family=DM+Sans:wght@400;500;600display=swap" rel="stylesheet">
Team #95 · Maxx · Timing-Based Team Analysis

Project
5FIVE3

Cooloola — Round 1
15 March 2026 6-Hour Endurance 0.89 km Circuit Cooloola Coast Kart Club Data: MYLAPS Speedhive
Finish Position
7th
of 8 teams · Maxx
Best Lap
43.122s
— P5 in field
Total Laps
458
18 laps behind leader
Race Time
6:01:02
122 championship pts
Race Results

Overall Classification

Final race classification for SEKQLD Round 1 at Cooloola. 8 teams completed the 6-hour endurance race. Project 5FIVE3 finished 7th with 458 laps.

SEKQLD Round 1 final race classification
Pos#TeamTotal TimeLapsBest LapGap
1#66Force Phantom6:00:52.77147642.820s—
2#64Alpha Racing Team6:01:02.25447443.121s2 laps
3#787ShapeCUT Racing6:01:09.26446942.996s7 laps
4#42GF Motorsports6:01:09.05046643.490s10 laps
5#49BR Motorsport FASTEST LAP6:01:16.55146642.815s10 laps
6#397CASA Racing6:01:18.38446043.628s16 laps
7#95Project 5FIVE36:01:02.17445843.122s18 laps
8#00Team Fang (Come'n'Try)6:01:06.07141444.396s62 laps
Qualifying

Grid Position

Project 5FIVE3 qualified P4, +00.402s off pole. Qualifying determines the starting order for the 6-hour race.

SEKQLD Round 1 qualifying results
Pos#TeamClassLapsBest LapGap
1#66Force PhantomMaxx1342.920s—
2#49BR MotorsportSportsman1143.178s+00.258s
3#64Alpha Racing TeamMaxx1443.191s+00.271s
4#95Project 5FIVE3Maxx1343.322s+00.402s
5#42GF MotorsportsSportsman1343.516s+00.596s
6#787ShapeCUT RacingMaxx1343.521s+00.601s
7#397CASA RacingSportsman1344.065s+01.145s
8#00Team Fang (Come'n'Try)Sportsman1145.002s+02.082s
Pace Analysis

Pace Profile

Comparing each team's fastest single lap against their estimated average lap time. A smaller gap between best and average indicates more consistent pace throughout the 6-hour race.

#49 BR Motorsport
42.815s
46.516s
#66 Force Phantom
42.820s
45.489s
#787 ShapeCUT Racing
42.996s
46.203s
#64 Alpha Racing Team
43.121s
45.701s
#95 Project 5FIVE3
43.122s
47.297s
#42 GF Motorsports
43.490s
46.500s
#397 CASA Racing
43.628s
47.127s
#00 Team Fang
44.396s
52.334s
Best Lap Estimated Average Lap
Insights

Key Takeaways

Timing-based insights for Project 5FIVE3 inferred from public Rd 1 qualifying, race, and points data.

📉
Lost Positions
Qualified P4 but finished P7 — dropped 3 positions during the race. Endurance racing rewards consistency over raw qualifying pace.
⚡
P5 Best Lap
Best lap of 43.122s was 0.307s off the field fastest (42.815s). Ranked 5th for single-lap pace across all teams.
📊
Consistency: P7
Gap between best lap and estimated average: 4.18s. Ranked 7th out of 8 teams for race consistency. Lower gap = fewer disruptions and steadier pace.
🏆
122 Championship Points
Sitting P7 overall in the championship after Round 1. Class: Maxx.
Timing-Based Read

Data-Inferred Report

This page is inferred from public timing only. Without pit-stop, driver, fuel, or incident logs, the notes below describe likely race patterns rather than confirmed team decisions.

High-confidence timing read: Project 5FIVE3 is one of the clearest under-converters in the field. Their qualifying and best-lap pace suggested a much stronger finish than P7, but the average-lap profile points to repeated race-time loss across the six hours.

Qualifying Delta
P4 → P7
A three-position drop was one of the most negative race deltas among the Maxx teams.
Peak Pace Rank
P5
Their 43.122s best lap was almost identical to Alpha's and much quicker than CASA's.
Consistency Rank
P7
A 4.18s best-to-average gap points to far more race disruption than the front half of the field.
⚡
Unrealised Pace
Project 5FIVE3 qualified P4 and had the fifth-fastest best lap, but dropped to P7 by the finish. That combination usually points to a race where underlying speed existed but was not sustained cleanly enough over six hours.
📉
Long-Run Cost
Their best-to-average gap was +4.18s, ranking P7 of 8. Timing alone cannot explain whether that came from traffic, pit sequence, or incidents, but it does show a much less stable long-run profile than the teams ahead.
⚔️
Comparison To CASA
Project was 0.506s quicker than CASA on best lap yet finished 2 laps behind. The data suggests the lost result came after the fastest single laps were already on the board.
🔶
BR Comparison
They were only 0.307s slower than BR Motorsport on best lap, but their average pace slipped almost 0.8s per lap behind BR. That kind of spread points to repeated interruptions, not just a lower performance ceiling.
Field Comparison

Where The Result Got Away

Project 5FIVE3's public timing reads like a team with enough speed to fight much higher, but not enough race retention to cash it in.

🥊
Vs Alpha And ShapeCUT
Project qualified closer to the front than ShapeCUT and near Alpha's outright pace, but both teams finished well ahead. The difference was not qualifying potential; it was how much pace survived the whole event.
📍
Vs CASA Racing
CASA was slower on the stopwatch's best-lap line, but faster on average and ahead at the flag. That is a strong signal that Project 5FIVE3 lost more time in the messy or interrupted parts of the race.
🏎️
Vs Maxx Contenders
Among Maxx teams, Project was close enough on outright pace to stay relevant, but their average-lap profile was the weakest of the Maxx group. That made them vulnerable over the long run even before comparing them to the outright leaders.
🏆
Points Position
They leave Round 1 seventh on 122 points. The data says the season outlook depends less on finding more speed and more on turning existing speed into cleaner six-hour execution.
Inference Limits

Likely Race Pattern

Public timing cannot tell us whether the lost time came from fuel, traffic, kart issue, driver changes, or a combination. It can still suggest the overall shape of the problem.

🔄
More Unstable Segments
A large best-to-average gap usually means the race included more slow laps, recovery laps, or interrupted sequences than the top teams experienced. That is the clearest timing-based interpretation here.
📉
Pace Fell Away Over Distance
Because the one-lap speed was competitive, the major issue likely was not base pace. The numbers instead suggest that the team struggled to keep that pace available often enough over a full six-hour cycle.
🎯
What Unlocks A Rebound
If Project 5FIVE3 can stabilise the slow portions of the race while keeping the same outright speed, they have enough pace on paper to move several places up the order without needing a dramatic performance leap.
Round 1 Navigation

Round 1 Team Selector

Choose any team below to stay inside the Cooloola round context and compare reports side by side.

Round 1 · Cooloola Round 2 · Warwick
#66 Force Phantom #64 Alpha Racing Team #787 ShapeCUT Racing #42 GF Motorsports #49 BR Motorsport #397 CASA Racing #95 Project 5FIVE3 #00 Team Fang
Round 1 Team Hub → Full Field Analysis →