448 replies to this topic

[Johnny D]

I was kinda asking that from the "what was checked in Tech after the race" question.

If Cooke was DQ would we be talking a 35mm RP.
Or were the 99 running the 37 RP to keep up?

J~

[KentCarter]

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?

Just as much as you can assume they were sandbagging hard to get the rules changed, just like NA1.6 drivers were all last year.

[Steve D]

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?

You can assume that the 99 Fowler was driving has the timing/FPR mods. I am almost certain that Brock's car did as well. I do not know about the others.

[pat slattery]

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.

Denny, not at the SCCA National races that we race at.

[pat slattery]

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.

Denny, not at the SCCA National races that we race at.

[Weekend Warrior]

Well we raced at VIR this weekend and I think the field was very close. They took data from me Sunday but that may prove to be useless since I had to scrub tires in Qualifying then had a terrible start and lost 5-6 positions from 9th. Spent most of the time in traffic and had only a few clean laps. Still, the top 5 were very representative of all years.

Results from Saturday were also impressive, Whitis(99) and I(90) battling just like last year and two 1.6s (myself and Tyler Cooke) drag racing for 2nd. So far I am impressed with the changes. I guess I can still build my 99 since preseason rumors of its demise were just that.

[dmathias]

Wait - you mean the sky isn't falling?!?

[Steve D]

Well we raced at VIR this weekend and I think the field was very close.

Alan - Congrats on the strong weekend! Can you give a run down of all the drivers and which year cars they drove?

[Michael Novak]

I was kinda asking that from the "what was checked in Tech after the race" question.

If Cooke was DQ would we be talking a 35mm RP.
Or were the 99 running the 37 RP to keep up?

J~

Top 3 cars were brought in but I don't believe any where teched. My car 37mm plate, fuel and timing---Fresh Roush Engine. 2445 after the race though.

[Qik Nip]

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.

Denny:
Quityerbitchin ..Ya gotta get the HPDE cars on track!
Rick

[Weekend Warrior]

Alan - Congrats on the strong weekend! Can you give a run down of all the drivers and which year cars they drove?

I think I am correct on this:

Saturday's Race 1.)Whitis-99, 2.)Olson-1.6, 3.)Cooke-1.6, 4.)Molaver-99, 5.)Lawson-1.6?

Sunday's Race 1.)Cooke-1.6, 2.)Whitis-99, 3.)Cawley-?, 4.)McBride-1.8(94), 5.)Molaver-99

If anyone knows different, please correct me.

* McBride was up front on Saturday, but as the "Wiley Whitis and pals" gang closed in - he ended up getting spun in t-1.

[dmathias]

Ya gotta get the HPDE cars on track!

Why?

[Nash Lawson]

Guys,

I ran both of these events and was leading the race at CMP on Saturday before a royal screw up on the restart on the last lap. I also had fast lap time Saturday; and the Sunday race was a wash because of the Double Yellows. I think we may have had 5 laps of racing. We also ran a SM test session during lunch Saturday and the data was pulled from our traqmates. The cars looked pretty even to me. I don’t think CMP is the best test venue because the 1.6 does well there due to the lack of elevation change.

At VIR the engines in question from Alan’s results that I know, mine(Lawson=1.6) and McBride=1.6; I think Cawley has a 94 with a 1.8. We also ran an SM test session during the practice day on Friday and they pulled the Traqmate data again. I don’t know how they plan to use the data collected at VIR and CMP. It did seem that the cars were pretty even. I usually get pulled a little on the straights there and it seemed to happen less this past weekend but I didn’t think I had an advantage anywhere.

I would like to see them test at Road Atlanta because that is where it seems to me the 99 has an advantage.

The problem I see in their testing is all the results are affected by the different drivers and different cars and setups. The testing has to have some sort of baseline to ensure that the test results are repeatable everywhere.

[Matt McBride]

The problem I see in their testing is all the results are affected by the different drivers and different cars and setups. The testing has to have some sort of baseline to ensure that the test results are repeatable everywhere.

I'll second Nash here. To do a good statistical analysis of the differences between the cars, we'll need to get as many samples as possible, to figure out what's driver and what's car. This past weekend's event highlighted some of the familiar strong points of the 1.6's vs. 1.8's vs. 99's. I'm running an old crate motor, and am slightly down on power vs. most of the front runners, so as usual, I get caught pretty easily on straights. The '99 guys still seem to have a good straight-line advantage, especially apparent on the back straight, but not as much so as before. I couldn't even stay in a '99's draft last year. My nice, light, little 1.6 car still seems to have a handling advantage, as I'm seeing higher mid-corner and exit speeds than the '99's.

IMO, it looks like the 1.8L is the car to have at VIR this year. John was able to stick right with the top 1.6L cars in the corners, and had just a little more grunt coming out of Oak Tree, despite faster minimum speeds in the 1.6L cars. Running up with him was fantastic.

All in all, it seems that things are MUCH more fair this year. I was so ecstatic to be IN FRONT of a fast '99 for most of Saturday (until he got tired of it and sent me off T1). The racing this past weekend demonstrated that the cars seem to be very close. The top 5 or more on both days qualified within a second of each other. We didn't see the seperation of groups b/w the 99s and everyone else that we usually do.

-Matt

[Steve D]

I would like to see them test at Road Atlanta because that is where it seems to me the 99 has an advantage.

Nash -
I am fairly certain we will be testing at Road Atlanta as well. Are you coming? It would be great to have data from the same cars at different tracks.

The problem I see in their testing is all the results are affected by the different drivers and different cars and setups. The testing has to have some sort of baseline to ensure that the test results are repeatable everywhere.

I understand and agree. If you could plug all the data into a spreadsheet and accurately predict what would happen under all circumstances, we wouldn't need to run the races. The data will not even be close to perfect given all the variables, but I believe (a) we can get/keep the cars close and ( some people will criticize NASA and/or the process no matter what we do and regardless of results.

Thank you for running your car for the tests!

[Nash Lawson]

Steve,

I wish I could make it to Road Atlanta but I will be running at CMP that weekend.

I do commend Nasa for being active and trying to keep the racing even and fun.

[Matt McBride]

I do commend Nasa for being active and trying to keep the racing even and fun.

Ditto.

[Kyle Burkhardt]

Not being a smartass.

It would be nice to hear from the many respected and knowledgable folks who declared the 99 dead in NASA to offer an explanation or counter-point to the early evidence that seems to be indicating that the competition is still close. Granted, there are a lot of variables and it's still very early in the season, but the talk out there was that the 99s would be racing each other at the back of the pack--so much so that it has been suggested that they all bolt for PTE or leave NASA all together.

Just curious as I'm still preparing my 99 for the start of the NASA Midwest season.

[Steve D]

It would be nice to hear from the many respected and knowledgable folks who declared the 99 dead in NASA to offer an explanation or counter-point to the early evidence that seems to be indicating that the competition is still close.

Given the small sample sizes at each race and low number of races, can we get a few more under our belts before either side attempts to bludgeon the other into reasonableness?

The 99-vs-pop-up, NASA-vs-SCCA, crips-vs-bloods, Red-Sox-vs-Yankees arguments are unlikely to change anyone's mind...

Signed,

Switzerland

[john mueller]

... still preparing my 99 for the start of the NASA Midwest season.

Kyle are you planning to take your 99 to the Mid-Ohio event April 8-10 2011 ?

...

Signed,
Switzerland

Steve, Very very funny !!!