View Full Version : Ways to push less in Auto-x corners
rigged94
03-13-02, 02:14 PM
I have only auto-x'ed a few times, usually what happens is I enter the turn, tap the brakes and start to turn and it ends up making a howling, slow, big turn deep at the exit of the turn. I'm thinking if I hit the brakes harder to slow me down more while I'm going straight and then turn, it might transfer more weight and be better. I don't auto-x to compete really but it's embarrassing to mess up like that and lose a number of seconds. This usually happens in at least one turn every 2 or 3 runs so I need to work on it for sure.
I have MM C/C plates with about -1.5 deg camber and BBK springs and that's it for suspension. My car is actually sitting with the a arms below parallel right now so I'm raising it up some with some GW spring spacers on all 4 corners. I'm sure having it sit that low causes more geometry change in the positive camber so that does not help me. It's a 94 Mustang vert. PS-will more camber help a noticeable amount? I could proably go -4 if I wanted...
The braking technique is exactly what you need to do and it's called "trail-braking". Basically do your hard straight line braking but don't come all the way off the brakes, start your turn in while you're still on them hard and ease off them in direct proportion to how much steering you're dialing in. Then have patience, don't hit the gas too hard or too soon or you'll take the weight back off the front tires and plow OUT of the turn too.
scottjua
03-13-02, 02:25 PM
Everything I was ever told was that braking in a straight line is the best policy. It keeps from having a more dramatic transfer of weight in the car during a turn and gives you a cleaner entry/exit from a turn.
When I have been auto Xing (cone dodging) I have been braking as absolutely late as possible just before I turn. At least I think...my mind tells me I'm doing it that way...what actually may be happening could be different. ;) if what was described above is trail barking...I've done that too :)
not sure about the camber questions though...anyone else?
rigged94
03-13-02, 02:36 PM
So the best policy is to brake hard while pointed straight (at the apex???) and start to turn as I'm coming off the brakes?
I think I currently go into the turn too fast, don't hit the brakes hard enough and then have issues.
I think you summed up the problem you are having very well. If you are waiting until you are in the turn to brake, this will definitely aggravate the understeering inherent to the Fox chassis. Do like the others said, brake hard while approaching the turn, as you initiate the turn in, ease off of the brakes, let the car negotiate the turn at steady speed, accelerate out of the turn. You are basically getting the load transferred to the front end so that the chassis has settled before actually having to turn. I wouldn't go with any more than 2.5 degrees negative camber. What tires are you running?
Edit: If you are serious about autocrossing, I suggest you check with the SCCA as to when one of their Autocross schools will be held in your area. The cost is usually $40-$50 and from my experience with them, I would highly recommend attending one.
Hawk
Actually if you use trail braking (letting off the brake while you are turning in) it will help the car rotate.
You can brake in a turn, but you had better be prepared to handle what happens next ;).
It sounds like you may be turning in early as well? Do you have to add more steering input on the exit of the turn? If so, try turning in later and maybe reading "Going Faster" by Carl Lopez :).
Also, after you have ruled out all possibilities of driver error, soften the front suspension (with shocks or springs) and/or stiffen the rear (with shocks/springs/sway bar/etc).
rigged94
03-13-02, 04:03 PM
I think I just carry too much speed and then don't brake enough. I still drive too much like I drive on a regular road. I am going to a school this year so hopefully that will help more. Thanks!
Sorry, I'm stepping in to call bullshit on all this "get your braking done in a straight line." This advice is from the Corey Shaw school of vehicle dynamics and doesn't apply unless you are worried about discombobulating your reactive kinematic servo loop. It's also slow as balls. This is autocrossing, gents, and the mustang is a piss poor chassis for it. You're never going to get around the cones fast trying to finesse the nose-heavy and poorly balanced dinosaur chassis. There are varying levels of smoothness when it comes to technique, but you'd never drive the car the same way you'd drive a boxster or S2000. Here's what I suggest you do:
1)Knock your camber plates in as far as they will go before the event. -4 might be a bit much, but -3, -3.5 is fine. It will help, and if you are on race tires it will help drastically, especially if you proceed to to the next step:
2)Trail brake like a whore. If people watch your run and think to themselves that it looks like you are trying to shake a mutant knife-weilding serial killer off the roof of your car, you're getting there. Like eknuds said, just be prepared for what happens next. It will feel weird the first couple times but you'll get used to it and you should warm up to how the car behaves before attempting to trail brake hard and deep. Once you get it down, be aggressive with it. A tap on the brakes isn't enough to get the car turned in in most situations. A lot of times it will take a quick and hard stab. When I drive, the steering wheel turn in motion and brake pedal stab are often simultaneous. Because you're going to be compressing the front suspension, this is where loads of static camber pays off.
