This is the part that I don't understand, why spend all the time money and effort on your car then let someone else drive it to win. I mean I can understand if certain criterias are met. eg:

1. People share the cost of development and work to make the car better.
2. Or one person provides the money while another provide the knowledge and advice to help make the car and the other driver faster.
3. Or the people involved are really close friends.

But if you are doing all the R&D yourself then why bother?

 

It was a joke. I was being self deprecating. The implication was that my driving sucks.

I don't really think it's _that_ bad though. I was happy with my midpack finish at my rookie nationals, especially when I consider that I was on a) the wrong tires b) the wrong springrates c) the wrong motor (8 instead of 9).

Believe me, I'm driver #1 in this car.

d

 

Yes it does seem unbalanced to spend $40-50K on the car and development, just to have someone else win in it.

Normal contribution of codriver:

For a full local season they provide tires, split fuel.
Local single event: entry fee, split fuel
For a single big event: 1 tire + split contingency $ won.
For out of town big event or Nats: split all tow, fuel, hotels,1 tire + split contingency $ won, Photo disk.

But the benefits of a good codriver are cost sharing for expensive out of town events, tire warmer as first driver, team to help prep car, good for sponsors, and advice and coaching to be a better driver.

Unless you have a very good shot at winning, it's worth having a better driver . Best case would be to have your codriver/friend 1st, you 3rd. Worst case, codriver 1st, you 2nd. It is hard on the ego if your codriver always beats you.

 

SS RX7 r2 : I completely understand what you said above. Heck, my friend and I have co-driven to Mid-Div events @ KC together and split most of the costs and prep work. Its definately easier on the wallet.

If your co-driver is much better than you and you happen a complete novice then it makes more sense I guess. But if you are pretty good and competetive then its just one more person placing in front of you. Seems like a waste after you spent all the money on the car and parts.

donour: My apologies for not noticing the humor in the earlier comment. I guess sometimes I take things too literally

 

Yeah, our local CSP driver came in 2nd at nats to his codriver. He never hears the end of it. In '06 a local STX driver had the same thing happen - must be tough.

 

haha! Codrivers can be tricky. Only 0.018 seperated me and my codriver at Nats. Luckily it fell in my favor or it would have been a long quiet 30hr drive home. I would have been happy for him had it went the other way.........eventually.

James

 

Well Donour, at least your suspension doesn't "suck" like mine apparently does

As far as co-drivers go though, it's tough, especially on the car owner. As the owner you have a lot more going through your head whereas your co-driver can just focus on driving. I still never hear the end of it that somebody trophied in my car at Nationals and I didn't.....

 

Tire pressures for Asphalt:

RE01R: I liked 32F 36R. Set 'em there cold and bleed off as the warm up. I would fiddle with rear pressure to make small adjustments to the balance.

Azenis 615: 38F 40R. I was fighting roll the whole season I ran these. Those pressures were basically as low as I could go without driving on the sidwalls

OE Advan AO46: 36F 38R.

--

What do folks like with the Neova? I'm running it this weekend.

d

 

Sorry haven't used Neovas yet but you could start @ 36psi and adjust. I'm sure everyone has checked out the lastest fasttrack:

http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastra...k-mar-solo.pdf

Some interesting changes coming to ST* is seems with twin turbo cars being allowed. Not sure how I feel about the proposed increase in rim and tire sizes for 2WD cars in STX but I will say this, I actually feel it wouldn't hurt much to lets the 2WD cars to roll their fender lips inwards a bit to accomdate the max tire sizes available to them (eg: 275 tires in STU). Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?

 

I'd like to see the allowance of a front LSD in STU, doubt it will ever happen...

Any more thoughts, comparisons between the Dunlop Z1 and the Advan Neovas?

 

+1! that is one of my biggest complaints about STU right now. Those of us with '03/'04 Evos are not even allowed to update to stock parts that come on a an IX, or even '05. Having a leaky platic POS DV, and an open front diff could be remedied with as little as $500 in stock parts, just to get on par with an IX in the same class. Not fair that this is illegal IMO. I could see about upgrading the turbo, including a 10.5 hot side, but forbidding updating to a factory front LSD that comes stock on newer models if your stock one breaks (we are supposed to then go shopping for a replacement open diff? wtf?), and DV that does not raise boost, just be less prone to leakage really grinds my gears.

 

I just read the STU rules and it sure seems that installing a FLSD from an '04 RS into any '04 EVO would be legal. They don't separate the EVO RS into a separate category. Is there something I'm missing?

 

Well the 03 and 04s already have a center and rear LSD, so you can't add one as per the allowance. The front LSD was never offered as an option on these, so you can't use that argument.

You could, in theory, do a conversion to a '04 RS like mine, but that would pretty impractical. There are a lot of special RS items like window glass, trunk lid, and about a zillion interior panels.

I'm on the fence about a FLSD allowance. One the one hand, I think it is silly to require cars to run the open front diff which mitsubishi saw fit to replace in later cars. It's not going to make the '03s better than the 06s. No way no how.

On the other hand, maybe they will. Excepting the 04 RS, the those cars are lighter than the later ones. Do you also have to allow it for the WRX? Any other cars? Do you just do away with diff limitations? Consider that. No diff restrictions. $$$$$.

d

 

edit: beaten by donour with different words.
The SCCA generally tries to avoid car-specific rules, and making allowances like this for everyone (basically, allowing update/backdate) is sometimes more harm than good. The ST category used to have it until people were picking and choosing parts to build high power/light weight Civics for STS.

Where do you draw the line? Why should it be ok to change a diff but not a turbo, especially with the diff will probably be more useful on an autox course?

As much as I'd like to use parts like the metal DV, it's generally a lot simpler for everyone if update/backdate isn't allowed.

It doesn't matter if it's not on a separate line. Since the ST classes don't have update/backdate, you would have to do it like a stock-class option package change. Meaning that you would have to completely convert your car to an RS, aside from a) comfort and convenience items (of the same weight), and b) parts that the class allows you to change anyway.

 

Cool. Thanks for the info. I just read the stock rules and now I understand. That's weird. I always thought you could change any components between trim levels of any particular model year car as long as they are on the same line in Stock category.

I always thought as long as they are on the same line you could share any parts between different trim levels. . . guess I've been spending too much time in SP and SM!!