Jump to content

2022 BCCR Petitions - Member comments period has opened


Recommended Posts

And as I said earlier, a lot of this is bash and ban GBU via rules petitions.

 

CC was silly enough to give a C3 Vette a vpi of 150 points. Someone built one and not surprisingly kicked ass.

 

A someone said a while back "Champcar can't survive on BMW's and Miata's alone."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The differential swap language was changed for the 2021 BCCR and is different than the language in the 2017-18 BCCRs and 2019-20 BCCRs. 

2019-20: 

Quote

Differential swap: 25pts for any diff. not originally available for your year, make, and model or chassis generation (excluding specialty high-performance models not listed on the VPI table).

 

2017-18: 

Quote

 Differential swap: 25pts for any diff. from a vehicle on the VPI list, stock axles/CVs included

The axles on the GBU car were not stock axles. And it wasn't the stock housing (or the stock anything). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Snorman said:

The differential swap language was changed for the 2021 BCCR and is different than the language in the 2017-18 BCCRs and 2019-20 BCCRs. 

2019-20: 

 

2017-18: 

The axles on the GBU car were not stock axles. And it wasn't the stock housing (or the stock anything). 

Ahhh. Slight wording change that is not reflected in the red line edition of the 2021 rules.

 

eta-The housing shouldn't make any difference as long as claiming a diff swap as I read it as the diff and diff housing being one and the same.

 

Tech has used the FWD trans swap as an example as I recall. 

Edited by Bandit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two comments unrelated to any particular petition:

 

1) As a Board we will not consider multiple choice petitions.  For example, here's one petition with 8 different possible ways to reign in tire costs.  Nope.  We expect eight different petitions.  We can burn them all or choose one to approve.

 

2) Reliability items vs. no free stuff.  I encourage member to continue to submit petitions even though similar ones have been shot down year after year.  In my experience, about 40% of members think anything that helps keep motors/trans/diffs intact should be free.  It leads to more on track time and more money to enter more races.  60% of members want no more free stuff for real fear of additional speed creep.  This is somewhat a response to the 2015-6 era when a bunch of stuff suddenly became free.  More free stuff also leads to more money from other teams to keep up.  

 

As a Board member, I'm on the fence but will ALWAYS side with the majority of these issues.  That 40% for free reliability mods could be 60% someday and then I will support those petitions.   I see both sides of the coin.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that a lot of these proposals look like they are pointed towards restricting the big American iron.  Not sure why.

 

The GBU car had a metric poop ton of items that were unclaimed, unpublished, or just had made up values.

 

It isn't just the rear end.

 

Front tubular structure, body, alternator, etc...

 

In other words, it gave the impression that Jay just let them do what they wanted because he wanted that car to dominate.  Im not sure what point was beinf made, other than pissing off a lot of paying customers that were not given the same "leniency".

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I agree that a lot of these proposals look like they are pointed towards restricting the big American iron.  Not sure why.

I think it is because teams like Riley and Crowd Control have shown American Iron can kick ass and win at certain tracks. Others have shown really good speed but not gotten the finishes. (Pinto Dave's 4th gen LT1 Camaro had fast lap at Daytona a couple years ago iirc. The Beer Money 2nd gen is knocking on the 2:40's at RA. Faster each time they are out.) High speed tracks allow the AI cars to get out and run. Technical tracks show they have problems with quick transitions.

 

Frankly, in my opinion, the running costs are why more haven't been built. 315, or bigger, tires are not cheap. Nor are 14 inch brakes. Fuel burn obviously is higher. Plus, for the most part AI cars are not easy button. You're not bolting on 200tw tires and running respectable laps while having fun with your buddies.

 

As I see it it comes down to AI cars are around 5-10% of the entrants. If they are allowed their full potential it'll make for a lot of unhappy team owners at bigger tracks. The petitions show this.

 

eta-Concerning tires. My 315/18 615k's are about $80 more than the hot 245/15 Rival S's people are running just to give an idea on tire costs. The same size Rival S is $371 each. Big car=big tire expense no matter what you run.

 

 

Edited by Bandit
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Snorman said:

Did you consider the option that maybe these won't be approved because, like what appears to be the majority of the membership, the BOD doesn't see an issue with the current tire rules? 

