Well, I wouldn't call myself a totally inexperienced racer, but... I
really can't setup a car worth s%$t. I know how the car handles (loose,
tight, etc) and know what each chassis ajustment is supposed to do, but
each time I tried making changes, I ended up with a messed up car
(perhaps impossible to drive). Thus, I would settle for a fixed setup.
Otherwise, if you run an open setup league (or race or whatever) I find
I end up looking for setups on the net (as are other racers in the
league/race) suitable to stay in the pack. I'd rather squeeze the most
out of a fixed setup and concentrate on race strategy (however limited
they may be).
> Not the first two faced medals we've seen in racing, and certainly not the
> last one either.
> I think the main aspect of fixed setup racing - i.e. that you don't need to
> spend time and effort creating a setup before you can race on a level basis
> with others - is both the greatest advantage and disadvantage of fixed setup
> racing.
> On one hand, I like fixed setups because without spending much time with
> practice, learning the physics or the track, I can just jump into a race and
> have fun. For me that's a boon on ovals ( on which I'd never even think of
> practicing offline :-)
> On the other hand, with fixed setups, without spending much time with
> practice, learning the physics or the track, I can just jump into a race and
> have fun - or ruin it for everyone else on the track because I don't have a
> clue about the track, the physics, my limits or the car.
> Of course, nobody prevents me from practicing anyway, but it is my
> impression that this 'easy way in' using the fixed setup seduces a lot of
> less experienced drivers to jump into races without giving the racing the
> thought and attention they'd need to give it in order to make it fun for all
> participants.
> Achim
> ...
> > ...FIXED SETUP racing ...is more exciting"
--
Philippe "Philster" Sergerie
