Equipe Rapide Challenge Cup #8 - October 2, 2016 - Burleson

[ratt_finkel]

Gonna be a long day!

[Ziggo]

So I am guessing we dont get reruns for pointing out our own downed cones in the slalom

[BMcCann]

So I am guessing we dont get reruns for pointing out our own downed cones in the slalom

Oh shit. I didn't even think of that. Corner workers are gonna have to be on top of the cones to get them put back in time.

[nomadtrash]

Brad is already scheming on which cone he can whack to pick up more than 2 seconds on the return. It is the 4th cone in the slalom BTW.

[OZMDD]

Oh shit. I didn't even think of that. Corner workers are gonna have to be on top of the cones to get them put back in time.

Meh - once you've killed a cone on your own run, its kind of a moot point if it doesn't get back in place before you return. The only concern will be for the next car, but I think there is enough time after the release before the car can make it into the 2-way slalom.

As for the "long day" thoughts, this lot cannot accommodate more than 2 cars on-course in any configuration that I can see, so it made sense to use a loop/crossover. That also means that there is a balance of L & R hand turning.

[ratt_finkel]

Meh - once you've killed a cone on your own run, its kind of a moot point if it doesn't get back in place before you return. The only concern will be for the next car, but I think there is enough time after the release before the car can make it into the 2-way slalom.

As for the "long day" thoughts, this lot cannot accommodate more than 2 cars on-course in any configuration that I can see, so it made sense to use a loop/crossover. That also means that there is a balance of L & R hand turning.

Not criticizing. Just pointing out the obvious. By the time it's safe to send the 2nd car. The 1st car will be %70-80 done. And finishing very quickly. I would suspect only two cars at a time for about 10 seconds max.

[Robert]

It should be fine, looks like a car about every 20 sec.

It's a small site, at the first event STR was running 24.xxx sec. times.

[Davidss]

It should be fine, looks like a car about every 20 sec.

Agreed

[Davidss]

I thought the course ended up working really well today. That course is a lot like what other regions in the country would consider a normal course.

[general default]

Event Results

[Ziggo]

I thought the course ended up working really well today. That course is a lot like what other regions in the country would consider a normal course.

In terms of the double used slalom, the kinkiness or just the length?

[OZMDD]

I didn't think the 2-way wallom was actually very kinky at all; it just was visually offset. I was also happy with the course, both in terms of flow and getting a challenging-but-not-painful 40 second course onto that lot. Also had zero safety issues, despite the small confines.

Ideally, I would have like to made it 2-3 seconds shorter/faster, mainly by moving the big LH sweeper closer to the finish side of the lot, and increasing the radius by about 15%. To me, that would have made it about perfect.

I do have to say that it was very good for my driving technique to have a course that gave no margin for error. I have gotten lazy about looking ahead enough and early throttle application.

Grip was fantastic, and no gravel! I'm actually looking forward to running there again.

[ratt_finkel]

Ok here are my thoughts. You guys know I'm nothing if not honest.

Surface was...tricky. And in combination with the course. Made for a lack luster driving experience.

I think the event ran great. And my early predictions of a delayed event due to course design were not realized. However, we also only had 64 entrants. Double that amount and it would have been different.

Anyway, overall I like the site. The surface is super clean and smooth. However, I can't say I was all that impressed with grip or driving dynamics.

I think the key for sites like this is: Less is more. Rather than trying to cram a traditional course on a small lot. Work with what you have. I would have preferred a course that was 10 seconds slower. Allowing for more traditional speeds and elements. And I absolutely think that a site like this has the benefit of trying new things. As well as focusing on elements those of us see in national competition.

You can even make 1/2-3/4 of the course focus on a unique elements. I think rhythm and flow trumps overall course length and driver inputs any day.

I won't' get into the inequities overly tight courses like introduce. Because I think we are all aware of them.

[865]

I liked the course. It was my first autocross on concrete, and I found it to be fun, challenging, and very grippy. No gravel and less dust to clean off my leather upholstery was a plus. :) I'm looking forward to the next one there.

