If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Understeer vs Oversteer
I found this interesting article from a wiki website:
"A car that tends neither to oversteer nor understeer when pushed to the limit is said to have neutral handling. It seems intuitive that race drivers would prefer a slight oversteer condition to rotate the car around a corner, but this isn't usually the case for two reasons. Accelerating early as the car passes the apex of a corner allows it to gain extra speed down the following straight. The driver who accelerates sooner and/or harder has a large advantage. The rear tires need some excess traction to accelerate the car in this critical phase of the corner, while the front tires can devote all their traction to turning. So the car must be set up with a slight understeer or "tight" tendency. Also, an oversteering car tends to be twitchy and ill tempered, making a race car driver more likely to lose control during a long race or when reacting to sudden situations in traffic. Carroll Smith, in his book "Drive to Win", provides a detailed explanation of why a fast race car must have a bit of understeer. Note that this applies only to pavement racing. Dirt racing is a different matter. Even so, some successful race car drivers do prefer a bit of oversteer in their cars, preferring a car which is less sedate and more willing to turn into corners (or inside their opponents). It should be noted that the judgement of a car's handling balance is not an objective one. Driving style is a major factor in the apparent balance of a car. This is why two drivers with identical cars on the same race team often run with rather different balance settings from each other. And both may call the balance of their cars 'neutral'." I guess having oversteer, understeer, or neutral is a user preference and related to how you like to drive. I remember seeing Jeremy on the show "Top Gear" complain once because of a car oversteering too much, but then the manufacturer drove it and told him he wasn't driving it correctly. Regards, Mike. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Understeer vs Oversteer
Yep, I;d agree with the "bit of understeer" theory for all said reasons.
But some tracks/conditions demand a bit of oversteer if you wish to be competitive. I always believe the best setup for a race is the one that spreads the wear most evenly across the tyres (assuming the tyres are properly balanced front to rear - width and compound wise) - one must adjust to be able to drive THAT setup. "Mr T" > wrote in message ... >I found this interesting article from a wiki website: > > "A car that tends neither to oversteer nor understeer when pushed to > the limit is said to have neutral handling. It seems intuitive that > race drivers would prefer a slight oversteer condition to rotate the > car around a corner, but this isn't usually the case for two reasons. > Accelerating early as the car passes the apex of a corner allows it to > gain extra speed down the following straight. The driver who > accelerates sooner and/or harder has a large advantage. The rear tires > need some excess traction to accelerate the car in this critical phase > of the corner, while the front tires can devote all their traction to > turning. So the car must be set up with a slight understeer or "tight" > tendency. Also, an oversteering car tends to be twitchy and ill > tempered, making a race car driver more likely to lose control during > a long race or when reacting to sudden situations in traffic. > > Carroll Smith, in his book "Drive to Win", provides a detailed > explanation of why a fast race car must have a bit of understeer. Note > that this applies only to pavement racing. Dirt racing is a different > matter. > > Even so, some successful race car drivers do prefer a bit of oversteer > in their cars, preferring a car which is less sedate and more willing > to turn into corners (or inside their opponents). It should be noted > that the judgement of a car's handling balance is not an objective > one. Driving style is a major factor in the apparent balance of a car. > This is why two drivers with identical cars on the same race team > often run with rather different balance settings from each other. And > both may call the balance of their cars 'neutral'." > > I guess having oversteer, understeer, or neutral is a user preference > and related to how you like to drive. I remember seeing Jeremy on the > show "Top Gear" complain once because of a car oversteering too much, > but then the manufacturer drove it and told him he wasn't driving it > correctly. > > Regards, > Mike. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Understeer vs Oversteer
"Mr T" > wrote in message
... >I found this interesting article from a wiki website: > > "A car that tends neither to oversteer nor understeer when pushed to > the limit is said to have neutral handling. It seems intuitive that > race drivers would prefer a slight oversteer condition to rotate the > car around a corner, but this isn't usually the case for two reasons. > Accelerating early as the car passes the apex of a corner allows it to > gain extra speed down the following straight. The driver who > accelerates sooner and/or harder has a large advantage. The rear tires > need some excess traction to accelerate the car in this critical phase > of the corner, while the front tires can devote all their traction to > turning. So the car must be set up with a slight understeer or "tight" > tendency. Also, an oversteering car tends to be twitchy and ill > tempered, making a race car driver more likely to lose control during > a long race or when reacting to sudden situations in traffic. > > Carroll Smith, in his book "Drive to Win", provides a detailed > explanation of why a fast race car must