for track experience are forced to drive with clubs outside PCA Zone 8 to get in their first year. This 8 event restriction also hinders participation in PCA Time Trials events. Other clubs have offered entry level track day DE events that fall outside Zone 8 DE rules but they have been done safely and promote the intent of a PCA DE event.

Well said, I certainly don't want to wait 2 years before qualifying for DE/TT, especially after karting with some if the instructors. Obviously the challenge is mixing rookies and pros while maintaining safety and fun for all. I think it boils down to what concessions the experienced drivers are willing to make; I'd have made the trip for an hour (or less) of track time but I would feel funny paying the full reg fee for a partial day and it would be silly to think a rookie could share the track with an experienced driver going for time.

Current Rule and the Problem: AX DE and TT, part VI (TIME TRIAL AND DE ENTRANT PERMIT PROCEDURES) section B (novice qualification); To participate as a Novice in a Time Trial or DE, the entrant shall demonstrate that he/she has competed in at least eight (8) days of PCA Autocross or Drivers School type events, or their equivalent.

This rule prevents new members from participating in DE/TT for a significant period of time. Participation should be based on a safety and skill assessment of the driver; and provisions should be made to enable drivers to reach and demonstrate their qualification.

Proposed Change: Having no DE/TT experience I'm not qualified to pen a change but I'd start with something as follows:

Novice Instruction is for new DE/TT drivers. In order to qualify for Novice Instruction a driver must be endorsed by a driving instructor familiar with the safety and skill of the new driver; such familiarity could come from AX, PDS or Non-PCA event experience. Drivers in the Novice Instruction category should follow all Novice procedures with the added stipulation that they don't participate in "non-instructional" runs. A reduced registration fee may be offered to Novice Instruction drivers.

Novice Instruction drivers will be promoted (signed off) to the Novice class at the discretion of their instructors.

Rationale: A modification of the rule would promote good sportsmanship according to the General rules, section I (Purpose), especially relating to section II (Guiding Principles) of the existing rules, "Encourage attendance at ALL events". The proposed change is flexible enough to accommodate a relatively high, or low percentage of "Novice Instruction" drivers (and more or less non-instructional time) and due to the limited track access time, Novice Instruction drivers won't prevent experienced drivers from making their full speed runs.




Current Rule and the Problem: AX DE TT, section I (Introduction), Part N; [for AX, TT DE] no lap timing of Novice Drivers shall occur.

Proposed Change: remove the stipulation that novice drivers are not timed.

Rationale: I don't understand the purpose of this rule. Driving instructors should be explaining to novice drivers that power slides and spin outs are costly events with regard to time and safety. A timing system will make perfectly clear the impact of missing a corner or two. Presumably the purpose of this rule is to remove incentive for a novice to over drive; but a timing system will demonstrate the value of smooth, controlled laps; and what reasoning is there that a driver who disregards their instructor and over drives will be any safer without a timing system?

---George

[tb911]

I'm really curious where "2 years" came from!

The rules state you must be actively participating in autocross or driver's schools for at least 9 months. In that time you must get 8 days of experience. Between our driving schools and AX events that is more than one day a month available to you, on the average. After 4 days you can run in our regional parking lot DE series. That adds even more opportunity. Add in OCR's events and the other events around the zone and you should have no problem meeting the current requirements. I guess there is the assumption here that if you are willing to drive to the track for a TT, you should be willing to drive farther than to the Q for an AX.

So is the real problem the 9 months minimum? Or what? The thinking behind the current rules is this: AX is where you learn car control. DE/TT is about dealing with traffic. You should know car control before you get to the DE/TT level and have to deal with this. Why 9 months? Because learning doesn't sink in overnight. It takes time for new information to be absorbed and skills to be developed. Does everybody learn at the same rate? Of course not, but a rule per person is out of the question, of course.

One question we always get is: Why in the rest of the world is a DE an entry level event? Simple answer -- they don't autocross much, they have no choice. We do, what is wrong with taking advantage of that to ensure our big track events are safer? Also, their standards of instruction tend to be far more rigorous than ours, as well as their standards for instructors. Implementing similar systems would involve adding much more bureaucracy to (as in increased workload and volunteer time required).

Again, I'm just curious where 2 years comes from. Does 8 days sound like a lifetime? Sounds like when my kids used to complain about having to walk 4 blocks when we refused to drive them. It'll take so longggggg, went the whining....... A brand new driver on January 1st could be participating in our October Time Trial as the July 18 event will be our 8th day this year. With the Aug-Oct AX and driving school schedules, we have another 5 days available before the Oct TT, in case you missed one earlier this year. We have 13 qualifying days within a 10 month period. And that doesn't even include anything in other regions. So again, I'm just curious about this perception of taking forever to get there. Let me put it to you another way -- If you, as an absolute beginner, can only get out to an event every 3 months, should you be on a big track? The rules committee thinks not, as described above.

I'm not saying what is right or wrong, just trying to explain the thinking behind the current rules. As always we welcome the input of the membership and look forward to your comments, proposals and questions.

[kurquhart]

I'm really curious where "2 years" came from!

