STL engine builds?

[JeffYoung]

Let's go back to the basic point.

Do you agree that weight over the drive wheels can be and advantage? If we can't get you to understand that point, then we'll just have to wait until March and those beers....lol....

Seriously, you coming down? I've FINALLY gotten in the 16s at VIR and with the new motor and shock package will be shooting for 15s. Might even have a shot at beating you....lol....

What are you citing as data to support this?

A tire only has 100% grip. If the fronts are using all of that to corner, then shift weight OFF of them to try and accelerate, it's not optimal. Slower corner speeds (less than 100% of the tires ability) are needed to then apply another force at once WHILE also increasing weight transfer to the opposite end.

Wait, now I get it...you don't like the SIM output because you don't BELIEVE it! That Lucas smoke is damaging. LOL.

Cheers bro. VIR in March again. Beers and debate!

[red986s]

Honestly, ugh.

So I tow to Nashville to get some points, and run against 3-4 cars that are not very competitive. I get slapped with 100 lbs. I come back to CMP and face a 15 car field with 8 cars that are top notch, and I have 100 lbs on the car because of Nashville?

Yes Jeff, no one person would be allowed to dominate the class. 100 lbs? No, 50 lbs maybe and like I said it doesn't have to be a "weight" penalty. It could be adjusted position, restrictor, whatever.

Appreciate the thoughts but just don't see how this will work.

Just trying to think outside the box.

[lateapex911]

Yes Jeff, no one person would be allowed to dominate the class. 100 lbs? No, 50 lbs maybe and like I said it doesn't have to be a "weight" penalty. It could be adjusted position, restrictor, whatever.



Just trying to think outside the box.

Sounds socialist!

If somebody is dominating, then I guess I better earn more money, tell my wife we're not going on vacation this year, build a better car and get my crap together and bring more speed. Or talent. Or all of the above.
Now, if the CAR (ie a Teg or Miata, or whatever) is dominating...ALL OVER, race after race, and there are objective reasons identified as to WHY the car is dominating, THEN I suggest the objective reasons need to be considered for adjustment/equalization.*

But if a PERSON dominates, and he's getting weight slapped on him, I'd hand him the trophy if I beat him. Cuz it's BS that he's being handicapped. Not a fair fight. I only want to win a fair fight, not some handicapped deal.
But that's me.

IF you have a very tightly run closed series (like a pro series, with limited car choices and drivers), AND it's being run to entertain an audience, then sure, I can see some form of 'equalization". In IT, I could see this for series' that support Pro Racing events. We ran a 3 race IT series at Lime Rock a few years ago, that supported various pro events. That could work ...but I'd do some qualifying results juggling**. I'm not going to make amateurs start bolting in weight blocks....

**I'd take the top 6 guys, say, and make the pole sitter draw a number. Between 1 and 6. If he draws five say, either 5 guys draw straws or numbers for starting position, or they just reverse the top five starting positions.

My take is that the STAC is loath to do any form of diddling. They seem fine with this being essentially a one Make class. Or, maybe a class that has a very limited number of choices to win

[Andy Bettencourt]

Let's go back to the basic point.

Do you agree that weight over the drive wheels can be and advantage? If we can't get you to understand that point, then we'll just have to wait until March and those beers....lol....

Seriously, you coming down? I've FINALLY gotten in the 16s at VIR and with the new motor and shock package will be shooting for 15s. Might even have a shot at beating you....lol....

I agree it can be. But a 'net' advantage? Nope.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Yes Jeff, no one person would be allowed to dominate the class. 100 lbs? No, 50 lbs maybe and like I said it doesn't have to be a "weight" penalty. It could be adjusted position, restrictor, whatever.



Just trying to think outside the box.

Why can't any one person dominate? That box you speak of is no place for me. Congrats, your good at what you do, let's bring you back to everyone else so they don't have to be as good as you. Ugh.

[JeffYoung]

Explain to me how you reached that conclusion (no net advantage) using suspension design, tire width, varying tire grip levels (Toyo v. Kumho v. Hoosier), track adhesion levels, horsepower levels, driver skill, setup skill, and the speed of an African Swallow shitting on an ITB Volvo.....lol...

And now that we have finally acknowledged FWD ain't all bad, show me your calculations detailing the extent of the disadvantage over the advantage at varying horespower levels, tire sizes and grip levels.

Then, explain how your calculations justify a deduct for FWD cars vis a vis sub 200 whp RWD cars with front engines.

Show your work!

Starting to see the problem with LapSim?

I agree it can be. But a 'net' advantage? Nope.

[red986s]

Sounds socialist!

It does.

But if a PERSON dominates, and he's getting weight slapped on him, I'd hand him the trophy if I beat him. Cuz it's BS that he's being handicapped. Not a fair fight. I only want to win a fair fight, not some handicapped deal.
But that's me.

I wish I had suggested "If you win, the next race you have to hold a beer in your left hand" instead of weight. Don't focus on that. It's only one of many ideas.

**I'd take the top 6 guys, say, and make the pole sitter draw a number. Between 1 and 6. If he draws five say, either 5 guys draw straws or numbers for starting position, or they just reverse the top five starting positions.

There ya go! That's a good one!

Okay getting back in the box now.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Explain to me how you reached that conclusion (no net advantage) using suspension design, tire width, varying tire grip levels (Toyo v. Kumho v. Hoosier), track adhesion levels, horsepower levels, driver skill, setup skill, and the speed of an African Swallow shitting on an ITB Volvo.....lol...

And now that we have finally acknowledged FWD ain't all bad, show me your calculations detailing the extent of the disadvantage over the advantage at varying horespower levels, tire sizes and grip levels.

Then, explain how your calculations justify a deduct for FWD cars vis a vis sub 200 whp RWD cars with front engines.

Show your work!

Starting to see the problem with LapSim?

My stuff is simple physics...plus I asked you to support your conclusion first. I must have missed that.

Are you telling us that you think FWD is equal to RWD (given as many equal variables as possible)? You are trying to confuse the witness with completely irrelevant data - driver skill? Really? Come on. That is why I think LapSim is an interesting exercise, because it takes all those BS variables out - or else it would be impossible to come to a conclusion.

[red986s]

Why can't any one person dominate?

I give up, why can't any one person dominate?

That box you speak of is no place for me.

Different ideas from the old line of thinking? But yeah, I noticed this from your comments.

Congrats, your good at what you do

???

let's bring you back to everyone else so they don't have to be as good as you. Ugh.

Okay thanks for your input. (ugh)

[JeffYoung]

My stuff is simple physics too. Weight over the drive wheels equals more grip.

I don't have to show any numbers. My position was we couldn't quantify this accurately and we shouldn't try. You guys are the ones who came up with 2% here and 3% there. Justify it with numbers.

I'm not saying that FWD is equal to RWD. I am saying:

1. Justifying the FWD deduct because "all real race cars are RWD" is a fallacy. Most purpose scratch built race cars have their engines over the drive wheels. Like FWD.

2. Using a program like LapSim to quantify all of the assumptions I listed above requires you to understand what, how and why LapSim is doing things. We had no clue.

3. I can use modeling software to try to quantify aero advantage. I mean, I can take the CD and the frontal area of an RX7 or an Integra and use simple physics to show you me and the old Z cars are at a significant disadvantage to the newer models.

The real question is when should we do this (adders/deducts) and what should we use to quantify them?

Here, in retrospect, it's pretty clear to me we jumped on an assumption that is not correct (that FWD is always at a disadvantage to RWD) and then used a program we had no clue how it worked to quantify that assumption.

Another analogy. If LapSim had a box that said "Crappy Aero," we checked it, and it gave a 2% weight break to older cars that kinda sorta matched up with some real world lap time data we had, would you consider that a valid process for weighting cars in IT?

My stuff is simple physics...plus I asked you to support your conclusion first. I must have missed that.

Are you telling us that you think FWD is equal to RWD (given as many equal variables as possible)? You are trying to confuse the witness with completely irrelevant data - driver skill? Really? Come on.

[Ron Earp]

That is why I think LapSim is an interesting exercise, because it takes all those BS variables out .

Really?

You don't know what LapSim does when you click "FWD". It might be that when you click it LapSim simply creates a lap time based on (0.691s + AverageLapTime) to obtain the lap time. Ain't any modeling going on there, just a scalar based on what someone perceives to be fact. That is the root of the discussion that Jeff is trying to get to, what do we "know" LapSim is doing?

[Chip42]

the FWD/RWD debate really burns me. scratch built race cars put the engine in the MIDDLE to reduce the polar moment and get the lump out of the way so the suspensions can have more design freedom. They drive the REAR wheels because it offers handling advantages over FWD in a variety of ways (FACT). weight distribution will tend to be a rear biased but generally not by more than 10%, typically less.

scratch built racecars also don't have to put up with the street car cost, complexity, and packaging compromises that IT/ST and Prod cars must start out with. so it's kinda a BS basis for an argument. find me a scratch built race car with mcstruts, a spare tire, seating for 4, and a cargo hold to match. I'll wait.

and as much as it is a fallacy to site the miata as an example of all RWD machines (awesome suspension design and weight distribution with the compromises being to cargo and occupant room, an atypical scenario in street cars of this price range), it is equally fallacious to look upon 90's honda products as typical FWD (far better than average suspensions and great motors that are also lighter than most of their rivals' drivetrains). mid engined cars tend to be even more exotic, but that doesn't mean they are all formula cars with fenders - most of those in club racing share more of the compromises of the standard econobox than does the miata.

I think STL and U - and I said this over a year ago in a letter to the STAC, should specline allowed motors and chassis wherever they fall afoul of the target "zone", listing alternate base weights and maybe a cam lift or compression difference from the class norm. increase the base weight of the B18C1 if its so good. lower that of the borgwald I4 if it's remarkably underpowered. maybe list a few chassis with a weight break or penalty if needed. remember that "the car" isn't what was delivered to a showroom - its an engine with a base weight number nominally determined by its displacement, and a box with wheels into which it's bolted.

the classes seem very exciting but not all things are as equal as the rules would require in order to build parity. some ability to class by specifics is needed to keep things interesting and stable long term.

[JeffYoung]

Exactly. And yet we fell into the trap of assuming RWD is always better than FWD and coming up with a black box deduct to "deal with it."

I agree that RWD "generally" is better than FWD. I pointed out what I did above to make it clear that there is far more nuance to the situation than we gave it, or that this thread was giving it.

The FWD deduct is water under the bridge. It's part of the Process and I would not vote to change it. However, it is, in my opinion, a shining example of what NOT to do in creating an adder/deduct which is to make assumptions about various car attributes and then use a process you don't even understand to come up with a number for the modifier.

[lateapex911]

OK, I won't ask anyone to show me the numbers...

So, all you FWD /RWD debaters, and other smart guys, put a number on the subject:

Tell me the weight you feel can equal a FWD STL car with the same engine. (ignore gearing issues, assume each can be ideal)...in a RWD chassis.
The FWD version will weigh 2350. What weight do you think the RWD needs to be if:

-the car is run at Watkins Glen. For the sake of discussion lets choose a track that isn't a dyno run like Road America, or a bullring like Lime Rock. Lets say Watkins Glen.
-the test is a 10 lap cumulative time. Lets say the "challenge" is the best time for 10 laps. (30 miles or so). So not an enduro, but not a 1 lap banzai quali session either.
-Suspensions are as equivalent as possible....a wash. A great FWD double wishbone front end and good rear.
-Aero will be a wash between the two.

So, if Randy Pobst is driving the 2350lb FWD car, what weight should the RWD car be for Bill Auberlin to run the same total time.

(credit Greg Amy for this little exercise )

[JeffYoung]

How are you going to quantify this is the real question.

OK, I won't ask anyone to show me the numbers...

So, all you FWD /RWD debaters, and other smart guys, put a number on the subject:

Tell me the weight you feel can equal a FWD STL car with the same engine. (ignore gearing issues, assume each can be ideal)...in a RWD chassis.
The FWD version will weigh 2350. What weight do you think the RWD needs to be if:

-the car is run at Watkins Glen. For the sake of discussion lets choose a track that isn't a dyno run like Road America, or a bullring like Lime Rock. Lets say Watkins Glen.
-the test is a 10 lap cumulative time. Lets say the "challenge" is the best time for 10 laps. (30 miles or so). So not an enduro, but not a 1 lap banzai quali session either.
-Suspensions are as equivalent as possible....a wash. A great FWD double wishbone front end and good rear.
-Aero will be a wash between the two.

So, if Randy Pobst is driving the 2350lb FWD car, what weight should the RWD car be for Bill Auberlin to run the same total time.

(credit Greg Amy for this little exercise )

[lateapex911]

How are you going to quantify this is the real question.

Aww, c'mon, just play along! I just want a bunch of weights from people. You know, Bob thinks the RWD car needs to be 50lbs lighter to be even up, and Frank thinks it needs to be 200 heavier. I just want to get an idea of the crowds ideas. Group think!

[JeffYoung]

I have absolutely no idea. It could be 5 lbs, it could be 200 lbs. If it is a hot slippery race track the FWD car could have the advantage.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I give up, why can't any one person dominate?



Different ideas from the old line of thinking? But yeah, I noticed this from your comments.



???



Okay thanks for your input. (ugh)

You didn't read the comments in the context they were meant. 'You' is the collective you. Sanctioning body says, "Congrats, you are a better driver, or better car preparer or better racer" so you get a lead trophy. We do this simply so that you can't perform better than everyone else"

That sucks IMHO.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Really?

You don't know what LapSim does when you click "FWD". It might be that when you click it LapSim simply creates a lap time based on (0.691s + AverageLapTime) to obtain the lap time. Ain't any modeling going on there, just a scalar based on what someone perceives to be fact. That is the root of the discussion that Jeff is trying to get to, what do we "know" LapSim is doing?

True, but it makes no sense that it wouldn't take out stuff like driver ability? Of course it does, unless there was a metric for dialing in a quantifier for each subject. IIRC, and we can go back to the posts, but the guy who ran the program created an 'everything else equal' scenario using the inputs he had at his disposal. Not sure what else you want.

[Matt93SE]

You people make my brain hurt. This is really simple here...
THIS IS NOT IT, THIS IS ST. No car is guaranteed to be competitive in the class. Warts and all.

If you want to make adjustments to your competitors to make your favorite car competitive, then you're looking at the wrong class. Stop trying to fudge the rules to make your Whatsit competitive and built a Thatsit instead because you know it will run up front.