When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I found my 2010 Boxster S handles fantastic with neutral front toe and a little rear toe in. My 2004 was undriveable in oversteer with rear toe out. Tarrett GT bar is a good bar for these.
I ran .25" toe out with the gt3 front bar on the B-stock cayman a few years ago. Also around 1/8 toe in rear, you need some back there to counter the mass pendulum.
Guys, I've started an autocross blog. Please check it out and feel free to tell me where I'm totally whacked.
edfishjr.com
This whole "racing in a parking lot" thing. Totally whack.
Re: the radius, run the numbers for holding 1" off the cones vs 1' and see what the difference is. I've run the numbers myself and come to the conclusion that I hit far too many cones with my back tire for not a whole lot of gain
Would be very interesting to see the difference between tight, racing line and double apex for different cars, and where the break-even point is between the prototypical autocross line (tight) and racing line (racing line). I sat down and ran a whole bunch of numbers for a fast entry into a sweeper exiting into a tight S-bend once but for the life of me can't remember what I found aside from the racing line holds more speed, but you spend a lot of time actually in the sweeper and have to get on the brakes sooner and gas later.
Re: the radius, run e numbers for holding 1" off the cones vs 1' and see what the difference is. I've run the numbers myself and come to the conclusion that I hit far too many cones with my back tire for not a whole lot of gain
On the 1" off the cones... This is one of my favorite pictures of me driving -- this was a local event in preparation for 2006 Solo Nationals. (This was my first event ever in this car, although I had been autoXing my own Evo for over 3 years.)
I can't pull that off every time, but when I do, and get to see the photographic evidence, that rocks.
I would add that you're only gaining time by being so tight on a cone if you're otherwise driving the corner exactly the same. If you're giving up speed to get the shorter line, you may actually be losing time overall.
Yeah, I remember when he posted that- validated the ole ".2 seconds for every foot" conventional wisdom. No question it's critical to stay tight to slaloms. I do try to stay tight; I remember when I first pointed my gopro backwards and discovered I bobbled 4 cones that run on that side of the car alone- can't get much better than that. I also take a lot of cone calls, lol.
I was actually referring to Ed's sweeper calcs. For sweepers, it's a different story because you're able to maintain higher speed with the greater radius of a racing line or less-than-shortest-radius which offsets some of the loss of time. On some courses, that higher speed can mean savings on entry/exit, too. Ed worked out .37 tenths for being 10' off the line in the sweeper. It's not a linear relationship, but if being 1' off the tightest line would only be worth somewhere around 0.03 seconds, it's probably not worth the risk of coning the run away. I'd save that risk for the slaloms where the return on risk is greater.
Yeah, I remember when he posted that- validated the ole ".2 seconds for every foot" conventional wisdom. No question it's critical to stay tight to slaloms. I do try to stay tight; I remember when I first pointed my gopro backwards and discovered I bobbled 4 cones that run on that side of the car alone- can't get much better than that. I also take a lot of cone calls, lol.
I was actually referring to Ed's sweeper calcs. For sweepers, it's a different story because you're able to maintain higher speed with the greater radius of a racing line or less-than-shortest-radius which offsets some of the loss of time. On some courses, that higher speed can mean savings on entry/exit, too. Ed worked out .37 tenths for being 10' off the line in the sweeper. It's not a linear relationship, but if being 1' off the tightest line would only be worth somewhere around 0.03 seconds, it's probably not worth the risk of coning the run away. I'd save that risk for the slaloms where the return on risk is greater.
Gotcha - misunderstood what you were referring to. Your biggest issue with wide is the dirt kicked up by everyone going tight. I face this frequently when wanting to take an "aero" line, but simply can't due to marbles/dirt.
OK Ed what about the one cone 140 -180 deg. turn around. This turn has kicked my butt. I have been taking it wide in 2nd gear but I loose a lot of speed out of the turn.
OK Ed what about the one cone 140 -180 deg. turn around. This turn has kicked my butt. I have been taking it wide in 2nd gear but I loose a lot of speed out of the turn.
TRSCCA always used to have a 180 pin cone at the Nashville Super Speedway site. Randal Wilcox, a top national driver, taught us to take it absolutely as tight as possible. This meant approaching it no more than 2 car lengths to the side,braking down to 1st gear speed, turning very tightly around it, shift to 1st and blast outta there right on the cone. I haven't done any analysis of this, but it sure seems to work.
Whenever we have a 180 pin, both Brolliar and McCrispin do it this way also. (Both multi-time Nat Champs)
I would add that you're only gaining time by being so tight on a cone if you're otherwise driving the corner exactly the same. If you're giving up speed to get the shorter line, you may actually be losing time overall.
I think this is a key point. I was watching Sam Strano videos from the Spring Pro at Wilmington and noticed 2 things: I don't think I'd ever seen him drive so hard and he was about 1 foot off each key cone. Usually he is much closer. I think he knew he needed the extra margin given with what abandon he was driving. He won SSR over tremendous competition.
07-22-2015, 01:47 PM
