>I don't believe that John Ames, who apparently hasn't beaten Tunnell,
>believes he can't win. I don't know why this topic is a debate anymore. If
>John Ames can't beat him, then the case is closed.
John Bob Delta
'97 Pro Nats 51.262 51.445 +.183
'97 Nats 106.472 106.752 -.280
'98 Nats 106.295 106.705 -.410
'99 Nats ???.??? 121.318 Ames wasn't at Nats?
Well there's your counter proof. Ames has beaten Bob. You'll also
notice very few events that I could find where Ames has even competed
(with Bob) recently. There is no doubt that Ames is an autox god, but
even gods need to practice to be at the top of their game. I don't know
Mr. Ames personally and I don't wish to speak for him, but it is my
understanding that he is dealing with issues more important than autox
right now. In any case the average time differential between them is
.169 in Bob's favor. I'd say that is pretty close competition.
Ok, for the whole BFG/Hoosier factor, here are G values taken from my car's
data acq from an event at the E-Center in '99, and from our last event
there this year. The courses were very similiar (the event chair even
complained about it ;) and the temps/conditions were almost the same as
well, sunny/dry. (Sorry I cannot provide more data points, but this
is the only event that overlaps since the tire switch.)
Peak Sustained (.5 secs)
BFG 1.34 1.18
Hoosier 1.32 1.26
So if you want to know why I switched it isn't because the Hoosiers are
a 'faster' tire, it is because they are a 'better' tire from a
drivability standpoint. Testing shows that you can go just as fast in
an M3 on BFG's as Hooters, but you'd better have zero mistakes because
they aren't very forgiving. Mitigating factor...GEEZ! gave me an
overall rating of 88.06% last year and 98.63% this year. So you could
argue that I didn't have as high sustained values last year because I
didn't drive as well. On the other hand, you could say that the
'better' tires allowed me to driver, well, better. As Jason, too
astutely, pointed out, it is all intertwined.
I'll make a deal for you. Buy GEEZ! and run it at Wendover. If you run
a higher overall rating than I do, I'll pay for it. (If we're both over
the 99% cap, we shorten the sustain duration util one of is us not.)
Fair enough?
Byron may even be there with a school. Maybe we could talk him into
a loaner cube for Eguina (or whichever hot shoe pony car driver shows
up). Bob should have one by then as well. Let's get some empirical
data on who is using what percentage of his car. Are the pony boys up
for it?
Tell you what, I'll even go out on a limb and if Byron doesn't want to
go near this issue with a 10' pole, loan Steve your cube, and I'll make
sure Bob has a cube, and I'll make the same bet. Steve wins, I'll pay
for GEEZ! for you. Steve loses, and you owe Bob and me a 6 pack of
(non-Utahn) beer of our choice and will have to admit that Bob is just
on fire this year.
I am by no means arguing that the M3 has to be in ESP. I want the car to
be in the class where it best fits. What I am arguing is that we need
to collect more data before we can say it is an overdog in ESP, and
needs to be moved.
Speaking of which, the only thing I could find in the rule book on car
classification was:
3.2 Vechicle Classification
New car makes, types and models will be classified by the SEB as
soon as sufficient information is available to do so. The SEB may
reclassify a car within the 12-month period following its INITIAL
CLASSIFICATION, without the approval of the Board of Directors.
Emphasis is mine. The M3 has already been classified, so the SEB cannot
change the class before Nationals without the BoD stepping in. Any SEB
lurkers with a clarification on this?
Ok, I'll really try to stay out of this thread, but please Jeff, check
your facts before making claims that can easily be proven false.
Todd
P.S. All bets are off if one person's car breaks down, one runs in the
rain and the other doesn't etc. etc.
|