Thanks Brian, I am trying to help and sorry for the ambiguity from previous post.
For #4, if say there are only 40 attendees, running 6 runs per event will take ~4.24hrs, and if the next event have like 50 attendees, 6 runs will add roughly an hour to the day without considering safety factors for hiccups which is somewhat direct-proportional to # of attendees, and slightly longer day if going for 5 runs in a 50 attendees event making it kinda unfair, work longer and race less.
(# of attendee) x (# of runs) x (estimated mins per run) / (mins per hour) = (hours per event from group A start to group B ends without 30min lunch break)
40ppl x 5runsperevent x 1.06minperrunperperson / 60minsperhr = 3.53 hrsperevent
40ppl x 6runsperevent x 1.06minperrunperperson / 60minsperhr = 4.24 hrsperevent
50ppl x 5runsperevent x 1.06minperrunperperson / 60minsperhr = 4.42 hrsperevent
50ppl x 6runsperevent x 1.06minperrunperperson / 60minsperhr = 5.30 hrsperevent
60ppl x 5runsperevent x 1.06minperrunperperson / 60minsperhr = 5.30 hrsperevent
60ppl x 6runsperevent x 1.06minperrunperperson / 60minsperhr = 6.36 hrsperevent
Risk factors such as, technical difficulty with timing, weather, car breakdown on track, longer lunch service, ...etc, and most risks are proportional to number of attendees.
#4 is pure assumption and opinion of mine based on my estimate, if we can run constantly at 5 runs with ~40 ppl event sticking to the planned schedule and with time to spare, we can surely consider going for 6 runs in 2 groups of 3 runs thereafter.
Great summary of the pros and cons for changing the schedule and number of runs!
Can you elaborate on step #4. I'm not sure I understand why it would be unfair or disappointing.
I'll still keep my vote for 5 runs with a schedule that opens at 8:30 AM and first run group goes out at 10:00 AM.
Thanks Helix ... keep up the good work!
The second phase I have in mind for the group as I have already mentioned to some of you, will be to start 30 mins earlier. Depending where you live, most of us have experienced waking up at least another 30mins earlier in order to join a Gimli event, not to mention the extra 30mins drive on the way back. Ultimately, I would like to see run group #1 to start at 10am with registration starting 8:30am instead of 9am. That way most of us will have a better chance to utilize the remaining 1/2 day with family and friends.
After some consideration, I think having runs beyond 5 per event isn't practical to majority of us due to:
1) extra tire wear could result more than 1 set of tires per season,
2) longer run time per group removed the chance of ending event early making it whole day event might be attractive at first but likely to be too much if we keep at it, not to mentioned the work group will be out in the sun or rain for an extended period of time at once; breaking 6 runs in 2 groups of 3 runs is feasible, however we will waste ~15 mins or more combined to switching run groups, thus removing the benefit of a compressed schedule,
3) if we ever get an event group of 45+, have 6 runs will be impractical for reasons listed in #2
4) running 5 runs or 6 runs depending on number of participants sounds unfair and disappointing to me especially if you think about working longer with less track time...
My thoughts is that 5 runs per event is very close to optimal, given ample room for delays and issues if encountered while keeping everything in check for a early afternoon dismissal.
I will be going up to Gimli that afternoon if anyone wants to join me. Probably won't be doing any hot laps, just some ride alongs for me. There should be some family fun as well if you want to bring your spouse and kids.
"Anyone can be fast in 10 runs" ? … uh, not really. Believe it or not, between broken asphalt and timing gremlins, I managed to get in 7 runs.
Did I improve with each run? - you bet. Was I fast? - nope. Based on my rate of improvement, I would guesstimate it would take me 15 runs to get "fast".
Obviously my vote is for the most runs we can squeeze into a day.
I loved the auto trans in the C7 Z06 for the two laps at an autocross school. I couldn't shift that fast, and it felt like it was wired into my brain stem. It was always in the right gear. Granted, it only used 2, 3, 4 once I got off the line, but it downshifted under braking and kept that tire-shredding power available at any moment I wanted. Stunning.
Other cars were going between 90 and 110 kph through the finish on that course. The C7 was ~140 kph. Woah.
I love seeing the other run videos! Cool.
I'm torn on the # of runs. SCCA Nationals is the gold standard of the sport. I heard a fast driver say something like: "Anyone can be fast in 10 runs, I can be fast in 2." But, more runs = more fun for not a lot longer on site.
I'm in favor of 5 runs. The biggest issue I have with autocross is the amount of time spent relative to the amount of racing you get to do. Even adding one run helps justify the outing for those of us with a scarcity of time. Fun runs aren't quite the same, certainly with respect to the level of seriousness employed.
I'd like to suggest that 3 runs at SCCA Nationals is a practical move to get through the massive number of cars racing.
When I go to Chevy Canada right now and choose 2019 Corvette Grand sport it gives me a $76,895 MSRP before adding any options. You can easily upgrade to $90k plus if you add in performance packages and different wheel sets. So the new mid-engine is going to be cheaper? That's a tough pill to swallow. We shall see.
The exterior looks great, like a Ferrari crossed with a Ford GT, but the interior is the typical sore spot. It appears the driver is walled off from the passenger by a bulkhead containing a row of 25 buttons and the steering wheel is aesthetically dreadful.
There will certainly be a lot of complaints about the lack of a manual transmission, but the reality is many modern performance cars are just too fast for manual transmissions. If the car can do 0-60 mph sub 3 seconds, 1st gear is probably over in 1-1.5 seconds.