In the end the driver has to pull it all together and make things happen. The Spec Miata suspension is not ideal.
So those guys just use it and pull rabbits out of their hats anyway. See…if they don't, someone else will. |
Originally Posted by BenR
(Post 690401)
What time did he get with just changing the shocks and what is the spec miata record at that track?
Originally Posted by sjmarcy
(Post 690474)
In the end the driver has to pull it all together and make things happen. The Spec Miata suspension is not ideal.
So those guys just use it and pull rabbits out of their hats anyway. See…if they don't, someone else will. |
Originally Posted by BenR
(Post 690379)
Your track must be a lot different. If I could drop 6 seconds just by changing to cheap china coilovers from kyb agx, I'd be all over it. But I highly doubt it's possible in my case. 6 seconds is huge.
Those laps were 1:36.2 kyb, 1:30.6 w/d2's. I'm hoping to run 1:25's next full dry day. |
Could your improvement be caused by getting more experience with the track, and pushing a bit harder because the suspension inspired more confidence?
Our tracks are very similar, short and relatively low speed from all the turns. Everything I've seen 4 seconds below my time is tube frame on slicks. 6+ seconds would be full fender track record. I just don't see 6 seconds happening in my case. I'd be realistically happy with 2 seconds from something like xidas. I've been planning on putting some better suspension on later this year. I hope I eat my words. |
Originally Posted by BenR
(Post 690685)
Could your improvement be caused by getting more experience with the track, and pushing a bit harder because the suspension inspired more confidence?
Our tracks are very similar, short and relatively low speed from all the turns. Everything I've seen 4 seconds below my time is tube frame on slicks. 6+ seconds would be full fender track record. I just don't see 6 seconds happening in my case. I'd be realistically happy with 2 seconds from something like xidas. I've been planning on putting some better suspension on later this year. I hope I eat my words. |
Who cares if their coilovers are any good or not...DGR is giving away a free set of LUGNUTS!!!!!
http://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.php?t=409463 :giggle: |
Originally Posted by BenR
(Post 690685)
I've been planning on putting some better suspension on later this year. I hope I eat my words. |
Originally Posted by revlimiter
(Post 690752)
Maybe we can do a XIDA group buy of two. :)
Only if Emilio would throw in pink lugnuts. Joking aside if you went some xida's this year I'd probably buy and respring your old teins. lol |
Originally Posted by BenR
(Post 690685)
Could your improvement be caused by getting more experience with the track, and pushing a bit harder because the suspension inspired more confidence?
Our tracks are very similar, short and relatively low speed from all the turns. Everything I've seen 4 seconds below my time is tube frame on slicks. 6+ seconds would be full fender track record. I just don't see 6 seconds happening in my case. I'd be realistically happy with 2 seconds from something like xidas. I've been planning on putting some better suspension on later this year. I hope I eat my words. So I didn't have extra experience but for sure it did something confidence wise. The 350/250 springs were fine with uhp street tires, but were too soft for r-comps |
You can also try some A-B-A-B… testing. If you think a mod dropped your lap times 4-5-6 seconds…swap back to the old parts…fine tune to suit and have at it. And look at the data…WHERE was the time being made and lost? When things get closer then things like blind testing start to make more sense IF the logger cannot clearly find zones where the improvements came from the mod. For instance you'll note that GR Motorsports magazine will do a baseline before and after testing some handling mods. You always run out of testing time but the more reality checks and followups you do, the more confident you can be that certain mods truly benefited your car in the manner expected.
|
Originally Posted by sjmarcy
(Post 690846)
You can also try some A-B-A-B… testing. If you think a mod dropped your lap times 4-5-6 seconds…swap back to the old parts…fine tune to suit and have at it. And look at the data…WHERE was the time being made and lost? When things get closer then things like blind testing start to make more sense IF the logger cannot clearly find zones where the improvements came from the mod. For instance you'll note that GR Motorsports magazine will do a baseline before and after testing some handling mods. You always run out of testing time but the more reality checks and followups you do, the more confident you can be that certain mods truly benefited your car in the manner expected.
|
Originally Posted by hustler
(Post 690880)
It's not really up for debate, drive a car with good shocks and it comes together. I also don't care to install suspension 4-times instead of 1. Not only that, once the money is spent, I'm convinced enough to put my wallet away.
|
If you can get the Penske crew to do all the wrenching while babes feed you peeled grapes, then sure, swap it a few times to test back to back.
|
Just read Grass Roots Motorsports for some reasonable testing. Not perfect of course but look at some other magazines.
GRM goes back and tests their benchmark after they have completed their main tests. Such as when they compare tires. Or coilovers. Or xxx… Andy Hollis is often involved and has won many big events in cars he developed using similar strategies. Here is a quote from a recent tire test (my bold): "Before calling it a day, we always retest our first tire. Did the track, car or driver get faster or slower as the day progressed? Of course, this retest is always accompanied by a bit of nervousness. If these numbers don’t match the first test, then we may have some investigating to do." Someone claimed a six second per lap improvement after swapping coilovers. Personally I am unsure that the 6 seconds came ONLY from this swap. If there was a retest then we'd have more confidence in how much time the swap produced. There could have been some other factors. If the retest showed only say 2 seconds difference…then claiming six is likely a stretch. If six was shown by a retest, then it begs further investigation to see wassup. After all…maybe there is even more time to be found. Which can be discovered by doing the PITA stuff like this. |
Originally Posted by sjmarcy
(Post 690894)
Just read Grass Roots Motorsports for some reasonable testing. Not perfect of course but look at some other magazines.
GRM goes back and tests their benchmark after they have completed their main tests. Such as when they compare tires. Or coilovers. Or xxx… Andy Hollis is often involved and has won many big events in cars he developed using similar strategies. Here is a quote from a recent tire test (my bold): "Before calling it a day, we always retest our first tire. Did the track, car or driver get faster or slower as the day progressed? Of course, this retest is always accompanied by a bit of nervousness. If these numbers don’t match the first test, then we may have some investigating to do." Someone claimed a six second per lap improvement after swapping coilovers. Personally I am unsure that the 6 seconds came ONLY from this swap. If there was a retest then we'd have more confidence in how much time the swap produced. There could have been some other factors. If the retest showed only say 2 seconds difference…then claiming six is likely a stretch. If six was shown by a retest, then it begs further investigation to see wassup. After all…maybe there is even more time to be found. Which can be discovered by doing the PITA stuff like this. |
Originally Posted by sjmarcy
(Post 690894)
Just read Grass Roots Motorsports for some reasonable testing. Not perfect of course but look at some other magazines.
GRM goes back and tests their benchmark after they have completed their main tests. Such as when they compare tires. Or coilovers. Or xxx… Andy Hollis is often involved and has won many big events in cars he developed using similar strategies. Here is a quote from a recent tire test (my bold): "Before calling it a day, we always retest our first tire. Did the track, car or driver get faster or slower as the day progressed? Of course, this retest is always accompanied by a bit of nervousness. If these numbers don’t match the first test, then we may have some investigating to do." Someone claimed a six second per lap improvement after swapping coilovers. Personally I am unsure that the 6 seconds came ONLY from this swap. If there was a retest then we'd have more confidence in how much time the swap produced. There could have been some other factors. If the retest showed only say 2 seconds difference…then claiming six is likely a stretch. If six was shown by a retest, then it begs further investigation to see wassup. After all…maybe there is even more time to be found. Which can be discovered by doing the PITA stuff like this. They are autocrossers, their track changes every time. Retesting is more important for them. They're not going to get the sustained and repeatable hours on their track to know exactly where the time is. If I change one thing on my car and drop a full second, I could tell you exactly where it was and why. |
Originally Posted by BenR
(Post 691081)
They are autocrossers, their track changes every time. Retesting is more important for them. They're not going to get the sustained and repeatable hours on their track to know exactly where the time is.
If I change one thing on my car and drop a full second, I could tell you exactly where it was and why. |
The problem is skill and memory also increase after each pass.
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 691094)
The problem is skill and memory also increase after each pass.
|
Originally Posted by sjmarcy
(Post 691095)
That's why they do multiple runs and redo a baseline. Decent drivers are also required. And you also log.
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:58 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands