Production Class Philosophy

[Rob Futcher]

Basic idea:

Two categories (Sedans and Roadsters) with three classes in each category. ALL production cars eligible, regardless of age/origin etc. No more going to the CRB to get a car classified, or a rule set generated. Would be a logical group for cars from other catgories that are age restricted.

1) <1400cc, 9.1" rotors, 8 X 13 Tires, 2X 1.25 carbs (or equivalent restrictor to limit and equalize power), 1700lbs (more for the Sedan category?)
2) 1401 - 1800cc, 10" rotors 9.5 X 13 Tires, 2X 1.5 carbs (or equivalent restrictor to limit and equalize power), 1900lbs
3) >1800cc, 11" rotors 9 X 15 Tires, 2X 1.75 carbs (or equivalent restrictor to limit and equalize power), 2300bs

I haven's studied the sedans too closely, so maybe a different capacity/weight breaks would make more sense for each category.

Yup - this means 6 Production Classses. Three races at the RunOffs with split grids.

All constructive converation welcome!

 

[dryenko]

Finally some cogent thoughts on class groupings without posturing or obvious ego driven remarks.
That also might have a realistic chance of being addressed by SCCA "management" as a chance to include those who have been driven away by the rules changes in the past decade of pandering to many different voices.
Lets hear some constructive ideas around this question.
It makes a lot of sense to me, at least so far.
Fire away !!
BC

 

[Don Walsh]

This sounds a lot like the old sedan and prod classes. Not necessarily a bad idea. IMO things got screwed up when the change was being made to GT and then stopped halfway. The resulting rules creep in prod has put us where we are today. The only concern I would have is that any changes made not disenfranchise existing competitors. I'm speaking from the perspective of being involved in road racing since 1971 both with SCCA and other groups.

 

[Rob Futcher]

Bump.

 

[Chris Schaafsma]

I would vote yes, but accidentally got no on my phone.

 

[Rob Futcher]

I have to admit that given the passion about rules on other threads, I am a little bemused as to why there's not more banter about this topic. Maybe I need to inject more emotion....... 267 views to date (approx 20 are mine checking on the voting!) and only 22 votes. REALLY??

Given that many seem to believe that the CRB and BOD are out to eliminate Production, it's hardly surprising when one looks at the % of the membership we make up and the amount of whining we collectively do.

I put forward some thought on how a fundamental shift in philosphy may provide a simple rule set with a way to equalize LBCs (and provide us old(er) guys with a way to remain competitive with the inevetitable and needed influx of younger racers with newer cars) and the reponse is........... wait for it..........."crickets".

So, I ask, "why"?

I'll add more. Let's abandon the constrictive prod rule set, but adopt the proposed framework. If you're concerned that your car won't be competitive because it's 1500CC and the class break is 1400-1800cc, you can run a shorter throw crank to get it down to 1400CC, or over bore it to be nearer your competitors in the next class up.

The pole runs through Saturday - how about some input?

Thoughts?

Anyone???

 

[Greg Nagy]

my response is that the poll itself is vague.

do you support the idea of a rule set that groups dynamically similar cars together

I would say that this is what we have, and we have been grouping dynamically similar cars for over 50 years. It was easier when we had 8 prod classes instead of 3, but new cars were slotted into an appropriate class after a few years. Been doing that ever since we realized that while statically similar by displacement and FIA rules, dynamically the Porsches and MGs were worlds apart. I can't tell if I am therefore supposed to vote yes for what we now have or yes for something different.

Oddly enough, going back to a simple modifed displacement class like proposed, favors the unique extremely limited production cars like the elva, or the lotus 7. What is your car again, Rob?

Back when car companies paid attention to the FIA classes, or tage formula for displacements, we got alot of cars that had similar engine sizes. Now the genie is out of the bottle, and engines are all over the map. Trying to get so many engines to an arbitrary displacement limit is a nightmare and for many a financial black hole. Heck we can see a dynamic perfomance difference in as little as 150 cc displacement for the same engine.

Let GT try it. They are close to this allready, and they have tried everything else by now. I suspect that after a few years of such a ruleset being applied, this years runoff filed would be looked at fondly.

 

[blamkin86]

Rob if we were starting from scratch, I'd take your idea and add wheel width and track specs, and the weights would be more different between classes.

Unfortunately as interesting as the exercise is, Prod is doing pretty well and I think that's too much change.

Is it perfect, no not at all. Can it be improved, yes absolutely... I personally think that's a lot of change to even consider.

What is interesting to me is separating out the big-motor cars, like the 240 and the BMWs. The chance of having a DP is rather slim tho - and we all know when GP is coming back - even though it's clear there's a performance window between FP and HP.