Fast laps in GPL

I have been looking at quite a few Fast laps for several tracks, and I cannot figure out if I am running the same corner entry speeds, corner exit speeds and am very close in mid corner speed how these guys are running over a second faster on tracks like Monza and are in another Time Zone at SPA. I am not the fastest guy around and I do know it but is it depressing to sit down and watch some really quick laps a not know what I am doing wrong. It helped a bit at Watkins, I dropped a 1/4 second by seeing a few fast laps. I was just wondering what I am missing, I am running consistant 128.30 to 128.40s at Monza and 105.30 to 105.50s at Watkins. -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear.

Dont feel bad. I have the same problem yet im about 3-4 seconds slower at monza and about 10-15 secs off at spa. Yet the only place i could possibly be losing time at spa is in masta and eau rouge but i couldnt possibly loose that much time there. Watkins im completly outclassed but i know why. I can only put together like one good lap out of 20 there. For some reason its the hardest track for me. I would like to know why it is im so much slower if my speeds arent any slower except maybe 2 spots on the track at spa and hardly at all at monza??? Chris

It has everything in the worl to do with making a setup that fits your driving style, yet allows you to keep up. And hot-lapping is not the end--all be-all indicator of skill at a given track. I think too much emphasis is placed on single-lap speeds instead of overall race performance. A 1:28 lap time at Monza ain't squat if you can't keep it on the track lap after lap. -- ========================================================= John Simmons - Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12) http://www.members.home.net/jms1/index.html John Simmons - Barbarian Diecast Collector http://members.home.net/jsimm/diecast_index.html IGPS Director http://members.home.net/jms1/igps.html If you want to send me email, go to either of the URL's shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame. =========================================================

I agree with you there, and I can string as many laps as I care to in the mid 1:28 range easy. I was just trying to figure out how to go faster. -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear.

Which makes you VERY VERY fast, Cheers, Paul

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > It has everything in the worl to do with making a setup that fits your > > driving style, yet allows you to keep up. And hot-lapping is not the > > end--all be-all indicator of skill at a given track. I think too much > > emphasis is placed on single-lap speeds instead of overall race > > performance. A 1:28 lap time at Monza ain't squat if you can't keep it > > on the track lap after lap. > I agree with you there, and I can string as many laps as I care to in the > mid 1:28 range easy. I was just trying to figure out how to go faster. > -- > David Robinson > Egan's Law > The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first > gear.

I find it hard to believe that ANYBODY would complain about consistent mid 1:28's. That's a full 2 seconds faster than my best time, and about 5 seconds faster than my average time.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Which makes you VERY VERY fast, >>I agree with you there, and I can string as many laps as I >>care to in the mid 1:28 range easy. I was just trying to >>figure out how to go faster.

-- ========================================================= John Simmons - Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12) http://www.members.home.net/jms1/index.html John Simmons - Barbarian Diecast Collector http://members.home.net/jsimm/diecast_index.html IGPS Director http://www.paddedwall.org/igps/igps.html If you want to send me email, go to either of the URL's shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame. =========================================================

And both Paul and I just got back from a VROC race where good 'ol Casper Gripenberg was in the 1m27's in the race.... Cheers! Graeme Nash http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk ICQ# 11257824 1998 Xoom GP2 League Champion

I did not think I was that fast but thank you for being so nice. -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear.

I don't see what your problem is:-) If you can do consistent 1:28 laps at Monza you should be able to win most online races. -Jan Otto

I am just trying to figure out how to go faster, that is all I am not Complaining just trying to learn something. -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear.

Graeme, thanks for all the help. I was able to get my dog of a Packard Bell PC to run GPL even online with around 6 drivers and run good. -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear. > >Which makes you VERY VERY fast, > And both Paul and I just got back from a VROC race where good 'ol Casper > Gripenberg was in the 1m27's in the race.... > Cheers! > Graeme Nash > http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk > ICQ# 11257824 > 1998 Xoom GP2 League Champion

Quoted text (11 lines)

> I have been looking at quite a few Fast laps for several tracks, and I > cannot figure out if I am running the same corner entry speeds, corner exit > speeds and am very close in mid corner speed how these guys are running > over a second faster on tracks like Monza and are in another Time Zone at > SPA. I am not the fastest guy around and I do know it but is it depressing > to sit down and watch some really quick laps a not know what I am doing > wrong. It helped a bit at Watkins, I dropped a 1/4 second by seeing a few > fast laps. > I was just wondering what I am missing, I am running consistant 128.30 to > 128.40s at Monza and 105.30 to 105.50s at Watkins.

Hey, those lap times are pretty good, nothing to be ashamed of! I wish I could run those times every lap. My 'best' time at the Glen is a 105.04....... I have seen some times a few seconds faster.....! More practice me thinks! Unless anyone has heard of some way to 'cheat' GPL into giving more 'horsepower' or reduce the 'break-away' element other than the correct way of adjusting the set-ups (or just drive better). Don't get me wrong... I am not advocating a s/ware cheat, that in my opinion would ruin the on-line play and make it impossible to have a fair race, hopefully, that 'can't be done successfully! I am just asking if anyone knows if its been done? Dave Hawnt (UK)

Yeah, he's awesome isn't he and they were talking about a 1:27.10 in the elite class......wow!. But there's always someone faster however good you are - and someone slower - thank heavens. Btw, Graeme, I was connected to an ISDN host today and it rocked, no warps, no dcons and no blinking. Like you, I seldom connect to modem hosts, but I wouldn't write off ISDN - I've been on much worse cable and ADSL hosts than the ISDN one today, Cheers, Paul

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >Which makes you VERY VERY fast, > And both Paul and I just got back from a VROC race where good 'ol Casper > Gripenberg was in the 1m27's in the race.... > Cheers! > Graeme Nash > http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk > ICQ# 11257824 > 1998 Xoom GP2 League Champion

Anyone know what kind of hardware & controller he uses?

Quoted text (13 lines)

>>Which makes you VERY VERY fast, >And both Paul and I just got back from a VROC race where good 'ol Casper >Gripenberg was in the 1m27's in the race.... >Cheers! >Graeme Nash >http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk >ICQ# 11257824 >1998 Xoom GP2 League Champion

can anyone tell me if GPL now works over ip masquerading/firewalling? Cheers, Uwe -- Spam-proof e-mail: Uwe Schuerkamp <hoover at telemedia . de> http://www.telemedia.de/~hoover ////// Phone: +49-5241-80-10-66 Best of Scottish Folk: http://home.pages.de/~nsg >>> Blue Ribbon Campaign: Support Free Speech on the Internet <<<

Currently, you can only host races in such a situation. Maybe Papy will improve this area of the sim with the patch Randy Cassidy spoke of. We can only wait and see. By the way, I've heard that [the current release of] GPL does allow you to host AND join races if you're using IPchains, but since IPchains is only fully implemented in the 2.1.x developer kernels, I haven't yet tried it (I'm running 2.0.36). However, the current buzz is that 2.2.0 is *supposed* to be released on Monday (01/25/99), so if you're a brave soul you could try it. Personally, I'm waiting for either SUSE or Slackware (prefer Slackware) to hit the streets with an official distribution CD. Maybe Papy's waiting for 2.2.0 to be released to, so they can say that you need to be running 2.2.0 in order for GPL to work from behgind a Linux firewall... :-) -- ========================================================= John Simmons - Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12) http://www.members.home.net/jms1/index.html John Simmons - Barbarian Diecast Collector http://members.home.net/jsimm/diecast_index.html IGPS Director [link lost in import] If you want to send me email, go to either of the URL's shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame. =========================================================

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I have been looking at quite a few Fast laps for several tracks, and I >cannot figure out if I am running the same corner entry speeds, corner exit >speeds and am very close in mid corner speed how these guys are running >over a second faster on tracks like Monza and are in another Time Zone at >SPA. I am not the fastest guy around and I do know it but is it depressing >to sit down and watch some really quick laps a not know what I am doing >wrong. It helped a bit at Watkins, I dropped a 1/4 second by seeing a few >fast laps.

