|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
12 Sep 2005, 20:38 (Ref:1406084) | #1 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,022
|
"Technical circuit"
You come across the phrase "it is a technical circuit" or "it is a technical corner" a lot in motor racing. My understanding is that this infers that it is a corner that you have to be smooth and get right in. There is one "technically" right way to do it and that is that. No muscling through it. Am I right?
What characteristics do you think make a technical corner or circuit and what is the perfect example of a technical corner or circuit? During the GP coverage Brundle or Davidson in the lap walk described the new bus stop at Spa as a technical corner. I guess it is. During the GP and because I like to think I am knowledgeable I nodded my head and went "oh yeah" in a manner a bit like the Churchill dog would. Then I heard Brands Indy described as a technical circuit. I have what I think is the right way to do the corners there, but it never really struck me as "technical". Or at least no more than anywhere else as there is a technique to every corner. Especially Paddock, there is a right way to do it, but it's main characteristic is a great bum clenching smile inducing rollercoaster ride. This got me thinking - what is technical and is it just a racer's 'technical' phrase. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
12 Sep 2005, 21:47 (Ref:1406156) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,523
|
A technical circuit is one where the driver's ability is more important than the car, where a power circuit is one where the great goddess of acceleration rules the roost.
Mallory Park is known as a power circuit. Cadwell & Lydden are technical circuits. Totally different, but both require 100% driver commitment, and control. The Nurburgring GP circuit is a Technical Drawing Circuit - in that it was designed by a schoolboy with a geometry set. |
||
__________________
There is no substitute for cubic inches. Harry Belamonte - 403ci Vauxhall Belmont!! A 700hp wayward shopping trolley on steroids!! |
13 Sep 2005, 03:46 (Ref:1406289) | #3 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 9,718
|
ans snetterton is a pub circuit . . . . . .the shape of a fag packet with some squashed corners
|
|
|
13 Sep 2005, 08:10 (Ref:1406413) | #4 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 458
|
I always thought technical covered tight slow to medium speed corners. Technical just sounds beeter than "we could'nt afford much land so we just jammed in as much as possible in the area we could" I would describe the majority of rockingham infeild as being technical, good fun though
|
||
|
13 Sep 2005, 09:05 (Ref:1406468) | #5 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 161
|
Thinking along the same lines that "technical" is a series of corners which are easy to get wrong i.e. slow and require precision to get them right
|
||
|
13 Sep 2005, 10:10 (Ref:1406522) | #6 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 41
|
This is an interesting question that is posed, the bus stop at spa I would summise is technical for two reasons,
1. The speed it is approached at and the point that you have just exited a sweeping right hand bend before you need to hit the brakes, and also 2. The fact that the apex's of the left-right corners are close together (although further apart than they used to be) and they are 90' corners. As someone who has driven on some circuits but now navigates in rallycars a different angle can be looked at, for a navigator, a single venue, air field i.e Smeatharpe, as you do two laps to one stage and as they can only be varied by a certain amount is not technical from a drivers or a navigators aspect, (although there is still plenty of opportunity to get it so, so wrong!) however a venue such a Caerwent at 11-15 miles a stage, is a nightmare on four wheels, as you dont retrace your steps until 20-30mins later (after being in service) those points that you make a mental note of where you could take a cut are not done solely by the driver but also the navigator who will also have to tell the driver so a different angle of technicality arises. |
||
|
13 Sep 2005, 23:28 (Ref:1407167) | #7 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,479
|
I think that from a drivers point of view, "technical" means that you actually have to think about the nature of your car and the nature of the track and understand how they interact to get a good lap time. Paddock Hill Bend at Brands is a classic "technical" corner. Yes it needs committment, but it needs understanding as well. You can't just chuck it in and collect it up later if you want a decent lap time. Same applies to corners like Clearways, or Coppice and Craner at Donnington, or the whole sequence of Jim Clarke Esses/Barcroft/Sunny in/Sunny out and the Complex at Croft. I'd also say the the first part of that sequence shows that corners don't have to be slow to be technical.
