The 2012 PCGB Club Championship

[Steve Brookes]

You guys raise some very interesting points. I can only speak as an avid follower and spectator of the championship but I think we are only seeing the same sort of thing that happens in most forms of motor racing. The BTCC being a classic example of how they try to achieve parity between different makes of car but continually fail because there are too many factors that the rules can't control. Team knowledge, driver skill, budget, testing time, chassis design, different circuits, etc. Even in one make series, it's clear to me from watching from the sidelines that some cars are clearly more equal than others! What I do know is, that from a spectator point of view, it's great to watch so many different Porsche models competing in the same race and to see their different strengths and weaknesses. Far more interesting than watching a big grid of MX5s playing follow my leader round a track. []

 

[Neil Haughey]

They do have a difficult job to be fair in matching so many different models. I do believe as well that there is a trend of ppl just copying each other hence why so many have been racing in the front engined cars these past few years. Certainly wasn't like that a good few years back from the race meets I attended as a spectator back then. I believe to some extent Steve has to consider the issue of trying to encourage new cars and diversity to try and stop the Championship becoming stale. It was in danger of becoming a front engined championship in recent years. Clearly introduction of the more modern cars is the way forward for the Championship although these next two seasons are certainly a transition to somewhere else but where? Things definitely change, two years ago if you wanted to win the Championship you clearly needed to enter in an S2 into class 2, now that car is effectively obsolete.

 

[bazhart]

I agree with all that. New models must be added over time (or it will eventually become a vintage event). Newer models should have improved performance so are better introduced to Class 1 and they cannot all do that each year - without making space - so something must encourage some older cars to move elsewhere and a slight weight advantage seems the most practical solution and seems to have worked. We had three problems with the 968 last season caused by hidden corrosion and metal fatigue and so it might also prove better to move on eventually and move up in model age every so often. With the passage of time - the majority of club members cars will be of a similar age that they always were (and therefore move to newer models) and they need to identify with the club events to support them - and so movement is healthy and essential. The problem for me is that the 996 has been gifted far too much of a power to weight advantage for all those issues above. I think it will render it unbeatable (all things being otherwise equal) and this is why I want to mention my view before the season starts. However - I thought at my age I knew quite a lot about the subject of performance assessment - but through investigating this apparent anomaly I have realised just how very complicated these calculations and adjustments are and after several days analysing things I have learned more about this subject than I imagined was possible – you are never too old to learn - it was quite a humbling experience! My conclusions is that it is completely different trying to balance different models with different capacities and power outputs than cars used in most competitions of similar engine size or design. It is also technically impossible to make them equal on different circuits (without different weights etc for each circuit) which is impractical. Basically the problem is easiest understood by stretching the differences. For example – imagine all the cars had the same power to weight ratio. Then compare 2 cars – say one with 100bhp and one twice as heavy with 200bhp. On a short circuit the light car’s braking will not be only half as good as the heavy car and so it will be better on braking, manoevering round tight slow corners and the initial acceleration would be excellent while the car twice as heavy would be struggling to slow down, corner and get going out of corners – the lighter car would be beneficial. However on a long circuit with long straights – the air resistance would eventually limit the top speed of the less powerful lighter car and the heavier car would carry on to higher and higher top speeds and be quicker. If the power output and/or capacity is similar between models then using a similar power to weight ratio has been proved to work well and theoretically should as well (and this is probably why a 964, 968 and Boxster S have proven well matched resulting in fair racing. The 993 starts to move that power output to a level where it needs a little extra weight ratio benefit (and this was proven right in practice) and all this should result in different models proving fastest at shorter slower or longer faster circuits. Introducing more powerful cars (like the 996) creates a bigger step in this direction and in my view does justify it having the power to weight ratio figure adjusted a bit further than the 993. All this means that so far I seem to be in complete agreement with the organisers and the regulations – but I am still not because I think the amount by which that ratio has been adjusted for a 996 is far too much and if I left it until the racing starts and am proved right – even if a change is added later – the points will stand and complaints will seem like bad form and bad sportsmanship. It is a very difficult and complicated problem and I sympathise with the organisers because they can never satisfy everyone – but it is all a question of degree and it should be no excuse for not correcting a miss judgement or mistake. To put this into perspective – although I am not proposing that the power to weight ratio figure should be the same for all models and accept the need for adjustment as capacities and outputs change and the series needs models movements between classes - if we were sticking to the ratios that previously proved successful – a 996 would need another 207kilos added to it to make it the same (equivalent to two heavy passengers). Whereas all the other cars fit within a couple of percent of each other a 996 is up to 13% advantaged and this is too much. None of this is down to the drivers or sponsors so I am not complaining about that and if they end up having a glaringly obvious advantage in a particular model – good luck to them - although knowing them as I do I think they would regard their results as hollow victories if they were clearly achieved as a result of a clerical or technical miscalculation. If they were correctly calculated then the ratios chosen should result over the season – in the bigger engines more powerful cars getting their best results on the fastest circuits and the smaller engine lighter car making up for it on slower shorter circuits – the balance being roughly equal overall. However according to the result from my computer model – sending the different cars set up for the same driver ability (and all other parameters) and adjusted to the weights designated – the 996 will also be even better on the shortest of circuits (although admittedly only marginally). I will be sending my findings to the organisers to reconsider the class 1 996 rating – but I appreciate it is very difficult to change now and guess we will have to put up with it. This is why I was interested to find out how the drivers are finding the weight changes – because – if I am right – I would expect some 996 testing on short circuits to show much quicker laps than the same driver might have achieved before driving one of the previously well matched models – but wanted to try and confirm that my systems and theoretical understanding is right. Now all that is getting put behind us as we concentrate 100% of making our cars as competitive as possible and try our best to get them to the front sooner rather than later regardless of any unfair advantages that some models may or may not be carrying. Close racing and competitive results is all we seek and as we are racing a new car with the same sort of power to weight ratios as previous winners cars – but without the benefit of previous races on any circuits - behind us – we expect a busy and challenging time – bring it on! Baz

 

[Neil Haughey]

Still leaves the issue of where do the old cars race? This has been the biggest change in recent years and will only get worse. Class 3 has become a non entity and Tim Barber entered his SC in class 2 but honestly that car IMHO will never compete with well driven S2's let alone 968's. I will be asking Steve when I talk to him about this, years back there was a classic championship and a cup, are we heading down the same sort of route? If this was the case then why not put the 996 3.4 in with the GT3s and repackage that championship to flesh out its numbers some? At the moment its not clear where the whole thing is heading.

 

[bazhart]

Neil, I did look at the relative 968 to S2 ratios and they are running a bit light but you already understood why and actually it does not make anything like as much of a difference as the 996 ratios in class 1. I have not had time to spend analysing it as much as the class 1 cars but will send you what I have soon (once the car we damaged is rebuilt and ready to go). Perhaps the place for the older cars is gradually into a class three suitably reconstructed? You have a good point about newer cars. Once the 3.6 996's and Cayman S etc are introduced they are so much more powerful and handle so well compared to much older cars - it will be more and more difficult to adjust weights to even out performance and perhaps that should become more of the control criterea for the classes - the basic power output range? Baz

 

[Neil Haughey]

ORIGINAL: bazhart Perhaps the place for the older cars is gradually into a class three suitably reconstructed?

Amazing you say that as I was going to post that about class 3. I really like the new regulation to limit tyres, should really help to focus on keeping costs down. My main issue going forward is that I really want to race, but it has to be affordable. When I say race I mean comparable cars and drivers without arbitrary success penalties. Hell I would take you all on if we had to race lawnmowers around the paddock []. An expanded class 3 would be perfect for me but its difficult for anyone to enter into something that is currently dead and doesn't allow one to win honours. Not least the fact that current rules would mean changing a lot of parts on my car including the engine. Controversial point perhaps but maybe something like class 3 should be the rookie/junior class such that only National A holders and above can compete in the main classes? Allow cars to run in either 2 or 3 depending on weight, tyre type/width rules etc. Plenty of possibilities.

 

[bazhart]

I had a look at your S2 compared to a 968 in Class 2 and you are right - the 968 is far to lightly weighted in Class 2. To equalise things it would need to carry (IMHO) about another 165 Kilos. However the 996 looks to be too light by about 65K. I wonder if a similar system was used that I just bought to test these parameters - to compare lap times - but in both cases the weight of the driver was ignored (because my programme excludes the weight of the driver and the Porsche weights include it). In my programme you need to take of the driver weight from the weight of the car before carrying out lap timed runs (as it is then added back in automatically). This would explain the mistake and as a driver may well be 65Kilos (just over 10 stone old money) it would put things right to add another 65kilos now to the 996. Similarly - if the driver weight had also been forgotten for the 968 in class 2 (and an incentive to move of say 100K) that explains that as well. I will send on my findings to PCGB Motorsport and see if anything will be done. I have been in touch before but no response then - so I am not hopeful. Good luck Neil, Baz

 

[paulf968]

Barry - hi (I'm here! ....) A question. Does your modelling take into account the higher brake and tyre degradation that is expected in Class 1, for the heaviest cars like the 996 compared to the other cars? (Am I correct in thinking that this sort of factor is exponential with the weight? so could be a limiting factor ) NB It is a personal view but I am expecting the 996's to struggle in the last third of the race, particularly when on a circuit where there is a lot of braking. Barry - I think you are right to put your marker down now with the organisers ....... anything after the season has started might be received a different way. Then beat them all anyway !!! . . . To finish: Hey!! I don't want to carry a 165kg penalty in Class 2 ...... -- I've had enough trouble in the last 3 seasons getting ahead of folk in well prepared and driven 944's without any weight penalty. (You're not allowed to mention my age! or talent level!) and Neil, I don't think your point about 944's being obselete is right. A competitive 944 in Class 2 stands a real chance, yes it would have to be driven well but that is the objective for all of us.

 

[Neil Haughey]

I would have been happier with a 50 to 60Kg penalty on the 68's. S2 can run 245 wide tyres on the front as well as the lower weight so has some advantages. TBH if the 968s hadn't of come into class 2 it may have been a bit of a mockery this year with Chris and Marcus moving on, sounds crazy but I would have been in a very good position to win the Championship which is silly (quali 3rd fastest class 2 car at Silverstone behind Chris and Marcus before all my problems got the better of me). On that basis I can't argue at all about the competition and it will only make the racing more fun which is top priority anyway. As things stand though if one was to put Alex Eacock in a fresh EMC 968 +35kg v Marcus in an S2 I don't think Marcus would beat him on most UK tracks IMvHO []. Alex is as fast as Pete, faster at some tracks, slower at some others, he also has a rep for being very good in the wet. He is my bet to win it this year.

 

[paulf968]

Neil I had not realised that you could run 245 section tyres on the front of a 944, whereas 968's are limited to 225mm. So will you be running front wheels at 16 x 8J with those tyres?

 

[bazhart]

Paul, the system was bought from the USA, contains cars and circuits and all types of parameters for running them round a circuit. It doesn't show the track as a picture - just a plan with a little dot going round it. Using all the same parameters for each but just adjusting the weights gave the different results for straight acceleration tests and lap times. There is a lot more in the system and it does lower laps times a little as the race goes on - but I doubt it relflects and additional allowance for a particular car getting its tyres hotter than another (although it might do). But according to my figures - if a 996 can lap anything from 1 to 3.5 seconds quicker in the early laps (depending on the track) - than anyone else - they should be able to manage that degredation OK - although it will make for some great finishes if others can manage tyres better and are closing them down at the end. Furthermore I don't think we can afford new tyres every race and anyone that can (as I think was evident last season) can pay their way out of that problem anyway if they want to. I am all for racing against the odds - used to it for years - when I had a smaller business than Hartech, I made my own engines, gearboxes and complete racing motorcycles that beat works bikes and riders in winning many Internationals - and I never complained about their superior finances, tyres (they had specials just for themselves) etc etc - it is all a question of degree. Then we probably ran with a budget much less than 1% of theirs and had to do all the designing, machining, building, testing, and mechanic work ourselves - and this season in the Porsche Championship is nothing like that degree of handicap -so for I feel much more equally set up than ever before/ It is just that INHO the 996's are weighted so light they have a marked advantage over everyone else (and all the other cars seem on a reasonable parr and not enough to complain about. I just think it is a shame because otherwise I think we are in for a great season. Once we get some settings right - I expect our own Boxsters to do really well and hope to build a 996 before the season ends for 2013 - but I would prefer the challenge of equality than vast superiority as a result of a clerical figure in the regs. Perhaps I will be proven wrong (I hope so) but you are right - it would be no good raising all this later for people only to say "well why didn't you say something before the season starts". It's with PCGB Motorsport now and up to them what they do. If nothing changes it will simply make me even more determined - and the more of that I feel the bigger the problem for everyone else! Neil - you are going to be up against it - sorry - but then Marcus did do really well last season with an S2 and think how satisfying it will be if you beat them! Baz

