Buttonwillow TT June 3-4

[Robert]

Price goes up after this Friday, May 19. Sign up now and save $. No charge if you have to cancel, so if you are even thinking about going (which you should be) send in a form now. Great track for first time TT'ers with appropriate AX experience, too.

http://www.pcasdr.org/img/2006/Calendar/TimeTrial/ButtonWillowJune3_4FI.pdf

[Brad Roberts]

Robert,

Do you have track config information? With or without Star Mazda, counter clockwise or clockwise? I looked over the PDF but didnt see anything related to track config.

Thank you.


B

[Robert]

Clockwise with Star Mazda

[pdy]

That would be configuration # 1 (from the BWRP
site track layout) -- Right?

[kary]

Clockwise with Star Mazda

Great, that is a great track layout and very long too!!

Can't wait to drive it again.

[Robert]

Yes, Race #1, clockwise:

http://www.buttonwillowraceway.com/race_01.htm

[Brad Roberts]

Thanks Robert. I have in car video running that config that I wanted to review. I havent ran there since last summer during testing.


B

[Jad]

Since I don't like Star Mazda, Jack said I could take the turn before, so I will merge carefully back in through the chicane

Robert, any idea how the groups might work? The 2 groups worked great at SOW in my opinion, much better than 3.

[Robert]

Depends on signups. We're expecting a full boat, in which case the plan is to go to the usual three group format. However if you've scared away the competition with that Grosekemper special head gasket, the two group A/B format is a possibility. We appreciate the constructive feedback on format by the way, positive or negative.

[kary]

Depends on signups. We're expecting a full boat, in which case the plan is to go to the usual three group format. However if you've scared away the competition with that Grosekemper special head gasket, the two group A/B format is a possibility. We appreciate the constructive feedback on format by the way, positive or negative.

I like the three group format because one needs time to work on their car and/or get in and out of student cars. Otherwise it is just a mad frantic dash all day which means I would just skip some sessions and/or make mistakes while owrking on my car
.

[Dan Chambers]

I like the three group format because one needs time to work on their car and/or get in and out of student cars. Otherwise it is just a mad frantic dash all day which means I would just skip some sessions and/or make mistakes while owrking on my car
.

I found with 3 groups at 20-minute intervals, there is always a back-to-back if you're instructing: either you cut your session short, or the student cuts theirs short .... remember, there are two transitions: 1 for student into Instructor car, and one for Instructor in to student car. Two out of three sessions means one is back to back. In the past, I've always had to sacrafice my time driving.

With the 2 run groups of 30 minutes (4 really: a 15-min of "A" and a 15-min of "B") both my student and I had more drive time with less scrambling at SOW. I'd drive 20 minutes. We'd have 10 minutes to transition: he'd drive 20 minutes, we'd have 10 minutes to transition; on and on. I wound up with tons more driving than before, lots of time to drink hot coffee, use the "blue room," and still be relaxed getting in and out of cars during the transition. I really really like the 2/4 run group theory. It worked with the lower participant numbers ... don't know about more drivers....

I'll throw out a controversial thought: What about 4 run groups: one being a "Vintage" group? I know a few of the older, lower-HP drivers would LOVE to TT, but they don't want to be in run-groups with >100 to >200 higher HP cars (it's no fun being passed on every straight-away .... ask me how I know ), .....and scramble to get in and out of cars with 5-point harnesses, ....yadda yadda ... in 3 run groups. If we had a "vintage" group (912's, 2L 911's, 914-4's, 356's, etc.) we might actually see an increase in participants that otherwise might "stay home" at the Q-DE's. If we had 4 groups, one being vintage racers, I think it would ease the hustle-bustle of Instructors, give more diversity to the TT program, and be more inclusive to all members who want to taste the big track.... not just be a playground to those with high HP cars and track-ready racers. Having TT venues for all members would be great; even for the older low-HP vintage Porsche owners.

My 2-cents.......

[Brad Roberts]

Wow. Smoking idea Dan. I can see quite a bit of value with a "vintage group". I know of several people who would rather run with "similar" cars than be passed by cars 2x faster.

Interesting idea.

PRC (Porsche Racing Club) out of NorCal just created a GT "light" class for stock powered 3.6L cars on Goodyear Bias ply slicks. The class is taking off.


B

[kary]

I like the three group format because one needs time to work on their car and/or get in and out of student cars. Otherwise it is just a mad frantic dash all day which means I would just skip some sessions and/or make mistakes while owrking on my car
.

I found with 3 groups at 20-minute intervals, there is always a back-to-back if you're instructing: either you cut your session short, or the student cuts theirs short .... remember, there are two transitions: 1 for student into Instructor car, and one for Instructor in to student car. Two out of three sessions means one is back to back. In the past, I've always had to sacrafice my time driving.

With the 2 run groups of 30 minutes (4 really: a 15-min of "A" and a 15-min of "B") both my student and I had more drive time with less scrambling at SOW. I'd drive 20 minutes. We'd have 10 minutes to transition: he'd drive 20 minutes, we'd have 10 minutes to transition; on and on. I wound up with tons more driving than before, lots of time to drink hot coffee, use the "blue room," and still be relaxed getting in and out of cars during the transition. I really really like the 2/4 run group theory. It worked with the lower participant numbers ... don't know about more drivers....

I'll throw out a controversial thought: What about 4 run groups: one being a "Vintage" group? I know a few of the older, lower-HP drivers would LOVE to TT, but they don't want to be in run-groups with >100 to >200 higher HP cars (it's no fun being passed on every straight-away .... ask me how I know ), .....and scramble to get in and out of cars with 5-point harnesses, ....yadda yadda ... in 3 run groups. If we had a "vintage" group (912's, 2L 911's, 914-4's, 356's, etc.) we might actually see an increase in participants that otherwise might "stay home" at the Q-DE's. If we had 4 groups, one being vintage racers, I think it would ease the hustle-bustle of Instructors, give more diversity to the TT program, and be more inclusive to all members who want to taste the big track.... not just be a playground to those with high HP cars and track-ready racers. Having TT venues for all members would be great; even for the older low-HP vintage Porsche owners.

My 2-cents.......

I am confused Dan, you suggest that 2 run groups is better for an instructor for example but then you suggest having 4 run groups to accommodate low horse power cars? Which is it?

Under the low horse power car premise maybe we should just put all cars in a horsepower range together? Of course that would not work because the skill level of the drivers is the key, not the car capability.

I think for all but a few of us, we are always being passed by faster cars (me included). I think it is important to remember that learning to drive with various car types and speeds is an important part of the time trial series. Car awareness, which is still a problem for some of our membership, is very important and should be held very high versus specializing car type or horsepower run groups.

[Dan Chambers]

I am confused Dan, you suggest that 2 run groups is better for an instructor for example but then you suggest having 4 run groups to accommodate low horse power cars? Which is it?

Kary:

Sorry you don't understand this. I guess I was vague. I was talking about two separate ideas .... thus 2 seperate paragraphs.

In the former paragraph I talked about the advantage of 2 groups - which, inreality were 4 groups broken into 15 minute intervals. This was advantageous to me, and my studnet. We both ran 20-minute driving sessions (combining 2X15 minute sessions, and then cuting 10 minutes out of the 30-minute time allotment). Then, we had 10 minutes (out of the 30-minute allotment) to change to the other person's car. That was the former idea.

Then, the latter paragraph I introduced a new concept: 4 run groups, including a Vintage class. No mention of time was in this idea/paragraph. Sorry.

Under the low horse power car premise maybe we should just put all cars in a horsepower range together? Of course that would not work because the skill level of the drivers is the key, not the car capability.

The low HP and vehicle capabilities concern is, in fact, legitimate (If it wasn't, why are so many early 911 drivers poking 3.2L engines in their tubs? Why would Weissach/Stuttgart continue to up the HP in their newest production cars - ie; the 997 GT-3 with the highest NA power built by Porsche to date?). I don't care how talented a driver you are. If you are driving a 1969 912 with 101 HP in a class with a 1986 944 Turbo, or a 1983 Carrera with +100 HP, you will eventually get passed. Most likely again and again and again. ( This is why you haven't seen Monica - and probably others in low HP cars - at the big tracks) Let me give you an example from last weekend:

Last weekend Monica drove her 912 at the DE. She is a very accomplished driver, capable of driving her car to the limit with drifting, threshold braking, and almost perfect line judgement. She was in the same class with my student, John B. who drives a 968, chipped to 245 HP. John is a good student, who is learning how to handle his car well. But up against Monica in the same vehicle (either the 912 together, or the 968 together) Monica would most likely defeat John, based soley on driver skill.

However, because of the 145 gain in John's 968; and better suspension system, he lapped Monica on every session. He was unable to catch her in the corners, but as we hit the straights, he was capable of 85 to 90-MPH speeds. Monica's fastest straight-away speed was 72-MPH. He caught her on every straight, over and over and over. HP caught Monica, not driver skills.

I think for all but a few of us, we are always being passed by faster cars (me included). I think it is important to remember that learning to drive with various car types and speeds is an important part of the time trial series. Car awareness, which is still a problem for some of our membership, is very important and should be held very high versus specializing car type or horsepower run groups.

I totally agree with this idea. However, I think there is a significant difference between getting passed occasionally by better drivers in a session vs. being passed every straight on every lap by lesser drivers in higher HP cars.

I don't mind being passed by 944Spec cars, early 911's etc, where the drivers are really great drivers. I try to follow them and figure out their skills, line, etc. I do mind being in a run session where every car is besting my HP rating by at least 150 HP, and being caught in the straights again and again and again (I'm thinking Red run group at S.O.Willow, Orange run group at Fontana, Orange run group at Buttonwillow, etc). It is frustrating beyond belief to reel someone in at the corners, only to watch them pull away on the straights ..... then have to get off the throttle and let a 993 TT with a student driving it pass you.

HP doesn't matter? Yea, and "the check's in the mail, I'll still love you in the morning, and of course I'm listening to you, honey ( now: where'd I put the TV remote.. )." Let's get real, hmmm?

Brad: thanks for the support. I'm glad to hear other areas are thinking along these lines. I think it would round out a driving program well, and be a more inclusive situation for our own region. It is a controversial idea, I grant you.

One last thought: with the impending loss of Qualcomm, and a close venue for driving events, the Time Trial series will become more significant for driving events. It would be a shame to lose the participants of AS class and possibly CS class cars to the evolution of higher speed/HP events. These drivers are as legitimate a group of racers as any body in our club. They shouldn't be penalized for owning classic (if lower HP) cars at TT's. Currently, there really is no incentive for AS/CS class cars to run at our TT's. I think that's a shame.

[Jad]

I strongly agree that either 2 or 4 run groups is much better than 3. With a student or sharing a car, the 3 groups just doesn't work. Plus, with the 2 group system, I was able to instruct 2 people during the same run session at times. I would go with one person for the first 10-15 minutes, then another for the next 10-15 minutes. Worked great and still would have allowed time for me to do a 20 minute session after taking a 10 minute break every hour.

Kary, I know you weren't at streets to see how this worked, but I found it much better. It also allowed enough time to go out and do 10 minutes, come in and adjust things for 10 minutes, then squeeze in another 10 minutes per run session.