Depending on class rules, I've heard urethane in the front lower control arms also helps a great deal with turn in. Really really stiff springs and shocks will help as well.
Trail braking isn't something we can teach you to do over the internet, you'll just have to experiment. It's also much easier if you have good brakes. The other mustang autocross gurus here will back me up on this and if there are any other doubts we can start comparing autocross seat time. I didn't really start to get fast until I learned the technique. If you want to be a big pimp, you can learn to do it with your left foot too.
Nick,
Until rigged gets some seat time, telling him to drive like that will get him nowhere in a hurry. Once you upset a Fox chassis, recovery isn't going to happen in time to get a decent run time. I have run a Fox chassis for several years and can tell you that smooth is the way to drive a Fox body. When I say smooth, I'm not saying slow. It takes very quick reflexes to get one of these cars around an autocross course with a decent time. The trick is to make those quick movements in a smooth manner to keep the chassis planted. As rigged gets more seat time, he will start pushing the car more and more, braking harder, turning harder, accellerating harder. The way to get fast at Autocross is to develop a feel for what the car is doing, then up the bar. Just like dance, or, if that isn't macho enough for you, Martial Arts, you practice slowly, precisely, until you are one with the movement, then crank it up. BTW, before you call Bullshit again, I autocross with several of the SCCA National champions, including Tom Kotzian. Smoooooth, that's the trick. Have you ever seen Tom drive? I'll give you a hint, he looks like Grandma on a Sunday drive. Then you drop your lower jaw when they announce his time.
BTW, before you call Bullshit again, I autocross with several of the SCCA National champions, including Tom Kotzian.Are you a national champion? That's about all I care about. I autocross with former and current national champions as well, but it doesn't make me a better driver just by association.Do like the others said, brake hard while approaching the turn, as you initiate the turn in, ease off of the brakes, let the car negotiate the turn at steady speed, accelerate out of the turn.Tell me which, if any, national champions brake right up to the turn, then let off, and negotiate turns at steady speed. Texas has some of the fastest FS drivers in the country, do they drive this way? Hell no, half the time they have the rear axle off the ground. Smoothness comes in form of technique, as in your inputs, motions and transitions are smooth and it's only something you can develop over time. However, the feel of the driving style necessary to make a heavy american sports car go fast is inherently not smooth. I can get around the course smooth as glass, and guess what? It's slow as shit. That's because the car doesn't turn in worth a damn, and unless you modify your style to include a supplemental input it will never turn in worth a damn.
Have you ever seen Tom drive? I'll give you a hint, he looks like Grandma on a Sunday drive. Then you drop your lower jaw when they announce his time.We have those guys down here too. Not a single one of them drives a mustang though. Boxter, 944, S2000, Z06.....but no mustangs or camaros. Madarash would be the counterpoint to this logic. Seen him drive?
Once you upset a Fox chassis, recovery isn't going to happen in time to get a decent run time.
I still think you're driving by the reactive kinematic style. Since when does trail braking upset the car to the point it wont recover? Maybe if you lose traction, but then you aren't doing it right. If you mean upsetting suspension balance, then I would like to know when the suspension was ever properly set in the first place.
Look, I didn't tell the guy to go out and set the world on fire at his next event, but there's no reason he can't start learning a new technique now. The pace at which he learns it is his prerogative. I've taken a friend of mine here autocrossing for the last year and not only has he never gotten in over his head, he's also progressed very rapidly. You don't have to start out like grandma to do well in this game, but I'll compromise with you anyway. Get the push under control, find the limit at which you can negotiate the turn without pushing all the way through it, then try introducing some trailbraking.
Hawk, If you're ever in the area I would love to split some seat time with you. I'm not a madman, but I know how to make a mustang go fast and so do a lot of other guys down here. Maybe they just do things differently in the north.
Rousch Cobra
03-13-02, 05:49 PM
Hmmm... I'm new here so I'm sure this won't be appreciated. We have a 5 time National Champion in our Region who is the Rookie Chief. The advice she dispenses at EVERY rookie walk through is this: "Your car can brake or it can turn... but trying to do both at the same time is not the fastest way around the course".
The guy who wins the index at every event drives a Boxster and couldn't be more boring to watch... looks slow, never a sqeak out of his tires... then they post his time and everyone looks like this :eek:
I would still bet he trail brakes (but since he has a rear biased car with good suspension geometry to start with, he may not need to do it as much).
