ttweed wrote:I agree that it is easier to get an early 911 to that ragged edge and stay on it longer during a lap, but I don't agree that you can't reach the car's limits in a modern GT car and enjoy the same feeling, perhaps even more intensely because the limit is higher and the risk even greater. The rush is still there for me. The "edge" is the limit of grip, of course, where the tires have reached optimal slip angles and threaten to exceed them at one end of the car or the other at any moment, with the level of grip dropping precipitously. The tremendous grip of a modern GT car with wide, sticky tires is just so high that they must be pushed even harder to achieve those moments, and the opportunities to get to that point are more limited as a result, especially on a slower course, but they are still there. Even with PSM on, the GT cars still allow enough slip angle and yaw to get the most out of the tires, and the driver's inputs to keep it on that edge are just as critical, it just happens at a higher level and the car must be pushed harder to get there and keep it there. It's the same challenge, just at a different level.
TT
Gary Burch wrote:I agree Tom, any car can be driven to it's limit
it just takes commitment and skill.
it also takes confidence, and that comes from experience,
and that sometimes comes at a high cost.
mrondeau wrote: What we’re trying to educate people on has to do with improving their driving ability. If you want to learn to get the most out of your car, learn to drive in a lower horsepower momentum car.
kleggo wrote:GT3 wrote:Dan, as we discussed quickly at the AX the other day, the 997 is a whole different beast when it comes to TC and ESC.
It is like comparing an old Intel Pentium II to an Intel I9 processor, in laymen’s terms the computers of 2016 run circles around the ones of 14 years prior.
Well since we seem to like the Road&Track articles here is another good one to read: https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cultur ... our-nanny/
I laughed at this part................"WHEN I WENT ON MY FIRST (and last) skydive, I didn't see anybody ostentatiously throwing their reserve chutes in the garbage.".
but must question this;
"When you see the stability control light flash, ask yourself what you did to upset the car's balance and fix it the next time."
It's a good sentiment, but how easy is it to see a nanny light flash (briefly) when you're looking up and down the track???
Craig
ttweed wrote:Contrary to what has been expressed here, the nannies are not "excellent drivers," they slow you down.
sf.in.sd wrote:The obvious counter argument is that when the nannies keep someone from sliding off track or worse, then they are turning better times with them on, relative to what a big mistake would cost them with it off.
You are making my point here.Obviously a perfect lap would be faster without intervention.
That said, no one is perfect and our F1 or local (Erik and Isabella) heros still make mistakes, but they are small and quickly correctly.
To the extent that it can show the driver where they are making mistakes in practice, allow them to be more aggressive right away to find the edge of intervention and then correct their approach to just under that level, this may be true. But in timed runs (TT or AX), where tenths of a second make the difference, the net effect of ESC braking the car unintentionally and TC reducing motor speed and power for any length of time means you go slower overall. You can use it as a learning tool, perhaps, but it won't help you be faster on a "money" lap (not that any of us are making any money with this hobby ).Now I am going to invite controversy by saying that I think that even a great driver can sometimes benefit from the electronic driving assists and end up being faster.
...the 981/991 era assists in Sport Plus (or whatever the GT car equivalent is) provide minimum intervention and will intervene just enough to allow you to drive much closer to 10/10ths around the entire track versus leaving time on the table by only going 8 or 9/10ths at times.
Well, first of all, after 1-1/2 days of practice on a big track for a timed session, or 8-10 laps of practice on an AX course, the track should no longer be "unfamiliar." Secondly, the safety aspects of the PSM systems are obvious, but there is only one performance advantage I can see in driving a car with them vs. without. The only way to "beat the computer" is by using your practice laps to figure out as soon as possible how aggressive you can be while still keeping it from intervening. If it's "saving" you in timed runs, you're losing....for a great driver- on a new or unfamiliar course especially- they would have to work really hard to beat the computer.
cag4 wrote:Here’s a reminder of why we care so much about this topic:
https://www.facebook.com/festivalofspeed/videos/1884509421559382/
ttweed wrote:One thing you all seem to be forgetting is that in the GT cars, the "nannies" are calibrated in a much more "sporty" manner than the other 911s
TT
mrondeau wrote:Dan A was faster in his “slower” GT car at SOW than both of the GT3RS’.
GT3 wrote:mrondeau wrote:Dan A was faster in his “slower” GT car at SOW than both of the GT3RS’.
I beg to differ sir... First off SOW is not a HP track and you know this, and a GT4 might even have some edge due to the weight and size difference, but that aside.
Dan A best lap was a very nice 1.22:99
Rich G best lap was a 1.22:89
Alain S best lap was a 1.23:06
So to say he was "faster" is a little bit of an exaggeration.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests