| ChrisDP | 02-05-2007 06:53 PM |
[QUOTE=KC;16939346]Grip is reduced when its wet in a STOCK car that's not setup to handle like Nate's civic on oil or Daddios SM car.
[/QUOTE]
I know you guys are hardcore and all with your DL1, but... Nate developed an "oil" setup for his car? Damn.
[/QUOTE]
I know you guys are hardcore and all with your DL1, but... Nate developed an "oil" setup for his car? Damn.
| ratt_finkel | 02-05-2007 07:38 PM |
[QUOTE=leecea;16938222]Well, that's another interesting question. Is this the fastest way around a rallyx course?
I have no experience at rallyx but I've read plenty of advice not to do WRC style slides when you start rallyx.
I still don't understand this. I've always heard that you want to slow the weight transfer through smooth inputs because fast and jerky weight transfer can upset the car. Doing this partial flick is designed to load the inside suspension a little then use its rebound in conjuction with a quick turn back into the corner to throw the weight quickly onto the outside tire, which I thought was wrong.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes you want to upset the car a little. Especially in a stock class WRX or RS.
I have no experience at rallyx but I've read plenty of advice not to do WRC style slides when you start rallyx.
I still don't understand this. I've always heard that you want to slow the weight transfer through smooth inputs because fast and jerky weight transfer can upset the car. Doing this partial flick is designed to load the inside suspension a little then use its rebound in conjuction with a quick turn back into the corner to throw the weight quickly onto the outside tire, which I thought was wrong.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes you want to upset the car a little. Especially in a stock class WRX or RS.
| Impreza01 | 02-05-2007 09:01 PM |
[QUOTE=chimchimm5;16940745]I'm still appreciating the relevant responses.
My apologies for calling it "grip", I didn't know what else to call it.
[/QUOTE]
Call it whatever surface it is: tarmac, gravel or snow. In racing, the point is to get through in the shortest amount of time. It doesn't matter if you need to slide or "grip drive" (shudder, so many Initial D fanboys here).
Many of the guys who are advocating drifting through some turns, have you guys been watching too much Initial D? :confused: If you watch WRC and think that's the answer, think again. It's been said before, on gravel and snow stages, the reason drivers use drifts is to trace the shortest distance while still maintaining some degree of momentum. However, if you watch carefully, you'll also notice the faster drivers aren't tails out hanging with a massive amount of slip angle. They're just angling the car better to trace their line. If one watches Sebastian Loeb's driving, the car isn't totally sideways like the cars you see in D1 Gran Prix. I believe it was Petter Solberg who said something like "oversteer is better because it leaves you with more options going through a turn".
My apologies for calling it "grip", I didn't know what else to call it.
[/QUOTE]
Call it whatever surface it is: tarmac, gravel or snow. In racing, the point is to get through in the shortest amount of time. It doesn't matter if you need to slide or "grip drive" (shudder, so many Initial D fanboys here).
Many of the guys who are advocating drifting through some turns, have you guys been watching too much Initial D? :confused: If you watch WRC and think that's the answer, think again. It's been said before, on gravel and snow stages, the reason drivers use drifts is to trace the shortest distance while still maintaining some degree of momentum. However, if you watch carefully, you'll also notice the faster drivers aren't tails out hanging with a massive amount of slip angle. They're just angling the car better to trace their line. If one watches Sebastian Loeb's driving, the car isn't totally sideways like the cars you see in D1 Gran Prix. I believe it was Petter Solberg who said something like "oversteer is better because it leaves you with more options going through a turn".
| leecea | 02-05-2007 10:15 PM |
[QUOTE=ratt_finkel;16942772]Sometimes you want to upset the car a little. Especially in a stock class WRX or RS.[/QUOTE]
Then wouldn't I be seeing people drive this way at autox? Or maybe I'd see the T2 drivers do it? I'm confused :confused:
Then wouldn't I be seeing people drive this way at autox? Or maybe I'd see the T2 drivers do it? I'm confused :confused:
| ratt_finkel | 02-05-2007 10:32 PM |
[QUOTE=leecea;16944548]Then wouldn't I be seeing people drive this way at autox? Or maybe I'd see the T2 drivers do it? I'm confused :confused:[/QUOTE]
It certainly pertains to autocross. I drive that way.:)
It certainly pertains to autocross. I drive that way.:)
| randy zimmer | 02-05-2007 10:40 PM |
"Or maybe I'd see the T2 drivers do it?"
Ummmm,
On the TV show of the run-offs, those cars were definately NOT planted.
Ummmm,
On the TV show of the run-offs, those cars were definately NOT planted.
| rubinm | 02-05-2007 11:53 PM |
[QUOTE=Recce80;16939433]Rubinm,Posting a video in the snow,is not a "grip" situation ,and your tecnique is rather......well...keep practicing.
Johnny[/QUOTE]
Well Johnny, considering snow IS a "grip situation", just with lower grip than tarmac, the video is valid.
In addition to which, that flick was appropriate for that turn, considering the following turns, the later of the two being decreasing radius, unfortunately where the video cuts off.
IN FACT, thats why i maintained the fastest times at the track that day.
so i guess you could say my tecnique is rather... well... faster than the rest.
come join us on the slippery stuff Johnny- i'd love to show you a thing or two about being fast on snow.
one more thing- the vid you posted demonstrates only a minor flick with some weight transfer on tarmac- in which it looks like it would have been faster to leave out that minor little flick, it prob just cost you time in the end.
Perhaps the old man can show you how its done:
[url]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5980015426837232422&q=flaine[/url]
watch and learn.
Johnny[/QUOTE]
Well Johnny, considering snow IS a "grip situation", just with lower grip than tarmac, the video is valid.
In addition to which, that flick was appropriate for that turn, considering the following turns, the later of the two being decreasing radius, unfortunately where the video cuts off.
IN FACT, thats why i maintained the fastest times at the track that day.
so i guess you could say my tecnique is rather... well... faster than the rest.
come join us on the slippery stuff Johnny- i'd love to show you a thing or two about being fast on snow.
one more thing- the vid you posted demonstrates only a minor flick with some weight transfer on tarmac- in which it looks like it would have been faster to leave out that minor little flick, it prob just cost you time in the end.
