East Tennessee Region SCCA

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:33 pm**

I don't see that CAM-C will ever be faster than a properly prepared and driven AS Corvette. Yet the AS PAX is lower than the CAM-C PAX. Suspension and tires can only do so much against a lighter car with a lower center of gravity and similar power to weight. For that matter, CAM-C has never been all that much faster than FS. Yet the FS PAX is way lower than CAM-C. I'll be very surprised if the new purpose built, high bucks CAM-C cars change that much. Years of real world data have never changed the relative PAX numbers significantly.

Edit: Looking at the 2017 Solo National Championship results, which, as I remember, were less affected by the weather than 2018, the first 13 FS cars and the first nine AS cars finished higher on PAX than the first CAM-S (330) and CAM-C (333) cars.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:48 pm**

dewittpayne wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:33 pm I don't see that CAM-C will ever be faster than a properly prepared and driven AS Corvette. Yet the AS PAX is lower than the CAM-C PAX. Suspension and tires can only do so much against a lighter car with a lower center of gravity and similar power to weight. For that matter, CAM-C has never been all that much faster than FS. Yet the FS PAX is way lower than CAM-C. I'll be very surprised if the new purpose built, high bucks CAM-C cars change that much. Years of real world data have never changed the relative PAX numbers significantly.

but OMG!! what about all the possibilities??? I mean 1000 HP can be achieved!

yea, your right Dewitt.. no HP or suspension can overcome 3500lbs.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:03 pm**

I think we are about to see some cam cars really pushing the min weight and that will make them faster I think by a lot.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:06 pm**

John Brown wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:48 pm
dewittpayne wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:33 pm I don't see that CAM-C will ever be faster than a properly prepared and driven AS Corvette. Yet the AS PAX is lower than the CAM-C PAX. Suspension and tires can only do so much against a lighter car with a lower center of gravity and similar power to weight. For that matter, CAM-C has never been all that much faster than FS. Yet the FS PAX is way lower than CAM-C. I'll be very surprised if the new purpose built, high bucks CAM-C cars change that much. Years of real world data have never changed the relative PAX numbers significantly.
but OMG!! what about all the possibilities??? I mean 1000 HP can be achieved!

yea, your right Dewitt.. no HP or suspension can overcome 3500lbs.

3500 lbs I wish. Maybe I could spend a gajillion bucks on carbon fiber body parts and get down to that weight or even the 3300 lb class minimum weight (and hope the car is never outside in a hail storm) while lowering the center of gravity a tad. But if I put a blower on the car, it would make the fore and aft weight distribution worse and raise the cg height.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:09 pm**

I could spend 1400.00 dollars and drop 210 pounds for cam but it wouldn't be legal for ESP.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:13 pm**

jcox07 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:03 pm I think we are about to see some cam cars really pushing the min weight and that will make them faster I think by a lot.

I dunno about a lot faster. Less weight and no wing might make it harder to put power down. Can you see a significant difference in time when you have a passenger? About half the time I don't bother to remove my spare tire. But that could be my less than stellar driving.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:19 pm**

jcox07 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:09 pm I could spend 1400.00 dollars and drop 210 pounds for cam but it wouldn't be legal for ESP.

Only $1400? What's that, hood and trunk lid? My car isn't legal for ESP now anyway. If you weren't running ESP, you could change your rear axle ratio rather than the pulley on your blower. Except for that one time in Ohio a few years back, you probably don't really need to be able to go to 90mph in second gear.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:21 pm**

DOORS AND DASH!

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:23 pm**

IT WOULD BE 1900.00 NOT 1400.00.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:31 pm**

I am making big drops in weight this winter.. but I dont have unrealistic goals to be made from it. I think it may make the car possibly equal to a slightly built GT-350.
(fingers crossed)

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:40 pm**

dewittpayne wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:33 pm I don't see that CAM-C will ever be faster than a properly prepared and driven AS Corvette. Yet the AS PAX is lower than the CAM-C PAX. Suspension and tires can only do so much against a lighter car with a lower center of gravity and similar power to weight. For that matter, CAM-C has never been all that much faster than FS. Yet the FS PAX is way lower than CAM-C. I'll be very surprised if the new purpose built, high bucks CAM-C cars change that much. Years of real world data have never changed the relative PAX numbers significantly.

Edit: Looking at the 2017 Solo National Championship results, which, as I remember, were less affected by the weather than 2018, the first 13 FS cars and the first nine AS cars finished higher on PAX than the first CAM-S (330) and CAM-C (333) cars.

Are you arguing that CAMC should be close to FS?

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:43 pm**

I THINK CAM C SHOULD BE FASTER THAN FS

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:47 pm**

steverife wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:40 pm
dewittpayne wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:33 pm I don't see that CAM-C will ever be faster than a properly prepared and driven AS Corvette. Yet the AS PAX is lower than the CAM-C PAX. Suspension and tires can only do so much against a lighter car with a lower center of gravity and similar power to weight. For that matter, CAM-C has never been all that much faster than FS. Yet the FS PAX is way lower than CAM-C. I'll be very surprised if the new purpose built, high bucks CAM-C cars change that much. Years of real world data have never changed the relative PAX numbers significantly.

Edit: Looking at the 2017 Solo National Championship results, which, as I remember, were less affected by the weather than 2018, the first 13 FS cars and the first nine AS cars finished higher on PAX than the first CAM-S (330) and CAM-C (333) cars.
Are you arguing that CAMC should be close to FS?

Closer than it is now.

I THINK CAM C SHOULD BE FASTER THAN FS

Probably. A little. What about AS? Should CAM-C be faster than AS? I don't think so. But that's what the PAX says.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:52 pm**

The difference between CAM-S (0.833) and SSR (0.843) is also way too small. But the relative difference between CAM-S and CAM-C is about right.

Posted: **Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:54 pm**

dewittpayne wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:47 pm
steverife wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:40 pm
dewittpayne wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:33 pm I don't see that CAM-C will ever be faster than a properly prepared and driven AS Corvette. Yet the AS PAX is lower than the CAM-C PAX. Suspension and tires can only do so much against a lighter car with a lower center of gravity and similar power to weight. For that matter, CAM-C has never been all that much faster than FS. Yet the FS PAX is way lower than CAM-C. I'll be very surprised if the new purpose built, high bucks CAM-C cars change that much. Years of real world data have never changed the relative PAX numbers significantly.

Edit: Looking at the 2017 Solo National Championship results, which, as I remember, were less affected by the weather than 2018, the first 13 FS cars and the first nine AS cars finished higher on PAX than the first CAM-S (330) and CAM-C (333) cars.
Are you arguing that CAMC should be close to FS?
Closer than it is now.

I THINK CAM C SHOULD BE FASTER THAN FS
Probably. A little. What about AS? Should CAM-C be faster than AS? I don't think so. But that's what the PAX says.

Why shouldn't CAM-C be faster than AS?

You can run whatever power you want. You aren't limited by tire and wheel. You can run a bit of aero. You can drop a 99 Mustang or whatever body on a Corvette if you think that is the ideal suspension/CoG and ballast weight, etc, etc, etc, etc.

I mean, STU is way faster than AS.

East Tennessee Region SCCA

2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax

Re: 2019 pax