Solo 1 Rulebook Workshop - Nov 5th

[Dave]

As usual, we will be having a rulebook workshop on the same day and same location as the banquet (LeBiftheque Steakhouse near Pearson Airport -- see the banquet flyers for more details about its location). Coffee, tea and water will be freely available (paid for by Solo 1 and Solo 2). Menus will also be available for anyone who would like to order food.

Our workshop will be from 1-4pm. Solo 2 is also having a workshop from 11-2pm, for those of you interested in both rulebooks.

Here's a preliminary agenda. Please e-mail me or post other items you'd like to see discussed and we'll try to add it to the agenda.

1. Suspension ratings, suspension PIPs, and the convergence of handling as all types of cars' suspension become more and more modified. How best to deal with this reality? Currently the CCC is working on two different approaches to dealing with this issue more accurately and equitably than the '05 rules allowed. We will present one or both approaches (depending on how our research goes in the meantime) for your feedback.

2. Eliminating all Starting Class +1 and Starting Class +4 authorized mods. In our meeting on the 23rd, the CCC agreed to eliminate all authorized mods for these two levels of prep. Some have been moved to the PIP schedule, others have been moved to the Starting Class authorized mods section (which will simply be called authorized mods in '06 since the starting class concept will no longer apply).

3. Dyno plot option - tightening useage and limiting PIP savings. The CCC has agreed in principle to institute a rule change that will limit PIP savings from dyno plot submissions to 50%, meaning that if you have a 20 PIP engine and submit a dyno plot that saves you more than 10 PIPs, you'll still be charged 10 PIPs. We are also considering other stricter requirements for this option to be used so that tuning tricks and other ways of creating artificially low dyno results are prohibited.

4. Differential and gearing mods. How best to deal with these.

5. Making the rules easier to use and enforce. How best to go about this. We are talking about, among other things, introducing an online classification process where all competitors will have to do is tick off boxes and all the math will go on automatically in the background, providing competitors with accurate classifications very quickly.

6. PIPs for R-compounds -- will doing so improve the competitive balance of the series?

7. Other items.

See you Saturday!

-- Dave Pratte

[haniforama]

Sounds interesting! I should be able to attend...

[Chuck91GT]

Chris and I will be there.
Should we address competition, or lack of competition, within classes and how this impacts on the overall standings? Large competitive classes are at a distinct disadvantage when any driver can win on any given day compared to a small class where there is no competition and the same driver wins continuously. This is not directed towards Chris P. - he has proven that he is a very capable driver not only of his own car but of others as well - but rather instead to the whole process of evaluating classes that are so different. My suggestion is individual class winners rather than one overall series winner.

Chuck

[thekid]

Our workshop will be from 1-4pm. Solo 2 is also having a workshop from 11-2pm, for those of you interested in both rulebooks.


Glad to hear they won't be completely overlapping this year... I should be there.

[G-ForceJunkie]

What's wrong with the current way of classifying the gearing and differential mods?

[Dave]

come to the workshop and you'll find out :) In short, there is some concern that the way we currently have diffs and gearing bundled hurts some cars and advantages others, depending on their OE set-up. We'll probably break things down further so that everyone is treated fairly.

[Chris91GT]

Oooooh... sounds like fun. I've never attended a workshop, but this year looks like it could be... er... controversial. :D

[craig]

What is the relationship between the CASC-OR rules and the ASN Canada FIA ones next year? I realize this year the rules were essentially identical except for the GCR differences, but will the same situation by true for next year? (besides the National rules being available in both official languages :rolleyes: )

[B18C5]

If I were to speculate, I'd say that charging PIPs for gearing changes is unfair. We're already classifying cars based on weight vs. power. Some cars will have very similar suspension and horsepower ratings, but one could be majorly disadvantaged because of what it came with.

[Dave]

Craig, as far as I know the Ontario ruleset will be used as the National ruleset again next year.

[craig]

Craig, as far as I know the Ontario ruleset will be used as the National ruleset again next year.

Okay, then - my suggestion is that in places where the National rules are different from the Ontario ones, can the two rulesets be harmonized, please? Although I thought the rules were the same at a cursory glance, having read through a couple sections, there are some differences, e.g., seatbelt requirements - and phrases have been moved around, paragraph numbering is slightly different as a result, etc.

[Dave]

There is a national committee that'll be working on doing just that, from what I understand. Christian is currently on the national committee and I may be joining it.

[thgear]

will there be any talk of PAX??

my main beef comes in the form of the following scenario (that happened to me and a few other competitors as well)

lets take T4 and T3

lets assume T3 class has its 3 members, and T4 doesnt.

the leader of the T3 class runs 60 seconds lets say, the guy below him runs 61, and the guy below him 62

Now this is where i dont like the way things work out right now.

if i dont beat the T3 leader, i get hit with pax, lets assume that i ran 60.5 seconds.

as at is almost always the case, PAX sets a time for me that ends up being FASTER than the fastest T3 competitor!

using said numbers PAX will for instance give me a time to beat of 59 seconds, so by running 60.5 i will get lets say 97 points or something.

when the guy running 61 seconds in T3 is getting somewehre along the lines of 98-99 points!

which is absurd, i get less points for running faster than the guy in a class higher than me!!



i would propose then that in the case of when the class below you doesnt have a full set of competitors, then it would be better to simply count them as part of the 1 class higher up for points calculation.

[Dave]

We've already taken a look at PAX and our guru on the subject (James) seems comfortable with what we've got. But if you'd like to bring it up at the workshop for discussion, come on by and join the party. I'm sure James would be happy to crush you with his statistical powers :)

[thgear]

i'll be sure to bring my calculator :)

[Chris P]

Serge, instead of attacking PAX, perhaps you want to propose collapsible under filled classes. This is something we have looked at before and it seems like your example is actually a reason to make it happen.

The general idea is that T2 T3 T4 and T5 are perpetually under filled classes. It was proposed that unless these classes have 3 competitors the people in them will be scored in the next higher class. So if there is 1 person in T4, 1 person in T3 and 1 in T2, the T4 and T3 people will be moved into T2 to make a class of 3 people.

However, we decided to leave things alone since it was never a big issue and some of the PUFC competitors didn't like the idea, but they didn't run last season anyway, opinion null. We decided to eliminate T5 at all events unless 3 competitors were present. If you and your tortus friends :p like this idea then bring it up at the workshop and we can try to work something out.

As for PAX, if you build a car and drive it to the limits of the class you should be able to make PAX. The PAX numbers will not be adjusted for 2006. However, I suspect for 2006 people with modified suspension will all move up 1 class, therefore making pax a little easier on stock, or close to stock folks like your self. ;)

[James Mewett]

which is absurd, i get less points for running faster than the guy in a class higher than me!!

i would propose then that in the case of when the class below you doesnt have a full set of competitors, then it would be better to simply count them as part of the 1 class higher up for points calculation.

What I can argue is the fairness of the PAX factors as estimates of the relative performance potential of an optimized car in each class. The problem is that not all classes are equally competitive. Factors such as degree to which the car is optimized within the rules, driver skill and experience, and competition from within the class affect how well a class winner does. At the moment the class winners in T2, T3 and T4 are traditionally between 0.5 and 1.0 seconds slower than the PAX predicts and thus would not score 100% if PAXed.

The T classes have always tended towards being PTUC (Perpetually and Terminally Underfilled Classes). For T5 the condition was indeed terminal in 2005. Being scored routinely against the PAX is a harsh way to be scored if you indend to finish well in the overall standings. This is particularly true if the class above you is traditionally slower than you, or at least close. In this case it may be strategically beneficial to run in the class above.

Now if we can just convince all of T4 to move up to T3 maybe we can T another PTUC.

[John P]

Serge, if you had used R compound tires all season, you probably would have beat T3. Please don't blame the PAXs system because you ran an under prepared car.

[gkierst]

...

which is absurd, i get less points for running faster than the guy in a class higher than me!!
...


I'm not sure what the current rule is, and sorry for not looking it up before posting. However, I would say that you propositioned the higher class and so they too should be scored against the same PAX that was applied to you. That is in the case where you did not beat PAX, otherwise they would be scored against your time as usual.

Greg

[thgear]

Serge, if you had used R compound tires all season, you probably would have beat T3. Please don't blame the PAXs system because you ran an under prepared car.

thats a little harsh, by your logic if i had really known all the in-s and out-s of SOLO1, and had stacks of cash comming out of my pockets i would have come driving a fully prepped F1 car with a team to back me up, probably would have blown everyone away...... :rolleyes:

thats not the point i'm arguing John, car prep aside and anything else that you can think of,

there is no LOGIC behind an opponent running slower than you, in a higher class, getting MORE points than you.

i didnt beat pax, well, i suck, so i dont get 100 points, but i SHOULD at the very least be GRADED on an equal level compared to the people CLOSEST to me (ie, the one class above me).


===========================

food for thought, here then is a little wrench in your gears

why is it that when Chris beats both pax and the class above him, pax gets thrown out the window and chris all of a sudden becomes "the leader of the class above him"

why not then maintain a "pax" position and take away propositions for those people running solo in their class at any given event??

something to think about ...

the way i see it, PAX should only be used for a class that does not have anyone ABOVE them to be compared to...

[ScotcH]

I'm not sure what the current rule is, and sorry for not looking it up before posting. However, I would say that you propositioned the higher class and so they too should be scored against the same PAX that was applied to you. That is in the case where you did not beat PAX, otherwise they would be scored against your time as usual.

Greg

When you proposition, you don't get hit with pax ... Serge is saying that if was just a hair slower than the leader of the class above.

[Chuck91GT]

All of this discussion, which seems to be going nowhere, can be resolved by having class winners and no overall series' winner. To mathematically adjust completely different classes so that they can be ranked accordingly is at best a nightmare and completely unrealistic. The committee has done a great job over the last few years trying to make the classes fair but as for an overall champion, it is good on paper only.
It is time to move forward and be more realistic. All of the arguments over 3 or 4 runs, pax, number of competitors in a class only exist because of the notion of an overall series' champion.
Here is a suggestion - why don't we vote on the following:

1. Do we want individual class champions only, or
2. Do we want class champions and an overall series champion?

I'm not sure how to set this up on the board but maybe John P. could do that for me???

[thekid]

I think Serge and JohnP both have good points... John is right, you didn't bring a car that was optimally prepared so you can't complain about how you were scored against PAX... however, there is something to be said about how you scored vs the class above you... ChrisP had some good suggestions and perhaps you should pursue something like the collapsing of underfilled classes to the class above..

[gatherer]

I always thought that if you beat the class above you you got 100 points?

isn't that how it works?

so If I'm the only guy in T1 and I go faster then Krispy in GT4 Shouldn't I get 100 points?

I rememebr being told by many in solo 1 that well PAX sucks because of the lack of data to create meaningful index numbers.

So shouldn't propositioning instantly give you 100 points and create the concept of a "filled class"

I duno I'm just posting my thoughts most people know I've only done 3 events and I like to scream on microphones so I might just be babbliing here.

An Idea I'd liek to see is the abolishment of "Filled" class requirement. This would allow you to do away with PAX completely then. How? simple if you have an underfilled class (say T3 for example) that 1 competitor just has to make sure he doesn't get beat by T4 or T5 competitors and then he gets his 100 points ... rest of the day he can work on backup scores. you would never need back.

I've been told you can't get enough stats to use PAX anyways so the best solution would be to remove it from the event all together.

[James Mewett]

there is no LOGIC behind an opponent running slower than you, in a higher class, getting MORE points than you.

i didnt beat pax, well, i suck, so i dont get 100 points, but i SHOULD at the very least be GRADED on an equal level compared to the people CLOSEST to me (ie, the one class above me).

Actually, there is logic to this approach. What you are suggesting is that on the days that you beat the class above (which if you have done, is clearly not competitive) you should judged by an uncompetitive standard. (I should clarify that by comptetitive, I mean competitive with respect to the PAX average. Obviously there was competition in your class, and it was fun to watch.) BUT, on the days that you don't beat the class above, you should be judged by your own class's uncompetitive standard. This is having your cake and eating it too. (I don't say this to be harsh Serge. You put in a great season, and for the times you beat the class above, well done. The rules need to take a broader view of things though.)

