> If he's using them, there's no doubt he feels they are faster - agreed.
> What I can't agree with is taking results from a previous year and
> saying that we can disregard all the other variables and subtract 1.5%
> from said results in order to make a point with the SEB. Those races are
> over, we can't replay them with one variable hypothetically changed to
> make the results fit an agenda. Do we know that Bob's suspension tuning
> suited the Hoosiers last year? Looks like he's certainly got it sorted
> out this year, but that doesn't validate changing last years results to
> make a point. Those results have to stand as they occurred on that day
> with the equipment that was on the car or we could start to speculate on
> tire pressures, shock valving, spring rates, his mental frame of mind,
> or anything else.
Figures from the previous year is what got the M3 in ESP in the first
place... So much attention has been given to the fact that the ponycars may
not be 100%. Well, you said it best -"Do we know that Bob's suspension
tuning suited the Hoosiers last year? Looks like he's certainly got it
sorted out this year.."
That's right - Even Bob's car wasn't 100% last year, let alone ANY other M3.
But, somehow, it was good enough for SCCA to move the car. Now, the ponycars
are expected to be shining examples of perfection before anyone lends any
credence to the situation......
> > >And I'd bet $1000 that if Bob had developed and driven a Camaro for the
> > >past five years, he'd still win that ESP championship this year.
> >
> > Perhaps so, but this isn't a petition on preventing Bob Tunnell from
winning
> > a championship. It is about whether the M3 belongs in ESP (and it
doesn't).
Besides, if he did build a Camaro, he might win it, but it wouldn't be by 2
seconds hitting the brakes defore the timing lights...
Mike
|