TD in DC

I don't see who wouldn't agree with this. I'm not sure how this statement could start a 50 page debate.

The only difference in my mind between a high HP car and a low HP car is that you can drive a high HP car in an unimpressive way through the corners and still have a seemingly impressive overall lap time to the uninformed. If you drive a low HP car in an unimpressive way through the corners, your lap time will be the subject of ridicule and your arm will get extremely weary.

I mean, a 2:07 lap time seems objectively impressive to many people (and I am not picking on anyone here, I am using this time just to make a point in reference to Forklift's time). Indeed, a 2:07 lap time is 3 seconds per lap faster than Forklift's 2:10 lap times in his 263 HP RSA, so, over the course of a run session, you would leave him. However, if the car you are driving is capable of sub 2 minute laps, then a 2:07 lap time is really not all that impressive despite the fact that nobody else can keep up with you. Under those circumstances, Forklift driving a 263 HP RSA to a 2:10 lap time, or some guy driving a 147 HP 944 to a 2:20 lap time, would be much more impressive driving despite the fact that they get passed multiple times in the run session. It is all relative.

Driving at the limit is driving at the limit. Each type of car brings its own kind of challenges. In a low HP car, if you make a mistake ANYWHERE on the track, your momentum is killed and you cannot get it back soon. One mistake can have a five second impact on your lap time for that lap. By contrast, if you make a mistake in a higher HP car, you can regain your momentum with the gas pedal, which is why you see so many newbie drivers of high HP cars exhibit squid-type behavior: slow through the turns and fast on the straights aka point and shoot. The newbie drivers of low HP cars would love to be able to exhibit the same behavior. The only difference is that they can't even do that.

In a fast car, you can easily fool yourself into thinking that you are driving extremely well. Afterall, you are passing everyone else and nobody ever passes you. That's great for the ego. However, you will never know if you are really driving well unless you are running with a talented driver in a similar car. The higher up you are on the HP chain, the harder it is to find people like that simply because there isn't as much hardware out there. There are a lot better chances to drive with great drivers in lower HP cars simply because, generally speaking, there are more lower HP cars out on the track. Plus, it's harder to fool yourself about how well you drive because, no matter how well you are driving, many cars with higher HP will still pass you . . .

Who wouldn't want HP? Anyone who says they wouldn't is lying. I would love to have gobs of HP in my next race car.

TD in DC

Will do! That sounds great.

930man

i guess that is true.... but i dont think i have never been overly concerned with lap times in y personal experience,,, i do compare my lap time with my own lap time time in the same car... ie what i did this session vs that session or weekend to weekend...

i know one thing ,,,,mistakes are really magnified in a high HP car maybe not in "times" but damn that next corner comes up fast when you mess up!! lmaoooo i have the video and pics to prove it

TD i suggest a high hp car for you ! lol ... a DP would work well for you ... kind of a momentum car ,,, just fast all the way around the track

TD in DC

At this point, I would be happy with ANY kind of car to get back to the track!

In the end, all that counts is that you are having fun. NOTHING else matters. Lap times don't make a man (whether you are a good father, husband, friend, back door man, etc . . . does), but a good lap time sure is fun when you do manage to get one.

Also, I am 100% positive that driving a high HP car fast can be much scarier/dangerous. In that sense, learning in a low HP car is much easier. Driving at the limit is driving at the limit, but learning at a limit that is lower can be less intimidating.

930man

let me say god yes ... less intimidating........

i drove the gt2 for the first time at the track 2 weeks ago... i have driven a lot of cars and i can say driven them pretty quickly.. but it was a new experience ... everything came up pretty quickly and yes it had me a lil tight for a while...

"whether you are a good father, husband, friend, back door man, etc . . . " that in the end is all that matters... hence selling the cup cars to spend more time with the kids!

kurt M

I am going to have to go counter to the flow of water here. I think that high HP cars are not as easy to drive well as low hp cars. Fast? Yes more HP = less time to make a circle. Well? Not so easy. My low of the low HP car will take bone headed abuse through the gas pedal. I can almost drive the car with the ignition switch. Brick the gas pedal to the floor and only modulate the braking while flipping the ig switch as needed. With high HP you are working a pedal that can remove most of the drive wheels traction from over use in a turn. Add turbo boost lag and you have added a timing issue in as well. Can a high HP car pull lower times with a drover? sure, is it as easy to drive at the full potential? No, I think low HP cars are easer to drive to their full potential. There is also less pucker factor in a low hp car.
Drover respect seems to come from getting the most from the car you have in hand lap times aside.

(edit) well TD and others dropped posts that concure with my thinking on HP so disregard my going counter curent.

930man

see you and TD express yourselves better than i! this is what i was trying to say earlier.... didnt know how to say well

i will show you all a video clip at oak tree ... lets just say entertaining with hp car!

TD in DC

I think one of the funniest ironies of amatuer track enthusiasts is that we will argue for hours that our car is superior (e.g., rear- versus mid- versus front-engined car, AWD v. RWD v. FWD, n/a v. turbo, etc . . . ) when speaking in general terms but then, when asked about lap times, we argue for hours about how it is harder to get a good lap time in our cars.