If you want to be judged by the class above you should run in that class, and make that decision before the results are known.

On the other hand, being judged against the PAX average is a truer measure of your performance relative to the other class winners. Remember the PAX average is the average of the PAX times of each of the full class winners. Half of the class winners will have beaten PAX at any given event, as will some of the other close finishers. Although nobody beat PAX at every event this year, a few beat it at all but one. If we are to have an overall championship (and the fact that we do is the only reason it is relevant how you score relative to a class above) surely everyone should be judged against the standard of ALL the other class winners (which is what PAX does).

That said, PAXing sucks and Solo 1 is really about competition within your own class. If you want to enjoy it more, don't run in a PTUC class.

I realize that hindsight is 20:20 and you obviously would not consider these things in your Novice year. Perhaps it is time for T4 to be retired just like T5 was last year?

[Anamaria]

I always thought that if you beat the class above you you got 100 points?

isn't that how it works?

so If I'm the only guy in T1 and I go faster then Krispy in GT4 Shouldn't I get 100 points?


You get 100 points if you beat the WINNER of the class above you.
In Serge's example, he beats the guy in second place, not the winner.

Oh ! and yes.... PAXing sucks !

[thgear]

If you want to be judged by the class above you should run in that class, and make that decision before the results are known.


I realize that hindsight is 20:20 and you obviously would not consider these things in your Novice year. Perhaps it is time for T4 to be retired just like T5 was last year?

actualy your not harsh at all!

ahah, last night when i went to bed i was thinking over the "having your cake and eating it to" dilema

and i wont argue with you that its a little unfair for a person to be judged based on whatever method gives him the most ammount of points..

so, what i;m gonna do is go over this years results and see if anyone in the T classes ever actualy beat the pax, if not, then maybe i can suggest a collapsing of the classes on a given race day when a member of a T class does not have enough members

or perhaps, as you said in the quote above, perhaps the competitor could be given a choice at the begging of a race day, to either run VS PAX or be compacted into the class above him.

hmmm....

one thing that always bugged me is that PAX works off the average of the race day, however how much of that average does the T class actualy contribute to ? I know that the modifier is there to take care of the situation..... but i dunno, you guys been doin this for awhile now so i guess its pretty solid

[James Mewett]

Since you have got me going on about PAX ...

1) Only full class winner times contribute to the calculation of the PAX average.

2) Nobody in T2, T3 or T4 beat the PAX average in 2005.

3) It is interesting to consider the lap records for each track and to calculate the PAX average of the lap records. This can then be used to establish what an excellent time is for each track and each class. The PAX average lap records are:

Fabi 70.772
Pro 74.188
Mosport 96.957
DDT ccw 56.604
DDT ccw 1 kink 60.524
Dunnville 77.355
Dunnville ccw 77.707

4) To find the predicted lap record pace for each class (as opposed to the actual lap record time) divide these times by the PAX factors

Open Modified 1.036
Modified 1.024
Prepared 1.012
Improved 1.000
Super Grand Touring 1 0.988
Super Grand Touring 2 0.976
Super Grand Touring 3 0.964
Grand Touring 1 0.952
Grand Touring 2 0.940
Grand Touring 3 0.928
Grand Touring 4 0.916
Touring 1 0.904
Touring 2 0.892
Touring 3 0.880
Touring 4 0.868
Touring 5 0.856

When you do this and compare the actual lap records to the lap record pax times the match is quite good. This is one reason we believe that the PAX factors are good. I have attached a graph showing the correlation.

5) The bottom T class (T4 this year) is unique in that it doesn't have anyone below them keeping them honest. As such it is the best place for a strategic attack on the overall championship. Collapsing the T classes at each event to make sure that the bottom class is always full (and thus never PAXed) would definitely improve the overall fortunes of T4, but this would be at some expense in terms of fairness. You should expect some resistance to this.

6) If overall results are of particular interest to T4, they would be advised to voluntarily register in T3 if T4 can't be assured of being full. Provided the class is always full it will never be PAXed and cannot be propositioned if there is no class below. This may be the best kept secret in Solo 1 and is why the lowest class in the series is the best place for a strategic attack on the overall championship. It is actually convenient for the rest of the competition that T4 is not full as it limits the possibility of strategic attack.

[thgear]

2) Nobody in T2, T3 or T4 beat the PAX average in 2005.


5) The bottom T class (T4 this year) is unique in that it doesn't have anyone below them keeping them honest. As such it is the best place for a strategic attack on the overall championship. Collapsing the T classes at each event to make sure that the bottom class is always full (and thus never PAXed) would definitely improve the overall fortunes of T4, but this would be at some expense in terms of fairness. You should expect some resistance to this.



food for thought:

everyone always says that PAX is based on the assumption that you have an optimized car, but realisticly speaking, how many people have a "maximized" T5-T2 car... even T1 didnt see too many "maximized" cars this year either.

most people that end up in the T classes either have lightly modded cars, didnt even know where their cars would land, or have to end up driving a T class car cuz their other cars are in the shop/bottom of a lake/whatever :D

this statement is reinforced by the fact that no one beat the pax in the lower T classes this year, do we all simply suck? ;)

or probably its the fact that no one actualy has a maximized car, already people like Richard (s2000), Peter (mr2 supercharged) and even Ana (????)want to move up to higher places :)

i dont know how its been in years before this, but i doubt anyone would seriously consider optimizing a lower level T class car just for the sake of winning the championship.

but for those that end up in such a position, i think a small change in the points calculation (such as class compression on X event) would perhaps be appropriate, as everyone is well aware that every single little point counts in the end.

[ADAM]

HMMM ITS BEEN THOUGHT OF..... aka "stunta pimp sentra"

[Anamaria]

or probably its the fact that no one actualy has a maximized car, already people like Richard (s2000), Peter (mr2 supercharged) and even Ana (????)want to move up to higher places :)




I won't be chasing PAX next year... that's for sure !! :cool:

[thgear]

HMMM ITS BEEN THOUGHT OF..... aka "stunta pimp sentra"

i wanna see you finisht the 2006 season with your engine intact before i hear any more of your crazy ideas :cool:

[John P]

T4 class cannot be propositioned if there is no class below. This may be the best kept secret in Solo 1 and is why the lowest class in the series is the best place for a strategic attack on the overall championship. It is actually convenient for the rest of the competition that T4 is not full as it limits the possibility of strategic attack.

Serge had a chance for the Overall Solo 1 Championship and Novice Championship with a Strategic Attack from T4? If only he had purchased some R compound Tires! :)

[Chuck91GT]

Class champions not an overall series winner!!!
Do Hondas really beat up on high powered cars such as Corvettes, Mustangs and RX7's???
Only in your wildest dreams and backup times. Most racers try to go faster and faster each session, not be consistent so their backup times are good. Who came up with these pax numbers anyway? I'm not criticizing as much as I'm trying to figure out how Solo1 can be fairer to everyone who competes.

[craig]

Am I the only one who thinks that the graph James posted shows there is possibly a problem with the PAX ratings (or with the "linearness" of the classification system :eek: )?

(Yes, Dave, all other things being equal ... ;) )

To me, the graph shows PAX to be precise (reasonably tight groupings within a class if you throw Mosport out), but not accurate (if you draw a line through the middles of the class groupings of the points, it would not be the 1.000 line) nor fair between classes (that line would not be horizontal - it would have a definite curve to it.).

What am I missing here? I can't be reading this graph correctly ... I expected to see noise, not patterns! :confused:

[gatherer]

Class champions not an overall series winner!!!


Best statement ever.

[glh]

Can some 1 tell the address of this workshop or directions from Pearson
Thanks Steve

[Dave]

25 Carlson Court.

401 to the 427 N.

Dixon Exit - go east on Dixon

Turn left (north) onto Attwell Dr.

Turn right (east) onto Calrson Court. Bingo!

[glh]

Thank You See you there

[TYSON]

3. Dyno plot option - tightening useage and limiting PIP savings. The CCC has agreed in principle to institute a rule change that will limit PIP savings from dyno plot submissions to 50%, meaning that if you have a 20 PIP engine and submit a dyno plot that saves you more than 10 PIPs, you'll still be charged 10 PIPs. We are also considering other stricter requirements for this option to be used so that tuning tricks and other ways of creating artificially low dyno results are prohibited.


Is this really going to be included? How many PIP credits for removing a factory turbo system then?

[James Mewett]

Is this really going to be included? How many PIP credits for removing a factory turbo system then?

a) Yes
b) In the unlikely case that someone did this they would have to submit a credible dyno plot which the CCC would consider on its merits.

[TYSON]

a) Yes
b) In the unlikely case that someone did this they would have to submit a credible dyno plot which the CCC would consider on its merits.

What if they already did it?

http://cranked.nopistons.com/albums/Engine-Bay/Engine_Bay_15.sized.jpg

[James Mewett]

What if they already did it?


Any number of people have done any number of things that any number of other people would never consider, so allow me to clarify: if this hypothetical person actually submitted an application for classification they would be asked for a credible dyno plot. When they did "it" would not be of particular interest but why would surely spark some lively discussion. :rolleyes:

[TYSON]

hehe :D

But would 'they' still have to do that 50% bit? ;) Depending on who's reading the rule book, there's about 30 engine PIP points in that picture after +1 and +4 deductions. So it would end up +3 classes on drivetrain alone, despite only perhaps a 30% power gain over stock.

No doubt with 30 points and different modifications much more power could be made, but the same could be said about a turbo car heavily modified who chooses to run on pump gas versus one using race gas. There would be the same PIP points yet easily 100 hp difference.

This is why the dyno rule was so great. If stock cars are being graded by power to weight why would modified cars not be? There IS a point where you max out the spreadsheet right now, though, at 6 lb/hp, beyond that horsepower is free. ;)

How many people utilized the rule and how many are suspected of having cheated?

[Dave Barker]

All other PIPs have been calculated as if the driver optimised their car. You can put crappy KYB shocks on your car or remote reservoir Motons but it is the same # of PIPs whichever you chose. Most drivers end up somewhere imbetween.

We do know that at high levels of PIPs in an engine that it is not necessarily true that performance ,even when optimised, will produced the expected gains. ( OTOH in some high pressure forced induction situations the PIP schedule may not charge enough PIPs for the power gained) Hence the dyno rule to make sure Turbos and Supercharged cars with lots of PIPs are not making more power than the PIP schedule expects (or less for that matter) and to grant all engine builders a bit of grace in building less than optimal engines. OTOH it is possible with small tuning changes to change the outcome of a dyno and if we consider that other PIPs are optimised why not assume that engine building is also optimised? The CCC is confident enough in our PIP schedule that we feel that if your engine builder can't make enough power to produce at least 50% of the gains that should have occured then you need a better builder or tuner or else you have spent PIPs frivolously.

[TYSON]

I don't see why power to weight ratio is good enough for stock cars but not good enough for modified cars then? My car as an example, it wouldn't be a big deal if removing the turbos meant from that point forward it was treated as an N/A car, disregarding all the PIPs that refer to "factory turbocharger".

If you want to easily make the PIP system look foolish on a heavily modified car, use the Toyota Supra as an example. The turbo model is shown as starting class SGT3, whereas a non turbo model would be in GT3 ( I think they were 220hp). Add the SAME big turbo kit to each, some cams and some porting. You've now got two cars that could put out 600+ whp without even trying. BUT, the turbo model has gained 28 PIPs to the non turbo car's 20. AND it started three classes higher. Yet their power to weight ratio is the same. Dividing PIPs by two certainly won't put them in the same class. :)

If this is to prevent cheating, why not identify the cheaters? Public humiliation for cheating at a hobby would about cure it, I would think.

[James Mewett]

I don't see why power to weight ratio is good enough for stock cars but not good enough for modified cars then?

It is. The 50% rule merely sets a lower limit on the power claimed.

If you want to easily make the PIP system look foolish on a heavily modified car, use the Toyota Supra as an example. The turbo model is shown as starting class SGT3, whereas a non turbo model would be in GT3 ( I think they were 220hp). Add the SAME big turbo kit to each, some cams and some porting. You've now got two cars that could put out 600+ whp without even trying. BUT, the turbo model has gained 28 PIPs to the non turbo car's 20. AND it started three classes higher. Yet their power to weight ratio is the same. Dividing PIPs by two certainly won't put them in the same class.

Yes it will because if they dyno 600 hp they will be classed accordingly.

If you want to easily make the PIP system look foolish on a heavily modified car, use the Toyota Supra as an example. ... You've now got two cars that could put out 600+ whp without even trying.

If you really want to look foolish, bring a 600 hp Supra to Solo 1 ;) Vertical torque curves and road courses don't go well together.

If this is to prevent cheating, why not identify the cheaters? Public humiliation for cheating at a hobby would about cure it, I would think.

The classification rules are about fairly classifying cars in an unambiguous way. We don't see cheating as a problem in the series, and removing ambiguity from the rules minimizes the chance of creative interpretation that is counter to the intent of the rules. Enough with the cheating already :rolleyes:

[TYSON]

It states right in the first post that it is being instituted;

We are also considering other stricter requirements for this option to be used so that tuning tricks and other ways of creating artificially low dyno results are prohibited.

Your own reply that you are concerned that people will claim too low of a dyno number basically backs this up, nor does it answer why power to weight is only suitable for stock cars.

Put the 600 hp Supras in the spreadsheet. You can't get more than 12 PIP points no matter how much power you add to the factory turbo car. Since the factory turbo car would need to enter 14 now, they aren't in the same class.


If you really want to look foolish, bring a 600 hp Supra to Solo 1 Vertical torque curves and road courses don't go well together.

Perhaps, but this rule only prevents that person from turning down the boost to get a more tractable power delivery. If all the parts are there, the rules state they have to be maxxed out.

[thgear]

isnt there a clause somewhere in the rule book whereby the CCC has the authority to request a dyno plot/weight papers

[CobraStang]

A Dyno Plot must be submitted when using the Dyno Plot option, Serge.
The CCC is confident enough in our PIP schedule that we feel that if your engine builder can't make enough power to produce at least 50% of the gains that should have occured then you need a better builder or tuner or else you have spent PIPs frivolously.Engine PIP's are not the same as suspension PIP's. You are choosing the degree to which the modifications will make power. Many of us want a reliable engine that will last the season. Adam would have done much better with his turboSX if it didn't crap out halfway through each event. There is no way to measure the effect of different suspension modification choices (ie are KYB's worth 1 PIP vs Moton DAs worth 2 PIPs?). But there is a very easy way to measure what engine modification choices have done.

Just because someone chooses to bore out just a bit instead of as much as possible, doesn't mean their engine builder isn't competent.
Just because someone increases the compression ratio from 9.85:1 to 10:1 instead of to 13:1 doesn't make the engine builder incapable.
Just because someone chooses a streetable camshaft profile doesn't make them unable to build more power (from a race camshaft).

The 2004 rulebook required that a competitor have 12 PIPs or more before they could utilize the Dyno Plot option. If someone had ten PIP's, and wasn't making 10 PIP's worth of power, it would make sense to add a couple cheap PIP's, then submit a Dyno Plot.

The proposed rule change will penalize those people who opted for reliability over absolute maximum power.

[Dave Barker]

Russ, the dyno rule was originally put in place to make sure that forced induction cars did not make MORE than the PIP schedule predicted. Adam has insisted that in the past we were under pipping Turbos and hence needed the dyno plot. The reason for his miserable engine failures is that he pushed the limits. I am quite sure that he would confirm that his engines made a ton of HP as he has not suggested dropping any of the PIPs for turbo cars. Obviously if he were to back off on his quest for mega HP ( beating V8s is the holy grail for him) he would have had much better reliability and still be much higher than the 50% rule that the CCC is proposing.

Tyson, 600 HP ?, on a Solo 1 budget?? Have you been talking to Adam???

[thgear]

600 hp on a supra is one of the easiest things to do

from what i read anyway... ahahah :rolleyes:

a bigger turbo here, some custom engine management there, 104 octane, your good to go.

maybe not 600 whp, but 400 whp is a very easy goal from a Supra/Skyline.

[TYSON]

Russ, the dyno rule was originally put in place to make sure that forced induction cars did not make MORE than the PIP schedule predicted. Adam has insisted that in the past we were under pipping Turbos and hence needed the dyno plot. The reason for his miserable engine failures is that he pushed the limits. I am quite sure that he would confirm that his engines made a ton of HP as he has not suggested dropping any of the PIPs for turbo cars. Obviously if he were to back off on his quest for mega HP ( beating V8s is the holy grail for him) he would have had much better reliability and still be much higher than the 50% rule that the CCC is proposing.

Tyson, 600 HP ?, on a Solo 1 budget?? Have you been talking to Adam???


I thought his complaints were that they were overpenalized.

And since you are only targeting cars with monsterous PIP totals, of course the modifications are expensive. On a Supra it's a turbo system, fuel system and an ECU. If you don't think anyone will do it, why are you changing the rules?

The person has no choice with this rule, they can't turn down the power even if they wanted to. In fact, as I stated already, the Supra guy (or RX-7 guy) can't turn the power up far enough on the dyno to get even this half point total! Once you reach 6lb/hp it flatlines:eek:

[thgear]

i think a better way to look at it, is see which class this 6hp/lb car will end up, and look at your competition.

solo 1 is not about being fast

its about being fastER than the other... atleast thats how i see it.

[ADAM]

IF turbo cars are done properly, they can beat the PIP system (i know cause i did not take the dyno option the first few years) meaning...you can make more power than what the PIPS would indicate....

however...all this dyno plotting of NA cars was really not the intention originally of the dyno plots..since thier power is more static..unless people are pulling silly amounts of timing out of the motor to cheat the system.

Turbos are mystical.... temperature and the limits of boost make them very tempermental power wise, you can see extreme power changes with those alone.

And yes... beating V8's is alot of fun..... this year...this year.. all the bugs are worked out....and they will be punished....


I have never tried to protect turbo cars from PIPS...cause they do have the POTENTIAL to decimate the field...since they can have such high power outputs and really have no top end limit. 2 seasons ago I was running over 21psi of boost, and was able to run down and away from Porsche GT3's..like they were not there..the car was outputting over 400rwhp....from a 2.4l SOHC motor.... that being said its alot of strain on the car....and the transmission let go.... HOWEVER..it can be done....so we have to be very carefull not to let turbo cars get away with murder in our series...or it wont be very fair to NA cars, which are pretty static and predicable in power increases.

hmmm what was my train of thought again?

[ADAM]

cant turn down the power?

heard about tuning? pull some timing.... voila..power gone



I thought his complaints were that they were overpenalized.

And since you are only targeting cars with monsterous PIP totals, of course the modifications are expensive. On a Supra it's a turbo system, fuel system and an ECU. If you don't think anyone will do it, why are you changing the rules?

The person has no choice with this rule, they can't turn down the power even if they wanted to. In fact, as I stated already, the Supra guy (or RX-7 guy) can't turn the power up far enough on the dyno to get even this half point total! Once you reach 6lb/hp it flatlines:eek:

[TYSON]

Starting with a factory turbo car in the SGT classes already is not the same as starting with a car from Touring.

The results are nowhere near what you have seen, do the comparison of the turbo and non turbo Supra yourself. Adding a turbo to a non turbo car is far more favoured than fully upgrading a factory turbo car in the PIP schedule.

[TYSON]

cant turn down the power?

heard about tuning? pull some timing.... voila..power gone


Not allowed to turn down the power, since they will be penalized for the parts, not the power level.

[G-ForceJunkie]

Your not allowed to turn down power for the dyno in anyway. :rolleyes:

[TYSON]

Your not allowed to turn down power for the dyno in anyway. :rolleyes:


This can't be that hard of a concept to grasp. :confused:

If someone who has spent a significant amount of PIP points wants to dyno at 10 psi and run at the track at 10psi they are free to do so now, because their power to weight ratio will be what it will be and they will be classed appropriately.

With the new way, someone with a 93 RX7 or turbo Supra with a single turbo kit and some motor porting gains around 30 PIPs. Cut that in half. Now they have to claim 15 points, even if they want to run on that same 10 psi.

On my car as an example, putting the turbo back on would mean being in Prepared, with 12.5 points from the dyno no matter how high I turned the boost! (anywhere beyond about 13psi would do this) With being forced to take 15 points, my car would now automatically be in Modified, even if I set the boost low enough for 300hp (maybe about 7-8psi). Since I don't have a cage, my car would now be illegal. Setting the boost for 300hp with the dyno rule would put the car in Improved, still difficult to compete, but at least legal to come out and have fun.


As it is, this rule would only have the desired effect on those who start with a low powered car, add a full turbo system and claim a very low power level on the dyno while cranking the boost at the track. :rolleyes:

If you guys think he's going to cheat, why don't you just go to the dyno with him or something :p

Someone who starts with a higher classed factory turbo car gets screwed.



I'm certainly not attacking the rules committee, but I think this particular rule does target those who honestly saw the dyno rule as a method to bring out an unusual car to compete. Maybe it won't end up affecting many people in such a negative way, but surely the group it is truly targetted at is not that large either? Either way, I guess I'll need to talk to someone about which starting class my car would be in, sans turbo system. :o

[James Mewett]

I am not sure what your car is, but I assume it is not the NA 3rd Gen RX-7 in the picture. But then again maybe it is?

To stop spinning our wheels can you give us an actual vehicle and level of prep instead of a range of posibilities to consider.

The point of the classification system is to fairly classify cars competing in the series. The CCC has the discretion to deal fairly with vehicles that fall outside the range of expectation based on a rational assessment. The extreme scenarios you have presented are not typical of the preparation level we have seen in the series.

[TYSON]

That's my car in the picture. It is the stock motor with the turbos removed and new ports, and all the other stuff you would need to do it. :)

I know they are not typical, but the only cars affected by this rule would be cars with a significant amount of preparation anyway. My two examples are simply a couple I could throw together quickly.

[James Mewett]

How much power do you make? How high do you rev the engine? What kind of exhaust do you run? Do you maintain stock compression from the turbo engine? What kind of porting did you do? Are you happy with the results?

[miataboi]

I'm guessing a peripheral port FD...

Is there a noise limit for cars in solo 1???

;) :D :eek:


WICKED track car.
I'll come just to listen.

And ANY turbo car with half-decent engine management can retain peak HP #'s...or marginally increase them and FATTEN up the torque curve massively while using HIGH octane fuel... (100+) and play with redline as required.

If I had a turbo car... I'd tune it TOTALLY different for DDT and Dunneville vs. big-track... still have the same class / HP... but I'd have a really flexible power band to suit the track that I'm competing on.

A non-turbo car CAN NOT COME CLOSE to being able to do this...

Don't know how I'd address the issue with the current ruleset tho... if it was considered necessary.

[Cheers!]

Tyson.

Who cares? It’s giong to be your first year at solo1. You have no credibility to base your arguments on. You won't have any or gain any until you can beat me by a solid 5 seconds around a track. Till then finish off your car and be ready for 2006 Shannonville race #1. :D

that is my 2 cents for this time wasting thread. I think more time should be devoted on us trying to get TMP and Calabogie back on the map.

[thgear]

+1

dude, seriously, power isnt everything

look at this seasons top scorer, 90 front whp!!

most of the tracks Solo 1 frequents arent really made for really powerfull cars, Mosport so far is probably the only exception as the powerfull mustangs demonstrated their superiority (damn i wish i was there)

but tracks like DDT or Dunville, your either gonna use only 1/3 of your power or kill your brakes in the first 2 laps with a 600 hp supra.

wait till the new rules come out, dyno your car, and then see where you land in the classification and figure out what competition you have, if you still feel cheated out of fairness... well then you can complain.

