14 replies to this topic

[shaggy]

When Montoya first raced in Japan, during his rookie year in F1, Berger stated that it was then that he finally became convinced of JPM's talent. He said that the track is a "driver's track" and the fact that, within 3 laps or so, JPM was already up to MS's level was evidence of Juan's immense talent. A little weird because he had a whole year of driving and testing to see Juan's talent and yet he still had to wait until Japan to be convinced.

So, what is about a track that makes it into a "driver's track" ? Does it have to do with low downforce and high speed corners ?

I have also read that in Hungary, you are looking at a "technical or engineering track." What is the difference between the two ?

shaggy

[baddog]

well its a tricky one isnt it? after all the 'drivers tracks' Spa, Suzuka seem in some ways similiar.. fast, lots of fast turns.. but then Monaco is also considered a track that marks out a good driver, and thats so slow..

The common factor for ME seems to be tracks that have a design and profile that echoes real roads in some way.. so less predictable and 'uniform' than more maunfactured tracks, and with extansive use of elevation and varying cambers/radiuses.

Suzuka I think is just a track where, in spite of being manufactured, it just got everything right..

Shaun

[Svenko Wankerov]

driver's track = good mix of fast hi-g corners and slow hairpins, usually such tracks have good a good flow to it.

[RSNS]

I think a driver's track is one where he can show that he can link a lot of corners in succession without making mistakes. That is, a fast driver is capable of linking several corners through a very clean line and without losing speed.

That is what is difficult in Suzuka (the esses, and other places), Monaco (all of it, really), Hungary (most of it), Spa (Eau Rouge is precisely that: a linkage between fast corners) and the old Ring.

In old days one also spoke of tracks for boys and for men. Spa and the Ring being the most notorious tracks for men, that is, they asked for real guts. For instance, the Masta kink in Spa required a driver to be both very precise and very courageous.

Altitude elevations combined with bends are also very challenging, because the adherence keeps changing and you have to plan your entry and teh beginning of the power very carefully (the prototype of this being, of course, the Ring).

Of course, that occurs in road circuits, but *not* in modern F1 tracks, which are really more like big go-kart circuits than anything else.

Fast bends are important just because you must get your in line and the power down properly if you don't want to be thrown out (at high speed there is precious little control once the car is actually into the corner). Mind you, lesser drivers can take high speed corners fast and get away with it, but perhaps not do it systematically.

The great driver's circuits were: first and foremost, the Ring; then perhaps Monaco and Spa. Mont Tremblant in Canada was extremely difficult (there was a video around somewhere: quite incredible).

I'll close saying that the great drivers showed off precisely in those tracks: Fangio (Ring, Spa, Monaco - unbeatable); Moss (Monaco, Ring), Clark (Spa, unbeatable); Surtees (Ring), Stewart (Monaco, Ring); Senna (Monaco); Schumacher (Monaco, Spa).

RSNS

[Terramax]

Jos = Any track that has lots of gravel, where the barriers can be easily jumped to start fights with spectators

[George Bailey]

If your favorite driver does well at a particular track, it's a drivers track.

[senninha]

Originally posted by George Bailey
If your favorite driver does well at a particular track, it's a drivers track.

True.

Even a oval track it´s a driver track.

[tifosi]

Originally posted by George Bailey
If your favorite driver does well at a particular track, it's a drivers track.

You beat me to it but yes, this is the Official AtlasF1BB definition of a drivers track.

[TT6]

Originally posted by George Bailey
If your favorite driver does well at a particular track, it's a drivers track.

If your favourite driver does extremely well at a particular track, it's racers track.

[fingers]

Upto Schumachers level ?

[RSNS]

Could we stop the Kindergarten mode, please? This is a F1 Forum, not a playground, in case some of you hadn't noticed. This thread addresses a most interesting topic.

[tifosi]

Originally posted by RSNS
Could we stop the Kindergarten mode, please? This is a F1 Forum, not a playground, in case some of you hadn't noticed. This thread addresses a most interesting topic.

And you got the most serious answer possible. The fact is what makes a track any kind of track is one's own perceptions. For example, most fans hate Hungfary and want it droipped from the calender, but F1 teams and driver acknowledge it is one of the most challenging and demanding tracks on the circuit. Likewise, Imola, another track considered boring by fans, is very difficult to get right on the engineering side due to the heavy use of the curbs.

[CLX]

I beleive all tracks are drivers track, to a certain extent.

Not much people think today's Nurburgring is something great, but Kimi had a such an impressive weekend, while his car was going, that it's seems impossible to credit his performance to his car only, especially if we take a look at Coulthard's performance. So Nurburgring can be considered a driver's track, and Kimi is one of the drivers who knows his way there.

Imola wasn't something huge too, but Senna's 7 straight poles are an indication that it wasn't only because of his car that was so commonly on pole there. So, to a certain extent, Imola also was a driver's track and Senna was a driver who knew his way there. Not to mention Monaco and other street tracks, where Senna won 13 times.

Or what about Schumacher and Canada or Spa? His wins there can't be credited to his cars only.

Every track is in its own particular way a driver's track.

[RSNS]

Originally posted by CLX
I beleive all tracks are drivers track, to a certain extent.

Not much people think today's Nurburgring is something great, but Kimi had a such an impressive weekend, while his car was going, that it's seems impossible to credit his performance to his car only, especially if we take a look at Coulthard's performance. So Nurburgring can be considered a driver's track, and Kimi is one of the drivers who knows his way there.

Imola wasn't something huge too, but Senna's 7 straight poles are an indication that it wasn't only because of his car that was so commonly on pole there. So, to a certain extent, Imola also was a driver's track and Senna was a driver who knew his way there. Not to mention Monaco and other street tracks, where Senna won 13 times.

Or what about Schumacher and Canada or Spa? His wins there can't be credited to his cars only.

Every track is in its own particular way a driver's track.

When I speak of the Nürburgring, I'm referring to the old circuit, as you know, currently known as the 'North Loop'. The modern one is also difficult, but nothing as the previous one.

I already mentioned Spa and Schumacher.

Imola was a great track. Now it has too many chicannes, and that is why it is boring and less selective.

The modern time Canada circuit is a stop and go one, so it doesn't seem to be very selective - but perhaps I'm miistaken.

RSNS

[RSNS]

Originally posted by tifosi


And you got the most serious answer possible. The fact is what makes a track any kind of track is one's own perceptions. For example, most fans hate Hungfary and want it droipped from the calender, but F1 teams and driver acknowledge it is one of the most challenging and demanding tracks on the circuit. Likewise, Imola, another track considered boring by fans, is very difficult to get right on the engineering side due to the heavy use of the curbs.

I quite agree about Hungary (see my first post). But the demanding circuits are often very boring precisely because drivers differences show up more than in the others. For instance, Monza (before teh chicannes) and, to a lesser extent, Hockenheim, were less selective, and, the cars being usually more level with each other than the drivers, they made for very impressive races (as in the horrible oval racings of North America).

So, to a large extent, a driver's circuit doesn't provide the closer racing unless the main driver gets delayed and must make up time (Fangio at the Nürburgring, Schumacher at the Hungaroring).

I particularly remember the old Nürburgring races to be extremely boring. If you were there, you'd see cars passing every 8 minutes; and the driver differences made their rythms to be quite different, so all you saw was 1st driver, 7 seconds after him, 2nd one, 4 seconds after that, another one and so forth; the gaps just kept increasing. What was interesting was watching the different lines different drivers took.

But then, if you want just an exciting race, go for ovals: they stop every 4 laps (pace car) and are always fighting for position. But you wont see great driving there.

RSNS