CTCRC Discussion 2006

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by teej

Shame about so few CT events, I do hope that it can keep running as that's the main appeal of the CTCRC meetings for me. Ideas on a postcard..... (nearly everyone already seems to think the championship is actually called Classic Thundersaloons *hint*)

Don't panic, Classic Thunder is just fine, and is not on a yellow card from the MSA for grid sizes, unlike a number of others.

The fewer rounds are simply designed to avoid the shorter tracks, and concentrate the grids to insure our position - until we see the effect P93 has on the position.

Cheers

Stacy

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Ian Sowman

I think CTCRC have been there before on at least one occasion - anyone got any experiences of that?

Hi,

Yes we've been there a couple of times. In 99, and more recently in 2003.

The circuit isn't the fastest, but it's technical and actually quite enjoyable - more corners than Lydden I'd like to point out.

The real bonus with the weekend however is sheer track time for us, with plenty of double headers. We'll also be running our usual social events, and that makes it a pleasant sunny (hopefully!) weekend.

Stacy

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by big andy

and no CADWELL PARK

Hi,

It's worth pointing out that BARC this year had a very poor calendar in totality. During our meeting, when you can be assured Hugh Poston and myself said just the same things which have been stated here, Ian Watson conceded the whole calendar was the worst he's seen in many years.

Given the hand which was available, or secured, by Dale - this represents the strongest calendar we could have achieved.

As we move forward, if this becomes a regular issue then clearly we will have a problem to be resolved, but taking the longer term view, I think we can weather it, and be better placed to improve next year.

Sincerely,

Stacy

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I don't like the Rotary's going up two classes either, that will put them in with the plus 4000cc heavyweights and I personally think that class should be the domain of heavier big cars like mine and the Jags, it waters the spectacle down letting a much lighter Rotary car in, sorry I think this is a big mistake IMHO.

Actually it is a mistake, rotaries will be in class B, except for turbo's which will be in class A. As for watering it down in class A, I'm not sure I buy that - if you're quick enough you'll beat it anyway surely? We'll see and all that.. ;-)

As for the multivalves - all I can say is that we dry ran a number of core cars through the championship, and compared lap times for each. The classes reflect that, and while it clearly doesn't suit everyone, we have a record number of entries for it, so it seems to suit the majority.

Sincerely,

Stacy

[Tim Wilkinson]

Stacy - I've spoken to you about the wheel size "problem" over email in the last month or so; I've since got hold of a set of papers and found that Vauxhall homologated 15s in '91 or '92, so the issue's resolved. The engine is off to the vets this weekend, along with a set of the pre-93 regs (if it meets those it meets the regs for all series I've been looking at), so I shouldn't have any eligibility issues this year or next.

I'm glad the pre-93 registrations have been going well, and I hope that CT will follow suit.

My target is the CSMA festival (although that is optimistic for me, to be honest, and a little daunting), with back-ups of Lydden or Snetterton. T&R also has a local calendar for the second half of the year - I think I could compete every other weekend and not go more than an hour from home!

I noticed this on your site, tho - "we will be campaigning the RX7 in the Classic Touring Car Racing Club’s ‘Pre-93 Touring Car’ series. This includes BMW’s, Cosworths and more so will be fun if not likely to deliver the wins we are lucky enough to achieve in Group 1."
I thought Cossies and M3s were specifically banned from pre-93?

JohnW - true, I can't take it with me. I do have a long time over which to make what little I have last, however!

Tim

[Al Weyman]

Originally Posted by stacy

Actually it is a mistake, rotaries will be in class B, except for turbo's which will be in class A. As for watering it down in class A, I'm not sure I buy that - if you're quick enough you'll beat it anyway surely? We'll see and all that.. ;-)

As for the multivalves - all I can say is that we dry ran a number of core cars through the championship, and compared lap times for each. The classes reflect that, and while it clearly doesn't suit everyone, we have a record number of entries for it, so it seems to suit the majority.

Sincerely,

Stacy

I actually said in my opinion Stacy it waters the spectacle down not the class as such.

I have no problem whatsoever running with smaller much lighter cars as long as they are not in a class that the rules require I run a very heavy car.

Please clarify this, if a car by virtue of having a Rotary turbo moves into my class what does it have to weigh in at because this I think is the crunch question. Also what about all these cars that move up a class virtue of turbo, Rotary or Multi-valve, what do they weigh in at?

Logically if a Rotary has an equivalincy factor of 1.8 then if it started of as say a 2 litre (I use two litre example as it is easy to calculate) that makes it 3600cc normally asperated in which case it should run at a weight of 1146kgs and run in class A. If in fact it was also turboed then I would assume the 3600cc x 1.7 factor becomes 6120cc and should then weigh in at 1480 kgs. Now if they came in at that weight I would happy enough to run against them (in class) as they are as heavy as my old tub and I would rate my chances but that is not going to happen the way I see it which is why my comment that I think Class A should be the domain of the heavyweight cars like the Jags and the yanks, not mingled with some tiny little coupe rice burner on steroids (sorry turbo ).

Oh as I have also stated here previously because of the weight factor I cannot run my IROC in the pre-93 as I would have to make it nearly 150 kgs heavier andthat would defeat the object. I may get it out for a run in the CT though although I don't think in fact I know, it will not hold a candle to an RS500 or any homologation special turbo car with multi injectors etc. unless it had to weigh in at the equivilancy factor of course.

[Ian Sowman]

Surely the simple point about classes in race championships is that they should collect cars together that have a similar performance. At one type of circuit, a particular type of car within that class might go better than another, but at another circuit the positions would be reversed. Do we need to get hung up about weights and equivalency factors?

[Al Weyman]

No if you don't want to win the overall championship but if you do (I don't incidently) then yes I think it is important. To get beaten in the points tallys by some little lightweight running in the same class is not really good IMHO.

[Alan Raine]

Originally Posted by Ian Sowman

Surely the simple point about classes in race championships is that they should collect cars together that have a similar performance. At one type of circuit, a particular type of car within that class might go better than another, but at another circuit the positions would be reversed. Do we need to get hung up about weights and equivalency factors?

I agree. I remember cracking races at Brands with big cars like Al's being hounded by 2 litre Escorts etc but at places like Silverstone the V8's would disappear into the distance.

[Ian Sowman]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

No if you don't want to win the overall championship but if you do (I don't incidently) then yes I think it is important. To get beaten in the points tallys by some little lightweight running in the same class is not really good IMHO.

I can see your point Al, but if you in your bigger, heavier car beat the 'lightweight' and a track more suited to you, so that over a season the issue goes away. Obviously there could be issues with one type of care becoming dominant over time, and in those circumstances you would need to look at realigning the classes accordingly. I would presume that organisers keep tabs on this though.

[Al Weyman]

But I doubt you would ever beat it at most tracks. This was the problem in ModProds and for years the dominate class was Class B which was ruled by the powerful very light Sunbeam Talbot Lotus. Now that is fair enough but if the car was made to run in A and there was talk of this, I think it would have made a mockery of the class. CTRCC has a class B normally asperated limit of 3500cc which is pretty big for a class B and that is where I personally think the likes of turbos and Rotarys really belong. I just dont quite understand why Rotary Turbos go up into the big boys class as surely they should run with the Cossies not a class above.

[johnw]

Originally Posted by teej

JohnW ............ I do have a long time over which to make what little I have last, however!

If you can see into the future, we should talk Tim

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

No if you don't want to win the overall championship but if you do (I don't incidently) then yes I think it is important. To get beaten in the points tallys by some little lightweight running in the same class is not really good IMHO.

I'm sorry Al, you've lost me.

The smaller lighter weight cars, in our regulations anyway, put out significantly less horsepower than the larger engined cars - assuming a similar level of development of course. Leaving the power to weight ratios running front to back (A-E).

Historically the CTCRC has adopted the BTCC regs of the period, and that's worked out fairly well with Class A generally at the front, with B&C behind.

Stacy

[Al Weyman]

I will reiterate then.

If say the Jag boys, a couple of Camaros, a Mustang are in Class A then lining up IN THE SAME CLASS is an Mazda rotary Turbo wieghing what 1000kgs but producing similar power the chances are by virtue of its power to weight ratio, superior braking and handling because of its lightweight then the odds are on it is going to win taking class points away from one of the heavyweights.

It is NOT about being beaten overall in the race it is about being BEATEN IN THE CLASS thus taking points away from the guys who by virtue of their large cars and normally asperated engines fall into that class. If the lighter car run in class B and beat the larger cars then so be it thats fair enough and that is what I like about the rules in general as it means I can have a good dice with a BMW or a Lotus Cortina etc but in the knowledge who ever wins the tussle will not take CHAMPIONSHIP points away from the other. But I feel the whole thing is thrown out the window when you allow an anomally like a Turbo Rotary into Class A. I am sure if someone built such a car and it was seen to start running away with it then Class A runners complaints would start as I know some drivers in class A are not too happy with the weights they have to run at anyhow. I personally think as I have stated and particularly as you have a 3500cc class B that cars like Sunbeams, Cossies, Rotarys should be pegged at that class and leave class A for the big normally asperated cars.

You know it takes considerable effort and expense to get a heavyweight car on to the track (ask Jaguar with their Coupe, they could'nt crack it) and they are always crowd pleasers and as such I feel should be allowed to run without lighter cars nibbling away at their drivers points tally and thus ruining their overall Championship chances. You see the same does not appear to happen down the classes especially the tiddler class which is prehaps why you have a championship overall winner from that small class as they have not has any lightweight turbo monsters thrust apon them to steal points. Do you understand where I am going with this? Just maybe there should actually be a MINIMUM weight cars should weigh as stock before they can be concidered a Class A car. That would solve the problem at a stroke.

[Ian Sowman]

But is there an issue here whereby, in Class A lightweight cars are routinely beating what you might consider to be 'genuine' Class A cars, at almost every round over a number of seasons? If not, and the truth is that the long run average shows that they are of a similar performance - the lightweights and the genuines - what is the issue?

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Ian Sowman

If not, and the truth is that the long run average shows that they are of a similar performance - the lightweights and the genuines - what is the issue?

I think the fact here is that they don't, not in our series anyway.

As for Pre-93, which has yet to turn a wheel incidentally, I'd point out that the period winner of such a championship was Matt Neal in a Skyline. From this we can deduce that a) Big cars can be made competitive, and b) Turbo's are a fact of the era.

A lot of time was spent playing with classes, and a number of the key cars were assessed. If having run a season we discover we've got it wrong, it'll change. At this stage though, I don't think we have anything we could justify a change on - which the sunstantial number of registrations will testify to.

Sincerely,

Stacy

[Al Weyman]

what is the issue?

The fact that in the new rules a turbo rotary moves up two classes taking it into class A but does not have to carry the weight penalty. Someone must be planning one or why would the ruling be made. The fact also that if I was to run my car in the pre 93 then I would have to bolt on 150kgs but a lightweight tiny sports coupe would not have to and in all likelyhood would be producing as much if not more power. Also the reference back to the rules at the period, I don;t recollect cars having to be different weights for different cc's and this is the real issue, it is retainingthe weight penaltys from the older championships but updating to allow cars to move up that should not neccessarily be there (IMHO of course).

Anyhow it does not matter because I have decided I will take the car out in CT instead so just as well.

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

The fact that in the new rules a turbo rotary moves up two classes taking it into class A but does not have to carry the weight penalty. Someone must be planning one or why would the ruling be made.

Anyhow it does not matter because I have decided I will take the car out in CT instead so just as well.

Al,

I fail to see how anyone can be 'planning' one when the rules were made, as they were set before they were announced. If you're implying it was me, then you're even wider of the mark, as the original rule was set when with the first draft class structure, the 2 class lift would have been needed to move a normally aspirated RX7 to class B, where we, as a group, thought they belonged.

As the class limits changed just prior to go-live, the 2 rule text wasn't updated as an error - as I've said previously.

CT is most definately the place for the more agricultural spectacle.

Sincerely,

Stacy

[johnw]

So..... I can run my John Deere in CT then

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by johnw

So..... I can run my John Deere in CT then

If it had enough horsepower..

CT is about lots of power, RWD, four link axles, etc. I mean agricultural in the most sensitive way.

Stacy

[Al Weyman]

It was not just the Rotary Mazda Turbo though which I used as an extreme example to highlight because what was written in the rules i.e. they move up two slots but any car that moves up a class by virtue of an equivalancy factor or being multi-valve, why should they not have to run heavier to even thing out for the heavier cars.

Lets take a more common Cossie for example which may be more relevant to the discussion. 1998cc x 1.7 = 33396cc therefore it goes into class A and will in fact be producing far more power than any 3396cc normally asperated car I can think of, so why should it not also have to run at the 3398cc weight limit just how much advantage do these pesky turbos need, they ruined (IMHO) the original BTCC that you/we are trying to emulate. If they are not required to carry the weight I really don't see it to be fair and I think by making them carry the extra kilos they would not be so all conquering like they were in the BTCC and the end result would be far better racing and spectacle for all involved. In SCCA racing in the US the Camaro and Mustang were doing quite nicely thank you then Ford launched the Merkur Cossie predessor that immediatly upset the apple cart and made racing the heavy iron unviable.

[Al Weyman]

One other thing I am a little unclear of in both the 93 and CT rules (maybe I am just thick) it states equivalncy factor of 1.7 for turbos then also states Forced Induction moves up a class.

Does than mean then that the Cossie in my example with an equivalncy factor of 3396cc which would normally place it in Class B then by the fact it is forced induction pushes it up yet another class to class A. The wording is a little ambiguios (for my little brain at least) and I would really like a clarification on this so I can decide whether to state Class A or B on the BARC & CTRCC registration forms, i.e. just where does a 2 litre turbo car run?

[Tim Wilkinson]

Cossies are banned from pre-93, aren't they? Both Escort and Sierra, and the Skylines?

(goes back to watching RX7s on ebay....)

[Al Weyman]

They are allowed in Classic Thunder though ar'nt they? And for pre 93 lets ask the same question for say a 2 litre Starion Turbo, where would that run for example, A or B?

[greenamex2]

My head hurts

Looking over last years results for Classic Thunder I can sort of understand what the committe is trying to do. I agree what Al is trying to say though, the more you read the class structure the more confused you get!!!

Perhaps the management could produce an examples/lookup sheet or something.

And putting 1600 multi valves in with 2150 dual valves is still daft (speaking as somebody who has spent the last 13 years racing against like cars), but it's still better than it was (against 2900 dual valves)!