Mahler9th

I can see from some of the responses that you can possibly lose time just from reviewing your own data and considering changing some of the timing and nature of your steering, brake and throttle inputs. Of course when we instruct, observing a driver coasting or not using all of the grip we know is there is akin to this process, on the macro scale. We don't need $10k worth of Motec for that.

And of course, there are suggestions regarding lines, but most, if not all of those presume your car's capabilities/inherent performance potential.

I have met JR and I think he is really onto something. Suppose you go to that POC event and the weather is decent and you have an instructor or coach familiar with WSIR and your configuration. And you know this instructor or coach is as good or better than you at driving near 100% of what the car can do. And you collect video and data from both drivers. Say take a guy like Tyson if he fits that description.

Then you get might much further toward your goals much, much faster than stduying professional Audi race car video and data.

Seems like a much more direct approach, and a good way to know whether your goal is even achievable for your vessel.

JackOlsen

Thanks so much, Matt. The two laps are from the same session. It's probably safe to say I wasn't getting the same from the tires in the earlier (slower) lap.

You've already donated too much of your time to the cause, but the slow (1:29.61) lap is #5 and the quick (1:27.04) one is #9 in this video of the full session:


The brake stab is actually just backing off the throttle momentarily, before going into turn 2 (right-hand sweeper).

And now that I'm watching the session, I see the reason for the extra braking and lower speed through the slow part of the course (turns 3-4-5) was being held up by a Corvette.

But I was still braking too early on the slower lap -- even when traffic wasn't an issue. I'll point out that the Nitto NT01s are not going to brake as well as stickier tires, and also that I not only don't have ABS, but don't have power brakes, either. But I think your point is valid about braking later in turns 1 and 9 (the one with the green line and the one with the circle). I'll try to implement that next time out.

Matt Romanowski

From the video it looks like the track is fairly flat in each braking zone, so you should be able to attain the same negative G values in each spot. When you look at yours, it ranges from around -1.2G to around -1G. You're goal should be to have the braking values across a lap to be within around .1G.

I run the same tires on a 914, so I'm familiar with the stick and lack of ABS and power brakes. The -1.2 G is very good (straight and level I get around -1G). To maximize braking, sometimes you have to step over the limit. If you are never locking a tire, you probably still have some to go. I tell people all the time to go out on old tires and not worry about locking the brakes up. This gives you good practice with getting to the threshold very quickly and then letting off if they lock. It's a skill that is tough to learn and can take some practice.

One thing you have to figure out in your driving is if you're a leader or chaser. For me, I'm quicker when I'm trying to keep up with someone. When I'm trying to keep up with someone, I'll have my moments of flowing brilliance (thanks Bruce!). It might be worth trying to get behind someone who typically runs 1-2 seconds faster than you and try to keep up.

JackOlsen

Mike, I can't go to the POC event -- can't go out for weekend events at all, right now. I think your suggestions are spot on, but I've got to work within constraints (some work-related, some family-related). Still, I think you're correct about Cup Cars and Audi race cars being an apples-to-oranges comparison, so I've dug up what I think will be more useful: Kevin Roush driving a just-slightly-faster-than-me lap in a V3 POC car.

Matt, thanks again. The braking zones for 1 and 3 are uphill, although they don't really look like it in the video. In fact, Willow doesn't look like it would come within 10 feet of Laguna Seca, in terms of elevation changes. But it does. I'll work on my braking in any case. I think it could have a lot to offer.

The Roush comparison is betwen my 1:27.04 and a lap of his that's 1:26.82. His car probably has better tires and brakes. Mine probably has better torque and gearing. I'm guessing we're close to even on power. But all of that is speculation.

Initially, I just looked at how much we each slowed down in each corner -- that's the easiest metric to get, and it is probably more useful with two cars that are as similar as these. But I think there is a problem with his GPS-generated speed numbers. The more I compared, the more it seemed like there was a slight lag in his speeds. Either that, or he's entering just about every corner faster than me and then exiting the corner slower than me. If you correct for the speedo lag, a lot of those differences diminish.

So I added a second half to the video, which is a comparison of segment times. From that, I deduced that I need to carry more speed through turns 5 and 9 -- which are also the most important corners on this track, in terms of lap times. I haven't gone through this stuff very thoroughly yet (I was working on it during one of my kids' gym classes). But that's the path I'm pursuing right now.

