Menu toggle

The 2012 PCGB Club Championship

Timetable for our races at Croft is now available [link=http://barc.net/images/stories/HQ_1222_CR_212207.pdf]Croft timetable on 21st July[/link] Quali at 9.55 ...... I note that the races are only 20 minutes each and start at 15:10 and 17:30 ....... so there is not much time between them.
 
---- it is difficult to get a lie in on race day when the adrenalin kicks in about 5 am !! (as you know yourself all too well .......)
 
anyone making the pilgrimage to Croft this Saturday? just had my first look at the BBC weather forecast ....... sun is predicted for most of the day! that'll make a change............
 
Have a good one guys. Weather is looking promising and I've just seen that the Class 1 boxsters have been given a small weight reduction to help them out, after a mid season review. I'll catch up with you all the middle of next month at the return to Oulton. [:)]
 
Fingers crossed that everyone comes home in one piece. To many cars spanked this year already. Odd that still nothing is done about the 968 in the regs. Watching the vids of Lee (boxster S) trying to pass Paul F (968) at Oulton it is clear he could back him up in the corners so much that Lee didn't have a look in to getting pass on the straights. That just isn't right IMHO, no class 2 car should be able to back up class 1 cars like that, it just shows that if anything a class 2 968 is probably as quick or quicker than a class 1 boxster S.
 
Hi Neil, it is odd isn't it and while I am delighted at a small reduction to our weights with our Boxsters I do intend to try and find out how these figures are worked out - because these days it is not difficult to analyse such outcomes very accurately - and the actual figures seem more like arbitrary guesses. I have asked for a meeting to discuss this and hope to learn more - perhaps there is more to it than I thought! Meanwhile we are making little progress with some handling issues. We need about half a second a lap but so far have failed to find it. This may of course be entirely down to the power to weight ratio issue - but I feel there is something else missing. I am presently involved in complex calculations for spring rates and roll angles using spring frequencies and wheel rates etc - and testing different springs and settings - all very time consuming and all while we are trying to earn a living and develop 2 race cars - hectic it is! Still our aim to learn more is working and stretching the old brain capacity is good while there are less and less people we find can assist with answers as we ourselves learn more about our subject and our own questions become more intricate. How is your car coming along? Baz
 
I think the problem is that introducing new models creates too much of a power spread within class and to much overlap between classes. Looking back at class 2 for example if you have S2s and SCs then it is easy to compare cars with almost the same power and similar weight. Then one can penalise one car a bit on weight because it has better brakes for example. Same again in class 1 were we had the 968, C3.2 and 964, again 3 cars all within 20 Bhp of each other. Now though the spread is enormous in class 1 something like 80 Bhp which for me will never work. Class 2 however could easily be evened up, allow S2's to run M030 front brakes for example, put more weight on the 968, less on SC and boxster 2.5. Personally I would put the boxster 2.7 in class 2, would be much easier to build to the sort of target weight it would have in class 2 as a well and power is bang in the right place for the class.
 
ORIGINAL: bazhart How is your car coming along? Baz
Click to expand...
It will be finished off after Croft. Looked at her last Saturday, the panels on the car all fit better than it did before which is quite hilarious. Even the new FG badge panel she has now instead of factory steel. Just needed some painting, cleaning up and prep for a track shake down.
 
Looking forward to seeing you out there again soon then. I agree that it is very difficult to balance the performance of different cars, circuits and drivers - but it is possible if you understand all the issues. The first problem is the insistence of the majority in believing that it is bhp that determies straight line performance (on an equal weight for weight basis). I have had so many arguments on this subject but it absolutely is the torque in the gears that determines performance (as those that make every simulation tool know and use). Therefore basing a method of equalising cars on a bhp basis is technically flawed and totally unsuitable. Of course if the cars are of very similar power (or toque) then it would be a good way but once different capacities and torque curves come into it - the only basis to judge it on fairly is a rear wheel torque analysis. It is not difficult and before the season started (as I think you know) I presented an argument to the competition organisers predicting that with the present weighting - the 996's would be much too fast, the 993's a little to fast and the rest of the field reasonably well balanced. I also predicted that it would make little difference at Brands Hatch, a small difference at Oulton Park and a significant difference at Donnington Park - and the evidence of the performances since demonstrated that spot on - proving that with educated analysis it is possible to predict performance and would therefore have been possible to avoid the present imbalance (and it also showed that the 968's were too light for class 2). I did this 3 ways - one - just comparing power to weight ratios on a graph two by using a proven bhp/acceleration diagnostic program comparing the bhp necessary to accelerate the weight of different cars equally fast and three by putting the figures into a simulation program that uses all the technical information about a model (including the gear ratios, torque curves and weight) then adjusting the weight to that in the rules and allowing the simulator to race the cars around different circuits and see what lap times were predicted. Each method clearly showed the identical imbalance. For simplicity - if you took 2 cars of equal maximum bhp but one had much more torque (and therefore bhp) in the rev range leading up to that identical maximum bhp figure - I don't think anyone would argue that the car with the extra mid range toque would accelerate faster. The problem is that the bigger the engine the flatter the torque curve - so a bigger engine accelerating through the gears will out perform a smaller engine - if the bigger engine'd car is simply penalised purely on a "maximum" bhp to weight basis. Furthermore the bigger engne'd car does not only benefit from that extra torque purely on the basis of the revs it falls to as you change up through the gear - because in every corner the driver runs at lower revs than that in mid corner (because they cannot use all the power while still accelerating out of the corner) and it is better to be in one gear than try and change gear half way round a corner - so the bigger engine's car also benefits form that extra torque out of every single corner. Some argue that this is balanced by the extra weight the higher powered car carries - making it need to brake earlier and overheat tyres more. The braking argument is a very small issue because if you are going faster and braking earlier - you only reach the same speed as someone going slower at the same track marker and with ABS the disadvantage would be minute. Tyres would suffer more but not as much as the benefit from under weighting the cars by using peak bhp as the control weighting issue. Ironically that is not even the problem - the fact of the matter is that despite the fact that the more powerful cars (with bigger engines) should really have a HIGHER weight ratio proportionally - for some reason the 993 and particularly the 996 - has been gifted a much LOWER weight ratio than the smaller less powerful cars - even using the flawed power to weight balance basis? This makes it so easy to predict the outcome - that anyone understanding vehicle motion dynamics would realise (as I did) before the season started - that they would be unfairly fast - and for anyone that disagrees - go and watch the races and as the commentators have already observed - the cars in front of our Boxsters just pull away on the straights. I fully appreciate that it is a difficult problem to set the right ratios in advance of the season and even more difficult to start adjusting them mid season - but this was both easily predictable and brought to the organisers notice in good time and has been clearly demonstrated in the first races - for all to see - so since the drivers keep all the points that they may have gained while the the weight they carry was unfairly too light - it does seem more than fair to apply a correction now for the rest of the season and since all the other cars seem reasonably well equalised - it only needs a 993 to have a small additional weight and a 996 to have a larger additional weight to carry - to sort it all out and return the series to be the fair and equally balanced sport that the organisers both intended and far more importantly - that they owe to all the people who set out to enjoy a fairly based competition for the 2012 season. Baz
 
Barry - what you have written seems entirely reasonable, although to be fair I am not intelligent enough to see if there are any counter arguments! The issue now is that we are mid-season with Regs that were published late in 2011 and I am sure there is a reluctance to make wholesale changes of the type you feel are needed. Also, as you know a bulletin was issued last week to reduce the weight of all Class 1 Boxsters by 15kg, a bit of help but not enough to correct things. Back to the racing ............. After the 2 races at Croft yesterday, then the long haul back down the A1 and some recovery time I can think about a few words. The results pack here: [link=http://www.tsl-timing.com/barc/2012/122921pcb.pdf]Croft Results - July 2012[/link] Thankfully it was a nice dry and sunny day, some wind but nothing to worry about. I almost did not race! The car failed 2 static noise tests and it was only when we asked for the test to be done in a wide open area that we got close to the 105 dBa limit. The rear box from Dansk, will be cut in half when we get home, re-packed and welded back up -- that should do it! I knew my weekend would hinge on a good quali session, there was no pre-race testing so youtube and my own race videos from 2011 were my homework! It paid off as I got Class 2 pole and was 6th overall. Next Class 2 car was 12th overall! Race 1 was a competitive affair, I had a reasonable start but was soon gobbled up by Class 1 cars and I fell back to 10th overall. Fortunately the Class 2 cars chasing me could not close the gap and it was a win for me followed closely home by the local expert Robinson & then Alex Eacock of EMC. Four cars DNF'd of which 2 took no further part in the proceedings. Race 2 saw me one row further back on the grid and that bit closer to those chasing me in C2. I got away cleanly but it is always very tight in the first couple of corners, was again passed by some C1 cars to find myself in 10th again. This time Robinson was right behind me and at half distance he just squeezed past to put me 2nd ........ then Bennet and Koeberle had a coming together at the tight hairpin that is at the start of the finish straight (the drivers were OK). This was enough to stop the race as the track was blocked. A few minutes later we were re-gridded in the positions we'd achieved so far and then set off for a 5 lap sprint to the chequered flag. I was 2nd in class and now had Alex Eacock all over me like a rash, he did seem quicker and I started to drive a bit more on the ragged edge, which is not a strong point of mine! Anyway I don't know how I did it but a combination of defensive lines and pushing where I seemed to be a bit quicker kept him back. So 2nd in Class 2 was my reward. This time 6 cars DNF'd, leaving 19 finishers. Great performance in Class 1 by 'Mad' Pete Morris who set pole and won both races in his 996 prepared by EMC. Onto Oulton on Sat 11th August for the next 2 races, this being a return visit following our June races there.
 
