Quote from lerts :

ill stick to drive like rl

Isn`t that negated by the fact you`re not using 1080 degrees of steering, like IRL?
Or at least match lock-to-lock degrees the(current) car is capable of.. ?
I would also say IRL, LFB is not as hard as you may think. It all depends on the amount of time(and gas:razz you dedicate for practice.. Starting slow also helps, but slow is slower than you think. I once asked a friend of mine, to try and brake with his left foot, VERY gently. Good i was wearing the seatbelt..

On the contrary to the argument that one might mistake pedals. A competent driver won't easily make the mistake of confusing pedals. If the person driving is not competent, then they should probably not be on the race track at all.

Especially when left foot braking in cars with out a clutch less shift mechanism, its hard to confuse the pedals because the driver has to constantly switch pedals.

Also, for cars that use clutch less shift, knowing the position of the pedals in what ever car that is currently being driven is second nature in competent drivers. It's like knowing where your mouth is when you put a cup to your face to drink, or a fork when you eat. On that note, switching back to a regular manual car is not a problem for competent drivers.

Quote from Becky Rose :

For example at Blackwood a RHD car is faster, on Blackwood Reverse a LHD. So i'll switch sides as appropriate.

Not always the case sometimes in the LFS world of physics and setup choices the opposite is the fastest...

as has been said, you tend to automatically adapt to where you are, i tend to left foot brake when im driving an automatic in real life but if im driving a manual i right foot brake and nevr get confused about it.

before anyone asks, i got in the habit of doing it when i had a garage as there was nothing worse than trying to manuver an auto that either wouldn't idle and died if you take your foot off the throttle or had a very high idle and wanted to dissapear through the wall if you put it in gear.

also the late great LJK Setright pointed out that one of the biggest advantages of an auto is that in a car where you right foot brake the first thing you do when wanting to slow is in fact just to stop accelerating as you move your foot to the brake pedal where as when left foot braking, you can apply the brakes as your removing preasure from the throttle.

one other advantage is of course that you can use the brakes whilst accelerating to tame wheel spin or understeer which is why it was used in rallying even with gearchanges that neded a clutch.

just a quick extra thought, if lertz is scared he'll left foot brake in real life and press the clutch, doesn't the same logic mean that he'll expect a car in real life to respond like it's only got 40 degree steering movement and go straight into something because he hasn't turned the wheel far enough ?

Now that's a scary thought

Quote from lerts :

i was thinking if you start acelerating in the corner 1 tenth of a second before at the end of the straight you have not gained on tenth but maybe a whole second, is this correct

No. Why should it be like that? If two identical cars accelerate from the same line, with a one second head start for one car, why would one expect the time difference to change by the time they reach the end of the straight?

But if they accelerate from the same line, one with a head stand and an initial speed advantage then the gain difference at the end will be more than the head start.

e.g. Car one at line at t=0 and V=60
Car two at line at t=0.5 and V=58 (i.e. the first car got on the power earlier, possibly from an initially lower speed and is therefore faster at corner exit, where the line is).

At the finish line some distance further on it might be something like:

Car 1: t=15 V=150
Car 2: t=17 V=149

And so, by going slower INTO the corner but faster OUT of the corner car one is ultimately quicker.

Does that make sense? Numbers picked from thin air of course, but prove the point.

Absolutely, it's the first thing I teach when my friends come to me for tips for karting days. It's a rudimentary concept that 0.1mph faster out of the corner is 0.1mph faster right up until you come off the throttle, the cumulative effect of being that little bit faster for a sustained period of time translates to a net gain substantially more than what is gained by being 0.1mph faster into a corner, except when doing so keeps a position.

Quote from tristancliffe :

...but prove the point.

ILLUSTRATE the point...


Actually we have to be precise here. If you do a drag race with two identical cars that accelerate identically but one starts half a second later, the time difference will always be half a second, while the distance grows until both cars reach topspeed.

"Being earlier on the gas" on a circuit isn't quite the same. It's earlier in the meaning of "a few inches or feet earlier", which then leads to a higher corner-exit-speed, less time needed for the following straight and therefore a time difference to the car that accelerated "later".

If you have a higher exit speed at any given corner, it is certain that (as long as you are in cars that accelerate at the same rate) you will arrive at the next corner before someone who had a lower exit speed.

Quote from tristancliffe :

But if they accelerate from the same line, one with a head stand and an initial speed advantage then the gain difference at the end will be more than the head start.

e.g. Car one at line at t=0 and V=60
Car two at line at t=0.5 and V=58 (i.e. the first car got on the power earlier, possibly from an initially lower speed and is therefore faster at corner exit, where the line is).

At the finish line some distance further on it might be something like:

Car 1: t=15 V=150
Car 2: t=17 V=149

And so, by going slower INTO the corner but faster OUT of the corner car one is ultimately quicker.

Does that make sense? Numbers picked from thin air of course, but prove the point.

Well the simplest cornering model I can come up with is that two cars are absolutely identical, in speed and position, at the apex of a corner, and then one car fully accelerates while the other car will first continue at the apex speed for 0.1 s and the accelerate.

In this case the second car will actually be less then 0.1 s behind the first car when they reach the end of the straight. This is because, compared to the pure drag racing example, the second car is actually moving and shortening the length of the following straight instead of just waiting.

The way I see it, the most you're going to get out of accelerating earlier is a time advantage that is exactly the amount of time that you started accelerating earlier. To get a time gap that increases along the straight you need to accelerate better than the other car i.e. go from zero to full throttle faster.

if you acelerate 1 tenth before youll go all time with 1 kph faster

so tthe diference would be the time that lasts the staright going at 1 kph while the other go at 0 kph

thats how i see it

Quote from lerts :

if you acelerate 1 tenth before youll go all time with 1 kph faster

so tthe diference would be the time that lasts the staright going at 1 kph while the other go at 0 kph

thats how i see it

WHy the hell would you go 1kph??

It isn't about the moment at which drivers hit the throttle alone, it's about maximising the length of the straights and being on full throttle for a longer distance.

The drag racer comment by bandit 77 is of course correct but it doesn't work like that on the track, as he says.

A way to relate that to the corner to corner thing we see on the track is to imagine one of those drag racers (car B) starting the drag race 20 yards further back from the line, but the other guy (car A) cannot leave the line until car B is halfway towards it (10 yards still behind it). Let's assume slow cars so it's easier to envisage.

Because the length of the "race" is different for the two cars and they left at different times, the time gap between them will not stay the same even if acceleration curves are identical, and who wins the race depends on where you put the finish line, the further away it is the more chance car B has of winning. The time gap would actually only full stabilise once both cars have reached their maximum speed (assuming equal cars).

This is how slow-in, fast-out works. Instead of a start line being further back, your slowest point of the corner is further back. Its value is completely determined by the ratio of sacrifice to reward at a particular section.

Quote from Chrisuu01 :

WHy the hell would you go 1kph??

he means that if you put the gas on earlier in the corner you will gain more speed out of the corner and so you might go 1kph faster on the straight

I'ts not only the point of throttle. I can go 10 meters earlier full throttle and still loose time at the end. If the horizontal forces are much bigger then if i go 10 meters later on throttle the car wont accelerate fast.

I can post some data from my Formula Renault at Spa if anyone finds that interesting.

Quote from G!NhO :

he means that if you put the gas on earlier in the corner you will gain more speed out of the corner and so you might go 1kph faster on the straight

Lol like that makes a difference

Do it. What datalogger do you use?

Quote from sinbad :

what you wrote

I totally agree.

We can also picture the moment when both cars are at the same point on the track in sinbad's example:

Car B will travel at a higher speed at this point, in this moment. So provided the cars are absolutely identical in acceleration and topspeed, car B will pass by and will 'never' catch it again.

This is just a picture to confirm what i just wrote. Taken 2 random laps from a free practice at SPA last year.


Note= Blue engine had some small problems, but the point stays the same



We used AIM btw, but i don''t know what i'll be using this year. Since im going to race something else

Quote from NickC :

I'ts not only the point of throttle. I can go 10 meters earlier full throttle and still loose time at the end. If the horizontal forces are much bigger then if i go 10 meters later on throttle the car wont accelerate fast.

I can post some data from my Formula Renault at Spa if anyone finds that interesting.

Well I think we take it as read that you only accelerate as early as is possible, not so early that you do not accelerate properly because you are turning too tightly or because you need to lift again- Full throttle only being valuable if it actually accelerates the car. Perhaps I should have used the phrase "at maximum acceleration" rather than on full throttle.

But it's really hard to feel ( you wont feel it at all :P ) this in a sim, when or whether you are TO early on the throttle. It's not only with full throttle. Like the last corner on Classic rev, sometimes if you are a bit to early the car tends to understeer outside a bit. So it's better the wait a bit.

Quote from NickC :

But it's really hard to feel ( you wont feel it at all :P ) this in a sim, when or whether you are TO early on the throttle. It's not only with full throttle. Like the last corner on Classic rev, sometimes if you are a bit to early the car tends to understeer outside a bit. So it's better the wait a bit.

I think you've missed the point of the thread (or at least the argument within). It's about the value of slow-in, fast-out, the choice of line through a corner, not about when is the best moment to open the throttle which is always simply "as soon as opening the throttle is faster than not opening the throttle".

Oké

Slow in fast out works better then fast in slow out. But i always try go fast in - fast out .

"as soon as opening the throttle is faster than not opening the throttle".

If only this was so easy!! how do you know when exactly? It's harder then you make it sound