From "Going Faster", pg 80 (a quote from IRL driver Robbie Buhl):
"This whole issue of trail-braking or not trail-braking is bullshit because every quick driver trail-brakes, whether they talk about it or not. On fast racetracks, like you find in Europe, you might do it less, but in the States you have more tight turns where you have to carry the brakes in there to help point the car and to gain an advantage by going deeper. There should be no question about it. That's that."
The book itself talks about it for seven pages.
Nick,
No, I'm not a National Champion. I do however, drive a Fox chassis car very well. To tell the whole truth, it is a worn out pile of shit. Even so, I end up in third place out of 15 cars in GS on a regular basis. I'm not completely dissagreeing with your approach. If you were to watch me drive, you might be impressed, who knows.
I agree with you whole heartedly on your point about perfectly smooth=incredibly slow with a Fox body. The last event I ran I did so on street tires due to laziness. Needless to say, the car didn't stick worth s**t.
After reading your latest post, I'd say you understand how to drive one of these fast. The thing I stress when someone new asks advice is learn to drive smooth first, speed will come with seat time. Too many of the new drivers get on the course and think it is nothing but a drag race with some turns in between. In reality, they're right, but, you have to keep the tires hooked to the pavement in order to get in a good run.
No, we don't do things differently out here in the NW, we run quick times on Autocross courses. If you want to know who drives like I describe, watch Tom's ZO6 sometime. If you don't know the name, check Tirerack results. He's 3 time SS champion, and a regular with 2 of the clubs I run with. There are numerous National Champions that live in the NW and drive like that. The reason I mentioned Tom is that we all learn by observation, as well as personal experience. In our Region the counterpoint to Tom would be Gary Millican from BC. Gary's car is almost never hooked to the pavement, but, he regularly sets fast time of the day. The catch 22 is, as you said, if you drive like Tom K. in a Fox, you will end up with slow times.
I won't advise people to drive the way I do because it will usually result in a lot of knocked down cones and missed gates. I brake late, carry throttle through the turns etc. By the book, I do everything wrong in order to maintain the momentum of my overweight, underpowered, ill handling Fox. The end result is, I turn in some respectable times. I'd love to come run with some of you guys on the board. I'm hoping next year I will have a car that is actually competetive in its class. Until then, I'm in the "run what ya' brung" category, just having fun.
Eknuds,
I thought I would respond to your post about trail braking. I don't know about the style the driver described in the previous post uses, but, the easiest way to tell what the drivers are doing in most of the classes is to watch their brake lights. The driver's I'm referring to are on the brakes at the last second approaching the turn, off during the entire turn. The lights make a great visual aid as to what is going on with the driver.
I end up in third place out of 15 cars in GSWell that's part of our disagreement right there. The 4 cyl fox is a different animal altogether when it comes to autocrossing and I'm not even sure how much of what I say could transfer over. I drive a 95 cobra with 350rwhp and big brakes. For me, momentum is easy to shed and recover so getting in and out of the turn faster is my priority. For instance, it's much more beneficial for me to shave distance off a turn by keeping a really tight line instead of trying to sweep wide and keep whatever speed I have up. My slalom approach is downright scary. If you want to know who drives like I describe, watch Tom's ZO6 sometime. If you don't know the name, check Tirerack results. He's 3 time SS champion, and a regular with 2 of the clubs I run with.I know exactly what you're describing. I've watched Erik Strelneiks, current SS pro solo champion, drive since I started. Even he trailbrakes, but every motion is much less violent and more difficult to discern. For one, he's an incredibly smooth and fast driver, but a lot of it is also the nature of the beast. A Z06 with $3K in the shocks alone damn sure better look more sorted than my car. Yet another example is my friend Bill Kim. He'll be making an all out effort in AS at nats this year, and I seriously think he has a shot at it. I walk courses with him a lot and his advice on lines is very useful. However, I can tell just by walking the course how different our actual runs will really be. There are simply things his car can do that mine cannot, and I have to recognize this decide what I'm going to do differently.
Anyway, the more we talk on this subject, the closer I think we're coming to parity. I exaggerate at times to add humor and entertainment, but I stick by my point. Trailbraking is part of going around the cones fast, no doubt about it. I probably do it a lot more than you because I usually have extra speed to sacrifice in order to make the car change directions faster.
The thing I stress when someone new asks advice is learn to drive smooth first, speed will come with seat time. I'll agree with you there too. Though my actual driving style might not be described as smooth, my inputs to the steering wheel, brake, and throttle are always as ginger as the situation allows. If you're not smooth on the controls, then you aren't in control of the car. Learning good lines is the first important step, and the last place you always look to make up time is braking (Going Faster says this too). In the case of "stunt driving," as Erik (Koenig) likes to describe it, the two are more difficult to seperate.