2 good race length vids from Marcus Carniel at Croft just up -- if you have an hour to spare! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgPDsESLnyg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjVh0BXBnJA
 
Well done Mr F,You are having a dream season!!!!![:D] I hope 968s are not made any heavier as they will become not fun to drive,that would put me right off,my 968 seems to have a knack of losing weight mid race at the minute with bits being shaved off as I go,this needs to stop..!
 
Paul these issues of power to weight to control and even out performance are extremely complicated and I am not being critical of the organisers - they are experienced and experts at organising and running events (and do a great job) while I have spent many years analysing torque curves, gearing and their influence on acceleration (as you know well form my discussions with you many years ago now and the high torque 3 litre 944 turbo I built to prove a point and that you test drove at Oulton Park for me - that confirmed the whole issue). I would not expect the organisers to understand these comparisons and they do their best within the scope of their understanding and the adjustments they have at their disposal - to even things out on a power to weight basis. It is unfortunate that they seem to have gone wrong mainly with the 993 (due I believe to them originally being a little uncompetitive at first - it turns out for different reasons) and the 996 (the justification for the light weight of which defies almost any analysis). It is also difficult because it seems from the videos that the cars are now almost correctly matched once they are in the higher gears but that we lose out on initial low gear acceleration. Even this is difficult to analyse because of the concertina effect that exists anyway - showing 2 identical cars lapping close to each other when the car in front will appear to out accelerate the other while the following car will appear to brake better and close up - even though they are going at exactly the same speed. To analyse what proportion of this concertina anomaly is due to natural science and what part is down to an unfair power to weight ratio - would never be easy for anyone and I do fully understand that the organisers cannot be changing things every other event - nor too far and have to go backwards (if they can help it) and it just seems that we set out this season with some power to weight ratios that are not quite right and will simply have to await the observation of that to convince the organisers that changes are still needed (something the commentators at Croft were quite clear about). With the logical conclusion that it is easier to take weight off a heavy car than a lighter one - reducing the weight of the lighter cars is not such a benefit as it may seem (would be expensive and potentially impossible in some cases). It would be far easier simply to add weight where a car is clearly too light and then if the change proves to be too little or too much it is inexpensive and simple to change it again (far more than trying to lighten a lighter car with special wings and bonnets etc). But organising an event with engines of different capacities will always be difficult because bigger engines always have flatter torque curves and will always out torque a smaller engine'd car out of a corner - but the smaller engine'd car - with the righjt compatrative power to weight would then catch it on the straights. With different circuits to consider - this really is impossible to get right every time. My impression is that some added weight to the 993 and 996's would even things up nicely. The 964's also have this torque advantage but only 5 speeds (which counteracts it a bit in higher gears) and less sophisticated suspension geometry - so could be left as they are (even though with Sumpter and Purdie driving we will find them very hard to beat) and the 968's seem evenly competitive with our Boxsters (if you take previous and current lap times into account). The good thing is that as we try to beat those cars with a weight advantage we have to concentrate on something wuite new to me - to try and make our cars handle better than theirs and in doing so we are learning so much and making progress - in a strange way it will probably be an advantage eventually. Great drive again - well done! Baz
 
An awesome performance from Mad Pete and the EMC chaps, Pete had a commanding lead from the start and kept it in both races - long time coming but well-deserved. Well done Paul, another steady performance from your good self [:)] MarkK and County Classics had yet another lacklustre day but I'm sure Lady Luck is lurking just around the corner for us dudes! [8D] Looking on the bright-side, it was gloriously sunny at Croft . . . who said it's grim oop north?! Oulton's three weeks away now . . .
 
Mark - hope you are too -- the paddock would not be the same without you. With the doubling of the points in the last 3 rounds at Silverstone the good news is that everything is still up for grabs. I calculate that only 45% of the 2012 points have been distributed to date so there is everything to go for. A good consistent run of results from almost anyone will make them a contender for championship honours.
 
ORIGINAL: paulf968 2 good race length vids from Marcus Carniel at Croft just up -- if you have an hour to spare! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgPDsESLnyg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjVh0BXBnJA
Click to expand...
Just spent that hour watching! [:D] Excellent video from Marcus' car again. And again, it shows just how quick those front running 911s are. Any idea which car was chucking out all the smoke at the end of the first race....and was it putting fluids down in the process? I also saw Paul Ward's 944 stuck up against the barriers in race 1....any idea what happened to him during the race?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

Porsche
Lockton
Pirelli
Officially approved
Oracle Finance
WEX Esso
Collecting Cars
Archant Dialogue
Back
Top