Does heel/toe cause any extra wear on any parts of the car?

[StressedDave]

RobM77 said:

That still doesn't really answer my question?! You appear to be trying to blind me/us with science! You have actually stated right at the end of your post that more throttle gives more grip than a trailing throttle or braking (I think we all realise that), but what about the situation we're talking about? - keeping a steady speed?

Sorry I'll try to be more lucid. I'm glad you've agreed that more power = more grip. But I've said it at least four times now - for a steady speed on a constant radius you can't use more power than is necessary to balance the car as you'll end up requiring more steering to stay on that path. I think we agree on the basics, it's just that you've decided my style of driving is wrong and that I should give it up and do it like you...

Are you happy now?

[7db]

StressedDave said:

Taking a hyperboloid path (is that right db?)

Errr. Not unless you're driving round the surface of a powerstation cooling tower. A curious shape -- the hyperboloid -- an apparently curved surface that is made up of straight lines, and is surprisingly easy to build out of rigid identical col-shaped concrete blocks reinforced by straight steel running along the surface.

[RobM77]

StressedDave said:

RobM77 said:

That still doesn't really answer my question?! You appear to be trying to blind me/us with science! You have actually stated right at the end of your post that more throttle gives more grip than a trailing throttle or braking (I think we all realise that), but what about the situation we're talking about? - keeping a steady speed?

Sorry I'll try to be more lucid. I'm glad you've agreed that more power = more grip. But I've said it at least four times now - for a steady speed on a constant radius you can't use more power than is necessary to balance the car as you'll end up requiring more steering to stay on that path. I think we agree on the basics, it's just that you've decided my style of driving is wrong and that I should give it up and do it like you...

Are you happy now?

No, not really. You're just constantly dodging the question and you still haven't answered it straight. Will accelerating (increasing speed) through a corner create a balance more towards understeer in a car? I say it will, what do you say? To restate my point, I also say that the safest way to corner in a car is to create a balance, much like the safest way to stand is with your weight equally on both feet; if something happens and you're out of balance, you're more likely to fall over. Equally, if a car is closer to the limit at one end than the other during a corner, it's more likely to start sliding if something should happen because the grip isn't shared out front:back equally.

[StressedDave]

RobM77 said:

No, not really. You're just constantly dodging the question and you still haven't answered it straight. Will accelerating (increasing speed) through a corner create a balance more towards understeer in a car? I say it will, what do you say? To restate my point, I also say that the safest way to corner in a car is to create a balance, much like the safest way to stand is with your weight equally on both feet; if something happens and you're out of balance, you're more likely to fall over. Equally, if a car is closer to the limit at one end than the other during a corner, it's more likely to start sliding if something should happen because the grip isn't shared out front:back equally.

It could be because I don't like the way the question is worded. As it is worded the answer is 'it depends'.

So, seeing if I can put enough caveats in place:

1. If you are cornering in the linear region of the tyres
2. On a constant radius curve
3. Where the acceleration is low enough to perhaps increase the speed over the duration of the corner by no more than around 3 mph
4. Then the extra traction required to do this generates sufficient extra grip to require less steering angle than if you had perfectly balanced the car with zero net longitudinal acceleration. In other words a small decrease in steady state understeer. Of course it isn't true steady state and the effect is more pronounced on FWD than RWD. It's also distinctly more noticeable if you haven't got wide section tyres on the car.

But as I've repeatedly said, it's very rare to have such steady state circumstances and the gains are significantly more in the case of the transients on the way into and out of steady state. And in general it is the transients that are far more important than your somewhat rigid steady-state examples.

Edited by StressedDave on Monday 9th June 14:34

[RobM77]

StressedDave said:

RobM77 said:

No, not really. You're just constantly dodging the question and you still haven't answered it straight. Will accelerating (increasing speed) through a corner create a balance more towards understeer in a car? I say it will, what do you say? To restate my point, I also say that the safest way to corner in a car is to create a balance, much like the safest way to stand is with your weight equally on both feet; if something happens and you're out of balance, you're more likely to fall over. Equally, if a car is closer to the limit at one end than the other during a corner, it's more likely to start sliding if something should happen because the grip isn't shared out front:back equally.

It could be because I don't like the way the question is worded. As it is worded the answer is 'it depends'.

So, seeing if I can put enough caveats in place:

1. If you are cornering in the linear region of the tyres
2. On a constant radius curve
3. Where the acceleration is low enough to perhaps increase the speed over the duration of the corner by no more than around 3 mph
4. Then the extra traction required to do this generates sufficient extra grip to require less steering angle than if you had perfectly balanced the car with zero net longitudinal acceleration.

But as I've repeatedly said, it's very rare to have such steady state circumstances and the gains are significantly more in the case of the transients on the way into and out of steady state. And in general it is the transients that a far more important than your somewhat rigid steady-state thinking.

well, yes or no then given those caveats?

Ok, let's try a different approach to this and maybe we'll have more success:

Let's imagine a flat bend that we're approaching at 70mph. The limit for the corner is around 60mph, but we wish to travel round it at 40mph. The bend is perfectly sighted, so we've got no complications there. Describing only the driving technique, and not mentioning observational concerns, speed limits etc etc. Here is my approach for your critique:

1) Brake smoothly and gently from 70mph down to 40mph.
2) Select the correct gear for the corner whilst braking. I will choose this based on what gear will give my right foot the most control over the attitude of the car (i.e. a decent amount of revs), and also a gear that won't require changing up during the corner itself. For my Elise, BMW or Caterham 3rd gear would be appropriate for this sort of bend. I would use heel and toe because I'm going to be braking right up to the turn in, and also because I want to keep the brake covered at all times.
3) As I come off the brakes, gently wind the steering onto the lock required to take me to the apex. The actions of braking and steering have an overlap, and I would judge this by the balance that the car is getting itself into - my aim would be to achieve a balanced state once the turn-in has finished.
3) Bring my right foot off the brake and onto the throttle. I will give the throttle enough of a push to keep my speed steady, but that's secondary - what I'm actually thinking about it maintaining a neutral and steady balance. If my turn-in is correct, what you would see is me giving the pedal about an inch of throttle depression and my foot staying more or less still, the speed staying more or less constant and the steering angle staying still also. The front is just as far from the limit as the rear.
4) Once at the apex, I will begin to unwind the steering and bring on the throttle as one seamless action. Again, I'm aiming for smoothness and balance. At the exit of the bend when the car is straight, I have the steering straight and the throttle at the maximum depression that I wish to utilise. If the gear has been chosen correctly we can now upshift once the corner is 100% complete.

As previously stated, you disagree with this technique, so could you critique it please? Maybe that'll get us further? As I understand it, your differences (shown well in your video) are that you will come off the brakes completely before turning in, wait for the car to settle (ride height as it would be for a stationary car), turn in, and then accelerate, increasing your speed throughout the bend.

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 9th June 15:04

[7db]

Pay the man some money and have him sit next to you. You'll go quicker.

[StressedDave]

Firstly there is nothing wrong with it. If the corner is of relatively short duration you could decrease understeer by going in a fraction slower and using a little more power through the corner, but we're splitting hairs.

The big question from a road point of view, and the reason why my technique is generally preferable (note, it isn't essential) is how, if you've never driven said bend before do you know it's a 40 mph bend so as to be able to judge how to smoothly execute the trail braking-type manoeuvre without unnecessary (and therefore discomforting to your passengers) changes in acceleration.

And how does the rest of the driving population who don't have your car control skills going to be able to judge the rate to apply everything to avoid destabilising the car. IME it all becomes very jerky when drivers try your technique on unfamiliar roads.

[RobM77]

StressedDave said:

Firstly there is nothing wrong with it. If the corner is of relatively short duration you could decrease understeer by going in a fraction slower and using a little more power through the corner, but we're splitting hairs.

The big question from a road point of view, and the reason why my technique is generally preferable (note, it isn't essential) is how, if you've never driven said bend before do you know it's a 40 mph bend so as to be able to judge how to smoothly execute the trail braking-type manoeuvre without unnecessary (and therefore discomforting to your passengers) changes in acceleration.

And how does the rest of the driving population who don't have your car control skills going to be able to judge the rate to apply everything to avoid destabilising the car. IME it all becomes very jerky when drivers try your technique on unfamiliar roads.

Yes, that's fair enough. If the corner is completely unknown then smoothness could suffer if following the steps I show to the letter. Some small modifications to the technique would retain it in spirit and make it more suitable to an unknown bend. I still wouldn't accelerate through a corner though, would you?... (I feel like Jeremy Paxman here!). Are you advocating accelerating through corners?

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 9th June 15:33

[Vaux]

StressedDave said:

So, seeing if I can put enough caveats in place:

1. If you are cornering in the linear region of the tyres
2. On a constant radius curve
3. Where the acceleration is low enough to perhaps increase the speed over the duration of the corner by no more than around 3 mph
4. Then the extra traction required to do this generates sufficient extra grip to require less steering angle than if you had perfectly balanced the car with zero net longitudinal acceleration. In other words a small decrease in steady state understeer. Of course it isn't true steady state and the effect is more pronounced on FWD than RWD. It's also distinctly more noticeable if you haven't got wide section tyres on the car.

So, coming into a bend, steering set, adding power tightens the line so in effect you can straighten the steering and apply even more power (not too much)? Or would you apply less steering than "normal" going in and use power to optimise?

So does this theory explain why a FWD car will tighten its line if you accelerate, opposite to standard thinking that it should understeer? (Within limits).

[StressedDave]

RobM77 said:

Yes, that's fair enough. If the corner is completely unknown then smoothness could suffer if following the steps I show to the letter. Some small modifications to the technique would retain it in spirit and make it more suitable to an unknown bend. I still wouldn't accelerate through a corner though, would you?... (I feel like Jeremy Paxman here!). Are you advocating accelerating through corners?

Yes, within reason and keeping to the golden rule of being able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear. Often (as was the case in the video, you try to go slower in then necessarily to retain constant attitude through the bend if possible.

Vaux said:

So, coming into a bend, steering set, adding power tightens the line so in effect you can straighten the steering and apply even more power (not too much)? Or would you apply less steering than "normal" going in and use power to optimise?

So does this theory explain why a FWD car will tighten its line if you accelerate, opposite to standard thinking that it should understeer? (Within limits).

I apply less steering and then have the ability to tune line with throttle. The theory does indeed explain power 'oversteer' in FWD cars.

[RobM77]

7db said:

Pay the man some money and have him sit next to you. You'll go quicker.

I think there's always something to learn of everyone that meet in life, but if I want to go quicker I will speak to an established racing instructor who has proved himself on track and with instruction:

http://www.simonmason.com
http://www.chrishodgetts.net
http://www.andy-schulz.co.uk
http://www.markhales.com

I think Dave will agree with that one. Dave's specialism is road driving, and I don't see any mention of any track experience on the cadence website. I don't think that "quicker" is ever in my mind when driving on the public road. "Safer" is though.

I should swiftly add that, although I've no experience of Cadence's other instructors, I do have a huge amount of admiration and trust in Huge Noblett, Cadence's founder, both through recommendation from others and through personal experience. As such, I am sure that Dave and the rest of the Cadence team are highly capable road instructors. So if I want to drive more safely on the road, Cadence would be my first port of call. Quicker, no; but safely, yes. My curiosity with this accelerating through corners business is just a small part of driving repertoire, and although Dave and I disagree on that one (at least we did five pages ago and it's all gone a bit fuzzy since then!), I'm certain there's a huge amount I could learn from about other aspects of driving. I can tell from that video that he's certainly a very capable driver.

We need to understand the distinction between being a fast track driver and being a safe road driver. If you put the top police driver from Hendon on a track he'd probably be pitifully slow. In fact they did it on TV recently and the gap was huge to even an average racing driver. As such, Cadence is where I'd go for road instruction, and one of those guys in the links above is where I'd go for track instruction. I would be all ears in both situations though (as always), as you can learn something new anywhere you go.

[RobM77]

StressedDave said:

RobM77 said:

Yes, that's fair enough. If the corner is completely unknown then smoothness could suffer if following the steps I show to the letter. Some small modifications to the technique would retain it in spirit and make it more suitable to an unknown bend. I still wouldn't accelerate through a corner though, would you?... (I feel like Jeremy Paxman here!). Are you advocating accelerating through corners?

Yes, within reason and keeping to the golden rule of being able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear. Often (as was the case in the video, you try to go slower in then necessarily to retain constant attitude through the bend if possible.

So you are advocating a constant attitude through corners? I thought you were favouring accelerating round them?

Vaux said:

So, coming into a bend, steering set, adding power tightens the line so in effect you can straighten the steering and apply even more power (not too much)? Or would you apply less steering than "normal" going in and use power to optimise?

So does this theory explain why a FWD car will tighten its line if you accelerate, opposite to standard thinking that it should understeer? (Within limits).

StressedDave said:

I apply less steering and then have the ability to tune line with throttle. The theory does indeed explain power 'oversteer' in FWD cars.

Adding power does not tighten the line in a car, it does the opposite and widens it. You tighten the line in a car by lifting off the throttle (the ultimate example of which is lift off oversteer), and you widen it by adding throttle. That's one of the most basic principles of driving. It applies as much at very high speed as it does at low speed. Yes, there are some unusual exceptions (such as FWD power oversteer), but that's the general schema to keep in one's mind when driving.

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 9th June 16:02

[Vaux]

RobM77 said:

If you put the top police driver from Hendon on a track he'd probably be pitifully slow. In fact they did it on TV recently and the gap was huge to even an average racing driver.

Was that the Fifth Gear VBH thing? Vonhosen made a good comment (I thought so anyway) - if they'd raced the "wrong way round" the circuit, what would the difference have been, with no braking points etc. for VBH to use?

[StressedDave]

RobM77 said:

http://www.markhales.com

I'd certainly go with Mark - unlike many he coaches rather than teaches.

You are indeed correct that I'm not a circuit racing expert (I spent too long as an accident investigator to be comfortably dicing for positions), although I do a lot of training of amateur racers like yourself. I generally find them quite a lot of time because the natural inclination is to barrel into corners too quickly and getting people to understand how to turn a car properly is actually quite a useful skill.

RobM77 said:

I think Dave will agree with that one. Dave's specialism is road driving, and I don't see any mention of any track experience on the cadence website. I don't think that "quicker" is ever in my mind when driving on the public road. "Safer" is though.

But most people like 'progressive'

RobM77 said:

My curiosity with this accelerating through corners business is just a small part of driving repertoire, and although Dave and I disagree on that one (at least we did five pages ago and it's all gone a bit fuzzy since then!), I'm certain there's a huge amount I could learn from about other aspects of driving. I can tell from that video that he's certainly a very capable driver.

I don't think we disagree, it just my way can be more efficient under certain circumstances which occur frequently on road. And on track at the limit (I may have never raced but I do a lot of development driving at the limit) I probably drive the same way you do.

[RobM77]

Vaux said:

RobM77 said:

If you put the top police driver from Hendon on a track he'd probably be pitifully slow. In fact they did it on TV recently and the gap was huge to even an average racing driver.

Was that the Fifth Gear VBH thing? Vonhosen made a good comment (I thought so anyway) - if they'd raced the "wrong way round" the circuit, what would the difference have been, with no braking points etc. for VBH to use?

I believe it was just an arbitrary circuit laid out on an airfield, and not one that VBH was used to. Besides, they would have been using a press car that VBH wasn't used to, so unless she had more practise than the police driver the playing field was level.

The crux of my point is that I really don't think that training in advanced road driving would make someone quicker than someone trained and experienced in motor racing, just as much as it would the other way round. Quicker than the average guy, yes, but not quicker than someone who devotes their life to going faster. Motorsport is a very competitive sport, and if there was anything taught at Hendon, HPC or Cadence etc that made someone quicker on a track you can bet your life that racing schools would teach it too! Every minute of the day that someone such as StressedDave spends thinking about vanishing points, the Highway Code, Mirror checking etc; a racing driver is spending thinking about apexes, turn-in points, braking points etc. If they spend the same amount of time practising and learning, there's no way an advanced road driver is in any way prepared for fast lapping on a track. For a start I'm not even sure some track techniques are used on the road at all - threshold braking for instance, or maintaining a four wheel drift?

A good analogy would be compare my great Uncle Bob Roberts, who was a sailor by profession and sailed night and day for half his life; with a winning racing yachtsperson like Ellen McArthur. Just because my Great Uncle Bob could navigate the waterways and harbours of the world by sail with great skill doesn't mean he could sail round the Isle of Wight faster than an experienced racer.

[StressedDave]

RobM77 said:

The crux of my point is that I really don't think that training in advanced road driving would make someone quicker than someone trained and experienced in motor racing, just as much as it would the other way round. Quicker than the average guy, yes, but not quicker than someone who devotes their life to going faster. Motorsport is a very competitive sport, and if there was anything taught at Hendon, HPC or Cadence etc that made someone quicker on a track you can bet your life that racing schools would teach it too! Every minute of the day that someone such as StressedDave spends thinking about vanishing points, the Highway Code, Mirror checking etc; a racing driver is spending thinking about apexes, turn-in points, braking points etc. If they spend the same amount of time practising and learning, there's no way an advanced road driver is in any way prepared for fast lapping on a track. For a start I'm not even sure some track techniques are used on the road at all - threshold braking for instance, or maintaining a four wheel drift?

Some advanced road drivers do do track work you know. Several of my acquaintances race very successfully in VLN for a start and HPC even does it's own track days. Broad generalisations do tend to put peoples backs up...

[RobM77]

StressedDave said:

RobM77 said:

http://www.markhales.com

I'd certainly go with Mark - unlike many he coaches rather than teaches.

It's good to see that philosophy spoken about more It's something I admire about Hugh. I'm a trainer myself (in IT), and I can't stand it when people just bark instructions at people. What Hugh does so well is to coach, not instruct. Crucial difference.

StressedDave said:

You are indeed correct that I'm not a circuit racing expert (I spent too long as an accident investigator to be comfortably dicing for positions), although I do a lot of training of amateur racers like yourself. I generally find them quite a lot of time because the natural inclination is to barrel into corners too quickly and getting people to understand how to turn a car properly is actually quite a useful skill.

Absolutely, yes. However, I do spend a fair bit of time sitting with people on track who haven't ever raced extensively and all I can say is that it's an entirely different kettle of fish driving on the limit round a track for fun or for interest and actually constantly trying hard to make yourself faster. Racing drivers who have constantly measured their performance with a stop watch do, by a process of evolution, improve their on-limit driving immensely until their driving is unrecognisable from how they drove when they first started. There are little bits of time to be gained in all sorts of parts of a corner. Once a driver has reached a very high standard, it looks effortless (like the Button or Stewart laps I posted earlier), but getting to that point from just being able to lap smoothly a second off the pace is a huge journey. I know myself that my main weak point is threshold braking perfectly, especially in the wet. Hopefully in a few years I'll have cracked that, but the key point is that I have a pressure on me to improve in that area because of the need to go faster.

RobM77 said:

I think Dave will agree with that one. Dave's specialism is road driving, and I don't see any mention of any track experience on the cadence website. I don't think that "quicker" is ever in my mind when driving on the public road. "Safer" is though.

But most people like 'progressive'

Maybe I'm alone in this one, but as a passenger I like accelerative forces from different directions to be blended. If they are seperate then it makes me feel sick. The same goes in planes too. I'd rather climb whilst turning than turn, straighten, then climb.

StressedDave said:

RobM77 said:

My curiosity with this accelerating through corners business is just a small part of driving repertoire, and although Dave and I disagree on that one (at least we did five pages ago and it's all gone a bit fuzzy since then!), I'm certain there's a huge amount I could learn from about other aspects of driving. I can tell from that video that he's certainly a very capable driver.

I don't think we disagree, it just my way can be more efficient under certain circumstances which occur frequently on road. And on track at the limit (I may have never raced but I do a lot of development driving at the limit) I probably drive the same way you do.

You probably do, yes. Where we appear to differ though is my interest in keeping the car balanced and happy wherever possible. I don't advocate accelerating before the apex in a corner!!

