Great Laurinburg Course

Les Davis · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:04 pm **Posts:** 2059

Chris Landi wrote:

WalterHouston wrote:

The finish was needlessly slow. I had to start braking before the finish line. Did anybody drive the finish in anything with more than 150 HP and over 3,000 lbs.??

Yes on both accounts...I couldn't get passed the timer on throttle. I believe I was braking just after my front bumper crossed the line.

Z06 brakes kick ass!

Vincent Keene · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 1:53 pm

David Spratte wrote:

Bad day autocrossing is better than the best day mowing the yard. . . .

Agreed! That's why I pay someone to mow the yard while I'm out driving a car somewhere.

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:01 pm

This one ought to be mandatory reading:

Roger Johnson's course design handbook

Warning, direct link to a PDF file.

Anyhow, I wouldn't consider his writing to be gospel, but it's a pretty darn good basis for course design.

Roger Johnson's Course Design Handbook wrote:

Track the number of DNFs for other than mechanical failure
• The goal is zero:
• acceptable is 1 in 20 on the first run, 1 in 100 there after
• Number and frequency of pylons hit
• The goal is zero
• Acceptable is 1 car in 10 hitting any; no more than 3
for any one car
• Keep in mind, the main goal of course design is to provide the Solo
II competitors with Fair, Fun and Safe Competition.

How did we do?

The discussion of "input density" is also interesting.

I wasn't there, so I'll leave the remainder of the discussion to everyone who was.

Scott

Todd Breakey · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:01 pm

KeithSanders wrote:

Hey Walter,

How does a shorter course speed anything up? If the cars start at 30 second intervals, it will take the same amount of time to run 100 cars if the course is 1 minute or 2 minutes long.

For the above, 100 cars would take 50 minutes + 1 minute for a 1 minute course or 50 minutes + 2 minutes for a 2 minute course.

One way that a shorter course will help speed the event along is the number of cars on course. For those of us that work in the bus, a long course like yesterdays makes for a very busy day. There were times when there were 4 cars on course at once. The majority of the day it was 3 on course. When you are receiving penalty calls for that many cars, it is VERY easy to get them mixed up and then you have to hold the start. We got lucky yesterday in that we didn't have to do that too often. You have to remember that we get rusty at T&S also. We haven't had a real event in 5 months. So not only were we rusty at driving, but we were at scoring also. These events don't score themselves.

On that note, I have to once again thank my scoring team. You guys and gals really are what makes this club the best at what we do. Thank you very much!!!

Edit - Carl stole my thunder and already hit on this,

Chris Landi · **Joined:** Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:31 pm **Posts:** 579

Les Davis wrote:

Chris Landi wrote:

WalterHouston wrote:

The finish was needlessly slow. I had to start braking before the finish line. Did anybody drive the finish in anything with more than 150 HP and over 3,000 lbs.??

Yes on both accounts...I couldn't get passed the timer on throttle. I believe I was braking just after my front bumper crossed the line.

Z06 brakes kick ass!

Well, for me, it was more of an effort to move my foot over quick enough. Brakes were good, reaction time was moderate.

By the way, I was at station 1 just after the first slalom when you did your first run. You did a throttle tap after leaving the slalom that caused your passengers head to snap back and go for the "Oh-SH*T" handle. Hopefully no one got hurt :shock:

Todd Breakey · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:13 pm

scottjohnson wrote:

Roger Johnson's Course Design Handbook wrote:

Track the number of DNFs for other than mechanical failure
• The goal is zero:
• acceptable is 1 in 20 on the first run, 1 in 100 there after
• Number and frequency of pylons hit
• The goal is zero
• Acceptable is 1 car in 10 hitting any; no more than 3
for any one car
• Keep in mind, the main goal of course design is to provide the Solo
II competitors with Fair, Fun and Safe Competition.

How did we do?
Scott

Well on the "Number and frequency of pylons hit...no more than 3 for any one car" thing...I hit 10 on my first run, possibly the most for any single run and I didn't have a clean run all day. On one raw sheet, there were only 5 runs that were clean, out of 50 on the page and on another there were 14 DNFs.

Rodney, I didn't dislike the course driving it as much as I did when I walked it. My car thought it was busy, the power steering pump couldn't keep up with the inputs for some reason! Overall the course really rewarded looking ahead. Obviously Jim F proved that taking FTeverything in his 100hp street tired CRX.

And you are right, it is a thankless job being an event chair. I did it once and I think that was enough. :lol:

Bill Fitzgerald · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:15 pm

Besides thanking Rodney and Chris for the course design, I do also want to thank Todd and his team! Must have been crazy in that bus!

Let me also say that while I have only been around for little while here at THSCC, I have autocrossed with SCCA clubs in Florida, Georgia and Texas, and THSCC runs the best events by far!

This is a great club with leaders and volunteers that really work hard at maximizing fun for everyone. Thanks to all!

Chris Landi · **Joined:** Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:31 pm **Posts:** 579

Todd Breakey wrote:

My car thought it was busy, the power steering pump couldn't keep up with the inputs for some reason!

Todd,

The driver of the green SVX had the same problem too. First time I've ever heard of this..

Todd Breakey · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:25 pm

Chris Landi wrote:

Todd Breakey wrote:

My car thought it was busy, the power steering pump couldn't keep up with the inputs for some reason!

Todd,

The driver of the green SVX had the same problem too. First time I've ever heard of this..

I have never heard of this in Miatas but I beleive that Ryan had this problem in his Talon. I'll have to talk to Chris (the SVX guy, he works with me) about this. Interesting.

