How about requiring the builder to drive their own creation on one of the two autocross sections as mentioned earlier.
How about requiring the builder to drive their own creation on one of the two autocross sections as mentioned earlier.
In reply to Patrick :
You’ve got mail.
pimpm3 said:How about requiring the builder to drive their own creation on one of the two autocross sections as mentioned earlier.
Easy for you...
In reply to JG Pasterjak :
I'd lean towards keeping the "drag" portion a non-scoring part of the event. However, measure and record times and give out a "What a Drag!" trophy to the fastest time. I think that's what Andy got awarded in 2011 when the drags got rained out. The sentiment is similar here.
I'd say embrace that this year is going to be different and more focused on handling performance. I'm genuinely excited to see how things shake out with this double autocross format. I agree that it's not quite to the original spirit of the event (fastest, low expense car, in drag reachingra autocross), but that doesn't mean it won't generate interesting and informative content for the magazine.
And whatever happens, it will all go back to "normal" next year. And that should be a fast year because all of the drag racers will have had an extra year to develop their cars. Maybe the current 9.51 second record will fall.
I’d just like a firm direction so I know what to plan for in the next week.
Not that there aren’t excellent ideas, but this is a big change late in the game.
Firm Direction:
Two autocross courses. One normal, one more open. Launch straight that will be a separate trophy, but not part of the overall scoring.
All tech rules will remain the same, even the drag-centered ones. This is a one-year deviation, not an ongoing change.
Tom Suddard said:Firm Direction:
Two autocross courses. One normal, one more open. Launch straight that will be a separate trophy, but not part of the overall scoring.
All tech rules will remain the same, even the drag-centered ones. This is a one-year deviation, not an ongoing change.
Please define "more open". If this means a course that doesn't play to the Miata (and yes, I know Miata is always the answer), so perhaps something else that's not short course compromised can make up some ground, I may be able to proceed with my build. Otherwise, I would expect the top five places to variants on the Miata or its ilk... like the MR2 I posted as NMNA in the $2018 Classifieds last week (Apparently sold, the ad isn't answering my emails now.)
I think the more open courses can actually favor the miata like cars as they don't have to slow down for the corners. The tight courses can favor the vette's because they can get from turn to turn faster.
In reply to rdcyclist :
Where are you based?
You apparently have an interest in an MR2, and I’ve got a nice one. 
Robbie said:I think the more open courses can actually favor the miata like cars as they don't have to slow down for the corners. The tight courses can favor the vette's because they can get from turn to turn faster.
Actually, now that I think about it, ill put it like this.
I heard someone once say that all autoxes are just combinations of slaloms and u-turns. slaloms favor the skinny, light, low HP cars since they carry more speed through the slalom. U-turns favor the wide, heavy, high HP cars (mostly because they aren't slaloming).
How about we'll say that one course will be a bit more complex and transitional and the other course will be simpler and more sweepery. Does that help?
In reply to JG Pasterjak :
Sweepery. Good technical word!!
Does the firm direction also confirm that pro drivers will be available for both events?
Robbie said:Robbie said:I think the more open courses can actually favor the miata like cars as they don't have to slow down for the corners. The tight courses can favor the vette's because they can get from turn to turn faster.
Actually, now that I think about it, ill put it like this.
I heard someone once say that all autoxes are just combinations of slaloms and u-turns. slaloms favor the skinny, light, low HP cars since they carry more speed through the slalom. U-turns favor the wide, heavy, high HP cars (mostly because they aren't slaloming).
You need to get out to more events. You will find that power negates that ability to not slow down. More than negates it. Tight courses are hard for bigger cars, and Vettes are bigger than Miatas. If you are still in SE MI, go to a Vette event, and then go to an AROC event- notice the relative difference in performance of cars at those two events. You'll see that small cars light tight courses, and power cars like open courses.
SVreX said:In reply to rdcyclist :
Where are you based?
You apparently have an interest in an MR2, and I’ve got a nice one.
San Jose, CA. Undoubtedly a coupla thousand miles from the location of said "Nice One"...
JG Pasterjak said:How about we'll say that one course will be a bit more complex and transitional and the other course will be simpler and more sweepery. Does that help?
Sure does. Probably. I think.
