45 replies to this topic

[gillesthegenius]

From Jim Clark's Autobiography:
. . . I know I am inclined to go into a corner earlier than most people. By that I mean that most people run deep into a corner before turning the wheels to go round. In this way you can complete all your braking in a straight line, as everyone recommends you do, before setting the car up for the corner; but I prefer to cut into the corner early and even with my brakes still on to set up the car earlier. In this way, I almost make a false apex because I get the power on early and try to drift the car through the true apex and continue with this sliding until I am set up for the next bit of straight."

Going by what Jim Clark himself says in the above quote, his driving style doesnt seem to be as simple as just being smooth and easy. I mean, if my interpretation is right, not only is he talking about braking while turning, he is also talking about accelerating while turning!!!

I can understand that Jim Clark's apparently amazing ability to control the car meant that even such a driving style was so smooth that it looked like he was driving on rails, but what beggars belief is that even with such a 'drifting' driving style, he was apparently better at taking care of his tyres than most of his competitors!!!

How is this possible???

Anyone with enough technical nous who could explain to me how this is possible?

PS: Im not saying that his trail breaking and accelerating is unique. What I am saying is that driving so smooth without looking atleast a little ragged with such a driving style is unique.


Thanks.

Edited by gillesthegenius, 02 October 2011 - 07:17.

[cheapracer]

I mean, if my interpretation is right, not only is he talking about braking while turning, he is also talking about accelerating while turning!!!

Oh My God! He turned the steering wheel while braking and accelerating? Why didn't he die?? Oh My God!!

but what beggars belief is that even with such a 'drifting' driving style, he was apparently better at taking care of his tyres than most of his competitors!!!

Oh My God, you mean he got 4 races out of a set instead of 3? Oh My God!!

How is this possible???

Oh My God, I don't know!!!

Anyone with enough technical nous who could explain to me how this is possible?

You could try at The Nostalgic Forum or Chuck Norris .com

Edited by cheapracer, 02 October 2011 - 05:08.

[primer]

^ lol @ cheapracer losing it.

I don't know what's so special or 'unique' either about trail braking, or steering on throttle. Go watch kids at any go-kart track, it comes naturally to most everyone.

Edited by primer, 02 October 2011 - 05:35.

[Tony Matthews]

Proof that Jim Clark could walk and chew gum at the same time.

[gillesthegenius]

^ lol @ cheapracer losing it.

I don't know what's so special or 'unique' either about trail braking, or steering on throttle. Go watch kids at any go-kart track, it comes naturally to most everyone.

I know trail breaking and steering on the throttle is very common and comes naturally, but why I said it is unique was because of the smoothness with which he did it.

I dont know much about these things, but my expectation is that if one does that, one will atleast look a little ragged. But if one looks at Clark's onboards, he looks so smooth. Forgive me for my ignorance, but I cant think of anyone who did that without looking ragged.

Besides, I thought if one wants to be easier on one's tyres trail breaking and and steering on the throttle are the two things that one must try to avoid.

But what I cant understand is how he did both and still was easy on his tyres. Sorry for my ignorance btw.

Edited by gillesthegenius, 02 October 2011 - 06:51.

[gillesthegenius]

Oh My God! He turned the steering wheel while braking and accelerating? Why didn't he die?? Oh My God!!



Oh My God, you mean he got 4 races out of a set instead of 3? Oh My God!!




Oh My God, I don't know!!!




You could try at The Nostalgic Forum or Chuck Norris .com

Thanks alot.

But I dont think you got my question...

My question was... with such a driving style which atleast an ignorant person like me would expect to be very ragged, how was Jim Clark able to look so smooth???

Besides, if it wasnt unique then please be kind enough to tell me someone who drove like that without looking ragged?

Thanks.

[24gerrard]

Ragged?

Try driving a big winged rally BDA Escort down the Troodos mountain on Cyprus.
One stage used to be about threee miles long and the car would 'never' be strait but always in a drift left or right.
Great fun and done well it looks like a smooth dance routine.

Clark was not the only driver to master the art on tarmac.
This was proper racing without the skill being diluted by huge downforce.
A combination of a much higher polar moment than todays F1 cars, brilliant car set up and a skill now almost lost.

Perhaps a tyre expert can answer the lower wear question, I have my own ideas but am not qualified enough in that area.

[gillesthegenius]

Ragged?

Try driving a big winged rally BDA Escort down the Troodos mountain on Cyprus.
One stage used to be about threee miles long and the car would 'never' be strait but always in a drift left or right.
Great fun and done well it looks like a smooth dance routine.

Clark was not the only driver to master the art on tarmac.
This was proper racing without the skill being diluted by huge downforce.
A combination of a much higher polar moment than todays F1 cars, brilliant car set up and a skill now almost lost.

Perhaps a tyre expert can answer the lower wear question, I have my own ideas but am not qualified enough in that area.

Thanks.

[Lukin]

gillesthegenius, don't worry about cheapracer, he is a bit hormonal at the moment it seems!

I would think that his description of his style would actually imply it being smooth. He doesn't have any big inputs and has an overlap of all the different phases of the corner. I can imagine if you look at his brake pressure, steering and throttle trace I would think it would have very small rates of change and the loads through the tyres wouldn't change abruptly. The opposite style could be harsher on the tyre; you brake hard then release the brake quickly and wind on the steering. As soon as you get to the apex you have to be harsh on the throttle.

I've seen drivers with both those styles and have tried (very poorly) to draw out what their traces look like. You can do the same laptime with both styles but in my experience, the blue driver will be nicer on the tyre as long as they can get the car rotated well enough. This style is also a characteristic of the tyre but that's a bit beyond me. Also the blue guy will be better on fuel which never hurts.

And as for the drift part; it depends on what he refers to as drift. I find excessive yaw rate on exit to hurt the tyres, but if it's a high sideslip angle on exit that doesn't necessarily imply it will hurt the tyre.

http://imageshack.us...ingstylewd.gif/

[gillesthegenius]

gillesthegenius, don't worry about cheapracer, he is a bit hormonal at the moment it seems!

I would think that his description of his style would actually imply it being smooth. He doesn't have any big inputs and has an overlap of all the different phases of the corner. I can imagine if you look at his brake pressure, steering and throttle trace I would think it would have very small rates of change and the loads through the tyres wouldn't change abruptly. The opposite style could be harsher on the tyre; you brake hard then release the brake quickly and wind on the steering. As soon as you get to the apex you have to be harsh on the throttle.

I've seen drivers with both those styles and have tried (very poorly) to draw out what their traces look like. You can do the same laptime with both styles but in my experience, the blue driver will be nicer on the tyre as long as they can get the car rotated well enough. This style is also a characteristic of the tyre but that's a bit beyond me. Also the blue guy will be better on fuel which never hurts.

And as for the drift part; it depends on what he refers to as drift. I find excessive yaw rate on exit to hurt the tyres, but if it's a high sideslip angle on exit that doesn't necessarily imply it will hurt the tyre.

http://imageshack.us...ingstylewd.gif/

So the smoothness of his driving comes from the subtlity of his inputs.

Thanks a lot for your insightful explanation. Enjoyed reading it.

Btw, you said you have seen drivers with driving styles of both extremes of the spectrum. Could you please name some good examples from whose onboards I could get a better understanding about this subject.

As much as these different driving styles fascinate me, their complexity is tearing my head apart.

Thanks.

[gillesthegenius]

Dear Lukin,

Another thing I want to ask is...

I have this idea that Button's smoothness comes from the fact that he breaks early and then he turns in and after that only does he get on the throttle. Am I right to have such an idea, or does his braking, cornering and accelerating also overlap like Clark's does?

Thanks.

[cheapracer]

But I dont think you got my question...

My question was... with such a driving style which at least a person like me would expect to be very ragged, how was Jim Clark able to look so smooth???

Oh I got your question all right, I was just amused by all your exclamations

There's been many a driver who, oversteers, understeers or 4 wheel drifts while either arcing or squaring off who look either ragged or smooth.

It comes down to driver inputs and car setup for all of them not to mention the car itself.

As for Clark himself I haven't seen any evidence of what he says other than he uses every inch of the track he can and from a wider line may feel he turns in earlier while braking from a wider point on the track. There certainly isn't the sort of onboard you can use today to make judgements.

[cheapracer]

don't worry about cheapracer, he is a bit hormonal at the moment it seems!

Bitch.

[Lukin]

That is just a thought though. I have never worked in open wheelers so can't really point you in the onboard direction.

I do remember this from years ago. The car behind is obviously quicker but you can see a bit of the style difference between the two; who carries lots of speed to the apex and who forgoes apex speed for reducing vulnerability under brakes and on exit.

[Lukin]

Bitch.

[gillesthegenius]

Oh I got your question all right, I was just amused by all your exclamations

There's been many a driver who, oversteers, understeers or 4 wheel drifts while either arcing or squaring off who look either ragged or smooth.

It comes down to driver inputs and car setup for all of them not to mention the car itself.

As for Clark himself I haven't seen any evidence of what he says other than he uses every inch of the track he can and from a wider line may feel he turns in earlier while braking from a wider point on the track. There certainly isn't the sort of onboard you can use today to make judgements.

Thanks.

Do you mean he uses the whole track in a similar way to how Seb does?

[gillesthegenius]

That is just a thought though. I have never worked in open wheelers so can't really point you in the onboard direction.

I do remember this from years ago. The car behind is obviously quicker but you can see a bit of the style difference between the two; who carries lots of speed to the apex and who forgoes apex speed for reducing vulnerability under brakes and on exit.

thanks.

[Lukin]

Dear Lukin,

Another thing I want to ask is...

I have this idea that Button's smoothness comes from the fact that he breaks early and then he turns in and after that only does he get on the throttle. Am I right to have such an idea, or does his braking, cornering and accelerating also overlap like Clark's does?

Thanks.

I'm not sure, I've never worked on an aero car. And Id assume with F1 that you would need to carry huge speed to the corner to keep the aero load up so that would dictate the style.

[primer]

I know trail breaking and steering on the throttle is very common and comes naturally, but why I said it is unique was because of the smoothness with which he did it.

What is your measure for 'smoothness'? How are you judging he was smooth, or significantly smoother than his peers while drifting through a corner?

Edited by primer, 02 October 2011 - 11:16.

[cheapracer]

What is your measure for 'smoothness'? How are you judging he was smooth, or significantly smoother than his peers while drifting through a corner?

In my mind smooth and sliding are not the same thing although one can slide smoothly.

[gillesthegenius]

What is your measure for 'smoothness'? How are you judging he was smooth, or significantly smoother than his peers while drifting through a corner?

I dont know how to explain. But my measure of smoothness is probably based on the car taking corners with a gentle arc without the driver having to make many / drastic corrections and without the rear stepping out.

When looking at Clark's onboards, for untrained eyes like mine atleast, it looks like he is braking early, then turning in and then accelerating away. In other words it looks like he is being very conservative with his cornering allowing him to drive the car as if it is driving on rails.

Besides, the drifting that Clark talks about isnt easily visible in his onboards either.

That is why I was surprised when I read his quote that said he braked and accelerated while cornering.

If you ask me about other drivers that I think that are smooth, then Button is certainly one and I can remember reading somewhere that he was smooth because he braked early, then took the corner and then accelerated away. Since then my belief was that for a driver to be smooth, he must avoid braking and accelerating while cornering.

That is why I turned to you guys seeking explanantion of Clark's comments.

Edited by gillesthegenius, 02 October 2011 - 12:05.

[Vanishing Point]

There's no one single type of method which applies in all cases.The best way depends on the car and the handling v power compromise.Braking at the same time as turning isn't really going to work with something like a big heavy Ford Falcon or TWR XJS etc but maybe what he's describing fits in with a Lotus Cortina ?.There are times when a big,powerful,heavy,road car (like a modified 6 Litre V12 Jag XJ saloon for example ) can be driven at around 9/10 ths,at the right time of day,over an alpine pass which is probably as,if not more,demanding as any track day or racing event.

Trust me in that case you get all the braking done and finished with while the thing is still in a straight line,before turning in,and then use the torque and power to balance it through the bend just using the throttle and then floor it on the exit,not before,and 'never' use the brakes on turn in or in the corner,or give it a lot of throttle before the exit,or you'll find out the true meaning of understeer and/or oversteer or maybe even a mixture of both and a car then becomes an aircraft

Edited by Vanishing Point, 02 October 2011 - 22:18.

[gillesthegenius]

In my mind smooth and sliding are not the same thing although one can slide smoothly.

Its not the same in my mind either, and that is what baffles me about Clark's comment that he drifts through a corner.

If he really did indeed drift through the corners, he must have had immaculate car control as his onboards dont show any sign of it.

[Vanishing Point]

I dont know how to explain. But my measure of smoothness is probably based on the car taking corners with a gentle arc without the driver having to make many / drastic corrections and without the rear stepping out.

When looking at Clark's onboards, for untrained eyes like mine atleast, it looks like he is breaking early, then turning in and then accelerating away. In other words it looks like he is being very conservative with his cornering allowing him to drive the car as if it is driving on rails.

Besides, the drifting that Clark talks about isnt easily visible in his onboards either.

That is why I was surprised when I read his quote that said he braked and accelerated while cornering.

If you ask me about other drivers that I think that are smooth, then Button is certainly one and I can remember reading somewhere that he was smooth because he braked early, then took the corner and then accelerated away. Since then my belief was that for a driver to be smooth, he must avoid braking and accelerating while cornering.

That is why I turned to you guys seeking explanantion of Clark's comments.

1.41 -

Edited by Vanishing Point, 02 October 2011 - 12:06.

[BorderReiver]

I think it has to be remembered that Clark's apprenticeship was unlike anything drivers of today would be experienced with in that he began, pretty much from the off, racing big, heavy, high powered Sports Cars with low mechanical grip (compared to light, high grip carts and junior formula cars today). This meant that smoothness and, crucially, conservation of momentum were at a premium and, whilst cross-ply tyres were highly volatile if you had the ability (which he most certainly did) to work with them at angles both under breaking under power the potential was there to make power before the apex work hugely well, provided you could judge how far you were pushing the tyres to perfection.

Cheapracer of course consistantly rubbishes everything that Jim Clark did (including making the ludicrous accusation that he was a car breaker, farcical given the machinery he nursed over the line in his career) and so will probably dismiss the testimony of people who saw him drive and worked on his machinery, but the very fact that he extended break pad life beyond his team-mates and still managed to be hugely quicker than all of them speaks volumes.

[Vanishing Point]

I think it has to be remembered that Clark's apprenticeship was unlike anything drivers of today would be experienced with in that he began, pretty much from the off, racing big, heavy, high powered Sports Cars with low mechanical grip (compared to light, high grip carts and junior formula cars today). This meant that smoothness and, crucially, conservation of momentum were at a premium and, whilst cross-ply tyres were highly volatile if you had the ability (which he most certainly did) to work with them at angles both under breaking under power the potential was there to make power before the apex work hugely well

It was just a type of driving which was used by many drivers not just Jim Clark which,as you've rightly pointed out there,had more to do with the type of cars,grip levels, etc etc.Many other drivers used four wheel drifting through bends such as Salvadori,Moss,Hawthorn etc etc.Crossply tyres actually had much better progression on the limits of grip than radials which although they provide more grip are usually more a case of all or nothing.

[gillesthegenius]

I think it has to be remembered that Clark's apprenticeship was unlike anything drivers of today would be experienced with in that he began, pretty much from the off, racing big, heavy, high powered Sports Cars with low mechanical grip (compared to light, high grip carts and junior formula cars today). This meant that smoothness and, crucially, conservation of momentum were at a premium and, whilst cross-ply tyres were highly volatile if you had the ability (which he most certainly did) to work with them at angles both under breaking under power the potential was there to make power before the apex work hugely well, provided you could judge how far you were pushing the tyres to perfection.

Cheapracer of course consistantly rubbishes everything that Jim Clark did (including making the ludicrous accusation that he was a car breaker, farcical given the machinery he nursed over the line in his career) and so will probably dismiss the testimony of people who saw him drive and worked on his machinery, but the very fact that he extended break pad life beyond his team-mates and still managed to be hugely quicker than all of them speaks volumes.

Hmmm... Very interesting.

Like you say his apprenticeship was probably what helped him develop that type of a style which probably looks as beautiful as it is thanks to his inch-perfect car control skills.

[gillesthegenius]

1.41 -

Thanks alot.

Hadnt watched any of Clark's non-f1 footage before this. But having watched this video, I think I have finally understood what he meant.

Thanks.

[Kelpiecross]

Going by what Jim Clark himself says in the above quote, his driving style doesnt seem to be as simple as just being smooth and easy. I mean, if my interpretation is right, not only is he talking about braking while turning, he is also talking about accelerating while turning!!!

I can understand that Jim Clark's apparently amazing ability to control the car meant that even such a driving style was so smooth that it looked like he was driving on rails, but what beggars belief is that even with such a 'drifting' driving style, he was apparently better at taking care of his tyres than most of his competitors!!!

How is this possible???

Anyone with enough technical nous who could explain to me how this is possible?

PS: Im not saying that his trail breaking and accelerating is unique. What I am saying is that driving so smooth without looking atleast a little ragged with such a driving style is unique.


Thanks.

27 comments on the first day a new topic appears - a record?

[gillesthegenius]

There's no one single type of method which applies in all cases.The best way depends on the car and the handling v power compromise.Braking at the same time as turning isn't really going to work with something like a big heavy Ford Falcon or TWR XJS etc but maybe what he's describing fits in with a Lotus Cortina ?.There are times when a big,powerful,heavy,road car (like a modified 6 Litre V12 Jag XJ saloon for example ) can be driven at around 9/10 ths,at the right time of day,over an alpine pass which is probably as,if not more,demanding as any track day or racing event.

Trust me in that case you get all the braking done and finished with while the thing is still in a straight line,before turning in,and then use the torque and power to balance it through the bend just using the throttle and then floor it on the exit not before and 'never' use the brakes on turn in or in the corner,or give it a lot of throttle before the exit,or you'll find out the true meaning of understeer and/or oversteer or maybe even a mixture of both and a car then becomes an aircraft .

Yeah, it certainly seems to fit perfectly with how he drove the Lotus Cortina.

But then how would you describe the way he drove in f1? Would be interesting to know your description.

Do you think he let his f1 cars also drift while cornering? because my untrained eyes dont see that happening in his f1 onboards.

Edited by gillesthegenius, 02 October 2011 - 13:03.

[Tony Matthews]

Is there any real need for the constant use of these annoying bloody emoticons? It's like reading a comic. There's more than enough of them in the Paddock Club...

[Kelpiecross]

Is there any real need for the constant use of these annoying bloody emoticons? It's like reading a comic. There's more than enough of them in the Paddock Club...

I agree - I thought I was the only one who found them annoying and juvenile.

[cheapracer]

It was just a type of driving which was used by many drivers not just Jim Clark which,as you've rightly pointed out there,had more to do with the type of cars,grip levels, etc etc.Many other drivers used four wheel drifting through bends such as Salvadori,Moss,Hawthorn etc etc.Crossply tyres actually had much better progression on the limits of grip than radials which although they provide more grip are usually more a case of all or nothing.

Well said and having competed on crossplies completely agree, they let go early and are completely predictable, part of the reason you see those wonderful slides from 60's and 70's F1 and other race cars.

Cheapracer of course consistantly rubbishes everything that Jim Clark did (including making the ludicrous accusation that he was a car breaker, farcical given the machinery he nursed over the line in his career)

No, I merely constantly rubbish the people who believe in more than what is humanly possible but then I can't stomache any type of religion.

And as for car breaking that's not what I said but why expect someone with your nickname to accept anything less than your own perceived blind truth of the man - and of course you're here to defend him ....

Edited by cheapracer, 02 October 2011 - 14:06.

[cheapracer]

Bit of a writeup here on radial Vs crossplies ...

https://rsracing.com/tech-tire.htm


Interestingly they end it with this ..

"Most racing radial tires are closer to a belted bias ply tire than a passenger car radial tire. This gives the racing radial tire traits from both bias & radial tires (good feedback & higher breakaway traction)".

Edited by cheapracer, 02 October 2011 - 14:05.

[carlt]

Bit of a writeup here on radial Vs crossplies ...

https://rsracing.com/tech-tire.htm


Interestingly they end it with this ..

"Most racing radial tires are closer to a belted bias ply tire than a passenger car radial tire. This gives the racing radial tire traits from both bias & radial tires (good feedback & higher breakaway traction)".

possibly a bit out of date for current tyre technology

As has been pointed out above - how the man used the tyres available would be a big factor in his driving style - not always considered when comparing driving styles from different eras

[Vanishing Point]

Yeah, it certainly seems to fit perfectly with how he drove the Lotus Cortina.

But then how would you describe the way he drove in f1? Would be interesting to know your description.

Do you think he let his f1 cars also drift while cornering? because my untrained eyes dont see that happening in his f1 onboards.

It's obvious that something like a Lotus 49 F1 car with it's long wishbone and outset suspension relative to the car isn't going to drift like a Lotus Cortina or even the earlier types of F1 cars which were a bit closer in suspension design to road cars such as Hawthorn drove in a similar way.

But check out the steering input and angle on entry to this corner after the previous one and it shows the same type of driving being applied.It's just that the amount of drift and angle won't be so much because the different suspension geometry makes it more like cornering on rails in comparison to the Cortina.



1.34-1.36

[Vanishing Point]

Well said and having competed on crossplies completely agree, they let go early and are completely predictable, part of the reason you see those wonderful slides from 60's and 70's F1 and other race cars.

http://www.mike-hawt...uk/finality.php

[mariner]

I will admit that ( apparently unlike Cheapy) I was/am a Jim clark fan but even I don't think he could trescend the laws of physics.

However I would mention three examples of his style ( and probably others as well)

I was lucky enough to see Clark race several times. Once my very kind parents gave me one of those Page and Moy coach trips to the Dutch GP for my 17th birthday. Clark just ran away from everybody but just once I saw his skill. We were watching at the fast sweeps at the back of Zandvoort where you could look down at the cars. Clark's Lotus jumped sideways on one lap. his correction was so quick and precise my slower brain processed the steering wheel movement after seeing the car twitch and stabilse. From that I would deduce both great anticipation and also precision in steering inputs. No big wheel movements because one correct input did the whole job.

I also saw him in the Lotus Cortina at Brands. The Louts Cortina's always cornered on three wheels due I think to heavy front roll stiffness and an A frame rear end. Clark was in a great hurry to make up for a pit stop and around Bottom bend not only the front wheel but the inside rear were constantly off the ground. By constantly I mean that despite Bottom bend having many camber changes the car was held in near perfect balance all the way. I think that shows how important balance is to a driver, you can't see it in an F1 car but the sloppiness of a saloon shows balance better.

Lastly , and this is just a book comment, one of Clarks mechanics tells of how fast Clark would negotiate Roundabouts ( trlaffic circles) in a vast Ford Galaxie he won for the Indy 500. The mechanic described it as just " whoosh-whoosh". When the mechanic tried it in a better car he just scared himsef. I suspect that was the anticipation element of a top driver. Put in more technicsl terms as you push the limits of the G-G diagram the force left over for directional change reduces ( the Milliken movement method diagram).

So I think the very top drivers biggest weapon may be superior depth/speed perception which allows a finer judgement of entry speed so as to eliminate the need to retain any directional change capacity i.e to use 100% of availalbe G-G you must have zero manovering capacity left going in.

Stirling Moss IIRC called this "presenting" the car to the corner with the wheel and adjusting it with the throttle which makes sense on older cross ply tyres.

To answer the different driver examples there is , somewhere, a pubished set of G-G diagrams of the Lotus 79 ( a more modern GE car) taken at a test at Paul Ricard with Ronnie " super reactions" Peterson, Jackie "super smooth" Stewart and Mario" in between" Andretti. I doubt Stewart was trying as hard as the others but that is the only example of different driver G-G traces in the same car I have ever seen in public.

BTW the graphs kind of question my explanations above as Peterson seemed able to drive just as quick constantly exceeding the G_G enveloped then correcting!!

[MatsNorway]

Quality post right there.

[Magoo]

Is there any real need for the constant use of these annoying bloody emoticons? It's like reading a comic. There's more than enough of them in the Paddock Club...

I find it helps to visualize the poster physically acting out the icons -- i.e., jumping up into the air and clapping, waving maniacally, rolling on the floor, etc.

[Magoo]

I will admit that ( apparently unlike Cheapy) I was/am a Jim clark fan but even I don't think he could trescend the laws of physics.

However I would mention three examples of his style ( and probably others as well)

I was lucky enough to see Clark race several times. Once my very kind parents gave me one of those Page and Moy coach trips to the Dutch GP for my 17th birthday. Clark just ran away from everybody but just once I saw his skill. We were watching at the fast sweeps at the back of Zandvoort where you could look down at the cars. Clark's Lotus jumped sideways on one lap. his correction was so quick and precise my slower brain processed the steering wheel movement after seeing the car twitch and stabilse. From that I would deduce both great anticipation and also precision in steering inputs. No big wheel movements because one correct input did the whole job.

I also saw him in the Lotus Cortina at Brands. The Louts Cortina's always cornered on three wheels due I think to heavy front roll stiffness and an A frame rear end. Clark was in a great hurry to make up for a pit stop and around Bottom bend not only the front wheel but the inside rear were constantly off the ground. By constantly I mean that despite Bottom bend having many camber changes the car was held in near perfect balance all the way. I think that shows how important balance is to a driver, you can't see it in an F1 car but the sloppiness of a saloon shows balance better.

Lastly , and this is just a book comment, one of Clarks mechanics tells of how fast Clark would negotiate Roundabouts ( trlaffic circles) in a vast Ford Galaxie he won for the Indy 500. The mechanic described it as just " whoosh-whoosh". When the mechanic tried it in a better car he just scared himsef. I suspect that was the anticipation element of a top driver. Put in more technicsl terms as you push the limits of the G-G diagram the force left over for directional change reduces ( the Milliken movement method diagram).

So I think the very top drivers biggest weapon may be superior depth/speed perception which allows a finer judgement of entry speed so as to eliminate the need to retain any directional change capacity i.e to use 100% of availalbe G-G you must have zero manovering capacity left going in.

Stirling Moss IIRC called this "presenting" the car to the corner with the wheel and adjusting it with the throttle which makes sense on older cross ply tyres.

To answer the different driver examples there is , somewhere, a pubished set of G-G diagrams of the Lotus 79 ( a more modern GE car) taken at a test at Paul Ricard with Ronnie " super reactions" Peterson, Jackie "super smooth" Stewart and Mario" in between" Andretti. I doubt Stewart was trying as hard as the others but that is the only example of different driver G-G traces in the same car I have ever seen in public.

BTW the graphs kind of question my explanations above as Peterson seemed able to drive just as quick constantly exceeding the G_G enveloped then correcting!!

First rate, enjoyed reading that.

[Bloggsworth]

Swishing through roundabouts is more a matter of timing than anything else, get the timing wrong and you clip 3 kerbs! Some drivers are better at chicanes than others...

[cheapracer]

It's obvious that something like a Lotus 49 F1 car with it's long wishbone and outset suspension relative to the car isn't going to drift like a Lotus Cortina

They all drifted around that era, the F1 cars were going faster and being body'less tends to not appear as sideways as they actually are. Jack Brabham was generally the biggest sideways proponent of the day.

[cheapracer]

Stirling Moss IIRC called this "presenting" the car to the corner with the wheel and adjusting it with the throttle which makes sense on older cross ply tyres.

"Presenting" is a good word for it, far better than "Arrived...(now what?)".

[gillesthegenius]

They all drifted around that era, the F1 cars were going faster and being body'less tends to not appear as sideways as they actually are. Jack Brabham was generally the biggest sideways proponent of the day.

Nice

Forgive me for my ignorance, but I thought that Rindt had the most spectacularly sideways style of those golden years.

Edited by gillesthegenius, 03 October 2011 - 05:52.

[Bloggsworth]

Nice

Forgive me for my ignorance, but I thought that Rindt had the most spectacularly sideways style of those golden years.

Brabham learned his style in Midget racing, and anyway, it's harder to overtake a car with its back end hanging out. It wasn't merely a matter of style, the old tyres ran at higher slip angles than modern ones.