Peter, i have twice your data amounts and on the same car, controlling variables on anything from rain , cold to hot temps. And this over 20 years and times kept in the narrow range of 1:36 to 1:38 for the most part. YOU of all people need to understand the psychology of a slower track and the tendency to push naturally over the edge. i hardly think with half the turns being ulta high grip, and a couple of very slow turns that you can say the surface is more slick based on your video data. too many variables. unscientific. and when you are unscientific , it becomes feelings.
what did you witness last weekend? you saw what we all saw on the TV. cars crashing into each other and making bad decisions someone losing their brakes and flying up the fence in another race as well... NOTHING to do with track surface or confidence, and everything to do with bad decisions.. i saw no lockups no looseness, no pushy cars. i saw great racing when it was all cleaned up, AND the times were as they usually are. So, without actual data on the mu of the track, its guess work and feelings. sorry peter you are not there enough to know the personality of the track as I do and comparing to to at least all the California tracks, the surface doesn't seem to be any different , but the track is, and that, i say is the difference.. if you dont think how a driver , drives a track , doesnt make the car behave differently, i cant help you. . IMHO !!! that's it , nothing more. my opinon. take it or leave it. and PEACE OUT TO YOU !

yes, but for some reason, he is not posting a single data point and has only made excuses of how the turns might be different in camber, etc. so, i suggested peak mu on a flat 90 degree turn, something similar to determine if the grip is higher or not............He declined to say, and used his viewing of crashes on a TV race as proof of his case. classic!

I always find it entertaining that someone has to announce when they dont want to partake in a discussion. Dave, it's ok. you dont have to believe me about Laguna...
yes, feelings are facts about feelings.............. that is a good point and is totally valid. yes, Laguna can make you drive in such a way that the track "feels" slick.....so, can we both be right??

 

Mark,

Just because you *think* you know more than anyone else doesn't mean you do. You really need to learn that concept.....

 

There are tools that are used by the tire manufacturers that measure the grip level of a surface. Those come up with WRLS being low grip.

 

You must have missed the part that all that i said was my opinion based on my experience and general understanding. Since Matt has ACTUAL data, I would want to see if the data matches all the feelings and how it stacks up to other tracks in California.
Do you have data from the use of these tools. How where they used, where were they used and how does Laguna compare to other tracks?

 

May be some more words after all these posts about the grip of this track :

I have been in "few tracks" in my life, (like Spa, (my favorite), Le Castellet (my second favorite), (the horrible) Nurburgring (the only one that I *really* do **NOT** like at all), and etc.. or, some, very fast, i.e.: Monza, or, Le Castellet, when no chicane is in place at the middle of the Mistral straight, ..or 1.2 miles straight line !), and some "slow" ones.

..But : I just *love* big time Laguna Seca, and this : as is !

It is not a track where you are very fast, but it is very technical.
Ok, it is "hard" for the car (i.e.: 3 track days there, and my (front) brake pads are done !), and, to be back on topic : it is very true that tires makes a huge difference (i.e.: with my slow, old and under powered Boxster S, I do have easily 5 seconds differences between street tires and Nitto NT01, or : it is true that if you have the good tires at the right pressure and on the day where the temperature is good, imo, you can have what I call a good grip.
Proof : I never had my recorder giving me 1.5 G lateral in Sears Point, but, ..I got this data in Laguna Seca.

Or, very frankly, I doubt that you can name a track being "low grip", ..when you can get 1.5G lateral, ..with an old Boxster S ! (OK, with NT-01, correct negative camber, and PSS9 adjusted firm and low.)

..my 0.02 G

 

Yes, but none that I can share. If you were at the pro weekend track walks and tire tests, you would see it being collected by a few of the teams. It agrees with the majority here.

 

 

I kind of feel the same and know the track extremely well through all of its moods. ive been able to keep my car ,with no changes over the past 10 years, and achieve a narrow window of performance. the one thing you get good at by visting it a lot,is to know where you can push and where you need to be careful as well as where grip falls off or increases when the track conditions change Its a great track, and thats why it is a favorite of racers all over the world...

Ive been at the track during the pro weekends, but may times they didnt have track walks and there wasnt any testing for us. but ive heard about it being done. i was just asking where the "majority " is getting the data and introducing some reasons that it might feel like less grip than other tracks. again, just my opinon but i dont sense any less grip than other tracks, but it is a greatly different track than others. i was suggesting the configuration and layout might induce feelings of lack of grip. But, if you have comprehensive data that shows the actual asphalt has more grip, i would belieeve that . and how much variance vs tracks like sears, ACS, TH, BW, WS, etc, would be interesting to see. for example... i call turn 5 at ACS ("turn 2' LAGUNA") becauase it is the same radius and speeds as laguna.turn 2. i approach it exactly the same and apply the same steering angle and throttle through out it....... however, the exit seems to have actually less grip than laguna turn2, even though the asphalt is much more rough. Just a data point based on what i felt at the two different tracks. Ive never said my data is anything more than feelings.. ive only introduced ideas that might effect feelings we have at the track, even if the majority feels the same way.

i agree and have seen these devices, but thought most of their data was related to turn inclinations, and temps . I know they are limited to only a few data points based on one guy, one sensor and limited time to gather information, but i trust that the information you saw or heard about was correct. It would be interesting to see that data and see how it correlates , as well as compares to other tracks. then, the most important part is how that information is transferred to the driver and how the driver responds to it. some get it right and others get it wrong, and that's one of the many reasons why some cars are faster than others.

I'm just offering a few factors that could cause a track to "feel " like it is more slick than others. I'm not declaring that this is the fact or debating what you have seen, Just discussing it, because the question was asked. I've been fooled by feelings plenty of times when looking at the actual data ending up being different.. For example, some "Coaches" said you could "Feel" straight-line acceleration sometimes being greater by short shifting, Clearly the data and math doesn't support that in 99% of the cases.