John Whitling wrote:
>If we spent all of our time on slow autox courses I wouldn't
still be doing this.
What exactly do you mean by "slow?" If you've got enough time to
look at your speedometer in a Solo II run, you're not going as
fast as you can.
>For me, your normal Pro Solo is SLOW solo. No fun.
Maybe this just isn't your sport, then. Ever tried bungee
jumping? I understand it's a real rush....
>There should be a place for fast courses in solo.
There are two. They're called "Solo Trials" and "Solo I." If you
can't get your cookies at Solo II - legal speeds, then one of
these might be just the ticket.
What do you really mean by "fast?" It's not the same as "quick."
I can go over 120 in my car on a straight stretch of freeway.
That's moderately fast, at least to me. Not exactly my idea of
fun, however, nor terribly challenging. Anyone can push the loud
pedal.
> They are often safer courses too.
Maybe you'd better offer some f'rinstances so we get an idea of
what you mean by that.
>Any courses slower than 55 or so are way too slow for me.
Well, we all have to start from zero. On a 3/4-mile course if
your time is, say, a minute, your average speed will be 45 mph.
Is that too slow? I claim the numbers don't tell you squat.
>Slow courses are not fun. They are usually littered with
>too many maneuvers jammed too close together, and usually by
rookie course
>designers.
I can go along with the concept, but how many maneuvers on a
given size lot is too many? There's a pretty wide range of
answers to that one, and I've had lots of fun on courses I
suspect you'd call "slow."
Jay
|