Da Groj

Jeremy wrote:Speaking of that, did everyone seem happy with the new classes? Anybody feel like they couldn't compete? The only thing that caught my attention was class G. It seemed like that guy in the Mustang was driving his ass off, yet he was 2.8 seconds out of first.

Loren wrote:Guys, you can't expect the classing to make EVERY driver in EVERY car competitive at EVERY event. It's just not gonna happen... even if we had 3x as many classes, it still wouldn't happen.

Loren wrote:I'm going to try to at least ATTEND the next autocross. Then I might be competitive.

Alexis wrote:You better attend!

Loren wrote:Second... "the drifting incident". One thing I did not pick up on was: did this happen on the kid's first run? Or did he play nice for a while, and then go psycho on us? It doesn't much matter, I guess. I'd still be inclined to give the kid a stern warning. Everybody deserves a warning. Red flag his run, bring him in and explain to him that we don't play that way. That's not how autocross works.

I agree, outright banning the kid for his antics on ONE run may have been a bit harsh. But, I wasn't there... so maybe it wasn't? Perhaps a better answer would have been to say "look, we'll let you finish your runs, but we're not letting you back out today without an instructor".

Yes, we all get a little "loose" from time to time, especially on a less-than-grippy site like Lakeland. But any experienced autocrosser can tell the difference between simply losing traction (or even intentionally having a LITTLE bit of fun) and staying safely on course and driving like a complete idiot. Don't pretend like you don't know where the line is, I know you do.

muddy wrote: Here is what I saw, it was the driver's last run of the day:
smokey burnout/donut in at the end of the slalom, followed immediately by a smokey drift. that changed direction and slip angle several times, while heading directly towards the trucks and against the direction of the course. That was followed by another drift following the direction of the slalom, but not actually following the slalom. We then attempted to red flag the car, but he did two more smokey donuts before he saw the flags and exited the course.

muddy wrote:Although some may think it is harsh, I know right decision was made with the best interest of the club in mind.

If it was his 6th and final run, and he'd been driving appropriately prior to that, then there is no excuse.

Drifting is allowed. If you spin out, hit more than one cone, or go off course during your run, then the drifting must not continue for the duration of that run, try again on your next run.

Jeremy wrote:I don't want to see "drifting" and "smoke show" categorized as idiot behavior as long as you have control of the car, which I agree the person involved at Lakeland did not have control of his car.

If I was to make the rules it would be something like this...

Drifting is allowed. If you spin out, hit more than one cone, or go off course during your run, then the drifting must not continue for the duration of that run, try again on your next run.

Had my rules been implemented last weekend, none of this would have happened.

Drifting is NOT any more dangerous than a normal autocross run. I would argue that a normal autocross run at 10/10th's is more dangerous, because you are balancing on the edge of adhesion. Autocrossing produces HUGE off's, drifting not so much.

*This is just my opinion, if you are offended by it or can't hold a discussion without getting bent out of shape, don't bother replying to me please.

Jeremy wrote:I don't want to see "drifting" and "smoke show" categorized as idiot behavior as long as you have control of the car....

Jamie wrote:

LadyMaynie wrote:If I drove 6 times, how come I only have 5 times?

The combination of 19 and 61 recorded 12 runs. If you recall, I came out after your fourth run and asked you both how many runs you had -- at that point, the scoring system showed Bob with 5 runs and you with 3. Since you both told me you'd done four, I concluded to you that you'd taken a run with his number on the car. After that, you both recorded two more times, so the system showed him with seven runs, and you with five. Based on the trend in times, I'll wager that the 53.009 recorded as his fifth run is actually your fourth, and he's missing one because the computer was set to keep only the first six runs. (Bob...you missing a time?) If that's right, that's a hazard of two-driver cars...if the number on the car isn't correct, the starter may or may not recognize the person under the helmet and call it in.

Kenny -- any way of checking my theory? There's also something wacky with several of the two-driver cars. I'm sure both the Harvey and Merideth cars did more runs than indicated...or did formatting drop something off the spreadsheet?

Alizarin wrote:There was one run of hers that was incorrectly attributed to Bob that I tracked down when doing the results, but in the end, they only had 11 combined.

Alizarin wrote:There was one run of hers that was incorrectly attributed to Bob that I tracked down when doing the results, but in the end, they only had 11 combined.

impalanut wrote:There already is an engine size split for modified street tire. We lumped all the modified race tire cars together because at that level the motor size had little to do with the results. You will see that in the modified race tire class the smaller cars/smaller motors are usually the fastest.

meicalnissyen wrote:And how fascinating that 5 of the 6 cars in "D" are under 3 liter.........Trying to avoid the crowd in "E" ???