autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: The 'New' G Stock?

To: "Kevin McCormick" <ktm@unify.com>, "'Scott Meyers'" <solo2@uswest.net>
Subject: Re: The 'New' G Stock?
From: "Joe Goeke" <buttheat@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 10:31:36 -0700
I'll take a light under torqued car with a great LSD and double wishbone
suspension, over a heavier/torque car ANY day.

So you are saying that no good drivers are running in GS except for the Type
R drivers?  Look at some of the data this year compared to last year with
the _same_ drivers competing against Type R's now.  You'll see a HUGE
difference in times.  ---JCG
----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin McCormick <ktm@unify.com>
To: 'Scott Meyers' <solo2@uswest.net>
Cc: <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, September 03, 1999 8:45 AM
Subject: RE: The 'New' G Stock?


> Ah, you're looking at only HP - look at the pounds/torque ratio - (as Joe
> did earlier) - the Type R is worse off then the others.  Also, the rev's
> required for each of the respective HP numbers show an intersting story as
> well.  Not to mention 15x6 wheels compared to the rest at 16x7 or so.  The
> Road & Track article on the new Celica says 6.5 for 0-60 (Toyota's
numbers)
> with the six speed.
>
> You just have good drivers in Type R's now - how is that different than
> Neon's?  The Camaro's and DSM cars will do fine, I expect (remember that a
> Prelude came in 3rd last year, BTW...).
>
> I agree, though - leave things as they are and put the Celica in there.
> Don't much with what is working...
>
>
> Kevin McCormick
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Scott Meyers [mailto:solo2@uswest.net]
> > Sent: Friday, September 03, 1999 8:32 AM
> > To: Kent Rafferty
> > Cc: autox@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Re: The 'New' G Stock?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Kent Rafferty wrote:
> >
> > > So, potentially you could have the following match-up
> > > in GS (excluding the Type R, etc for now), correct?
> > >
> > >       Car                     hp       weight     lbs/hp
> > > ---------------------    --------    ----------   ---------
> > > Audi TT Quattro      225     3200        14.2
> > > Audi S4                   250     3500        14.0
> > > DSM AWD             210      3100        14.7
> >
> >    Firebird V-6            200hp   3200        16.0  but rear
> > drive + posi &
> > big rubber.
> >                                (ever notice the engine
> > setback in one of
> > these?)
> >
> >     Type R                   195      2400        12.3   Wow!
> > All the good
> >                                   stuff *and* this power to
> > weight. No wonder
> > it dominates.
> >
> > I don't know. With all of the "new good stuff" coming out
> > that is classed in G
> > Stock, it might make sense to leave all there for another
> > season and see just
> > how things stack up.
> >
> > Better than making a lot of wrong guesses based upon "I thought".
> >
> > And after looking at the above, the Type R seems to be way
> > out of the scope of
> > the other cars.
> >
> > Scott Meyers
> >
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>