RJay

Sorry, 44 wasn't a target, it was just where things could wind up if I was being a little over exuberant. Running RA1s at the time and you could always tell when they got to that level as you'd go to take a set and of course, you wouldn't. After the first session, I'd bleed down to precisely the level you suggest. And yep, more evidence that great and not so great minds sometimes think alike, with the NT01s I deduced that the thing to do was to try to induce a little more sidewall flex by starting at lower pressures. Given the lower profile and the stiffer sidewall, these tires present a hitherto unknown challenge in terms of getting up to operating temp in cold weather. In fact, I did exactly as you suggested, starting at 28, I was arriving at around 34, but (and Ive just recovered my pyrometer) the palm test after a session suggested temps in the 120-30 range, nothing like the 180 or so I'd like to be seeing. Its a little frustrating, but exciting because, even given this I was seeing a gain of nearly .2 G in most corners at WGI over last year. Presumably theres even more available.

Compared to most, I'm already on a strict camber diet, I run 1.75 in the rear, I think I'm at 2.25 in front, but perhaps its not a bad idea to experiment with a tick or two less. This setup thing is indeed a PITA, but hopefully we'll get a little closer before the end of the season.

wanna911

Depends on the track. I'd bet money a 996 TT would beat a 996 GT3 at the high speed tracks if the TT were allowed coilovers, rear sway and camber adjustment only. Same tires, same day.


But as for the overall theory, the lighter weight car with the same weight to hp ratio, similar aero and suspension setup will be faster on most any track.

Veloce Raptor

Wow, just came across this older thread, George.

Notice how our ooompa loompa friend has not reappeared in this Track/Racing section since he had his head handed to him in this thread?

I am sure he is still pontificating mightily and dangerously to the unsuspecting and naive in other forums here, though.

Veloce Raptor

No, it won't, as we have already illustrated.

wanna911

You havent illustrated, or better yet PROVEN anything of the sort.

95ONE

Formula 1 cars are 1320lbs Maybe they should only run 225'S?

RJay

Do they really? What do they weigh at a 100MPH?

Veloce Raptor

You first, dogcatcher. You made the claim, YOU prove it.

We'll wait.


Meanwhile, I found this--it's just for you.

95ONE

Damn. got me..

But I still argue less weight is better than more.
use whatever tires you want.

Veloce Raptor

I'll agree for wear and tear it is better. But again, having 2 vehicles with the same power/weight, with one heavier than the other, on some tracks the higher HP one will turn faster laps. Contrary to what some folks seem to insist in this thread.

Hey, wanna911, when you go to visit your buddy Michael Vick in prison, and he complains about prison food, show him this:

smlporsche

I have to agree with VR on this one.
On a big track like VIR or Daytona a lighter and lower HP car will get its a$$ handed to it while on a tighter smaller track like CMP it could be the other way around.

smlporsche

As a personal example when First Settlers does its 3 day event at VIR with the first 2 days on the North Course I am much more "competetive" with my higher HP bretheren but on day 3 when we use the full course and the big HP cars get to stretch their legs it's sayonara time...

Veloce Raptor

Same at TWS...as in the personal example I gave earlier in this thread when kicking 02 Carrera to the curb.

Whereas, it is likely the be the other way around on a technical track like Motorsport Ranch.

trackjunky

Not sure about this. How do you account for the Mazda RX8 in Grand Am? I think this may be a pretty good example, although I'm not sure about the HP/Weight ratio. I believe that everyone is missing out on torque and gearing, which is what NASA GTS accounts for in some ways.

95ONE

So you live here in Houston?

I am so damn close to finshing the car. Could tune as soon as Friday.