AWD (no flaming please), and no mention of the Audi

[kbrew8991]

Hummm, no conflict of interest there.

I still haven't been able to figure out how his SRT-4 w/ LSD that weights less and has more power from the factory can be placed in a base class of TTE and my 02 WRX that weights more and has less horsepower from the factory starts out in TTD.

 

you can point fingers all you want, but Bryan Cohn and those other National guys ESPECIALLY won't allow that... so...

 

You really should drive one of those cars before you point fingers, in stock form they're legitimately TTE material, especially against stuff like the Mazdaspeed Protege. and Doug brings up a great points, you couldn't add AWD or even get it close to performing like a WRX off a corner with 14 additional points (and more points than that actually depending on how you use the tire width credits)

 

now modified to hell and back, they're pretty damn potent...

 

If I were you, I'd look and really see if your car was legitimately classed by comparing to other D cars, not pointing fingers at one well modified TTC car that starts in E, but thats just my $0.02 towards giving you an actual leg to stand on

 

lets ask this question:

you've got an 02 WRX, what class do you compete in?

[StealthTT]

For example, when looking at 2door vs 4door you need to consider: what if the Evo came in coupe form? If it was the exact same car just repackaged as a coupe, then the aero would be better and the car should conceivably be issued a 2door penalty. Or actually I guess the 4door would get a credit under the current rules.

- Mark

 

But all the aero numbers are thrown out the window when we run windows down. As stated before, a 2-door coupe will typically have larger side windows and more drag than a 4-door.

[StealthTT]

....and Doug brings up a great points, you couldn't add AWD or even get it close to performing like a WRX off a corner with 14 additional points (and more points than that actually depending on how you use the tire width credits)

 

You guys argue like all we're doing is timing acceleration out of corners. We're racing around a whole track. There is braking, cornering, and acceleration...in traffic. When considering all these facets, AWD loses it's perceived advantage due to it's higher weight in front of front wheels and increased polar moment of inertia. In steady state cornering like carousels, typically a RWD will walk away from an AWD.

 

It is easier to drive and it's great for the street, but on the track with moderately trained drivers, the 0.5 penalty is too much.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Guest

[Spectator Racing]

What's interesting though, is in this thread you're arguing against the 4-door giveback on AWD cars:

 

http://www.nasaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=15555&start=10&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=5c444f5235df8d0730b1ed189a05170c

 

In my first or second post to this thread (page 5, third post down) I mentioned that I tried to remove the 4dr penalty. I then stated that enough legitimate arguments were provided and I decided I did not have enough data to the contrary and dropped it. So I'm not sure what you're trying to say with this reference.

 

Why do some people have to be an ass when discussing rules? You'd think there was $1,000's in prize money. Or is the keyboard warrior syndrome more prevalent in the A-type personalities found in most racers? I give up, you're tougher than me.

 

And how was my post construed as "being an ass?" I suggested that you and all of these other Stealth / Eclipse drivers come out and compete, then if your allegations turn out to be true, make a formal request to the rules committee. The quoted statement is simply commenting on the fact that you're making threats to NASA about all of the members it's going to lose due to this issue. It's a little far fetched. I assume they're more concerned with losing members they already have then members they might someday have if they make a rule change.

[StealthTT]

And how was my post construed as "being an ass?"

 

Oh I dunno, you could look at the post I quoted from you that you had to remove when quoting me.

 

I suggested that you and all of these other Stealth / Eclipse drivers come out and compete, then if your allegations turn out to be true, make a formal request to the rules committee. The quoted statement is simply commenting on the fact that you're making threats to NASA about all of the members it's going to lose due to this issue. It's a little far fetched. I assume they're more concerned with losing members they already have then members they might someday have if they make a rule change.

 

I tried and will continue to try. By the way, it's 10 times harder to gain new customers than to keep the ones you have.

 

I have no doubt that you're happy with things the way they are. All you have to worry about is keeping from charbroiling another Vette and you're competitive.

[Spectator Racing]

I tried and will continue to try. By the way, it's 10 times harder to gain new customers than to keep the ones you have.

 

I will agree with you there. That is a good point.

 

I have no doubt that you're happy with things the way they are. All you have to worry about is keeping from charbroiling another Vette and you're competitive.

 

Then you would be very wrong. I have a hard time keeping up with 17 years of technological advances in the Corvette since my car's 1984 design. The top 5 TTS and TTA vettes are running faster lap times than me with similar wt/pwr ratios. And I removed 400 lbs and added 150 HP to get to 8.7. I don't have ABS or a transmission in the back to help with weight distribution. I don't have AC or a stereo. I can't take my helmet off and drive the car home (assuming it didn't break).

 

I'd love to come up with some way to get my car classed a little lower, but that possibility is far fetched. I built it over the years to nobody's rules, then discovered NASA TT and tried to make it fit. Same exact situaion as SOP. There's no point in trying to de-tune it to A as TTA is just as fast these days. I don't have the scratch to buy a Z06 and prepare it, so I stick with my car and try to figure out ways to make it faster that don't affect power or weight. But I'm not quitting just because I didn't win. I'll be there next year, in fact, my intent is to move into ST2. Maybe I won't win there, either. But I'll work my ass off to try.

 

So arguing and name calling aside, I hope to see you out there in TTS (you, too, SOP). An AWD rule change isn't going to affect me much either way. But if you aren't running, I guess I won't be too broken up. There are some pretty good guys in TT, I'm looking forward to racing them next year.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Guest

[1LapSRT]

You guys argue like all we're doing is timing acceleration out of corners. We're racing around a whole track. There is braking, cornering, and acceleration...in traffic. When considering all these facets, AWD loses it's perceived advantage due to it's higher weight in front of front wheels and increased polar moment of inertia. In steady state cornering like carousels, typically a RWD will walk away from an AWD.

 

So how is that does that relate to the FWD (SRT-4) question that was posed prompting those replies?

 

FWD has the same forward mounted, high wieght as the WRX and even worse weight distribution ~65/35 due to almost nothing being behind the driver.

 

And (I did it again....) FWIW I think the WRX comes with better brakes too!

[StealthTT]

So how is that does that relate to the FWD (SRT-4) question that was posed prompting those replies?

 

FWD has the same forward mounted, high wieght as the WRX and even worse weight distribution ~65/35 due to almost nothing being behind the driver.

 

And (I did it again....) FWIW I think the WRX comes with better brakes too!

 

The 65/35 doesn't hurt a FWD as much as you think. In some circles, people believe having most of the weight on the set of tires that are turning, braking, or accelerating is a good thing. When you're doing that with all 4 tires, most of the weight in front of the axle is a disadvantage.

 

I think the 0.9 advantage that FWD has over AWD is waaaay too much.

[IndyWRX1]

Hummm, no conflict of interest there.

I still haven't been able to figure out how his SRT-4 w/ LSD that weights less and has more power from the factory can be placed in a base class of TTE and my 02 WRX that weights more and has less horsepower from the factory starts out in TTD.

 

Umm...lets see..... AWD? Maybe?

 

And the SRT starts with one * (7pts) towards the move to TTD and you have no *. Not that big of a seperation.

 

Besides.... It's just a neon!

 

Not that big of a separation, 13 points. Interesting, I could do a lot with 13 points.

 

Mr. Brewer

As you have probably guessed I run in TTC. Now my question to you is "do you run on any tracks that are only composed of turns"? I don't. This recurrent theme that keeps getting presented here that "AWD cars have the advantage out of corners", may be true, but a LARGE part of that also depends on the driver skill and a number of other factors. In addition if I don't come out of that corner with a lot of moneteum then a lighter car with more hp will more than likely pull past me, if I'm on a track with straights .

I am looking at weather the WRX is legitimately base classed or not. And after all of the data has been complied I'll submit it. But I can tell from things I've read in this post and others I'm more than likely not going to get very far.

And it really doesn't matter what you say, if you run in the class that you write the rules for there is the potential for a conflict of interest.

When I mentioned this senario to a couple of friends who work in technicals area of one of the racing series they just laughed and said "isn't that a conflict of interest"?

It should be set up so that someone else, or better yet a committee of people not running in that class is writing the rules.

[1LapSRT]

And it really doesn't matter what you say, if you run in the class that you write the rules for there is the potential for a conflict of interest.

When I mentioned this senario to a couple of friends who work in technicals area of one of the racing series they just laughed and said "isn't that a conflict of interest"?

It should be set up so that someone else, or better yet a committee of people not running in that class is writing the rules.

 

I don't know for sure so this is as much of a question as it is an answer.... "Did Greg write the current rules"? Or is he enforcing those written by a predecessor.

 

Until NASA can pay people for there services as directors, I think there wil always be someone running a program that competes in said program. I know I don't want someone who only knows spec miata's (just and example...not wanting to piss anyone else off) to make all the decisions for TT were the cars vary HUGELY, and there are a lot of people with questions about other makes/models of cars.

 

And Greg may write new rules or adjustments to current ones, but they still have to be approved by a National committee.

[1LapSRT]

In some circles, people believe having most of the weight on the set of tires that are turning, braking, or accelerating is a good thing.

 

I think people in those "circles" are idiots.

 

First thing you learn on a FWD car is that the tires can do one thing well at a time. They can accelerate, but not turn. Or they can turn, without (much) acceleration.

 

But any "excess" input of either thing will completely eliminate either from happening. Can you say wheelspin and push?

[kbrew8991]

Indy, I'd say keep running.... if there really is a legitimate conflict here and the SRT4 really is that far off, he'll get caught one of these years. But so far, it just seems that he's spent the points just right and drives his ass off at Nationals to do as well as he does...

 

Part of this is a chicken-and-egg problem, so far I really haven't seen a serious TTC effort besides Greg's car, so if he's the only serious build competing against other stuff I'd sure hope he'd beat them all... otherwise that means that he sucks at driving/setup/etc

 

the other competitors this year were a thrown-together in a few weeks Boxster S (that was still about 90lbs overweight) driven by a new guy to Mid-O and a M Coupe with a moderately prepared to the limit, but still stuff left on the table car.

 

Are you really prepared well for "C" (not just the points you chose but free-mods as well)? How do you do regionally?

[heavychevy]

How about a rear engine +3?????

 

[Greg G.]

Here we go. If you can't beat the fastest guy on the block, then he must be cheating somehow (by influencing the rules process in his favor). It can't have anything to do with his driving skills, driving strategy, preparation, experience, daily setup, and time spent figuring out the best way to push the car to the extent that the rules permit. It can't have anything to with the support he has gotten from his sponsors, and the time and money that they have put into helping his efforts. It can't have anything to do with getting a little lucky when it counts, and beating a guy by seven one-hundredths of a second for a national title ('06 TTC).

 

Be careful for what you wish for, because you just might get it. The TT and PT rules are "special". They are different than rules for other race classes that are significantly easier to write, because you just make a rule, and everyone in the series follows it--effecting everyone equally (supposedly). In TT/PT, there are rules (hundred plus modification possibilities, and forty plus no-points mods) that do not effect everyone equally, because every rule does not apply to every car. With literally thousands of possible permutations and combinations of possible modifications, and around 10-15 thousand car models that are eligible under the listed base classes, this is not a task that should be taken on by anyone that doesn't have the complete and full interest of the series in mind--including from both the driver's and administrator's points of view. If you want someone to write your rules that doesn't compete in the series, you will get rules that often won't make any sense to you (much more often than you get now--believe me). You will get rules that do not take the driver's point of view into account nearly as often. I have seen some of the potential rules in the past that could have been instituted, that would have been terrible from the drivers' perspective, and once that perspective was explained, they were deleted. Believe me (or not), you do not want a guy (or committee) who has not spent years working with these cars and rules to be writing them. This is not Spec Miata, or Spec Neon. Also, it is in your interest (collectively) to have the rules written by someone that does not have a financial interest in NASA (or the need to appease a boss or lose a job that is putting bread on the family table). I think that NASA has recognized all of these factors over the years, and watched how TT and PT are growing, and realized that although not perfect, the system is working.

 

Now, once again, the process goes like this:

1) I get your e-mails all year long with rules change suggestions.

2) I get e-mails and comments from TT and PT Directors all year long with rules change suggestions.

3) I solicit rules change suggestions from TT/PT Directors, and the National Executives before we begin the revison process.

4) All suggestions are kept in a file until revision time, and then opened up and reviewed together. In the past, John Lindsey has looked at them with me, but I am getting Bryan Cohn more involved now, with all of his years of experience with various forms of race competition.

5) All of the National Executives and I discuss the desired direction and "strategy" that will help to improve and build both series in the future.

6) The suggestions are reviewed, and the ones that are viable possibilities are closely scrutinized. Hours of research is sometimes done to determine how a possible change will effect multiple cars differently. Various persons that I use as technical consultants are often then asked for their opinions, and to look for loopholes in the potential change(s).

7) The language of any rule change is then initially written by me.

