Pairity Progress!

[Daniel Allford]

The 2013 CMC rule changes certainly had the desired effect. Even though Ford represents only 45% of the CMC field they have won 66% of the races.

Questions: Can further improvements be made? Can we completely eliminate any wins by those pesky Camaros?

2014 NASA TX CMC Season Stats

27 Different points earning competitors: 12 Ford/15 GM
24 races: 16 Ford wins/8 GM wins
11 qualifying sessions: 6 Ford wins/5 GM wins
12 races gridded on qualifying: 8 Ford wins/4 GM wins
12 inverted races: 8 Ford wins/4 GM wins
72 podium positions: 47 Ford/ 25 GM

Overall season points:
Ford in the top spot
Ford 4 of the top 5

Dan #82

[mach1]

Nice info, got any previous season stats on tap?
It would be fun to switch platforms and compare lap times.

[AllZWay]

Watch a few videos of straight away speeds and it is pretty evident of the faster car.

[mach1]

Watch a few videos of straight away speeds and it is pretty evident of the faster car.
Do you have any examples?

[Rob Liebbe]

Glad I'm rebuilding back into a Mustang, now I'm sure to win!!!!!

[Suck fumes]

Any car in the class can be fast if you build it right and can drive it to its full potential.

[MikeP99Z]

Aaron should fix this next year.

2014 NASA TX AI Season Stats

23 Different points earning competitors: 17 Ford/6 GM
24 races: 6 Ford wins/18 GM wins
11 qualifying sessions: 3 Ford wins/8 GM wins
12 races gridded on qualifying: 3 Ford wins/9 GM wins
12 inverted races: 3 Ford wins/9 GM wins
72 podium positions: 49 Ford/ 23 GM

Overall season points:
Ford in the top spot
Ford 3 of the top 5

[Suck fumes]

Still saving my pennies for the engine. Should hopefully start building in early January.

[marshall_mosty]

Mr. Patterson won every single regional race he took the green flag in for 2014 with the exception of the one rain race at TWS... The pointy end of the AI stick is still really damn pointy and I need a car sharpener if I'm going to close the gap.

[michaelmosty]

Here are the fastest laps of every event for the last 4 years:

2011
MSRH - CW 1:45.842 (J. Gunter)
MSRC 1:24.769 (G. Landrum)
TWS - CCW 1:59.155 (G. Landrum)
Hallett 1:28.961 (J. Procter)
TWS - CW 1:58.606 (S. Mulder)
ECR 2:04.731 (J. Procter)

2012
MSRH - CCW 1:46.272 (J. Procter)
MSRC 1:23.623 (C. Powell)
TWS - CCW 1:58.228 (D. Allford)
Hallett 1:28.078 (J. Procter)
ECR 2:02.457 (D. Allford)
NOLA 1:58.765 (D. Allford)

2013
MSRH - CW 1:46.381 (Mosty)
MSRC 1:23.331 (J. Procter)
TWS - CW 1:56.105 (A. McSpadden)
NOLA 1:58.451 (D. Wright)
Hallett 1:28.188 (B. Curtis)
TWS - CCW 1:58.405 (G. Landrum)
ECR 2:02.847 (B. Curtis)

2014
MSRH - CCW 1:46.981 (Mosty)
MSRC 1:23.100 (G. Landrum)
TWS - CW 1:56.979 (K. Jander)
Hallett 1:28.216 (B. Curtis)
TWS - CCW 1:57.191 (Mosty)
ECR 2:01.791 (Mosty)

For 2011 - 2012:
Ford had 1 fast laps of 12 events, Chevy had 11 fast laps of 12 events.
After 2012, there was a change to the Chevy track width and min weight.

For 2013 - 2014:
Ford had 6 fast laps of 13 events, Chevy had 7 fast laps of 13 events.

Total fast laps by a Ford (over the last 4 years): 7
Total fast laps by a Chevy (over the last 4 years): 18

The facts are the facts. Every platform has some sort of advantage over the other. The rules have been adjusted to make things much closer than they were a few years ago.

Bottom line, 11 individuals have had the fastest lap in CMC over the last 4 years of racing, for the last 25 events.
Mosty - 4 events
Landrum - 4 events
Jander - 1 event
Curtis - 3 events
Procter - 6 events
McSpadden - 1 event
Wright - 1 event
Powell - 1 event
Allford - 2 events
Gunter - 1 event
Mulder - 1 event
That is a pretty good spread IMO.

[Fbody383]

The facts are the facts. Every platform has some sort of advantage over the other. The rules have been adjusted to make things much closer than they were a few years ago.THIS is much more 'accurate' than talking about fast lap.


