Originally Posted by
miller tyme
A few of us were discussing this at the track today so we looked at resulting lap times pretty carefully.
Bob you met Phil Zimmerman at Cleveland this year,
he ran 43 laps with a fast lap of 10.7 and a consistency of .195,
he finished second to a fast lap of 10.7 and a consistency of.190
and I rolled in 3rd also with 43 and a fast lap of 10.7 but only a .245 consistency
and taking my consistency out to 35 laps yielded .295. Studying the #'s if my 12 laps at 11.1 had been 11.0 (excluding a bad marshaling incident) all 3 of us would have finished ~ .8 seconds apart.
Conclusion is it may be easier for me to concentrate more on those dozen laps and not sweat trying to pull a 10.6 second lap.
Phil kept me outta the main! Actually, I kept me outta the main, Phil drove better.
Good close racing there. Once you're to that point, it gets even better. Unless one of you changes something, you will not go much faster. Sure, you'll eventually run some better laps as track familiarity increases, but your error tends to follow you. Some guys dial in quick. I'm not that guy. I'll sometimes struggle the whole weekend and never find something. It happens.
Assuming better driving, for you to knock these dudes off, you need to not only step up your game, you gotta find something else in your chassis. If you assume that your error follows you, you need to up the anti everywhere else you can, so that even with your error, you can win. That's tough. And usually good drivers go faster anyway, so it's hard.
BUT, the more you watch the numbers, the more you'll see guys with super fast cars just barely win, to much error. Or guys with very slow cars knock off a bunch of good drivers, not much error.
Just gotta maximize the package.
