Driver styles/preferences

[bot6]

Mariano, this might help a bit:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3529

[Tamburello]

Some commentators, chief amongst them Peter Windsor, speak of another dichotomy in styles: reactionary vs manipulative.

In the reactive category he places the likes of Vettel, Alonso (and presumably though he hasn't said it himself AFAIK, Senna) and in the latter group Hamilton (he has a crush on this character!), Raikkonen, Schumacher, Moss and Clark.

Could somebody elaborate on this categorisation.

[Jersey Tom]

TV announcers say a lot of things. Personally, I don't believe in binary categorization of drivers.

Also still don't agree kart setup is much like any pro series I'm familiar with. But, I'm too tired to elaborate for now.

Beer me!

[Jersey Tom]

Allright. Briefly-

Very few things are a black and white '1' or '0'. Prefering understeer or oversteer, pointy or stable, active or passive, whatever. All of these are valid but they're all a sliding scale. When I order a steak I don't get asked if I want it 'cooked' or 'raw' - depending on the cut, thickness, and my mood I might like varying degrees of doneness.

With regard to karts... are we talking 85 mph top speed or mid corner speed? In any event, they're a unique animal given the super short wheelbase, no suspension, speeds and corner geometry. I don't know of any other major vehicle class where the goal is to lift an inside rear tire to get around a corner. Besides, going through a power-limited high speed corner you don't want the rear end to be sliding all over - it's straight up going to be slow, bleeding speed and abusing the tires.

Trust me. An appropriate dose of understeer at the right times is a good thing.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Very few things are a black and white '1' or '0'. Prefering understeer or oversteer, pointy or stable, active or passive, whatever. All of these are valid but they're all a sliding scale. When I order a steak I don't get asked if I want it 'cooked' or 'raw' - depending on the cut, thickness, and my mood I might like varying degrees of doneness.

With regard to karts... are we talking 85 mph top speed or mid corner speed? In any event, they're a unique animal given the super short wheelbase, no suspension, speeds and corner geometry. I don't know of any other major vehicle class where the goal is to lift an inside rear tire to get around a corner. Besides, going through a power-limited high speed corner you don't want the rear end to be sliding all over - it's straight up going to be slow, bleeding speed and abusing the tires.

Trust me. An appropriate dose of understeer at the right times is a good thing.

But the intrinsic idea is the same. Understeer has varying degrees of understeer and oversteer has varying degrees of oversteer.
As you rightly say yourself, you never have a steak raw or cooked. But the state you get your steak in is by your own defintion to the chef...more raw or more cooked. How else would we define it?

Equally a driver can have a preference or a style, and a specific tyre may work better for a specific preference(maybe). You may feel that it is too simplified, but when Brundle and even F1 drivers are using these terms, perhaps there arent any other more usable terms to get the drivers point across?

[Jersey Tom]

There are words which are much more precise and descriptive. Just typically not used openly, as that's the "good stuff" that ends up being competitive advantage.

And I'd say it's not so much that understeer has varying degrees and oversteer has varying degrees... they are the same thing. The thing that really irks me is making a blanket statement that a car is one or the other, globally. Vehicle balance is a map over speeds, driver inputs, etc.

[raymondu999]

Some commentators, chief amongst them Peter Windsor, speak of another dichotomy in styles: reactionary vs manipulative.

In the reactive category he places the likes of Vettel, Alonso (and presumably though he hasn't said it himself AFAIK, Senna) and in the latter group Hamilton (he has a crush on this character!), Raikkonen, Schumacher, Moss and Clark.

Could somebody elaborate on this categorisation.

I think binary categorization can work, but only in very broad terms. @Tumba maybe you can link us to that blog post? I can only find this post: http://www.theracedriver.com/2011/03/au ... y-with-it/

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Oversteer and understeer maybe the same force acting on opposite ends of the car, but in terms of feel, nature and setting they are worlds apart as Im sure you would agree.

But I do understand what you are saying. I have experienced cars that understeer on certain corners yet oversteer wildly on others. I have experienced the devil known as "lift off oversteer" in my old 106 GTI, and that creeps up on you like DEATH. Once you experience that, try driving that car and lifting without grimacing at the same time!

Thing is, in the case of an Alonso/Massa scenario where the styles are different, could the team stiffen the rear to induce oversteer or vice versa to increase understeer? I think they can. But, is a concept more inclined to favour one or the other? Bystanders can only guess would be my answer.
But engineers would be foolish to dial in one or the other at concept stage, rather they would go for the most neutral handling car possible, then go ad hoc in terms of what drivers prefer.

Has anyone got any documented evidence of a driver changing their style of driving from either suffering from a poor car, or even a total lack of confidence(racing equivalent of the golfing "yips"). I think it would be interesting to note it on this thread.

[N12ck]

i dont know how to word this, but what you can do in principal to a kart is very similar to what you do in principle to a car, im not saying you do the same thing on each to get certain things to happen, but in principle they are very similar in what you do to each type of vehicle, for example tyre pressures you alter them in the same way you alter an f1 cars tyre pressures, lower the pressures to loose grip, heighten the pressures to gain grip on front and back thats one example of many examples, they are very similar in what you do in principle to achieve different things, anyways thats what i think, as doing setup work on my kart, is similar to the set up work that rally teams do, but anyways thats my opinion, back to driving style, i dont like understeer generally as a characteristic as it seems a bit less predictable than oversteer, my ideal setup on the kart which produces fastest times is slight oversteer, but thats down to my driving style which i have to say is aggresive

i may be wrong about the setup work but thats in my experience of what i think

[N12ck]

but at the same time i like the kart to have bite out of the corner so oversteer which gives a little sliding on the rear but when the accelerator goes down it bites into the track and gets the power down,

[gold333]

Guys, here's my 2c.

