Reconfigured Turn One at Sebring
01-21-2012 | 04:07 PM
#61
Rennlist Hoonigan
which cost no drachmas
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
which cost no drachmas
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,725
Likes: 1,019
From: Manchester, NH
A little elaboration of my previous post.
It's important in these observations (and even in VR's response, I think, tell me if I'm out of line VR
) to understand that these are not criticisms of anyone's performance, they are observations of potential performance improvement.
Predicate #1 in my business: EVERYONE can go faster.
Predicate #2: There is NO car that cannot be driven faster by someone else.
Predicate #3: The greatest limitation to performance improvement is one's own belief (based on their perception and experience) of what is possible.
As one becomes familiar with the quantifiable and objectively measured "best practices" of those who are pros (have a demonstrated level of performance far in excess of those who do this more casually), one becomes familiar with the patterns of performance execution that differ the greatest between the two sets of drivers.
Those of us who make a living (on a daily basis and full-time) can observe these videos and snippets of data and relate VERY quickly those differences, doing rough calculations in our heads to come up with these sort of statements.
In the past twenty-two years, I have found, on average, the most time at Sebring for drivers in Turns 1, 5, 7, 13, 15 and 17. Very few do the Turn 3-4-5 or Turn 15-16 sequence well. Even fewer do Turn 7 or 17 without wasting a BUNCH of time...
That said, I don't ever spell out, guarantee or even target particular, very specific lap times in any of the work I do with drivers/clients/pros.
I have an idea of a range, in my mind, based on my experience and thousands of data files (from the widest range of driver performance that you can imagine), but there are too many variables not within the drivers control that dictate what the stopwatch will read to say "2 seconds, easy."
That's treating the problem symptomatically, instead of treating the disease. Focus on forming a detailed plan, execute as well as possible and the times will come without drama. The faster you go, the more detailed the plan has to be. At some point, you have to go beyond what you think is possible, but at a gradient that is gentle enough that will allow you to pull it back, if it goes to far beyond your limit.
It all boils down to equipping the driver with a vision SO CLEAR of EXACTLY where to place the car and under what dynamic condition, then measuring the variance between the ACTUAL best execution of THAT driver in other areas where said driver has been able to demonstrate best execution, then COLLECTIVELY between the coach and the driver come up with and identify where and how to execute that HIGHEST LEVEL of performance EVERY CORNER, EVERY LAP.
Only THEN does the driver goes quicker with less drama and the times come down. Often quicker than the driver expects they will be...
As a final observation, James Sofronas did a 2:10.7 in WC Qualifying in 2006, 2:10.8 in WC Qualifying in 2007 and a 2:11.9 in WC Qualifying in 2008. All this on Toyo RA-1/R888... THIS is fast...
So yes, there is evidence to support that the average Joe, properly focused and executing, can certainly do the target time suggested by VR.
Finally, TRAKCAR hits the diagnostic nail on the head. The fact that his throttle application points through T1 are, in his words, "a mess" (I read that they are not consistent in location, the car's heading or even at a speed that they occur) means that he HAS to have a better idea, in much more detail and processed real-time as he goes through this corner of what he want to do...
It's not just needing a "better rhythm" of what he needs to do "going in to t1," it's a better rhythm and a path so perfectly charted so that every control input, every speed versus distance measurement and execution, every lateral placement for every foot of forward motion is planned and executed to yield traces on the data that are overlaid nearly perfectly... Gotta do the same thing and at a high level, first.
If it were easy, everyone would do it! That's enough from me today...
It's important in these observations (and even in VR's response, I think, tell me if I'm out of line VR
) to understand that these are not criticisms of anyone's performance, they are observations of potential performance improvement.Predicate #1 in my business: EVERYONE can go faster.
Predicate #2: There is NO car that cannot be driven faster by someone else.
Predicate #3: The greatest limitation to performance improvement is one's own belief (based on their perception and experience) of what is possible.
As one becomes familiar with the quantifiable and objectively measured "best practices" of those who are pros (have a demonstrated level of performance far in excess of those who do this more casually), one becomes familiar with the patterns of performance execution that differ the greatest between the two sets of drivers.
