I have a data acquisition system I use on my BP car (not at
Nationals and tours). I run alot of fast American Autocross
Series courses in addition to more normal SCCA solo courses.
With the data aq system (a Pi system) I know exactly what my peak
speed is. Often, I'll see that my max speed was, say, 65mph and
I'll have stock guys and street prepared guys telling me stories
about how fast they were "toped out in x gear" or "against the
rev limiter in x gear" and were going 70 or 80mph. Since my time
is typically several seconds faster in BP, I tend not to believe
the stories much.
That said, the course may or may not have been appropriate. Can't
tell, I wasn't there. I'd speculate that the individual or
individuals filing the protest have cars more amenable to, ahem,
handling courses, ie, tight courses.
Maybe I wish I was there since if the GT3 really went 83mph I
could have just gotten out of first gear for a change in my BP
car on an SCCA course.
Rick Brown
BP Corvette
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net
> > [mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of MWood24020@aol.com
> > Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 9:55 AM
> > To: 76067.1750@compuserve.com; ba-autox@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Re: Interesting Solo II news
> >
> >
> > Regarding course speeds at Ft. Myers, I have to amend my first
> > statement.
> > The 83mph speed has not been substantiated. The calculated
> > theoretical top speed
> > in 2nd, with the tires they were running, would be 78mph and
> Ian says he
> > never hit the rev limiter in 2nd, indicating a speed below
> > 78mph. The protest
> > was initially filed just to bring official attention to the fact
> > that the
> > course was "non compliant" and the response was to throw out
> > Sunday's times, which
> > is now under appeal (likely to be overturned?).
> >
> > If the current speed guidelines were written in 1994, when a C4
> > or RX7tt was
> > about as fast as a stock class car would be and street prepared
> > was nowhere
> > close to where it is now, I would think revising to bring in line
> > with the
> > current cars SAFE performance envelope would be the indicated
> > course of action.
> >
> > Mike
|