In a message dated 9/24/99 8:40:58 AM Central Daylight Time, kennedy@i2.com
writes:
At 11:06 PM 9/23/99 , GSMnow@aol.com wrote:
>The last one was the ES car at Nationals. I did not see it happen, but know
>the area of the course well, I worked that course, and drove it. It was a
>very fast slalom into a tight 90 right turn. Many cars were getting upset
by
>the manuever. The concrete has amazing grip and VW's lean ALOT.
<< Perhaps this is a good time to ask: why not have Nationals on asphalt? >>
It has been brought up, and I thought one course on each would have been
cool. Use the south course as Paddock, and the current asphault paddock as
the south course. It looks like a very good surface.
Points for asphalt:
<<1) It is easier on tires -- less expense. >>
maybe, tough to sell
<<2) It is easier on the cars -- less expense and less likelihood
of mechanical failure ruining a few people's Nationals. >>
No, the force differances are too small to prove that. Of the cars that broke
down, only the roll might have been different, but that was the north course,
so even the split nat's would not have kept the car off the concrete there.
The south course seemed in worse shape. I didn't whittness any mechanical
failures that were caused by greater grip, or even the bumps. Not saying
there weren't but, but it was not obvious. Maybe the fried clutch in a Mitsu
GSX, but I have seen that happen on asphault as well
<<3) Its somewhat safer (now, I am not going into some ridiculous
rant about how we're all going to roll our cars and die; rather
I'll just say that even a very rare rollover is one too many and
will tend to scare off potential drivers; also consider that the
higher likelihood of mechanical failure is also a safety issue).>>
Well, I have to admit this may have helped, but Hmmmm, a crack in the
asphault at just the right point in a corner? The first roll I saw 10 years
ago was on asphault, but it was a fluke with broken pavement way off of the
proper line and a driver not willing to take a DNF when he already blew the
run.
<<4) Its just as challenging for drivers: it will tend to be slower
making it a bit easier, but it will also tend to be less uniform
(elevation changes; texture changes) making it a bit tougher.>>
All asphault is different, so it would be a bit of an equalizer to those who
don't get concrete experience, but if you go to tours and divisionals, you
should get some concrete practice. I had just one concrete event this year
before nat's, so I like the idea. Many others don't. Concrete is a blast to
drive on, it does respond faster and more precise to driver inputs, I think
this is why the top level drivers like it. Just ask ANY mod car driver, they
hate asphault.
<<5) Most regional events are on asphalt -- large curb-free concrete
is often tough to find. And thus Nationals always on concrete
definitely favors those few who get to drive on it more often.>>
Once again, a good argument, but since many top level drivers greatly prefer
the greater grip and fast response, I really doubt we will see a change. So
if you want to win at nat's you should hit a few concrete events. I know I
will try next season.
<< I think the biggest negative is probably that you need to make sure that
you find _good_ asphalt -- asphalt that is loose, cracking, breaking up
in spots, etc., is not what I am talking about above. >>
This is why I mentioned the very nice paddock area in Topeka, it was far
smother then the concrete.
<< Another negative, I'd guess, is that in light rain, concrete may drop off
in traction more slowly.>>
VERY TRUE. even in the wet, the cars seemed to have good grip. The slick cars
fell off alot, but DOT and especially the ST cars were still running good
times. I got lucky and ran dry for all 6 runs, so I can't say for sure, but
from when I ran asphault in the wet, this sure looked better.
<< I am just curious why it is commonly accepted that "Nationals must be
on concrete"?? >>
TRADITION, this is how it has been. ;-) Seriously, I have no idea. Going to
new sites is part of the fun, and being a different surface just adds some
challenge. Drivers who do alot of concrete obviously have an advantage. Is
this a bad thing? Well, the "serious" drivers do divisional, and tour events
and end up on concrete more, so maybe they deserve this little edge. I wish I
could say that was why I was beat, but I can't, I was out driven. If I did
more big events and had more than 2 events in the car I ran at nat's maybe I
would have done better. The only thing for sure is I need alot more seat time
in the car I run there if I want to get into trophies next time. The level of
competition made any local event look silly. Even dead last in many classes
was still a very good driver. My time would have had me solidly in our top 20
locally, but there I was below mid pack, and the cars behind me were all
within 1 second. As my first nat's I was overwhelmed a bit.
Gary M.
|