Once this process is completed for all possible rule changes, the first revision is sent out for review by National executives, and sometimes select TT Directors that have been with the program for years. I suppose in a sense, you could consider them the TT/PT Rules Committee.

9) All comments and suggested changes to the first revision are then considered, and rules are re-written, and then go back to the exec's. This process goes on until there is consensus between me (National TT/PT/ST Director), and the NASA National executives. There are often five or more revisions before we are all satisfied.

10) The nearly completed package is sent to the NASA Executive Director, who then makes his own comments and recommendations, or approves the Rules as delivered. If necessary, all of us then conference on any proposed changes that the Exec. Director is proposing, and once we all come to a consensus, the rules are approved and finalized.

** During this process, if there are any proposed rule or base class changes that would effect the car(s) that I drive, they are scrutinized more closely by the NASA Executives than any other car model. There is no favoritism given to the SRT4 over any other car, but it is probably the most scrutinized of any car out there. At my request, and for the benefit of the series in the future, the changes in '06 to the base classing system, took much of the subjective nature of the base classing out of the hands of those assigning base classes.

 

So, from a personal aspect, I will remind "my fans" the following:

I have won 4 NASA National Championships, one National Championship third place finish, and after this season, a total of nine Regional Championships, and three second place finishes in Regional Championships (in PTC, TTC, TTB, Spec SRT, TTD, Super Unlimited). We can haggle over a 7 pt. * for the SRT4 base class all day, but the above accomplishments in TTB and Super Unlimited, while driving a TTC/PTC legal car, had nothing to do with rules writing.

 

Now as far as the car being to much for TTC, I have lost multiple track records over the past year to other TTC cars. I have had very close battles with other TTC cars both this year, and in the past years. In fact, there is a TTC BMW in NorCal that I have yet to meet up with, that has smashed my personal best times at all of his tracks. I only won the TTC Championship by 0.07 seconds in 2006, and in PTC this year, the fast lap times between me and my closest competitor in PTC at the Championships was again with a tenth of a second (I think he had the faster time, but I would have to check again). There are multiple possible builds of different car models that I have thought of that I think would be better in TTC than my own. And, here is the embarrassing kicker. At Buttonwillow, as recent as 2 weeks ago, the fastest Honda Challenge 4 car (a TTD/PTD car if he competed), not only beat my best time of the weekend, which was my fastest ever, but he beat the TTB record set by an M-Coupe that beat me on Saturday. There were other H4 cars that were very close behind as well. You can say that it is just because of the nature of the track, but if you look at the H4 times from Willow Springs, which is clearly a HP track, the best of them is very close to my fastest times there as well. No, not quite as fast, but then again, we are talking about TTD/PTD cars that still have at least 10 points left in their class before even getting bumped to TTC. The classing of my car is fair. Those who want to beat it just need to step up (before I get an H4 car myself). Until you drive a stock SRT4, and feel what a real push-pig is like with its 67/33% front-rear balance, you shouldn't even talk about its classing. And, until you drive one that has a Stage II kit, and realize that with the little OEM turbo it really only has two throttle positions (off and wide open), and then either watch the tires spin coming off corners, or sit impatiently waiting for the damn thing to straighten out enough to hit the accelerator, you have no idea about these "fantastic" cars. If I had the money.......

 

I've got one more thought for those of you that think that rules changes should be determined by how many cars of that type are winning. Other than mine (and the one win Jeff Lepper had in USTCC at Cal Speedway in 2005--where he was accused of bending the rules by his competitors), how many SRT4's have you seen win anything in road racing? (No offense to Curt Simmons in the USTCC, but his wins this past year came only when the top cars (Evo, WRX, BMW, Integra)from '06 and '05 decided to go and play elsewhere). But, if the car is so great, then where are all of the other championship trophies in NASA TT and PT for SRT4's?

 

Rant over--got work to do for you guys.

Edited November 2, 2007 by Guest

[heavychevy]

So is there no one in the ranks that thinks the AWD penalty is a bit excessive, or is it only the people that drive them?

 

When are the rules going to be finalized? Have the discussions already began with the big wigs in NASA? If so, can we be notified of the hot topics, or is this our only chance to speak?

 

 

Sorry, lotta questions.

[InTheTurns]

Wow. I thought this thread was over when SOP stated the following:

 

 

I got into TTS because my car dynoed at 355hp, and so that's where it fit strictly according to hp/wt, not points. I probably need to investigate if counting points will get me into TTA instead.

 

19 pages and counting? I propose SOP and Stealth list their all their mods to see if they have maximized their cars potential. Otherwise, we may see 40 pages. This is good entertainment!

[1LapSRT]

I've got one more thought for those of you that think that rules changes should be determined by how many cars of that type are winning. Other than mine (and the one win Jeff Lepper had in USTCC at Cal Speedway in 2005--where he was accused of bending the rules by his competitors), how many SRT4's have you seen win anything in road racing? (No offense to Curt Simmons in the USTCC, but his wins this past year came only when the top cars (Evo, WRX, BMW, Integra)from '06 and '05 decided to go and play elsewhere). But, if the car is so great, then where are all of the other championship trophies in NASA TT and PT for SRT4's?

 

Hey Hey.... I take offense to those remarks.... I have kicked some serious ass this year and only missed nationals due to getting laid off at work.

 

 

http://www.onelapofamerica.com/index.shtml?place=fifth

 

2007 GRM - UTCC participant (finished right behind Chip Herr).

 

2007 Super Lap Battle Challenge Qualifier - Unlimited Class

 

"Congratulations to all the Rd Atl. qualifiers and thank you NASA for hosting another successful weekend at one of the finest road courses in America.

 

Position Name Lap Time

1 Ed White 01:35.6 996 TT

2 Chris Rado 01:36.0 Scion TC

3 James Clay 01:36.1 BMW M3

4 Douglas Wind 01:38.5 SRT4

5 James Elterman 01:40.1 STI

6 David Norton 01:45.7 S14 "

 

http://gallery.modified.com/gallery2/main.php/v/modified-com/13-410248/_MG_2513.jpg.html

 

And with only 7 days of NASA-SE TTS this year, 4 wins and third in regional points ain't too shabby!

[IndyWRX1]

Mr Brewer,

 

I have not taken all of the free mods yet. I have 7 mods points left before I get bumped up to TTB. So.. I have some work to do and room to work with.

I placed second in my 1st TT and lost a wheel bearing (known problem with the 02 WRX's) the second day.

 

Mr Greenbaum,

 

Thanks for that explanation of the process. My only suggestion would be to include the regional directors in the review process since they (hopefully) have contact on a monthly basis with the little guy's running in TT, and are familiar with their concerns. Although I'm sure you get plenty of email as it is.

[slowoldpoop]

Greg's explanation is a thoughtful, welll-written description of the rules process. It explains how competitors can lobby for changes, and how NASA considers all these requests in a fair and equitable manner.

 

It should be edited and posted somewhere on the NASA site or in the rules so everyone--not just the viewers of this thread--can see how the process works.

 

NASA's biggest problem (IMHO) is that it does not communicate well. Everything you ever wanted to know about NASA is buried somewhere in the rules, but it is virtually impossible to get a clear understanding of how it all works. It's like trying to get a drink from a fire hose.

 

Like most technical documentation in this world, everything NASA publishes lacks a Chapter 1; that is, an overall description of how the system works, how to get started, what it all means, and so on. Most documentation assumes that you already know everything, and just need some place to look up details.

 

Similarly, NASA assumes that everyone understands everything from the gitgo when, in fact, you need a PhD in Rules Reading to wade through it all. Somebody ought to edit everything with the intent of making it more understandable and useful to new and existing competitors.

 

For example, it took me two years to realize exactly what NASA was offering to HPDE competitors. I was under the impression that the only way to race in NASA was to qualify for one of the special race groups, such as AI, Spec Miata, and so on. I also thought that all cars had to be race-prepped with roll cages and whatnot. When I finally understood the progression from TT to PT, and that I could prepare a car for TT that could eventually be raced in PT, I came over.

 

I bet all that information is buried somewhere in NASA's documentation, rules or promotional material, but it is not in any usable format--like in a simple brochure or document that explains what NASA is and what it offers competitors.

 

NASA is growing in leaps and bounds, but I suspect it is mostly because of racers talking to other racers, not from any public relations, marketing or advertising on NASA's part. Man, imagine what NASA could become if all the Time Attack, Porsche and BMW club, SCCA and HPDE participants actually understood what it is we are up to over here.

[Greg G.]

