OK, so we can agree that these are just your thoughts. What you are proposing is a comp adjustment.
Jeremy did submit dyno sheets - and we thank him for it, but they prove nothing. The motor is far from built. Nicely tuned for what it is but come on, the data is irellevant, no?
I use 14% but it's not germaine to the process as it operates on crank numbers. If you want to use 180 as the pinnacle and 14% correction - guess what??? 209.3 crank hp. Smack dab in the wheelhouse of the process.
The issue over the course of the race (how long is too long?). The Integra is also one of the best handling FWD car on the planet. On to the brakes. Do you know what was a very competitive ITS car before the E36 325i/is obsoleted it? The E30 325i/is. Same sized front brakes, 2750lbs. You are gonna find a LOT of cars at a higher weight with the same sized or smaller brakes. Yes, the car is FWD but how can we quantify the issues? And your 5th gear comment holds no water. Take a look at the RX-7 5th gear. WORSE. RX-7 is .76 and GSR is .79. 15 cars in ITS have a equal or worse fifth gear.
We don't count FWD and weight distribution twice (unless it's something OBSCENE), your 5th gear is moot, and the crank hp is equal to 180whp already...so we have the original two - do they cancel out? I don't think so. But if you subtract 50lbs for a net loss, you get within 1lb of it's spec weight.
Class dismissed... :P Just kidding Dog!
And AGAIN, curb weight has little to NOTHING to do with spec weight...only a sanity check to make sure someting can GET to spec weight.
In the interest of full disclosure, Steve called me on his way home from work and we busted each others chops - and he knows all of this is here. Good debate - like I said, the system may not be perfect for everyones car but it is the SAME imperfect system.
AB
[/b]
Bookmarks