> Probably a good reason the fastest F-body ESP car around lately is a
> lighter (somewhat) 3rd gen. car of Mark Madarash's. That car is quick
> because of driving and balance, not hp.
Half the F-body trophy winners at nationals (and 8 out of 9 Mustang
trophy winners) the past 3 years have been heavier 4th gen cars. There
are other issues in their favor (e.g., the 4th gen Mustang bodies are
55% stiffer)
> Traction is an issue, but a possible alternative, is to go ahead and
>take ALL the potential weight reductions, then address the traction
>issue with engine controls, ie. reduce available torque at corner exit
>rpm's to let the car hook up.
It's an idea. Not sure what to do with balance. I think 20-100K R&D
could *possibly* yield an answer that gets the cars somewhat close to
the M3s. But the more likely probability is that it will be 20-100K thrown
away. I'll continue to pursue it as budget/ideas allow.
But if a number of top autocrossers think the ESP cars are
underprepared, chasing all of them away with M3s won't get them more
prepared.
MODESTLY better competition will. Let people continue to work on the
DSMs, see if the Cobra IRS is really better than the well-worked out
aftermarket live axle solutions, perhaps the F-body crowd has some
other ideas coming too.
> Fun stuff to think about anyway.
Yes, particularly if you did well with an internet $tartup.<s>
|