Rich, I think that you and I finally agree on something

 

NASA has been spending more time and money on marketing. We are also getting more TV and magazine coverage. You may have seen the recent Redline TV show that highlighted NASA. However, I agree that there is a need for the "average Joe" to be better informed of his ability to get out on the track with his street car, and stay at that level, or slowly build and progress in a logical fashion from HPDE to TT to PT/ST. The word is getting out, but I wish that it was getting out more quickly as well. Now, the TT website does have a few pages that have just the descriptions/ summary type narratives that you are describing, as well as a FAQ section. Please tell me that you know we have a TT website....But, I agree that this information should really be on the main NASA website as well.

 

I'll copy the post I wrote about the rules process, and post it in a Sticky.

[Slowwrx]

Greg: I think you are doing a great job and I'm sure you take a lot of heat for things that you can't control.

[StealthTT]

Thanks Greg for both posting the rules process and looking to advertise the club more. I've been pm'ed and emailed several times about this process, but I was unable to find it. I could only told them how I recalled it went based on what I'd read here on the forums. Unfortunately I've searched and couldn't find it in the past. A sticky is a great idea. Posting this process will be quite beneficial to people who think it's "one guy who is a winner" making the rules. I do think the regional TT directors should have a say in the rules. There are more races than Nationals and just a couple regions. I have no idea if Dave Royce is one of those you tap, but he should since the Midwest and O/I regions are full of some of the toughest competitors.

 

I will continue to work on getting more 2-door, AWD's to participate. Hopefully with more data we can see how the classing is working out. I have a lot of respect for those who've done the planning and execution of these rules. I've probably been too outspoken about this one issue.

 

Both Rich and I feel this is the best organization to run with because of the wonderful instruction and driver path. We've both written countless forum posts and emails to help people figure out NASA. The NASA websites are a little difficult to navigate when you don't know what you're looking for. The classing is a little difficult, but I understand completely why it is. I've classed probably a hundred cars for people and I will continue to help those who can't figure it out.

 

With Rich's professional background and love of this sport, I know he could shape the beginner's introduction to NASA into something very beneficial. He's quite adept at writing for the particular audience.

 

So when are we going to see these rules? I have a car to build.

[kbrew8991]

Mr Brewer,

 

I have not taken all of the free mods yet. I have 7 mods points left before I get bumped up to TTB. So.. I have some work to do and room to work with.

I placed second in my 1st TT and lost a wheel bearing (known problem with the 02 WRX's) the second day.

 

I was amazed at how much faster I was by spending 3 mod points, 7 will definatley make a huge improvement

 

Maximize the car in the class, then see how you compare.. my $0.02

[kbrew8991]

I've got one more thought for those of you that think that rules changes should be determined by how many cars of that type are winning. Other than mine (and the one win Jeff Lepper had in USTCC at Cal Speedway in 2005--where he was accused of bending the rules by his competitors), how many SRT4's have you seen win anything in road racing? (No offense to Curt Simmons in the USTCC, but his wins this past year came only when the top cars (Evo, WRX, BMW, Integra)from '06 and '05 decided to go and play elsewhere). But, if the car is so great, then where are all of the other championship trophies in NASA TT and PT for SRT4's?

 

Hey Hey.... I take offense to those remarks.... I have kicked some serious ass this year and only missed nationals due to getting laid off at work.

 

 

http://www.onelapofamerica.com/index.shtml?place=fifth

 

2007 GRM - UTCC participant (finished right behind Chip Herr).

 

2007 Super Lap Battle Challenge Qualifier - Unlimited Class

 

"Congratulations to all the Rd Atl. qualifiers and thank you NASA for hosting another successful weekend at one of the finest road courses in America.

 

Position Name Lap Time

1 Ed White 01:35.6 996 TT

2 Chris Rado 01:36.0 Scion TC

3 James Clay 01:36.1 BMW M3

4 Douglas Wind 01:38.5 SRT4

5 James Elterman 01:40.1 STI

6 David Norton 01:45.7 S14 "

 

http://gallery.modified.com/gallery2/main.php/v/modified-com/13-410248/_MG_2513.jpg.html

 

And with only 7 days of NASA-SE TTS this year, 4 wins and third in regional points ain't too shabby!

 

nevermind the 2 days you had fastest overall TT time at Roebling, a course that rewards cornering grip over horsepower IMHO

[1LapSRT]

nevermind the 2 days you had fastest overall TT time at Roebling, a course that rewards cornering grip over horsepower IMHO

 

Yeah...there was that too....but I didn't want to brag....

 

(and let us not forget I only ran one session on Sunday because I had a broken axle boot)