Here's the comparison. If you watch it in HD and full-screen, it's easy to compare speeds.

James-GMG

Jack,

Here is the data with the WC Audi vs the WC Porsche at Willow.
These are the best lap times I have with either of these cars....

JackOlsen

Thanks!

Since it's the holiday, here's a quick and dirty overlay of Mr. Sofronas' two fast laps and my slow one. One easy lesson for me is that I'm braking too early (and too soft) for turn 1. (The other easy lessons are that I'm not a pro and my car is pretty slow compared to a Cup Car or a race-prepped R8.)

Three Lines: R8-Cup-1972

I'm amazed by how much speed the Audi is able to carry through turn 2, and also the way it's able to not slow down at all for the second half of turn 8. (I don't slow down either, but that's because my car isn't able to go fast enough to lose any traction through there.)

It's not worth much -- but there's one brief heartbeat in turn 4 where I'm carrying pretty good speed. It's interesting to me not because my low-HP car has different cornering characteristics than the Cup Car or the R8, but more because I drive a fairly unconventional line through 4 -- and sometimes wonder if I'm losing time there. Well, I suppose it is possible that I am losing time there, but it also gives me the one moment where I'm carrying a tiny bit more speed than these other two (much faster) cars.

My car is the red line.

JackOlsen

Here's a better illustration of what Sofronas' data connects to. Again, the parts that are just amazing to me are his ability to go through the slow part of turn 2 at 110 mph and then his (and the Audi's) ability to continue to accelerate all the way through turn 8 -- up to 150+ mph -- right past the point where the Cup Car needs to back off in order to avoid flying off the track at 140 mph.

Mahler9th

I have noted previously your constraints. I perceive that you are primarily driving at events on a catch as catch can basis, and rarely (if ever) encounter cars that are similar to yours in performance potential and configuration.

Sure, there could be a Corvette or BMW out there going as fast or slightly faster, but these cars are different enough from yours that they may not be adequate benchmarks for what you are trying to achieve.

Having been at this for 2 1/2 decades+, I have observed various ways that folks attempt to break through thresholds... without making major changes in their vehicles. If folks know they are 1-2 seconds away from what an experienced expert can do on a regular basis with their car, and have motivation, then a number of approaches are of course possible.

In my experience, the easiest and most expeditious paths to success usually include methods like lead/follow, conversation, video and ride alongs.

I think it is really hard to "drive to the data," even if you are trying to do this with data from your car with a different driver. With video, I have instructed a driver regarding exit speed, and braking points... the latter usually as a means of achieving the former without leaving too much on the table. Of course, leaving too much on the table would manifest in non-optimized exit speed, no matter what. Regardless of BHP or other performance parameters.

So you see in this regard my preference is to work the driver toward "losing just enough speed, but no more," to achieve an exit speed goal, rather than using the concept of "braking harder and later." And of course I have used observation from within and outside of a car to work with a driver on line adjustments/modifications in an effort to achieve breakthroughs.

I have to admit that I have never, ever used the type of data analysis you are using. I had an interesting interchange with an expert friend who is one of the country's best at this and is "in the business," and he and I came to agreement on why we see so little penetration of this approach in some geographical areas and track/driving/racing subcultures. For example in my area, very, very few Porsche drivers really use data as the leading tool to attempt to break through thresholds (that is without making big changes to the car).

Even with all of this as a backdrop, I think the biggest impediment to going faster for many folks is getting to an environment where a strong minority, if not majority, of others on track with you and in the paddock with you are working on the same thing. Nowadays it seems really uncommon to go to an open track or DE event where a good number of folks are really focused on the craft and going faster. So often motivations spread across a pretty broad spectrum, and in my opinion this makes it tougher if you are focused on going faster and working by yourself.

The bulk of my early DE experience was in the PCA Golden Gate Region in events called time trials. In these events, a large number of folks there really worked constantly on going faster. Every session. Driven by (pardon the pun) the knowledge that it was put up or shut up at the end of the weekend with timed runs. Very different from race qualifying, by the way.

To me, the opposite of a time trial, is a track day with a sprinkling of folks in a wide variety of cars with a wide variety of goals. With the most common denominator being to "drive around and have fun."

