ba-autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Course design and surface was: Re: Larry and: Oakland lives!

To: Craig Boyle <craig_boyle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Course design and surface was: Re: Larry and: Oakland lives!
From: "Darren P. Madams" <darren@madams.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 10:06:56 -0800
Excuse the long rambling... but I just gotta put in my 2 cents.

At 07:23 PM 3/12/00 -0800, Craig Boyle wrote:
>There were comments last week about the technical
>difficulty of the course at 3COM. Would the same folks
>object to Oakland on the same grounds that it is no
>preparation for Nationals? Or is the course design
>more important than the surface?

OK, on the technical difficulty side of the question, I would say 
absolutely that no, it wasn't a good preparation for a nationals type course.

Now, I'm not saying it was a bad course, or bad for the event.  I quite 
enjoyed driving it actually, but I do not feel well prepared for the Pro 
this weekend or the upcoming big events.  Looking back over the video that 
Carl Merritt posted, you can see just how few times you really had to brake 
on that course.  A couple taps after the straight to rotate for the 
lefts.  One medium brake in the middle right hander.  One hard serious 
braking zone at the end of the kink (nice bit of course there, btw).  And 
one stab near the finish.  These death by sweepers courses with no 
definitive apexes may be good because anyone can get through there on any 
sort of line and carry some sort of speed through it, but I don't feel like 
_I'm_ learning anything from it.  Now, it's still a question whether the 
goal of SFRs Solo 2 program is to make me a national champion someday or 
whether it is to provide the most amount of fun to the most number of 
people.  Personally, I think a little of both is very possible.


Now, issue two is the surface and whether we should adjust the course 
design to account for the reduced grip.  And here, Charlie's course does a 
pretty good job.  Some hard tricky braking zones could have been a disaster 
for people overshooting them... not to mention the possibility of tearing 
up the surface.  Obviously, a course that relied on a lot of transient grip 
would never be good at Oakland so that certainly needs to be taken into 
account.


Issue three (I think you're asking) is whether the surface at Oakland is 
worth running on at all, if nationals and other events are going to be held 
on grippier surfaces.  I think any track time is good (especially right 
before the pro) but in general, I don't think you gain a lot of useful 
experience and it certainly won't give an adequate reading of car setup.


Again, no complaints on Charlie's course, or in fact any course as they all 
teach you something.  I just think we're missing out on a couple key 
elements that you see on every nationals type course, and I know that hurts 
me at the big events.

         --Darren

p.s. I'll agree with Don's comment that the surface will get better with 
age and use.  It was certainly absolutely terrible on my first lap out (3rd 
car overall?  I can't remember) but that was mostly due to the dust and 
pebbles.  But it was exactly like driving in the rain.  Once I adapted to 
that it was ok.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>