Official Evo X Track Times

#41
My dear EVO trackies ,

I brought my SST in Jun 09 . Started to go Sepang and got addicted ....like everyone else . Haha .
My very first lap in Speang I did over 3 mins . Naturally I am curious to know how fast is an EVO X on track . Only way to know then , was thru word of mouth . Until this tread came along .....

To my surprise and awe , I found all on the list are on stock turbo except Lester.
I asked myself , is there an unofficial , unspoken rule or preference among the EVO X tracking community to use stock turbo on Sepang?

To know there are so many guys there doing low 2.30s on stock turbo . Means I have a lot to learnt. Mod the driver first .

The EVO X is too new compared to EVO 9 to know the limit with stock turbo. After markets parts pale in comparisons to know if we can break the 2.30 barrier with stock turbo.

Recently I have learnt , there are unlimited combinations to play with our EVO X , beside upgrading to a bigger turbo . Tires ( Street vs Semi Slicks or R888 vs A050 ) , camber setting , Toe in or toe out , castor angle , RCA , sway bar soft or hard , ASC on , off or full off . S-AWC Tarmac , Gravel or Snow , brake pad 900 or 800 degree ..... the options are limitless to play with for beginners like me .

Very soon , our EVO X will be like the EVO 9 where you seldom hear it is on stock turbo. For the time being , majority is still on stock turbo. Hope there will be more breaking new lap records with non-stock turbo and other engine mods .

This list allows us to track the improvements in lap times for those on stock and non-stock turbo. To search for the holy grail together is where the fun is .

The word Stock is controversial in all forums . Hence the famous S'porean word STOCK KI LAN . Hahaha .

The most enjoyable part of going to Sepang is getting to spend time with my buddies , getting to know fellow EVO X drivers and chat about different set up , racing lines , heat issues etc over good food in KL .

Most important is what Protege had said : this list is not a hall of fame or used for bragging rights.
Whether is it stock turbo or with stroker kit depends on personal integrity . Nobody can report police if a false declaration is made .

I am proud with my fellow Evo X drivers that so far , I have never heard anyone lying . I always believe EVO drivers are a special breed .
Let's keep it this way . Friendly , frank and mutual trust . No prize for being No 1. No point risking one's reputation .
 
#42
Hi Shaun,u see...that's the whole idea...y r we even comparing?I thought this thread was created to share info instead of comparing lap times?If this is juz a competition among evo x drivers,will bro protege pls take my name n timing out becoz I do not intend to compete wif anyone here...

2nd,y shld there be a set of standards to judge how individual driver perform?n y shld it be base on the modification condition of a car?like I said,can anyone guarantee 100% better lap times when I swop a bigger turbo in?no?then y always emphasize on stock engine stock turbo n etc?

Finally,I actually do find wat u said pretty exciting...if someone really does such extreme modification to an evo x or any other car for that matter,even if he leta a 10 yr old kid drive the damn thing,I wld find it very exciting...unless ur no car enthusiast,I'm sure u'll find it exciting too...

Have a gd day... :)
 
#43
Rei said:
Hi Shaun,u see...that's the whole idea...y r we even comparing?I thought this thread was created to share info instead of comparing lap times?If this is juz a competition among evo x drivers,will bro protege pls take my name n timing out becoz I do not intend to compete wif anyone here...
Hi Rei, sharing info is great, but comparisons that follow are inevitable. Just like when we look at the old 2:16, 2:17 set by Choon's older gen Evo, ST Power STI and the GR's Mitchell's old Evo, we compare it to how the current Evo X laptimes are relatively unimpressive. That's comparing cars. Other situations lead to comparing drivers, comparing car and driver combinations, etc. It happens all day everyday, online, in real life, trackdays, CCTs, racedays, time attacks, etc.

If I have an E10, identical in spec to yours, and you're doing a 2:32, whereas I on the same day same session run 2:42, we swap cars, and the times are the same.. well then.. it just means that I'm 10 seconds off from you because of my poorer driving. The information about the cars, about the back to back test, is all good info, but it leads naturally to a conclusion about my driving, whether I want it to or not. Motorsport is full of ego so comparisons will be made. It's not like more solitary and peaceful activities like yoga, bonsai growing, basket weaving, interpretive dance :mrgreen:

2nd,y shld there be a set of standards to judge how individual driver perform?n y shld it be base on the modification condition of a car?
Not that there should or should not be standards, but because everyone in motorsport naturally and whether they admit it or not, is curious about not just cars, but drivers. Car and car state matters because a laptime cannot be confirmed good or bad without knowledge of it. A 2:42 out of a showroom stock 130i is an extremely good time, but a bad time for modified GTR. A 2:32 out of a highly modified GTR is a bad time, but a godly one from showroom stock Evo X. The times alone mean almost nothing until other information is known.

like I said,can anyone guarantee 100% better lap times when I swop a bigger turbo in?no?then y always emphasize on stock engine stock turbo n etc?
Within very wide limits (proper turbo spec, proper tune, no problems with car), you're just about guaranteed to go faster because of greater power. I'm talking about going from like 400 to 600hp and not trackable limits (peakiness, traction) like going from 900hp to 1000hp and crazy stuff like that.

Just like if you take a good driver out of a stock Evo X and drop him in a stock GTR, chances are he is going to go faster in the GTR. It's not 100%, but I'll bet some money on it :D Just like if you were to hop into a modified GTR from your modified E10, I'd bet that you'd go faster after familiarization.

Finally,I actually do find wat u said pretty exciting...if someone really does such extreme modification to an evo x or any other car for that matter,even if he leta a 10 yr old kid drive the damn thing,I wld find it very exciting...unless ur no car enthusiast,I'm sure u'll find it exciting too...
I'd find it marginally interesting. It could be 1000x more interesting if the car was entered into a class of racing where cars of equal cost and under the same rules compete. Then we get a good idea of whether the 1 mil was spent efficiently, whether the design and race engineers did a good job for how much money they used.

Cheers mate :)
 
#44
Hi Shaun ,

Thank you for your interesting input from a very technical point of view . It got me thinking ......

Currently MPT Super Lap Battle / Time Attack has 4 classes which EVO X commonly enter in.

4WD Category
Class 1a - Full-Slick Tires
Class 1b - Semi-Slick Tires
Class 1c - Street-Use Tires

EVO X One Make Class
Class 6 - Tires open and must be road registered.

As you know , above classification are scrutinised by MPT marshals and every pit in and out we have to declare any changes in set up.

Sadly , tires are only what we have for official classification and updating of this thread.

Shaun wrote : unless we know car spec for certain. Not rumours of car spec or talk of car spec, but independently measured, scrutineered, open data shared, etc.
Can we tap your technical knowledge to suggest an alternative classification for better comparison in this thread ?
Of course any suggestion have to be logistically enforceable . We can talk to Mr Koh of MPT to change the classification .

Even in F1 , we have loop holes in FIA regulations which teams exploit creating controversy year after year . We are only amateur enthusiasts under the 3 Diamond's Spirit of Competition .
Beside tires , I am thinking along the lines of :
1) SST vs GSR ( easily enforceble ).
2) Stock vs non-stock turbo ( Non enforecable - mutual trust in self declaration only ) ?
 
#45
Mave7221 said:
Can we tap your technical knowledge to suggest an alternative classification for better comparison in this thread ?
Of course any suggestion have to be logistically enforceable . We can talk to Mr Koh of MPT to change the classification .

Even in F1 , we have loop holes in FIA regulations which teams exploit creating controversy year after year . We are only amateur enthusiasts under the 3 Diamond's Spirit of Competition .
Beside tires , I am thinking along the lines of :
1) SST vs GSR ( easily enforceble ).
2) Stock vs non-stock turbo ( Non enforecable - mutual trust in self declaration only ) ?
Hi Maverick, it's nice how logical your post is. I agree completely that all suggestions have to be enforceable at reasonable cost and manpower requirement.

Agree that SST and MT should be split since SST is slightly easier to drive than MT and 6 SST gear spread should result in smaller gaps vs 5 speed MT's. I haven't looked into gearing specifics of both cars though, so correct me if wrong. All I know is that the MT RPM drop upshifting even really quick from redline in 4th, to 5th, is still abysmal.