[TYSON]

My objection has nothing to do with me hoping to be competitive or win or build some advantage for myself. Christ, using the dyno rule anyway, my car would be in Improved. I really don't think ANYONE is going to compete for the overall championship in a 300hp, 2800lb car coming out of Improved, nevermind a rookie like myself.

I have simply pointed out that changing the rule in this manner would disadvantage certain vehicles beyond the intentions of the rules committee, where the previous rule would at least allow them to compete.


James, to answer your questions,

Not finished on the dyno yet thanks to melting or burning various pieces of the exhaust evacuation system at the dyno. FJO wideband also doesn't seem to work on this car either, as well as the charging system has caused more trouble than any I've every heard of. :confused: It is all the stock pieces from the original motor, so stock compression. Don't know the rev range yet until a power curve is there. Umm, miataboi called the port, and the exhaust is big? Happy with the results? Well, it's different, and I made it myself, so I'm already a little bit happy with it despite it not being finished quite yet.

[TYSON]

+1

dude, seriously, power isnt everything

look at this seasons top scorer, 90 front whp!!

most of the tracks Solo 1 frequents arent really made for really powerfull cars, Mosport so far is probably the only exception as the powerfull mustangs demonstrated their superiority (damn i wish i was there)

but tracks like DDT or Dunville, your either gonna use only 1/3 of your power or kill your brakes in the first 2 laps with a 600 hp supra.

wait till the new rules come out, dyno your car, and then see where you land in the classification and figure out what competition you have, if you still feel cheated out of fairness... well then you can complain.


Yes, bitching and whining AFTER the rules are written is super productive, and welcomed by all. :rolleyes: BTW, look up the results for your two examples. Look at SGT2 specifically. :confused:

I believe this thread was started by Dave to gather feedback on proposed rule changes. Unfortunately I did not see it until after the workshop, or I would have presented my viewpoints in person.

[thgear]

well it is a work in progress ;)

[Slowpoke]

The dyno plot option properly evaluates some lesser prepped cars. The problem with some of the PIPs such as ECU being an automatic 4 PIPs is ... what if you only take stock boost from 15psi to 18psi? And you only gain ~30whp... 2 PIP's for that PLUS the dyno tune bringing me up to the new horsepower level? What's the point?

So, the dyno plot lets me keep my car at a safe tune and represent it to my competitors truthfully for what it is.

Call me naive, but I really don't understand why someone would cheat on a dyno. It's not "winning" if you don't claim PIP's, or falsify a dyno plot. Do we have to select an official dyno shop for 2wd and 4wd and train them on Solo 1 rules to make sure that everything is on the up and up?

Similarly, 6 pips for spring and strut change on a car that started with a good handling rating?? I'm dying here! :confused:

[sjagman]

Yes PAX sucks!! ;-) We all know that. and I it makes no sense to me. I understand the numbers but not why we even need to use it!

Also my biggest issue is when a racer in one class beats the class or 2 classes above them. That IMEDIATELY tells me that that person is in the WRONG class. If some one "breaks out" they should be moved to the class they are beating i.e. if you are in GT4 and beat the GT2 class then you should be move to GT2 or even GT1. This would make it very fair and allow the car and drivers that can run the faster times to compete against cars and drivers with similar times! This would also keep 1 person from runing away with a class, while the rest fights for table scraps! That really takes to fun out of it.

We should set the classes up by times and run it like bracket racing, the person that can run as fast to the index with out going over wins the class!! If you go faster you get either 1) penalized time or 2) bumped to the next class. This way cars and driver with simalar times are running togehter regardless of mods. NO PIPS!!!! RUN what you brung, do 3 your timed practice laps in the morning and pic you index from there!
Ontario GT sprints GTA, GTB, GTC run a very similar classification system based on lap times.

At this level FUN has to be the number one priority.

Right now the PIPS and PAX make it WAY too confusing and a PIA, KISS!!

Just my 2 cents worth.
thanks
Steve

P.s. I will be back next year, with a reliable engine this time, ( I didn't build the last one!!).
LOL!

[thgear]

i think that would work if we had a consistent competitor base

since random people show up to random events it would be a mess trying to keep track of it all

plus the whole "class championship" would be thrown out the window.

since Krispy is the common denominator here,

imagine:

GT3 has a bunch of crappy drivers in it, Krispy beats em from GT4, so they move him to GT3... now when do they move him, next event? or during the actual event?

now lets say they move him to GT3 for next event, but for this event Krispy-2 shows up, with a GT3 prepped car, now Krispy-1 is at a disadvantage cuz hes obviously outclassed.

so they move him back into GT4 for the third event, but on the third event Krispy-2 doesnt show up

so it starts all over again...

i think the way we have it now is just fine, and after considering it, pax works pretty well, just not so well in the T-classes cuz very few people ever run an "optimized" T-car so they pretty much never beat PAX, combined with the fact that they are often under-filled, people get frustrated.

[sjagman]

Good points-I had 2 points , but I think you missed my 2nd point

1. I agree but if he was running faster than the next class then he should be in that class he or she beats at least and stay there. No bouncing around.

or

2. I like the breakout classes better where your class is based on lap time not car prep. That way drivers with simaler skill levels ( i.e lap time) in a ANY car ca run together. more fun !

Steve

[Cheers!]

I'm sure everyone here has some sort of a hidden secret about their cars. Something no one else knows about. That is racing. Racing is about pusing the envelope. I think the saying goes:

There are only two types of racers out there:
The cheaters and the losers.

Remember, we are not racing for money. For that reason I could careless about arguing rules, pax, pips... blah blah blah. This is a series where any car can be raced. If you were smart you would've picked the most advantageous car and modfiied it to the extent possible. But everyone has sentimental value on their own cars so we bite the bullet and race what we have. If i was rich and had money i would put a z06 on the track or stock STI. Those cars are classed most favorably i think.

All I want is cheaper comsumables by having more companies sponsor us. Like automatic 30% off brake pads from a brake company, 30% off sunoco 94, 30% off tires, etc etc...

