Wow, I can't believe my question generated this much discussion.

I think people are missing the point on reliability. I'm not really worried about failure as much as a miss-shift. A miss shift can ruin a season with broken or bent valves. The Turbo springs provide a little more over-rev protection at a cheaper cost.

There's also the problem with enforcement. It's a common practice to replace NA valve springs with Turbo springs during a head build. Thus, lots of donor cars and motors could already be running them. Are we going to start tearing down motors and putting the valve springs on spring dynometers?

I'm not saying these need to be included in the rules. Just throwing it out there for more discussion. (Plus I'm a little bored at the moment. )

loftygoals wrote:


Sorry but this is a terrible defense.
It is your responsibility to make sure your car conforms to the current 944-SPEC rules package. If you did have them, didn't know you had them when you bought the car and were tore down, you would be found illegal, PERIOD.
We cannot start adding to the rules based on your above reason. Think about it for a minute, you are saying "guys, we should change a rule because it is easier to allow it than it is to check it"
THIS IS NOT WHAT 944-SPEC WAS FOUNDED ON AND IT IS NOT WHERE IT IS GOING TO GO.

I could not agree more Michael.

This is a non issue. Keep it the way it is.

So this topic sparked my curiousity and reply (on 1st Page) and my position still stands. The issue I think Michael, myself, and others are worried about is 2 fold.

1. It opens the door for rule creep and the eventual (because it will happen) realization that we are no longer a class that is true to the OEM Spec of the 944.

2. Stronger valves for "overrev" protection also open the door for aftermarket chips. Not implying that anyone would do this but the opportunity is there if the rules allow us to make these kind of "upgrades"

I emailed a friend who sat on the PCA national Tech board for a number of years, was a scrutineer for a very long time, and now runs his own shop in Oklahoma that works on Porsche both racecar and non. His response was to let the rule change happen due to the obvious benefits (cost, reliabilty, etc) and come to the realization that sooner or later we will have to allow for some other kinds of parts to be used because the availability will simply not be there. He suggested that 928 valve springs would be the ideal spring to use.

He did offer a way to police this to prevent ANY mod that would bump the HP or otherwise change the motor from stock. Mandate a "Spec" fuel.... I.E. have each racer bring X number of gallons of 91 Octane(or whatever Octane is deemed appropriate) and put it into a "community" tank (I know the logistics would be.....interesting) This tank would then be dyed with a different color. At impound a car would be weighed and then have a fuel line be pulled and checked for the right dye. If the color was wrong or diluted the car would be DQ'd. Furthermore, and this may ruffle some feathers, if your running any performance mods the "low octane" fuel could cause a catastrophic failure is the motor. The cost for abusing the rules would be high but it would only take a few examples before the message was heard loud and clear.

Now lol please don't shoot the messenger but that is an option should this become a more serious issue.

My stand remains a solid NO on this issue.

My car is mostly prepped but I haven't started racing yet, so help me understand...
In reality, is there ever a situation where I would be asked to disassemble my engine to verify internals? What would be the penalty if I refused?

I could see if I dyno'd at unusual HP or torque, but I'd probably rather forfeit whatever trophy, Toyo-bucks or bragging rights in question than tear my engine apart.

I could not afford the time or money to deal with something like that. It's not like we're sponsored teams here. Even pulling the cam tower to verify springs is a pretty big deal in my book. This is supposed to be a grassroots, average Joe, affordable, most fun for your buck, class. I'd think that in that spirit, the honor system would prevail.
Everyone I've met in my 944Spec region are gentlemen who would not knowingly gain perfomance advantage by skirting the rules. I think this class will continue to grow, in spite of the economy, if that mindset is kept.

So wouldn't we rather have 5 car minimum at every race because more dependable parts were allowed, or have people being out for the season because of preventable breakdowns?

Okay, here is the scoop on tear downs. I am sure that after many,many dominating performances, successful passing of a dyno test, many,many complaints from other competitors, it would most likely be required for you to tear down your motor to:
A: Keep a win
B: Keep a championship (locally AND nationally)

Would it ever happen? Unlikely, but it COULD happen.

Now, if you refuse that tear down, while I see your point of it not being worth it to do so, it would be an admission of guilt and you would be disqualified. It is your choice to do so, and you don't have to agree with it but it is the common rule in motorsports. Denying a tear down is the same as allowing it and finding a non-compliant part. THIS IS REQUIRED TO KEEP RACERS IN CHECK. Regardless of how honest they seem, most, not all, racers are looking for a performance advantage.

This is why I chose NASA, but more importantly, why I chose 944-SPEC. What I found is that we (944-SPEC) are a group of individuals who want a fun, affordable racing class that provides EQUAL competition amongst its racers. Yes, you can add aftermarket springs, cams, chips, etc. and win, but if you want to do that, go do it somewhere else. Please keep 944-SPEC as the "STOCK" class it is. The aftermarket community can go play in GTS or that "other" 944 class if they want to make these changes to their cars. I will say this and I will stand behind the statement, if you want to cheat WE DON'T WANT YOU HERE. I could give two sh#ts about a car count, if I have to lose 20 cheaters and have a 3 car field of compliant racers, I will do it in a heartbeat. SPEC is for those that want to race driver against driver, not who has the better car. There are plenty of other classes for you out there, go race in them. If you are building a car and are contemplating doing some things that are "questionable" please go race somewhere else. I don't want you in SPEC. If you are so gung-ho on doing something illegal to your car because you feel it is better economically and it makes sense to you, go race somewhere else. I AM TIRED OF RACE CLASSES GETTING OUT OF HAND BECAUSE PEOPLE CANNOT SIMPLY ACCEPT THE FACT THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO CHEAT TO WIN. Am I getting all wound up over a simple valve spring question? You damn right I am. BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN TO BE A PROBLEM WITH OUR CARS. If EVERY 944 had valve train issues. them maybe we could consider mandating the use of "other" springs but it is NOT a problem.
Look, I am probably a little naive to think that no one in SPEC is cheating, only because in my 15 years of racing, someone ALWAYS is. But I came to SPEC because I thought that I would be surrounded by other racers that realize the point that I made above, you do not need to cheat to win. Not to mention that they have the desire, much like I do, to race in a series where you don't have to worry about the guy next to you cheating. Those racers are 944-SPEC racers and I will continue to fight to keep it that way. PLEASE GO RACE SOMEWHERE ELSE IF YOU WANT TO PUSH THE ENVELOPE. Understand that statement and you will have a lot of fun racing with us, chose to cheat and yes, you might win but your wins will be much like your ability behind the wheel.....worthless.