THE BACK ROOM or ....

Knestis said:
...because they're Atlantic motors dammit. Pay attention.

;)

K
Click to expand...

not helpful. i'm not sure that anyone on the AC really thinks they're atlantic motors. i can't speak for everyone else, but i did read through the data presented, and i don't.
 
Knestis said:
...because they're Atlantic motors dammit. Pay attention.

;)

K
Click to expand...

Good one! :happy204:

And it was the former builder of the Atlantic engine (Quicksilver RacEngines in Frederick, MD) who told me I might get 5-10 HP out of a full IT build under the IT rules! FA rules, now that's a different story!
AJ
 
tnord said:
not helpful. i'm not sure that anyone on the AC really thinks they're atlantic motors. i can't speak for everyone else, but i did read through the data presented, and i don't.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Travis - I thought i'd figured out how to use that winky thing.

Anyone who's been paying attention knows how I really feel about this.

K
 
what IS the problem??

"Fix the process first, then run the cars. Look back on history, see the double standard, realize there is no logical grounds for such a rule - and just fix it. JUST FIX IT." Bettencourt

Can anyone JUST fix it? The 800lb gorilla is that no-one can know what the multiplier should be for every car OR what is the starting point (actual factory spec [ie: Audi Cpe, Volvo 142] garbage in=garbage out!)
That won't be going away.
I found this in my in-box and publish it without prejudice:

"bhp 1484 concord ln bethlehem, pa 18015

I bothered to read thru your IT stuff. In general, it is the same old stuff of a lot of ignorant people playing smart executive- hey- ME, I know a lot even though I have little to back it up!!
No one seemed to get the point that the entire setup they have is useless- they are looking at the wrong stuff and even that is based on bogus info.
THE solution is based on 2 things:
-use some IT entry fees, much like national fees going to runoffs- for a chassis dyno now and then at the track, test some fast cars and find some answers that are based on fact.
-take the club's radar gun to the track and get some actual end of straight mph info.
It would be an amazing 1st step to wipe the slate clean.
bob g."

PS: radar gun is pretty simple and give some real intersting info! I know, I know, exit speed effect it and aereo comes in too, but regardless, motors are 90% or more of it. Sure would be easily collected and VERY interesting!
 
Last edited:
phil are you actually proposing adjusting weights of individual cars based on what we see on a radar gun at a given track?

and for the third time.....where did you get this document?
 
I can't say that I agree Phil.

motors are 90% or more of it.
Click to expand...

Which is why even in the instructor HPDE groups I pass a LOT faster cars? I mean these high end porsches with uber HP and an ITB car?

You're a Lime Rock guy. There isn't a big difference in straight speeds depending upon how fast the downhill is taken? Really?

The fact of the matter in Club Racing is there's a fairly large disparity in driver talent. We're not talking about a group of drivers who would run within tenths of each other given the same car. That's just not the reality. Then there are guys with big buck cars who reach the same point with guys who are superior drivers with less prepped cars.

It just isn't as simple as that, which is too bad.

We've also been over why the dyno system won't work and it extends beyond the little button being installed to decrease the map.
 
pfcs said:
"Fix the process first, then run the cars. Look back on history, see the double standard, realize there is no logical grounds for such a rule - and just fix it. JUST FIX IT." Bettencourt

Can anyone JUST fix it? The 800lb gorilla is that no-one can know what the multiplier should be for every car OR what is the starting point (actual factory spec [ie: Audi Cpe, Volvo 142] garbage in=garbage out!)
That won't be going away.
I found this in my in-box and publish it without prejudice:

"bhp 1484 concord ln bethlehem, pa 18015

I bothered to read thru your IT stuff. In general, it is the same old stuff of a lot of ignorant people playing smart executive- hey- ME, I know a lot even though I have little to back it up!!
No one seemed to get the point that the entire setup they have is useless- they are looking at the wrong stuff and even that is based on bogus info.
THE solution is based on 2 things:
-use some IT entry fees, much like national fees going to runoffs- for a chassis dyno now and then at the track, test some fast cars and find some answers that are based on fact.
-take the club's radar gun to the track and get some actual end of straight mph info.
It would be an amazing 1st step to wipe the slate clean.
bob g."

PS: radar gun is pretty simple and give some real intersting info! I know, I know, exit speed effect it and aereo comes in too, but regardless, motors are 90% or more of it. Sure would be easily collected and VERY interesting!
Click to expand...
Tell Bob G he's about as disconnected as he can be.
Anyone who thinks a chassis dyno is going to nail it down is been Rip Van Winkleing it.
WHY?
-Once you place the CLUB in the role of checking everyone, it becomes an
"us against them" proposition...at least subconsciously in some peoples minds, rather than a gentleman's agreement of policing and trusting each other.
- Most will have simple methods of ensuring the dyno sees the right map, and the car will be, of course, just under the appropriate number.
- Regions are often operating on thin margins. Getting, paying for and operating a chassis dyno is something they don't have the money for, nor likely the experienced and trained manpower to oversee. After that, we face the issues of WHICH chassis dyno? When calibrated? how was it used? Can we compare numbers from the NE one to the SE one? Etc etc.
- As for the radar gun, geeez, where do I start? So I run Hoosier A's and get a flyer on them and get out front before tehy go off, then block a bit for the second half of the race. Of course, I'm coming off the last corner a few mph faster because of that, so my MPH is higher. I MUST have mo' powah!

We have THREE HUNDRED PLUS cars to balance!

BTW, I love how you present this stuff, 'without prejudice'. LOL
Tell BobG to post himself...:rolleyes:
 
tnord said:
phil are you actually proposing adjusting weights of individual cars based on what we see on a radar gun at a given track?

and for the third time.....where did you get this document?
Click to expand...
Trav, Phil answers to no one, obviously. He's just having fun trolling and being a malcontent.
 
phil are you actually proposing adjusting weights of individual cars based on what we see on a radar gun at a given track?
No. But I believe the information would be pretty enlightening and would be valuable-it wouldn't be rumor, opinion, etc but empirical information. It could very well foward the process a lot more than all the ruminations of the various talking heads on this forum-this conversation is as much about how this has been wrongly/wrongheadedly handled as it it about what works. I say, if what you're doing isn't working, do something different.

and for the third time.....where did you get this document?
If you haven't guessed yet, I'm not planning to tell.

"Which is why even in the instructor HPDE groups I pass a LOT faster cars? I mean these high end porsches with uber HP and an ITB car?
You're a Lime Rock guy. There isn't a big difference in straight speeds depending upon how fast the downhill is taken? Really?"
Limerock may be a little exceptional but peak V is still largely a function of power. I've passed beginners & bozzos too. They're slow at both ends of the straight, but peak V is higher than mine every time-from pwr/wt! (Most IT guys aren't in that group, either). WGI? Mid Ohio? Unless you park it in the turns, it means a LOT.
And it would be easily collected and looked at.

Gee-look at all that's been posted while I typed!
 
Last edited:
i'm under the impression he got a hold of it before it was on the SCCA site Andy.

phil doesn't have to answer for me to have a pretty good idea. i don't really believe in coincidences. i ask not because it matters that it's out there (since as you mentioned, the whole thing is available on the SCCA site), but because someone isn't trustworthy.
 
Last edited:
pfcs said:
No. But I believe the information would be pretty enlightening and would be valuable-it wouldn't be rumor, opinion, etc but empirical information. It could very well foward the process a lot more than all the ruminations of the various talking heads on this forum-this conversation is as much about how this has been wrongly/wrongheadedly handled as it it about what works. I say, if what you're doing isn't working, do something different.
Click to expand...

hogwash. the same cheater volvos that resulted in misleading power data would lead to misleading trap speed data.

and what we're doing is working. look at the fields regardless of where you used to/currently are finishing.
 
tnord said:
he got a hold of and published it here before it was on the SCCA site, or the ITAC had a chance to announce it, Andy.

phil doesn't have to answer for me to have a pretty good idea. i don't really believe in coincidences. i ask not because it matters that it's out there (since as you mentioned, the whole thing is available on the SCCA site), but because someone isn't trustworthy.
Click to expand...
fixed.

That it was out and published does suggest it and other things are being distributed back channel..
 
WGI? Mid Ohio? Unless you park it in the turns, it means a LOT.
Click to expand...

Too many variables still. Does one throw out any numbers seen when a driver gets a good tow? At the Glen when I've gotten behind an SSM, my back straight speeds are quite different. Then would these numbers only be compared to other cars at the track that day?

Okay, so maybe if the same data acq system were used by all competitors, you one could gain some resemblance of useable information.
 
Well, Trav, you are more in the know than us. But the chicken and egg thing does come up those of us who are in the dark. Such as, was it published publicly BECAUSE it was leaked? As in, "Well, it's out, might as well make it official"?

And if YOU didn't know it would be published, Trav, I'd assume most/all of the ITAC wouldn't know either...so I imagine it shouldn't be landing in non ITAC members mailboxes.
Still. I'm glad it's out. I don't have to be all secretive anymore, LOL.
 
Last edited:
He wants to be.

Hey, I'm glad the thing is out, and especially that most seem happy with large portions of it. All we could ask for.

I do wish someone had told us when it went up on the SCCA site, so Josh could have announced it here.

The fact that it got out this way, rather than from us, makes it look like we didn't want folks to see it when in fact we expressly voted that we did and planned on making it available to all.

Just some frustration over that on my part, and why I wish Phil, apparently a 55 year old adult, would stop playing spy v. spy games over a hobby.

Jeff
 
JeffYoung said:
He wants to be.

Hey, I'm glad the thing is out, and especially that most seem happy with large portions of it. All we could ask for.

I do wish someone had told us when it went up on the SCCA site, so Josh could have announced it here.

The fact that it got out this way, rather than from us, makes it look like we didn't want folks to see it when in fact we expressly voted that we did and planned on making it available to all.

Just some frustration over that on my part, and why I wish Phil, apparently a 55 year old adult, would stop playing spy v. spy games over a hobby.

Jeff
Click to expand...

Great to hear.
Yes, I can certainly see your frustrations!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top