Bottom line, 11 individuals have had the fastest lap in CMC over the last 4 years of racing, for the last 25 events...Since we are not time trialing don't award points and tires on fast laps, I don't see this as relevant as podium positions.


The 2013 CMC rule changes certainly had the desired effect. Even though Ford represents only 45% of the CMC field they have won 66% of the races.

Questions: Can further improvements be made? Can we completely eliminate any wins by those pesky Camaros?The original observation is also a fair one.

For CMC the better question could/should be: did each driver competing with minimal mistakes, in a well prepared car, whithout unnecesary distractions (i.e. yellow/red flags, out of class racing, third party contact/avoidance, picking the right lane in traffic, etc.) have the capability to podium regardless of make/model?

AI is a different question because they invite differences of development per car. So not only is the driver a variable a Chevy may not be a Chevy in AI. CMC is devoted to trying to squeeze the platform differences out.

Did the 2013 changes go way-way-way-way too far? Absolutely not.

As Dan has fairly asked, can further improvements be made? I don't think that answer is as clear, though I tend to believe that yes, some erosion of the 2013 moves would be reasonable.

[mach1]

I am going to build a 4th gen and just switch back and forth between platforms depending on the rules. J/k
It looks to me that the rules are pretty damn solid considering the previously posted data.

I think lap times are quite relevant when we are comparing the platforms.

This is pretty spot on IMO, but I think it is 80% driver 20% platform.

For CMC the better question could/should be: did each driver competing with minimal mistakes, in a well prepared car, whithout unnecesary distractions (i.e. yellow/red flags, out of class racing, third party contact/avoidance, picking the right lane in traffic, etc.) have the capability to podium regardless of make/model?

[AI#97]

I'll make you a helluva deal on a mustang that will make Mr Patterson sweat a lot. Will include the correct intake to knock the power down....just have to not draw attention to the face plated trans! ;). $25k for the fastest SN95 in the 5 state area....or more.

[michaelmosty]

Fast lap time totally means something when talking about platform parity!!! It has to do with getting the most out of the platform and seeing the potential that is there.
My question would be, why are the GM fast laps not transitioning to as many race wins?
Heck, Dan was in the regional championship hunt up to the very end and it is pretty safe to say he had some of the worst mechanical luck at multiple events this year.

Just because a car wins or gets on the podium, doesn't mean it is the best platform to have.
And just because a car has the fastest lap of the race, doesn't mean it is the best platform to have either.
Like has been stated, there are a dozen factors that determine the finishing position of an individual.

[Fbody383]

Fast lap time totally means something when talking about platform parity!!! It has to do with getting the most out of the platform and seeing the potential that is there.That's more lap time consistency and 'raceabilty' than one lap flying performance.

[Note: this made me think, do you have the data on fastest race lap person versus their qual times? I'm aruguing it's racing parity not outright one lap time parity.]

I don't think you would argue that a driver/car that had every pole, and fastest lap time but never reached the podium (without mechanicals, incidents, etc.) was parity. (To be fair, based on our collective experience, it's hard to believe this could happen)

CMC parity is green to checker and not just starting line to starting line.

IF we could simply swap drivers around in cars and have them maintain the same relative level of performance, we might be able to see the platform differences. We won't and, in government terms, no body wants to pay to do so.

Ultimately I think we have a pretty good problem - well sorted cars and very capable drivers at the front of the field. But the orginal question is valid - are there changes that could be made to continue to increase competitiveness?

And I like to argue. From behind a keyboard. As a midpack slacker. Orange.

[RichardP]

Mathematically, the Fords have a better power to weight ratio. In theory, this was done to compensate for reduced handling/cornering speed and come out with equal lap times. I think the platforms are reasonably close in this aspect.

From a racing perspective, when two cars are equally capable of producing the same lap time, the car with the better power to weight ratio has an advantage in passing and preventing being passed. The difference in CMC is subtle but I’m sure we’ve all experienced more extreme examples of this. You come up on a car with a big motor that you are say two seconds a lap faster than. Getting past is an exercise in frustration. He can take full advantage of his strengths on the straight but when he parks it in the corner, you can’t take advantage of your cornering advantage because he is physically in your way. It takes really exact positional timing to pull it off even though he quickly fades from the rear view mirror once you do pull it off…

Richard P.

[blk96gt]

I agree with Michael and Tyler, lap times are very relevant, but IMO are only relevant if there is data attached. There are too many other factors that go into lap times to only consider how fast someone drives around a track.

The only way to properly solve the (potential) parity issue is to find/hire a third party driver to drive multiple platforms and compare data/lap times. There is even an issue with this, as you really need to have all platforms tested prepared to the limit of the rules. Even so, I still think it would be interesting to get 2-3 cars from each platform and let someone drive them back to back with data.

Hire someone like Eric Foss for the day, and he brings a Traqmate with him and will even go over the data with you. I'm pretty sure his cost is around $1000/day. Split between 6-8 people it would be <$170/person plus the cost of the DE/track day.

[BlueFirePony]

I agree with Michael and Tyler, lap times are very relevant, but IMO are only relevant if there is data attached. There are too many other factors that go into lap times to only consider how fast someone drives around a track.

The only way to properly solve the (potential) parity issue is to find/hire a third party driver to drive multiple platforms and compare data/lap times. There is even an issue with this, as you really need to have all platforms tested prepared to the limit of the rules. Even so, I still think it would be interesting to get 2-3 cars from each platform and let someone drive them back to back with data.

Hire someone like Eric Foss for the day, and he brings a Traqmate with him and will even go over the data with you. I'm pretty sure his cost is around $1000/day. Split between 6-8 people it would be <$170/person plus the cost of the DE/track day.
I'd be willing to wire up the cars for free with our sensors so you will get much more comprehensive data - 4 corner balance, travel, temp. We are not going to make steering angle sensors right now, but I am looking into some semi-universal sensors that would also provide steering input data - combined with throttle, brake and the 4 corner, you will be able to objectively see how driver input affects the car through the session and how the chassis and tires are behaving.

[AI#97]

I agree with Michael and Tyler, lap times are very relevant, but IMO are only relevant if there is data attached. There are too many other factors that go into lap times to only consider how fast someone drives around a track.

The only way to properly solve the (potential) parity issue is to find/hire a third party driver to drive multiple platforms and compare data/lap times. There is even an issue with this, as you really need to have all platforms tested prepared to the limit of the rules. Even so, I still think it would be interesting to get 2-3 cars from each platform and let someone drive them back to back with data.

Hire someone like Eric Foss for the day, and he brings a Traqmate with him and will even go over the data with you. I'm pretty sure his cost is around $1000/day. Split between 6-8 people it would be <$170/person plus the cost of the DE/track day.

Or you could hire someone already familiar with driving both chassis to their limits on the same track on the same day at a track that driver can drive blindfolded....AND is cheaper than Eric Foss! I might just know someone like that. ;)

[Daniel Allford]

James P. Watch a few videos of straight away speeds and it is pretty evident of the faster car.

Richard P. Mathematically, the Fords have a better power to weight ratio. In theory, this was done to compensate for reduced handling/cornering speed and come out with equal lap times. I think the platforms are reasonably close in this aspect.

From a racing perspective, when two cars are equally capable of producing the same lap time, the car with the better power to weight ratio has an advantage in passing and preventing being passed. The difference in CMC is subtle but I’m sure we’ve all experienced more extreme examples of this. You come up on a car with a big motor that you are say two seconds a lap faster than. Getting past is an exercise in frustration. He can take full advantage of his strengths on the straight but when he parks it in the corner, you can’t take advantage of your cornering advantage because he is physically in your way. It takes really exact positional timing to pull it off even though he quickly fades from the rear view mirror once you do pull it off..


Been there, done that.
Dan

[RichardP]

Heck, Dan was in the regional championship hunt up to the very end and it is pretty safe to say he had some of the worst mechanical luck at multiple events this year.

This is an interesting statement that kind of masks your utter dominance of the season. You missed 20% of the races and still won easily. That means that every one of the races you started counted towards your point total, even the race where you blew up your motor and the ones you did in Dave's substitute car. You won 37% of the races that you started and finished on the podium 74% of the time. Very impressive.

More interesting from a parity aspect: Fully half of the GM wins were in the 20% of the races that you personally didn't run. 63% if you count the races where you weren't driving your own car.


Richard P.

[mach1]

Add weight to the ford and give it better suspension?

[michaelmosty]

Is the sky falling because a Mustang won the regional championship in TX?
I did notice a Camaro won the Colorado region and a Camaro won the Great Lakes/Midwest region. A Camaro also won the East Coast Nationals.

[mach1]

Is the sky falling because a Mustang won the regional championship in TX?
I did notice a Camaro won the Colorado region and a Camaro won the Great Lakes/Midwest region. A Camaro also won the East Coast Nationals.

I count 3 camaros, and 1 ford, sounds like the ford needs the better suspension part, without the weight.

[BryanL]

Well now this is the best thread I have seen in I don't know when. Like most threads there is some good stuff and some garbage. I'll call the garbage in this thread anything concerning AI.

I'll start from the top-Tyler makes a good point about past seasons-that data might be on the national site from awhile back where Boudreaux compiled quite a bit of data. Though my question is how has the data changed due to changes in the rules? Also, maybe good to outline the rules that were changed-then when they were changed did a trend change/start? EDIT-I think between 2012/2013 weight was added to the 4th Gen as well as a reduced track width.

