| Author | Message | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 1638 Registered: 10-2002 |
Whoa! I was in Maranello watching exactly nobody in the rain. Darn. Good for you! Have you ever been to Hockenheim's Motodrom or Indy's stadium? THAT is the ultimate in sound: The screams of the engines reverberate off the three level grand stands. Unfreakingbelievable! I remember walking towards Indy being late for practice and you hear them scream by from the outside and you think it is freakin' loud. Then you enter the arena and you feel like being dropped into the Colosseum as gladiator. Goosebumps all over your body and you know you came to the right place. Never realized the brakes squealing. Gotta pay attention this year at Indy. I love that sound of the downshifts and the Whammkabanngbangbangboooom of the engine. Just drives me nuts! To some very small degree even my dinky 308 does that. Once I take of the foot of the gas I hear some small bangs as it is lowering its own revs and I remember the sounds of the cosworths etc. Of course not the same as a F1 of today, but it somehow links me in my mind with my legends. Joys of driving a Ferrari I guess. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1151 Registered: 1-2002 |
andreas: what...? i can't hear you... speak up man, this damned ringing in my ears hasn't gone away... speak up. only joking. it was amazing, however, what i loved most was: on the dowshifts ,coming into rasscasse, the concussions of sound that blasted through that little cavity of space felt almost like blows to your chest; like syncopated cannons firing. amazing. ps: f1 brakes squel like stuck pigs. pps: 2 days later we were in maranello at the foot of the fence surrounding fiorano, watching rubens go round and round, that was a bit louder, but also not unbearable w/out plugs. it's such a glorious sound to behold, in person, that i didn't want to dull the sensation with aural analgesics like ear plugs. hubert | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 1636 Registered: 10-2002 |
Rascasse without earplugs? You da man! Can you still hear Vivaldi's four seasons?  Must have been a blast to see them so close. On second thought I realize how you survived: Low revs and traction control around that thight bend. No 19,000 rpm chainsaw in your ears. I was once at tabac and had the cars about 4 feet away from me (back in the eighties). Not survivable without headsets. The only time I needed a *wide* angle lens to shoot the cars. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1150 Registered: 1-2002 |
andreas: I didn't wear plugs at the gp in monaco; sat right at rasscasse, too. i just couldn't bear NOT to hear the cars. the formula renault v6's "seemed" louder, as did the porsche cup cars that were a prelude to the gp that sunday. | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 1634 Registered: 10-2002 |
Jack, thanks for the compliment. Stumpen Schneider (?) was my idol. Long time ago. He died in a racing accident. Loved the guy. Same goes for Winkelhock and Bellof. Sigh. Tell us the Hugenholz bocht pun. Please. BTW: Always loved Zandvoort. That Tarzan curve was just the best! I agree with Hubert. Never looked at it from a setup perspective, but there is something to it. I prefer a neutral setup, but that's just me. "Normal" drivers probably prefer a tad of understeer (push) as it is easier to correct. "Wild" drivers (read tons of talents) like Gilles Villeneuve want oversteer. So yes, in the section of turns right after the start I end up with too much understeer. Same happens in the Maggots/Beckets complex in Silverstone. Very difficult to keep the momentum going without going off the track. Hate it. But yes, that's just me. I love the Nuerburgring as well as a driver. But as a spectator it is as boring as Sepang because they made it so safe, that the runoff areas are so wide, the cars look like toys. Compare that to Monaco, where you really do need ear protection. The new Imola has lost some compared to the old one. Tamburello is missing. But yes, most of the character is still there. Agua minerale is as difficult as ever. Never really got the hang of that one. You don't want to break for it, but if you miss your spot by a fraction you're toast. Really though. Magny Cours is abominable, but not easy. IMHO it lacks the flow. Squirt and shoot, but also weird combinations and that 180 turn just about throws me for a loop every time I go through it. Anyway, back to the real world. PS: Does anybody know the old Swiss Bern Bremgarten track? Now that's what I call racing. Flat out everywhere and scary ups and downs paired with stunning scenery. Too bad they banned racing in Switzerland. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1148 Registered: 1-2002 |
As a driver tracks that are "technical" (IMO) are ones that require a car with a setup that leaves the car as neutral as possible; tracks like these have corners, and layouts, that change by the foot, and require a car so neutral that you're able to use all the available momentum through ALL the turns. I mean, you always "want" a neutral car, right? But, a track that's "technical" is planned so well that it's just one series of turns; hence the need to carry momentum. Some tracks, or a lot of them, there's always one corner (or a complex therof) that you say to yourself "hmm.. the car really pushes there" and you have to adapt your car/driving; therfore you are having to adjust the car to the track, and, essentially, that turn b/c it's the rate limiting step b/w you and the best lap time. A technical track requires you go fast thoroug the series of corners that make the track one entity. Suzuka is an excellent example. You come down the front straight, the 1st rhander is quick, the 2nd one is a little slower, but the two together is almost like 1 double apex turn; if you can keep the car going, you get rewarded by blasting up the short straight that leads to the uphill windy section of the course; if the car's not dialed for this part, or you've compromised it for straight speed, or for braking into T1 then you've lost the lap, a technical track won't allow you to make a lap out of one turn, that's why tracks like : spa, suzuka, f1 track at nurburgring ( I like it *flame suit*), the old imola (the new isn't THAT bad), et. al. are so fantastic, but it's also why tracks like magny cours, indy, hockenheim, and monza aren't all that great b/c you can make a good lap by simply going fastest down the straights, and the corners are fairly easy. With regard to magny cours, I don't think you should even bother talking about it, it's abismal, really. just my 2 cents, and you should get change. | ||
| Jack Habits (Ferraristuff)
Member Username: Ferraristuff Post Number: 884 Registered: 4-2003 |
Andreas, I admire you tatste in circuits and also rate Suzuka both as the most techincal circuit as well as the most challenging to drive and most entertaining to watch (although it will be difficult to beat the recent UK GP of course...). My tatste might be a little biased though as Suzuka was drawn by my fellow countryman and fellow Fiat 2300S Coupe admirer, the late Hans Hungenholz, father of current Le Mans contender Hans Hugenholz Jr. Hugenholz also drew the Zandvoort track in 1947 (I believe) and when he retired from his position as manager of that track, the company honoured him by naming the Hugenholz turn after him. There is a funny story about the "Hugenholz bocht" but it is a Dutch play of words which I won't bore you with (yet). Best, Jack | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 1632 Registered: 10-2002 |
Arrgh. Long winded response lost. Good for you guys... Great question, so here my 2nd attempt: A technical track is normally a test track (like Suzuka started out) with tricky corners trying to emulate the most difficult ones in the world. A regular 90 degree turn with straights on either side is easy to take, the line is obvious. But the story changes when we're no longer talking 90 degrees or e.g. tightening turns, turns with camber, turns leading into other turns, turns with elevation changes. All of a sudden the line becomes blurred, setups difficult. That's when it gets technical. Monza for the most part is not technical and rather flat out. Suzuka is about as technical as it gets. Technical courses are more demanding on the driver and his skill, which is why I hate them as I'm simply not good enough. But there is more to a 'great' course. It is also about elevation changes, spectacular scenery and flow in the course. The antidote would be Magny Cours: In the middle of nowhere, no scenery, no elevation changes and no rhythm. Total bore. On the other end of the scale is Spa: Lots of ups and downs, great scenery, weather always a factor and some good rhythm for the most part (bus stop chicane is an unnecessary pain) AND is technical with Eau Rouge. Monaco is horrible as a track, but great as a place and spectacular scenery, elevation changes, tunnel and history. That's why it is still there, but yes trackwise a desaster. Indy is a bit of a bore from a driver's perspective: The stadium section is just flat out, whereas the infield is so thight, that not much passing is possible. It has fairly common turns, so not much there either. What does make it fascinating (aside from being at the place of one of the greatest motorraces in history) is the challenge to the setup: No wings for the stadium or tons of wings for the infield? Compromise. Similar to what the old Hockenheim used to be with its long straights through the forest and the narrow turns in the Motodrom. Hard to find a good solution, very interesting. | ||
| rob guess (Beast)
Junior Member Username: Beast Post Number: 116 Registered: 5-2003 |
I think it also depends on also what aspect of the track you are talking about. For example a driver might complain that the track is simple and boring to race on yet you talk to the engineers and they are constantly crunching numbers and trying various set ups just to make the car faster on the track because they feel it is very technical and vice versa. When i raced pro motocross i would layout practice tracks that every one hated to ride on since you had to thread the needle just to keep the bike on two wheels. I.E. off camber turns, jumps traversing the side of a hill Etc. When i went to race at an event, i tended to find that the track was not a challenge to race on and allowed myself to stay smooth. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2185 Registered: 6-2001 |
I don't know about those tracks, however a technical track is one where the corners and how you deal with them determines your placing. An example of such would be Daytona is not a technical track, you have more HP than your competitors, unless you're truly a duffus, you win. Sears Point (now Infineon) is a technical track: your exit speed from 11 and 7 determines your lap times, and ultimately your position, and unless you get those right, you won't do well, no matter how much HP your daddy bought for you. Art | ||
| Ken A (Zff)
Junior Member Username: Zff Post Number: 103 Registered: 12-2002 |
I've heard people refer to Sepang as a "technical" circuit. What exactly does that mean? I also don't understand what makes a particular track better than another. I'll readily admit I like some tracks more than others, but I'm not exactly sure why. For example, I've found a lot of F1 fans don't like Nurburging, but I think it's a great track. I even like the new Mercedes Arena more than the original Turn One. I also like Sepang more than Monza, Spa, or Hockenheim, but it seems that almost disqualifies me as an F1 fan. Although I did like the old Hockenheim a lot more than the new one. I don't care for Magny-Cours. I think Monaco is a horrible track and I like Indy the least. My favorite, though, is easily Suzuka. |