Vodafone Rally de Portugal 2014

@ Lundefaret

two very insightful posts
opinions may differ, but its always good to see some rational behind someone's views

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lundefaret

Ogier and VW are not playing with the other contenders. Ogier is, regardless of wich car he is in. If you take Ogier out of VW, VW is left wanting.

And no, rallydrivers can not drive like the "classic" racing driver, beqause they have to have risk management as a much higher priority. The latest rule changes regarding tires/downforce etc etc, has actually forced racing drivers to drive more like Loeb (Nose End First)
Race car driving is changing in the direction away from the classic "smooth line drivers" like Jenson Button, towards the Nose End First driving style.
In Formula 1/racing they call it "straight line driving", and "straight line accelerating", and the guru is Rob Wilson.

---

And this is the reason why Kubica seems to fail now.

Photos from last day HERE: http://www.rally-mania.cz/photogallery.php?id=1243

http://www.volkswagen-motorsport.com...40406-3938.jpg
http://www.volkswagen-motorsport.com...40406-3929.jpg
http://www.volkswagen-motorsport.com...40406-3966.jpg
http://www.volkswagen-motorsport.com...40405-3839.jpg

Strange, they count Sordo points... (no points in this case)

Attachment 41

http://ewrc-results.com/foto.php?e=1...-Portugal-2014

http://www.ewrc.cz/images/2014/photo...o_dsc_6796.jpg
http://www.ewrc.cz/images/2014/photo...o_dsc_6812.jpg
http://www.ewrc.cz/images/2014/photo...o_dsc_6753.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUJKLJ3uHv0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WUff1

And this is the reason why Kubica seems to fail now.

---

There are several aspects of his driving that Kubica needs to adress if he is to become succesfull in rallying, this is two of the most important ones.
1) Risk management: How high a risk is sustainable during a WRC-event.
2) Learning driving technique tools to lower risk, and to better his ability.

Kubica have a racers notion of braking points, and his toolbox regarding braking seems very limited.

In rallying, especially on loose surfaces, you can not have a braking point, you have to have a braking area. This is beqause you dont know exactly what the grip level is going to be at the braking point, or after it.
This is why you have to establish a braking strategy where some of the braking is used to feel the grip level, compromising the braking distance.

a) You brake more progressivly.
b) You brake for a longer stretch of road.
c) You use your throttle to extend the braking sone. (Left foot braking)
d) You use a combination of throttle and brakes to create extra grip by getting the car to sit lower on its dampers.
e) The "reaction" of the car sitting lower on the dampers can be used to build up a "counter reaction" if need be (ie. if your in throuble you have more choices/tools.)

Kubica seems "cought out" on several occations. His off in Rally Wales was a very good example. After discovering that he had braked to late, he had no tools to save the situation, and he went straight on in the left hand corner.

Kubica is a very good driver, and he seems to be a very inteligent man. Maybe he should reflect on Sebastien Loebs ability to win so many rallies with such a low level of risk?

It is VERY old fasioned to believe that first you learn speed, and then you learn to keep the car on the road. You have, from the word go, learn to establish a higher and higher sustainable speed. Maximum speed is for other types of motorsport than rallying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lundefaret

There are several aspects of his driving that Kubica needs to adress if he is to become succesfull in rallying, this is two of the most important ones.
1) Risk management: How high a risk is sustainable during a WRC-event.
2) Learning driving technique tools to lower risk, and to better his ability.

Kubica have a racers notion of braking points, and his toolbox regarding braking seems very limited.

In rallying, especially on loose surfaces, you can not have a braking point, you have to have a braking area. This is beqause you dont know exactly what the grip level is going to be at the braking point, or after it.
This is why you have to establish a braking strategy where some of the braking is used to feel the grip level, compromising the braking distance.

a) You brake more progressivly.
b) You brake for a longer stretch of road.
c) You use your throttle to extend the braking sone. (Left foot braking)
d) You use a combination of throttle and brakes to create extra grip by getting the car to sit lower on its dampers.
e) The "reaction" of the car sitting lower on the dampers can be used to build up a "counter reaction" if need be (ie. if your in throuble you have more choices/tools.)

Kubica seems "cought out" on several occations. His off in Rally Wales was a very good example. After discovering that he had braked to late, he had no tools to save the situation, and he went straight on in the left hand corner.

Kubica is a very good driver, and he seems to be a very inteligent man. Maybe he should reflect on Sebastien Loebs ability to win so many rallies with such a low level of risk?

It is VERY old fasioned to believe that first you learn speed, and then you learn to keep the car on the road. You have, from the word go, learn to establish a higher and higher sustainable speed. Maximum speed is for other types of motorsport than rallying.

---

Could we maybe have these quotes in another topic like "How to become the fastest rallydriver in the world" or something??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stefanvv

What you talk about is called car set-up and every driver must do this at every Rally. I was talking about decisions engineers must make, based on output from a Driver, that involves mostly drivetrain, can't tell You much details about the exact parts what will impact in particular, I'm not that familiar, and also very important - the weight distribution. I'll give you not that fresh example of.... AUDI. In "Sport" evolution of Quattro they made shorter wheel base, also put oil coolers and stuff on the back of the car to achive more oversteer and weight distribution. All that is based on Driver experience with the car. Same would happen with 200 Quattro '87 and further if AUDI decided to continue this project (well not "the same" things per ce), but the car needed urgenty of some weight reduction on the front, based on the impressions Herr Rohrl had in Monte '87.

---

Again: The engineer designs the rally car, the driver has to try to drive the optimal rally car with as few compromises as possible.
I can promise you that the engineer can make a rally car that is faster than todays WRC-cars (whitin the same regulations), but you would need an all knowing computer to drive it.

Regarding Audi and Röhrl: The Audi quattro Sport is a perfect example of this. Theoretically the shorter Audi quattro Sport was faster, then if you would have the same engine in the UR quattro, but it was to unstable for the drivers to take full advantage of this. Thath is why a compromise of the longer car would have been faster.

But, regarding Audi in the Group B-era: Don´t forget that it was not the engineers that decided that the wantet to drive with the big and heavy engine hanging out in front of the front axle, it was the "clever" idea of the marketing department. And the marketing department is even worse at making good rally cars than the drivers;)

The Audi engineers wanted to have a mid engined car just like Peugeot and Lancia, and they even made it. It was a rally monster destined for the still born class called Group S, that was to follow Group B. It was an engineered made Audi, it was mid engined, light weight, and very powerful.

The legend Walter Röhrl (wich I have been so lucky as to spend quite a lot of time with), can tell you that when the engineers got to decide, and not the marketing department, they made a truly marvelous rally car.He tried it once on a public road, and I think that you in the forrests of Bavaria still can hear an eccho from this day:)