| Redneck Ricer | 03-23-2004 02:25 PM |
Cadillac romps the competition in Speed WC
�
�
Did nto see this posted anywhere in this forum yet, but kinda nice to see :)
looks like the CTS-V series is getting off to a good start.
1-2 after satarting at the back of the pack. set course lap records, Pilgrim even stalled at the start, had everyone pass him, then pased them all but one for second!
nice to see :)
[url]http://www.world-challenge.com/news/04press55.html[/url]
p-rex
looks like the CTS-V series is getting off to a good start.
1-2 after satarting at the back of the pack. set course lap records, Pilgrim even stalled at the start, had everyone pass him, then pased them all but one for second!
nice to see :)
[url]http://www.world-challenge.com/news/04press55.html[/url]
p-rex
| pio!pio! | 03-23-2004 02:46 PM |
[url]http://bbs.sccaproracing.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/003179.html[/url]
| GarySheehan | 03-23-2004 08:14 PM |
I'm not sure that I'm happy to see a brand new car come out and be 3 seconds/lap quicker than the championship winning cars of last year. SCCA needs to jump on this and make the Caddies play fair.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
| Mopho | 03-23-2004 09:06 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by GarySheehan [/i]
[B]I'm not sure that I'm happy to see a brand new car come out and be 3 seconds/lap quicker than the championship winning cars of last year. SCCA needs to jump on this and make the Caddies play fair.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]
I was there working the race on an photo assignment for the SCCA, they were pretty bummed out about it and were already looking into ways to even things up immediately after the race
[B]I'm not sure that I'm happy to see a brand new car come out and be 3 seconds/lap quicker than the championship winning cars of last year. SCCA needs to jump on this and make the Caddies play fair.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]
I was there working the race on an photo assignment for the SCCA, they were pretty bummed out about it and were already looking into ways to even things up immediately after the race
| Patrick Olsen | 03-24-2004 05:20 AM |
I'm not sure what the SCCA was expecting from a CF Caddie sporting a 'Vette C5R engine. :rolleyes:
Pat Olsen
'97 Legacy 2.5GT sedan
Pat Olsen
'97 Legacy 2.5GT sedan
| ellisnc | 03-24-2004 06:51 AM |
Nothing about 300 pounds and more narrow tires wouldn't fix.
| cdvma | 03-24-2004 10:38 AM |
Dont they get 75 lbs for finishing first? That can add up quickly.
| ChrisDP | 03-24-2004 10:53 AM |
Assuming they weren't burying everyone WHILE sandbagging.
| MulletSlayer | 03-24-2004 11:06 AM |
I watched the race and you could tell Angelelli was holding back a lot during the second half of the race. In All the in car shots you hear he was short shifting everywhere.
It looks like everyone else will be racing for third if the SCCA doesn't do something.
It looks like everyone else will be racing for third if the SCCA doesn't do something.
| GarySheehan | 03-24-2004 12:08 PM |
I also didn't like how Angelelli played it off as a tough race against the Audi of Galati while Andi Pilgrim came from beyond dead last to pass the Audi and slip in behind his teammate. The boldfaced lie made me ill. Does he think the SCCA and all the spectators are morons?! Damn, just say the car was awesome and leave it at that.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
| HoRo1 | 03-24-2004 12:19 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cdvma[/i]
[B] Dont they get 75 lbs for finishing first? That can add up quickly. [/B][/QUOTE]
I believe that they'll get an additional 75lbs for the win and another 75lbs if they win their next race and another for the 3rd...and they were sandbagging. That car will be several seconds quicker when necessary.
[B] Dont they get 75 lbs for finishing first? That can add up quickly. [/B][/QUOTE]
I believe that they'll get an additional 75lbs for the win and another 75lbs if they win their next race and another for the 3rd...and they were sandbagging. That car will be several seconds quicker when necessary.
| Ralgh | 04-08-2004 12:45 AM |
How about not posting the results of a race in the thread title. Also putting a "Spoiler" tag in the title would be nice. I have seen the races already but have had a few races I had on Tvio that I hadn't watched yet ruined by such titles.
| FSelekler | 04-08-2004 01:01 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Ralgh [/i]
[B]How about not posting the results of a race in the thread title. Also putting a "Spoiler" tag in the title would be nice. I have seen the races already but have had a few races I had on Tvio that I hadn't watched yet ruined by such titles. [/B][/QUOTE]
ditto.
[B]How about not posting the results of a race in the thread title. Also putting a "Spoiler" tag in the title would be nice. I have seen the races already but have had a few races I had on Tvio that I hadn't watched yet ruined by such titles. [/B][/QUOTE]
ditto.
| AdsWRX | 04-08-2004 01:10 AM |
I work for tiger racing (Tom Oates) last years rookie of the year. Because we are a corvette team i was allowed inside their tent and got up close and personal with the caddy. SIMPLY AMAZING!! Max has a lay down seat. The car is way over engineered. Give it full slicks and maybe take some weight off, and it would of challenged porsche for the 12 hrs gt class win! Anyway, during the our GT race, SCCA kept asking for Aron (in charge of GT class) to go on the private radio channel to talk to the higher up authorites, they didnt sound very happy. The officials were asking for every single split time and mph on the caddy's, they were very unhappy and you could tell over the radio. My only question is, everyone else in the world ke\new that a caddy 1-2 was in order and was going to happen. The SCCA should of know and done something before hand (do i hear pay-off) to give them that all elusive 1-2 at sebring! We will never know. But the 8 million a year budget that leaked out at Sebring made many peoples hopes break. I guess i will have to wait until limerock to see what happens
| Mopho | 04-08-2004 09:19 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Ralgh [/i]
[B]How about not posting the results of a race in the thread title. Also putting a "Spoiler" tag in the title would be nice. I have seen the races already but have had a few races I had on Tvio that I hadn't watched yet ruined by such titles. [/B][/QUOTE]
If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid
[B]How about not posting the results of a race in the thread title. Also putting a "Spoiler" tag in the title would be nice. I have seen the races already but have had a few races I had on Tvio that I hadn't watched yet ruined by such titles. [/B][/QUOTE]
If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid
| Mopho | 04-08-2004 09:33 AM |
[QUOTE]The SCCA should of know and done something before hand (do i hear pay-off) to give them that all elusive 1-2 at sebring[/QUOTE]
As I mentioned earlier, I was at the race doing a photoshoot for the SCCA. I know most of the SCCA officials and I can tell you that it is ludicrous to suggest that there was a pay off!!! They are all good people and there is no favoritism.
All those SCCA officials you see at a race have day jobs (with one or two exceptions), and if I recall, I was told that they did not have the chance to see the Caddies before that weekend, so they did not have a good idea how much of an advantage they would have. I do know they were worried about it before the race even started, and they were admitting they were wrong in the "formula" for the Caddies and were already devising ways to slow the cars down immediately after the race. I guess we will see, but when a team has that much of a budget advantage they will likely be able to overcome anything the SCCA throws at them to slow them down.
Hopefully, Cadillac won't do to WC what Subaru did to SCCA Pro Rally-raise the bar too high for anyone else to be competitive without throwing a ton of money at it causing the series to take a tumble
As I mentioned earlier, I was at the race doing a photoshoot for the SCCA. I know most of the SCCA officials and I can tell you that it is ludicrous to suggest that there was a pay off!!! They are all good people and there is no favoritism.
All those SCCA officials you see at a race have day jobs (with one or two exceptions), and if I recall, I was told that they did not have the chance to see the Caddies before that weekend, so they did not have a good idea how much of an advantage they would have. I do know they were worried about it before the race even started, and they were admitting they were wrong in the "formula" for the Caddies and were already devising ways to slow the cars down immediately after the race. I guess we will see, but when a team has that much of a budget advantage they will likely be able to overcome anything the SCCA throws at them to slow them down.
Hopefully, Cadillac won't do to WC what Subaru did to SCCA Pro Rally-raise the bar too high for anyone else to be competitive without throwing a ton of money at it causing the series to take a tumble
| RedBean | 04-08-2004 09:46 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mopho [/i]
[B]If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid [/B][/QUOTE]
I think it is a legitimate complaint. Just because something has aired on TV doesn't mean that everyone has seen it already. By that reasoning, if a movie has been out for a while, it is okay to let everyone in on the ending? It's not that hard to to put "SPOILER" in the title and post the results in the thread, is it?
