It would be awesome to have a car that maintained it's balance on all of the different surfaces I race on. It's just never been something I've experienced. In my experience the car changes it's handling based on available grip levels.
[/quote]

Matt, I think we've done more adaptation to our driving style per surface change on the fly, but the car seems to be pretty consistent or close to it across the board.

 

Yeah, you always have to adapt driving style. That's part of the fun/challenge and why 3 runs help separate the adaptable from the boys. I just don't like driving around a car I feel is not 100%. For example, I thought my car was a touch pushy at Lincoln. A month later, it was loose as a goose at Blytheville. I mean, I had to wait for ever to get on the throttle out of a corner. It took 6 runs to finally adjust the shocks to the point where the car worked.

In this case, Lincoln was super grippy from all the rubber laid down. If I got on the gas early, the front would just push. In Blytheville, the lot was dirty and cold (we ran first) and there just wasn't any way for me to use the gas on exit without getting sideways.

 

Oh yeah, I'm fully aware that my views are skewed. It's pretty widely accepted that you need good shocks to run at the top, and most people are probably right. I just haven't felt the advantages first-hand, perhaps because we run on nothing but bumpy, low-grip asphalt at home, where softer compression seems to be better.

I'm with Matt - my car feels different on every surface. I love the balance at home, but it gets quite pushy in Lincoln.

 

I just got my photos from Nationals today... you called it, the body roll was insane!



I recommend NOT setting a car like this for Nationals!

Back to PAX, I really hope the Pro Index helps as well. Making the car better suited for launching makes me more interested in Pros. The competition will keep certainly times tight and the sandbagging out.

-Marc

 

That was also before STR.

In STR you don't need the shocks to act as extra springs you can change the springs to suit the surface. You can buy a lot of springs for the cost of a set of Motons.

 

Agreed that fancy shocks are less critical in STR, but this subthread is specifically about comparing two different B Stock cars.

 

Well, duh. You act like STR was the first class to use springs on an S2000.

We've had an SSM S2000 on 1000# springs since 2008... but it also has Motons, lol.

 

I don't know who you were talking to, but I don't recall anyone ever laughing at the CR for any reason other than its appearance. The SAC/SEB placed the car in with the standard model with the warning that it would be monitored closely. I still don't see how a car with stiffer springs and swaybars and lower weight could not be a better performing car. You can claim it's not much better, but how much is "not much" when you're driving a standard model and just got beat by someone with a CR?

 

This has been discussed at length. The answer you seek is different depending on who you talked to. I listed some of the main points I could remember, criticizing the CR when it first came out. Trying to remember every detail is not the point. This was the point ... the CR was not expected to be the best auto-x S2000 (based on popular belief) until a couple years after its release due to reasons already mentioned. I claim the difference between S2000 is within driver error ... a tenth or two on a proper course. There are some disadvantages to owning a 06+ s2000 as well. The computer can start acting up on you if you spin, on hot days, launching, etc. No model is perfect. Get used to the one you have, forget about the rest.

-Marc