I took the two most profitable types of players, TA (VP$P <22%, Flop Agg 1.8+) and sLA (VP$P 22-35%, Flop Agg 1.8+) to analyze their PFR%'s and corresponding PTBB/100 rates. I decided to use these two player types for two reasons.
1. They are the most profitable
2. Recently I am finding myself borderline between the two (so they apply to myself the greatest)
For TA, I broke them down into 10 categories of increments of 1 with a cap of 10. I would have liked to take this further, possibly to 15% PFR; however, their just were not enough TA who raised that frequently so the sample size was too small to be significant therefore I lumped everyone who raises more than 10% into the same cateogry. For sLA, I broke them down into 15 cats of increments of 1 with a cap of 15.
Notes regarding the graphs below:
1. The Y axis is PTBB/100 winning rates.
2. The X axis is their PFR%. 5 corresponds to PFR%'s in the 5.01-6.00 range.
3. For TA, 10 = 10+ PFR% and for sLA, 15 = 15+ PFR%
4. The lines (arcs) are best fit, polynomial trend lines.

For TA players, it appears that the optimum range to raise is somewhere in the 5.5 - 7.5% range. Below 5.5% and above 7.5% winning rates are not at their peak. 6.50% seems to be peak with a PTBB/100 of about 5.25.

For sLA the graph is similiar, however, the peaks are greater than that of a TA meaning they are making more. Another interesting thing to note is that the peak percentages are shifted over by a few percent in comparison to the TA. The optimum range is 6.5 - 9.5% with the peak occuring at 8% with a PTBB/100 of about 7.5.
Conclusions:
Although the data was not as clean as I had hoped, I think that the polynomial trend lines give us as good of a prediction as it gets. TA players optimum range is 5.5-7.5% with the peak occuring at 6.5% with a PTBB/100 of 5.25. The sLA wins more and should be raising a little more frequently. The sLA optimum range is 6.5-9.5% with the peak occuring at 8.0% with a PTBB/100 of 7.5-8.
It is clear why the sLA is winning at a higher rate since they are playing more hands that have a +EV value; however, I am unsure why the optimum %'s are shifted higher for the slightly loose aggressive. Could it be due to the fact that sLA raise more with lower suited connectors while the TA is raising more with paint cards? I'm not sure although that is the first thought that comes to mind.
What is the optimum amount of times that you should raise pre flop? I personally would aim for around 7-8% regardless of your player type; however, make sure that you are picking your spots and play smart post flop. Post flop aggression is more important than pre flop aggression. As long as you are somewhere in the optimum range you should be maximizing your profits.
How does this apply to the new auto rate rules? This just proves the point that the previous rules of dividing up the player types by pre flop aggression with an aggressive/passive mark at 7% was purely meaningless. The only reason that the previous pre flop aggressives tended to win more than the labled passives is due to the fact that the <1% PFR players were pulling the passives down further than the extreme aggressives.
To get an accurate auto rate rule by using pre flop raises, you would need to divide them into two groups. Goodbye to the passive and aggressives pre flop. Instead you should have one group that is in the optimum range and one that is on the outer edges. This would provide the most meaningful results. Without digging much deeper into this, they would be as follows:
Optimum: 5.5% - 9.5%
sub-optimum: 0-5.49% and 9.51%+
Maybe once Pokertracker Pat gives us a few more player types we can incoporate PFR%'s back into the auto rate rules using these optimums. Until then, the new rules are the best that we can do with so few player types.