supermac Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Having been on both sides of the being faster in a slower car argument, I can't honestely say for sure why it happens. I have beaten AI cars in my CMC car and been beaten by CMC cars in my AI car, I didn't change that much but my car prep level did. My point is that I am not completely buying the "its all the driver" BS, the car definetely matters! I for one would like to see the number increased just for the fun of it (big cams sound cool!) and it would allow the slower AI guys a little more cushion over the fast CMC/2 drivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Hallett is a very short and twisty track too... rewards handling. Heck some of the CMC midpackers aren't any faster than me at that track On other more normal tracks I wonder how big the difference really is....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koserv Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 I've been the sound of one hand clapping, but I don't think the AI guys need faster rules to clear us, I think we need slower rules. Bigger brakes, tires, wings, more HP/TQ....I understand the CMC/CMC2 split started to keep up with the newer platforms, but I'm not convinced we didn't go too far. Being the "little brother" doesn't have to mean we all grow up into.....well, into what? We piss and moan that AIX is "too open" and only a couple guys nationwide can spend to keep up. Half the AI guys want to go faster so the CMC guys don't run 'em down. I gotta go get a wing for my crappy CMC car. Where does it end? In my short racing career, I haven't much cared how fast I'm going, as long as I've got somebody to race with..... Man, guess that rant has been cooking for awhile... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UBR Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 I'm with Kent on this one. What has changed in the last few years? AI has the same basic rules (except for a snazzy dash requirement now) as when I started 3 years ago. CMC has "evolved" to where, on some tracks, they can run similar times as AI. Depending on a lot of factors, some driver, some car, some track... If there is a concern of overlap, don't change the series that has been a constant. Address the creep. j Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koserv Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 Address the creep.j I resemble that remark..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T&A Racing Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 So why is it a problem if some CMCC cars pass some ai cars. What tally is the issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koserv Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 Cause you guys get in our way.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron B Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 EXACTLY- when I ran CMC it sucked racing for position with another CMC car and some SLO-PO AI guy gets in the mix if he would have had 9.0/1 he might have been able to get away from us AB AI #46 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UBR Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 Address the creep.j I resemble that remark..... Ooopps. Sorry about that. Just so you CMC guys know. You can pass our AI car because of my well researched coaching style. When Mark is getting ready to go out, I remind him that he's not ready to push the gas pedal all the way down yet. He does remind me on the radio of his kindness. As much as he would like to show up all the GM products in that other class, he's too polite to do that. And in fact, even lets them pass him from time to time. Between my coaching and his manners, it makes for some fun out of class action. j Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z28racergirl Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 I have no video to back this up. Back in 2007 at Cal Speedway Brady Flaherty and I got caught up in a hopeless battle which was between classes (he was CMC) and it was W-R-O-N-G but I was going to Nats later that year and learning a lot. I had the power and handling over Brady but he'd dive-bomb me in braking zones and pull off other maneuvers just to race me (can't remember where his other CMC guys were in relation to him). We were racing only for claims of superior male genitalia length - not for CMC or AI points or position - and let's just say I've never been ashamed to admit the truth that I'm short; but I really didn't want him to beat me. I can't remember how each of us finished that weekend but after being pretty frustrated with him at first, I'd like to say I learned A LOT and without him racing with me I wouldn't have. Yeah, racing out of class is a stupid, potentially unsafe waste of time, energy and dough. But CMC and AI for as long as they are valid classes with NASA will be joined together much like when your dad leaves your mom, marries the newer model and makes new babies. Which offspring is better? Hard to say. Need new rules to further differentiate our classes? I don't think so. I hate hearing this "you're in my way" crap. If that's true - this is racing. Make the pass. I ain't gonna hand it to you but if you "get" me I'll keep it clean out of respect. Let's all race together and share a laugh and a handshake at the end of the day. http://www.z28racergirl.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=4143 Christine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firehawkclone Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 It's not only the CMC cars catching the back markers in AI, it's the other way around. A 2 car has the same tire and pretty close to the same brakes, and real close to the Tq. So unless it's the very large tracks, it's offen we have to force a pass when we start lapping them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeP-99Z Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 8:1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakebit Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 8.7 would make sense if you do change it. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallmosty Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 Pi is a nice round number... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nape Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 I sure hope you guys who want to raise the power to weight ratio are thinking about the next brake upgrade too. Another $2-3k for a motor upgrade and $2-3k for a brake upgrade. No problem in a crap economy, right?. Either way, I'll be there with the little iron block 305. Have fun spending the cost of 2-3 events to go a couple tenths faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron B Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 I'm not sure I would need to upgrade my brakes? If we went from 9.5 to 9.0 with 350hp and a car that weighs 3350lbs, all I think I would need to do is take out the 150lbs of balast? and run at 3200lbs- my current brakes might work better? stay cooler? hauling less weight down into the corner? but I could be wrong - but I can see where some cars built super light already and much lower hp numbers could have to make upgrades to both because they have no weight to take out? Looking at Nats, what was the ratio of older to newer cars? It seems most new cars have to run balast or build heavy to match hp/weight numbers or run some type of restrictor - so it becomes easy to remove weight cheap or remove a restrictor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKBITN Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 What he said!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nape Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I'm 2920-2940lbs post race based on fuel load and the car makes 300-306 average RWHP on the dyno (1-2% variance). I'm dialed in and I've got a spare engine back from the machine shop ready to assemble that's identical to the first. A power to weight change costs me twice if I have to up the power and removing weight when already this light gets expensive really fast. If there was any chance I thought the power to weight would change, I would've spent the money on an LS1-based engine instead. Oh well, I guess it's only money and it rewards those who put together too much motor instead of building to the rules package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron B Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKBITN Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 It's only money.If you don't spend it then Obama will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T&A Racing Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 Guys, I know Todd and directors have no plans of making a change this year on the power to weight stuff. I have both a Fox and now a s197, and really don't think either one has a real problem within the rule being competive with the right driver. I am totally with TJ on this one this is a tweak that we just don't need. The newer cars can run with the current rules, detune or add weight. If we feel that this is realy a long term issue then phase something in over the next five years, but again I think we mostly trying to solve a problem we don't have, or at least not our biggest one. Thanks for listening, end of rant. Mark TeamUBR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacovini Posted December 14, 2010 Author Share Posted December 14, 2010 Mark's right. It is not a near term problem as the power:weight ratios will remain for 2011. The pro/con debate of changing is interesting and good to have, but will do nothing for the 2011 rules package. Long term we'll continue to look at it and if possible, give some insight into the future years. Now...back to finishing up the 2011 rules! I've been out of pocket and super busy the past few weeks. I will concentrate on getting this done now... -=- Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnett Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Todd, thanks for the update. I know there are some items that are more pressing for 2011 than HP to LBS so when you said "I will concentrate on getting this done now..." do you mean soon.....ish? Just kidding Do you care to share with the class the items that we might still have influence over? It looks like you have our attention. Say; S197 track width increase? (Dean ruined that for us) Computer controlled throttle closing? Dash boards with working clock? (that was for Adams) What ever you have to share........ Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T&A Racing Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Dash boards with working clock? (that was for Adams) Robin Sounds like a warranty item to me, pretty sure the clock is not currently working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Horse Posted December 16, 2010 Share Posted December 16, 2010 Maybe that's my problem, I need to upgrade to a clock from my sundial! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts