Catharsis

then stop comparing cars and start comparing drivers

l2aine

tell them not me jeez

Catharsis

it was a general comment not just at you

l2aine

KAY

off the subject, how are those GP Sports coilovers? Are they the "drift" version?

Catharsis

yes they are the G4 that have been discontinued becasue they were to harsh for even the super smooth roads o japan. i love em and could never go softer now.

bradltl

Ok.... it's not all about the G's. Let's look at this hypothetical situation, and then apply some driving physics. Lets say that we have 2 cars that have identical hp, tq, and power curves. One being FWD, the other being RWD. Since on a FWD car, the engine and the transmission both are in front of the car, the car will be front heavy. Usually to the tune of about 60/40. The RWD is going to be closer to nuetral. What does that mean for the situation? FWD and RWD cars should take different lines through the corners. The FWD car (prone to understeer) will need to apex ealier in the turn to account for that, otherwise they will push through the corner and run off the road. That means they will also not be able to carry as much speed through the corner. The RWD car should apex later, carry more speed into the corner, have a more nuetral response, and thus be higher in the powerband at the exit point. That also means the RWD car should exit the corner with greater acceleration.

Alright, now that I've said all that, it isn't possible. There are no such things are identical cars, equal drivers, or anything like that. There are so many variable to consider it would be impossible to predict an outcome for every corner (slower reaction time, tire temp, or even a little gravel on the road).

Another thing to consider is that lateral G's are a "constant" measure. Sure the type R may pull more G's, but it's not having to worry about setting up for the corner, hitting an apex, or exit speed. It is in a constant motion, one in which you will never incounter in the real racing world. Bottom line, RWD has physics on it's side for two main reasons: better balance and it's drive and steering wheels are seperate.

That help anyone? And don't even get me on throttle steering!

Brad

Catharsis

apex is not detrmined by the layout of the car, regarless of weight balance "the line" will be the one that yeilds the largest radius. as i stated in a previous post the maximum average speed you can go around a corner is:

15GR=MPH(SQUARED)

G= the % of a lateral G a car can pull
R= Radius of the corner



a car that understeers is going to fast in to a corner juat like a car that oversteers. you will loose speed with either.

the onle time you would early apex is if it is an increasing raduis corner, you would late apex in a decreasing radius corner.

by late apexing in a car the is prone to over steer you will hit track out just like if you early apex a corner with a car that has heavy understeer you will track out also

you have no tech just bs. i can back up what i ahve said with science and math along with proven racing from many sources.

back up what you say, bring the tech and some sources to boot

bradltl

Call it an engineering degree and 10 years of racing cars. That should count for something. Anyway the equation posted in this topic shouldn't be considered "tech" or even a "source". It's inaccurate, or mis-applied at best.

Determining a given cars performance through a corner isn't based on any one equation, especially not a linear one. It would be a complex series of equations all with very specific relationships to one another. At minimum, it would have to involve 4 points (unless any of you are on a motorcycle). I'll give you this, there is a "ideal line" through every corner. That line is the line that has the least amount of bend. My point is that not ever car is going to perform at it's peak potential on that line, and that the physics of the car are the determining factor. I provided a generic example for your consideration. For some cars carrying more speed later into the corner may be of benefit, others braking more when entering and then accelerating through the corner would be best.

Your statement about there only being one "line" is the equvilant of saying the fastest way around the track is staying to the inside. And hopefully everyone knows that is incorrect.

FWD and AWD cars typically perform better apex'ing early and accelerating through the corner. Using their natural understeer to guide them back to the racing line. For typical RWD cars, it is opposite. They tend to perform better by apex nuetral or late using throttle steer to control their position on the track. This is typical, I'm sure there is plenty of exceptions.

The original point is: a FWD following the same line as a RWD (or vice versa) is not an accurate measurement of which car can individually take a corner at a higher speed. Since no one on this planet can be unbaised yet have the perfect understanding of both cars and the lines through the corners... we get in cars and race to "prove" which car wins.

Don't get hung up on stuff like this, in the end it comes down to CAR + DRIVER / ROAD = Outcome.


Brad

PS. I'm not trying to pick any fights, just trying to spread knowledge.

Catharsis

the equation posted is a well know for finding an average speed for a corner used by top racing team, you can source this equation and its aplication in:

"Going Faster" used and written by members of the skip barber racing school.

i understand no 1 equasion can determine all the factor but laws of physics state that driving the largest radius will yeild the highest rate of speed. thus making the line clear.

i agree that there are many factors in determining who would win. it really all comes down to driver.

i wasnt trying to pick a fight i jsut saw no proof of what you said

240chz

the ITR has a built suspension, the "R" in type R does mean racing.

not to sound like a ricer or tool

l2aine

protractor... anyone?

Catharsis

i will write up a tech article later about corner ideal line and 100 other basisc of driving soon