Maybe, I do not think it is a problem for teams with a lot of money.  I also think that I talk to only a small % of the teams out there and my sample size is small, but I think that could be said about anyone asking about topics with our small scope we all see. I wish we could get 80% or more of the team captions to vote on how they feel about tires. Maybe Champcar can send an email out to all captions asking to fill out a survey (though I doubt there would be much response).  I wonder what the masses really think about the spending wars on tires. Some love the idea of going faster and buying tires, some are on a budget, a bunch do not care either way until they do well enough to care. I wonder what the mass data would suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

Maybe Champcar can send an email out to all captions asking to fill out a survey (though I doubt there would be much response). 

Have a short, simple, brief questionnaire to hand out at tech?

 

Might have a higher response rate.

 

Frankly the hot tires are making a mockery of the 180tw limit as the whole idea of a treadwear rule is to lower costs by mandating durable tires. Might as well allow Hoosier R7's.

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bandit said:

Have a short, simple, brief questionnaire to hand out at tech?

 

Might have a higher response rate.

 

Frankly the hot tires are making a mockery of the 180tw limit as the whole idea of a treadwear rule is to lower costs by mandating durable tires. Might as well allow Hoosier R7's.

 

 

I do wonder if someone ran a set of Hooiser R7 how long would they really last? When I tested them versus hankook RS3 the R7 was worth 6 seconds at VIR. I would think the RS4 vsRE71r would be 3-4 seconds different. It is getting close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

I do wonder if someone ran a set of Hooiser R7 how long would they really last?

We got 6+ hours out of R6's the last time we ran the SCCA 13 hour at VIR in our 944 S2.  Grip was reduced in the end, but that may have had as much to do with the high level of dirt kicked up from folks running off at night).  That said, VIR is particularly easy on tires in my experience.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

I do wonder if someone ran a set of Hooiser R7 how long would they really last? When I tested them versus hankook RS3 the R7 was worth 6 seconds at VIR. I would think the RS4 vsRE71r would be 3-4 seconds different. It is getting close.

 

Just get Hoosier to say they are 200tw and we'll find out. The manufacturers are currently deciding what is legal in CC while they battle for autocross supremacy.

 

Quote

We got 6+ hours out of R6's the last time we ran the SCCA 13 hour at VIR in our 944 S2. 

40tw tire wearing as well as some 200's....

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bandit said:

Have a short, simple, brief questionnaire to hand out at tech?

 

Might have a higher response rate.

 

Frankly the hot tires are making a mockery of the 180tw limit as the whole idea of a treadwear rule is to lower costs by mandating durable tires. Might as well allow Hoosier R7's.

 

 

 

holy hyperbola. R7 is another few levels faster than a re71, A052 and the like, lets be real here.  re71/A052 is closer to a 100tw from a few years ago (r888r), and even some current 100tw, but its not an r7 hoohoo.

 

as the 200tw is the hot autocross class. unfortunately it appears a lot more companies are pushing for that crowd than the enduro cars. they are willing to have a lower run count on a set than before, so here we are. and the counter to that is to go up in TW and thats not a great way either. thank God maxxis and hankook are still firmly in the long wear enduro court.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, chbright said:

 

holy hyperbola. R7 is another few levels faster than a re71, A052 and the like, lets be real here.  re71/A052 is closer to a 100tw from a few years ago (r888r), and even some current 100tw, but its not an r7 hoohoo.

 

as the 200tw is the hot autocross class. unfortunately it appears a lot more companies are pushing for that crowd than the enduro cars. they are willing to have a lower run count on a set than before, so here we are. and the counter to that is to go up in TW and thats not a great way either. thank God maxxis and hankook are still firmly in the long wear enduro court.

 

Sure there was some hyperbole there, however the point stands. RE71r/Rival S/new Cooper RS3/RT660's>>>>>615k/RS4/VR1

 

R7's likely wear about as well as the RS3r's did at NCM.

 

The "hot" tires are 200tw because the manufactures mold that into the sidewall to be legal for SCCA autocross. They are not endurance tires as shown in recent CC races. So while it was hyperbole, if CC is not concerned about tire costs they might as well let a guy run whatever he wants. 

 

It's not about controlling speed. It's about holding costs down.

Edited by Bandit
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jer said:

As a Board member, I'm on the fence but will ALWAYS side with the majority of these issues.  That 40% for free reliability mods could be 60% someday and then I will support those petitions.   I see both sides of the coin.  

I have a problem with this statement (Tyranny of the majority). As a thought exercise, imagine a time and place where all the BMW and Miata teams represent 60% of the membership and decide to create a petition wherein all non-BMW and Miata vehicles must start with 5 penalty laps, or BMW/Miata teams get free stuff or other examples; you get the point.

 

Would you support this? I hope not. The role of the Board in ChampCar should be to ensure (as much as possible) a level playing field and to prevent any faction from gaining an advantage at the rules level. Sometimes the Board must side with the minority in order to prevent despotism. Please be rational and use common sense.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, dimitri.mariutto said:

I have a problem with this statement (Tyranny of the majority). As a thought exercise, imagine a time and place where all the BMW and Miata teams represent 60% of the membership and decide to create a petition wherein all non-BMW and Miata vehicles must start with 5 penalty laps, or BMW/Miata teams get free stuff or other examples; you get the point.

 

Would you support this? I hope not. The role of the Board in ChampCar should be to ensure (as much as possible) a level playing field and to prevent any faction from gaining an advantage at the rules level. Sometimes the Board must side with the minority in order to prevent despotism. Please be rational and use common sense.

 

I think that's a bit of an extreme example and not what Jer intended.  I think he's more generic in what he'd be siding with.  If someone wants to make reliability mods free so they can add tons of speed, but the majority of the drivers are against this, he'd side with the drivers.  If they want to last longer to keep them coming back to races without blowing up, he'd support that.  Siding with a loop hole or cater to a specific build or model is not what any majority would get behind, and neither should anyone.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, dimitri.mariutto said:

I have a problem with this statement (Tyranny of the majority). As a thought exercise, imagine a time and place where all the BMW and Miata teams represent 60% of the membership and decide to create a petition wherein all non-BMW and Miata vehicles must start with 5 penalty laps, or BMW/Miata teams get free stuff or other examples; you get the point.

 

Would you support this? I hope not. The role of the Board in ChampCar should be to ensure (as much as possible) a level playing field and to prevent any faction from gaining an advantage at the rules level. Sometimes the Board must side with the minority in order to prevent despotism. Please be rational and use common sense.

What I also wonder if the majority that they see is really just the most vocal very tiny minority and does not really represent the org as a hole.  Example, new system is announced that the BOD thinks is a good idea, that will change X and looks to be a great change long term, person Y and Z email and call everyone they can and get their way and change X is squashed without even trying it and thinking about the long term benefits.  In this case they would be accepting the tiny minority that is vocal.

 

I also think the BOD needs to look at the rules and changes long term as a business as that is what it really is. I want Champcar to succeed long term (selfish me wants to keep on racing) and that might make a change that some people might not like. I do see us selling out most races, east of that big river in the middle, so things are going well in the right direction, but to succeed you need to look long term and that is to have some change to adapt.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Originalsterm said:

Siding with a loop hole or cater to a specific build or model is not what any majority would get behind, and neither should anyone.

Well,  just to throw one out there, Miata's and BMW's don't need Accusump's.

 

Any surprise they cost points?

 

What the hell, another. Miata's have hub problems with big sticky tires. So hub points were lowered to 2.5.

 

Just a couple examples of the majority ruling.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Originalsterm said:

 

I think that's a bit of an extreme example and not what Jer intended.  I think he's more generic in what he'd be siding with.  If someone wants to make reliability mods free so they can add tons of speed, but the majority of the drivers are against this, he'd side with the drivers.  If they want to last longer to keep them coming back to races without blowing up, he'd support that.  Siding with a loop hole or cater to a specific build or model is not what any majority would get behind, and neither should anyone.

I do wonder why some think reliability equal speed? to me I see reliability as finishing a race at the same speed. Here are some examples and school me if I am not seeing something.

 

Accusump- adds weight which makes you slower.  Saves engine rod bearings from going boom boom. Car finishes race. I have never seen a real example of it making a car faster. I saw someone say they could rev it a few hundred rpm higher in a certain turn and they somehow saw the low oil pressure before it killed the engine, in a turn, under full G load, while in traffic, and let off the gas enough to save his engine. He said he would be faster with and accusump, but I have to call BS on this example.

 

Trans cooler- We all race all out on almost every single lap. This will save the trans and keep it to the end of the race. again, I do not see people driving around slow to save a trans long term. We all go for it.

 

Oil cooler- I am not sure how much an engine oil cooler is needed in Champcar, but if it was and saved the engine, great, It adds weight.

 

Diff cooler- This one I can see both ways. Diff cooler can save an LSD if clutch type. The LSD will slip when hot and not get the traction. This would be performance I think. Thought on one side some LSD clutch types will last like 2 races before they slip and go and need replaced. Some change them out regularly and the cooler could save cost here, but I would still side on the performance gain on this one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

What I also wonder if the majority that they see is really just the most vocal very tiny minority and does not really represent the org as a hole. 

I don't know your position on this, but in my opinion that is why IRS swaps are now ten points per part.

 

50 points was a reasonable hit for the performance gain. 100+ isn't. Yet the pitchforks were out on the forum and the BoD folded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

I do wonder why some think reliability equal speed?

Some things, yes they do go together.

 

See the Miata hubs I mentioned above. Without them the Miata teams are either running smaller, less grippy, tires or they are going through hubs like candy. With the aftermarket hubs they can run whatever tires they want with no worries.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/27/2021 at 11:51 AM, enginerd said:

Your suggestion is still more complex than “adding anything to the car which wasn’t there from the factory adds points”.


No, because the above rule requires lists of what non-OE parts cost. I'm just saying who really cares how a team gets negative camber, so long as they don't have adjustable arms or altered geometry? You can only enforce so many rules, and inspect so many parts on these cars. Gotta make them count.
 

On 3/29/2021 at 7:55 AM, Grufton said:

As for oil coolers, free coolers = free speed parts.


I'd wager most cars will be faster without an oil cooler since it thins the oil out. SC300s (including the #225 car which has won Sebring and Daytona a bunch) run 300+F oil temps. The engines will just need to be refreshed more often.

My car has an OE coil cooler and only sees 260F temps. Trans temps are about the same, but the diff gets over 300. I would add a diff cooler if I could do so without points.

Edited by Grant
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bandit said:

I don't know your position on this, but in my opinion that is why IRS swaps are now ten points per part.

 

50 points was a reasonable hit for the performance gain. 100+ isn't. Yet the pitchforks were out on the forum and the BoD folded.

I did not have a position on the IRS, but I can say 50 points might be close. I guess it depends on what is included in that. Some might be a simple rear IRS and some might need complete unequal length upper and lower control arms with adjustable camber, caster and toe. I think there is move involved than just IRS 50 points. That is just me looking at it from a perspective of how much change to the car and performance based on what it was to what it will be. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

I do wonder why some think reliability equal speed? to me I see reliability as finishing a race at the same speed. Here are some examples and school me if I am not seeing something.

 

 

There are so many examples on either side of this argument, I can see it both ways.  I'm against free things in these scenarios, which is broad and generic and makes it hard to enforce/support I get...

 

If I add 50hp, my trans won't support that power level so I need free coolers.  Stock, the trans will survive all day though.  Free coolers support speed creep.  

 

Bigger wider tires and better suspension allow high G's in the corner, my car has a poor oil pan design and pickup, so an Accusump allows me to last all day with my (now cheaper) suspension mods.  Free Accusump allows speed ($$$) creep.

 

Also, I've heard since the beginning, "we didn't pick your car".  If your car can't last an entire race without free mods, choose where to spend your points or choose another car.  If your car has been in the series for years without these mods, I don't think you need them now.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bandit said:

Some things, yes they do go together.

 

See the Miata hubs I mentioned above. Without them the Miata teams are either running smaller, less grippy, tires or they are going through hubs like candy. With the aftermarket hubs they can run whatever tires they want with no worries.

 

 

That is one example, though it does not equal speed.  You can run stock wheel bearings and change them every race. We did that with Jerry's car and never upgraded the hubs and ran wide tires and sticky ones. If we did swap them out we would have saved money long term though and saved us the time to change them after the race, though it did not take all that long. In that example the hubs do not equal speed.

 

Do you have another example?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...