Agree that true power level is difficult to check. Stock turbo housing can be confirmed visually, but the internals can be different. Bigger aftermarket turbos can be run and it is highly unlikely that anyone would go bigger without getting more power out of it vs stock. Datalogs can actually tell a lot about the car including power level, but given that most are afraid of sharing, we can use a second option that requires less trust in others.

This second best easiest way to show different power levels and their effect on laptime, requires only 2 helpers, 2 synchronized wrist watches, and 2 sets of photocells. The only condition is that the cars need to run at least 15 seconds apart and never have a group large enough to where they overlap any of the others across the stint.

- Both helpers' wrist watches synced to timing and scoring clock in pits.
- Photocells set at immediately after T15 trackout, and slightly before a very conservative T1 brake point, to make sure that all cars passing these pre-brakezone traps are still accelerating on their hotlaps
- At each photocell trap, 1 helper sits safely off the track and nearby in the shade, watching the photocell's very large speed display
- As each car passes, each helper writes down the car's event number, and besides it writes the trap speed down, and the time according to their synced wristwatches, accurate to +/- 1 - seconds. The process can be standardized among both helpers to reduce error even further. The permissible error window is actually very large anyway (basically +/- tens of seconds) since all you need to know is which lap it is, and the trap physical sequence will allow you to arrange in chronologically anyway
- List of traps speeds at each point collected at the end of the event
- Since normal transponders have been run as usual, and their timings were pre-synced to trap speed times, every participant's trap speeds at the start and end of the main straight for every lap is known and a overall list is compiled

With true turn exit speed known, and end of straight speed known, a true picture of each car's acceleration is formed. The relationship between power and laptimes will show itself. The guys with power will not be able to sandbag, especially along the front straight where trap speed around start finish is already measured by the transponder system anyway (physical lines instead of photo lines).

If the organizer has access to 3 cars of varied but evenly spread across full range of common states within a class, and some basic data from each car with 1 or 2 unbiased good drivers, they can even calculate their own accurate correction for acceleration (as derived directly from the trap speeds). All testing and analysis and working out the correction can be completed within 1.5 hours at any fairly empty trackday (40 or less cars). This correction can be checked easily and once confirmed good can be announced as an official correction for the class, whereupon it will allow, for example, Evo Xs of very different power levels on the same class of tire, to be ranked on the same results table after it is applied to normalize the times.

The process may seem a bit long to read, but in practice it is very simple. Photocell speed/timing lights can be rented. Each helper has a very simple job to do. Video can be recorded at each point with synced time stamp as well, so there is permanent record and never any dispute. Some months ago I suggested the trap speed idea to another time attack organizer, so with any luck we'll see it applied this year. It would be better if TA organizers could use the same trap locations as each other and across events too, so the speed data is comparable across events by different TA organizers even. More samples = better trending, better correction within a class, general overall correction. Even if the organizers don't announce or apply an official correction, as the number of samples increases over time, any keen observer of the TAs can come up with a correction by looking a the stats.

The last an only possibility in cheating or just looking good under the speed trap system, is to run a lot a lot of power, but also a lot of downforce and drag. The drag will hurt the straights so acceleration will not look spectacular going by the numbers (especially with great distance between traps and fairly high speeds reached - another reason why the start/finish trap in the middle should be functioning), but lower speed acceleration along all shorter straights in the circuit will be good, and that level of downforce will really help turns. Thankfully building that level of downforce in a balanced manner will not be easy, and it will not happen without extensive and very visible aero work done to the car - so rules to address this can be created and enforced.

To get an extremely clear picture, the back straight and straight before T4 should also be trapped. If it's just the front straight where measurements are taken, you do still get some idea, but not as clearly. The relationship is not linear though, so at least you get 80% clarity by taking these speeds at the two main straights. These straights are also in close proximity to the pit area, so there's less hassle setting up and getting people out there. There is at least 1 other sector where power really shows up, but it is kind of far from the pits and has lots of runoff distance, so not practical to trap.

IMO, this system is cheap, practical, and impossible to cheat/sandbag even if just trapping the two main straights. If anyone has counter points, I would be very interested to hear. Thanks and cheers :)
 

Mave7221

Active Member
#46
Hi Shaun ,

Wow ....Sori bro ...too cheem . I failed my PSLE actually . I catch no ball .

Your main point is to classify lap times according to power levels and set up a system so no one could cheat or lie about power levels . Right ? This is to show if the lap time is indeed impressive enabling us to compare drivers' skill too . Interesting...

But we will have to wait till some TA organiser willing to set up your propose system . Till then ....We stick to good old trust .
Thank you for agreeing that stock turbo housing can be easily confirmed visually , but the internals can be different.

Our dear Protege who is holding THE fastest lap time record for stock turbo , had just showed us a fine example of trust : By declaring his turbo internals had been modified by Owens . See ....it is ok to trust people to self-declare truthfully .

The EVO X tracking fraternity is rather small in S'pore . Everyone knows everyone . False declaration of modification can be easily found out or questioned . Like you wondering out loud if full slicks or non-stock turbo was used during the last MPT .

Comparing lap times based on the simple classification of tires and turbos is where the fun is .
Everything else is open for different set up and modifications. More topics for us to discuss during kopi sessions.

I have a simpler solution to prevent cheating and for comparing : For every TA , all cars have to submit a stipulated workshop endorsed dyno chart , weight , turbo inspection cert and seal by LTA ? Suicide siah ....

I can hear the Booos...... already. Is this your dream of a real TA in our very own upcoming Changi track? Which trackie doesn't worry LTA will set up road blocks outside the track . They used to during the Kallang car park races .

If everything are measured , scrutinized and compared , then it kills the fun.
It's like having sex with a crash test dummy . You can compare thrust , duration , angle and load but will you want to do it ?
 
#47
Mave7221 said:
Your main point is to classify lap times according to power levels and set up a system so no one could cheat or lie about power levels . Right ? This is to show if the lap time is indeed impressive enabling us to compare drivers' skill too . Interesting...
It's not necessarily about catching people who are dishonest about their turbos or power levels. In many cases, drivers don't even really know true power levels because it is all relative. Accusations about high and low reading dynos fly back and forth, cheating dynos is easy enough too. Then there's the issue of margin of safety factoring track conditions, and whether the tuner has done a good job for a track application etc. One driver looks at another car and says it is faster because it has this and that turbo, but that guy is looking back at his car saying, yeah I have this turbo but he's got that gearing or that open exhaust worth this much power and blah blah. The corrections get inflated or deflated depending on who is suits at any one time or location.

The idea is to eliminate all of that inaccurate judgement, exaggeration flying (you know the usual workshop / supper / pitlane chatter) to where just 2 zones of real acceleration put down into real quantities on the flying laps. It's just like quarter mile drag racing. Drivers can mess around with giving handicaps, subjective calls on who jumped the start, who passed the start finish line and by how much of a gap and all that subjective trash, but when it gets to national levels, you have the systems in place, and you run headsup, and your reaction times, jumpstarts, 60', 1/8 and 1/4 mile ETs and traps are all known, there is no dispute no matter what happens.

But we will have to wait till some TA organiser willing to set up your propose system . Till then ....We stick to good old trust .
Sorry mate, but maybe stick around a bit longer or go a bit deeper and you'll realize that between competitors, there is next to no trust, no honour, in motorsport. It is the nature of motorsport that attracts egoistic, aggressive personalities to it. Anyone who says otherwise just doesn't trust you enough to show so, or isn't honest enough. As the stakes grow, the cheating grows. Even in series' with tight controls, look at how many get caught on monthly, weekly basis. What more a very free type of race? Guys like Protege who can actually drive, and are open enough to share data to prove true stock powertrain status, and then later declare internal change at the point of the switch, are few and far between. I would estimate literally 5% of the enthusiast community.

Also, it was in Protege's own interest to have an independent, and even adversarial party, check this data and confirm that it does not exceed any other known stock evo X power levels at all. Who doesn't want to be known as a good driver. In the same situation with people doubting how much power my car was putting out, I'd do the same. No one in motorsport is very selfless.

The EVO X tracking fraternity is rather small in S'pore . Everyone knows everyone . False declaration of modification can be easily found out or questioned
Yup, questions can be asked, but on certain changes that are hard to scrutineer, there is never pure confirmation until there's data or a less vaguely measured run with no sandbagging.

More topics for us to discuss during kopi sessions.
You can chose to do it that way, but little to nothing will be learned and everyone will be lost in subjectivity and inaccuracy whether intended or not.

I have a simpler solution to prevent cheating and for comparing : For every TA , all cars have to submit a stipulated workshop endorsed dyno chart , weight , turbo inspection cert and seal by LTA ? I can hear the Booos...... already. Is this your dream of a real TA in our very own upcoming Changi track? Which trackie doesn't worry LTA will set up road blocks outside the track . They used to during the Kallang car park races .
You know that this is impossible because of workshop partiality, corruption. Weighing cars at tech inspection at the track is easy and fast to do though.
You shouldn't even bring up the LTA, that is ridiculous and is a straw man. Since you stopped at PSLE.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

If everything are measured , scrutinized and compared , then it kills the fun.
This is the second ridiculous thing you've said. Do you think national series drag racers are not having fun with detailed stats of all their runs known to the world? F1 teams and drivers have less fun because their sector times, engine speeds, top speeds are known? LM 24 hour drivers don't have fun because their corner sector times, corner apex speeds, end of straight speeds, sector average speeds, are known and published? No, it makes things even more fun because if you can beat someone who is undoubtedly running more power, lower drag, more grip, better balance, it means you're a better driver. If your team can beat theirs, then the race strategy, the pit work, was all better.

In my experience, the people who run from any form quantification are those who know they've got nothing solid to support them except trying to buy every advantage possible and downplay the advantages, while exaggerating the advantages of their competitors. You see this all the time... it is so boring. Not wanting any quantification is fine, just openly state so and the real reasons why. No need to try and make other excuses. You ask for an enforceable, practical, improvement to the system and one is suggested, then you reveal that you never had any intention to be measured further in any way at all. So much for honesty huh?

Anyway, your preferences don't dictate that happens at one time attack, or all time attacks. Sooner or later the system will be applied and it'll open eyes. You can sit around and kopi and supper your years away, but others will keep on progressing...

Oh and nice false analogy with the dummy sex example. You're an expert at logical fallacies!

Cheers bro :alien:
 
#48
Our dear Protege who is holding THE fastest lap time record for stock turbo , had just showed us a fine example of trust : By declaring his turbo internals had been modified by Owens . See ....it is ok to trust people to self-declare truthfully .
I know when he got Owen work done and it was way after he had set his best times. The way you phrase it allows misinterpretation that at the point of setting his best times, it was already Owen-ed. This is false and I hope you did not intend to mislead.

Thankfully he has the logs to prove it and logs never fade or forget. I checked those logs back when I used to think he was a BSer, and they were clean. I declared it at that point, and am stating so again, here and now. Anyone that tracks and keeps their own logs is welcome to check a known stock reference log against it, live, without taking the file away after. This offer is rarely/never made because few have done that kind of time on the stock turbo. I know guys way slower than 2:30 who think their data is worth being secretive about - funny.
 
#49
Shaun said:
Our dear Protege who is holding THE fastest lap time record for stock turbo , had just showed us a fine example of trust : By declaring his turbo internals had been modified by Owens . See ....it is ok to trust people to self-declare truthfully .
I know when he got Owen work done and it was way after he had set his best times. The way you phrase it allows misinterpretation that at the point of setting his best times, it was already Owen-ed. This is false and I hope you did not intend to mislead.

Thankfully he has the logs to prove it and logs never fade or forget. I checked those logs back when I used to think he was a BSer, and they were clean. I declared it at that point, and am stating so again, here and now. Anyone that tracks and keeps their own logs is welcome to check a known stock reference log against it, live, without taking the file away after. This offer is rarely/never made because few have done that kind of time on the stock turbo. I know guys way slower than 2:30 who think their data is worth being secretive about - funny.
Mate, think it was not meant to hit protege but rather to just suggest that now Protege has done his turbo's he is openly telling all that he has done them so that next time he posts a time, it will be in the knowledge that the car has been modded.

