Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

[craig]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Certainly.. But for you, we'll grant you a lifetime membership.. Now how's that for stirring up the pot?

Sorry, I didn't express myself clearly. I meant to say:

I'm not even a member of SPDA and you want me to be president of SPDA ?

[JoeT]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Sorry, I didn't express myself clearly. I meant to say:

I'm not even a member of SPDA and you want me to be president of SPDA ?

For somone as honourable as you, absolutely... The offer remains.. LOL

I'll be happy to be just a "co-founder".

[craig]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

For somone as honourable as you, absolutely... The offer remains.. LOL

I'm sure that a coup d'état would be the result

Besides, it isn't very presidential to hijack the hijack of a thread!

So ... to get back on topic, is there still a radar gun around somewhere? I remember that speed on the straights used to be measured and published as part of the results - that data could inform the issue - or maybe muddle it more?

[Chuck Atkins]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

I'm sure that a coup d'état would be the result

Besides, it isn't very presidential to hijack the hijack of a thread!

So ... to get back on topic, is there still a radar gun around somewhere? I remember that speed on the straights used to be measured and published as part of the results - that data could inform the issue - or maybe muddle it more?

I have the SoloSprint radar gun.

[Slowpoke]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

So ... to get back on topic, is there still a radar gun around somewhere? I remember that speed on the straights used to be measured and published as part of the results - that data could inform the issue - or maybe muddle it more?

Speed at the end of the straight is useless for any scientific measurement if you dont also have a starting speed and take the improvement over an exact distance. For this reason, GPS data is better.

[Doug P]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

In either case, what prevents someone from sandbagging on the pedal?

[1999_ITR]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Their overall time.

[Slowpoke]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

In either case, what prevents someone from sandbagging on the pedal?

Sandbagging equally each of the three timed laps that the GPS is there is a difficult thing to do. If we see different slopes in the speed lines from one lap to the next, we wouldn't use the data. And as Mark suggests, if the overall lap times are different then other sessions, we could reject the validation.

If it would be logging for the exclusive reason of validating a dyno plot, then a CCC member could also ride with the participant. (Assuming there are two seats. )

[craig]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Speed at the end of the straight is useless for any scientific measurement if you dont also have a starting speed and take the improvement over an exact distance. For this reason, GPS data is better.

Okay, speed on the Fabi straight.

You have to keep in mind that it is hp/weight (or vice versa) that is of interest, not hp.

To put it another way, in a gas tank whose capacity is only known roughly, you don't have to empty a gas tank to measure miles per gallon. However, you do need to empty the tank to measure range. The former (mpg) doesn't give you the latter (range), but determining range does give you mpg. So knowing hp gives you power to weight, but knowing power to weight doesn't give you hp.

(Hmm, I think I may be confusing everybody here. Friday night at work is not good place to think about calculus. )

No doubt GPS data is better, and the software included in GPS' does the math for you.

[Slowpoke]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Okay, speed on the Fabi straight.

You have to keep in mind that it is hp/weight (or vice versa) that is of interest, not hp.

To put it another way, in a gas tank whose capacity is only known roughly, you don't have to empty a gas tank to measure miles per gallon. However, you do need to empty the tank to measure range. The former (mpg) doesn't give you the latter (range), but determining range does give you mpg. So knowing hp gives you power to weight, but knowing power to weight doesn't give you hp.

(Hmm, I think I may be confusing everybody here. Friday night at work is not good place to think about calculus. )

No doubt GPS data is better, and the software included in GPS' does the math for you.

Keep talking like that and you'll end up on the CCC. Most GPS units will estimate HP/TQ but require the tests to be from a dead stop. James worked out a way to do it reliably through trap speed from a roll so that launch and shifting aren't as significant as it would be with time over a distance.

[MastaDeeMon]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

well if everyone agreed on that we wouldnt be sitting here discussing this

obviously the TRUTH of the matter is that very few of us are optimizing, and those that are not optimising are running and busting down dynographs, 23 competitors!

and thats just the engine side,


with the exception of Luca and James, no one is optimising aero,

suspension wise, how many competitors are running 100% sphearical bearings and ohlins?

I run full sphericals, but only Koni yellows. I could add Ohlins, and I'd still be dead slow because I am a noob driver. You can optimize the car all you want, it's the driver that's most important.

Unless he's really heavy against a very light dri..........................hehe, I keed, I keed

[craig]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Keep talking like that and you'll end up on the CCC.

No way . I've been asked before, and my answer remains the same: I do not have sufficient experience as a SoloSprint competitor, let alone a consistently successful SoloSprint competitor, to be on the CCC.

Besides, I usually agree with Adam

[Tashko]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Soooo, I'm sure everbody is busy with the holiday related stuff, but...have all the necessary meetings for '09 rules taken place and decisions made?

Anything going on with the car classification that the competitor at large can know, or do we need to be patient and wait for the '09 rule book?

[Dave Barker]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

We are well along with the final wording of rules changes as accepted by the OSO but for official stuff I would wait until the i's are dotted and the t's crossed. Chuck wants them available by Jan 1/09

Here are a few teasers to keep you thinking :

There are no recommended changes to aero PIPs

There are no changes to the neg tire PIP rules ,

There ARE recommended changes to turbo PIPs but they are not all decreasing

There ARE changes to the dyno rules including the addition of another type of dyno with a different wheel to crank HP conversion. The changes are not as drastic as suggested at the drivers meeting in November

[Tashko]

Re: Topics for meeting, Nov 22 at 1:30

Thanks Dave. It's nice to have a timeline and Jan. 01/09 is great! Plenty of time to figure things out...and get a dyno done