This fast setup is WHACKED! I don't believe I've ever run a fast setup as
poor as this. It re-defines 'loose'.
Tomorrows race is certainly going to be interesting.
Larry
This fast setup is WHACKED! I don't believe I've ever run a fast setup as
poor as this. It re-defines 'loose'.
Tomorrows race is certainly going to be interesting.
Larry
Joe
>Joe
Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank:-0.381
MonsterRank: +339.873
N2002 Rank:+17.59
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Joe
> >What happened to running Atlanta and Las Vegas?
> >Joe
> Didn't those run afterwards?
> Eldred
> --
> Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
> GPLRank:-0.381
> MonsterRank: +339.873
> N2002 Rank:+17.59
> Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats
you
> with experience...
> Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Larry
> Joe
> > Folks,
> > This fast setup is WHACKED! I don't believe I've ever run a fast setup
as
> > poor as this. It re-defines 'loose'.
> > Tomorrows race is certainly going to be interesting.
> > Larry
> >What happened to running Atlanta and Las Vegas?
> >Joe
> Didn't those run afterwards?
> Eldred
> --
> Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
> GPLRank:-0.381
> MonsterRank: +339.873
> N2002 Rank:+17.59
> Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats
you
> with experience...
> Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
> > >What happened to running Atlanta and Las Vegas?
> > >Joe
> > Didn't those run afterwards?
> > Eldred
> > --
> > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
> > GPLRank:-0.381
> > MonsterRank: +339.873
> > N2002 Rank:+17.59
> > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats
> you
> > with experience...
> > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank:-0.381
MonsterRank: +339.873
N2002 Rank:+17.59
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
It's not too bad. Granted, you need to be gentle with it in clean air, but
it's very "danceable" in traffic. Low line, high line, middle line... it
goes everywhere. The usual way too much front brake bias, but otherwise I
can live with it.
I've found I needed to turn down the force setting on the force feedback
about 10 clicks from my NR2002 to stop it overresponding. Perhaps it helps
you too.
As usual it'll be all about surviving what the impatient get up to.
Jan.
=---
I believe whoever wrote it did it in TESTING mode, where speeds are at the
top, with no traffic involved. And therein lies the problem.
The setup is basically ok under these circumstances, and is obviously
designed for long runs. It becomes 'stable' after the fuel is burned off by
1/2 tank.
Unfortunately this does not take traffic into consideration. Especially OUR
type of traffic :)
I found that as long as I was running at full speed and didn't have to try
and slow down for parking lots in the turns, I was ok. But, like it
happened so many times during our race, the pace was slow and the turns
turned into parking lots when you tried to let up or, worse yet, brake to
avoid running into someone the rear end would swap around in a heartbeat.
I think this was because at slower speeds, there was insufficient airflow
over the rear spoiler. When the race started, I started off slow and
careful because I thought turn one was going to be a real mess. I entered
turn 2 slow and careful, and I'll be damned if the thing didn't snap-spin on
me on entry. Again, I think this is because there wasn't enough speed to
get the spoiler in action, not to mention the cold tires. A case where too
slow was more of a problem then too fast.
I also think this setup needs a couple of clicks more forward bias on the
brakes. This would, I believe, help the instability at lower speeds when
ovoidance of other cars was a necessity.
Larry
Wouldnt a few more clicks forward brake bias make this situation worse? I
would think a few clicks to the rear would be more stable, no?
Mitch
> I believe whoever wrote it did it in TESTING mode, where speeds are at the
> top, with no traffic involved. And therein lies the problem.
> The setup is basically ok under these circumstances, and is obviously
> designed for long runs. It becomes 'stable' after the fuel is burned off
by
> 1/2 tank.
> Unfortunately this does not take traffic into consideration. Especially
OUR
> type of traffic :)
> I found that as long as I was running at full speed and didn't have to try
> and slow down for parking lots in the turns, I was ok. But, like it
> happened so many times during our race, the pace was slow and the turns
> turned into parking lots when you tried to let up or, worse yet, brake to
> avoid running into someone the rear end would swap around in a heartbeat.
> I think this was because at slower speeds, there was insufficient airflow
> over the rear spoiler. When the race started, I started off slow and
> careful because I thought turn one was going to be a real mess. I entered
> turn 2 slow and careful, and I'll be damned if the thing didn't snap-spin
on
> me on entry. Again, I think this is because there wasn't enough speed to
> get the spoiler in action, not to mention the cold tires. A case where
too
> slow was more of a problem then too fast.
> I also think this setup needs a couple of clicks more forward bias on the
> brakes. This would, I believe, help the instability at lower speeds when
> ovoidance of other cars was a necessity.
> Larry
> > "Larry" wrote...
> > > Folks,
> > > This fast setup is WHACKED! I don't believe I've ever run
> > > a fast setup as poor as this. It re-defines 'loose'.
> > It's not too bad. Granted, you need to be gentle with it in clean air,
but
> > it's very "danceable" in traffic. Low line, high line, middle line... it
> > goes everywhere. The usual way too much front brake bias, but otherwise
I
> > can live with it.
> > I've found I needed to turn down the force setting on the force feedback
> > about 10 clicks from my NR2002 to stop it overresponding. Perhaps it
helps
> > you too.
> > > Tomorrows race is certainly going to be interesting.
> > As usual it'll be all about surviving what the impatient get up to.
> > Jan.
> > =---
No, I believe it needs more braking force at the front. This keeps the rear
end in check. Putting more on the rear would make it far worse.
I have a little trick I use that gets me out of spins the majority of the
time.
If I cannot correct it by normal means, I'll just 'stab' the brakes to the
floor for a split microsecond. This tends to pull the front end around and
put the rear back into line. This would not work at the Rock because there
was not enough forward bias. It works in most all cases where the bias is
set properly, you don't have to get carried away with the bias at all.
Larry
> Wouldnt a few more clicks forward brake bias make this situation worse? I
> would think a few clicks to the rear would be more stable, no?
> Mitch
> > I think I understand why this Setup was so troublesome now...
> > I believe whoever wrote it did it in TESTING mode, where speeds are at
the
> > top, with no traffic involved. And therein lies the problem.
> > The setup is basically ok under these circumstances, and is obviously
> > designed for long runs. It becomes 'stable' after the fuel is burned
off
> by
> > 1/2 tank.
> > Unfortunately this does not take traffic into consideration. Especially
> OUR
> > type of traffic :)
> > I found that as long as I was running at full speed and didn't have to
try
> > and slow down for parking lots in the turns, I was ok. But, like it
> > happened so many times during our race, the pace was slow and the turns
> > turned into parking lots when you tried to let up or, worse yet, brake
to
> > avoid running into someone the rear end would swap around in a
heartbeat.
> > I think this was because at slower speeds, there was insufficient
airflow
> > over the rear spoiler. When the race started, I started off slow and
> > careful because I thought turn one was going to be a real mess. I
entered
> > turn 2 slow and careful, and I'll be damned if the thing didn't
snap-spin
> on
> > me on entry. Again, I think this is because there wasn't enough speed
to
> > get the spoiler in action, not to mention the cold tires. A case where
> too
> > slow was more of a problem then too fast.
> > I also think this setup needs a couple of clicks more forward bias on
the
> > brakes. This would, I believe, help the instability at lower speeds
when
> > ovoidance of other cars was a necessity.
> > Larry
> > > "Larry" wrote...
> > > > Folks,
> > > > This fast setup is WHACKED! I don't believe I've ever run
> > > > a fast setup as poor as this. It re-defines 'loose'.
> > > It's not too bad. Granted, you need to be gentle with it in clean air,
> but
> > > it's very "danceable" in traffic. Low line, high line, middle line...
it
> > > goes everywhere. The usual way too much front brake bias, but
otherwise
> I
> > > can live with it.
> > > I've found I needed to turn down the force setting on the force
feedback
> > > about 10 clicks from my NR2002 to stop it overresponding. Perhaps it
> helps
> > > you too.
> > > > Tomorrows race is certainly going to be interesting.
> > > As usual it'll be all about surviving what the impatient get up to.
> > > Jan.
> > > =---
> No, I believe it needs more braking force at the front. This keeps the
rear
> end in check. Putting more on the rear would make it far worse.
> I have a little trick I use that gets me out of spins the majority of the
> time.