As for Protege being a BS'er heck I thought he always was anyway ;) kidding mate.
 
#50
Harold said:
Mate, think it was not meant to hit protege but rather to just suggest that now Protege has done his turbo's he is openly telling all that he has done them so that next time he posts a time, it will be in the knowledge that the car has been modded.

As for Protege being a BS'er heck I thought he always was anyway ;) kidding mate.
hahah you're too nice a person bro.. see the good in all situations. I'm too skeptical I guess, but it's been my experience that in situations like this, it's always safer to state very explicitly what I mean and try to avoid phrasing things such that they can be easily misinterpreted.

For example, I would have structured it - "Our dear Protege who currently holds THE fastest lap time record for stock turbo, has just showed us a fine example of trust : By declaring his turbo internals have recently been modified by Owens after setting his best times on the factory internals. We should be expecting even faster times in the future after this Owen upgrade. See ....it is ok to trust people to self-declare truthfully."
 
#54
We have a New Leader on the board! Congrats to Gerald Tan !

The format for the list is: Position / Laptime / Driver Name [SGevo Nick] / Version / Event

Circuit: Sepang International Circuit

Slicks Class
None

Semi Slicks Class
1. 2.27.42 - Gerald Tan / GSR 5MT / 2011'May MPT SuperLap Round 2
2. 2:27.98 - Lester Wong / GSR 5MT / 2010’Apr MPT SuperLap
3. 2:30.45 – Kelvin Teo [Protégé] / GSR 5MT / 2009’Sep MPT Time Attack
4. 2:31.80 – Koo Dat Way [Rei] / GSR 5MT / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
5. 2:32.08 - Mohd Yusoff [Mod13] / SST / 2010'Dec MPT Superlap
6. 2:34.00 – Stephen Tan [Stephen-San] / GSR 5MT / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
7. 2:38.23 – Jeffrey Tan [Wildarms] / GSR 5MT / 2009’Nov MPT Time Attack
8. 2:39.10 – Maverick Lim [Mave7221] / SST / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
9. 2:40.75 - Samuel Tay [Xist3nz] GSR 5MT / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
10. 2:43.15 – Raymond Lee / SST / 2010'Oct MPT SuperLap



Street Tires Class
1. 2:37.94 – Kuvesh Pather [kuvesh] / SST / 2010’Apr MPT SuperLap
2. 2:40.15 - Alan Lim [Alan9955] / SST / 2011'May MPT SuperLap
3. 2:42.53 – Eugene See [Count Dookoo] / GSR 5MT / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
4. 2:42.70 - Koo Dat Way [Rei] / GSR 5MT / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
5. 2:46.70 - Roger Goh /GSR 5MT / 2011'May MPT SuperLap
6. 2:49.56 – Maverick Lim / GSR SST / 2010’Apr MPT SuperLap
7. 2:52.18 – Raymond Lee / SST / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
8. 2:53.70 – Edwin Foo / SST / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
9. 2:54.71 – Gary Suet / GSR 5MT / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
10. 2:55.34 – Nick Han / GSR / 2010'Oct MPT SuperLap


As for frequently asked questions on topics such as power and other mod factors; I will let the folks who are in the list to provide more information if they are comfortable to.

Suggested format: Laptime / Driver Name [SGevo name] / Version / Event / Turbo type / Damper type / Tires / Data: Yes or No / Data share: Yes or No. More info will certainly be useful for highly modified cars, such as car weight: Real or Estimated / Estimated or dyno measured power level etc…
 

Mave7221

Active Member
#56
Just realised I last updated this board on May 2011 after MPT Round 2 time attack .

Round 3 in Sep'11 was a very wet track . Will include a new Wet track timing just for fun .
And Round 4 was cancelled .

So here we are , after the first time attack in 2012 . RCA's Megalap Rd 1 on 26th Feb . Only a single update in the street tire class . Well Done Jeffrey ! LOL .....