[B]If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid [/B][/QUOTE]
I think it is a legitimate complaint. Just because something has aired on TV doesn't mean that everyone has seen it already. By that reasoning, if a movie has been out for a while, it is okay to let everyone in on the ending? It's not that hard to to put "SPOILER" in the title and post the results in the thread, is it?
| trojan9x | 04-08-2004 10:33 AM |
I wish they would air it again
| Mopho | 04-08-2004 11:06 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by RedBean [/i]
[B]I think it is a legitimate complaint. Just because something has aired on TV doesn't mean that everyone has seen it already. By that reasoning, if a movie has been out for a while, it is okay to let everyone in on the ending? It's not that hard to to put "SPOILER" in the title and post the results in the thread, is it? [/B][/QUOTE]
I am not saying that the original poster could not have been more considerate, and I would never post a title like that, but how long does one have to wait to accommodate someone who has recorded it? Are we supposed to be telepathic to know when everyone has watched it? I don't get Speed channel and most of the time I don't get to see WRC until the New Years day party, so therefore no one can say in the title who won the rally until the end of the year, because I said so:rolleyes: Come on!
Certainly, after a few days it would be nearly impossible to not have heard about it, especially if you are this serious about motorsports it is quite likely your friends are too, and how long does it take for one of them to bring up the race? If this were the Superbowl how long do you think you could go without hearing about it?
Comparing this to a movie that is in the theaters for weeks,and that one could rent for years after, is rediculous, there is an expectation that people would wait to see it. A race only airs once (generally), it is reasonable to expect that a few days after the race was on TV that anyone who cared about it already knows the results, especially in the day and age of electronic media.
If you recorded it and you don't want to know who won, that is your responsibility to avoid contact with the world, not anyone elses.
That is my rant, take it or leave it;)
Now back to Cadillac...
[B]I think it is a legitimate complaint. Just because something has aired on TV doesn't mean that everyone has seen it already. By that reasoning, if a movie has been out for a while, it is okay to let everyone in on the ending? It's not that hard to to put "SPOILER" in the title and post the results in the thread, is it? [/B][/QUOTE]
I am not saying that the original poster could not have been more considerate, and I would never post a title like that, but how long does one have to wait to accommodate someone who has recorded it? Are we supposed to be telepathic to know when everyone has watched it? I don't get Speed channel and most of the time I don't get to see WRC until the New Years day party, so therefore no one can say in the title who won the rally until the end of the year, because I said so:rolleyes: Come on!
Certainly, after a few days it would be nearly impossible to not have heard about it, especially if you are this serious about motorsports it is quite likely your friends are too, and how long does it take for one of them to bring up the race? If this were the Superbowl how long do you think you could go without hearing about it?
Comparing this to a movie that is in the theaters for weeks,and that one could rent for years after, is rediculous, there is an expectation that people would wait to see it. A race only airs once (generally), it is reasonable to expect that a few days after the race was on TV that anyone who cared about it already knows the results, especially in the day and age of electronic media.
If you recorded it and you don't want to know who won, that is your responsibility to avoid contact with the world, not anyone elses.
That is my rant, take it or leave it;)
Now back to Cadillac...
| paultg | 04-08-2004 12:44 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mopho [/i]
[B]If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid [/B][/QUOTE]
[b]Owned!![/b]
[quote][i]Originally posted by Mopho [/i]
[b]I am not saying that the original poster could not have been more considerate, and I would never post a title like that, but how long does one have to wait to accommodate someone who has recorded it? Are we supposed to be telepathic to know when everyone has watched it? I don't get Speed channel and most of the time I don't get to see WRC until the New Years day party, so therefore no one can say in the title who won the rally until the end of the year, because I said so Come on!
Certainly, after a few days it would be nearly impossible to not have heard about it, especially if you are this serious about motorsports it is quite likely your friends are too, and how long does it take for one of them to bring up the race? If this were the Superbowl how long do you think you could go without hearing about it?
Comparing this to a movie that is in the theaters for weeks,and that one could rent for years after, is rediculous, there is an expectation that people would wait to see it. A race only airs once (generally), it is reasonable to expect that a few days after the race was on TV that anyone who cared about it already knows the results, especially in the day and age of electronic media.
If you recorded it and you don't want to know who won, that is your responsibility to avoid contact with the world, not anyone elses.
That is my rant, take it or leave it
Now back to Cadillac...[/B][/QUOTE]
[color=red][b]Owned X 2 !!![/b][/color]
[B]If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid [/B][/QUOTE]
[b]Owned!![/b]
[quote][i]Originally posted by Mopho [/i]
[b]I am not saying that the original poster could not have been more considerate, and I would never post a title like that, but how long does one have to wait to accommodate someone who has recorded it? Are we supposed to be telepathic to know when everyone has watched it? I don't get Speed channel and most of the time I don't get to see WRC until the New Years day party, so therefore no one can say in the title who won the rally until the end of the year, because I said so Come on!
Certainly, after a few days it would be nearly impossible to not have heard about it, especially if you are this serious about motorsports it is quite likely your friends are too, and how long does it take for one of them to bring up the race? If this were the Superbowl how long do you think you could go without hearing about it?
Comparing this to a movie that is in the theaters for weeks,and that one could rent for years after, is rediculous, there is an expectation that people would wait to see it. A race only airs once (generally), it is reasonable to expect that a few days after the race was on TV that anyone who cared about it already knows the results, especially in the day and age of electronic media.
If you recorded it and you don't want to know who won, that is your responsibility to avoid contact with the world, not anyone elses.
That is my rant, take it or leave it
Now back to Cadillac...[/B][/QUOTE]
[color=red][b]Owned X 2 !!![/b][/color]
| Redneck Ricer | 04-08-2004 01:16 PM |
Ok, ok, maybe I should have put a headline..
BUT
there had already been two similar threads on it in the motosports forum, just none that said what I had to say (which is why i started a new one instead of replying to theres...)
besides, TiVo is teh Evil in the world of direct marketing and should be banished! It is only one more way for big brother to track you! :)
well, I guess I know my lesson now....
BUY A CADDY V SERIES!
haha
p-rex
BUT
there had already been two similar threads on it in the motosports forum, just none that said what I had to say (which is why i started a new one instead of replying to theres...)
besides, TiVo is teh Evil in the world of direct marketing and should be banished! It is only one more way for big brother to track you! :)
well, I guess I know my lesson now....
BUY A CADDY V SERIES!
haha
p-rex
| wvonkessler | 04-09-2004 09:21 AM |
'nuff said
�
�
[url]http://www.scca.org/news/press04_18.html[/url]
| Mopho | 04-09-2004 10:29 AM |
Re: 'nuff said
�
�
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by wvonkessler [/i]
[B][url]http://www.scca.org/news/press04_18.html[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]
Actually, more to be said, read this
[url]http://www.world-challenge.com/news/04press61.html[/url]
[B][url]http://www.scca.org/news/press04_18.html[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]
Actually, more to be said, read this
[url]http://www.world-challenge.com/news/04press61.html[/url]
| Kitsune | 04-09-2004 12:07 PM |
I wonder how long GM will allow the Caddy to beat its flagship go fast car, Corvette. GM has a long history of pulling the plug on any program that makes the Corvette look inferior to other GM products...let alone anyone else's product.
| Ralgh | 04-11-2004 01:31 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mopho [/i]
[B]If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid [/B][/QUOTE]
I don�t want to hijack this thread but since I started this I will say this and let it go. I am saying [B]never[/B] put the results in a thread title. Talk about the results in the thread all you want. An excellent example of a good thread title is this one titled �[URL=http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=531109]GP Bahrain[/URL] �. Anyone who hasn�t seen the race should be smart enough not to read the thread until they have watched the race. If they do read it then it is their problem. People who are interested in the series will know from a title like that, that there is information they want to see. Pretty simple if you ask me which I know nobody did. I�m done.