> If I cannot correct it by normal means, I'll just 'stab' the brakes to the
> floor for a split microsecond. This tends to pull the front end around
and
> put the rear back into line. This would not work at the Rock because
there
> was not enough forward bias. It works in most all cases where the bias is
> set properly, you don't have to get carried away with the bias at all.
> Larry
> > I think you're hittin the nail on the head Larry! If a driver can get
> into
> > his groove at this track all is ok. It's when you have to get out of
that
> > groove that the problems arise.
> > Wouldnt a few more clicks forward brake bias make this situation worse?
I
> > would think a few clicks to the rear would be more stable, no?
> > Mitch
> > > I think I understand why this Setup was so troublesome now...
> > > I believe whoever wrote it did it in TESTING mode, where speeds are at
> the
> > > top, with no traffic involved. And therein lies the problem.
> > > The setup is basically ok under these circumstances, and is obviously
> > > designed for long runs. It becomes 'stable' after the fuel is burned
> off
> > by
> > > 1/2 tank.
> > > Unfortunately this does not take traffic into consideration.
Especially
> > OUR
> > > type of traffic :)
> > > I found that as long as I was running at full speed and didn't have to
> try
> > > and slow down for parking lots in the turns, I was ok. But, like it
> > > happened so many times during our race, the pace was slow and the
turns
> > > turned into parking lots when you tried to let up or, worse yet, brake
> to
> > > avoid running into someone the rear end would swap around in a
> heartbeat.
> > > I think this was because at slower speeds, there was insufficient
> airflow
> > > over the rear spoiler. When the race started, I started off slow and
> > > careful because I thought turn one was going to be a real mess. I
> entered
> > > turn 2 slow and careful, and I'll be damned if the thing didn't
> snap-spin
> > on
> > > me on entry. Again, I think this is because there wasn't enough speed
> to
> > > get the spoiler in action, not to mention the cold tires. A case
where
> > too
> > > slow was more of a problem then too fast.
> > > I also think this setup needs a couple of clicks more forward bias on
> the
> > > brakes. This would, I believe, help the instability at lower speeds
> when
> > > ovoidance of other cars was a necessity.
> > > Larry
message
> > > > "Larry" wrote...
> > > > > Folks,
> > > > > This fast setup is WHACKED! I don't believe I've ever run
> > > > > a fast setup as poor as this. It re-defines 'loose'.
> > > > It's not too bad. Granted, you need to be gentle with it in clean
air,
> > but
> > > > it's very "danceable" in traffic. Low line, high line, middle
line...
> it
> > > > goes everywhere. The usual way too much front brake bias, but
> otherwise
> > I
> > > > can live with it.
> > > > I've found I needed to turn down the force setting on the force
> feedback
> > > > about 10 clicks from my NR2002 to stop it overresponding. Perhaps it
> > helps
> > > > you too.
> > > > > Tomorrows race is certainly going to be interesting.
> > > > As usual it'll be all about surviving what the impatient get up to.
> > > > Jan.
> > > > =---
No you don't. <g>
It's possible, but I wouldn't take it as a certainty.
It does get better as the run progresses. "You have to start off a little
free at The Rock" -Dale Jarrett
Our traffic is ok... our front runners push too hard to keep up with one or
two aliens who happen to be in the mix. <g>
Hehehe... to be caught out by someone's speed once can happen to the best of
us. Multiple times....
Check it: if you come flying up on someone where are you gonna go once
they're in the turn? -Nowhere. You're stuck with the same corner speed as
them and, because they don't have to get the car all squirmy to get slowed,
they'll beat you on accelleration too. Repeat at the next turn until you
lose it.
Now, smart drivers time their run on people so they're moving faster when
there is somewhere to pass. That's why people like Ginger just blow by
people you might struggle to pass.
There often is such a slow, but not slow enough speed, true. However, I
found that if some air was taken off the front (by following another car
around) this balanced the car nicely until the tyres came in.
It already has exessive front bias.
Not necessarily, certainly not on a banked surface against partial engine
power. You want to slow down, not transfer a lot of weight away from the
rear wheels.
Jan.
=---
Most <fast> setups have excessive front brake bias. That's my biggest
struggle with them.
Jan.
=---