2012 is a sad year to start off as we lost 4 of our fastest EVO X drivers dekitting their EVO X.
Protege , Gumpy , Kuvesh and Alan9955 . We will miss you guys pushing the bar higher .

Well fellow EVO X , records are meant to be broken . Hope more will join us on the battle up north .

And all those bloody Hidden Dragons Crouching Tigers ! Pls come out and show yourself on an official time attack ! LOL . Yes Encik Yusoff . I am talkin about you . Pls get your 2.28 on the board .
Tribute to Kuvesh : Straight Roads are for fast cars . Corners are for fast drivers .
 

Mave7221

Active Member
#57
Update 29 Feb 2012 :

The format for the list is: Position / Laptime / Driver Name [SGevo Nick] / Version / Event
Circuit: Sepang International Circuit

Slicks Class
None

Semi Slicks Class
1. 2.27.42 - Gerald Tan / GSR / 2011'May MPT SuperLap
2. 2:27.98 - Lester Wong / GSR / 2010’Apr MPT SuperLap
3. 2:30.45 – Kelvin Teo [Protégé] / GSR / 2009’Sep MPT Time Attack
4. 2:31.80 – Koo Dat Way [Rei] / GSR / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
5. 2:32.08 - Mohd Yusoff [Mod13] / SST / 2010'Dec MPT Superlap
6. 2:34.00 – Stephen Tan [Stephen-San] / GSR / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
7. 2:38.23 – Jeffrey Tan [Wildarms] / GSR / 2009’Nov MPT Time Attack
8. 2:39.10 – Maverick Lim [Mave7221] / SST / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
9. 2:40.75 - Samuel Tay [Xist3nz] / GSR / 2011'Mar MPT SuperLap
10. 2:43.15 – Raymond Lee / SST / 2010'Oct MPT SuperLap

Street Tires Class
1. 2:37.94 – Kuvesh Pather [kuvesh] / SST / 2010’Apr MPT SuperLap
2. 2:40.15 - Alan Lim [Alan9955] / SST / 2011'May MPT SuperLap
3. 2:42.53 – Eugene See [Count Dookoo] / GSR / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
4. 2:42.70 - Koo Dat Way [Rei] / GSR / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
5. 2:46.70 - Roger Goh [RogerGoh] / GSR / 2011'May MPT SuperLap
6. 2:49.56 – Maverick Lim [Mave7221] / SST / 2010’Apr MPT SuperLap
7. 2:49.66 - Jeffrey Tan [Wildarms] / GSR / 2012'Feb RCA MegaLap
8. 2:52.18 – Raymond Lee / SST / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
9. 2:53.70 – Edwin Foo / SST / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack
10. 2:54.71 – Gary Suet / GSR / 2009’Dec MPT Time Attack

Wet Track
1. 2:48.182 - Maverick Lim [Mave7221] / SST / 2011'Sep MPT SuperLap
2. 2:51.643 - Wu Jun Wei [Gumpy] / SST / 2011'Sep MPT SuperLap
3. 2:56.763 - Kuvesh Pather [Kuvesh] / SST / 2011'Sep MPT SuperLap
4. 3:08.062 - Alan Lim [Alan9955] / SST / 2011'Sep MPT SuperLap
5. 3:08.883 - Nick Pyi [Simon Yam] / GSR / 2011'Sep MPT SuperLap
 
#58
Hi Maverick,

Can you pls remove me from the Wet Track league table. Am frankly embarrassed about my timing. Could not get my semislicks to work on that one day.
 
#59
gumby said:
Hi Maverick,

Can you pls remove me from the Wet Track league table. Am frankly embarrassed about my timing. Could not get my semislicks to work on that one day.
Yo bro ,

Don't need to be embarrassed la . We had a thunderstorm that day . Just to start an indicator time since we are not sure what is a reputable lap time on a wet track .

An official time is an official time . Like Jeff's 2.49 on street is good enough to be in the top 10 so I told him : bro sorry but no choice .......LOL . Just to rib him to get better timing soon .

If it is bad it will be bum off soon , but I've got a feeling your's will stay for quite some years
Code:
 

Similar threads


Top