AutoX Weather

Old Feb 22, 2004 | 09:13 PM
  #16  
chrisw's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 435
From: keep santa cruz weird
Car Info: 2003 blue EVO
I was F* pissed.... I almost asked for my money back after waiting for so long.

I managed to run a 53.5 on my second run. IF I had managed to get a third run, I know I could have gotten a podium in ESP.
Old Feb 22, 2004 | 09:14 PM
  #17  
Impala SS AutoX's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,253
From: Santa Clara CA USA
Car Info: 96 Chevy Impala SS, 06 GMC 2500HD (former 02 WRX)
I can sum up the entire issue today in one word and why it became such a bad event :

crossover

A crossover on the course can be safely and efficiently done, but that one was in a HORRIBLE spot. If you have a crossover on a course, it is ESSENTIAL that it MUST be in the first 20 seconds of the course (where a car goes thru the crossover the FINAL time) or you are screwed.

Today, most cars were going thru the crossover the second (i.e. final) time at around the 35 second mark.

As a result, to SAFELY run the event we had to run an interval between car starts of approx 35-37 seconds. Normally you run about a 23-25 second interval.

Multiply 12 seconds times 300 cars times 3 runs per car and you get almost 11,000 seconds. That is THREE HOURS of unnecessary delays.

If the crossover had been properly done (or just hadn't had one), we would have been done in PLENTY of time with 3 runs per car, even taking in consideration the 9:15AM start (which is actually not that bad....due to contract, we can't start before 9:00 AM anyways with first car out) and the fact we had over 300 cars today.

As a former multi-time event chair myself, today was frustrating because you could see the issue and see that it was dang easy to solve safely. Simply change the course in the "crossover" point to get it under 25 seconds (which was doable with todays course.....just make that "loop" about 1/2 the length it was and it would have been done). If this had been done at the mid-day break, we would have been able to run 3 runs/car this afternoon. Sure the PAX would have been meaningless, but then due to constantly changing course conditions (i.e. drying out as the day went on) the PAX was worthless today anyways.
Old Feb 22, 2004 | 09:37 PM
  #19  
Impala SS AutoX's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,253
From: Santa Clara CA USA
Car Info: 96 Chevy Impala SS, 06 GMC 2500HD (former 02 WRX)
BTW, it did get mentioned that those who only got 2 runs are getting a voucher (which will be mailed to you automatically) for $10 off on your next event.

So in effect you will have paid $20 for 2 runs instead of $30 for 3 runs. Yeah I know it still sucked today, but at least SCCA is trying to "make it right".
Old Feb 22, 2004 | 09:56 PM
  #20  
joltdudeuc's Avatar
Thread Starter
Old School
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 14,983
From: Union City
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
I would also like to ***** about the course layout.

I felt that this course was created to help RWD and high Hp cars get good times. It was just so damn straight, and fast, i wanted to choke someone... It was simply unfair to create a course like this. I felt it, cause in my inexperience, my turn exits weren't as fast as they could have been, but to have to top out in 2nd gear in a 130 WHP car... think about how long that takes... that's a long *** straight away, and there was many of them.

Weather we can't control, so driving on a wet course in Run Group 1 was sucky, but you can't do anything about that at all.

I just hope that we have some more technical courses where the low power people can have a more fair shot at good times with the big guys.


sirfrankwilliams: which car were you?

-Gagan
Old Feb 23, 2004 | 02:13 AM
  #21  
Daredevil's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,715
From: at the track
it being my first time, i still had a great time, and i can tell you, you will see me at the next event, and now that i got a 10 dollar voucher, oh man, even betteR

gagan- i see what you are talkin about, i hadn't thought of that b/c i've never thought on or about a course layout before, but i get what you mean. im glad it was like this though, for my first time b/c i was able to get a feel, and actually do well without having to worry about super techinical turning.

only thing i wish was that the course was like, a good minute longer, i know this is impossible, but hey, i get so pumped up out there, 55 seconds later, its over and thats what just cost me 30 dollasr :\

overall, i had a ****ing blast, as well did my brother who rode shotgun and got it all on tape. i can't wait til the next one
see you all there


btw, sorry for the useless talking :P
Old Feb 23, 2004 | 08:14 AM
  #22  
stratos's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 413
From: Penngrove, CA
Car Info: 96' GF w/EJ205
I have been trying to blame a ton of miscellaneous things on my poor showing at this event...but unfortunately it was the driver. It sucks that you afternoon people only got 2 runs! I would have been upset too. I am looking forward to the next event for better things all around.
Old Feb 23, 2004 | 06:15 PM
  #23  
sirhankwilliams's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 498
From: 94928
Car Info: 08 STI
Originally posted by joltdudeuc

I felt that this course was created to help RWD and high Hp cars get good times. It was just so damn straight, and fast, i wanted to choke someone... It was simply unfair to create a course like this.

sirfrankwilliams: which car were you?

-Gagan
I was the blue wagon #296 in D Stock. I'm pretty sure I was the only blue wagon in run group 5 to spin into on comming traffic.

Actually, aside from the monster-loop bumble, the course really wasn't all that hard on the WRX. There were a spell of courses last year that posessed what I call 'Miata hairpins'. I think they were designed in to level out things in favor of light nimble cars over heavy high powered cars. Stock WRXs have dismal turbo lag and really suck at these tight hairpin corners. There were enough of them that I got to downshifting into 1st trying to keep the power up so I wasn't crawling out of the corner. It may have improved my times, but it probably just helped me wear out my syncro. I'm happy as long as the Miata haripins are kept to a minimum.

Bring on Round 3!
Old Feb 24, 2004 | 10:20 PM
  #24  
Joe250's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 175
From: Bay Area
Car Info: Toyota pickup, Tuono, '62 Mini
My account of Sunday's autox

http://www.joe250.com/cars/autox/oaklandrd2.htm

All that stuff aside, it was good seeing several of you there. Wish things had turned out different. Definitely looking FORWARD to the next event.

Joe
www.joe250.com
Old Feb 24, 2004 | 10:30 PM
  #25  
Joe250's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 175
From: Bay Area
Car Info: Toyota pickup, Tuono, '62 Mini
Talking

Gagen,

The course was not created to help anyone in particular. Like any autox course, it is designed around a number of different goals and constraints - safety, site layout, length, overlap (NOT ONE WORD! ), and fun. You will find as you continue to do more autocrosses that some courses will be easier than others for a particular car (and particular driver). It is not possible to design a course that will please the Miata drivers without ****ing off the Corvette drivers and vice versa.

That's not to say you have to be happy with any particular course. We all have our preferences. Just wanted to assure you that we weren't out to get you.

One other thing, as I mentioned on my site, volunteering to Chair and Co-chair an event is a lot of hard work - but getting to design the course is definitely a nice perk

Also, to address your earlier points - Navid and I, along with the bulk of the setup volunteers were there by 6:45am. We immediately began setting up the site. These things take time (We setup the waiver sign-in table, registration area, tech area, grids A & B, the trailer, timing lights, scoring displays, PA system, laid out the course roughly, filled in the course the rest of way, had it changed by the Chief Safety Steward in a couple areas, tried to line the course but the humidity clogged the new spreader carts, marked all the cones, organized all the workers and started running. Trust me, no one was slacking). Also, if I'm not mistaken, it is normal for the first cars to go out at 9am, so we were just a few minutes late. If you can, please help out with course setup or teardown. Any help is appreciated!

Joe
www.joe250.com

Originally posted by joltdudeuc
I would also like to ***** about the course layout.

I felt that this course was created to help RWD and high Hp cars get good times. It was just so damn straight, and fast, i wanted to choke someone... It was simply unfair to create a course like this. I felt it, cause in my inexperience, my turn exits weren't as fast as they could have been, but to have to top out in 2nd gear in a 130 WHP car... think about how long that takes... that's a long *** straight away, and there was many of them.

Weather we can't control, so driving on a wet course in Run Group 1 was sucky, but you can't do anything about that at all.

I just hope that we have some more technical courses where the low power people can have a more fair shot at good times with the big guys.


sirfrankwilliams: which car were you?

-Gagan

Last edited by Joe250; Feb 24, 2004 at 10:40 PM.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
medicSTi
Bay Area
19
Mar 16, 2008 09:06 PM
joltdudeuc
Bay Area
6
Mar 7, 2004 06:44 PM
joltdudeuc
Bay Area
27
Dec 30, 2002 11:44 PM
thebankman
Wanted
1
Dec 21, 2002 01:23 PM
joltdudeuc
Bay Area
8
Nov 25, 2002 11:17 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:35 PM.