Does heel/toe cause any extra wear on any parts of the car?
Discussion
RobM77 said:
Nothing wrong there. That's exactly what I'm advocating both through theory, my own experience and what I've been taught. Enough gas to balance the car until the bend opens out, and then unwind the steering and accelerate out of the bend. It's essentially the same as how one drives on the track.
I'm not sure that's right for the quickest track drivers. The steering wheel is a blunt instrument - it rapidly changes the slip angle at the front wheels. The rear wheels trail along behind as it were as their slip angle is dependent only on the speed and the path being followed. Unwinding steering lock, except perhaps for the system Rob Wilson teaches, is something best not done when right on the limit because of the obvious instability it can cause.Now for most people, both on track and on road, trail braking isn't a commonly used technique (and when it is used it's generally poorly done), so I work on people's ability to consistently improve their corner exits. IMHO trying to optimise your corner entry is of less value than optimising your exits.
So the technique I teach and advocate (and it works both on road and on track) is thus:
1. Get the braking done in a straight line. Feel free to heel and toe to get the changes right. If you've got a nice sounding engine, I'm all for listening to those lovely blips between gears. If not then I prefer you to leave space at the end to get the gear change. Taper off the brakes smoothly. My neck is weak and I don't like doing the nodding dog, especially as the only thing holding me in my seat is the belt and I'm not a small chap.
2. Transfer your right foot onto the throttle and bring the car up on the power. This gap between stopping one thing and starting another is important - some of the great racing drivers famously used this pause. As you get the power right you'll hear the tone of the engine change. If you're on road AND you've got enough vision AND you're travelling slowly enough that you can safely increase speed through the first part of the corner, you might consider using more power than will be necessary to balance the car because it means you'll need less steering to complete the cornering manoeuvre...
3. Start steering. This is important. You don't 'steer' you start to steer. Most people steer too much and steer too quickly. You need to be positive with the steering but the key is to keep a constant rate of steering. The thing that makes you feel uncomfortable as a passenger is 'jerk' - the rate of change of acceleration. Jerk is directly proportional to the rate you turn the steering, so slow movements are more comfortable and also less likely to suddenly unbalance the car. As said above turning the steering wheel changes the front slip angle. The rear slip angle changes as a result of the yaw and sideslip created by that change. If you change the front slip angle gradually then there will be less lag between front and rear wheel slip angles and the car will feel like it's cornering on rails.
4. Keep adding to the steering until you're on the line you want. So rather than turning the steering wheel by 'x', you are using the visual feedback of what you can see (and limit point is just as important on track as it is on road - staring at an apex is generally a recipe for disaster).
5. Once you've passed your late apex, start increasing the power to drive the car out towards the edge of the road/circuit. Let's face it - a majority of PH readers are male and we don't do multi-tasking. So instead of balancing steering and throttle, just use throttle to drive the car out to its exit. Then gradually wind the steering lock off as the exit line becomes a straight line. Again you're using visual feedback to control your exit. If you do nothing in terms of steering and throttle, a late apex means you'll come out somewhere in the centre of the track, so you've always got the safety margin built in and it's up to you how much of it you use.
The result I generally find is that you have much more confidence that the car is going to go where you want it to and you have control over where you come out rather than hoping there's enough grip left when you get it wrong. Once you can consistently do this then you can start working on optimising your entries to corners.
Dr Jekyll said:
RobM77 said:
If I had all the vision in the world I wouldn't accelerate out of a bend until I was actually leaving that bend from the point of view of my car. My car doesn't have eyes, it still thinks it's cornering! Once you are pulling lateral g you are subject to the physical complications of cornering - you can't just accelerate off where you want to.
But on the road your cornering speed is likely to have been dictated by vision rather than grip. If you are cornering with plenty of grip still in hand there is nothing wrong with using some of it to accelerate when vision improves. Though obviously still not getting as close to the limit as would be acceptable on the track.I'm all for understanding the physics in order to better cope with emergencies, but not as a guide to normal road driving. To paraphrase an old saying, the superbly skilled driver uses their superb skills to avoid getting into any situation where they are so close to the limit that racing driver techniques become relevant.
With this analogy firmly in our heads, we can see that what you're advocating is three things:
a) Not setting a safety margin and sticking to it. This is because the knowledge required to walk the line of the limit is the exact same knowledge that you should be using to walk a lesser line at a percentage of the limit. Yes, ok, I'll hold a hand up to the pedants and say that the exact physics of what's going on is different (as it is in any situation: wet vs dry or RWD vs FWD etc etc), but the fact of understanding the physics is what should concern us, not the minute details that can be inflated beyond their true importance and used to try and blind people with science (which Dave now admits to, although he thankfully doesn't condone it as his usual teaching practise). You can't just drive around oblivious to the grip you've got, thinking that your limit skills will rescue you if you happen to cross the limit. I believe you should set a safety margin and monitor your proximity to it.
b) Not knowing the limit is broken until you've actually broken it and an "emergency" is declared. That's just barking. It'd be far safer to have the experience and knowledge of where that limit is so you can avoid any "emergencies" altogether. I suppose a good analogy is cadence braking vs threshold braking - in one you breach the limit then cope with it, whereas in the other you avoid the limit (and actually stop quicker plus retain steering control!). I'll always chose the option of avoiding the limit thanks very much.
c) Making more progress at the expense of safety. This is obviously deeply wrong. Driving on the road is not a race! The core principle of driving on the road is to make journies whilst preserving the safety of yourself and of others. Moving on from that you've got another principle of good driving practise, which is to make decent progress where possible to show efficient use of the car as a mode of transport. To do that you're going to have to know where you can make more progress and where you can't. This involves spotting hazards such as parked cars opening doors or pulling away, children running after balls, spotting horses in the road etc; but it also equally involves knowing the dynamics of your car and what it's capable of, or more importantly what it's not capable of.
RobM77 said:
...but the fact of understanding the physics is what should concern us, not the minute details that can be inflated beyond their true importance and used to try and blind people with science (which Dave now admits to, although he thankfully doesn't condone it as his usual teaching practise).
Blimey, that's some reality filter you've got there... I actually wroteDT said:
I will admit that I'm hampered by not being able to draw diagrams on a text-based forum and I'm sort of short of time to spend with Photoshop/Illustrator laugh I'm normally more coherent than this - honest, although I'm reminded of a conversation with a former boss prior to delivering a training course where he told me that the aim was not to teach the cops anything, but merely to show how much more than them you knew. I don't subscribe to that view, although occasionally...
Now I know this is an internet forum where EFA is common, but that's probably a revisionist statement too far...Edited by StressedDave on Tuesday 10th June 22:14
StressedDave said:
RobM77 said:
...but the fact of understanding the physics is what should concern us, not the minute details that can be inflated beyond their true importance and used to try and blind people with science (which Dave now admits to, although he thankfully doesn't condone it as his usual teaching practise).
Blimey, that's some reality filter you've got there... I actually wrote[quote]I will admit that I'm hampered by not being able to draw diagrams on a text-based forum and I'm sort of short of time to spend with Photoshop/Illustrator laugh I'm normally more coherent than this - honest, although I'm reminded of a conversation with a former boss prior to delivering a training course where he told me that the aim was not to teach the cops anything, but merely to show how much more than them you knew. I don't subscribe to that view, although occasionally...
From your statement there it was clear to me that you don't normally subscribe to a method of teaching where your goal is to demonstrate how much more you know than the target audience, although occasionally it is a useful tactic?
My apologies if I mis-interpreted that!
It seemed quite clear to me though reading it, and it still does now to be honest! Maybe an example of another confused statement?
The other thing I was getting at there was that when explaining things it is important to scale one's emphasis on fundamentals in proportion to the smaller details. Failure to do this can put across a misleading impression, which I believe you were guilty of earlier if you'll pardon me saying so. I've got a story to tell that proves this very well: It's normal to teach people that oversteer can be caused by two things: weight transfer or power application. Yes, I know there's complicated physics going on, but that's the best message to put across to the ordinary Joe in the street. Now, in a fairly low powered car on a dry road weight transfer is going to be the predominant factor. Therefore I would expect any explanations or training to give more "air time" to the notions of weight transfer than to the notions of power application. An example of this going wrong belongs to a friend of mine. He went on a skid pan course where he got used to the idea that power application caused oversteer, and backing off and applying opposite lock corrected the skid. Their cars have bugger all grip and are rear wheel drive with reasonably punchy engines. Guess what was in his mind a few months later when we got a twitch of oversteer on a greasy roundabout at 60mph? Yes, you've guessed it, he backed off completely and applied the opposite lock, just as he has been taught to on the skid pan. How did we get to 60mph on a roundabout? He was trying to get the back end out for a laugh by accelerating, when in fact all that was happening was understeer. That's one person completely confused by the correct information presented in the wrong manner. For a second I thought it was two people in hospital, but thankfully the lessons he'd learnt on the skid pan about opposite lock and over correction saved the day.
RobM77 said:
Sorry, what does EFA mean?
From your statement there it was clear to me that you don't normally subscribe to a method of teaching where your goal is to demonstrate how much more you know than the target audience, although occasionally it is a useful tactic?
My apologies if I mis-interpreted that! It seemed quite clear to me though reading it, and it still does now to be honest! Maybe an example of another confused statement?
More a case of a missing smiley methinks... From your statement there it was clear to me that you don't normally subscribe to a method of teaching where your goal is to demonstrate how much more you know than the target audience, although occasionally it is a useful tactic?
My apologies if I mis-interpreted that!
It seemed quite clear to me though reading it, and it still does now to be honest! Maybe an example of another confused statement?
StressedDave said:
Blimey, that's some reality filter you've got there...
What a nice (and apt) concept.Don't you realise that Rob knows all the answers already? He's been driving on the road and track for years and has a full trophy cabinet. *And* a degree of Physics.
I think you should just be posting your thank for his insights, rather than having the temerity to correct his version of reality.
7db said:
StressedDave said:
Blimey, that's some reality filter you've got there...
What a nice (and apt) concept.Don't you realise that Rob knows all the answers already? He's been driving on the road and track for years and has a full trophy cabinet. *And* a degree of Physics.
I think you should just be posting your thank for his insights, rather than having the temerity to correct his version of reality.
StressedDave said:
RobM77 said:
StressedDave is a perfectly intelligent, articulate and self sustaining person...
You've not met me have you... 
BTW, what's wrong with the 7? You've not troubled the scorers so far this year.
You'll hopefully see me on the results sheets again soon!Edited by RobM77 on Wednesday 11th June 13:54
StressedDave said:
I figured it was either broken car or funding - you're still listed at the bottom of the results sheet for Roadsports, so I presume you paid entry fee to championships and are now condemned to be listed as 'Not Seen'.
Yes, sadly you're spot on there! If I remember rightly championship registration is about £375 as well!!The car's actually in full working order sat in my garage now
It just needs a fire extinguisher refill to race, which is about £65. I may do another race if I can't sell it before a local one comes up. I have actually been out in it this year, I tested at Combe a few weeks ago, which was great fun In the time since my last race I've been trying other sports to try and find something cheaper that I enjoy. Since that last race I've been sailing, kayaking and jet-skiing so far and I'm going waterskiing next week along with some more kayaking. I also run, cycle and swim regularly, as well as playing Badminton, Squash and Tennis when I can. Nothing really grabs me like motor racing though; I haven't yet had that "wow, this is the sport for me!" feeling that I had when I first stepped in a go kart at 17 or when I first took the track in a car when I was 21. It's such a shame that it's so expensive.
I saw my old team mate from the Metro Cup at the weekend and he's actually crewing on big racing yachts instead. It costs him £300 for the whole of Cowes week, and I think that includes beer! I've had a few quotes for arrive and drive in single seaters and it's coming in at around £1500 per race, but I think I can do it for about £1000 per race if I own my own car and get someone to run it for me. That's cheaper than Caterham racing, and of course I get someone else to set the car up and look after it etc, which given my free time and expertise is essential really if I want to be competitive. Given that I've just booked a two week holiday on a Greek island in a villa with a private pool for £940, this motor racing lark does all seem a bit expensive!
My other option is buying an R400 or R500 and doing track days etc. I think I'd miss the competition though. I've done a few track days in my road going Elise and Caterham and go to the Nurburgring once a year, but it's just not the same.
RobM77 said:
You're quite right. I wasn't strictly correct there. If I had all the vision in the world I wouldn't accelerate out of a bend until I was actually leaving that bend from the point of view of my car. My car doesn't have eyes, it still thinks it's cornering! Once you are pulling lateral g you are subject to the physical complications of cornering - you can't just accelerate off where you want to.
Yes of course you can. The point has been made that in many, many road driving situations, your bend speed is limited by visibility way, way below the speed you might enter it if there was complete line of sight at your chosen level of grip contingency. Then you are fully able and it's perfectly dynamically ok to accelerate before the steering unwinding point. Are you saying that however low the speed you enter a bend, you would never increase that speed until the bend unwinds?RobM77 said:
With regard to your second comment, I have been driving on the road and racing on the track for many years; so maybe with both sides of the story under my belt I'm better to judge such a statement than you, who seem to have only driven on the road. Not best to judge, but certainly better. I say that driving on the road without thought to the limits and aspects of car control is a foolish pursuit. Yes, it's not the sole concern for the road going motorist, but just as before one goes sailing one should learn to swim and how to right a capsized boat, I think you would benefit from a more thorough understanding of how things work, especially before you criticise others who are trying to look at the whole picture.
Er I hope your powers of observation on the road are better than your powers of observation in my profile. All I can say is that you may be a fabby driver, but you take a mighty bigotted position in an intellectual debate. And as for the sailing analogy, with respect, utter b
ks.Bert
Scoobman said:
Hi all
I am thinking of geting a MX5 MK1.
As I had one years ago before I could H&T and it was a great car in many aspects.
Someone mentioned that they didnt find it all that good for H&T
Any MX5 owners out there H&Ting with ease?
I've driven a couple of Mk1 MX5s and a Mk2 and heel and toed in them without an issue. It seems that everyone has a slightly different technique, so the best thing to do is to get a test drive and find out. There's certainly nothing obvious in the pedal box preventing effective heel and toe as far as I can see. Bear in mind also that the MX5 has a huge amount of upgrades available for it, so no doubt something can be sorted with different brake pads (makes a surprising difference on most cars) or even pedal extensions (although I'm not sure if they're legal on the road - can anyone advise?). They're great cars, so have fun! I am thinking of geting a MX5 MK1.
As I had one years ago before I could H&T and it was a great car in many aspects.
Someone mentioned that they didnt find it all that good for H&T
Any MX5 owners out there H&Ting with ease?
RobM77 said:
I've driven a couple of Mk1 MX5s and a Mk2 and heel and toed in them without an issue. It seems that everyone has a slightly different technique, so the best thing to do is to get a test drive and find out. There's certainly nothing obvious in the pedal box preventing effective heel and toe as far as I can see. Bear in mind also that the MX5 has a huge amount of upgrades available for it, so no doubt something can be sorted with different brake pads (makes a surprising difference on most cars) or even pedal extensions (although I'm not sure if they're legal on the road - can anyone advise?). They're great cars, so have fun!
There's nowt in Con & Use about the illegality of extensions and I've fitted them to my '5 to improve the position for heel and toe... I've also been running the Axxis Ultimate pads to bring the performance of the brakes up to the same level as the uprated suspension.StressedDave said:
RobM77 said:
I've driven a couple of Mk1 MX5s and a Mk2 and heel and toed in them without an issue. It seems that everyone has a slightly different technique, so the best thing to do is to get a test drive and find out. There's certainly nothing obvious in the pedal box preventing effective heel and toe as far as I can see. Bear in mind also that the MX5 has a huge amount of upgrades available for it, so no doubt something can be sorted with different brake pads (makes a surprising difference on most cars) or even pedal extensions (although I'm not sure if they're legal on the road - can anyone advise?). They're great cars, so have fun!
There's nowt in Con & Use about the illegality of extensions and I've fitted them to my '5 to improve the position for heel and toe... I've also been running the Axxis Ultimate pads to bring the performance of the brakes up to the same level as the uprated suspension.
There's your answer! I've often wondered because in catalogues such as Demon Tweaks and GPR they quote that pedal extensions are for "off road use only".Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff