Point & Shoot vs Swoop
07-06-2012, 07:02 PM
#16
It all depends, but this is one area where the theory seems to apply to ALL racing from 1:1 F1 to micro RC cars. Generally speaking, the more power to weight you have, the more point and shoot works. Low power racing doesn't have the power to accelerate hard so corner speed rules.
It can also be set-up dependent. A low powered car such as a Formula Ford is all about corner speed so they are set-up with lots of camber and suspension set-ups to maximize lateral grip. The grip tends to be very poor in braking and acceleration but so what? They don't use the brakes that hard and don't have the power to spin the tires. Cars such as this need good, smooth driving.
High powered cars like F1 or old Can-Am are a different animal. Forward bite is nearly everything. These cars can spin the tires in nearly every gear so giving up a lot of lateral grip in exchange for a small gain in forward bite allows the driver to put more power down and thus accelerate harder which leads to faster lap times despite slower mid-corner speeds. Thus you see set-ups with huge rear weight bias, so much rear downforce that the car wont turn at all off power, rear spools that destroy corner entry steering but get the power down off, etc. To drive these cars well, you got to manhandle it in a point and shoot style. The all time master of this in the real world would have to be Mark Donahue back in the old Can-Am days. 1200+ horsepower in a Porsche 917/30 with a rear spool. This car would not turn AT ALL while coasting. You had to brake hard and late, trail brake all the way to the apex, then immediately jump in the throttle. Any coasting or nice, smooth, gentle steering inputs and it was off in the weeds. Many other supremely talented drivers tried to run Mark's set-up only to find it completely undriveable, yet Mark won titles with it. Point and shoot at it's finest.
Drivetrain matters as well. Spools and lockers for point and shoot, open diffs for smooth. (generally speaking, there are always exceptions)
And finally, either one done well is better than the other done badly. If you are good at one but bad at the other, stick with what you are doing even if the other style is theoretically better for your class unless and until you can practice the other enough to master it.
It can also be set-up dependent. A low powered car such as a Formula Ford is all about corner speed so they are set-up with lots of camber and suspension set-ups to maximize lateral grip. The grip tends to be very poor in braking and acceleration but so what? They don't use the brakes that hard and don't have the power to spin the tires. Cars such as this need good, smooth driving.
High powered cars like F1 or old Can-Am are a different animal. Forward bite is nearly everything. These cars can spin the tires in nearly every gear so giving up a lot of lateral grip in exchange for a small gain in forward bite allows the driver to put more power down and thus accelerate harder which leads to faster lap times despite slower mid-corner speeds. Thus you see set-ups with huge rear weight bias, so much rear downforce that the car wont turn at all off power, rear spools that destroy corner entry steering but get the power down off, etc. To drive these cars well, you got to manhandle it in a point and shoot style. The all time master of this in the real world would have to be Mark Donahue back in the old Can-Am days. 1200+ horsepower in a Porsche 917/30 with a rear spool. This car would not turn AT ALL while coasting. You had to brake hard and late, trail brake all the way to the apex, then immediately jump in the throttle. Any coasting or nice, smooth, gentle steering inputs and it was off in the weeds. Many other supremely talented drivers tried to run Mark's set-up only to find it completely undriveable, yet Mark won titles with it. Point and shoot at it's finest.
Drivetrain matters as well. Spools and lockers for point and shoot, open diffs for smooth. (generally speaking, there are always exceptions)
And finally, either one done well is better than the other done badly. If you are good at one but bad at the other, stick with what you are doing even if the other style is theoretically better for your class unless and until you can practice the other enough to master it.
07-06-2012, 07:09 PM
#17
Im just talking about faster corners more along the lines of places where I need to hit the brakes cause of the lines I was taking and where I was driving. I put in the one way and realized there were places that if I went smoother I would transfer more speed through the corner cause I didn't have to hit the brakes. If your tight and twisty Im for sure point and shoot..god this conversation makes me miss carpet.
07-06-2012, 07:39 PM
#19
I am not sure driving style matters...when comparing slow to fast. Three of the best drivers in the on-road world have very different styles and are all very fast.
Hara tends to drive very point and shoot and takes very direct lines from corner to corner. Volker is very smooth and takes much different lines around the track. Marc tends to have a hybrid style and is clearly very fast also. All three of these guys drive different and yet they are all fast.
Hara also drives a 17.5 car very similar to his mod car and does not change styles based on the speed of the car.
It is clear that any style can be fast and I find that when I try to adjust my driving style based on the speed of the car then it usually does not work. I try to drive very round and maintain corner speed even with a very fast motor in my car. This style works for me, but probably does not work for someone else.
I think the key is to match setup with driving style...it is better to choose or develop a setup based more on driving style then really any other factor. Find a setup that exploits the keys of your driving style. If you drive PnS then build a PnS setup...if swoopy is your thing then focus your car on corner speed and stability...
Hara tends to drive very point and shoot and takes very direct lines from corner to corner. Volker is very smooth and takes much different lines around the track. Marc tends to have a hybrid style and is clearly very fast also. All three of these guys drive different and yet they are all fast.
Hara also drives a 17.5 car very similar to his mod car and does not change styles based on the speed of the car.
It is clear that any style can be fast and I find that when I try to adjust my driving style based on the speed of the car then it usually does not work. I try to drive very round and maintain corner speed even with a very fast motor in my car. This style works for me, but probably does not work for someone else.
I think the key is to match setup with driving style...it is better to choose or develop a setup based more on driving style then really any other factor. Find a setup that exploits the keys of your driving style. If you drive PnS then build a PnS setup...if swoopy is your thing then focus your car on corner speed and stability...
07-07-2012, 07:55 AM
#20
Have been having similar discussions with some at our local track. As VTA is our primary class, I would venture that PnS is a little less effective, as maintaining corner speed is vital in keeping up your momentum. With the weight to power ratio of 17.5 and above, there is almost no need to maintain corner speed as your acceleration curve is fairly ridiculous. That is the main difference between real racing and RC, is the acceleration potential and top speeds. Real cars are not running 500+ mph and getting there in 2-3 seconds.
07-07-2012, 08:29 AM
#21
I tend to agree Orca. As r/c racers, we do not have all the same tools for judging the limit as we do in our 1:1 cars. Sight and maybe sound only. We don't feel G's, steering wheel feedback, brake feedback etc. Corning transitions happen very quickly in the faster classes and because we are so limited by our tools to gauge what is happening, it makes it very difficult to get the most out of our cars' handling capabilities within every segment of a corner. A smooth driving style demands the ability to diagnose what is happening at smaller increments within the corner and the faster the car is, the more difficult it becomes to realize them. This is precisely why I personally enjoy moderate speed cars (17.5 TC for example) on lower grip surfaces, even a high grip track with a new layout that has yet to be run in. There's plenty of power but a bit more difficult to use it all of the time without blowing the line.
07-07-2012, 11:49 AM
#22
It is clear that any style can be fast
I think the key is to match setup with driving style...it is better to choose or develop a setup based more on driving style then really any other factor. Find a setup that exploits the keys of your driving style. If you drive PnS then build a PnS setup...if swoopy is your thing then focus your car on corner speed and stability...
I think the key is to match setup with driving style...it is better to choose or develop a setup based more on driving style then really any other factor. Find a setup that exploits the keys of your driving style. If you drive PnS then build a PnS setup...if swoopy is your thing then focus your car on corner speed and stability...
07-07-2012, 12:35 PM
#23
I agree as well. I am a swoopy driver and I definitely work on my car knowing that. I've been racing against PNS guys and there are times (even though they are generally faster) where I can manage to keep up. As of my last race I know that I'm getting beaten on entry but I seem to be able to make up for it on exit, sometimes using every bit of the lane width depending on the sequence of turns.
07-09-2012, 01:55 PM
#29
Tech Rookie
Just some food for thought ... how about tire wear? With most races having a small set of tires allocated per driver, I think the driving style also plays a part on the tyre strategy for a whole event, possibly giving the edge to the smooth drivers. 
07-09-2012, 02:33 PM
#30
Not necessarily tire wear, per se, but tire temperature certainly is affected and thus may create either good and/or bad balance tendencies. However, as a driver tunes his car for a particular driving style, they also tune for these tendencies to occur or not to occur.