Those of us who make a living (on a daily basis and full-time) can observe these videos and snippets of data and relate VERY quickly those differences, doing rough calculations in our heads to come up with these sort of statements.
In the past twenty-two years, I have found, on average, the most time at Sebring for drivers in Turns 1, 5, 7, 13, 15 and 17. Very few do the Turn 3-4-5 or Turn 15-16 sequence well. Even fewer do Turn 7 or 17 without wasting a BUNCH of time...
That said, I don't ever spell out, guarantee or even target particular, very specific lap times in any of the work I do with drivers/clients/pros.
I have an idea of a range, in my mind, based on my experience and thousands of data files (from the widest range of driver performance that you can imagine), but there are too many variables not within the drivers control that dictate what the stopwatch will read to say "2 seconds, easy."
That's treating the problem symptomatically, instead of treating the disease. Focus on forming a detailed plan, execute as well as possible and the times will come without drama. The faster you go, the more detailed the plan has to be. At some point, you have to go beyond what you think is possible, but at a gradient that is gentle enough that will allow you to pull it back, if it goes to far beyond your limit.
It all boils down to equipping the driver with a vision SO CLEAR of EXACTLY where to place the car and under what dynamic condition, then measuring the variance between the ACTUAL best execution of THAT driver in other areas where said driver has been able to demonstrate best execution, then COLLECTIVELY between the coach and the driver come up with and identify where and how to execute that HIGHEST LEVEL of performance EVERY CORNER, EVERY LAP.
Only THEN does the driver goes quicker with less drama and the times come down. Often quicker than the driver expects they will be...
As a final observation, James Sofronas did a 2:10.7 in WC Qualifying in 2006, 2:10.8 in WC Qualifying in 2007 and a 2:11.9 in WC Qualifying in 2008. All this on Toyo RA-1/R888... THIS is fast...
So yes, there is evidence to support that the average Joe, properly focused and executing, can certainly do the target time suggested by VR.
Finally, TRAKCAR hits the diagnostic nail on the head. The fact that his throttle application points through T1 are, in his words, "a mess" (I read that they are not consistent in location, the car's heading or even at a speed that they occur) means that he HAS to have a better idea, in much more detail and processed real-time as he goes through this corner of what he want to do...
It's not just needing a "better rhythm" of what he needs to do "going in to t1," it's a better rhythm and a path so perfectly charted so that every control input, every speed versus distance measurement and execution, every lateral placement for every foot of forward motion is planned and executed to yield traces on the data that are overlaid nearly perfectly... Gotta do the same thing and at a high level, first.
If it were easy, everyone would do it!
That's enough from me today...
01-21-2012 | 07:28 PM
#62
Rennlist Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 41,906
Likes: 1,753
From: All Ate Up With Motor
Yup.
IMO, as Peter and I both noted, it is key to enable the driver to do less work behind the wheel, which will feel slower to them initially. However, with the car doing more of the work, there is less overall drama, and thus the limits--which seemed so easy to reach previously--become notably farther away. Additionally, the car generally knows where to go. We just need to give it some gentle adult supervision, much like we would do dancing when we lead.
IMO, as Peter and I both noted, it is key to enable the driver to do less work behind the wheel, which will feel slower to them initially. However, with the car doing more of the work, there is less overall drama, and thus the limits--which seemed so easy to reach previously--become notably farther away. Additionally, the car generally knows where to go. We just need to give it some gentle adult supervision, much like we would do dancing when we lead.
01-21-2012 | 08:08 PM
#63
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,583
Likes: 10
From: Los Everglades
2:10 at Sebring on RA1 with a 3.8 GT3 RS is feasible, increase downforce by 500%, remove 500 lbs, add a sequential shifter and add 50Hp. This will do it, because that's what the 06-08 997 GT3 Cup WC cars were running, RSR engines with no restrictors, sequential trannies, more downforce than the 997 GT3 Cup, close ratio gearset, and 500 lbs less than a 2010 GT3 RS 3.8.
The WC aero package should be good for 2 secs on a street GT3 RS 3.8, the re-geared tranny with sequential good for another second, the extra 50Hp good for another second, the 500 lbs removed good for another 5 secs. 9 secs improvement without improving the driver, puts TRAKCAR on the 2:11.9 without all the adjustments he needs to make to his driving, very close to 997 GT3 Cup 3.6 on slicks lap times.
The WC aero package should be good for 2 secs on a street GT3 RS 3.8, the re-geared tranny with sequential good for another second, the extra 50Hp good for another second, the 500 lbs removed good for another 5 secs. 9 secs improvement without improving the driver, puts TRAKCAR on the 2:11.9 without all the adjustments he needs to make to his driving, very close to 997 GT3 Cup 3.6 on slicks lap times.
01-21-2012 | 08:16 PM
#64
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,583
Likes: 10
From: Los Everglades
"monstrous". Ummm, not really
I would be willing to join the debate and say that that car, set up properly, could beat an average 6 Cup. One thing that Peter (TrakCar) doesn't tell you is that he rarely ever adjusts sways, camber, etc. Now, beating an average 7 cup, probably not...especially at Sebring.
I would be willing to join the debate and say that that car, set up properly, could beat an average 6 Cup. One thing that Peter (TrakCar) doesn't tell you is that he rarely ever adjusts sways, camber, etc. Now, beating an average 7 cup, probably not...especially at Sebring.
The street car (3.8RS) is 600 lbs heavier, generates less than 80 lbs of downforce at speeds of 80mph, it reaches higher speed on the straights, but it needs to slow down way sooner, and carry less speed through the turns.
A 996 GT3 Cup can run a 2:13, probably a 2:12 at Sebring.
But as with everything, modifying the street car with all sort of go-fast parts, can get the car on the 996 GT3 Cup lap times:
This would do it:
- 2011 GT3 Cup wing and splitter
- 18x10 and 18x13 wheels on slicks
- remove 400 lbs
- extract another 50Hp from the engine
- re-gear it
01-21-2012 | 08:39 PM
#66
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 29,452
Likes: 1,700
From: S. Florida
A little elaboration of my previous post.
It's important in these observations (and even in VR's response, I think, tell me if I'm out of line VR) to understand that these are not criticisms of anyone's performance, they are observations of potential performance improvement.
Predicate #1 in my business: EVERYONE can go faster.
Predicate #2: There is NO car that cannot be driven faster by someone else.
Predicate #3: The greatest limitation to performance improvement is one's own belief (based on their perception and experience) of what is possible.
As one becomes familiar with the quantifiable and objectively measured "best practices" of those who are pros (have a demonstrated level of performance far in excess of those who do this more casually), one becomes familiar with the patterns of performance execution that differ the greatest between the two sets of drivers.
Those of us who make a living (on a daily basis and full-time) can observe these videos and snippets of data and relate VERY quickly those differences, doing rough calculations in our heads to come up with these sort of statements.
In the past twenty-two years, I have found, on average, the most time at Sebring for drivers in Turns 1, 5, 7, 13, 15 and 17. Very few do the Turn 3-4-5 or Turn 15-16 sequence well. Even fewer do Turn 7 or 17 without wasting a BUNCH of time...
That said, I don't ever spell out, guarantee or even target particular, very specific lap times in any of the work I do with drivers/clients/pros.
I have an idea of a range, in my mind, based on my experience and thousands of data files (from the widest range of driver performance that you can imagine), but there are too many variables not within the drivers control that dictate what the stopwatch will read to say "2 seconds, easy."
That's treating the problem symptomatically, instead of treating the disease. Focus on forming a detailed plan, execute as well as possible and the times will come without drama. The faster you go, the more detailed the plan has to be. At some point, you have to go beyond what you think is possible, but at a gradient that is gentle enough that will allow you to pull it back, if it goes to far beyond your limit.
It all boils down to equipping the driver with a vision SO CLEAR of EXACTLY where to place the car and under what dynamic condition, then measuring the variance between the ACTUAL best execution of THAT driver in other areas where said driver has been able to demonstrate best execution, then COLLECTIVELY between the coach and the driver come up with and identify where and how to execute that HIGHEST LEVEL of performance EVERY CORNER, EVERY LAP.
Only THEN does the driver goes quicker with less drama and the times come down. Often quicker than the driver expects they will be...
As a final observation, James Sofronas did a 2:10.7 in WC Qualifying in 2006, 2:10.8 in WC Qualifying in 2007 and a 2:11.9 in WC Qualifying in 2008. All this on Toyo RA-1/R888... THIS is fast...
So yes, there is evidence to support that the average Joe, properly focused and executing, can certainly do the target time suggested by VR.
Finally, TRAKCAR hits the diagnostic nail on the head. The fact that his throttle application points through T1 are, in his words, "a mess" (I read that they are not consistent in location, the car's heading or even at a speed that they occur) means that he HAS to have a better idea, in much more detail and processed real-time as he goes through this corner of what he want to do...
It's not just needing a "better rhythm" of what he needs to do "going in to t1," it's a better rhythm and a path so perfectly charted so that every control input, every speed versus distance measurement and execution, every lateral placement for every foot of forward motion is planned and executed to yield traces on the data that are overlaid nearly perfectly... Gotta do the same thing and at a high level, first.
If it were easy, everyone would do it! That's enough from me today...
It's important in these observations (and even in VR's response, I think, tell me if I'm out of line VR
) to understand that these are not criticisms of anyone's performance, they are observations of potential performance improvement.Predicate #1 in my business: EVERYONE can go faster.
Predicate #2: There is NO car that cannot be driven faster by someone else.
Predicate #3: The greatest limitation to performance improvement is one's own belief (based on their perception and experience) of what is possible.
As one becomes familiar with the quantifiable and objectively measured "best practices" of those who are pros (have a demonstrated level of performance far in excess of those who do this more casually), one becomes familiar with the patterns of performance execution that differ the greatest between the two sets of drivers.
Those of us who make a living (on a daily basis and full-time) can observe these videos and snippets of data and relate VERY quickly those differences, doing rough calculations in our heads to come up with these sort of statements.
In the past twenty-two years, I have found, on average, the most time at Sebring for drivers in Turns 1, 5, 7, 13, 15 and 17. Very few do the Turn 3-4-5 or Turn 15-16 sequence well. Even fewer do Turn 7 or 17 without wasting a BUNCH of time...
That said, I don't ever spell out, guarantee or even target particular, very specific lap times in any of the work I do with drivers/clients/pros.
I have an idea of a range, in my mind, based on my experience and thousands of data files (from the widest range of driver performance that you can imagine), but there are too many variables not within the drivers control that dictate what the stopwatch will read to say "2 seconds, easy."
That's treating the problem symptomatically, instead of treating the disease. Focus on forming a detailed plan, execute as well as possible and the times will come without drama. The faster you go, the more detailed the plan has to be. At some point, you have to go beyond what you think is possible, but at a gradient that is gentle enough that will allow you to pull it back, if it goes to far beyond your limit.
It all boils down to equipping the driver with a vision SO CLEAR of EXACTLY where to place the car and under what dynamic condition, then measuring the variance between the ACTUAL best execution of THAT driver in other areas where said driver has been able to demonstrate best execution, then COLLECTIVELY between the coach and the driver come up with and identify where and how to execute that HIGHEST LEVEL of performance EVERY CORNER, EVERY LAP.
Only THEN does the driver goes quicker with less drama and the times come down. Often quicker than the driver expects they will be...
As a final observation, James Sofronas did a 2:10.7 in WC Qualifying in 2006, 2:10.8 in WC Qualifying in 2007 and a 2:11.9 in WC Qualifying in 2008. All this on Toyo RA-1/R888... THIS is fast...
So yes, there is evidence to support that the average Joe, properly focused and executing, can certainly do the target time suggested by VR.
Finally, TRAKCAR hits the diagnostic nail on the head. The fact that his throttle application points through T1 are, in his words, "a mess" (I read that they are not consistent in location, the car's heading or even at a speed that they occur) means that he HAS to have a better idea, in much more detail and processed real-time as he goes through this corner of what he want to do...
It's not just needing a "better rhythm" of what he needs to do "going in to t1," it's a better rhythm and a path so perfectly charted so that every control input, every speed versus distance measurement and execution, every lateral placement for every foot of forward motion is planned and executed to yield traces on the data that are overlaid nearly perfectly... Gotta do the same thing and at a high level, first.
If it were easy, everyone would do it!
That's enough from me today...Thank you. Very well put and much appreciated.
01-21-2012 | 08:50 PM
#67
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 29,452
Likes: 1,700
From: S. Florida
"monstrous". Ummm, not really
I would be willing to join the debate and say that that car, set up properly, could beat an average 6 Cup. One thing that Peter (TrakCar) doesn't tell you is that he rarely ever adjusts sways, camber, etc. Now, beating an average 7 cup, probably not...especially at Sebring.
I would be willing to join the debate and say that that car, set up properly, could beat an average 6 Cup. One thing that Peter (TrakCar) doesn't tell you is that he rarely ever adjusts sways, camber, etc. Now, beating an average 7 cup, probably not...especially at Sebring.
I might try to go stiffer in the rear and if to much go one stiffer in the front. We will see if I feel like doing it. Remember trakcar is 260lbs and with a proper bowel movement I can get more weight advantage then stripping entire interior. With proper diet I can get .5 secs easy.
Still one exclusive day at Sebring with orbit would be 1 sec guaranteed.
01-21-2012 | 08:51 PM
#68
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 19,236
Likes: 3,397
From: Durham, NC and Virginia International Raceway
I'm still learning. Every day.
__________________
-Peter Krause
www.peterkrause.net
www.gofasternow.com
"Combining the Art and Science of Driving Fast!"
Specializing in Professional, Private Driver Performance Evaluation and Optimization
Consultation Available Remotely and at VIRginia International Raceway
-Peter Krause
www.peterkrause.net
www.gofasternow.com
"Combining the Art and Science of Driving Fast!"
Specializing in Professional, Private Driver Performance Evaluation and Optimization
Consultation Available Remotely and at VIRginia International Raceway
01-21-2012 | 11:16 PM
#70
Rennlist Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 5
From: Land of the Old People
No way a street 2010 GT3 RS 3.8 can keep up with a 996 GT3 Cup at a road course.
The street car (3.8RS) is 600 lbs heavier, generates less than 80 lbs of downforce at speeds of 80mph, it reaches higher speed on the straights, but it needs to slow down way sooner, and carry less speed through the turns.
A 996 GT3 Cup can run a 2:13, probably a 2:12 at Sebring.
But as with everything, modifying the street car with all sort of go-fast parts, can get the car on the 996 GT3 Cup lap times:
This would do it:
- 2011 GT3 Cup wing and splitter
- 18x10 and 18x13 wheels on slicks
- remove 400 lbs
- extract another 50Hp from the engine
- re-gear it
The street car (3.8RS) is 600 lbs heavier, generates less than 80 lbs of downforce at speeds of 80mph, it reaches higher speed on the straights, but it needs to slow down way sooner, and carry less speed through the turns.
A 996 GT3 Cup can run a 2:13, probably a 2:12 at Sebring.
But as with everything, modifying the street car with all sort of go-fast parts, can get the car on the 996 GT3 Cup lap times:
This would do it:
- 2011 GT3 Cup wing and splitter
- 18x10 and 18x13 wheels on slicks
- remove 400 lbs
- extract another 50Hp from the engine
- re-gear it
01-22-2012 | 12:28 PM
#73
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,297
Likes: 6
From: Deep Downtown Carrier, OK
Yep +964.
Ignoring the "Krause Paradigm" #1: i.e., somebody else is always (always) going to be able to drive your car faster than you can.
At some point you have to "run what you brung" and just do what it takes to drive it faster.
Ignoring the "Krause Paradigm" #1: i.e., somebody else is always (always) going to be able to drive your car faster than you can.
At some point you have to "run what you brung" and just do what it takes to drive it faster.