"Your car can brake or it can turn... but trying to do both at the same time is not the fastest way around the course". Good advice for a newbie, but not true. You can't threshhold brake and turn is a true statement, but the other is not. I would like to see how this instructor handles decreasing radius turns.
Nick,
I'd say we're in agreement. Different cars require different driving styles to obtain the same end goal, quick times on the course. I come from the high Horse power type of background, so, I'm very familiar with what you are saying. I'm hoping that I can get my hands on a Z28 to run in FS next year. I'm not really a Camaro guy, but, they have dominated the class. I did notice that a 95 Mustang did well at the Nat's this year. We had a 2002 Cobra run at our last event. The car was damn fast. If I could be convinced they were on an even playing field in FS, I would actually prefer the Mustang over the Z28. I'm tired of playing second fiddle due to running obsolete equipment. BTW, what class are you running in? With 350 HP it sounds to me more like CP.
If people watch your run and think to themselves that it looks like you are trying to shake a mutant knife-weilding serial killer off the roof of your car, you're getting there.
I don't have much to add other than this is a freakin' great line. :)
I look like that all the time when I autocross but generally end up getting beat by stock Civics.
I have had a debate with a couple people about how much autocross experience translates into open track/road racing. My opinion is that not much does, because if you drive like that at 8/10ths (or higher) on a road course you will be farming in a hurry.
SM.....basically a 3,300 lb. CP car with an interior minus the tire width.
SM, cool. I'm glad SCCA came up with that class. It allows one to have a street machine that really performs. I have thought about building a car to run in that class. For now, I'm going to stick with FS to keep the cost down. I'm lucky enough to have a fiancee that really likes autocross. She tried it last year and was instantly hooked. After one of the events last season I said, "We really need to get something competetive in its class like a Z28", her response, "How soon do you think we can get one?" I knew right then she was a keeper.
I just sense that rigged94 is past the point of having to explain about the braking vs turning thing. That's for people who don't know when to let OFF the brakes. By virtue of the fact he's cognizant of car balance enough to question whether or not he should carry the brakes into the turn in order to load the front tires more, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say this conversation about trailbraking is good for him, not bad.
It also sounds like he's not using the brakes hard enough or late enough which is a common mistake and which will lead to understeer, as will carrying too much brakes too far into the turn. That's what I mean about knowing when to let off. It's a fine line. Braking hard as you absolutely can, as late as you absolutely can, and not turning in too early, allows you to get the car rotated enough and in time to allow you to accelerate out of the apex.
I also say that if a person is developed enough as a driver to even understand the conversation then there's no such thing as upsetting the chassis too much with trailbraking. That's because if the car over-rotates under braking all you have to do is let off the brakes and the rotation stops, and if it doesn't, it's nothing a little counter-steer won't usually fix.
I would not advise this activity in a bald-ass newbie but I don't think that's the case here.
John in Houston
03-14-02, 09:48 AM
I only have one thing to add.... Nick's car drives MUCH differently than mine does... and the braking techniques I use on each car is different (I think Nick will agree with me on this).
See, Nick has ABS. In his car, I can go deeper in and then pound the pedal and the car slows.... Do that in my car and you lock the fronts and slide through the box. My car, I feel, has better modulation (easier to feel the threshold)... which makes it easer to ride in on the brake and release as going through (trail-braking).
I'm not disagreeing with anything that was said... but braking thresholds are different for different cars.
mfennell
03-14-02, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by rigged94
I think I just carry too much speed and then don't brake enough.
The hardest thing to learn IMHO is that you need to go slow in the slow turns. You also need to learn when to be patient after you've screwed up. Cranking in all sorts of steering just ruins your tires. When you've blown it, just curse under your breath and wait until you're going slow enough for the tires to do some good. Assuming you're not going to hit anything, of course.
A trailbraking tip I often share with novices is to imagine a string between your steering wheel and the brake. As you turn the wheel, you are forced to ease off the brake. When you get used to this, it's easy to initiate and control a little rotation by just hanging onto the brake a little bit longer. Coming out of the corner, the string moves to the gas - you have to unwind the wheel as you feed in throttle.
I know, intuitive to everyone here but rigged said he was just starting out.
rigged94
03-14-02, 03:36 PM
Damn, lots of responses. Looks like I'll just print this out and use it as a guide. Everyone has their own technique I guess. Hopefully whoever instructs me can give me some tips too. I'm not even sure what class I'm in but there is no way I'm competitive.
Close to stock suspension+3700# mustang+turbo'ed motor making 400rwhp=not the ideal car for auto-x.
FYI I run 245 series RE-71's on a 17x8.5 wheel in the front and Nitto DRAG RADIALS 275 series on a 17x9.5 wheel. I actually works ok since I hae a good amount of power I can give it some power out of the turn without much spin. The front tire could probably stand to be a 255 or 265 though...
I usually keep my camber at -1.5 (street setting). Would adding more in help alot for auto-x? I have not found a good way to change the C/C back and forth on my own anyway, and I'm not paying $40 for alignment after each event.
I just don't want to be"that guy" that everyone turns their head at while I'm making my run because my tires are yelling for their lives!
I don't think your tire mismatch is helping the understeer problem any. Physically it doesn't mean you have less traction in the front than if you had the same tires in the rear, but mentally it's going to play with you since you have a lot of rear grip for the straight line and none for the front.
Mfenell made the best observation to help with this. You just need seat time to develop the mental discipline of giving up the speed where you need to. With a mustang you really do slow down to a crawl through the really tight turns and it feels like you're losing 2 seconds every time you do it, but it's faster to crawl through with traction than bulldoze through with understeer. Often you will have to think a corner ahead as well, as in give it up early in one corner so you will be better set up for the next.
You and John have put together the other peice of the puzzle. We're all going to have different styles, not only for different cars, but personally as well. You can take some pointers and fundamentals, after that it's kind of up to you. There are a lot of things that work and you wont know until you try them out.
Msquared
03-14-02, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by rigged94
Damn, lots of responses. Looks like I'll just print this out and use it as a guide.
Boy, don't be readin' no forum printouts during your runs!
You know, this thread brings me back to my very first post in the predecessor to this forum. It's how I got the nickname "Shawshank." Too bad we can't go back and see it! Suffice to say that you must master trailbraking if you hope to drive a Mustang. If you ever find yourself doing all your braking in a straight line, and letting off the brakes completely before turning the wheel, you are going slooooooowwwwwww.
rigged,
I think the real issue here is that it's hard to describe what technique works because every turn on every autocross course is different. It would take us forever to put it into words. We are all generalizing in our advice. Where you brake, how hard you brake, where you start your turn in depends on so many things. You have to think at least 2 turns ahead of where you are, or, you aren't going to put down a fast time. The best advice we can give you is get as much seat time as you can. Watch everyone, both fast and slow, especially people running the same type of car. Take what works from what you observe and experiment. Ask questions of others at the events you are at. Most of the people I have encountered in the autocross scene are very helpful. As competetive as it is, there is a lot of comraderie. The best advice I can give is keep an open mind and have fun.:)
rigged94
03-15-02, 09:25 AM
Also, does anyone know what class I would be in?
I think it's still FS?
I'm so far from stock it's not funny, but I don't know what that class is?
John in Houston
03-15-02, 09:44 AM
Your wheels are not stock sized... so you would be in ESP at a minimum.
Post all of your mods and someone can give you a 100% response.
Later,
John.
rigged94
03-15-02, 10:08 AM
94Gt vert
single turbo, cobra heads/intake
bbk springs, 4pt rollbar, subframes, mm c/c plates
un-stock wheels, drag radials on rear and street tires on front, rock chips on front bumper ;)
Name that class!
John in Houston
03-15-02, 10:24 AM
E-modified.
You might be able to run STU (Street Touring Unlimited) if you are on street tires.
I think CP is out as you have a V8 with a power adder.
I know Street Modified is out because you are over the displacement limit for a power adder (4.0 litres).
That leaves E-modified.
Ahhh... missed the 'So far from stock' and only saw 'stock'.
rigged94
03-15-02, 11:39 AM
Well, are Nitto drag radials "street tires"? I would think so...that would be STU
John in Houston
03-15-02, 11:44 AM
Actually, I think the Nitto DR has been classified as an R type tire by the SCCA.
They have too low of a treadwear rating to be considered street tired for autox class purposes. Minumum rating is 140, the Nitto DR's are rated at 100. We all know treadwear ratings are a crock at best but that's the rule.
rigged94
03-15-02, 12:24 PM
ok, E modified it is. Thanks!
rigged94
03-15-02, 12:34 PM
ok, E modified it is. Thanks!
Don't forget Street Mod 2 (SM2)!!!
Nick
It's not autocrossing and it ain't Mustangs, but if you turn on Speed Channel right now you can get some good visuals.
Wait for an in-car view that shows the telemetry and notice how the braking cornering forces nearly always overlap. Braking force decreases as cornering force increases--not becoming zero until cornering force is about maxed out. Those suckers brake deep!
That's using all of the available grip, all the time. You don't get paid the big bucks by braking in a straight line only.
Every time I see or hear this debate going on, I am reminded of an interview with Jackie Stewart that (the late) Don Sherman did for Car and Driver years and years ago (see, there is an advantage to being a fossil).
Specifically, they were at the Ford Proving Grounds putting something through its paces, with Stewart driving, and Sherman taking up space. Sherman noticed that Stewart did all of his braking in a straight line, releasing the pedal well prior to entering the turns. Asking him why he employed that particular braking technique, Stewart replied (and I'm paraphrasing here, albeit accurately) that doing so allowed the car to be more balanced entering/through the turn, as the weight was not excessively transferred to the front end, effectively not asking too much of the front tires, and allowing better/faster conering, higher corner exit speeds, etc.
Sherman proceeded to inform Stewart that he had been to Bondurant several times, and, specifically, extolled the virtues of trail-braking, as he had learned there. Stewart countered that said technique just ain't the way to do things, and Sherman admonished him by way of Bondurant's insistance that trail braking was the shit, that he drummed it into his students heads, and, generally, so there.
Stewart repied (and this is why I remember the article 20+ years later): "Aye, and how many Grand Prix has Bondurant won?"
Now, admittedly, I knew precisely dick when I read this, and that may be all I still know....but it made sense then, and I've always been faster using this technique. Of course, maybe I just stink.
So, there it is.
Msquared
03-19-02, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by JonnyX
Stewart repied (and this is why I remember the article 20+ years later): "Aye, and how many Grand Prix has Bondurant won?"
I've seen Ayrton Senna, Mansel, Prost, et al drive in person, and I can say for a fact that they all trail brake, as do all other fast drivers I've ever seen race. This was to the point that in practice (this was in Pheonix, 1991) they were frequently locking front tires in an effort to explore the limits of their cars in various corners, get the best lines, and determine the best car setup. During actual racing, trailbraking is often used even more, as traffic dictates mid-corner braking and passing requires too-late braking to get by on the inside. Jackie Stewart is hardly the best driver ever to get in a car, but I can guarantee you that he trailbraked his cars, too, when he raced. Otherwise, he would have lost - period. I don't know what that article said, or what car they were testing for what purpose, or what kind of smoke Stewart wanted to blow up some no-drivin' journalist's ass. But I do know that I have witnessed the appalling lack of driving ability that most journalists display, and their unbelievable vacuum of knowledge when it comes to vehicle physics, and it's not hard for me to believe that what was printed bared little resemblance to what Jackie Stewart actually meant or actually did in the car that day. I also remember the commercials for the T-bird Turbocoupe where Stewart was show supposedly driving the car around a road course while he discussed the virtues of the car. The way that hog (it was still a Fox chassis, after all) was elegantly drifitng through corners with all 4 tires equally sliding, and with never a hint of plow in any clip, there was no way there wasn't massive trailbraking going on, or else they cobbled up the camera car with such tremendous rear roll stiffness to let it do that that trailbraking wasn't possible.
I am not writing all this to dis you, JonnyX, but rather to simply state that I wouldn't waste even one grain of salt on what any writer for Car and Driver has to say about driving technique or the physics of racing - not even on his version of what a professional racer has to say on the subject. The issue of braking and turning really comes down to simple physics. You cannot take advantage of all the traction a car has to offer if you insist on completing all braking in a straight line and then costing all the way through a corner. And I am willing to bet that even most of the people who claim they drive like this don't really drive like this, whether they realize it or not. The one case where I could see trailbraking not being good is when your car is so loose that it can't be done without spinning. If this is the case, your car is so badly set up that you're going to be slow no matter how you drive it!
PS - This thread has prompted me to change my moniker back to its past glory!
mfennell
03-19-02, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by JonnyX
Stewart repied (and this is why I remember the article 20+ years later): "Aye, and how many Grand Prix has Bondurant won?"
Hey, I remember that too. All these years later, I still don't believe he really drove that way except possibly in really fast corners. You can't go from zero to maximum cornering in zero time and you're just wasting available traction if you're not braking as you turn in.
Of course, I haven't won any grands prix either.
As for Car & Driver, Larry Webster has won a number of ITA races and Tony Swan did reasonably well with an outclassed S2000 in T2. Around here, you do not win ITA unless you are really good, no matter how much money you spend. It may be fun to call them hacks but I don't think there's much truth in it.
Originally posted by Msquared
I am not writing all this to dis you, JonnyX, but rather to simply state that I wouldn't waste even one grain of salt on what any writer for Car and Driver has to say about driving technique or the physics of racing - not even on his version of what a professional racer has to say on the subject.
Don't feel dissed in the least; just don't want you to think that I wrote this to appear as the final word on the subject.
I'm not dopey enough, even in my advanced stages of mid-life, to think that anything C&D says on racing/driving means enough to consider it a "source" (in fact, after all their praise of the VW Passat over the years, and coming to the end of a 3 year lease on one, and having decided it is the single worst POS I have ever had the displeasure of driving, I'm not so sure they know anything about anything). My point, perhaps poorly made, was that the process may have been debated/rebuked by somebody like Stewart, which is to this forum's credit.
I also found it irresistably interesting that the discussion (reportedly) regarding trail-braking vs. not-trail-braking became so contentious that when Sherman suggested that t-b'ing was "it" because Bondurant says so (a not-so-brilliant non-sequitor), Stewart replied as if to say "Oh yeah?" (also a non-sequitor; brilliant.... I'm also not so sure), and it made an impression on a young, impressionable JonnyX. (Also, just to clarify, while Sherman was, reportedly, commenting on how Stewart was driving the car at the time, I remember the affect of the discussion being about how Stewart drove, period; if somebody can find a copy of this in an archive somewhere, let me know)
I will say this much; was Stewart the best GP ever? No, but he was one of them. Did he drive his race cars as he said he did in that article? I dunno, but I'd venture to say that he was good enough that there's no need for him to snow-job anybody, especially Don Sherman, or any other journalist, so that makes it interesting.
Finally, in light of your comments Matt, I'd give money for the chance to show him that article, and ask him the same question again.
Msquared
03-19-02, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by mfennell
As for Car & Driver, Larry Webster has won a number of ITA races and Tony Swan did reasonably well with an outclassed S2000 in T2. Around here, you do not win ITA unless you are really good, no matter how much money you spend. It may be fun to call them hacks but I don't think there's much truth in it.
I am sure that some people on some magazine staffs can drive. Of course, I can't speak to every writer's skills because I haven't seen them all. It's certainly possible that Swan and Webster are good drivers, but I bet if they are they are the exception rather than the rule. It is also very possible that they aren't very good, but there just isn't much competition in their classes. Around here, I don't think too many of the amatuer classes have too many good drivers. At least that's the way it has always been when numerous friends of mine were racing, including the IT classes - basically, they all came in with underdog cars and no previous roadracing experience (but plenty of autocrossing) and proceded to place at the top of their class consistently. So I don't know, but we should all be open to the possibility that even these two examples aren't really great drivers. I am familiar with the results when several C&D writers, including Chubby Checker himself, tried to "comparison test" kit-car Cobras here in Texas. One of my friend's Cobras was in the test, and they literally couldn't keep it going straight on the autocross-like course. Keep in mind, this was no overpowered cobbled-up kit, but rather an Everett Morrison kit based on Vette C4 chassis, with a pretty mild 351 in it (actually, this one might have been a Chevy 350, but in either case it wasn't fast - maybe mid 12s at it's 2200lb weight). This car had been autocrossed by the owner and many, many TAMSCC members over the preceding year or two, and was not known as a difficult car to drive. These ass clowns just couldn't drive it. IIRC, the only car they could control - and consequently their proclaimed "winner" - was an even less powerful Cobra kit.
Does that make them bad people? No. What is bad is that these same NDAs (no-drivin' asses) drive all these cars and proceed to write judgments about them, and they pass themselves off as authorities on the subject. In fact, they count on and expect you to accept them as authorities so that they can sell more magazines. And it works, as a visit to almost any other forum will prove (just check the "content" of most of the posts on most forums - what joke! - you can always tell when guys have been reading too many mags). So when one of these pompous asses writes a story ultimately asserting that you must never use the brakes while turning, then I have to play the hack card. And no, I don't know exactly what Don Sherman's driving skills or credentials were, but I think it's fair to assume that he is a hack - and a pompous one at that - if he got in Jacke Stewart's face claiming that he has been to Bondurant and therefore knows more about driving than Stewart (no, I don't think he's the best F1 driver around, but he obviously had talent, and he was damn sure a few steps up from the typcial Bondurant graduate!). Even though it sounds like Bondurant's teaching was pretty accurate in this case, don't anyone ever forget that this is the guy who teaches "cadence braking." I would have to be pretty desperate to use him as a reference in any discussion of driving technique!
Finally JonnyX, I agree for sure that it would be fun to talk to Stewart and ask him the same question. It'd be even more fun to have ridden with him in a car with sensors on the brakes, throttle, and steering to see what he was really doing!
mfennell
03-19-02, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by Msquared
So when one of these pompous asses writes a story ultimately asserting that you must never use the brakes while turning, then I have to play the hack card.
I don't disagree with your assessment of Joe Average Journalist (and the Magazine Racers you just can't escape) but I don't remember the article the same way Johnny does. I just recall Sherman asking about trail braking as taught by Bondurant, not hassling Stewart and being an ass (even if he was an ass, would he have written the story to sound like he was?). I don't recall the story supporting one method or the other, just reporting the facts.
Finally JonnyX, I agree for sure that it would be fun to talk to Stewart and ask him the same question. It'd be even more fun to have ridden with him in a car with sensors on the brakes, throttle, and steering to see what he was really doing!
Agreed.
Originally posted by mfennell
I don't disagree with your assessment of Joe Average Journalist.......but I don't remember the article the same way Johnny does. I just recall Sherman asking about trail braking as taught by Bondurant, not hassling Stewart and being an ass (even if he was an ass, would he have written the story to sound like he was?). I don't recall the story supporting one method or the other, just reporting the facts.
See what happens when ~20 years passes and you don't review the reading materials? We were warned about this, but did we listen?
Just to be clear, while I remember the article to be about Stewart, rather that driving technique, in general. I am pretty sure that on this point (TB vs. whateverelse) Sherman made a point of writing about his strongly voiced disagreement. As I also recall, the writer also indicated feeling more than a little admonished as a result of Stewart's reply, and pretty much dropped it at that point, out of embarassment if nothing else. I think the point was to glorify Stewart more than for the (dopey) writer to make himself look stupid which, well, you get the point by now.
Now I'm going to spend the next 5 days looking for this article in an archive someplace......I just know it........
Originally posted by Msquared
Finally JonnyX, I agree for sure that it would be fun to talk to Stewart and ask him the same question. It'd be even more fun to have ridden with him in a car with sensors on the brakes, throttle, and steering to see what he was really doing!
Now you're talking. With all the hot-shoes around this place somebody has GOT to know this guy!
I mean, what the hell has he done lately that he's so good he can't post here?
Oh, and Matt, AMEN on the magazine jockies.
Blusmbl
03-19-02, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by Msquared
NDAs (no-drivin' asses)
That's remarkably close to a patented Caintmakit Racing moniker: "NDB", aka Non drivin' bassad. One of many ways to document spectacular failures. :p
One thing I'm suprised at- I've skimmed every single post, and don't see any reference to the traction/friction circle. Especially in reference to Jackie Stewart- reading Mark Donohue's book he seems to imply the european style of driving shys away from techniques such as trail braking (and subsequently using the entire circle), so I definitely believe JohnnyX about that article. However...we've come a long way in racing technology and driving skill since the mid 70's, so I don't know how much of that still holds true in regards to their driving style.
Parting thought: since my last 'autocross' session was ice racing both a Colt and a Mustang on studded tires, I'll have to say left foot/trail braking helps out immensely. But there are some points where it's easier to rotate the car with the throttle instead of the brake... :)
Kleckner
03-20-02, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by Blusmbl
Parting thought: since my last 'autocross' session was ice racing both a Colt and a Mustang on studded tires, I'll have to say left foot/trail braking helps out immensely. But there are some points where it's easier to rotate the car with the throttle instead of the brake... :)
Basically, how much trail braking or left foot can be used is entirely dependent on the car, the setup, and the course. There are many places to use it, and many places NOT to use it.
My POS street car, a T-Bird, was actually an OK autocrosser with decent tires and an alignment. It was such a big car that it had to be bitch slapped around the course, though. Lots of trail braking, almost like driving a rally car. I was pleased with the results in terms of class (F-stock street tire).
I drive my RWD rally car using trail/LFB. I used to use it a ton. When I changed from a limited slip to a locked (welded) diff in my rally car, I HAD to use less trail braking and then get onto the throttle earlier in a turn. Even on pavement. The car is more difficult to drive, but faster overall because of the way it comes off the corners. It is unorthodox, but it works.
One local autocrosser around here, Aaron Miller, absolutely bitch slaps his Neon around the course, and is very successful at the national level. I beleive that most school instructors will tell you that is not the way to drive a Neon. I have tried to co-drive a friends' Neon at autocrosses, I can't do it very well. Damned wrong wheel drive.
Anyways, bottom line is "different strokes for different folks". Some people CAN be successful with unorthodox setup or methods.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.