How to reconcile West coast vs. East coast for Nationals

[944 #24]

Maybe you could have saved the drivers, who switched to 2.7 engines, some money if you had had tighter rules. What a shame to have to go through that to discover it wasn't the engine. Waste of dollars.

 

The rules are written to be all-inclusive, not exclusive. If people want to run a 2.7 we don't want to scare them away. We don't discourage people from learning a lesson the hard way. The interesting thing about it is they could sell their 2.5 to recoup the cost... or even pull the 2.7 and sell that for the same price they bought it for. The initial output is there but these guys aren't losing any money by switching engines.

 

I think people have a misconception about how much it really cost to run in an "open" series. Anything you take off your car you can sell and very few people have Frakenstein cars with uberbuilt engines and $5000 suspension. Heck, a guy that used to podium with us regularly had a bone stock suspension on his car. I think the only real cost difference is that everyone runs Hoosiers whereas you guys have a spec tire. They're more expensive than a spec but even there exists a misconception about how long you can run a set of Hoosiers.

[Tim Comeau]

I agree, Freek. But it would be more affordable to many more drivers if ...........well, .....you know.

You can start out being inclusive of the cars in existence, or start out being inclusive of the new cars built. I had no cars in SoCal in Feb of 2003, when I bought my car and took it to Phoenix to race with the only spec group in existence. I drove my first SoCal event at Fontana, Cal Speedway, as the only car in the 944 spec class in March. I put the class rules out there and within 6 months , I had 15 drivers onboard. People believe in these tight rules. There are no hard lessons in order to learn that the driver is what makes the difference.

Anyway, I'm going to go back to building this class within the NASA chapters because we seem to be at an unproductive impasse here. I'll also keep supporting the 944 spec classes within the POC, SCCA, and PCA Zone 8.

All the best,

TC

[944-Spec#94]

I have said it before and will say it again. 944 spec rules are 10x better than cup rules for cost control and competitivness.

 

I for one will fight if we start changing the idea of the class as it was intended. When you consider the cars running in 944 spec or spec 944 or GSR consider that 90 to 95% of these cars were scratch built for the class. They are not adaptations or an attempt to be "inclusive". Honestly I believe a strong reason for sucess here is that the class has tightly controlled rules. No actual advantage and minimal percieved advantage.

 

944 cup rules do a good job IF you want mix ITS cars and PCA cars. They are rather poor attempt at equal, low cost 944 race cars.

 

Some may not like that, but it is how I feel.

 

Note there are currnetly 3 rule sets on the west coast. NASA 944 spec, POC GSR and SCCA spec 944. Each of which are different, but still very close and each class has the same intent.

 

Seems to me the intent of 944 cup was to gather up the existing ITS cars and PCA cars in to a 944 only group. That is a very different misson from the 3 944 spec classes we have here. It is not Tim's inflexiblity, but the basic concept for the class that keeps him from making radical changes.

[Tim Comeau]

Bull's eye again, Joe.

I can't move away from spec and still stay true to the spec philosophy and all that it offers.........

Cheers everyone!

[944 #24]

Seems to me the intent of 944 cup was to gather up the existing ITS cars and PCA cars in to a 944 only group.

 

Add "...and give them a place where they're not as outclassed as ITS and I." and you're spot on.

 

It is not Tim's inflexiblity, but the basic concept for the class that keeps him from making radical changes.

 

No one asked for radical changes... in fact, people that run your own series asked for a compromise... a compromise to which Tim has already said no. If you missed those posts I'll be happy to quote them for your convienence.

 

I think we have to agree to disagree about the solution. At this point we should just accept the majority opinion here and run together under 2 (3 w/Super Cup) rule sets with separate Champions.

[Spec-944#70]

Yes I and others have asked for talks to begin. I even asked for some suggestions. I did NOT say we would neccesarily agree to them but I was interested in what you have in mind! I love the Spec ideals and love running with these guys as I'm sure you do on the East Coast. My though was maybe we can get our 2.5's on the same page. It won't happen for the 2.7's or anything else that runs in Cup. Soi agin what would it take to put our cars and your 2.5's on an even page. If it's not possible then fine but I have not herd any suggestions as of yet. Our rules are simple and are only 5 pages in length. You have SCCA and PCA rules so how can we do this. Tim does want to grow the Spec idea as do most of us and we'd like to be able to include the East Coasters. If we can make a few changes and keep it in Spec form and you guys make a few changes you could still run Cup over there and then make a few simple changes to run Spec in other locations.

Make any sense? If not then we can drop the debate as we have our rules and you have yours and the 2 will never be equal. Don't just bag on Tim as I've herd nothing from your side except we won't work with you and we should just run SuperCup/Cup/Spec at the Nationals and call in a Championship!! The reasons our rules work so we and we get along so well is we don't wonder if it was so and so's 2.7 that beat us or his Ohlin shock setup!!

[Tim Comeau]

Eric,

Please keep running with your idea of seeing if and how Freek can suggest we can run against the 2.5 NA cars of 944 Cup. Forget about the 2.7's and other cars for now. Just the 2.5's. Let's see how far off we are.

I'll work on other things for now.

Thanks, buddy.

[944 #24]

Forget about the 2.7's and other cars for now. Just the 2.5's. Let's see how far off we are.

 

I can tell you that not including the 2.7s is going to be a deal breaker. We'd be willing to compromise with weights and/or restrictor plates to make the field as level as possible (if necessary since you guys might actually be level at 2600) but we're not going to exclude half the cars that would get invites to run because you guys don't want to run against them. If you're willing to run against the 2.7s with a weight/power penalty then we can start talking specifics on equaling the power and hadicapping for handling on both the 2.5 and 2.7.

 

We're willing to work together but we're not going to leave guys out in the cold for the sake of running against you.

[Candi]

I was just reading up on the NASA National data that NASA has posted. I was wondering if All of the NASA classes are considered National classes, which after reading I assume they are. Which means if 4 drivers from the 944-Spec group ran 5 races and obtained points, and 4 of them entered the event, you would be good to go as I see it.

 

I said it much earlier, 944-Spec and the Cup cars are simply 2 different classes. We set up the 944-Spec class as it basically remains today. Build a class, save money, have spare time at the track, and a great deal of fun. We have accomplished this and it will not change.

 

Tim I still say put together a west coast invitational type/run-offs and watch it grow! With the car count you have, NASA AZ has, and our SCCA group, it would be a blast! I think the 944-Spec class would have a minimum of a 50 car field.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is copied from the NASA website:

 

Competition events will include traditional road racing, time trials and a potential rally sprint.

 

Requirements to participate in NASA Nationals:

 

1) The driver must have points in at least five races in the class.

2) There must be at least four entries in a class at the Nationals by the September 1, 2006 deadline.

 

Entries that don’t meet the above requirements will be returned promptly with a full refund.

 

 

Best to you all, and I am anxious to see and hear about your Nationals!

[Tim Comeau]

Candi, I think you're correct on all points.

I've been dreaming of getting all of us together on the West Coast!

I'm in lock-step with you on that darlin'!

That's precisely why a number of us have worked to keep the spec rules nearly identical among the 4 groups.

 

SPEC is SPEC!

[944 cup]

Yes I and others have asked for talks to begin. I even asked for some suggestions. My though was maybe we can get our 2.5's on the same page. It won't happen for the 2.7's or anything else that runs in Cup. Soi agin what would it take to put our cars and your 2.5's on an even page. If it's not possible then fine but I have not herd any suggestions as of yet. If we can make a few changes and keep it in Spec form and you guys make a few changes you could still run Cup over there and then make a few simple changes to run Spec in other locations.

I've herd nothing from your side except we won't work with you and we should just run SuperCup/Cup/Spec at the Nationals and call in a Championship!!

 

Eric:

 

Could not agree with your assessment that we would not work with the Spec series for the National, as we did in the early stages of this thread, but once we realized the Spec position was that Spec was the better rule set and would be the one standard, we let go of the idea of any compromise.

 

My assessment of the rules for 2.5's in the Spec and Cup series show the main differences to relate to power to weight ratio, rear coilovers and remote res., Ring and pinion, metallic bushings, and wheel and tire size and type. The nature of these differences are such that our cars would need to make substantial changes to find any middle ground. This would cause 944 racers to endure substantial hardship to come into compliance for the sake of a National, unless changes in minimum weights were used to level things out.

 

And as I understand it from this forum, 944 Spec is not interested in making any changes to the minimum weights. Hence, my observation that the outcome would be for the 944's would be to run in 3 classes at the National. I did not reach this conclusion because the Cup just wanted to run against the Cup for a National Cup Title or our rule set is better. I just saw no practical way to make up for the differences except using weight as the vehicle, which was not an option per Spec viewpoint. Could we accurately reset weights to level the playing field? Don't know.

 

Below I go thru these areas presuming all cars are being built to the maximum allowed, which is not the case for Cup cars, no idea about Spec cars. And,I'm not suggesting either series be asked to make any changes to any of these areas to compete in a National. Not saying either series is better or worse then the other, just different. And if they chose to stay different, that's fine too.

 

On the power to weight, hard to say which is faster in a straight line. The 2.5 Cup PCA cars cannot shave the head to 10.5: 1 compression like the Spec cars but can update to '88 specs to get to 10.2:1 or early Euro spec( 10.6:1 with a weight adjustment). Cup Scca cars can go to 10.7:1 . The Cup cars are anywhere from 50 to 200 lbs heavier then the Spec cars.

 

With the wheel and tires differences, the advantage would likely go to the Cup cars with Hoosiers. Not practical to have extra sets of Toyos or Hoosiers for 1 National weekend. Could adjust weight.

 

Suspension differences, not practical to change over rear coilovers or remotes for one National weekend. Not sure that much of an advantage here since 2004 Cup Champ raced with torsion bars. But weight could be used.

 

Ring and pinion for Cup cars would be an advantge at most tracks, but the 2 or 3 cars using an nonstock R&P are already weight penalized.

 

Metallic bushings is a advantage for Cup cars, could be weight adjusted, removing would not be practical.

 

 

Then there is your problem with the 2.7's. Like the Marines, we leave no one behind. Unreasonable to think we would race with 2.7 racers all year, and then exclude them for the Nationals, as previously mentioned on this forum.. Of course the Super Cup would need to be there too, as a separate class.

 

So, there it is from the Cup viewpoint. Thanks for asking.

[944 cup]

I have said it before and will say it again. 944 spec rules are 10x better than cup rules for cost control and competitivness.

 

 

944 cup rules do a good job IF you want mix ITS cars and PCA cars. They are rather poor attempt at equal, low cost 944 race cars.

 

Joe:

 

You're a man wise beyond your experience. I've never seen you at a Cup race on track, in the paddock, or in the stands watching, yet you have such a command of the Cup series. Impressive, the 944 Spec series is so fortunate to have someone like you.

[PeanutinCA]

OK, I'm back online. I would like to speak for myself. I don't think the Spec rules are the be all end all, we shouldn't be so arrogant. Yes they are good, good for us with the cars built to spec. And had I stayed in NY, not moved to SoCal then chances are the East Coast rules would be good had I built a car to those. It does come across as very jackass like (sorry guys) to say we 'wont' compromise! Perhaps, we 'can't' for the various reasons, but atleast from what I can see, the East Coast guys are trying. (Hey, I'm in their hood, I need to show face! ). But, reading the last few posts on all the difference, it does sound difficult. We know are cars right? We all know what problems we have with schooling 911's in the corners then losing them on the straights, only to catch them in the next corner. Well, I can see cars with ring/pinion changes possibly being an issue for those reasons. That would be hard to sure up with weight alone. Could we SoCal guys not use Hoosiers for a National Event? Would mean a change in Setup, but we would all be in the same boat (from the West). The biggest trick is knowing what weight to asses each car? Could we run this year as the seperate classes and whilst there, do some driver/car testing to ascertain the correct weight bias to set to each class to make it close racing? We should entertain the ideas and thoughts, not just say it's our rules that should be run. We are not like that racing each other, why would we be like that racing guys from across the country?

 

The guys that know the rules from both sides well should discuss further how things or 'which' things could be evened up?

 

Cheers,

P.Dilly.

[944 cup]

The biggest trick is knowing what weight to asses each car? Could we run this year as the seperate classes and whilst there, do some driver/car testing to ascertain the correct weight bias to set to each class to make it close racing?

 

This makes sense to me.

[Spec-944#70]

Cool Dave - I don't know what scares me more the fact that we're making some headway or the fact your agreeing with Dylan!!!

[Tim Comeau]

Dave, the spec rules are cheaper, simpler and result in very equal cars. That's a given. You don't have to watch a race to see the effect of the rules.

Guys,

Trying to add weight to account for changes in suspension bushings, tires, wheels, shocks, etc., and any possible combination thereof would be extremely difficult, to say the least. Can you imagine how many laps it would take to do the testing with the same driver at the same track to try to gather the data? Unrealistic.

The best idea I have for gathering data like this is for someone to build a pure spec car on the Eastcoast, (there's no such thing as a pure Cup car with all the rules variations to test out here) then have some hand-picked drivers see how it compares in lap times to some Cup cars on familiar tracks. That would give Dave an idea of what weight to add when a spec car runs in the regular Cup series.

The best we can do right now is run with the classes as is. Our cars are just too different, not only in terms of installed equipment, but in philosophy. I see no workable way to even the Cup cars and spec cars out, either by adding weight or by buying new gear like shocks, tires, wheels or a 2.7 engine.

[bmw22]

There is already a solution, though some of you may not like it since you are talking about 944 cars competing only with 944 cars. GTS Challenge has classes that all you guys can run competitively in. Just by making minor mods or weight adjustments you can be a the front of GTS1, GTS2 or GTS3. Our 2006 rules are almost finished and they will be posted on 12-31-05. GTS Challenge is running at the Nationals. 4 yars ago when we started GTS our goal was to make a fun and competitive series for all German makes. The fragmentation of German cars nationwide in NASA is a bit of a problem. Spec 944, 944 Cup, Spec-E30, GTI Cup, etc... are great classes, but the potential for growth is limited on a national scale because of the differences from region to region. GTS has seen great growth in just a few years because it's "run what you brung" nature. We don't limit modifications because there are dozens of prep levels out there between BMW CCA, POC, PCA, SCCA and NASA. We get Speed World cars, Grand Am cars, and just about every flavor of German race car you can imagine. We even had a Small block chevy 911 at VIR. In 2004 NASA Ohio/Indiana held a huge spectator event at Mid Ohio and in only our 2nd year, GTS Challenge had the largest most competitive field at the event.

 

The point of my post isn't to pat GTS on the back, but to point out that bring many into one group is much stronger than have several fragmented groups scattered about.

 

Lastly, here is an open invitation for anyone who wants to run at the Nationals to run with GTS. This is NOT a suggestion that you leave your current series, just an option for those that want to be at the Nationals.

 

Maybe it's time that the leaders of all the German series have a summit and see if there is something we can do collectively to benefit all.

[944-Spec#94]

I have said it before and will say it again. 944 spec rules are 10x better than cup rules for cost control and competitivness.

 

 

944 cup rules do a good job IF you want mix ITS cars and PCA cars. They are rather poor attempt at equal, low cost 944 race cars.

 

Joe:

 

You're a man wise beyond your experience. I've never seen you at a Cup race on track, in the paddock, or in the stands watching, yet you have such a command of the Cup series. Impressive, the 944 Spec series is so fortunate to have someone like you.

 

 

Dave,

I am not sure what to make of this comment. What I do know is that if I want build a "to the max" 944 cup car it WILL cost me MORE than my current to the max 944 spec car. I just need to read the rules to see that. Currently my car only lacks a limited slip in keeping from being a on the limit car and having built it myself I know what it takes. There are many others like mine that are on the limit. That is one of great advantages of 944 spec. A max prepared car costs the same or less as maybe an average prepared 944 cup. So this means if want to be at the front of 944 cup the option is simple. Spend my way a car that is better prepared that all the rest.

 

In 944 spec top cars are already well prepared so doing basic prep is such that it IS THE LIMIT. It is very hard if not IMPOSSIBLE to spend your way to the front of 944 spec.

 

That is why I think the rules are better for cost control. Yes they suck if you have a PCA or ITS car, but I have not seen any complaints about that here.

[944 cup]

I have said it before and will say it again. 944 spec rules are 10x better than cup rules for cost control and competitivness.

 

 

944 cup rules do a good job IF you want mix ITS cars and PCA cars. They are rather poor attempt at equal, low cost 944 race cars.

 

Joe:

 

You're a man wise beyond your experience. I've never seen you at a Cup race on track, in the paddock, or in the stands watching, yet you have such a command of the Cup series. Impressive, the 944 Spec series is so fortunate to have someone like you.

 

 

Dave,

I am not sure what to make of this comment. What I do know is that if I want build a "to the max" 944 cup car it WILL cost me MORE than my current to the max 944 spec car. I just need to read the rules to see that. A max prepared car costs the same or less as maybe an average prepared 944 cup. So this means if want to be at the front of 944 cup the option is simple. Spend my way a car that is better prepared that all the rest.

 

In 944 spec top cars are already well prepared so doing basic prep is such that it IS THE LIMIT. It is very hard if not IMPOSSIBLE to spend your way to the front of 944 spec.

 

That is why I think the rules are better for cost control. Yes they suck if you have a PCA or ITS car, but I have not seen any complaints about that here.

 

 

Joe:

 

It deserves repeating, 944 Spec is so fortunate to have you. And thanks again for telling us here in the 944 Cup all about the problems we have with our series.

[944 #24]

So this means if want to be at the front of 944 cup the option is simple. Spend my way a car that is better prepared that all the rest.

 

That's where you're wrong. Prepping a car to the limit will not get you up front and you do not need a fully prepped car to be there. Contrary to popular belief there is a small enough difference between cars of different prep levels that drivers can and do make the difference. You have not seen the cars on or off the track so other than engine size you have abolsutely no idea as the prep levels of any of the cars that appear in the standings. Your assumption that cash buys points is just that, an assumption.

 

There's no denying that Spec is better for cost control but I believe his post was in response to you saying it's 10x better for competitiveness and a rather poor attempt at equal low cost racing. I challenge you to find any budget Cup driver that would say their car isn't competitive enough. As an FYI, probably 90% the field qualify as budget racers. Just out of curiousity, what does a "competitive" Spec car cost out of the box?

 

edit: I just looked at your results and I'm wondering how Spec rules can be 10x better for competitiveness when they're so restrictive you're only getting 3 other cars to compete against. As an ideal they're clearly more "level" but practcally speaking it doesn't look like they're getting the job done.

 

I'd also like to call attention to the fact that Tim's solution requires someone out East to go out on a limb and then do the testing when they could just build a Cup car and race. The "group testing" that quite a few had agreed on as a decent approach doesn't work for him. It's Spec cars in east or nothing, even for this leveling exercise. Now does anyone see what we mean by inflexible?

Edited December 29, 2005 by Guest

[944 cup]

Lastly, here is an open invitation for anyone who wants to run at the Nationals to run with GTS. This is NOT a suggestion that you leave your current series, just an option for those that want to be at the Nationals.

 

Maybe it's time that the leaders of all the German series have a summit and see if there is something we can do collectively to benefit all.

 

Mark:

 

Thanks for the invite. Will pass on the opportunity here at the 944 Cup. This past year we ran with GTS and Spec E30 in the Autobahn run group. The GTS Director has requested from NASA that the GTS be moved out of the Autobahn run group for 2006 due to incompatibility.

 

That and the fact that the 944 Cup was the largest series here in NASA MidAtlantic for 2005 ( like you not patting ourselves on the back) would suggest were better off keeping the 944 identity going vs the German thing.

 

Thanks again.

[topley]

Can someone point me to the official 944 Cup message boards? I'm having a hard time finding the "correct" forum to go in and trash talk its own members and directors.

 

Thanks guys, you've done a fantastic job here.

-jay

[944 #24]

Can someone point me to the official 944 Cup message boards? I'm having a hard time finding the "correct" forum to go in and trash talk its own members and directors.

Who's trash talking? I haven't seen anything here but open debate.

 

Forum link on 44cup.com - http://44cup.zeroforum.com

 

Come on over and say "Hi".

[Tim Comeau]

Jay, It's ok. Really, man. I appreciate the support but it's ok to get this stuff out in the open. People are pretty much staying respectful. LOL!

Not every attempt at merging any two things will be successful.

That's ok, too.

We don't need the 944 Cup Series at all. We are a NASA class. They don't need us to exist either. They're ok, we're ok. We're just too different to mix. We'd have to destroy what 944 spec is in order to mix with the Cup cars. We could keep our cars exactly as is, then take a weight penalty to attempt to even things out between us and the Cup cars, but that would be a guess, at best, without lots of controlled testing. Even with the testing accomplished by?, on who's nickel, the cars wouldn't be equal. Guess what? We already have equal cars.

I'm being told I'm inflexible, but I don't see an acceptable, workable way to flex here. So, as I said before, it's probably time to shelve the idea of growing the 944 spec class within the 944 Cup groups, and it's time to forget about competing head to head against the Cup groups. That's ok.

[944 #24]

We could keep our cars exactly as is, then take a weight penalty to attempt to even things out between us and the Cup cars, but that would be a guess, at best, without lots of controlled testing. Even with the testing accomplished by?, on who's nickel, the cars wouldn't be equal.

Agreed.

 

...it's probably time to shelve the idea of growing the 944 spec class within the 944 Cup groups, and it's time to forget about competing head to head against the Cup groups.

Agreed.

 

 

Moving on... how many cars are you guys actually bringing? Honest question, I have no alterior motive in asking.