CMC#11 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Here is the fast lap data from the Traqmates that James Proctor (4th gen) and I (Michael Mosty - Fox) were running (thanks to NASA-TX) at our last event at Eagles Canyon Raceway on the weekend of 10/6/12. *per Al Fernandez: The following data traces were captured using NASA Traqmate data recorders at Eagle’s Canyon Raceway in October 2012. Blue trace is the LT1 4th Gen of James Proctor Red Trace is the 5.0 EFI Fox Mustang of Michael Mosty All data published with the express permission of both James Proctor and Michael Mosty This is each driver’s best lap of the session: 2:02.559 for Proctor, 2:03.009 for Mosty (note Mylaps times for these laps were 2:02.457 and 2:03.032 respectively). http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/598750_3277396553145_441181427_n.jpg Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted October 22, 2012 Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 Awesome, thanks for hosting this Michael. I know Adam is working on coverting my original chart to a pdf so it will hopefully be a little clearer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 No comment. Subscribing to allow notification of comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMC#11 Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 No comment. Subscribing to allow notification of comments. Please clarify Glenn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 No comment. Subscribing to allow notification of comments. Please clarify Glenn. Once I post in a thread, I get an email notifying me of any other posts made. This will allow me to keep tabs on this via my phone while at work. No black helicopters involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMC#11 Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 No comment. Subscribing to allow notification of comments. Please clarify Glenn. Once I post in a thread, I get an email notifying me of any other posts made. This will allow me to keep tabs on this via my phone while at work. No black helicopters involved. Understood. Do you care to share your opinion on the posted data? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted October 23, 2012 Members Share Posted October 23, 2012 http://www.shrackracing.com/hosting/rules/Fox_vs_4th_Gen_Data_at_ECR.pdf That should be a little clearer image. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 No comment. Subscribing to allow notification of comments. Please clarify Glenn. Once I post in a thread, I get an email notifying me of any other posts made. This will allow me to keep tabs on this via my phone while at work. No black helicopters involved. Understood. Do you care to share your opinion on the posted data? And what, skew the opinions of everyone else? I'm sure all the Ford guys know my opinion already since I drive a GM. Why do I need to post it? If I do, it will be once many other folks have posted theirs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadracerwhite Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I look at that data and ask why do we need to do anything to the fox platform? The 4th gen and fox platforms look dead even to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADVENM Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I look at that data and ask why do we need to do anything to the fox platform? The 4th gen and fox platforms look dead even to me. This 4th gen had an LT-1 engine, an LS-1 engine may have different results against both the LT-1 and Fox platforms. I think they compared these two partly because James rear track width isnt maximized to the rules (I heard 73 inches and change) while Michaels is fairly close to the allowable current rules which but is still less then James. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguydave1548534741 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I look at that data and ask why do we need to do anything to the fox platform? The 4th gen and fox platforms look dead even to me. At first glance, yes... Until you look at the half-second lap time differential. In a "typical" sprint race of 30 minutes, maybe 25 of which are under the green, and using ECR's 2-minute-ish lap time, that equates to roughly 12 laps. Now, multiply that 1/2 second differential times the dozen laps, and the Fox comes in six seconds behind... Yes, I know, traffic will play a part, but this is an example of the absolute potential of the two chassis, in the hands of high-level drivers. Six seconds behind in a race is not even close, some might call that "off-pace." I'm not an expert at DA analysis, but it looks like Mosty nailed a clean lap, and Proctor actually had a couple of small errors in his. Look at 35 seconds (T5?) and 98 seconds (T10?)... I *think* the jagged velocity trace and the momentary unloading on the LatG trace are from a quick counter-steer correction. He didn't lose much, though, maybe another tenth or two if he had gone though cleanly. ... because James rear track width isnt maximized to the rules (I heard 73 inches and change) while Michaels is fairly close to the allowable current rules which but is still less then James. So we have a maxed-out Mustang, against a 4th Gen that isn't at the limits, and the 4th Gen is still a half-second a lap quicker? Ouch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHISSTC Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Related to the above comment, I was going to ask if the red line was smoothed, or smoothed more, than the blue line. I looks to me like the blue line is more jagged. - More/Less smooth driving or a differences in driver finesse at the limits of adhesion? - More/Less vibration due to mounting method/location of the instrumentation? - More/Less jittery platform at the limits of adhesion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I look at that data and ask why do we need to do anything to the fox platform? The 4th gen and fox platforms look dead even to me. This 4th gen had an LT-1 engine, an LS-1 engine may have different results against both the LT-1 and Fox platforms. I think they compared these two partly because James rear track width isnt maximized to the rules (I heard 73 inches and change) while Michaels is fairly close to the allowable current rules which but is still less then James. None of our LS1 are running top times. We have 3 and they all are about the same w/ regards to laptimes. They compaired these two cause one is a Fox and the other is a the top 4th gen. Al managed the data loggers and I collected the track width data. I measured track on Sunday late inthe day and Al never saw the info until I sent it to him via email a few days after the event. And the only track data I took was front, not rear. Lets speak of the facts please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted October 23, 2012 Members Share Posted October 23, 2012 I had to double check that I had the right files when I saw that the 4th gen's data is more choppy. They are both smoothed by the software, but using the same setting. Mounting method was the same; duct tape the box to the floor. I have another set of data from the same weekend, from Mosty and Allford. Mosty's data trace is smoother than Allfords. I am leaning towards the reason not being recorder mounting. I have asked people that know Traqmates more than I what the reasons could be. If it were just in the turns that'd be one thing, but the choppiness difference is there in the straights too. Again, this is a best lap of the session. Both cars are just about as good as one could hope. Both drivers are just about as good as one could be. The 4th gen is at 74" front track, not the 74.75 its allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastntim Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 The differences in this current example are too close to say that the 4th gen has an absolute advantage. The small difference could be easily explained away in a myriad of diffrent ways. Both great drivers? sure. Does this mean that one driver isn't slightly better at this track than the other? Nope. This data is a good start, but you need a lot more of it before you can draw a definite conclusion. Run this same comparison on 5 different tracks and see what the results look like and then you will have a sufficient sample of data from which to draw reasonable conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cozog1548534733 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I had to double check that I had the right files when I saw that the 4th gen's data is more choppy. They are both smoothed by the software, but using the same setting. Mounting method was the same; duct tape the box to the floor. I have another set of data from the same weekend, from Mosty and Allford. Mosty's data trace is smoother than Allfords. I am leaning towards the reason not being recorder mounting. I have asked people that know Traqmates more than I what the reasons could be. If it were just in the turns that'd be one thing, but the choppiness difference is there in the straights too. Again, this is a best lap of the session. Both cars are just about as good as one could hope. Both drivers are just about as good as one could be. The 4th gen is at 74" front track, not the 74.75 its allowed. Maybe, contrary to the prevailing *opinions*, the Fox is easier to drive and it takes a 4th gen to run at the ragged edge to be equal. I don't know for sure because I'm not a Traqmate guru, but it is possible. I'm just sayin'... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 If it was mounted to the same place on both cars (4th gens), could it have been a poor mounting location? Where was it mounted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I just saw where you said you mounted it to the floor. Bad idea. Refere back to the TA threads where we point out the damage being done to the floorpan from the TA. The cracks dont' appear in the floor due to a lack of vibration. Al - lets work together on coming up w/ a cage mount design that can be used in all cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHISSTC Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I just saw where you said you mounted it to the floor. Bad idea.Refere back to the TA threads where we point out the damage being done to the floorpan from the TA. The cracks dont' appear in the floor due to a lack of vibration. Al - lets work together on coming up w/ a cage mount design that can be used in all cars. It looks to me like noise in the trace. That's why I asked about smoothing between the two. Is it vibration or stray electrons? Cage mounting away from vibration and wiring sounds good. Do you think any type of vibration damping material between the floor or cage and the unit would affect the ability of the unit to do it's thing, or would it get rid of some of the noise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 No idea. Wold be worth a call to Trackmate and see what they say. Likely they have seen this happen before and will know right off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Algozine Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Congrats to Michael and James for allowing there laps to be dissected. Some more information that would be helpful. Is the smoothness a product of driving more smooth ? or other? How did there average laps times compare to each other? How did these best lap times compare to each average laps time? Is the half second difference typical or atypical? I guess what I'm asking, are these typical laps for both cars? If not, what are the differences? Great info, as always, more variables is helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMC#11 Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 Congrats to Michael and James for allowing there laps to be dissected.Some more information that would be helpful. Is the smoothness a product of driving more smooth ? or other? How did there average laps times compare to each other? How did these best lap times compare to each average laps time? Is the half second difference typical or atypical? I guess what I'm asking, are these typical laps for both cars? If not, what are the differences? Great info, as always, more variables is helpful. The data that has been posted was from R2 on Saturday. There is also data from R3 on Sunday when we had a Traqmate in both my car and Dan Allfords 4th gen. I have not seen that data from Sunday but it would be great to be able to compare my data from Sat to Sun as well as compare James' (4th gen) data on Sat to Dan Allfords (4th gen) data on Sunday. I know the data from James to Dan is not 100% apples to apples but it could be a good reference. Al, would you mind posting the data we have from Sunday? Also, below is the mylaps information for fast lap of each race for me, James, and Dan. R1 + R3 were based on qual times and R2 + R4 were inverts with the three of us starting at the back. Michael...2:03.548.....2:03.032.....2:03.544.....2:02.783 James.....2:03.541.....2:02.457.....2:03.845.....2:02.669 Dan........2:03.822.....2:03.976.....2:03.537.....2:02.576 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Algozine Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Just to clarify and not to be a smart a$$, but isn't Michael the exception? Isn't he so passionately refered to as the "Alien", meaning one of the very few to grind out some incredible laps in the Fox/SN cars? If so, somehow that should be a factor. Which also infers that repeating this type of testing with a couple other cars and drivers would be a good idea, if possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHISSTC Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Seeing similar best laps from Mr. Mosty during multiple sessions the same weekend either overlayed or averaged together along with some type of statement of average error or variation may be a good way to validate the accuracy, consistency, and repeatability of a specific driver/car combo instead of assuming a single lap during the entire weekend is an accurate representation of the whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Just to clarify and not to be a smart a$$, but isn't Michael the exception? Isn't he so passionately refered to as the "Alien", meaning one of the very few to grind out some incredible laps in the Fox/SN cars? If so, somehow that should be a factor.Which also infers that repeating this type of testing with a couple other cars and drivers would be a good idea, if possible. Mosty isn't getting lap times out of the car that the car isn't capable of. If one car can do it, they all can. Last I checked, racing was about who is the fastest. With this said, and I'm sure all Directors agree w/ this, no matter who is driving (pick your favorite F1 driver), if you put them in a CMC Fox and they run 2 seconds faster than anyone in a Fox has ever run and then you put them in a 4th gen and don't see the same 2 seconds, the Fox will get adjusted (downward). The goal is to level the playing field of the chassis, and not driver skill. If Mosty was 2 seconds off Proctor, I would be demanding change in favor of the Fox. He's not. The difference in times is easily explainable if you know both drivers. I could be wrong and Proctor sucks and Mosty is destined to be racing in F1 in 2 years. I wouldn't put money on it, but I could be wrong. One thing I keep going back to is Kellam. His first year in his SN-95 was full of DNF's. He just could not catch a break. His 2nd year of wheel to wheel he kicked our ass. All this in a SN-95 against the same Proctor we have now. He also was faster than Mosty w/ Kellam having less seat time. I can't help but feel as though Mosty is leaving something on the table. A small something like 2 tenths. From what I know, there ain't much difference between a max'ed out Fox and a max'ed out SN-95. Those two car should be very close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.