PCA SDR

Congrats to Erik Kinninger for TTOD and Steve Grosekemper for 2nd TTOD and BRI.
Except for the slalom section it was a busy but fun track, but oh that slalom section

Photos are up on Picasa at:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1057760116 ... directlink

Videos to follow, lots of shuffle steering with release and catch (here they are).
https://picasaweb.google.com/1057760116 ... directlink

One from each session, 928 in first session and then 968 for next two after clutch hydraulics overheated in 928

Greg

Thank you Greg for the great pictures.

As for the track, unfortunately it was different from the posted track map. The slalom and the upper chicane were ^%$&^%$^%$ , the rest was manageable but more of survival rather than a fun flowing course.

It was a really difficult course to run and this is coming from a 914 driver...
I really didn't like it in the morning but I have learned that the more difficult a course the deeper I have to dig to concur it.
Felt better about figuring it out in last practice but certainly didn't love it.

Spent last night unloading gear thinking about everything I could have done to get back into the 1:13's...
Oh, well. there is always next month.

And thanks to Erik Kinninger for beating me by .08 seconds in his Dad's 3000+ pound fire breathing beast.
Kid seriously keeps us all on our toes!
That was a serious drive in such a big, fat, single turbo car.
Back to the drawing board.

Like most of us I guess I hated the track at first, but as Steve said yesterday every track seems to somehow get better after you learn it. Still, in my car it was a wrestling match, a match that I lost
I would now like to give standard feeble excuses #7 and #23 for my slow times, "I was on dead tires, the track was super turbo unfriendly, and Erik's times were just a fluke!"
Yeah, that's it.....

That course was so difficult that I DNF'd on the parade laps!

I am amazed I didn't hit any cones in timed runs. I guess I have to be happy at being the "best of the rest" behind a crafty veteran and a young alien driver.

TT

the track was not the only difficult part...
the schedule was brutal for the red run group, it was almost 2:00 before I had a chance to sit down
much less check tire pressures or anything else.

Thanks for all of the feedback on the course design.

The only part of the design that was significantly different from the map posted online was the slalom section. We had to add an extra slalom cone and tighten the spacing in order to get cars lined up to cross the drainage ditch at a more gentle angle at the exit. The AX team that helped to set up the course on Sat found that change to be challenging but fun, so we left it as-is with the aggressive offset on that first slalom cone. Drivers who anticipated that first cone and got set up for it much earlier were able to drive through that section with much less fanfare. It might have been too challenging and frustrating for more novice drivers though, so next time we'll consider making that type of element more mild.

The only other changes we made compared to the online map were to avoid potholes and weak looking pavement. Those changes were relatively small in terms of cone movements, but some of them did tighten up a few turns more than we planned. I'll spend more time verifying those type of pavement adjustments during the actual setup of the next course, so we can ensure the course has good flow. My lowest speed on this course dipped to 28mph in two locations, which isn't too bad, and that was the design-goal for our tightest acceptable turn (approx 50' radius). Until I watched my own video, I actually wasn't aware how far I was turning the wheel sometimes. I used to shuffle-steer a lot more than I do now. I was apparently reluctant to let go of the wheel yesterday.

This was my fastest timed lap (but it resulted in a re-run due to a timing issue):
https://plus.google.com/photos/10542021 ... vexvKKWjwE

By the way, the printed maps available on the day-of the AX, were updated based on GPS logging of the actual course setup from the night before, so those printed maps were very accurate and are to-scale. I'll try to make those printed maps for any event where we are able to set up the course the day before.

Andrew Simmons came up with the original course design, and I made a few tweaks to his design for safety reasons and to add a couple more visually interesting/different elements. Our goal was to make some elements of this course reward drivers that carefully chose their line by properly interpreting and anticipating those elements. We plan to continue proposing some interesting new elements to help keep the courses fresh and challenging, while still making it fun and drive-able for everyone. We welcome any feedback and suggestions for future designs.

Marcus

Steve, thanks for the words, and Serious drive yourself! That has to be the closest 1st and 2nd TTOD finish. .08 Sec!

People, below is what Steve looked like in almost every corner of the track.. He was pushing it!





As for the track... everyone has their opinions, but at the end of the day we all have to drive on the same course! Fun day in Dads turbo monster, I will get a Video uploaded soon.

Erik K,

Thank you for trying to keep the tracks interesting. I am aware that this not an easy job and it's difficult to make everybody happy.

We do not have PCASDR guide on how to design our autocross tracks as far as I know, but here is a link to a short and good reading on the subject to refer to.

http://www.houscca.com/solo/courses/Course_Design_4-1-2.pdf

It's an SCCA document, so not everything applies to us such as their famous gates, but there are a few good points in there which could be applied on our tracks.

Such as: How to Keep Your AX Peers from Killing You...

Do Not...Get them lost or make them hit cones!
Do Not...include too many pylons creating effect known as the “Sea of Pylons”
Do Not...space pylons the same or similar distance as the gate width
Do Not...place the next gate out of their line of sight
Do Not...fail to line the course (when possible)
Do Not...place a cone(s) with the only intent of “boy, will THAT one get creamed!”

Great people, great SoCal spring day, a challenging, but a track we all shared. A autocross crew and volunteers that are second to none in pulling off a event. Excellent Piccies and video's Greg (I showed Betty about 30 seconds of your first run and she was getting a bit queasy ) and great local brews and telling lies at the end of the day. Hmm, let me think, yeah it was a good day.

Bob

Thanks to all for the hard work, and for wanting to improve designs and handling the critiques. The banter at the awards was hilarious.

Shout out to Kathy Smalley, who rocked it yesterday! Marcus, I enjoyed watching your good driving video and your fantastic car!

The Guy who compiled that SCCA document obviously had a lot of experience. I found a couple of other points (below) that may pertain to yesterday's track, and may be good to keep in mind for future tracks.

Input Density
A “too busy” design will have more than 35 inputs for ~3/4 mile
• Drivers will never seem to have the time or room to set up for the next element
• Drivers feel they are thrashing through the course, just trying to survive until the finish

Judging your success
• Did you receive unsolicited praise or complaints?
• Note the number of delays for course workers, course repair, etc.
• Track the number of DNFs for other than mechanical failure
• The goal is zero - acceptable is 1 in 20 on the first run, 1 in 100 there after
• The number of “newbies” can affect this count
• Number and frequency of pylons hit
• The goal is zero - acceptable is 1 car in 10 hitting any; less than 4 for any one car
• If almost every car is hitting “that cone”, the course will not be well received

in the spirit of constructive criticism...

i, like most of the participants, found the last ax track to be not only frustrating but overly complicated and loaded with unnecessary gadgets.
too many 180 degree turns( sweepers, decreasing and increasing radius accomplish the same thing and are a lot more fun ) and way too many 120 degree turns (what's wrong with a simple 90).
the first part up to the slalom( we use to do a nice left/right chicane to slow down before the swale) and the last part were good. the chicane at the top before the downhill 180 was odd. was it to slow you down? or to plow thru as many cones as possible.

tight, gimmicky, tracks with no flow do equalize the field but they sure take the fun out of it.

Martin and Jennifer,

Thanks for the link and excerpts to that SCCA document. I actually have that one already, and have read through it multiple times over the past several months. We tried to use as many of their guidelines as we could, although it's tough to make them all work out when we have to work around the last-minute pavement issues.

As you said, some of the SCCA guidelines either don't apply or wouldn't be well-received by PCASDR (mostly due to what people are used to already), so we have to be selective about what we use from their guidelines. But we did actually make careful design measurements using CAD for minimum radius of turns, length of straights, minimum safety distances, and number of driver inputs (I counted about 29 over the 0.86 mile course, so that actually falls within the SCCA guidelines). A few of those got compromised when we had to adjust the course for pavement conditions though (some turns ended up tighter than we planned).

The cone spacing guideline is a tough one though, and I'd be interested to hear suggestions on that. We don't have enough cones to do the tighter spacing option, and if we space them even farther apart, people drive off the track too often. That happened in a couple of spots yesterday where there was only a mild gap between cones. I had to add our last remaining cones to fill those small gaps part-way through the day. I personally like the very minimal cones and gates used at El Toro, but I've heard from several people that would not be well-received at the Q, partly for safety reasons (light poles, potholes), and partly for people getting lost since many aren't accustomed to that course style.

It's interesting that early-on, we heard a lot of unsolicited positive reviews for the course design from those that helped to set it up on Saturday, and from several more people after the parade laps. (And Gary, I thought you said you really liked the course after your safety check laps?) But then later in the day, the feedback I overhead seemed to turn more negative. Regardless, we'll take the feedback and try to make the next course appeal to more people.

Thanks again for everyone's feedback.

marcus981 wrote: (And Gary, I thought you said you really liked the course after your safety check laps?) But then later in the day, the feedback I overhead seemed to turn more negative. Regardless, we'll take the feedback and try to make the next course appeal to more people.

Thanks again for everyone's feedback.

i said it appeared to be safe, and that is the main focus of the safety drive. we did move one section due to pavement problems. my comment to jerry was people are going to complain because it is too tight

From my perspective, it was nice to have a course that was not focusing on HP. Yes the course was more technical and I had to work alot to get around it, but it was a nice change of pace to the normal courses that SD puts together.

I would like it if we could remember that not all participants have high HP cars and a course should not only reward those. By example, my car only has 200hp, but handles very well. I will never beat a car up the hill at Qualcomm, that handles just as well, but has more hp, with an outstanding driver. That has been proven at most of the courses at Qualcomm. SDRPCA has alot of great drivers, but not all of them are running GT3's. lol.

Again, It was really nice to run a different type of course at Qualcomm. I applaud the autocross team for trying something different. Keep testing ALL drivers abilities.