I still have no idea what I'm going to be doing in the middle of October but I guess we'll see when the time comes. Hey, if it wasn't for the last minute, nothing would get done.
alfadriver said:Robbie said:Robbie said:I think the more open courses can actually favor the miata like cars as they don't have to slow down for the corners. The tight courses can favor the vette's because they can get from turn to turn faster.
Actually, now that I think about it, ill put it like this.
I heard someone once say that all autoxes are just combinations of slaloms and u-turns. slaloms favor the skinny, light, low HP cars since they carry more speed through the slalom. U-turns favor the wide, heavy, high HP cars (mostly because they aren't slaloming).
You need to get out to more events. You will find that power negates that ability to not slow down. More than negates it. Tight courses are hard for bigger cars, and Vettes are bigger than Miatas. If you are still in SE MI, go to a Vette event, and then go to an AROC event- notice the relative difference in performance of cars at those two events. You'll see that small cars light tight courses, and power cars like open courses.
I AGREE I need to get to more events!!
However this is coming from an admittedly small personal dataset that does seem to contradict conventional wisdom. I used to go to 3-4 autoxes per year, and for 4 or so years I would play "miata or vette" with myself at the event. It was actually something I would log on a sheet of paper (I had a notebook to track car setup and my own personal results vs ftd and pax, etc), I had a checkbox for course favors miata or corvette. I'd look at the results to see if the car with the faster times was a corvette or a miata.
I can tell you that most of the time the miatas won courses I would've described as big and open and the vettes won the tight ones. I was almost always surprised.
That said I will admit that my "study" is highly flawed because it depends on who shows up, car prep level, drivers, conditions, etc, not to mention sample size is probably low...
In reply to Robbie :
The hard part is that it's not a general Miata v Vette question. It's more about driver A in Car B vs. Driver X in Car Y- and noting the relative difference in those cars.
I'd never make a general statement about how fast Vettes are at a Vette event, but there were 4-5 Vette drivers who I knew very well, and you could use their data to make a comparison. One of those drivers was the fastest driver in an Alfa at an AROC convention back in 2007, when we let some people volunteering to help take our loaner cars out. They were great drivers. So on an equally time long course (not distance), the distance between the best Miata/Alfa drivers were closer at an AROC event than a Vette event.
just make a Roebling Road type course, plenty of straight's plenty of turns. Fast sweepery's , tight turns short straights. divide by two, 1 lap by a pro 1 by owner. or ringer but Alan Mc. can't be the ringer and the Pro.nor can anyone else, MY ego wants to drive, my age and reaction time say otherwise.
Tom Suddard said:I guess this could finally be my chance to take the overall title in my LEAF!
Only if the new high-speed autocross course includes a cliff.
two kegs of beer and bring back the sliced beef and more meatballs and anything bacon
Well, I have a $2,000 NC to put back together. If it shakes out as well as I hope and expect it to, double autocross is gonna be right up my alley!
And, just an aside here, I feel like having the “pro-driver” wheel your car to a fast time should at least have an asterisk by the result. Drive yo own E36 M3 people!
KyAllroad (Jeremy) said:Well, I have a $2,000 NC to put back together. If it shakes out as well as I hope and expect it to, double autocross is gonna be right up my alley!
And, just an aside here, I feel like having the “pro-driver” wheel your car to a fast time should at least have an asterisk by the result. Drive yo own E36 M3 people!
Realistically, the asterisk goes to the driver who drives their own car. FTD in the owner driven car is pretty darned rare at the challenge since the pro drivers were introduces in 2003. Remember, this is a competition of cars, not drivers. And having driven my own cars at a Challenge, I'm totally Ok with the pro drivers.
Any chance of finding a banked oval? I like the thought of building my 2 1/2 ton v8 Caprice as if NASCAR had a wagon class in the 90s
Justjim75 said:Any chance of finding a banked oval? I like the thought of building my 2 1/2 ton v8 Caprice as if NASCAR had a wagon class in the 90s
YES! so much YES!
GTXVette said:OH come on, those Datsun's can't be any worse on a road course than A Fiero on a drag strip. Patrick you did good in auto cross last year.
Datsun is over budget now and retired from challenge duties. Plus i’m a drag racer. I can make a car handle if i care, but when the current build gets trotted out you’ll understand where my head is. Maybe, nobody including myself really knows where my head is.
You'll need to log in to post.
