View Single Post
      11-26-2008, 06:16 PM   #133
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
609
Rep
10,407
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
Only if you say so, but if true then it's been and obscure position because for the most part your stance would suggest otherwise.

You wrote this only a short while ago which suggests different.

You see how difficult it is to know what you mean at any one time. Maybe that is why I keep repeating myself.
You can selectively quote all you want. My position on the ZR1 video analysis has been clear. UP TO THE point when it was clear that the car was not under WOT or not under full acceleration, I believe it was under WOT. Again from about 109 - 170 mph. I stated they very early in our discussion in this post, long before you brought it up. Any other position would be absurd given the video. My analysis specifically stopped just at this point so it's really immaterial to my conclusion nor to proper use of this data in my analysis. All of the other discussion, argument and disagreement was about whether there was a lift BEFORE 170 and I am convinced there was not. You are the one who then continued to focus on the peak speeds and what happened further down the track. I always said that an analysis can't be done for the ZR1 past this point based on this simple observation. Sorry foot, case closed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
I believe we are in disagreement as to where the two points are being measured, I believe it's the middle of both apexes were as you think it's the entry point of the apex (i.e. when the car first touches the apex). As I said I believe it's the latter and thus the 15mph different I believe there is between the two cars.
Yes serious disagreement. You still have this wrong. DR states in no unclear terms "MINIMUM SPEED". How much more clarity do you need? If you want to reinterpret that to mean speed at a predefinied position you can, but it is not correct nor justified. This is what we call arbitrary. Heck I would even go further and call it comedic. My analysis uses the end of the curb to be conservative. I never said anything about an "entry point of the apex". That is meaningless. An apex is a single point in a turn perhaps you mean the turn in point? Doesn't matter I never brought that up either. The devil is in the details. Either DR is wrong or footie is wrong. Minimum speed means minimum speed, it does not mean the speed at a fixed spatial location.

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
I suggested this right at the very beginning and I might add you laughed at this very thought. I told you it was an educated guess from experience though not of this track and it looks like after months of arguing you are starting to see the light, though you will never agree that I was right about this.
Incorrrect. I brought it up first. See link above.

Keep trying foot, you are not making any progress nor convincing anyone. It doesn't really matter either you come to 530 hp precisely and for all GT-Rs by a guess or some other process. I come to a range of 530-560 by a rigorous analysis. The trap speed data shows a wide variation as well which I have always spoken about. You disagree on this as well, but then continue to dodge this point. We agree on the ultimate end result but I can always fall back to my analysis, perfect or not. You have your "guess".
Appreciate 0