Safe road speed in slow and fast cars?
Discussion
I'm quite a numbers person when it comes to cars (worked on some vehicle sims) and I fully understand on a race track that a Lotus Elise for example will blow a Focus TDCi into the weeds, and power to weight reigns supreme, risks are reduced and you can fully utilise the cars potential.
However, on the road is a hugely different discipline.
I've read Roadcraft and many threads on here, and I quite like the logic and safety driven aspects of road driving vs the relatively raw aggressive aspects of race track driving.
But, I've come a cropper, or so it seems.
To save repeating myself here too much I'll post a link to the thread I am discussing in (here at PH)
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=354044&f=129&h=0&p=10
It started towards the end of page 8.
Now I'm not fussed either way, I'm happy to be told I'm wrong because good road driving is about knowing your limitations and lack of understanding and being open to improvement.
Am I wrong in saying what I am saying there? I enjoy a good drive, and have had and driven numerous fast cars, but the only times I have gone really fast I am sure I have driven rather badly (with respect mainly to observation), and that as much as I can I fnd myself using the limit point technique as much as possible when "pushing on", and even in my little 306 Hdi I find myself approaching what I deem safe plenty of the time, and a downgrade of around 30% power to weight from my last car has only seen acceleration phases being slightly longer, especially since using ALL the power even in the revvy car required more work and again a more aggressive driving style more at home on track.
Am I wrong to suggest what I suggest in that thread?
Feel like a bit of a plonker but happy to be proven wrong!
Dave
However, on the road is a hugely different discipline.
I've read Roadcraft and many threads on here, and I quite like the logic and safety driven aspects of road driving vs the relatively raw aggressive aspects of race track driving.
But, I've come a cropper, or so it seems.
To save repeating myself here too much I'll post a link to the thread I am discussing in (here at PH)
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=354044&f=129&h=0&p=10
It started towards the end of page 8.
Now I'm not fussed either way, I'm happy to be told I'm wrong because good road driving is about knowing your limitations and lack of understanding and being open to improvement.
Am I wrong in saying what I am saying there? I enjoy a good drive, and have had and driven numerous fast cars, but the only times I have gone really fast I am sure I have driven rather badly (with respect mainly to observation), and that as much as I can I fnd myself using the limit point technique as much as possible when "pushing on", and even in my little 306 Hdi I find myself approaching what I deem safe plenty of the time, and a downgrade of around 30% power to weight from my last car has only seen acceleration phases being slightly longer, especially since using ALL the power even in the revvy car required more work and again a more aggressive driving style more at home on track.
Am I wrong to suggest what I suggest in that thread?
Feel like a bit of a plonker but happy to be proven wrong!
Dave
It's an interesting point, especially one about visibility due to the higher seating positions in the Focus. I think the point they are missing on the other thread is that of driving safely based on what you can see, not on the cars abilities.
As you have mentioned in one of your posts, the only way to find out would be to stage a test, however I suspect you would see a minimal difference.
editted to add: if the driver was prepared to drive at safe but illegal speeds then the outcome may be different.
As you have mentioned in one of your posts, the only way to find out would be to stage a test, however I suspect you would see a minimal difference.
editted to add: if the driver was prepared to drive at safe but illegal speeds then the outcome may be different.
Edited by hugh_ on Wednesday 14th March 18:01
I didn't read the other thread, but did anyone mention overtaking capability, or is your cross country blat devoid of other traffic?
I would say the Elise would make better progress because it could take advantage of overtaking opportunities? (Although having said that, sometimes they miss out as they don't have the vision....)
I would say the Elise would make better progress because it could take advantage of overtaking opportunities? (Although having said that, sometimes they miss out as they don't have the vision....)
I agree with you, though of course the choice of roads will have an effect.
