Jump to content

Use of non-stock exterior mirrors ok?


Tim Comeau

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

I want to find out if the Phoenix 944-spec Series Director and I, the SoCal 944-spec Series Director are off base on this one.

Us Series Directors are for keeping stock mirrors in their stock location. No extra money spent on aftermarket, more aerodynamic mirrors. We believe the cars should all have the same exterior mirrors and the same total Coeifficent of drag.

If any mirror is allowed, then no mirror is allowed and I'll just remove both of mine because my big "Wink" 5-section mirror is more than enough. We have made changes to our rules specifically to be more inclusive of other club's racing 944's. Our 944 racing community has been divided long enough. We've made a concerted effort to bring the groups together. That's our feelings. What's yours?

 

(I edited myself on this one because I mis-stated the facts. I meant to state that there would now be a rules difference. Sorry for the confusion.)

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

Glen/POC dod NOT change any rules!!

And I quote from NASA Spec 944 rules - "16.1.3 Any mirrors may be used." So what is the deal? Aero advantage? Yeah right? I don't think any driver among us can tell the difference in a car with/without stock mirrors. Professional paid drivers we are not! Glen has not changed any rules to benefit himself. AutoSport is not his only source of income and not his big priority. In fact I think he has less of a vested interest in the series than you do. Glen sole motive is to have a bunch of people come to the events and enjoy themselves plus give him some competition. If he sells a few cars along the way great. But do not accuse him of changing the rules. He doesn't have that power in the POC. That responsibility lies with the Competition Commitee not Glen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well,

On the one had I really don't think mirror will make that much difference. Calif Speedway or Willow might be different. However... Mirrors do have an aerodynamic impact and therefore any change in mirrors if they do not have the same size and shape do have an impact on the car's performance. The 924S already has an aerodynamic edge. This is however counter balanced by the natural limitation in track width. Narrow fenders = better aero, but not as good track width.

 

Now mirrors... they provide no advantage other than aero dynamic no matter how minor it may be. They are an added cost. Smaller mirrors could be a safty issue. Here is why. Lets say we allow mirror to be replaced, not removed. So some guy installs tiny 1" square mirrors. These cut down on drag and meet the letter of the rule in that a mirror exists. It his however unusable. Let say one of those "I did not see him" issues occurs.

 

 

So... from my standpoint they are not worst things in world, but I see no practial need to allow anything other stock flag style mirrors on both sides.

 

 

 

PS... if it is already in the rules (I did not check) then they are legal now and this discussion becomes one of should the rules be changed to restrict mirrors or allow them to be free. That is different than creating a new allowance that did not exist for mirrors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mirrors on my car were useless when I bought it. So I replaced them with the cheapest mirror I could find at the local auto parts store. Choice, look online and the mirrors I thought at that time were running $100 a piece (Tim can get them cheaper from Autobahn, for all of us). Or, $15 a pair for these plastic fantastics. They are about the same size, perhaps a little bulkier through the width, lighter being plastic, more flimsy being plastic, but bottom line cheaper. Which is why I got them. I flat out started this series for the simplicity of the rules. If we are going to go back to worrying about every little bullsh*it advantage, then screw it. It's not worth the headache. But in this case it's also not worth the headache to argue over? On one hand, I don't think Glen can 100% argue on them NOT being an advantage (not saying he is, but just for arguments sake), but on the other hand, is it worth 2 groups splitting over? Pick the battles. This is not one of them. The rules are interpreted differently by each person. I read "any mirror" as, side mirrors are at high risk of getting knocked off in door to door racing, therefore make any mirror possible. And aftermarket plastic mirrors are cheaper than stock factory. Just because Glen's interpretation (and mine) means he is fitting his car with (way better looking) more expensive mirrors, does not make it more expensive for everyone. Because I went out and bought cheaper than stock or "cool" looking mirrors. I can see people worrying about HP mods, handling mods, but now Aero mods of such small consequence! Does this mean I have to go out and buy front bumper mounts because mine got squashed when the previous owner crashed the car? Because now my car has an "Aero" advantage? It's just getting too petty. Pick the blatant rule violations and quit with the petty ones. It's not worth splitting groups over. And as Eric alludes also, perhaps people with vested interests should not be in a position to influence the rules?

 

P.Dilly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again your rules. "16.1.3 Any mirrors may be used." Right off the Spec 944 rules page! Dylan is right (Can't believe I said that!) This is not an issue that needs to be argued over. The other Az 944 group doesn't even bother with mirror rules at all. They also allow 6,7,or 8" wheels and they are growing. Why? Because they're not pissing over little s*%t like this. Let it go and go race!! Grow the group, don't piss everyone off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

So how did Glen change the rules??? I'm confused???