+1. I participated in my first AX in Jan 06. That Oct I went to my first TT at Spring Mtn. In between, I did several AX, the spring PDS, and two Q DE. Ten months total...

[Cajundaddy]

I'm really curious where "2 years" came from!

+1. I participated in my first AX in Jan 06. That Oct I went to my first TT at Spring Mtn. In between, I did several AX, the spring PDS, and two Q DE. Ten months total...

Easy guys. I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers.
Obviously if you are a member of SDR it is much easier to met the 8 event requirement. You can roll out of bed at 7am and be in the tech line by 7:30. No reason a local SD driver should ever need 2 yrs to get in 8 events. Remember that these rules are for all PCA Zone 8 members and it only makes sense to have rules somewhat consistent with the rest of the country.

I simply believe that a DE should be an entry level event that novice drivers can participate in, In their own run group, with instruction. This is how it is done in most other PCA zones in the country and I believe it is in the spirit of the PCA. I fully understand how the current rules ladder system came about and I am well aware of the vast AX opportunities in SD. Remember that these rules are for all Zone 8 members and not just SD. Many other regions within Zone 8 simply do not have the facilities or organization to carry out such extensive AX schedules so for many PCA Zone 8 members in Riverside, San Gabriel, LA, Santa Barbara, Inland, Grand Prix, and Phoenix a lot of travel will be required just to qualify for track time. And yes, for many outside SD or OC it may take 2 years. Or they can sign up with POC, NASA, or Speed Ventures and hit the track tomorrow. I would rather have them drive with us. Wouldn't you?

[ttweed]

3. Tire compounds are under-rated in terms of performance. An increase in points is warranted relative to other mods in terms of points. A good set of 50 tires might be worth 5sec on a 90sec course. I can't think of any other 4 pt mods that would come close to this.

This seems to come up in some form every year. It has been recognized by everyone for a long time that the penalty for race tires is not equivalent to the resulting decrease in lap times. Yes, tires are the single most important improvement you can make for performance driving. Yes, the tires of today are better than the tires in the day that this rule was created. That doesn't mean that the rule should be changed in order to make all penalties proportional and equivalent. That would be a very difficult proposition under any circumstances, and needless to boot. The fact is that almost everyone who does this sport of performance driving for any length of time replaces their hard, stock tires with either R-compound or increased performance street tires of 140-200 treadwear. If everyone has the mod, it doesn't matter if it is 1 point or 10, the playing field is level. This is why no increase in points for them is necessary, and would actually be detrimental. Too many people have optimized their cars for a class by counting on the same tire points that have been in place for years. To raise the point penalty for tires now would cause people to be bumped into a higher class by a mere 2 points or so, rendering them uncompetitive or forcing them to decontent their car to remain in their intended class. There is something to be said for "rules stability." Without raising the point maximum for every class by 2 points at the same time, increasing the penalty by 2 points for a mod that almost everyone outside of the SS class has already done will cause anyone who has optimized their car by the existing rules to be bumped up in class. This will cause needless grief to solve a non-existent problem.

I would like to hear from the people who feel that they are being treated unfairly because they haven't spent their points on tires and others have. How many are there? What did you choose from the "cafeteria" of possible improvements instead? Please speak up. Shall we also handicap the 140-200 high performance street tires again, too? They certainly are faster than the 300-400 treadwear high-mileage tires. What about the people who want to use those to save money? Shouldn't they have parity? Where does it stop? Do we update the rule each year as tires improve, adding points as lap times drop? Are we going to suggest handicapping by brand again (ref: the evil Hoosier argument)? This proposal may be well-intentioned, but it is impractical to implement completely and fairly, and creates unintended consequences for our class structure. I will be sending in my comments opposing it to the Rules committee.

TT

[Ted Myrus]

Tom Tweed for ....................?

After reading Tom's post, which I find logical and well reasoned, I think he would make a great Board candidate or officer. He's dedicated to the Club, to the sport, and now retired with lots of time. What do you think gang? Draft Tweed.

[ttweed]

Draft Tweed.

Note to self--send comments on rules proposals by direct email to the committee in the future.

TT

[Gary Burch]

[Dan Chambers]

Here we go again.
No body likes the current rules. So people submit changes.
Nobody likes to feel they're being bested by someone else's "interpretation" of the rules. So people argue against rule changes, (or for rule changes).
No body wants the rule to be static when the cars and the technologies (tires, suspensions, chips [and salsa ], exhausts, ad nausium) are constantly changing. So people submit changes for the newer technologies, when the older car owner haven't the new technology advantages. So people argue against (or for) rules changes... again.

Ironically, changes in the rules are allowed, according to the rules.
Maybe we should submit a rule that says there are no rules changes allowed?

Mmm. Mmm. Mmm. What a delema. Reminds me of the dog that chases it's tail.

Don't know about you guys & gals, but I'm just gonna drive..... I think that's what Ferry intended.

Ferry would go.

Dan'o

ps - Good one, Gary.

[Michael Dolphin]

Gee, Dan'o -- reminds me of the good ol' days too....

How much are bragging rights worth?

[Dan Chambers]

How much are bragging rights worth?

2 points. 6 points if you're on Hoosiers.

Dan'o