The sort of thing you suggest does happen in training (not the cars you suggest, but different vehicles with drivers of very similar training & ability) & invariably there is little or nothing in it (save for overtaking opportunities that can be realised)
The sort of thing you suggest does happen in training (not the cars you suggest, but different vehicles with drivers of very similar training & ability) & invariably there is little or nothing in it (save for overtaking opportunities that can be realised)
Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 14th March 18:05
It's an interesting point you're making, and I see where you're coming from.
But I don't agree with you. If the type of car you're driving makes little difference to the speed you can safely drive a car at on the road, then us traffic bobbies would all be driving diesel Astras, rather than 3.2litre Vectras and ST220 Mondeos.
Take this point that you made, for instance...
Not a chance! And I speak from some considerable experience.
A good advanced Police driver will be able to use most of a cars performance most of the time on the road, to make maximum progress, whilst still sticking to the guidelines laid out in Roadcraft. Hence, put that driver in a faster car, and they'll be able to extract more performance from the car.
I'd cover ground far quicker in an Elise than I would in a diesel Focus.
But I don't agree with you. If the type of car you're driving makes little difference to the speed you can safely drive a car at on the road, then us traffic bobbies would all be driving diesel Astras, rather than 3.2litre Vectras and ST220 Mondeos.
Take this point that you made, for instance...
Mr Whippy said:
I'd wager that a trained pursuit Trafpol officer driving an Elise S2 or a TDCi Ford Focus would go point to point in about the same time on pretty much any road.
Not a chance! And I speak from some considerable experience.
A good advanced Police driver will be able to use most of a cars performance most of the time on the road, to make maximum progress, whilst still sticking to the guidelines laid out in Roadcraft. Hence, put that driver in a faster car, and they'll be able to extract more performance from the car.
I'd cover ground far quicker in an Elise than I would in a diesel Focus.
The biggest factor in taking a car down a given road in a safe but quick manner is down to the driver. The car is secondary. So a good road driver in a lower powered car will usually be quicker and safer than a poorer driver in more powerful car.
A good road driver given two cars one quicker than the other will tend to be quicker in the quick car.
What makes a quick road car? People in mags the pub etc seem to bang on about how powerfull cars are and power to weight ratio (which obviously has a part to play).
For me it is three things. How good the brakes are how effectively can you wipe off speed at the end of a straight or if you see a potential hazard. How quickly does a car find its neutral balance (steady state). How progressive is it on the limits of its grip, does if give you clues and if it breaks is it in a PROGRESSIVE manner.
None of the above mentions power or weight. But I would rather be in a car with the above characteristics but with less power than one with more power but with none of the above.
The V70 T5 - of which I have driven many in my time I feel is the later. Great engine - pulls like a train ....er thats it. Apart from in a straight line the brakes suspension etc in stock form are not up to the job and it is difficult to safely exploit all the cars power safely on a country road. The engine is simply too good for the rest of the car. I call it the golf VR6 syndrome - those of you that have driven a VR6 will know what I mean. Bloody quick but bloody Awfull.
Give me control over power any day. For me this is what I feel makes for a safer road car you can make progress in.
SM
A good road driver given two cars one quicker than the other will tend to be quicker in the quick car.
What makes a quick road car? People in mags the pub etc seem to bang on about how powerfull cars are and power to weight ratio (which obviously has a part to play).
For me it is three things. How good the brakes are how effectively can you wipe off speed at the end of a straight or if you see a potential hazard. How quickly does a car find its neutral balance (steady state). How progressive is it on the limits of its grip, does if give you clues and if it breaks is it in a PROGRESSIVE manner.
None of the above mentions power or weight. But I would rather be in a car with the above characteristics but with less power than one with more power but with none of the above.
The V70 T5 - of which I have driven many in my time I feel is the later. Great engine - pulls like a train ....er thats it. Apart from in a straight line the brakes suspension etc in stock form are not up to the job and it is difficult to safely exploit all the cars power safely on a country road. The engine is simply too good for the rest of the car. I call it the golf VR6 syndrome - those of you that have driven a VR6 will know what I mean. Bloody quick but bloody Awfull.
Give me control over power any day. For me this is what I feel makes for a safer road car you can make progress in.