By contrast, there's very little technical about Gerrards at Mallory, the uncrumpled end of Snetterton or indeed most of Pembrey. That doesn't meany they're not fun to drive. But it does mean that you don't have to think too hard... just keep your foot to the floor to the limit of your grip :-) |
||
|
15 Sep 2005, 09:11 (Ref:1408320) | #8 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 4,380
|
Quote:
There's a couple of points, certainly in my car, through Gerrards where you have to be in approximately the right position (particularly the end of the inside kerb, where the camber changes), and you can't just chuck the car in sideways, or you'll run out of room and be slow through it. I tend to think very long, smooth corners are more 'technical' than short 90 degree efforts, because you have to set them up right on entry, and get the correct acceleration point - it's hard to judge the last one particularly at Gerrards, because the apex is a long way from the exit, so you have to wait a while before you can tell if you've applied power too late, or much too early! |
|||
__________________
This planet is mildly noted for its hoopy casinos. |
16 Sep 2005, 16:07 (Ref:1409423) | #9 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,479
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
14 Sep 2005, 08:03 (Ref:1407343) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 871
|
Perhaps 'technical' is when there is more than one way through a corner or series of bends and the whole thing is a bit of a compromise? Personally they are all an adventure for me
|
||
|
14 Sep 2005, 08:12 (Ref:1407355) | #11 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 376
|
for me a technical corner or circuit is the one where the ctual setup of the device you are driving is of grearewst importance whereas driver skill ,and commitment do not help you as much as in a ballsout corner.
So as an example,I´d say the nurburgring Grandprix circuit is quite a technical one,where you need a good setup to do a decent lap time,and very often the driver does not really make a huge difference . On the other hand the Nordschleife where you can have a real good car and setup but may be 30 seconds of the pace because of the driver not knowing the track and its vices. |
||
|
14 Sep 2005, 08:14 (Ref:1407358) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 582
|
Technical is when finesse rewards more than testicle size......
|
||
|
14 Sep 2005, 08:55 (Ref:1407409) | #13 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 128
|
Sorry to use an Aussie example but barbagallo raceway in perth is a compromise in two places. at turn 2-3 you could jump the kerb or not and yield similar lap times. At Kolb corner you could take the traditional race line or hug the inside to lengthen the back straight. This makes it more technical. To me anyway
|
||
__________________
Go Cam and Skaifey "So, do you just go for anything red, Russell?" -M Skaife |
15 Sep 2005, 12:15 (Ref:1408470) | #14 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 114
|
I've always regarded The Complex at Thruxton as being a Technical section. The line through Campbell is as you'd expect (unless your name is Rydell) but you then have to make compromises through Cobb to ensure that you get a perfect exit from Segrave. This, to my mind, is the corner that makes or breaks the rest of your lap, and ultimately is the start of an overtaking move into the Club Chicane.
|
||
__________________
MG Metro #35 - Proud Class A Series Winner CSCC Tin Tops 2006 |
15 Sep 2005, 12:48 (Ref:1408489) | #15 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 108
|
I would agree with both dtype38 & stuart05, technical to me means where the line is not the obvious fastest line or shorts point from A to B, the entry into Clearways is one that springs to mind and the twisty bits at Rockingham too. I prefer the seat of the pants stuff where it is bravery rather than join the dots myself as they are easier to learn and generaly provide pure racing rather than degems.
|
||
|
16 Sep 2005, 19:46 (Ref:1409563) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Sounds pretty technical to me! I also agree that Gerrards is more complex than it first appears but guess it all depands what you are sitting in.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
20 Sep 2005, 09:19 (Ref:1412027) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,623
|
I can only agree with the both of you. Aren't those chicanes horrible. The stupid thing is they usually have more than enough room to spare to build a copy of the original corner, with some more run off.
