***The Official Time Trials/Time Attack Thread***

[D_Eclipse9916]

Ya know, I thought about the torque thing and maximizing tq when hp is rule limited makes sense. However, by removing 10 - 30mm of tire you reduce the ability to use that tq. It's penalized for the tq AND the tire to use it. I think taking a star away and forcing one to take tire points to use the tq and handle the weight is a fair compromise.

I'd bet the 1/4 mile times are at least equal between the three cars with second half of the track (a road course straight) going to the BMW/Honda. The long tubes designed to go on a 305cid run out of breath at 4500RPM, and I mean no breath, it's like hitting a wall. That's why it only makes 230-50hp with that much tq. The tq advantage in this car is neutered by the lack of RPM. If we had to pull our trailers around the course, then yes, a second (and third) star would be appropriate.

As I unwind the wheel, I can't put down any more tq on a 255 A6 than you, the tire and traction circle don't care how much is available.

I don't think the pre-LT1 cars (84-91, 88-91 have about 20hp over 85-88) are faster than an E36 M3. Similar pw/weight, more usable RPM, and given 10yrs of suspension/chassis research by a company as good as BMW it wouldn't be a surprise. There are advantages/disadvantages to each that I think are pretty well balanced and would expect them to be classed the same. The S2K folks are high, for all the reasons you mentioned.

I might make a case if I was seriously considering a TT venture but it's not going to happen anytime soon. Which is pretty much why I posted this here and not there, not trying to make a stink, just a discussion.

edit- unless you guys think there is a case, I might see if a few of the guys running would be interested. so, honest feedback, i'm certainly not coming at this as competitor who's trying to blame the "system".

Even if you are thinking of just maybe running TT you should absolutely make a case for it.