Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Parking lots and traffic cones.
User avatar
ericw
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 7:10 pm
Car: 1990 Mazda Miata
CDC Member#: 681
Location: Hagerstown, Maryland

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by ericw »

I favor the original idea best. I think it has the greatest potential to sustain two large, mutually-exclusive series if the FRS people will play in what is currently called smallbore. If they DID play in new-smallbore I would probably stay there because it intrigues me.

I am skeptical they can't be competitive. Considering Josh finished 4th in the index, the addition of 5(per facebook?) events at Waldorf... Josh what does your car weigh?... I think they would have a shot. Josh was usually like .5s raw behind me at the last few Frederick events.

However, I think the current smallbore ruleset isn't favorable to the frs people because it is unlimited prep and (assuming) they don't want to strip their cars and so on because not race car. Perhaps some basic rules would keep it from getting out of hand - model specific lb/hp limit? Maybe minimum weight? If I added 150 lbs that's probably a few tenths, then you find a few tenths somewhere and you're winning.

Lots of people like the more recent idea but it doesn't really offer anything new to people already in smallbore and seems to result in a lot of small classes.
silver 681
User avatar
ericw
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 7:10 pm
Car: 1990 Mazda Miata
CDC Member#: 681
Location: Hagerstown, Maryland

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by ericw »

qtrracer wrote:Also agree on the nine-event pack. This solution seems to account for the possibility of cancelations/no shows for any reason, yet provide a discount for nine events plus the benefit of early cash-flow.

Just as a point of reference, I did drag racing back in the day (circ. 1970). Was very good at it; very competitive. Belonged to a club. Got an article in Car Craft. Turns out that at some point the competition narrows way down to say two - six. And most of those guys tend to be in the car game for a day-job. Besides the time commitment to stay on top and the cost of the next super-zoot part, it got way too serious for "fun" - more like a job. I stopped and haven't looked back. It took me nearly 30 years to get back into auto sports because of my drag racing experience.

Julie and I joined CDC because of the group camaraderie, and what appeared to be the focus on having fun and improving self. No classing rules made it very attractive as well as the emphasis on the honor system to determine indexes. There is no way our driving skill or our cars are going to get FTDs unless we're the only ones running and even then one of us would have to "beat" the other. We both have a great time no matter where we place in the standings.

My fear is a change that emphasizes competition, over the club's roots. Any way the club goes on these proposed rules, don't compromise what the club really means - at least to some of us. There are plenty of local and national events for those that need the competition. Moreover, in my experience that is where the real competition is anyway. CDC has competition but it's not what the club is about, is it?

As for the suggestion of a "muscle" car being 250+ Factory HP, my 86 Mustang and any Fox excepting the 93 Cobra never got close to 250 factory; 220 for 87+; 210 for the 86 down. I know these are mere suggestions but a little more research might be in order before selecting factory HP figures.
:roll:
silver 681
User avatar
BugBomb
Posts: 1199
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:28 am
Car: '02 Whorevette
CDC Member#: 33
Location: PA

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by BugBomb »

Here is my new proposal for the tire index, building on Eric's TW numbers:

1. 101-200TW (R1R, Rivals, RS3, ZII, etc.) (default at registration) - 1.00
2. 50-100TW (RA1, R888, A048) - 1.01
3. <50TW (A6, R6, V710, Z214) - 1.025
4. 201+TW (Lower performance tires, all-seasons) - 0.99

This actually makes a lot of sense when compared to our previous tire index. Essentially the new street tires have slotted themselves in a little closer to r-comps, and the old street tires (201+TW) are still 1.035 difference to R-comps. On a 45-second course, the differences between tires would break down like this:

1. 45.00 seconds / 0.00s difference
2. 44.55 seconds / 0.45s faster than category 1 tires
3. 43.90 seconds / 1.10s faster than category 1 tires
4. 45.45 seconds / 0.45s slower than category 1 tires

Thoughts?
Mike M
"There’s no way you can eat a hot pocket and do this." -Ed Chan
The views expressed herein are my own and are not intended to sound like a "dick."
User avatar
Areddi
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:34 pm
Car: 2013 Scion FR-S
CDC Member#: 650
Location: Jessup, MD

