Toms Update Backdate proposal for 2007

[ttweed]

If you are suspected of cheating a weigh in and dyno are relatively cheat comparied to the thousands to tear down a motor. Rather simple really.

I still don't see how you think this is a simple solution, Kary. The practical logistics of measuring the HP of all competitor's cars are daunting, not to mention expensive. Are you saying that there should be a portable dyno in impound at every race? Those machines are not cheap to acquire and operate. I don't know of a single sanctioning body that uses them in the way you are suggesting, amateur or pro. If it is so simple, why is it not practiced anywhere in the motorsports world?

Almost all regulations for highly modified or purpose-built race cars are based on Displacement/Weight, not HP/Weight. That is the truly simple solution, as there are practical limits to how much HP can be developed in a given type of combustion engine with a specified displacement. For our Porsche engines, 100HP/Liter is a pretty good yardstick for how much power can be developed in a normally aspirated engine. For other types of engines (forced induction or rotary types) a multiplier is added to equalize them.

There are not any loop holes with weight to horsepower ratios.

Sure there are. With modern electronic engine management systems, it is a simple matter to "sandbag" or "game" a HP measurement. Fuel and timing maps can be changed with the flick of a switch these days. Even if you had a dyno set up in impound, and every car was measured immediately as it came off the track, someone could easily change the engine's programming as they ran their cool-down lap and came down the pit lane. It is that easy, and would be as difficult and time-consuming to discover as an engine teardown, requiring extensive and sophisticated examination of the software and electronics controlling the engine.

Even within a given "HP/Weight" class, there would still need to be additional parameters in any rule set to equalize cars relating to tire size and type, aero development, etc., that can make a HUGE difference in lap times between cars with equal HP/Weight. A car developing a lot of downforce is going to have an advantage in grip that can dominate any car with equal HP/Weight and no aero aids. I'm afraid there is no simple "one size fits all" rule that solves every problem.

If you are caught cheating, as many of you do, you are out for a year.

This is a very curious statement to me, Kary. What makes you think that "many" of us are cheating? Our modest level of amateur competition in PCA-SDR Autox and TT events is entirely "honor-system" driven, with owners classifying their own cars, according to their understanding of the rules, and enforcement of the rules is completely dependent upon competitors filing protests if they believe there are flagrant transgressions. In all the time I have been competing in our events, I have yet to see a single protest filed at any event. Almost all "transgressions" I have seen take place were out of misunderstanding or ignorance of the rules, not intentional "cheating." Why would we want to ban an owner from events for a year who made an unintentional oversight or mistake? That seems overly punitive to me, given the stakes involved (a 50-cent ribbon or a $10 trophy at year end.) And since our system is dependent on everyone's understanding of the rules, then their clarity, along with discussions and education regarding what they mean, like we are having here, are essential, I think. Regardless of how "goofy" you think they are, I do not see a simple "panacea" for curing them in what you have suggested.

TT

[Curt]

Come on now Tom, there you go making sense again.

Yes Kary we all realize how skilled of a driver you are. It was simply AMAZING to those of us who observed how much more skilled you became as soon as you started running slicks. But don't get mad, I still agree with you that your car is much better looking than any 996. It's just that we all liked your car better before those damn slicks.

[4est]

I agree with one aspect of Kary's theory. Pick a car you like, do what you like to it, and have fun with it. You will find others who perform in the same range as you, whether it is because of vehicle capabilities, tire performance, or whatever. Compete against them, and yourself. In my 993, I regularly run comparable times with Greg in his 928 or Neil in his TT. (I hope I don't drag them into this discussion). I look forward to mixing it up with my friends, and coudn't care less what they have under their hoods.
There is so very little at stake in this particular series; bragging rites and a cheap trophy. In a national series there must be a method for leveling the playing field for categories, but for a regional club (re: fun) series, I say just shut up and drive. "Run what ya brung."
I would dyno and weigh my car prior to the season, and pony up if I added significant modifications, say something that added like 15 more horses. With a hp/wt categorization, I could then add to the list of guys who out drive me with a similarly capable car.
Lastly, anybody who gets offended by the offering that some people sandbag could possibly be one of them. From my limited experience, I know of more than 'a car or two' or better yet 'a guy or two' who have a fairly liberal view of what constitutes "stock". These aren't newbies who probably mis-understand the rules, but guys who have been around a long time. I COULDN'T CARE LESS. If I get 100% of what I'm capable of out of my car and you beat me, Congratulations! (to me; I got 100% out of my car!)
I am a big proponent of 'shut up and drive'. Maybe we should investigate the reasons that this means so much to some... (or just shut up and drive)

[kary]

If you are suspected of cheating a weigh in and dyno are relatively cheat comparied to the thousands to tear down a motor. Rather simple really.

I still don't see how you think this is a simple solution, Kary. The practical logistics of measuring the HP of all competitor's cars are daunting, not to mention expensive. Are you saying that there should be a portable dyno in impound at every race? Those machines are not cheap to acquire and operate. I don't know of a single sanctioning body that uses them in the way you are suggesting, amateur or pro. If it is so simple, why is it not practiced anywhere in the motorsports world?

Almost all regulations for highly modified or purpose-built race cars are based on Displacement/Weight, not HP/Weight. That is the truly simple solution, as there are practical limits to how much HP can be developed in a given type of combustion engine with a specified displacement. For our Porsche engines, 100HP/Liter is a pretty good yardstick for how much power can be developed in a normally aspirated engine. For other types of engines (forced induction or rotary types) a multiplier is added to equalize them.

There are not any loop holes with weight to horsepower ratios.

Sure there are. With modern electronic engine management systems, it is a simple matter to "sandbag" or "game" a HP measurement. Fuel and timing maps can be changed with the flick of a switch these days. Even if you had a dyno set up in impound, and every car was measured immediately as it came off the track, someone could easily change the engine's programming as they ran their cool-down lap and came down the pit lane. It is that easy, and would be as difficult and time-consuming to discover as an engine teardown, requiring extensive and sophisticated examination of the software and electronics controlling the engine.

Even within a given "HP/Weight" class, there would still need to be additional parameters in any rule set to equalize cars relating to tire size and type, aero development, etc., that can make a HUGE difference in lap times between cars with equal HP/Weight. A car developing a lot of downforce is going to have an advantage in grip that can dominate any car with equal HP/Weight and no aero aids. I'm afraid there is no simple "one size fits all" rule that solves every problem.

If you are caught cheating, as many of you do, you are out for a year.

This is a very curious statement to me, Kary. What makes you think that "many" of us are cheating? Our modest level of amateur competition in PCA-SDR Autox and TT events is entirely "honor-system" driven, with owners classifying their own cars, according to their understanding of the rules, and enforcement of the rules is completely dependent upon competitors filing protests if they believe there are flagrant transgressions. In all the time I have been competing in our events, I have yet to see a single protest filed at any event. Almost all "transgressions" I have seen take place were out of misunderstanding or ignorance of the rules, not intentional "cheating." Why would we want to ban an owner from events for a year who made an unintentional oversight or mistake? That seems overly punitive to me, given the stakes involved (a 50-cent ribbon or a $10 trophy at year end.) And since our system is dependent on everyone's understanding of the rules, then their clarity, along with discussions and education regarding what they mean, like we are having here, are essential, I think. Regardless of how "goofy" you think they are, I do not see a simple "panacea" for curing them in what you have suggested.

TT

Tom I wish I had the time to sit and respond properly to each and every statement you have made, but I don't. So here is a short answer:

Don't like horsepower to weight, then my argument is the same for displacement to weight, same difference except you need to deal with turbo's whcih create more HP for the same displacement of a normally aspirated engine.

Loopholes, sure you can sandbag horsepower, but not displacement so I think your earlier argument negates your sand bag argument. As well, I think the sand bagging of an engine is much more obvious than a sand bagging of other areas of the car. People will notice this in a more simplified rating system. Also, what I am saying is with the exception of tires (which someone has serious issues with and lacking top ten status ) everything else is rather stupid to try and regulate because it plays little into the end result. And yes aero aids are really useful in auto-x

Dyno and weighing - I do not see the need to dyno a car that has a stock engine in it. The values are posted publicly for most cars. Likely that engine will be lower anyway than what is published. Weighing a car, not that is expensive. I have not been to an event yet, outside of PCA, that has not had a scale around. All the local race shops have them. Why is this such as big deal?

Cheating, Hmmm, many cars I see are not legal by their classification. Some because they are just competitive and want to win while others are ignorant of the rules. Simplify the rules because all those individual rules rarely help, but only confuse and create more loop holes, which is why this thread exists.

Penalties - well then is the 13/13 rule punitive? The 13/13 rule is there for safety so why not have rules in place for fairness, particularly if we have a set of rules everyone can understand! The 13/13 rule has been in existence for a long time, or should we just allow cheating with our convoluted class system continue?

-----

I think we all need to open our minds to other possibilities because the repetitive conversation of the rules each and every year, well seems to me anyway, stupid. We keep expecting a different result by doing the same thing, that is insanity by definition.

[gulf911]

I welcome you to come up and join me though your car would likely not be in my class because your car is much lighter than mine. Plus I would out brake you and out handle you anyway with superior brakes and suspension, not to mentiuon driving skill :O ,not much of a challenge there Nonetheless I would enjoy some competition in my class rather than just competing for top 10's, ever been in the top ?

Regarding me and the RC, could care less. Trying to keep of with these useless rules in our region, POC rules, and PCA national rules is a waste of time and money.

You all should buy a car you like, modify it how you like and go out and compete against the track and others that drive in your time range. You would be much happier!

Been in the top? Yeah, I do alright sometimes. I was #10 in 2005 at SM and my 3.2L, Kumho tired junker was less than 3 seconds from your Slick riden, superior brake, superior suspension, 3.6 carrying MI car.

I am pretty confident with a 3.6 and slicks , for that matter just give me slicks, we wouldn't be having this conversation... But with all those goofy rules and classes and all that nonsense I can't run in MI....lucky for you.

[kary]

Come on now Tom, there you go making sense again.

Yes Kary we all realize how skilled of a driver you are. It was simply AMAZING to those of us who observed how much more skilled you became as soon as you started running slicks. But don't get mad, I still agree with you that your car is much better looking than any 996. It's just that we all liked your car better before those damn slicks.

Curt, possibly it has been the weight lose in the car? the use of data acquisition system on driving line and brake points? Jae's countless effort to optimize the suspension for those tires? Driving with POC?

Same tire for the past 3 years and mysteriously my lap times are dropping each year....yeah you're right, it must be the tires. They must have a faster compound this year over last year over the previous year...

[kary]

I welcome you to come up and join me though your car would likely not be in my class because your car is much lighter than mine. Plus I would out brake you and out handle you anyway with superior brakes and suspension, not to mentiuon driving skill :O ,not much of a challenge there Nonetheless I would enjoy some competition in my class rather than just competing for top 10's, ever been in the top ?

Regarding me and the RC, could care less. Trying to keep of with these useless rules in our region, POC rules, and PCA national rules is a waste of time and money.

You all should buy a car you like, modify it how you like and go out and compete against the track and others that drive in your time range. You would be much happier!

Been in the top? Yeah, I do alright sometimes. I was #10 in 2005 at SM and my 3.2L, Kumho tired junker was less than 3 seconds from your Slick riden, superior brake, superior suspension, 3.6 carrying MI car.

I am pretty confident with a 3.6 and slicks , for that matter just give me slicks, we wouldn't be having this conversation... But with all those goofy rules and classes and all that nonsense I can't run in MI....lucky for you.

Talk is cheap dude, put the slicks on and let's see what you can do! You don't have to be in my class to compete with me.....do ya?

[Curt]

Curt, possibly it has been the weight lose in the car? the use of data acquisition system on driving line and brake points? Jae's countless effort to optimize the suspension for those tires? Driving with POC?

Same tire for the past 3 years and mysteriously my lap times are dropping each year....yeah you're right, it must be the tires. They must have a faster compound this year over last year over the previous year...

Ah Kary, you know the drill. If it's improvement in lap times in MY car then it is all about the driver. If it's improvement in lap times in someone else's car it's all about the tires.

[Curt]

Talk is cheap dude, put the slicks on and let's see what you can do! You don't have to be in my class to compete with me.....do ya?

Talk is cheap, but so is Dan. He's not buying slicks anytime in our lifetime.

[gulf911]

Talk is cheap dude, put the slicks on and let's see what you can do! You don't have to be in my class to compete with me.....do ya?

Talk is cheap, but so is Dan. He's not buying slicks anytime in our lifetime.

Its easier for me to use Anderson math...2-3 seconds faster on slicks, less than 3 seconds than Kary on the track = Dan wins with slicks!!

[ttweed]

Oh boy! I can see that once again, the natural tendency for every thread on this forum to go off on tangents and eventually deteriorate into trash-talk has once again asserted itself.

So far, my simple question about how to obtain a clairification of an existing rule has resulted in suggestions that we need a revised update/backdate rule that allows for approved engine swaps between different model lines, that we need a radical simplification of the rules based merely on HP/weight (or displacement/weight, as we seem to have agreed), that we should just drive Spec cars, or go back to driving stock cars and move up in class and beat up on the poor 944s , that cheating is rampant in the club anyway, so we should just not worry about the rules and shut up and drive, and finally the usual "if I only had your tires/brakes/engine/suspension/money/etc I could kick your A$$" trashtalk.

Regardless of the shortcomings of our rule set and/or the ignorance of, or cavalier attitude towards them of our members, the rules are what they are, and they are all we have to work with at this point in time. I'm just trying to understand what they mean in one specific area, here. I happen to believe that in the interest of fairness, all competitors should make an effort to understand and abide by the rules, whatever they are.

The Zone rules have been in place for a long time, and they have developed in an evolutionary manner over the years. Maybe they do need a "revolutionary" overhaul, and when Kary has the time to lay out specific details of what he is suggesting, I would be happy to listen to it. However, I think it is important that we not underestimate the magnitude of such an undertaking. It is not a simple matter, and could not likely be accomplished by any single person working alone.

We also need to recognize that there is some value in "rules stability." Lots of people in the club have spent substantial time and money modifying their cars in accordance with the established rules. Any radical changes would have to take into account where these people have ended up and create a similar "niche" for them, or we risk losing participants. There are lots of other organizations competing for the "performance driving market dollars" these days, and we could end up discouraging those who are not content to just "show up, shut up and drive" with their PCA friends from participating.

I think it is obvious, though, that this medium is not really the place to get an answer to a question such as mine, and I will pursue its resolution elsewhere. Meanwhile, I will continue to participate in this spirited discussion purely for its entertainment value.

TT

[ttweed]

And yes aero aids are really useful in auto-x

I take it by the smilie that you don't think aero aids are of any use at the lower speeds of an autox, Kary. In the interest of sparking some more entertaining banter, I would submit the following:



If you don't recognize it, this is a picture of a purpose-built autox special called the Phantom. It was developed by a couple of inventive Canadian guys in the last century (mid-1990s, I believe) who didn't accept the commonly held belief that aero aids were largely ineffective for autox. They went into a wind tunnel and found that airfoils can be designed to be very effective at low speeds, depending on their shape and angle of attack, etc.-- it's just that we rarely see such equipment, as most of the existing stuff is almost always designed for high-speed circuits (or airplanes, of course!)

This car develops SERIOUS downforce at less than 60 mph, and went on to dominate SCCA Solo2 competition for 4 years, often running 3-4 seconds faster than any other competitors, including the sportsracers and Formula Atlantic cars.

I can see it now--Herb Meeder looks at this picture and starts another phase of blacksmithing on his 914, comes out next year with a wierd front-and-rear-winged, 4-cylinder contraption and blows us all away!

TT

[Red Rooster]

Hey look....he's even in "AM"

I'll bet that's a SC chassis and he has a vario-ram 3.6L in it...and only at 42 pts.

[ttweed]

Hey look....he's even in "AM"

I knew someone would see the irony in that, JR!

I'll bet that's a SC chassis and he has a vario-ram 3.6L in it...and only at 42 pts.

Yah- if he would just lose the slicks and run some V710s, he could drop 2 points and could run in Improved class! That would be a tough nut to beat on the BRI...

Actually, I believe the car started out with a 3-cylinder, 2-cycle, snowmobile engine with a CVT to keep it in the powerband at all times w/ no shifting required. Truly a go-kart on steroids.

TT

[ttweed]

Just dredging up this old thread to post the resolution of this question as determined by the Zone 8 Rules Committee, so that anyone searching this forum or looking at old postings will know how this came out in the end.

My request for clarification of the update/backdate provision has been answered here by the committee.

The short answer is that the more liberal view of this provision is correct--there is nothing in the rules to prevent a car from being updated/backdated within its model range (virtually or otherwise) before being modified extensively and progressing upwards in class. Thus the 1972-73 911E and S can progress to AM class instead of IM, by backdating to 1972 911T specs and using that for the base model from which to calculate appropriate modification points, starting in F-class rather than I.

TT