SCCA ProSolo & Nationals summary
09-24-2008, 01:17 PM
#1
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,936
SCCA ProSolo & Nationals summary
I have no complaints about how the week went, other than Jason Burns drove way too well and pushed (and at times pulled) me to get with the program. But considering he's a friend, his car is setup similar to ours (it is after all another Strano Performance Parts Mustang) and we constantly beat on each other locally I'm not at all surprised by his showing. And if I couldn't have won, he'd have been one of few I'd have been ok with getting beaten by.
At the Pro Jason was fastest on the left, I was fastest on the right. I was just faster than he was by .117 on the right than he was to me on the left. So that's what I won by, .117. Because it rained all weekend but stopped before the Challenge, it was dry and was chaos. As rounds went on, I was forced to break out (and get the time and a half penalty) to beat my guys. Jason's guys red-lighted and such so he never did break out. We met in round 3. I had to give him a 5 second head start (in the same class car). We had fun with it since there was no way I could beat him being 10 seconds in the hole to an equivlent driver and car combination. Oh well.... He went to the final round where he lost. But then later in the week the car that beat him was DSQ @ Nationals and the driver gave up his ProSolo winnings too. So it appears Jason will be the ProSolo Finale Challenge winner and gets the 4 Hoosiers to go with it.....
Come Nationals, it was a battle all the way.
We had to run 1st heat, 1st day. It was dirty, and the course we ran was very confining for a big car like the S197. It was also very, very slalom intensive. And just what I had been saying came true. A Bullitt (basically a GT suspension) ended up 2nd. Burns was 1st, Kent Kroll was 2nd .067 back, and I was 3rd another .070 back. I wasn't happy with 3rd, didn't feel I drove my best (and I know Jason felt the same way, we talked about it).
Day 2 came along, and I was determined to drive like I wanted to win vs. not wanting to lose. I came out of the box on the West course with a 42.8 which I ended up standing on since I coned my 42.7 and slowed down a .9 on run 3. The good news was that nobody else in the class ran a 42 second run, clean or dirty. I think Piccione had 2nd fast scratch time (in the Strano Performance Parts/Jason Burns Shelby) @ 43.1.
In the end, I won by .397 over Jason. I paxed 27th overall, but there were some course changes to the east that make that a little iffy. On the west course, I was higher in the index. That course never changed, and we didn't have to clean it off like the east course.
I know have a total of 4 ProSolo series titles. 3 in F-stock (2 in Mustangs), and one in my ESP Camaro. I'm also now a 5-time National Champion. 3 in ESP Camaro's, 2 in F-stock in the Mustang. And I've won 3 in a row, and 5 out of the last 7 years.
I also had some cars I either setup or help with setup do very well in other classes. ES, ASP, SS, ESP, STU to name a few....
Hopefully we'll see some more folks out there next year. F-stock is great, friendly and fiercely constested. We don't know why we don't see more cars from out west in our class..... you all don't know what you're missing.
At the Pro Jason was fastest on the left, I was fastest on the right. I was just faster than he was by .117 on the right than he was to me on the left. So that's what I won by, .117. Because it rained all weekend but stopped before the Challenge, it was dry and was chaos. As rounds went on, I was forced to break out (and get the time and a half penalty) to beat my guys. Jason's guys red-lighted and such so he never did break out. We met in round 3. I had to give him a 5 second head start (in the same class car). We had fun with it since there was no way I could beat him being 10 seconds in the hole to an equivlent driver and car combination. Oh well.... He went to the final round where he lost. But then later in the week the car that beat him was DSQ @ Nationals and the driver gave up his ProSolo winnings too. So it appears Jason will be the ProSolo Finale Challenge winner and gets the 4 Hoosiers to go with it.....
Come Nationals, it was a battle all the way.
We had to run 1st heat, 1st day. It was dirty, and the course we ran was very confining for a big car like the S197. It was also very, very slalom intensive. And just what I had been saying came true. A Bullitt (basically a GT suspension) ended up 2nd. Burns was 1st, Kent Kroll was 2nd .067 back, and I was 3rd another .070 back. I wasn't happy with 3rd, didn't feel I drove my best (and I know Jason felt the same way, we talked about it).
Day 2 came along, and I was determined to drive like I wanted to win vs. not wanting to lose. I came out of the box on the West course with a 42.8 which I ended up standing on since I coned my 42.7 and slowed down a .9 on run 3. The good news was that nobody else in the class ran a 42 second run, clean or dirty. I think Piccione had 2nd fast scratch time (in the Strano Performance Parts/Jason Burns Shelby) @ 43.1.
In the end, I won by .397 over Jason. I paxed 27th overall, but there were some course changes to the east that make that a little iffy. On the west course, I was higher in the index. That course never changed, and we didn't have to clean it off like the east course.
I know have a total of 4 ProSolo series titles. 3 in F-stock (2 in Mustangs), and one in my ESP Camaro. I'm also now a 5-time National Champion. 3 in ESP Camaro's, 2 in F-stock in the Mustang. And I've won 3 in a row, and 5 out of the last 7 years.
I also had some cars I either setup or help with setup do very well in other classes. ES, ASP, SS, ESP, STU to name a few....
Hopefully we'll see some more folks out there next year. F-stock is great, friendly and fiercely constested. We don't know why we don't see more cars from out west in our class..... you all don't know what you're missing.
09-24-2008, 05:35 PM
#3
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,936
The Bullitt isn't the car to have. There are courses that it, like a GT will do well on because of the suspension. Those cars are a lot more stable transitionally than a Shelby is. On the other hand the Shelby is a much better sweeper car than the GT or Bullitt.
If you run in an area that has a lot of runway type courses, I think a GT or better yet a Bullitt is a good option. But overall, and for National competition the Shelby is going to be better car more often. Bear in mind I have a GT, setup for FS. It's a lot of fun and I'm sure can win at a site like Ft. Devens in Mass. or at a site like Englishtown NJ.... but I know it's not a national winning (though trophy winning) FS car.
If you run in an area that has a lot of runway type courses, I think a GT or better yet a Bullitt is a good option. But overall, and for National competition the Shelby is going to be better car more often. Bear in mind I have a GT, setup for FS. It's a lot of fun and I'm sure can win at a site like Ft. Devens in Mass. or at a site like Englishtown NJ.... but I know it's not a national winning (though trophy winning) FS car.
10-18-2008, 05:15 AM
#6
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The Greatest State-Texas
Posts: 3
Sam Strano & Jason Burns at the SCCA Nationals
Sam: Great job to both you, and Jason in Topeka. Congratulations! As you mentioned, Jason was at in top form, and so were both cars. In reply, I'd like to mention a little about the Bullitt ( 81 & 181 F/Stock ) , because I'm not quite convinced it's not the car to have, but this all depends on the course, and the driver. While my performance was a little behind what I had hoped, 
, Kent Kroll did a real nice job driving the Bullitt, and, things could have worked out quite differently. But, as you said, the Shelby's seem to be much better sweeper cars, which is due to the lowered suspensions, lower c.g. & progressive rate springs. I set up the Bullitt to stock rules, to see how it would match up, however, I also wanted to eliminate as much body roll as possible. These big S197s do exhibit some body roll from the factory in any trim. The choice of heavy duty Bilsteins, front & rear, worked quite well. The previous body roll is now gone. I also installed a BMR adjustable front bar. The car is very nimble, and doesn't lean in turns, and is pretty quick in slaloms. However, as you could see on the grid, the Bullitt was the "skyscraper" in F Stock, clearly sitting much higher than all the other cars. This is attributed to the constant rate & taller stock springs. I've always believed a race car should run on constant rate springs. I guess I'm old school. I haven't quite accepted the notion of those progressive springs, and am a little confused as why C.S. and FRPP chose them, but they seem to work on the SGT.
Maybe they help the car launch, as this is a problem with the Bullitt. Kent seems to be able to launch it OK, but I spin the tires too much. At Nationals this year, that was my fifth time to run in 25 years, and my first time to run on other than the BFG stock tires, and it was Kent's second time to even drive the car. Yes, while the Bullitt is taller, on any given Sunday, it still has a great chance. Unfortunately, I'm too old to be the driver to prove it, but maybe Kent will want to drive it again. I hope we get the opportunity.
Congratulations again to you, and to Jason. F Stock sure is fun.
Steve
P.S. The Bullitt is soon to get a few stock improvements.
An Autopower race roll bar & front tires that don't slightly rub on the front struts with proper F stock camber settings.
, Kent Kroll did a real nice job driving the Bullitt, and, things could have worked out quite differently. But, as you said, the Shelby's seem to be much better sweeper cars, which is due to the lowered suspensions, lower c.g. & progressive rate springs. I set up the Bullitt to stock rules, to see how it would match up, however, I also wanted to eliminate as much body roll as possible. These big S197s do exhibit some body roll from the factory in any trim. The choice of heavy duty Bilsteins, front & rear, worked quite well. The previous body roll is now gone. I also installed a BMR adjustable front bar. The car is very nimble, and doesn't lean in turns, and is pretty quick in slaloms. However, as you could see on the grid, the Bullitt was the "skyscraper" in F Stock, clearly sitting much higher than all the other cars. This is attributed to the constant rate & taller stock springs. I've always believed a race car should run on constant rate springs. I guess I'm old school. I haven't quite accepted the notion of those progressive springs, and am a little confused as why C.S. and FRPP chose them, but they seem to work on the SGT. Maybe they help the car launch, as this is a problem with the Bullitt. Kent seems to be able to launch it OK, but I spin the tires too much. At Nationals this year, that was my fifth time to run in 25 years, and my first time to run on other than the BFG stock tires, and it was Kent's second time to even drive the car. Yes, while the Bullitt is taller, on any given Sunday, it still has a great chance. Unfortunately, I'm too old to be the driver to prove it, but maybe Kent will want to drive it again. I hope we get the opportunity.
Congratulations again to you, and to Jason. F Stock sure is fun.
Steve
P.S. The Bullitt is soon to get a few stock improvements.
An Autopower race roll bar & front tires that don't slightly rub on the front struts with proper F stock camber settings.
10-18-2008, 08:45 AM
#8
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 7,635
See post #4.
Norm
10-18-2008, 05:23 PM
#10
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The Greatest State-Texas
Posts: 3
SCCA Nationals results
There are some thoughts that not all Bullitts are getting the same springs, possibly related to meeting delivery dates.
See post #4.
Norm
See post #4.
Norm
Norm: Thanks.
It would be nice to find a set that are slightly shorter, Guess I'll have to add those to my "to do" list.
