[Editor's Note: This article originally ran in the February 2010 issue of Grassroots Motorsports]
When most people take up the sport of autocross, it’s merely an enthusiast activity that makes use of the car out in their driveway. As the racing bug bites harder, they spend a little time and money to further prep that car for whatever class it …
404s on the rest of the story and original
In reply to bentwrench :
Looks like some wires got crossed on the back end, it should be fixed now.
This is a solid article. It's ten years later now but I bet Andy is still maintaining his spreadsheet. I'd be curious to hear what his top picks are these days, based on the latest crop of cars and the current rule set.
No
First time I've ever seen SCCA Solo described as having "so few classes"!
I did this once and ended up with a Swift GT in STS. It sucked. I went back to emotionally picking my cars and it's been much more fun.
The swift, numerically, made sense. It was narrower, shorter, lighter and made similar power to the reigning car in the class the 89 Civic Si and could scream to 9500 rpms chipped. What you DIDN'T know from the numbers was the chassis is a wet noodle, the gearbox has a mountain between 1-2, the suspension is terrible and you can barely fit a 195/50/15 under it. But damn did that G13B make people's ears bleed.
In reply to RadBarchetta :
Original story is from 2010, so grain of salt and whatnot.
bobzilla said:I did this once and ended up with a Swift GT in STS. It sucked. I went back to emotionally picking my cars and it's been much more fun.
The swift, numerically, made sense. It was narrower, shorter, lighter and made similar power to the reigning car in the class the 89 Civic Si and could scream to 9500 rpms chipped. What you DIDN'T know from the numbers was the chassis is a wet noodle, the gearbox has a mountain between 1-2, the suspension is terrible and you can barely fit a 195/50/15 under it. But damn did that G13B make people's ears bleed.
I mean...the numbers should have told you some of those things. Gearing is almost more important than actual power/torque numbers for autocross, and area under the curve is more important than peak numbers for that matter. If you're not looking into that, you're doing it wrong. And if that info isn't available, it's a good sign that the chassis isn't well supported enough to make a good autocross car out of. Somewhere around here I still have the thrust calculation spreadsheet from when I was trying to numerically justify my emotional desire to run a STR Z3 and gaming out which model was the best starting point (luckily the ND was added shortly after I started looking into it and killed all hope of it ever being competitive and brought me to my senses).
In reply to Jordan Rimpela (FS) :
I know. There are more classes now then there were then, but not by a large margin. There were still a lot then, too.
But autocrossing is more fun when I actually like the car I'm driving! Even if that's a Lincoln Town Car, flopping all over the cones! 
dps214 said:bobzilla said:I did this once and ended up with a Swift GT in STS. It sucked. I went back to emotionally picking my cars and it's been much more fun.
The swift, numerically, made sense. It was narrower, shorter, lighter and made similar power to the reigning car in the class the 89 Civic Si and could scream to 9500 rpms chipped. What you DIDN'T know from the numbers was the chassis is a wet noodle, the gearbox has a mountain between 1-2, the suspension is terrible and you can barely fit a 195/50/15 under it. But damn did that G13B make people's ears bleed.
I mean...the numbers should have told you some of those things. Gearing is almost more important than actual power/torque numbers for autocross, and area under the curve is more important than peak numbers for that matter. If you're not looking into that, you're doing it wrong. And if that info isn't available, it's a good sign that the chassis isn't well supported enough to make a good autocross car out of. Somewhere around here I still have the thrust calculation spreadsheet from when I was trying to numerically justify my emotional desire to run a STR Z3 and gaming out which model was the best starting point (luckily the ND was added shortly after I started looking into it and killed all hope of it ever being competitive and brought me to my senses).
there's just so many things though that you can't quantify. The steering rack for instance was fine for a road course, but tight slaloms it was just a little long and required a bit more angle than you could get out of your arms. So that benefit of the narrow track was lost in the slower steering rack. But it wasn't much, but just enough. Some slaloms it was fine. Others it wasn't. 2nd gear on it was great for autox. 35-65mph in the power, problem was 1st ran out at 20mph and you had this lag to get back into the power from a dig. Another issue was always wheelspin. Because it was so light (mine weighed in at 1770lbs with a full 9 gallons of fuel) inside wheelspin was hard to manage. An LSD would have made that car so much better, but wasn't (isn't) legal for ST(S).
slowbird said:But autocrossing is more fun when I actually like the car I'm driving! Even if that's a Lincoln Town Car, flopping all over the cones!
I brought a farm truck to the second Peru Cam Challenge....
Pffft. Trucks suck at dodging cones. Do I care? Nope. I'll still try.
bobzilla said:slowbird said:But autocrossing is more fun when I actually like the car I'm driving! Even if that's a Lincoln Town Car, flopping all over the cones!
