WCMA Road Race Classing Review

[Tachyon]

HI Brooke,

ACCUS  is the US equivalent to ASN CANADA FIA - The groups affiliated with ACCUS are Grand Am, IMSA, IndyCar, NASCAR, NHRA, SCCA and USAC & their Karting association.

NASA is not part of ACCUS.   This is why there is an issue with respect to licensing, etc.

Gary

[ChrisS]

Here's why I like this proposal:
- I think the NASA classes fit the inclusive / tuner mindset that our racers and wider motorsport community is looking for.
- It will be a stable rule set.
- Somebody else maintains them.  This means less work for our volunteers, and that new cars and developments are more quickly accounted for in the rules.  NASA has a much larger sample size to make rule decisions on.  For example we don't know if a Sentra should be lighter in IT2 or if Gary just drives slow
- Since our region would match a nation-wide rule set it becomes easier to buy or sell race cars.  What to easily and cost-effectively get into racing?  Go buy a race car from anywhere in North America.  It's also easier to justify that investment when the car could be resold to people outside of Alberta and Manitoba.  Obviously we'd rather nobody stopped racing, but life happens!
- It opens the option for travel (buy/build something that fits an SCCA class and you can race *anywhere*).

Disclaimer: I'm not impacted by this proposal as I race in the Spec Miata class.  Which coincidentally is matches the SCCA and NASA classes.  And also coincidentally has a large number of new competitors.

Aside:

Chrisw,
I'm curious to hear your opinion as a new-comer.  You say that NASCC's 'Getting Started' page wasn't helpful.  What would you have liked to see there?

Chris

[Terence Thyr]

As someone who intends to be racing in 2015 I suppose my views would be of those who you are hoping to attract. Regardless of who's rules end up being used it would seem to make sense for many already previously stated reasons to adopt the ruleset of larger sanctioning body outright, rather than have rules unique to the region. Why have them really close to SCCA's but not quite the same? Obviously those of you who have been racing would have a more informed viewpoint than myself. After reviewing the rulesets myself I find that for the stated goals that you are hoping to accomplish that hands down the best fit would be to adopt NASA's rules.

1. They are more inclusive and flexible, which I think should be the main focus ,so as to attract more racers.
2. It should save a lot of work
3. Regionally I think it makes enough sense and NASA only seems to become more popular, and they tend to best represent the amateur racer in my opinion, which would best serve us I expect.

As for myself, it would certainly help with my aspirations. I have 2006 Mustang GT that was raced as a NASA CMC2 car primarily at buttonwillow from 2006 until 2011. I bought it in 2012 after spending a weekend at Miller Motorsports Park in a BOSS 302 and then an FR500S. I was never so happy in my life, and decided that I wanted to find a way to race as an amateur. I have been slowed due to financial restrictions, but it's going happen sooner or later. It's a nice well sorted car and would currently fit into ST-O but I expect it would be rather uncompetitve being a rather large displacement yet low power car with a stock 4.6l 3V. I personally don't care about being competitive, I could come in last all the time and will probably be the happiest guy out there. However what I would like to do is slowly upgrade/mod the car every year and NASA's rules make that much easier. I don't want to have to put in a fuel cell right away because I want to put in a cold air intake which would immediately require me to move into GT. I just want to come out and have fun and upgrade my car over time, NASA seems to be onboard with that mindset and I think that mentality would help interest more people to join. 

[Roy Wallace Racing]

I would like to offer my opinion regarding the GT classes.
I am currently preparing my super late model to race in GT1 at Castrol. Has any thought been given to providing a home for these cars like the SCCA has done with the GTA class in the southern USA?
It would be nice to have a class that would maintain "stock car" rules and preparation and not have to directly compete against Trans Am type cars that have an advantage within the GT rules as they are currently written.
I understand nothing motivates discussion like strong car counts, and this will certainly take time to accomplish. Perhaps the stock car class is something that will develop in the next few years. There are a large number of cars just sitting in this province because there is no longer a place for them to race.
Cheers

RW

[Tachyon]

Good morning!  First of all it's good to hear so many passionate competitors and the majority of the comments are in the right direction to improve amateur sports car competition in the WCMA territory.  However, this topic was suppose to be focused on looking into the future of which direction competitors may wish to direct the amateur sports car community with respect to classifying competition vehicles.  Last fall WCMA received a number of contacts via various sources telling us WCMA's car classification was not keeping pace with it's peers  in other territories in Canada and in United States and there are a number of competitors who have race cars in the States but can not figure where they fit into the the WCMA system. They said they could determine where to put a 1.2 litre British car from the 1960s but a not an off shelf Porsche GT3 or a Shelby Mustang or Viper ACR or a Corvette Z0 or  BMW M3.  To complicate matters for the past 10 years we have been trying to deal with highly modified or highly altered production sedans that just do not fit perfectly into any particular class and the competitors are frustrated at running at the back of one class or another. There are so many different variations of cars from similar manufacturers and so many after market tuner kits that is has been become very difficult to create a common & equal Playing field. The ITJ class has been very popular and I'm sure many of these competitors may eventually wish move to another class. The Spec Miata class  is a fabulous concept and the BMW Pro 3 & 944 type classes are popular in the State but we do not have the population to support all these "so called restricted or one design type competition classes. The modified sports car or sports sedans is nothing new for car classifications were a hot issue in the 1950s and 1960s and there were hot verbal conversation, back then  face to face in club houses or at the many, many racing track that were scattered across in Canada and United States in the 50s, 60s & very early 70s.  Yes, even back in the early 1960s the wealthy drivers like Penkse & Hobarth would show up with their expensive off the shelf Porsche RS60s or 61s or Jaguar SS. For the next 3 to 4 decades as tracks disappeared & the majority of the competitors were usually very mechanically inclined and they built good , fast competition cars. Today we're seeing a resurgence on race tracks ( closed circuits) around the world and many of the active lapping session drivers want to go racing.  So what car racing class do their off the shelf fast cars fit into. WCMA's and others do not have classes that accommodate these cars. SOme groups like NASA started out with 1 or 2 classes and because of pressure they now have dozens of classes.  WCMA can not do this for we have a very small population.  We still have a far higher per capital number of races compared to virtually every where else in NA but still we cannot have 30 classes for 40 cars.

WCMA's executive would like to build the sport, make it more competitive and more fun,  and we realized we had to address the future of the sport.  Gary Roberts and Doug Campbell agreed to initiate this latest topic: review what our peers are doing and to try to come to consensus on an acceptable format for future car classifications within the Prairie Provinces and Territories.

They suggested we all review the rules of a number of other groups: CASC-OR, ICSCC, CACC, NASA & SCCA or stay with the existing rules and some how fit in all these modern off the shelf street cars that are very worthy race cars. We're a very tiny populated area compared to Ontario, California & New York so we have to be careful when planning where we want our rules to go for 2015 & beyond. There is a possibility that Alberta could have 3 tracks by 2017 or 2018.
May I recommend that we keep this particular topic to the focus of reviewing all our peers rules and provide direction towards  future car classifications.   It has become apparent many competitors have many other valid issues, such as websites' content,how expensive car racing is and how frustrating it is getting on to this forum to voice your opinion, or the ease of getting into the sport, no one to talk to about their particular issues.
If competitors have other issues they would like to voice their concerns about or share their thoughts with fellow competitors please start another new topic.  WCMA's forum is a soap box to improve amateur sport car racing in the Prairie Provinces and the Territories.
If you would like to volunteer your time to build motorsports please work with your local sports car club.  This sport is driven by the local sports car clubs and their many dedicated volunteers. These clubs are the centre of like minded individuals.  Thank you and let's hope we can refocus on future car classifications. This is a very complex issue.

[Chrisw]

Chrisw,
I'm curious to hear your opinion as a new-comer.  You say that NASCC's 'Getting Started' page wasn't helpful.  What would you have liked to see there?

I will try to respond to this in another thread when I have some time.

Back to the rules! I will bring up this issue...

