continued from above
If you look at my best raw time (51.228 sec), it looks like I nearly matched 7-time ESP National Champion Mark Madarash's official time (51.19 with +2 seconds for a cone), and out PAX'd him... But again, he ran another course with only one run and it had a cone (something broke on the line during his second run - he left the event early after his single run in heat 3). I did put two seconds on the four cars that ran in STU open, but again, I ran a different course. Nobody knows if the course change was faster or slower, or by how much. Just... "different". 1st, 3rd and 5th in overall PAX ran in the 1st heat (and were all in "X" class), whereas 2nd, 4th and 6th in overall PAX ran in later heats on the altered course, so who knows?
The only data that is really usable is to compare Mark's STU times vs other STU and STX drivers, or my times within X-class. No offense intended, but the drivers in STX are a lot more competitive than STU class in our region, with the two top STX cars being fully prepped, dedicated autocross-only cars (we've worked on both cars here at Vorshlag) and driven by serious drivers. Brad Maxcy was ON FIRE that day, where he won STX class big time and PAX'd strong (6th) with his 50.29 second run (compared to the fastest STU time of 53.126). The X-class has 100% PAX factored results and only the first three runs count for times or overall PAX. They DSQ runs 4 and 5, so I took passengers on runs 1, 4 and 5, which is how National level events are run - three runs and done. I was 7th out of 9 X-Class entrants, and my third run was one of my best feeling runs in a LONG time, yet I still got creamed relative to X-class.
Part of
that is the actual PAX number for STU is terrible, and even STU people will tell you the factor for this class sucks. The STU PAX is .846, whereas ESP is nearly the same at .849, while STX is considerably better at .827. So this test was only partially successful and many of the comparisons we wanted are invalidated by the changing course and conditions. Next time we set up another S197 in STU test (you up for it, Mark?) we will both run in STU open class, and just spray those tires like mad.
S197 in STU: Impressions + Street Tire Car Control
All-in-all Mark's mostly-STU-prepared Mustang was a LOT more fun to drive in STU trim than my '11 GT was in well prepared STX trim. Personally I wish Mark's car had the 3.31 gears (instead of the 3.55), as we had to use 3rd gear on this course. And the MGW shifter was too balky and difficult for me to shift fast, but I feel this way about every aftermarket short throw shifter I've come across on the MT-82. Give me a poly rear body mount bushing + stock shifter and I'm never missing a shift. Other than that the car was a dream - we only made a few tire pressure and shock adjustments and it felt like I could put the car anywhere I wanted, rotate as much as needed, step on cone bases, put the car in any amount of yaw, etc. But of course it always takes some delicate car control to get everything out of a 375 whp car on 200 treadwear street tires. It was a LOT harder to drive this car in STU than our Mustang was in ESP, where we had massive R compound tires to generate gobs of grip. Autocrossing on street tires is a smart choice financially and it will also make you a better driver.
What? That sounds crazy, but bear with me for a minute. When I first started autocrossing I was in college and had no money. Neither did any of my racing buddies at the time in the
Texas A&M Sports Car Club - we were all starving students who raced whatever we could on cheap, junk tires (usually used street tire take-offs we pillaged from a local tire store, or discarded R-compounds we scrounged from Texas World Speedway events). Instead of splurging on $1000/set R-compound tires every 4 or 5 events, we ran on $20/set "may-pops". But a bunch of us were racing together in the same cars (mostly 5.0L Fox Mustangs and V8 Camaros) and on the same grip levels, so it was fun.
To make it competitive (competition = fun!), we created a new autocross class that had virtually unlimited mods, but had to be run on max width 275mm 200+ treadwear tires and the car had to be tagged/inspected/insured, back in 1990. We called this class Super Street Modified, and we banned all Porsches and Corvettes (and would have banned AWD turbo cars, but they didn't exist here yet). At our 120-150 entrant TAMSCC autocrosses we would regularly have 30-45+ cars in the SSM class, almost 100% of which were RWD pony cars with college student drivers. Since our tire budgets were kept so low, we could actually afford to do a
lot of autocross events, and even set-up and ran TAMSCC practice events many times per year. At these practice events we would make 75-100 runs in a single day, sometimes using up more than one set of tires. Not four autocross runs in a weekend, but one hundred. Seat time, seat time, seat time.
We would swap cars, learn techniques from one another, and we all developed a lot of car control as a result. And you know what? A lot of National level autocrossers and competitive road racers came out of this group of budget driven, college street tire autocrossers. Since we were forced to drive on low grip tires, it made us better drivers. And while all of those folks have since moved beyond street tires and are racing on the best tires money can buy, we all benefited greatly from racing on street tires for several years. I can honestly say that I wouldn't have half the car control that I do now if I hadn't raced a challenging, high power RWD car on low grip street tires way back then. So don't blow all of your money on R compound tires if you are just starting out in autocross - learn to drive fast on street tires for a few years before taking the plunge.
Driving Mark's 2012 GT on 285mm Hankook street tires reminded me of my days racing in SSM - back to dancing around the rear tires' friction circles in a stick axle car with too much power. Throwing this big car around, muscling it through tight offsets, using every ounce of forward acceleration that the tires would allow... it was damn FUN. Driving it at 11/10ths all day and not hitting a single cone was what I really liked, even if my raw and PAX times weren't noteworthy to almost anyone else there that day. Running in any ST class takes thick skin, as you just might get beat by an H Stock car on R-compounds. So be it.
Unlike the two years where we hopelessly slid around in STX in our 2011 Mustang GT, the added 20mm of tire and extra 1" of wheel width running in STU once again made this car a good bit easier to drive than in STX. It was by no means a cake walk though. The throttle takes a delicate touch and it is still likely one of the more difficult cars on the paddock to drive quickly. Sure, Mark could add a Watts link, real race seats, and a different shifter (did I mention I hate
all S197 short throw aftermarket shifters), and it will only get faster. Adding things like a cold air, headers or other power upgrades probably
won't make it faster, but will make it more fun, and a tick lighter. But this car is 90% prepped for STU as it sits. And it will never win a trophy at Nationals, heh.
And Now: C5 Corvettes to STU?
Our test was a bit of a bust, due to circumstances out of our control, so we will all need to run more Mustangs in STU. Once we have gathered a lot more data then we can try to prove a case to have the STAC/SEB add more tire width to STU stick axle cars. Does The S197 need a tire adder? Of course it does. But it will take a lot of events, a lot of time, and a LOT of letters to get the SEB and STAC rules makers to even think about that. Still, the Mustang is
MORE FUN TO DRIVE IN STU than in any other class (FS, ESP, SM, CP, EM). That part I will stand by. Just as long as you don't mind getting beat by virtually any car on R-compounds.
continued below