This is all quite humorous (no insults implied).
> I'm not saying that the Type R isn't one of the top 2 or 3 cars in the
class,
> because it is <watch out for the Beretta's : )>. As far as killing DS,
> Nationals should shed a little more light on where they should/shouldn't
go.
OK two things:
1) Only if they run in or near the same run group. This year it shouldn't
be to bad, for they run one group off each other on different courses.
Hopefully the weather won't mess up the results, as it did last year (GS ran
in somewhat wet/dirty first day).
2) You really don't class cars based one event do you? The entire year
should be used, comparing established fast driver data, from not only the
class in question, but classes with simular cars to the front runners (ie DS
for the Type R).
> You can only get a "perceived" top car BEFORE the data is in! As soon as
the
> Type R went to GS, everyone flew off the handle. Yes there was some
timing
> issues (lets not go into that again) but the majority of the racers
thought it
> simply wasn't a GS car. I submit that it may fit in the 'new GS', or to
phrase
> it better, how GS has evolved.
The timing WAS the main issue, and who wouldn't "precieve" a car as a threat
that had "ringer" writen all over it.
How is a two car class better than the one before which was about a 10 car
class, especially when one of the top cars looks like a DS car??? Seem real
inconsistant and a mish mash to me. With this 'new GS' thinking, we'll have
other classes with mismatch lineups, like BMW 328's and Miata's... Oh, yah,
that's already there ;-).
> You have driven a car that is proof of this. The Z3 2.8 Coupe made a
dominant
> showing at ONE race in the beginning of the year and it got everyone in a
tizzy.
> The "perceived" car for AS by May. Cries of Super Stock were heard from
Maine
> to San Diego. The results have shown that the car is competitive and
properly
> classed.
Where do you get this stuff. This is cracking me up (once, again no insult
intended). The Z3 2.8 coupe has never "dominated" any event. Check the
data. It won San Diego based on a decent second day showing (it did not
lead the first day). Do you call 0.365 and 0.072 a dominate win? Also,
look at the car. It has about the same power, torque, and weight as the
rest of the AS cars. Why would you even start to compare this to the GS
situation. At the same event, the Type R won GS over the next type of car
by about 1.5 seconds! The Once again, predictable drivers in each class and
cars.
> The bottom line is that the 1998 Nationals didn't show the Type R as a
dominant
> car. Take away the North course (wet) and you get a pretty good mix for
raw
> times: South Course:
>
> 1. Rohn 52.356 F-body
> 2. Endicott 52.389 Type R
> 3. Allen 52.473 Eclipse
>
> If the 99 Nationals show it crushing similar cars with similar drivers,
maybe a
> change is in order.
Once again, see above on using only nationals to gauge car performance. 99
Nationals, by it self IMHO is not enough to judge a car. Same for 98
nationals, especially when you don't consider the details (which you failed
to mention, or do not know about the 98 GS nationals).
---JCG
|