[onething]

Ok here are my thoughts. You guys know I'm nothing if not honest.

Surface was...tricky. And in combination with the course. Made for a lack luster driving experience.

I think the event ran great. And my early predictions of a delayed event due to course design were not realized. However, we also only had 64 entrants. Double that amount and it would have been different.

Anyway, overall I like the site. The surface is super clean and smooth. However, I can't say I was all that impressed with grip or driving dynamics.

I think the key for sites like this is: Less is more. Rather than trying to cram a traditional course on a small lot. Work with what you have. I would have preferred a course that was 10 seconds slower. Allowing for more traditional speeds and elements. And I absolutely think that a site like this has the benefit of trying new things. As well as focusing on elements those of us see in national competition.

You can even make 1/2-3/4 of the course focus on a unique elements. I think rhythm and flow trumps overall course length and driver inputs any day.

I won't' get into the inequities overly tight courses like introduce. Because I think we are all aware of them.

Sounds like ER just found a new course designer

[OZMDD]

I know everyone tends to see pros/cons in tight or open courses based on their own driving style and vehicles, but the pax results show that 4 of the top 10 finishers were in HP cars - including Madarash in a large high-HP car on street tires - and most of the others were in highly-prepped cars with very good power to weight ratios. Same cars/drivers that perform well at every other site and course style. That list also includes 3 people with National Championship jackets, and several others with Nats trophies.
The data just doesn't support the idea that small lots are unfair to power cars, or that tight courses are either. Your personal impressions about what is fun or not is certainly affected and valid, but that's a different animal.

[BMcCann]

I know everyone tends to see pros/cons in tight or open courses based on their own driving style and vehicles, but the pax results show that 4 of the top 10 finishers were in HP cars - including Madarash in a large high-HP car on street tires - and most of the others were in highly-prepped cars with very good power to weight ratios. Same cars/drivers that perform well at every other site and course style. That list also includes 3 people with National Championship jackets, and several others with Nats trophies.
The data just doesn't support the idea that small lots are unfair to power cars, or that tight courses are either. Your personal impressions about what is fun or not is certainly affected and valid, but that's a different animal.

At first I was bitching about the course but I think it might have just been my setup for concrete.

David said something pretty astute: this kind of course was akin to what much of the rest of the country does. I'd have to agree. When I was running in AZ these kind of tight, low 2nd gear slaloms were the norm...but on sealed asphalt.

The site has promise and loops/laps are going to be the common thing to extend time. Should have plenty of variety!

[ratt_finkel]

I know everyone tends to see pros/cons in tight or open courses based on their own driving style and vehicles, but the pax results show that 4 of the top 10 finishers were in HP cars - including Madarash in a large high-HP car on street tires - and most of the others were in highly-prepped cars with very good power to weight ratios. Same cars/drivers that perform well at every other site and course style. That list also includes 3 people with National Championship jackets, and several others with Nats trophies.
The data just doesn't support the idea that small lots are unfair to power cars, or that tight courses are either. Your personal impressions about what is fun or not is certainly affected and valid, but that's a different animal.

The point is. The only people you hurt when making courses too tight, are those with large cars.

The courses at LSP have been phenomenal lately. Some of the best I've driven in my career. I think we could achieve a similar result in Burl. But just have to keep in mind that not every site SHOULD have a 40+ second course. Even if it CAN be done.

[Yamahaman444]

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Some courses are pretty challenging. I think that one was as opposed to the last two at LSP where it was much more wide open. But both have merits and develop skills.

It was not suited to my recent modification but I have work to do and learning so I can't be too mad. Just wish my times would've got faster throughout the day, but I got slower after my first run

[Davidss]

The point is. The only people you hurt when making courses too tight, are those with large cars.

This course wasn't that tight. You were just driving a giant mustang with a 4 cylinder and automatic.

Minimum speed for me was 25, 30, and 30mph in the 180s and 40mph in the slalom. Top speed of 50mph in multiple locations and 2 sections sustained WOT for 4 seconds. You were just driving a giant mustang with a 4 cylinder and automatic.