Membership

I'am looking for a league to join !!!!! As I have gotten tired of the so called leagues that I have joined only to find out that they are really unorganized and are there for there own egos. Looking for clean racing with MATURE people. Any infomation on this would be greatly appreciated. Charlie ((IronPony))

For ICR2..try Indy Extended Circuit..very professionally done league....there site is IEC.home.ml.org...then click on IEC98.

Yes, i have to agree with Tom, the IEC league for ICR2, is in my opinion, the fairest and best run league i have been involved in... It is a very professionally run league with the emphasis on having a good time and all drivers being honest with their racing results, with no noticeable egomania..... Cheers, Ron Ayton

And I'll have to agree with them both. BTW, you can get news about the IEC from "Inside The IEC", written by me. The location is at http://members.tripod.com/~Rymer_Motorsports/inside.html . And while you're there, visit Rymer Motorsports at http://members.tripod.com/~Rymer_Motorsports/ . Arthur B Rymer

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Yes, i have to agree with Tom, the IEC league for ICR2, is in my > opinion, the fairest and best run league i have been involved in... > It is a very professionally run league with the emphasis on having a > good time and all drivers being honest with their racing results, with > no noticeable egomania..... > Cheers, > Ron Ayton

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Yes, i have to agree with Tom, the IEC league for ICR2, is in my > opinion, the fairest and best run league i have been involved in... > It is a very professionally run league with the emphasis on having a > good time and all drivers being honest with their racing results, with > no noticeable egomania..... > Cheers, > Ron Ayton

Yes, the IEC is great. Great drivers and very well run with new and improved features all the time. And there is no egomania - and I'm not just saying that because I am the current points leader! LOL. See these for the best 2 ICR2 leagues I know of; http://members.aol.com/ccccracing/ http://168.23.240.35/~gparra/iec/

Oh well, there goes the theory of no egomania...... :-) Still, the S&S team had better watch out, Southern Racing has just recieved their 98 Reynard package, so things could improve, especially with the new lighter more powerfull Mercedes power plant. Now all Southern Racing needs is another competitive driver to boost the team's performance, and THEN, we will redefine the meaning of egomania...... Anyone interested?? Cheers. and improved features

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Oh well, there goes the theory of no egomania...... :-) > Still, the S&S team had better watch out, Southern Racing has just > recieved their 98 Reynard package, so things could improve, especially > with the new lighter more powerfull Mercedes power plant. > Now all Southern Racing needs is another competitive driver to boost > the team's performance, and THEN, we will redefine the meaning of > egomania...... Anyone interested?? > Cheers.

Ron, are you kidding me? :) If you want to run REAL fast in ICR2 you need the Lola/Honda combo. Firestones seem to be best at most tracks but the Goody's are better at some. Much of a muchness as far as tyres go. But the Lola/Honda combo is definantly the best. The Lola simply steers best and the Honda is unbeatable for power AND efficiency. I'm pretty sure the Merc is easily the worst of the 3! Try it and see. Note that some of your setups may become loose if you use them with the Honda after using Reynard. Rudy and I have been teamed up in various leagues for nearly 10 months and after much testing we run the Lola/Honda/Firestone combo for good reason :)

Byron, i kid you not.... Myself and a friend have spent countless hours testing the different chassis, tyre and engine combinations for ICR1, and ICR2, and while i feel there are small benefits (or disadvantages) using the different combinations, it ultimately boils down to driving style. Having said that, i will now comment on the differences we have found, and why i chose the Reynard Mercedes Firestone package. Incidently, we are not talking about fast lap competitions here, but an overall competitive package consisting of street circuits, ovals and super speedways spread over a full season of racing, using our own setups, not generic go fast setups that are available from the internet. A fast generic setup is perfect only for the driver who made it, using his/her chassis/engine/tyre combination, and usually at low temperature with no wind. Firstly, i agree with your comments on the Firestones being on average more sticky than the Goodyears, but the trade off here is more heat build up, so driving style must be smoother with the Firestones to achieve better lap times consistantly. A more aggressive driver would find the Goodyears to be a better proposition. The difference is really quite minor, with the ultimate choice being the aggression factor of the driver and to wether the driver likes looking at yellow rings or white rings around his front tyres. Fuel usage, i totally disagree. The Mercedes engine develops it's torque curve much lower in revs than the the Honda or Ford, and consequently requires much less downshifting which in turn uses less fuel to achieve identical lap times in a similar chassis/tyre combination. Also with the Merc engine having a broader torque curve, at a lower rpm, the gear ratios can be higher, with an obvious advantage in fuel saving. Running into a head wind with a Mercedes powered car, is a much more fuel efficient proposition than with a Honda. (see torque) Once again, the input from the driver can have different ramifications regarding fuel usage, but on general, the Mercedes engine is the most fuel efficient of the three, by far! Note: without having access to the engine parameters that Papy coded into ICR2, i can just go off self testing findings here... Engine Power... I agree that the Honda and Ford do seem to have a small advantage at the top of the useable rpm range, but keeping these two engines in that rpm through differing weather conditions is much harder than keeping the Mercedes in it's useable rpm range. As an example, using two identical setups, with a Mercedes in one, and a Honda in the other, (2 computers linked with null modem cable), rolling acceleration tests, (side by side on the main straight at Portland), showed that anything under 10,000 rpm, the Mercedes would pull out initially about 5 car lengths over the Honda. Positions were reversed at 11,000 rpm and over, with the Honda having the edge. If you then add a decent head wind to the equation, the Honda suffers more than the Mercedes. I found that for the Super Speedways, the Honda and the Ford are probably a better choice, but the Merc is still capable of matching these two with good driving and chassis setups. For other circuits, where gear changing becomes more of a necessity than a luxury, the Merc wins hands down, and that also includes ovals where passing CC's becomes a major part of the equation. Every time you make a gear change, it effects the lap time, and over over a full race length, it can be quite noticeable to your race finish time. Especially in a league as competitive as the IEC is between the top runners, a couple of tenths of a second could be the difference between finishing 1st or 5th. Chassis. Your point that the Lola steers better is under contention here. When i first started racing ICR i used a Lola chassis, mainly because of the better feeling of stability at the quicker ovals, but after running the first season with the Lola, it's lack of cornering ability on the street circuits made me go for Reynard. I feel the Penske is the best all rounder, with the Reynard best at the circuits, and the Lola best at the ovals. The Reynard, in my opinion, is a harder chassis to achieve a balanced combination, without excesses in looseness or pushing, but once achieved can be marginally quicker than the other two over a full season of racing. I find the Reynard responds more to chassis tweaking than the Lola, and for my style of driving is a better unit. The Reynard is a twitchier chassis than the Lola or Penske, but gives more ultimate speed if you can be bothered to set it up correctly. Anyway, i will be interested to hear your thoughts, or anyone elses for that matter, regarding combinations of Chassis/tyres/engines for ICR2. Maybe we should have renamed the posting heading to something more appropiate to get more feedback! Ps, see you at Indy..... Good luck! Cheers, Ron

This is good work Ron, and your right. It comes down to driving style. I came to most of the same conclusions after fooling around with the options, and testing for different leagues ( IRL vs. CART ), but it's always nice to know that somebody else figured things out the same way. Bobby Upward etc., etc., etc.

Yes, very interesting all this. On reflection I must admit that most of my observations are based on ovals where you are running flat out and can do pretty consistant laps. Also, from looking at many hotlap sites. I have never really bothered to compare on the street courses because it's so hard to know whether it was a good lap or not in many cases. As Ron mentions, it's a matter of getting the car setup right and simply driving it well in the end.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> This is good work Ron, and your right. It comes down to driving style. I > came to most of the same conclusions after fooling around with the options, > and testing for different leagues ( IRL vs. CART ), but it's always nice to > know that somebody else figured things out the same way. > Bobby Upward > > Myself and a friend have spent countless hours testing the different > > chassis, tyre and engine combinations for ICR1, and ICR2, and while i > > feel there are small benefits (or disadvantages) using the different > > combinations, it ultimately boils down to driving style. > etc., etc., etc.