BrianKeithSmith

I might open up a can of worms here.

But I've read the recent postings regarding the new tracks, and then I've looked at some of the new tracks that have opened in the last few years. One of the things I've noticed is that a majority of the new tracks were designed by Alan Wilson?

Now, I have nothing against Alan Wilson, but one thing I've noticed about his tracks are that they are normally not very long, and if they are, they generally contain short straights and hard corners.

So my question is, do you guys like this trend that we are seeing with the new tracks? Shorter courses with hard, sharp corners, or would you prefer a more free flowing higher speed track that is a maybe a little lighter on the sharp turns that are going to weare out our tires and brakes more? I guess I'm looking at it more from an amateur standpoint, and a track that is more car friendly and less expensive from a resource standpoint (tires, brakes, wear/tear on the car) appeals to me a little more I guess.

Any thoughts. As I was reading the details of the new Camberstone track, I noticed that Alan Wilson was the designer, and I know he designed CMP, and Barber, both of which I have driven. I like both of the tracks, but they are both fairly low speed tracks with short straights and a few tight corners so it makes it hard to really open the car up.

Any opinions out there?

Brian

macfly

Brian, I wasn't aware that one man had designed so many tracks, I'd like his job!
I grew up on the classic tracks in the UK, Brands Hatch, Donnington, Silverstone, Thruxton etc, and they are all more open, fast and flowing in their layout than the tracks you mention. Out here in CA we have Laguna Seca and Willow Springs that are open flowing tracks, but the others are tighter and more technical. I agree with you about the pleasures of a fast open track, and they can be less taxing on a heavy road car, but they also demand a lot of real estate both in tarmac and in run off, so maybe that is why they aren't the norm in his portfolio.

BrianKeithSmith

Yeah, I guess I want a track that is technical, yet fast, where I can stretch my car's legs.

For us on the east coast (southeast) we have VIR and Road Atlanta, both of which contain technical segments within the circuit, but then open up so that you can really see the top-end of the car.

I guess that's what I'd like to see more of.

Brian

Juan Lopez

Here's Wilson's webpage: http://www.wilsonmotorsport.com/default.htm

I like the tight/technical tracks but can relate to the "be able to open up the car" mentality. My guess is that faster is viewed as more dangerous by insurers, .... In this highly litigious society.....

Have not driven Barber but, from what I've read/heard its a superb facility. Some sections of other tracks (like Road Atlanta) have wide open sections but perhaps are considered too fast/dangerous by some. Case in point last turn at Road Atlanta.

What would it cost to build a track?????? Need one closer to home which is more technical than Moroso and more accesible than Homestead.

Z-man

I think you'll see that folks with 'slower' cars prefer a tighter, more technical tracks, whereas the guys with the higher hp cars like the tracks with longer straights.

Or, let me rephrase my comment: folks who drive momentum cars perfer the 'momentum' tracks, where the guys with the higher hp hardware simply can't just run away from them on the straights!

Then again, a 930 and a GT3 are also momentum cars, but they can carry much more momentum down the straights!

With my 'on a good day' 208 hp 944S2, I prefer the tighter tracks. My top three tracks are Lime Rock, Mid-Ohio, and VIR. Now one might argue that VIR is not a 'momentum track,' but I disagree" mess up any one of the turns from T1 through the Snake, and your whole lap will be effected. Same applies to Rollercoaster and Hog Pen.

Sorry for rambling again...
-Z-man.

PS: What's that saying again? "Straights are for fast cars - corners are for fast drivers!"

M758

Having driven an Alan Wilson track here in Az what I will say is this.

Any track designer is given certain limitations.

Lot size and layout play a huge role. More land allows for a long track. The shape and naturaly terrain profile play another huge roll.

Really these two things are biggest factors. The local Wilson track here is 2.25 miles with 16 corners and is flat. The land is built on is all flat and much of the shape is driven by the shape of the lot the track ower could purchase.

Second to those are what the track owner plans for. Our track was build as a club track with a keen focus on street cars. Than means plenty of run off room and in general moderate speeds. If the owner had wanted a Pro track for specator racing the layout would have been different.

So those are biggest factors ANY design will deal with. Beyond that the design controls alot.

Wilson seems to be the leading track designer right now.

924RACR

I've driven both Beaverun and Gingerman, among his layouts, as well as the Kart track at the Beav, so here's my comments. I do think he does a good job with the terrain and constraints (from the owners) imposed on him. Gingerman I'm rather not fond of, due to a lot of decr. radius corners, no real hair-raisers, etc. I find it a technically challenging, but not rewarding, track. It's intended to be a great safe place to exercise your street car, primarily.

Beaverun, in contrast, I find to be an absolute hoot, and if it weren't for the fact that Mid-O's closer than The Beav, I'd be back there more often by far! I love the track, even though it's very short and quick lapping. Though I get utterly slaughtered climbing up that reverse corkscrew of a hairpin before pit-in, losing out to anything with more torque than a lawnmower, the speed I can carry through 1-2-3 is a hoot, and the drop onto the backstraight is both inspiring and sphincter-clenching at the same time, more than making up for the hairpin and front straight! Heck, even the back "straight" is a scream! I really can't wait till they can get the rest of the track done and we can run them all together in a big fat long enduro... I see some really exciting possibilities there.

Don't get me wrong, I'd definitely love some longer sweepers and higher-speed combinations, but it's quite true, I'm in a slow underpowered car and I like to have the challenge of modulating the throttle, not just planting it and plotting the perfect path. I can always go find a roval if I want to do that...

Sam Lin

Based on my experience, you'll find that the shorter, twistier, lower max speed tracks are actually less wear on tires and brakes.

I for one find a long straight where I get a ton of speed to be flat out BORING. I'd much rather have a tight track, lots of different corners, a short straight or 2 (or none!), and this is in any car. I just prefer tracks that require more technical driving, I'm there to stress the handling limits of the car, not drag race.

Sam

JC in NY

Is Wilson the "Peter Keating" of track design, or the "Howard Roark"?

penguinking

let me say this - Barber is a short track, but its not because of a lack of real estate. if you've ever been there, you'll notice how incredibly huge the facility is - several huge grass lots for parking/camping, as well as a giant field out back for spectators. if they wanted a longer track they could've used more of that area. in comparison, Road Atlanta has much less space - most of the camping/grass area is *inside the track, whereas at Barber, all the walkaround area is accessible on the *outside of the track

Mike in Chi

JC

impressive reference.

Can you blow up a race track?

Bob Rouleau

FWIW Alan Wilson is the architect of a new track in these parts - Calabogie Motorsports. It's a fairly long track - about 3 miles and very technical. I had the chance to meet Alan and asked him how he goes about his design.

His answer (I paraphrase here) was that he operates within constraints:

- The terrain
- The owner's budget
- The intended use - club or racing and if racing, what kind.
- Current and anticipated safety requirements.

His web site gives a lot of technical details about his design and shows insight into the constraints he operates under. Calabogie is destined for Club Use only - no hard core racing. I'm not sure how that influences his design mind you, safety is safety after all. He does seem to be the premier race track designer though.

Rgds,

Premier Motorsp

JC,

It is maybe a little unfair to call him Peter Keating, but he is no Howard Roark. But then again who is?

I wonder about his motorsports experience. Based on my experience, I wonder if he knows what is fun in a racecar.

By the way, that is probably the only Fountainhead reference ever on the Rennlist.

Chris Cervelli
Premier Motorsports

Mike in Chi

Chris,

Yep, first one I've seen. (although I've suspected that Jim Bob Jumpback may be Howard Roark's bastard son)

But my question remains... you can blow up a race car, but can you blow up a race track?

Premier Motorsp

To do it right though, you'd first need to design the best racetrack the world has ever seen, and then blow it up.

One of my customers is a demo guy, I'm sure he knows how to blow up a racetrack.

So, do you think the motor of the world is dry-sumped?

Chris Cervelli
Premier Motorsports