This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Sprockett
31
« on: March 18, 2018, 10:13:59 AM »
My vote would also be to scrap the three run rule. Not sure who or when that discussion happened but...I think ride alongs are important to newbies in the club and less so taken by experienced people for the purpose of advantage. If we don’t allow ride alongs, the the wrong people lose out I think. Also, I don’t remember the last time I took a fun run so dropping the event to only three runs counting will really just shorten my day  If these locals are to be practice for some people as the point, fun runs are worthless...when they don’t count, they don’t count...
32
« on: September 27, 2017, 03:40:32 PM »
YYC is limited time only and we should use it as much as is reasonable. No one would argue that, the question is what is reasonable.
YYC is expensive but im not sure that means we would ever lose money at an event there. Our break even numbers have to be relatively low and if we were averaging anywhere near that number we could cut down on porta potties.
If we used YYC more we could justify working out storing (a set of?) gear on site and less work would be necessary each event.
Schedule a minimum number of events there in order to keep the venue but do not 'engineer' attendance by requiring travel to those sites for the championship. This will show you the real desire of people to go there and YYC. People have skipped non-champ YYC events in order to go to 'required' champ events in Red Deer and FtMc so the effect is doubled and this year's attendance numbers aren't necessarily representative.
Honesty with the other venues would be a reasonable approach. "We have a great local venue for a limited time and need to take of advantage of it for our membership. Therefore we need to cut back dates for 2018...but we will be back!"
If Westerner does not plan to maintain the lot it's not going to last much longer.
33
« on: September 20, 2017, 12:02:50 PM »
Absolutely no attempt or desire to be condescending.
In the end, there is no system of competition that will work to normalize the guy that shows up with whatever car he happens to have and the serious competitor in an autocross car. I think it's great that you are paying attention enough to the results and having these realizations as it may mean you're hooked and we all want to grow the sport locally.
34
« on: September 20, 2017, 10:19:24 AM »
That is the flaw in my opinion, outside of street class your car needs to be setup for only the purpose of Auto X which isn't a "street" class in my opinion.
I know trying to explain to anyone who is still missing the concept is likely futile but... Your comment suggests you are confusing what this index is. This index does not determine how you must setup a car in a class. The index is determined by how people have setup their car in a class. This index does not exist (even in theory) to normalize everyone at the event. It exists in an attempt to normalize classes and as flawed as it is, no one has anything better. I think one of the biggest hurdles is that this index is (allegedly) developed from the results of major events but is used for the local events. At the major events, no one cares about where they place on index. It's a challenge enough to win your class and the class is all that matters. The index is 'needed' at the local level because class sizes don't offer any competition and the sport is still based on competition.
35
« on: September 19, 2017, 01:03:45 PM »
The issue for me is about course design, HP & PAX not creating a level playing field. I agree with you. Furthermore, we should add in car width, car weight, altitude, tires, time of day, temperature, racing surface...PAX has an impossible job and cannot create a perfectly level playing field. We should all just ignore it.
36
« on: September 19, 2017, 10:39:01 AM »
Sorry Reijo, I have no idea what Terry is even arguing? I suspect he doesn't either. Maybe you can translate?
In the post you quote above he is suggesting it's crazy Tom (in an SSP Vette on Hoosiers) raw timed Murray (in a CS Miata on street tires) by 4 seconds (actually ONLY by ~2sec per course) and offers that as evidence that PAX doesn't work. All the while ignoring the fact that Murray beat Tom on index. All this of course on a course that he contends is a Power course.
I don't think Terry knows what PAX is and what it is used for. His car is the wrong choice for CS and it is questionably prepared if at all. I don't see anyone arguing that any driver should be able to jump in it and come anywhere close to Tom Gs raw times on any day on any course...except Terry...confusingly enough.
37
« on: September 19, 2017, 09:20:30 AM »
This discussion has nothing to do with the laws of physics its to do with PAX & HP. Neither has anything to do with this thread anymore? Maybe start a 'All our courses favor power' / 'PAX doesn't work in general (again)' thread? Then those inclined can re-hash the debate without having to stumble upon it in another thread. Or maybe it's the Line choice discussion that would be quicker to move haha
38
« on: September 19, 2017, 08:30:36 AM »
He is sensationalizing things in an attempt to prove a point that isn't there.
Murray was actually only 1.7 indexed seconds behind Cam (which is more relevant) over two courses are less than 1 indexed second behind per course. Even less behind me. Quentin, in a car with even less thrust than Murray, was closer still.
39
« on: September 19, 2017, 08:22:56 AM »
You're definitely missing something here Terry and there's just no having this debate when we can't agree on the fundamentals. A 3400lbs car that is top heavy and as wide as a Corvette is debatably even competitive in BStreet never mind the car to have dominate your local PAX.
Also, I'm absolutely not claiming that YOUR car necessarily has any hope on index. But I would say that in a top car for its class that has been prepared and sorted properly (save my disclaimer regarding our altitude) a top driver will index well. Of course the system isn't perfect and can't account for everything but on average this has already been proven the case for years here at this club.
40
« on: September 18, 2017, 09:53:12 PM »
When I see Ryan at the top of the PAX scales in an ES Miata I'll retract my previous comments and agree with Stephen that the Miata is the car to have, until then Im not convinced.
While you may never see me at the top of any PAX standings so may be safe there... I'll point out for those with short memories that our current Index king did just fine in an ES car with two dead cylinders in 2014. To add insult to injury he was also tops in RAW 
41
« on: September 18, 2017, 09:29:57 PM »
He also points out that, although he shed about 20 kph for the kink, he gained all this speed back accelerating between the kink and the right-hand turn before having to brake again. While true, I think that with less than half the power, it would have been a lot harder for me to claw back any speed I shed going into the kink. I think it's reasonable to approach the kink slightly differently depending on the type of car being driven.
I actually didn't point that out...or at least not like that as I didn't look at the data until this evening...and also don't think that is particularly relevant that I made the speed back. That said, I do believe a Miata would have made the speed back too, see below. In the end, I do not accept that the correct line changes drastically from car to car. When I say line really I mean strategy...maybe you won't end up on the exact some line car to car but the what you are trying to do doesn't change. Even with little power you need to maximize the time on the throttle. Even with lots of power you can't drive triangles everywhere. I chose my line because it was the shortest distance from the end of the slalom to the finish lights. I would have attempted to do the exact same thing in a Miata. Lets not just look at power when deciding what to do in a Miata or 'low powered' car....because there is no such thing as a low powered and big and heavy and competitive autocross car. In an NB Miata that is some 1,000 pounds(!) lighter than my M2 I would not have had to slow nearly as much to make the left turn out of the slalom while being on the same line. Therefore would have had less to 'make up' on throttle. I would still have been on the shortest path to the finish and spent less time in the slow 180 degree turn. It's possible I'm completely off the mark but I haven't heard a thing so far to change my mind.
42
« on: September 18, 2017, 08:04:19 PM »
I also do acknowledge that any normally aspirated car is at a distinct disadvantage at Calgary's altitude but that does not directly affect my car buying decisions 
43
« on: September 18, 2017, 07:56:19 PM »
Since I'm never at the top of the index standings now you are right that an ES Miata is unlikely to change that  THis was not a power course. In fact, through our first 4 runs each in the morning session Cam and I both were barely 1 tenth in front of Quentin in his not so powerful FRS and others. I personally took this as a clue that I should stop trying to drive it point and shoot and instead start concentrating on maximizing my speed in the corners (drive it like a Miata). That epiphany had me drop a 1 sec from my last run of the morning. Cam's the real genius at picking cars Corvette is apparently always the right answer eh Terry?
44
« on: September 14, 2017, 09:31:10 AM »
Everything is gone. You're too slow 
45
« on: September 11, 2017, 02:43:14 PM »
For what it's worth, I ran a lot of the year on tires that sat un-wrapped in my 'heated' (10C) garage all winter and never felt I was at a disadvantage. My tires will again be sitting on my shelf in the same garage this winter. YMMV.
|
Show Posts