August 2011 Fastrack

Matt93SE said:
Just to throw in my $0.02 about ABS on track..
My DD is a 2004 Infiniti G35. ABS and VSC (stability/traction control).
I decided just for grins to take it to the track while my STU was was in pieces...
The car has NISMO S-tune springs, shocks, sway bars, and a stoptech brake kit, so it's reasonably well-handling. I stuck some Hawk HT-10 pads on the front with freebie Hoosier take-offs and went to the track.

...
I short, that system was definitely NOT track worthy, and this is a much more modern ABS system on a "sports car" that should be much more track-worthy than the cars that will be going into IT in the near future..

Unfortunately, many of the new ABS-equipped cars no longer have a true proportioning valve and use the ABS as a crutch to lower the parts count (and eat rear brake pads like my Infiniti). The Mazda RX-8 is like this. You can't pull the fuse to disable the ABS because you will then have no brake bias adjustment either.

This is something the ITAC is going to have to address in the next couple years as these cars come into radar range of IT..
Click to expand...

Actually... it's no crutch, the proportioning capabilities of a well-tuned system far exceed the capabilities of one analog pedal and a knob. That is, far and away, the issue I have as a racer against allowing these systems due to the performance benefit.

You didn't experience it, since you have a) a crappy Japanese car tune, and b) major mods from stock anyway... but trust me, as a professional/subject matter expert, I could make that car go deeper and more stable in the corners on a hot street tire than you can with R6 takeoffs and a prop valve.

I'm very familiar with the components in the RX8 and G35, among others...

But I agree with your closing statement, as Stephen said - this technology will continue to come at us, it isn't going away but rather is now required equipment on all street cars - so SCCA will continue to be faced with how to deal with it.

As a driver, and as an engineer - I don't support its use for racing.
 
924Guy said:
You didn't experience it, since you have a) a crappy Japanese car tune, and b) major mods from stock anyway... but trust me, as a professional/subject matter expert, I could make that car go deeper and more stable in the corners on a hot street tire than you can with R6 takeoffs and a prop valve.

I'm very familiar with the components in the RX8 and G35, among others...
Click to expand...

What I don't get though is that the car was nowhere NEAR lockup when the ABS started getting mad. For several laps, I actually made a concerted effort to squeeze into the pedal from 100+ft back from my normal braking spot, and the damn brakes still didn't work. I did better just mashing my foot to the floor and waiting on the computer. you think it was just going into ice mode or whatever?

Given the existing tune of the ABS system I could drop 5+ seconds a lap by removing it from the G. that's effing frustrating!!
 
Matt93SE said:
What I don't get though is that the car was nowhere NEAR lockup when the ABS started getting mad. For several laps, I actually made a concerted effort to squeeze into the pedal from 100+ft back from my normal braking spot, and the damn brakes still didn't work. I did better just mashing my foot to the floor and waiting on the computer. you think it was just going into ice mode or whatever?
Click to expand...
Actually, no... the so-called "ice mode" is just the control starting too early, at too little slip for dry/clear pavement. It can be triggered by many things... but the point is, you'd feel the pedal moving around a lot.

As for what the problem was... I can imagine some ideas, and we could discuss them, but send a PM - rather off-topic for the thread, and we've wandered pretty far already. Though I think this is still a good example of the negative side of allowing ABS in racing, at our level... and to think, this is still the system your car came with! Imagine if some genius figured he'd go faster by putting the ABS from a 911 or an E46 on your car... :wacko:

Given the existing tune of the ABS system I could drop 5+ seconds a lap by removing it from the G. that's effing frustrating!!
Click to expand...
Yep. :023:
 
924Guy said:
I can imagine some ideas, and we could discuss them, but send a PM - rather off-topic for the thread, and we've wandered pretty far already.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but yeah I'll get back to the topic. I just won't drive that car at the track anymore and the problem is solved. :)
 
StephenB said:
Jeff, are you allowed to unplug a sensor and run it without the ABS?
Click to expand...

You can't disable the ABS in SS. Plus, aren't the BMWs infamous for limp mode when puling sensors and fuses?

Although I would like to know how it's done since I won;t be running SSB next year. Anyone??

.
 
Page 15:
IMPROVED TOURING
1. #4187 (Grafton Robertson) List process math on each spec line
The process is listed in the IT Process Addendum to the Advisory Committee Manual on SCCA.com.
Click to expand...
Anybody got a link to this addendum and/or manual on SCCA.com? Google didn't turn up anything. Thanks.
 
gsbaker said:
Many thanks to those who supported the H&N restraint motions as forth on page 7.
Click to expand...

Mr. Drago did as he promised he would before the CRB as did I at the BOD level. There was a thorough and spirited debate and everyone in the room voted in what they felt was the best interest of the club. It was not an easy decision for anyone. I am sorry we lost but it is what it is and I am afraid we have to move on.
 
Everyone's efforts on this are appreciated. As you said, it's not an easy issue and it's not an easy decision to make.

dickita15 said:
Mr. Drago did as he promised he would before the CRB as did I at the BOD level. There was a thorough and spirited debate and everyone in the room voted in what they felt was the best interest of the club. It was not an easy decision for anyone. I am sorry we lost but it is what it is and I am afraid we have to move on.
Click to expand...
 
dickita15 said:
Mr. Drago did as he promised he would before the CRB as did I at the BOD level. There was a thorough and spirited debate and everyone in the room voted in what they felt was the best interest of the club. It was not an easy decision for anyone. I am sorry we lost but it is what it is and I am afraid we have to move on.
Click to expand...

Thanks Dick, I appreciate your and the other board members efforts who tried to get this through.
 
JeffYoung said:
Everyone's efforts on this are appreciated. As you said, it's not an easy issue and it's not an easy decision to make.
Click to expand...

+1 to that. Knowing that the issue was discussed thoroughly and exhaustively at all the appropriate levels goes a long way to boosting our faith in our representatives at that level, and the club in general. Hint: maybe this is something that might be well worth communicating to the wider membership, such as through a column in SportsCar???
 
dickita15 said:
Mr. Drago did as he promised he would before the CRB as did I at the BOD level. There was a thorough and spirited debate and everyone in the room voted in what they felt was the best interest of the club. It was not an easy decision for anyone. I am sorry we lost but it is what it is and I am afraid we have to move on.
Click to expand...

Really appreciate the effort, the open mindedness (from a HANS wearer even!*) and you coming on here to keep us in the loop.



*Years ago, Dick and I were 'early adopters', and bought HNRs. I got an Isaac, thinking it was the better way to go. Dick got a HANS. We discussed. Dick, correct me if I'm wrong, but you were pragmatic, thinking it would become mandated eventually. Yet you debated in spite of you position, kudos.
 
JeffYoung said:
Attached
Click to expand...
Thanks, much appreciated.

I do not use a HNR at this time. I haven't done any research, and all I think I know comes from these on-line forum discussions. However, I do know that I don't like being told what to do or what to buy. I will be doing everything I can to make sure a HNR stays a recommendation for MCSCC and that no rule exists that excludes perfectly acceptable devices. At least for racers in the Midwest that will provide an alternative.
 
dickita15 said:
Mr. Drago did as he promised he would before the CRB as did I at the BOD level. There was a thorough and spirited debate and everyone in the room voted in what they felt was the best interest of the club. It was not an easy decision for anyone. I am sorry we lost but it is what it is and I am afraid we have to move on.
Click to expand...

Thanks. You did all we could ask.
 
mc-integra111 said:
Thanks, much appreciated.

I do not use a HNR at this time. I haven't done any research, and all I think I know comes from these on-line forum discussions. However, I do know that I don't like being told what to do or what to buy. I will be doing everything I can to make sure a HNR stays a recommendation for MCSCC and that no rule exists that excludes perfectly acceptable devices. At least for racers in the Midwest that will provide an alternative.
Click to expand...

fyi, i find the second motion to be a very good alternate to SFI 38.1:

MOTION: to change 2012 GCR section 9.3.20. C.2 to read: As of 1/1/12, Head and neck restraints meeting SFI 38.1 or FIA 8858 will be required. The SCCA may also specify additional acceptable Head and Neck Restraint systems that [FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]are certified by manufacturers to exceed the performance standard described in SFI 38.1, or other appropriate industry standards as tested by one of the labs qualified to undertake such performance tests. [/FONT]
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

I am surprised that one vote to not require changed sides on this vote....(if i read that right...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top