SM
From what I read in Roadcraft it is written for driving while obeying the highway code and not indulging in pursuit techniques. When sticking to Roadcraft a driver will not disobey the speed limits, the two second rule or force themselves into gaps between cars in a queue of traffic. IMHO an Elise will be barely any quicker than a Focus. If on the other hand you chose to disregard speed limits and think that setting a good example to others is for losers then the faster accelerating car is naturally likely to be faster, especially when making use of overtaking opportunities. Ultimately though the highest cross country speed is probably down to which driver has the smallest safety margins. (There may be some among you who have heard about Dave Brodie in a Capri versus Ronnie Peterson in an Elan many years ago)
On a separate note why don't people who break the speed limits and follow too close use the hard shoulder on motorways in heavy traffic? It would save them much more time and is surely less dangerous.
On a separate note why don't people who break the speed limits and follow too close use the hard shoulder on motorways in heavy traffic? It would save them much more time and is surely less dangerous.
Scoobman said:
What makes a quick road car? People in mags the pub etc seem to bang on about how powerfull cars are and power to weight ratio (which obviously has a part to play).
For me it is three things. How good the brakes are how effectively can you wipe off speed at the end of a straight or if you see a potential hazard. How quickly does a car find its neutral balance (steady state). How progressive is it on the limits of its grip, does if give you clues and if it breaks is it in a PROGRESSIVE manner.
For me it is three things. How good the brakes are how effectively can you wipe off speed at the end of a straight or if you see a potential hazard. How quickly does a car find its neutral balance (steady state). How progressive is it on the limits of its grip, does if give you clues and if it breaks is it in a PROGRESSIVE manner.
I was going to ask this.
I think brakes are #1. I think this is the only upgrade to Police cars? (Willing to be told different though).
The rule is "stop in the distance you can see to be clear". Better brakes means higher speeds into hazards. And better brakes means less fade under progressive driving.
Don't understand the balance bit.
Don't get anywhere near the limits of grip on the road.
The other thing I'd think was important was acceleration - taking advantage of overtakes and building up speed on the straights.
Thanks for the replies.
Sounds like I am half way there.
I do expect as said that the faster cars will show that advantage when the conditions allow, and I always like to use extreme's to make the point and an Ultima in the snow vs an S1 Landie is about as stark as it gets
Not a chance! And I speak from some considerable experience.
A good advanced Police driver will be able to use most of a cars performance most of the time on the road, to make maximum progress, whilst still sticking to the guidelines laid out in Roadcraft. Hence, put that driver in a faster car, and they'll be able to extract more performance from the car.
We were really talking S1 Elise (as in the 116 ish bhp model), but I take you point.
I think on roads with lots of clear straights and then sharp bends with straight aways it's pretty clear what will happen, the primary advantage of power will show itself over 80mph (aerodynamic) and then any power to weight will show itself from maybe 40mph > 80mph from the bend.
The problem is most roads are not like this, and even ones that are (go out towards York on the flood plains where it's flat and fenceless roads with nothing but crop fields around) can have off cambers, hedges, dips, blind humps, and right to the worst roads like Buttertubs pass, or high walled narrow roads up near Kettlewell where a lorry is quicker than a car due to the sight line round the next three bends!
I generally accept a faster car will be quicker, but there was an air of "walk away from" or "leave for dead" on the thread, under "all" circumstances, which of course was a little general and not to be taken literally, but it was still a bit ignorant and I just had to reply
My initial thought was ignoring speed limits (not the obvious ones, but lets say national limits on relatively quiet roads because you'd have to be seriously silly to start comparing car speeds point to point in urban areas), but using everything else Roadcraft suggests.
I do also agree (another point I failed to think of) with overtaking potential of faster cars, I'm sure on certain roads this would enable much quicker progress... but again on a road like Buttertubs to a stranger, overtaking opportunities would be taken by the book, with no prior preparation, which I think it's all too easy to assume you have in these situations. Ie, you use your experiences from roads you know, which isn't fair, and it's surprising how much more condensed and difficult overtaking is on an unknown road. It is certainly a challenge, which just shows perhaps how bad my normal overtaking is (ie, assuming rather than being totally thorough as if I had never driven the road before)
Anyway, I digress.
