McLaren MP4-12C does 10.55 @ 134.56 - edit now 10.37@134.97

It’s uphill not downhill but check your logs to verify.

just a heads up, if anyone is looking to test elevation change at their track you could try an onset hobo g-logger. Its a 3 axis accelerometer logger with internal memory, only costs $80 for the pendant. Works pretty good in my experience, can handle a 100hz sample rate which is likely overkill for doing cars. Hoboware can output to .csv, so from there its fairly easy to integrate your way to displacement along the y axis

where’d you see that?

From you… ;D

You’ve mentioned it a few times. Check your logs and let us know.

Has anyone actually asked the track staff to see if they are actually sloped? Or this is all from the pbox then?

On google’s maps which use data from many many sources, the elevations of any of these areas shows as totally flat, by the foot.

I also notice the pbox showed PBIR as being ‘minus’ 50-70’, ie. under sea level, but it’s at 20-ish feet in reality.

One percent grade is often what I use when designing storage warehouses where I need to drain spilled liquids, about 1/8" per foot, sometimes I use 1/4" even (2%). It is very very noticeable to me.

Prime, is your track really 17’ downhill? Jupiter, is PBIR 30’ downhill? That’s a heck of a lot of earth to move over a couple thousand feet, we’re not talking a few jumps like on supercross weekend or anything. Does NHRA/IHRA have anything to say about slope?

nah, I remember it being slightly down, not up. Maybe I had dyslexia.

Bear says I have “Datelexia”, I was ready to go to TMP this weekend lol.

I may borrow the tripod level next time I’m out here and see…I’m super curious now.

Ok so the official word is NHRA tracks are allowed to slope up to 13’, or 1% only. Some new tracks take advantage of that, some don’t, but anything over 1% isn’t certified.

No I think you’re schizophrenic as the last time we had this discussion you said it was downhill then you look at the logs and said it was actually up hill… Did you check your logs?

Did not check. Poor memory is not a sign of schizophrenia. Quadrophenia maybe.

Google maps indicates a drop small enough to be shown as 0m ( although the elevation cross section does show a drop).

No clue how accurate this is of course.

http://www.imgur.com/UviqWDb.jpeg

And just for fun here’s what it says about Thompson

http://www.imgur.com/mQoHheX.jpeg

Unfortunately not enough elevation data for pbir it seems.

Oh, yeah I used a different application for my other post. Ok here goes:

PBIR shows 0’.
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,26.91824342024242,-80.30528426170349,7.158,23.484
1,26.921256797086144,-80.30502676963806,7.158,23.484

Thompson shows 5’ downhill.
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,41.64702963177952,-81.01587116718292,345.294,1132.854
1,41.64700958889246,-81.01131677627563,343.682,1127.567

TMP shows 10’ downhill.
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,42.898807994611275,-79.85635221004486,206.851,678.645
1,42.90154696416119,-79.85334277153015,203.848,668.794

ATCO shows 0.2’ uphill.
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,39.775058088088436,-74.83027875423431,29.013,95.187
1,39.778512981852586,-74.82963502407074,29.074,95.386

Pomona shows 14’ drop, this is pretty much verified since this was the reason for the 13’ drop rule.
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,34.09487208415798,-117.76977360248566,315.026,1033.548
1,34.09259313770732,-117.77145802974701,310.534,1018.813

Edit more:

E-town shows 0.1’ uphill
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,40.33680881493102,-74.34545874595642,20.943,68.711
1,40.333786945323716,-74.34803903102875,20.973,68.810

Sparta shows 1.8’ uphill
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,42.70208671426011,-81.09992623329163,225.265,739.057
1,42.70033632765259,-81.10000669956207,225.810,740.847

Sacramento shows 0.4’ downhill
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,38.52790494294503,-121.29483595490456,31.938,104.784
1,38.5272104005726,-121.29041969776154,31.798,104.323

Grand Bend shows 3’ uphill
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,43.292997278791645,-81.71869039535522,194.000,636.483
1,43.291138695576265,-81.71431303024292,195.000,639.764

MIR shows 1’ downhill
number,latitude,longitude,meters,feet
0,38.394886108141975,-76.84570133686066,39.882,130.847
1,38.39646692897895,-76.84166193008423,39.566,129.809

So three different readings for every place using three different methods.

Great!

NY07RS4 had a website that had data like this. Can’t remember. I’m betting on a fourth, distinct reading though.

Mistro howd you get Google maps to show elevation changes point to point?

Also it looks like there’s a serious change in elevation there, but the cursor being that red dot shows zero from the start. Move the red dot to the finish line.

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/sakimano/2013-03-26001743_zps7a634b4a.png

http://www.daftlogic.com/sandbox-google-maps-find-altitude.htm

I stuck with the right lane and zoomed in to the staging lights and the 66’ traps where I could. Grand Bend was tough.

Edit…tmi

The red dot signifies the peak. Its one of the labs options in the settings of the app. I think it just scales up whatever elevation changes there are to fit that box, but the total ascent field seems to be truncated or rounded somehow.

Here’s another random road for comparison.

http://www.imgur.com/Wm4Nh13.jpeg

OK figured it out. Turns out ascent is actually ascent only (it doesn’t net or include downhill as negative). Kinda stupid but when I measure it backwards it gives some truncated or rounded values now that match better with JSpazz’s more accurate values.

http://www.imgur.com/VrMSdmg.jpeg

http://www.imgur.com/FztTwuV.jpeg

Mistro, pretty awesome your phone has the elevation profile… I tried google earth on the computer and it gave pretty good results as well, unless you go over an area where map data is pasted together…you see a sharp “step” in elevation. I found if I re-render/refresh the path, the elevation corrects and the “step” disappears. Pretty useful though.

Noticed below on Google Earth…:slight_smile:

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/03/26/ba3atagy.jpg

So a switch to R888s and an even quicker time…nuts.

[QUOTE=fiksegts;36383]This car has far exceeded my expectations, it’s amazing how smooth, powerful and balanced the car is. It’s crazy that this car can be this quick and fast without AWD.

I put some Toyo R888 tires (similar specs to the Pirelli Corsa that can be optioned from the factory but a lot less $$) on and ran 10.37 @ 134.97 MPH last night at PBIR without even heating them up. I think the car without question can do the same times on Michelin Pilot Super Sport Tires as the 60’ really isn’t that great and the car doesn’t come out that hard from the 3k RPM launch control setup.

0-60 MPH, 2.7 seconds, 0-100 MPH, 5.8 seconds.

http://www.dragtimes.com/Mclaren-MP4-12C-Timeslip-25329.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPJ9ItB7zPI

Working on some McLaren vs ZR1 videos now… guess what happens??
[/quote]

no surprise there. Directional tires FTW at the strip.

http://audirevolution.net/forum/index.php?topic=1463.msg40360#msg40360

I think he’s guessing about the Michelins when he says the car can do the same times on the PSS. Nothing I’ve seen would back that up.