I'm starting to think you enjoy twisting bits and pieces of what I say ;-)
> Joe, you support my points in your message to Ron but you refute them
here...
>
> 1. There were at least 5 different cars contending for the GS National
title in
> 1998. That to me is a successful class.
Having 5 or more _is_ a success, and in 98 we had this but as the year wound
down, it came apparent the Talon was a dominate car. Then came the Type R
fiasco, and now the data shows the dominace of both these two cars, so now,
with data, it is apparent that GS is now a 2 car class, dropping back the
other 5 manufactures and all the other permutaions. How is this
contridictive to what I said before?
> 2. You also state that you think the DSM's are competitive with the Type
R's.
> How does that make the R a 'ringer' if it has equal competition???
The Type R is a ringer. So is the Talon. At the time of the prevoius
conversation we were only talking about the Type R.
> 3. Lets look at North raw times then:
> Allen: 59.632 Eclipse
> Sapp: 59.676 Type R
> Paul Z: 60.139 Prelude
> Joe G: 60.108 Audi A4 2.8
> Bob E: 59.609 Type R
> Jim R: 60.244 F-body
> ...doesn't look to bad to me...
Once again you continue to look a only one event, and one day at that, to
draw your conclusions. I sinserely hope you don't make all of you decisions
this way ;-). Now add this years data and you'll see for your self just how
far off you are.
But let take your one day of one event data and look at it. You'll see only
0.067 between the top three times (Talon and Type Rs) and then again only
0.136 between the other car types(A4,Prelude,F-body), and yet a 0.432 gap
between the two car groups. Remember DS at this point was run about 0.5
fasters the GS on the average. See any parallel here?
> As far as the development point, I will concede that as valid. It is my
> understanding that Bob E had been roadracing one in 1998 and was at worst
very
> familiar with the car. He is also a top driver. With more development,
the
> cars could go faster. A second year developing an A4 may have improved
that car
> as well?
First, Bob stated to me directly, that racing a Type R in stock is
completely different than running one in a road racing senerio. So your
statement really dosent' apply. Also, look at Bob's track record over the
years. While he his is a good driver, he is more often beaten than he wins.
If you look at this years data, you'll see he has yet to win against other
Type R drivers. Point being, I would guess last year that the same would
have been true, and would have made the gap even worse.
Second, tried more dev on the A4 at the beginning of the season this year.
While there are a few very little things we could do more with the A4, In
less time than we developed the A4, Ron has gotten the Type R to
consistantly turn AS times. I'm not shitting you, he would win if not come
in very close to winning in about %80 of the races this year againt Bill B
and myself in AS. The best we both did in the A4 was about a 50% with DS.
Like I said, just look at the more than last years nats data, you'll see
just how fast GS has gotten.
> I'll go back to my original point that sparked our (butt)heated debated:
with
> Mark Allen, you and Ron gone (out of the A4), I hope the same drivers (Jim
Rohn,
> Paul Zimmerman) can repeat their 'competitive' performances. Otherwise,
the
> Type R's look to fulfill their own prophecy. The competition for the Type
R's
> that WAS there, as the numbers bear out, simply isn't there this year.
Granted, with serveral top drivers out, there are still some consistant good
drivers left to compare with. I also hope Jim and Paul show and have good
events, but don't be surprised to see the top of GS running top AS times.
> BTW: Thanks for a somewhat civilized debate. Lets thumb wrestle for it
in
> Topeka.
See ya there, and you'll see me watch the GS runs ;-)
|