Ken,

Yes you're right. The "Any mirror may be used " rule was very vague. That's why Steve and I and others went to work re-wording our rules.

We wrote the new rules to state clearly that any interior mirrors may be used, but the stock exterior mirrors must remain in place. Very clear now.

This is from your post on another thread.

I think you owe someone an apology. Since you are the one that wants the change. We are all enjoying this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric, Dilly, Joe,

Ok, good points.

Let's see what the other drivers say.

Eric, you're right in that the vague wording of the rules didn't change. Sorry for that inaccuracy. They have been changed for the NASA set.

I just can't stand it when guys try to jack around with a good thing. Leave it alone. We're starting to get away from the philosophy of the class and I'm worried about the slippery slope concept.

This is what happened in the RX-7 racing, or so I'm told. I had been warned by drivers of that series to not let little things like this happen.......because they escalate.

The spec-944 group in PHX is growing only because they have good leadership. Joe Stubblefield is very strict about the rules!

 

Look guys, here's my bottom line. I'm trying to protect the concept of spec racing Porsches, but if most of the drivers want to re-define what that spec is I'll roll with it. What is your idea of "spec"?

You already know my point of view....STOCK IS GOOD.

Let's wait to hear from some others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok guys. Eric is right. Glen did not actually change the rules. Apologies to Glen for the "rules change" mistake on my part. I meant to communicate that there would be a rules difference, which I can't support, especially for the reasons given. I haven't touched any other driver's posts. I've edited my first post, reworded the text to simply ask the question about stock or non-stock mirrors.

 

I'm tired of trying to keep the rules and this series on track and in accordance with it's original intent. I'm just tired of it. Much of the racing fun has been replaced with racing work.

I've always done what I thought was best for the class, not myself. Maybe I'm trying too hard.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My vote is stock for stock's sake.... Tim's argument that changes (however small) become a slippery slope, holds a lot of water. Every little exception to the stock rule takes the series further away from it's spec intent. Ideally every deviation from stock should be specifically defined as with our suspension mods and tires. It's only natural to look for ways to make the cars faster, to find that little edge, be it psychological or practical, but the idea is to be driving identical cars and let the drivers make the difference. From my casual observation, our "spec" series already has as many or more exceptions than most other spec classes. My feeling is that safety is the only circumstance that should supercede the spec/stock rule. Sometimes cost and practicality should play a role but this exception should be closely guarded and infrequently utilized.

Now those feelings are for an ideal world that doesn't take into account the practical and political realities of organizing this herd of cats into a cooperative group of racers.

That's why Tim gets the big bucks! (Toyo bucks that is)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal view on exterior mirrors is not that strong either way.

 

I do however want to let everyone know that intent of this class is to have equal cars racing at a low cost.

 

In the sprit of equal cars there WILL be some folks that may have to spend a few more bucks to make the cars stock. That is reality. I do think that we need to be smart about how we do that. Stock mirrors are not that hard to come by really. The bodies last and should be avalible on just about any 80's Porsche. I have seen glass fall out of the mirrors. These parts can be replaced by junkyard parts with no tools and or new glass.

 

Are they cheaper than $15 aftermarket? Maybe not, but I would not expect every 944 driver to be speeding $200 per year on mirrors.

 

Now...

... If we restict the rules on mirrors what will it do.

 

1) Will it reel in "cheater" cars? No - Does it enforce the intent of the rule? Yes

 

2) Will it make some folks spend money? Yes Will it cost lots of drivers lots of money in the future? No

 

Guys... Just like our spec wheels. 15x7 Cookies or Phonies...

 

Sure some 944's came stock with Fuchs or have other aftermarket 15x7 wheels. So will those guys need to spend money to get legal wheels? Sure.

 

However the class as whole will spend less since folks don't need to go out and spend money on the latest "best" wheel. That will cost alot more folks alot MORE money.

 

So... In the end the mirror thing is not that important from a racing perspetive, but is a reflection on the class. The good news about spec classes is the level playing field. The bad news is these classes can be very restricive on what you can and can't do.

 

Just think.... what is good for the class vs just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe,

when you take the mud slinging out of it (as in your post being so polite), then yeah it makes me agree more. I have the $15 mirrors, I admit it! I was lazy, I couldn't be bothered chasing down parts. I admit it, I did it!!! I'll look into going back to stock. I think I have some shells laying around, that's if Mr. Shafty Rea didn't steal them all? I just need some internals. Actually I think I have my original shells? They will need paint though? Hmmm, fluro orange, green? What's a good bright color that goes with, well, bright yellow? As for mirrors being a 'big' issue, I don't think it should be? We could certainly say 'then intent' is for stock mirrors with a view to make it mandatory in the future? But maybe we shouldn't be so quick to 'rule out' drivers/cars based upon mirrors? Perhaps a grace period for people to make there decision?

