Speed of OPEN Class Cars? What do you think about OPEN class, too fast, too slow, too high tech, too low tech? Please vote and leave a reason for your vote. thanks -george

[gplsek]

[Jon Bogert]

powerful than WRC. This is America after all, land of the big horsepower!

But keep a cap on technology. No WRC cars, no active diffs with yaw sensors, no paddle shifters, no acres of carbon fiber, no 45 meters of crome-moly tubing.

That's my vote.

Edit: If you want to see what I mean, buy a 1985 WRC season highlights video and compare the driving to what you see on the Speedvision WRC coverage. Which would you rather watch: high HP and low tech or moderate HP and active everything?

[Andy M]

I think some of the Open Class cars do make more power than WRC cars! Hyundai told me they were getting around 400hp in the new Tiburon, and they have no more than around 340 in the WRC cars (although they say 300..)

[starion887]

1) Open class is "Amurkin"!
2) It gives a place for older PGT cars to go and still compete for a while.

Mark B.

[Flyboy]

Rumor has it that Lovell's US spec Open class car is faster than the WRC car, at least in pure acceleration. Soooooo, we can either spend millions of dollars developing active transmission and diffs, or we can simply chuck the restricter in the lathe and turn out a few mm. I think the SCCA has the right idea on this one.

Dennis Martin
demartin@gbonline.com
920-432-4845

[Over Exposure Racing]

While we can't directly compair to the WRC cars, we can see a very significant stratification in the speed/ability of open class competitors here. Over all I don't think the open class is all that fast, granted the top guys are but on average we have a long way to go.

As for safety? That is a function of driver ability and car capibility. There are a lot of drivers of open class cars out there that are honestly beginners and a number of others that are experianced but do not push that hard (perhaps wisely?). So long as a driver, beginner or not, stays within his level of skill, there should not be much of a safety issue. However, with a high capability car it is so much easier to get in over your head and that is where we have safety issues.

There is another area that I am real concerned with the high power cars however, and no one seems to talk about this. Way to many people spend all their effort on more HP yet neglect the suspension and handling of the car. I can not think of many things more dangerous than a beginner in a overly powerfull car with some really bad handling traits. I know there are drivers out there that think they have a great handling car but here is a simple one for you to ask yourself, when you land a good yump does your rear end hop or bounce? If so you had better do some more homework before you end up on your lid or in the trees.

Bradney A. Boli
Over Exposure Racing
Honda Accord #311

[Ray]

Open Class and A is too fast for rookies. I think drivers should have a few years experience under their belt in other classes before trying to compete in open or A. Even the FIA recognized that and require experience in other groups.
PGT and N,... same thing. I would say there is a bomb waiting to go off. Someday we'll have the big one and realize what's going on, maybe. Our sport will suffer and we will be scratching our heads.
Whiplash RallyeSport

[Pete Kuncis]

If we get very active manufacturer involvement (at least 6 manuf's involved), then I'm all for seeing the "no expense spared" WRC caliber cars over here. That'd be around 12 super powered cars and would make for great competition. I don't want to see 1 or 2 cars winning all the time. Make a diff't class for them too. Get an FIA class or something. That way they won't totally overshadow all the other open class cars there are now.

Over the past couple years, the speeds are definately picking up on the stages. I'm not sure if the use of pace notes is going to even speed the cars up more. If so, then it'd be good to see. Of course we all want the cars to go faster!

Pete

[perodi]

I agree with Ray in that the SCCA should only license beginners
in Production or Group 2. Then, after a certain number of events
(or maybe Seed), go onto 4WD, PGT, Group 5. How many Seed 8
4WD cars were at Rim? Too many.

Patrick

[RallyRat]

Cars are approaching group B performance, but the caliber of North American drivers is almost pathetic IMO. This is a recipe for disaster; group B cars were very dangerous even in the hands of the world's best drivers.

We should consider what the purpose of ProRally's highest level is. Do we want the campionship to go to the driver who can get 1 mph of extra speed off each turn or to the car that can go 2 mph faster by the end of the straights? Should it be a showcase for the manufacturers' ability to make a strong and efficient car or the manufacturers' ability to make the most horsepower? Do spectators want to see world-class driving or lots of speed and dust? If horsepower is limited, it becomes the driver's and the car's job to do the most with limited resources. More horsepower leads to sloppier driving, engineering and spectating, just look at the current state of NASCAR.

Will MacDonald
1968 Volvo 144

[Don Kennedy]

You've got a good point about suspension. Having the advantage of running 9th on the road at Sawmill, I spectated most of the rest of the cars twice at the bridge just before the end of stage 2/6. Some of the cars were scary with their suspension. Maybe it's not so bad from inside the car but from outside some bounced and bottomed out easily.

[Trevor Donison]

>Cars are approaching group B performance, but the caliber of
>North American drivers is almost pathetic IMO. This is a
>recipe for disaster; group B cars were very dangerous even
>in the hands of the world's best drivers.
>
>We should consider what the purpose of ProRally's highest
>level is. Do we want the campionship to go to the driver
>who can get 1 mph of extra speed off each turn or to the car
>that can go 2 mph faster by the end of the straights?
>Should it be a showcase for the manufacturers' ability to
>make a strong and efficient car or the manufacturers'
>ability to make the most horsepower? Do spectators want to
>see world-class driving or lots of speed and dust? If
>horsepower is limited, it becomes the driver's and the car's
>job to do the most with limited resources. More horsepower
>leads to sloppier driving, engineering and spectating, just
>look at the current state of NASCAR.
>
Last time I checked, the overall leader so far in ProRally is a privateer... That obviously knows how to drive.
>Will MacDonald
>1968 Volvo 144

[t0940ds]

High speed is what makes race cars dangerous because at high speed there is more energy to dissapate in the eventual sudden stop (energy = 1/2 mass times velocity squared).

High drop height can be dangerous too (energy = mass times height)

Drivers "taking chances" can be extremely dangerous!

High speed comes from roads (twistiness and grip), car acceleration (power and weight), active chassis systems (diffs and swaybars) and tire grip.

Currently we manage by:

* Choosing twisty stage roads with lower average speeds
* Avoiding paved stages on race tires (usually)
* Limiting power and weight of 4wd cars
* Limiting aerodynamics
* Limiting active diffs and swaybars
* Cautioning dangerous places in the routebook an with arrows along the course
* Requiring drivers to be schooled and demonstrate some maturity by finishing a Club event before issuing a National license.

Other steps we could take:

* Limiting the size of tires on 4wd cars
* Putting drivers on probation for the next 100 stage miles after an accident, and suspending their license if their accident rate exceeds 2/100 completed stage miles (not quite sure what is an "accident" -- maybe extent of body damage is determinant)

[MDBodnar]

Great comments Doug, and it brings up an issue:

Do we have events with Roads that are TOO FAST?


In my opinion there is one, but none of the top drivers seem concerned. Your one of the TOP drivers -- any concerns, or are the events all still reasonable?

Mike

[RallyBrat]

"* Putting drivers on probation for the next 100 stage miles after an accident, and suspending their license if their accident rate exceeds 2/100 completed stage miles (not quite sure what is an "accident" -- maybe extent of body damage is determinant)"

What do you mean by this? Does that mean if you get into an accident, you basically can't drive the next event? (Say someone at STPR crashes out, that means they couldn't do Maine because that's less than 100 miles I believe. Something like 90 stage miles) I also don't think that would fly too well with the manfufactuers involved; therefore, it won't fly with the SCCA.

Anyway, while STPR is extremely fast, it also is gently sloping with a forgiving road surface. The trees aren't forgiving, but they make the roads easier to read (and on about 50+% of the corners there's banks anyway). Most accidents there are due to people pushing way too hard rather than the roads being too fast IMO.

Thanks,
Alex

[Foghorn]

C'mon Alex, you're still in school, you should know about probation versus suspension. }> Oh wait a minute, maybe in school you get kicked out when you're on probation too. :P Anyway, I think Doug's suggesting that their driving is monitored for the next 100 stage miles they compete on after an accident and then judgement is passed (possible suspension) based on how they do on those hundred miles.