Mosty's top lap times-Kind of tough to only take the fastest lap of the whole weekend to really make a point without considering how close the other cars were at a specific track. What is the delta at each track otherwise we may skew the numbers due to the track.

-One point of interest from the data collector Mosty-he only had 1 fast lap prior to 2014-then in 2014 he had fast lap 3 of the 4 events he had his car at? Is that correct?

Richard-psst-I think this guy might be sharp even if he works at NASA-nice point about the skewed data due to Mosty missing some events and his sheer dominance in 2014. Hat tip to Mosty.

Not to take anything away from Mosty as I know I wouldn't win in his hooptie. But it does raise my eyebrow to look at Mosty's dominance this year both in race wins & fast laps compared to years past. But he didn't dominate in 2013? Why? (was there a different mustang that dominated when it ran?)

To heck with data-here is my opinion-I agree that any platform can win and the cars are pretty dang close. I think this is a good exercise to look at the data and see if it's worth considering any change. Certainly difficult due to all the different variables.

[michaelmosty]

I chose 2011 because that is as far back as the results go on the Nasa website. For your info #24, the rules were changed for the 4th gens before the 2013 season, not 2011. The two big changes were to add 50 lbs to the platform and reduce the track width advantage the 4th gen has from 2" down to only 1 1/4" advantage over the Fox.

Would we be having this discussion if Burch, Wirtz, and Procter ran a full season in 2014? I think it has also been 5 years since Glenn ran a full season as well.

[smitty328]

Mr. Patterson won every single regional race he took the green flag in for 2014 with the exception of the one rain race at TWS... The pointy end of the AI stick is still really damn pointy and I need a car sharpener if I'm going to close the gap.

I was actually able to read the 8 on the back of Mike's car during one finish.

[Fbody383]

Bottom line, 11 individuals have had the fastest lap in CMC over the last 4 years of racing, for the last 25 events.Don't dig it up if it's not already in your data, but do you also have the qual stats and individual race fast lap times?


Would we be having this discussion if Burch, Wirtz, and Procter ran a full season in 2014? I think it has also been 5 years since Glenn ran a full season as well.Yes; we'd be talking about the third gen/LT1 combo.

[ShadowBolt]

If the 28 had ran this season this thread would never have been posted. I really used to think the GM cars had an advantage. After seeing Kellam and Aaron win like they did I realized a great driver can win in any good car. If both the Jeffs were still racing I'm guessing we would be bitching about the third gens. I certainly don't think everything is perfect but it's damn close right now. I'm open to listen to ideas. I think we already missed it for 2015 did we not (as far as rules changes are concerned).

JJ

[marshall_mosty]

Kinda like Corey renting Morgan's 4th gen and doing really well at Hallett...

[Rob Liebbe]

Having spent time in both Mustangs and Camaros, I feel that each car has its good points and bad points. However, the cars that win a lot of races and set fast lap times are the ones that have been tuned and developed either over years and years or have benefitted from setup help from a known or good tuner. Those same cars have drivers that have a lot of seat time and race experience. Those same winning cars are reliable and complete their races when not involved in on-track incidents. I don't see any particular parity problems from where I sit right now.

If you want to make the car and driver combination an issue, then you could have event to event adjustments like adding weight to the top qualifiers or something like that. But I don't recommend that.

On the other hand - we should make rule changes that favor 1994-1995 Mustangs with old-school 5.0 engines and old drivers who might be a bit rusty.

[mach1]

Having spent time in both Mustangs and Camaros, I feel that each car has its good points and bad points. However, the cars that win a lot of races and set fast lap times are the ones that have been tuned and developed either over years and years or have benefitted from setup help from a known or good tuner. Those same cars have drivers that have a lot of seat time and race experience. Those same winning cars are reliable and complete their races when not involved in on-track incidents. I don't see any particular parity problems from where I sit right now.
.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

[michaelmosty]

Don't dig it up if it's not already in your data, but do you also have the qual stats and individual race fast lap times?

Yes; we'd be talking about the third gen/LT1 combo.
I have not pulled that data yet.
About 2-weeks ago I got curious my fast laps vs the fast laps of the event and I made a spreadsheet of the last 4 years my fast lap, event fast lap, and current track record for that track.

It is interesting to see what the lap times have done at the various tracks over the years.
MSRH both directions and Hallett have had virtually no change.
Lap times at Cresson have slowly dropped every year.
TWS both directions and ECR have had some massive drops over the last few years.

I'll try to get the list posted, not sure how the formatting is going to look though.