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.
|