Planet-9 Porsche Forum banner
1 - 20 of 64 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Welcome CaymanSpec Racers! We need your rules revision suggestions.

Attached is the current version (2010) of the regulations for the CaymanSpec Racing class. This rule set was created by a number of grassroots owners and racers who desire to build a new club-level racing class for the Porsche Cayman. For 2010 CaymanSpec is a recognized Time Trial and Race Class with the Porsche Owners Club (POC). For 2011 and beyond our goal is to increase the car count with the POC and expand the class to PCA and others.

We continue to build awareness and interest in CaymanSpec and want to refine a rule set that meets the spirit of the class and puts the greatest number of cars on track. There is currently one CSR complete and at least two under construction that should be on track shortly.

Please download the attached file (2010 rules), give the document a good read and post your suggested improvements to this thread by June 18th. We will consider each of the suggestions and post the revised rules proposal here by June 25th for final review and comment. Following any final changes we will submit the proposed rule to the POC (and PCA?) for inclusion in the GCRs.

Also, if any of you are interested in serving on the CaymanSpec rules team please send me a PM. We are working to build a small team of racers and technical experts to help us continue to develop.

See you at the track!

CaymanSpec Racing

EDIT: Updated Attachment - Proposed 2011 Regulations - Draft

View attachment 14744
 

·
PCA / POC Member #125
Joined
·
504 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

1. How about allowing Plenums- many interested in the CSR have asked me about these.

2. Should we allow brake upgrades? Like rotors with aluminum hats, possibly bigger with relocating the factory calipers.

3. Allowing Lexan, Fiber glass, and Carbon fiber body parts.

4. Allowing race slicks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

5. Lower overall weight to ~2700 w/driver

6. This may contradict CC4321 but I was thinking of following BSR's suit with a specific tire we would all be running. I think many potential CSR drivers may be turned away by the high operating costs (remember that conversation?). With R6's or slicks in the mix it's difficult for anyone on a budget to be competitive. I can understand wanting to be competitive in the Red race group with the POC but if we get enough cars in CSR, then more affordable tires can be the difference between a few cars and many cars.

7. Maybe have a CSX class? Safety mods, street tires (140+ Treadwear), basic suspension, stock intake/exhaust?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

1. How about allowing Plenums- many interested in the CSR have asked me about these.

2. Should we allow brake upgrades? Like rotors with aluminum hats, possibly bigger with relocating the factory calipers.

3. Allowing Lexan, Fiber glass, and Carbon fiber body parts.

4. Allowing race slicks.
CCC4321,

Thank you for the comments. We will consider each of these suggestions. To further the conversation, please respond the itemized questions:

1) Plenums - What is the purpose of allowing plenums? While we understand that a few potential competitors have them, most stock donor cars will not. It seems that someone with an AM plenum could re-install the stock parts, sell the AM plenum and come out ahead financially. This is in contrast to allowing the plenums and expecting others to purchase.

2) Brakes - Again, what is the purpose of the brake "upgrade"? Is there an issue with the stock brakes? We know that the Interseries cars have switched to StopTech brakes, but most of the inside information indicates that only the less experienced drivers are having issues with brake temp, etc. As we understand it, most (all) of the pros who have driven the car have not had issue with the stock brakes and the most of the overheating is PSM related. This change is certainly something we can consider if we find there is an issue (maybe we will know more after AAA this weekend in the 100F heat).

3) Panels - The purpose is obvious here - reduce weight. We will be curious as to the thoughts of others. CSR#1 currently weighs ~ 2935# with a 220 driver (210# + 10# of helmet, suit, etc). We set the initial target weight at 2850#, which seems attainable if bumper internals are removed, lighter weight exhaust is installed, and AM wheels are used.

4) Tires - Slicks? This is an interesting contrast to many others who think we should go to a slower, lower cost alternative. What is the logic here?

Thank you again for your comments and we look forward to your response.

