Hoosier A7s

[Fair]

Amen Terry! However its got to the point where trackside dyno testing on turbo cars is somewhat irrelevant because of how easy it is to switch tunes between sessions or even on the fly. NASA needs to figure out how to use GPS data to compliance check cars. Period. That is the only we can know for sure if a car is legit or not. I'm not talking about 5-10hp differences either. I'm talking about getting 1 to 1.5 seconds quicker between sessions with no other 'changes' to the car. Going from pulling dead even on the straights in the morning sessions and then walking away after lunch...in the Texas heat. This does not take Einstein levels of technical knowledge to deduce. Nearly everybody has data on their cars now. We should all be willing to share our files and if not or if no data exists we should be slapping a Solo in cars if they are running at the front and setting records/winning tires. If they go from pulling .6g to .7g long accel between sessions or during a session they just broke the laws of physics. Sorry but that session gets DQ'ed. No dyno required! Its painfully obvious how easy it is to switch between tunes on these cars when they can show up on any given weekend and cherry pick which class to run in for contingencies by the press of a button. Its kind of like Home Run records in the steroid era, not saying everyone was doping but when its that easy to get away with it you gotta break out the asterisks.

Agreed. To me this seems like the "Wild West" for the AWD Turbo cars right now... No AWD dyno = license to cheat. Not saying that anyone/everyone is cheating, but with no way to verify, its hard not to be skeptical.

 

But Alan's right - I think the move towards NASA supplied on-board GPS monitoring is coming soon, and this loophole can finally be closed. I've seen the same phenomenon he's describing and it needs to be stopped, and NASA attaching a data logger to every car is the answer. Its not a cheap technology right now, but it is becoming the norm in Pro Racing. Give it another year or two and these things might be $50 or less.

 

Retraction: Also want to retract some of the venom from my previous statement about "dyno irregularities" at NASA Nationals East. First of all, I wasn't even there. And after talking to several officials and competitors in the months that have followed, the issues seemed to be cleared up by Sunday. I apologize for my previous remarks based on too few, second hand accounts. I still don't agree with no-AWD dyno track-side monitoring.

 

Terry, sorry 404 pity not found... you've lost what, twice in the past two years and both times to 2WD cars? Jus sayin

 

True, my TT3 competition in 2013-14 only saw losses twice, and both times were to RWD non-turbo cars, but in other competitions I've run I did have to compete against AWD turbo cars over the years. And I even ran AWD turbo cars in the past, and know how painfully easy it is to push the limits and play the games.

 

 

Any updates on testing, times or setup on either the new R7's or A7's? Reports I have heard thus far (with the exception of whatever testing NASA did one time) is that the R7's are not meeting expectations. Local record holder who is consistently fast holding records at Sears, Thunderhill, and Laguna was consistently slower on the R7's as compared to the R6's. I have not heard great stuff either about the A7's as yet. Perhaps the setups have not been correct....

Hmm, well, I think its too early to see a pattern just yet. But, that's not what we saw at the first NASA Texas event, where 6 track records were reset (including TTB and TTC on R7s), and 3 TT classes were won on R7s. They are not as sticky as an A6 but they are faster than an R6, and the wear is excellent and heat cycle fall-off seems minimal. See my comments + data in the 2015 TT letter tire thread in this section.

 

 

I'm no brand loyalist by any means, but after seeing how well the R7 did at our first NASA Texas TT event in 2015, I'm not switching anytime soon.