Rule changes for 2011

[Greg Phillips]

I think the GGR system makes a lot of sense.

If we adopt it we will have to spend a lot to time figuring out what modifications to include. Seems to me that GGR gets a little too detailed. I mean do we want to penalize for things like plastic suspension bushings? Here are some examples.

7b. Car has non-stock brake calipers 10
>>I have OPTIONAL "S" calipers, 10 points?

13. Car has smaller battery or battery removed 5
>> One battery instead of the two on an older car?

15. Car has non-stock glazing 10
>> 10 points for plexiglass?

16. Car has window lift mechanism removed 5
>> Leather straps instead of cranks?

17c. Car has one or more racing style seats. 10
>> Racing seats, I guess they do make me faster.

18b.Car has a complete interior - no untrimmed surfaces 5
>> If I take out the carpet on the drivers side floor is that 10 points?

19b. Car has flared fenders added 10
>> I'm not sure flairs make you faster.

20.Car has non-stock bumpers 20

21.Car has non-stock front hood 5

22. Car has non-stock rear hood. 5

23.Car has non-stock doors 20

26.Car has one or more windshield wipers removed 0

27.Car has ancillary systems modified or removed 5

30b.Car has a non-stock front spoiler 10

43.Air cleaner or housing, or air inlet ducting is not stock.5

44.Complete induction system has been replaced with alternate system 15

Can the members of SDR agree to this?

At what level would one have to wear a fire suit at a TT? or DE?

Yes I think you do need to use this level of detail. Most of these are either ways to lose weight or make more power. Also if you notice, some of these changes like removing windshield wipers are 0 points.
The reason for detail on the interior, battery, plexiglass windows etc is because there are no points for weight per se. Instead you get points for making changes that reduce your weight. These changes are easy to check at tech or by competitors, as opposed to having to have a car weighed to determine how many points are needed.
The system we now use for weight is probably one of the more contentious issues. What is the base weight? How much weight do I get to take off for the spare and tools etc? What is it's actual present weight?
It does not matter now, you have fiberglass doors, take points. remove interior, take points, put in lighter race seats, take points.
If you also check, you might notice that certain modifications take point for TT but are zero(or less) points for AX like brakes or aerodynamic devices
Flared fenders might not make you faster, but the larger tires you put under them likely will.
The fire suit issue will also need to be revisited, I have not looked to see if Zone 7 requires a driving suit in some classes or not. The may only require them in their GT cars with over 650 modification points.
Greg

[JERRY B]

Just to be fair Mark I could put 50 treadwear tires on the black car and run with you in your class.

[gocart]

I'd be O.K. with their system. I just am just anticipating a lot of arguing over some of the items that are counted for points.

Let's give it a try. Maybe one of the AXs coming up we could test the system.

[Cajundaddy]

I like the idea of more cars to compete with for sure...assuming of course that the cars are really equal in their ability and thus making it about the driver. When I did a quick point tally I see that my 993C4S (PSS10's, 280tw tires, M030 sways) is in AX/TT 9 which puts me up against several stock Cayman S cars with treadwear as low as 50. I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge that a stock Cayman S (or non-s boxter or cayman for that matter) with equal tires and driver as a 993 will give a whoopin to a 993 around an AX course. Then you add in a 230tw point tire allowance favoring the Cayman S and I think it's pretty clear that the GGR system would not allow 993's to be competative given equal drivers.

I spent a bit of time over a year ago working with Tom Brown to adjust the current Zone 8 classification rules to get a stock 993C4S or 2S out of the "prepared" class because I; (1) didn't want to be forced to install race seats and harnesses to be able to attend a DE or TT, and (2) found that it was a joke for a stock widebody 993 to be classed with narrow bodied 993/Cayman/boxters with r-compounds/cages/seats/harnesses/suspension mods/etc....that's just not fun if you are in the mood to compete.

There are a lot of people in this club far more knowledgeable than I am about this stuff so I only offer my comments as one example with the GGR system that appears out of balance. From my seat at least, I think the Zone 8 proposal is a continued positive progression towards a better classing system.

And, I'll go ahead and say it before anyone else does...I know, if I was a better driver I wouldn't have to worry about the Cayman S's

Hey Adam,
I believe you whooped all the Cay S and most of the Boxsters last weekend at Fairplex so your car must be somewhat competitive . SDR AX BRI also rates all three classes the same (MS, NS, OS). The raw stats look pretty close as well: http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ ... ra_4S.html

I think the GGR points system may have some merit.

[LUCKY DAVE]

I'm tired of being the only car in my class. As it stands we have so many classes it's ridiculous.
"What? No separate class for YELLOW Boxters? We need another class......"
Bring it on.

[AGill]

[/quote]

Hey Adam,
I believe you whooped all the Cay S and most of the Boxsters last weekend at Fairplex so your car must be somewhat competitive . SDR AX BRI also rates all three classes the same (MS, NS, OS). The raw stats look pretty close as well: http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ ... ra_4S.html

I think the GGR points system may have some merit.[/quote]

Hey Dave,

I stopped by your car to meet you on Sunday but missed you! I wish I would have whooped them all but based on the times below (best lap is the last one listed) it looks like I was bested by 2-4 seconds by those mid-engine warriors. Now, I have no idea where everyone falls below as far as driver ability so who really knows how to compare these numbers.

Cool website by the way! On a big track, I think the playing field is much closer between a 993 and Cayman S but at an AX not so much...those slow corners in low rpm's of a very TALL 2nd gear are endless I guess my biggest concern is the fact that with the GGR system the Cayman S I could be going up against would be able to use such sticky tires (50tw) where I could only use 200tw at the most...tires are one of the biggest time-shedders out there.

OCR MSS 56 Chodos, Jeff 2000 Boxter S 135.285 132.979 132.109 132.109
OCR MS 631 Power, Dennis 2000 Boxster S 127.208 131.277 125.105 125.105
OCR MS 986 Ang, Roger 2002 Boxter S 127.408 162.715 131.198 127.408
LAR NSS 217 Nelson, Mark 2009 Box S 127.734 128.028 128.657 127.734
RIV NSS 392 Carbajal, Rene 2006 Boxter S 138.285 134.054 133.959 133.959
GPX NSS 38 Goldsmith, Marty 2006 Cayman S 147.577 145.593 142.983 142.983
GPX NSS 25 Bloom, Carl 2006 Cayman S 149.775 147.005 149.750 147.005
RIV NS 111 Soler, John 2007 Cayman S 136.597 135.680 134.146 134.146
GPX OSS 7 Chaparro, Arturo 2001 911 996 143.675 144.662 145.470 143.675
SDR OS 115 Gill, Adam 1997 911 C4S 129.654 130.169 130.238 129.654

I like the idea of running a test run with these classifications at one of the AX's...maybe in addition to our current system so we can compare how things shake out with our current system and the GGR system. I do think it has merit and is obviously very thorough.

[Greg Phillips]

Hey Adam,
I believe you whooped all the Cay S and most of the Boxsters last weekend at Fairplex so your car must be somewhat competitive . SDR AX BRI also rates all three classes the same (MS, NS, OS). The raw stats look pretty close as well: http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ ... ra_4S.html

I think the GGR points system may have some merit.[/quote]

Hey Dave,

I stopped by your car to meet you on Sunday but missed you! I wish I would have whooped them all but based on the times below (best lap is the last one listed) it looks like I was bested by 2-4 seconds by those mid-engine warriors. Now, I have no idea where everyone falls below as far as driver ability so who really knows how to compare these numbers.

Cool website by the way! On a big track, I think the playing field is much closer between a 993 and Cayman S but at an AX not so much...those slow corners in low rpm's of a very TALL 2nd gear are endless I guess my biggest concern is the fact that with the GGR system the Cayman S I could be going up against would be able to use such sticky tires (50tw) where I could only use 200tw at the most...tires are one of the biggest time-shedders out there.

I like the idea of running a test run with these classifications at one of the AX's...maybe in addition to our current system so we can compare how things shake out with our current system and the GGR system. I do think it has merit and is obviously very thorough.[/quote]
Not sure why you think you would only have 200 treadwear tires.
The 993 C4S has a base of 370 for AX & TT, the lowest Cayman is 350 for TT and 375 for AX( note they recognize the AX advantage in the base points). You should each have similar points available to enhance performance.
Their system has been tested for 4 years using the same types of Porsches that we drive
Greg


987 Cayman 2009- 2900 380 405AX
987 Cayman 2007-08 2687 350 375
987 Cayman S 2009- 3387 450 475
987 Cayman S 2006-208 3386 420 445
993 C2 1993-1998 3600 360 360
993 C2S 1997-1998 3600 390 390
993 C4 1993-1998 3600 350 350
993 C4S 1996-1998 3600 370 370

[Gary Burch]

I'm tired of being the only car in my class. As it stands we have so many classes it's ridiculous.
"What? No separate class for YELLOW Boxters? We need another class......"
Bring it on.

We could all do this as an unofficial exercise. Figure your points and class, tape it on your car, and we will see how it works.

[Cajundaddy]

I think AX is roughly 70% talent, 20% tire grip, 8% hp/wt ratio, and 2% everything else. The GGR system simply gives you more cars with close performance to play with. It is very similar to the PHRF rating system in yacht racing which has been in use for 30 years??

If you truly think your car is not competitive there is a simple test: Ask Erik K, Kim C, Jad D, or any other top SDR Porsche pilot put down a few timed laps in your car (maybe offer to buy them lunch). If they are unable to post a quick time there may actually be a problem with your car or setup. With the right tires and setup these drivers should be able to post a top ten AX time in nearly any Porsche in the club. If there is a 10 second spread between their time and yours...um, it's not the car. You just have a loose nut behind the steering wheel... an easy fix.

[Greg Phillips]

I'd be O.K. with their system. I just am just anticipating a lot of arguing over some of the items that are counted for points.

Let's give it a try. Maybe one of the AXs coming up we could test the system.

As if we don't argue now about how many points with our system

The beauty of taking a complete system from Zone 7 is to try and prevent some of the wrangling and nit-picking. The system is in place and working. Is it perfect? Of course not( I am sure the 356 people would not agree that all 356's are the same). No system is but, but it seems to be fair and reasonable.

Those people wondering about early 911's being poorly treated, we had an informal test at Buttonwillow and it seemed to work out well. My 911SC would be in either TT7 or TT6 depending on which tires and wheels. Even with my driving it did well (but faster with Steve at the wheel)

Greg
577 Obrist Otto II 1986 Guards Red 944 Turbo 2:03.00
481 Gates Randy QP 1996 Red 993 Twin Turbo 2:05.94
97 Grosekemper Steve II 1982 Red 911SC 2:07.63
19 Yaws Curt RS 2004 Red GT3 2:08.70
272 Lisowski Craig TT8 2006 Gray Cayman s 2:08.75
22 Tavernetti John TT7 2003 Black Carrera 2 2:11.82
928 Phillips Greg II 1982 Red 911SC 2:12.77
591 Malin Kelvin FUN 2002 Gray Turbo 2:12.79
46 Pinisetti Partha TT5 2002 Silver 911 C4S 2:13.19
15 McClelland Jim TT7 1971 Orange 914-6 2:13.45
206 Seligson Andrew TT9 1989 Black 951S 2:14.30
820 More Braden TT9 1995 Black 993 2:14.34
841 Lyon Dean TT10 1970 White 911T 2:16.67
421 Hockett Dan BSX 1999 Silver Boxster 2:17.38.
129 Hockett Dave BSX 1998 Guards Red Boxster 986 2:17.39

[AGill]

Not sure why you think you would only have 200 treadwear tires.
The 993 C4S has a base of 370 for AX & TT, the lowest Cayman is 350 for TT and 375 for AX( note they recognize the AX advantage in the base points). You should each have similar points available to enhance performance.
Their system has been tested for 4 years using the same types of Porsches that we drive
Greg

Greg, the fact that a stock 993C4S is 370 and a stock Cayman is 375 speaks to the point I am getting at, in an AX setting I think that given equal drivers a stock Cayman will beat a 993C4S every time, I do not think they are equal cars. This is of course my opinion and I very well could be wrong but based on my experience at AX's watching novice and experienced drivers in both types of cars this is the case. I would be curious as to what other members' opinions are on this matter given their own observations. And, just because their system has been tested for 4 years doesn't necessarily mean it's any better than ours or another region's system...how long have we been using our system and "testing" it??? I'm not advocating for either one, I just want to make sure the powers that be make an informed decision before we jump ship. Again, I like the trial run idea.

[mrondeau]

Ralph Linares has beaten a few Cayman S cars in his C4S when they were all grouped together in NSS (and the occasional Boxster S). His wife, Annette, was able to "chick" a few drivers in her very first AX in that C4S.

http://results.pcasdr.org/event_class_overall.php?event_date=2007-06-23&class_str=NSS&database=&time_format=0#64.15-51

The current BRI has the OSS and NSS cars indexed exactly the same. We already acknowledge that the cars are pretty close in performance. In AX, it really comes down to track, setup and driver. With drivers that are equal, one car or the other will have the advantage due to that car's inherent strengths or weaknesses and the way the track is layed out. Sometimes you're the bug, sometimes you're the windshield.

[Kone Killer]

I'll put in my .02 cents in. When I first started AXing all I did was whine about how much faster the Cayman S's were than my old 1999 996 Water Buffalo . After a lesson with JAD and a couple rides John Simone and John Komer and getting a few tips from Mark Rondeau and Dan Chambers regarding negative camber and sticker tires (still have not used my 2 points in S/S) I gave those Cayman S guys a run for their money . So, I am in with giving the GGR rules a go, maybe not this year since we are halfway through the season, but diffinetely on the agenda for next season.

As I said my $.02

[ttweed]

I guess I am a little confused by all this. What exactly is being proposed? Replacing our classification system with that of GGR, or replacing our entire AX/TT/DE ruleset with theirs? The two cannot be separated really. Many of our safety and prep rules are related to our classification system. Do we adopt theirs, then? For instance, the rollbar/cage, steel lugnut, fire suits and driver restraint requirements in Zone 8 are all tied to the class of your car. What is the proposal for dovetailing those with the GGR classification rules? They are two different things. Do we adopt their safety rules as well, then? What about our update/backdate provision? Do we abandon that and adopt theirs? This is crucial to how you point out a car with an engine swap, it seems to me. Our rules are quite different in this respect.

All I am saying is this is not as easy as it may appear at first glance. The Zone 8 ruleset has many provisions connected to our classification scheme that would have to be modified/rethought to use the GGR classification system, unless we are talking about wholesale replacement of our rules with theirs. If we are doing this simply because we have too many classes with too few cars in them, are there better/easier ways to fix that--like consolidating classes--rather than a revolutionary change that will have quite far-reaching, complex, and unintended consequences, raising as many new questions as it resolves, forcing people to modify their cars in ways they didn't anticipate in order to be competitive under the new system, making this hobby even more expensive than it already is? I am and always have been a proponent of rules stability, with evolutionary (not revolutionary) development, so as not to obsolete investments people have already made in building/modifying their cars. This would be a radical change, requiring alterations to many other portions of our ruleset besides simply the classification system. Has anyone really thought about these other aspects and how they would be resolved? I would like to hear all the answers before I could say this is a good idea.

TT

[rshon]

The irony is that our proliferation of classes stemmed from the fact that some folks complained about being in the same class with Boxsters, or Turbos, or 997S's, or whatever. I guess when we had a lot of attendees, it was easier to give each car type its own class (especially in the L to R range), but now due to a down-turn this inadvertent laziness has created many 1-car classes.

Maybe we should revisit re-consolidating some of the classes (although this could be less drastic than adopting a whole new system, I know this will also be a can of worms, especially when some cars have an advantage in a TT, and some in an AX). Perhaps we could review cars for their base class the way other sanctioning bodies do, by calculating HP/weight, Torque/weight, and Stock Tire Width/weight, and start by grouping cars of similar vintage and similar base class numbers together, and see how it looks.

Although I think we have been resisting it, we should also look at breaking up model series (like 997 and 987) into year ranges, because Porsche has on occasion bumped the horsepower from year to year enough to make a noticeable difference (especially in 2009 - on).