SS 0.860
AS* 0.854
BS* 0.847
CS* 0.840
DS 0.825
ES 0.829
FS 0.837
GS 0.812
HS 0.803

ST 0.824
STS 0.826
STR* 0.842
STX 0.830
STU 0.844
SM 0.877
SMF* 0.870
SSM 0.883

ASP 0.871
BSP 0.865
CSP 0.863
DSP 0.849
ESP 0.852
FSP 0.838

XP 0.890
BP 0.875
CP 0.866
DP 0.874
EP 0.873
FP 0.876
GP 0.850

AM 1.000
BM 0.965
CM 0.915
DM 0.913
EM 0.907
FM 0.908
FSAE 0.960

F125 0.959
FJA 0.869
FJB 0.834
FJC 0.772

And the diff between 09 & 10

SS 0.004
AS* 0.011
BS* 0.012
CS* 0.003
DS 0.006
ES 0.006
FS 0.004
GS -0.009
HS 0.001

ASP 0.005
BSP 0.006
CSP 0.001
DSP 0.004
ESP 0.006
FSP 0.007

ST 0.006
STS 0.006
STR*
STX 0.008
STU 0.008
SM 0.01
SMF*
SSM 0.007

XP 0.008
BP 0.007
CP 0.002
DP 0.009
EP 0.012
FP 0.004
GP 0.009

AM 0
BM 0.021
CM 0.008
DM 0.013
EM 0.013
FM 0.005
FSAE 0.006

F125 0.002
FJA 0.009
FJB 0.002
FJC -0.006

 

That 2010 ST PAX is still baffling me...

I'm looking forward to officially getting my STX build underway this weekend. If I can keep up with Ian Baker's STS CRX next season, I'll be a happy man.

 

I agree. Rick says that he utilizes data from all over and, as far as I can tell (local, Tours, Nationals), it is very hard to quantitatively justify a bigger bump for STU/STX than ST...

I guess he depended more on the "Theoretical" component of his methodology, as there is no doubt in my mind that there is a lot more left in STU and STX and the ST cars are pretty far along their curve.

 

I would definitely agree with that comment...