Jump to content

944 Cup Nationals... what was the leading configuration...


Packfill

Recommended Posts

Are MAFs legal in cup? ...

 

Nope on MAFs. Anyone have any further input on what POC 944's are producing in the way of HP?

 

If and when data comes in that supports a difference in base weights or HP limits for Spec cars in Cup, we'can set accordingly. Not married to any specific number, other than one that works. I think as we see more of these cars crossover and race against each other, we'll know more how close we are to getting it right. Based on Nationals, don't think we're far off on Cup vs Spec, when Spec can use any tire.

 

And Eric, glad you brought you up the subject on the various rule sets, think the discussion has helped understand the 944 world we live in. Thanks to everyone for the input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 944 cup

    14

  • Packfill

    12

  • Sterling Doc

    10

  • John Milne

    7

Dave,

 

If it helps the conversation... the last two POC races (and the Laguna Seca Track Record) were won by Mikael Weitze in 100% SPEC legal car...

 

Mikael, please chime in if this is not the case...

 

Remember, "I am a better driver than EVERYONE behind me, and everyone in front of me has a better car."

 

Some things just never change....

 

PS: Eric, I totally agree with DD. This is a great thread and I think progress is being made... keep in mind, at the end of the day, we all have ONE COMMON GOAL. To get as many of these great cars to the grid as possible...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get as many of these great cars to the grid as possible...

 

That's out theme song Jim.

 

Would love to get the POC boys in as part of the mix. Let's hammer it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave,

 

If it helps the conversation... the last two POC races (and the Laguna Seca Track Record) were won by Mikael Weitze in 100% SPEC legal car...

 

Mikael, please chime in if this is not the case...

 

Remember, "I am a better driver than EVERYONE behind me, and everyone in front of me has a better car."

 

Some things just never change....

 

PS: Eric, I totally agree with DD. This is a great thread and I think progress is being made... keep in mind, at the end of the day, we all have ONE COMMON GOAL. To get as many of these great cars to the grid as possible...

 

OK, I'll bite. I also whole-heartedly agree with this goal of more cars to grid, I just live in a different world here in the Midwest. All my racers are new and building cars. Chips that make no HP, and have been known to detonate engines, and headers that cost $ and make no HP doesn't make sense for building cars on a budget. However, people will always be sucked in by the prospect and claims by others that these things do make more power (or a better power curve, which would certainly be tuneable through these means), leading to more money spent, and more detonated motors. This does not get more cars on the grid, and opens up a lot room for frustration & controversy. In my world then, and moving forward from here, banning chips and headers is a smart move. The same is true for the fastest growing Spec region - Chuck's RM region. Your situation is different, as you made painfully clear in your post. In the end, though this leaves us divided on the rules. Maybe we should settle this at Nationals - winner makes the rules .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, my car at Laguna Seca during race and TT (track record lap) used a aftermarket chip so not spec leagal. It yields 3hp according to Dyno test over stock chip, yoohoo

 

Think about this for a while before replying in disbelief; Too many baskets and not enough eggs!

I feel DD has ben very successful with trhe current cup rules and weight penalties.

The time may have come to merge spec with cup. I can think of a lot more positives than negatives.

I would bring my car to the 2650lbs level and I'm sure it would be competitive at Nationals. Run Hankooks, collect "bucks" and the tire budget would be similar to TOYO.

Constructive thoughts, please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chips that make no HP, and have been known to detonate engines, and headers that cost $ and make no HP doesn't make sense for building cars on a budget. ...In my world then, and moving forward from here, banning chips and headers is a smart move.

 

Eric, I do not want this positive string to become another debate of the rules... what is done, is done... we are looking forward and EXCITED about the prospect of teaming with Cup... BUT I do want to make our point clear to you... I have been at this a pretty long time, and have seen MANY, MANY cars developed. Here are my thoughts..

 

Once you have reached PEAK AFM Horsepower... which is 137-140, there is little you can do to get past that. The AFM simply wont give the motor any more air, a much needed element to make HP. However, if you are the guy who is making 132, and NEEDS 3-5HP to feel competitive, it is REALLY NICE to have the option of adding a $150 chip, or a $200 set of headers to get there. What we are afraid of in the POC is a motor building war.. IF you take away all the cheap ways of getting a few extra HP, then all is left is a rebuild... this is now 4-6K... This does not sound like cheap racing to us... If the 140hp ceiling did not exist, this theory would not be valid. We have just yet to see the old spec car that makes more than that and prompts a rule change....

 

just my $.02...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mikeal, I was really disapointed that you didn't make it to Nationals as it seems to be the consensus that you are 'the best in the West'. It would have been great to see where we all stand.

 

There is no reason to abandon 944 Spec as a class. We have the ability to run in two classes and I think that's great. You and Jim can run in Cup (at a higher weight I hope). Eric and I will meet you at Nationals next September. We will all have more equal data from the same track and dyno at the same event to measure the difference, small or large. Let's have fun and grow 944 Challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Eric, I do not want this positive string to become another debate of the rules... what is done, is done... we are looking forward and EXCITED about the prospect of teaming with Cup...

 

The time may have come to merge spec with cup. I can think of a lot more positives than negatives.

 

 

There is no reason to abandon 944 Spec as a class. We have the ability to run in two classes and I think that's great.

 

It's good to hear the differing opinions and thoughts on 944 racing classes. Think this thread has been good in working towards getting more cars in the race fields for 944 Challenge with the possible addition of some POC spec cars. Hope that works out.

 

As for one or two classes, don't think we'll likely get a consensus here on what's the best way to go. We certainly want to keep the discussion constructive. I do think in the end this will be a NASA decision and one that is influenced greatly by the numbers, and that being the numbers we see at Nationals. Either way, hopefully the day we all end up in the PT leftover pile is a ways off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way, hopefully the day we all end up in the PT leftover pile is a ways off.

 

+1,000,000,000

 

Hey lets never lose sight of this. 944 Challenge is great class and that can be seen by the growth in each region. I am always concerned that NASA will use Nationals Entries to determine which classes are strong and which are not. Reason being the location of Nationals makes it much easier for east coast drivers to attend and makes it harder for west coast guys. For that reason alone I would aways expect the car count to be skewed torward east coast drivers. 944 Cup's core is in the DC area and the tow to Mid-Ohio is not horrible for many of them. For Arizona drivers Mid-Ohio is 2000+ miles One-way and no matter how you slice it a very expensive event. Just to give perspetive even the relavility close Miller race is a full day's tow (8-10 hrs and 700 miles) for Phoenix 944 guys. This distances just don't make National that attractive. I do hope in future years the promis of competition will make the event more palitable to those with the means to attend.

 

Lets remember however that for 944 spec especially local attendance and growth is a key to staying on NASA's radar. Here in Arizona 944 spec is consistantly the largest most cohesvie class in the region. This may also be the same in the Rocky Mountian NASA region. In Nor-Cal 944 spec is growing, but faces a very strong overall NASA region so would have a long way to go before being the region's permier class. In so-cal we have seen pretty piss poor numbers that are attributable to the rules changes. I would hope that maybe through 944 cup we can gain back those POC 944 drivers back into the NASA fold. On track performance shows that all the cars can play and run together so while a pack of 5 spec and 5 cup may not be as much fun as 10 spec it is sure a heck of alot better than 2 spec cars doing an extended time trial.

 

For NASA 944 spec the rules are set for a few more years still. However when we are open for changes I want to make sure we have a solid discussion on what makes the most sense for the class given the landscape of the time. I also want to make sure drivers have some input on what changes and what does not. I will never be a straight up/down vote, but clearly define insight full input should carry alot of weight.

 

Till then come out and hang with guys and race!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...