Perhaps the old man can show you how its done:
[url]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5980015426837232422&q=flaine[/url]
watch and learn.
| chimchimm5 | 02-06-2007 01:10 AM |
[quote=rubinm;16945648]
one more thing- the vid you posted demonstrates only a minor flick with some weight transfer on tarmac- in which it looks like it would have been faster to leave out that minor little flick, it prob just cost you time in the end.
to that extent, the [B]original topic starter was asking about a full on flick- with the rear end coming completely out[/B].. which i demonstrated in my video.
[/quote]
NO I was NOT and I clearly said other wise in the OP and repeatedly clarified this in followup posts. This is incredibly frustrating because I know you're not the only one who didn't bother to read the OP completely, and decided to comment on what the thread was assumed to be about.
Did you not see this post?
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16937901&postcount=35[/url]
one more thing- the vid you posted demonstrates only a minor flick with some weight transfer on tarmac- in which it looks like it would have been faster to leave out that minor little flick, it prob just cost you time in the end.
to that extent, the [B]original topic starter was asking about a full on flick- with the rear end coming completely out[/B].. which i demonstrated in my video.
[/quote]
NO I was NOT and I clearly said other wise in the OP and repeatedly clarified this in followup posts. This is incredibly frustrating because I know you're not the only one who didn't bother to read the OP completely, and decided to comment on what the thread was assumed to be about.
Did you not see this post?
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16937901&postcount=35[/url]
| rubinm | 02-06-2007 03:55 AM |
chim chim- dont worry about it.. i was making a point to a previous poster.. i understand your question, and it has been throughly discussed. no sense getting pissed about a post not regarding your situation, rather a response to a comment that was completely off base..
| solo-x | 02-06-2007 10:25 AM |
[QUOTE=ChrisDP;16942214]I know you guys are hardcore and all with your DL1, but... Nate developed an "oil" setup for his car? Damn.[/QUOTE]
[OT]Actually, the "oil" setup was developed by the owner of the car I was driving last year. I drove the STS car after purging 4qts of fresh 50wt synthetic on the entire course while driving the Reynard. I was simply amazed that street tires were able to knock down .8-.9g's cornering on a surface (that isn't very grippy in the dry) that had water, speedy dry, and oil film on it. It was pretty funny to see on the data log where I'd cross over the main oil line where the oil film/speedy dry was the thickest. The lateral g trace would drop to .1-.2 and then gradually ramp back up. I wish I'd had steering and brake force plots for that day. Driving quickly in those conditions required some seriously slow hands.....[/OT]
[OT]Actually, the "oil" setup was developed by the owner of the car I was driving last year. I drove the STS car after purging 4qts of fresh 50wt synthetic on the entire course while driving the Reynard. I was simply amazed that street tires were able to knock down .8-.9g's cornering on a surface (that isn't very grippy in the dry) that had water, speedy dry, and oil film on it. It was pretty funny to see on the data log where I'd cross over the main oil line where the oil film/speedy dry was the thickest. The lateral g trace would drop to .1-.2 and then gradually ramp back up. I wish I'd had steering and brake force plots for that day. Driving quickly in those conditions required some seriously slow hands.....[/OT]
| KC | 02-06-2007 10:39 AM |
[QUOTE=solo-x;16948794][OT]Actually, the "oil" setup was developed by the owner of the car I was driving last year. I drove the STS car after purging 4qts of fresh 50wt synthetic on the entire course. I was simply amazed that street tires were able to knock down .8-.9g's cornering on a surface (that isn't very grippy in the dry) that had water, speedy dry, and oil film on it. It was pretty funny to see on the data log where I'd cross over the main oil line where the oil film/speedy dry was the thickest. The lateral g trace would drop to .1-.2 and then gradually ramp back up. I wish I'd had steering and brake force plots for that day. Driving quickly in those conditions required some seriously slow hands.....[/OT][/QUOTE]
And the V710s loved that condition!! :lol:
Have we started the rain pool yet? How many events THIS YEAR will it rain?
--kC
And the V710s loved that condition!! :lol:
Have we started the rain pool yet? How many events THIS YEAR will it rain?
--kC
| solo-x | 02-06-2007 11:11 AM |
They could all be rainy for all I care. It's the sideways rain with a 30mph wind and 40* air temps that I'm tired of. I do believe there was sleet at that NHIS event too. I hate that carp.
| rubinm | 02-06-2007 12:36 PM |
i dont like carp either. they are garbage fish. ehehe
| Patrick Olsen | 02-06-2007 01:00 PM |
[QUOTE=randy zimmer;16944855]"Or maybe I'd see the T2 drivers do it?"
Ummmm,
On the TV show of the run-offs, those cars were definately NOT planted.[/QUOTE]
First, allow me to introduce you to the [URL="http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/images/buttons/quote.gif"][U]quote button[/U][/URL].
Second, are you saying that the T2 drivers are using chimchimm's wicked awesome, parking-lot-proven "grip flick"? I must have missed that part of the coverage. I've been to SCCA racing events with various IT classes, A Sedan, etc, with lots of different cars running stock or nearly stock soft suspensions. I have yet to see anyone using the wicked awesome, parking-lot-proven "grip flick". Who knows, maybe when chimchimm is done with his reading and parking lot testing and strange questions he'll come out to an event and show us all what we've been missing in our "grip" driving.
Pat
Ummmm,
On the TV show of the run-offs, those cars were definately NOT planted.[/QUOTE]
First, allow me to introduce you to the [URL="http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/images/buttons/quote.gif"][U]quote button[/U][/URL].
Second, are you saying that the T2 drivers are using chimchimm's wicked awesome, parking-lot-proven "grip flick"? I must have missed that part of the coverage. I've been to SCCA racing events with various IT classes, A Sedan, etc, with lots of different cars running stock or nearly stock soft suspensions. I have yet to see anyone using the wicked awesome, parking-lot-proven "grip flick". Who knows, maybe when chimchimm is done with his reading and parking lot testing and strange questions he'll come out to an event and show us all what we've been missing in our "grip" driving.
