Bay area 914 people. For those of you who participate in PCA-GGR events, please consider attending the GGR rules meeting this Saturday at 3:30PM. Some mid-engine representation is needed to make sure our interests are considered. Details are at:
http://www.pca-ggr.org/show.cgi?id=2006rulesprop
GGR is proposing changing from the current class system to a point system. Its clear that the proposed point system was developed with little input from914 people (or Boxster people for that matter).
See http://sandbox.visualproduce.com/ru...s/web/index.php
The point system is supposed to have two benefits - more competition, and incremental modification. With points, there will be fewer classes with more cars each. Also, if you make one small modification to your car, say going from EFI to Webers, you will bump up just a few points - not all the way from B to Bx.
While these two benefits sound good, as a 914 owner they are of limited value and there are some big disadvantages. There is a huge mid-engine bias in the current proposal, it favors heavily modified cars, and it leads to very different cars running in the same class.
First, the folks making the rules had enough mid-engine envy that they gave a 2.0L 914 a 150 point penalty for autocross. That is, they consider the difference between a 914 and a 911 with comparable power/weight to be the equivalent of adding R-compound tires. As a result an unmodified 2.0L 914 (95hp) has the same points as a 69 911E (140hp), so being mid-engine is worth nearly a 50% increase in horsepower, I don't think so.
The argument the commitee used in making these rules is that the 914being a mid-engine car handles better than a 911. This is true, but the new rules also make it relatively cheap to balance the handling of any car with sway bars (30 points) - making the 911s just as balanced as a 914 but with 50% more horsepower.
Second, the rules favor people who modify their cars. For example the first 1 point increase in compression ratio is free. So someone who upgrades their 2.0L with european pistons (taking the stock 7.5:1 to 8:1) gets a free 10hp. If they modify the heads to take it to 8.5:1 its still free (in points, not $$). Going to non-stock springs is one point charge regardless of the spring rate, so someone who heavily modifies their car with very stiff springs pays no penalty vs someone who puts on a streetable 140lb spring. There are many other examples that favor people who move their cars further from stock.
I personally like to keep my cars very close to stock and don't want to be non-competitive because of rules that encourage extreme modifications.
Finally, the new rules will have all different sorts of cars running in the same class. The points equate adding sway bars with an increase in horsepower. Unfortunately this doesn't work. There are some autocross courses - like the one Trekkor did at Marina a while back - that favor horsepower, and others that favor handling.
The current system works well for 914s. We have lots of competition and small modifications keep your car in Bi or Bp with other cars with comparable modifications. The new system will result in 914s being penalized - competing with 911s with 50% more horsepower - and will favor people who modify their cars far from stock. I see no need to change.
What do other 914 club folks think?
Full Version: Bay Area 914 Folks
I'm underwhelmed by the response here. I guess folks don't care if 2.0L 914s are put in the same class as 997 turbos.
In any case, if you have an opinion and can't make the meeting you can make your opinion known by sending e-mail to the driving event committe at dec@dleong.com - see the following excerpt from the GGR site:
"You can send an e-mail to the DEC committee at dec@dleong.org. This will reach all of the members of this committee, and as a refresher, they are: David Leong, Committee Chair Larry Sharp, Zone 7 Rep Ken Park, TT Chair John Beck, TT Rep Doug/Dana Ambrisko, AX Chair Boris Teksler, AX Rep Another way to be heard, ask questions, or discuss the proposals, is on the new Online Community. http://pca-ggr.aegsys.com/phpbb/index.php "
In any case, if you have an opinion and can't make the meeting you can make your opinion known by sending e-mail to the driving event committe at dec@dleong.com - see the following excerpt from the GGR site:
"You can send an e-mail to the DEC committee at dec@dleong.org. This will reach all of the members of this committee, and as a refresher, they are: David Leong, Committee Chair Larry Sharp, Zone 7 Rep Ken Park, TT Chair John Beck, TT Rep Doug/Dana Ambrisko, AX Chair Boris Teksler, AX Rep Another way to be heard, ask questions, or discuss the proposals, is on the new Online Community. http://pca-ggr.aegsys.com/phpbb/index.php "
wow, very interesting and I am surprised that the usual auto-x suspects are not chimeing in........
I'll be in traffic school on Saturday 
... for real
... for real
i've been out of the loop, off the site, travelling a sh-t load and slammed with work and not even finishing the AX season, else i'd have chimed in sooner, billd. we've had threads about this topic before (last year, when the system was proposed). i can't make that meeting (work again), but i'll say right now that i support the proposed rules being "officialized".
in an AX, i don't mind going up against the 997s and such. power just doesn't make much of a difference, even in 'power courses'. look at any of the local 914 guys active this past year: trekkor, grant, me, howard, andy, albert and others -- we've all done pretty well for ourselves when we show up. i don't think i've placed less that 5th or 6th place overall in any event this year. i've been 1st or 2nd in my 'proposed class' as well. ditto with the other guys. yes, most of us 'regulars' have fairly modified cars, but none of us have an excess of power. trekkor and andy and i have pretty stout engines, but nothing like a 993/996/997. and of course, we can't forget nieslony and blyholder -- both of whom make that point that a light-weight balanced package will kick ass regardless of engine.
on the track, it's a different story of course, but they've got a seperate point system for that.
of course, the system doesn't distinguish between 110# springs and 300# springs, or a 19mm bar and a 36mm bar (trekkor) -- but i think that's OK, actually. R-tires, 140# springs and a 19mm bar is all you need to make the 914 semi-competitive anyway. further modification beyond that gives progressively less performance gain, IMHO.
and in any case, i think it would be fun to go up against the 911s, the 944s, the 986s and even the 997s! getting 10 drivers per class is much more fun that 1-3 drivers per class. 914s will hold their own, regardless.
besides, if we're outclassed, we can always just out-drive them
in an AX, i don't mind going up against the 997s and such. power just doesn't make much of a difference, even in 'power courses'. look at any of the local 914 guys active this past year: trekkor, grant, me, howard, andy, albert and others -- we've all done pretty well for ourselves when we show up. i don't think i've placed less that 5th or 6th place overall in any event this year. i've been 1st or 2nd in my 'proposed class' as well. ditto with the other guys. yes, most of us 'regulars' have fairly modified cars, but none of us have an excess of power. trekkor and andy and i have pretty stout engines, but nothing like a 993/996/997. and of course, we can't forget nieslony and blyholder -- both of whom make that point that a light-weight balanced package will kick ass regardless of engine.
on the track, it's a different story of course, but they've got a seperate point system for that.
of course, the system doesn't distinguish between 110# springs and 300# springs, or a 19mm bar and a 36mm bar (trekkor) -- but i think that's OK, actually. R-tires, 140# springs and a 19mm bar is all you need to make the 914 semi-competitive anyway. further modification beyond that gives progressively less performance gain, IMHO.
and in any case, i think it would be fun to go up against the 911s, the 944s, the 986s and even the 997s! getting 10 drivers per class is much more fun that 1-3 drivers per class. 914s will hold their own, regardless.
besides, if we're outclassed, we can always just out-drive them
Don't Run GGR autox anyway, and this is the reason why.
Will we be able to effect any rule change probably not. But might be worth a try for those who want to run their series and are close enough to attend the meeting.
mike
Will we be able to effect any rule change probably not. But might be worth a try for those who want to run their series and are close enough to attend the meeting.
mike
I see the pros and cons of both types of classifications. Ultimately GGR wants as many different cars coming out and that the events are as competitive and fair as possible. GGR is also trying to address the number of classes that exist - something that we as a 914 group no longer impact - but as Porsche AG continues to make new and significantly improved cars they too need to find homes. Clearly the points based system makes sense to keep control of the number of classes and foster more competition within those classes.
Yes - the Rules committe will need to be more vigilant to ensure that all drivers/cars will want to come out and drive because they can be competitive. If the classification system makes it unappelaing for any model or specific car - then they will go away, and we as a group lose out.
