Bota wrote a response in another thread pointing out a simple physical fact - an equation that allowed him to say rather clearly that one parameter dwarfed another. Speed vs weight in kinetic energy...applied to braking specifically.

It got me thinking - about that which I was already thinking about - so I guess it just got me thinking more - about choices we make with an unquantified improvement in mind.

Many of us have been educated one way or another in the workings of the physical world. We are pretty good at applying that education crudely to make relatively sound decisions. We know in which direction improvement lies.

But I find that I fall down too often in the sense that something I do on the basis of sound fundamentals doesn't produce a return in line with the correspondingly fuzzy expectation.

One way to prevent such disappointment is to calculate the benefit. Or take the word of someone who has - preferably after they've validated their calculations in the real world. OR Not do it - which is surprisingly difficult when the fundamentals are goading you.

Scott, who's being vague...who acknowledges that "mistakes were made"...and who is coming to believe that calling something a "no brainer" says more about the decision maker than about the decision...

 

A no brainer? Using someone else's equipment. Why think when you don't have the choice to? But then..

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RR98ITR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
But I find that I fall down too often in the sense that something I do on the basis of sound fundamentals doesn't produce a return in line with the correspondingly fuzzy expectation.

One way to prevent such disappointment is to calculate the benefit. Or take the word of someone who has - preferably after they've validated their calculations in the real world. OR Not do it - which is surprisingly difficult when the fundamentals are goading you.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

You know I never took a probability class, and that can PROBABLY explain why I do some of the things I do or say with such a egotistical tone. The probability of me being right could possibly be slim, but I depend too much on science being fact that I forget the real world and all the assumptions I made that lead me to believe my statements are fact and they're not, because we do not live in an ideal world. Things we assume in real life are never what we assume in our calculations, so why do we even bother with assumptions? Because we need to find a shortcut to the answer

Always learn from the best, master their technique and design and improve upon it. Only then can you be closer to success. However this is a good theory to operate within, it keeps our world from making large leaps forward, so I don't agree with it 100%. It works for the present time being of course but I think we can think further outside of a box. I mean when was the last time you've seen a big change in toilet paper? Sure it works, but it doesnt make the most sense. Now companies are finally coming out with moist wipes-anyway you get my point.

 

So what does all this really mean shawn does it mean we should follow or lead? innovate or immitate?


-Casey who thinks shawn is thinking outside the pedal box

 

When we attempt to lead and innovate ourselves outside of the box we must accept that the odds are rather more against than for us.

Scott, who can understand that all fine and well, but it still hurts when it bites.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Casey@Burns &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So what does all this really mean shawn does it mean we should follow or lead? innovate or immitate?


-Casey who thinks shawn is thinking outside the pedal box</TD></TR></TABLE>

it means innovate in college where it's not your money. joint FSAE and go racing while it lasts.

as for getting those extra tenths at the track, only if you're loosing by those extra tenths at every race is when you should really consider spending the flow. It's just insane to want to spend the bucks on the things sponsored race teams have. We really are forced into a set of rules in a series for our own good. Rule makers are helping us NOT to spend all of our money.


Modified by HapaHaole at 4:58 PM 10/17/2005

 

I meant *join*

I was thinking about the "other" reason why people go to college I suppose

 

I &lt;3 rules even thought its fun to think what you could do without them.

-Casey who is realizing how expensive it is to run an H1 car

 

I think spending money on cars is dumb.

Just get it so it performs decently and still drives good on the street.

I don't race and I've only done a handful of autocrosses and two HPDE's, but I'm happy with my stock d16y7 with 6-puck and 7lb, along with the ctr brakes/shocks/springs. All I want is a rollbar and seats (safety and comfort) and a LSD and final drive, then I'll be done with spending money on it and just track it and drive it everyday. At least until I pull the engine and rebuild it once I put another 50k or so on it.