With regard to the Cadillac�s winning, one race like this can be expected. It is now up to the SCCA to come up with an appropriate remedy.
[B]If you watch the races on Tivo that is your problem.
It is only rude to be a "spoiler" if you post before the race has aired on TV (Public TV, not [b]your[/b] Tivo). In this case the original poster started this thread 4 days after the race and 2 days after the race had aired on TV-fair game
IMO your complaint is invalid [/B][/QUOTE]
I don�t want to hijack this thread but since I started this I will say this and let it go. I am saying [B]never[/B] put the results in a thread title. Talk about the results in the thread all you want. An excellent example of a good thread title is this one titled �[URL=http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=531109]GP Bahrain[/URL] �. Anyone who hasn�t seen the race should be smart enough not to read the thread until they have watched the race. If they do read it then it is their problem. People who are interested in the series will know from a title like that, that there is information they want to see. Pretty simple if you ask me which I know nobody did. I�m done.
With regard to the Cadillac�s winning, one race like this can be expected. It is now up to the SCCA to come up with an appropriate remedy.
| ANZAC_1915 | 04-11-2004 10:35 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mopho [/i]
[B]Hopefully, Cadillac won't do to WC what Subaru did to SCCA Pro Rally-raise the bar too high for anyone else to be competitive without throwing a ton of money at it causing the series to take a tumble [/B][/QUOTE]
There are plenty of competitive entrants this year, and probably on smaller budgets than AVSport etc from last year or two. :)
[B]Hopefully, Cadillac won't do to WC what Subaru did to SCCA Pro Rally-raise the bar too high for anyone else to be competitive without throwing a ton of money at it causing the series to take a tumble [/B][/QUOTE]
There are plenty of competitive entrants this year, and probably on smaller budgets than AVSport etc from last year or two. :)
| Ralgh | 04-11-2004 12:28 PM |
Volvo was supposed to field a maufacturer supported 4 car team in WCGT this year. I saw no Volvos at Sebring. Anyone know the details there?
| Mopho | 04-11-2004 12:34 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Ralgh [/i]
[B]Volvo was supposed to field a maufacturer supported 4 car team in WCGT this year. I saw no Volvos at Sebring. Anyone know the details there? [/B][/QUOTE]
Volvo was there, but the cars were not ready and were on display only.
Same for the Airforce Reserve
[B]Volvo was supposed to field a maufacturer supported 4 car team in WCGT this year. I saw no Volvos at Sebring. Anyone know the details there? [/B][/QUOTE]
Volvo was there, but the cars were not ready and were on display only.
Same for the Airforce Reserve
| AdsWRX | 04-11-2004 09:54 PM |
They have no trannies. The motors are done, but they have no way to put the power down. I hungout with Bob Miller at a local bar one night and poured him a couple beers and he told us the whole story on their cars.
| Ralgh | 04-11-2004 10:34 PM |
That stinks. I was looking forward to seeing them. I watched them (Volvos) in the European Touring Car Champinship this off season on Speed. They never placed very high but I was rooting for them anyway. Hopefully they will get it together for Atlanta.
| Mako | 04-12-2004 05:20 PM |
GO CADILLAC!
I have no pity on the SCCA if the Caddy is a mind-blowing car...how about some reverse logic: the OTHER teams need to step up to the plate, spend some money on engineering, parts, drivers, whatever, and CATCH UP to the Caddy!
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!
Hell, what a good deal for the slower teams..rather than step up their efforts and improve, they can sit back, drink a gin and tonic and relax while the fastest car is made to slow down. Why bother to gain some speed when the SCCA will just change the rules for you? Ridiculous.
GO CADILLAC!
I have no pity on the SCCA if the Caddy is a mind-blowing car...how about some reverse logic: the OTHER teams need to step up to the plate, spend some money on engineering, parts, drivers, whatever, and CATCH UP to the Caddy!
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!
Hell, what a good deal for the slower teams..rather than step up their efforts and improve, they can sit back, drink a gin and tonic and relax while the fastest car is made to slow down. Why bother to gain some speed when the SCCA will just change the rules for you? Ridiculous.
GO CADILLAC!
| Ralgh | 04-12-2004 06:38 PM |
Well my take on this is that the SCCA has set the bar. Cadillac just came in above it. All the other cars have had time to be equalized so they are at the bar.
The cool thing about World Challenge racing is that they have so many different manufacturers that are racing competitively. There was something like 11 or 13 manufacturers in Touring Cars last year.
In reality the cars will never be perfectly even but they are really close. If it was just a matter of developing other car to go faster where would it stop? There needs to be a limit to development to keep the sport relatively affordable an competitive. I personally think the SCCA has done a good job of that in WC racing, particularly well in Touring.
I would guess most racing fans would agree it just isn�t that exciting when only two cars have a realistic chance of winning. It�s kind of like going to see a mystery movie when you already know the ending. All that said I wish Cadillac, Volvo and all the rest an exciting, competitive season.
The cool thing about World Challenge racing is that they have so many different manufacturers that are racing competitively. There was something like 11 or 13 manufacturers in Touring Cars last year.
In reality the cars will never be perfectly even but they are really close. If it was just a matter of developing other car to go faster where would it stop? There needs to be a limit to development to keep the sport relatively affordable an competitive. I personally think the SCCA has done a good job of that in WC racing, particularly well in Touring.
I would guess most racing fans would agree it just isn�t that exciting when only two cars have a realistic chance of winning. It�s kind of like going to see a mystery movie when you already know the ending. All that said I wish Cadillac, Volvo and all the rest an exciting, competitive season.
| X1_SRT | 04-12-2004 07:19 PM |
i saw this car at the NYIAS on friday. very very sexy. sorry, no digi pics. no suby wrc car this year though... damn!
-PJ
-PJ
| Mopho | 04-12-2004 09:34 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mako [/i]
[B]GO CADILLAC!
I have no pity on the SCCA if the Caddy is a mind-blowing car...how about some reverse logic: the OTHER teams need to step up to the plate, spend some money on engineering, parts, drivers, whatever, and CATCH UP to the Caddy!
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!
Hell, what a good deal for the slower teams..rather than step up their efforts and improve, they can sit back, drink a gin and tonic and relax while the fastest car is made to slow down. Why bother to gain some speed when the SCCA will just change the rules for you? Ridiculous.
GO CADILLAC! [/B][/QUOTE]
If the cost keeps going up becuase of having catch up all the time, sooner or later the small teams decide it is too expensive and not worth it anymore
What the SCCA is trying to do is make it as much about the drivers and the brand, not about who has the biggest budget and the best engineers. It is a really interesting formula
.
[B]GO CADILLAC!
I have no pity on the SCCA if the Caddy is a mind-blowing car...how about some reverse logic: the OTHER teams need to step up to the plate, spend some money on engineering, parts, drivers, whatever, and CATCH UP to the Caddy!
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!
Hell, what a good deal for the slower teams..rather than step up their efforts and improve, they can sit back, drink a gin and tonic and relax while the fastest car is made to slow down. Why bother to gain some speed when the SCCA will just change the rules for you? Ridiculous.
GO CADILLAC! [/B][/QUOTE]
If the cost keeps going up becuase of having catch up all the time, sooner or later the small teams decide it is too expensive and not worth it anymore
What the SCCA is trying to do is make it as much about the drivers and the brand, not about who has the biggest budget and the best engineers. It is a really interesting formula
.
| WRSport | 04-13-2004 04:02 AM |
When the Cadillac CTS-V next appears at an SCCA SPEED GT race, it will weigh 200 lbs more than Sebring, be restricted 30 percent more on air flow (to a total of 50 percent restriction), have a rev limit of 7000 rpm (900 rpm lower than Sebring) and be limited to a maximum of 49 percent rear weight distribution. The air intake Team Cadillac developed for Sebring will be the system specified on the car�s Vehicle Technical Specifications (VTS) for the remainder of the season.
The car was permitted to run a dog-engagement gearbox for Sebring at a 100-lb penalty, with the stock gearbox required at subsequent races. This ruling has not changed.
That should slow them down a bit.
The car was permitted to run a dog-engagement gearbox for Sebring at a 100-lb penalty, with the stock gearbox required at subsequent races. This ruling has not changed.
That should slow them down a bit.
| kfoote | 04-13-2004 10:28 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mako [/i]
[B]...
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!...
[/B][/QUOTE]
Rules. With the rules package the Caddilacs got from SCCA and what is allowed to other cars, the Cadillacs have Way more potential than anyone else. Let the Audis chop 4" off the body height of the stock car, move the engine 3" back, and let them run new RS8 internal engine components, and they would be just as fast as, if not faster than, the Cadillacs. The issue is that no other car has been given rules allowances that the Cadillac has, not whether or not they are the best team with the best drivers.
If Pratt & Miller had built a Corvette rather than a Cadillac to the existing VTS for the C5, they probably still would have finished about 1st and 5th, but I would have no problem with that. If you actually watched the race, the Caddilacs were WAY faster than any other car there. Pilgrim's pass of McClure was all car and had absolutely nothing to do with the driving ability of either driver.
I believe the Volvos and Focuses..Foci...whatever the plural of "Focus" is, are both expected to be at the next race at Lime Rock.
[B]...
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!...
[/B][/QUOTE]
Rules. With the rules package the Caddilacs got from SCCA and what is allowed to other cars, the Cadillacs have Way more potential than anyone else. Let the Audis chop 4" off the body height of the stock car, move the engine 3" back, and let them run new RS8 internal engine components, and they would be just as fast as, if not faster than, the Cadillacs. The issue is that no other car has been given rules allowances that the Cadillac has, not whether or not they are the best team with the best drivers.
If Pratt & Miller had built a Corvette rather than a Cadillac to the existing VTS for the C5, they probably still would have finished about 1st and 5th, but I would have no problem with that. If you actually watched the race, the Caddilacs were WAY faster than any other car there. Pilgrim's pass of McClure was all car and had absolutely nothing to do with the driving ability of either driver.
I believe the Volvos and Focuses..Foci...whatever the plural of "Focus" is, are both expected to be at the next race at Lime Rock.
| enduroshark | 04-13-2004 10:31 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mopho [/i]
[B] All those SCCA officials you see at a race have day jobs (with one or two exceptions), and if I recall, I was told that they did not have the chance to see the Caddies before that weekend, so they did not have a good idea how much of an advantage they would have. I do know they were worried about it before the race even started, and they were admitting they were wrong in the "formula" for the Caddies and were already devising ways to slow the cars down immediately after the race. I guess we will see, but when a team has that much of a budget advantage they will likely be able to overcome anything the SCCA throws at them to slow them down.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Who's fault is it that they did not "have a chance" to see the Caddies before the weekend"?
I mean, they had been testing for a whole year! There were pictures all over the internet, including their own (SCCA Pro) board.
They gave Caddy the allowances that they had and everyone, except them, knew that it was an excessive amount of allowances.
[B] All those SCCA officials you see at a race have day jobs (with one or two exceptions), and if I recall, I was told that they did not have the chance to see the Caddies before that weekend, so they did not have a good idea how much of an advantage they would have. I do know they were worried about it before the race even started, and they were admitting they were wrong in the "formula" for the Caddies and were already devising ways to slow the cars down immediately after the race. I guess we will see, but when a team has that much of a budget advantage they will likely be able to overcome anything the SCCA throws at them to slow them down.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Who's fault is it that they did not "have a chance" to see the Caddies before the weekend"?
I mean, they had been testing for a whole year! There were pictures all over the internet, including their own (SCCA Pro) board.
They gave Caddy the allowances that they had and everyone, except them, knew that it was an excessive amount of allowances.
| enduroshark | 04-13-2004 10:42 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mako [/i]
[B] GO CADILLAC!
I have no pity on the SCCA if the Caddy is a mind-blowing car...how about some reverse logic: the OTHER teams need to step up to the plate, spend some money on engineering, parts, drivers, whatever, and CATCH UP to the Caddy!
[/B][/QUOTE]
I don't think any of the other teams would have a problem with "stepping up to the plate". The problem is that the Cadillacs got a lot more allowed modifications than the other cars. The BMW's and Corvettes don't get to move their motors 3 inches back and chop the body panels, for example.