[RobM77]

StressedDave said:

RobM77 said:

The crux of my point is that I really don't think that training in advanced road driving would make someone quicker than someone trained and experienced in motor racing, just as much as it would the other way round. Quicker than the average guy, yes, but not quicker than someone who devotes their life to going faster. Motorsport is a very competitive sport, and if there was anything taught at Hendon, HPC or Cadence etc that made someone quicker on a track you can bet your life that racing schools would teach it too! Every minute of the day that someone such as StressedDave spends thinking about vanishing points, the Highway Code, Mirror checking etc; a racing driver is spending thinking about apexes, turn-in points, braking points etc. If they spend the same amount of time practising and learning, there's no way an advanced road driver is in any way prepared for fast lapping on a track. For a start I'm not even sure some track techniques are used on the road at all - threshold braking for instance, or maintaining a four wheel drift?

Some advanced road drivers do do track work you know. Several of my acquaintances race very successfully in VLN for a start and HPC even does it's own track days. Broad generalisations do tend to put peoples backs up...

Sorry, I didn't mean it like that. Hugh's former colleague John Lyons for instance has plenty of racing experience, and I'm well aware of the obvious cross-overs. What I was responding to was the suggestion that 1) if I want to go faster on track, I should go to a company like Cadence in preference to someone such as Simon Mason or Mark Hales! As I'm sure you'll agree, that would be misguided of me. Mark Hales' job is to train people to drive faster on track, your job is to train people to drive safely on the road. The other suggestion I was responding to was 2) that the training that a Class 1 Police driver goes through makes him well equipped to challenge at the front of the pack in a GT race. That's like saying that Steffi Graf could beat a club level table tennis player! I know for a fact a traffic policeman wouldn't even qualify for a GT race, and if it's any different then I want my money back as a tax payer, as setting quick qualifying times is not one of the skills that a Class 1 driver should be learning!! They're highly skilled people, but just not in that particular area.

[Vaux]

RobM77 said:

The crux of my point is that I really don't think that training in advanced road driving would make someone quicker than someone trained and experienced in motor racing, just as much as it would the other way round.

No argument there - horses for courses. Although some advanced driving groups do branch out into track stuff and limit handling. Drop an IAMer into Oulton Park and I doubt many records would be broken! (Sorry about the generalization!)
I'm not so sure a good Police Driver would be too shabby on track - they've got a better grasp of hard braking (most people severely over-estimate the distance it takes to stop) and I would think they can drive much closer to their limits than a keen amateur.

This has been an intersting thread (of that much I could comprehend). I was out earlier today for a blat round and it's quite a fine line in timing (for me at least) between where I'm getting on the power, after turning in and where it's opening up anyway.

Maybe I should commission Dave for a few hours tutoring. It's not the money, it's the verbals that puts me off! (And the huge hit to my power to weight ratio.....)

[StressedDave]

RobM77 said:

Sorry, I didn't mean it like that. Hugh's former colleague John Lyons for instance has plenty of racing experience, and I'm well aware of the obvious cross-overs. What I was responding to was the suggestion that 1) if I want to go faster on track, I should go to a company like Cadence in preference to someone such as Simon Mason or Mark Hales! As I'm sure you'll agree, that would be misguided of me. Mark Hales' job is to train people to drive faster on track, your job is to train people to drive safely on the road. The other suggestion I was responding to was 2) that the training that a Class 1 Police driver goes through makes him well equipped to challenge at the front of the pack in a GT race. That's like saying that Steffi Graf could beat a club level table tennis player! I know for a fact a traffic policeman wouldn't even qualify for a GT race, and if it's any different then I want my money back as a tax payer, as setting quick qualifying times is not one of the skills that a Class 1 driver should be learning!! They're highly skilled people, but just not in that particular area.

On-road training is indeed never going to help with limit work on the track - that's why I don't do that sort of tuition there. But if I had a pound for every track-experienced (and that includes Track day lunatics as well as amateur racers like you) client who didn't know the basics then I'd be well on my way to a Veyron (well a 1/24th scale model anyway). I do find somewhat disappointing that you feel that no-one except a successful racer can help you with your goals. As I've said before, I do a lot of work with racers and the problem is normally not one of vehicle control, but more of getting the acceleration in the right direction at the right time.