"The 911 is the greatest track car of all times. Drivers of 911s are superior to other drivers."

"Why?"

"Because it is harder to drive a rear-engined 911 well than it is to drive other cars"

"Well, if it is superior, then why is it harder to drive?"



You can substitute in any number of variables (e.g., turbo, awd, etc . . )



The simple truth is that for 95% of us amateur drivers, 95% of the reason why we are not faster has nothing to do with the type of car we are driving. Our errors typically are FAR more basic than that. So I am always a little skeptical when I hear "my car is different" or "I need to upgrade my car," even when it is me who is saying it.

wanna911

Well since my lap times are the ones being used, I feel inclined to respond. If you think anyone could run a sub 2:00 in my car on old heat cycled hoosiers, please send them to me, because I'd like to meet them and learn something. FWIW my car is over 3600 lbs and about 550 hp. I definitely think as it ran it could go 3-4 seconds faster, but no where near a sub 2:00 car at least not on those tires. Personally many times I'll limit my straight speeds for that simple reason, to emphasize maximizing the cars ability everywhere else. For example, my cars has gotten to 170 on the back straight at Road Atlanta. But my fastest laps have been with back straight speeds of about 155-160.

My car has about the same weight/power ratio as a T1 car so I always have a guage to measure myself by as I think we all know there are some awesome drivers in the SCCA ranks and T1 is one of the most popular.

TD in DC

Out of all the information posted in this thread, THIS is what provokes a response, and this is how you choose to respond? Really? No "thanks for taking the time to respond to my request." Nothing? Wow.

I said that the times weren't meant to be directed at anyone. They were not. If I had meant to target you, I would have said so directly. Did you not read my earlier posts where I said good job? Did you think I did not mean that either?

You jumped down Dell's throat for doubting your lap times (I understood your point for doing so), but then you jump down my throat in a similar or worse fashion after I take the time to try to provide you with useful information about my initial observation. Thank you very much. I am glad I took the time . . .

LVDell

Now you see my frustration with this. However, as you pointed out Todd, I understand why he was upset with my SECOND response as it was inappropriate. I realize that and I even apologized for it that by the way was never accepted. No biggie, I didn't expect it to be accepted but I wanted to make sure that I did as I said what I posted was inappropriate.

Since this thread started he has been told on numerous occasions that he is not appreciative of the time people are putting into responses for him, keeps making excuses, etc, and thus the rationale for some of the posts people that have been made.

I regret now making the post I did and have basically punished myself by making sure I don't get dragged into these thread anymore as they never seem to come across as intended. (my postings are going to take a serious decline in number from now on as I am going to spend more time on the sidelines than in the action).

Reading my response to him in this thread (and a few other threads lately) I realized I am posting in a manner that is incongruent with who I am. That is embarrasing but I can handle it. First step is to apologize to the OP even if he doesn't care to hear it.

wanna911, again, you have my apologies.

jenk12m

after 7 pages already

wanna911

Dell was the only one to actually critique the video. And you are correct, I did not thank him for it, so in that regard, my apologies to Dell, and thank you's. You TD have been given opinions on things I never asked for and dont totally agree with, do you want a cookie?

Then you got upset about me saying I wouldnt change my whole style because of postings on the internet, made a sarcastic comment and have been making snide underhanded comments ever since. Sorry, but I do not play those games.

Then you started posting based on what OTHER people were emailing you about. So how does this apply to me again?

Larry Herman

Aww, now what fun is that Dell?

TD in DC

I gave you actual critique on your video. Specifically, I said that:

1) I agreed with Dell's line critique (do I have to retype it to get credit );
2) it sounded like you were coasting and using maintenance throttle, which I advised against; and
3) you should think about trying a lower gear in some of the corners.

In fact, here is my original post:

I didn't think you did a bad job to begin with, so I didn't have anything else. I am not going to make **** up. After all, my point was to be helpful, not run you down.

You responded as to why you disagreed with me.

I explained why I didn't understand your response. My explanation was directly related to line choice (and whether turning in earlier is wiser) and your preference for coasting/maintenance throttle. In fact, all of the information in this thread is directly related to the original exchange. Until this latest post, I had no idea that you found this information irksome.

Also, I didn't get upset about anything. When you told me that you disagreed, I said we apparently learned different techniques from different people, and, since I don't know everything, maybe you should just keep doing what you were doing. There wasn't a sarcastic note in my message. It was sincere. I have zero idea why you seem incapable of taking my remarks at face value, and yet you expect others to take your remarks at face value. Why is that?

I have not made one single snide remark in this thread. You, however, are the only one being insulting.

That's ok. It seems obvious to me that you believe you know better and that you can learn nothing from me or any of the information I have posted here. Maybe that is true (believe it or not, again, this is a sincere statement). Just wish I had known before I wasted my time here that you would find someone trying to pass forward knowledge to you would only annoy you. Next time I will know just to ignore your request for critique, particularly since it seems you are not interested.