Curious about the pit strategy on this one. I thought I was taking a small risk doing four stops, at laps 8, 16, 24, and 32, and running RM/RS until 32, then switching to RH/RS. I thought others might run the hards all the way and get by with three stops. I'd like to hear what other GT300 drivers did.
I'm now guessing the opposite is what happened, that it was more stops for others rather than less.
Anyway, I count this as a particularly gratifying win, considering the +8% weight penalty. It convinces me even more that very, very careful tire testing and good pit strategy can pay off. The qualifying times seemed to indicate that, at this track, fewer stops would be the only way to do good, and it is the only track so far where I actually thought about running hard tires all the way. But the tire testing results said otherwise and the long pit stop times of almost 34 seconds supported the decision to go with the mediums until the last stop.
I'm now convinced that a good team effort can win the GT300 Championship next season, so Drew and I will be teaming up to give it a shot. I only wish I had discovered this series earlier. It's the only one I've seen that is worth the commitment.
--------------------------
The following is additional comments on my tire and pit strategy. For those who do not take tire testing and pit stop analysis seriously enough, it may be useful:
During tire testing sessions I drive at about 90% effort in order to be absolutely consistent. Regardless of how badly the tires are going off I will hold the same exact line all the way around the track. This makes the predictability of the tire wear vs. lap time consistent between tire types. One important factor is the difference in lap time AVERAGE when pushing tires to the limit. Sometimes it is easy to think that when the tires are badly worn the indication is that the time lost/saved pitting will offset the average lap time during a single stint, when sometimes it makes sense to stay out and maybe save one stop.
The testing for SSR5 generated data that I used in the race; that I could do four 8 lap stints with mediums and average 1'25.045" for those 8 lap stints and, that I could do one 10 lap stint with hards and average 1'25.923 for those 10 laps.
So, using those numbers I could justify running a four stop race plan. The calculations were: 32 laps at 85.045"/lap plus 10 laps at 85.923"/lap totaling 3580.670". Adding four stops at 33.7"/stop increased the total to 3715.47". Adding 4.4" for the lost time at the start further increased the total and generated a predicted race time of 3719.870" or 1: 01' 59.870", and---that's at a 90% effort.
With my actual race time turning out to be 1: 01' 14.688", I only had to run at an effort that generated an average lap time of 1' 24.178" vs. the calculated average lap time of 1' 25.254", which amounts to a actual average lap time only 1.26% (1.076"/lap) quicker than the calculated average lap time based on a 90% effort.
For what it's worth..............
-----------------
or a supra... or anything else with even tire wear... no more RM/RS combos:tup:
Sigh, 1 penalty and 1 spin on cold tires. Will be turning in my time shortly.
Seriously Taz, great job, if I didn't know you for as long as I have I wouldn't believe it. Dang!
