[MDBodnar]

With the N4 cars regularly beating the Open cars (no not on all events, just on most events). It seems we should have our maximum restrictor size match Group N.

I believe Austraila has a set of rules that basically allows any or most cars to be built to Group N-type specs. Adopting and adapting the assie rules might create more competition in a top tier class.

It is my personal belief we would have better competition with fewer classes. In an ideal world I would see that as no more than 4 classes; 2 awd classes and 2 - 2wd classes. The 4 classes would be designed for Big Dollars and Small Dollars. The only wrinkle in this would be a spec class.

Our current class structure has two (sorta) dollar limited classes P and PGT. All of the other classes are Big Dollar even if you choose not to spend big $$$.

I am interested in talking the philosophy of the classes prior to naming then amd setting the rules. My suggested philosophy:

AWD - Big $$
AWD - Limited $$
2wd - Big $$
2wd - Limited $$
- I would happily substitute a Spec Class for either of the two low $$ classes.
- I would also be open to eliminating one of the low dollar classes if we could agree that either AWD or 2wd will be a run what you brung class (Big $$).

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Mike

 

[randyzimmer]

Everyone thinks "big money" is just more a bit more than THEY spend.
PatR spends more than me so he's big money?
Stig spends more than Patr so he's big money?
Good luck with that one.
rz

 

[Foghorn]

There are probably as many potential variations on class structure as there are grains of sand on a beach (to coin a phrase).

Here's one: Two classes for national and two classes for regional.

National:
1) Whatever is the most promotable class from the sanctioning body's perspective. This would be the only class running for the national championship. I would guess that currently this would be Group N.

2) Everybody else. "Rules restricted" so that the promotable class is most likely to win the rally. Over time this would encourage those who want to run nationally to run in the championship class instead or by natural attrition would lead to a certain type/style of vehicle. This class would really only be there as an accomodation to those who want to run "nationally" but for whatever reason aren't willing/able to run in the championship class.

Regional
1) Whatever is the most popular class based upon actual cars built/rallied in regional events. I'm guessing this might currently be Group 2.

2) Everybody else with lots of room for individual creativity, limited only by safety rules. Run what cha brung. This class is for the rebels among us.

Kent Gardam

 

[MDBodnar]

>Everyone thinks "big money" is just more a bit more than THEY
>spend.
>PatR spends more than me so he's big money?
>Stig spends more than Patr so he's big money?
>Good luck with that one.
>rz


Your correct - impossible to really define, but right now a Full Spec Group N car seems to be big money, so for AWD that may be the definition of big money.

I think the tougher part is defining little money - what are people willing to give up - one guy wants big brakes another a big turbo...

A lot of people would say Group 2 is a low bucks class to run, but in reality a lot of people run low bucks cars in group 2 and there are no real rule limits to limit spending.

It's a philosphy, might not be the right one, but I don't think the current class proliferation is working that well for us.

 

[Ole]

Keep it the same, GN Costs TOO MUCH !

Lets have a little fun with this topic ...

(disclaimer, dislaimer, disclaimer,
WARNING, this is purely speculation,
blah, blah, blah ...)


Forgive me ... talking from the right side, my knowledge
of all this "technical car stuff" might be a bit limited




"everybody" with the cash ran group-N this year because
thats where the contingency bucks were, plain and simple

Not very many of the TRULY fast people ran open this year.
(in "Full" open cars)

Just look at the STPR results !
(as one example)

Lets keep the classes the same as they are.
DON'T FORCE EVERYONE INTO THE BIG $$$$ Group-N Class !!!!!!!


?? You can make a group-N beating Open car much cheaper than
?? you can make a group-N winning Group-N car ? (I think ?)


(placing target on back of shirt):

If "everybody" was running open this year, or "anybody" out of the
list of the "fast" everybodys, you would not have seen
any overall wins by a group-N car.

If Subaru's contingency was for all Subarus (Open, GN, PGT all equal), nobody would have wasted their time with the Big $$$ group-N class.

AND if Pat had the $$$ to support it, and ran an
open car, Stig (in a group-N car) would have NEVER beaten him.

Flame Away !


This is gonna be fun !

 

[Dave Clark]

RE: Keep it the same, GN Costs TOO MUCH !

Nothing to flame, Ole. I agree with you 100%.

 

[randyzimmer]

RE: Keep it the same, GN Costs TOO MUCH !

Yep, me too.
rz

 

[John Vanos]

RE: Keep it the same, GN Costs TOO MUCH !

Ole, that is what I thought all year. Obviously if a driver of equal speed of Pat were to have run a full open car no one would touch him, period. Group N is not the answer, its a lot of extra BS and cost for no real reason.

 

[rightseat]

what seems to be lost in this thread is that it's the DRIVERS of the GpN cars beating DRIVERS of Open cars.

Cars don't beat each other by themselves. Hot drivers having inspired days have put Gp2 cars and PGT cars on podium of hotly contested events. Does this mean we have to somehow slow those guys' cars down, too? sheesh.

Current class structure has stood many tests of time and fiddling and lots of brain power trying to "make it better".

One vote here for...no change.


Dave G
www.lastditchracing.net


"...Embrace loose gravel, beware big trees..."

 

[MDBodnar]

what is the test of time?

Classes have been evolving for the last 15 years:

from run what you brung

To:

Open
GN
PGT
G5
G2
P

at some point divisional classes were different than national classes
and there was a truck class too


Yes the classes work fine, but they are all undersubscribed, so philisophically how to we obtain well subscribed classes on a consistent basis?

 

[Bruce]

RE: Keep it the same, GN Costs TOO MUCH !

There are basically two types of racers, be it rally or any other form: drivers and engineers.

Pure drivers want someone else to do the R&D and hand them a car to race...the driving is the attraction. This produces cars like Spec Racers and Showroom Stock classes.

Engineers get a charge out of doing the R&D themselves...while they like to race, they also like tinkering with the car to get that last bit of performance. This produces cars like D Sports Racers and wide-open run-whatcha-brung classes.

Note that neither of these is necessarily cheaper than the other...a new car every season for Showroom Stock may cost the same as the machine shop the DSR guy needs - IF YOU INSIST ON WINNING. No matter how you slice it, a racing budget is going to be every-last-dime-you-can-afford...and then some.

The comparisons to rally classes - and your favorite drivers - are left as an exercise for the student. Whatever class structure you postulate, remember that you need to accomodate both types. Whether someone likes, say, Open Class may depend on where he/she falls on the driver-engineer scale.

Bruce
Engineer

 

[Ole]

>what is the test of time?
>>Classes have been evolving for the last 15 years:
>>from run what you brung

To: Open, GN, PGT, G5, G2, P
>


I've only been doing this for nine years, and other than
the addition of Group-N, classes have remained the same.


>
>Yes the classes work fine, but they are all undersubscribed,
>so philisophically how do we obtain well subscribed classes on
>a consistent basis?
>

... a litle more tounge-in-cheek with a touch of reality:

But seriously, you want well subscribed classes ?

1) Improve the economy
... more bucks = more people racing
2) One sanctioning body
(or JUST ENOUGH events, not too many)


... I remember a time when there were 100 car entries ....
(with a waiting list)

.... Aaahhh the good old days...

( not the horse and buggy "run what ya brung" days
... I was just a pup back then )

 

[John Vanlandingham]

RE: Keep it the same, GN Costs TOO MUCH !

>There are basically two types of racers, be it rally or any
>other form: drivers and engineers.


Well maybe in America where it seems that there can never been anything but a "one or the other" type analysis.
>
>Pure drivers want someone else to do the R&D and hand them a
>car to race...the driving is the attraction. This produces
>cars like Spec Racers and Showroom Stock classes.

In my experience, it produces GruppH and GpF, simple, strong, light fast effective tools for the job with the right bits.
>
>Engineers get a charge out of doing the R&D themselves...while
>they like to race, they also like tinkering with the car to
>get that last bit of performance. This produces

a lot of talk about why this or that is the best "because theorectically, and if you recall in the 4th lap of the Sverdlotsk Formula Lada Libra Spec class............"





cars like D
>Sports Racers and wide-open run-whatcha-brung classes.


In my experience, limited as it is natch, it seems that in many countries the vast majority of RALLY drivers are interested in DRIVING but do quite a lot of the build and fab part because there is no other way to have a good strong car, since the average guy isn't a trustafarian or software guru who sold his company for 27,000,000 dollars.
Most of them want to _understand_ the WHY of why this damper is better or that cam will give them more "Ax" but REALITY intrudes and they buy a simpler unit and get on with it.

In my limited experience of only 35 or so years, most racers who are engineers never get the project done because they are trying to perfect it.


Among actual _real_ professional racers, it is a common subject of mirth and bonding when they get to swapping stories of "engineers".
>
>Note that neither of these is necessarily cheaper than the
>other...a new car every season for Showroom Stock may cost the
>same as the machine shop the DSR guy needs - IF YOU INSIST ON
>WINNING. No matter how you slice it, a racing budget is going
>to be every-last-dime-you-can-afford...and then some.
>
>The comparisons to rally classes - and your favorite drivers -
>are left as an exercise for the student. Whatever class
>structure you postulate, remember that you need to accomodate
>both types. Whether someone likes, say, Open Class may depend
>on where he/she falls on the driver-engineer scale.
>
>Bruce
>Engineer






John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

janvanvurpa (at) f4 (dot) ca

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat!
Vive Le Groupe F!

 

[SagSert]

All I can say is K.I.S.S.

Cheers
M.Samli