Traction Control & Racing

[Scott Knight]

Frederic,

You wrote:
> Traction control by the OEMs (Caddy, Lexus, BMW, Nissan) etc are all
> designed to resolve two issues - bad drivers screwing up, and good
> drivers screwing up :)  And the common factor is... yes, you got it!
> "Screwing up".  This "safety device" gets the OEM's kudo's, marketing
> "brag rights", and more profit.  And, it makes the government happy, and
> lowers our car insurance 12 bucks a month, so its a win, win, win
> situation, right?  :)

Ah, but aren't these the same people that make the ABS systems the way
they are?  I have driven OE traction control cars and they are good for
nothing better than my wife not looping the car in the rain or snow. 
The idea does fascinate me from an ultimate performance standpoint
however.  I like their idea, just not their implementation.

The ABS systems are no different.  They are 'tuned' (can I use that word
here?) for the masses and not for performance.  Many many times, I see a
racecar with one tire locked up no matter how good the driver.  IMO,
many good drivers could benefit from some kind of ABS system that was
predictable and had as it's only mission to keep that one tire from
sliding.  Racers are good enough to keep from mashing the brakes in a
panic, so their most typical problem is of flatspotting one tire on a
particular situation where a good ABS system would keep it rolling.

> What traction control is all about is reducing the power to the wheels,
> or specific wheel, when the tire's adhesion ability is exceeded.  

My point exactly.  Hoping I can come up with a scheme that is 'better
than the human'.  May not be possible, but will be fun to play with
regardless.
 
> The best form of traction control, is driver experience.

Well, that is where we differ slightly on our philosophy.  The one
rhetorical question here is: why then to the supposedly best drivers in
the world (F1) need to have an explicit ban on traction control? 
Because it is unsafe, or is it because it could give an unfair
advantage?

I have a lot of driving experience with very fast cars.  Street raced
for quite a while and do understand the value of knowing the car's
limits.  The only problem is you can never ever predict what the
'racing' surface will be like.  Having 750+ horsepower available with
10" tires makes for a very throttle controlled ride.  It also makes for
a slower tun than if I could, say, reliably dial in 15% tire slip and
concentrate on keeping it between the ditches.  Sorry for the non-PC
example for those of you that don't condone street racing.  Just
consider the case where you drive wide open all by yourself for the hell
of it.

Even in drag racing, they have means of controlling the amount of power
put down at any given time.  Clutch timers, progressive nitrous systems,
bypass valves, etc.  The difference there is that they can usually rely
on some minimal amount of track preparation, and that during a run, the
car will have a given amount of bite at any place on the track.  Set
timers work pretty well in these cases to get them through 95% of the
traction problems.  IMO, John Force is somewhat of a god, but he also
has more money available than probably any other team on the circuit,
and probably more than some multiple teams.  Austin is his traction
control system <G>.  John is a god because he has the unique ability to
most often deal with that remaining 5% that Austin can't account for. 
Imagine for a minute what fuel racing would be like if they took away
the current clutch/timer setup.  Those guys would all be sitting on the
starting line with lifted blowers of liquefied tires.

> think parallel parking should be removed from drivers ed courses, and
> all potential drivers should be forced to slalom a camaro through cones
> sitting in 3" deep of water for 20 laps.  Nothing ever beats

Hehe, here I have to agree with you wholeheartedly.  I raced for about 4
years before I took driver's ed.  Almost failed because I couldn't break
the old left foot braking habit.  Interestingly, they were more
concerned that we could navigate a parking lot than the highway.

> The most common form of traction enhancement in racing is two things -
> more tire - and more downforce.  The problem for a street car, is the
> DOT limits the tires we can use from optimum, roads are not flat, and
> under 100 MPH, there is not enough downforce to make a 1800lb 600HP race
> car make 315/35R17's stick to the road effectively, experienced driver
> or not.

Exactly my point.  

> Anyway, instead of ranting on and on, I think my thoughts are clear -
> driver experience is the best traction control there is.  Join the SCCA
> and do weekend slolams every saturday for a year, and take the same car
> to a 1/4 mile on Sunday, and practice, practice, practice.  The better
> you know your car and its limitations as its configured, the better off
> you will be, every time.

Well, I guess I have both of these covered.  Drag raced and street raced
for 15 years and currently SOLO2 every chance I get, though it is with
my Impala SS...an interesting study in traction itself <VBG>.

Thanks for your views.  I agree with a lot of them, but still want
traction control.  Just not the OE system.
-- 
Scott Knight  mailto:sknight at mich.com
http://www.mich.com/~sknight IRC:SS396man
'95 Black Impala SS
'94 Ducati 900SS CR