But no. |
||
__________________
The older I get, the better I used to be ! |
22 Sep 2005, 08:56 (Ref:1413714) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,623
|
Don't misunderstand me as well, dtype. I've nothing against chicanes, some are even quite challenging.
But my point is why put a chicane at Knickerbrook, when they had more than enough room to move the original corner towards the infield? And create more run off by doing this. |
||
__________________
The older I get, the better I used to be ! |
8 Nov 2007, 08:52 (Ref:2062753) | #19 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,513
|
Quote:
I haven't driven Oulton or Combe without chicanes, and don't mind them. Knickerbrook is quite good as you're trying not to let the car run too far at the exit, and I rather like the Esses at Combe (the second chicane is a bit too close to Tower though). A good chicane is a joy to behold - Kirkistown and Knockhill's "Chicane"s, and the 90s version of the Bus Stop. But back on topic - there's two types of circuit (or at least corner): technical and ballsey. Back of Thruxton and old road sections of Spa are ballsey - you can make time by being brave; Anglesey and Rockingham are technical. Best combination of both is probably Croft - ballsey outer section then tiptoe through the new infield. |
|||
|
22 Sep 2005, 10:17 (Ref:1413782) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,623
|
No need.
|
||
__________________
The older I get, the better I used to be ! |
20 Sep 2005, 04:51 (Ref:1411907) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,523
|
Exactly.
With a FWD car, you can make up so much time in Gerrards, because once you're turned in, you can apply power to the point where it's just starting to understeer, and if set up right, maybe with a bit of drift, and you remain nailed all the way out. I've driven around many RWD cars around Gerrards in the past in my old trusty Nova. If technical is about flow, then the old Castle Combe is technical, in that technically, if you had bigger b*lls than some of the others, you'd be faster. I just used to love Old Paddock. Stupid chicanes. Stupid stupid stupid. Rob. |
||
__________________
There is no substitute for cubic inches. Harry Belamonte - 403ci Vauxhall Belmont!! A 700hp wayward shopping trolley on steroids!! |
20 Sep 2005, 08:08 (Ref:1411986) | #22 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Same as Oulton Rob, first one, ok fair enough was a bit quick out the back there and people had died, but then they stick a second in (chicane) and completly ruined it. And don't talk about Russell please.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
20 Sep 2005, 12:18 (Ref:1412144) | #23 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,479
|
Can't completely agree with the above. Not liking chicanes is a bit like not liking racing in the rain... It's a fact of life unless you want to move to the US and drive ovals! Better to learn to do it well and use that as an advantage
|
||
|
20 Sep 2005, 18:20 (Ref:1412450) | #24 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Not saying that Dtype just that I personally liked the circuit better before. But as I said I am sure there is justification, I actually lost a friend of mine, Paul Hawkins back in the 60's at Oulton so proof indeed that something should have been done.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
21 Sep 2005, 08:21 (Ref:1412882) | #25 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,479
|
I've haven't been racing long enough to have driven Oulton, Castle Coombe or Snetterton without chicanes, so I can't really compare. What I was getting at was your obvious dislike of some of them. Personally I don't really go in for the big hero stuff and prefer tricky little complicated bits... technical corners you might say
Incidentally, not even the reduced speeds due to the second chicane at Oulton is a guarantee of safety. A friend came over the crest just after the second one and still managed to get airborne in his GT40... followed very closely by a large impact with the tyre wall. Only the car was hurt fortunately |
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Forum's 2005 "Indy 500" RACE "Pick 'Em" Contest | Tim Northcutt | IRL Indycar Series | 26 | 31 May 2005 08:36 |
Circuit in "Victory by Design"? | Lee Janotta | Motorsport History | 26 | 28 Apr 2003 13:16 |
Mont Tremblant - a circuit worthy of "Spa of North America?" | paul-collins | Formula One | 12 | 24 Sep 2002 02:39 |
Jos "Dead Loss" Verstappen & Enrique "Not Piquet" Bernoldi | I Ate Yoko Ono | Formula One | 16 | 9 Oct 2001 14:44 |