|
|
Post by johngoddard on May 29, 2013 17:05:03 GMT 10
It is a long way and we did miss 1 race, but shit, the racing we did get was awesome! Bad luck for Danny Stutterd & Ken Knight ,both innocent victims of someone else`s accident. Both cars were badly damaged. That aside, the racing was great, the guy`s in the 911 style cars got a bit of a shock at just how close we race and it frightened the Bejesus out of some off them. Past 944 champ and reining GT3 Challenge champion, Kane Rose had a forgettable week-end when the Bob Mitchell entered 944 Turbo popped a cork in race 1, leaving him with nothing else to do but spectate. To add to his misery, reining 944 champ Richard Muscat took his Eastern Creek lap record in the GT3 Challenge Series.(There is a rumor Kane and brother(& 2 time champ) Brent may come back to the 944`s for a few rounds, that should liven-up things a bit). It was disappointing we had only 7 starters for the week-end as this was a perfect opportunity to showcase our series (politics & bullshit often get in the way off common sense) but we still had a reasonable amount off interest in the 944`s. Speaking off 7 entries, I was talking to a few off the guy`s about where our series is going. When I joined the series in 2001 ,you could run in the top 3or4 in a basically stock standard car, things have changed a bit now and I`m not sure it`s for the good of the class. To continue to attract new members to the series I think we need to keep it simple. Some say you can`t go backwards, I say, why not ? (Did`nt the late JFK once say ASK NOT WHAT YOUR SERIES CAN DO FOR YOU,BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR SERIES? or something like that)
Anyway, what do YOU think? (PS. I attribute my current lack of pace solely to my "date of birth") Regards J.G.
|
|
|
|
Post by marius on May 30, 2013 21:34:23 GMT 10
Johnny, I am the greatest supporter of the second part of your posting. I will happily build a new car based on std specs but I cannot see the point in investing anymore in this one.
On a similar note, Dick, Michael Westaway and I went to Sandown with the sports cars. Believe it or not, for a few laps I was held up by an Audi R8 and a 911. Dick passed quite a few of them, including a Ferrari.
|
|
|
|
Post by johngoddard on May 31, 2013 11:04:49 GMT 10
Marius, I`m not suggesting we go back to stock standard cars, but instead, introduce more controlled components like suspension packages, clutches, no data logging, number of tyre`s for the season,(damaged tyre`s could be replaced, but at a cost of some points) perhaps minimum ride height`s etc. These would have to fazed-in over a period of time but I believe this would bring the racing closer and would reduced the cost of building and maintaining a car. These are just Idea`s, but again I ask, what do YOU think? Regards J.G.
|
|
|
|
Post by marius on May 31, 2013 15:06:05 GMT 10
I didn't think stock standard. I know what you mean and totally agree.
More controlled components means higher volume so lower prices. There are enough of us involved in the engineering business who can design/draft and arrange supply of certain parts at a decent cost.
If this discussion takes off, I will get more specific. I know I can offer certain services and I'd be happy to do it for free.
|
|
lj47
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by lj47 on Jun 1, 2013 12:05:13 GMT 10
Correct me if I am wrong didn't we have 7 cars out of the 14 cars fighting for second place at PI in race 2. And all those car's had different specs right hand, left hand drive different set ups different drivers, different people looking after the cars. And all cars raced bumper to bumper. Guys I think the series should promote racing instead of going back to 2002 we already have rules to comply with dated 2013. Anyway that's my 2 cents.
Regards LJ
|
|
|
|
Post by smith99 on Jun 1, 2013 14:25:45 GMT 10
Most of the time differences is in the drivers hands, i know if Richard Muscat or Kaine Rose were steering my car the lap times would drop, same applies to when lj drove ross millars car he got a high 1.38 at winton i only acheived those times at our last event there, Muscats car is not winning at the moment how many lap records did that get ! but as adam gets used too it that could change, also you should note that the quicker guys probably do more laps, by doing test days and driver training days this helps get confidence and reduces your lap times, video footage in car helps, another driver pointed out some mistakes i was doing by watching my video, and as usual i was not aware of it!
