Tech Forum - Review of Classes 4 & 5

[VTECJohn]

I'm a prospective new competitor with an R300 and I do feel the current structure is a little off putting. I'm sold on the just give it a go line, but I would welcome the prospect of a class with a 180-200bhp limit and 1A&B radials. At the moment the power band spread in classes 4 and 5 seems just too large. Even without the bhp limit though, the exclusion of ACB10's would be more accomodating for the turn up and drive newbe.

 

Although it might not immediately improve the numbers, a separate place for the more serious competitors might still be worthwhile. This class 5 structure could provide a place for ACB10's as well as the over 200bhp cars.

 

John.

[DSL]

It's all too easy to become obsessed with the power issue ☹️

 

What all you potential new boys need to realise is, that the power is the least important element in achieving the best time from your package.

 

You only need to look into some of the class 3 top times in realation to class 5 at some events during the year to see that. Try Llandow where the top class 3 car would have come 3rd in class 5 (missing out on 2nd by a whisker) beating 7 other class 5 cars,the first two class 5 cars beaten by it, were both at least 100hp more powerful & driven by very experienced guys ❗ Similar story at Curb 1 & other events during the year

 

You have to be mindful of not using the I have'nt got x-y-z hp therefore I won't be in with a chance, as an excuse to not even give it a go.

 

You may well be towards the back of the class in the early days, but not neccasarily so (I was'nt, often punching above my weight powerwise 😬) Whatever you will be assured of a warm welcome, with virtualy everyone more than happy to help you in anyway possible, including setup & course specific tips.

 

I found what tends to happen is you find someone you are fairly close to timewise, then become obsessed with making it your mission to beat them, including a good bit of friendly needle 😬, at this point the top boys in the class become of little relevence to you, until eventually you progress so far that they become the target of your obsession[ 😬 😬U]

 

Give it a go *thumbup*, if you have even a little bit of a competitive nature, I guarantee you will be hooked 😬 😬

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by - DSL on 12 Nov 2006 08:58:29

[Richard Anderson]

Darren and Simon (who made the same point earlier),

 

While I agree with you to a large extent about power not being THAT important, it is something that you only accept after a few years of sprinting.

The perception of anyone new to the sport would be exactly contary to that and these are the people we are trying to attract to the series.

Also, a power disadvantage AND a lack of experience is a bigger mountain to climb than just a lack of experience if u r a newbie wanting to get a result.

 

Rich.

[Simon.Rogers1]

I agree Rich.

 

However we can not go arround saying "oh yeas you need 230 bhp in class 5 to win - or don't bother." Its just not true. Look at Daz times at Mira 18.5 bhp down on me and half a sec difference? He was faster through the trap also.

 

Same last year. DJ was @ 243bhp ish and until the last run was like 5mph slower through the trap than me. Admitedly he was sideways through it 😬

 

If Class 5 was on Radials I would not have tuned my engine above the R400 spec. Not required on relatively hard rubber. This can be justified by looking at you and Mark this year. How much more ooomphhh did he have over you. What were the times 0.01 sec difference at times. Now tell me poower makes a difference. (It obviously does but nowhere near what people think).

 

I'd put money on Class 3 on ACB10's being quicker than Class 5 on Radials.

 

Somehow we need to get accross that power is not the thing.

 

And thats our problem.

[DSL]

Richard, that's why its a point worth emphasing *thumbup*

 

You are absolutley right that having less power is perceived as a problem, but for 95% of newcomers the strange thing is that having a lot more power would make them go slower 😳 😳

 

 

 

[Richard Anderson]

I should have said that my point was relative to having Class 4 and 5 combined and NO Class 4 (meaning a very wide power band in the combined class).

 

As long as Class 4 survives and is capped at about 190bhp I don't think we have a problem.

 

Personally, I have no problem giving away power in class 5....I don't think it makes much difference. The result I would quote at people was you getting within 0.0?secs of DJ at Llandow when he had his new 246bhp engine and u only had you 204bhp R400! :-)

 

However, if anyone come along with a 300bhp Duratec.... ;-)

 

Rich.

 

 

[Simon.Rogers1]

They would be to heavy and not be able to get the power down 😬

[Gambo]

If you do ban ACB's, It will really close things up, and as Simon and DSL has mentioned, without ACB levels of grip, any power gains over 200bhp really start into the laws of diminishing returns. Look at Dave J with his 1600K on 032's a few years ago. Splitting the class by power could work, but after upping my power consitantly over the past couple of years but staying on the same tyres, I have realised that around most circuits we use, 200 BHP is all you would really need. Any more and you just end up trying to fight power oversteer 😬 . The real time is made up with corner entry and corner speed, Which is why the quick guys in class 3 are getting close to a lot of runners in class 5.

 

 

RED 2.0 HPC 230BHP

[Myles]

Who will judge how much horsepower each competitor has?

 

And while I'm not keen on ACB10s, I'd certainly want to be able to run 1Bs of my choice - I run'em on the road (R888s) and wouldn't want to take the physical risk of stepping down to 1As for a competitive event.

 

 

 

          🙆🏻 🙆🏻 🙆🏻 🙆🏻 🙆🏻

Alcester Racing

7s Equipe™

^🙆🏻 🙆🏻 _🙆🏻 🙆🏻 ^🙆🏻

 

Alcester-Racing-Sevens.com

---

[neil.cavanagh]

Myles,

No one is suggesting limiting class 4/5 to list 1as. Just banning ACB-10s.

 

As for "wouldn't want to take the physical risk of stepping down to 1As for a competitive event"..... you could argue the physical risk is lower on 1As as you not going as quick when you go off!! *eek*

[KenEvans]

No one is suggesting limiting class 4/5 to list 1as

They are - I was! Seriously.

 

Ken

[Jason Plato]

Many of the comments above relate to newcomers perception that you need loads of grunt, the experienced entrants know that is not the case but this needs to be conveyed to the potential new comers. It comes down to publicity again in my opinion.

 

The contrast of time difference between me in class 3 at curbuggar with 140 ish bhp and 240ish bhp last year is a valid one and this needs to be conveyed .

 

You dont need power to get in the top 5 in class. But you need power, handling, grip, experience of the course and reasonable sized balls/lack of interest in living to win the class.

 

 

 

 

 

here is C7 TOP

South Wales AO

[DSL]

DJ's class 3 Curb times as he rightly points out, show what can be acheived with all the other parts of the package at hand except the huge power output.

 

It was roughly 1 second slower than his usual class 5 time, with 100hp less 😳 😳

(Except the freaky 56.99 sec that you did just the one time 😬 😬 😬)

[robmar]

cross posting from the class 2/3 thread

 

I think the main issue with class 2/3 is that the original intention for them was to have a class where relatively stock cars have a competitive class structure to compete in (as someone has previosly said...) however as with all things with ruless and regulations they have been intrepreted and discussed to length.

 

Myself included many people have spent money and time getting their cars to be as competitive as possible within the rules, but this is seen as a opposite to what the original idea of these classes are. However these are still the most popular classes by far and there could be potential for a split from 2 to 3 classes...

 

Class 2 = as rules are today however have the following further restrictions, no head mods whatso ever, no adjustable suspension (bump/rebound...), notional 150 bhp limit (I know hard to police) for engines such as twinks and xflows

 

Class 3 = same as class 2 but allow list 1b radials (should we exclude superspoft compounds????)

 

Class 4 = allow unlimited mods on plenum (for 1600 & 1800), allow adjustable suspension, allow unlimited mods on xflows/twinks,

allow 1b cross plys, allow vvc's, allow r300's

 

would this suit those wanting to have a really unmodified class structure whilst at the same time allowing those wanting to run sticky tyres and have invested in curent rules to have a home to go to? Not sure how many like RP in class 2 this would effect?

 

then go with the amalgamated class 4 & 5 being discussed currently or alternativly allow current class 4 cars into the new class 4 above as most events there is not much in it between class 4 on list 1a tyres vs class 3 leaders on acb's....

 

thoughts - will cross post on the class 4/5 thread...

---

 

rob?

 

My MSN Space and Blog - Syndicate Using RSS

[metal mickey]

So are bec's going to be allowed in class 4/5 as they are now or put in class 6

[KenEvans]

Loads of options have been discussed up above Mike - but that's all they are at the moment - just ideas.

 

I'm coming round to thinking we should leave the classes as they are and the contenders do their bit to recruit new competitors from other championships, and not just newbies but seasoned drivers.

 

Ken

[Jason Plato]

I dont see there is an issue with BEC in class 4/5

 

so long as they are only allowed upto 1400cc

 

 

 

 

[metal mickey]

Why limit the bec capacity when its unlimited for car derived engines,are we going to ban 1900 K's and 2.3 Duratecs/vauxhalls as well 🤔

I've been away and am only just getting up to speed with all this but the phrase 'if it ain't broke why fix it' keeps coming to mind.

[Mark Durrant]

Mike

 

Nothing has been decided and these threads are to give people an opportunity to put their views across prior to the Tech Forum on Sunday especially those who cannot make it.

 

Mark D

Comp Sec

 

[Jason Plato]

1400 cc BES would as I understand keep the class in line with the national hillclimb classes 🤔

 

 

[DSL]

Well most of us would be ok if that was to be the case, however there could be a long stroke steel crank & rods going cheap from a certain A. Griff 😳

 

 

[Gambo]

As far as I am concerned, my only gripe with class 5 is the ACB's. I do however think something should be done for the boys/ girls with VVC and R300's. They really are stuck in the middle. If you look at the forsale ads, these seem to be very popular road cars, so is the club missing out on a lot of sprinters because of these people not feeling there is a competetive class for them?

 

RED 2.0 HPC 230BHP

[Jason Plato]

Gam, I suggested we take VVC and R300 in class 3

 

 

[Simon.Rogers1]

Thats fine putting them in 3 as I don't think the power is a problem. But as you have said on a previous post Dave about a bhp type of class structure whats to stop them (particularly R300) throwing in a set of cams and a new map.

 

Spirit of the champ and club committee

[neil.cavanagh]

Simon,

To be fair what is there to stop anyone doing that today in class2/3?? My engine isn't sealed. I could easily have had some serious porting and hotter cams put in. It is not impossible to get the code to open up your MEMS to a bit of remapping. I should think I could get another 20bhp or so without too many outward signs....

 

I don't see there being too big an issue with the BHP limits. BUT i've only been doing this a year, and I'm not a devious soul so I might be naive.... *eek* 😬 😬 😬