|
|
Post by DerElf on Jan 8, 2004 7:19:13 GMT -8
This is legitimate information gathering, not a joke
|
|
|
|
Post by DerElf on Jun 7, 2004 0:18:57 GMT -8
Well as of the last Fastrack this matter has been tabled pending an examination of the competitors at the runoffs and their weights. I have heard that the "Average" minimum weight last year was about 1040 and might be considered as a median average for the class.
|
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jun 7, 2004 2:47:16 GMT -8
During conversations with drivers, many felt the 10 or 15 pounds extra didn't make that much difference and they ran high to avoid problems. Hence the 1040 lbs. was an avoidable choice.
My old car always ran 1045. Mostly due to frame repairs and cheesecake.
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jun 7, 2004 12:28:26 GMT -8
It would be interesting to know the average weight of drivers at the Runoffs. I would venture a guess that number would be lower than the average FV driver's weight. It seems the lighter drivers tend to be more successful, which would skew the numbers gained from the Runoffs. Also, drivers at the Runoffs who do weigh more tend to invest substantially more funds in reducing the weights of the cars (or create their own lightweight cars).
Ponit being, the Runoffs do NOT represent an accurate depicition of your average FV competitor and should not dictate the future weights of the class.
|
|
sean
Novice Driver
Posts: 35
|
Post by sean on Jun 8, 2004 8:37:40 GMT -8
I'm not sure I buy that. I met Bill Noble years ago, and he had already won the runoffs multiple times. He's not exactly jockey-size, and he was driving a stock Caracal.
I do agree though, it would be more representative to weigh all top 3 cars in all nationals everywhere for one full season. The larger sample would be more statistically accurate than just one runoffs event.
My car has always been in the 1040 range, after qualifying, for the last 8 years (except for that time at Sears when a 12 year old was left in charge of the scales. 986lbs, with driver!!?). I keep 10lbs of lead in it. Seems like most everyone doesn't want to get closer than 10 pounds to the minimum. If we raised the minimum weight, that wouldn't change.
Maybe I haven't been paying attention, but what's the point? It's been 40 years, and suddenly we need to make these cars heavier? Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jun 8, 2004 11:12:41 GMT -8
I personally have stated that I consider the minimum weight as a target to shoot for. I'm not sure who wanted to add weight, but I do know some that like this idea and if you saw them they have every justification. Those that are built small or normal like to keep it as is. I can't blame them as they would have to add weight and most of these drivers already are doing this.
What this is all about is input and opinions to see if the majority would like the rule changed. We do need to get other Vee drivers opinions.
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jun 8, 2004 11:49:17 GMT -8
Hey, we're a fat nation, we make umbrellas for 500lb people and think it's normal. We complain if we we don't get multiple free refills with our sodas. Why not raise the weight and make our unhealthy epidemic accepted in FV?
Also, did I mention I'm 1090 off the track and would love the weight raised to 1085?
|
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jun 9, 2004 2:52:20 GMT -8
I saw some data regarding national average weight and at 180 pounds, it was almost identical of what was found at the runoffs. Don't forget, we weighed drivers from all classes. So the averages are very close
|
|
