Driving style evolution

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rani

I haven't posted a question for a few weeks now, so I figuered it's about time I toss another one into the fray... :crazy:

Loeb is always heralded as the driver who changed the way WRC's are driven (being neat instead of scandinavian flicking and opposite locking) these days. I often read about it being attributed to the active differentials (now only central but formally the transverse ones as well) but I'd like to understand fully.
Is the active differentials' ability to 'kill" understeer on corner entry what made this change in style possible or am I completely off here and it's something I never even thought of?

---

In 2003 there was Loeb, Märtin and Solberg that was the new generation of drivers setting the pace and of course Loeb the most successful. I had a feeling that it was alot of politics involving driving styles. Since these 3 were quite neat (but Märtin not as clinical) that was the way to go end of story. Then Latvala comes along and his first win in sweden 2008 with the old fasioned style and proves them wrong. He is maybe the quickest guy around now...
These new cars made for a nice return to some wilder driving. In my book the "devolution" was scaled back a bit :)

The epic decline of Colin McRae in 2003 was I think down to motivation, working in french team and other issues, not neccessary his driving style. But that was what everybody talked about.

Would be nice with a video comparing drivers thru the same stage, how much they slide ect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

If I understood it correctly, the focus is to first get the car to turn around it’s vertical centre of gravity in a way or another and at the apex minimize the transversal forces that drives the car to the outside of the bend to get the driving wheels (front, rear or all) to point to the direction where the car should go.

What I’ve noticed at least with 4WD cars, is seems that the drivers turn in to a bend turning the steering wheel more than necessary (video in post #23) and in that way get it to controlled slide where the mass is “pushing” the car to the outside of the bend and the wheels driving the car to the inside of the bend.

---

I noticed this especially in Jordan and Portugal this year, both events it seems the gravel there you get less grip from(as opposed to, say, japan or GB).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pettersolberg29

Even in only the past 5 years or so the tidier drivers have become more and more successful.
Petter's style in 2003 is now out-of-date and not as effective, and it is no coincidence that Hirvonen and Loeb are top 2 now as they have the most consistent and neat style.

---

I disagree, I have a fair stash of rally onboards. Petter has always had a tidy style, further clues from his pace notes. He's more edgy and takes more risks in corners though so he crashes more, kinda remind me of Meeke now. Also the Subrau were crap.

I disagree about Hirvonen too, can be reliable, but either lack confidence or overdrive trying to go fast, as seen entire last season. He seems to struggle to find the right balance.

Gronholm is very smooth just like Loeb on gravel imo base on the onboards, but he gets ragged when he desperately tries to keep up with the Citreon. But he had ungodly confidence if he knows the rally well. Loeb on the other hand makes perfect preperation and has amazing adaptability and does well even in new events, this adaptiness is reminescene of Kankkunen. I know he only drove for Citreon, and I am not fond of Loeb, but now thinking about it, he'll be fast in any cars.

Ogier is very Hamilton-esque, both driving and personality, but draws less bling bling guess.

Sideway is going away with more emphasis on aero and wind tunnel design. At the sametime, I enjoy the new cars, short and less stable, but completely horizontal in turns and even higher and longer jumps, so it balances out. Not fond of high rpm engine sound though.

Here are some more to you Sami.

You claim.
Some basics of driving physics: the forces affecting the tyre count. There is certain level of friction to be used in either turning, braking or accelerating. The biggest threat is understeering, and killing that is the core art of driving.

I will claim the opposite: (When we talk about oversteering.)
Of course, too much understeering will be a problem, but oversteering will always be a bigger problem. Not always a problem in terms of speed, but very difficult to keep the car on the road for three days in a WRC rally.
A car with oversteering will tend to slip out the back end to easy, especially when you do not want that to happen.
I claim:
A car that is neutral at low speed (even with some understeer), will oversteer at high speed. Understeering is all about speed, at high enough speed understeering will disappear.
Most of what you (and many others) claim will maybe suit rwd (and slow drivers) but not fwd, 4wd (and fast drivers).

i think most fast drivers are fast because it comes natural to them....not because they have a degree in physics...in any aspect of life which is considered art most of the people who are very good at, do not have a big background on the theoritical aspect of it...of course it helps if you are no good to become better/average since you do not have the talent, and this discussion suits better in an amateur driving driving forum....when it comes to world level it all comes to having the talent and practice with the proper equipment...

I completely agree with you there N.O.T.
But what makes fast drivers, fast, and not so fast drivers, slow, is something we can discuss if we find it interesting.
If you do not find it interesting, do not join in the discussion.

The fast guys dare to go flat over blind crests on 6th gear. That´s the difference.

Compare to slow rallies lika Cyprus a few years ago when not so fast drivers could have a podium finish.

Rallyper, I completely agree with you on that. The biggest importance of the braveness is on blind rallies where you can win 2-3 seconds on one blind crest if other are braking and you are not. That is consious risk taking.

coach2, reading your texts makes me think that you probably have background in tarmac rallying. On tarmac your rules of driving are totally right, but on gravel in rwd or 4wd cars, in my understanding, not so much. On gravel the car is driven much more with weight distributions and by throwing the weight from rear to front and left to right in order to make the car turn better and play with different levels of friction on different wheels. Driving the racing line you described is just steering around and less effective, you are loosing the whole momentum and a lot of car's and its tyres potential there.