 

[bazhart]

Perhaps I can explain the ratio curve better like this. Say one car has 40bhp - it may never exceed 70mph (whatever the weight) and therefore be flat out half way round some bends and easily overtaken on the straights. Similarly if it had 500bhp - almost however heavy that was - it sill still manage 130mph quite easily. The light car would be magic round the shortest twistiest circuit you could imagine (say three sisters near us) - but a bit slow round say Spa. Yes the heavy car would overheat tyres and brakes while the light one would probably not get them hot enough. I tried to account for all this and I think the right ratio would give the heavy more powerful car the benefit on faster circuits and the lighter one on short circuits - with the ratios I worked out and the resulting graphs and predictive performance. I would like to publish the "evidence" (that includes spreadsheet charts and graphs - well you know by now how I go about this sort of thing) but I don't want to appear to be putting pressure on the organisers because they may have good reason and I might be wrong and the may be a good balance. Time will tell - if it is obvious and I am right - and nothing is done about it - that is the time to reveal all that was provided for consideration - but if I am wrong - the quicker I can dig a hole - get in it- and hope everyone forgets - the better. It cannot be easy for the organisers and I think it would be wrong to jump the gun before there is a chance to see the results. Baz

 

[Neil Haughey]

Thanks Baz and you are right if I can do anything this year it will be an amazing achievement. Paul the tyre situation has been like that for the S2 for years, rims are limited to 8" width but we can run 245x45-16 all round. I believe Jez though ran 225 on the front and 245 on the back when he won the Championship. This is what I had at Silverstone for race 3 as I had Mark Sumpters old tyres and it felt really great to me. Thing is though that was without an LSD and a knackered front left shock so maybe a completely false impression compared to what the car will be like now. The tyres are something I will be discussing at length with the EMC boys as its something they have run both ways. I would hope that the extra cost of the 245 is offset by lower wear BTA it will move around more as both would be on a 8" rim.

 

[bazhart]

Many years ago it took some years and loads of calculations and records to finally work out a stunningly simple three dimensionsal graph that predicted power band width, torque and bhp (with great accuracy) based on port time areas. Similarly - after spending hours on this Championship power to weight ratio issue - a simple graph just says it all. I hope it prints on here (as it doesn't show it on the preview). The red line of "equality" is what my system predicted would provide average equal lap times (compared to a 968CS) on different types of circuits. I think it is interesting that most of the cars plot exactly on it while a 3.2 Carrera (that won last year) was arguably slightly advantaged, and the 964 that won the previous season was also bang on the line. The 993 was adjusted aparently (I assume before the adjustment it was close to that line as well - does anyone know the original weighting?) - but there seems little justification to benefit a 996 which is way below the advantaged line. Even if the second blue line was regarded as forming a band between it and the red line within which cars should fit (with a leeway range of say 60 to 85 kilos (which is a lot) the 996 still falls well below that line needing another 55 kilos to reach the bottom of it and 85 kilos to match the other main cars. Does that graph demonstrate why I wanted to record my opinion before the season starts? Baz

 

[carreraboy]

Good Luck Paul, see you 5th at Brands.

 

[paulf968]

Does that graph demonstrate why I wanted to record my opinion before the season starts?

Barry .... yes --others may chat about such things and express opinions all day long, but you just can't beat a well constructed graph.

 

[paulf968]

just counted 29 cars registered for 2012 in Class 1 & 2, see: http://www.porscheclubmotorsport.co.uk/sites/default/files/files/Registered%20Competitors%20@%2005_04_12.pdf methinks if everyone pitches up at Brands Indy where a quick lap is only 55 seconds, it is going to like a mini version of the M25 in the rush hour!

 

[Steve Brookes]

They seem to have made a bit of mess of the weights and HP for class 2 on that list. Paul Ward is in one of those rare 944S2s that has 240 HP and weighs 1255 Kg! []

 

[paulf968]

good spot. sorry, should have mentioned that the weights/powers are all over the place, one day it might be in alignment with the Regs !

 

[964RS]

I thought I could sneak in with the power hike but unfortunately they've caught me out and given me a huge weight penalty. []