I wonder if working with an in-person coach in your car at a weekday DE or test day would help you get to where you want to go. I suspect that folks that do some coaching, like JvO do weekday gigs. I suspect so.

Who knows what they would charge. Maybe you could even find someone who would do it for free.

To me, the path with the lowest likelihood of success (or at least the slowest path) would be comparing data from highly unlike cars offline, and then trying to drive to the data while working by yourself on one of these causal, sparsely attended DE/track days. If you are able to achieve success with this approach, you will have really accomplished a breakthrough about which you should be very, very proud.

Matt Romanowski

I think it is happening more and more and people don't realize it. Guys like Peter (ProCoach), Jason Hart, and many others are utilizing Traqmate and AiM Solo systems all the time to do this. Other guys like John Block are doing remote data coaching for racers, during their races, around the world from their home base.

ProCoach

Jack, you're greedy with corner entry speed in two places I can see on the vel/dist graph. This explains why James' vMin is sometimes a tick lower than your all-conquering antique! <very big grin>

Your "one shining moment" is, unfortunately, one of the two places...

James' upward acceleration trace is sure and unbroken, while yours is "stepped," indicating partial throttle application transitioning suddenly and quickly to more or full throttle acceleration.

James' stops the car, turns the car and then fully commits, whereas you are trying to "float it in" and end up having to "wait" on the car to finish turning, partially because you are too greedy and want gratification NOW! <big grin>

I was ready to pile on those guys saying "vMin is only one measure, and not a good sole one, at that." But they're right, in this case. A little deposit that hurts up front (slowing a tiny bit MORE than you want to) might let you take an earlier withdrawal AND pay off all the way down the subsequent "straights."

Fun stuff! Thanks for sharing.

ProCoach

First off, great discussion! Thanks for posting your considered and experienced thoughts.

And that motivation can be high, which is the seed for this thread. Great stuff!

I've worked with many people who break through doing just that. Once they are aware of untapped potential and opportunity, and the level required to bridge that gulf is known, they can DO it. Others need to think much more about it, but want and grow to need the data in order to make intelligent decisions on where and how much more to "push."

The data is a super accurate, unflinching, non-judgmental and in-car "observer." It only records what has happened.

Our minds are very powerful things, we remember things happening the way we would have liked them to be, not necessarily as they were...

Lastly, good data looks the same, platform to platform, track to track, driver to driver. The best execution of fundamental skills allows for incremental, measured improvement, but you have to know what you're doing now.

Part of the fun I'm having with reams of data from a variety of cars driven by World Champion drivers in F1, FIA GT1, Grand Am and ALMS, particularly at tracks I know well, is that the while the capabilities of the cars are not similar, the proper execution of fundamental skills in them is VERY similar...

On the former, a very good and true observation. One that is the biggest "area for growth" for most drivers. But then what do you do when you're going well?

On the latter, I have seen successful examples of both approaches, but "just enough" is a subjective measure, whereas braking later and harder (for a shorter period of time and closer to the assumption of lateral grip) is one that someone searching for a more objective measure might subscribe to. Most of the top-notch folks I've seen data for strive to fully utilize the entire available grip, ALL the time... That can be measured...

And you could "see" things on the data that are not evident or quantifiable that would bolster your observations within and from outside even further... It might increase your success rate, or at least hasten the breakthroughs! <grin>

What was it that you came to agreement, pray tell? And why is that, I wonder?

While there has been a quantum leap in the use of data, and especially data-laden video, in the club level track/driving/racing subcultures, I think a lot of people that have it don't use it. For a variety of reasons.

I've seen quite a bit more activity in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic and Southeast over the last two years. And there are "pockets" of like minded friends who go to the track together who are now energized and motivated to learn with the aid of this technology and professional counsel.

I have not seen that here. My (and my colleagues') business is exploding specifically among those who have done this for many, many years and say; "is this all there is? What can I do to go quicker, without too much more risk?"

It's become common in business and high-level sport to enlist the services of a professional to assist and formulate an accelerated plan for improvement, of course after a detailed analysis first. People are now doing that in their recreational activities, because it enhances their enjoyment! I hope, anyway...

JvO would be perfect, as would Randy Buck, Rene Villeneuve, Buddy Rice (yes, the Indy 500 winner) or anyone of a number of professionals, if only to give a jaundiced eye to WHAT YOU ARE DOING NOW (in granular detail), helping by collaborating with you to formulate a simple plan, one step at a time, then measure your execution of that plan. Free is worth what you pay for it.

I've said before that while there are people who internalize the new data-driven observations of their performance, I'm not sure that people singularly drive "to (the) data."

I see, in my mind and when on-track, exactly what the traces I am generating will look like... I am cursed!

Different people benefit from different approaches, which is why this input is good. Many folks need input, then noodle away on a variety of approaches for awhile in order to formulate a plan that will allow them to break through their OWN limitations... In my observation, the laws of physics don't really know the difference between cars, at least until the very ragged edge.

By examining the delta in the "execution," I think of your apt statement "work(ing) with a driver on line adjustments/modifications in an effort to achieve breakthroughs."

The addition of video and data comparisons can be used to formulate a knowledgeable, informed approach that CAN help accomplish the breakthroughs we all seek. Just another tool and more information to make a better choice...

tahoelife

Jack thank you for starting this thread I am seeking similar advice and sat in on Pro Coaches webinar on data learning recently. @mahler I currently run with GGR and do the Time trials they have worked hard to create car classes but still not perfect the hardest thing for me is trying to find someone in a similar car. It has created an environment for guys wanting to learn and using data to do so along with trading some lead follow (I help change a guys line last week at Laguna which made him consistently faster) he went from laps that were 7 tenths plus apart to putting back to back TT laps 1 tenth apart. With that said I am still struggling to find a real good baseline for my car and then try to learn from there. I think I am driving like Peter is explaining you being greedy with entry speed which may be hindering overall top speed at end of the straight. My observation is that in my low hp car I feel like the less change in speed is better for me as I / we do not have the power to make it up down the straight? (also drive air cooled 911) I try to drag a qualified person in my car as often as I can but has been hard to come by lately. I know the data has given me the most gains as in "knowing" I took a certain part of the track at a certain speed gives me confidence to do it again and figure out what i did to achieve it the video overlay is very helpful for me at least. In fact I watched some of Jacks you tube videos to help me this past weekend at Laguna so thank you

Mahler9th

Peter, I think we have reached this point before in other threads. And I am pretty sure we agree.

I have not done any formal or informal analysis, but I believe you about the growth of the data acq. market and the expansion of opportunities to provide coaching/instructing services with data at the core. What I find interesting is how it is growing and how folks are influenced to try and/or use these tools. I see a future but I have trouble seeing the path. We still need to write that book which bridges the old and the new. Everyone would benefit.

All of this technology has great benefits, but those do not come without costs. For my needs, data acq. consists of a good video camera with lights that come on in the FOV when brakes are applied and when WOT is reached. I need just one more item, some indication of exit speed, like a tach in the FOV. I can get the vast majority of what I want from that simple approach and I suspect this is true for most people.

Of course I do believe that I could use more sophisticated data and look at my inputs and/or compare them to others to get ideas to try go a bit faster more consistently. Trying to optimize from a control systems standpoint. But for me that approach assumes a certain budget justification that has higher near term priorities. Like having a more consistent set of tires at all events. Why have a $1000-2000 data acq. system to search for tenths when I am not keeping a reasonable set of tires under the car at all times?

I think it is great for folks like Jack to ask for input in places like this, and I am sure he has found ways to lose time in his data. It is an opportunity he has of which I think he has taken excellent advantage.

But I also see some interesting concepts perpetuated in threads like this, like these potential fallacies:

1. "Some tracks are horsepower tracks." What does this mean and how is it relevant?

2. "Some cars are momentum cars." What does this mean and how is it relevant?

These topics and others may be worthy of some discussion and in some ways may be more important than minute examination of the differences between the shapes if curves. In other words, there may be a real danger in loosing the basics as we examine the minutia. I am sure experienced and expert professionals in the coaching field are conscious of that and work hard to keep things within balance.

MSR Racer

I was thinking the same thing after watching video. Almost sounds as if he is dropping the clutch. May be it is an illusion!

ProCoach

Agreed. On all of the above!