Ascutney II Length Change

[Chief Geek]

I'm a worker, not a competitor (so far) but I think it is healthy to tinker with things once in a while. From what I know of the key decision makers in the clubs, it's unlikely an experiment will be tried that will turn out to be a disaster, nor are experiments likely to be too frequent. My 20 millicents says to give it a try and see what happens. If they still race up Pike's without dirt rooster-tails, we can try an occasional long or short course.

My own sporting preference leans toward Joey K's and Chris D's (make the vehicle fit the course, not vice-versa). Numbers 25 & 36 may need narrower tires because I don't see the park service bringing in the giant asphalt planer anytime soon.

That said, Rich (my Dad) and I will certainly be working no matter which course is used.

I'm interested the opinons of the NEHA regulars that competed in the Max event about a few things:
1) Why were such a large fraction of the incidents occurring on the upper-most part of the hill, beyond the traditional NEHA finish?
2) Why was the wrecker crew was 4 times busier than I can ever remember? It was like a Nascar or Grand-Am race minus the spectators drinking lousy beer.

Paul

PS No one will have to convince me of the need for breakout times ever again.

[Rabbit Farmer]

With all this talk of hill length, I forgot to submit my entry.

Driver #7 or 8 for Team Daewoo.

Steve

[Kiwi]

I am VERY against the decision to run a short(er) course to the bridge. After Mt Washington, Ascutney is my favorite hillclimb in the world. Pikes Peak is third (though that might change if I had a more powerful car). I ran the Ascutney long course with Max BMW and the upper section is incredible! It is fast, challenging, and not nearly as bumpy as the top of the "traditional" course.

I now think that all Ascutney hillclimbs should be run on the long course.

Most of the arguments in favor of shortening the course don't resonate with me. I doubt we would gain any additional runs; with the same number of cars leaving at the same intervals (1.5 minutes or whatever), you only gain time by having a shorter bring-down. We would save only 30 seconds per run group by starting the bring-down at the bridge. If you shorten the interval between cars, then you could gain time, but I doubt it would be by much.

A better way to save time and get more runs is to persuade people to keep their enthusiasm in check; one 'off' costs much more time than we would save running this 'shorter' course.

Drew mentioned this would be a chance to try a "new course". The thing is, it's not a new course, it's the same, just shorter. For most people, a new course would be to run to the top of the hill, or even better, a new hill entirely. I'll have both please!

The two bigger reasons that I hear are 1) people worrying about breaking their cars, 2) losing entries because of the bumpy section. There are solutions.

• A driver can choose to run at reduced speeds through the bumpy section.
  You can build your car or tune your suspension to cope with the bumpy stuff.
  Do something different to "gain" entries (like running the full hill).

I want to share something very strange and counterintuitive. When I drive slowly down the bumpy section (on bring-downs), my car is actually worse off than when driving up. The car is shaken around horribly. But on the way up at speed, the suspension is working properly and the car just floats over the bumps. For me, high speed over the bumps is less damaging than slow.

When I had softer street suspension on the M3, it would bottom out to the bump stops, and that was really hard on the car. Stiffer suspension actually is better here.

"Change the car, or your driving, not the course!"

Jamie Melhuish

[sdwarf36]

"" The two bigger reasons that I hear are 1) people worrying about breaking their cars, 2) losing entries because of the bumpy section. There are solutions.""

Did you happen to notice at Maxsutney -out 22ish cars--there were FOUR front suspension failures? You tell Mike W. he should slow down--or work on his Porsche.

[Charlie Gerry]

I think the hills to rough so we probably shouldn't run it at all. Maybe we can set up some cones in a Sears parking lot somewhere. We are also going to need hugs at the end of all of our runs. Maybe instead of dash plaques we can give out teddy bears and lolypops.

[BugEyeRex]

Robin and I would like lollipops. Big swirly ones. Kate wants a teady bear.

[sdwarf36]

I think the hills to rough so we probably shouldn't run it at all. Maybe we can set up some cones in a Sears parking lot somewhere. We are also going to need hugs at the end of all of our runs. Maybe instead of dash plaques we can give out teddy bears and lolypops.

Autocrosses are dangerous- I heard cars flip over at them.

[Larson]

I think the hills to rough so we probably shouldn't run it at all. Maybe we can set up some cones in a Sears parking lot somewhere. We are also going to need hugs at the end of all of our runs. Maybe instead of dash plaques we can give out teddy bears and lolypops.

Autocrosses are dangerous- I heard cars flip over at them.

The only time I saw this happen was an inexperienced driver in his daughter car on snow tires.

[BugEyeRex]

Maybe someone should take the car keys away from me.

[jkale]

"" The two bigger reasons that I hear are 1) people worrying about breaking their cars, 2) losing entries because of the bumpy section. There are solutions.""

Did you happen to notice at Maxsutney -out 22ish cars--there were FOUR front suspension failures? You tell Mike W. he should slow down--or work on his Porsche.

Sherman, those are 2 things that should be told to Mike. ie: cage the car, or slow down!