Menu toggle

The 2012 PCGB Club Championship

I have just noticed that the CSCC Deutche Marque series is to be replaced in 2013 by a Modern Classics series. This will be for all cars made in the 90's ..... and should grow the grid sizes. So Porsches will still be present but amongst loads more makes. So PCGB and Britcar will be going head to head with CSCC for racers money.
 
I guess that means that wherever competitors think they will get the best results through the fairest restrictions to balance performance - the most cars will go. As the regs are at the moment they probably will not get many 996's or 968's - but plenty of other models - unless changes in our championship balance performance better - lets hope so - ours is a great series - well run - but for that unfortunate error in the calculations - that is simple to put right. Baz
 
As some of you know, I'm a CSCC guy and, in fact will be the co-ordinator for the new "Modern Classics" series. I won't make any pretence that there will be an attempt to equalise performance because CSCC belives in keeping things simple and good value for money and in trying to attract as many entrants as possible. It's a club series, pure and simple and for a club like CSCC investing in eligibility scrutineering and complex power measuring devices is just not worth it. The advantages of any one particular car or driver combination will hopefully be controlled by the time based success penalties. There will be a simple class based system, based on the old Deutsche Marque one, with a few tweaks. The series is for Saloons and hatches above 2 litres (< 2 litres are catered for in our Tin Tops series) and for Sports and GTs of any engine capacity. Its for cars that are Pre 1 Jan 2000 model types (ie if your car was built in 2002 but is to the same spec as a 1999 car it will still be eligible). Deutsche Marque cars will have "grandfather rights" so 3.2 Porsche Boxsters and BMW Minis will still be eligible. There will be an Invitation Class for those post 2000 cars that the Committee deems to be in the "spirit of the series". The same 40 min one or 2 driver, with a compulsory pit stop for all foramt remains, as with all our other series and there will be time based success penaties for overall race winners. I really hope that the series will attract 2.5 litre 944's in the up to 2.5 litre class along with 968s, Boxsters and 996 etc etc etc in the appropriate classes. The final regs are not available yet but will be soon. It MAY be that 3.2 Boxsters and 996 will be in a different class, I'm not sure yet. I am hoping to race in the series myself and am thinking of a Ginetta G20 for the up 1800cc class. I also hope that the series will attract a few Lotus Elise, Mazda MX5, Vauxhall Vectra (remember the Vectra Challenge cars?), VAG 1.8 Turbo cars and V6 Alfas etc etc I hope that some of you will join us, and remember, CSCC has its annula pilgramage to Spa for 1 hours worth of racing in July.
 
Thanks for that Andy, but I think you misunderstand my point. To re-iterate - I think it is easy to establish a power to weight ratio that is fair for each model and this only requires a straight line graph and weighing at the circuit and the potential to take a car for designated dyno testing if it is suspected of being too powerful or too fast. It does not require any special equipment to establish those weights and ratios. It is only when it has been worked out incorrectly and there is an apparent reluctance to do anything about it that the more expensive methods come into play to use different methods to try and prove the mistake and add weight to the arguments to get things made more fair in future. Good luck with your proposed series and I hope you manage to encourage enough drivers to suceed. Baz.
 
Thanks Baz, I didn't misunderstand but CSCC have consistently taken the view for many years that it will keep things simple. It won't employ eligibility scrutineers and it won't go the expense or trouble of needing competitors to go to a dyno etc. We all know that dynos differ (and I wouldn't want to be forced to travel to the same one as everyone else if I lived 200 miles away, for eg) and we all know that there can be different engine maps that are not obvious, particularly with turbo cars. CSCC tries to keep the overheads and red tape down for both the club and the competitor and most competitors seem to understand that. The PCGB and Britcar have different remits (and different cost structures) to CSCC and I genuinely don't believe we are competing with them. CSCC are often criticised for its "lassaiz faire" approach but the stipulation on standard size and shape body shells is quite clever really - it means that wheels can't be too big and therefore brakes can't be too big either, meaning that although engines can be modified they still have to put the power to the ground and then cars have to stop etc. Its far from perfect but there is no pretence that it is anything other than what it is. The time penalty for race winners is also used to reasonably good effect to balance things out over time. Race winners get a 30 sec pit stop "success penalty" added to their mandatory pit stop and this stays with them for the duration of the year in subsequent races. If they still win they get another 30 secs and so on. Remember, CSCC is deliberately not a championship and, again, competitors seem to be accepting of this format. Competitors have a choice of what car to race with us and in what series; some cars are suitable for one and not another. Take my example of the 2.5 litre 944 - in age terms its a "Future Classic" car but its probably not competitive in the FC 2 litre to 3 litre class. Instead it could race in the new Modern Classics series and be at the top of the 1800-2500cc class. CSCC has a fair few Porsches in its existing series so far and I really hope that continues with Modern Classics. Its impossible to get the class structure right to suit everyone but hopefully we will get it close enough to suit enough people for big grids and happy customers!
 
Just a brief update, I have run the models round Oulton and Brands, with the AI driving it gets round in the following best times: Oulton 996 = 1:59.8 986S = 2:00.2 Brands Indy 996 = 55.05 986S = 55.23 Very surprising that even at Brands the 996 is coming out as faster, note that the gap is roughly 1/3 that of Silverstone at Brands and 2/3 at Oulton. As a comparison my best time thus far at Oulton with the 996 model is a frankly bonkers 1:53.45. Has to be said though that if the car can get round Silverstone in 2:25 I can't see why not. I will post the lap on my photobucket account at some point, it doesn't look that amazing but the clock stops in the 1:53's still. Nowhere near finished driving them round those sim tracks though as I have been busy moving house and with work commitments.
 
