If we spent all of our time on slow autox courses I wouldn't still be doing
this.
For me, your normal Pro Solo is SLOW solo. No fun. Too small, too slow. You
don't
have to be 75 in a stocker to have some fun, but you need some variety. There
should be a place for fast courses in solo. They are often safer courses too.
Any courses slower than 55 or so are way too slow for me. I don't go back to
those
sites. I do this for fun. Slow courses are not fun. They are usually littered
with
too many maneuvers jammed too close together, and usually by rookie course
designers. Solo courses should have enough of a fun factor that everyone
attending
has a good time .... not just the winners.
John Whitling
Scott & Glenda Meyers wrote:
> Justin Hughes wrote:
> >
> > >Randy wrote... "I think that it is hard for someone who is only used to
> > >slow/small courses to hit a gate at 75mph and know that they can make it
> > >stick."
> >
> > >
> > >Mari Clements pointed out that section 2.1 in the rule book states,
> > >"Speeds on straight stretches should not normally exceed the low 60's
> > >(mph) for the fastest Stock or Street Perpared category cars".
> >
> > I agree strongly with both statements. Personally, I wouldn't want to hit a
> > gate at 75 in my bare bone stock econobox, even if it could go that fast to
> > begin with!
> >
> A friend in a Neon relayed to me after this SD event that he entered at least
> one corner at 75+ mph, and he's not one of the faster drivers - going to
> relevance here, not commenting on his ability :-)
> >
> > It would even be questionable in my autox car, just because the
> > consequences could be quite severe if I made a mistake.
> >
> I watched at the 97 Nationals as more than one Miata spun attempting the "Wall
> of Death" (was it called?) flat out at over 50 mph. NONE of these Miatas had
> roll protection (weight you know). And I mean these were first class spins,
> backwards, sideways, and 360's.
>
> Is this what our sport is about? Balls to the wall - sorry ladies, I meant
> foot to the floor ;-) - at 70+ mph? Is this "autocross" or "Solo 2"?
>
> I suggest not.
>
> I contend that the SSS and course designers are responsible for creating
> something that tests driving and car control skills, and not chutzpah. It is a
> completely different skill to enter a corner at 75, 80 85 mph (which many
> classes did at San Diego) than even 50 mph. This is more closely aligned with
> Solo 1 speeds and not what we call Solo 2.
>
> I do not suggest that people who enjoy or create these courses are wrong,
> sick, or even crazy; just misplaced. Who will step forward and say "I did
> this" once the first tragedy occurs (and it will - it is only a matter of
> time)? Just watch.
>
> Econoboxes and any other older cars do not typically enjoy the kind of
> maintenance and parts replacement necessary for cornering speeds ON VERY
> STICKY TIRES and the mechanical forces thus created. Even if it isn't driver
> error, it very well could be mechanical failure, and it will occur. This is
> why Solo 1 and Racing mandate additional safety protection.
>
> I offer this in the spirit of high concern for the future of our sport, and
> what a tragedy and the following negative publicity would create. I wonder if
> a serious incident might reflect on not only insurance rates, but many
> regions' ability to have access to good sized lots? What do you think?
>
> A related second point is that often I have heard about "National quality
> courses", and how so many 'local lots' do not offer that experience. Hmmm.
> Think about that.
>
> If the Nationals should represent what our sport is, then shouldn't those
> courses also represent what the MAJORITY of the regions run on? I think the
> cart is before the horse at times here.
>
> I am not suggesting that the Nationals be held on postage size lots, and have
> shorter courses - just that the speeds and cornering conditions should reflect
> what most of the country enjoys week in and week out.
>
> Well - here we go. Hopefully down the path of considered thought and looking
> at the conditions described.
>
> I have no flame shields, not do I expect the need for any. Just plug these
> concerns into your "personal thought processor" and see what you come up with.
>
> Thank you for your consideration.
>
> Scott Meyers
> SSS in Arizona
|