Drivers at this level use oversteer and understeer to their advantage.

Like Senna says in his book, the preferred setup for a street circuit is one with a slight tendency to oversteer, it helps point the car into the slow corners.

The preferred car for fast circuits is one with a slight tendency to understeer, you lose less time because you have to opposite lock less in faster corners.

Senna's staccato throttle usage was just the way he drove everything, from a turbo T97 Lotus, to a Honda NSX Type-R to a McLaren Ford MP4/8.

He had the same advantage over Allan Mcnish / Palmer that the telemetry showed in '90 that Schumacher exhibited over Herbert in '95. Senna was on the brakes slightly later but notably for less time and started jabbing the throttle right away. He was thus over the limit immediately and "felt" his way to the maximum grip the car could achieve. Senna also mentions at length the advancing the apex style of cornering for slow and medium bends, where he would brake late and turn in late for these types of corners and oversteer the car (jabbing throttle) into facing into the turn and still have enough car control to perform an exit at the limit of adhesion. He therefore had a faster speed at the next straight. This is from that BBC documentary the pic referenced.


Schumacher's advantage over Herbert was that Schumacher braked earlier than Herbert, but not as much, and was able to keep the car at the limit of the "friction circle principle" than Herbert using a lot of small steering corrections. Not only at the exit (as many drivers can) but also at entry.


What I do remember is that Schumacher had a similar style to Mansell. I.e. early turn-in. A bucket of paint on the back of Mansell and Schumachers cars would draw the shortest line around the circuit. Schumacher could keep the car at the apex using a very high feel for grip that he had. He would sort the back end out at the apex.

I find this analysis of driving styles fascinating. But it is so rare to get informed opinions. I believe Peter Windsor is really the best authority when it comes to driving styles. You can do a google search.

[Jeffsvilleusa]

I find this analysis of driving styles fascinating. But it is so rare to get informed opinions.

I would imagine the best analysis of a driver would be from another driver. Fisichella said the following about Alonso back in '05:

"He is very aggressive with the steering wheel at turn entry," said Fisichella, "while I'm very tidy. The R25 had to be driven more with his style than with mine."

I have often heard that Alonso drives very hard on his front wheels, which I guess also correlates with the aggressive turn-in described above. Perhaps this also explains why he had those super-cambered fronts back on the R26. I also notice that Alonso tends to ride further up on the kerbs than others in general, which probably also abuses his fronts.

This also reminds me of a quote I heard from Piquet jr. about being paired with Alonso, and how Alonso would help Piquet 'learn how to use the kerbs.' It seems there is a fair bit of strategy in the employment of kerbs beyond what is obvious.

[mariano]

it´s maybe a bit more like this:



more extreme V-shape in a 180° corner


It´s not so much "short cutting" the corner, as using the stength of a car, which is maybe better in straight line braking (late braking) and in acceleration. you can be on the throttle earlier with that technique.

It´s a typical technique in cars which don´t can support high midcorner speeds due to maybe weight or/and tires or a lack on downforce.
You see this for example in V8Supercars, and other touring cars with high power and weight.
Done to extreme, pivoting the car on a too small radius, will put excessive stress on the ear tires, as you slide them sideways.
You will be slow at this point (pivoting) of the corner, but if you won time before under braking, and gain on the next staight by being early on the throttle, it can be faster.
It´s typical used in low(er) speed tight corners exiting onto a long(er) straight, or in reverse after a straigh when there is no long stright at the exit, so you try to win time under braking, but are not too concerned with the exit.

It´s not effective in high speed wide corners , because (due to limiting engine power/drag) you can´t gain that much under acceleration.

I think that in your first photo the broken line is Button's, and the purple's one is Michael Schumacher's.

mariano

[mariano]

More front static weight (moving the CoG forwards) = undesteer?
more front static weight (moving the CoG forwards) + braking = oversteer?

[mariano]

Is right this ?

Alonso: early apex, early throotle, in '05/'06 very agressive turn-in due to Renault's more rear weight than its rivals. He can tolerate some understeer, obviusly he is quicker with a neutral car. He increases steering wheel's angle while releasing the brakes.

Schumacher/Vettel/Hamilton: smooth turn-in but agressive middle of the corner (they point the car at the apex). Smooth throotle. They start the turn-in with full brakes. They like a neutral car but they can tolerate some oversteer. Rear weight.

Rosberg/Webber/Button: smooth turn-in and smooth apex. Agressive throotle. They only tolerate a neutral car. Frong weight.

Raikkonen: smooth turn-in, smooth apex and smooth thtootle. He needs the car to rotate for him (oversteer). Rear weight.

Hakkinen/Barrichello: they can brake with the right or the left leg. They brake in a right line (they don´t brake while entrying to the corner). Agressive with the throotle and the steering wheel. 50% front weight and 50% rear wheight. They toletate some oversteer.