Pat
| chimchimm5 | 02-06-2007 01:17 PM |
[quote=Patrick Olsen;16950829]Second, are you saying that the T2 drivers are using chimchimm's wicked awesome, parking-lot-proven "grip flick"? I must have missed that part of the coverage. I've been to SCCA racing events with various IT classes, A Sedan, etc, with lots of different cars running stock or nearly stock soft suspensions. I have yet to see anyone using the wicked awesome, parking-lot-proven "grip flick". Who knows, maybe when chimchimm is done with his reading and parking lot testing and strange questions he'll come out to an event and show us all what we've been missing in our "grip" driving.
Pat[/quote]
WTF? Now you're just putting words in my mouth.
I'm fine with the answer, "no, your technique is not better." It's the misinterpretations that were annoying.
Damn. I used to look up to you, Pat.
Pat[/quote]
WTF? Now you're just putting words in my mouth.
I'm fine with the answer, "no, your technique is not better." It's the misinterpretations that were annoying.
Damn. I used to look up to you, Pat.
| Ramsdale | 02-06-2007 01:22 PM |
Well, I understand what chim was trying to ask.
I found myself doing the same thing, actually. I took the STi out for it's first 'autocross' during an EVO class. On the third run with the instructor, he pointed out that I was flicking the wheel, just slightly, before a 180.
I didn't really notice I was doing it, and on the next run my hands moved before the brain could stop them. I did pick up on the sense that I was doing it to 'plant' the car into the turn. Reflecting on it between runs, I think I was sensing (or expecting) understeer, and was trying to get the back to transition faster. Not enough of a flick to break grip, but enough to shift some weight to make the car feel like it was firmed up.
When asked about it, the instructor basically said, "Sure, some people do that to help make the car feel settled, or to try and bring the tail around. Try the turn without it, though, to see what's better. While learning the car, try different things, but use what gives you the better exit speed." (The turn was before a relatively straight shot to the finish.)
In the end, I was busy learning a lot of things, so I can't really say which method had a better posted time. Doing a slight flick before the 180 felt better, and if that made me able to learn the car, it 'worked for me'. Since then, however, I've been trying to avoid doing it, as I don't want to learn a potentially bad habit.
The other lessons learned from EVO were "transition the weight" and "wait for it, wait, now get on the gas." Those seemed to conflict with the idea of pre-loading one side of the car. Plus, I'm not at the level where I want to try dealing with understeer by inducing oversteer. I need to figure out more basics first.
KR
(CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)
I found myself doing the same thing, actually. I took the STi out for it's first 'autocross' during an EVO class. On the third run with the instructor, he pointed out that I was flicking the wheel, just slightly, before a 180.
I didn't really notice I was doing it, and on the next run my hands moved before the brain could stop them. I did pick up on the sense that I was doing it to 'plant' the car into the turn. Reflecting on it between runs, I think I was sensing (or expecting) understeer, and was trying to get the back to transition faster. Not enough of a flick to break grip, but enough to shift some weight to make the car feel like it was firmed up.
When asked about it, the instructor basically said, "Sure, some people do that to help make the car feel settled, or to try and bring the tail around. Try the turn without it, though, to see what's better. While learning the car, try different things, but use what gives you the better exit speed." (The turn was before a relatively straight shot to the finish.)
In the end, I was busy learning a lot of things, so I can't really say which method had a better posted time. Doing a slight flick before the 180 felt better, and if that made me able to learn the car, it 'worked for me'. Since then, however, I've been trying to avoid doing it, as I don't want to learn a potentially bad habit.
The other lessons learned from EVO were "transition the weight" and "wait for it, wait, now get on the gas." Those seemed to conflict with the idea of pre-loading one side of the car. Plus, I'm not at the level where I want to try dealing with understeer by inducing oversteer. I need to figure out more basics first.
KR
(CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)
| KC | 02-06-2007 01:39 PM |
[QUOTE=Ramsdale;16951174]
(CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)[/QUOTE]:banana: :banana: :banana:
(CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)[/QUOTE]:banana: :banana: :banana:
| chimchimm5 | 02-06-2007 01:44 PM |
[quote=Ramsdale;16951174]Well, I understand what chim was trying to ask.
I found myself doing the same thing, actually. I took the STi out for it's first 'autocross' during an EVO class. On the third run with the instructor, he pointed out that I was flicking the wheel, just slightly, before a 180.
I didn't really notice I was doing it, and on the next run my hands moved before the brain could stop them. [B]I did pick up on the sense that I was doing it to 'plant' the car into the turn[/B]. Reflecting on it between runs, I think I was sensing (or expecting) understeer, and [B]was trying to get the back to transition faster[/B]. [B]Not enough of a flick to break grip, but enough to shift some weight to make the car feel like it was firmed up[/B].
When asked about it, the instructor basically said, "Sure, some people do that to help make the car feel settled, or to try and bring the tail around. Try the turn without it, though, to see what's better. While learning the car, try different things, but use what gives you the better exit speed." (The turn was before a relatively straight shot to the finish.)
In the end, I was busy learning a lot of things, so I can't really say which method had a better posted time. Doing a slight flick before the 180 felt better, and if that made me able to learn the car, it 'worked for me'. Since then, however, I've been trying to avoid doing it, as I don't want to learn a potentially bad habit.
The other lessons learned from EVO were "transition the weight" and "wait for it, wait, now get on the gas." Those seemed to conflict with the idea of pre-loading one side of the car. Plus, I'm not at the level where I want to try dealing with understeer by inducing oversteer. I need to figure out more basics first.
KR
(CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)[/quote]
That does indeed sound like what I'm talking about (bold). And it sounds like not only was your instructor familiar with it, he knew multiple people who did it. However, his comment seemed to not be completely against it. Was he just being neutral so you could discover the difference, or do you think he really was neutral about it?
[quote](CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)[/quote]
I can accept that.
I found myself doing the same thing, actually. I took the STi out for it's first 'autocross' during an EVO class. On the third run with the instructor, he pointed out that I was flicking the wheel, just slightly, before a 180.
I didn't really notice I was doing it, and on the next run my hands moved before the brain could stop them. [B]I did pick up on the sense that I was doing it to 'plant' the car into the turn[/B]. Reflecting on it between runs, I think I was sensing (or expecting) understeer, and [B]was trying to get the back to transition faster[/B]. [B]Not enough of a flick to break grip, but enough to shift some weight to make the car feel like it was firmed up[/B].
When asked about it, the instructor basically said, "Sure, some people do that to help make the car feel settled, or to try and bring the tail around. Try the turn without it, though, to see what's better. While learning the car, try different things, but use what gives you the better exit speed." (The turn was before a relatively straight shot to the finish.)
In the end, I was busy learning a lot of things, so I can't really say which method had a better posted time. Doing a slight flick before the 180 felt better, and if that made me able to learn the car, it 'worked for me'. Since then, however, I've been trying to avoid doing it, as I don't want to learn a potentially bad habit.
The other lessons learned from EVO were "transition the weight" and "wait for it, wait, now get on the gas." Those seemed to conflict with the idea of pre-loading one side of the car. Plus, I'm not at the level where I want to try dealing with understeer by inducing oversteer. I need to figure out more basics first.
KR
(CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)[/quote]
That does indeed sound like what I'm talking about (bold). And it sounds like not only was your instructor familiar with it, he knew multiple people who did it. However, his comment seemed to not be completely against it. Was he just being neutral so you could discover the difference, or do you think he really was neutral about it?
[quote](CN: Does it instinctively, feels better, but logically thinks it's a bad habit.)[/quote]
I can accept that.
| Ralliart4 | 02-06-2007 03:33 PM |
It seems like you guys are going round and round on this
| Impreza01 | 02-06-2007 04:25 PM |
[QUOTE=Ralliart4;16953013]It seems like you guys are going round and round on this[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I don't get it. Chris Lock pretty much lays it out when he wrote it here:
[QUOTE=goto_racing;16940129]A long sweeper is good example of where it wouldn't do you any good. Realize that the extra load you are putting on the outside tires is coming from the momentum you put in the sprung mass with your flick. Your tires are not capable of producing this load in steady state, therefore your suspension will quickly rebound, eliminating that extra rotation you got at turn in. Unless you kept "upsetting" the car for the entire sweeper, your rotation (and what is making you "feel" it is faster) is gone in fractions of a second. If it isn't, then you are counter-steering at corner entry because you overdid it, and trust me, that is bleeding speed.
The fastest way around a corner has your radius(and rotation) as a function of your velocity. Meaning that as you near apex and slow, you rotate more, and at turn-in and track-out, your radius opens up. If you are rotating quickly at turn in, you are non-optimal, just like if you had to pinch off your turn or wiggle your butt at the end.
There is a way to get to mid corner in the same shape without doing the flick, trust me. Sounds kindof like Dumbo's feather right now. As you practice you probably will find that it isn't really hurting you so much as it is unnecesary.
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
To re-iterate what he says.
Yeah, I don't get it. Chris Lock pretty much lays it out when he wrote it here:
[QUOTE=goto_racing;16940129]A long sweeper is good example of where it wouldn't do you any good. Realize that the extra load you are putting on the outside tires is coming from the momentum you put in the sprung mass with your flick. Your tires are not capable of producing this load in steady state, therefore your suspension will quickly rebound, eliminating that extra rotation you got at turn in. Unless you kept "upsetting" the car for the entire sweeper, your rotation (and what is making you "feel" it is faster) is gone in fractions of a second. If it isn't, then you are counter-steering at corner entry because you overdid it, and trust me, that is bleeding speed.
The fastest way around a corner has your radius(and rotation) as a function of your velocity. Meaning that as you near apex and slow, you rotate more, and at turn-in and track-out, your radius opens up. If you are rotating quickly at turn in, you are non-optimal, just like if you had to pinch off your turn or wiggle your butt at the end.
There is a way to get to mid corner in the same shape without doing the flick, trust me. Sounds kindof like Dumbo's feather right now. As you practice you probably will find that it isn't really hurting you so much as it is unnecesary.
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
To re-iterate what he says.
| chimchimm5 | 02-06-2007 04:55 PM |
Yes, Chris Lock's is one of the responses I really appreciated.
[quote=goto_racing;16940129]A long sweeper is good example of where it wouldn't do you any good. Realize that the extra load you are putting on the outside tires is coming from the momentum you put in the sprung mass with your flick. [B]Your tires are not capable of producing this load in steady state, therefore your suspension will quickly rebound[/B], eliminating that extra rotation you got at turn in. Unless you kept "upsetting" the car for the entire sweeper, your rotation (and what is making you "feel" it is faster) is gone in fractions of a second. If it isn't, then you are counter-steering at corner entry because you overdid it, and trust me, that is bleeding speed.
[/quote]
However, I was not talking about that (bold, above) hard of a flick. The flick would require anticipation of the amount of load that will be achieved midcorner. If the flick produces more load than is held by the velocity/accel midcorner, than yes, I understand it will rebound; and that's not what I'm doing.
[quote]
The fastest way around a corner has your radius(and rotation) as a function of your velocity. Meaning that as you near apex and slow, you rotate more, and at turn-in and track-out, your radius opens up. If you are rotating quickly at turn in, you are non-optimal, just like if you had to pinch off your turn or wiggle your butt at the end.
[B] There is a way to get to mid corner in the same shape without doing the flick, trust me.[/B] Sounds kindof like Dumbo's feather right now. As you practice you probably will find that it isn't really hurting you so much as it is unnecesary.
Chris Lock[/quote]
It probably is a dumbo feather to me, which is why I posted in the first place. So, this rookie only knows braking and transition smoothly... what is the correct way?
[quote=goto_racing;16940129]A long sweeper is good example of where it wouldn't do you any good. Realize that the extra load you are putting on the outside tires is coming from the momentum you put in the sprung mass with your flick. [B]Your tires are not capable of producing this load in steady state, therefore your suspension will quickly rebound[/B], eliminating that extra rotation you got at turn in. Unless you kept "upsetting" the car for the entire sweeper, your rotation (and what is making you "feel" it is faster) is gone in fractions of a second. If it isn't, then you are counter-steering at corner entry because you overdid it, and trust me, that is bleeding speed.
[/quote]
However, I was not talking about that (bold, above) hard of a flick. The flick would require anticipation of the amount of load that will be achieved midcorner. If the flick produces more load than is held by the velocity/accel midcorner, than yes, I understand it will rebound; and that's not what I'm doing.
[quote]
The fastest way around a corner has your radius(and rotation) as a function of your velocity. Meaning that as you near apex and slow, you rotate more, and at turn-in and track-out, your radius opens up. If you are rotating quickly at turn in, you are non-optimal, just like if you had to pinch off your turn or wiggle your butt at the end.
[B] There is a way to get to mid corner in the same shape without doing the flick, trust me.[/B] Sounds kindof like Dumbo's feather right now. As you practice you probably will find that it isn't really hurting you so much as it is unnecesary.
Chris Lock[/quote]
It probably is a dumbo feather to me, which is why I posted in the first place. So, this rookie only knows braking and transition smoothly... what is the correct way?
| Impreza01 | 02-06-2007 05:49 PM |
[QUOTE=chimchimm5;16954329]However, I was not talking about that (bold, above) hard of a flick. The flick would require anticipation of the amount of load that will be achieved midcorner. If the flick produces more load than is held by the velocity/accel midcorner, than yes, I understand it will rebound; and that's not what I'm doing.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter though, your suspension will still rebound and then compress again as you go from the turn-in to apex of the corner.
It doesn't matter though, your suspension will still rebound and then compress again as you go from the turn-in to apex of the corner.
| Ramsdale | 02-06-2007 06:14 PM |
[QUOTE=chimchimm5;16951491]...it sounds like not only was your instructor familiar with it, he knew multiple people who did it. However, his comment seemed to not be completely against it. Was he just being neutral so you could discover the difference, or do you think he really was neutral about it?
[/QUOTE]
He wasn't completely against it, but it was a learning environment. Other than what I mentioned, he did say that some people do it on tight corners to bring the rear around. (Which doesn't mean he agreed with it either...)
My sense was that he was more interested in having me try the corner with it, and without it, to see if I felt a difference. He did not say to try it on anything but the tight 180, and I think he actually mentioned not to do it on sweepers.
My other sense is that he was saying, "If it helps you learn to feel the car, try it. It may not be the fastest way, and it may not be 'proper', but if doing it lets you feel more comfortable so you can free up enough brain cells to learn what you're doing, it's beneficial."
The tone he had, though, made me think that it was something he would try and break me out of doing in the next class. ;)
KR
[/QUOTE]
He wasn't completely against it, but it was a learning environment. Other than what I mentioned, he did say that some people do it on tight corners to bring the rear around. (Which doesn't mean he agreed with it either...)
My sense was that he was more interested in having me try the corner with it, and without it, to see if I felt a difference. He did not say to try it on anything but the tight 180, and I think he actually mentioned not to do it on sweepers.
My other sense is that he was saying, "If it helps you learn to feel the car, try it. It may not be the fastest way, and it may not be 'proper', but if doing it lets you feel more comfortable so you can free up enough brain cells to learn what you're doing, it's beneficial."
The tone he had, though, made me think that it was something he would try and break me out of doing in the next class. ;)
KR
| KC | 02-06-2007 09:37 PM |
[QUOTE=chimchimm5;16954329]However, I was not talking about that (bold, above) hard of a flick. The flick would require anticipation of the amount of load that will be achieved midcorner. If the flick produces more load than is held by the velocity/accel midcorner, than yes, I understand it will rebound; and that's not what I'm doing.[/QUOTE]OK, I think most of us were hung up on the term 'scandinavian flick' you used in the thread title, and mentioned in the OP, and continued to use the word flick throughout your posts. What you're describing is not flicking. [Inigo Montoya]You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.[/Inigo Montoya]
You're not flicking the car in the traditional sense, all you're doing is preloading the inboard suspension minimally so the weight transfers to the other side quickly, and usually to the rear once you let go of the brakes.
I can tell you this, again, it's the slow way to do things. You start slowing down earlier than you should be, and you're off the line. The car also becomes unpredictable because you'd have to do everything exactly at the same time (turn left-right-brake-adjust midcorner-gas) or else you're either going to be off line or slow. It should be: Brake-turn-gas. You take any guess work out of it.
You want to get fast? I mean, wickedly fast on a tight turn like a 180? Set up to the outside of the tun, brake, turn-in and run over the damn base of the cone with your rear tire.
If you're more than an inch off that cone, you are throwing away time. I don't mean 10ths of a second here, I'm tallking one-onethousand, two-onethousand seconds. If you don't get more than 50% of your turning done before you run over the base of that pivot cone, and you're not running OVER THE BASE of that cone, you're throwing time away.
When you flick the car, you can never, and I mean never unless you're the next coming of some superstar, BE ON that cone. You'll always be, in one shape or another, away from that cone.
I **** you not. Work on that one element, just that one exercise, and you'll see your times drop exponentially.
And one other exercise... looking ahead. You come up to a 180, where are your eyes? On that piviot cone? Bad monkey! As you approach the braking zone, your head should be turned, looking out your side window at the gate(s) after the pivot cone. Wherever your car is now is because of how you went through the last set of gates, that you cannot change... and that will dictate how you take this 180. It's pretty much already too late to save it and get the best, ideal, perfect turn. Your eyes should already be looking beyond that cone, which, in this case, may sometimes mean over your shoulder.
The fast people are fast because they, say it with me... "look ahead." The pivot cone no longer matters because your entrance to it was defined by what you did 20 feet, 30 feet, 50 feet BEHIND you.
Let those two concepts sink in, work on them, and you'll see, this really isn't stuff that can be learned on weeknights in your 'closed' parking lot.
--kC
You're not flicking the car in the traditional sense, all you're doing is preloading the inboard suspension minimally so the weight transfers to the other side quickly, and usually to the rear once you let go of the brakes.
I can tell you this, again, it's the slow way to do things. You start slowing down earlier than you should be, and you're off the line. The car also becomes unpredictable because you'd have to do everything exactly at the same time (turn left-right-brake-adjust midcorner-gas) or else you're either going to be off line or slow. It should be: Brake-turn-gas. You take any guess work out of it.
You want to get fast? I mean, wickedly fast on a tight turn like a 180? Set up to the outside of the tun, brake, turn-in and run over the damn base of the cone with your rear tire.
If you're more than an inch off that cone, you are throwing away time. I don't mean 10ths of a second here, I'm tallking one-onethousand, two-onethousand seconds. If you don't get more than 50% of your turning done before you run over the base of that pivot cone, and you're not running OVER THE BASE of that cone, you're throwing time away.
When you flick the car, you can never, and I mean never unless you're the next coming of some superstar, BE ON that cone. You'll always be, in one shape or another, away from that cone.
I **** you not. Work on that one element, just that one exercise, and you'll see your times drop exponentially.
And one other exercise... looking ahead. You come up to a 180, where are your eyes? On that piviot cone? Bad monkey! As you approach the braking zone, your head should be turned, looking out your side window at the gate(s) after the pivot cone. Wherever your car is now is because of how you went through the last set of gates, that you cannot change... and that will dictate how you take this 180. It's pretty much already too late to save it and get the best, ideal, perfect turn. Your eyes should already be looking beyond that cone, which, in this case, may sometimes mean over your shoulder.
The fast people are fast because they, say it with me... "look ahead." The pivot cone no longer matters because your entrance to it was defined by what you did 20 feet, 30 feet, 50 feet BEHIND you.
Let those two concepts sink in, work on them, and you'll see, this really isn't stuff that can be learned on weeknights in your 'closed' parking lot.
--kC
| chimchimm5 | 02-07-2007 01:08 AM |
[quote=KC;16957991]OK, I think most of us were hung up on the term 'scandinavian flick' you used in the thread title, and mentioned in the OP, and continued to use the word flick throughout your posts. [I]What you're describing is not flicking[/I]. [Inigo Montoya]You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.[/Inigo Montoya]
You're not flicking the car in the traditional sense, all [I]you're doing is preloading the inboard suspension minimally so the weight transfers to the other side quickly[/I], and usually to the rear once you let go of the brakes.
I can tell you this, again, [I]it's the slow way to do things[/I]. You start slowing down earlier than you should be, and you're off the line. The car also becomes unpredictable because you'd have to do everything exactly at the same time (turn left-right-brake-adjust midcorner-gas) or else you're either going to be off line or slow. It should be: Brake-turn-gas. You take any guess work out of it.
You want to get fast? I mean, wickedly fast on a tight turn like a 180? Set up to the outside of the tun, brake, turn-in and run over the damn base of the cone with your rear tire.
If you're more than an inch off that cone, you are throwing away time. I don't mean 10ths of a second here, I'm tallking one-onethousand, two-onethousand seconds. If you don't get more than 50% of your turning done before you run over the base of that pivot cone, and you're not running OVER THE BASE of that cone, you're throwing time away.
When you flick the car, you can never, and I mean never unless you're the next coming of some superstar, BE ON that cone. You'll always be, in one shape or another, away from that cone.
I **** you not. Work on that one element, just that one exercise, and you'll see your times drop exponentially.
And one other exercise... [I]looking ahead.[/I] You come up to a 180, where are your eyes? On that piviot cone? Bad monkey! As you approach the braking zone, your head should be turned, looking out your side window at the gate(s) after the pivot cone. Wherever your car is now is because of how you went through the last set of gates, that you cannot change... and that will dictate how you take this 180. It's pretty much already too late to save it and get the best, ideal, perfect turn. Your eyes should already be looking beyond that cone, which, in this case, may sometimes mean over your shoulder.
The fast people are fast because they, say it with me... "look ahead." The pivot cone no longer matters because your entrance to it was defined by what you did 20 feet, 30 feet, 50 feet BEHIND you.
Let those two concepts sink in, work on them, and you'll see, this really isn't stuff that can be learned on weeknights in your 'closed' parking lot.
--kC[/quote]
Thank you very much. You summed up completely satisfying response to my OP. Much appreciated.
You're not flicking the car in the traditional sense, all [I]you're doing is preloading the inboard suspension minimally so the weight transfers to the other side quickly[/I], and usually to the rear once you let go of the brakes.
I can tell you this, again, [I]it's the slow way to do things[/I]. You start slowing down earlier than you should be, and you're off the line. The car also becomes unpredictable because you'd have to do everything exactly at the same time (turn left-right-brake-adjust midcorner-gas) or else you're either going to be off line or slow. It should be: Brake-turn-gas. You take any guess work out of it.
You want to get fast? I mean, wickedly fast on a tight turn like a 180? Set up to the outside of the tun, brake, turn-in and run over the damn base of the cone with your rear tire.
If you're more than an inch off that cone, you are throwing away time. I don't mean 10ths of a second here, I'm tallking one-onethousand, two-onethousand seconds. If you don't get more than 50% of your turning done before you run over the base of that pivot cone, and you're not running OVER THE BASE of that cone, you're throwing time away.
When you flick the car, you can never, and I mean never unless you're the next coming of some superstar, BE ON that cone. You'll always be, in one shape or another, away from that cone.
I **** you not. Work on that one element, just that one exercise, and you'll see your times drop exponentially.
And one other exercise... [I]looking ahead.[/I] You come up to a 180, where are your eyes? On that piviot cone? Bad monkey! As you approach the braking zone, your head should be turned, looking out your side window at the gate(s) after the pivot cone. Wherever your car is now is because of how you went through the last set of gates, that you cannot change... and that will dictate how you take this 180. It's pretty much already too late to save it and get the best, ideal, perfect turn. Your eyes should already be looking beyond that cone, which, in this case, may sometimes mean over your shoulder.