Kent Gardam

[RallyBrat]

I see :) I just assumed he used the wrong terminology because I was thinking, "Who would be the officer? How would he be in the car?"

Now that I get it, it sounds like a better idea. It could still piss off the manufactuers though, but it may have been able to save Hyundai some money w/ Noel last year ;)

Thanks,
Alex

[JohnB_SPY8808053]

I'm not so sure I'd consider the Group B cars low tech, but they were more powerful for sure.

John B.

[RallyVolvo]

More horsepower
>leads to sloppier driving, engineering and spectating, just
>look at the current state of NASCAR.
>
>Will MacDonald
>1968 Volvo 144

Um, actually, NASCAR cars have restrictor plates. And they are all engineered to be equal, but you're right on the crappy driving and spectating part!

Me, I want the best of both worlds, high horsepower and world class drivers. Gotta be low tech though, its annoying when a car can't finish the rally because a software problem in the transmission... Judging by your choice in vehicle you'd agree with me. :) Hey, mine's even more high tech!


Nick Polimeni
'71 Volvo 142E (daily driver/RallyCross)
Editor, Blue Mountain Region, SCCA
www.bmr-scca.org

[RallyRat]

>Um, actually, NASCAR cars have restrictor plates. And they
>are all engineered to be equal, but you're right on the
>crappy driving and spectating part!

Exactly, the cars are engineered to be equal, not faster than the other cars. The restrictor plates are, however, only used on really fast tracks so fewer drivers wind up dead because they always bump into each other. Ever watch them race on a road course? :o

>Me, I want the best of both worlds, high horsepower and
>world class drivers. Gotta be low tech though, its annoying
>when a car can't finish the rally because a software problem
>in the transmission... Judging by your choice in vehicle
>you'd agree with me. :) Hey, mine's even more high tech!

Unfortunately, it is a lot easier to make a faster car than it is to make a faster driver. Naturally, modifying the car becomes the most apealing method to get quick quick, and the driver becomes secondary.

Technology caps should be up to the manufacturers. After all, the only reason they sponsor rallies and drivers is to sell a product. Why should we reduce ProRally's appeal to them by making rules for their arena which they might not like, but have little ill effect on the average joe rally driver? The manufacturers can help us, SCCA's members, a lot; let's not spoil it.

For now, I'd say that the sport is growing too fast, so let's kill two birds with one stone and limit all cars to 200 hp (maybe even less) for a few years. That way drivers will have to keep their speed up in the turns so we might get at least a few good drivers, and until we figure out how to control them, we won't get so many spectators because the cars are boring.

BTW: My car will soon have an engine and induction system which are a mere 30 years old, with a little help from MadMike et al. I'm also working on a state of the art driver module for it, so watch out! :P

Will MacDonald
1968 Volvo 144

[t0940ds]

Mike,

Several of our events have lengthy stage sections that are very fast and somewhat dangerous. To fit this description, the stage has to include firm surfaced 60-80 mph corners with little to no recovery room before a big bang or drop. If a stage winning average speed is over 65 mph, its a likely candidate, depending on geography.

Some stage names that come to mind are Fuller Lake, Delaware, Asaph Run and Clay Mine. These roads don't have friendly edge berms. These roads are such that a driver that presses too hard can have a very sudden stop.

But in the end, any driver that drives within his true limits can have many safe runs through any of them. Its a matter of maturity and good judgement. Same as in any other motorsport.

[t0940ds]

Mike,

The events are all reasonable. But there are some stages with average speeds over 65 mph, 60-80 mph long corners, firm road surface and unfriendly edges (less grip and hard things to hit, close by). Drivers need to be more attentive in these stages.

As examples, I pay extra attention to my driving approach on Clay Mine, Asaph Run, Delaware, and Fuller Lake.

At the end of the debate though, any driver that stays within his true limits can have many safe runs through these and other similar stages. Its a matter of maturity and good judgement, same as in all motorsports.

[RallyBrat]

Hey Doug:

I'm just curious, what makes Asaph or Phasa more dangerous than the other STPR stages? I know it has some vistas, but it's not like Wild West or Rim or anything (which I really shouldn't judge since I've never been there :)) Also, does anyone know why STPR has though occasional breaks in the trees on hills? Is the angle just too steep in some areas for vegitation to grow? Any Geologists here? :)

Also, one thing I'm worried about with stage notes this year is a possible "Mad Mike" type accident when there was a right turn, but Mikey turned left (or vise versa, don't quite remember). With stage notes, when the drivers trust their co-drivers 100%, and STPR gets some infamous dust or fog, imagine "5 left, i mean..." CRUNCH. Instead of slowing down and trying to read the road the drivers may follow their co-driver's lead and instantly slam into one of the many trees. This deals with all cars though, not just AWD turbocharged ones.

Thanks,
Alex

[Ray]

>Hey Doug:
>
>I'm just curious, what makes Asaph or Phasa more dangerous
>than the other STPR stages? I know it has some vistas, but
>it's not like Wild West or Rim or anything (which I really
>shouldn't judge since I've never been there :)) Also, does
>anyone know why STPR has though occasional breaks in the
>trees on hills? Is the angle just too steep in some areas
>for vegitation to grow? Any Geologists here? :)
>
>Also, one thing I'm worried about with stage notes this year
>is a possible "Mad Mike" type accident when there was a
>right turn, but Mikey turned left (or vise versa, don't
>quite remember). With stage notes, when the drivers trust
>their co-drivers 100%, and STPR gets some infamous dust or
>fog, imagine "5 left, i mean..." CRUNCH. Instead of slowing
>down and trying to read the road the drivers may follow
>their co-driver's lead and instantly slam into one of the
>many trees. This deals with all cars though, not just AWD
>turbocharged ones.
>
>Thanks,
>Alex

Through your statement here about notes, you obviously don't have experience with them.
"Pace Notes" are done on a recce. They are very individual to the "Driver". It has nothing to do with trusting your co-driver. Driver and Navigator, run the recce, while the driver announces the conditions and road, the co-driver marks (writes) them down on paper.
"Stage Notes" are totally different again.
So you see, it has nothing to do with trusting your navie if the driver announces a note wrong and the co-driver writes them down. But then again, co-driver should be paying attention as well.
Whiplash RallyeSport

[Mad Mike]

RallyBrat said:

"a possible "Mad Mike" type accident when there was a right turn, but Mikey turned left"

Huh? If you're talking about my STPR shunt in '83 that was more thanks to dust and a driver too keen to keep going fast. There was no instruction where we lost the road, no intersection and, conincidentally, no trees near the the road to alert us the edge was near.

But to answer your question, it comes down to the driver since he (she) is in charge of the controls 100% of the time. Too fast for conditions is too fast for conditions - period. Sometimes you can take a chance or ten and get away with them. Sometimes you wind up totalling a new car, get to take an ambulance ride, meet a thoroughly entertaining Pennsylvania ER Doc who likes putting stitches in Okies and then get welcomed home by divorce papers (ain't rallying grand?).

Halley ...
http://www.realautosport.com

[RallyBrat]

Sorry, I use the terms interchangably as its the same system but without recce. What I meant is, with stage notes, your getting a call for every corner (from the co-driver), like a 5 right which is pretty fast right hander. Anyway, what I'm saying is, last year with the route book, only big corners or hazards were called, making the driver read the road and use the co-driver to keep him on track. With stage notes, however, you can get into that rhythm of co-driver and driver where you rely on your co-driver to keep you going. The drivers in the WRC do this especially in foggy conditions (like Makinen in Portugal last year. You couldn't see ANYTHING, yet he was pushing hard and driving nearly flawlessly) Even though they do recce, 2 runs through 3 days worth of stages won't commit much to memory. He's relying on what his co-driver says and the distances, and basically driving to what he says and making adjustments as he can see the corner. ANYWAY, at STPR, 98 and 99 were exceptionally dusty rallies and 2001 was extremely foggy at night (97 had light rain, 96 had some dust, 95 had light rain periodically, and 93 was wet, so only in recent years has it been bad) so if the stages have bad conditions this year where the driver can't see, and the co-driver accidently calls left instead of a right or vise versa after a fast straight, a hard hit with a tree is inevitable if the driver is driving fast and trusting his co-driver instead of backing off. It doesn't happen that often, but it does happen, EVEN AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS. For example, at Catalunya 95, Juha Kankunnen and Nicky Grist were running strong (with their illegal) Toyota Celica GT-4 when Nicky Grist goes "...and medium right, I mean..." and before you knew it they were off the ledge and on their roof. It wasn't even a blind corner, and Juha could clearly see it, he even stated it in the interview afterwards, it's just that his first reaction was what the co-driver said, and by the time he realized Nicky was wrong, it was too late. Now, if one of the best if not the best co-driver in the WRC currently can make an error like that, I'm sure a relatively new Seed 5 co-driver with no experience in stage notes or pace notes can make the same error.

I'm all for Stage notes, just a little worried on fast events with no room for error like STPR.

Of course, I have no real experience with pacenotes because of my obvious circumstances :) I just keep telling myself, "Only 8 months to go, only 8 months to go Alex"

Thanks,
Alex

[RallyBrat]

sry, double post

[RallyBrat]

Of course I know about your accident, you've told me many times :) Probably the Catalunya 95 incident would have been a better example though, but I used it in the other post!

Yes, the driver is in control, but with stage notes and pace notes, more control is given to the co-driver until you get to the WRC where the driver drives off of what the co-driver says as much as what he sees, and when in deteriorating conditions, they'll use their co-drivers as their eyes. Now, if that occurs at an event like STPR when it has bad conditions with navies more inexperienced, there's a greater chance of a navie error and there's no room for error.

Thanks,
Alex

[PJ]

>>Cars are approaching group B performance, but the caliber of
>>North American drivers is almost pathetic IMO.

To whom are you comparing the "almost pathetic" NA drivers? For a country which, as far as I know, has had almost no active recruitment of rally drivers (until recently; eg Lagemann), what do you expect? Rally is not a way of life for most (North)Americans the way it is for many European countries. In Europe, potential drivers are found at an early age, and by the time Joe/Joan North-America enters his/her first race, their Euro counterpart has already had years of experience specific to rallying under their belt. That is how it will stay until interest in the sport grows to a level it can attract a significant fan base (it's on its way, however). For instance, look at basketball. America has the best basketball program in the world, bar none. We also have the greatest base from which to choose players. That is no coincidence. It is all about exposure to the sport.

>>This is a recipe for disaster; group B cars were very dangerous even
>>in the hands of the world's best drivers.

I agree with you on that. Here, anyone whose wallet is large enough can enter a car that has a potential of winning an event. However, some may say that that could (or does) lead to, how should I say, slightly less than fabulous drivers piloting insanely fast cars down increasingly crowded stages. Remember how Group B went down the drain?

>>We should consider what the purpose of ProRally's highest
>>level is. Do spectators want to
>>see world-class driving or lots of speed and dust?
>>just look at the current state of NASCAR.

Yes, look at the current state of NASCAR. I despise it as much as the next guy, but it's hard to argue with the success of NASCAR. Take a look at Speedvision, er NASCARchannel, I mean SpeedChannel... In our distinctive market, "speed and dust", as you put it, commands the most attention. Whatever spectators want to see is what the sponsors are going to push.

And finally,
>Last time I checked, the overall leader so far in ProRally
>is a privateer... That obviously knows how to drive.

He's not exactly a NA driver, now is he? (Okay, technically he is now, but you what I'm saying). No disputing his driving talent from me though!!

[Don Kennedy]

Alex, that is exactly one of the reasons I'm against using stage notes. I think it's a big possability but we'll probably have to wait and see how it plays out.

[saywhat]

Do I think they're to fast?
No
I'm not really impressed by them, not to P.O. anyone. I know they're fast when behind the wheel but good drivers adapt and are able to stay "on top of the car". However I think the speed will increase greatly over the next few years as competition heats up and teams look for an advantage. It would be a good idea to look to the future as to what rules will be needed to limit the power output or speed of the open class cars before it becomes an issue. The rules made already in regards to keeping the costs down are affective at aiding reduced speeds, I think that all those involved in those decisions should be commended.
An addition to this it would be interesting to see rules made that would make G5 and possibly G2 cars competitve overall and take the focus away from 4WD and place it even more on the driving, also greater number of different makes and models of cars. After all its the closeness of the competition that makes the fun not always the out right speed. IMHO

George: Thanks for asking:)

[RallyRat]

>>>Cars are approaching group B performance, but the caliber of
>>>North American drivers is almost pathetic IMO.
>
>To whom are you comparing the "almost pathetic" NA drivers?
>For a country which, as far as I know, has had almost no
>active recruitment of rally drivers (until recently; eg
>Lagemann), what do you expect? Rally is not a way of life
>for most (North)Americans the way it is for many European
>countries. In Europe, potential drivers are found at an
>early age, and by the time Joe/Joan North-America enters
>his/her first race, their Euro counterpart has already had
>years of experience specific to rallying under their belt.
>That is how it will stay until interest in the sport grows
>to a level it can attract a significant fan base (it's on
>its way, however). For instance, look at basketball.
>America has the best basketball program in the world, bar
>none. We also have the greatest base from which to choose
>players. That is no coincidence. It is all about exposure
>to the sport.
I'm comparing to WRC drivers (if there is any comparison at all). I understand why NA drivers are not world class, but cars, trees and the laws of physics don't care which contry you're from.

>>>This is a recipe for disaster; group B cars were very dangerous even
>>>in the hands of the world's best drivers.
>
>I agree with you on that. Here, anyone whose wallet is
>large enough can enter a car that has a potential of winning
>an event. However, some may say that that could (or does)
>lead to, how should I say, slightly less than fabulous
>drivers piloting insanely fast cars down increasingly
>crowded stages. Remember how Group B went down the drain?
And in the United states, there's no homoligation for open class to ensure sound engineering and no credentials required for drivers beyond class at their first rally.

>>>We should consider what the purpose of ProRally's highest
>>>level is. Do spectators want to
>>>see world-class driving or lots of speed and dust?
>>>just look at the current state of NASCAR.
>
>Yes, look at the current state of NASCAR. I despise it as
>much as the next guy, but it's hard to argue with the
>success of NASCAR. Take a look at Speedvision, er
>NASCARchannel, I mean SpeedChannel... In our distinctive
>market, "speed and dust", as you put it, commands the most
>attention. Whatever spectators want to see is what the
>sponsors are going to push.
Do we, as a club, really want rally to be like that?

>And finally,
>>Last time I checked, the overall leader so far in ProRally
>>is a privateer... That obviously knows how to drive.
>
>He's not exactly a NA driver, now is he? (Okay, technically
>he is now, but you what I'm saying). No disputing his
>driving talent from me though!!
>

Will MacDonald
1968 Volvo 144

[Andrew Comrie Picard]

If you want to ever have a NorthAm driver capable of competing on the world level you have to let them practice with the speeds they would see there. There is much evidence that leading drivers see things happening more slowly thanks to their familiarity with speed.

As noted in "Rally Navigation" ed. Holmes p64 I think, what's happening with the clubman Gp.A drivers in England is that they're getting to the corners a lot faster than they used to (straightline speed) but aren't going around them as fast as the world pros (expensive transmissions).

Consider a 34mm rule in the US, as we now have in Canada, and know that the absence of sequential 'boxes will ensure we're always slower than WRC, for better or worse.

ACP
www.musketeerracing.com
Flirting with the laws of physics.

PS - we can almost fly as high - here's us last weekend - Canadian open class:

http://www.morisoncom.com/rmr/Stage1/pages/S1ACP1.htm