Should Greater than 250 HP be the top Index?

[dmyer]

Dang... must be about time to go... people are testy from being couped up all winter

IMO... what do I know... I'm a pudknocker compared to the guys running the heavy metal! Hope to be good enough to drive a car like a Cobra on course that fast someday... till then I sure do enjoy watching them... maybe we should give them a bling index bonus to attract more!

[Wade Chamberlain]

I voted to keep the old index because I hate Cobra people.

I propose a 1.05 multiplier for sideburns that extend below the ears, with an additional .01 for every additional cm below the that.

[Walka]

.01 is half a second or less on CDC lots.

Based on last years data, every event except the June 11th a car over 350hp was not within half a second and would have lost regardless. So this change IMO would not make a difference. Therefore, why change and if there is a change make it so that it would make a difference.

[Ben L]

I voted to keep the old index because I hate Cobra people.

I propose a 1.05 multiplier for sideburns that extend below the ears, with an additional .01 for every additional cm below the that.

But then someone would have to measure them. Volunteers?

[LaurenceC]

I suggest we get rid of this index all together. Raw time, period!

[CaitieD]

I was on the fence about this... and then I looked up on nasioc and the suxass makes 354 wheel hp... even awd, that car isn't making any use of any more hp on cdc courses...

the question isn't "should a 251hp car be the same as a 351hp car?". The questions is "does having more than 350hp really make a difference?...." and the answer is no.

I disagree. The question truly is "should a 251hp car be the same as a 351hp car?". If the top 350+hp index was done away with then the new top index would be 250+hp. The 251hp car and the 351hp car would have the same index.

[BugBomb]

Since we are also using the suxass as an example, I will point out that I never use the high boost map in the Sux on CDC courses. Not even at Winchester.

[madrian]

Do we have anybody who drives a car in the higher horsepower brackets that also drives a car in one of the lower horsepower brackets? Do they consistently run about the same index times? That's about the only way I know of to verify the accuracy of the index system. There is always the driver skill that has to be factored in the equation when you're considering changing the index.

I think I know two guys who could test this out this year... I'm just excited to get my foot back on the gas pedal again!

[gimp]

I voted to keep the old index because I hate Cobra people.

I propose a 1.05 multiplier for sideburns that extend below the ears, with an additional .01 for every additional cm below the that.

Haters gunna hate.

[Ben L]

I suggest we get rid of this index all together. Raw time, period!

"Yeaaah Boyeee" -- Flava Flav

[03threefiftyz]

I'm late to the party. I'm for dropping the higher hp bracket (surprise I know ). I think the cobra guys do pretty damn well all things considered. I have bunches of electrical magical thingys that keep me going straight and my tires non-flat spotted....and they still beat me most of the time . There are 10-15 real BSP evo/sti's in the whole country. The chances of them showing up is nil. They don't show up to WDCR in BSP or SM, which is one of the largest solo regions in the country. You would have to journey up to Philly to see a full prep evo or down to the blue ridge region to see a fast BSP STI.

The cobra guys (and others) could just as easily petition for a 1.01 for ABS, etc.

Not entirely on topic, but I do think the penalty for R-comps is a bit more harsh than even that on hp. Just my .02.

[Sky Render]

Yes, it's easy to make 350+ WHP in an EVO or some other modern SCCA-popular vehicle, but those sorts of folks/cars are not regulars at CDC. Normally people build cars like that to compete in a specific SCCA class. We don't see them much and we don't need to consider them in the index at this time. The majority of our high-HP cars are either compensating for severely high curb weights or they are Cobras. In either case, we don't see these vehicles with massive wings and other modifications to help put that power to the ground.

I agree. On most courses, I can't really go full-throttle in my Mustang. My point is that a V6 Mustang with 100 fewer horsepower would probably be just as fast (if not faster due to slightly better weight balance).

[AJ_RDR_Civic]

I guess my point there was do we have anybody who drives a car in the higher horsepower brackets that also drives a car in one of the lower horsepower brackets? Do they consistently run about the same index times? That's about the only way I know of to verify the accuracy of the index system. There is always the driver skill that has to be factored in the equation when you're considering changing the index.

Fred has driven a Miata that he owned and his Cobra numerous time, I think both in the same event a couple times. I believe with those index's, he was probably positioning pretty close to the same with each car. Though I don't know the hp for his Cobra. Correct me if I'm wrong Fred.

Speaking of past events, it would really help figuring out Index times if everyone had access to an archive of past event results. If that isn't already posted somewhere... I just don't see it on the main page.


Maybe insted of having a HP Index, we figure out a better tire/weight Indexand just do that since clearly HP doesn't matter. We've had top Index positions taken by everything inbetween ~90whp and ~400whp(?)...

[madrian]

AJ, I think you make a very good point about looking at past results/historical data. We can speculate all we like, but looking objectively at the stats would be the best indicator.