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Areddi »

ericw wrote:Lots of people like the more recent idea but it doesn't really offer anything new to people already in smallbore and seems to result in a lot of small classes.
I would say that you may be looking at this the wrong way. The concept here is to give people something additional to compare with. One of the fun things of the local clubs that have classes is that you have a really good measuring stick, and it is fun to build rivalries. These proposed classes are completely optional, and do not have an effect on the standings in the club as a whole. Fun class not for you? No problem, don't check a box when registering. The gain here is an easy way to parse the results from the event, and compare against the people similar, and with an interest in a similar competition.

The club could choose to support or not support this in terms of rewards. There were some earlier comments about "trophies for everybody" syndrome, and that is not the goal here. At a minimum the spreadsheet sorting makes life easier, if say the Twins guys want to run their own reward program and crown their own champion. If the club wants to recognize a few of the classes, and maybe give a cool prize at the end of the year, or even say on the mic at an event "And here is Josh Adams, our current [Name to be Determined 2.5L and under RWD] leader," it just makes it fun.

The classes I proposed were just an idea, but I feel were fairly comprehensive of general attendees. If you want to keep small-bore as one of those, it would be easy to do so. If the 250 HP suggest HP number isn't accurate enough, something else could be picked, or one could say that if one has a V8 they run in there no matter what. Just some ideas to kick around.
Check out my YouTube channel with Autocross videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/MrAreddi
jadams1217
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 4:28 pm
Car: Scion FR-S
CDC Member#: 688

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by jadams1217 »

ericw wrote:I am skeptical they can't be competitive. Considering Josh finished 4th in the index, the addition of 5(per facebook?) events at Waldorf... Josh what does your car weigh?... I think they would have a shot. Josh was usually like .5s raw behind me at the last few Frederick events.
My car in race ready form (spare removed, etc.) should be weighing in around 2680-2700lbs with a full tank of gas (+200 if you count me). Planning on dropping another 50lbs. out of the car this winter with lighter flywheel, driveshaft, and battery. I would say weight is definitely the FR-S/BRZ biggest weakness compared to the quick Miatas at CDC. I feel like they can still be very competitive, but they take a lot of skill to keep up especially on the really tight courses. I feel like if I can clean up my runs, especially at Frederick, I should be able to be right up at the top in raw times, but I usually just end up drifting a lot :D
User avatar
03threefiftyz
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 3:33 pm
Car: Nissan 350Z
CDC Member#: 533
Location: Frederick, MD

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by 03threefiftyz »

Not that it matter all that much, but the STX prep FRS's are starting to get down in the low 2500's already (no driver).
User avatar
Sky Render
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 4:41 pm
Car: 2011 Mustang 5.0
CDC Member#: 750
Location: NW of Baltimore

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Sky Render »

BugBomb wrote:Here is my new proposal for the tire index, building on Eric's TW numbers:

1. 101-200TW (R1R, Rivals, RS3, ZII, etc.) (default at registration) - 1.00
2. 50-100TW (RA1, R888, A048) - 1.01
3. <50TW (A6, R6, V710, Z214) - 1.025
4. 201+TW (Lower performance tires, all-seasons) - 0.99

This actually makes a lot of sense when compared to our previous tire index. Essentially the new street tires have slotted themselves in a little closer to r-comps, and the old street tires (201+TW) are still 1.035 difference to R-comps. On a 45-second course, the differences between tires would break down like this:

1. 45.00 seconds / 0.00s difference
2. 44.55 seconds / 0.45s faster than category 1 tires
3. 43.90 seconds / 1.10s faster than category 1 tires
4. 45.45 seconds / 0.45s slower than category 1 tires

Thoughts?
I like it.
Vince (#750)
Grey 2011 Ford Mustang 5.0

I'm slow.
User avatar
Nathan Atkins
Posts: 285
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:28 pm
Car: 2005 Mazda RX8 Red
CDC Member#: 10
Location: Bel Air, MD
Contact:

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Nathan Atkins »

BugBomb wrote: 1. 45.00 seconds / 0.00s difference
2. 44.55 seconds / 0.45s faster than category 1 tires
3. 43.90 seconds / 1.10s faster than category 1 tires
4. 45.45 seconds / 0.45s slower than category 1 tires

Thoughts?
I like it, but would like to add 400+ at an index of 0.985
User avatar
ericw
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 7:10 pm
Car: 1990 Mazda Miata
CDC Member#: 681
Location: Hagerstown, Maryland

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by ericw »

jadams1217 wrote:I would say weight is definitely the FR-S/BRZ biggest weakness compared to the quick Miatas at CDC
Yeah, mine weighs 2050 with the hardtop (which is like 45 lbs) so we are right at the edge of index limits for both weight and power :)
silver 681
User avatar
03threefiftyz
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 3:33 pm
Car: Nissan 350Z
CDC Member#: 533
Location: Frederick, MD

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by 03threefiftyz »

BugBomb wrote:Here is my new proposal for the tire index, building on Eric's TW numbers:

1. 101-200TW (R1R, Rivals, RS3, ZII, etc.) (default at registration) - 1.00
2. 50-100TW (RA1, R888, A048) - 1.01
3. <50TW (A6, R6, V710, Z214) - 1.025
4. 201+TW (Lower performance tires, all-seasons) - 0.99

This actually makes a lot of sense when compared to our previous tire index. Essentially the new street tires have slotted themselves in a little closer to r-comps, and the old street tires (201+TW) are still 1.035 difference to R-comps. On a 45-second course, the differences between tires would break down like this:

1. 45.00 seconds / 0.00s difference
2. 44.55 seconds / 0.45s faster than category 1 tires
3. 43.90 seconds / 1.10s faster than category 1 tires
4. 45.45 seconds / 0.45s slower than category 1 tires

Thoughts?
I think that tire multi will probably work well everywhere except Waldorf. It's pretty low grip. Just referencing from when we run AI events (which are usually in the 40-45s range), a ~1s advantage to street tires is going to be a problem if some folks show up. I do think it is probably the best tire breakdown posted so far.

This was from the first event last year at Waldorf from another club:
1 1 pss 148 Sam Strano 2012 Chevrolet Corvette 41.140 *0.859000 35.339 0.000 0.000
2 2 pstu 107 Mike Lane 2006 Mitsubushi Evo 43.110 *0.846000 36.471 1.132 1.132
3 1 str 51 Christopher Lin 2006 Mazda Mx5 Miata 43.875 *0.839 36.811 0.340 1.472
4 1 ss 48 Danny Kao 2012 Cheverolet Corvette 42.872 *0.859 36.827 0.016 1.488
5 3 pesp 197 Kevin Henry 2001 Pontiac Firebird 43.406 *0.849000 36.851 0.024 1.512
6 4 pfsp 55 Ian Baker Darren's replacement 44.126 *0.838000 36.977 0.126 1.638
7 5 pstu 7 John Willemin 2006 Mitsubishi Lancer 43.737 *0.846000 37.001 0.024 1.662
8 1 stc 50 Alejandro Aviles 1991 Honda Civic Si 44.920 *0.824 37.014 0.013 1.675
9 2 str 97 Brian Karwan 2004 Honda S2000 44.156 *0.839 37.046 0.032 1.707
10 3 str 151 James Dunham 2006 Mazda Mx-5 44.210 *0.839 37.092 0.046 1.753"
v10climber
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:21 am
Car: STI, JCW Mini, S2k, Miata
CDC Member#: 621
Location: Alexandria, VA

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by v10climber »

I've kept my nose out of this thread but I figured i should finally pop in and say a few things.

First, the season pass thing just isn't going to happen (unfortunately). There are many reasons why and it's too much to discuss on a forum. Ed has already outlined a few points to give you an idea of why the club isn't able to do season passes.

I like the new tire index that Mike M posted. The first one wasn't thought out enough.

I don't like this new proposal for everyone runs in the same class and we sort out smaller subgroups. All you're doing is introducing more classes. This is the whole reason CDC has an index is so that we don't have to separate everyone into classes. Especially when Alex talks about making rules for all those different subclasses. That's ridiculous. Who would agree on and create the rules? I know people think there are some SCCA rules that are stupid. lets take carbon fiber hoods as an example. We'll say in the CDC FRS/BRZ class that body panels made from alternate materials are legal because the SCCA is stupid and carbon fiber hoods are heavier than stock ones and I want my mad tyte JDM fenders with vents an stuff. So now another autocrosser comes by and goes "sweet... I can shave 170lbs off my FRS and be legal!". Replace hood with one strip of tape. Replace trunk with one strip of tape. Replace doors with one strip of tape. Replace fenders with one strip of tape. Win class. Bad example? How about lightweight bumper beams? We'll allow those because "everyone replaces those" and there is "practically no performance benefit I just do it so I can fit my intercooler". Fine then... I'm replacing my bumper beam with a toothpick. Now I can beat all of you because I just took 50lbs off the nose of my car. My point is that writing rules isn't a simple thing and people will always try to circumvent them. Keeping a simple power/weight/tire index helps to eliminate those issues with writing rules although I'll agree it's not a perfect solution.

Also, If the parsons are opposed to creating a "rift" in the club by splitting small bore and regular (which doesn't change anything from how it is today) then how you can support a proposal that creates more "rifts" in the club? Instead of us vs them (small bore vs regular) now you have us vs them vs them vs them (us vs FRS/BRZ vs miata vs AWD vs ....)

We talked about a bunch of this stuff when the whole FRS/BRZ separate class thread was brought up. I believe the decision made there was CDC isn't officially going to change anything but if the FRS/BRZ guys want to police their own class that's fine with CDC. Well has that happened? To my knowledge none of the FRS/BRZ guys are keeping track of results and awarding a "twins champion". Now you want to make more subclasses? I'm guessing CDC organizers will have to keep track of all that? That sounds like a lot of time spent keeping all that stuff straight.

I'm with Eric in that I like the original proposal more.

Alternately, what about doing something with weight/power ratios? How about three classes... (on second thought this is a bad idea... but I already typed it out so I'll leave it in)
1. Cars with weight/power ratios greater than 16lbs/hp
2. Cars with weight/power ratios between 16lbs/hp and 13lbs/hp
3. Cars with weight/power ratios under 13lbs/hp

There would still be tire indexes within each class.
Some cars for comparison...
Parson's miata (2000lbs/100hp = 20lbs/hp)
FRS/BRZ (2700lbs/180hp = 15lbs/hp)
NB miata (2400lbs/130hp = 18.46)
STI (3400lbs/300hp = 11.3lbs/hp)
Cobra (2500lbs/375hp = 6.67lbs/hp)
S2000 (2700lbs/200hp = 13.5lbs/hp)
--Nick D
User avatar
Areddi
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:34 pm
Car: 2013 Scion FR-S
CDC Member#: 650
Location: Jessup, MD

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Areddi »

v10climber wrote:We talked about a bunch of this stuff when the whole FRS/BRZ separate class thread was brought up. I believe the decision made there was CDC isn't officially going to change anything but if the FRS/BRZ guys want to police their own class that's fine with CDC. Well has that happened? To my knowledge none of the FRS/BRZ guys are keeping track of results and awarding a "twins champion". Now you want to make more subclasses? I'm guessing CDC organizers will have to keep track of all that? That sounds like a lot of time spent keeping all that stuff straight.
So let's be very clear here before anyone is perceived as trying to create more work, be whiney, or demanding. Ed proposed the idea of changing Small Bore, and a discussion started about how this might work differently. Mike showed that is is pretty simple to add something to the results sheet, made a suggestion, and a few ideas were suggested for fun classes. I think there is some exaggerating the scope of this. If there is not buy in or interest, or if it would create extra work, than I don't think anyone would want it. The question about having "rules" within a class was a question, and you are the first to voice an opinion on that part. I think your comments are solid and make sense, especially when it comes to creating a rule set. We certainly would not want anyone taking exploitation to the piece of tape level from your previous comment.

