SCCAForums.com

I think the long term solution to the problem of car classing is to assign a “handicap” to each car!  The classes would then be “brackets” of handicaps.  This idea could be extended to all classes, stock through prepared.  As a new car, say an Evo 15 comes to market; it is assigned its handicap based on the preparation level the owner chooses to use, i. e. stock rules or street prepared rules, then races in the class its handicap places it in.  This would eliminate the having all of the cars in the bracket (class) being made obsolete.

Of course the hard part is coming up with the handicap.  I have had talks with Rick Ruth about this idea over the past few years and always get discouraged about moving forward with it.  But with the problems caused by having so few classes with a wide range of performance, we will always have “the car” in each class.  Some classes are fortunate to maybe two or three cars, but that is the exception.  With today’s computer timing programs, it would not be hard to have 1000 RTP/PAX numbers in the system and calculate the results.  With this, you could run a 68 VW Beetle in street prepared against an STI and be competitive!

I would start with the current PAX numbers for “the car” in each current class and start developing a formula for the handicap.  Of course the handicap can be adjusted.  A model for this is the PHRF rule used in sailboat racing.  The SEB and associated advisory groups would track and recommend adjustments.

A dialog could be started as to the factors in the handicap; weight, power, gearing, tire width, and such.

I think this is the long term solution to the classing problem in SCCA solo!

Jojoo:

Uh....I was told by one of the members of the SEB. You missed that little fact there.
 

Nope, I didn't miss anything.  Assuming you were "told by one of the members of the SEB", you obviously missunderstood what they told you. 

Jojoo:

You are having a serious problem with not reading. I never said they should take it upon themselves to "take action". I included member input. Another missed fact. 

I read just fine.  You need to re-read what you wrote. 

Jojoo:

  

SCCA needs to stop pus*y footing around about the rules and classing and fix it and keep it fixed instead of letting things get antiquated before fixing them. And that's why waiting for letters to fix things is a horrible way to work the system. 

Your statement above is demanding that the SEB take action without member input. 

Jojoo:

Great argument. Now write some facts as to why it's bad idea considering you could "spend all night doing it". You seem to have plenty to say. Might as well dig right into why classing based on speed is such a terrible way to class as opposed to the random classing we have now. I'm ready to hear it.

I already have.  Its called "Best of Breed".  Its one of the original building blocks of SP.  Somewhere in the twenty year history of the catagory, it got lost in the process.  If we returned to it, most of the problems would go away.   I don't need to waste my time rewriting it here.  If you knew history, you would know what it was.  Time for you to do some reading.

MugenSI:

I think the long term solution to the problem of car classing is to assign a “handicap” to each car!  The classes would then be “brackets” of handicaps.  This idea could be extended to all classes, stock through prepared.  As a new car, say an Evo 15 comes to market; it is assigned its handicap based on the preparation level the owner chooses to use, i. e. stock rules or street prepared rules, then races in the class its handicap places it in.  This would eliminate the having all of the cars in the bracket (class) being made obsolete.

 

Of course the hard part is coming up with the handicap.  I have had talks with Rick Ruth about this idea over the past few years and always get discouraged about moving forward with it.  But with the problems caused by having so few classes with a wide range of performance, we will always have “the car” in each class.  Some classes are fortunate to maybe two or three cars, but that is the exception.  With today’s computer timing programs, it would not be hard to have 1000 RTP/PAX numbers in the system and calculate the results.  With this, you could run a 68 VW Beetle in street prepared against an STI and be competitive!

 

I would start with the current PAX numbers for “the car” in each current class and start developing a formula for the handicap.  Of course the handicap can be adjusted.  A model for this is the PHRF rule used in sailboat racing.  The SEB and associated advisory groups would track and recommend adjustments.

 

A dialog could be started as to the factors in the handicap; weight, power, gearing, tire width, and such.

 

I think this is the long term solution to the classing problem in SCCA solo!

 

 

So would the "handicap" computer have a thermometer, barometer, wind speed meter, and course design (tight technical/straight, fast) meter factors built in? ;)

Hmmm...lots of circular jerking going on in this entertaining thread.  I personally do not think it's possible to do a classing structure like this.  As I suggested on the other thread, since the fact remians that many, many cars have not been fully prepped and run seriously with the right diver, there is NO database available to accurately class those cars.  You simply do not know the performance potential of those cars.  Your system is completely predicated on the ability to know what the ultimate performance envelope is for every car eligible for SP.  Aint going to happen.

OK, so maybe you say "take an initial stab at it, and throw them in the fire to let it all sort itself out".  How many years will that take?  You think SP is F'd up now?  Wait until your car gets re-classed once a year based on empirical data, for how many years?.  Twice a year?   I don't know...how often are you going to re-class everyone????  One guy picks a car near the bottom of your "bracket",. preps it and kicks everyone's behind:  Ok that car needs re-classing.  Please explain what is different about that than what we have now????

Given a highly structured, and unforgiving "bracket racing" type classing structure, (showing your hand gets you re-classed)  I do feel that sandbagging will become part of the game.  Doesn't matter if it exists right now...it will. We've also already discussed the wildly in-accurate data you will get when you throw two diametrically opposed types of vehicle into the same class.  Course design, weather, ....*will* affect the results in a more dramatic way, making the data gathering process almost impossible.  These thing cannot be ignored in your plan.  Who you going to get to apply the subjective "equalizers"....Cole?  :)

I await your proposed classing structure based on existing historical data.  Good luck, I mean that.  Going through this process might bring to the forefront some of the reason why people are saying this won't work.  Have at it....can't wait to see the results.

Patrick Washburn:

OK, so maybe you say "take an initial stab at it, and throw them in the fire to let it all sort itself out".  How many years will that take?  You think SP is F'd up now?  Wait until your car gets re-classed once a year based on empirical data, for how many years?.  Twice a year?   I don't know...how often are you going to re-class everyone????  One guy picks a car near the bottom of your "bracket",. preps it and kicks everyone's behind:  Ok that car needs re-classing.  Please explain what is different about that than what we have now????

Given a highly structured, and unforgiving "bracket racing" type classing structure, (showing your hand gets you re-classed)  I do feel that sandbagging will become part of the game.  Doesn't matter if it exists right now...it will. We've also already discussed the wildly in-accurate data you will get when you throw two diametrically opposed types of vehicle into the same class.  Course design, weather, ....*will* affect the results in a more dramatic way, making the data gathering process almost impossible.  These thing cannot be ignored in your plan.  Who you going to get to apply the subjective "equalizers"....Cole?  :)

I await your proposed classing structure based on existing historical data.  Good luck, I mean that.  Going through this process might bring to the forefront some of the reason why people are saying this won't work.  Have at it....can't wait to see the results.

I've asked him repeatedly to class three cars in two classes to take his classing scheme through it's logical progression - once the cars are classed and in the two car class either the fast car gets moved up into a class where it is an also-ran or a slow car moves down where it is an overdog. And then the next year where you have to ask the question on moving the car again...

I've also asked him to explain how this is different than how classing is done right now except that cars are also moved down every year (and the additional workload that the  already overworked SEB would need to do). 

The other thing that is missing is the "How do we get there from here?" question.  It could be the most perfect plan around but if there isn't a clear path on how to get there, it simply can not be done.

To the OP - sorry for keeping this part of the thread alive.  To bring it back a little, I believe that SP isn't drawing new blood because the cost of entry is too high.  If you look at the top cars, they have had a lot of work done to them.  People, and class fillers specifically, really really like to lemming.  They want to be able to look at the top car and replicate it bolt for bolt easily so they don't have to spend the R&D money.  I think if you remove the aero, engine internal mods, and any other mod that a "average" autocrosser can't do in a home garage - I think you will start getting people back.

This is my take on the OPers comments.

SP should be a closer stepping stone to Stock rather than Mod IMO.

Make it more of a "bolt on" class that reflects how people mod their cars for the street. This would attract a MUCH larger group of new competitors to the sport and the class in general. As it sits now unless you run stock or ST for the most part your car is a DEDICATED SP class or above car (I dont need to hear arguments about how XXXXX SP car was driven to work blah blah).

Is it much of a surprise to anyone that the ST classes are so well subscribed? They are the cars and the mods people are running on their daily drivers, this is what most people own.

As it sits now most/all of the SP cars are 1 mod away from being in SM or SM2. Which will be a great place for them to go if they have done mods that are irreversable for the new SP.