One major hurdle that I see for the new system is the ability to classify a car accurately by the car's competition. Today at least we know that B means 2.0 4 cylinder 914's. A is 356, 912 and 914 1.7/1.8's etc... and we knew if you had R-Compounds you were at least Ai/Bi etc... With the new rules your 914 may be running against a 993, and modified 944 (or whatever). How do they know that I am correctly classified? How do I know that my competition is classified correctly? It is much more dificult to ascertain if some one is 'mis-classified'.
I could go on and on about the merits and downside for each. In short, ya run what ya brung and race the guys (and gals) that are out there. If the new categories are incorporated - you will have more drivers that you compete with and get to know which should be a good thing. We will however need to be extra vigilant about those that have 'mis-categorized' their car.
Steve
Yes - the Rules committe will need to be more vigilant to ensure that all drivers/cars will want to come out and drive because they can be competitive. If the classification system makes it unappelaing for any model or specific car - then they will go away, and we as a group lose out.
One major hurdle that I see for the new system is the ability to classify a car accurately by the car's competition. Today at least we know that B means 2.0 4 cylinder 914's. A is 356, 912 and 914 1.7/1.8's etc... and we knew if you had R-Compounds you were at least Ai/Bi etc... With the new rules your 914 may be running against a 993, and modified 944 (or whatever). How do they know that I am correctly classified? How do I know that my competition is classified correctly? It is much more dificult to ascertain if some one is 'mis-classified'.
I could go on and on about the merits and downside for each. In short, ya run what ya brung and race the guys (and gals) that are out there. If the new categories are incorporated - you will have more drivers that you compete with and get to know which should be a good thing. We will however need to be extra vigilant about those that have 'mis-categorized' their car.
Steve
Steve,
I agree that there are too many classes at present - and some classes have too few cars. However we can easily deal with this by merging adjacent classes. A practical approach is to keep the current two dimensional class system where a car is classified by its base type (e.g., B for a 2.0L 914) and its degree of modification (_,i,p,x,m), but to merge base types with nearly identical PAX scores. The spread in PAX score from a 914 2.0L (.881) to a Turbo 996 (.932) is only 0.051. We could reduce the current set of 16 stock classes to 6 by assigning all cars with the same first two digits of the PAX score to the same class - e.g., all cars with a PAX between 0.880 and 0.889 would be in "B". The modification subclasses could also be streamlined - for example by folding r and x into p.
----Bill
I agree that there are too many classes at present - and some classes have too few cars. However we can easily deal with this by merging adjacent classes. A practical approach is to keep the current two dimensional class system where a car is classified by its base type (e.g., B for a 2.0L 914) and its degree of modification (_,i,p,x,m), but to merge base types with nearly identical PAX scores. The spread in PAX score from a 914 2.0L (.881) to a Turbo 996 (.932) is only 0.051. We could reduce the current set of 16 stock classes to 6 by assigning all cars with the same first two digits of the PAX score to the same class - e.g., all cars with a PAX between 0.880 and 0.889 would be in "B". The modification subclasses could also be streamlined - for example by folding r and x into p.
----Bill
i'll try to make the meeting even with my car "out of comission" ...
Andy
Andy
I sent this to the Rules Group.
Ken
Comments on Proposed rule changes
"Change to 5pt. Rule, (3.3T) in Time Trials."
I feel no change should be made for the following reasons.
1. In the time I have been active in the Time Trial program I have not heard of any injuries caused by a harness installation following the current specifications.
2. Others I have asked, who have been involved for much longer time, report the same lack of injury using harnesses installed as currently specified.
3. The proposed change seems to be based on a manufacturer liability disclaimer rather that on any statistical information.
4. The exclusion of harness usage in cars without racing seat is irresponsible. The use of any equipment that will improve safety should be encouraged. This change would limit some cars to only the stock 3-point belts. I have personnel experience where severe back and neck injury resulted because one shoulder was held in place while the other shoulder was allowed to come forward twisting the torso and neck.
"Points System instead of Class System"
I feel no change should be made for the following reasons:
1. The change claims it will increase competition. I do not think that the case. If this were NASA or the SCCA where many car manufacturers are represented maybe it is need. But this is a Porsche club and for the most part the competition is among cars of the same MODEL. 914s vs. 914s, 911 vs. 911, Boxsters vs. Boxsters. All one has to do is walk around the TT pits and listen to the conversations. Have you heard a Boxster owner ask a 914 owner for advice on how to dive his car better?? I think not. A points system might work in our Z class or classes where the cars are dedicated track cars but it does not belong in the lower classes.
2. Who cares if we have more classes than cars, the owners are free to build their cars for whatever class they want. Same as a Points System. Then why change?
3. The argument that in the existing system a minor modification will move the car into the bottom to the next higher Class is ludicrous. A minor change in the Point System does the same thing, in fact it does more harm. A 5 point change can put a 914-4 in the same group as 911s & Boxsters…does this make sense? NO.
4. As far as accommodating new models the existing rules are more than flexible enough for modifications to be made.
I feel that making a change to a Points System will do more harm-than-good for the GGR Time Trial Series. To Quote Mr. Spock, "The good of the many outweigh the needs of the few".
Respectfully,
Ken Holladay
Ken
Comments on Proposed rule changes
"Change to 5pt. Rule, (3.3T) in Time Trials."
I feel no change should be made for the following reasons.
1. In the time I have been active in the Time Trial program I have not heard of any injuries caused by a harness installation following the current specifications.
2. Others I have asked, who have been involved for much longer time, report the same lack of injury using harnesses installed as currently specified.
3. The proposed change seems to be based on a manufacturer liability disclaimer rather that on any statistical information.
4. The exclusion of harness usage in cars without racing seat is irresponsible. The use of any equipment that will improve safety should be encouraged. This change would limit some cars to only the stock 3-point belts. I have personnel experience where severe back and neck injury resulted because one shoulder was held in place while the other shoulder was allowed to come forward twisting the torso and neck.
"Points System instead of Class System"
I feel no change should be made for the following reasons:
1. The change claims it will increase competition. I do not think that the case. If this were NASA or the SCCA where many car manufacturers are represented maybe it is need. But this is a Porsche club and for the most part the competition is among cars of the same MODEL. 914s vs. 914s, 911 vs. 911, Boxsters vs. Boxsters. All one has to do is walk around the TT pits and listen to the conversations. Have you heard a Boxster owner ask a 914 owner for advice on how to dive his car better?? I think not. A points system might work in our Z class or classes where the cars are dedicated track cars but it does not belong in the lower classes.
2. Who cares if we have more classes than cars, the owners are free to build their cars for whatever class they want. Same as a Points System. Then why change?
3. The argument that in the existing system a minor modification will move the car into the bottom to the next higher Class is ludicrous. A minor change in the Point System does the same thing, in fact it does more harm. A 5 point change can put a 914-4 in the same group as 911s & Boxsters…does this make sense? NO.
4. As far as accommodating new models the existing rules are more than flexible enough for modifications to be made.
I feel that making a change to a Points System will do more harm-than-good for the GGR Time Trial Series. To Quote Mr. Spock, "The good of the many outweigh the needs of the few".
Respectfully,
Ken Holladay
Guys,
The problem is that many folks are reading only the parts they are interested in instead of reading the entire proposal. Not looking out for the club in the long run just their own little patch of heaven.
All of the folks Nathan spoke about have fairly modified cars not B, Bi or even BP cars.
As has been said in the past the rules are less draconian the more your car is modified.
For the more stock cars, the points proposal throws you in with some very high powered. cars. This is due in part that 914s are penalized points right out of the box for being mid engine just like the Boxsters.
Also points are not adjusted to the type of car it is being placed in. EG: a limited slip has much less effect on a 914 2.0L than it does on a 993, but both are given the same amount of points. There are a lot of mods that way.
140# springs are the same points as 350# springs. So many current Bi cars end up against BP cars in the points classification.
If I have my old 2.7L RS motored "6" I would probably like the points rules better than the old rules also.
With the points proposal there will be no STOCK classes since stock cars will be pitted against modified cars in whatever points total class the end up in.
I urge everyone that is interested in this to class their current car with the points system and see what their competition will be. I think some of you will be very suprised.
Probably not as surprised for AX as you will be for TT. Remember every big track we use is a high horsepower track. Not too many high HP 2.0L 914s running around. 
The problem is that many folks are reading only the parts they are interested in instead of reading the entire proposal. Not looking out for the club in the long run just their own little patch of heaven.
All of the folks Nathan spoke about have fairly modified cars not B, Bi or even BP cars.
As has been said in the past the rules are less draconian the more your car is modified.
For the more stock cars, the points proposal throws you in with some very high powered. cars. This is due in part that 914s are penalized points right out of the box for being mid engine just like the Boxsters.
Also points are not adjusted to the type of car it is being placed in. EG: a limited slip has much less effect on a 914 2.0L than it does on a 993, but both are given the same amount of points. There are a lot of mods that way.
140# springs are the same points as 350# springs. So many current Bi cars end up against BP cars in the points classification.
If I have my old 2.7L RS motored "6" I would probably like the points rules better than the old rules also.
With the points proposal there will be no STOCK classes since stock cars will be pitted against modified cars in whatever points total class the end up in.
I urge everyone that is interested in this to class their current car with the points system and see what their competition will be. I think some of you will be very suprised.
Probably not as surprised for AX as you will be for TT. Remember every big track we use is a high horsepower track. Not too many high HP 2.0L 914s running around.
Bill... I think the PAX system has it's own set of flaws that would drive it's own thread.
Dan... I agree as an autocross only driver with a hevily modified 914 - I will be on the sharp end of the classification system... I was just surprised when I classified how many cars that used to be classified below me in the old rules are know classified higher.
In reference to the springs comment... Back when I first autocrossed my silver 914... there was just EP, and that was a class combining what today is BI and BP - so we used to have this merge in the past. Stock was stock, and modifying in any way bumped you up a class. Whn the current rules were introduced they tried to remedy this by allowing different levels of mods, hence the i and the p split. They also added the BX and BR classes because those mods were very popular.
All... I am not sure the proposed rules are better or not. I am also not sure that they will serve GGR and Zone 7 well in that they might discourage participation by certain cars or drivers due to perceived or real inbalances in the points. This is the big unknown and might not truly manifest itself for a year or two.
We do need to address the classification. Porsche continues to introduce new cars. In the past 2 years we have had a carrera GT, 987, 997 and know the Cayman. Where should they be classified?
Whichever way this goes... the group tried its best to come up with a solution - and we should applaud them for all their work and effort. This was not a quick and dirty discussion... this has been in the works for a long time...
Steve
BTW: Don't forget the SVR Autocross at the Stickton Fairgrounds on Sunday! link: derporsche.net
Dan... I agree as an autocross only driver with a hevily modified 914 - I will be on the sharp end of the classification system... I was just surprised when I classified how many cars that used to be classified below me in the old rules are know classified higher.
In reference to the springs comment... Back when I first autocrossed my silver 914... there was just EP, and that was a class combining what today is BI and BP - so we used to have this merge in the past. Stock was stock, and modifying in any way bumped you up a class. Whn the current rules were introduced they tried to remedy this by allowing different levels of mods, hence the i and the p split. They also added the BX and BR classes because those mods were very popular.
All... I am not sure the proposed rules are better or not. I am also not sure that they will serve GGR and Zone 7 well in that they might discourage participation by certain cars or drivers due to perceived or real inbalances in the points. This is the big unknown and might not truly manifest itself for a year or two.
We do need to address the classification. Porsche continues to introduce new cars. In the past 2 years we have had a carrera GT, 987, 997 and know the Cayman. Where should they be classified?
Whichever way this goes... the group tried its best to come up with a solution - and we should applaud them for all their work and effort. This was not a quick and dirty discussion... this has been in the works for a long time...
Steve
BTW: Don't forget the SVR Autocross at the Stickton Fairgrounds on Sunday! link: derporsche.net
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.