rotor-te-rex

For those who don't know, the unknown autocrosser has been offering a gratis co-drive in his top-notch STU car for the Nationals in Topeka. Chris T of Kansas City has won that right. He is a 2004 GTO driver who is about to attend the EVO school this month....which is an autocross training school taught by winning drivers. Not sure how much EVO training in a GTO will carry over to a torqueless better-balanced RX-8, but he will certainly get a first class ride in a large 40+ class field of talented drivers.....mostly in STi and EVO, with a few M3s and RX-8 invited as well as the class requires a backseat and is er sedan-based.

I'm also introducing myself as a new autocrossing forum member. Have followed some threads from time to time but was always trying to think of a screen name. The "rotor" refers partially to my helicopter pilot background and of course our powertrain. The te-rex part is part dinosaur and part king in latin. I owned two first generation 100 hp RX-7s back in the late 70's through 85, and got to drive one in Germany on the autobahn for 3 years (actually wife drove it most of the time, I had a faster 82 Mustang GT). I also got to autocross someone's 3rd gen TT RX-7 once on R-tires back in 93 which was pretty amazing. Currently I am racing my 2005 white RX-8 in B Stock on Falken Azenis RT-615 on stock rims with no mods.

I'm glad to be here. Many of you know me from sccaforums. I want to make peace with a few of you who have messed with me in the past and apologize for those times I was...uh...myself....argumentative and opinionated to be sure. But I know I'm not alone in that respect in these parts.

Again congrats to Chris T. Wish it had been me. And Kudos to Mark S for his generosity, and rare display of class!

dknv

That must've been a looonnnng drive!
Welcome to the forum Cole. Should be interesting to see new blood in some of the "exchanges of ideas" that go on here ..

rotor-te-rex

It was actually a loooong boat trip from Charleston to Bremerhaven, DE....that's Deutschland, as they call it. I actually bought the Mustang GT just before we got married from the PX Car Sales over there with its whopping 155 hp (but 240+lb-ft) and massive 185/65-14 tires on a 2900 lb Fox Mustang.....things have certainly changed in the Mustang power, tire, weight arena. That was adequate back then for an 8 second flat 0-60...quite quick at the time, compared to about 9.5-10 seconds for the first RX-7 GSL. It gave me the edge against German-spec pesky GTi's that creamed the RX-7.

Meant to tell you all since a couple of you have influence theoretically as SEB and STAC members, that it would behoove you to have STU not run first thing Tuesday AM. At the Milwaukee NT, on asphalt similar to Heartland Park so they say, I noted that the AWD STU cars averaged about 2.2 seconds difference between Saturday's Heat 1 course without rubber on the ground and Sunday's course with rubber laid down. In contrast, us indexed RWD and FWD street tire guys averaged 2.7 seconds difference between days closing the gap with STU on Sunday. The lack of rubber on the ground made half a second difference since presumably the AWD cars got better traction prior to R-tire rubber on the ground. So if you Rex STU guys don't wanna give up half a second from the get go, lobby for a later day running since it is a large class. What criteria do they use to determine who runs when?

rotor-te-rex

I figured out that I screwed up and STU actually ran Heat 5 vs my Heat 1 at Milwaukee which explains the time gap difference between Saturday and Sunday.

However the same basic premise that AWD will have an advantage on pre-rubberred asphalt may hold true insofar as STX did run Heat 1 and they were also markedly faster than me and other RWD Stock Street Tire cars on Saturday vs. Sunday. A national STX trophier last year was 2.9 secs faster than me on Sat and just 1.9 secs faster on Sunday, and the second place WRX was 2.2 faster on Sat vs 1.0 on Sunday. The third place Wilcox Mini John Cooper Works with just FWD was 1.8 faster Sat and 1.3 on Sunday, illustrating the AWD advantage on pre-rubbered asphalt.

altiain

iTrader: (3)

Oh good lord.

Cole, welcome to the board, but please don't pollute this one with the same meaningless statistical extrapolations that reguarly get you into trouble over on the other board.

NoCones

x2

Imp

x3

rotor-te-rex

Guys, I welcome the analysis of you engineering and college professor types. Where am I wrong? What else would you conclude when faced with this evidence, both running Heat 1, without rubber on the ground on Saturday and with lots of rubber on the ground on Sunday:

Time gaps (Sat time – Sunday time)
Stock Street tire…………………..STX
1st C6 - 2.707 secs…………………1st WRX - 1.932 secs
2nd ’06 MX-5 - 2.705 secs………….2nd WRX - 1.670 secs
3rd RX-8 - 2.919 secs…………3rd Mini S JCW - 2.431 secs
4th S2000 - 2.728 secs………………4th WRX - 2.152 secs
5th Tacoma - 2.826 secs
1st Mazda 3 - 2.737 secs

In other words, all stock street tire drivers had very similar 2.7 second gaps between their two day times. My larger improvement reflects learning the surface, versus the other locals, including local WRX drivers (STX Mini not local). Stock RWD/FWD and STX Mini S JCW closed the gap with STX AWD cars by a significant margin on Sunday when rubber was on the ground.

I drove someone’s well-prepped STX WRX at a Divisional in 2003 on similar asphalt and guarantee you that car was significantly faster than my stock RX-8 on Azenis. The STU STi winner was a consistent .4-.5 seconds faster both days than the STX WRX winner, who finished 6th in STX at Topeka last year. The STU winner was close behind Rankins at the Ft Myers NT event, and I suspect S. Rankins will be in the top 3 or 4 this year in STU.


Both Milwaukee courses were nearly identical except run in the opposite direction. They were speed-momentum courses with no really long straights, but several short “straights” favoring torque out of corners. Sunday’s course gave the WRXs a great launch opportunity and yet we still closed the time gap vs. Saturday where the start commenced with a curve. Here is a link where the courses are depicted in the photo link about 4 posts down (red Corvette avatar). The other photo link in the thread's first post has me shaking hands with Andy Seipos on the second page, bottom right photo. I’m on the left.

http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/200403.aspx

Imp

That there kills your whole argument. You didn't own an RX8 in 2003. You didn't drive an RX8 in 2003. You didn't run them back to back on the same course in 2003. You cannot draw that conclusion that the WRX was faster than your RX8 (or that your RX8 is slower). You just don't have the evidence to back that statement up. You're just coming up with supposition.

All of your other concusions, therefore, are suspect, due to a fallacy in the argument (control) itself.

Leave the arguments at home Cole. We're here to talk about RX8s. Not street tires and SCCA classing.

--kC

rotor-te-rex

Heh guys. I said I wanted to make peace. I'm not hearing peaceful sounds eminating from some of you.

In 2003 I had direct, same-heat-Sunday comparisons against both Mark Chiles and Alan McCrispin who both drove Chile's H Stock Mini. On Sunday I was slightly faster than both in the STX WRX and slightly slower than G.H. Sharp's GS Celica. I was .8 sec (almost all on Sat) slower than Per Schroeder's H Stock Mini at Milwaukee in the RX-8. Per's a great driver but I doubt he would have matched the pace of Chiles and McCrispin....the latter won several National championships years ago as Alan McConnell before he changed his last name, and he was second last year in HS at Topeka.

NoCones

From the college professor perspective:
1. If you're trying to enlighten us by telling us that AWD becomes increasingly advantageous as surface grip decreases, you could stop right there...I think we'll all buy that.
2. "Analyzing" a set of fewer than 10 data points from an "experiment" where there are tons of uncontrolled confounding variables and trying to draw some meaningful conclusion with any level of confidence is absurd.
3. Your general M.O. has been: a. Set agenda based on what would be nice for you; b. Relay a couple of anecdotes that support said agenda and turn hand-picked facts from those anecdotes into some sort of "proof"; c. Go searching for data that supports said agenda, ignoring other data along the way.; d. Repeat a-c in the face of logical opposition. Any credibility you ever had in this community has been shredded to pieces to the point that even when you throw an idea out that someone might agree with, the default reaction is understandably, "there goes Cole again."

Bryan

rotor-te-rex

Perhaps I will acknowledge the partial truth of one and two....except that Heat 3 though 5 results after rubber was on the ground, and all of day 2 results add up to considerably more than 10 data points. I continue to see an absence of data from anyone that indicates the relative time value of mods or street tires vs R-tires....so forgive my own little experiments. I would be happy to further the experiment by showing up at Nationals in STU with just changed front and rear sway bars (not on car now, or even ordered) and larger wheels/street tires if someone rented me the latter.

I further thank you for offering to rent me your R-tires on regular rims, but a less than fully-prepped car without a quality driver for reference in the same car would be utterly meaningless.....and contributes nothing to my "agenda."

Although it is true that I have an "agenda," the sole one in this thread was to point out that of the 45 Open competitors in STU, only 4 (not counting me) are in RX-8s, and if STU runs Heat one on day one, you can pretty much write off any chance for our car doing well and showing up in larger numbers next year. Soliciting a paid co-drive in regular B Stock was also part of my agenda, as was my attempt to mend fences to make it a more enjoyable meeting for all. Obviously that is not in the cards.

Big surprise that I pick and choose facts that are advantageous to me. Kind of like what you guys in academia do when some big corporation pays colleges and private analysts to do a study supporting their agenda. I routinely see those studies biting the hand that feeds it.

