shakedown times are not always created equal

**Mickey T** · 15th February 2007, 19:43

There are some things about shakedown that you shouldn’t take at face value, and they’re the same things you see at most rallies.

For starters, if you’re looking for a form guide for the rally, the second and third runs are the best indicators, the fourth not so good and anything after that can be effectively ignored.

The reason is that the drivers get so accustomed to the shorter course that they memorize it and it gets treated like a racetrack, not a stage. The other thing is that the road tends to get swept clean. This will help find pace in some countries, but the road will chop up in others.

Of course, this isn’t how they find the stages during the rally, so stages two and three are the real key indicators, usually.

The first run is a strange one, as some teams use it as kind of an installation lap in F1 – just making sure everything has been bolted on right, or easing into the weekend.

This isn’t hard and fast, as some teams can find the demon tweak on set up (though most have their testing well and truly finished before shakedown).

But by and large, the second and third runs are where it’s at, and the times tend to stabilize over those two runs.

Here’s Rally Norway’s shakedown, broken up by the run numbers.

First Run

1. Latvala 2:06.8
2. Gronholm 08.4
3. Henning 08.6
4. Schie 09.4
5. Galli 09.6
5. Garde 09.6
7. Atkinson 10.1
8. Loeb 10.2
9. Hirvonen 10.5
10. Ostberg 11.0

Second Run

1. Gronholm 2:02.3
2. garde 04.2
3. Loeb 04.4
4. Hirvonen 05.2
5. Atkinson 05.4
5. Galli 05.4
7. Petter 07.6
8. Schie 08.4
9. Stohl 08.6
10. Sordo 09.5

Third run

1. Latvala 2:04.3
2. Carlsson 04.6
3. Loeb 04.7
4. Sordo 05.2
5. Petter 05.5
6. Hirvonen 05.7
7. Schie 06.8
8. Hanninen 08.3
9. Dalsjo 09.3
9. Wilks 09.3

Run Four

1. Loeb 2:00.7
2. Latvala 02.0
3. Garde 02.3
4. Hirvonen 02.8
5. Atkinson 02.9
6. Pette r 03.4
6. Galli 03.4
8. Carlsson 03.6
9. Sordo 03.7
10. Henning 04.1

A quick bit of analysis raises a few points. The two best guys out there both lopped six seconds off their time on the second run, then stabilized on the third. Gronholm didn’t bother after two runs (similar to Atkinson, who dawdled through a third run), while Loeb kept pushing.

The Ford guys ran different strategies, with Mikko taking 5.3 seconds off on his second run, then stabilizing (actually a fraction slower, like Loeb) on the third, before getting quicker again on the fourth.

Everybody who ran the fourth time dropped heaps of time, which indicates they got very familiar with it, or it got quicker. Or, probably, both.

Sordo crept up on it, like his team leader a bit. Not in the top ten on the first run, he took chunks of time out on each subsequent run. Petter was very similar in the way he approached the session.

Of the non-works guys, latvala looked demonically quick out of the blocks and improved only two seconds on his third run (he hedged it on the second), which indicates he’s not exactly a guy who eases into it.

Schie must be a bit of a surprise, chipping away steadily after a solid start.

But look at the second and third times:

Gronholm 2.3 dns
Loeb 4.4 4.7
Latvala dnf 4.3
Hirvonen 5.2 5.7
Petter 7.6 5.5
Atkinson 5.2 out of top ten
Garde 4.2 out of top ten
Sordo 9.5 5.2

For the front runners, these are pretty consistent, with the notable exceptions of the guys who didn’t try on the third run (which could be for all sorts of mechanical or engineering reasons, or under team orders) and Dani Sordo.

The other notable was Wilson, who had a best of 16.3…

**Donney** · 15th February 2007, 19:48

I hope you are right because that means Sordo is not that far from the top guys, not that I'm saying he's gonna set the world on fire here, but if true he could do a very decent rally.

**Tomi** · 15th February 2007, 20:31

nice analysis, but shakedown times actually means nothing really, except that the cars works

**Magnus** · 15th February 2007, 22:02

Interesting notes! Something to think abt. Tomi is right of course, but if you are competing in a rallycar, and has the possibility of putting the pedal to the metal, I guess you will take it, regardless of wheather it is a SD or a proper stage.
We will se tomorrow if the analysis bears some truth in it!

**SubaruNorway** · 15th February 2007, 22:23

The drivers werent egsagtly going slow i can tell you som big moments for several of the drivers

**N.O.T** · 15th February 2007, 22:58

Wow....

**L5->R5/CR** · 15th February 2007, 23:30

Originally Posted by Tomi

nice analysis, but shakedown times actually means nothing really, except that the cars works

And that the set up is close to being right if not right on....

The only reason to do a shakedown is to become accustomed to the character of the roads at speed and to see if the set up needs to be changed.....

To me drivers taking more runs are having set up problems, even if they end up getting faster it can be a negative indicator if they take a lot of runs...

**Tomi** · 15th February 2007, 23:43

Originally Posted by L5->R5/CR

And that the set up is close to being right if not right on....

The only reason to do a shakedown is to become accustomed to the character of the roads at speed and to see if the set up needs to be changed.....

To me drivers taking more runs are having set up problems, even if they end up getting faster it can be a negative indicator if they take a lot of runs...

Yes, but changing a set-up after many passes there is a chance is that it goes wrong too, the real stage condition is much different than a shakedown stage after many passes.

The shakedown is supposed to be much like the stages of the event, but nowdays it seldom is.

Yes i think too if a driver drives many times the stage, it can indicate of some problems or that the driver has not had much test before the event.

**JAM** · 16th February 2007, 01:50

Shakedown times means nothing, but really nothing. I don't know why people give so big importance to that. Maybe because ther~e's nothing more to discuss? Is just like F1 tests... a lot of news about it...