I'm still quite a bit off the fastest guys (Wolfgang, Sasa, Tadej, Ian..) but I can tell you a way to maybe help you check where you are loosing time. Because there are no good reference points on the track you cannot cross-check your exit speeds out of corners with others. So what you do is you check your maximum speed before braking into every corner. You get two kinds of information from this. One, you get the entry speed, but you also get an indication of your exit speed from the previous corner. If your exit speed was low from the previous corner your entry speed into the next turn will be lower. This is not perfect..but helps.. If you want to do it real techie style ;) Then you run a really good lap, record Vmax (maximum entry speed) at the entry to every corner, and Vmin (the minimum speed through the corner) for every corner. Also record the speed when you cross the start/finish line. Do the same with e.g. Wolfgang's 1:27.14 lap, and you have a nice (depressing) reference :) You will probably find that you're 0-10 km/h slower at every point. Wolfgang is especially fast at the start/finish line. Hence he's exiting really good out of Parabolica. Also check his entry into Parabolica. He's coming in VERY fast, but turning in a little early, letting the car slide out and wide. He's kinda doing two apexes at Parabolica. One entry apex and one exit.. The Lesmos are also crucial to a fast lap. You have to be excruciatingly smooth through these two corners and get on the power long before the second Lesmo straightens out. You can also measure exit speed at the end of the armco of Ascari. The armco provides a nice reference point. A high exit speed comes from smoothness through the turn, and is important for the straight before Parabolica. So to sum it up: you have to be fast and smooth at every corner to make a really good lap :) Was this a surprise? :) I know this is just a game, but it is fun to think about these things why someone is faster than you or not. You can go about it in a technical, methodical (boring? :)) way, as I just desribed..or you can just look at the laps, enjoy them, and see if you maybe learn something.. Hope I could help :) Regards, Casper

I am doing that right now and find that thru curva grande our entry speed is the same i am quicker mid corner nad exit is the same, at lesmos his entry is a touch quicker but mid and exit is the same. the Ascari our entry is within 1 mph and exit is the same and at para he is about three mph faster out and 2 mph slower mid corner I have always done this even in real racing. The tach reading at the end of the straight is your grade card for the last corner. Thanks for hte help tho. -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear.

>> I find it hard to believe that ANYBODY would complain about consistent >> mid 1:28's. That's a full 2 seconds faster than my best time, and about >> 5 seconds faster than my average time. >I am just trying to figure out how to go faster, that is all I am not >Complaining just trying to learn something. David, it's just that the number of people who are qualified to give you advice on going even faster is decreasing rapidly. :) My lap times are comparable to John's, even a bit slower. Go to W. Woeger - mere mortals can't help you getting better anymore. The Force is strong in you! :) -- Wolfgang Preiss \ E-mail copies of replies to this posting are welcome.

Don't take online lap times for granted. Once I turned 1.27.15 in quals for Monza without flat-shifting :o) Sasa Mencinger did 1.26.90 on the same lap. Lap times done online can sometimes be confusing. Regards, Tadej Krevh Lotus Internet Racing http://members.xoom.com/LotusRacing/

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >Which makes you VERY VERY fast, > And both Paul and I just got back from a VROC race where good 'ol Casper > Gripenberg was in the 1m27's in the race.... > Cheers! > Graeme Nash > http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk > ICQ# 11257824 > 1998 Xoom GP2 League Champion

1:27.10 is yet to be done in Monza :o) Cheers, Tadej Krevh

Quoted text (26 lines)

> Yeah, he's awesome isn't he and they were talking about a 1:27.10 in the > elite class......wow!. But there's always someone faster however good you > are - and someone slower - thank heavens. > Btw, Graeme, I was connected to an ISDN host today and it rocked, no warps, > no dcons and no blinking. Like you, I seldom connect to modem hosts, but I > wouldn't write off ISDN - I've been on much worse cable and ADSL hosts than > the ISDN one today, > Cheers, > Paul > > >Which makes you VERY VERY fast, > > And both Paul and I just got back from a VROC race where good 'ol Casper > > Gripenberg was in the 1m27's in the race.... > > Cheers! > > Graeme Nash > > http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk > > ICQ# 11257824 > > 1998 Xoom GP2 League Champion

Hi, going faster at Monza ? Try scrubbing off the speed entering turn 1 and keep feathering the throttle while going past the apex (you need a nice setup to do that). Trail brake into Lesmo 1. Get on the power in Lesmo2 as soon as possible, even if that means sacrifising some (pre)apex speed. Be smooth through that long left flat-out corner (watch replay - your speed shouldn't drop under 180mph). Brake for Parabolica just when you're about to pass that white sign on the left side of the track. Let the car carry some speed into the corner. Line up the car on the inside of the track and accelerate out of Parabolica in 3rd gear, correcting your steering with wheel rather then throttle, be smooth. Cheers, Tadej Krevh Lotus Internet Racing http://members.xoom.com/LotusRacing/ // Monza, 1:27.36

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > I find it hard to believe that ANYBODY would complain about consistent > > mid 1:28's. That's a full 2 seconds faster than my best time, and about > > 5 seconds faster than my average time. > I am just trying to figure out how to go faster, that is all I am not > Complaining just trying to learn something. > -- > David Robinson > Egan's Law > The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first > gear.

I dowloaded a few of his laps and have been disecting them. I still am trying to figure out where he is making the second on me at Monza tho. We run almost the same entry, middle and exit corner speeds witht he exception of Parabolica and I really not sure if there is a full second in Parabolica. I guess a few hundred more laps will be the final decider for me. Thanks, -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear.

It's not just the apex,entry or exit speed. Take Lesmo 1 for instance (or DL my 1.27.36 lap) - it for sure looks faster then W.Woeger's (compare the speeds). But on the finish line he get's the pole :o) I think I'm loosing my time in the mid-corner. It's better to come in slower and line the car up before the apex and then soon on the power. I could be wrong thou :o) Cheers, Tadej Krevh

Quoted text (25 lines)

> I dowloaded a few of his laps and have been disecting them. I still am > trying to figure out where he is making the second on me at Monza tho. We > run almost the same entry, middle and exit corner speeds witht he exception > of Parabolica and I really not sure if there is a full second in > Parabolica. I guess a few hundred more laps will be the final decider for > me. > Thanks, > -- > David Robinson > Egan's Law > The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first > gear. > > David, it's just that the number of people who are qualified to give > > you advice on going even faster is decreasing rapidly. :) My lap times > > are comparable to John's, even a bit slower. Go to W. Woeger - mere > > mortals can't help you getting better anymore. The Force is strong in > > you! :) > > -- > > Wolfgang Preiss

No it's not ;) Ian Lake just posted 1:27.09 to gpl.gamesmania.com 8-O And he did 1:27.13 or some such in the GPLWS Elite qualifying session. Pretty neat, eh? :-) Regards, Casper

Yeah, unbeliavable. But I think once I get my PDPI settled (it still needs some fine tunning) and replace the pots I should be in the magic 1.26 at Monza :o)) At present, when at full throttle, the slider in the calibration jumps from 1.0000 to 0.927something. That's baaaaaaad for places like Monza. It worked for Monaco & Silverstone though :o)) ce'ya on the track, Tadej Krevh Lotus Internet Racing http://members.xoom.com/LotusRacing/

Quoted text (11 lines)

>>1:27.10 is yet to be done in Monza :o) >>Cheers, >> Tadej Krevh >No it's not ;) Ian Lake just posted 1:27.09 to gpl.gamesmania.com 8-O >And he did 1:27.13 or some such in the GPLWS Elite qualifying session. >Pretty neat, eh? :-) >Regards, > Casper

You think that's good? I've done 0:04.53 at Rouen - beat that :-) Ok, I confess, I was using warp drive :-) Cheers, Paul

Quoted text (27 lines)

> Don't take online lap times for granted. > Once I turned 1.27.15 in quals for Monza without flat-shifting :o) > Sasa Mencinger did 1.26.90 on the same lap. Lap times done > online can sometimes be confusing. > Regards, > Tadej Krevh > Lotus Internet Racing > http://members.xoom.com/LotusRacing/ > > >Which makes you VERY VERY fast, > > And both Paul and I just got back from a VROC race where good 'ol Casper > > Gripenberg was in the 1m27's in the race.... > > Cheers! > > Graeme Nash > > http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk > > ICQ# 11257824 > > 1998 Xoom GP2 League Champion

On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:02:20 +0100, "Tadej Krevh" >Yeah, unbeliavable. >But I think once I get my PDPI settled (it still needs some fine tunning) Tune your PDPI?? How? I'd loveto tune my PDPI. Sam

>I dowloaded a few of his laps and have been disecting them. I still am >trying to figure out where he is making the second on me at Monza tho. We >run almost the same entry, middle and exit corner speeds witht he exception >of Parabolica and I really not sure if there is a full second in >Parabolica. I guess a few hundred more laps will be the final decider for >me. Parabolica is the beginning of one *huge* straight. A few mph difference in exit speed can add up to a lot of time over the whole straight, I should think. Especially since the car is always accelerating. You might like to compare the time it takes to get from the end of the guardrail on the left of Parabolica to the braking zone for Curva Grande. -- Wolfgang Preiss \ E-mail copies of replies to this posting are welcome.

On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:02:20 +0100, "Tadej Krevh" >Yeah, unbeliavable. >But I think once I get my PDPI settled (it still needs some fine tunning) >and >replace the pots I should be in the magic 1.26 at Monza :o)) It's possible. But it will take hours to get I believe. My 1m27s09 took around 2 hours, so to get into the 26's is going to take many more. One technique for this jumpiness is to short calibrate your accelerator. i.e. when calibrating don't push it all the way in. Leave a few millimetres of gap. That way you garanteed full throttle, when u put the pedal to the metal :) hehehe, yeah it was 1m27s16 for race 2 :) Ian

Rouen's the only track that I've done a warp-speed lap at... 2.14 seconds!

Wolfgang you are right there, the MPH is the same but since the car is near top revs I might not be at 193 MPH as long I will have to look at that. Thanks, -- David Robinson Egan's Law The Pace car will always go 2 MPH slower then your race car idles in first gear. > >I dowloaded a few of his laps and have been disecting them. I still am > >trying to figure out where he is making the second on me at Monza tho. We > >run almost the same entry, middle and exit corner speeds witht he exception > >of Parabolica and I really not sure if there is a full second in > >Parabolica. I guess a few hundred more laps will be the final decider for > >me. > Parabolica is the beginning of one *huge* straight. A few mph > difference in exit speed can add up to a lot of time over the whole > straight, I should think. Especially since the car is always > accelerating. You might like to compare the time it takes to get from > the end of the guardrail on the left of Parabolica to the braking zone > for Curva Grande. > -- > Wolfgang Preiss \ E-mail copies of replies to this posting are welcome. cancellation warned.

Quoted text (12 lines)

>>I dowloaded a few of his laps and have been disecting them. I still am >>trying to figure out where he is making the second on me at Monza tho. We >>run almost the same entry, middle and exit corner speeds witht he exception >>of Parabolica and I really not sure if there is a full second in >>Parabolica. I guess a few hundred more laps will be the final decider for >>me. >Parabolica is the beginning of one *huge* straight. A few mph >difference in exit speed can add up to a lot of time over the whole >straight, I should think. Especially since the car is always >accelerating. You might like to compare the time it takes to get from >the end of the guardrail on the left of Parabolica to the braking zone >for Curva Grande.

Okay, let's figure it out: Let's compare two drivers accelerating out of a 100mph curve on a long straight, topping out at 200mph, but the slower guy is on the gas 50 meters later. If both are accelerating the same way (the two acceleration curves are 50 meters apart, no wheelspin, same car and setup) the difference is that the slow guy is cruising the first 50 meters at the beginning at 100mph (1.125sec), while the fast pilot is speeding 'his' 50 meters at 200mph at the end of the straight. The difference is only 0.56 seconds which is IMHO not much compared to the 50 meters (or more than 10 lenghts of a car, or 1.125sec) which the slow driver hesitates before he dares to move his right foot. So IMHO pretty awful driving is needed to lose 0.5 seconds between two corners. I think "exit speed" is somewhat overrated. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:44:41 +0000, Paul Jones >I think this is a terrible idea, if it were there I'd use but it's bad just the >same. Worse than this though is the racing line drawn on with *** - you just >don't get this on race tracks What? Certainly, there is a racing line on race tracks, if there was a race or practise. I think it's needed for orientation, especially for braking - there are to few distance signs or other marks at the side of the tracks. Helpful, certainly. But not "original 1967". -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

Good point, I've been following this thread as a mediocre driver (low 1:30's at Monza) and last night tried to do what was suggested - take a fast replay and note down max/min straight/corner speeds. Comparing my laps against a 1:27.7 shows that i'm reaching the same top speeds on the straights and am hitting the same min speeds on the corners, the only place i'm losing out is that i'm 4 miles an hour down on the curve after the bridge. I find it hard to believe that 4 mph there equates to nearly 2.5 seconds a lap. Studying the replay more closely it seems that the faster driver is at minimum speed in the corner for a much shorter length of time before he gets on the gas, this must mean that i'm at maximum speed on a straight for less time, but again - 2.5 seconds a lap??? I must be losing the time elsewhere - quite probably in my braking areas where i'm sure there is room for improvement. just my tuppence worth -- Mike Buckley WWW: www.toastyhamster.freeserve.co.uk

Well let's assume that your time through the corners is identical. There still remain any number of different ways to get from Exit Point A to Entry Point B while maintaining identical exit and entry speeds. Perhaps your gearing is different, affecting your rate of acceleration between A and B? Secondly, consider your attitude on exit from the corners. Even though their exit speeds may be identical, the driver who is scrubbing more on exit will be slower than the driver who's not. Along those same lines, consider the fact that the speed observed may or may not be along the groove. If the "speed" is the velocity component along the car's longitudinal axis, and not along the groove, then what's observed to be identical exit speeds may not, in fact, be identical. I guess, tire slippage could also be a consideration also if "speed" is measured, as in a road car, off wheel rotation. Finally, have you considered actually doing a little split timing while watching the replays? Since you race, I know you have a good timer. Having said all that, I hope it does you no good whatsoever. You're too fast as is. <G>

Good idea I have not done that yet.

> Worse than this though is the racing line drawn on with *** - you just > >don't get this on race tracks > What? > Certainly, there is a racing line on race tracks, if there was a race > or practise. Well, on a real circuit, I've never seen a racing line like the ones you get in GPL and other sims. I think it would be even more unlikely with the kind of tyre (tire) compounds that they used in 1967, Cheers, Paul

A buddy of mine is having trouble with a T2 in ICR2 -- it steers in the opposite direction. I tried recalibrating it with him, but that didn't help. Any ideas? Thanks Kurt

I don't have either a T2 or ICR2, but I have had that symptom. When you calibrate, try turning the wheel the other way first, from your usual way. Worked for me. Another time, I calibrated several times and it finally worked. Sam

On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 19:15:27 +0000, Paul Jones

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> Worse than this though is the racing line drawn on with *** - you just >> >don't get this on race tracks >> What? >> Certainly, there is a racing line on race tracks, if there was a race >> or practise. >Well, on a real circuit, I've never seen a racing line like the ones you get in GPL >and other sims. I think it would be even more unlikely with the kind of tyre (tire) >compounds that they used in 1967,

I remmember watching the F1 saga a while ago on tv. In one episode they showed the 1967 cars and circuits. I remmember a camera angle they had that was above the station hairpin at monaco. It had an extremely dark racing groove around the entire corner. Ian

Quoted text (12 lines)

>Okay, let's figure it out: >Let's compare two drivers accelerating out of a 100mph curve on a long >straight, topping out at 200mph, but the slower guy is on the gas 50 >meters later. >If both are accelerating the same way (the two acceleration curves are >50 meters apart, no wheelspin, same car and setup) the difference is >that the slow guy is cruising the first 50 meters at the beginning at >100mph (1.125sec), while the fast pilot is speeding 'his' 50 meters at >200mph at the end of the straight. The difference is only 0.56 seconds >which is IMHO not much compared to the 50 meters (or more than 10 >lenghts of a car, or 1.125sec) which the slow driver hesitates before >he dares to move his right foot.

This is where you're probably mistaken. The two 'accelerating curves' won't stay 50m apart through the acceleration. The distance will grow with time. This comes from the fact that the guy starting to accelerate earlier has a higher speed at any point and time on the straight where he's accelerating than the guy starting 50m later. So at the end of the straight your 50m will have grown to, say 70m or a 100m. This is why it always feels difficult to overtake another car when accelerating out from a corner. The other car will always seem to pull impossibly away. The only way to pass a car is by either drafting or leaving enough room before the exit of the turn so that you can get on the gas earlier when coming out. Actually a combination of both would seem to be most effective :) This is why when 'defending' your position it is a good idea to slow down excessivly in a corner so that the car behind you failes to get the needed room he needs to get on the gas earlier. I.e. he's so close to you that he has to wait for you to start accelerating _first_ before he can start accelerating. Ok. This is not the only factor which makes a fast lap. Others have commented on driving at Vmin through the corner for a shorter period, for example. I guess an ideal corner entry & exit would be to have the car constantly accelerating or decelerating. So just as you reach the apex you lift the brakes and immidiately step on the gas. Your total time at Vmin time will be infinitely small. Another factor might be the driving line. You can take the long way around a corner or the short way..but still with comparable Vmax/min speeds. Regards, Casper

> >You think that's good? I've done 0:04.53 at Rouen - beat that :-) > >Ok, I confess, I was using warp drive :-) > Rouen's the only track that I've done a warp-speed lap at... 2.14 seconds! H'mmm, the dreaded 'warp'... I got lap time at Monza 1m26.... I thought I was really getting good, I saved the replay of the lap, not totally convinced I had picked up 3 seconds form my normal lap times..... I thought I would be honest with myself and time the replay with a stopwatch.... yup, you guessed it... a 1m29... I was just fooling/warping my ego! ;-) Dave Hawnt (UK)

Quoted text (8 lines)

> A buddy of mine is having trouble with a T2 in ICR2 -- it steers in the > opposite direction. I tried recalibrating it with him, but that didn't help. > Any ideas? > Thanks > Kurt

H'mm, If I remember, you must steer LEFT first when the calibration screen comes up...! Make sure you calibrate in W95 first if you use that OS..... If all else fails, remove the calibration setup file in ICR2 , can't remember its file name, but you may need the sim to seek your wheel out again for calibration! Hope this helps.... Dave Hawnt (UK)

>H'mm, If I remember, you must steer LEFT first when the calibration screen >comes up...! Close, but not exactly right... you have to steer left first in the SET CONTROLS screen, not the calibration screen... - m. ============================================ Mike Holthouse - Indianapolis, IN Drop the "X" to e-mail me. ============================================

Quoted text (36 lines)

>>Okay, let's figure it out: >>Let's compare two drivers accelerating out of a 100mph curve on a long >>straight, topping out at 200mph, but the slower guy is on the gas 50 >>meters later. >>If both are accelerating the same way (the two acceleration curves are >>50 meters apart, no wheelspin, same car and setup) the difference is >>that the slow guy is cruising the first 50 meters at the beginning at >>100mph (1.125sec), while the fast pilot is speeding 'his' 50 meters at >>200mph at the end of the straight. The difference is only 0.56 seconds >>which is IMHO not much compared to the 50 meters (or more than 10 >>lenghts of a car, or 1.125sec) which the slow driver hesitates before >>he dares to move his right foot. >This is where you're probably mistaken. The two 'accelerating curves' >won't stay 50m apart through the acceleration. The distance will >grow with time. This comes from the fact that the guy starting >to accelerate earlier has a higher speed at any point and time >on the straight where he's accelerating than the guy starting >50m later. So at the end of the straight your 50m will >have grown to, say 70m or a 100m. >This is why it always feels difficult to overtake another car when >accelerating out from a corner. The other car will always seem to pull >impossibly away. The only way to pass a car is by either drafting >or leaving enough room before the exit of the turn so that you can >get on the gas earlier when coming out. Actually a combination of both >would seem to be most effective :) This is why when 'defending' your >position it is a good idea to slow down excessivly in a corner so that >the car behind you failes to get the needed room he needs to get >on the gas earlier. I.e. he's so close to you that he has to >wait for you to start accelerating _first_ before he can >start accelerating. ><snip> >Regards, > Casper

You make a mistake here I think. The distance between the cars grows, at the same time the speed of the cars increases, as a result the time difference remains the same (if they accelerate at the same rate on every point of the track). The explanation must be that the faster driver has started to accelerate earlier. If he did this from a lower cornering speed, it looks like the drivers are leaving the corner at the same speed. But the faster one has a greater acceleration, and will be faster on the straight until approaching top speed. Regards, Bart Westra

Ian Lake wrote Or just watch the movie Grand Prix at the start at Monaco. You can clearly see the racing groove almost all around the dark. It's very nice (of course that movie rules for racing sequences). Zandvoort from Nine days in the summer also has a dark groove IIRC. and the Ring also, but the Ring has a very unsmooth texture to the track. I figure it's a limitation of the GPL graphic engine with the track texture. That would be really incredible to actually have a realistic feeling to the track texture (not the same one for 24km). -= Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard/Nas-Frank> -= NROS Nascar sanctioned Guide http://www.nros.com/ -= SimRacing Online http://www.simracing.com/ -= Official mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. -= May the Downforce be with you... "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I meant FineTune it :o) I get very small calibration space and that can be fixed with hacking the registry. Contact PDPI for help, or ask around here. I'm going to try it out when I get home on Thursday. I'm also expecting new pots :o) Tadej

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:02:20 +0100, "Tadej Krevh" > >Yeah, unbeliavable. > >But I think once I get my PDPI settled (it still needs some fine tunning) > Tune your PDPI?? How? I'd loveto tune my PDPI. > Sam

Yeah, probably :o) But I already have at least some 700 laps done there ;o) Yeah, I'll try it out :o)I did that in GP2 though... Yeah, you're crazy ;o)) I mean, how on earth could you do that without flat-shifting ?? Although one shouldn't trust too much to online times (I did once 1.27.15 and Sasa 1.26.90) :o) What do you think you gained most over W.Woeger's lap ? Parabolica, Lesmo1, Lesmo2 or Curva Grande ? I doubt it could be Ascari :o) ce'ya Tadej Krevh

I meant the beginning of the acceleration. What distances the cars have during the acceleration time/distance does not matter. Well, 100m is a good guess, but you forget that in this example, the cars were not 50m apart at the beginning, but side by side. The overall gain of early acceleration is, as I figured out, 50m. As you did not understand my example the way I intended, I'll explain it again: Let's say a single driver travels at 100mph, then accelerates somehow within a mile to 200 mph, then continues at 200 difference in the time needed. With that example, the 1.1sec or 50m acceleration delay at 100mph of the slower driver/driving leeds to only 0.5 sec or 50m disadvantage compared to the fast driver/driving. BTW: I think the effect of seeing a growing/shrinking distance to the car ahead is called "*** band effect", because the time gap between two cars stays roughly the same, but speeds and thus distances vary. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

I think any modern software should take this into consideration, and leave some "space" at idle and full throttle, especially when the signal is shakier than any nervous human foot can be. In GP2, it was possible to check whether you reached 100% throttle, or not. In GPL, you have to guess. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 11:24:36 +0100, Tadej Krevh

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> >and >> >replace the pots I should be in the magic 1.26 at Monza :o)) >> It's possible. But it will take hours to get I believe. My 1m27s09 >> took around 2 hours, so to get into the 26's is going to take many >> more. >Yeah, probably :o) >But I already have at least some 700 laps done there ;o)

yikes! I think I would be closer to 350. I don't particulary like the track, so I don't practice it much. In qualifying for race 1 I did 4 laps under wolfi's qual time time of 1m27s45, best being 1m27s29. For race 2 in qual I managed 3 good laps being, 1m27s31, 1m27s29, 1m27s17 (just checked, wasn't 16 after all :) All weren't using flat-shifting :) In hotlapping, I really don't think flatshifting makes any difference to normal lifting on gear changes. Just depends how well you can lift, and how consistant you are. I rarely blow a lotus engine nowadays :) Though, in hotlapping it's easier to just keep it floored. Yeah, probably 1 out every 50 laps you will have a warp lap where you can't be sure weather you did that time or not. Actually I have no idea. I watched his lap once to see where the lines where, then I went out and hotlapped, making adjustments to what I believe was a faster line. In general, the secret to a good lap at monza is getting parabolica down pat. You can lose almost 1/2 a second on this corner alone from a good to great lap. Ian

Which is just as it was in real life when comparing 1994 F1 to 1967 F1. Cheers! John

>>In GP2, it was possible to check whether you reached 100% throttle, or >>not. In GPL, you have to guess. >Which is just as it was in real life when comparing 1994 F1 to 1967 >F1. No. Such simple things don't need electronic data recording. After I bought a used motorbike and got a horsepower test, I looked into the carb in search for the missing hp and found that the throttle did not open completely. But I confess, that was in the 80s. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

Quoted text (9 lines)

>As you did not understand my example the way I intended, I'll explain >it again: Let's say a single driver travels at 100mph, then >accelerates somehow within a mile to 200 mph, then continues at 200 >difference in the time needed. >With that example, the 1.1sec or 50m acceleration delay at 100mph of >the slower driver/driving leeds to only 0.5 sec or 50m disadvantage >compared to the fast driver/driving.

I don't know where my previous posting disappeared. In fact I hope it disappeared since it's probably not correct either :) But just for fun I made an excel sheet where you can try out different values and see the result. http://www.hut.fi/~casper/floorit.xls I hope I remembered the old formulas right. The sheet does not take braking into account, but I don't think the end result would be that much different... Now start checking your Monza times with excel sheets and let's see those lap times come down ;) Regards, Casper

Sorry for the long post, but it is all relevant. See my addition at the bottom.

Quoted text (38 lines)

>>>Okay, let's figure it out: >>>Let's compare two drivers accelerating out of a 100mph curve on a long >>>straight, topping out at 200mph, but the slower guy is on the gas 50 >>>meters later. >>>If both are accelerating the same way (the two acceleration curves are >>>50 meters apart, no wheelspin, same car and setup) the difference is >>>that the slow guy is cruising the first 50 meters at the beginning at >>>100mph (1.125sec), while the fast pilot is speeding 'his' 50 meters at >>>200mph at the end of the straight. The difference is only 0.56 seconds >>>which is IMHO not much compared to the 50 meters (or more than 10 >>>lenghts of a car, or 1.125sec) which the slow driver hesitates before >>>he dares to move his right foot. >>This is where you're probably mistaken. The two 'accelerating curves' >>won't stay 50m apart through the acceleration. The distance will >>grow with time. This comes from the fact that the guy starting >>to accelerate earlier has a higher speed at any point and time >>on the straight where he's accelerating than the guy starting >>50m later. So at the end of the straight your 50m will >>have grown to, say 70m or a 100m. >>This is why it always feels difficult to overtake another car when >>accelerating out from a corner. The other car will always seem to pull >>impossibly away. The only way to pass a car is by either drafting >>or leaving enough room before the exit of the turn so that you can >>get on the gas earlier when coming out. Actually a combination of both >>would seem to be most effective :) This is why when 'defending' your >>position it is a good idea to slow down excessivly in a corner so that >>the car behind you failes to get the needed room he needs to get >>on the gas earlier. I.e. he's so close to you that he has to >>wait for you to start accelerating _first_ before he can >>start accelerating. >><snip> >>Regards, >> Casper >You make a mistake here I think. The distance between the cars grows, at

the

Quoted text (11 lines)