Thats probably a good generalisation for your average person having a blat on the road with another driver...
I guess my point of view comes from my own limitations, which see me not using the higher performance of faster cars, and I'm never in THAT much of a hurry, but I do generally find that I'm only missing out in the acceleration phases (two very similar cars on commonly used roads, just one with 120bhp/1130kg, the other was 167bhp/1210kg), with the braking phases, cornering speeds and peak speeds being about the same...
I also tend not to enjoy too higher speeds, mainly the thought of "what if" at anything around 1 lepton worries me enough to slow me down, afterall I'm not trained at such high speeds... but again, is that sensibility on the roads I drive, IS it really safe enough to go quicker? Can I *really* stop in the road I can see to be clear? Have I made sure there are no hazards that *may* present themselves? Am I making a wise decision or am I being overly cautious (mainly due to a lack of skill/experience in making safe observations at these speeds?)
Ultimately the only answer really is to the said test, with a wide range of roads and conditions, with equally well trained and constrained drivers, because your average road drivers risk assesments and so point to point speed will likely vary by much more than their respective cars "paper (controlled test environment) stats could ever display...
And thats all before you throw in tyres, handling, brakes, visibility, stability, feel, responsiveness, gearbox, drive type, any ESP/ABS type devices etc etc etc whose effects are simply not considered in real road driving on paper reports and tests etc...
Maybe we should get a few Trafpol over to the IOM, 5 Trafpol, 1 lap per car, as many cars as the weather stays constant, and as many varying weather conditions as possible per set of cars
(not on the tourist one way road days of course, just de-restricted but road law still standing)
Hmmmmm
Dave
Sounds like I am half way there.
I do expect as said that the faster cars will show that advantage when the conditions allow, and I always like to use extreme's to make the point and an Ultima in the snow vs an S1 Landie is about as stark as it gets
R_U_LOCAL said:
Mr Whippy said:
I'd wager that a trained pursuit Trafpol officer driving an Elise S2 or a TDCi Ford Focus would go point to point in about the same time on pretty much any road.
Not a chance! And I speak from some considerable experience.
A good advanced Police driver will be able to use most of a cars performance most of the time on the road, to make maximum progress, whilst still sticking to the guidelines laid out in Roadcraft. Hence, put that driver in a faster car, and they'll be able to extract more performance from the car.
We were really talking S1 Elise (as in the 116 ish bhp model), but I take you point.
I think on roads with lots of clear straights and then sharp bends with straight aways it's pretty clear what will happen, the primary advantage of power will show itself over 80mph (aerodynamic) and then any power to weight will show itself from maybe 40mph > 80mph from the bend.
The problem is most roads are not like this, and even ones that are (go out towards York on the flood plains where it's flat and fenceless roads with nothing but crop fields around) can have off cambers, hedges, dips, blind humps, and right to the worst roads like Buttertubs pass, or high walled narrow roads up near Kettlewell where a lorry is quicker than a car due to the sight line round the next three bends!
I generally accept a faster car will be quicker, but there was an air of "walk away from" or "leave for dead" on the thread, under "all" circumstances, which of course was a little general and not to be taken literally, but it was still a bit ignorant and I just had to reply
My initial thought was ignoring speed limits (not the obvious ones, but lets say national limits on relatively quiet roads because you'd have to be seriously silly to start comparing car speeds point to point in urban areas), but using everything else Roadcraft suggests.
I do also agree (another point I failed to think of) with overtaking potential of faster cars, I'm sure on certain roads this would enable much quicker progress... but again on a road like Buttertubs to a stranger, overtaking opportunities would be taken by the book, with no prior preparation, which I think it's all too easy to assume you have in these situations. Ie, you use your experiences from roads you know, which isn't fair, and it's surprising how much more condensed and difficult overtaking is on an unknown road. It is certainly a challenge, which just shows perhaps how bad my normal overtaking is (ie, assuming rather than being totally thorough as if I had never driven the road before)
Anyway, I digress.
Martin a said:
Ultimately though the highest cross country speed is probably down to which driver has the smallest safety margins.
Thats probably a good generalisation for your average person having a blat on the road with another driver...
I guess my point of view comes from my own limitations, which see me not using the higher performance of faster cars, and I'm never in THAT much of a hurry, but I do generally find that I'm only missing out in the acceleration phases (two very similar cars on commonly used roads, just one with 120bhp/1130kg, the other was 167bhp/1210kg), with the braking phases, cornering speeds and peak speeds being about the same...
I also tend not to enjoy too higher speeds, mainly the thought of "what if" at anything around 1 lepton worries me enough to slow me down, afterall I'm not trained at such high speeds... but again, is that sensibility on the roads I drive, IS it really safe enough to go quicker? Can I *really* stop in the road I can see to be clear? Have I made sure there are no hazards that *may* present themselves? Am I making a wise decision or am I being overly cautious (mainly due to a lack of skill/experience in making safe observations at these speeds?)
Ultimately the only answer really is to the said test, with a wide range of roads and conditions, with equally well trained and constrained drivers, because your average road drivers risk assesments and so point to point speed will likely vary by much more than their respective cars "paper (controlled test environment) stats could ever display...
And thats all before you throw in tyres, handling, brakes, visibility, stability, feel, responsiveness, gearbox, drive type, any ESP/ABS type devices etc etc etc whose effects are simply not considered in real road driving on paper reports and tests etc...
Maybe we should get a few Trafpol over to the IOM, 5 Trafpol, 1 lap per car, as many cars as the weather stays constant, and as many varying weather conditions as possible per set of cars
(not on the tourist one way road days of course, just de-restricted but road law still standing) Hmmmmm
Dave
Edited by Mr Whippy on Wednesday 14th March 20:32
Years ago, at the same time I owned a contempory Renault 5 GT turbo (115 bhp) and a Westfield powered by a Kent on Webers, probably about a 100bhp in reality, so power to weight, not much in it.
Thanks to the Renaults brilliantly supple suspension, and the Westfields chronic lack of visibility and crude suspension, the Renault was absolutely miles quicker down a lane. The Westfield couldn't stand a chance.
Interstingly though, I took the Westie to a Porsche OC night at Curborough, and this was the first time I had participated in anything near resembling competition. Thanks to Curboroughs smooth surface and the Weesties light weight, I was the second fastest on the night. That wouldn't have happened with the Renault. But the 5 was still way quicker on a typical B road. That 5 could live with a mates 160 brake Esprit, too. It could live with his Excel as well, up to about 120.
Thanks to the Renaults brilliantly supple suspension, and the Westfields chronic lack of visibility and crude suspension, the Renault was absolutely miles quicker down a lane. The Westfield couldn't stand a chance.
Interstingly though, I took the Westie to a Porsche OC night at Curborough, and this was the first time I had participated in anything near resembling competition. Thanks to Curboroughs smooth surface and the Weesties light weight, I was the second fastest on the night. That wouldn't have happened with the Renault. But the 5 was still way quicker on a typical B road. That 5 could live with a mates 160 brake Esprit, too. It could live with his Excel as well, up to about 120.
Mr Whippy said:
...but again on a road like Buttertubs to a stranger, overtaking opportunities would be taken by the book, with no prior preparation, which I think it's all too easy to assume you have in these situations. Ie, you use your experiences from roads you know, which isn't fair, and it's surprising how much more condensed and difficult overtaking is on an unknown road. It is certainly a challenge, which just shows perhaps how bad my normal overtaking is (ie, assuming rather than being totally thorough as if I had never driven the road before)
I don't know why you're making such a point about known/unknown roads?
Even a road you know can have different conditions day to day? OK - you might know that after the next bend it opens up for an overtaking opportunity.
But an advanced driver would be closing up anticipating an overtake - if it's not there drop back? (OK - except R_U_Local
) Edited by Vaux on Wednesday 14th March 20:50
Vaux said:
Mr Whippy said:
...but again on a road like Buttertubs to a stranger, overtaking opportunities would be taken by the book, with no prior preparation, which I think it's all too easy to assume you have in these situations. Ie, you use your experiences from roads you know, which isn't fair, and it's surprising how much more condensed and difficult overtaking is on an unknown road. It is certainly a challenge, which just shows perhaps how bad my normal overtaking is (ie, assuming rather than being totally thorough as if I had never driven the road before)
I don't know why you're making such a point about known/unknown roads?
Even a road you know can have different conditions day to day? OK - you might know that after the next bend it opens up for an overtaking opportunity.
But an advanced driver would be closing up anticipating an overtake - if it's not there drop back? (OK - except R_U_Local
) Edited by Vaux on Wednesday 14th March 20:50
I'm making a point because many drivers don't do what an advanced driver do, and use local knowledge to make up for a lack of skill.
Chances are most of these on-road meets where one driver thinks their car is superior to another have one or both on a road they know... or at least these are the ones they will use as an example of a cars performance.
I agree with you though, a good driver should make a judgement as the conditions change, not on what was or has been there the last several weeks, months or years... but I just felt it required extra note in my original arguement because many people will prefer to engage in said activities on roads they know!
Dave
I used to compete in road rallies. On the sort of roads we'd use, I don't think an Elise would embarrass a well prepped 205 gti.
But having said that, on the roads we all like to hoon on in the daytime, a dag-dag Focus wouldn't see which way an Elise went. The biggest factor for the Elise is its lack of weight. Even the earliest lowest powered model had acceleration times roughly half that of the Focus.
But having said that, on the roads we all like to hoon on in the daytime, a dag-dag Focus wouldn't see which way an Elise went. The biggest factor for the Elise is its lack of weight. Even the earliest lowest powered model had acceleration times roughly half that of the Focus.
I reckon safe road speed does vary by car - but not by as much as you'd think.
The ability to stop in the distance you can see to be clear is paramount. The lighter the car and the better the brakes the shorter this distance will be. Caterhams can stop on a sixpence in comparative terms with most road cars. Downside is if there's anyone following you you'll be rear ended as they blindly follow you in. In truth - most drivers will not and should not use this capability as anything more than additional safety margin.
Better acceleration will make a difference as more time will be spent on the straights at the speed limit - or terminal velocity dependent on your predilictions - as you go there sooner using the performance of the car. This aspect most drivers can and will use I'd have said.
All the same - the biggest factor in making progress on the road is vision and the certainty that the road is clear. Thereafter a car's performance will make a difference.
It would be very, very interesting to find out what the proportion is.
Oh - and Mr Whippy - I absolutely agree that if a driver is willing to take risks (i.e. drive in a stupid and dangerous fashion unable to stop in the distance they can see to be clear) then they can beat point to point times performed by someone not doing so. Hands down. Until they crash. Which they will - eventually.
The ability to stop in the distance you can see to be clear is paramount. The lighter the car and the better the brakes the shorter this distance will be. Caterhams can stop on a sixpence in comparative terms with most road cars. Downside is if there's anyone following you you'll be rear ended as they blindly follow you in. In truth - most drivers will not and should not use this capability as anything more than additional safety margin.
Better acceleration will make a difference as more time will be spent on the straights at the speed limit - or terminal velocity dependent on your predilictions - as you go there sooner using the performance of the car. This aspect most drivers can and will use I'd have said.
All the same - the biggest factor in making progress on the road is vision and the certainty that the road is clear. Thereafter a car's performance will make a difference.
It would be very, very interesting to find out what the proportion is.
Oh - and Mr Whippy - I absolutely agree that if a driver is willing to take risks (i.e. drive in a stupid and dangerous fashion unable to stop in the distance they can see to be clear) then they can beat point to point times performed by someone not doing so. Hands down. Until they crash. Which they will - eventually.
Don said:
In truth - most drivers will not and should not use this capability as anything more than additional safety margin.
Better acceleration will make a difference as more time will be spent on the straights at the speed limit - or terminal velocity dependent on your predilictions - as you go there sooner using the performance of the car. This aspect most drivers can and will use I'd have said.
Better acceleration will make a difference as more time will be spent on the straights at the speed limit - or terminal velocity dependent on your predilictions - as you go there sooner using the performance of the car. This aspect most drivers can and will use I'd have said.
The first part makes sense, I'm sure Roadcraft mentions something about the friction circle and if you use all one direction you loose the other (ie, braking or turning) and so for normal safe driving it's good to use roughly half the maximum to maintain smoothness and balance...!? (or am I making that up) Roughly 0.5g braking is "ample", though I wasn't sure on lateral or accelerative g's, but again I guess smoothness is key over peak!
The second is the part that is key to the major difference I'd guess, as you have said. However, how many roads really allow cars like an F40 to deploy all their power for example. They might only be able to use ~ 300bhp alot of the time due to the delivery and conditions (wet road maybe), effectively loosing a great deal of that advantage.
Of course the advantage is there. Just when you add up the initial road safety factors, then the variable conditions where more and more power can be used, the increase in power and power to weight must have increasingly negligible returns?
Ie, the Veyron with twice the power probably wouldn't be any faster at all unless it was on a drag strip or very very fast circuit, infact upto 100mph it simply may only have the traction for what it already has and see no benefits at sub 100mph for example!? It'd probably be just as fast on 99% of UK roads/conditions with 1/3rd of it's power cropped off!
Of course when the power and high-speed potential can be fully used in a considerately safe manner, these fast cars are blisteringly quick but then I don't have issue with that, it's obvious, and they will still be damn exciting to drive
It would be interesting to see the mix/difference. Infact I'd say it would be a good thing to do to show drivers that it's about them, not about their car and it's performance! It might also show enjoyable fun driving is more important than how fast you are going...?!
Dave
Edited by Mr Whippy on Friday 16th March 16:10
In my limited experience I can see where you're going with this.
I've seen some very talented drivers keep up with vehicles far beyond the "spec sheet" capability of the vehicle pursuing. Two that stand out were a BMW M3 that we kept up with in a BMW 330d for about 15 miles along the M1, and two 600CC sports bikes that we kept up with in a 1.8 Zafira in central london for about 5 minutes. Both of these were a triumph of driving talent over grunt.
However, you can only go against the odds for so long. On a long straight road with no hazards power to weight wins. Looking at lap times by drivers of similar talents must give some indication of a cars envelope of performance, or else magazines and TV shows wouldn't bother doing it. I thinl that a Mondeo TDCI vs any elise would be a no contest due to light weight, higher cornering speed and better poise. Negating driver differences (which on road is the only factor differing massively) there will of course be substantial varyation if the performace of cars. Otehrwise we's all be driving daewoo matiz's!
I've seen some very talented drivers keep up with vehicles far beyond the "spec sheet" capability of the vehicle pursuing. Two that stand out were a BMW M3 that we kept up with in a BMW 330d for about 15 miles along the M1, and two 600CC sports bikes that we kept up with in a 1.8 Zafira in central london for about 5 minutes. Both of these were a triumph of driving talent over grunt.
However, you can only go against the odds for so long. On a long straight road with no hazards power to weight wins. Looking at lap times by drivers of similar talents must give some indication of a cars envelope of performance, or else magazines and TV shows wouldn't bother doing it. I thinl that a Mondeo TDCI vs any elise would be a no contest due to light weight, higher cornering speed and better poise. Negating driver differences (which on road is the only factor differing massively) there will of course be substantial varyation if the performace of cars. Otehrwise we's all be driving daewoo matiz's!
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff