Fargostreet TOP 1/4 mile times
-
EDIT
Timing system malfunction, see below. :icon_shaking2:
EDIT -
EDIT
Timing system malfunction, see below.
EDIT -
I'm gonna need you to post up your quickest time in the right (spectator) lane for comparison. The timing lights in the left lane weren't working correctly during the time you made these runs.(the timers didnt start until the REAR wheels tripped the staging beams) We had to disallow many of the bike qualifying times due to this. We had many bikes that usually 60 foot in the mid/low 1.4s, have slips that showed mid 1.3s, and ETs that were 1.5 tenths quicker they had ever run.
-
2wheeler;328176 wrote:
I'm gonna need you to post up your quickest time in the right (spectator) lane for comparison. The timing lights in the left lane weren't working correctly during the time you made these runs.(the timers didnt start until the REAR wheels tripped the staging beams) We had to disallow many of the bike qualifying times due to this. We had many bikes that usually 60 foot in the mid/low 1.4s, have slips that showed mid 1.3s, and ETs that were 1.5 tenths quicker they had ever run.WTF.Were the Top End guys aware of the issue? Nobody thought it would be cool to make an announcement that they were having problems? What was the time period they were malfunctioning? All day?
My best run in the spectator lane was a [email protected], which was my fastest trap, but I had a just average 60' of 1.859.
I also had two bad 330' splits.
60' times in the left lane:
1:03pm - 1.631
1:07pm - 1.883
4:02pm - 1.502
4:06pm - 1.584
4:11pm - 1.891
5:15pm - 1.824
5:19pm - 1.826If you throw out the 3? bad ones I had better times last year.
Breaking down the video, it looks like you're right. Pretty hard to tell, but the 60' looks more like 1.8 and the ET 13+.
Shit.
-
No, it was not all day. It was corrected as soon as it was found.
The issue was found when some racers brought it to our attention that their time slips didn't seem correct. The time frame seems to be roughly between 3:30 and 4:15.
What would an announcement have done?
-
Ok, that's good to know, at least I know my 1.631 60' was real. If I hadn't missed the 2>3 shift that run it could've easily been my fastest... D'oh!
An annoucement would've let racers know to avoid that lane, but if it was corrected right after it was reported it wouldn't have made any difference.
Glad it was corrected quickly.
-
I apologize for the timing issues guys. As soon as the issues were brought to my attention we tracked down the problem and corrected it.
More or less the heat we had the week prior caused some shifting with the bracket and mount locations of the start line sensors causing the angles to be off. When we checked the roll out and reaction of the sensors that morning, everything checked out as the height, distance, and settings were all the same. The angle caused the sensor to look half at the sensor across the track and half at the wooden box which caused it to sometimes work just fine but other times to not react until it got the second pulse from the rear tires.
Again, sorry for the issues and thanks again to everyone who came out and raced.
-
Thanks for the explaination and for getting it fixed quickly. I guess I'll just have to come back out when the temps drop to get my 12.99
-
9.90 @ 144.31 82 camaro
-
as of right now i'm 9.66 @ 144 (7-12-14)
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login