Final Zone 8 proposals

[gulf911]

Thanks Curt for that excellent information!! , it does appear as though PCA Club racing rules have taken this inequity into account. In the spirit of figuring this out I would repsectfully ask if Paul or Steve could look into this with the PCA club rules commitee to possibly come up with ideas to resolve this. The Tire width rule would be a great start IMHO.

[gulf911]

I will admit that assuming through impromptu discussions/complaints with others that the issue will be taken care of, was naive on my part and from this point forward will voice my recommendations in writing to the rules commitee. It would be helpful to know how my recommendations get to the actual people who directly make the decision, or why they wouldn't get to them as well. If 6 AM class members were to have submitted the tire size rule, as an example, to the powers that be would it have been included in 2007 rules? Would anybody on this thread have a problem with allowing additional points beyond 245's? Maybe up to 275's which will fit under stock SC fenders, but if you have a wide body and want to run 315's or 335's you take a big hit. Maybe include the fronts as well? If you can stuff 275's in the front you should have to take points for that IMHO. Sorry Jad.. While I wholeheartedly echo Tom's and Curt's appreciation for all the volunteers that take thier personal time for this, I am still a bit puzzled that some felt 3.2's and 3.6's in a modified class were similar in performance, when clearly other clubs, including our own, know different. I would like to also thank Tom for his help and input, he has helped me understand a lot. Perhaps a commitee member can respond to many of these unanswered questions when they have a chance.

[gulf911]

I know this is probably irrelevant to the discourse regarding the AM fiasco but I have been fighting a similar battle in the Stock classes for the last 3 years and to this date, have been unsucessful.

I don't believe that R-compound tires should be allowed in S/S or S classes because it is contrary to ther spirit of the class. You drive the car on the track the way you drive it on the street, and R-compund tires are not street tires-just read the label. I heard on an F-1 telacast that a 10% increase in horsepower was a .2 increase in laptime and a 10% increse in tire grip is2-3seconds

With R-compound tires, I can turn a lap over 3 seconds faster in my car than I can with street tires.

And the stupid part is they still charge 1-point for any 200 DOT tire.
Not as exciting as the AM struggles but thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

FWIW Gary, I definately agree with you.....................Its irrelevant to AM... Gotcha!


I'm kidding of course Gary, Even though I don't run in SS or S I would absolutely agree with you on your point. S does mean Stock right? I don't think anyone would be running on R-compound for the street.

[Red Rooster]

So far we have had 6 current AM class racers chime in on this thread. Every single one of us is not happy. Some are so NOT happy they are no longer continuing to even discuss it on this thread.

Hmmm....I guess Curt's refering to me?....anyway I have not gone off on any rage or anything ...but rather have been sitting back listening and learning, TT has said some really educating things here in this thread which I greatly appreciate.

In looking at the big picture after reading and re-reading this thread, it is all become very simple and clear...and Tom has repeatedly been hitting the nail on the head....

Quoting Tom:
"... This all started with the elimination of 911s from G class, to protect the 944s which were perceived as being dominated. The error that was made was in moving the 911s UP instead of moving the 944s DOWN. Our car classifications are structured from A to Q according to speed potential, with A being the slowest and Q the fastest. If 944s were slower than the G class 911s, they should have been moved DOWN in class, perhaps to E, since it seems a well-developed F class 911 is still capable of greater speed potential.

Once the 911s were moved up to H and I classes, the HM class was considered unnecessary and replaced with KM class, and former HM cars were consolidated into AM. This again was a mistake, as the H and J cars have greater speed potential when developed according to our rules, and the former F and G class 911s cannot compete with them on an even basis (for the reasons I cited earlier.) Additionally, there have been ZERO, not one single car, entered in the new KM class in the last 2 years.

My specific proposal would be to establish a new E class for the 944s currently in G, replace the 911s into G class, and restore the original AM and HM division, eliminating the useless KM class."

Do that and the great majority of all problems in AM are solved. Too simple a solution though....

So I'm looking ahead to '07 and trying to rationalize how I will feel after shelling out all the $$$ for entry, tires, race gas, hotel etc...etc..and arriving at the track only to see a 3.6L AM car being unloaded. Instantly I know short of some unfortunate situation involving that car, I am almost guaranteed to have no chance of being competitive enough to win.

hmmmm...I'm going to have to think about this a bit more...... so for now I'm going back into lurk mode

[ttweed]

The Tire width rule would be a great start IMHO.

Sorry, Dan, a tire width rule alone will not make a difference. The Carrera under discussion is not a widebody, and runs the same tire sizes any RS-clone could. It is the combination of a well-balanced setup, the new V710s, and a massaged 3.6 with a very broad torque curve that makes it so fast and stupid-easy to drive! It doesn't need steamroller slicks to win. Christy took 3rd TTOD in her very first outing in the car. Erik has dominated in it.

Roland's car is on to AR, and Chris' 3.6 widebody was misclassified at Spring Mountain, so what car would the tire rule alone effect?

TT

[gulf911]

The Tire width rule would be a great start IMHO.

Sorry, Dan, a tire width rule alone will not make a difference. The Carrera under discussion is not a widebody, and runs the same tire sizes any RS-clone could. It is the combination of a well-balanced setup, the new V710s, and a massaged 3.6 with a very broad torque curve that makes it so fast and stupid-easy to drive! It doesn't need steamroller slicks to win. Christy took 3rd TTOD in her very first outing in the car. Erik has dominated in it.

Roland's car is on to AR, and Chris' 3.6 widebody was misclassified at Spring Mountain, so what car would the tire rule alone effect?

TT

I was thinking about that Tom, actually I don't know of any other 3.6 cars in AM...so maybe we are safe for next year? But wouldn't you agree that having points stop at 4 with 245's is a problem considering the sizes run today?, which is free points. Man, say one nice thing about you and you smack me down like the gnat I am...
What can we do to move forward on the idea of changing the 944 class as mentioned, or bring back HM?

[gulf911]

This Just In!!


Huntington Beach, CA - Man goes into a rage at convenience store.
Without provocation a man , later identified as John Rizvold, started trashing the store after the clerk asked for $3.60 from the man. Asking an elderly woman on the scene she said "He kept yelling 3 6!! , 3 6!! , 3 6!!...."

[John Straub]

The "club race" rules are pretty clear when it come to a 3.6L. When a driver goes out turns a time like that, first time in the car, (as Tom said) it tells me it's the car!

[ttweed]

What can we do to move forward on the idea of changing the 944 class as mentioned, or bring back HM?

Unfortunately, I came to the realization about the class structure too late to make a formal proposal this year by the deadline. It was precipitated by a "spirited" discussion I had with Dan Chambers, off-forum, the very week that proposals were closed. Hi, Dan!

It's miraculous how epiphanies can be born out of conflict, isn't it? Anyway, it is too late for this year according to the published process established by the Club. Unless some unilateral actions were taken by the Rules Committee, such a classing proposal could not be forwarded to the Z8 Presidents for a vote until next year. I don't even know if it would be appropriate for them to do that at this point, but I can tell you that the message I got that "the committee does not MAKE the rules, the members do, and we just evaluate them and forward them to the Region Presidents" was a strong one.

Personally, I would suffer greatly if such a thing happened immediately, anyway, as my twisted, evil, vindictive plan to wreak havoc on the GP 944s with an FP 911 next year would be thwarted if they were moved down to a new E Class.

That said, there are many examples of other race sanctioning bodies making arbitrary, objective judgements about class performances and changing rules as often as necessary to balance performance. This happens race-to-race in many current pro series, with restrictor plate and weight adjustment mandates, but that's all for the show, and we ain't pros!

This is all supposed to be for fun, anyway, and though we are competitive by nature, I think the old adage "winning or losing is not important, it's how you play the game" comes to mind. I know this is going to be a big comfort to JR, once he gets out of jail for that convenience store thing. We have some choices to make, as usual, and can decontent our cars and run in FI or HI (the new displacement and HP rule changes actually make this easier for us), spend another 15-20K to remain competitive (another old adage--"which part of this racing thing did you think was going to be easy and cheap)" or just show up, shutup and drive.

Maybe Christy won't run in the TT series and Anthony DiLanzo won't show up all the time, and no one else has absorbed Mark's sage advice and is currently building another killer Carrera as we speak, and one of you guys can still win next year!

[John Straub]

If your going to move the 2.0L 911 back to "G", also move the 914/6 2.0L to "G".

[ttweed]

But wouldn't you agree that having points stop at 4 with 245's is a problem considering the sizes run today?, which is free points.

I forgot to respond to this part, Dan. I think Steve made the wide tire size proposal last year, and it was not forwarded for approval. I'm not sure about this, but that's how I remember it.

I do believe that there needs to be some adjustments in the wheel and tire rules, as the readily available choices have widened in that arena in the past few years, just as it has in the engine area.

It's a complicated set of issues, though, and range far outside the ones effecting AM, which include the fact that if an early car has to be run straight up against a Carrera, shouldn't it be allowed the same wheel and tire size? To me, this is more important than penalizing wide slicks. The 2 points for track increase on the early car when running the same size wheels is the disadvantage. Plus the fact that the Carrera can go to 255s for only 2 points while the early 911 can only go to 225s. For sure, a widebody running slicks is going to have a traction advantage, both from contact patch and track increase, and that should be addressed, but if the playing field was leveled otherwise, than both types of cars could be improved equally in this area, and the penalties would be the same.

The other tire issues range widely, and I haven't given them as much thought, because they weren't my major concern. They include the fact that DOT-R tires have progressed so far lately that some may be as fast as slicks now, in some applications, as well as the use of these tires in stock class (Gary's pet issue ) and the 1-point for 140-200 treadwear issue.

I don't even want to go there at this point.

TT

[Dan Chambers]

Unfortunately, I came to the realization about the class structure too late to make a formal proposal this year by the deadline. It was precipitated by a "spirited" discussion I had with Dan Chambers, off-forum, the very week that proposals were closed. Hi, Dan!

I'm listening.

Personally, I would suffer greatly if such a thing happened immediately, anyway, as my twisted, evil, vindictive plan to wreak havoc on the GP 944s with an FP 911 next year would be thwarted if they were moved down to a new E Class.

Hmmmm. Interesting.......... Revenge is best served up cold, eh Tom? I'm sorry my request to move 911's out of G class has provoked you to such ends. I apologize if that change has affected you so deeply.

FYI: should you decide to run in GP, you'll need to have someone else running against you at each event to qualify for a win. " P. Entrants may run for points in a higher class as long as their car conforms to the rules for that class. Cars may move up vertically or horizontally, but not backwards, into a higher class. Anyone electing to run in a higher class must have competition in that class in order to recieve points for the event."

So if I were to go back to 200-wear rated 225's on my 944, I'd be in G-Stock class. Except for Greg Sharp, who is at university in New York, there's no one in GP for you to drive against for 9 months out of the year. Hmmmmm. No competition in GP, Tom. Did you really want those points? Something to think about.

I think anyone who purpose-builds a vehicle to compete unfairly in a class above the base-class of the original car is pressing the limits in a somewhat unsportsman-like way. Now, that's just me. I knew guys in high school that took steroids in football and basketball. I new guys that had their surfing competitor's surfboards stolen the night before a competition. Yes, these kinds of "advantages" happen. that's up to those whose conscience is..... well .... where it is. It's not how I play the game. That's just the way I think. I play for the thrill, not the ribbon or trophy. Others can spend their money and do what they will. At the end of the day, I'll share a beer, a great story, and a smile with everyone there. That - to me - is the spirit of competition and good, clean, fair sportsmanship.

As to an "E" class for 944's; I'd personally endorse it as a 944 driver, as long as the 911's are excluded from the class (with the notorious "bump-up" in exception). Play hard, play fair, no body hurt.

These are just my opinions.

[gulf911]

I forgot to respond to this part, Dan. I think Steve made the wide tire size proposal last year, and it was not forwarded for approval. I'm not sure about this, but that's how I remember it.
TT

And this is where I get fuzzy. The commitee says they don't make the rules, we do? Then who makes the decision to not forward the proposal for acceptance?

[gulf911]

So if I were to go back to 200-wear rated 225's on my 944, I'd be in G-Stock class. Except for Greg Sharp, who is at university in New York, there's no one in GP for you to drive against for 9 months out of the year. Hmmmmm. No competition in GP, Tom. Did you really want those points? Something to think about.

I think anyone who purpose-builds a vehicle to compete unfairly in a class above the base-class of the original car is pressing the limits in a somewhat unsportsman-like way. Now, that's just me.

This is a very interesting post.... The rules state this is legal, so how can it be unfair Dan?? (can you see distinct parallel lines here?) Are you afraid of a lower class 911?? So much so, you would move down in class to avoid it? What happened to your "don't worry about the points, just shut up and drive position"?? Maybe I misunderstood? , was this only if it didn't affect you?....

[ttweed]

FYI: should you decide to run in GP, you'll need to have someone else running against you at each event to qualify for a win.

That doesn't concern me at all. If the GP 944 drivers flee the class to avoid an FP 911, that will prove the same point that I am trying to make--that the classing structure is out of whack if a lower class car can move up and win in a higher class. This should not be possible, if our classing structure represents a hierarchy of increasing speed potential.

If there was no competition in GP, I would just run the car in FP or FI. I think it would have a good chance to score as well on the BRI as my former GS 911 if I ran in FP. I don't really care about class championships at this point--I have won enough in the past both in PCA-SDR and Zone 8 to satisfy myself. I like the idea of the indexed performance measure, and seeing how I can do with an older car against the newer ones. That would be enough for me. I have alternatives, I don't think it is a clueless waste of my time and money. I can probably sell the car to someone who wants a cheap little Porsche hotrod at the very least when I'm done.

I think anyone who purpose-builds a vehicle to compete unfairly in a class above the base-class of the original car is pressing the limits in a somewhat unsportsman-like way.

I will repeat Dan A's question--what is unfair about moving up in class according to the published rules? This is a rather baseless characterization of my actions, in my opinion. Yes, I am frustrated about what has happened to two of my 911s in the last 3 years due to classing decisions. Yes, it is an extreme solution, but I see nothing wrong with protesting what I see as flawed rulemaking by using the very same rules to prove my point. I see NO relationship to steroid abuse or stolen surfboards, Dan, I think you're way off base there and resent the implication.

TT