The last time Trial Format...

A place to hang out and discuss all things Porsche.

Postby JHPGT3 on Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:34 am

kary wrote:I suppose we could just look at the times for each person during the timed sessions and make a general determination as to how many folks were really held up? We have the session times.


I think that more important than looking at times would be looking at the finishing order vs. the starting grid order. For example, I started in 18th place on the starting grid and wound up in 13th place. You can assume that I encountered traffic. From that point on, the assumptions get a little shakey. Do you assume that because my TT time was better than my practice times, that I wasn't held up? Or do you assume that it's impossible to pass 4 cars without some impact on time and that I could have done better without any traffic?
Robert did a great job in dealing with the weather. And, if we do this again, I like the idea of using the best time from any of the prior run sessions to determine the grid placement.
User avatar
JHPGT3
Time Trialer
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 4:42 pm

Postby Dan Chambers on Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:14 am

Robert wrote:I've asked Tom Brown to provide us with an additional function for our timing software that will allow us to print up a grid order based upon the best times from any previous session. Once we have that ability, we can announce which session will count for determining grid placement in the timed runs session. That way people can put on their tires, etc. in the qualifying session for better placement during timed runs. In a perfect world, it would be the session immediately before timed runs. When there are other groups running, like at CA Speedway, that will work. If we are by ourselves (say at Willow and we want to run the same format), we'll need it to be two sessions before timed runs so that we have time to run the reports and post the results.

This past weekend, everything had to be done by hand, which is why we had to use times from the day before.


Without stirring the pot needlessly, I just want to make a couple of points:

1) There seems to be a lot more effort required on the part of Timing to figure out which sessions will "count" for qualifying using the multiple car/20 (or 30) minute/ timed sessions (the quote above illustrates...). Is that entirely necessary if the other, segregated format - individual cars out with 1 warm up and two timed - is used?
2) The likelihood of someone being inadvertantly "blocked" during timed runs is much greater when using multi-car timed sessions. How frustrating is it to pay bigger bucks, and dedicate 3 to 4 days to driving, just to have your most-critical 20 to 30-minute time on the track compromised by someone else driving in error during your timed runs? Would segregated timed runs (the old method) reduce the possibility of incidental/accidental blocking during timed runs?
2-A) If drivers are sent out on the track together based on relative times, what is the likelyhood that someone who "REALY REALLY wants to be top-dog" blocks one of the drivers in his/her group; knowing that they were close in qualifying? Could this be a safety issue? Would this safety issue go away with segregated timed runs?
3) Often, I drive at 95% to 98% during practice runs to save tires, fuel, and strength. When the timed runs come, I drive 100% flat-out, and completely on the edge. Both the adrenelin, and the excitement are peaked. Under these conditions I'm afraid any errors I make would have dire consequences if someone else is close by. If I blow it during a segregated timed session, I bend a rim (or two), dirty the car, and hope I can limp home to fix my car .... alone, and without interfering or mixing it up with anyone else. Will the safety of others be brought to bear if I'm sharing the track with other drivers during my 100% effort/high adrenelin/maxed-out Timed Run session? Will risk to others be mitigated if I'm driving all-out in a segregated timed-run session?

I have driven enough TT's, and with both timing formats, to feel confident that I know from where I speak. My premise here is strictly about safety.

Just something to stew on. Thanks for your time.
Dan Chambers
"It's just a "well prepared" street car ... or a very, very well-mannered track car." :burnout:
1983 SC #91 3.6L, "Black Pearl" Livery
1987 944 (gone but not forgotten)
User avatar
Dan Chambers
Pro Racer
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:57 pm
Location: San Diego

Postby Red Rooster on Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:53 am

As a side note only, I specifically remember Jack in the drivers meeting stating that the grid workers would be sending the cars out at specific time intervals, i.e. 5 seconds apart(?), for the timed runs.

I was therefore quite surprised when the middle run group (mine) was sent out with no breaks in between cars....at least those around me (first couple of cars) were sent out one after another in a continious stream.

No harm done where I was as we were the first cars in the session to go out, but I could see how without the timed intervals there could be log jams at certain turns (T3/T4, T9 & T12/T13)

So my question is, did the rest of the group(s) get sent out with no time interval between cars or was my experience just an isolated one....or I completely mis-interpeted what was going on around me...?
Johnny Riz
Red 73 911 AM #255
User avatar
Red Rooster
Autocrosser
 
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:30 am
Location: Surf City, USA

Postby gulf911 on Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:58 am

Looks like aircooled wins in parking lots and watercooled dominates the real racing on big tracks



ummm....no, 275's all the way around in a chipped turbo does. If I could get 275's all the way around, and 25hp more, we wouldn't be having this conversation.... :shock: :lol:
Dan Andrews
#2 Carmine Red GT4 , 19" Forgelines , LWBS.
User avatar
gulf911
Pro Racer
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:17 pm
Location: San Clemente

Postby Red Rooster on Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:03 pm

gulf911 wrote:
Looks like aircooled wins in parking lots and watercooled dominates the real racing on big tracks



ummm....no, 275's all the way around in a chipped turbo does. If I could get 275's all the way around, and 25hp more, we wouldn't be having this conversation.... :shock: :lol:


ummm....wrong again.....

Dan I think in your case, not lifting in T1 & T2 is the ticket... :mrgreen:
Johnny Riz
Red 73 911 AM #255
User avatar
Red Rooster
Autocrosser
 
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:30 am
Location: Surf City, USA

Postby Robert on Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:12 pm

It's not presently intended that we will run this format at all tracks. In fact, of the 5 we go to, it only really makes sense at CA Speedway, and possibly at Big Willow.

That said, based upon data and feedback from this past weekend, gridding by time is useful regardless of format, for both practice and timed runs. We had 20% more participants per run group than ever before at the Festival. Ask anyone who drove and I believe they'll tell you the first couple run sessions -- before we had gridding by times worked out -- were a nightmare. The speed limit in the pits was faster than you could get around T9. But when we gridded by time, the difference was incredible. Sure, passes needed to occur (which is part of the TT experience), but the quality of the experience was significantly higher. It really worked well.

It's certainly worth it to have Tom spend the time to create the reports we need to do this. Once we've got it, we can sort out when, where and how we'll use it. There's no doubt that the continuous session method of timed runs is more akin to Club Racing (in that there's a strategy component, but it's clearly not a race), whereas the 2-lap method is more akin to an Autocross. Both have their merits, both are fun and if implemented properly, both can be safe (although I'll grant that the former will always be slightly riskier). We always announce which method we're using ahead of time, so anyone who doesn't want to participate in the selected method can simply opt out.
User avatar
Robert
Time Trialer
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 10:11 am
Location: Del Mar

Postby Jad on Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:17 pm

gulf911 wrote:
Looks like aircooled wins in parking lots and watercooled dominates the real racing on big tracks


ummm....no, 275's all the way around in a chipped turbo does. If I could get 275's all the way around, and 25hp more, we wouldn't be having this conversation.... :shock: :lol:


Ummm, I am still well within class. I just have not had a competitively prepared car in the past, but Bob, Martin and Bill are making it painfully obvious that won't work any more.

To get 275's and 25 hp more, you would be in AR picking on a poor little 4 cylinder in KP, you must be proud :oops: . Besides, winning by 4+ seconds I could have removed all chips, run 185 tires and still beat you :P
Jad Duncan
997 S Cab - Sold
996 "not a cup car" Sold
Tesla Model S
Porsche Taycan
https://www.goldfishconsulting.com/
User avatar
Jad
Pro Racer
 
Posts: 1788
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:03 am
Location: Del Mar

Postby Carl Scragg on Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:03 pm

I really enjoyed the format! Even though there were some imperfections in the gridding due to the practice sessions being affected by rain, it worked out OK for me. The drivers in our session were generally aware of faster traffic coming from behind and they reacted well.

I agree with Robert that this format would only work at tracks where there are ample passing opportunities, like CA Speedway and maybe Big Willow. But I'd look forward to doing it again. Way more fun than I expected.
User avatar
Carl Scragg
Autocrosser
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 4:20 pm

Postby gulf911 on Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:16 pm

Jad wrote:
gulf911 wrote:
Looks like aircooled wins in parking lots and watercooled dominates the real racing on big tracks


ummm....no, 275's all the way around in a chipped turbo does. If I could get 275's all the way around, and 25hp more, we wouldn't be having this conversation.... :shock: :lol:


Ummm, I am still well within class. I just have not had a competitively prepared car in the past, but Bob, Martin and Bill are making it painfully obvious that won't work any more.

To get 275's and 25 hp more, you would be in AR picking on a poor little 4 cylinder in KP, you must be proud :oops: . Besides, winning by 4+ seconds I could have removed all chips, run 185 tires and still beat you :P


Man, are you uninformed.. Take a look at the AM car Roland is driving...he beat you and John R. by about 4 seconds...I have plenty of points left for AM... :lol: Johns right though, I had no problem with you boys on the infield, the straight and bank is where you became dots... :roll:
Dan Andrews
#2 Carmine Red GT4 , 19" Forgelines , LWBS.
User avatar
gulf911
Pro Racer
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:17 pm
Location: San Clemente

Postby jrgordonsenior on Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:49 pm

Hi Cary,

I'm a newby this year to TT, and I also ran the TT with POC at Las Vegas a few weeks back. So here's my comparative review:

POC ran a 15-20 second staggered start in their TT, and I think it made a major difference vs. the rushed start we had last Sunday. There were a similar number of cars at LVMS, and they allowed each participant 1 warmup and 2 timed laps. The overall run time of the group was similar to our 30+ minutes. Here, everyone just jumped on it when they cleared the hot pit and if there was a Yellow flag up for the first lap it became incidential. I'll agree with J.Payne that this format made it exciting as I too passed 4-5 cars at high speed on through turns 1 & 2. I do think however, that I could have had a faster run time without all the traffic, expecially getting clear onto turn 1. I quit early as there were many cars in front of me and I couldn't see that *#*#* J.Payne out in front of me. :D Perhaps a combination of the 15 second staggered start and a shorter run session would be optimal. As someone else mentioned, I think it's also dependent upon the track.

I also like the concept Robert mention previously of basing grid position on fastest times of any previous practice run session. Sunday morning's should have counted as it was finally dry.

Thanks everyone at PCASDR for the event, it was a blast! Hope to see all of you in 3 weeks for POC's TT race there.....

JRG
User avatar
jrgordonsenior
Autocrosser
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 1:37 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby kary on Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:05 pm

It has been very interesting reading the group's experience. In my group we all went out at the same time without any breaks between cars, but then everyone knew that as they hit the track and began to naturally space out on the first lap to provide room. I noticed that Jack pulled off behind me and decided not to spread out, but there were 5 or 6 cars in front of me the entire time. So no issue for us because I think we spaced ourselves accrodingly. I never caught up with the slower cars in the session and in fact most people pulled off so I was the last one out there, I think. Track time folks!

I do believe that it would have been nice to have the grid workers send us out about 3 to 5 seconds apart, but they did not. I think it is a very good experience for folks to run that way and I do not think there is any safety issue, infact I think it is far more of a risk during the rain given folks inexperience driving on big tracks in the rain.
Kary
1997 993 PCA#131 POC#131
Group 9 Motorsports
www.group9motorsports.com
Image
User avatar
kary
Pro Racer
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 9:35 pm
Location: Cardiff by the Sea, California, USA

Postby Red Rooster on Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:17 pm

I don't have any fancy chip either... 6 yr. old off the shelf Autothority unit from my "Concours" days

Dan, I was hoping for the opportunity to run next to you at some point during a session, too bad it didn't materialize the way I had hoped.

Roland trounced us both by a good margin. Quite a bit for another car in the same class. Assuming his car is classed correctly, then It looks like with the reshuffling of the 911SC's & '72-73 911E's & 911S's, to "I" class, a good driver with the biggest engine is going to be the winner over a comparible driver with less power on a big track...case in point...our 225hp 3.2L 's running against a ??? hp 3.6L custom Black Forest built motor. ...hmmm....

Only reason I stretched out on you is I didn't lift on the bank. any 3.6L pressed as hard as I did mine will walk on me & my 3.2L by a comparable amount just as Roland did.

I would find it very interesting err.. I mean amazing, to see any 3.2L 911 driven to 1:50.xx at Fontana...

anyway...just my .02
Johnny Riz
Red 73 911 AM #255
User avatar
Red Rooster
Autocrosser
 
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:30 am
Location: Surf City, USA

Postby gulf911 on Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:08 pm

I would find it very interesting err.. I mean amazing, to see any 3.2L 911 driven to 1:50.xx at Fontana...


Hey John, not just motor but gearing will also play a part. Yeah, the bank was an issue, but I was getting pulled on the straights by some 3.0L ish cars... :D Maybe too much wing on my car...

I will ask Steve what we (AM boys, you, me, Curt, Mick, Lewis, Tom Tweed , Mike G etc.) could do to compete in AM against a 3.6 and 315 rears. The rule change has made all of our cars obsolete in that class.
Dan Andrews
#2 Carmine Red GT4 , 19" Forgelines , LWBS.
User avatar
gulf911
Pro Racer
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:17 pm
Location: San Clemente

Postby Mike on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:40 pm

gulf911 wrote:

I will ask Steve what we (AM boys, you, me, Curt, Mick, Lewis, Tom Tweed , Mike G etc.) could do to compete in AM against a 3.6 and 315 rears.


Let me know what Steve suggests.. till then I'll continue to build my 911 into a Roland car on roids. :wink:
User avatar
Mike
Club Racer
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 9:45 am
Location: La Mesa

Postby gulf911 on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:52 pm

Yipes!!... :shock: I forgot about your new project!. At least you said you were running in AR....you are going to run in AR aren't you?? :cry:

When's the car going to debut?
Dan Andrews
#2 Carmine Red GT4 , 19" Forgelines , LWBS.
User avatar
gulf911
Pro Racer
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:17 pm
Location: San Clemente

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 222 guests