 

P.Dilly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the problem I have with dinking with the mirror rule.

1. Free from heads back. Headers, exhaust blah, blah $$$

2. Suspension - Can use any torsions up to 30mm, bilstein or koni, and sway bar size, any spring rates, camber plates, coil overs. All cost $$$ especially the torsion bars.

3. DME we allow to chip or not to chip. Again $$$

4. Intakes, some use cold air, some use stock box with K/N some just put in new paper filters. $$$

5. Lets not forget the infamous 5th gear trick we all need at WS and CSW. $$$$

You can order from the factory a 1988 924S with the m030 option that comes with roll up windows, coil overs and a plastic remote mirror drivers side only!!!

Our cars follow a rule set and we ARE NOT ALL THE SAME!! NOT SPEC!!Some use Koni's, Bilstiens, different spring rates, torsion bars exhausts, intakes, chips and it goes on and on with differences. Our cars dyno from about 122-138 RWHP and you actually think the side view mirrors are a thing to worry about?

How about building the cars and go play. You were right about one thing you are trying WAY to hard on this. As the drivers skills get up to speed (me especially) then you'll have close racing.

I don't feel the rules need to be tweaked at all. Lets just go play. I have yet to hear someone saying anything about anyone having an unfair advantage outside "our" rules.

If you want a true Spec then NO headers, no chip, stock intake, and specify exactly what suspension components you can use. I think the reason the guys in AZ are growing the series is because they are not argueing over little petty things. They are just playing and having a great time!! That all I want to do!! I can come in last every race and I'll still come. It's FUN. No one is getting hired by Porsche from this and never will.

I'm done with my rant and I'll behave now.

Flame away!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to prolong this argument, because it's not really warranted. So, I'll make it basic if I can.

 

If we are concerned about the aero benefits of a non-stock mirror, then should we NOT be concerned about the aero benefits of the 924S? Yes, it's a narrower track width, but who has done the calculations to determine the benefits of less drag versus the deficiencies of the narrower track in cornering? Does my question seem a little over the top? If so, then maybe concerning ourselves over the variable of a more aero mirror is a bit over the top too?

 

Then of course, we would have to start considering the advantage potential us (me included) 88 model 944 drivers have with the ability to shave the head on an already higher HP car (the reason I left mine head stock so as to not gain any advantage in that area).

 

Lets just drive. Lets address issues when someone has a CLEAR advantage over others. Lets nip big issues in the butt from the get go. But lets not worry ourselves over something as small as this.

 

I did say I would go back to stock mirrors for the 'intent' of the class and at some point I will. But it's just for the intent. If Eric, or Tim, or Benbow or anyone else turns up with better mirrors at the next race, more power to them!!

 

P.Dilly, out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O.K. now that the 2005 rules are out it reads.

"16.1.3 Any interior mirror may be used. Stock exterior mirrors or replacements os similar size must remain in the stock location."

Now we have a vague rule!! Before any mirrors could be used now we have "similar" size? How similar in size? Mirror dimensions or casing dimensions? So if it's the same size rectangle but has an aero front to it insted of the flat front we now have is that O.K.? It sounds like Dylans lighter plastic mirrors are now O.K.?

NASA CCR's state

"11.4.16 Rearview Mirrors

The vehicle must have at least one rear view mirror affixed such as to provide the driver with good visibility to the rear."

So if someone has a 924S with the M030 option they only need the drivers side mirror? Having only 1 mirror would have an aero advantage more so than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is coming from someone who ran the last race "without" a passenger Mirroe...it broke off without reason.

 

I can't believe this is even a post. Keep your mirrors on te car, if they fall off replace them. Try to use stock, but if you can't....no worries, put whatever ones you get and put them in the stock location.

 

We are not f1, we don't go that fast and aero advantage...c'mon we are really nitpicking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

The new rules say stock exterior mirrors in the stock location. That means plural, as in 2.

And for you jack a$$es who still think I pulled my mirror off for Tribute, call Bill Addy. The same thing happened to my red 944 the other day at an AX. I hated to, but I had to cut the wiring and send the car back out on the track. Bill was right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever had the probelm where your headlights went up and down on their own, again? That was the spooky one... and almost every lap in the same place... really strange....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Agree!!

 

I have been out of the car for over 30 days for the first time since I got it...

 

I am jones'n for some high speed therapy....

 

Anyone want to do a test day at Willow in January??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever had the probelm where your headlights went up and down on their own, again? That was the spooky one... and almost every lap in the same place... really strange....

 

Jim,

I had problem on my stock street 944 Turbo that caused the headlights to move up and down by themselves. Was a bad headlight motor relay.

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...