Championship Class Structure

[Offspring]

As for Class One the variety of potentially competitive cars/drivers with 100 to 128bhp makes it a great place to be.

 

David, spill the beans, who's got 128bhp in Class 1!! 😔

 

😬

[Richard Price]

My feeling is that both the current class 2 and 3 are both great classes, with the potential for good close competition.

Grahams proposal would render all the cars currently competing in those classes uncompetitive

 

I'd say that the existing class structure is not broken, but it may need a few tweeks.

 

 

[Richard Price]

Al,

who's got 128bhp in Class 1!!

 

A 1400 supersport is quoted as having 128bhp. However, its got very little torque, and only produces good pull right at the top of its rev range, and with a 5 speed 'box, you can't keep a 1400SS quite "on the boil".

A 1400ss with a six speed 'box would look like a 128bhp car, but one with a 5 speed is seriously compromised.

 

 

[David Lynch]

That be me then (as quoted output for a 1.4K SS and ifit was timed up on verniers, which it isn't but might be in 2011 )

As it is I think speed trap data is a great indicator of power vs torque vs gearing....or maybe I just need more bottle through the corners and slightly softer springing Al

 

(Club Trackday at Cadwell. GPS Max speed on the long straights 97mph)

[CaterBram]

Simon, Thanks for the mention, don't worry about not replying yet as I know you have been under the weather so to speak. Hope you are feeling better.

 

I think this thread has stimulated useful discussions in a positive way which at least gets people thinking prior to the tech forum.

 

At the end of the day I know where my own car is now and the options I currently have available to me to get to where I want to be, it's a balance between making the best choice for the long term rather than a short term fix.

 

The decision of the tech forum will decide what I do over the winter and/or how much I compete next year.

 

Fingers crossed for the tech forum

 

Q469 WET, 1990 1690 Xflow Long Cockpit in Ali except for the red bits. But hopefully a Class 2 159.99999BHP Zetec in 2011. With a Dual Drive :-)CaterBram on Facebook

 

Edited by - CaterBram Jnr on 15 Sep 2010 17:01:39

[Mark Durrant]

The point regarding restricting one way dampers to classes 1-4 is to save on cost. I agree there will always be cars where you have to spend money to be competitive however, if I spent £2.5k upgrading an R300 engine the last thing I would want to do is spend another £2.5K on dampers.

 

Mark D

[Offspring]

Thanks David/Richard

 

Looks like I will have to diet to make the car lighter and drive with my eye's shut (even more than I'm doing already) for enhanced corner bravery.....

 

 

[robmar]

Simon - in fact TM didn't put me up to it, I did it all myself 😬 , but i think it is a valid point if we are going to allow the new avon tyr in a24 compound (and assuming the costs is the same as for the acb10) then the argument over not using it due to cost is now null and void, as the tyres will give in theory similar performance.

 

I like the idea of restricting the damper adjustment as mark says in keeping costs down for the majority of competitors. It is lucky i think that no one in class1-4 is running multi way adjustable dampers at the minute allowing us to potentially add this rule for future years, so it is the ideal opportunity to do this.

 

I think it also helps differnetiayt the classes a little bit more, but as you say you could pay £1800 on single way so whats another 700 quid between friends 😬

 

Rob

[Sgt Pepper]

Rob,

 

To answer your question:

 

Hmmm..... Having used and abused my x/flow for many years/miles I decided to have a go at sprinting and found myself in Class 3. More than happy with that even though I wasn't really competitive but that was really down to' learning the ropes' as opposed to a poor car.

 

Unfortunately, I always knew one day that the x/flow would give out and I'd have to consider re-building or going to Zetec. For various reasons (not connected with sprinting) I chose the latter.

 

Cost now begins to play a part as I consider the basic upgrade to a 160bhp Zetec, however I was led to believe that this was automatically push me into Class 4 and immediately have a distinct disadvantage. Now although I'm still inexperienced I'd still like to, at least, have the chance to be competitive and hence I decided to go for 190bhp spec.

 

This, to be fair, has more than stretched the budget but ultimately it was my decision alone to go down this route as I quite fancied a more powerful car.

 

I do think I would have ended up eventually with the 190 bhp spec, but I think I would have settled for the 160bhp if that had kept me in Class 3 and upgrade again at a later stage.

 

 

 

 

Currently powered by Fresh air ☹️ 😬

[CaterBram]

Slitghtly O/T,

 

what rear end are you running with the 190bhp zetec, ital live axle, english live axle or Dedion or other ?

 

 

 

Q469 WET, 1990 1690 Xflow Long Cockpit in Ali except for the red bits. But hopefully a Class 2 159.99999BHP Zetec in 2011. With a Dual Drive :-)CaterBram on Facebook

 

Edited by - CaterBram Jnr on 15 Sep 2010 20:32:27

[Sgt Pepper]

De Dion

[CaterBram]

So at least you've not got the ital live axle capacity to contend with,

 

Q469 WET, 1990 1690 Xflow Long Cockpit in Ali except for the red bits. But hopefully a Class 2 159.99999BHP Zetec in 2011. With a Dual Drive :-)CaterBram on Facebook

[robmar]

Luddite - very interesting

 

but at least you will have that extra 30bhp straight away 😬

[Mr Happy]

I think class 4 should be up to 210BHP. It makes perfect sence.

 

 

[The Headmaster]

TM = Pot hunter

 

 

[Stuart Miller 7]

Thanks for starting the thread Graham. I just thought I'd add my 2p.

 

I think the class structure as it stands works pretty well (yes I know I have a 190BHP car - well 179 actually). The competition is very close in all classes which in my opinion says it all. There will always be the exception that doesn't quite fit in but the rules work 95% of the time for 95% of us which is pretty exceptional for any class based racing structure in any field of sport. If it ain't broke......

 

The only question I have is the MOT / Tax thing, but I don't know how this works for scrutineering at our events?

 

RE tyres: The ACB10 ban was before my time. Most of us on 1B tyres run the Kumho. Going back to crossply would mean suspension adjustments when going between road and race and a set of ACB10's are still north of £600, so I can see why the ban was introduced. A set of Kumho's is about £380. The ZZR's (which nobody has tried yet) are £430 so can't see why they should be banned on cost. They are also factory option on the new cars and I'm sure we don't want to prevent people with a new superlight turning up for a sprint or three.

 

From a personal perspective, I'd prefer not to have to spend ANOTHER 2.5K on dampers, so would favour rules that keep the costs down. Also, a cage should be personal choice and not mandatory. I think Ian proved at Shelsley that it's not a bad idea even on a class 1 car.

 

Stuart

 

 

[robmar]

Dad - not sure he would still win too many based on this years performance

 

maybe he is planning slicks as well

[robmar]

but stuart if the cost of the cr32's are similar to the acb10's do we ban them both or allow both, seems odd to only allow one

[Richard Price]

I think it's now proven that the Kumho's are a match for (if not better than?) ACB10's, so why not allow them back in again? It may attract the odd competitor or two.

 

ZZR's may or may not offer an advantage. If a new competitor, with a new car, that was supplied with ZZR's fitted from the factory, were to turn up, then it would be a shame to bump them into class 6 just because of the tyres. (if they were the standard compound ZZR's, they'd already be at a disadvantage to the softer Kumho's).

 

 

 

[Mark Durrant]

Richard

 

The Avon ZZR is a radial and is list 1b so can be used in classes 3-5.

 

Mark D

[Mark Durrant]

Looking back on the decision to remove cross ply tyres I posted the following:

 

The decision to remove cross ply tyres from classes 3 - 5 was taken as models that qualify for this class are normally fitted with CR500’s when leaving the factory and a high proportion of owners also fit other list 1b radials such as Yoko 48R’s, 32R’s etc. The cost of ACB10’s in A24 compound and the need to change the camber, tracking was seen as potential reason as to why someone would not compete. This change will also allow owners to drive to events without being compromised on tyre choice.

 

Since the decision was taken a number of other championships have banned cross ply tyres and I suspect this has resulted in Avon producing the ZZR in A24 compound. ACB10' are still more expensive than either the Kumho or ZZR and with the changes to the suspension that are required the original argument is still valid.

 

Mark D

[robmar]

but the argument goes that we banned acb10's becuase of the cost of the tyre and the associated costs of changing setup etc and also the perceived lack of longevity of the tyre meaning additional wheels and tyres for some.

 

Now if the ZZR's are allowed have a similar price and lifespan as acb10's and are equivalant in performance to the acb10's then why should we stop a competitor wanting to use acb10's, if they want to change the setup and have the associated issues with that then why not...

 

just my 2ps worth

 

ad oh yes acb10's look sooooooooooooooooooooooooo cool on a 7

[robmar]

Mark - our posts crossed 😬

 

but if they offer similar performance ZZR vs ACB10 why now not let people use them and fork out for the extra costs if they so desire to run the acb10

 

in fact the move away from acb's has probably cost me more as I can now no longer run el cheapo xply slicks on track days

 

rob - twiddling thumbs waiting for things to happen

[Richard Price]

Mark,

Yes, I know ZZR's currently would be legal, but a few posts further back cast doubt over the ethics of their legality based on their cost.

 

Back in the A24 compound ACB10 days, they were seen as the only way to be competative in class 3,4, & 5. However, now, its proven that there are radial alternatives.

 

Maybe there are folks out there, that have ACB10's, and would like a go at speed events, but currently feel excluded?

 

I no longer feel that A24 compound ACB10's should be excluded because the offer a performance advantage, but are expensive. Kumho's or ZZR's are jsut as good, if not better.

 

 

[Mattj]

I'm not the most technically knowledged person around the paddock, but can I ask as to what the proven material advantage is to using 2-way dampers over high-quality 1-way dampers for your average amateur-level driver over the length of a sprint/hillclimb?

From what I understand, handling set-up is a very sensitive art anyway, and I can understand there would be an advantage if you were a pro-level driver who could knock out one perfect lap after another, test, and set it up perfectly for that particular venue..but as for me, you could probably let 5psi out of all my tyres and I'd struggle to notice the difference! Some competitors (such as Richard Price) are performing brilliantly on pretty much standard suspension equipment - Is the banning of high end equipment really to stop people blaming their tools for not getting the best times rather than their sub-perfect driving skills?