Good stuff Neil - amazing how close that all is to reality. I think that even when (or I suppose IF) the weights are made fair - the bigger engine'd cars will always be fastest at Silverstone (and we probably have to accept that) - but there would be other circuits where the lighter and smaller engine'd cars should be quickest. A fair weighting would probably result in 968 or Boxster S winning at Brands, a 996 at Silverstone and be more unpredictable and equal between them all at Oulton Park etc. But we don't expect it to be perfect - just a whole lot better than it was last season. Baz p.s. good luck with the move.
 
I agree Baz, I would expect that to be the case. This is why I am thinking my proposed 30Kg on the 968 in class 2 is probably more than required to equalise with the S2. Around Brands for example my best sim laps in both cars are an identical 53.9 seconds. The 30 Kg would close up the gap round Silverstone but in all fairness its probably realistic to expect the 968 to always be the fastest car in class 2 there, and marginally quicker at some other tracks. The S2 should definitely end up quicker round Brands though based on the same logic. The AI suggests that the 996 is faster than the boxster everywhere. I want to get to a point where I am happy with my own laps before saying what I believe the end result is for those tracks based on my simulated cars. I can't see me getting the boxster round Oulton though anywhere near 1:53, 1:55 flat maybe but that would still leave a 1.5 seconds gap or so which is enormous as its only a handful of tenths less than the gap I found at Silverstone.
 
Great effort again Neil but you know the same answer is also available by looking at the times at different circuits this season. It's good to compare times over the last 2 seasons between Ben, Mark and others who drove 968's in class 1 with roughly equal performances on and off - with those that transferred to a 996 and also look at the results for a 993 9once driven by a top driver) - and they reveal a similar lap time difference to your simulation. I think it is only by comparing drivers of proven similar ability that a true comparison can be made - but when it agrees with every other way of comparing performance - surely it has to be taken seriously. My own simulation using the computer to generate lap times is similar as is the road dyno analysis changing power to weight ratios until the acceleration is matched. It all shows up the 968's and Boxster S's needing a weight reduction in class 1 - a slight increase for a 993 and a big increase for a 996 and it confirms that the 968's in class 2 need some weight added. Although lap times are often similar on shorter circuits (or the differences less noticeable) once a more torquey car gets in front the others cannot pass it because it is in the way a bit into corners and pulls away on the straights. The overall lap time may be the same when they are seperated but in a competitive situation the smaller engine'd lighter car will still be at a dissadvantage. Because of this I think (comparing with say leaving a Boxster the same) around 50 + kilos needs adding to a 996, about 25 to a 993, nothing to a 964 and a 968 needs a little weight removing. If you change the boxster weights the same end differences should result. But more important than this is to be prepared to change things quickly during the season when it is painfully clear the balance is not quite right. Many other similar events penalise winners by adding weights imediately. It is not always possible for organisers to work out what balance is right in advance. For example the 993's were thought to be too heavy and had weight removed but then the performance of Mark Proctor etc showed that to be a mistake and on his admission he could out accelerate our Boxsters that he said were by comparison - too light (great respect for that honesty mark). No one should expect the organisers to have been able to predict all this but once they can see it and it is obvious - they should act quickly before everyone gets so frustrated they become angry and resorts to a fight for justice that could so easily be avoided and in the process enhance the standing of the organisers and increase trust in their determination to provide a level racing field. With various comparative methods giving almost the exact same results - it should not be difficult to use one system and then adjust it from time to time so that eventually it becomes foolproof and trustworthy. In the light of the ability several of us have shown to have - to work these things out and even predict the outcome before the season even starts - making it seem to be a random uneducated guess that clearly benefits some models so much that no one else can compete and then refusing to discuss how those figures were reached and doing little or nothing about it - is a poor way to run a Championship and devalues the brilliant contribution the organisers make in every other aspect of the Championship. I think we all know how very difficult this power to weight balance is and that it would be impossible to get it right first time - so I would have far more respect and patience for those admitting they made a mistake and trying to do something about it (even if it takes a few goes during a season) than apparently ignoring the situation and allowing the consequences to fester amongst competitors who otherwise are a friendly lot who could have a much happier inter-club relationship without this unfortunate inbalance throwing a proverbial spanner in the works - that they had nothing to do with anyway. Baz
 
Alex Eacock must be starting practicing for next year early.....I've just seen his 968 on the back of a trailer on its way to Oulton for tomorrow's PCGB trackday. [:D]
 
Saw EMC and Hartech at Oulton today,early for testing chaps??????!!!![:D] Boxsters looked like they were flying!One of the 968s had a teeny off[&o]
 
Hartech(Flying) who was pedaling?and yellow and Black (didnt see it lap)one were there,Pete M was there and some EMC cars aswell. Had some good chats,a bit slippy,but a nice way to put a full stop to a season.Good times[:)]
 
It was slippy wasn't it Mark but it helped delay the inevitable withdrawl symptoms we are going to now suffer through the Winter. Our driver was simply testing out a theory about susepnsion etc and it worked out as we expected - so smiles all round and now it is back to the drawing board for the winter and a whole new start next season (as long as the weights allocated to each model give us a fighting chance). Otherwise it will be a regretable step into a new series. Baz
 
Hi all , I am new to this forum but have watched the threads with interest . I am posting this for a different reason , I have a question for Neil , I have been offered a great opportunity to drive a 993 rsr at Bathhurst next year . Neil my question is , does Rfactor have this circuit ? , if so can you tell me what I equipment I need to get as this would be great to learn the circuit ,I can start another thread if necessary so we do not interfere with this one ,Cheers Ben Demetriou (Faze1)
 
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