Among other things I would propose taking away the unlimited wheel and tire widths (these are SM/SM2 allowences). Therefore taking away fender modifications/overfenders allowence. Before anyone says anything, think about the BSP vette drivers that complained that their $30K investment into their SP car was worthless now in BSP. WHy? because they took a sawzall to the fenders, put on FG overfenders and now the car is unsellable to 99% of buyers because it looks gay with OEM wheels on it (this is just an example, I dont think the vette should be obsolete in autox). If simple bolt ons could be removed and sold along with the car much of that money could be recovered, its a very common thing these days with street cars.

There would be more taken away from the SP rules and the OPer listed some that I agree with such as fuel system cant be touched, no engine blueprinting, etc.( I would be willing to elaborate if there was interest). Some allowences IMO could be given to the class too. For instance you could give SP carbon fiber hood and trunk lids. VERY popular aftermarket mod and doesnt take a lot of time (ie: wont make you go faster) away from most cars.

The jist of it without going into grave detail (and arguement starters) is lets take away some of the money and engineering that takes STREET prepared away from the common folk and allow the sport to grow with new members that dont have access to as much of those resources. Not many newcomers are willing to leave their cars stock for the street just to be competitive in autox.

Dont you think the under subscribed SM/SM2 will grow as a result? SM/SM2 will most likely have to add a few classes.

 I realize that some cars would need to be reclassed as a result of this ruleset (but they need it anyways as most have argued) but why wait untill it hits rock bottom to change. The important thing now IMO is that the sport grows, we get more cars involved from different manufacturers so that contingency rises etc. There is a lot of money out there to be had from many different companies from tuner/parts companies to manufacturers. Should we believe that if a Scion car was competitive in autox that they wouldnt set up a contingency? They spend millions of $ on the car scene.

In regards to the classing arguments by the posters above, I agree something needs to be done, most importantly, cars that are not competitive need to be reclassed to be at least in the mix (RSX is a great example). Its dicouraging when someone comes out to autox, they love their car (RSX), they want to take it to the next level and you have to tell them they are in the WRONG car to be competitive in autox.

Patrick Washburn:

Hmmm...lots of circular jerking going on in this entertaining thread.  I personally do not think it's possible to do a classing structure like this.  As I suggested on the other thread, since the fact remians that many, many cars have not been fully prepped and run seriously with the right diver, there is NO database available to accurately class those cars.  You simply do not know the performance potential of those cars.  Your system is completely predicated on the ability to know what the ultimate performance envelope is for every car eligible for SP.  Aint going to happen.

OK, so maybe you say "take an initial stab at it, and throw them in the fire to let it all sort itself out".  How many years will that take?  You think SP is F'd up now?  Wait until your car gets re-classed once a year based on empirical data, for how many years?.  Twice a year?   I don't know...how often are you going to re-class everyone????  One guy picks a car near the bottom of your "bracket",. preps it and kicks everyone's behind:  Ok that car needs re-classing.  Please explain what is different about that than what we have now????

Given a highly structured, and unforgiving "bracket racing" type classing structure, (showing your hand gets you re-classed)  I do feel that sandbagging will become part of the game.  Doesn't matter if it exists right now...it will. We've also already discussed the wildly in-accurate data you will get when you throw two diametrically opposed types of vehicle into the same class.  Course design, weather, ....*will* affect the results in a more dramatic way, making the data gathering process almost impossible.  These thing cannot be ignored in your plan.  Who you going to get to apply the subjective "equalizers"....Cole?  :)

I await your proposed classing structure based on existing historical data.  Good luck, I mean that.  Going through this process might bring to the forefront some of the reason why people are saying this won't work.  Have at it....can't wait to see the results.

Negative waves man...to many negative waves!

I am just putting out an idea that could solve most of the problems in having "the" car or not, in ANY class.  I would use the current PAX numbers that are based on historical information as a starting point for the top cars in each class.  The idea is to use our knowledge of what makes a car fast to come up with the handicap system, a formula to perdict performance.

I do not see this happening overnight, I see it as a process that could be ready by say 2010.  The goal would be to not have to sell your car just because a better car comes along.  This just might be enough incentive for this to work.

MugenSI:

I think the long term solution to the problem of car classing is to assign a “handicap” to each car!  The classes would then be “brackets” of handicaps.  This idea could be extended to all classes, stock through prepared.  As a new car, say an Evo 15 comes to market; it is assigned its handicap based on the preparation level the owner chooses to use, i. e. stock rules or street prepared rules, then races in the class its handicap places it in.  This would eliminate the having all of the cars in the bracket (class) being made obsolete.

 

Of course the hard part is coming up with the handicap.  I have had talks with Rick Ruth about this idea over the past few years and always get discouraged about moving forward with it.  But with the problems caused by having so few classes with a wide range of performance, we will always have “the car” in each class.  Some classes are fortunate to maybe two or three cars, but that is the exception.  With today’s computer timing programs, it would not be hard to have 1000 RTP/PAX numbers in the system and calculate the results.  With this, you could run a 68 VW Beetle in street prepared against an STI and be competitive!

 

I would start with the current PAX numbers for “the car” in each current class and start developing a formula for the handicap.  Of course the handicap can be adjusted.  A model for this is the PHRF rule used in sailboat racing.  The SEB and associated advisory groups would track and recommend adjustments.

 

A dialog could be started as to the factors in the handicap; weight, power, gearing, tire width, and such.

 

I think this is the long term solution to the classing problem in SCCA solo!

 

 

So you want to use the NASA  NASA-x and TT rule set then. They handicap based on hosespower and mods done.

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/nasa-x_tt_classes_update.pdf

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/Time-Trial-Rules.pdf

 I could not find a PAX for these classes. In their TT rules they have classes above the A-class base on lb/hp of the car, (sm-sm2, amod).

MugenSI:

[

Negative waves man...to many negative waves!

I am just putting out an idea that could solve most of the problems in having "the" car or not, in ANY class.  I would use the current PAX numbers that are based on historical information as a starting point for the top cars in each class.  The idea is to use our knowledge of what makes a car fast to come up with the handicap system, a formula to perdict performance.

I do not see this happening overnight, I see it as a process that could be ready by say 2010.  The goal would be to not have to sell your car just because a better car comes along.  This just might be enough incentive for this to work.

Not trying to be negative...just bringing to light some details that will have an effect on the plan to do something like this.  Lots of people have great ideas, but when you really lay out the nuts and bolts, it's a little harder than they thought.  These things tend to get glossed over in the executive summary.  Besides, my response was directed more to the idea of classing by speed..not your handicap idea.  Kindly re-read my point regarding the lack of data on the cars that have not been prepped and ran at the highest levels.  You have no data to create a handicap.  Your plan falls fown when you try to introduce Cole-esque swags at predicted performance.  You *think* you know, but you really don't...there is no formula that works.  Not being negative...the data is simply not there.

The goal of "not having to sell your car when a better one comes along" is simply not possible IMHO.  There will always be better cars coming out, always be a better driver, always be a hierarchy within each class, and there will always be the car to have. 

Pat,

I think the idea is to quantify what makes a car good, weight, HP, type of suspension, gear ratios, tire width, etc.  If we could come up with a realistic handicap, no historical data would be needed.  What we would do is adjust the handicap based on results.  This would ineffect replace the PAX index totally.  The SEB does this now when they class a new car, sometimes great and other time not so great.  The handicap would help by not making existing car obsolete.

I know this is a "500" foot view, but we have to start somewhere.

Art

brian94ht:

Make it more of a "bolt on" class that reflects how people mod their cars for the street. This would attract a MUCH larger group of new competitors to the sport and the class in general. As it sits now unless you run stock or ST for the most part your car is a DEDICATED SP class or above car (I dont need to hear arguments about how XXXXX SP car was driven to work blah blah).

Apparantly you don't know; that is EXACTLY how Street Prepared came to be.  It was a class that was designed to be a "bolt on class that reflects how people mod their cars for the street".  

brian94ht:

Is it much of a surprise to anyone that the ST classes are so well subscribed? They are the cars and the mods people are running on their daily drivers, this is what most people own.

And in 10 years you will have the exact same complaint about STS that you now have about SP.

brian94ht:

As it sits now most/all of the SP cars are 1 mod away from being in SM or SM2. Which will be a great place for them to go if they have done mods that are irreversable for the new SP.