If you wanted to race in a leauge that is completely fair you should quit solo1 and go race go karts in the ron fellows leauge.

Solo1 racing depends on the driver as much as the driver prepping the car well. Engineering is 1/2 of the battle of racing in a series like this one. You don't see Ferrari saying... hrm... That's against the rules... i'm not going to do that.... Neither does renault. People will continue to cheat until they get caught. And once the punishment is over they will cheat again.

[J.C.]

Racing is about pusing the envelope. I think the saying goes:

There are only two types of racers out there:
The cheaters and the losers.

Sorry to disagree but I know not everyone cheats, some of us still have our dignity.

[ADAM]

this series is about the best drivers.... not equal lap times...


Good points-I had 2 points , but I think you missed my 2nd point

1. I agree but if he was running faster than the next class then he should be in that class he or she beats at least and stay there. No bouncing around.

or

2. I like the breakout classes better where your class is based on lap time not car prep. That way drivers with simaler skill levels ( i.e lap time) in a ANY car ca run together. more fun !

Steve

[G-ForceJunkie]

If you wanted to race in a leauge that is completely fair you should quit solo1 and go race go karts in the ron fellows leauge.
Something tells me you don't 100% what your talking about ;)

maybe if you said, "approaching fair" it would be ok, but that series is not even close to completely fair.

[ADAM]

its about bringing simular weapons to the track...and duking it out....

not penalizing drivers for driving well

[thgear]

why would someone wanna cheat at solo 1 anyway??

there is nothign to gain and so much to lose.

i like solo 1 cuz i get a chance to beat cars that should techinicaly be faster than me... thats what really gets my blood going :D :cool:

if deep down inside i cheated and knew that my car was actualy faster than what it was represented at, i feel cheated out of my own victory.

[John P]

Cheers,

Cheaters are the losers. Solo 1 is just basic amateur motorsport. Anybody at any skill level can win by cheating. If you have to cheat to win, you should take up some easier sport. If you just have to compete at this basic level of fun motorsport, learn to drive. Repeat, don't cheat, learn to drive, or take up an easier sport.

John P

[Dave Barker]

[QUOTE=Cheers!]I'm sure everyone here has some sort of a hidden secret about their cars. Something no one else knows about. That is racing. Racing is about pusing the envelope. I think the saying goes:

There are only two types of racers out there:
The cheaters and the losers......

If you wanted to race in a leauge that is completely fair you should quit solo1 and go race go karts in the ron fellows leauge.

QUOTE]


I couldn't disagree more. The Ron Fellows league has some pretty sig prizes and plenty of motivation to cheat. OTOH Solo 1 really doesn't have any prizes of significance (ask Krispy about all the Formula Atlantic offers he is getting). I think you are insulting a lot of winners. Sometimes people try to push the rule interpretations and it is the CCC's job to try and make the rules clear and not open to various interpretations.

The big advantage of this series is that I think most competitors are very open as to what they have done with their cars and are quite willing to share that information. I also think the willingness of various drivers to share their ideas about different lines etc speaks to why the Solo 1 community has been so successful in promoting itself as a user friendly "race" series.

It has been a long time since I have been aware of any definite cheating in Solo 1 ( doesn't mean it doesn't happen but I am not aware of it) BTW that guy is now regional racing.

[Chris91GT]

What would be the benefit to cheating in Solo I? The only thing you win is pride... and how much is that worth if you know that it wasn't earned?

Now... OTOH... since you've confessed to cheating... where shall we start the rules rape on your car? :D

[Dave Barker]

What would be the benefit to cheating in Solo I? The only thing you win is pride... and how much is that worth if you know that it wasn't earned?

Now... OTOH... since you've confessed to cheating... where shall we start the rules rape on your car? :D


You will have to forgive Chris about the paranoia about rules rape. Mustangs (and Subarus) did exceedingly well this past year and, like the engine swapped Hondas from the year before, have been subject to some "rewards" pips. OTOH despite coming down supposedly hard on Hondas at the end of 2004, the top 2 this year were again Honda products. Thank god I have never done well enough to arouse the suspicion of the CCC other than Krispy, who continues to argue the benefits of torque and then goes out in a torqueless car and wins AGAIN !! :rolleyes:

[craig]

Mustangs, Subies, and Honda's? I show up for a couple weekends, lose, open my big mouth at the workshop, and seemingly get bumped up two classes for next year! :p :D :eek:

(just funnin' :cool: )

P.S. Does the definition of "OEM" in the rules have to change to exclude optional LSD?

[CobraStang]

There are only two types of racers out there:
The cheaters and the losers..................People will continue to cheat until they get caught. And once the punishment is over they will cheat again.Speak for yourself.

And since I've been PIP'd out of competitiveness already, is it OK for me to start cheating?

[ScotcH]

We should set the classes up by times and run it like bracket racing, the person that can run as fast to the index with out going over wins the class!! If you go faster you get either 1) penalized time or 2) bumped to the next class. This way cars and driver with simalar times are running togehter regardless of mods. NO PIPS!!!! RUN what you brung, do 3 your timed practice laps in the morning and pic you index from there!
Ontario GT sprints GTA, GTB, GTC run a very similar classification system based on lap times.


This idea is what the CCC tries to accomplish, though granted, on a slower timeframe. We review the results of the competition, and if we find an anomolous car, we (try to) fix it. However, we look at the CAR, and not the driver. If a CAR is regularily and easily beating other cars, then maybe the car is misclassed. If however, the DRIVER is beating all others in his class, well, there is no justification for penalizing that driver by arbitrailiy moving him/her up a class. Besides ... sand-bagging is not fun, and the idea of Solo 1 is to drive balls-out all the time, not try to go almost as fast as you can, without breaking out (that sucks in my opinion).

[glh]

Leave the bracket racing for the drag racers !
Can't wait till spring !

[Cheers!]

What would be the benefit to cheating in Solo I? The only thing you win is pride... and how much is that worth if you know that it wasn't earned?

Now... OTOH... since you've confessed to cheating... where shall we start the rules rape on your car? :D

I got a small bottle of nitrous in the storage bins no one sees. ;)