Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PCA GGR Point System
914World.com > The 914 Forums > The Paddock
Pages: 1, 2, 3
nine14cats
A few of us run PCA events in the Golden Gate Region and Zone 7. This year GGR instituted a points system that took the place of the decade old system that had cars classed by type (mostly). This system needed updating and the points system addressed some of the updates, most notably incorporating the newer water cooled cars.

Unfortunately, the system needs tweeking to make it equitable. A glaring example would be Grant's current car in the same class as Andrew Blyhoder's ride. Both are in AX3. Or in Time Trials where TT8 has some cars that in technology and power to weight are very uncompetitive car to car.

I'm getting ready to respond to the Zone Rep in a PCA forum and encourage anyone wanting to join in the debate to do so. Go to www.pca-ggr.org and click on "online community". Just register and join in.

Here are some datapoints from my looking at it. I compared 2005 (the last season run under the old rules) and 2006 (the current season with the new points system).

I'll compare AX participants:

2005 = 227 different participants
2006 = 195 different participants

Number of classes where a minimum of (1) participant competed at least once:

2005 = 69
2006 = 23

Based on the above number the points system really was succesfull in cutting out the number of classes.

Now let's look at the number of classes that had enough particpants to qualify for the competition standings/year end awards.

Number of classes where particpants qualified for awards:

2005 = 26
2006 = 18

You could make the argument that people wanted someone to compete with, so they tried fitting into some classes under the old system.

Total number of drivers qualifying for awards:

2005 = 50
2006 = 53

Average number of drivers qualified for awards in each class:

2005 = 1.7
2006 = 2.5

This is a very interesting statistic. On the surface you would think that under the new points system that the average number of drivers qualified for awards would be substantially higher with the reduction in classes. I then decided to take out the biggest class in terms of number of qualified participants from each year (N class in 2005 and AX10 class in 2006), in case the number of drivers in these classes were skewing the data. Here's what I got for average qualified award participants:

2005 = 2
2006 = 3.1

Statistically, the percentage growth per number of qualified award participants was substantial, >30%. But in whole number terms....all this debate and we average 1 extra qualified driver per AX class? WTF.gif One nice benefit we did see with the new rules is the reduction of single driver classes from 15 to 3. But the data says we moved that single driver into a class that had 2 drivers and made it 3.... av-943.gif

It's my opinion that we need to make a few more adjustments with the new system.

Here's a few charts of what it looks like. The red bars show total particpants per class (even if just 1 time the entire season) and the blue shows the participants qualified for year end competition awards (in this case a minimum of 5 out of the 9 events).

Bill P.
race914
Bill,

Believe it or not, my 914-4 is in TT5 according to the current point system.

Anxious to see if changes can be made.

Greg
grantsfo
Yes it is an interesting system. TT is the most interesting given huge power to weight advantages in same classes. 165 hp 914-6's against 996 Turbos. biggrin.gif I'm willing to deal with mismatch in AX as power is somewhat equalized. However I wont be able to compete with Andrew or Steve N in AX unless I strip my car and throw on race slicks, install a LSD, etc but that would kick me up into AX2 or AX1! ..and they would still beat me as they are far better AX drivers than I. However I would at least like to have a chance from car capability standpoint.

If things dont change I'm just going to continue to build a car that gives me opportunity to shoot for top 10 places consistently at both track and AX regardless of classing.

Noticed the GGR classing system is down. Wanted to run my planned mods through to see where I end up in 2006 system.
J P Stein
Just for the hell of it (since I'm not involved) tell me what you're trying to accomplish.

A few things I learnt over the years....to your points, I hope:

Class inequities. We got those. The simple answer is RTFB. I would seem that NO ONE wants to run against Andrew......duh. Them guys didn't write the RB, but musta read it. biggrin.gif Show up with a knife at a gunfight......who's to blame?

Awards. Sure, use the NASCAR ploy......show up & run. biggrin.gif Those are your hardcore AXers. Our local SCCA uses your best 7 out of 9. 5 minimun ain't bad.....

Trekkor
We talked about this for a minute at lunch on Sunday and I mentioned power to wieght as a factor.

It might be hard to get accurate data as not everyone will get their car wieghed or dynoed confused24.gif

In ax5, where I run, I was just a second off the pace. I blame that on my taking a hit due to my own mechanicals...I feel I can compete in my ax class.

TT...that's another story.
Dean Thomas is in TT8 with me and was clicking off 1:54's at Sears with me as a passenger. If he had open track, I see him running 1:50-52's.
Where am I ever going to find 10 more seconds?

He's in a mildly prepared 3.0 911 to my 2.0 914-6.
I *might* be faster in few corners, but his speed on the straights, esp to turn 7 just blow me away.


KT
nine14cats
QUOTE(trekkor @ Nov 15 2006, 05:46 PM) *

We talked about this for a minute at lunch on Sunday and I mentioned power to wieght as a factor.

It might be hard to get accurate data as not everyone will get their car wieghed or dynoed confused24.gif

In ax5, where I run, I was just a second off the pace. I blame that on my taking a hit due to my own mechanicals...I feel I can compete in my ax class.

TT...that's another story.
Dean Thomas is in TT8 with me and was clicking off 1:54's at Sears with me as a passenger. If he had open track, I see him running 1:50-52's.
Where am I ever going to find 10 more seconds?

He's in a mildly prepared 3.0 911 to my 2.0 914-6.
I *might* be faster in few corners, but his speed on the straights, esp to turn 7 just blow me away.


KT


Hi Trekkor,

The power to weight for each car could be addressed from the stock base points level. The figures are published by Porsche. I don't think it would be that difficult to also just use a more educated swag on the points assessed or "groupings" of cars. Since there is no AX1....just put the zoomies there (i.e. myself, Randal, Andrew, etc). Besides, the DEC (drivers committee) are all race folks. Their collective wisdom could be used to tweak the system quickly and equitably. They only need to do it.

Bill P.
nine14cats
QUOTE(J P Stein @ Nov 15 2006, 05:33 PM) *

Just for the hell of it (since I'm not involved) tell me what you're trying to accomplish.

A few things I learnt over the years....to your points, I hope:

Class inequities. We got those. The simple answer is RTFB. I would seem that NO ONE wants to run against Andrew......duh. Them guys didn't write the RB, but musta read it. biggrin.gif Show up with a knife at a gunfight......who's to blame?

Awards. Sure, use the NASCAR ploy......show up & run. biggrin.gif Those are your hardcore AXers. Our local SCCA uses your best 7 out of 9. 5 minimun ain't bad.....


Hi JP,

I'm all for one to pick your poison. And I'm a big boy and I run with the big boys. I have hardware that allows me to challenge for a top 5 at any regional AX I enter, so I'm not lobbying on my behalf. I'm lobbying for the other 90 to 100 folks that are coming out, or the newbies. In Grant's case, he drives to an event in his car in 2005 and he would have been GM, (modified street for cars past 2.2L but up to 2.7L, I think Grant has a 2.4). Andrew would show up and be placed in X (anything goes for cars up to 2.2L). Grant goes home for the winter and shows back up in 2006 and voila...he and Andrew are in AX3. He didn't get to read the rule book, the rule book is new.

It is my opinion that the DEC should revisit the points classifcation after year one and tweek what is needed. They have the history, they have the knowledge and more importantly IMHO, they have the responsibility. A new group led by others has to play catchup. And I'm not leading the charge to change much, just do a sanity check. AX is actually in the ballpark as far as calibration. The Time Trial points are much farther out of alignment. All you have to look at is Dan Thompson's 4 cyl put put going against 993 iron in the same class and you know it's not quite perfected yet. No offense to Dan, but he could consistently be a tenth faster in ever turn at Thill and those stock 993's and 6's are going to find him in their crosshairs in the straights and the high speed turns.

I'm after the DEC to finish what they started. They should be the ones publishing data, explaining what and why. Instead they cancel the only review meeting scheduled and stay quiet. It's an absence of leadership more than anything else. Other's will step forward during the next board election, but why wait another year. This thing ain't rocket science or brain surgery. It's mousenuts regional PCA crap for god's sake.

Bill P.
DanT
I was after the Adhoc Committee (they proposed the points system) for 3 years trying to get them to address the starting points values....they are grouped too closely together, yielding just what you pointed out in my class. I can hold my own but not against cars with 3x the horsepower...All the tracks GGR uses are HP friendly... biggrin.gif

Going up the hill from 5-6 and 6-7 at Laguna is not going to be a fair fight between my car (even with the new slug) and the cars...(boxsters, 911s, 964s etc) in my class for TT.

At AX I think we are pretty close since HP is not as big of a factor...

Bill, the DEC is only there to pass judgement on the proposals presented to them each year...they are not there to write new rules or change anything....

If you or anyone perceives an inequity in our current points system, then they make a proposal to change them in some way like BillD did this year...
Our bilaws are not set up to enable the DEC to make wholesale changes...of course individuals of the DEC or the DEC as a group can detect inequities just like any of us and then make proposals to be discussed by us all and then voted upon by them...

THis is what happened in the early 90s....the Evolution Comm was made up of the DEC and some other interested folks and they came up with our old rules...

You are right the silence says volumes just as it did at the end of last season...
Larry is willing to concede that changes are needed and inevitable, David on the other hand is of the belief that things are just about perfect....but then again he and the majority of the Adhoc Comm that brought us these rules no longer run with us in TT or AX. confused24.gif
DanT
Bill,
can't say I am surprised by the answer you got from David wink.gif w00t.gif
DanT
wooohooo go Bill.

Now you are starting to get where Ken and I were about 2 years ago....
His responses are typical....unfortunately sad.gif
race914
I had several discussions with Andrew Forrest last year about dwindling GGR Time Trial turnout. We talked about the various reasons/challenges GGR is facing to financially make these events work out.

We did not however discuss the impact of the points system may be having.

What do you guys think? Is there a possible connection between current GGR car classes and TT attendance?

I remember back early 90s when I drove the 914 in the stock class "B" I was not too happy when an effort to reduce the number of classes eliminated all stock classes and I had to run with the 'improved' class "Bi".

With the stock classes, I didn't have to spend much $ to be competitive, the cars were more or less close to the same, and it was essentialy the driving that mattered. Not cubic $$s that were put into the car. The stock classes also gave the 'newbies' a place to start and not be completely embarrased by being compared to prepared cars. (helped new membership in my opinion)

By eliminating the stock classes, for me it meant keep the car as is and show up last in the timed runs, or.... spend a fair amount of $ to get competitive again. For awhile I took the third option and just decided not to run timed runs anymore. It was not exciting to always show up at the bottom of the list running against faster cars... Back then I had no motivation to "bring a knife to a gunfight". Eventually, I spent the $, upgraded suspension, tires, wheels, engine etc so I could have fun by at least being competitive with others in the class.

But at least back then, in the "Bi" improved class, after I spent the $, I was running against other 914-4s with similar improvements, not setup 911 track cars like with the current points system...

I know this probably doesn't play into everyones decision to run at a TT (Personally I just like getting the track time and seeing friends! (or is it just those lovey Motel 6 accomodations idea.gif ) But does anyone think the current points system may keep people from the TTs?

My position: I'm still going to run, and in TT5. Just not putting too much value on 'what other cars are in my class' in the timed runs. I'm going to continue to focus on improving my driving (with the help of TraqMate) and continue to gather data and make car improvements. I'm not going to worry how I can get my 914-4 to outrun track prepared 911 3.0s (which the current points system kinda pushes you into worrying about IMHO). The most important thing for me is having fun with the guys running around the same times, no matter what class they are in!


nine14cats
Hi Greg,

At this point in time I think the lowered attendance is due more with the fact of the increased alternatives (Trackmasters, NCRC, CDS, HOD, Leadfoot Adventures, etc) than the points system. And maybe from the fallout from the split that occured with the old CDI group and the successor group. I don't really see any of the old guard running anymore, maybe it was time to move on. I don't know. And several folks that were enjoying Time Trials moved up to W2W with PRC.

There have been alot of HPDE folks at the events this year. It has been filling up on the DE side (intstruction is maxed out). This coming year will be a telling year. If the TT series again declines in attendance, a new way to market itself will have to come into play. This in itself will probably make the point system debate secondary to the board. The TT series was a cash cow. At this point, it is not.

Greg, your car makes a great case for needing to review and tweek the rules. You can do all the suspension mods you want and coax a few more ponies out of that beautiful 4 of yours, but you're still going to give up more than 150HP+ to your competition. TT5 is the wrong class for the car. Power to weight you are probably TT8 and maybe TT7 with the suspension mods if you're looking at comparitive lap times.

I think the declining attendance is currently not the points system. I think it's a matter of GGR having to reach out to the market and having to appeal to the customer base for the first time. There are finally alternatives.

Bill P.
ConeDodger
I wish I had the time to really look over the AX rules and see what all is wrong. I have pointed out a few odd things I have noticed in the past but an exhaustive look is out of the question unless I had a miracle intern who was self-motivated, had good knowledge base, and.... awwww there I go dreaming again.

Since we seem to send a good number of competitive entries to Parade from this region every year, wouldn't it be a viable idea to use Parade rules for AX?

I don't advocate throwing out the baby with the bathwater if you guys who have taken a fair and exhaustive look feel there is something to be salvaged there... Again I have not looked it over exhaustively. I can just see something is smelly when I see 100hp cars in the same class with much higher hp cars.
Chris Pincetich
I really have no business in this debate, but am curious as to WHEN a decision is likely to be made. I was kinda flaky this year running in the fun group when I didn't stay out too late the night before and was within AAA tow range to home, but I want to register as part of a class next year in Zone 7/GGR. I have done enough reading around here to realize the RULES will dictate how to best spend time and $$ this winter.

I read the Parade rules and liked them, seems like a SCCA type thing. I would feel good running AX in an "Improved <2.0L class" especially since some 914s are going 2056 wink.gif .
race914
Ok, another Monty Python quote "let's not worry about who killed who..."

Love it!

PCA is track time.... period. Real measure is with SCCA, IMSA, etc....

Who cares how PCA classes cars? It's not like you'll win or lose any $?????


Bye Now! poke.gif
grantsfo
QUOTE(Dan (Almaden Valley) @ Nov 15 2006, 11:15 PM) *

wooohooo go Bill.

Now you are starting to get where Ken and I were about 2 years ago....
His responses are typical....unfortunately sad.gif


Of all the people to turn into the poster child for class inequity! av-943.gif I dont even think I showed up for enough GGR events to qualify for for potential award in my class. I have never taken classing too seriously. But if helps to make a point I'm happy to help.

Next year I'll be showing up in a car that while not terribly radical should give me a better chance of going after top 10. I would much rather chase TTOD than win some abritrary PCA class. I have always gauged my success by picking a few drivers who have consistent results and compare my times.
nine14cats
QUOTE(grantsfo @ Nov 16 2006, 10:02 AM) *

QUOTE(Dan (Almaden Valley) @ Nov 15 2006, 11:15 PM) *

wooohooo go Bill.

Now you are starting to get where Ken and I were about 2 years ago....
His responses are typical....unfortunately sad.gif


Of all the people to turn into the poster child for class inequity! av-943.gif I dont even think I showed up for enough GGR events to qualify for for potential award in my class. I have never taken classing too seriously. But if helps to make a point I'm happy to help.

Next year I'll be showing up in a car that while not terribly radical should give me a better chance of going after top 10. I would much rather chase TTOD than win some abritrary PCA class. I have always gauged my success by picking a few drivers who have consistent results and compare my times.


Hi Grant,

Hope you aren't mad I used your car classification as a "for instance". It was just such an easy one to use. laugh.gif

I don't think anyone will be arguing if we put the Hamilton Racing 914, Randal's Raby Silver Rocket, or Fritz in the same class and call it GT or AX1 for AX. But I'm pointing out to someone (whoever will listen) that some tweeks are needed from the initial rules design. It's a natural progression. Let's make it better if possible.

The TT classes have more of the inequities. My Spec Boxster for instance is in TT8 as it sits. A couple of 993's in there and several older 911's in various states of tune and modifications. Looking at a few of the TT8 911's, the older ones are going to have trouble competing with the Spec Boxster and the 993's. The mod points the older 911's get place them uncompetitive. It takes someone looking at it objectively to figure out whether to play with the base points on the cars or not.

I feel bad for the Ad Hoc committee members. Stick a fork in those guys, they're done. Not unlike many change agents they burned out long ago and no longer have the ability to listen or the desire to continue. Pretty normal, but a shame nevertheless.

I think the points system is here to stay and will work even better with some adjustments. If I didn't have all of the things going on with work I'd run for a board position or at the very least chair an Ad Hoc II committee. Since the framework is there, it won't be nearly the work as the original committee and maybe we can make the adjustments through the normal proposal process.

I just wish these Ad Hoc committee wasn't so toasted that they could be of help. That is not going to happen so we get on with life. I may just make of mess of things and step up to the plate and take a swing here...but I'm evaluating. I've got some heavy duty personal things going on and it's going to get busy.

Bill P.
Trekkor
I guess for me, in TT8 as well, is how a low powered car on 205's is supposed to be competitive...Regardless of the driver.

I mean, really, what would a "pro driver" hope to turn at TH, SP, BW and LS in my car?
Seriously, I'd like some educated guesses.

I just don't see it being very fair at all.

I'll run, but it won't mean anything to anyone.


KT
Trekkor
For your info:

I run: --- , and hope to run:

2:00 at SP--- ( 1:55 )
2:15 at TH--- ( 2:10 ) ( with turn five, "over the top" )
1:55 at LS--- ( 1:50 )

KT
race914
Hi Trekkor,

And your in TT8 with your 914-6. They have me in TT5 because of a non stock cam and carbs....on a 4!

Like I have any kind of chance running against the zoomy 911s...

No big deal for me. Not like there is any $ or trophys at stake smilie_pokal.gif

Now if this was my living, I'd put some effort in to make it equitable... but it's just a fun hobby so I'm not going to stress over it.... Let the 911 big sixes brag that they beat a 914-4.... wacko.gif

Greg


QUOTE(trekkor @ Nov 16 2006, 01:39 PM) *

For your info:

I run: --- , and hope to run:

2:00 at SP--- ( 1:55 )
2:15 at TH--- ( 2:10 ) ( with turn five, "over the top" )
1:55 at LS--- ( 1:50 )

KT

grantsfo
QUOTE(nine14cats @ Nov 16 2006, 01:07 PM) *

Hi Grant,

Hope you aren't mad I used your car classification as a "for instance". It was just such an easy one to use. laugh.gif

Bill P.

No worries I think its funny. It does make a fairly good point.
nebreitling
QUOTE

Larry is willing to concede that changes are needed and inevitable, David on the other hand is of the belief that things are just about perfect....but then again he and the majority of the Adhoc Comm that brought us these rules no longer run with us in TT or AX. confused24.gif


weird.... not that i have (or ever had) a stake in it, but anyone who thinks the TT rules are fair is smoking some pretty optimistic shit.
DanT
QUOTE(nebreitling @ Nov 16 2006, 05:28 PM) *

QUOTE

Larry is willing to concede that changes are needed and inevitable, David on the other hand is of the belief that things are just about perfect....but then again he and the majority of the Adhoc Comm that brought us these rules no longer run with us in TT or AX. confused24.gif


weird.... not that i have (or ever had) a stake in it, but anyone who thinks the TT rules are fair is smoking some pretty optimistic shit.



......and there you go. dry.gif

Thank you Nathan....
it takes some folks looking from the outside to put this all into perspective.

I believe that is part of the reason you saw so very few 914s of any kind or modification compete last season...
grantsfo
QUOTE(Dan (Almaden Valley) @ Nov 16 2006, 06:53 PM) *

QUOTE(nebreitling @ Nov 16 2006, 05:28 PM) *

QUOTE

Larry is willing to concede that changes are needed and inevitable, David on the other hand is of the belief that things are just about perfect....but then again he and the majority of the Adhoc Comm that brought us these rules no longer run with us in TT or AX. confused24.gif


weird.... not that i have (or ever had) a stake in it, but anyone who thinks the TT rules are fair is smoking some pretty optimistic shit.



......and there you go. dry.gif

Thank you Nathan....
it takes some folks looking from the outside to put this all into perspective.

I believe that is part of the reason you saw so very few 914s of any kind or modification compete last season...

...really? Do people who drive in GGR TT events really take classing so seriously that they just stay home if they feel its unfair? Wont stop me from driving a few events next year.
nebreitling
It would probably be a red herring to say that TT attendance is down because of the rules, but I think some people do take it seriously.

The classing and timing are the only thing that really distinguishes the GGR TT's from the countless other options for track time. Lots of choices out there.
anthony
I think what differentiates PCA/GGR is that it seems like a much more friendly and approachable atmosphere. I did SCCA AX once and those guys felt a little too hard core for my tastes.

QUOTE
I'm lobbying for the other 90 to 100 folks that are coming out, or the newbies.


Bill, IMO, the majority of those coming out don't really care about the class or points. Most of the 911 guys I'm friendly with just check Fun for their class and they also aren't interested in TT. They want to do HPDE and they have been flocking to Trackmasters lately. Maybe if GGR needs participants then they should expand HPDE to support TT?

I've never done TT or an HPDE yet but IMO the best way to increase participation at AX would be to make it more fun and accessible. To me that would mean more runs and less standing around and have a less business like atmosphere so that newbies don't feel so intimidated. Maybe they need a buddy system for newbies? I don't have a solution and I know a lot of hard work goes into pulling these events off but I'm just throwing it out there that the majority probably doesn't care about points.

That said, I've noticed that even the regulars don't seem to care so much about the points sytem. What I mean is that they, especially 914 guys, just mod their car in any way that they please and then just land where they land. I don't really see anyone purposely modding their car for a class win. (BTW, I've won my class a couple of times. There is no glory or recognition for winning AX14 or 15. Just my perception.)

Back to mods. Lots of the mod points don't make sense. My 914 is essentially bone stock but I loose like 5 points to a non-stock Bursch exhaust and get bumped up to the next class. There are lots of little things like that that incur points on a 914 - turbo tie-rods, 911 tranny mounts, etc. To me they are stockish replacement parts and should be free upgrades.

I'm building an engine for the 914. A 2056, a 2270, and a 2316 sized engine all seemed to incur the same points penalty. That didn't make sense. Other things like a non-stock fuel injection system get huge points. Go to Megasquirt and you pay a huge price even though it really won't do much for you unless you have a non-stock cam.

Some things like sway bars incur a smallish penalty and things like springs/torsion bars incur a large penalty. Both of course increase spring rate. If I wanted to build a crazy AX car I'd have massive anti-sway bars on my car and stock springs. The thing is, I don't want to mod my car just for AX. First, I want my Porsche to be a nice street sports car and then be classed fairly. For example, on my 911SC the logical upgrade would be 21/27 or 22/28 torsions. Ideal AX suspension, I'm sure, would probably involve huge spring rates many times what those torsions rate.

So for me I wish there were classes that reflected typically modified street cars. I think the SCCA went in that direction with the Street Touring classes. But really in the grand scheme of things I don't care that much and I realize that GGR's direction was to eliminate classes not create more.

I don't have an answer but I think Nathan might be right. The points system might be a red herring for larger issues.

Randal
QUOTE(anthony @ Nov 16 2006, 09:36 PM) *

I think what differentiates PCA/GGR is that it seems like a much more friendly and approachable atmosphere. I did SCCA AX once and those guys felt a little too hard core for my tastes.

QUOTE
I'm lobbying for the other 90 to 100 folks that are coming out, or the newbies.


Bill, IMO, the majority of those coming out don't really care about the class or points. Most of the 911 guys I'm friendly with just check Fun for their class and they also aren't interested in TT. They want to do HPDE and they have been flocking to Trackmasters lately. Maybe if GGR needs participants then they should expand HPDE to support TT?

I've never done TT or an HPDE yet but IMO the best way to increase participation at AX would be to make it more fun and accessible. To me that would mean more runs and less standing around and have a less business like atmosphere so that newbies don't feel so intimidated. Maybe they need a buddy system for newbies? I don't have a solution and I know a lot of hard work goes into pulling these events off but I'm just throwing it out there that the majority probably doesn't care about points.

That said, I've noticed that even the regulars don't seem to care so much about the points sytem. What I mean is that they, especially 914 guys, just mod their car in any way that they please and then just land where they land. I don't really see anyone purposely modding their car for a class win. (BTW, I've won my class a couple of times. There is no glory or recognition for winning AX14 or 15. Just my perception.)

Back to mods. Lots of the mod points don't make sense. My 914 is essentially bone stock but I loose like 5 points to a non-stock Bursch exhaust and get bumped up to the next class. There are lots of little things like that that incur points on a 914 - turbo tie-rods, 911 tranny mounts, etc. To me they are stockish replacement parts and should be free upgrades.

I'm building an engine for the 914. A 2056, a 2270, and a 2316 sized engine all seemed to incur the same points penalty. That didn't make sense. Other things like a non-stock fuel injection system get huge points. Go to Megasquirt and you pay a huge price even though it really won't do much for you unless you have a non-stock cam.

Some things like sway bars incur a smallish penalty and things like springs/torsion bars incur a large penalty. Both of course increase spring rate. If I wanted to build a crazy AX car I'd have massive anti-sway bars on my car and stock springs. The thing is, I don't want to mod my car just for AX. First, I want my Porsche to be a nice street sports car and then be classed fairly. For example, on my 911SC the logical upgrade would be 21/27 or 22/28 torsions. Ideal AX suspension, I'm sure, would probably involve huge spring rates many times what those torsions rate.

So for me I wish there were classes that reflected typically modified street cars. I think the SCCA went in that direction with the Street Touring classes. But really in the grand scheme of things I don't care that much and I realize that GGR's direction was to eliminate classes not create more.

I don't have an answer but I think Nathan might be right. The points system might be a red herring for larger issues.




Check out the posts on PCA GGR and also here.

What I read, concerning AutoX, is that people are coming out to compete more for some position,like the top 20, than for individual classes.

Two years ago, when my car was running, we never had more than 1 or 2 cars running "fun" runs. Now there are 20 blink.gif

Or people running TT are forgetting about doing the final time test as this doesn't seem important anymore.

I think there is a message here that no one is addressing.

People go to AutoX's or TT because - in the end - they want to compete. Are we enabling or disabling this core issue?
nine14cats
Hi Anthony,

Thanks for the comments. I agree with you that a large portion of folks don't worry about the point class. I'm actually one of them. I've built a few cars and then just run them where they fall. I've had a couple zoomy cars and I measure myself against TTOD. The folks that don't care about the classing make it easy for any points tweeking...it doesn't matter! laugh.gif

For the group of drivers that do care about point classing, since we have a system, why not try and make it accurate? And that's my point to the GGR folks. You put in a system, you might as well make it accurate. And since so much work and pain went into putting it in, it seems logical to keep an eye on it.

So by doing so, you can make both camps happy. The first camp, the ones that don't care about classes, will enjoy themselves. The 2nd camp, the ones that like competing under a set of classes, get classes that are more thought out and fairer. Not totally fair since it will always be a compromise, but as fair as we can make it.

Then comes your point about how to make the AX and TT events more friendly for newcomers. I've always been one to say let's make it as social as possible. I also like competing, mostly against myself, but also with a group of people that are running my speed. The GGR AX's attract a large number of cars, so they have always been more business like to keep the runs going and get eveyone their 8 runs minimum. The adjacent regions tend to attract fields roughly 50% or 60% the size of GGR and are definitely more relaxed in atmosphere. I've made friends in all the regions and I always have a good time (even when my car breaks!... laugh.gif )

GGR will continue to see pressure from the other car clubs. And I don't think that the folks that want a DE only experience such as Trackmasters will ever become Time Trialers with GGR. There are quite a few Time Trialers and this is their only series locally. If GGR wants to attract more people to the TT series to offset cost, they are going to have to appeal to the DE group. I've suggested moving the Timed runs to the end of the 2nd day instead of lunch to allow the DE to be uniterrupted, but this doesn't seem to be a popular option with GGR.

My crysal ball says that GGR will continue with the TT series, which I hope they do since I really enjoy it, and the DE crowd will continue to patron other clubs. And I think that's okay. I like DE events with other clubs too. Time Trials is just another form of the DE experience I happen to like. GGR does get excellent 2 day rates at the tracks they book, so it will be interesting to see how much the fees go up if attendance continues to be down next year.

Thanks,

Bill P.
Trekkor
Yes, I'll be happy running for top 5.

Depends on who shows, of course, but top a 10 out of 100+ cars should be an attainable goal for me.


KT
DanT
If participation does not pick up you can expect to see fees like the last TT Bill.

Probably around $275-300/ weekend. dry.gif if participation continues to hover around 80 drivers.

by increasing our participation by 20 drivers we would drop the cost to ~200-225/weekend.

Also if participation does not increase you can expect to see more joint ventures like TT #5 with PRC....

Or maybe they might try just doing a couple of events as DEs only...just to see if it makes a difference....try administering it along the lines of a CDS event where the ground school/classroom for rookies is at the track...

With hot lap timers....timed runs are really just for bragging rights and a shot at a $10 trophy at the end of the season.

Trekkor
I would love to get a shot at open track for two laps back-to-back.

At Sears last weekend, I don't think I had a lap with out some sort of hold up.

I'll do my best to support GGR as my schedule allows next season, regardless of classes.


KT

nine14cats
QUOTE(Dan (Almaden Valley) @ Nov 16 2006, 10:22 PM) *

If participation does not pick up you can expect to see fees like the last TT Bill.

Probably around $275-300/ weekend. dry.gif if participation continues to hover around 80 drivers.

by increasing our participation by 20 drivers we would drop the cost to ~200-225/weekend.

Also if participation does not increase you can expect to see more joint ventures like TT #5 with PRC....

Or maybe they might try just doing a couple of events as DEs only...just to see if it makes a difference....try administering it along the lines of a CDS event where the ground school/classroom for rookies is at the track...

With hot lap timers....timed runs are really just for bragging rights and a shot at a $10 trophy at the end of the season.


Yeah...but the focus and concentration leading up and during the timed runs is neat. And having the whole track to yourself is really alot of fun.... burnout.gif

I don't see the DE crowd and the GGR TT folks finding common ground next year. I've seen the DE crowd's comments on the bird board and it's pretty anti GGR. Most of them haven't run with us in that format, but the ground school, safety requirements, etc. is a barrier for these folks. And I don't see GGR changing directions so these folks won't be participating. But we did get quite a few newbies this year in the DE's and going for TT licenses. If we get an equal amount of newer drivers, it may be okay numbers wise.

Time will tell.

Bill P.
anthony
QUOTE(Randal @ Nov 16 2006, 10:04 PM) *

People go to AutoX's or TT because - in the end - they want to compete. Are we enabling or disabling this core issue?



Do people really go to AX to compete? Of course a few do but I think the majority go to drive their Porsche at the limits in a safe environment, and hang out with other car buddies.

I admit that it would be really fun if there were at least 10 stockish 914s showing up to every event. I'd be encouraged to bring my 914 instead of my SC and go head to head with fellow 914club members. It is kind of fun to be able to benchmark yourself against others in the same car.

Maybe the question here should be, 'Why with 5000 members and probably the largest concentration of 914s in the SF Bay Area, does the Club have such a small representation at GGR events?' I know at WCC #1 we had 30+ people in 914s having a great time autocrossing. So what happened to all those 914s? Is the GGR format not compelling enough? Why?

anthony
QUOTE(nine14cats @ Nov 16 2006, 10:09 PM) *

For the group of drivers that do care about point classing, since we have a system, why not try and make it accurate? And that's my point to the GGR folks. You put in a system, you might as well make it accurate. And since so much work and pain went into putting it in, it seems logical to keep an eye on it.

So by doing so, you can make both camps happy. The first camp, the ones that don't care about classes, will enjoy themselves. The 2nd camp, the ones that like competing under a set of classes, get classes that are more thought out and fairer. Not totally fair since it will always be a compromise, but as fair as we can make it.



I agree about making it as fair as possible. What I don't get is why GGR or any region has to make up the rules as they go along. Is there no other region with an equitable points system that works well and that GGR could just copy. (And I still don't get why parade rules are different. -referring to the topic Brad started recently)

Maybe one solution would be sub classes. Like a boxster class and a 914 class. Last years 914 Cup that Nathan started could be a model for generating more interest amoung sub groups and promoting the GGR events.

nine14cats
If they are anything like my 914, they're probably on jackstands.... laugh.gif

Bill P.
anthony
Why isn't the point system working right now?

Is there another page that lists the mod points so one could manually calculate points for hypothetical upgrades?
race914
Here is the GGR Rule Book section on car classes

QUOTE(anthony @ Nov 18 2006, 12:36 PM) *

Why isn't the point system working right now?

Is there another page that lists the mod points so one could manually calculate points for hypothetical upgrades?

ConeDodger
QUOTE(anthony @ Nov 18 2006, 12:36 PM) *

Why isn't the point system working right now?


For starters, the base points are a little wacked. My 911 Carrera has more base points in AX than my 914-4 and yet my Carrera couldn't possibly be competitive with my 914 on an autocross course base for base.

Would I still autocross if I really had a problem with the GGR rules? Yes. Does that make it ok to leave it as is and not make fair and equitable changes? No.
anthony
QUOTE(Rotten Robby @ Nov 18 2006, 03:48 PM) *

For starters, the base points are a little wacked. My 911 Carrera has more base points in AX than my 914-4 and yet my Carrera couldn't possibly be competitive with my 914 on an autocross course base for base.



Actually that is not true. Your Carrera should be quite capable. There are many AX courses where you should be able to crush stockish 914s all day long. I've done it many times when driving my SC. If there sections on the course where you can use the horsepower, then stock 914-4s don't stand a chance.

ConeDodger
QUOTE(anthony @ Nov 18 2006, 03:58 PM) *

QUOTE(Rotten Robby @ Nov 18 2006, 03:48 PM) *

For starters, the base points are a little wacked. My 911 Carrera has more base points in AX than my 914-4 and yet my Carrera couldn't possibly be competitive with my 914 on an autocross course base for base.



Actually that is not true. Your Carrera should be quite capable. There are many AX courses where you should be able to crush stockish 914s all day long. I've done it many times when driving my SC. If there sections on the course where you can use the horsepower, then stock 914-4s don't stand a chance.


Ahhh... you bring up a good point. I have been autocrossing for 25 years and rarely see a course that a 911 would have a horsepower advantage over a 914's handling advantage. When I lived in Minnesota there was one event a year called COMMANGSAC that would give the 911 leg room, however there were 25 events a year that did not, here only the Bay Area has that kind of room. I went to one event this year at Charles Shultz in RR and we were told that it was a "911 course" which was strange because only one 911 was in the top 10 and it was 10th. Trekkor and Grant were in the top ten while TTOD was a 912 driven by Tristan Bayless...

These rules were made by Bay Area people who culturally DO see courses where a 911 would have an advantage over a 914. Which brings up the question of relevence outside the Bay Area.

To be fair, our last course at Stockton did have a couple of straights that were long enough to give the 911 some leg room but this is rare. Something to think about...
anthony
First, remember that Trekkor and Grant essentially have race cars. Those cars are classed much higher than a stock 911.

I was talking stockish 914-4 versus your Carrera or my SC. At GGR AXes, usually Alameda, at least 60% of the time I feel that my SC has the upper hand over my 914 2.0L. And I'm talking courses where I didn't even get out of 2nd gear in the SC.

The year before at the Zone 7 2-day AX school we had a short and tight course where the 914s were king but on the long and fast course my stock SC was several seconds faster than Bi level 914s.

anthony
I was looking at the proposed 2007 rules. If this approved it will make 914s much more competitive.

QUOTE
Base points for 914s

From: Bill Dally

Proposal: Change the autocross base points for a 914 2.0 to 225 for a 914 1.7 or 1.8 to 200 and for a 914-6 to 250. Change the time trial base points for a 914/6 to 175.

Rationale: The current AX base point assignments for mid-engine cars are not appropriate. A base point assignment in line with the 2005 PAX scores would be more fair. A 914 2.0 had a 2005 PAX score of 0.881 which less than the 0.885 of a 911T (class G) which is currently assigned 250 points. The 2.0L 914 has a power to weight ratio comparable to an early 924 which is assigned 150-175 points or a 912 which is assigned 175 points.

The argument that 914s deserve a 150 point differential from their TT base points for autocross because they handle well is not valid. Under the current rules, car modifications such as springs, torsion bars, and sway bars are relatively inexpensive (in terms of points) making it easy to achieve balanced handling on all cars. Thus penalizing a 914 by 150 points for balanced handling puts it at a serious disadvantage compared to a 912 or 911T with suspension modifications.

This proposal does provide a "mid engine" penalty over and above the TT base points for 914s but makes this penalty a more reasonable 75 points for a 2.0L 914.

The base points adjustment proposed for a 914/6 is based on the fact that a 914/6 (class F) has exactly the same 2005 PAX rank (0.881) as a 914 2.0 and a weight to power (20 lbs/hp) only slightly better than a 914 2.0 (23-25 lbs/hp) and less than a 911T (16-18) and hence deserves only a small penalty (25 points) compared to a 914 2.0 for both autocross and time trial. The 914/6 is about 100 lbs heavier than a 914-2.0 and has 15 more horsepower - 110 vs 95. This is a small difference - worth 25 points, not 100.

As further data to support this proposal, the attached spreadsheet shows all times recorded for cars in classes A, B, C, G, and F for the 2004 and 2005 autocross series. All times are normalized to the TTOD (i.e., 1.28 means the time is 1.28 times that of the fastest car that day). Times above 1.5 times TTOD were discarded as outliers - this is clear from the scatter plot. The results show that the three 914s belong at 200, 225, and 250 respectively. The 914 1.8 has an average time of 1.33, slower than any of the other car types compared. The 914 2.0 had an average time of 1.28 - tied with an early 911T (250 points) and a 912 (175 points). The 914-6 had an average time of 1.26 - between the early and late 911Ts. Note that all of the 914s are slower than the 944 (225 points) and 924S (275 points).


DanT
QUOTE(anthony @ Nov 18 2006, 08:35 PM) *

First, remember that Trekkor and Grant essentially have race cars. Those cars are classed much higher than a stock 911.

I was talking stockish 914-4 versus your Carrera or my SC. At GGR AXes, usually Alameda, at least 60% of the time I feel that my SC has the upper hand over my 914 2.0L. And I'm talking courses where I didn't even get out of 2nd gear in the SC.

The year before at the Zone 7 2-day AX school we had a short and tight course where the 914s were king but on the long and fast course my stock SC was several seconds faster than Bi level 914s.

confused24.gif
ConeDodger
QUOTE(anthony @ Nov 18 2006, 08:35 PM) *

First, remember that Trekkor and Grant essentially have race cars. Those cars are classed much higher than a stock 911.

I was talking stockish 914-4 versus your Carrera or my SC. At GGR AXes, usually Alameda, at least 60% of the time I feel that my SC has the upper hand over my 914 2.0L. And I'm talking courses where I didn't even get out of 2nd gear in the SC.

The year before at the Zone 7 2-day AX school we had a short and tight course where the 914s were king but on the long and fast course my stock SC was several seconds faster than Bi level 914s.


It seems we agree then... What I am saying is that in GGR with your big courses with room for long straights the 911 based cars have an advantage. That is what I am saying when I say culturally relevent. In the GGR culture of big venues with room for long straights the GGR base point difference between the 911 and 914 make more sense. In SVR and other venues, we don't have room for the 911 to stretch its legs so the base points are unfair to the 911.
Looking it over though, the TT rules are the place where the need is greatest for review.
DanT
we never had the 911 vs 914 vs 986 vs 944S2 vs 951 with the old rules.
Until your car was in the street modified or fully modified classes you ran like cars against like cars.
suspension, tires, wheels, brakes, etc were the same for everyone...that modified their cars to the limit of each car classification be it B, BI, BP, BX etc...
car became less of a factor and the driver was what made the difference.
Now the driver may or may not have as much of an effect as the person the looks at the points and picks the car that looks most capable of being built right and staying within the points totals...yielding top dog cars as much as top dog drivers. blink.gif
anthony
Dan, what are you confused24.gif about?


QUOTE
In SVR and other venues, we don't have room for the 911 to stretch its legs so the base points are unfair to the 911.
Looking it over though, the TT rules are the place where the need is greatest for review.



Aren't we just talking about GGR here anyway? Or does SVR adopt GGR rules?


QUOTE
we never had the 911 vs 914 vs 986 vs 944S2 vs 951 with the old rules.
Until your car was in the street modified or fully modified classes you ran like cars against like cars.
suspension, tires, wheels, brakes, etc were the same for everyone...that modified their cars to the limit of each car classification be it B, BI, BP, BX etc...



It does seem like we have lost something. I can understand the other side though - if only 3 or 4 914s show up per event there isn't much class competition. The old system though would still work for Boxsters where a good number show up at every event.


DanT
all of the regions within Zone7 adopt and use the GGR rules..this includes, Diablo, Sacramento, Redwood, Yosemite, LPR etc.
Always have because GGR was the region with the most competition experience and the TT series.

confused24.gif because I would not call Trekkor's or Grants cars to be essentially race cars at this point.
Full bodied cars with most or all metal panels. Full interiors etc.
Until either of their cars go on a very strict diet I would not consider them as anything more than modified street cars. If you notice at the events that Trekkor, Grant and I all attended they did not finish appreciably higher than I did.
My car is certainly not a "racecar" at this juncture...at least I don't consider it one. Maybe others do?
Actually neither of their cars are any more modified than my car other than the 6 cylinder motors.
their cars are pointed so high because 914s are penalized at least 75 points in AX due to mid engine configuration (just like the Boxsters) to start with and then points for the conversions, and other items.

I would happily AX a stock (Bi) style 914 VS a Ki (SC) or Li carrera and at most
venues the well driven 914 would prevail...IMHO (your mileage may vary smile.gif )

BTDT with 3 four cylinder 914s and two Carreras (an '84 and an '87)
Rarely is there a course that really favors the high HP vs the light nimble 914.
anthony
You may not call them "race cars" but they are almost dedicated autocross cars. You can't really compare cars like theirs with flared fenders, race tires, and some fiberglass to a stock 914 like mine or a stock SC or Carrera. That was all I meant.
DanT
QUOTE(anthony @ Nov 18 2006, 10:49 PM) *

You may not call them "race cars" but they are almost dedicated autocross cars. You can't really compare cars like theirs with flared fenders, race tires, and some fiberglass to a stock 914 like mine or a stock SC or Carrera. That was all I meant.



OK wink.gif
McMark
I know this is completely out of left field, but what if you classed people on how fast they run on average. That would completely eliminate the arduous task of trying to classify an almost infinite number of engine build and tranny build and suspension build options. If you focus on the times, the people who are running fast are competing with the people who are just as fast, and the slower people are with the slower people. I know it's a crazy leap from the way things have usually been run, and I'm definitely one of the last people who knows anything about GGR classing, but I'm curious what you guys think about it, even if it is just hypothetically.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.