I'm not sure that removing HP all together makes for a solid case - even if power has diminishing returns. It's definitely one of the factors in what makes a car quick, along with driver skill (put me in a cobra and I can show you how slow a bad driver can be in a fast car), tires, weight, suspension, etc.

Couple of thoughts:

• 1) I've seen national champ drivers (certainly not me) in civics beat GT3's. No matter how good your index is, you'll always have folks who make an index seem wonky.

• 2) The beauty of the CDC's system is the simplicity. Can't be beat. The moment you start adding more rules or requirements, you kill it. I'm not saying we'll become the SCCA, but it's a slippery slope.

• 3)Our courses aren't "power car" courses (*tear from my latest automotive purchases*); however, power over 250 would definitely come into play in the STeeVO world where you have an opportunity to put some of it down. It's the law of diminishing returns, but will still have some effect.

• 4) I think there's value in taking a look at the stats and indexes to see if there's adjustments to be made, but I think the data will be hard to find given all of the variables. If we see something obvious, I think it's definitely worth talking about.

[eage8]

AJ:
2010 results:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key ... l=en&gid=2
2011 results:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreads ... rue&gid=19

I had them bookmarked.

But you have to be careful when comparing freds mostly stock miata and cobra with custom suspesnion geometry with heim joints/spherical bearings eveywhere and 2 foot wide tires. The cobra should still be much faster after index because it's much better in ways the index doesn't penalize.

[v10climber]

AJ:
2010 results:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key ... l=en&gid=2
2011 results:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreads ... rue&gid=19

I had them bookmarked.

But you have to be careful when comparing freds mostly stock miata and cobra with custom suspesnion geometry with heim joints/spherical bearings eveywhere and 2 foot wide tires. The cobra should still be much faster after index because it's much better in ways the index doesn't penalize.

The more and more I look and think about this it seems like it'll be nearly impossible to collect enough data to make a strong case either for removing the top hp index or for keeping it. Maybe the best way really is to just have a vote and go with that

[D_Eclipse9916]

Maybe insted of having a HP Index, we figure out a better tire/weight Index and just do that since clearly HP doesn't matter. We've had top Index positions taken by everything inbetween ~90whp and ~400whp(?)...

That would murder the cobras, but I know where you are going with it and its not bad way. lol. My 245 width 3176lb beast would have wayyyyyyyyyyy tooo much index against a 315/2400lb cobra. I could probably walk the course and win. Doesnt take into account a million things. I honestly dont think the index is too bad the way it is. Fred/Aj/Wade are typically on top, and from seeing them drive, they typically deserve it. Well maybe not Fred, he is a jerk .

[MicaCeli]

This thread brings out the giggle monster.



We have these threads every year. Everyone hates how the indexes stack up and so on. I know there is a bunch of hate for SCCA on here...but do you guys want to revisit using the SCCA index? That will take all the work out of it for you.

[Imprezive_04]

Since people wanted numbers:

In 2010 Wade finished 4th in index points and I was 3rd. It was a 2 point margin. Remove the 1.04 index and wade would have been 3rd in points that year based on the Jul 31 results alone.

In 2011 it would have made no difference, too many drops and AJ and myself captured too many points. However, Wade would have 5 more championship points.

Last number in each column is Wade's index time. Grey column is index time with 1.03 as top HP index

[ButtDyno]

Maybe insted of having a HP Index, we figure out a better tire/weight Indexand just do that since clearly HP doesn't matter. We've had top Index positions taken by everything inbetween ~90whp and ~400whp(?)...

0-235: .99
245-265: 1.00
275-285: 1.01
295+: 1.02

[JoeTR6]

This thread brings out the giggle monster.
I know there is a bunch of hate for SCCA on here...but do you guys want to revisit using the SCCA index? That will take all the work out of it for you.

Don't mistake not wanting to use the SCCA system with general dislike of the SCCA. But no, I hope that horse is dead. One of the things we wanted to avoid was worrying about prepping a car for a specific class. Want that shiny new intake? Oh, I'm sorry, welcome to Street Prepared. Or one of the many "street" classes. Not that I think many would prep a car just for CDC, but there is more incentive to prep right up to the limit of a class. We just wanted a system that was easier to deal with and enforce while allowing flexibility for modifications.

Not that SCCA isn't a good system. I also like the NASA system. We just wanted something simpler. Personally, I don't like the way SCCA uses H-stock as a dumping ground for older and less performance-oriented cars. That, and a "prepared" TR6 would get absolutely slaughtered in F-Prepared by fully preped M3s, etc.

[AJ_RDR_Civic]

We have these threads every year. Everyone hates how the indexes stack up and so on. I know there is a bunch of hate for SCCA on here...but do you guys want to revisit using the SCCA index? That will take all the work out of it for you.

That'd be the easiest but for w/e reason not so popular. I would imagine CDC is laid back enough that if they adopted the SCCA numbers following the classes, people running against each other in w/e class could be upfront enough to say if they have an "illegal" mod. Which in most cases, people at the CDC event would shug and let it go right? Unless showing up with the obvious extreme mods which clearly make a significant difference in times..

or,

Somehow come up with some classing and index numbers using the SCCA only as a simple guide.

Doing something like this will only promote more friendly competition. As of now, it's only a hand full of people really competing for SB and Index.. Where's that leave everyone else? I know it's all for fun but throwing in some friendly competition goes a long way. And if people are concerned about figuring out where their car falls into, there are plenty of knowledgable people who run CDC who also know a good bit about the SCCA classes and rules. It's not that bad.

And SCCA now has "Road Tire"-Stock classes. So no more complaints about unfair r-comps on stock cars lol

0-235: .99
245-265: 1.00
275-285: 1.01
295+: 1.02

Works for me

]
Don't mistake not wanting to use the SCCA system with general dislike of the SCCA. But no, I hope that horse is dead. One of the things we wanted to avoid was worrying about prepping a car for a specific class. Want that shiny new intake? Oh, I'm sorry, welcome to Street Prepared. Or one of the many "street" classes. Not that I think many would prep a car just for CDC, but there is more incentive to prep right up to the limit of a class. We just wanted a system that was easier to deal with and enforce while allowing flexibility for modifications.

Not that SCCA isn't a good system. I also like the NASA system. We just wanted something simpler. Personally, I don't like the way SCCA uses H-stock as a dumping ground for older and less performance-oriented cars. That, and a "prepared" TR6 would get absolutely slaughtered in F-Prepared by fully preped M3s, etc.

What's the worry if people at CDC are laid back enough to not follow the rules to a T? Want that shiny new intake? No problem! Just keep running in the same class! This whole thread is about horsepower, so the new intake really doesn't matter on the CDC lots anyways.. And with only 2 classes, SB and Index, it's flexible and not so flexible.

The SCCA rules/classes aren't perfect and never will be. H-Stock is a dump for slow(er) cars because there are 9(?) stock classes already. Adding more just creates problems and thins out the numbers for each class, reducing competition. You just can't have a class for every car out there... As with just about every other motorsports racing, this means you have to pick and choose classes for w/e suits your needs (or wallet). It's not fair but it is what it is.



Don't get me wrong, leaving things the way they are is just fine with me. But if there's an itch for more competition, something kinda needs to change.

[Rock Star]

IMO if you itch for more competition, you should be running with a different group. As AJ stated in another thread, there are many other opportunities within the region that offer events to supplement the CDC schedule. If you want enough complexity in the classing system to give you the false sense of even competition, there are groups out there.

But, none of these classes pit a cobra against a miata against a smart car. That is what I love about this group. Someone who drives a "H stock" car has no illusion that they could ever beat a XP car straight up, but with our system you could out index them depending on driver skill. I think that is huge, it promotes self improvement and a greater feeling of being part of the whole club not just a subset of it.

Also great, the simplicity of the index system. It is easy to grasp, and sets the entry bar low for new participants. They don't have to figure anything out, just enter the numbers and be done with it. Out of the 203 people who competed last year with CDC, more than half of them ran in only 2 events or less. These people aren't hardcore racers, they want to get out and try it and have fun. Maybe they'll be back, maybe they'll bring friends. To me that is what CDC is about, not competition.

I enjoy the system as is, that is why I run here. I do not have any perspective on the topic at hand so I will not vote. To tell the truth the only thing I would change about the system is to include the drivers weight when deciding the vehicle weight for the index system. If we are truly trying to isolate driving skill, why should the heavier people of the group be penalized due to growing a couple extra inches taller or downing a ham sandwich or two? I still don't think it is really worth changing anything over, but it is odd that it isn't included.

[hepcatz]

As the resident CDC vegan, I'm all for penalizing those that down a ham sandwich or two...

[AJ_RDR_Civic]

But, none of these classes pit a cobra against a miata against a smart car. That is what I love about this group. Someone who drives a "H stock" car has no illusion that they could ever beat a XP car straight up, but with our system you could out index them depending on driver skill. I think that is huge, it promotes self improvement and a greater feeling of being part of the whole club not just a subset of it.

H-Stock cars can, and very often do, beat XP cars in PAX. Mainly because there are so few true XP cars running. I don't see how an H-Stock car could beat a Cobra using the CDC index though.

On the other end of that example, someone running a near stock car and looking at the CDC index may be turned off as they may never get a chance to run for points. I agree there are many other clubs to choose from if someone wants to compete, but like you said, some people just really like the CDC atmosphere. The top like 15 or so cars running for index points last were all modified, some heavily. So where's that leave the guys running stock cars who may want a shot at points? The CDC index doesn't favor them IMO. Same deal with Small Bore. It's supposed to be a class for cheap cars, but to compete you need to spend a lot of money. Goes against the original idea of the class.

As the resident CDC vegan, I'm all for penalizing those that down a ham sandwich or two...

We're all screwed