Cheers,
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

5. Lower overall weight to ~2700 w/driver

6. This may contradict CC4321 but I was thinking of following BSR's suit with a specific tire we would all be running. I think many potential CSR drivers may be turned away by the high operating costs (remember that conversation?). With R6's or slicks in the mix it's difficult for anyone on a budget to be competitive. I can understand wanting to be competitive in the Red race group with the POC but if we get enough cars in CSR, then more affordable tires can be the difference between a few cars and many cars.

7. Maybe have a CSX class? Safety mods, street tires (140+ Treadwear), basic suspension, stock intake/exhaust?
Cayman_ Sense,

Thank you for your comments. We will consider each of these suggestions. Please see below for our initial comments and/or requests for clarification.

5) Weight - Lowering weight to 2700# w/ driver. This would be excellent if it can be achieved in a cost effective manner. What suggestions and/or data do you have that indicates that this is practical? As noted above CSR#1 is ~2715# without driver. Assuming an average 185# driver (I am, of course, above average), the spec car as it sits would be ~2900 pounds - requiring a further 200# reduction. It appears that ~ 50# is reasonably attainable without CF/FRP panels, etc. What are your suggestions for the next ~ 150# and what is the cost estimate for achieving this?

6) Tires - Yes, this is certainly an issue, and something that we need to resolve in the coming year. Here is some contrasting data that we are trying to reconcile: the newer/potential racers like you want a less expensive tire such as the NT-01 or 888, while the experienced racers do not want to run a car with the outright speed potential of the CSR on anything other than a R6 or 710 (some want slicks). Only part of the problem is the desire to be competitive in existing race groups (usually Orange in the POC). Sort of a Catch-22. Once we get enough cars on grid we can run a slower tire and reduce cost, etc, but running the first cars on slow tires will not attract the interest needed to attract seasoned racers to the class as well. More comments welcome.

7) CSX Class - Interesting idea, and one we toyed with a year or so ago. One of the reasons we did not push this ahead was there was/is resistance to adding even more classes to the POC. Essential a CSX would be very similar to an LS or LI car within the POC and these classes already exist. The question is would the existence of the CSX class help or hurt the development of the CSR class? More comments welcome. Our initial reaction is to test this with the BoD.

Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

5) Weight - Lowering weight to 2700# w/ driver. This would be excellent if it can be achieved in a cost effective manner. What suggestions and/or data do you have that indicates that this is practical? As noted above CSR#1 is ~2715# without driver. Assuming an average 185# driver (I am, of course, above average), the spec car as it sits would be ~2900 pounds - requiring a further 200# reduction. It appears that ~ 50# is reasonably attainable without CF/FRP panels, etc. What are your suggestions for the next ~ 150# and what is the cost estimate for achieving this?
We should keep this one open for conversation. I haven't started any dramatic weight reductions so it's hard to tell without seeing what can be done. I'd like to look at the CSR #1 build this weekend and maybe see what else can done, if anything.

6) Tires - Yes, this is certainly an issue, and something that we need to resolve in the coming year. Here is some contrasting data that we are trying to reconcile: the newer/potential racers like you want a less expensive tire such as the NT-01 or 888, while the experienced racers do not want to run a car with the outright speed potential of the CSR on anything other than a R6 or 710 (some want slicks). Only part of the problem is the desire to be competitive in existing race groups (usually Orange in the POC). Sort of a Catch-22. Once we get enough cars on grid we can run a slower tire and reduce cost, etc, but running the first cars on slow tires will not attract the interest needed to attract seasoned racers to the class as well. More comments welcome.
It makes sense to move towards tighter rules around tires when there are more cars. It's one of those areas that we "play" with, unlike suspension/aero/etc. Personally, I would like to see a way to have an "affordability" factor thrown in somehow. Maybe the leads us to the next point.

7) CSX Class - Interesting idea, and one we toyed with a year or so ago. One of the reasons we did not push this ahead was there was/is resistance to adding even more classes to the POC. Essential a CSX would be very similar to an LS or LI car within the POC and these classes already exist. The question is would the existence of the CSX class help or hurt the development of the CSR class? More comments welcome. Our initial reaction is to test this with the BoD.
I like the idea of CSR without aero and r-comps as being defined as CSX. It's a great way to... gently... motivate people down the slippery slope. Also, I am fairly new to world of AX/TT and can't imagine being very competitive in the CSR class for a good amount of time. It would be more inviting to others who are entering this world to feel like there's a fair chance at being competitive beyond the stock class without jumping into the deep end right away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

in regards to aero, i know the rear spoiler is open as long as it stays within a size limit (correct me if i'm wrong)... can it be that way for the front as well? seems that there are many aesthetic options for caymans and I would prefer the look of a different front bumper as long as it's not exceeding like a height (measured from ground up), and/or splitter length measured from front of bumper...etc... just a thought.

i think a south OC dinner should be in the works so we can all get together to discuss... paid for by the godfather himself of course... j/k!

J
 

·
PCA / POC Member #125
Joined
·
504 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

Plenums - It's a common bolt on part many of the street tuners that are making there way to the track have. I have been asked by several why they are not allowed per the POC / CSR rules. It seems those that have a plenum, don't like the idea of removing it and reducing their cars performance. So I figured I would mention it.

Brakes - We are increasing the performance level on the rest of the Cayman so why not the brakes too. As these car get developed more and more and the speed increases, I can't help to think that the brakes may not be able to stop the car consistently without issues. I believe the CSRs once fully developed and sorted will be quicker than the Interseries cars.
A secondary advantage is weight savings.

Body Panels - I was thinking of this as a reliability modification. The less the car weights the easier it is on all the components. Tires, Suspension, Brakes.......

Tires - Here are my thoughts on tires. Some slick racing tires are actually are cheaper than Hoosier R6s and if these tires work better they may last longer being a better value.
I plan to Practice and Qualify on NT-01s the race on Hoosiers to keep the tire cost down.

Weight - Well at this point I can tell you that it's going to be hard to get a car to 2700 w/driver with stock body panels. Removing the bumper supports is not going to do it, and it seems a little risky. FYI the RSR (former ALMS) and Cup cars I know of are running them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

Tires - Here are my thoughts on tires. Some slick racing tires are actually are cheaper than Hoosier R6s and if these tires work better they may last longer being a better value.
I plan to Practice and Qualify on NT-01s the race on Hoosiers to keep the tire cost down.
I thought the rules in 2010 stated you need to use the same set of tires during a race weekend... or I did misinterpret? I like that idea though if it's allowed.

Weight - Well at this point I can tell you that it's going to be hard to get a car to 2700 w/driver with stock body panels. Removing the bumper supports is not going to do it, and it seems a little risky. FYI the RSR (former ALMS) and Cup cars I know of are running them.
What weight did you reach? I haven't really started this process but figured a 500-600 lbs reduction would be tough, but possible. More theory than anything at this point I guess.
 

·
PCA / POC Member #125
Joined
·
504 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

The rules for the tires are so you don't use a brand new set each day, using an older set for practice is ok and I don't see why it would be a problem for Qualifying, its not giving an advantage.

I haven't weighted my car yet, but I can tell you from the other Caymans that I have seen race prepped, there's not much more to take out that Krokodil has not already done.
 

·
Sexual Philanthropist
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

I definitely like the idea of a closer to stock approach. I've been down the road with aero, engine mods, slicks, etc and don't feel like going back with a street based car. I'd be more inclined to buy a radical, Lotus 211, etc as it's cheaper in the long run and you don't have the time suck of R&D. Spec coilovers, spec NT01, and safety reliability mods is the most appealing to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

The rules for the tires are so you don't use a brand new set each day, using an older set for practice is ok and I don't see why it would be a problem for Qualifying, its not giving an advantage.
I think using newer tires for the race would the be advantage. I like the idea either way.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

in regards to aero, i know the rear spoiler is open as long as it stays within a size limit (correct me if i'm wrong)... can it be that way for the front as well? seems that there are many aesthetic options for caymans and I would prefer the look of a different front bumper as long as it's not exceeding like a height (measured from ground up), and/or splitter length measured from front of bumper...etc... just a thought.

i think a south OC dinner should be in the works so we can all get together to discuss... paid for by the godfather himself of course... j/k!

J
Jhuang25,

Thank you for your thoughts and comments. For now we think we need to keep all of the body panels stock (including the front bumper) to help control costs. Our thinking is that, in the distant future, we may move to AM panels to reduce weight, but not to alter the aesthetic.

We ask all to remember that this is a CaymanSpec class and the cars should look like Caymans, not 997s or GT3s. Also, when the car becomes a race car the aesthetic is not that important to most racers (street/track is different for sure) and chasing aero with a AM bumper seems to be an added expense. Other opinions are of course welcome.

As you state the wing is open within dimensional constraints, as is the front splitter (may need a slight rework on this one following completion of the prototype). You could, of course, have two bumpers - one for street and one for track - and swap as desired (does not take long).

Cheers,
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

I like the idea of CSR without aero and r-comps as being defined as CSX. It's a great way to... gently... motivate people down the slippery slope. Also, I am fairly new to world of AX/TT and can't imagine being very competitive in the CSR class for a good amount of time. It would be more inviting to others who are entering this world to feel like there's a fair chance at being competitive beyond the stock class without jumping into the deep end right away.
Cayman_Sense,

Thank you for your thoughts and comments.

We are likely to propose a street/track oriented transitional class (CSX) to the POC (and others) as a change for 2011. While any partially modified Cayman (with CSR limits) is currently eligible for CSR, it is not likely to be competitive.

While nothing is yet final, the CSX class philosophy would be similar to that of BSX and encourage modifications that will ultimately allow the competitor to move to CSR without needing to reverse any modifications. Additional consideration is given to including the most likely and necessary track oriented changes. It is expected that CSX will be more of a PDS/TT class than a race class and that folks will progress to CSR to go racing, but this is not mandatory.

Current thinking is the CSX would allow all of the same suspension and reliability modifications (engine, PS system) as CSR, but not allow any aero modifications or significant weight reduction. Our thinking is that CSX cars must maintain complete interiors and comply with a minimum weight that is equal to a stock weight car and standard driver (~ 3300#).

Tire type for CSX is still an open question. We are leaning toward a spec tire (NT-01) rather than a treadwear rating as this is not consistent among manufacturers. The NT-01 can be driven to the track, wears well, and is a great transitional tire. Thoughts?

As always, safety requirements are governed by the sanctioning body (e.g., POC) and may vary by competition type (TT vs. racing).

Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

This sounds great. Is there concern of overlap between the LI class in POC and the NS class in PCA?

I would recommend we allow "factory" aero for the CSX class. Some people get the cars with said options without thinking about competitive driving events. While my aero is not factory... I'll bow out from that argument since I might be the only one!


...anyone want a full Techart body kit? :hilarious:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

This sounds great. Is there concern of overlap between the LI class in POC and the NS class in PCA?

I would recommend we allow "factory" aero for the CSX class. Some people get the cars with said options without thinking about competitive driving events. While my aero is not factory... I'll bow out from that argument since I might be the only one!


...anyone want a full Techart body kit? :hilarious:
Yes, there is some concern on the overlap with LI. The problem is that most/many of the folks coming through either are not or do not want to run the LI legal PSS9s and already have V3s, etc. So ...

---

Aero - This is a tough one. While the initial reaction is that this is reasonable, we need to play the odds a bit.

If you believe that the factory aerokit provides some benefit, then those that do not have it will be tempted to buy it to keep up. And, if you accept that many fewer cars have the kit than do not, then allowing the kit could actually create an unnecessary expense, for more people, that is not really part of the progression to CSR (similar to the plenum).

We want to make it easy for people to enter and progress, but we can not just allow anything that someone might already have on their car. Take the three most likely new POC racers - you, Jhuang, and JCay - each of your cars have different aero treatment; which do we choose?

Thoughts from JCay, Jhuang, you?

Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

I can tell that it's a very complicated compromise between making racing affordable, but at the same time being competitive out there. I think CSX for PDS and Time Trials is a great idea. It's intimidating for someone like myself with stock power, street tires, to see a car like D's... all stripped out on Hoosiers, huge wing...our cars are so different, and about 25k in mods apart. A CSX class would at least be a stepping stone...both for car and driver.

In regards to mods, it's impossible for everyone to agree to what should be allowed or not. I don't know how the hell BSR ever pulled it off. For example, anyone with a plenum is going to want plenums in the class. You can always argue it both ways...I have KW V3's, and I will argue for those... but in the end, a decision has to be made by somebody. Has anyone made a complete list of all possible mods for CSR? If the goal is affordability which seems to be a large part of most comments here, then make a complete list... and let's talk about what needs to be cut and how much money that actually saves.

We should discuss how much it "should" cost to build a spec car... and try to see which mods match and work best to meet both budget and performance. I think things might look clearer in the end when we start putting a number next to those things. A plenum is $1000?ish? To most P Car owners, it's not much money, but when you are taking on an extra $1000, then another $500 for something else on a build that has a minimum cost of 25K, maybe it would start to make more sense for everyone. Then you aren't debating over just a $1000 plenum, but whether it makes sense to make the CSR build 30k instead of 25k...just my 2 cents. I'm really open to anything, and since my car isn't heavily modded yet, I'm in position to just tag along for awhile.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
128 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 · (Edited)
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

jhuang,

Thank you again for your comments. Very constructive.

BTW, BSR did not pull it off as the bickering is still intense several years after formation. Some have left as a result. Something we are trying to avoid.

Your question on how much a spec car should cost is a good one. Considering that there are very few race-prepped Caymans we really do not have a good answer about what is required, probably required, and nice to have. Labor will go down as more are built (I took one for the team).

As far as a list of parts - every allowable modification is called out in the rules. You will make a great contribution to the group if you will go through the spec and list all potential parts, their cost, and the likely installation labor (we can help with this part). Non-parts related labor (cage, parts removal, chassis prep, etc) wil also need to be consdiered and probably a greater expense than the parts.

This will be a lot of work for sure, but very valuable, so maybe you can get CCC4321, Cayman_Sense or JCay to help.

Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

Aero
I was suggesting we allow factory options in CSX. My aero is going to come off/change for CaymanSpec either way so I'm not very attached my aero (AM) vs. someone else's. My point was that people don't like reversing mods and for someone entering this realm with factory options they bought years ago it can deter them to stick with LS/LI (POC) and NSS/NS (PCA). No talk of AM kits, plenums, etc.

Other Factory Options
Similarly how do we handle PCCB, PASM vs non-PASM, factory 19" wheels, etc.?

Build Costs
Maybe we should create a separate thread for build costs...using MSRP's and labor hours. I'm up for researching what is available out there. It may even entice vendors to provide Group Buys or CaymanSpec rates. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
Re: CaymanSpec - 2011 Rules Revision Process - Please Comment by June 18th, 2010

I definitely don't mind getting a list together and trying to get a good idea what a CSR build would come out to. I think it allows us to look really constructively at the race class in regards to cost. Maybe it comes out really expensive and running costs like tires should be looked at more closely... or even better, maybe it's not as bad as we think and things like plenums can reasonably be argued. It's hard to argue costs when we really don't know how much money an individual would have to put into the car to be competitive in CSR. Let me try to put something together, and since I haven't done manyy mods, I will PM some guys and see if I can get some help.

PS: I agree, it's pointless to bicker about this stuff. If we all have a goal to make a good race class that's both reasonably affordable, and competitive, we should be able to make most individuals happy.
 
1 - 20 of 64 Posts
Top