>same time the speed of the cars increases, as a result the time difference >remains the same (if they accelerate at the same rate on every point of the >track). >The explanation must be that the faster driver has started to accelerate >earlier. If he did this from a lower cornering speed, it looks like the >drivers are leaving the corner at the same speed. But the faster one has a >greater acceleration, and will be faster on the straight until approaching >top speed. >Regards, >Bart Westra

I should not reply early in the morning, I stumbled over the same hurdle here! The big advantage does not come from starting to accelerate a bit earlier, as Matthias has already pointed out. For the same reason, braking a bit later does not gain great amounts of time either. I believe it is the rate at which a fast driver can accelerate. Acceleration like speed has to be build up. Pointing the car better, maintaining optimal traction, that sort of thing. This would account for a bigger time advantage then in the situation where the rate of acceleration is the same. The speed difference would continue to increase until sheer speed itself puts a limit on how fast the car can accelerate. You can see the effect of what I mean best in standing starts. Some drivers take off so easily (seemingly); one who gets wheel spin or is too careful is way behind immediately (both in distance and in time). Hope I made myself clear. Regards, Bart Westra

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>>In GP2, it was possible to check whether you reached 100% throttle, or >>>not. In GPL, you have to guess. >>Which is just as it was in real life when comparing 1994 F1 to 1967 >>F1. >No. Such simple things don't need electronic data recording.

Whether they need them or not, in 1994 these things could be electronically confirmed with 100% certainty (fly by wire throttle after all) and in 1967 they could not. This is true at any time you feel power may be down (even during a race), not only when the car is stripped and in the garage. This is consistent with real life, which is the point I was making. Cheers! John

> I must be losing the time elsewhere - quite probably in my braking areas > where i'm sure there is room for improvement. At last someone hits the nail on the head! :) Apart from the obvious necessity for a good setup and basic driving technique, the key to 27s at Monza are very late braking points into Lesmo 1 and Parabolica. Fast downchanges and brake biases starting at 55 and going downward should get a driver in the mid to low 28 range into the 27s soon enough with no other setup or driving adjustments. For those who like to know what's out there, I watched Ian Lake do about 5 laps in a row under 1.27.50 (best of 1.27.17) in a VROC social race about a week ago. Needless to say, he cleaned us all up (yes, even Wolfgang) in last weekends 2 races of GPLWS at Monza.

All this is becoming totally futile IMO. The biggest discrepancy between your lap times and the fast guys would be most profound under braking and turn in. And trying to compare relative speeds between replays would be laughable at these points since sppeds are changing so rapidly. I really don't know what any of you are trying to get at! The easy part is turning thru and driving out - something just about anyone can do. The interesting part is always the braking and turn in at any corner on any track. Which in turn leads to how good the mid corner is. So, you see, the braking and turn in is at least 2/3 of the corner. Question - how low a brake bias can you live with? Or how late a braking point.

Quoted text (47 lines)

> >>Let's compare two drivers accelerating out of a 100mph curve on a long > >>straight, topping out at 200mph, but the slower guy is on the gas 50 > >>meters later. > >>If both are accelerating the same way (the two acceleration curves are > >>50 meters apart, no wheelspin, same car and setup) the difference is > >>that the slow guy is cruising the first 50 meters at the beginning at > >>100mph (1.125sec), while the fast pilot is speeding 'his' 50 meters at > >>200mph at the end of the straight. The difference is only 0.56 seconds > >>which is IMHO not much compared to the 50 meters (or more than 10 > >>lenghts of a car, or 1.125sec) which the slow driver hesitates before > >>he dares to move his right foot. > >This is where you're probably mistaken. The two 'accelerating curves' > >won't stay 50m apart through the acceleration. > I meant the beginning of the acceleration. What distances the cars > have during the acceleration time/distance does not matter. > > The distance will > >grow with time. This comes from the fact that the guy starting > >to accelerate earlier has a higher speed at any point and time > >on the straight where he's accelerating than the guy starting > >50m later. So at the end of the straight your 50m will > >have grown to, say 70m or a 100m. > Well, 100m is a good guess, but you forget that in this example, the > cars were not 50m apart at the beginning, but side by side. The > overall gain of early acceleration is, as I figured out, 50m. > As you did not understand my example the way I intended, I'll explain > it again: Let's say a single driver travels at 100mph, then > accelerates somehow within a mile to 200 mph, then continues at 200 > difference in the time needed. > With that example, the 1.1sec or 50m acceleration delay at 100mph of > the slower driver/driving leeds to only 0.5 sec or 50m disadvantage > compared to the fast driver/driving. > BTW: I think the effect of seeing a growing/shrinking distance to the > car ahead is called "*** band effect", because the time gap between > two cars stays roughly the same, but speeds and thus distances vary. > -- > _____ > /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d > I XT /~~~~ > I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro > \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

-- Byron Forbes Captain of Team Lightning Bolt http://members.tripod.com/~HOSHUMUNGUS and [link lost in import: /~godsoe/bolt/home.htm]

I stand corrected, maybe those old tyres did leave more *** on the track than I thought. The surprising thing then, is that one set of those old tyres lasted for an entire race weekend, if they shed so much of their mass onto the track, Cheers, Paul

Quoted text (26 lines)

> Ian Lake wrote > >I remmember watching the F1 saga a while ago on tv. In one episode > >they showed the 1967 cars and circuits. I remmember a camera angle > >they had that was above the station hairpin at monaco. It had an > >extremely dark racing groove around the entire corner. > Or just watch the movie Grand Prix at the start at Monaco. > You can clearly see the racing groove almost all around the dark. It's very > nice (of course that movie rules for racing sequences). > Zandvoort from Nine days in the summer also has a dark groove IIRC. > and the Ring also, but the Ring has a very unsmooth texture to the track. I > figure it's a limitation of the GPL graphic engine with the track texture. > That would be really incredible to actually have a realistic feeling to the > track texture (not the same one for 24km). > -= Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard/Nas-Frank> > -= NROS Nascar sanctioned Guide http://www.nros.com/ > -= SimRacing Online http://www.simracing.com/ > -= Official mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. > -= May the Downforce be with you... > "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

If you're going to figure it out you should compare in reality. In the comparison you give you have to remember that the second car (slower) will never reach the same speed as the car which accelerated earlier, so the difference is not only the final speed minus the ending speed, it is the cumulative difference all the way down the straight. Let's suppose I exit Parabolica 2mph slower than you, call it 109 km/h (68mph). I reach 309km/h at the end (193mph). You exit at 70mph and reach 195mph. Given that the straight is (approx) 1.8km long, you will cover that ground almost exactly 0.5s faster than me. It is quite easy to lose half a second in such a way, especially around Monza and Spa. Then look at braking. If we think that you need 70mph on the apex then someone who brakes in a straight line must be at 70mph at the turn-in point for that corner. If someone else can trail brake into that corner then they can be at 70mph at the apex AND they can be doing, say, 75mph on turn in as well as going from turn in point to apex at an average of 73mph. This gains approximately 0.2-0.3s PER CORNER. If you add that up even over a relatively short track like Monza you can see that braking into the Lesmos and Parabolica alone could account for almost 1s, without even considering acceleration out of the turn. These numbers assume a "perfect" corner which of course would never happen, but even in real-life scenarios those tenths, which may not be important as long as you're spinning off every other lap, are the only way to keep an Ian Lake or a Wolfie from disappearing into the distance. They are what separates Schumacher and Senna from Irvine and Berger - they can't be underlined highly enough IMO. I doubt we're good enough to take advantage of them (I know I'm not) but for those that are the difference over a lap (or series of laps) is very significant. I remember racing for a while in a team with Michael Wollenschein, one of THE hotshoes on F1GP. We exchanged PRF files at Suzuka, with me trying to find where he was faster, and it was the start of a pattern I have often seen when comparing your lap with someone really fast - there is no one "magic" move or corner where all the time is lost. It is 1/10 here, 1/20 there, and before you know it there's a second a lap or more of a difference. He made a tiny amount out of me on every corner entry or exit, and clawing back the time was a matter of thinking, setup, practice and application. Cheers! John

I disagree - braking and turn-in will gain you time through that small portion of track, but anything you gain on exit will be amplified by being carried with you for many seconds along the following straight. You would think so, but it's surprising how many people take the second Lesmo exactly the same as the first. There is no "perfect line" for a particular type of corner, it depends utterly on what goes before and comes after, and the line is compromised or adjusted accordingly. Again I disagree, you cannot take a corner in isolation. It is a matter of little consequence how fast you are through one corner, never mind how fast you are through 1/3 or 2/3 of a particular corner. What matters is how fast you are over the full lap or even a full race - you've heard of "slow-in, fast-out"? Often it is better to take it easy into a corner to ensure a near-perfect exit. You may lose a tenth on the way in, but you'll pick it up and more on the way out and along the straight to the next turn. Compromise is in everything concerning racing. Cheers! John

On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:26:41 +0000, Paul Jones >I stand corrected, maybe those old tyres did leave more *** on the track than >I thought. The surprising thing then, is that one set of those old tyres lasted >for an entire race weekend, if they shed so much of their mass onto the track, Well, those old tyres had a lot of tread, over 1 cm, I guesstimate. With 80 wheels, 2 m circumference and 25cm width that adds up to 400 liters or 100 gallons of "black road paint". -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

>>Okay, let's figure it out: >>Let's compare two drivers accelerating out of a 100mph curve on a long >>straight, topping out at 200mph, but the slower guy is on the gas 50 >>meters later. >If you're going to figure it out you should compare in reality. Ah, a scientific challenge. Okay, here we go ... My example was given for a (very) long straight, were the cars (nearly) reach top speed, eg. at Spa. This has the advantage of completely eliminating the real acceleration (which depends on power curves, grip, gearing, wind drag etc.), about which we do not know much. But a top speed of at least 200mph and a maximum acceleration of 1g up to let's say 120 mph are realistic assumptions. In this example, you assume constant acceleration, or in other words, that a GPL F1 car can accel from 193 to 195 mph in the same time as it can go from 68 to 70 mph, which is, BTW, in 0.09s or within only 2.8 meters, at 1g =9.81 m/s2. This quick time is very unrealistic for 193 to 195 mph. Just watching a replay might give a guess. Calculating with a car mass of 600kg, 300kW or 400hp, and a max speed of 200 mph using a simple motion equation gives only an acceleration of 0.58 m/s2, or 1.5 s to accomplish it. (As GPL cars can reach 200 mph on tracks, their real top speed might be higher: with 220mph, the acceleration at 193mph would be 3 times better). At 194mph, the 2 mph advantage would have melted to a speed difference of 0.58m/s2*0.09s=0.05 m/s, which is roughly 1/9 mph. So much about your (correct) assumption that "the second car (slower) will never reach the same speed as the car which accelerated earlier". But the speed difference is certainly not 2 mph all the time. In your example, the unrealistic constant speed difference carried over the whole straight would add up to 0.5 sec, which is simply wrong: Calculated with more realistic (but non-relativistic) physics, it's 0.09s minus the 0.03s needed to travel the 2.8m at 195mph, so it yields 0.06s or the lenght of a car at the end of the straight, barely enough to overtake. BTW: The fast car in my initial example, accelerating with 1g from 100mph, would pass the 50m after 1 sec at 122 mph, while the non-accelerating car would need approx . 1.1 sec to cruise this distance at constant 100mph. So, 0.1s gained within the first 50m. This 22 mph difference in exit speed then adds up to 0.5 sec after a long straight. Compared to your example given above, this is much closer to reality. (The slow guy hits the brakes 357.3 m before turn in to slow down from 200mph to 70mph at -1g, which takes 5.92 sec. The fast guy passes the 357.3 m brake point at 200 mph, and hits the brakes 0.08 s later at 350.2 m before turn in to slow down from 200mph to 75mph at the same -1g, which takes 5.7 sec, and 5.78s overall. So 0.14 s are gained here. To gain another 0.06s (0.16s) with a different average speed of 73 to 70 mph lasts 1.4 s (3.7s) within 45.7m (120m) distance from turn-in to apex.) Okay, good braking in Monza gains 1 second, I agree. Plus another second from apex to "turn-out", if we apply the trail-braking example symmetrically for acceleration. Small different exit speeds on to the two long straights between Parabolica and Lesmos don't add very much, as I hope to have made clear (as long as the same car and setup etc. is used, no wheelspin). So, were are the other 2 or 6 seconds that are between a 1.27 and my 1.31 to 1.35 laps in the Eagle? Speed in Curva Grande and Ascari? (Too tired to figure that out now). Bad gearing setup giving bad acceleration? Not with setups from hotlaps, as long as I 'm in the right gear. But 8 seconds behind, as 1.35 used to be my best for a long time (without spinning), so I must have been braking like on ice, and waaay too soon? -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

I'm afraid that this flame-war-stopper.xls is incorrect, as it does not include wind drag, but assumes constant acceleration at all speeds: with a=1g=9.81m/s2, I got 495km/h at the end of the straight. Hardly realistic, even for veryhotlappers. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

Exactly. In fact, if a car reaches its terminal velocity, as constrained by aerodynamic drag, acceleration has, by definition, dropped to zero. The power required to maintain a given velocity varies with the cube of the velocity and the force required to maintain a given velocity in the face of aerodynamic drag varies with square of the velocity, i.e. Twice the speed requires four times the force and eight times the power. I know, Bernoulli told me so. <G>

>I'm afraid that this flame-war-stopper.xls is incorrect, as it does >not include wind drag, but assumes constant acceleration at all >speeds: with a=1g=9.81m/s2, I got 495km/h at the end of the straight. >Hardly realistic, even for veryhotlappers. Well I never said it was realistic. I made it just for fun. And I would guess it would go beyond fun to have to figure out how to calculate all that with an ever changing acceleration curve. Would need to integrate and create a function for acceleration relative to speed. Hmm..but I don't however think it's all that unrealistic either. You should give the car an acceleration that gives a reasonable end speed..One could assume that using a constant acceleration curve in this case is a good approximation now? But we can never be quite sure ofcourse until someone improves the excel sheet :) (I hope someone does because it would be interesting to see the difference between that one and the current one.) Regards, Casper

The point I was trying to make John, is that in my experience, the key to getting any corner right is the braking and turn in. If you brake to early you lose time, too late and you miss the apex. Obviously, it's possible to stuff up by not steering well thru the corner, getting on the juice too early or late coming out. But in my experience I find it considerably easier to drive a car thru and out of a corner after a good turn in (performed, of course, after perfect braking), than getting the braking and turn in itself done. Of course, speaking about the difficulty of turn thru and out is irrelevant after a stuffed up turn in, since by then the corner is stuffed anyway :)

Quoted text (33 lines)

> >All this is becoming totally futile IMO. The biggest discrepancy between your lap > >times and the fast guys would be most profound under braking and turn in. > I disagree - braking and turn-in will gain you time through that small > portion of track, but anything you gain on exit will be amplified by > being carried with you for many seconds along the following straight. > >The > >easy part is turning thru and driving out - something just about anyone can do. > You would think so, but it's surprising how many people take the > second Lesmo exactly the same as the first. There is no "perfect line" > for a particular type of corner, it depends utterly on what goes > before and comes after, and the line is compromised or adjusted > accordingly. > >The > >interesting part is always the braking and turn in at any corner on any track. Which in > >turn leads to how good the mid corner is. So, you see, the braking and turn in is at least > >2/3 of the corner. > Again I disagree, you cannot take a corner in isolation. It is a > matter of little consequence how fast you are through one corner, > never mind how fast you are through 1/3 or 2/3 of a particular corner. > What matters is how fast you are over the full lap or even a full race > - you've heard of "slow-in, fast-out"? Often it is better to take it > easy into a corner to ensure a near-perfect exit. You may lose a tenth > on the way in, but you'll pick it up and more on the way out and along > the straight to the next turn. Compromise is in everything concerning > racing. > Cheers! > John

-- Byron Forbes Captain of Team Lightning Bolt http://members.tripod.com/~HOSHUMUNGUS and http://www.frontiernet.net/~godsoe/bolt/home.htm

I agree, but it has the disadvantage of completely negating the point that we are discussing - why can "Driver X" in the Lotus gain time over you? The reason is because he _does_ accelerate better out of the corner, through smoother throttle application closer to the edge of the friction circle. In your calculations you assume the "fast driver" and "slow driver" accelerate at exactly the same rate, and the only difference between them is the point at which they begin accelerating. Your calculations still underestimate the effect of that, but the main point is that the acceleration is, in all probability, very different, especially in GPL where sensitivity to that is both crucial and difficult. Plus the same again for the other half of the corner from apex to exit, so that's two seconds at east given the quality of drivers you describe and with no wobbles or errors. There's the rub - no wheelspin. Beyond that even you have to assume neither driver bogs down due to being too conservative with avoiding wheelspin and drops too low in the powerband. Now think how that starting difference and acceleration difference would add up. Ascari would be a good place to start looking, since not only is it a long corner in and of itself, but it leads onto a long straight where again speed can be lost. There is also a fair choice of lines through there depending upon style and setup. It could be that - if someone else's foot is more sensitive than yours you may induce too much wheelspin if their setup is stiffer than you like or your style induces wheelspin due to their choice of ramp/clutch settings. This is also a strong possibility. Like in real life you get "locked in" to braking points, and often don't try to improve. I remember my driving style at Silverstone being described as "mental" one night on VROC because of how late I was braking at the end of Hangar Straight, but that to me is not a problem as there is a lot of room to gather things up if it goes wrong. Where I have a problem is Parabolica, where I know I can brake real, real late, but only if I really nail the braking action will I keep the car on the track. I find in GPL that my first half-second on the brakes determines whether I'm pulling up short of the corner, fighting to stay on the track or cruising in perfectly. If I lock up I slide so far in that short time that it's a fight to stay on the track once I release the brakes and get back on them. If I don't brake hard enough initially, same story. If I get it perfect then the car stops in a very short space of time. Now your braking point at any given corner has to be at least "mean braking distance plus standard deviation", otherwise you're going to be spending a lot of time picking hedge out of your teeth. That means the less consistent your braking the longer it will be on average, and that's the problem I have at Monza. My braking isn't _bad_, but I'm not confident enough to go as late as I know I can, due to the high possibility of ending up in the gravel. When I get it right I can run low 1:28s, but typically I'm in the mid to low 29s in the Eagle for the reason described above. Cheers! John

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>This has the advantage of >>completely eliminating the real acceleration (which depends on power >>curves, grip, gearing, wind drag etc.), about which we do not know >>much. >I agree, but it has the disadvantage of completely negating the point >that we are discussing - why can "Driver X" in the Lotus gain time >over you?

There can be many reasons. One of them, which is stressed by many people, is "exit speed". I think in one driving guide it is said that "if you are 1 mph faster out of the corner, you will be 1 mph faster for a long time". That's wrong for high powered cars or bikes. But for vehicles with a bad power/mass ratio, operating near their top speed, it has a bigger influence. My examples took this into account, in an extreme way: I estimated and calculated that the fast driver accelerates from 100mph at the apex (or any other given point) at +1g, and a slow driver travels 50m or 1.1 second with constant 100mph before accelerating at all. Can there be a bigger difference between max acceleration and no acceleration? This IMO big difference in driving ability leads to a speed difference of 22mph (and a time gain of 0.1 sec) 50m after the apex (the speed difference then adds another 0.4s over the straight). Oh yes, I assumed that a slow driver can accelerate from 100mph on the straight(er track) as good as a fast one can in the corner, 50m sooner. How bad has as slow driver to be to get even that wrong? So, this already is a worst-case calculation as far as perfect throttle control is concerned: one does it, one not at all. Oh well, one can extend the 50m to 100m, or the whole track ... See above. This is physics, considered to be an exact science. Assume different but realistic accelerations (by looking at replays) and figure out the difference. Thats what I had written in the sentence you deleted. Been there, done that, got the reply. See above. -- _____ /_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d I XT /~~~~ I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro \____/\__I_I http://matthead.home.pages.de/

Which I explained. Not at all - what you described is equal accelaration starting from a different point. What I was talking about was starting later as well as less efficient acceleration. Both do perfect throttle control in the example, one just does it later. That is not because of throttle control, rather because of poor line or whatever. The difference can't be figured out since driver ability is an inexact science. We already know the car is fundamentally capable of the speed (albeit perhaps with a different setup) therefore the difference is in the driver. You never addressed driver ability as far as I could see, simply theoretical calculations. We already know from the work, theoretical calculation and practical experiment of experts in the field what difference exit speed makes, and from that can be seen how much time will be lost. So too under braking, when you consider that pretty much any racecar can lose about 3-4km/h per tenth of a second under braking a difference of just one or two tenths in when you apply the brakes can see you be too fast or too slow into the corner, thus wasting time beyond the theoretical to correct and recover. Then too there is the point about Ascari/Curva Grande, where carrying slightly more speed would yield an advantage for longer. If we say that I am within 98% of your performance I can expect to run 46mph through Lesmo 1 where you run 50mph - you gain 2mph for a short time which is soon minimised by being "squeezed" under acceleration. In Ascari however I can only manage 176mph to your 180mph, a difference of 4mph which not only will you hold all the way through that much longer corner, but for much longer down the following straight since the acceleration is much less efficient. Add together braking, acceleration, Vmin and Vmean in high speed corners as well as minute driver erros and it's easy to find many seconds at most tracks. Cheers! John