AS 70-81 Camaro
#35239 from Andy McDermid · No action required · Minutes (2024-01 Fastrack)
Thank you for your input.
BoP Lab / Drivers / Andy McDermid
| Track | Class | Sessions | Typical gap to class best | Closest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daytona International Speedway (3.56 mi) | AS | 6 | +0.000s (0.00%) | +0.000s (0.00%) |
| Daytona International Speedway | AS | 1 | +0.000s (0.00%) | +0.000s (0.00%) |
Gap is the driver's best lap in a session against the fastest lap in their class in that same session (zero is fastest in class), shown as time lost and as a share of the lap, so conditions cancel out and tracks can be compared. Typical is the median session.
| Event | Date | Session | Class | # | Car | Pos | Best lap | Class best | To class best | Trap | Class trap | To class trap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Runoffs 2015 | 2015-09-26 | AS Race | AS | 24 | MILW | 1/19 | 2:02.922 | 2:02.922you | +0.000s (0.00%) | |||
| Runoffs 2015 | 2015-09-24 | AS/T1 Qualifying 4 | AS | 24 | MILW | 1/19 | 2:03.558 | 2:03.558you | +0.000s (0.00%) | |||
| Runoffs 2015 | 2015-09-23 | AS/T1 Qualifying 3 | AS | 24 | MILW | 2/19 | 2:03.553 | 2:03.374Tom Sloe | +0.179s (0.15%) | |||
| Runoffs 2015 | 2015-09-22 | AS/T1 Qualifying 2 | AS | 24 | MILW | 2/22 | 2:02.534 | 2:01.746Tom Sloe | +0.788s (0.65%) | |||
| Runoffs 2015 | 2015-09-21 | AS/T1 Qualifying 1 | AS | 24 | MILW | 3/19 | 2:02.983 | 2:02.629Tom Sloe | +0.354s (0.29%) | |||
| Runoffs 2015 | 2015-09-20 | Sunday | AS | 24 | MILW | 1/3 | 2:04.045 | 2:04.045you | +0.000s (0.00%) |
| Event | Date | Session | Class | # | Car | Pos | Best lap | Class best | To class best | Trap | Class trap | To class trap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Runoffs 2015 | 2015-09-24 | AS/T1 Qualifying 4 | AS | 24 | MILW | 1/19 | 2:03.558 | 2:03.558you | +0.000s (0.00%) |
#35239 from Andy McDermid · No action required · Minutes (2024-01 Fastrack)
Thank you for your input.
#25437 from Andy McDermid · Taken care of · Minutes (2019-01 Fastrack)
Thank you for your feedback. Please see the response to letter #25256.