have a bit of understeer. Note > that this applies only to pavement racing. Dirt racing is a different > matter. > > Even so, some successful race car drivers do prefer a bit of oversteer > in their cars, preferring a car which is less sedate and more willing > to turn into corners (or inside their opponents). It should be noted > that the judgement of a car's handling balance is not an objective > one. Driving style is a major factor in the apparent balance of a car. > This is why two drivers with identical cars on the same race team > often run with rather different balance settings from each other. And > both may call the balance of their cars 'neutral'." > > I guess having oversteer, understeer, or neutral is a user preference > and related to how you like to drive. I remember seeing Jeremy on the > show "Top Gear" complain once because of a car oversteering too much, > but then the manufacturer drove it and told him he wasn't driving it > correctly. > > Regards, > Mike. Great read... ! I honestly beleive this issue - in the end - is the difference in who has the power -RearWheelBrakeHorsePower ---- And who has the smooth consistency (with the potential of less power) *( in the case of absolute power equals power - none of this applies - that case is SMOOTHER IS FASTER )* My driving sucks.... ok, now it's out there, so anyway.... In a powerful car, you can over come the slowing affects of oversteering with power (spinning and sliding the rear around as needed to point the car in the desired direction) making up for the loss by using the HP to get OUT FAST from the tight over-steered corner when you are limited in power you are at the mercy of smoothness; continuity of speed. In this case understeering is more desireable. Keeping your speed into and through the apex of the corner with understeer will, when done properly, beat any loss of speed through over-steering the car and result in a lead at the next corner. Main reason my driving sucks.... I need enough power to overcome my errors. A smooth driver will beat me with less rear wheel brake horsepower by understeering and consistently managing his speed. An oversteering car tends to lose a lot of speed by 'sliding the rear' or side-slipping to get the car turned at the apex. Food for thought Comments Objections Observations and Critiques Welcome Life is Learning |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Understeer vs Oversteer
"Mr T" > wrote in message
... >I found this interesting article from a wiki website: > > "A car that tends neither to oversteer nor understeer when pushed to > the limit is said to have neutral handling. It seems intuitive that .... > Even so, some successful race car drivers do prefer a bit of oversteer > in their cars, preferring a car which is less sedate and more willing > to turn into corners (or inside their opponents). It should be noted If you ask me, this is the dead give away of the lack of understanding. Have traction circle left over to "turn inside" your opponents is much less a function of over/understeer as, well, having traction circle left over. It isn't helping if one end is washing out before the other reaches limits. (Yeah, I know. It's old news. I'm just now catching up with my inbox.) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Understeer vs Oversteer
MikeWhy wrote:
> If you ask me, this is the dead give away of the lack of understanding. > Have traction circle left over to "turn inside" your opponents is much > less a function of over/understeer as, well, having traction circle left > over. It isn't helping if one end is washing out before the other > reaches limits. It all comes down on how you like to steer the car. Some like to turn in early and then use the throttle to bring the front out to the apex. Others turn later and use the throttle to rotate the car to the apex. The former requires understeer, the later a bit on the oversteer side. Both drivers are using all of the traction available at both ends, it's just one technique needs more traction at the rear, the other in the front. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Understeer vs Oversteer
"Ken MacKay" > wrote in message
news:LR58k.1111$2G6.1062@edtnps83... > MikeWhy wrote: >> If you ask me, this is the dead give away of the lack of understanding. >> Have traction circle left over to "turn inside" your opponents is much >> less a function of over/understeer as, well, having traction circle left >> over. It isn't helping if one end is washing out before the other reaches >> limits. > > It all comes down on how you like to steer the car. Some like to turn in > early and then use the throttle to bring the front out to the apex. Others > turn later and use the throttle to rotate the car to the apex. The former > requires understeer, the later a bit on the oversteer side. Both drivers > are using all of the traction available at both ends, it's just one > technique needs more traction at the rear, the other in the front. Reading it again, maybe he just worded the thought badly. Carrying enough static understeer (not oversteer) might allow him to "turn inside" by carrying more speed to the apex under brakes. Could this be what he means? I think he means simply getting enough turn-in at speed while his opponent plows at that speed. That's just less understeer, not oversteer. Anyway, oversteer and understeer both take from cornering potential, limiting the good end to what the bad end will hold. (I also just hate it when my nephew talks about drifting. He has a different meaning for the word than I do.) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Induced understeer works GTR2 | Jeff Reid | Simulators | 11 | September 30th 06 07:49 AM |
Underpowered PCs cause understeer. | EldredP | Simulators | 5 | October 25th 04 11:57 PM |