Texas Mile: this Saturday- love to meet any FD guys
04-02-11, 02:41 AM
#26
dorito powered
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 2,839
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, and the FD has an advantage here over something like a Supra (generally regarded as the Japanese top speed king): the frontal area of the FD is less and I believe the Cd is also slightly better. However, unlike the commonly parroted myth you always hear in the kills section, the weight advantage of the FD means little above 100 mph
04-02-11, 03:30 AM
#27
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Quadratic"? "parabolic" is rarely used in this context....anyway, non-linear gets the point across just fine without the "let's see who can toss around impressive sounding terminology" game
04-02-11, 08:06 AM
#28
Im 99% sure that orange-ish red FC with bridge port is my old FC with the Half BP engine BDC built going on 8 years and still running hard. I saw some video a few weeks ago of it getting tuning at RP to be used in the Texas Mile. I heard they changed to a T04R turbo if they did that turbo is too small for the power you need to push it past 200mph
Last edited by 87GTR; 04-02-11 at 08:35 AM.
04-02-11, 10:12 AM
#29
Racing Rotary Since 1983
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
"what tire pressures are you going to run in the mile?"
while i do have a fairly aggressive battle plan i am nowhere near tire pressures. you do raise an important point however...
the second important takeaway was tires. it is probable that a tire failure lead to the Hinson mishap. they were running a softish drag sidewall tire and think that it may have just not been able to cope. while i will be running 600 rwhp and they were way above 1000 i will still defer a bit to their lesson learned.
i was planning on running my Sumitomo HTRZ IIIs. they are properly rated for 200 and i like the tire. i run 255/35/18 fr and 295/30/18 r. tires, like everything else are a balancing act. skinny tires for aero and fat tires to hold 600 rwhp.
my ultimate signal caller will be an old racing acquaintance who is director of info at Tire Rack. i was sponsored by Hoosier for 5 years and did see a bunch of Hoosiers at the Mile so we will see... my guess is Michelins, they were on the 226 mph Supra.
suspension enters in greatly. i want to run 24 inches ride height (lower RH lowers frontal area and Cd). since the FD has huge negative camber gain on bump for road racing i will have to make new adj upper A arms so i will be able to zero out the camber at the lower ride height. other items will be a 3.9 rear end, and 300 M axles. i will be running methanol only as a fuel and will need 12,000 CC/Min. i will be using a mechanical fuel pump.
ideally i will not run a wing and will run a small vertical front air dam w a splitter no more than an inch in horizontal length. i will also have two alu side farings to keep air from getting under the car if it gets sideways.
i have alot of projects for 2011 and they do get delayed. i think i am now on target. i expect my dyno project to be completely be finished in less than 60 days and at that point i want to do some road racing/coil-over evaluation.
i expect the fall Texas Mile event to be scheduled for Oct. i will start final prep work about 60 days prior. the Beyond Redline dyno will allow tuning to 220 mph so we should be pretty well dialed in.
that's the plan. while speed V hp isn't linear generally plans don't go exactly as expected either but i do feel i am ahead of the game for 2011. last year alot was accomplished, especially the Tremec T56 6 speed.
OBTW, yes, you are correct as to the FC. it was tuned by Chris Ott at Rotary Performance and Brian Cain built the motor. it ran 170. 21 psi, 7500 thru the lights in 5th. water/meth. according to Ari it made 380 at 14 psi and he didn't know what it was making at 21. neither did the driver, Peter.
not bad considering there were 3 GTRs there and one ran 174 and the other 2 didn't get to 170. (that was on sat.... they may have ran faster sunday... just sayin').
we do have some pretty good data re the FD. a 550 rwhp FD ran last year. 196. looking at the pics the car was nose high thru the lights a couple of inches. of course 550 piston and 550 rotary are different in that the rotary doesn't have as broad a power curve. the car had a Tremec 6 speed box but wider ratios. mine has closer ratios to help the more narrow power band. my porting is designed to widen the power band... 400 rwhp at 5500 at 20 psi.
numerous ZO6 Corvettes w similar power generally ran about 15 mph slower due to larger frontal area (22.3 sq feet) and a .34 Cd. the FD is one slippery dude and aero is everything thru the lights.
howard
while i do have a fairly aggressive battle plan i am nowhere near tire pressures. you do raise an important point however...
the second important takeaway was tires. it is probable that a tire failure lead to the Hinson mishap. they were running a softish drag sidewall tire and think that it may have just not been able to cope. while i will be running 600 rwhp and they were way above 1000 i will still defer a bit to their lesson learned.
i was planning on running my Sumitomo HTRZ IIIs. they are properly rated for 200 and i like the tire. i run 255/35/18 fr and 295/30/18 r. tires, like everything else are a balancing act. skinny tires for aero and fat tires to hold 600 rwhp.
my ultimate signal caller will be an old racing acquaintance who is director of info at Tire Rack. i was sponsored by Hoosier for 5 years and did see a bunch of Hoosiers at the Mile so we will see... my guess is Michelins, they were on the 226 mph Supra.
suspension enters in greatly. i want to run 24 inches ride height (lower RH lowers frontal area and Cd). since the FD has huge negative camber gain on bump for road racing i will have to make new adj upper A arms so i will be able to zero out the camber at the lower ride height. other items will be a 3.9 rear end, and 300 M axles. i will be running methanol only as a fuel and will need 12,000 CC/Min. i will be using a mechanical fuel pump.
ideally i will not run a wing and will run a small vertical front air dam w a splitter no more than an inch in horizontal length. i will also have two alu side farings to keep air from getting under the car if it gets sideways.
i have alot of projects for 2011 and they do get delayed. i think i am now on target. i expect my dyno project to be completely be finished in less than 60 days and at that point i want to do some road racing/coil-over evaluation.
i expect the fall Texas Mile event to be scheduled for Oct. i will start final prep work about 60 days prior. the Beyond Redline dyno will allow tuning to 220 mph so we should be pretty well dialed in.
that's the plan. while speed V hp isn't linear generally plans don't go exactly as expected either but i do feel i am ahead of the game for 2011. last year alot was accomplished, especially the Tremec T56 6 speed.
OBTW, yes, you are correct as to the FC. it was tuned by Chris Ott at Rotary Performance and Brian Cain built the motor. it ran 170. 21 psi, 7500 thru the lights in 5th. water/meth. according to Ari it made 380 at 14 psi and he didn't know what it was making at 21. neither did the driver, Peter.
not bad considering there were 3 GTRs there and one ran 174 and the other 2 didn't get to 170. (that was on sat.... they may have ran faster sunday... just sayin').
we do have some pretty good data re the FD. a 550 rwhp FD ran last year. 196. looking at the pics the car was nose high thru the lights a couple of inches. of course 550 piston and 550 rotary are different in that the rotary doesn't have as broad a power curve. the car had a Tremec 6 speed box but wider ratios. mine has closer ratios to help the more narrow power band. my porting is designed to widen the power band... 400 rwhp at 5500 at 20 psi.
numerous ZO6 Corvettes w similar power generally ran about 15 mph slower due to larger frontal area (22.3 sq feet) and a .34 Cd. the FD is one slippery dude and aero is everything thru the lights.
howard
Last edited by Howard Coleman; 04-02-11 at 10:18 AM.
04-02-11, 12:28 PM
#31
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we do have some pretty good data re the FD. a 550 rwhp FD ran last year. 196. looking at the pics the car was nose high thru the lights a couple of inches. of course 550 piston and 550 rotary are different in that the rotary doesn't have as broad a power curve. the car had a Tremec 6 speed box but wider ratios. mine has closer ratios to help the more narrow power band. my porting is designed to widen the power band... 400 rwhp at 5500 at 20 psi.
numerous ZO6 Corvettes w similar power generally ran about 15 mph slower due to larger frontal area (22.3 sq feet) and a .34 Cd. the FD is one slippery dude and aero is everything thru the lights.
numerous ZO6 Corvettes w similar power generally ran about 15 mph slower due to larger frontal area (22.3 sq feet) and a .34 Cd. the FD is one slippery dude and aero is everything thru the lights.
04-02-11, 09:36 PM
#33
its parabolic, and I'm sure Howard, as well as just about any one with a basic understanding of physics understands this.
