Jack667

Maybe I have something to add, maybe not -
I've got about 50 track days plus three PCA races. Also, snowboarding experience and golf. I think that there is something similar in each of these activities (track driving, skiing/snowboarding, and golf), regarding learing and getting better. I think its widely known that you won't get better at golf if you only go out three times per year. Similar can be said for skiing/snowboarding, and the same for track driving.
I was at Lime Rock a few years ago and I was parked next to a guy with a white 944. I think I remember him saying that he took it out for 1 day per year, every year, for the past 15. He was having a blast, even though he wasn't driving that fast. He brought his son, who was out for his first DE day. The guy was in yellow and the son was in green. The point is - if one is only going out 2-3 times per year, one might want to put more emphasis on fun and less on getting to PCA Club Racer podium speeds.
Should a 2-3 times/year golfer aim to shoot scratch golf?
Now DAS and an Engineering backgound may help, but how much would it help the golf get to scratch play, or the skiier get to doubloe black diamond, if they are only getting out 2-3 times per year?
I don't propose to have any answers, but just wanted to through out a different perspective.

Robert Henriksen

Yeah, that Randy Pobst is a putz.

ColorChange

Jack667, I agree the odds are stacked against my but I am a daddy first.

Adam Richman

Tim, I hope this comes across as constructive, not mean-spirited. I am wondering if you have looked at all your alternatives with enough information to make the best decisions. I understand your strong like for data and personally, I am interested in what the MyChron will tell us later this year (if all goes well) so I kinda follow your interest (have done a TON of analysis w/ video + timer and audio/spacial memorization) and all that is is data as well. I hear ya. But here's where I don't hear you as well and I am not sure how much information you have at your disposal.

Open track and HPDE events is in fact not competetive, nor is it a time trial. Time trials would place you in classes with comparable cars and you would have to have mandatory minimal safety equipment (fire bottle, roll hoop are a minimum). As you noted, they are also not racing. You admittedly are a very competetive guy, go out and find some competition. Do it with your skills and determination, not your ability to build a better widget out of your car. Or go do Time Trials (solo I). SCCA issues novice Solo I permits (in the regions I am familiar) based on recommendation (these recommendations can be from autocrossing or from the guys that know you on track).

What I guess doesn't make sense to me (and I am a pretty competetive guy myself) is that I don't see how you are exhibiting your competetiveness with data acquisition, a car with all the doo-dads and whizbangs that a 996TT has, brake upgrades, power upgrades, suspension upgrades - where is the competition? In what you can bolt onto the car to effect change? To outdo another 996TT w/ 50k in upgrades? Its somewhat nonsensical to me where the competetive nature lies.

I assume by some of your comments, you may regard me as someone w/ less talent than yourself and less potential and someone that requires a step-by-step process that you do not. Be that as it may, I won't try convey to you what I know, that's useless ramblings across a wide internet expanse. I will say, if you want to compete, compete. You don't have to respect how I drive or what I think I know (which is in reality the sum of knowing how little I actually know) to listen to this. If you are as competetive as I am, compete where you are forced to actually compete with a large majority of your skills, not with your purse. Find out what SCCA groups are competetive in your region - some regions its National Touring is where the big boys live, some regions its Regional Improved Touring, some Production is the big scene. Find out what it is near you, go do a Panoz/Skippy school if you feel you are ready, get your provisional competition license and race. Race two double weekends a year and spend the rest with your family and your data - AT LEAST in those 4 races, you'll know where you actually stand up against competition on some type of level setting. Maybe in your region, its not the SCCA at all but PCA racing or POC racing or BMWCCA racing that's uber competetive - make a few calls and find out where the actual competetion is and by all means, put your competetive nature to good use. Any competition on a web board over concepts and principles of racing in the end are really just competition on who can outlast whom on a keyboard.

It should be an easy sell for the wife, racing w/ somewhere between 75 and 300 hp in a fully caged production car is going to be a lot safer than 170 mph in a street car on Z rated street radials.

Best of luck.

carreracup21

Sure that's right, but maybe that's how a great driver finds the limits quickly in a new car. To drive the edge you also have to be comfortable going over the edge and bringing it back. It's not a novice exercise though ( unless you want to end up in the weeds or against a wall) and the data won't show you "how" to do it, just that it happened.

Robert Henriksen

Amen. Shoot, you could buy an SRF, a HANS, firesuit (you already have gloves), trailer, tow vehicle, and a year's worth of tires & brake pads for what you've spent in mods on your tt. And a tt isn't going to save you in a 170mph off.

This SRF driver didn't have a scratch on him:

924RACR

I have to agree with some comments made by others in this thread... with the limitations on your available track time (let's face it, few of us get as much track time as we need ) and your emphasis on coming up to speed as quickly as possible - it makes more sense than anything to optimize your learning curve in advance of all others. Since you have raised questions about the level of instruction at the club level, questions which I am personally not going to comment on, having similar questions myself, would it not make sense to park your car for the duration, until you go run a pro school? Pay for the professional, expert advice and feedback, and don't waste time or money stumbling around in the dark in the meantime.

The comment regarding Derek Daly intrigues me - are they switching cars? I've always been interested in going there someday explicitly because they use DAS. Don't they use FF's?

I have also heard great things about the Panoz school, might do that one day.

Another topic for discussion, particularly till you get to a pro school, might be to consider driving something else. Depends on your focus - become a good fast driver in any car or in your TT? If in any car, some time in some underpowered slow stuff will usually teach you gobs about optimizing your line, even without DAS, because the feedback of lost speed is immediate... so underpowered karts, Vee's, etc. Something to consider.

I've always been puzzled by the fascination with optimizing g's... Seems to me that the goal of driving on track is the minimal lap time. In that case, we are looking to optimize speed over the length of the course - maximize the area under the curve, in a way (though technically this value is just the distance covered, and is therefore fixed, oddly enough). What belongs next in the derivation you're looking for, CC (to approach this mathematically), is therefore a mathematical relation between the factors of interest (AX and AY, for you - long. and lateral accel.). Well, is this just not, in its simplest form, describing circular motion? The old AY = V^2/r. Only the radius can be changing constantly, I guess in this case to determine a line we are trying to solve for r, with the largest V possible... would this not indicate a desire for minimized AY? Perhaps I'm looking at this backwards as usual... besides, these thoughts belong in another thread.

Anyway, I would challenge you, CC, to reevaluate your list of training options with your #1 goal in mind, optimizing the learning curve, and then see exactly where DAS systems fit in. As everyone here WILL agree, the return on investment in training from each training source (autox, DE, DAS, pro school, etc) varies greatly depending on your level of experience. For the rank newbie, there's little question that it should start with autox and/or DE. However, for your level of experience, are you really going to get the best return on time and money invested from the DAS analysis, or from a pro school? In my case, I'm leaning on DAS since I can't afford the pro school right now, but I'm betting that, after racing competitively for 5 years, I can't expect much in the way of helpful feedback from most (though not all) DE instructors...

Bob Rouleau

CC - Give instructors a break. If I got in your car and observed that you made frequent mistakes and missed the line, I would also take you back to the basics. Assuming you were smooth, I would ask you to brake in a straight line so you could find the right entry point and be consistent.

Once you had the lines right and demonstrated acceptable inputs, then we'd work on more advanced techniques involving momentum and trail braking. As a person who wants to improve you need to consider how the guy sitting beside you feels. You need to establish his confidence in you before he'll welcome more advanced techniques.

Rgds,

Premier Motorsp

In response to Jack Olsen's question for me:

It wouldn't be fair for me to assume that CC is dangerous due to his unusual education. It also wouldn't wouldn't be fair to assume that he is not dangerous.
But no, based on what I know, I couldn't just say he is not ready to move to the next level.

Based on the video, he seems to be competent, if a little agressive.

This is the reason I quit instructing. Now and then you get a capable student with a good car. I want to teach these people the correct way to approach a corner, and that is always at odds with what the DE dogma is (straight-line braking, etc.)

It looks like all this revolves around CC's insistence that entry speed and braking down to the apex are worthwhile goals. Well, he is dead right. You guys using straight line braking and in-slow and out-fast are missing the boat. For proof of this watch an F1 or Supercup practice. (the drivers can't afford to spin in the race so the practice driving is riskier). Anyway, you'll notice that all losses of control begin just after the turn in point. No one spins out after the apex. So much for in slow.

The very fact that CC thought (thinks?) that ABS all the way to apex (really the throttle application point), tells me he is thinking correctly. It does not really work in practice due to the realities of setting the ABS up so it will threshold braking properly. But if you set the ABS and brake bias with only cornering in mind, CC's proposed technique would be correct.

On R compound tires:

I stand by my suggestion that he should be on Michelins PSCs. Street tires are not consistent or safe in that environment. CC doesn't seem shy about spending $$, but the MPSCs will be cheaper in the long run.

Chris Cervelli
Premier Motorsports

ltc

CC,
If your video were a 'racing resume' presented to a Chief Instructor for PCA DE registration, what group do you think would be placed in (green, yellow/yellow sign off, white, black)?

Geo

I've just really skimmed this as I'm getting ready to go out of town and I'll drop in later. But....

To translate rather bluntly, until your *** is properly calibrated in the seat, the data is of limited value sometimes to the point of being trivia. It can provide insight, but book smart doesn't mean real world smart and that is essentially what we are talking about. IOW, you can have all the information your little heart desires, but if you don't know what to do with it, what good is it? Ever know someone without a degree who was smarter than someone with a degree in a given area? That happens because they apply themselves and learn in the real world.

Data is good and so is theory. I love theory and I love trying to apply it. But sometimes you just have to have more experience to do it.

FormulaOne10

I think Chris nailed some of the most important issues here...

chris walrod

My .02

From the angle of professional motorsports, where we used $80k DAS (Pi Sigma), 24 channels of CAN based data, laser ride height, aero pressure tapping, you name it real time telemetry and data logging, a few talented data geeks and race engineers with numerous custom math channels, at the end of the day, the most valuable info was given to us via stopwatch, pyrometer, and driver debriefing! Drivers often have coach's that will watch them on track at certain corners and provide feedback on top of that.

Sure the data is important, but surely not the end-all tell-all for absolute minimum lap time and maximum performance.

FWIW, anyhow..

Bob Rouleau

Chris,

I'm sorry to hear that you gave up teaching. I guess rules vary from one region to another. In Rennsport we are liberal. Confronted with a competent driver and car, we enjoy teaching advanced techniques. Given that the margin for error is lower, we don't teach them to people who haven't demonstrated basic skills. I look for reasonably consistent lines, good pace with smoothness and good braking technique. I feel responsible for my students and I don't want to encourage them to get into trouble. Frankly I enjoy sitting beside a decent driver who wants to improve.

If on a first ride I encounter a student whose log shows no experience that attempts to brake to the apex before he even knows the line, I'd reel him in. I don't want him to crash and I don't want to be in the accident. At DE safety is our first concern, with fun and learning coming close behind.

I believe CC was unhappy with his instructor because he wanted him to demo the basics first. CC has made progress in spite of his determination to learn it without help. We have all been telling him that he would make faster progress if he would accept help from an instructor.

With respect to ABS I take issue with your comment. I posted in the original thread that a perfect ABS system would perhaps allow hard braking to the apex of some turns (note, some not all). Fact is those of us who know the 996TT, also know that the ABS system is imperfect and using the technique is ill advised. Furthermore the yaw control component of PSM - which cannot be disabled - prevents the technique in question. In the original thread my concern was that CC or someone else would actually attempt to trail-brake with ABS pulsing away and yaw control trying to straighten the car. Since ABS is not perfect I really disagree with comments which might encourage the uninformed and inexperienced to try.

I also appreciate your background. I suspect you drive race cars that are well sorted, perhaps even set up for a specific track. Your car(s) permit certain techniques which are ill advised in a heavy street car. As a teacher I try and factor in the behavior of the student's car. A 3600 lb TT will bite you if you drive it the same way as a full on race car.

Regards,

Premier Motorsp

Bob said--

With respect to ABS I take issue with your comment. I posted in the original thread that a perfect ABS system would perhaps allow hard braking to the apex of some turns (note, some not all). Fact is those of us who know the 996TT, also know that the ABS system is imperfect and using the technique is ill advised. Furthermore the yaw control component of PSM - which cannot be disabled - prevents the technique in question. In the original thread my concern was that CC or someone else would actually attempt to trail-brake with ABS pulsing away and yaw control trying to straighten the car. Since ABS is not perfect I really disagree with comments which might encourage the uninformed and inexperienced to try.



I have very limited track time in a 996TT. I liked the PSM because it allowed me to treat the car differently because of the one wheel braking effect. I could place the car into a giant understeer and allow PSM to pull it out. In this one turn I felt faster with PSM on.

I pretty much agree with your assessment of the stock PSM and ABS. It is there as a safety net and it is not an aid to going fast. I am not sure whether it fights trail braking in the way you say, I'd defer to someone with more 996TT experience on that.

Just to clarify, I agree that ABS to the apex doesn't work. But it is a good goal and good thing to keep in mind. By this I mean that the idea of decel after turn in should be in forefront of the driver's thinking.

Bob also said--

I also appreciate your background. I suspect you drive race cars that are well sorted, perhaps even set up for a specific track. Your car(s) permit certain techniques which are ill advised in a heavy street car. As a teacher I try and factor in the behavior of the student's car. A 3600 lb TT will bite you if you drive it the same way as a full on race car.


The last few years I have been fortunate enough to be driving 993s and 996s which are prepared and setup exactly as I like. So it is true that the techniques I espouse may not be for everyone. Any properly set up 993 or 996 should trail brake with good stability and exhibit little tendency to swap ends. Trail braking is inherently unstable and therefore spins result when mistakes are made. I do believe that regardless of the car, the driver will be faster if he maximizes decel after turn-in. The driver also needs to be aware that this is the most difficult aspect of high performance driving.

In CC's case I would say that he WOULD be going about things the wrong way if I saw from the video that he did not have a firm grasp of the basics. From the video I saw he seems to have the basics down. Maybe you guys know something I don't.

I am really adamant about the decel after turn in because I did not learn this technique until well into my driving career. I started at age 18 in a fast 944 Turbo. It was really unstable in decel so I learned quickly not to trail brake. It took me about 5 more years to unlearn this. Maybe if I had not gotten off to the bad start I would be much more skilled than I am now.

If CC hired me to be his coach, and cost and time were no object, I would suggest the following:

Build a C or B spec 993 or 996 and run it on Hoosiers. The Hoosiers, while inferior to the MPSCs, teach car control because they are gentle at the limit and like pretty large slip angles. I would keep him fooling with the data unless it became a distraction.

The 996TT is not going to teach control, and has the power distraction. On the other hand, CC indicated that the TT needed to be a street car as well. I think a Turbo makes a good street/track car.

Chris Cervelli
Premier Motorsports