Zone Rules proposals for 2005

[bill allen]

The Zone Rules change proposal is posted on the Zone website under the Rules tab. The Region presidents will be asked to vote on this proposal at the Zone meeting on November 20. Please review these proposed rule changes and provide your feedback to me before that meeting.
Bill

[Steve Grosekemper]

Here is a direct link to the new 2005 rules proposals

http://www.pca.org/zone8/rules_discussi ... Review.htm

Take a look at these changes for 2005 and get your feedback to Bill Allen

Pres@pcasdr.org

There are some really good proposals that should solve a great deal of issues we have been dealing with, but only if Bill knows that you want them.

If you have any specific questions concerning the new proposals feel free to send me an e-mail at Rules@pcasdr.org and I will do my best to clarify them for you.

Get involved now and let Bill know your views so he can make an informed decision on your behalf.

Steve Grosekemper
PCA-SDR Rules Chair
Zone-8 Rules Page Editor

[Dan Chambers]

I've reviewed the Proposed Rules for 2005 and think they're a great improvement. The people who have worked on this get huge credit. You've done a great job! A big thanks to all involved.

Bill, you have my personal agreement to vote for these changes.

Dan Chambers
2004 Autocross Co-Chair
2004 Member, Board of Directors, PCA-SDR

[Jad]

For change 7, it says SS class is 0-2 points, isn't currently 0-4 points for SS? Did I miss something (and the reg form) or is this in error and what is it suppose to be for 2005?

Edit....

Never mind, several rules later, it clarifies that it was a typo, the rule is suggested to change from the current 4 points for ss to 2 points.

I think most of the rules are really good. The only two I don't like are the classification of Boxster S's and GSS.

While a TON of people compete in MSS, only 5 or so compete regularly. By spliting the Boxster S and 996, you will end up with two classes with only 2 or 3 drivers, which is not much fun for anyone. As far as performance, the cars are VERY close, much closer than division in other classes and I feel a really good driver could easily win with any of the cars.

This brings me to the other rule I don't like, GSS. There are plenty of 944's to have their own class (unlike Boxster S and 996). The 911's, whatever model, have a huge advantage. While Tom is an excellent driver, he is winning the class by 4-5 seconds! That is not fair. I do not believe a 944 driver of any level, could possibly catch him. The 911's should all be moved up a class with the other 911's in H and I that have more similar weight and performance characteristics. While they may be SLIGHTLY slower, I believe they are MUCH closer than they are to the 944's. A comparison of times will show Tom will do just fine in the higher classes , so why force the mix of completely different types of cars in GSS?

Just my $.02 and I am not in either class, so I have nothing to gain, just trying to improve the fun and competition.

[Larry Clark]

Would it be useful to pencil in the 987 base and S to the L and M classes before the rules are adopted? These cars have been announced and will probably appear frequently at events in 2005.

[Steve Grosekemper]

You all make a great point that I was hoping not to have to point out.
The proposals have been up for comment for months!! That is the time for change.

These are the final proposals that were adopted by the z-8 rules commitee for final vote. They are not changable. They are a simple yes or no.

To specific comments.
Jad-
The 911S issue was addressed and voted down. It will be up for debate next year I am sure.

Larry-
We never place a car is class until we see what its performance level is. That avoids having to move it in class later.

The great thing about the new rules system that I developed for the zone is that it is all electronic and you can start making new suggestions for 2006 as soon as february or march. I am hoping to make it even easier to use next year.

This is the first year for this system and we are still tweaking it so be patient. And thanks for all your comments.

Remember for them to count you must send them to Bill Allen.
pres@pcasdr.org

Steve Grosekemper
PCA-SDR Rules Chair
Zone-8 Rules Page Editor

[David J Marguglio]

I have a few questions/need for clarification:

1. Where does the 91-92 Turbo go? N specifies 78-89 and P specifies 94 on. I assume this is an oversight.

2. The first definition of stock classes specifies that it shall not include tires with a treadware rating less than 140. Then later in the car progression section, it specifies SS as 100 or less. So is it 140 or 100?