Assuming this is true, its not SP's fault.  SP existed for 20 years before SM became a class. And what takes most cars from SP to SM is one mod.  Not because SP rules are so radical but because most SM cars are under prepared.

brian94ht:

Among other things I would propose taking away the unlimited wheel and tire widths (these are SM/SM2 allowences). Therefore taking away fender modifications/overfenders allowence. Before anyone says anything, think about the BSP vette drivers that complained that their $30K investment into their SP car was worthless now in BSP. WHy? because they took a sawzall to the fenders, put on FG overfenders and now the car is unsellable to 99% of buyers because it looks gay with OEM wheels on it (this is just an example, I dont think the vette should be obsolete in autox). If simple bolt ons could be removed and sold along with the car much of that money could be recovered, its a very common thing these days with street cars.

There would be more taken away from the SP rules and the OPer listed some that I agree with such as fuel system cant be touched, no engine blueprinting, etc.( I would be willing to elaborate if there was interest). Some allowences IMO could be given to the class too. For instance you could give SP carbon fiber hood and trunk lids. VERY popular aftermarket mod and doesnt take a lot of time (ie: wont make you go faster) away from most cars.

One you take away all of that stuff, what differentiates SP from ST??? 

All of the take aways will kill SP because there won't be any reason to go there from ST.  Your proposal will kill it.

There is no way that what Street Prepared has become is a  class of a "popular way to mod your car for the street".    How many street cars due to you see with hacked up fenders and A/C removed?    About none (no comments from those in the northern states where A/C isn't needed).   Sure do see a lot of carbon fiber hoods out there though, but wait those move one to Street Mod.

I really think that Brian94ht is looking in the right direction on this as a way to generate more participation.

As to Steve's comment on the difference between SP and ST - 'R Tires'.   There are a lot of people out there that once they go to "R" tires they become hooked and never want to go back to street tires.    I'd like to hear more of where brian94ht thinks this could go.

jw1:

There is no way that what Street Prepared has become is a  class of a "popular way to mod your car for the street".   

That is;  "how street prepared came to be" as in came into being.  NOT "has become".   

jw1:

As to Steve's comment on the difference between SP and ST - 'R Tires'.  

Dude... do you really think I don't know that?  And the difference between ST legal tires and "R Tires" is narrowing all the time.  In a couple of years there will be little if any difference.  As it is now, to be competitive in STS you have to buy the current tire of the moment and shave them.  And I see most of the STS guys changing tires at events now.  So how is this different than "R Tires" now?

Steve Hoelscher:

And in 10 years you will have the exact same complaint about STS that you now have about SP.

No, in ten years those of us that want to be constructive and make the sport grow will be discussing and exploring the possibilities of hybrid, electric, and biofuel classes.

Why dont you sit this thread out and let the younger generations that are willing to accept and discuss change talk about this, 20 years in SP and making zero contributions as an SEB member appears to have left you bitter.

brian94ht:

 [Why dont you sit this thread out and let the younger generations that are willing to accept and discuss change talk about this,

No problem.  I will be glad to let you play in Fantasy Land with the rest of the children.  Have at it.  The adults will handle reality. 

brian94ht:

 

Steve Hoelscher:

And in 10 years you will have the exact same complaint about STS that you now have about SP.

No, in ten years those of us that want to be constructive and make the sport grow will be discussing and exploring the possibilities of hybrid, electric, and biofuel classes.

Why dont you sit this thread out and let the younger generations that are willing to accept and discuss change talk about this, 20 years in SP and making zero contributions as an SEB member appears to have left you bitter.

 

Wow, that seems harsh. 

I don't always agree with Steve's  views, but he has been very involved for along time and most of the time has thought things out in reality.   Give it some time at the ST classes with have the same problems that exist everywhere else.  The honeymoon  won't last forever. 

Sort of reminds me of the birth of SM.  A big push for this wonderful new class that is going to bring in droves of new young hotrodders by providing an affordable place for them to be competitive.  It will be populated with tons of older cheap cars that have common street performance mods.  At that time there were people warning that the ruleset would allow a fully prepped car to 1) kick the dickens out of the "common mod street car" and 2)The fully prepped car would take very many $$ to build.   So SM was born, and there were tons of different cars that seemed to have a chance and many people flocked to the class.  Then some very beautiful, expertly prepared and driven cars with "larger" budgets came along and defined what the class could be.  Next some of the competiors with "smaller" budgets started looking else where for fun, and the class is not so big now, and there are many opinions on how SM should be made "better".  

So maybe that life cycle won't happen to ST classes but it would be a 1st.

Enough rambling, the point is that time will tell.

Jeff Christianson