I brought a farm truck to the second Peru Cam Challenge....
Oops I forgot to preface the following statement with my Thought that yes race the car you love. Emotions win because the effort to reward ratio is way off. No way can you justify logically the amount of effort to the level of reward.
I really don't understand the whole concept of autocross. Probably because I don't like accounting.
auto cross is technically exact. Same car same track same repeat and repeat. Measure to the nanosecond. Upgrade your car to go faster and it will go faster.
Wheel to wheel is more about competition, man to man. ( OK person to person) It's possible to draft a faster car and then under braking place yourself in a position to take his line away and finish ahead of a faster car.
Yes it's more like chess than checkers. Yes it's often the newest most expensive car wins. But just often enough the driver makes the difference.
The course is not the same track time after time, Frenchy. It's different at every event, unlike a racetrack. So there's a learning component to it. Watch a top level autocrosser and you'll see them exploring the course and making mistakes to see what works before laying down a fast run.
Autocrossers tend to learn how to drive on the track pretty quickly. It doesn't always go the other way.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Fair enough. Your point is valid. But my "feelings" are that a person only competes with himself. He/she tries to put their best lap in and does so without outside interference.
There is no one on one. Sort of the difference between playing basketball with yourself and playing against a competitor.
There are a lot of sports where it's just you against the clock or some other measurement. The majority of the sports at the Olympics, for example. Or, if you like internal combustion - hillclimb, rally, drag racing, gymkhana, time trial, desert racing, Ultra4 racing or qualifying for a race :) The fact that nobody else can influence your performance doesn't make it any less valid. If anything, it's more pure. It's nothing but one on one.
I've noticed that motorsports where there isn't the chance for one competitor to interfere with another are a lot more congenial in the pits. You won't see a fist fight in a rally service area (well, maybe in Ireland on general principles) because it's the competitors vs the clock. In fact, competitors will help each other because they want to win fair and square. It's much happier environment.
Meanwhile, my 3 year old nephew idolizes Chick Hicks in Cars because he wins by crashing out all the other cars :)
In reply to frenchyd :
Actually, when you are at an AX and in a battle for 10th's of a second with someone from run to run, it's actually really intense.
In reply to frenchyd :
You've made your point many times over the years. Why repeat yourself? Just accept that autocrossing is popular, and move on.
As for the original article, I've always brought up the point of copying the fast cars, as it saves a lot of time, efforts, and excuses. But we are also some who would rather race a car we love than one that is meaningless.
Keith Tanner said:There are a lot of sports where it's just you against the clock or some other measurement. The majority of the sports at the Olympics, for example. Or, if you like internal combustion - hillclimb, rally, drag racing, gymkhana, time trial, desert racing, Ultra4 racing or qualifying for a race :) The fact that nobody else can influence your performance doesn't make it any less valid. If anything, it's more pure. It's nothing but one on one.
I've noticed that motorsports where there isn't the chance for one competitor to interfere with another are a lot more congenial in the pits. You won't see a fist fight in a rally service area (well, maybe in Ireland on general principles) because it's the competitors vs the clock. In fact, competitors will help each other because they want to win fair and square. It's much happier environment.
Meanwhile, my 3 year old nephew idolizes Chick Hicks in Cars because he wins by crashing out all the other cars :)
Your argument is well reasoned and intelligently discussed.
I grew up in the era of blood sports. Among the rewards of winning was remaining alive. I started racing during that period. We were losing a major racer every week. As enforced safety saved lives attendance grew. Justified by increased safety reduced loss attendance increased. Furthering greater attention to safety etc
As racing grew safer and safer and more amateurs began participating. Leading to safe and safer versions of racing. Hence the growth of Autocrossing.
Motorsports would be super boring if everybody just drove the same car because it is "the ultimate" one for any given class or event. What makes motorsports fun are the crazy builds of people making something they love that may or may not win but will always be original.
I'd rather lose every motor sport event in a car I actually like and enjoy driving, rather than dump a bunch of money into a car that I may not really like just so I can get a plastic trophy (since I doubt there are very many people on here who are actually making a living winning motorsport events)
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Keith, I believe that fist fights are required in Irish rallying.
In reply to 300zxfreak :
Ironically of all the motorsports I've participated in over the years, including tons of autocross and road racing, I find that the people at rally are by far the friendliest and least likely to get up in arms.
The one exception to that rule: If Ryan Millen is competing there always seems to be a spat between him and one of the other top teams. The Irish guys tend to stay in their own little group. But almost all of them are at the front of the pack so their group is nowhere near mine lol.
I can't speak for Rallies actually in Ireland of course :)
If everyone used numbers instead of emotions in motorsports, no one would be in motorsports.
You'll need to log in to post.