"Alternate engines may be used, given that the manufacturer of the vehicle and engine are the same (e.g. Acura engine installed into a Honda auto)." In the STO rules, I believe there is the same stipulation for brakes to be from the same manufacturer, although I can't find it in the 2011 rules (the only ones linked to the NASCC site).

This makes little sense to me anymore. With all the different engine swaps out there, this ONLY limits cars and forces those that are already swapped differently to jump up to GT right away. I drive an S14 with an S15 engine in it. I am REALLY lucky that I didn't instead go with an engine from a different manufacturer, no matter how small the displacement... An example of such a car was a Toyota Carolla that was recently for sale out of BC. The car had a KA swapped into it because that's what the previous owner could afford/get at the time. The car was useless except in drift thanks to this rule. It barely has 100hp (on a good day) and is forced into GT.

[Tachyon]

CHRIS - That is a good example of why we initiated this topic.  What overall car classification system would work best for the WCMA competitors.  In the short term the WCMA rules do not work for some competitors and for others it  works great either by them buying the perfect car that fits the rules or by design where the competitor built the car to fit exactly into their desired class.

This topic is to give the competitors the opportunity to set in motion the potential for a car classification system that  would make it fair  to the majority of competitors. We will always have competitors who will show up with something that does not fit.

This topic is about what type of future  car classification that would work well for a small population sports car racing community with the potential by 2017 or 2018 of having 3 tracks in Alberta, plus 2 in BC and Gimli in Manitoba.

[zhao]

SOme groups like NASA started out with 1 or 2 classes and because of pressure they now have dozens of classes.  WCMA can not do this for we have a very small population.  We still have a far higher per capital number of races compared to virtually every where else in NA but still we cannot have 30 classes for 40 cars.

I dont think there is one person that wants more classes, or at least i hope there is not. the goal should be to reduce the classes.


Anyway, I do not think this is a decision we should decide on in the next few months. Going off half cocked is a great way to have to revisit this problem in a few years yet again. There is no real need to have a rule change for the 2015 season if it means we have to rush the discussion. I think this topic should be revisited after people have a few months to casually digest the idea of major class rule changes

[sturat77]

Here are a few thoughts:

1.  No matter what the rule set, I think its safe to say every race organizing body will find a class for a car to race if someone shows up with a car.  As long as it is safe and meets all their safety criteria, a home will be found for that car.

2.  No matter what the rule set, some competitors will maximize their cars to that rule set and some wont.  You will ALWAYS have disparity between the fastest and the slowest cars in a given class.  Always.

I have raced my Integra in its current configuration for 11 seasons.  It has raced with at least 7 different groups (WCMA, NASA, SCCA, ISSCC?,CSCC,VCR Indy, EDM Indy...) and in that time it has been classified in at least 11 different classes. 

At every race track I have been to, I have been welcomed with open arms and they have found a class for me to race in.  Did I win, was I competitive?  Sometimes yes, but most times no.  Do I win and am I competitive at my home track with the rule set my car is built to conform to - yes! 

My point is that our classing rules are not exclusionary, thay are as open as any organizing body out there.  If you build it, you can play.   You may not be competitive and win, but dont blame the rules, blame yourself.

If the rules change, there will be those that read the new rules, adjust their cars to fit and to be a fast as they can within those rules.  And there will be those that dont.  There will be a disparity between fast and slow cars within each class, as there always has been.  (Just as an aside, I always thought reading the rules, figuring out how to make the car incrimentally faster and still stay legal was part of the racing game?  Its the thinking part of racing, the mind game.)

My only hope is that we dont have to revisit this topic again because the guy who put a cage in his 2002 Daihatsu is pissed off because, even though we have "inclusionary" rules and he has a class to run in, his Daihatsu isnt competitive and he's always in last place.

Those are my random thoughts.

Stu Geddes
Acura Integra STU #77

[The Radium King]

under WCMA regs, how would you class a 3000 lb car with a 5L engine swap and no fuel cell (ie, a 302 in a fox-body mustang)?

no fuel cell means no GT. engine swap means no IT. it is too light to race ST-O. you would have to break a rule to make it fit. he might be able to race once like this, but would eventually have to add a lot of weight, spend a lot of $ for a fuel cell, or put the old engine back in. Or not race because the rules make it difficult and/or expensive to participate.

the same car could run in NASA no problem.

[Terence Thyr]

I think that nails it for me. NASA's classification system makes it real easy to class virtually any car. It also allows people to make modifications that they would prefer to do and you can easily figure out if the car changes classes by adding on the extra points. It allows you to set up a car to your own preferences as long as you meet the safety requirements and still results in fair classing.

Posts that are against the idea of adopting NASA's classification system seem to have a common theme of lets not change for the sake of change, which is very important, even as an aspiring outsider I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. I'm just curious what specificily are any problems you see with NASA's system as I believe that adopting their ruleset would actually result in not having to make any more significant changes in the future. Leaving the WCMA with a stable ruleset and I really believe it will also get many more people into the sport because it really seems to be an inviting and inclusive system. 

[The Radium King]

well, the caveat with my previous post is that the one instance i have presented (heavily modified engine, light car, no fuel cell) is the only area that i can see where WCMA regs can't find a class for you. i think that this affects quite a few potential competitors, however.

however, if what i have hear *alluded* to is true, then:

- removal of fuel cell requirement in GT will solve this problem, as the car could find a home in GT (may not be competitive as displacement isn't necessarily an indicator of power, but that is not the point; finding a class you are legal in is the point); or

- reduction of the ST-O class factor to 0.80 will allow the car to run without having to add weight. using my previous example, a 3000 lb car with 5 L engine x .75 DF for two valves and .88 CF = 3300 lbs or 300 lb ballast (note that NASA allows max 250 lbs ballast as safety starts to become a concern - we aren't racing pickup trucks) ... but ... at .80 CF he is back to 3000 lbs and no ballast.

[The Radium King]

just to expand on my 'potential competitors' comment above. i think that the focus should be on developing more local racers, and not so much on attracting racers from other jurisdictions. really, if you are in BC and want a break from Mission, are you going to drive to Castrol or are you going to drive to one of five or six closer, better tracks in Oregon and Washington State?

there are currently plenty of AXers, DEers, Drifters, etc., in Alberta. these guys already have cars and are currently thinking "man, i hate waiting for the guy in front of me to wave me by; i want to pass". you should make it as easy as possible for them to transition these cars (heavily modified engines, light car, no fuel cell) into road racing. i would suggest that there are a heck of a lot more of them than there are individuals with no previous exposure to motorsports that decide cold that they want to road race, find the WCMA regs, and build a car to suit (and they have to build as there is nothing to buy except perhaps spec miata from the USA). finally, these DEers, Axers, Drifters, etc., are already at the track; very easy to access, advertise, and lure over to the dark side.

[Chrisw]

My point is that our classing rules are not exclusionary, thay are as open as any organizing body out there.  If you build it, you can play.   You may not be competitive and win, but dont blame the rules, blame yourself.

You can play? That should read you can lap. If you force a car into a class where is is completely outclassed... it might as well be lapping. And if that is the attitude, you will not have those people stick around. You can't expect people to repeatedly come out to "race" when they are completely out classed... and there is no need for it. In this way, the current rules ARE exclusionary.

[The Radium King]

i guess that's where i differ. as a beginner, a competitive car ain't gonna help me. i think there is a difference between 'legal' (ie, meet all the requirements for the class) and 'competitive' (ie, be fast in that class). i doubt you'll get a lot of traction with folks if asking for a set of rules that make your car 'competitive' right out of the box; that's where you have to step up and find whatever advantage in the rules you can (and in the current case with wcma thats a small displacement japanese car). on the other hand, it sure would be nice to slap a cage in a car and be 'legal' for a class without having to drop another $2k on a fuel cell (only to run in a GT class with no other cars in it) or find 300 lbs of steel to bolt into the passenger seat (and have your car behave unpredictably because it isnt designed to be driven to the limit with such a load).