With all due respect it's statements like these that make me wonder if what goes on over here on the west coast during the year is either not noticed or for some reason considered irrelevant(?). These people have raced together on a number of occasions. Here are the results from the events I can recall

2014 San Diego National Tour (broken asphalt)
(1) 192 Brian Peters 2003 Nissan 350Z
102.633
53.854 52.540 52.145
53.594(1) 50.923 50.488

(2) 21 Geoff Clark 2006 Mitsubishi EVO
104.352 (1.719)
55.201 53.847 53.150
51.552 51.202 53.290(1)

(3) 97 Rick Jung 2004 Mitsubishi Evolution
105.870 (1.518)
55.467 54.482 53.632
52.705 55.822(2) 52.238

(4) 98 Peter Bollenbecker 2007 Subaru STI
105.959 (0.089)
55.395 53.901 53.826
53.059 52.133 52.437


2014 El Toro Pro
(1) Brian Peters 2003 Nissan 350Z Silver Hankook
66.295
34.156 34.203 33.850 33.809 33.701 33.800
33.789 RL 33.308 32.849 32.689 32.594

(2) Rick Jung 2004 Mitsubishi Evolution
67.019 (0.724)

(3) Geoff Clark 2006 Mitsubishi Evo
67.342 (0.323)
21 35.049 34.194 36.179(1) 36.194(1) 34.285 34.519
35.505(1) 43.269(0,1) 34.877(1) 33.148 35.302(1) 33.175

(4) Sean OBoyle 2006 Mitsubishi Evolution
67.673 (0.331)
67 35.946 34.754 RL RL 34.152 34.239
33.923 35.846(1) 34.005 33.521 RL 33.739

(5) Peter Bollenbecker 2007 Subaru STI
67.822 (0.149)
98 37.553(1) 35.307 34.875 34.884 34.559 34.762
DSQ 33.829 33.626 33.537 33.263 33.404


2014 Crow's Landing Pro Solo (concrete)
(1) Geoff Clark 2006 Mitsubishi Evo
66.598
21 RL 34.678 37.323(2) 35.845(1) 33.191 35.424(1)
33.758 39.945(3) 33.407 33.496 35.638(1) 33.616

(2) Brian Peters 2003 Nissan 350Z
66.709 (0.111)
92 36.283(1) 36.546(1) 33.949 33.805 35.597(1) 33.682
33.911 RL 33.292 RL 33.127 33.027

(3) Sean OBoyle 2006 Mitsubishi* Evolution
66.835 (0.126)
67 36.266(1) 38.649(2) 34.164 34.236 33.583 33.603
36.111(1) 36.258(1) 33.894 34.124 33.252 33.321

2014 Crow's Landing National Tour
(1) 192 Brian Peters 2003 Nissan 350Z
119.040
62.713(1) 61.145 64.736(2)
58.334 57.895 58.106

(2) 21 Geoff Clark 2006 Mitsubishi Evo
120.700 (1.660)
63.557(1) 61.732 63.524(1)
60.536(1) 58.968 61.015(1)

(3) 156 Doug Mikko 2006 Mitsubishi Evo
121.529 (0.829)
63.824 63.405 62.317
60.198 59.212 DNF

(4) 92 Robert Irish 2003 Nissan 350Z
122.821 (1.292)
63.901 64.974(1) 62.656
63.214(1) 62.325(1) 60.165

 

It's a big thread. So you probably don't remember this statement from post #398.

 

If we were back at HPT they'd probably put us on 245s!
Oh wait..

 

1) "the only surface that really counts": Other surfaces and other courses are pretty important data points when you're trying to figure out whether a class is balanced right. Look at the two Pros in California this year. Even giving up all that time at the launch, BP was only .1 out at Crow's Landing and that was on a course that looked like this, where the Evo's power advantage should have been a pretty big deal:

So usually you'll compare 60 foot times to figure out how big the AWD-2WD gap is. And usually it's about .4 or .5 per side at the 60 foot mark. It was actually worse here because the course started with a straightaway WAY longer than 60 feet. And it was still basically a tie after 12 runs, on a very very open horsepower friendly course. To me, that says pretty clearly that 80mm of tire is a really big deal on concrete.

I just don't think you can blow off FIVE national events as datapoints (Doug left out St George UT at the end of last year where BP was faster even in STR trim), most of which were on concrete, just because they're not Lincoln.

2) Even with less Evos there we still have relevant data points from this year's Nats. Last year, BP beat STR. This year, with 60mm more tire and a lot more wheel, he didn't, with a lot of the same names in STR as in 2013. His gap to Colin Fiedler was the same as 2013, for instance. And he won STU by 1.6 seconds. So maybe he didn't drive as well in 2014, compared to 2013, on "the only surface that really counts" and the gap is actually bigger than that single event would indicate.

 

I'd be more worried about Lane Borg next year than anyone else....

 

I heard few times that he was taking it easy at Nationals, but without being there it is hard to say anything else on the subject, aside more of the hearsay. His Vette in BS is clearly big time overdog and I would expect the same if he switches to STU. That car can be pushed a bit by the S2000 only on transition only tight courses (like those we have here in the NER region), but those are not the ones we will see at the Nationals. Everywhere else, 330/330 wheel HP/lb on bigger wheels/tires, excellent suspension geometry will walk away against anything that is in B-Street. By giving them even better suspension and potentially even more power and more tire, they would be even faster in STU trim. Unless SCCA does something about the Vettes and their extremely favorable classing this year, AS, BS, and STU are Vettes only classes!

 

I think you're missing the point. No one said those data points are irrelevant. Myself included. My point was that this class needed Geoff at nationals to see what the entire hand was really going to look like. Because Geoff is a data point.

Fact is, there are plenty of tour and pro winners who never shine at the big show (myself included). Cars that defy expectation and never show up. Or courses that restrict or hinder an outliers performance.

By Geoff not showing up though. We are missing data not from the only site that matters. (But I think all national competitors would agree) The most important site.

You bring up the fact that BP was slower than STR this year. Could you not also conclude that Geoff could have been faster? Heck, maybe even have won it?

I'm curious why he didn't show up to defend his position. Heck, he didn't even show up period.

 

P.S. That crows landing course looked about as speed maintenance as anything.

 

Clearly, I'm not a national-level competitor. But I still find it strange that you're trying so hard to steer the discussion away from the big picture (multiple events and data points) and toward a single competitor who didn't make it to a single event.

Can we get back to discussing the big picture here? Getting hung up on this one unknown isn't going to get us anywhere.

There's more to this debate than just one driver vs. another at a single event at a single site.

 

Btw, it looks official that Lane Borg is in STU next year!

 

I also heard Jeff Cawthorne was headed there/here, with Strano's help...

 

Very cool! Will be fun to have some more variety.

Hopefully we can get the tire sizing for AWD sorted out to keep the class from getting too lopsided before the AWD crowd moves elsewhere. Would be fun to have more cars in the mix as long as it's somewhat balanced.

 

It will be cool to have more cars included in STU. It's unfortunate that only an incremental increase to 255 is likely to happen, which may not stem the bleeding out of AWD cars from the class. Beginning to look like what happened to the WRXs in STX when the tire/wheel rule changed.

I realize the importance of looking at results from nats, but IMO the cumulative results of national tours and Pros (adjusted for launch time) should not have been ignored, since they provide an average. Doug's post of the results above gives valid representation of the top drivers and cars in the class, due to the surface grip of Crow's landing and El Toro being similar to Lincoln.

The decision to make a small incremental increase in tire allowance based on Nats results alone was flawed. For instance, was tire choice of the winning Z car taken into account? It was on Hankook V1s, instead of the generally considered faster new V2s. A top ST class driver tested switching back to V1s at a round at the Finale, and paid dearly. This may have been a factor on why the same Z that won STR last year on 255s, was slower than STR this year, even with 2" wider wheels and 285s.

Another interesting data point was from the Utah match tour. With a Prosolo like launch start on a low grip surface, the same STR Z on 255s, raw timed all ST cars, including the STU class and the National and ProSolo champion.

 

Agreed on all counts. I'm starting to get the impression that the goal wasn't so much to increase STU class attendance as it was to shake things up a bit and take the AWD cars down a notch or two.

 

The big picture is that the Z and possibly other RWD cars have supplanted the boost buggies.

If you take BP out of the picture, then all of a sudden that argument carries no weight. As the top car would have been an Evo. With the Z all the way back in 4th. When we looked at data and being generous on what I think the car could have done day two. I come up with a possible time of 124.574 for Scott or I. That is still .7 back from Mark. And an honest 2.4 back from BP.

So without having other top STU drivers there. It's really hard to get a grasp of the big picture. I just don't like seeing people jump to conclusions without playing out all the cards.

I like to see big, diverse and competitive classes. STX is a perfect example of what happens when you get it right. And I think STU has the same potential WITH the current rule set.