Approved Rule Proposals for 2011

[mrondeau]

Hey Dan, the weight reduction points seem to be the most difficult to assess. I'm between CC9 and CC7, depending on how the scales spin up. We figured that weight reduction points would be the biggest challenge in this new approach. The current system made the weight reduction points a little easier - an educated guess was close enough. But, now, scales are in order to really know...

The weight reduction points have always been difficult to assess. The new rules don't change that, but they give you additional points in smaller increments. It's actually 10 pts per 25 lbs since you round up to the nearest multiple of 10. For example: My car is 128 lbs below its base curb weight. I get 50 lbs free. 128-50 = 78 x .40 = 31.2 Round up to 40 pts. I can still take out 21 lbs for no additional points.. If I took another 22 lbs out, it would cost me an additional 10 points, since you round up. Cars also get to be weighed full of fluids, spare tire, jack, etc., but no driver. It's not that much different than our current system. The margin for guessing is about 1/4 the size it was previously and the point penalty is in 10 point increments instead of 40 points.

[Greg Phillips]

Greg,

The points for displacement increase from 2.0 to 2.7 are 126. The stock '69 911T engine had smaller valves than stock 2.7 heads, so that cost me 50 points (twice the adjustment for having the benefits of a mid-engine, I might add). The '67 911S cam, which is not all that big on a 2.7, cost me another 50 points, and I no longer have the minimal 27 mm venturiis in the carbs because they were too small even for a 2.0, so that cost me another 40 points, for a total of 266 points.

Under the old rules all the 911T's from '69 to '73 were in one model range, so I only had to take the points for cam, induction and the displacement increase from a 2.4 to 2.7, and the 2.7 heads were the same as the 2.4, so no points there. What doesn't seem fair to me is that a basic lightweight '74 911 (100 pounds heavier than a '69 911T) with a 2.7 and larger brakes has the base points of 200, or only 60 more than a '69 911T. So, if you put a stock '74 911 CIS 2.7 into a 2.0 911T, you will have to add the 266 points because the displacement, induction, cams and heads are non-stock for a '69 T. By comparison, under the new points system, my friend who has a track-only '75 911S with a 2.7 engine currently in the HI class would be in CC13 with under 400 total points.

One thing I haven't checked out fully are the update/backdate provisions. It has been suggested to me that I can classify my car as a '74 911 and not have to take points for a displacement increase. I would only have to take 20 modification points for non-stock gears (901 trans), 50 for the cam and 40 for the carbs, and with the other modification points for weight, suspension changes, etc, that would put my car at 480 points, or in CC11. Under the new rules, any air-cooled 911 model from 1964-98 are considered the same model series, so maybe that is possible. If the rules allow it, I might consider my car as a long-hood short-hood car just to stay a class or two lower than Dan.

The four of us Orange Coast Region competitors in the FI Class have decided to stick together and run in the FI Class next year in the OCR driving series rather than opting to run under the new rules. Under the new rules, all four of us will end up in different competition classes because of different model years and engine sizes. Hopefully, everything will be sorted out by the time the official transition takes place in 2012.

Rod

I am certainly not the rules expert, but I am not sure that because there are other cars with larger engines, you don't have to take points when you increase your engine from 2 to 2.7 liters and there are no points for the larger heads.
This may be a hidden backdate/update rule but if you change cams, heads, venturis, and displacement under the present rules you would take ~26 points or the 266 for 2011 (2012?)
The new rules just increase the previous points x10 for the most part.
The main changes from present rules are for gears from the previous 6=60 down to 20 and the change in tire size that is linear and has no maximum.

Greg

[Greg Phillips]

I think the scaling factor for HP increases due to engine swaps (2.2 times the HP increase) is out of line with the base point scaling:

If one were to take a 375 base point 2007 Cayman (with 245 HP) and do nothing more than replace the engine with a 295 HP Cayman S engine of the same year, the car would take a 110 point hit for engine swap/HP increase (50 x 2.2), making the total 485 points, even though a 2007 Cayman S (with a six-speed, wider wheels, and bigger brakes) only has 445 base points. The base Cayman would have no other advantage that justified a 40 point penalty versus the Cayman S.

It seems the HP upgrade scaling factor is unfair to those who swap an engine (at least in this example). For this example, the scaling factor should be closer to 1.4.

This rule is also carried over from our present rules, just scaled up x10. One of the issues that comes from taking a hybrid approach to the rule changes rather than a clean sweep.
One thing to remember is that the advantage of your horsepower increase is a function of how it affects your power to weight ratio. Increasing by 50 HP in a 2000 pound car will have a greater effect than the same HP in a 4000 pound car. Most of the engine swaps that the rule was written for were putting larger 3, 3.2,3.6 engines in early (lighter) 911's and would have a greater impact than a similar swap into a Cayman.

If you really want to get specific, you might just consider using the original equations for base points, plug in the larger horsepower amount and use that number.

Greg

[Greg Phillips]

If I am reading the rules correctly, a Street Stock car could run in either the SS class or a points (CC) class. Is that correct?

Yes, you can run in SS- which allows no performance modifications (wheels, cat-back exhaust, seats, intake changes, etc) or you can run in your CC class which would be your basepoints plus your tire width points or any other modifications if present.

Greg

[Don Middleton]

...It's not that much different than our current system. The margin for guessing is about 1/4 the size it was previously and the point penalty is in 10 point increments instead of 40 points.

Understood, Mark. The weight reduction penalty in the new system is 10x our current system. However, the class sizes, in terms of points, are much narrower. In my current class, 100 pounds is 4 points out of 20 (Improved is 21-40). But, in the new system, 100 pounds is 40 points in classes that change every 50 points. It is easy to be off in weight reduction by a small amount and have the resulting 10 points move your car between two classes.

So, you just need to be much more precise about weight reduction. How many of us will take the time to be that precise? Either way, it's not a big deal. CC9, CC8, or even CC7...close enough for club stuff, right?

[Gary Burch]

Dan, it's about competition, not trophies.
CC14, gotta love it

So you think I drive 1 hour ( 1 way) and pay $55.00 ( not including gas) for a $.50 cone??
FYI, I could care less about the trophy or the new rules. Its the way it was mandated.
It started very recently as trying it out to see and then voted on by a board to incorporate in 2012 and now it will be used next year. All without members (ax and TT drivers, not forum participants) vote. And as you can see there are already problems with its fairness.
Cajun Daddy is 100% correct, power to weight and tires is 95% at an ax.
Just so you know, I love the competition, the camaraderie, the trash talk and trying to beat the guys in 3.6's, which I usually do...when they dont show up...

I thought you drove down because you missed us...

The current set of rules were mandated and manipulated and tweaked to the end of their useful life, into 1 car classes or 25 car classes and little in between. All rules are unfair to somebody, as you know. It is tough starting over, but don't you think it's time?

From the classifications and the points allowed it looks to favor the older 911's and 914's with stock engines-this I like.

Gary, we all know you like to stir up the pot. But come on guys - US politics in to this thread? Let's p.o. more people!

Jennifer, Dan started it!

[Otto]

So, you just need to be much more precise about weight reduction. How many of us will take the time to be that precise? Either way, it's not a big deal. CC9, CC8, or even CC7...close enough for club stuff, right? Don Middleton

Yes Don, you need to be more precise about weight reduction because as you well note, smaller weight differences can place you in one class or another. And yes, we should ALL take the time to be precise. Weighing a car is a very simple exercise at your favorite mechanic's shop. As I see it and as everybody should see it, being in very close compliance with the rules IN EVERY RESPECT is something we should all AT THIS CLUB strive for. We should all be able to count on each others' honesty or else what we do even just for fun is meaningless.

[LUCKY DAVE]

Yes Don, you need to be more precise about weight reduction because as you well note, smaller weight differences can place you in one class or another. And yes, we should ALL take the time to be precise. Weighing a car is a very simple exercise at your favorite mechanic's shop. As I see it and as everybody should see it, being in very close compliance with the rules IN EVERY RESPECT is something we should all AT THIS CLUB strive for. We should all be able to count on each others' honesty or else what we do even just for fun is meaningless.

I can certainly see this for club racing, even TT's.
But for parking lot AX? C'mon guys, its a parking lot.........we're doing this for the pure fun of it..........how serious can it be?
In any case it's the driver that makes the difference more than anything else.

[c4s4pcs]

I see the weight issue as more of a preparation level question than an event type question. There are people running pure stock cars in TT as well as people running highly modified (expensive) cars in AX. For those running stock, weight is a non issue. For those on a significant weight reduction program, access to scales is almost mandatory. I agree with Otto that each competitor should be responsible that their car is correctly classified. I also think that there are enough people around San Diego who have scales that having a set at an event should not be a problem.

There are really two types of mod points - obvious (tire size, etc.) and hidden (horsepower, weight, etc.). Those of us who's points show clearly as tire size and PASM do would very much like to know that the horsepower and weight points are being counted as carefully as the tire points (most of which came stock) that my car has.

I am really looking forward to getting out of my "class of one" - I do hope that my car will be competitive wherever classified in the new system. I do think that the classes should be run in parallel this year at all events so as to gather as much real world info as possible - then tune the new system and switch over in 2012.

Just my $.02...

[ttweed]

I also think that there are enough people around San Diego who have scales that having a set at an event should not be a problem.

Since our weight rule does not include an "as run" stipulation, but rather a "curb weight" with full fluids, spare, jack and toolkit (which most people remove for an event), having scales at the event to verify weight is not a viable option for verification purposes. In the case of a protest, the owner is allowed to fill the fuel tank, replace those items, and then weigh the car. Of course, having a set of scales available would be a bonus service for members if someone wanted to volunteer them, even for unofficial/informational purposes, but the modern electronic scales require a power source so they would have to be set up by the trailer's generator, which would entail some logistical problems, or a separate generator would have to be provided as well, so that they could be set up away from the cold or hot pit areas, where the traffic for them wouldn't interfere with running the event.

It is a simple enough matter for everyone to check their curb weight before an event if it is an issue in their classification. Just fill the car with fuel, put all the standard equipment on board, and drive it across the scales at your local recycling station or moving and storage company with truck scales. They charge a very nominal fee for a "non-certified" weight slip--I think it was $3 the last time I went to Edco down on Federal Blvd. I have also used Alexander's Moving & Storage on Ruffin Rd., and they charged a bit more, maybe $5, but it is pretty cheap and easy to do. There's no reason to ignore this area of car prep, and it is relatively simple to use a little ballast if you need to avoid a 10-point penalty cutoff that may move you up an entire class under the new scheme. I routinely take 75 lbs. of lead in and out of my car for events as needed.

People also need to look carefully at the new update/backdate provision when classifying your car, especially for the early modified 911s with engine/transaxle swaps, as it is quite different now. It may pay off to begin in the base class of your engine/transaxle model and ballast up to stock weight for that model (or take the weight penalty) rather than taking the engine swap points. The 911 model line stayed nearly the same with interchangeable parts for many years (decades, actually).

YMMV,
TT

[SDGT3]

I just leave the tool kit in the car, added a teq roll bar, FE, etc and if I gain a couple pounds during the holidays can I deduct points?

CC7 ........ Hello Mr. Andrews

[gulf911]

ah crap...
Oh yeah...I am just loving these new classes... Ax is one thing, cause Peter knows I will just take off my wipers.. but TT as well? all you CC7's prepare to get your a$$ handed to you by Peter and Mike Avitt...

[mrondeau]

ah crap...
Oh yeah...I am just loving these new classes... Ax is one thing, cause Peter knows I will just take off my wipers.. but TT as well? all you CC7's prepare to get your a$$ handed to you by Peter and Mike Avitt...

Dan, Shouldn't you save your crying until AFTER you lose?

[gulf911]

Crying? Just pointing out the obvious Mark, and why the rules should be looked at a bit more. Peter and I have a blast competing with one another so it will still be fun at ax's in the same class. But if anyone thinks I or anyone else in CC7 can beat Peter in his GT3 at a big track with equal tire compound, well I have some swampland to sell you...

Oh, can someone point out the Smurf mobile?... Actually, nevermind, I dont want to know...

[mrondeau]

Crying? Just pointing out the obvious Mark, and why the rules should be looked at a bit more. Peter and I have a blast competing with one another so it will still be fun at ax's in the same class. But if anyone thinks I or anyone else in CC7 can beat Peter in his GT3 at a big track with equal tire compound, well I have some swampland to sell you...

Oh, can someone point out the Smurf mobile?... Actually, nevermind, I dont want to know...

I think the rules are really set up for AX. It will be interesting to see the differences at the TT level. I know that GGR uses different base point and mod point levels for AX and TT. We may want to consider that as well. HP really comes into play at the big tracks.... or so I've heard.