Virginia Motor Sport Club Discussion Forums
September 18, 2018, 12:58:02 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
  Home Help Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3]
51  Results / Autocross / Re: June 12th 2016 Results on: June 12, 2016, 05:52:33 PM
I have no idea whats going on with the missing runs.  Some of them are saved in the computer but not showing up on the reports and others just seem to be missing.

We have paper backups still so I will try and fill in missing runs.

52  Results / Autocross / June 11th 2016 School Results on: June 12, 2016, 04:19:21 PM
Results for the school:
53  Results / Autocross / June 12th 2016 Results on: June 12, 2016, 04:14:20 PM
Results are up, please post any corrections:

54  Results / Autocross / June 5th 2016 results on: June 05, 2016, 10:38:17 PM
Results are up.  Please post any corrections
55  Results / Autocross / May 7th Practice Results on: May 09, 2016, 06:23:54 PM
Results for the practice.  Only raw time for your first 20 runs was recorded, no penalties.
56  Results / Autocross / May 8th Results on: May 08, 2016, 04:59:30 PM
Results are up.  Please post any corrections.
57  Results / Autocross / Re: April 2016 Results on: April 28, 2016, 08:59:36 PM
Results updated
Ricky Wilmoth STF -> SM
Cory Lickey STU - CSP
Dallin French nSTX -> nSM
Christian Martos STX -> STU
Brian Kay STF -> STS
Daniel Brown - Got some runs, maybe even the right ones
58  General Category / Ask the Competition Committee / Re: Opinions on running by class on: April 28, 2016, 10:37:15 AM
My apologies if I sound like I'm complaining. By all means I am not, you guys do a FANTASTIC job running events and getting everyone sorted out in the heats as well as getting results out fast. We are are appreciative of that, Lord knows I couldn't do it.

No worries.

I like running by class and it worked well for us at the first event. At the last event we ran the last heat and there were only a few cars and so we were basically hot lapping with two drivers. We gave up our last two runs because there was no opportunity to cool the car. There should always be a minimum of five minutes between runs per the rules. Consideration needs to be given to heat size relative to the number of two driver cars.   

Agreed, Just because we can run through the heat faster doesn't mean we need too. We will make that point clear next time. If heat 1 took 1.5 hours with 25 drivers, then heat 4 should be able to take 1.5 hours with 12 drivers. No need to burn up cars or tires because you are in a smaller heat.


^All of this.
59  General Category / Ask the Competition Committee / Re: Opinions on running by class on: April 26, 2016, 05:35:21 PM
To be clear:
The computer decided nothing on the last event.  I go through and group the main categories (street, street touring, etc) into different heats and then balance from there.  Street was by far the largest category last event so HS and CS got shuffled out like STS got shuffled out of heat 3. 

Its not perfect and I'm trying to improve my system and it will not always be fair.  Planning the heats out in advance doesn't work well with when walk-ups are able to skew the heat size.
60  Results / Autocross / April 2016 Results on: April 24, 2016, 04:49:56 PM
Preliminary results are up.  Post any corrections needed.
61  Pictures and Media / Pictures and Media from Events / Re: March 26th 2016 Autocross media on: April 01, 2016, 08:04:33 PM
Dad's best:

My best:

Maybe someday I'll stop driving like a hack (not likely)
62  Results / Autocross / Re: March 26 2016 Results on: March 31, 2016, 09:36:53 AM

1 of the STX classed cars (white 325i) should be classed SM. I do not know the name but the car was turbocharged. I can help identify it in a line up.


Dallin French?
63  Results / Autocross / Re: March 26 2016 Results on: March 29, 2016, 06:42:57 PM
Results updated

Richard Gary moved from SS -> SSP
Billy Ju moved from DSP -> DP
64  Results / Autocross / March 26 2016 Results on: March 26, 2016, 04:29:17 PM
Results have been posted.  Please post any corrections in this thread.
65  General / Open Forum / Re: Dyno Day on: February 10, 2016, 07:43:09 AM
Joseph Banks
2006 rx8
180hp, 130 torque
66  General Category / Announcements / Re: 2016 PAX/RTP on: November 22, 2015, 04:45:59 PM
IDK what was going on with the first STP number.  Seems really optimistic for STP to be faster then STU even with wider tires and have a pax harder them CAM.
67  General Category / Announcements / Re: 2016 PAX/RTP on: November 19, 2015, 01:04:14 PM
STX, now <sarcasm>officially</sarcasm> faster then SS.
68  General Category / Ask the Competition Committee / Re: tire shopping need help class car and tire permitted on: October 18, 2015, 05:05:49 PM

Looks like its fine in CAM.  I'm not sure the club does the supplemental classes, but it would fit under CAM-S.

Wheels and tires are unlimited so long as the tires are 200 tread wear or greater.  BFG Rival-S and Bridgestone RE-71R have proven to be the best 200 tw tires this year.  I've heard wider sizes are coming, but don't have any details.
69  General / Autos and Autosport / Re: Yet another CAM based class. on: October 09, 2015, 09:23:00 PM
I wasn't aware of any ST class for Pony Cars. STX was around a few years ago and was limited to 305 cubic inches.

Yes.  So they bitched and got moved to STU where they could run wider tires and were even more outclassed.

I think the fact that Sam took the CAM Challenge in an F/S car reinforces my opinion. The car is competitive in F/Street, E/Street Prepared,C/Prepared, and will be in ST/P. I think CAM should be just that...CLASSIC American muscle. Anything built after 1995,(or whatever), isn't eligible. Just my .02.
Other then i think 95 is too recent for 'classic', I agree with the rest of this.  Just because muscle cars lag 20 years behind everything else doesn't make them classic.
70  General / Autos and Autosport / Re: Yet another CAM based class. on: October 04, 2015, 07:49:42 PM
I don't understand CAM either and I certainly don't understand why they add STP right after adding CAM. They were already plenty of places to run pony cars.


CAM was supposed to bring in pro touring/good guys types and isn't eligible for a jacket.  It might be a fun class to run in right now, but if anyone ever builds a real CAM car things will get out of control quick.

STP makes a lot of sense.  There is a market for people wanting to modify those types of cars that are seen as not competitive in STU.  Lets be honest, while there are stupid things in both the ST and SP ruleset, ST is less stupid and more street able with a pointy in build. 

And to qutoe someone with a better understand of behind the scenes then me:
"But what about CAM? CAM is some random experiment by the national office. If it brings people in from outside our world, great. But between it being unlimited, which the national office has shown no desire to address, and it not being a jacket class, which the SEB will fight tooth and nail against it ever happening, it is not an option for many. " -

Pages: 1 2 [3]
Copyright © 2018 Virginia Motor Sport Club