RE: IAM issues cornering tip
Discussion
7db said:
I agree it's inverse, I'm not sure it's proportional.
I'd agree with that - it's not a simple 'sum' relationship, which would be proportional, it's a lot more complex than that (I have a maths degree and I'm not sure I'd want to attempt the calculation without a spare hour, I certainly wouldn't want to explain it!).
I'm not going to add any comments to the driving techniques debate - there are people here more knowledgeable and eloquent than me.
What I would like to add is a comment related to the 'numpty driving standards' sub-debate:-
Having recently moved to owning a rwd, very sporting car from a series of varying fwd cars (last one being on of the best ever!), there is significant difference between cornering in the two types of car. A lot of the debate on here seems to assume rwd, and the consequences of getting it wrong in a rwd car. But most numpties drive fwd. And if you overcook it in a corner in a fwd, unless you're really effing stupid, a lift off the throttle will reduce the understeer you're experiencing, or at worst a 'tuck' from the back-end (as opposed to a 205-stylee tail-out moment). In my experience you'd need to be really rough in a typical fwd car to get it oversteering. As a result, the numpties are actually safer than we're discussing, as the instinctive reaction to going too fast is to lift-off the throttle.
That's not to say that they shouldn't be taught this stuff, only that modern cars, while allowing speeds far in excess of what is sensible for a road, also (in the same manner) give tolerances sufficient to protect such numpties from minor-to-moderate cock-ups. I know, I've made numpty-style errors earlier in my driving career, and the cars have (most times) been docile enough to protect me from said cock-ups.
CONCLUSION: I feel there are far more dangers from tailgating, from aggressive driving, and then from failure to read conditions (fog, ice etc.). So I'd say education needs to start with driver-attitude, THEN situational awareness, THEN driving skills last. 30-40 years ago, it would have been a different order, as the cars were less forgiving.
[quote=havocBut most numpties drive fwd. And if you overcook it in a corner in a fwd, unless you're really effing stupid, a lift off the throttle will reduce the understeer you're experiencing, or at worst a 'tuck' from the back-end (as opposed to a 205-stylee tail-out moment). In my experience you'd need to be really rough in a typical fwd car to get it oversteering. As a result, the numpties are actually safer than we're discussing, as the instinctive reaction to going too fast is to lift-off the throttle.
That's not to say that they shouldn't be taught this stuff, only that modern cars, while allowing speeds far in excess of what is sensible for a road, also (in the same manner) give tolerances sufficient to protect such numpties from minor-to-moderate cock-ups. I know, I've made numpty-style errors earlier in my driving career, and the cars have (most times) been docile enough to protect me from said cock-ups.
CONCLUSION: I feel there are far more dangers from tailgating, from aggressive driving, and then from failure to read conditions (fog, ice etc.). So I'd say education needs to start with driver-attitude, THEN situational awareness, THEN driving skills last. 30-40 years ago, it would have been a different order, as the cars were less forgiving.[/quote]
You are right that lift-off CAN correct a cornering error in an fwd, but sudden panic braking mid-corner can induce a 180 skid. Anything that teaches people about appropriate speed entering a corner can therefore only be a good thing. What's wrong with teaching them ALL this stuff anyway? :-/
That's not to say that they shouldn't be taught this stuff, only that modern cars, while allowing speeds far in excess of what is sensible for a road, also (in the same manner) give tolerances sufficient to protect such numpties from minor-to-moderate cock-ups. I know, I've made numpty-style errors earlier in my driving career, and the cars have (most times) been docile enough to protect me from said cock-ups.
CONCLUSION: I feel there are far more dangers from tailgating, from aggressive driving, and then from failure to read conditions (fog, ice etc.). So I'd say education needs to start with driver-attitude, THEN situational awareness, THEN driving skills last. 30-40 years ago, it would have been a different order, as the cars were less forgiving.[/quote]
You are right that lift-off CAN correct a cornering error in an fwd, but sudden panic braking mid-corner can induce a 180 skid. Anything that teaches people about appropriate speed entering a corner can therefore only be a good thing. What's wrong with teaching them ALL this stuff anyway? :-/
jazzyjeff said:
You are right that lift-off CAN correct a cornering error in an fwd, but sudden panic braking mid-corner can induce a 180 skid.