This tells me that the Cadillac really isn't that great of a car, since it needs way more mods than the others in order to compete.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mako [/i]
[B]
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!
Hell, what a good deal for the slower teams..rather than step up their efforts and improve, they can sit back, drink a gin and tonic and relax while the fastest car is made to slow down. Why bother to gain some speed when the SCCA will just change the rules for you? Ridiculous.
GO CADILLAC! [/B][/QUOTE]
That is not the way it works.
They compare the performance of developed cars to developed cars. They don't compare the performance of a developed car to the performance of an undeveloped car from an underfunded team, for example.
Sometimes they give allowances to the slower car model, based on the data of the developed examples of the model. Sometimes they take allowances.
It's not a perfect system and sometimes accurate comparisons can't be made because of how hard it can be to gauge development level and performance capabilities. It does tend to keep things interesting and have relatively close racing.
[B] GO CADILLAC!
I have no pity on the SCCA if the Caddy is a mind-blowing car...how about some reverse logic: the OTHER teams need to step up to the plate, spend some money on engineering, parts, drivers, whatever, and CATCH UP to the Caddy!
[/B][/QUOTE]
I don't think any of the other teams would have a problem with "stepping up to the plate". The problem is that the Cadillacs got a lot more allowed modifications than the other cars. The BMW's and Corvettes don't get to move their motors 3 inches back and chop the body panels, for example.
This tells me that the Cadillac really isn't that great of a car, since it needs way more mods than the others in order to compete.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mako [/i]
[B]
Why make the best cars regress because the others can't or won't? Talk about lame...devolution instead of evolution. When someone raises the bar, the rest need to match it. Racing, baby!
Hell, what a good deal for the slower teams..rather than step up their efforts and improve, they can sit back, drink a gin and tonic and relax while the fastest car is made to slow down. Why bother to gain some speed when the SCCA will just change the rules for you? Ridiculous.
GO CADILLAC! [/B][/QUOTE]
That is not the way it works.
They compare the performance of developed cars to developed cars. They don't compare the performance of a developed car to the performance of an undeveloped car from an underfunded team, for example.
Sometimes they give allowances to the slower car model, based on the data of the developed examples of the model. Sometimes they take allowances.
It's not a perfect system and sometimes accurate comparisons can't be made because of how hard it can be to gauge development level and performance capabilities. It does tend to keep things interesting and have relatively close racing.
| sdecker | 04-14-2004 08:00 AM |
Caddy was most definitely sandbagging BIG TIME.
[QUOTE]I would guess most racing fans would agree it just isn�t that exciting when only two cars have a realistic chance of winning.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, like the Audi R8's for example. I live right across the street from where the Panoz LMP cars are built and have been in their shop many times. You could literally eat lunch off their transmission teardown bench! They are really professional and organized -- but they get their asses handed to them constantly by the R8.
They are great guys with cool cars and engineering, but they just can't hang. It makes me sad. I'm a huge fan of ALMS but the LMP900 class is boring now because it's all Audi, all the time.
Hopefully the rest of the field can gain parity with the Caddies through whatever means are necessary (teams stepping up *and* rule changes as required). I'd hate to see Speed WC get boring in the same way as LMP900. :(
Scott
[QUOTE]I would guess most racing fans would agree it just isn�t that exciting when only two cars have a realistic chance of winning.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, like the Audi R8's for example. I live right across the street from where the Panoz LMP cars are built and have been in their shop many times. You could literally eat lunch off their transmission teardown bench! They are really professional and organized -- but they get their asses handed to them constantly by the R8.
They are great guys with cool cars and engineering, but they just can't hang. It makes me sad. I'm a huge fan of ALMS but the LMP900 class is boring now because it's all Audi, all the time.
Hopefully the rest of the field can gain parity with the Caddies through whatever means are necessary (teams stepping up *and* rule changes as required). I'd hate to see Speed WC get boring in the same way as LMP900. :(
Scott
| Ralgh | 04-14-2004 12:09 PM |
Well at least there are 3 Audis to chose from this year. I was also dissapointed to see Cadillac leave ALMS. It seemed like they left just as they got their cars competitive.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét