(2011) Annual AutoX Meeting - Febuary 5th

[Bob]

I won't be able to attend the meeting, but I'd like to suggest moving cars like Factory Five Racing cars out of X1... I know they don't show up to many events, but it's hard for my 4000 pound sedan, let alone the Corvettes, to compete with those when they do show up! Can there be a separate class for straight up race cars like those?

Try racing the Cobras at Fed-Ex/SCCA with an E30/M50, hasn't been pretty!, I don't think they outhandle/brake me, but they basically leap from gate to gate gaining a tenth or so in each straight section, after a mile of this they've got 2 seconds on me.

[woodym3]

I won't be able to attend the meeting, but I'd like to suggest moving cars like Factory Five Racing cars out of X1... I know they don't show up to many events, but it's hard for my 4000 pound sedan, let alone the Corvettes, to compete with those when they do show up! Can there be a separate class for straight up race cars like those?

Where do you suggest we draw the line for an additional class? First, these cars are street legal as far as I know, and not "race cars". Second, only three are super fast (Chamberlain, Kelly, and Casey). They stomp all of the other Cobras that show up anywhere. Third, no one guaranteed that we will provide a class where a Pontiac sedan will be competitive.
Just my feelings on this. . .

[03threefiftyz]

I made a gripe a few months ago about the classing, but only thing I could think of was to add another class for non-bmw. Perhaps something like X5 (0-1.6l) X4 (1.61l-2.8l) X3 (2.81-3.8l) X2 (3.81l-4.9l) X1 (4.91l+). It just seems crazy to me to be in X1 with a bolt-on 350z and R-comps. Regardless, I am looking forward to making a few event this upcoming year.

[Luda]

while we do TRY to account for everything/everyone there are going to be cars that will dominate a class, regardless of how we set them up. We can review the X Classing at the meeting in febuary, just to make sure everything looks kosher.

off the top of my head my first concern with breaking X class down to 5 classes is there will be less compeition in the classes, and while its not exactly fun to get stomped but the cobras, it does give you something to shoot for as far as improving your own driving.

[irish44j]

The only thing I'd maybe be interested in is more of a bump-up for the r-comp cars. I'd rather see a single category for all cars on r-comps. A set of Hoosier autocross tires is WAY more of an advantage in autocross than a Rotary or a Turbo is, in my opinion, vs. street tires.

Example: An Evo is currently stock in X3. The Evo is already a faster car than the 2.5L WRX's that are in X2. An Evo with r-comps bumps it to X2, where it would destroy everything else running in that class on street tires (they STi's and WRX's and Z's could put in R-comps too, but then they'd all bump to X1).

IDK, I did win X2 last year so I have little to complain about, but just thinking out loud. I'm fine with the rules as they are too. I probably won't be in the season points series much this year since I'm going to split time with AI events to see how I can do against the local STU competition.

[flohtingPoint]

The only thing I'd maybe be interested in is more of a bump-up for the r-comp cars. I'd rather see a single category for all cars on r-comps. A set of Hoosier autocross tires is WAY more of an advantage in autocross than a Rotary or a Turbo is, in my opinion, vs. street tires.

Example: An Evo is currently stock in X3. The Evo is already a faster car than the 2.5L WRX's that are in X2. An Evo with r-comps bumps it to X2, where it would destroy everything else running in that class on street tires (they STi's and WRX's and Z's could put in R-comps too, but then they'd all bump to X1).

IDK, I did win X2 last year so I have little to complain about, but just thinking out loud. I'm fine with the rules as they are too. I probably won't be in the season points series much this year since I'm going to split time with AI events to see how I can do against the local STU competition.

http://www.get-fast.net/nasacross/012311res_raw.htm

Hoosiers don't make up for that much. I'm fast, but not faster than a properly driven STI on street tires, as seen by the time sheet.

I highly doubt any Evo's with r-comps are coming to the BMW events, all the major Evo folk are in Philly for this region and surrounding areas.

I do, however, think the cutoff for X4 should be 1.9L, bumping the 2.0L's into X3.

[95Maxrider]

http://www.get-fast.net/nasacross/012311res_raw.htm

Hoosiers don't make up for that much. I'm fast, but not faster than a properly driven STI on street tires, as seen by the time sheet.

I highly doubt any Evo's with r-comps are coming to the BMW events, all the major Evo folk are in Philly for this region and surrounding areas.

I do, however, think the cutoff for X4 should be 1.9L, bumping the 2.0L's into X3.

I think Josh has a point; that no Evos showed up last year is irrelevant. The fact that you're keeping up with cars with double your horsepower clearly shows that R comps/Hoosiers make a huge difference. I would be in favor of an R-comp class as well.

[flohtingPoint]

I think Josh has a point; that no Evos showed up last year is irrelevant. The fact that you're keeping up with cars with double your horsepower clearly shows that R comps/Hoosiers make a huge difference. I would be in favor of an R-comp class as well.

Did you not look at that time sheet I posted? Three STi's beat me, all were on street tires. I routinely get beat by some STU cars, it all boils down to driver. An r-comp class is definitely not needed and would be foolish to implement.

AJ/Dunham beat cars with double their HP too and they're on street tires, want to segregate us SCCA folks?

[Bob]

Did you not look at that time sheet I posted? Three STi's beat me, all were on street tires. I routinely get beat by some STU cars, it all boils down to driver. An r-comp class is definitely not needed and would be foolish to implement.

AJ/Dunham beat cars with double their HP too and they're on street tires, want to segregate us SCCA folks?

My pet peeve for years, the 4wd launch advantage is often the margin of victory, they obviously have an "R comp" advantage with 50/100% more traction even with street tires.

[Biggins]

I motion to leave all as is...

I don't run in the non-BMW class and don't care, but there is no fair way to class cars period.

My idea for the non-Bimmer classes would be an X-R class for all cars on r-comps, an X-ST class for all cars on ST tires, and X-B class for all other cars not on R or ST tires. If you're on r-comps, you should be one of the fastest cars. The times of ST, STS, STX, STU, STR cars are relatively close and this is a local event so everyone should be relatively close and have great competition. The X-B class would be great for beginners or for those regular tires. This is a BMW club, so I'm not a fan of adding any classes.

I think it was Woody's idea last year, but we could class all non-BMWs by color. That would be fun.

[woodym3]

I don't think any of us expected it to turn out this way, but the idea that X4 (small displacement) is the slowest class and X1 (big displacement) is the fastest, has turned out to be wrong. Look at the fastest times in each class at each event. They're all pretty much the same. I'm for any system that is 1. simple to administer 2. provides a near equal number of entrants in each of four classes. I think our displacement-based system does that. Eliminating the bumps for r-tires, forced induction, and rotary engines might not make any difference. Our events are low-key, and in my opinion, mainly for BMWs. If you're concerned about your particular car being competitive, either buy the right car, or try SCCA events. And I am still curious to know if the black car class is faster than the red car class.

[civicexracer]

I'd say leave the non-bmw classes as they are. From what I saw last season, a lot of this seems to come down to driver, how many events you attend and the type of course/conditions, the type of car/mods comes after. There are only 4 non-bmw classes, all of which are simple and work pretty well for what they are. Adding more or moving things around will just complicate things further and add more debate.

Anyone have the address for where this is taking place?

[etherpool]

Anyone have the address for where this is taking place?

I think he's still trying to get it. I'll check and get it posted.

[Ethan Blank]

I'm OK with the current system for non-BMW. That said, the only alternative that I can think of is to divide the participants by Auto-X experience (and I can't say that this would be a better way of doing it). I think a lot of the improvement at Auto-X comes from experience, more than HP or tires, and that the more experienced drivers should compete against other similar drivers. This could be pretty easily accomplished to divide the participants (first season beginners, second and third season intermediates, more than three seasons advanced, for instance). It might also encourage beginners to participate (and give them a realistic shot at a championship). As I said, I'm not sure this would yield better results/competitiveness compared to the existing system.

As I said in an earlier post, classing based on tires is not a good idea, I did not like that when it was done that way a few years ago. I agree with a prior poster, the tires can help, but ultimately its the driver that makes all the difference (which is what led me to the experience-based classing as a suggestion).

[woodym3]

So if I did 1 or 2 autocrosses a year for several years back in the 70s I'd be in Advanced, but if I started in February, done several schools and 21 autocrosses so far this year I'd be in Beginner? Hypothetical of course, but not as easy to classify as you suggest.