Let's describe the scandinavian flick here in order to emphasise my point, technique that is used still, and now even more, on wrc level because of the new regulations. The scandinavian flick is the complete opposite to coach2's style. Let's say there's a tight corner to left. You enter on the middle of the road coming straight. On braking point just before braking you turn the car slightly to right and the brake at maximum effect. The weight of the car goes to front left corner of the car, which makes the rear lighter and throws the rear over to the left, so the car is pointing to the right and is sliding in full braking its left side first. Then just before the corner you turn the steering to the left a lot and release the brakes, the weight is still in front so there's a lot of grip on front wheels and less on rear, and that is just perfect! The car oversteers and the turning is done in minimun time, and then you just floor it with oposite lock steering! The weight goes from front left to rear right immediately and that flick enables the car to turn very well and throws the back of the car nicely out with a lot of weight and grip. Nailing it brings the weight to back, which gives the car more acceleration grip and the speed the car comes out of the corner is maximised because of that and also because with the flick you could take a much wider line than by driving the racing line and you could also open the throthle earlier and the driving wheels are pointing to the direction you want to accelerate ie. the opening straight as early as possible.. That is why on tight corners scandinavian flick is perfect method still.

Driving racing line in understeering car is another method, and as I described earlier is very much better suited to fwd cars, because on fwd the moment the weight transfers from front to rear in scandinavian flick the weight is transferred away from driving wheels, which means there's less traction available to accelerate. But still scandinavian flick is a method to avoid understeering also in fwd, along with left foot braking. I've codriven a very good Opel Kadett GSi once, and that car was very much oversteering, all the weight was in front and the rear was compeletely empty plus the rear wheels were at open angle toeing out in order to give brutal agility and oversteering to the car. That was because the driver didn't want to throw the fwd car at all, but wanted it to turn at maximum effect by the slightest movement of the steering and then he controlled the slides by nailing the gas. He always said that in fwd you just can't spin as long as you keep your right foot down.. And we won that rally overall by the way.

To go back to coach2, I disagree your analysis of oversteering and grip available. In my opinion on tarmac rallying the oversteering is often really brutal and quick and on gravel and snow it is a absolutely necessary in order to be fast. It is also risk control, as in rallying, opposite to cirquit racing, you will end up to surprising situations where you enter a place at too high speed, at that moment, at the latest, you will respect that characteristics of oversteering in your car. Oversteering and agility are key features also to give you some room to take more risks entering a corner, as it is said by European Champion Rauno Aaltonen, 9 of 10 corners seem tighter thatn they are, but the one is the one that is crucial. That is why rally driving as a piece of art is, in my opinion, as its finest in the crisis situation, that is where the car's and especially driver's abilities are really measured.

Hey Sami
No, I do not have the background from racing and tarmac rallying. As I wrote earlier, explain the driving style in a language other than my own, it will be difficult.
I claim:
You can flick, throw the car sideways, move the vehicle weight in many ways, but you have to go nose end first. Especially with fwd and 4wd. This is the way many describe as the new driving style (old as hell, if you ask me).
I claim:
Opesite lock steering is necessary with rwd, but errors in fwd and 4wd. Because you can slide all four wheels. It appears that the top drivers use opesite lock, but it is only to maintain the rotation of the car between turns, if there is a short distance between turns. Short between turns can be quite long if the speed is high.
If the car has a tendency to oversteering, one will because of humps, bumps or other reasons, often enter the turns with opesite lock. That will be the biggest killer of speed, if you drive fwd or 4wd. You can not increase speed until you get the front wheels to point where you want the car to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach 2

Hey Sami
If the car has a tendency to oversteering, one will because of humps, bumps or other reasons, often enter the turns with opesite lock. That will be the biggest killer of speed, if you drive fwd or 4wd. You can not increase speed until you get the front wheels to point where you want the car to go.

---

Hi, I knew this would happen after all, we are very much approaching each other's opinions. Your argumentation is fwd -oriented and mine is rwd-oriented, that makes the difference.

You got it absolutely right. As I wrote in my first post, it is crucial to get your driving wheels, ie. the power to point where you want to go. That is why let's take a closer look at opposite lock situation (exaggeration to make it more obvious). The force vector affecting a driving tyre should point where you want to go. So, if you are in opposite lock situation in a 4wd car, the force vector in your front wheels point to left and force vector of your rear wheels to the right and no force vector pointing where you want to go! That is loss of power and totally uneffective, of course.

It is important to understand that the friction of an object that is standing still is higher than an object in move. You should imagine a circle, a friction circle. force vectors within the circle mean forces that don't exceed the friction, ie. the object isn't sliding. The moment the vector crosses the border of the friction circle the friction drops. In rallying that drop is less dramatic on gravel and dramatic on tarmac. That is the reason why on tarmac you shouldn't slide and on gravel you should.

Inside the circle there's different forces affecting the tyres ability to grip, braking forces, accelerating, turning. Plus the weight dynamics discussed earlier, more weight on a tyre means wider friction circle, by left foot braking or scandinavian flick you will be able to play with weight and grip so that in understeering situation for example you push some brake keeping gas down, nose drops a bit and grips a lot better and at the same time rear end lifts a bit and looses some grip in order to make the car turn better.

So in the case of fwd the front wheels have to bear both accelerating/braking and turning forces and loose grip easier, as the vectors of acceleration and turning exceed the border of the friction circle easily (imagine a vector towards let's say right of the circle and towards up (acceleration) and the crossing line of those vectors is the point that counts whether the forces are big enought for the tyre to start sliding)... So fwd driving is constant struggle of finding grip for both acceleration and turning for those poor two front wheels.

Imagine 4wd case, coach2's front end first style means that in entrance of the corner you start the acceleration and your front wheels are turned inside the corner and your rear wheels point to outside. This is exactly the same loss of effective power described earlies in opposite lock case. You should be able to get all the 4 driving wheels to work for acceleration towards the opening straight and that means that you have to be in 4 wheels slide drifting and steering straight in optimal case as early as possible!