448 replies to this topic

[Danny Steyn]

Hi all

If I have my information correct, NASA took data from '99 and 1.6 SM cars at the race at CMP this past weekend. I understand that the '99's were off the pace quite a bit. Does anyone have this information? And will it be made public?

My understanding is that the horsepower numbers were quite close, with the 1.6 a bit higher, but with the 100lb weight difference it was no contest.

I am still very interested in running NASA this year but dont want to waste my time if the car is not competitive.

John or anyone at NASA care to comment. Steve - welcome to your first day in the Hot Chair.

[dmathias]

8 SMs Saturday, 10 on Sunday. Not really a representative field. Anyone know the model year of the winning car.

[fishguyaz]

8 SMs Saturday, 10 on Sunday. Not really a representative field. Anyone know the model year of the winning car.

while this might be true, its more representative than any data that NASA has posted for me( a 99 owner) to see; which is none.

before the rule change I had plans to run with NASA at cal speedway in march.
I decided that have no interest spending my time and $ to gather this data that should have already been gathered and released (made public)to potential customers deciding where to spend their time and $.

all i know is that at the NASA national SM race last year at miller, the 99 cars did not dominate like they do at road america.

[dmathias]

We 1.6 owners have been reminded constantly that we must compare cars of similar level of prep.

[Steve D]

I am still very interested in running NASA this year but dont want to waste my time if the car is not competitive.

John or anyone at NASA care to comment. Steve - welcome to your first day in the Hot Chair.

Danny -

Thanks for the warm welcome. I'm sure information will be forthcoming from the testing. There is an event at VIR this weekend that should provide additional data.

In the mean time, come on out to Road Atlanta for the March 12-13 NASA races. It will be great preparation for your two wins at the Double National the following weekend!!

[Johnny D]

CMP this past weekend, is this it ?

http://www.mylaps.co...t.jsp?id=625967
J~

[Weekend Warrior]

Well I would imagine that Tom was sandbaggin' too....

[Lance Snyder]

Which course were they running? New mickey mouse or old mickey mouse?

[Steve D]

Well I would imagine that Tom was sandbaggin' too....

From the looks of my car when he finished with it, Tom was pushing pretty hard.

If I have figured out the new forum software, attached is a rundown of the finishing order, car type and fast lap for each. Please be kind and constructive. Don't get too wound up because no matter how you slice it, the sample size is pretty small.
 SM finishers CMP 2011.JPG   29.02KB   110 downloads
While some adjustments to the rules appear warranted, my interpretation is that driver skill and car prep are still significant factors in finishing position.

PS - Lance - I'm not sure that was a serious question, but they were running the same course as the past couple years with the re-profiled 12-13 complex.

[john mueller]

Both days the top spot was a 1.6 and the fastest laps from the races were 1.6's (I'm not sure if the draft had anything to do with the times). 99's were then but a tick off.

I'm pleased with the race results, indicates that NASA is close if not spot-on. Nevertheless, I have the Trackmate data from CMP and will be reviewing it soon. I hope to get more from VIR and the SoCal's event at Cal Speedway (March 4-6th), after then I will be meeting with NASA to discuss if any changes need to be made.

Thanks to all involved and glad the weekend was a success.

[pat slattery]

There were plenty of 99's on the podium, and who knows how they were prepped

We need to have rules that are set for 2 to 3 years

Sound familar

[Johnny D]

+1 for Pat on 2 to 3 years, but probably isn’t going to happen.

What was checked in Tech after the races?
J~

[pat slattery]

There were plenty of 99's on the podium, Actually 4 out of 6, is that not enough for the 99? and who knows how they were prepped

We need to have rules that are set for 2 to 3 years

Sound familar

[dstevens]

I'm pleased with the race results, indicates that NASA is close if not spot-on. Nevertheless, I have the Trackmate data from CMP and will be reviewing it soon. I hope to get more from VIR and the SoCal's event at Cal Speedway (March 4-6th), after then I will be meeting with NASA to discuss if any changes need to be made.

The DAQ data to me is a better indicator of what is happening. What happened on the second day? Everyone but the leader lost a sec or two relative to the first day.

Are there that many 99s running in So Cal to get a bigger sample?

[Kyle Burkhardt]

I'm pleased with the race results, indicates that NASA is close if not spot-on. Nevertheless, I have the Trackmate data from CMP and will be reviewing it soon. I hope to get more from VIR and the SoCal's event at Cal Speedway (March 4-6th), after then I will be meeting with NASA to discuss if any changes need to be made.

Thanks to all involved and glad the weekend was a success.

If you're gonna make a change, do it quick. Id hate to get my corner balance/alignment done and have you change my wt before the first event!

[Lance Snyder]

PS - Lance - I'm not sure that was a serious question, but they were running the same course as the past couple years with the re-profiled 12-13 complex.

It was a serious question, only because that backside (which is a decent amount of the track) is incredibly different between the configs.

[dmathias]

A couple more data points (observed by someone 500 miles away):
It appears there was a full course yellow both days - was traffic a factor?
Look at the lap charts for the top 3 on Saturday - it looks like you could overlay them almost exactly.
Total race time top 3: P1 - 20:57.403, P2 - 20:58.323, P3 - 20:59.783. My point is that most of us pop-off one really good lap each race. IMO, more telling is the average lap time, which at least on Saturday, look almost identical.

-Denny

[Steve D]

A couple more data points (observed by someone 500 miles away):
It appears there was a full course yellow both days - was traffic a factor?

Look at the lap charts for the top 3 on Saturday -

Denny -

Both races were interrupted by extended full course cautions. The overall finishing times are close because the races checkered under yellow.

Unfortunately, these races may or may not provide the best indication of what will happen with a large field and a full race.

I was very encouraged that so many 99s showed up. The more 99s we have, the better data we will have ton rely upon in making rules decisions. Keep it up, guys!

[dmathias]

I also note that the races both days were only 9 laps. My biggest complaint with NASA - when time's up, you're done. SCCA does their best to run the full length of the race.

[FTodaro]

Can we assume that the 99's running had the timing wheel in place and the fuel pressure regulator such that they were maxing out the HP gain?