Imp

Wow, writing it all off without even trying. The power of positive thought does wonders Cole. Maybe you should try it sometime.

--kC

NoCones

This is what I really don't get. If you are so willing to admit you are not a quality driver, why do you give a flying $%^# about how competitive your car is? If you are not a quality driver, you shouldn't earn a trophy regardless of the rules. BTW, a bone stock RX-8 w/ V710's on oem rims is perfectly capable of trophying at nationals, and the offer stands.

Fine. Like I said, I'm pretty sure everyone understands the AWD, low-grip advantage...no need for the typical anecdotal support. As for soliciting a B-stock ride and mending fences, I can't comprehend how your post does that.

Thanks for the generalization, but I'm not one of those "guys in academia." None of my research is supported by a single corporate dime, which is the case for plenty of quality work in academia. Is some work tainted? Probably, although I've not witnessed any firsthand. Even if the answer is "definitely," are you saying that if someone else does research the wrong way, it's ok for you to do so and it legitimizes your tunnel-vision "fact" finding? Certainly not, so don't bring that weak $%^#.

The only way you buy credibility at this point is to play by the national rules on the national stage...nut up, come to Topeka, and run my wheels/tires.

Bryan

NoCones

Speaking of Cole's M.O...

ULLLOSE

iTrader: (1)

First off let me say every one of you that replied to his post is to blame for yet another useless Cole thread. If you have not learned yet ignore him and he will go away.

Now for something positive to make KC happy: I am positive that COLE STOCK WILL NOT HAPPEN. So guys stop wasting bandwidth exchanging useless info with him and let it die.

I hate the fact I even got sucked into this.

mwood

Its like deja vu, all over again

You ever see the movie "Groundhog's Day"?

altiain

iTrader: (3)

Gee, I don't know why I'm even bothering to go to Topeka. After all, I've got a choice of two B Stock rides at the moment, but one of them has OEM rims and fresh sticker tires, while the other one has SSRs but the tires have a few runs on them already. Obviously, neither car stands a chance, so I think I'll stay home and watch Jerry Springer instead.

Gimme a break, Cole. Either show up or STFU.

Imp

Great idea!! Wait... NOOOO!!!

altiain

iTrader: (3)

Don't worry Keith. As you know, I've got more reasons than just the competition to make it to Topeka this year.

rotor-te-rex

The implication is that in my car with just good tires, even top of the line drivers would not do well. I've never said I was anything but a midpack driver....high 20s out of 36 maybe in a competitive car......but not in my car without the good front alignment that nobody around here seems to be able to do. Not my car without the super light expensive wheels that you guys say aren't worth that much...then you run on your stock wheels. I love rules that permit 6 lb lighter $500 wheels but won't allow 4 lb lighter wheels that have 2 mms too much offset and cost $109. Good job of representing your RX-8 brothers there Jason. You see a need and ignore it.

rotor-te-rex

This must be that intransigence thing they speak of in the Solo strategic plan.....that does not even address stock category. Someone never learned anything about reinforcing success.

But they will legislate the heck out of ST seats to prevent saving too much weight....for that 250 lb driver.

ULLLOSE

iTrader: (1)

Are you really this clueless or is it just an act? The +/- 1/4" offset rule is way more flexible than the rules were when I started. It is not an RX8 specific rule it is for all of stock class. It was also put into place before I became an SEB member and I am sure it will still be there after I am gone. I suggest if you don't like the current state of the rules you take a seat on one of the boards rather than be a keyboard crier.

ULLLOSE

iTrader: (1)

Again you are clueless. The ST seat rule is being looked at for a revision only from a safety standpoint. btw this came from concerns by ST competitors not because the SEB has nothing better to do.

You are a joke. You are so messed up that even the people that agree with you wont support you and write a letter because the don't want to be associated with you.

rotor-te-rex

No kidding. I never would have guessed it was for all stock classes. Gee, your some sort of genius.

The difference is that you ARE on the SEB, and see that wheels and tires are getting bigger and more expensive and cars are getting heavier. Soon C Stock cheap tires will be replaced by Solstice behemoths, and you will have two classes....B and C....that are almost identically fast. That's real clever.

When I went to the RE meeting in Atanta, I voted to continue a spec tire class that 50 out of 62 drivers wanted, and you should have heard the complaining from those representing frontrunners who weren't winning their free Hoosiers, anymore. How would you have voted in that circumstance. With the overwhelming club majority or with the most successful minority...who are winning free tires and want to keep it that way. Kind of like Solo isn't it. It would be incredibly easy to create a class that combined the Solstice, RX-8, 350Z, and MX-5....all currently with big expensive R-tires....and put like a 255mm limit on a spec tire Falken in a 17" size......cost $125 a tire. But that is too much common sense for you stock or ST rules makers I surmise.