What's wrong with teaching them ALL this stuff anyway? :-/
1) Possibly...but unless they're a LOT closer to the true limits than they think, ABS can be a wonderful tool, esp. if combined with some sort of stability control. I've had ABS straighten me out of a rear-wheel skid before (albeit with steering input from me) (Oh, and on-track, that is - and i'm serious, not tongue-in-cheek, with that qualifier)
2) Nothing, but I still stand by my first two education needs.
>> Edited by havoc on Monday 20th March 14:39
havoc said:
What I would like to add is a comment related to the 'numpty driving standards' sub-debate:-
Having recently moved to owning a rwd, very sporting car from a series of varying fwd cars (last one being on of the best ever!), there is significant difference between cornering in the two types of car. A lot of the debate on here seems to assume rwd, and the consequences of getting it wrong in a rwd car. But most numpties drive fwd. And if you overcook it in a corner in a fwd, unless you're really effing stupid, a lift off the throttle will reduce the understeer you're experiencing, or at worst a 'tuck' from the back-end (as opposed to a 205-stylee tail-out moment). In my experience you'd need to be really rough in a typical fwd car to get it oversteering. As a result, the numpties are actually safer than we're discussing, as the instinctive reaction to going too fast is to lift-off the throttle.
That's not to say that they shouldn't be taught this stuff, only that modern cars, while allowing speeds far in excess of what is sensible for a road, also (in the same manner) give tolerances sufficient to protect such numpties from minor-to-moderate cock-ups. I know, I've made numpty-style errors earlier in my driving career, and the cars have (most times) been docile enough to protect me from said cock-ups.
CONCLUSION: I feel there are far more dangers from tailgating, from aggressive driving, and then from failure to read conditions (fog, ice etc.). So I'd say education needs to start with driver-attitude, THEN situational awareness, THEN driving skills last. 30-40 years ago, it would have been a different order, as the cars were less forgiving.
FWD is more forgiving but less involving (IMHO) each to their own I guess.
Re FWD , RWD & ABS
Of course you can provoke understeer & oversteer in both. If you are at a reasonable speed (say 60mph) & are on a wide enough piece of tarmac, if you just throw full steering lock on, with no brakes, both FWD & RWD vehicles will suffer massively from understeer. They will initially travel mostly straight on, only slightly turning on the arc as the vehicle skids (which understeer is.) The further you travel the more speed is scrubbed off, the more the wheels regain grip & the tighter your turning arc becomes until eventually you'd end up travelling 180 degrees from the original path.
If we do the same thing in a car (FWD or RWD) with ABS, but this time after throwing on full lock we stamp & stay on the brakes, initially the arc path that the car takes will be almost identical to the one where we didn't brake at all. This is because the vehicle is skidding & the ABS will not be able to apply any useful braking whilst it is still doing so. As the speed drops through frcition again, and the tyres start to regain some grip, the ABS can progressively start applying more effective braking. It is only after this point that the arc travelled will be a slightly tighter & shorter one.
The most dramatic change will come where we stamp on the brakes before we start throwing on the steering. If we do that & stay on the brakes, the brakes would have been able to work very efficiently whilst we were travelling in a straight line in getting rid of speed & we will get both less understeer as a result & turn on a much tighter shorter arc.
If we had been in a non ABS car & thrown on the steering, the moment we stamped on the brakes the wheels would have locked & the vehicle would have come off the arc travelling straight on where the nose was pointing at the time. It will continue travelling on that line until we release the brakes so that the wheels can rotate again. Provided there is at that point sufficient grip the vehicle when then resume travelling on an arc path, unless we lock up again.
Re the straightening of the vehicle during oversteer. Yes FWD or RWD with ABS, if when you develop oversteer braking will bring the rear end into line requiring less opposite lock steering correction, although still some.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Monday 20th March 21:35
vonhosen,
I wasn't talking at all about how involving fwd and rwd are - that's a completely separate debate, and irrelevant to the topic of driving standards.
Your analysis is correct, but equally lacking in relevance - you are talking about one hypothetical scenario, which I can't recall being that significant an issue on UK roads - we WERE talking about people driving too fast into a corner, not about violent steering inputs before/after braking.
So, back to the scenario, and the numpty in the modern, fwd, abs'd, over-tyred car will grip, grip, grip, understeer, then:-
- violent lift-off accelerator will tuck the nose in; or
- sudden braking will unbalance the car, trigger the abs, which will mitigate any loss-of-stability issues they have.
If they've really overdone it they're going off the road regardless, the only issue is forwards or backwards.
I wasn't talking at all about how involving fwd and rwd are - that's a completely separate debate, and irrelevant to the topic of driving standards.
Your analysis is correct, but equally lacking in relevance - you are talking about one hypothetical scenario, which I can't recall being that significant an issue on UK roads - we WERE talking about people driving too fast into a corner, not about violent steering inputs before/after braking.
So, back to the scenario, and the numpty in the modern, fwd, abs'd, over-tyred car will grip, grip, grip, understeer, then:-
- violent lift-off accelerator will tuck the nose in; or
- sudden braking will unbalance the car, trigger the abs, which will mitigate any loss-of-stability issues they have.
If they've really overdone it they're going off the road regardless, the only issue is forwards or backwards.
Maybe a stereotype 
but most PH'ers will be reasonably confident drivers.
An awful lot of folk on the road are not up to that level. People should be taught to know their own limits and stay within them - and if that means going a bit slower and not slinging a car into a corner then thats what it means.
A lot of drivers, if taught 'Limit Point Analysis' or any other similar idea by different words would go out and think "Now I know how to drive fast" and natural selection would soon be in control.
If the standard in driving is to be improved, its by teaching folk some basic manners, etiquette and patience. Whether its done by a voluntary organisation like IAM or a government agency, I think periodic retesting should be required to keep your license or maybe restructed into more classes to the driving license. Like a CBT etc for bikes - passing a more advanced driving test allows you to drive a more powerful/dangerous car.
but most PH'ers will be reasonably confident drivers. An awful lot of folk on the road are not up to that level. People should be taught to know their own limits and stay within them - and if that means going a bit slower and not slinging a car into a corner then thats what it means.
A lot of drivers, if taught 'Limit Point Analysis' or any other similar idea by different words would go out and think "Now I know how to drive fast" and natural selection would soon be in control.
If the standard in driving is to be improved, its by teaching folk some basic manners, etiquette and patience. Whether its done by a voluntary organisation like IAM or a government agency, I think periodic retesting should be required to keep your license or maybe restructed into more classes to the driving license. Like a CBT etc for bikes - passing a more advanced driving test allows you to drive a more powerful/dangerous car.
havoc said:
I agree it's inverse, I'm not sure it's proportional.
I'd agree with that - it's not a simple 'sum' relationship, which would be proportional, it's a lot more complex than that (I have a maths degree...
I've got a couple of those. I think it's an inverese elliptical relationship, but the ellipse is skewed by the slip angle of the tyre...
Do I get one of these put-downs now?:-
havoc said:
Your analysis is correct, but equally lacking in relevance
cj_eds said:
A lot of drivers, if taught 'Limit Point Analysis' or any other similar idea by different words would go out and think "Now I know how to drive fast" and natural selection would soon be in control.
You can argue that merely teaching them how to operate a vehicle is enough for these people, though.
Stopping distances? They learnt them once long ago...but don't actually care. The problem with driving is that daily experience doesn't provide any negative feedback with respect to poor driving. You can tailgate, quite possibly for years, before the second thing goes wrong and there is an accident.
Similarly many, many people throw their cars into corners too fast to be able to stop if they had to. They've done it every day. Quite possibly for their entire driving career - they know
it doesn't cause an accident - because they've never had one! Then, one day, the broken down tractor is just around the blind corner and they're dead, dead, dead. The challenge with teaching anyone with a modicum of driving experience is that simply because nothing has gone wrong yet it does not mean that the particular driving behaviour is OK. Hard thing to overcome, that. The worst ones for it are the middle-aged blokes who come along to the IAM to have their driving "rubber stamped" as "good".
Don said:
The problem with driving is that daily experience doesn't provide any negative feedback with respect to poor driving. You can tailgate, quite possibly for years, before the second thing goes wrong and there is an accident.
Similarly many, many people throw their cars into corners too fast to be able to stop if they had to. They've done it every day. Quite possibly for their entire driving career - they know
The challenge with teaching anyone with a modicum of driving experience is that simply because nothing has gone wrong yet it does not mean that the particular driving behaviour is OK. Hard thing to overcome, that. The worst ones for it are the middle-aged blokes who come along to the IAM to have their driving "rubber stamped" as "good".
Very well said Don. Never have truer words been spoken.
Similarly, I made an analogy yesterday with regard to learning on the limit car control on track days: If you drive a car through bends out of balance you're gonna get predominent understeer or oversteer. The problem is the feedback as to why you're getting what you're getting isn't there and people don't learn; just like Don says for safe road driving. Now, carving a car through a bend is identical to carving a surfboard along a wave. Thing is, surfing is a very direct thing - balance and you stay on, don't balance and you fall off. The feedback loop is so simple that given practise everyone learns. I've sat with people on track days who are quite intelligent and capable of learning to drive fast, but they simply don't understand what they're doing wrong. Going back to what Don says, if a driver makes a stupid mistake like tailgating, they don't instantly get very wet or something, they just bumble along like they always did. Sad fact is, they will learn one day - maybe in a month's time, maybe in ten years, and hopefully it won't result in serious injury. Same goes for smoking - you don't notice the increased risk of cancer till you get it...
Don said:
Stopping distances? They learnt them once long ago...but don't actually care. The problem with driving is that daily experience doesn't provide any negative feedback with respect to poor driving. You can tailgate, quite possibly for years, before the second thing goes wrong and there is an accident.
Similarly many, many people throw their cars into corners too fast to be able to stop if they had to. They've done it every day. Quite possibly for their entire driving career - they know
The challenge with teaching anyone with a modicum of driving experience is that simply because nothing has gone wrong yet it does not mean that the particular driving behaviour is OK. Hard thing to overcome, that. The worst ones for it are the middle-aged blokes who come along to the IAM to have their driving "rubber stamped" as "good".
Too true.
I said on antother thread that the problem is that people just have no idea about their defeciencies & the fact they don't have collisions all the time falsely enforces a belief in them that they are good.
They don't know what they don't know & when they look at their friends they don't see anything better to learn from either. They have simply never seen the right way.
havoc said:
You are right that lift-off CAN correct a cornering error in an fwd, but sudden panic braking mid-corner can induce a 180 skid.
What's wrong with teaching them ALL this stuff anyway? :-/
1) Possibly...but unless they're a LOT closer to the true limits than they think, ABS can be a wonderful tool, esp. if combined with some sort of stability control. I've had ABS straighten me out of a rear-wheel skid before (albeit with steering input from me) (Oh, and on-track, that is - and i'm serious, not tongue-in-cheek, with that qualifier)
2) Nothing, but I still stand by my first two education needs.
>> Edited by havoc on Monday 20th March 14:39
Very true. But that's assuming that the car they are driving has ABS (or EBD, LSD, etc. etc.). Most inexperienced drivers (theoretically the most likely to be 'numpty') probably won't have cars with these devices.
Personally I'm all for the driving test including a section including skid-pan training in an old Allegro ;-)
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff