WSCC Speed Series Class discussion

[Nick Algar - Competition Secretary]

WSCC Speed Series Class discussion.

 

Background: Over the years there have been discussions in the paddock about the classes that run in the WSCC Speed Series with a variety of suggestions being made as to ways that they can be changed etc. The classes are ultimately decided by the Speed Series Organising Team SSOT. But at the last meeting of the SSOT we wanted to get feedback from current drivers and other interested parties to see if we were actually providing what people want. The obvious difficulty with this is that no matter what you do you will never please all of the people all of the time but we felt an open on-line discussion may bring up some new ideas. So that is the idea of this thread to discuss ideas going forward with a view to taking a long term approach and trying to set the classes for say the next 5 years. This has actually been the desire of the SSOT but we have found ourselves having to respond to the changes that other clubs were making to the classes at events that the Speed Series goes to. We also have to respond to any changes made by the MSA.

 

History: It is worth trying to outline a brief history of the Speed Series classes / ethos so that you can see how it has evolved and changes made to the classes. After its formation the classes quite quickly settled into the concept that we run now which is a cc split of 1800cc to allow the then up and coming Zetec 1800cc engine in to the lower classes, whereas most other clubs had 1700cc for the bored crossflows. Then A&B as Novice classes, C&D as the progression classes from novice, but with limited modifications allowed on the cars, E&F as anything goes road going cars and somewhere for the bike engine cars to go. Then G&H for the modified non-roadgoing cars. During this time we initially used 1A tyres in A to D then 1B in E&F, but other clubs started to allow 1B tyres in all road going classes so after resisting this for a while we did the same, a similar situation existed with windscreens. So that all that now really differentiates the classes are gearboxes. However this is partly our own fault as all the other clubs running the events only have 2 or 3 classes for road going kits. Usually a cc split at 1700cc and then maybe a 3^rd class for bike engine cars of all cc’s.

 

SSOT Ideas to discuss, but please add your own.

·         Condense the classes in road going ie merge C&E and D&F

·         Change to a BHP/Ton class split (lots of problems defining and policing this)

·         Use a control tyre (cost of changing and making our top competitors uncompetitive)

·         Leave as it is (perfectly acceptable solution but at least we will have had the debate)

·         Change the cc split to 1700cc like the rest of the country

·         Control engine classes ie VX, Duratec, Zetec, 4AGE ( we could end up with a lot of classes and not really achieve anything)

·         Any significant change to classes will result in changes having to be made to the Target Times / Scoring System. Although the SSOT is considering having a similar debate about that as well depending on how this one goes.

 

So it's over to you guys, nothing is off limits but please debate in a polite way. Hopefully the ideas will bounce around and we will end up with a consensus on the views of current competitors. If needed we may after the debate hold a Poll.

[AdamR]

Firstly thanks for opening this up Nick, it is often discussed 'behind closed doors' so it's great to get a public discussion going

 

For me, one of the main 'issues' is trying to get people in at the bottom end so they can enjoy sprints, without preventing them from being competitive. Yes, it is about the fun, banter and experience, but if we didn't have a competitive fire in there somewhere we'd just be doing track days! I think the 1800cc class was a good move in this respect, but unfortunately 'open to interpretation' as was found last year...

 

At the moment I feel that a truly road going car cannot be competitive in the road going classes. I gave it a go recently and did ok, but just from a glance at some of the other cars in Class D you see how specialist they are.

 

Would there be a way of policing an actual road-going class, such as 'There must be more than 1000 miles (just an idea / example) difference between odometer readings on the two previous consecutive MOT certificates', or something like this? I appreciate that is always open to fudging (fitting a new dash / set of dials, someone pays for loads of rolling road time) but in my eyes this would be there to make it more difficult for the visibly competition-orientated cars to be in road category, and make it clearly against the spirit of the rules for them to be there.

 

Just my 2p...

[John Williams (Panda) - Joint Manchester AO]

things I like:-

 

1) the current classes as being a "1.8 novice" so the A / B classes work for me (i wouldn't want to see it go down to 1.7) as i wouldn't be able to compete with the big boys.

2) The target times for me are starting to work on the class level as events stabilise / but I'm sure there is a whole debate on the championship side.

 

My only big thought would be to welcome new blood into the SS, road going needs to be road going e.g. 2 'real seats' etc

 

the idea of "Control engine classes ie VX, Duratec, Zetec, 4AGE" that actually happens within the paddock with beer bets between smeg and shaggy etc.

 

 

cheers

 

Panda

[John Williams (Panda) - Joint Manchester AO]

seems like Adam and me are on a similar lines

[tkm_dave]

Quick one between work stuff...

 

·         Use a control tyre (cost of changing and making our top competitors uncompetitive)

·         Condense the classes in road going ie merge C&E and D&F

 

Something that, for better or worse, rightly or wrongly, popped in to my head was making C and D control tyre shod, then anyone who wants to remain competitive against other clubs/car makes and models can continue that on 1B tyres in E and F. Maybe with a continuation of C and D need to be H-pattern (or even synchro only?!) and then E and F is unlimited. I can certainly see the attraction for myself in either of those categories.

 

Possibly going back to 1A tyres for A and B would help keep the sport attractive for new comers, either that or a very cheap control trye that's available in a 13 and 15" (if such a thing exists) so people don't have to instantly change wheels to meet control tyre specs or spend large amounts on 1B so they don't become disheartened.

 

Back to work.

[AdamR]

either that or a very cheap control trye that's available in a 13 and 15" (if such a thing exists)

 

Falken ZE-914, comes in 185/60r13, 205/60r13 and 195/50r15 Under £200 a set for the 13s and under £150 for the 15s.

[Nick Algar - Competition Secretary]

Great discussion keep going as you are echoing our concerns. Looking forward to innovative solutions.

[stephenh]

I've hesitated to respond to this debate because in all likelyhood my car will be sold at the end of this season, and I will no longer be a regular SS competitor after this season. However, maybe that makes me potentially more impartial, so I will put my "twopenneth" in.

I do think it is a shame that we don't have a class(es) for "standard" Westfields, but the fact is that before classes A & B were changed to make them exclusively novice classes, we got very few regular competitors in those classes. In contrast, since those classes have been restricted to novices only, I think I am right in saying that they have been much better supported, so we have a good number of novices taking part over the last 2 or 3 years. This must be good for the individuals and good for the SS as a whole.

As for classes C & D, I think we have them about as right as we are going to achieve at the present time. I know that some of us (me included no doubt) spend a lot of money by Westfield standards trying to make our cars go faster whilst remaining within the letter of the rules, but that is motorsport for you. By motorsport standards in general, competing in a road legal Westfield is still relatively cheap motorsport. Particularly taking into account the performance my car has. How much would I have to pay to get the same sort of performance in any other more conventional vehicle, short of changing to production superbike club racing, and that would probably cost just as much as I spend on my Westfield if not more.

I think merging classes C with E and D with F would be a retrograde step, unless the number of entries in any one of those classes fell so low that it was forced on us. Otherwise, it would simply raise the cost of those on limited budgets even more in trying to "keep up with the Joneses". I along with one or two others changed from class F to class D 2 or 3 years ago for that very reason. A practical illustration is that I sold a second hand sequential gearbox for more money than the brand new "H" pattern synchro box cost to replace it.

As for tyres, the moves afoot by the various authorities may force the committee's hand. If supersoft ZZRs and V70As cease to be road legal within the next year or two then whatever the MSA does will make little difference to classes C, D, E and F. To remain road legal they will have to use a tyre which will almost certainly be less effective and therefor slower. In that event, it might make sense for the committee to impose a restriction on tyres, and maybe the answer would be to chose one of the trackday tyres then still road legal. It could be another distinguishing feature between C & E, and D & F. C & D might be a fixed control tyre and E & F free choice so long as still road legal. If that does come about then plainly target times would either have to be recalculated, or more probably suspended for at least 12 months. And to allow all classes to compete on an equal footing, they would have to be suspended for classes G & H at the same time.

Anyway, those are my thoughts, but I remain willing to be convinced of some sensible alternatives.

[pickmaster Andy Lowe]

I've always thought the 1800 Zetec against a xflow unfair

To swap a 1800 zetec to a 2000 zetec is cheap compared the the cost of getting a xflow upto zetec power

but can see that most new comers will probably not have xflows anymore as they get older

I still think driver aids like traction and lurnch control should be kept for the none road going classes

And I'm quiet liking the control tyre idea

[AdamR]

I still think driver aids like traction and lurnch control should be kept for the none road going classes

 

 

Would agree with that one

[Paul Morcom]

I think there may be reason to create a class structure around levels of experience and level of car development to enable a sensible progression up through the classes. Key to me is that the WSCC Speed Series remains fun and competitive and a series people want to join and stay in. There are many different type of competitor, all with different objectives...

1. Some take the WSCC Speed Series as the reason for competing and do so within their own level of competitiveness.

2. Some take the event on the day as the reason and want to be as competitive as possible within those regs with the aim to win, WSCC Speed Series is a secondary consideration but you fit into the appropriate class and accept whatever disadvantage that creates.

3. Some want to be very competitive in the WSCC Speed Series, event on the day and other speed series (e.g. HSA, Midland, British Sprint etc. etc.)

4. I am sure there are other types of competitor.

So for WSCC to create a framework that is right for all is almost impossible but the SSOT work hard to hopefully create the right framework for all.

So back to my first sentence.. how about a class structure based on Novice, Intermediate and Expert. Still keeping the 1800cc split and the option for a Novice or Intermediate to enter a higher class but still with their base experience status. So...

Classes A/B - Novice - up to 15 events (or equivalent level of experience), not having won a novice class series 1st award. Roadgoing (MSA compliant) and should include gearbox, electronic aid restrictions. Possibly some level of engine modification limits (but not sure how).

Classes C/D - Intermediate - up to 30 events (or equivalent level of and not having won an intermediate class series 1st award. Roadgoing (MSA compliant) and should include gearbox and electronic aid restrictions. Possibly some level of engine modification limits (but not sure how).

Classes E/F - Expert - unlimited in all ways but should be compliant with MSA roadgoing rules. Possibly exclude electronic aids (no launch, traction, electronic gear change etc.)

Leave Classes G/H as is.

Edited to say... Having just read Stephen's post I agree with him that it is probably not right for all roadgoing experts to be in E/F regardless of car spec. I would still like to see a sensible stepping stone class structure to enable competitors to move on from novice status but to progress with some expectation of a class win.

[tkm_dave]

I still think driver aids like traction and lurnch control should be kept for the none road going classes

 

As much as this rules out some of the gadgets on my car (although it turns out they didn't work last season anyway, oops) I wouldn't be against this.

 

For gearboxes; in my eyes the main thing with a sequential box is when people (like me) use paddles and don't need to take their hands off the wheel. With a stick shift sequential there's VERY marginal time to be gained over an H pattern dog box I'd have thought. So allowing sequentials on road legal cars could continue in E and F in my opinion, but maybe the way they are shifted could be considered. In Which case, John Hoyle's interpretation of a road legal car would be about as 'extreme' as would be allowable.

 

Paul's comments about the progression through the ranks is exactly what there needs to be and clearly what has been aimed for in the series, past and present. Whether it's through technical limitations on cars or driver experience needs further debate. Finding the right balance of tyre, transmission and electronic aids for each class is obviously bl**dy difficult and, as Nick rightly pointed out, not everyone will be happy about every technical rule.

[AdamR]

I like your idea of a clear 'progression' in the classes Paul, definitely - policing and setting the steps though is a different matter as Dave touched upon at the bottom of his post!

 

Regarding the road legal classes, from my POV I would argue that nobody would fit a dog box or sequential to a car that actually gets used on the road, and that H pattern synchro does offer a significant disadvantage (unless you are driving without any mechanical sympathy at all) in lap time over these two. Could probably pull some data to give an idea of just how much, actually.

[tkm_dave]

Regarding the road legal classes, from my POV I would argue that nobody would fit a dog box or sequential to a car that actually gets used on the road, and that H pattern synchro does offer a significant disadvantage (unless you are driving without any mechanical sympathy at all) in lap time over these two. Could probably pull some data to give an idea of just how much, actually.

 

Not sure how many people use dog boxes or sequentials on regularly used road cars, but I think one danger in making the top road going synchro only would be too big a jump up to the unlimited class. Potentially being synchro vs paddles, 1B tyres vs slicks, no gadgets vs electronic everything. That also means there's a smaller difference between the absolute entry level class for novices and the top road class. It would potentially result in no meaningful way to differentiate between C/D and E/F, meaning you're either a novice or in the top road going class.

 

Gut feeling is that between E/F and G/H it should have two of the potential three main differentiators of tyres, transmission, electronics. (I've deliberately left levels of engine tune out of it so far because theyseem so difficult to police)

[AdamR]

True, good point well made about the jumps between classes. I guess in an ideal world the Speed Series would cater for everyone from Mr Smith who just goes to the odd area meet right up to someone like Mr Everall who has a massively tweaked and sorted car, without tons of classes in between and which also don't have significant steps between them. I have a feeling that could be an impossible task given the variety of our machines!

 

My opinion of trying to police an 'actual' road-going class though still stands, to help get a few more people in at grass roots level.