I personally completely disagree with the rift thing, I think competition breeds additional fun, but not being mandatory is critical to that so everyone can enjoy coming out and not feel forced. Low barrier to entry is the big strength of the club, unlike SCCA's alphabet soup, and should not change. I think it is also possible to grow and offer other options without sacrificing the terrific identity.
Check out my YouTube channel with Autocross videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/MrAreddi
User avatar
BugBomb
Posts: 1199
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:28 am
Car: '02 Whorevette
CDC Member#: 33
Location: PA

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by BugBomb »

v10climber wrote:I don't like this new proposal for everyone runs in the same class and we sort out smaller subgroups. All you're doing is introducing more classes. This is the whole reason CDC has an index is so that we don't have to separate everyone into classes...

Also, If the parsons are opposed to creating a "rift" in the club by splitting small bore and regular (which doesn't change anything from how it is today) then how you can support a proposal that creates more "rifts" in the club? Instead of us vs them (small bore vs regular) now you have us vs them vs them vs them (us vs FRS/BRZ vs miata vs AWD vs ....)
It seems like you are reading too much into the proposed solution. Yes, it would create more classes than we currently have, but those classes are 100% optional and intended to be super-easy for the organizers to manage. The index series is still the core of CDC, everyone is included and gets points, and that's as far as anyone needs to go in order to have fun with CDC. I can see a potential issue with the optional classes if we start giving awards. If we created a FRSBRZ class and someone started winning that class with a ridiculous, stripped-down FRS, then we might have to play mediator. That's why Ed and I are leaning more toward offering this only as a way for people to break down the results into smaller groups, if they so choose.


Some people are thinking, "But Mike, You are just making it so anyone can view the results in a way that makes it look like they won." It may seem that way, but if you can easily add data and interesting ways to sort that data without creating more work, then why wouldn't you? Some groups want to be able to view their results alone or have their own, separate series. We don't have the resources to manage a ton of different series, and as many have stated, they don't want the club divided up (understandable). This solution requires a little set up on our end at the beginning of each season as we tweak what optional classes are desired by the participants. After that, this will require no extra work for the organizers. In fact, it's less work during the season than running with the separate smallbore series. And for anyone who doesn't care about the optional classes, nothing changes for them. Some people might miss Smallbore, but we can make that an optional class if there is enough interest.

Keep in mind, the optional classes do not need to be all-encompassing. They only need to cater to a majority of people that actually care about them. Also, I still want to give people an option to choose an SCCA class when they register. It will not be required, but some of us want to see that data as well, and it requires so little effort for us to include it.
Mike M
"There’s no way you can eat a hot pocket and do this." -Ed Chan
The views expressed herein are my own and are not intended to sound like a "dick."
User avatar
echan
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:50 am
Car: 1973 Triumph TR6
CDC Member#: 4

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by echan »

I talked to Joe S about this idea of different fun classes. He thinks we can change the reservation form by adding additional check boxes (like the Small Bore check box) for the various other groups - nothing more complex and everything on the honor system with probably no awards.
User avatar
Rock Star
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:32 pm
Car: 93 Rx-7, 83 SPEC7, 70 GT6
CDC Member#: 515
Location: NoVa

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Rock Star »

I like the proposed solution of feigned sub-classes because it seems simple and effective. Information for those who are interested in sorting it out, but no real effect on the rest of the group. The most important thing to me is that the section must be clearly marked as *OPTIONAL* on the signup page so that noobs don't think they have to fill it out. As was said before, the barrier to entry on this club is very low and IMO one of the largest reasons for its success along with the members themselves.

To add, my hair-brained idea to further the 'fun' of these new joke classes is to come up with a magnet for the points leader in each class to wear proudly on their car at each event until they are unseated and have to pass it on to the new leader. Kind of like the special jerseys that they wear in the Tour De France or the signal lights beside the number plate at leMans. Actually, it doesn't really matter if the other classes do this, Nate and I will make a Rotary Cup one and I'll just keep it on my car for next year ;)

As per other changes, can we please include driver weight when calculating the car's race weight? I ask because fat :D
User avatar
vettegirl
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:52 am
Car: 1996 Miata, 2011 Corvette
CDC Member#: 963
Location: Boyds, MD
Contact:

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by vettegirl »

My only concern was that the original proposal did away with the overall index and created two separate classes - small bore and index and you couldn't do both. This meant that you really couldn't gauge your progress against the entire club, you had to either compete in one group or the other - thus my comment about creating a rift. I really love the overall index that we use (of course with tweaks for index changes that others who have WAY more experience than myself have suggested). Small bore is a lot of fun, but I'd be happy to sacrifice that vs. losing an overall index group.

We really haven't been in this club long enough for our opinion to hold much water anyway, we haven't earned that yet - too many people have been with this club for many, many years - 2013 was only our first full season. But Ed did ask for opinions, so Jay and I both chimed in, take them for the 2 cents they're worth (or 1 cent perhaps in our case). Regardless of what the outcome ends up being, we'll be there - because bottom line, we are racing because it's fun! Cheering on other drivers and getting caught up in the competition was fun too, but the competition part of it was at the very bottom of my list of why I'm doing this. Progressing, learning and having other drivers to gauge my progress against is what it's about for me. And CDC provides a great atmosphere to do all of that - learn, progress and have fun.

So whatever the organizers come up with - we'll be there with our ugly little vroom vroom car and a big ole smile.
User avatar
echan
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:50 am
Car: 1973 Triumph TR6
CDC Member#: 4

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by echan »

vettegirl wrote: We really haven't been in this club long enough for our opinion to hold much water anyway, we haven't earned that yet - too many people have been with this club for many, many years - 2013 was only our first full season. But Ed did ask for opinions, so Jay and I both chimed in, take them for the 2 cents they're worth (or 1 cent perhaps in our case).
Not only do we value your opinion but we also try to anticipate what future participants may like/dislike. There's no tenure for having productive thoughts.

I like to think that a large un-tapped segment of the population that would participate at CDC if we did "X." This population is in addition to another segment that tried autocross with CDC or other clubs, but there was some missing factor "Y" that we don't provide, and if we had, we would enhance the experience, resulting in repeating participation.

I admit that I have no idea what "X" or "Y" is, but I also know that if all of us bounce ideas to improve the club, we might find "X" or "Y" or even "Z" which helps improve the CDC experience, which increases participation for future individuals and/or increase repeat participants for those that try CDC.
User avatar
Nathan Atkins
Posts: 285
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:28 pm
Car: 2005 Mazda RX8 Red
CDC Member#: 10
Location: Bel Air, MD
Contact:

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Nathan Atkins »

Bottom line Ed, I like the competitiveness with AI and SCCA, but I enjoy CDC event more than either for the atmosphere, all the talk of adding classes and such is all well and good but CDC has an X factor that can't be planned, it just is. Although sausages and free cokes help :-)
madrian
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:26 am
Car: e90 M3,NB Miata,'31 Ford
CDC Member#: 547
Location: Spring, TX

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by madrian »

So, I'm chiming in super late and can understand the all of the different points being made. Nick, I can completely see the slippery slope argument that you're making, and if it turned into that, we would have to make a change at the end of the season. That being said, the IT guy within me wants to filter data. If there's a cool way to give people more insight into how they're doing, or to compare, and we can do it easily, then i'm all for it.

As many have said, CDC for me is about the people, the sausage, the bar afterwards, and then about the driving. :D
--Mike Adrian
User avatar
glennkrueger
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:42 pm
Car: 2002 S2000
CDC Member#: 623
Location: Rosedale, MD

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by glennkrueger »

I often recommend first-timers attend a CDC event over an SCCA event solely because I don't have to start explaining classes. When people start asking me about some of the rules in the SCCA classes, I usually end up shrugging and saying "it is what it is." There have been debates on S2KI about which class a new person should run with, and it ends up with proponents from B stock and STR trying to "pitch" their class to the newbie, who ideally shouldn't be thinking about classes at all: the focus should be entirely on learning to handle the car, walk the course, work the course, etc.

The warm, welcoming, fun-centric atmosphere of this club combined with the ease of registration (it's very easy to google the weight and dyno output of a car) makes this a perfect club for first-timers.

So I say just index the cars as usual, keep open access to the result documents, and maybe just add sortable columns for car makes or groups of car makes. Don't add classes as something to do for the registration. My 2c
Math puns are the first sine of madness!
User avatar
Nathan Atkins
Posts: 285
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:28 pm
Car: 2005 Mazda RX8 Red
CDC Member#: 10
Location: Bel Air, MD
Contact:

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Nathan Atkins »

Hear hear Glenn
dmyer
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:20 am
Car: 2007 Mini Cooper S
CDC Member#: 770

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by dmyer »

glennkrueger wrote:I often recommend first-timers attend a CDC event over an SCCA event solely because I don't have to start explaining classes. When people start asking me about some of the rules in the SCCA classes, I usually end up shrugging and saying "it is what it is." There have been debates on S2KI about which class a new person should run with, and it ends up with proponents from B stock and STR trying to "pitch" their class to the newbie, who ideally shouldn't be thinking about classes at all: the focus should be entirely on learning to handle the car, walk the course, work the course, etc.

The warm, welcoming, fun-centric atmosphere of this club combined with the ease of registration (it's very easy to google the weight and dyno output of a car) makes this a perfect club for first-timers.

So I say just index the cars as usual, keep open access to the result documents, and maybe just add sortable columns for car makes or groups of car makes. Don't add classes as something to do for the registration. My 2c

What he said!! :D

I would be very carefull how you change the rules as it is just about perfect IMO... just look at the number of entries! If there was a real problem.... people would vote with their feet, however, with the CDC event entries often being the largest in the Washington DC area except for the SCCA at Fedex, I think CDC hit the nail. Tweek the indexes slightly if you must to adjust for technology but be carefull how far you go.
earl998
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:22 am
Car: 92 Mazda Miata
CDC Member#: 998

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by earl998 »

I totally agree with Dan. It ain't broke, so don't try to fix it. :D
Silver_Surfer
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2012 11:02 am
Car: 2006 Exige
CDC Member#: 682

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by Silver_Surfer »

I enjoy how simple the CDC is (compliment!). Other than minor tweaks to how the index is created why change a thing? There are many other options out there if you want to start narrowing your competition. I like the "run what you brung" style this club has. If this club got all divided up, why wouldn't I just run at Fedex, which would only be a 20min drive instead of the hour + plus it takes to get to some of the venues?
User avatar
echan
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:50 am
Car: 1973 Triumph TR6
CDC Member#: 4

Re: Proposed Changes in 2014 CDC Autocross Series

Post by echan »

OK. After much debate (both in the open forum and with the organizers), here's the new changes for the 2014 season:

The new tire indexes will be as follows:

Tires Multipler
201+TW (Lower performance tires, all-seasons) - 0.99
101-200TW (R1R, Rivals, RS3, ZII, etc.) (Make this the default at registration) - 1.00
50-100TW (RA1, R888, A048) - 1.01
<50TW (Hoosiers, V710, Z214) - 1.025

We will remove the Small Bore Series but will add the FYI sortable "fun" groups (small bore, AWD, etc) with no prizes. To make up the reduced prizes from the elimination of Small Bore, we will create more prizes as outlined below:

Index awards (end of season):
1st place - 8 passes
2nd - 6 passes
3rd - 4 passes
4th - 3 passes
5th - 2 passes
6th - 1 pass

If certain "Fun" groups become popular (e.g. more than 9 participants at most events) during the 2014 season, we may add a "fun" prize for that group in the in 2015 season.

I think all of the CDC'ers want to keep the system simple and not cause various sub-groups. I think these slight changes will make the tire index more fair and the additional awards will allow more people to win passes. Making Small Bore (and adding other fun groups), should help keep everyone together as one group.

When Small Bore was first introduced the Miatas and other small bore cars were much slower than the other cars. Now Miatas often do well in the index and even take FTD. So in some sense, the Small Bore cars have pretty much grew out of the initial reasons for giving them a special series.

Ed
Post Reply