Class Structure - Brainstorming

[Loren]

Let me preface this by saying that everyone just may be happy with things the way they are... in which case, we don't need to do anything.

But, I'm wondering if some adjustment may be in order. And if we're going to do anything for the coming season (which begins in September), we need to start discussing it now.

Here's what I'm seeing:
Typically, very small class sizes in S2, S3, S4 and S5.
Very large class sizes in M1 and M2.
Very small R1 class, and R0 except at Brooksville.

There are a few things we could do. (never forgetting that "do nothing" is an option)

--Stock--

First, we could combine S4 and S5, and bump S3 up to S2. That would fix the class size problem. But, does it address the "real" problem?

I hesitate to even suggest this, because "stock is stock", and "FAST Stock" is pretty far removed from "Stock" already. But, it is very evident that we live in a culture where "friends don't let friends drive stock cars". With the exception of the fastest stock cars (S1) and a few holdouts in the lower classes, most people are stuck running in Mod class because of something they've done that made them ineligible for stock. I'm guessing that more often than not, that something is springs. Ugh. Springs can make a huge difference! Especially since we have no restriction on wheel width or tire size. Personally, I don't think that's a can of worms we want to open in "stock". Forget that I said anything.

Okay, what if we... instead of sending an otherwise "stock" eligible car to Mod for having non-stock springs... we bumped them up a class? It presumes that there is a linear progression in our stock classes... which isn't 100% so, but it's pretty close in most cases. It could work. Something to think about, anyway.

--Mod--

For the large M1 & M2 classes... if we do something such as suggested above that would allow more people to stay in stock, that might alleviate the issue somewhat. Otherwise, the only other option would be to rearrange the classes and maybe do another split. (if we add yet another Mod class, I think we'd have to combine some stock classes to keep the total number of classes from getting out of hand)

As it stands, our Mod classes are based on SCCA's SP classes. M1 = ASP/BSP, M2 = CSP/ESP, M3 = DSP/FSP. So, there is definitely room to undo some of the class merges in M1 and/or M2. Exactly how to do that is a little fuzzy. The current PAX indexes are interesting: http://home.comcast.net/~paxrtp/rtp2013.html

CSP has gotten a lot faster and would actually make more sense to combine with BSP (CSP > BSP). And then maybe combine DSP/ESP/FSP, which would net a decent sized class. With the differences in prep rules between us and SCCA, it's hard to say whether ESP would be at an advantage or not... the PAX says DSP is faster. (not that we see a lot of DSP-type cars... I think we get more FSP)

So, maybe a new Mod Class split could be:
M0 = "Anything" (within reason) on street tires and bumps from M1
M1 = ASP and bumps from M2
M2 = BSP/CSP and bumps from M3
M3 = DSP/ESP/CSP

That would make M1 slightly smaller, M2 smaller or maybe about the same, and M3 a little larger.

I'm just throwing out ideas.

--Race Tire--

For the race tire classes, I just don't think there's anything we can do. We could combine them into one class, but I'm not a fan of making all of the stock race tire guys run against the FTD machines on race tires. So, I'm okay with leaving that one alone.

--Spec Tire--

The last thing I'll bring up is something we discussed a year or so ago: A "spec tire" class. There seemed to be some interest in it, but no real consensus on how to do it. Since that discussion, I've spent a year driving on 175-width all-season tires (on a car that came with 185's), and I've autocrossed on those tires a couple times. They're slow. Very slow. But, also VERY fun! The challenge that comes with trying to drive smoothly enough to stay in control, but fast enough to not be a complete embarrassment is... unique. On average, I'd say I was about 1-1.5 seconds per lap (50-second course) off the pace of a similar car on "good summer street tires". (3.2 seconds off of John in his 07 Miata... which has tires, but is also a much faster car) But, if we have a class for that... how they compare to "good tires" is irrelevant.

I'm open to discussing this possibility further if anyone is interested. It would definitely be a "driver's class", and also a "budget class". We're talking low-end all-season tires here, and ideally smaller than stock width. (or at least no wider than) Probably some restriction on going "low profile", as well. The whole point of this class is for the tires to put you ad a disadvantage that you'll have to overcome with a combination of driver skill and perhaps some suspension tuning.

I don't see this class as taking much away from the other classes. Not too many people are going to be interested. But, if we come up with a solid core of at least 4 people who are willing to try it and can agree on a set of rules... why not?

My Hankook H724's cost all of $267 for the set of 4. I could have gone cheaper, but I wanted these because they were particularly light. (15-pound tires on 10-pound wheels on a 2000 pound car is good)

[jesup16]

Loren,

These are all great ideas. I've only run 4 events, so I don't know the history of this topic.

I would like to throw in an idea. Is there any chance of a novice class?

I have a great time at the events, but its hard to be competitive in a class like m2 as a novice. I know the only way to be competitive is seat time, but there is no way I can auto-x every weekend.

Just my 2 cents...

[Jeremy]

I'd like three classes. It would make everything so much easier...

1. Race tires
2. Street tires
3. Howard and Scott. (Anything higher than SCCA's XP class)

[Jamie]

[Here's what I'm seeing:
Typically, very small class sizes in S2, S3, S4 and S5.
Very large class sizes in M1 and M2.
Very small R1 class, and R0 except at Brooksville.

10-12 cars is large only relative to our constrained event size. When you get half the field cars in M1, M2, and S1, that means the rest of the classes are bound to be small.

First, we could combine S4 and S5, and bump S3 up to S2. That would fix the class size problem.

Again, that assumes a class of 10-12 is a "problem." It assumes that the cars making up M1, M2, and S1 will always be the most popular. And it creates a big performance spread across the "S4+S5" and "S2+S3" classes to further subdivide M1, M2, and S1

But, does it address the "real" problem?

I hesitate to even suggest this, because "stock is stock", and "FAST Stock" is pretty far removed from "Stock" already. But, it is very evident that we live in a culture where "friends don't let friends drive stock cars".

Or we redefine stock parameters as modifed when the car gets "too fast".

Okay, what if we... instead of sending an otherwise "stock" eligible car to Mod for having non-stock springs... we bumped them up a class? It presumes that there is a linear progression in our stock classes... which isn't 100% so, but it's pretty close in most cases. It could work. Something to think about, anyway.

It also presumes all cars in the class benefit an equal amount (or close to) from springs. It also doesn't account for synergies between springs and other "FAST stock-legal" mods, particularly sway bars and wheels. We left those free because by themselves, the performance effects were fairly modest. Couple them with springs, and you're off to the races, literally. If we're opening that door, simply borrow the NASA-X points system and classes, and be done with it -- they've already put the hard thinking into it.

...we don't need to do anything.

This. Although I like Jeremy's idea, if we add him to the Scott and Howard class...he'll get the hang of that Mustang at some point.

[Loren]

I agree, 12-15 cars isn't a HUGE class. But, given the size of our events, I'd rather see them at 6-10. 6 being definitely "enough" competition, and 10 being on the verge of "too much" for the nature of our club. (all in my opinion)

I also agree that our 5-class "Stock" category is pretty fairly distributed and it would suck for the drivers of slower cars that got merged in with faster cars if we combined classes. I'd really had to lose S5, it's one of my favorite classes... but people in these parts just don't tend to autocross those kinds of cars much. We're lucky to see 3-4 cars per event in that class in particular. And S3 is often equally small. Maybe it's all just a phase? Never quite know who's going to show up.

Regarding springs... the other assumption is that people will choose the right set of aftermarket springs that will actually IMPROVE performance and not HINDER it. From what I've seen, that's never a safe bet!

I'm leaning heavily toward "do nothing" at this point in time. But, we haven't had a good classing discussion in a while, so I thought it was worthwhile to toss out some ideas and see where they went. Plus, we have a lot of new people (such as Jesse), who might have ideas or questions about things.

Oh, and Jamie... I was hoping you'd chime in on "Novice Class". As I recall, you had a good take on it.

[Jamie]

Regarding springs... the other assumption is that people will choose the right set of aftermarket springs that will actually IMPROVE performance and not HINDER it. From what I've seen, that's never a safe bet!

You propose to change classing rules based on the assumption that most people won't set up their cars correctly? Why not just take your other idea all the way, and set up a class for slammed cars on stock shocks and skinny, all-season tires? You can award a time advantage for adding weight with a body kit.

Oh, and Jamie... I was hoping you'd chime in on "Novice Class". As I recall, you had a good take on it.

The search routine throws out "novice" as a too-commonly found word, so couldn't find what I said before. I think novice classes do novices a disservice, though. Mix 'em in with their regular classes, and they become part of that community more rapidly. They learn from more experienced, often faster drivers what works and and doesn't work in car setup and driving, so they get faster, quicker. (Or is that quicker, faster?) We talked about awarding a "novice FTD" sticker, on the assumption for newbies, it generally doesn't matter if they're driving a Chevron or a Chevette. IIRC that died in a debate on how to manage novice status, and the reality that the novices of the time rapidly outgrew the label and became fast or slow in their own right.

[Loren]

Regarding springs... the other assumption is that people will choose the right set of aftermarket springs that will actually IMPROVE performance and not HINDER it. From what I've seen, that's never a safe bet!

You propose to change classing rules based on the assumption that most people won't set up their cars correctly? Why not just take your other idea all the way, and set up a class for slammed cars on stock shocks and skinny, all-season tires? You can award a time advantage for adding weight with a body kit.

Wasn't a proposal, just an observation.

The search routine throws out "novice" as a too-commonly found word, so couldn't find what I said before. I think novice classes do novices a disservice, though. Mix 'em in with their regular classes, and they become part of that community more rapidly. They learn from more experienced, often faster drivers what works and and doesn't work in car setup and driving, so they get faster, quicker. (Or is that quicker, faster?) We talked about awarding a "novice FTD" sticker, on the assumption for newbies, it generally doesn't matter if they're driving a Chevron or a Chevette. IIRC that died in a debate on how to manage novice status, and the reality that the novices of the time rapidly outgrew the label and became fast or slow in their own right.

Thanks, that's a good snapshot of some of the reasons why we don't have a "novice class". From the people I've talked to, only a handful of our novices are interested in a novice class. Most of them accept that they're newbs and they're not going to win anything out of the box, but they're eager to learn and work their way up the ranks.

[impalanut]

I don't think anything much needs to be done for our club, but I did take a look at the NASA rules for autocross just for fun. The simple rules that they used to have are now many pages long and they have expanded to 16 classes, with a point scale up to almost 200 points for upgrades. I think we do a good job of balance for a club with a relatively small turnout compared to the SCCA and NASA. Unless we want to try and reinvent the wheel (spring?) I don't think we need much change. In any group there are a small number who will spend money and time to get faster, but most people just treat it as a casual hobby with limited investment.
When you look at the last 5 events m0,s3,s4,s5 get about 4-5 people and r2 gets about 2-3. The rest of the groups are larger usually in the 9-11 range.
R2,M3 and S5 always are the slowest in their groups, but the finishing order of the rest is variable, so there is not a linear relationship between our classes. Also, the time differences between the classes are frequently small, also except for the slowest groups. Potentially, we could combine any of the other groups without affecting the ability of people to have a chance at winning their class.(Mo,1,2 or S 1,2,3,4) That being said, I don't think we need to do anything at this point. We would need a lot more data points in order to be able to make better generalizations about the classing. We would probably need at least three seasons with the same classing stucture. At that point we could probably work out a FAST PAX based on our classing, rules and venues.

[Loren]

We don't need to act immediately, but it might be worth taking a look at the SP PAX numbers for 2013 and 2014 next year and revise our Mod classes. The SSP class is new enough that it's not even considered in our classing. We should probably change our classes to account for that and the fact that CSP is now faster than BSP and ESP is slower... assuming that trend continues to hold true.

I don't think our club is anywhere near large enough to come up with our own meaningful "local PAX". Not enough data, not enough consistency in preparation, and not enough consistency in drivers. I think we're better off to continue using SCCA classing with a nod to PAX indexes as a reference as the basis for our classing. It's been working pretty well so far, and it's easy enough to manage.

[twistedwankel]

I for sure know of two guys always running in Mod classes who are eligible for stock because they like to compete at that higher level. They, based on raw times, would always be in the top of their stock classes yet seldom win in Mod. Personal preference obviously.

Group size is a BIG deal if they get so large as to overfill ONE run group and leave too few workers for the other two run groups = absolutely.

I personally was thinking of running S1 instead of S2 in 2013 as it's the only apparent truely stock class left and my times are normally very competitive with them. It's gotten quite a following this year. I decided to bounce classes instead with two different cars. Wow alot of good competition in both of those!! Always seeing new skilled faces it seems.

Yes we could put the FS - S3's back with the Sportscars in S2 but that will probably discourage alot of occasional racers in Pony cars. Basically an STX car is S2 in FAST and the two or three well driven ones last event in S2 certainly showed what skillful drivers can do with them. They finished well up in the overall standings. (Then there is Kurtis Clauser = alien....moan.)

All we will save re-combining classes is some stickers and one t-shirt for each group?

You'll have to count noses at the end of the year and see how many Mod cars of the equivalent SCCA classes SS vs AS vs BS, etc, need to be broken in half or a 1/3 if there's enough in each? What's 3 more stickers mean? I'm guessing BS is pretty competitive with CS if one wants to combine but way overkill for FS. See?

So long as you have consistently no less than 3 competitors in a class I don't think there's any reason to combine it with another one with the same number just to save 3 stickers. Seems like anymore alot of people don't stay for "awards" anymore unless they are first. Surprisingly a good number of folks were unable to come to the year end dinner to get their tshirts too. Hmmmm.

I think it's more about the 3 "F's": FUN, FRIENDS and FOOD than winning all the time.

I haven't followed it this year but other than 140 tires didn't the SCCA develop a PAX for that RT road tire class?

[Jamie]

Group size is a BIG deal if they get so large as to overfill ONE run group and leave too few workers for the other two run groups = absolutely.

We're not near that point.

Basically an STX car is S2 in FAST....

It's not, though -- ST allows spring changes, suspension geomtery changes, adn some external engine mods FAST doesn't allow in "Stock".

I haven't followed it this year but other than 140 tires didn't the SCCA develop a PAX for that RT road tire class?

IIRC, they're just using the standard PAX for RT.

We need a whole year to set this up so everyone can wear out their existing expensive tires first.

If you were running 16" tires, I'd have a set of nice, worn street tires ready to go for you...might not pass Loren's width standards, but I guarantee they lack grip.

[twistedwankel]

Geezus he can pick quotes from two separate comments blocks. I'm screwed. Might as well register as a Democrat.

[rab]

I think there needs to be a 300,000 mile with crappy driver class.

[Loren]

Most/all of the "all season tire class" discussion split to a new topic:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1480

[blacksheep-1]

First, I'm happy with whatever you guys want to do, but as a clarification (because I'm getting close to buying tires for the ratstang) does your proposed "open mod" class still have to be street legal and on treaded tires?

[Loren]

Open mod isn't proposed, it's an existing class. It is an extension of the Modified classes, and yes, street tires are required. Pretty much anything else goes in that class as long as it is ostensibly streetable (preferably actually street driven), and is safe. Any race tire class will carry a "race" moniker and we presently only have two race tire classes: Modified Race Tire and Stock Race Tire.

It's all right here: http://drivefast.org/event-info/rules-classing/

[blacksheep-1]

I got that, the reason I asked is that it sounded like you guys might be (considering) opening up the modified class for "stock type" cars and running the race class for everything else, with the corresponding tires of course.

[Loren]

I wouldn't go as far as to say we're "considering" doing anything. I just tossed out some ideas, they were batted around and pretty much went nowhere. Net result: we're not looking to change anything for the coming season. If more interest crops up for the "cheap tire" class, we might run with that, but that was the only idea that even remotely got attention... and as far as I know there are only two people honestly considering it.

To be clear, the first sentence of this thread said "Let me preface this by saying that everyone just may be happy with things the way they are... in which case, we don't need to do anything." And that's where we're ending it for now. No action required.