Matt McGrain · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:26 pm

For what it's worth, I think the course absolutely ruled. It was the easiest Laurinburg course I've every driven with the club, although it was the longest course I've run there.

The only element I can think of that wasn't utilized was the pivot cone, which is a-ok with me. The oval skidpad-like element was cool because it made you really look ahead to accelerate out into the lane change.

My favorite section was the back sweeper going into the lane change (where the 757 was) because hitting 8,500 rpm with your foot planted on the dead pedal while sliding sideways makes the AARRRR happy! Although, the slalom going from sets of two to single decreasing cones was damn sneaky. :lol:

-Matt

David Spratte · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:33 pm

Todd Breakey wrote:

My car thought it was busy, the power steering pump couldn't keep up with the inputs for some reason!

How fresh is the PS fluid?

Wes Eargle · **Joined:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:47 am **Posts:** 3683

Ditto. If it's foaming, replace it with Redline PS fluid. What're the chances that it's last breath was drawn in Hiroshima?

ChrisSuich · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:55 pm

RodneyWright wrote:

First let me say thanks and give a great big thumbs up Dustin and the other autox VP's, without their help, this event would not have been as successful as it was. As for the course that Chris and I designed, we tried to bring you some different elements. Could we have placed a nice sweeper at the end of the runway, yes, but there's always a sweeper there and I was tired of them. We thought the onion or skip pad would be a nice change and from a novice standpoint should really show whether your car pushed or rotated in tight circle.

The course was "busy", but chalk that up to Chris and I being novice course designers. I know a after while this thread will fill with the "I liked it" folks and the "I hated it" folks and that's fine, you can't please every one. You couldn't have asked for a nicer weekend and be it a good or bad autox design, you were outside having fun!!

I will throw this out, if you have not chaired and autox event, you owe it to yourself to perform this thankless job at least once. There is ton of work to do both from a prep standpoint and "day of the event work" you need to do. I think you'll get a very good appreciation of what goes on in the day and the life of a THSCC event chair.

To those that did not like the course, I'm not sure what to say other than we wanted to make something different and I think Chris and I succeeded on that note. You have more events coming up that hopefully will be more to your liking.

To those that did like the course, I'm glad we hit a sweet spot with you and you enjoyed the event.

I would like to list one major note for Laurinburg... the concrete is now dictating how to set up the course. So much patching and gapping makes it VERY hard to design a course with some different elements. I would suggest looking at another section of the area to see if there is any other area that would lend itself to an autox. I don't see Laurinburg holding up for too many more years.

your humble "would you like cones with that" co-event chair....

Ditto Rodney's post to express my sentiments as an event chair.
Especially thanking Dustin for helping work out our course design.

scottjohnson wrote:

This one ought to be mandatory reading:

Roger Johnson's course design handbook

Warning, direct link to a PDF file.

Anyhow, I wouldn't consider his writing to be gospel, but it's a pretty darn good basis for course design.

Roger Johnson's Course Design Handbook wrote:

Track the number of DNFs for other than mechanical failure
• The goal is zero:
• acceptable is 1 in 20 on the first run, 1 in 100 there after
• Number and frequency of pylons hit
• The goal is zero
• Acceptable is 1 car in 10 hitting any; no more than 3
for any one car
• Keep in mind, the main goal of course design is to provide the Solo
II competitors with Fair, Fun and Safe Competition.

...
Scott

Thanks for the link. We should provide resourses like this to all EC's.

That's funny... is he a relative?

From Roger's book

1st slide - Fundementals wrote:

Conditions of the surface
• Avoid sections of the pavement that are breaking up or bumpy
• Avoid patches or treated areas

IMHO...LAURINBURG conditions suck!!!!!!

Certainly constructive criticism is welcome. After driving the course in competition, there are areas I would still rework. Lots of effort went in to adjusting the course around site conditions. We just ran out of daylight on Friday and Saturday trying to improve sections dealing with the deteriorating surface. The novice school awakened us to keeping cars off the patches.

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:55 pm

Todd Breakey wrote:

I have never heard of this in Miatas but I beleive that Ryan had this problem in his Talon. I'll have to talk to Chris (the SVX guy, he works with me) about this. Interesting.

It happens to me every once in awhile in the Miata. I just drive around it.

I dont remember it happening yesterday.

JamesFeinberg · **Posted:** Mon Mar 12, 2007 3:03 pm

David Spratte wrote:

Bad day autocrossing is better than the best day mowing the yard. . . .

Amen to that, brother!

David Spratte wrote:

As a preview I present FTUglyAzzCar Feinberg:
<Image of UglyAzzCar>

Dang dude, if I had known you were going to post a picture I would have washed it!

OK, who in the heck am I kidding? Maybe I would have tried to find a rainstorm to drive through before the event. Or something...

Seriously though, great shot!

I must admit I wasn't a big fan of the pacing of the course. The 2 issues I had were the relatively narrow gates used virtually everywhere along with the over-abundance of relatively slow same-speed elements. Neither of these issues are necessarily a bad thing but with a course of that length, a little variety is nice. I will say that it was one of the most difficult courses I ever remember in terms of getting the entire thing "right".

I thought the design and layout was excellent. I really liked the optional slalom near the end of the main runway. It was a little painful to execute but it was one of the best examples I've ever seen where it didn't drive like it walked. Awesome job on that one guys!

I think if 1 or 2 of the slalom/offset sections were stretched out slightly along with increasing the width of some key gates, it would have been perfect-- for me. As others alluded to above, most of it comes down to what types of elements and pacing you prefer.

Rodney and Chris, you guys did a great job this weekend. Thanks for your hard work!

Jim

THSCC Forums

Great Laurinburg Course

Who is online