On Thu, 25 May 2000, Jeff Winchell wrote:
>
> But if a number of top autocrossers think the ESP cars are
> underprepared, chasing all of them away with M3s won't get them more
> prepared.
I'm not sure that's true; some people see a challenge and really
try to make it happen. I cannot say whether the Fbodies are
100% prepared or not - I have *no* idea. I do know Tunnell's car
is 100% prepared, between his site(tunnellracing.com), talking to
him & crawling around it when he's not looking, seeing what neato
things I can find that might apply to the FSP cars.
Every nut, bolt and screw on the bottom of that car looks as though
it has been loosened for one reason or another - it is not just a
bolt-on catalog wonder. Again, this is NOT to be interpreted as
"Fbody ESP cars *are* bolt on wonders."
In the 5 or so seasons I've been autocrossing, I've learned a lot.
The _real_ learning started first when Matt Leicester came to
Colorado and started beating up on the VWs(all of CO's DSP) with
a pickup truck. Then Kevin Wenzel showed up, he and I have been
working together for the past few years with one common goal:
Catch the Fiats.
We were the minority in D/FSP, we actually wanted the Fiats to
stay. We saw the Fiats as a challenge. Sure, we wondered if
they *really* belonged there, and we could see both sides(and
he can chime in if so desired, not trying to put words in his
mouth). They're low, they're balanced, they're fairly narrow.
They're slow, they are not as light as the rumors suggested, and Steve
is a _good_ driver. Wishy washy, both sides, but we wrote letters
suggesting they stay.
The recurring theme? Our car(s) were not prepared to the limit of the
rules. They were good, but they were nothing more than springs, big
wheels, swaybars where applicable, common intake and exhaust tricks.
Nothing that special, really. The Scirocco was really good last year
- IMHO, the fastest DSP VW in attendance, and Kevin's performance
bears that fact.
Fast forward to today - we've built motors, put EFI on(note - I was
not suggesting switching from TPI to carbs, but switching to an
optimized for performance induction system; Electromotive/DFI/etc; I
like my carbs, but they exist because they were cheap & seem to fit
the EP rules well...). Kevin put double adjustable shocks on the car
- huge difference over the "stock" Koni adjustables.
The VW crowd was of the mindset that well prepared Fiats were
uncatchable. We have not proven that wrong, but Kevin sure proved
that the VW can go a LOT faster than anyone thought - and I wonder if
the ESP cars are in something of the same boat.
Without something dramatically faster to catch, it is easy to blame
things on Ames. "Similar" car, different driver, ok, fine. It is
impossible to deny that some of the drivers in ESP are top notch,
but it gets easier to "blame" the driver for being so fast when
the driver is in a similar car.
When Matt showed up in Colorado with his truck & started winning
BIG locally(and doing very well nationally), some of the stuff I
heard was absurd - no one dared say "move it to CSP," but they
were coming up with ideas like "the rear framerails are filled
with lead, that's why it hooks up so well."
Uhh, sure. That's just it, Matt filled the framerails with lead
shot.
No, Matt is an _amazing_ driver with a very well thought out
autocross vehicle. Nothing wakes someone up like a new "car" in
the class going fast - and IMHO, people are too quick to blame
the car for winning. I've driven the truck, and it is *not*
fast. Not by any stretch. It sticks well, it goes OK, I guess,
but the truck is not the winning ingredient. Sure, it is
obviously very capable, but the driver made the difference
there - and I suspect the driver is making a big part of the
difference in the ESP M3.
It is not an apple-apple comparison; an M3 is obviously better
suited to autocross than a 77 Toyota truck, but the plot is the
same - new car arrives, new car wins, new car must be A) illegal
or B) classed wrong.
Again, I don't KNOW any of this - but I obviously suspect there's
more to it than "move it to BSP." Not pointing fingers; I
barely know names - but on Dave's list of things he did, I could
at least see some possible room for improvement, which I guess
got me rolling on the subject.
I do believe the VW people had largely "given up" catching the Fiats -
not really "given up," but I don't think many _believed_ it could
happen. We looked at our cars, looked at section 14 and started
making lists of things we had not *exploited.* Long, expensive
list, but it is paying off in terms of times.
Dunno. I personally believe a perceived overdog should be motivation
to build the car better. Maybe there's no room for improvement; I
don't know. If that's the case, and the drivers are driving as well
as the Tunnells/Todd/other M3 people, maybe it is classed wrong.
Again, I don't know, but I wonder - this whole thing sounds too much
like the DSP "Fiats Be Gone" brigade.
Sorry if I offend, not the intent. I just know that once we stopped
looking at why the other guy was faster and started looking at how we
could beat the other guy, things got a LOT better for us.
Raising/lowering/front/rear.
Byron Short once used a big hammer to convince me that raising one end
of a car would make that end heavier. It is true. You can do it with
two bathroom scales and a sawhorse(or anything that is relatively
heavy that will not allow the mass to shift). Put two legs of the
sawhorse on one scale, call it the front. Put two legs of the
sawhorse on the other scale, call it the rear. Sit two
bricks/dictionarys/heavy things on the sawhorses over the legs.
Observe "front and rear" weight.
Take the brick off the top of the sawhorse on the "front" scale, put
the brick *under* the legs of the sawhorse, raising the "front" three
inches(or however tall the brick is).
There are still the same things on the scales - one sawhorse, two
bricks - but the weight will change; not total weight, but
distribution. It really works.
Or, think of a crane, with a cable and a hook. Hook the hook to the
front bumper of a car, start lifting. Once the rear wheels come
off the ground, which is heavier? The front, all the weight is on the
hook.
While the rear tires are still on the ground, they are bearing a
portion of the total weight - but less than the hook.
Obviously, this would not work if the engine slid to the back as the
front raised, but that's not the case.
There are probably holes in the explanations about cable stretch, wind
and Hupmobiles, but the basic principle is there, and it really does
work - not only in conceptual(and ridiculous) theoretical worlds, but
with the car on scales, too.
Corner weighting is a Good Thing; should be part of the next $55k
spent:).
I'm done; beyond this, I can only speculate on really thin ice -
don't want to go there. I do find the whole thing interesting, and
I'm curious to see the outcome. Best of luck to all involved,
don't focus *too* much on how unfair life is - that'll affect
your driving;).
Iain Mannix(generic "you" unless otherwise noted, note smileys, don't
want ALL of ESP to hate me....)
>
> MODESTLY better competition will. Let people continue to work on the
> DSMs, see if the Cobra IRS is really better than the well-worked out
> aftermarket live axle solutions, perhaps the F-body crowd has some
> other ideas coming too.
>
> > Fun stuff to think about anyway.
>
> Yes, particularly if you did well with an internet $tartup.<s>
>
|