Whilst we were up at Rennsport we raised the idea of getting more of the old cars back in the field we could have a pro and elite series within our category sinilar to the cup cars where there is less technology used in those cars and they compete for there own trophies but still race against all of us. This may coax older spec cars out of the garages and still offer opportunities for people who like the technical challenge as well. another benefit is that it would allow us to market the series to people who want to go through to further classes and still appeal to a racer who is happy competing with whatever he or she has got.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianf on Jun 1, 2013 21:15:06 GMT 10
This is an interesting subject. As I have only been in the series 18 months I am wondering if the difference in speed come about due to rule changes or is it due to evolution with performance increases within the rules?
I think a good example of evolution is the clutch.
There was certainly a lot of discussion around clutches last year which I found confusing as what competitors were doing with fitting 5.5 or 7.25" clutches seemed to be clearly within the rules. There were even articles written in magazines in 2005 & 2008 that specifically mentioned clutches were free provided they met the minimum weight. I suspect this rule was probably written with the intention of allowing aluminium flywheels but has evolved well beyond the original intention and that resulted in the problems last year.
I'm not sure that making rule changes will have much affect on where competitors finish, I expect that is fairly well determined by ability and will only result in more compliance costs which is what we want to avoid. Outside of clutches and some freedom on suspension the current rules keep the cars fairly even.
In regard to getting some of the retired cars back into the series I like Mr Smith's suggestion of 2 classes within the series and it could be based on Mr Goddard's suggestions which would also give many of the current cars in the field the prospect of a championship without additional spending or development.
EG
944 Challenge A - Based upon current rules
944 Challenge B - Based upon modified rules such as
A) Minimum weight 1200kg
B) Standard clutch (or equivalent size)
C) Category shocks
D) Limited sets of tyres per season
E) No cross drilling or slotting of discs
F) No data logging
At the end of the day, to promote the series we need to work on our strengths. I think everyone in the series is proud that we are the quickest of the "affordable" categories such as E30s, HQs and Saloon Cars and we don't want to go backwards, but we also don't want to become too expensive for new comers.
|
|
|
|
Post by johngoddard on Jun 2, 2013 12:49:40 GMT 10
Guy`s I dont think for one minute,that if all the cars were the same there would be much difference to the current finishing order. No matter how equal the cars are, the cream will always rise to the top.(Suck Suck) What I`m suggesting is, keep it simple, keep it afordable. When a prospective new player comes along they will have a much better idea of how much it might cost to build/run a car plus knowing that the guy in the next pit dose`nt have any advantage just because he`s got a fatter wallet.( P.S. I`m not opposed to fat wallets, I`d have one myself if my wife did`nt have a black belt in shopping) Lj`s right, we did have 14 cars at P.I. but I remember when we`d be disapointed if we only had 24 cars. Australia`s most successful one make series, HQ`s, is successful because the rules they run under to-day are virtually the same rules they ran under 20 years ago. They don`t have an A & B class and I sure don`t think it would work in our class. But anyway it`s good we are talking about these things! Regards J.G.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianf on Jun 2, 2013 21:56:16 GMT 10
Hi John,
I'm trying to get a handle on where you are coming from so I've gone back through the 944 database that gives results back to 2001. The series had a huge year in 2003 exceeding 24 cars at 6 rounds but in 2004 it only exceeded 24 cars at 3 rounds.
From 2005-2009 it was lucky to hit 24 cars at one round in each year with the series hitting its lowest point in2010 with an average grid of 17.3 cars per round. The last 2 years we have done better and averaged 18.3 cars in 2011 and 18.2 cars in 2012.
Given the GFC over the past 5-6 years I don't think the drop in grid figures is unreasonable. The HQs probably have more reason to be concerned as they have dropped from an average of 29.7 cars in 2009 to 21.7 cars in 2012 and coincidently their lowest year was also 2010 averaging 19.7 cars.
I would be interested to hear why you don't believe a 2 class series wouldn't work. The main benefit I see is for those retired cars currently sitting in garages as they would become competitive with minimal cost.
By the way, my wife left for overseas last week. On the departure card she listed her occupation as "Retail Athlete"
|
|
|
|
Post by johngoddard on Jun 3, 2013 14:09:28 GMT 10
Jesus Brian, get a bloody life, how long did it take you to work all that out? But anyway ,firstly I don`t think we have enough cars to run a 2 tier series and if you look at the GT3 Challenge, they run a Pro & Elite class, but it`s about the driver`s, the cars are all the same. Secondly, if as you say, more of the retired cars may come back out to play because they will be more competitive, doesn`t that back-up what I`ve been saying about the cars being more equal? If you had 15 cars running Elite class and half a dozen running Pro`s at the end of the year, who`s the 944 Champ? I know some guy`s get a real buzz out of pushing the latest technical advances and there`s nothing wrong with this, but as our original charter was based on, Close, Affordable, Enjoyable Racing, is this appropriate for our class? We have a great bunch of guy`s racing in the 944`s at the moment and I`m sure the best drivers are racing at the front, what I want to see is that it stays that way. Anyway good on you guy`s for taking the time to respond, what about the rest of you? What do you think? (PS Brian, I wouldn`t be to concerned with what your wife puts on the Departure Card, it`s what they put on the Credit Card that`s the kicker!) Finally, in keeping with my theme of quoting dead American statesmen didn`t Martin Luther King once say ? I HAVE A DREAM, AND IN THAT DREAM ALL 944`s WERE CREATED EQUAL! Regards J.G.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianf on Jun 3, 2013 15:29:57 GMT 10
Hi John, What do you mean get a life? My therapist tells me it's good for me. ;D
I understand the pro & elite driver scenario and that's why I haven't used that terminology instead refering to a more generic A & B class.
By far the biggest fields in the Vic rounds is in Improved Production and they have 4 classes I think. Those cars can be a bottomless pit for spending but they still get great grid numbers. Want me to do the numbers?
I would simply see that you specify your class at the start of the season and you would end up with a 1st, 2nd & 3rd in each class.
Perhaps there are other ways to attract cars back into the series. I don't think asking most of the field to spend money downgrading there cars is sensible and it will still leave those currently retired cars uncompetitive against the front runners.
Like you I would like to hear what others think.
|
|
|
|
Post by johngoddard on Jun 3, 2013 22:02:59 GMT 10
Hi Brian. thanks for replying to my reply to your reply to my reply and so on and so on. With regard to Improved Production, there situation is somewhat different to ours as there are many different makes & models in the class. You can have turbo`s non turbo`s V8`s rotary`s all in the same race where as we, are a 1 make, 1 model, 1 engine category. I do see your point regarding what appears to be a waste of money to , as you say "downgrade" the cars, but this is what the forum is for, to discuss, A. do we want to do it? B. would it be good for the class ? & C. is it feasible? Obviously there`s plenty more to discuss, so lets discuss! Regards J.G.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianf on Jun 4, 2013 8:02:06 GMT 10
GT3 have 3 classes. 997, 996 & Open  |
|
|
|
Post by johngoddard on Jun 4, 2013 12:27:35 GMT 10
Brian, my understanding of the GT3 series is that they present trophies for outright only, not for classes. Also l was told that this year there are only 997 cars entered although I don`t know this to be fact. Come on fella`s Michael, Tony, Cameron, Dick and the rest of you guy`s have some input. Regards J.G.
|
|
lj47
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by lj47 on Jun 4, 2013 16:11:36 GMT 10
What about you have the series 1st, 2nd, 3rd placing's open to every car in the field on current finishing orders as is and then have both classes A & B cars compete for lets say. A called Pro and B called Elite which you could have 1st, 2nd, 3rd finishers for each round in both classes and do a presentation after the last race. I'm shore Brian won't mind working out the math.
|
|
