Mightymango and TRev, I appreciate your experiment this weekend. I looked at the PAX results, and I noticed that relative to top PAX time (top PAX/your PAX), TRev was at .959 with the Fost and .955 with the Fist. Mightymango was at .936 with the Fost and .945 with the Fist. The data can be looked at and construed multiple ways. When we compare the cars versus the average run, here are the "results": I used Excel to calculate the average run for each day (compared to all of the other drivers) and then the standard deviation. Based on the average and standard deviation, we can calculate a T-score, which is a psychometric measurement of distance from the "middle." Higher scores equal faster times relative to the average. Saturday Fost: Overall avg: 41.489 SD: 1.980 T-scores: Trev: 63.795 Ryan: 58.807 Sunday FIST: Overall avg: 44.688 SD: 2.279 T-scores: Trev: 62.773 Ryan: 60.632 Of course, there are many pitfalls in statistics not the least of which have to do with the assumption of a normal distribution (I didn't have time to look at this statistically) that mean these findings might be spurious. Read with caution and make no true, confident inferences based on the data. The comparison to control approach used by Trev has its merits. Compared to Andy Weigel. The Weigel index (higher is better): FOST: Trev: 1.019 Ryan: .994 FIST: Trev: 1.000 Ryan: .989 The Weigel index supports Trevor's impressions. I am not sure what to make of all these data. They do not give a clear answer as to which is better. It could just all be noise, but it was an entertaining diversion over lunch. Please save comments about all of the pitfalls of using statistics like these. There is a clear disclaimer that this sort of data mining could and probably will result in spurious findings and conclusions. If you have the time, look at the data yourself. There are so many sources of error and noise in the data that I am not sure they can really answer our question here. As always, remember that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.