Rob Wilson - driver coach?

[timbo]

So honestly, if anyone tells you to V-shape everything always, I'd seriously doubt he's right.

That's why I started this thread!

And I'm sure this is not what Rob is saying

Logic would suggest it's not - but he seems pretty adamant about it, in a way that has me thinking that it could be exactly what he's saying.

Actually I feel that at the minimum speed around the apex the car often has a bit of capacity for extra rotation which might get unused if you're too conservative on the steering. I.e. you turned in to the apex and got the required lock and then you hit the apex, and if your car is balanced you can add a little bit extra lock for more rotation and cleaner exit. It probably costs a bit of momentum but if you get it right the exit is better.

[SectorOne]

The key is to understand how long the straight is after the corner. It´s only worth doing that if you have enough of a straight to make it pay back.
Because first you need to catch the invisible you who got on the power earlier instead of turning in more, then you need to pass him and that´s where you start gaining your time.

With a short straight you won´t catch him before he hits the brakes again.

[timbo]

The key is to understand how long the straight is after the corner. It´s only worth doing that if you have enough of a straight to make it pay back.
Because first you need to catch the invisible you who got on the power earlier instead of turning in more, then you need to pass him and that´s where you start gaining your time.

With a short straight you won´t catch him before he hits the brakes again.

Well yes, but it depends also on how much speed you lost at the apex.
These factors all come to play when chosing line. In Senna's book he raises the point about using different lines depending a track width before and after the corner. I.e. if the narrow straight is followed by wide straight you can chose early apex into the connecting corner.

[JimClarkFan]

I can't claim to be much of a driver, but I have done some karting in my time and the 'create a flat spot' makes sense to me because I do it - but I'm not entirely sure I follow RW when he says 'shorten the corner.'

Anyway...

The reason why I create a flat spot is because I feel that if you exit one corner, and immediately start to apply steering for the next corner it makes the car more unstable at the front and rear. The instantaneous direction change without a 'flat spot' mid corner causes the momentum of the kart to fling to the other side of the car like a pendulum. The instanteous direction change causes the weight transfer to be greater from this pendulum effect and feels like the lateral G is higher. The result of this feels like increased lateral load, thereby increasing scrub and the chance of the front and rear sliding which takes up more grip.

However when I deliberately create a flat spot mid corner, allowing the car to settle for a split second, it neutralises the momentum from the roll and thereby prevents the pendulum effect of throwing the weight of the kart from one direction to the other quickly. The effect of this feels like less lateral G. This technique prevents excessive roll, resulting in less lateral load, less scrub, less chance of spinning and more grip to play with (for steering).

I don't know if that makes sense to anyone.

[munudeges]

Shortening the corner means what it says - take a tighter line and rotate the car more. The alternative is to take a wider, faster but longer line.

[raymondu999]

If you watched The Racer's Edge (Peter Windsor's webcast) and listened to what Rob said, it has become blatantly clear to me that he is talking of a late apex. Why he doesn't just call it that I do not know.

[timbo]

If you watched The Racer's Edge (Peter Windsor's webcast) and listened to what Rob said, it has become blatantly clear to me that he is talking of a late apex. Why he doesn't just call it that I do not know.

Don't think so.

[raymondu999]

Watch what he says. "Get a direction change before what you would normally call the apex" Sound like late apex to you?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrgmZyMHzrw[/youtube]

[timbo]

Watch what he says. "Get a direction change before what you would normally call the apex" Sound like late apex to you?

It's a different situation. You can have same apex position but different curve. In there he talks about sacrificing the momentum for better rotation.

[raymondu999]

Watch what he says. "Get a direction change before what you would normally call the apex" Sound like late apex to you?

It's a different situation. You can have same apex position but different curve. In there he talks about sacrificing the momentum for better rotation.

Yes, but he's talking about having more rotation before the apex. Draw it out geometrically - you will never be able to fit in more rotation before the apex unless you do a late apex.

You can have the same apex but different curve, yes. But if the direction change happens before what you would normally call the apex - as he says - then that will become a late apex line

[timbo]

I'd illustrate what I think he means.

Note that this is done with a curve tool in MS Paint, so the strange parabolic shape is because of it. And yeah, both lines would result in running wide, but I can't adjust curvature easily and done in 1 minute time, so I only hope it illustrates my thoughts.



So, both lines kiss the apex on the same point, and both are sorta late-apex'ey.
But the red line (obviously slower) places less demand on grip, has lower minimum speed but easier exit.

[raymondu999]

Yes, and the red line (compared to the blue one) is one I'd call a late apex lol. Wouldn't you?

[timbo]

Yes, and the red line (compared to the blue one) is one I'd call a late apex lol. Wouldn't you?

They're both late apex.

[raymondu999]

The red one is a later apex

[timbo]

The red one is a later apex

Not by far. And if I had better tools and spent a bit more time I'd match the apexes better.