Gary,
Not saying which way it will go, because I have no idea, but what are you going to do / say, if it comes back and says the current weight is below the process weight? I don't think it's a given that just because something wasn't run through the process, that it's for sure going to lose weight when it is. I'm all for running every car through, and going w/ that weight (w/ a pragmatic eye). To me, the variable w/ the largest 'window' is the power estimate. I don't think anyone will argue w/ the fact that some cars make more, and some cars make less, than the 'standard' gain percentage that's used in the process. There's a significant enough variation in the motors from marque to marque that I don't think anyone thinks they all respond the same to an IT build. That's where the pragmatic eye comes in.
>> ... His son Eric jumped in the car, did just a few laps and holy shit. Eric was turning 1:02.7s (which is below the track record).
Eric Curran obviously needs more weight.
K
Travis,
While those events are great, there are many cars that don’t show for one reason or another. Even then, there are too many variables.
Bill,
When I submitted my request to have my car run through the process, my thought was at least now it’ll be classed using criteria other cars were. Seeking consistency, explainable, and a fair classification for various cars – that’s what motivated me to write my letter.
Dave Gran
Real Roads, Real Car Guys – Real World Road Tests
Go Ahead - Take the Wheel's Free Guide to Racing
i agree there are a lot of variables, i just don't think that when discussions of using "on track performance" come up it's fair to talk about it in terms of any car anywhere in the country on any weekend. because in practice were it to actually happen i'd be pretty confident the results to be used would only really come from those two (and T-Hill maybe) events. to say otherwise i think is a scare tactic used to push an agenda.
Travis Nordwald
1996 ITA Miata
KC Region
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
I'm aware Jake.
Travis Nordwald
1996 ITA Miata
KC Region
......and "The Process" can obviously account for 40 years and 400 cars across 5 classes without fault.
Travis Nordwald
1996 ITA Miata
KC Region
If the weight stays the same or goes down, great... I'll prolly stick with the Volvo and just keep truckin'. If the weight goes up significantly, we know we need to work on plan "B". What ever that is.
But to be honest, I would be very surprised if there was a significant change (prolly 50 lbs or less) one way or another, on a "processed" 142.
I have one, no bias here.
DOHC Neon @ 2650, the SOHC is @ 2450. The SOHC is a mildly competitive car with better response to IT mods. The DOHC makes more power stock, but dosn't see the power gain that the SOHC sees in IT trim. The SOHC still is only a 3rd place car at best. I say lower the weight on the DOHC and see what happens?
Chris "The Cat Killer" Childs
Angry Sheep Motorsports
810 417 7777
angrysheepmotorsports.com
IT,SM,SS,Touring, and Super Touring
Chris, I'm not picking on you...really. But that's a classic quote.
So, based on your paragraph, you say lower the weigth and see what happens. How much? 100 pounds? 50? 150?
How should we tell the members we came up with that? "Chris said so"? How would you feel if Jake said his RX-7 only made 100 hp, and suggested a 100 pounds off? And "See what happens"?? How do we judge what happens, by what yardsticks. How will we really KNOW what happens?
Seriously, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I hope you see the point. We hear often things like "Everybody knows the Dohc doesn't make the same gains as the Sohc", or the "1.6 engine is not intake limited like the 1.7, everyone knows that". Yet, "Everyone knows" is the 'data' we get.
The internet is always accurate....
The questions above are serious. If anyone can answer them in a repeatable, robust, transparent and non subjective manner, please, please do so.
We act on issues when we can document the data, and our members EACH vote a confidence percentage. We need a minimum percentage to accept the data. So, we are MORE than happy to get data, but we HAVE to scrub it down. It's not easy to either submit effective data, or to examine it, but we owe it to the members to be vigilant when we stray off the standard.
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
New England Region
lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com
i think some are starting to come to the conclusion that what the ITAC is trying to accomplish with the process under the current lanscape is just not feasable.
it's a good guide, and probably works 90% of the time, but i think some of us are fooling ourselves in how well it should work. lets be honest here. the process is an educated guess the same way in that "lets take 30lbs off the DOHC Neon" is an educated guess.
25% power adder is a guess
FWD weight break of 100lbs (2%?) is a guess
DWB adder is a guess
live axle is a guess
mid engine adder is a guess
brake adder/subtractor is a guess
torque adder is a guess
"you guys" have just come up with a formulaic, formal, repeatable way to make your guesses, but to think it's going to work for the absurd amount of cars listed i think is a bit silly. don't get me wrong, these are all good things and its very helpful to future ITACs and current competitors to know just what's going on.
PS - I'm all for delisting cars that aren't actually run to make this a somewhat more manageable task.
Last edited by tnord; 09-16-2009 at 09:51 AM.
Travis Nordwald
1996 ITA Miata
KC Region
The point is to classify everyone using the same guess, then let people pick their weapon.
Bookmarks