3. The K class has been redefined to exclude the "911RS" as it "as it is unclear what specific model car this refers to". So, I assume that the RSA (see, its all about me) is then classifed as a C2/C4, which is fine except when it comes to weight. As the RSA with no options (like mine) weigh a lot less than the stock C2 does it take points? Perhaps "911RS" should just be clarified to include RSA and then they would be compared to factory weight.

Anyway, the rest of it looks good to me.

[MikeD]

Steve,

Can I split my vote? For proposal #9 I would vote "Yes" for the point changes, but "No" for the re-classification of the cars.

Also, I agree with waiting on classifying the 987. After driving a 997S with Sport Chrono, I think we may decide to put 987 non-Sport Chrono in SS, while putting 987+Sport Chrono in S (or some such). The difference in handling and ride on the 997 was significant, I can imagine how much more so it will be on a lighter more balanced car.

[David J Marguglio]

Ouch...did you hear that? Mike was taking a subtle shot at 911's...again.

[kary]

I like the new proposal, though I have to get new letters for my class designation

[MikeD]

Ouch...did you hear that? Mike was taking a subtle shot at 911's...again.

I was? Oh, yeah... I was!

[martinreinhardt]

David,

It is actually a good thing for us in KP that the 964RS (not RSA) has been removed from K, because it it would smoke us specially the N/GT version. I can't even get my car as light as the RS was and I removed 257.5 pounds so far.

BTW: I got most of the parts that I was looking for make it go a little faster . Now the fun will be to install them

I don't know what to do with the 968's yet maybe Bill should only be allowed street tires from now on.

[martinreinhardt]

Oh, I see now. Man I am getting 12 points for weight removal

Where are the 964 from JI going? KI? Hmm, it looks like I won't be in KP next year I better go where the current JI's are going


0-50 lbs. 0
51-150 lbs 4 (RSA should add this)
151 – 250 8
251 – 350 12

[Steve Grosekemper]

Each proposal is different and individual.

So don't try to find the exact ruling within the entire body of work.

The C2 turbos are a missprint, thanks, we'll correct that.

If you want to add more changes to these, DON"T

Wait till next year.

That's how it works.

BTW- RSA's are just C2's with a spoiler (sorry Keith) I weigh these cars al the time that storage shelf is a brick. Burls car is uncommonly light ( I don't know how)

[ttweed]

Oh, I see now. Man I am getting 12 points for weight removal

Are you sure? How are you measuring your weight, Martin? "Curb weight" in the owner's manual is with a full fuel tank and spare, jack and tool kit on board.

I think there are problems with proposal #16, since it doesn't spell out what condition the car must be in while competing. If the owner takes out the spare and tool kit and runs on a 1/2 tank of gas, they will be under curb weight by enough to take points even in a bone stock car. Is this the intent of the rule? If points start at 1 pound under curb weight while competing, everyone who takes out their spare and doesn't have a full tank of gas should take points. If the intent is that the car should weigh that much when the tank is full and everything is on board, but one is allowed to run with the normal items removed and less gas in the tank, then that should be spelled out in the rule. This will be a enforcement nightmare, especially since we do not normally bring scales to the track!

The other contentions in the proposal that "Both PCA Club Race Rules and POC Competition Rules discourage weight removal by beginning to handicap it with the first pound removed below 'factory curb weight' " and "The effect on the higher classes would be fair in that would have a more consistent rule between Zone 8 Competition Rules, PCA Club Race Rules and POC Competition Rules" are just not true. POC starts penalties at 140 lbs. less than curb weight in the Production and higher classes.

This rule should not be accepted without further clarification, in my opinion, and I will state this case to Bill in a separate email.

My other beef with the rules is with #10 changing the cut-off points for tire treadwear. The progression should be 0-49, 50-99, and 100-139) to be consistent with our past practices and SCCA rules for street tires.

TT