This is quite nicely demonstrated in the top gear clip where the Bugatti Veyron races the McLaren F1. The F1 has it off the line, but once it hits a certain speed (I don't believe they every say) the Veyron starts pulling due to its immense HP advantage.
This is quite nicely demonstrated in the top gear clip where the Bugatti Veyron races the McLaren F1. The F1 has it off the line, but once it hits a certain speed (I don't believe they every say) the Veyron starts pulling due to its immense HP advantage.
been a few years since I did any sort of calculus.
04-03-11, 08:48 AM
#36
Lucky
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-03-11, 10:07 AM
#37
Racing Rotary Since 1983
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Kevin Draper built the 3 turbos for the 3 rotor RB FD.
Kevin is an old friend and a real salt guy. he told me that the car broke traction upon getting into 5th gear. (that's why i have a healthy respect for running on the salt... translation: no way)
if that was the case, it wasn't totally an aero problem. i certainly will have no traction issues on asphalt and a comparatively modest amount of hp.
rest assured i will be bringing my adjustable rear wing and will have some splitter options. that said, the key, IMO, is having the correct longitudinal rake on the car. i will do some consulting when i get nearer to decison time of course.
things are always more complex than they seem.
for example:
when you dial in more front downforce, guess what happens in the rear? cars can be viewed longitudinally as teeter-totters. push one end down, the other goes up... pivot point is in the middle.
you learn this very quickly on a road course. more downforce front, loose rear and less braking in the rear etc.
BTW, just as an FYI, my objective w running the Texas Mile is not to break the sound barrier. my car remains a dual purpose streetcar. it will run at a limited 600 rwhp. i just want to see if the FD can do 200 moderately modded.
no GT42s on my car. my motor will be no different than my customer motors. i fully expect others w bigger turbos or 20Bs to best whatever i run. i really do want to run 200 however so if what i bring doesn't quite get it done i will be back.
howard
Kevin is an old friend and a real salt guy. he told me that the car broke traction upon getting into 5th gear. (that's why i have a healthy respect for running on the salt... translation: no way)
if that was the case, it wasn't totally an aero problem. i certainly will have no traction issues on asphalt and a comparatively modest amount of hp.
rest assured i will be bringing my adjustable rear wing and will have some splitter options. that said, the key, IMO, is having the correct longitudinal rake on the car. i will do some consulting when i get nearer to decison time of course.
things are always more complex than they seem.
for example:
when you dial in more front downforce, guess what happens in the rear? cars can be viewed longitudinally as teeter-totters. push one end down, the other goes up... pivot point is in the middle.
you learn this very quickly on a road course. more downforce front, loose rear and less braking in the rear etc.
BTW, just as an FYI, my objective w running the Texas Mile is not to break the sound barrier. my car remains a dual purpose streetcar. it will run at a limited 600 rwhp. i just want to see if the FD can do 200 moderately modded.
no GT42s on my car. my motor will be no different than my customer motors. i fully expect others w bigger turbos or 20Bs to best whatever i run. i really do want to run 200 however so if what i bring doesn't quite get it done i will be back.
howard
Last edited by Howard Coleman; 04-03-11 at 10:43 AM.
04-03-11, 10:11 AM
#38
Lift is certainly a factor. I'm sure that traction is better at the Texas Mile than up there on the Salt flats. Wonder how much of a factor that played in the white FD losing it?
Edit: funny I was tying my response at the EXACT time Howard was and did not see his post beforehand. Looks like we're on the same track
Have you considered a small spoiler on the back side of the roof just to disturb airflow enough to reduce the effects of lift?
Edit: funny I was tying my response at the EXACT time Howard was and did not see his post beforehand. Looks like we're on the same track
Have you considered a small spoiler on the back side of the roof just to disturb airflow enough to reduce the effects of lift?
04-04-11, 04:25 PM
#39
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not an inverse relationship at all, it's a directly proportional relationship
From the previous page I posted this link:
http://physics.info/drag/
Strike 1
Strike 2
care to try for #3?
From the previous page I posted this link:
http://physics.info/drag/
• Drag increases with speed (v). I hope that this is self-evident. An object that is stationary with respect to the fluid will certainly not experience any drag force. Start moving and a resistive force will arise. Get moving faster and surely the resistive force will be greater. The hard part of this relationship lies in the detailed way speed affects drag. Are the two quantities directly proportional? Does drag increase as the square of speed? The square root of speed? The cube of speed … ? According to our model, it should be the first of these. Drag should be proportional to the square of speed.
R ∝ v2
But for some situations this is not quite correct. As I said before, drag is a complex phenomena. It is cannot always be written with simple mathematical formulas. My first guess would always be that drag is proportional to the square of speed, but I would not be surprised if, over some range of values, it was found to be directly proportional, or proportional to the 3/2 power, or even that drag and speed were related by some polynomial. Welcome to the world of empirical modeling — where relationships are determined by actual physical experiments rather than an ideology of pure theory. Which brings us to our last factor …
• Drag is influenced by other factors including shape, texture, viscosity (which results in viscous drag or skin friction), compressibility, lift (which causes induced drag), boundary layer separation, and so on. These factors can be dealt with separately in a more complete theory of drag (how tedious in one sense, but how necessary in another) or they can be piled into one monolithic fudge factor (oh yes, please) called the coefficient of drag (Cd).
R ∝ v2
But for some situations this is not quite correct. As I said before, drag is a complex phenomena. It is cannot always be written with simple mathematical formulas. My first guess would always be that drag is proportional to the square of speed, but I would not be surprised if, over some range of values, it was found to be directly proportional, or proportional to the 3/2 power, or even that drag and speed were related by some polynomial. Welcome to the world of empirical modeling — where relationships are determined by actual physical experiments rather than an ideology of pure theory. Which brings us to our last factor …
• Drag is influenced by other factors including shape, texture, viscosity (which results in viscous drag or skin friction), compressibility, lift (which causes induced drag), boundary layer separation, and so on. These factors can be dealt with separately in a more complete theory of drag (how tedious in one sense, but how necessary in another) or they can be piled into one monolithic fudge factor (oh yes, please) called the coefficient of drag (Cd).
Originally Posted by KKMpunkrock2011
its parabolic, and I'm sure Howard, as well as just about any one with a basic understanding of physics understands this.
Originally Posted by KKMpunkrock2011
there we go, that's the word I was looking for. been a few years since I did any sort of calculus
care to try for #3?
04-04-11, 04:29 PM
#40
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no GT42s on my car. my motor will be no different than my customer motors. i fully expect others w bigger turbos or 20Bs to best whatever i run. i really do want to run 200 however so if what i bring doesn't quite get it done i will be back.
04-06-11, 02:58 AM
#42
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BayArea,ca
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Howard. When I ran 196 mph at Texas my car was running stock hood and no wing. When I took my car to Mojave mile and went 207 mph I put on a small rear wing-lip and a vented hood. My car was a lot more stable at 207 vs 196 with the wing and vented hood. I might take my car to Texas in the fall to see what it will do with 960rwhp.
04-06-11, 12:37 PM
#46
Racing Rotary Since 1983
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
"My car was a lot more stable at 207 vs 196"
here's your car at 196.
2 observations:
1. your nose is flying to the tune of close to a couple of inches. that means your camber is positive relative to the static setting by almost 2 degrees. (if you look closely you can see it). you want zero camber at 200 mph. further the front end gets light as it tries for take-off and i imagine the steering was really light. twitchy. 'must have been an attention getter. it all has to do w the initial (static) longitudinal pitch setting. wings can be a bandaid. of course w 960 hp wings just might be needed to avoid wheelspin
2. you would have run over 200 if you could have kept the nose down.
at this point i am merely an armchair miler and i greatly congratulate you (all) for what you have accomplished to date.
the next generation Texas Mile will situate at the Chase Industrial airport in Beeville and the runway/track is 8000 ft long. as i understand the initial event will take place Memorial Day and there will be a second event this year in October at which i expect to compete.
howard
...
here's your car at 196.
2 observations:
1. your nose is flying to the tune of close to a couple of inches. that means your camber is positive relative to the static setting by almost 2 degrees. (if you look closely you can see it). you want zero camber at 200 mph. further the front end gets light as it tries for take-off and i imagine the steering was really light. twitchy. 'must have been an attention getter. it all has to do w the initial (static) longitudinal pitch setting. wings can be a bandaid. of course w 960 hp wings just might be needed to avoid wheelspin
2. you would have run over 200 if you could have kept the nose down.
at this point i am merely an armchair miler and i greatly congratulate you (all) for what you have accomplished to date.
the next generation Texas Mile will situate at the Chase Industrial airport in Beeville and the runway/track is 8000 ft long. as i understand the initial event will take place Memorial Day and there will be a second event this year in October at which i expect to compete.
howard
...
04-06-11, 02:10 PM
#47
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BayArea,ca
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The picture above was taken in 1st or 2nd gear and the nose is high under acceleration. I am at 24.5" on all four corners with a 25.6" tall tire. I would like to run a shorter front tire next time and lower the front.
http://www.norotors.com/index.php?ac...ach=2515;image
http://www.norotors.com/index.php?ac...ach=2515;image
04-12-11, 05:42 AM
#48
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT
The Texas Mile Rules and Regulations have been updated. All rules and regulations are now listed in one document found on our website here: http://www.texasmile.net/rulesregulations.php . Download the "Rules, Regulations & Technical Specifications (RRTS)" to find out about vehicle, motorcycle, and LSR classing, technical requirements, and the NEW licensing program.
The Texas Mile has implemented a new, simple licensing program for our participants. Once you are registered for an event you will be sent a licensing form to fill out and return.
For your convenience here is the licensing information:
Competitor Licensing
The Texas Mile has implemented a competitor licensing program. Licenses and requirements are separate for automobiles and motorcycles. A license level in the motorcycle class doesn't apply to the car classes and vice versa.
The competitor will be issued a colored wrist band based on their license level. The competitor must notify the Race Director (Ryan Arnold) or Chief of Tech (Mike Patterson) when they wish to move up to the next license level. Failure to follow these polices can and will result in the competitor forfeiting all competition privileges for the event and possible future events. In the event that a competitor is found to be cheating by allowing another driver/rider to use their licensing band, they both will be permanently banned from all future Texas Mile events.
The Race Director decision is final in all matters pertaining to all event rules.
"Hard card" licenses will be issued to the Class A and Class AA license holders.
License color will be determined at the event.
CLASS C - (color TBD) The minimum qualification for a Class C license is a valid US, Canadian provincial, military or any other approved driver's license. All other licenses must be approved prior to the event. It is the competitor's responsibility to have their licenses approved. Class C license holders are limited to 165 mph.
CLASS B - (color TBD) The minimum qualification for a Class B license is a Class C license, plus sufficient acceptable prior experience or successful completion of one run with a trap speed greater than 140 mph but less than 165 mph. Class B license holders are limited to 190 mph.
CLASS A - (color TBD) The minimum qualification for a Class A license is a Class B license, plus sufficient acceptable prior experience or successful completion of one run with a trap speed greater than 180 mph but less than 200 mph.
Automobiles - An approved race license from the following sanctioning bodies: ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, IHRA, NASCAR, ARCA, SCCA, NASA, Grand Am, IMSA, or FIA will be accepted for a Class A license. Class A license holders are limited to 215 mph.
Motorcycles - An approved race license from the following sanctioning bodies: CMRA, ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, or IHRA, will be accepted for a Class A license. Class A license holders are limited to 215 mph.
CLASS AA - (color TBD) Highest level license. The competitor must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Race Director and/or the Chief of Tech that they are sufficiently qualified to run at the highest licensing level. Graduation to a Class AA license is not automatic and applicants must be individually approved by the Race Director and/or the Chief of Tech. Minimum qualifications are:
a Class A license;
considerable high speed driving experience or an approved race license from the following sanctioning bodies:
Automobiles - ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, IHRA, NASCAR, ARCA, SCCA, NASA, Grand Am, IMSA, or FIA
Motorcycles - CMRA, ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, or IHRA, and,
Two or more successful runs greater than 205 mph but less than 225 mph.
The Race Director has the final say whether a competitor does or doesn't qualify for a Class AA license. The Race Director has the final say in all licensing and cannot be protested to a higher level.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Jessica Reyna
info@texasmile.net
281-303-1844
The Texas Mile Rules and Regulations have been updated. All rules and regulations are now listed in one document found on our website here: http://www.texasmile.net/rulesregulations.php . Download the "Rules, Regulations & Technical Specifications (RRTS)" to find out about vehicle, motorcycle, and LSR classing, technical requirements, and the NEW licensing program.
The Texas Mile has implemented a new, simple licensing program for our participants. Once you are registered for an event you will be sent a licensing form to fill out and return.
For your convenience here is the licensing information:
Competitor Licensing
The Texas Mile has implemented a competitor licensing program. Licenses and requirements are separate for automobiles and motorcycles. A license level in the motorcycle class doesn't apply to the car classes and vice versa.
The competitor will be issued a colored wrist band based on their license level. The competitor must notify the Race Director (Ryan Arnold) or Chief of Tech (Mike Patterson) when they wish to move up to the next license level. Failure to follow these polices can and will result in the competitor forfeiting all competition privileges for the event and possible future events. In the event that a competitor is found to be cheating by allowing another driver/rider to use their licensing band, they both will be permanently banned from all future Texas Mile events.
The Race Director decision is final in all matters pertaining to all event rules.
"Hard card" licenses will be issued to the Class A and Class AA license holders.
License color will be determined at the event.
CLASS C - (color TBD) The minimum qualification for a Class C license is a valid US, Canadian provincial, military or any other approved driver's license. All other licenses must be approved prior to the event. It is the competitor's responsibility to have their licenses approved. Class C license holders are limited to 165 mph.
CLASS B - (color TBD) The minimum qualification for a Class B license is a Class C license, plus sufficient acceptable prior experience or successful completion of one run with a trap speed greater than 140 mph but less than 165 mph. Class B license holders are limited to 190 mph.
CLASS A - (color TBD) The minimum qualification for a Class A license is a Class B license, plus sufficient acceptable prior experience or successful completion of one run with a trap speed greater than 180 mph but less than 200 mph.
Automobiles - An approved race license from the following sanctioning bodies: ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, IHRA, NASCAR, ARCA, SCCA, NASA, Grand Am, IMSA, or FIA will be accepted for a Class A license. Class A license holders are limited to 215 mph.
Motorcycles - An approved race license from the following sanctioning bodies: CMRA, ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, or IHRA, will be accepted for a Class A license. Class A license holders are limited to 215 mph.
CLASS AA - (color TBD) Highest level license. The competitor must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Race Director and/or the Chief of Tech that they are sufficiently qualified to run at the highest licensing level. Graduation to a Class AA license is not automatic and applicants must be individually approved by the Race Director and/or the Chief of Tech. Minimum qualifications are:
a Class A license;
considerable high speed driving experience or an approved race license from the following sanctioning bodies:
Automobiles - ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, IHRA, NASCAR, ARCA, SCCA, NASA, Grand Am, IMSA, or FIA
Motorcycles - CMRA, ETCA, SCTA, NHRA, or IHRA, and,
Two or more successful runs greater than 205 mph but less than 225 mph.
The Race Director has the final say whether a competitor does or doesn't qualify for a Class AA license. The Race Director has the final say in all licensing and cannot be protested to a higher level.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Jessica Reyna
info@texasmile.net
281-303-1844
04-12-11, 08:18 AM
#49
Howard- when you're ready for twistys, you might want to try the "Silver State Challenge" in Nevada, in the UNLIMITED class.
You get two runs, 45-miles in each direction, on a closed public highway, that includes sweepers, esses through a canyon, etc.
AVERAGE top speed record holder is over 207 MPH. AVERAGE! over 90-miles.
I did it in my wagon with a target average of 115 MPH, and its tough esp. not in a straight line! I could not go over 140 MPH (tech speed) or below 25MPH from my target speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_...ssic_Challenge
http://www.sscc.us/
:-) neil
You get two runs, 45-miles in each direction, on a closed public highway, that includes sweepers, esses through a canyon, etc.
AVERAGE top speed record holder is over 207 MPH. AVERAGE! over 90-miles.
I did it in my wagon with a target average of 115 MPH, and its tough esp. not in a straight line! I could not go over 140 MPH (tech speed) or below 25MPH from my target speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_...ssic_Challenge
http://www.sscc.us/
:-) neil