The fast people are fast because they, say it with me... "look ahead." The pivot cone no longer matters because your entrance to it was defined by what you did 20 feet, 30 feet, 50 feet BEHIND you.
Let those two concepts sink in, work on them, and you'll see, this really isn't stuff that can be learned on weeknights in your 'closed' parking lot.
--kC[/quote]
Thank you very much. You summed up completely satisfying response to my OP. Much appreciated.
| Ralliart4 | 02-07-2007 10:25 AM |
[quote=KC;16957991]OK, I think most of us were hung up on the term 'scandinavian flick' you used in the thread title, and mentioned in the OP, and continued to use the word flick throughout your posts. What you're describing is not flicking. [Inigo Montoya]You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.[/Inigo Montoya]
You're not flicking the car in the traditional sense, all you're doing is preloading the inboard suspension minimally so the weight transfers to the other side quickly, and usually to the rear once you let go of the brakes.
I can tell you this, again, it's the slow way to do things. You start slowing down earlier than you should be, and you're off the line. The car also becomes unpredictable because you'd have to do everything exactly at the same time (turn left-right-brake-adjust midcorner-gas) or else you're either going to be off line or slow. It should be: Brake-turn-gas. You take any guess work out of it.
You want to get fast? I mean, wickedly fast on a tight turn like a 180? Set up to the outside of the tun, brake, turn-in and run over the damn base of the cone with your rear tire.
If you're more than an inch off that cone, you are throwing away time. I don't mean 10ths of a second here, I'm tallking one-onethousand, two-onethousand seconds. If you don't get more than 50% of your turning done before you run over the base of that pivot cone, and you're not running OVER THE BASE of that cone, you're throwing time away.
When you flick the car, you can never, and I mean never unless you're the next coming of some superstar, BE ON that cone. You'll always be, in one shape or another, away from that cone.
I **** you not. Work on that one element, just that one exercise, and you'll see your times drop exponentially.
And one other exercise... looking ahead. You come up to a 180, where are your eyes? On that piviot cone? Bad monkey! As you approach the braking zone, your head should be turned, looking out your side window at the gate(s) after the pivot cone. Wherever your car is now is because of how you went through the last set of gates, that you cannot change... and that will dictate how you take this 180. It's pretty much already too late to save it and get the best, ideal, perfect turn. Your eyes should already be looking beyond that cone, which, in this case, may sometimes mean over your shoulder.
The fast people are fast because they, say it with me... "look ahead." The pivot cone no longer matters because your entrance to it was defined by what you did 20 feet, 30 feet, 50 feet BEHIND you.
Let those two concepts sink in, work on them, and you'll see, this really isn't stuff that can be learned on weeknights in your 'closed' parking lot.
--kC[/quote]
Now thats a good piece of advice
You're not flicking the car in the traditional sense, all you're doing is preloading the inboard suspension minimally so the weight transfers to the other side quickly, and usually to the rear once you let go of the brakes.
I can tell you this, again, it's the slow way to do things. You start slowing down earlier than you should be, and you're off the line. The car also becomes unpredictable because you'd have to do everything exactly at the same time (turn left-right-brake-adjust midcorner-gas) or else you're either going to be off line or slow. It should be: Brake-turn-gas. You take any guess work out of it.
You want to get fast? I mean, wickedly fast on a tight turn like a 180? Set up to the outside of the tun, brake, turn-in and run over the damn base of the cone with your rear tire.
If you're more than an inch off that cone, you are throwing away time. I don't mean 10ths of a second here, I'm tallking one-onethousand, two-onethousand seconds. If you don't get more than 50% of your turning done before you run over the base of that pivot cone, and you're not running OVER THE BASE of that cone, you're throwing time away.
When you flick the car, you can never, and I mean never unless you're the next coming of some superstar, BE ON that cone. You'll always be, in one shape or another, away from that cone.
I **** you not. Work on that one element, just that one exercise, and you'll see your times drop exponentially.
And one other exercise... looking ahead. You come up to a 180, where are your eyes? On that piviot cone? Bad monkey! As you approach the braking zone, your head should be turned, looking out your side window at the gate(s) after the pivot cone. Wherever your car is now is because of how you went through the last set of gates, that you cannot change... and that will dictate how you take this 180. It's pretty much already too late to save it and get the best, ideal, perfect turn. Your eyes should already be looking beyond that cone, which, in this case, may sometimes mean over your shoulder.
The fast people are fast because they, say it with me... "look ahead." The pivot cone no longer matters because your entrance to it was defined by what you did 20 feet, 30 feet, 50 feet BEHIND you.
Let those two concepts sink in, work on them, and you'll see, this really isn't stuff that can be learned on weeknights in your 'closed' parking lot.
--kC[/quote]
Now thats a good piece of advice
| leecea | 02-07-2007 01:38 PM |
It is hard to get used to until you see it many times, but the fastest drivers are often the most boring to watch! I believe it is because they have mastered the tiny details that KC is talking about and drive with such precision that nothing 'exciting' is allowed to happen.
| kfoote | 02-07-2007 07:28 PM |
Listen to KC and Chris Lock. They know of what they speak.
From what I recall of the brief moments I had followed them on track, Kristain Skavnes and David Rosenbloom didn't really flick the car going into the corner as was described. The oversteer and sliding the rear all over the place seemed to be more a function of trail braking, early and abrupt throttle application, and suspension setup. With the STi's I've driven on track with either stock or very mild suspension setups (yes, the T2 cars use stock springs, but knowing the shocks they use, I'm guessing the damping settings that they are running are not anywhere close to "normal"), I have found that in most cases the car is faster when it has moderate understeer that you work around rather than trying to induce oversteer. I don't have the data to back this up, but it is consistent with the overall lap times I have turned when I've been trying things.
I also agree with fast is boring to watch for the most part. There are a few corners here and there that you have to do dramatic things to be fast, but those are generally limited to one or two corners per track.
From what I recall of the brief moments I had followed them on track, Kristain Skavnes and David Rosenbloom didn't really flick the car going into the corner as was described. The oversteer and sliding the rear all over the place seemed to be more a function of trail braking, early and abrupt throttle application, and suspension setup. With the STi's I've driven on track with either stock or very mild suspension setups (yes, the T2 cars use stock springs, but knowing the shocks they use, I'm guessing the damping settings that they are running are not anywhere close to "normal"), I have found that in most cases the car is faster when it has moderate understeer that you work around rather than trying to induce oversteer. I don't have the data to back this up, but it is consistent with the overall lap times I have turned when I've been trying things.
I also agree with fast is boring to watch for the most part. There are a few corners here and there that you have to do dramatic things to be fast, but those are generally limited to one or two corners per track.
| joltdudeuc | 02-07-2007 08:05 PM |
[url]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7778915511207719503&q=gino+drift&hl=en[/url]
This is Gino from GB Motorsports (the man who got me into autoxing). I think he executes this quite well ;)
-Gagan
This is Gino from GB Motorsports (the man who got me into autoxing). I think he executes this quite well ;)
-Gagan
| joltdudeuc | 02-07-2007 08:27 PM |
and I can atest to KC's explaination of mental focus, and looking ahead. It's something that I have a hard time with, and was lacking for nearly 1 year now, and it shows in my autox times.
A talk with the very Gino above has put me into the right state of mind and using his techniques during a course walk, my mental focus has been MUCH better, and find myself looking ahead more natually. It's SO fundamentally important, yet so hard to put into practice. But damned if it doesn't work!
-Gagan
A talk with the very Gino above has put me into the right state of mind and using his techniques during a course walk, my mental focus has been MUCH better, and find myself looking ahead more natually. It's SO fundamentally important, yet so hard to put into practice. But damned if it doesn't work!
-Gagan
| joltdudeuc | 02-07-2007 08:29 PM |
[QUOTE=chimchimm5;16954329]Yes, Chris Lock's is one of the responses I really appreciated.
However, I was not talking about that (bold, above) hard of a flick. The flick would require anticipation of the amount of load that will be achieved midcorner. If the flick produces more load than is held by the velocity/accel midcorner, than yes, I understand it will rebound; and that's not what I'm doing.
It probably is a dumbo feather to me, which is why I posted in the first place. So, this rookie only knows braking and transition smoothly... what is the correct way?[/QUOTE]
you wouldn't happen to autox in sfr scca would you? :p
However, I was not talking about that (bold, above) hard of a flick. The flick would require anticipation of the amount of load that will be achieved midcorner. If the flick produces more load than is held by the velocity/accel midcorner, than yes, I understand it will rebound; and that's not what I'm doing.
It probably is a dumbo feather to me, which is why I posted in the first place. So, this rookie only knows braking and transition smoothly... what is the correct way?[/QUOTE]
you wouldn't happen to autox in sfr scca would you? :p
| chimchimm5 | 02-07-2007 08:56 PM |
[quote=joltdudeuc;16971360]you wouldn't happen to autox in sfr scca would you? :p[/quote]
Last year I was just with UFO, but this year I'll participate in SFR SCCA.
Last year I was just with UFO, but this year I'll participate in SFR SCCA.
| BlkWRXWag | 02-07-2007 09:24 PM |
Don't be scared to sign up for the National Tour in Atwater. You can watch so many top drivers in action that you'll learn a bunch, as well as having a great time. We'll have a bunch of Subarus running at that event.
-Max.
-Max.
| chimchimm5 | 02-07-2007 09:37 PM |
[quote=BlkWRXWag;16972004]Don't be scared to sign up for the National Tour in Atwater. You can watch so many top drivers in action that you'll learn a bunch, as well as having a great time. We'll have a bunch of Subarus running at that event.
-Max.[/quote]
Were you referring to me? I've been looking at the Castle Airport, Atwater events (AAS?) and the thing that intimidates me is the 3+ hour drive. :) That's 6+ round trip.
As for the competition, I don't care if I'm 10 minutes behind everyone else. :p I just enjoy improving and getting the weight to skate the edge of traction, although "floundering" might be a better word than "skating".
-Max.[/quote]
Were you referring to me? I've been looking at the Castle Airport, Atwater events (AAS?) and the thing that intimidates me is the 3+ hour drive. :) That's 6+ round trip.
As for the competition, I don't care if I'm 10 minutes behind everyone else. :p I just enjoy improving and getting the weight to skate the edge of traction, although "floundering" might be a better word than "skating".
| BlkWRXWag | 02-07-2007 11:17 PM |
[QUOTE=chimchimm5;16972160]Were you referring to me? I've been looking at the Castle Airport, Atwater events (AAS?) and the thing that intimidates me is the 3+ hour drive. :) That's 6+ round trip.[/QUOTE]
I was referring to you:D We'll have a much longer trip from Southern Cal. If you do one event there, it should be the National Tour. We'll stay overnight Friday and Saturday. It's a 2 day event.
I was referring to you:D We'll have a much longer trip from Southern Cal. If you do one event there, it should be the National Tour. We'll stay overnight Friday and Saturday. It's a 2 day event.
| chimchimm5 | 02-07-2007 11:21 PM |
[quote=BlkWRXWag;16973286]I was referring to you:D We'll have a much longer trip from Southern Cal. If you do one event there, it should be the National Tour. We'll stay overnight Friday and Saturday. It's a 2 day event.[/quote]
Please let me know the website. I only see the AAS events from the SFR calendar so I can't tell when the National Tour is.... thanks.
Please let me know the website. I only see the AAS events from the SFR calendar so I can't tell when the National Tour is.... thanks.
| BlkWRXWag | 02-07-2007 11:26 PM |
[url]http://www.scca.org/Event/Event.asp?IdS=0A23DF-9A16E00&Id=6377[/url]
| KC | 02-08-2007 07:47 AM |
...and you need to be an SCCA member to participate if you aren't already.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét