Auto Racing Discussion F1, IRL, Champ Car, Nascar, WRC, BTCC, etc. Discuss recent races, results.

McLaren's using a form of traction control

Thread Tools
 
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 12:04 PM
  #31  
Triple-H's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 58,680
Likes: 2
From: West Henrietta UPSTATE NY
Default

Originally Posted by beanseff,Jul 23 2008, 02:51 PM
and if theres a backdoor in the ecu that only mclaren knows about and is exploiting
Oh man, if that were true, the FIA would make them a new backdoor.

Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 12:43 PM
  #32  
Borbor's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,202
Likes: 1
Default

not like that hasn't happened before *cue option 13*
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 01:34 PM
  #33  
samerthehammer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Default

It also makes sense that they could figure this out be4 any other team becuz all ECU's r created by mclarren.

I think this thing will go down the way the mass dampener went.
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 03:24 PM
  #34  
GPMike's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 10,513
Likes: 0
From: USSA
Default

Originally Posted by beanseff,Jul 23 2008, 02:51 PM
and if theres a backdoor in the ecu that only mclaren knows about and is exploiting
I CALLED THIS!!!!!
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 03:28 PM
  #35  
samerthehammer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Default

Ya mike I think I remember you saying something about it back in december.
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 05:40 PM
  #36  
GPMike's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 10,513
Likes: 0
From: USSA
Default

Originally Posted by samerthehammer,Jul 23 2008, 06:28 PM
Ya mike I think I remember you saying something about it back in december.
FIA is so stupid for allowing an actual F1 manufacturer to be the sole supplier of ECUs. They should have stuck with the Microsoft one if for anything at least the public knows there are no conflicts of interest.

F them McCheaters.

I knew something was fishy. I KNEW IT!! I mean come on...how else can you explain McLaren all of sudden leaping ahead the way they did while Ferrari and BMW have seemingly slipped the past 2 races. I'd like to see a 10 spot grid penalty next race for both McCheater cars and a docking of 10 WDC and 10 Manufacturer points.
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 05:51 PM
  #37  
Colin's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,653
Likes: 0
From: Honolulu
Default

Originally Posted by Triple-H,Jul 23 2008, 09:20 AM
Ok, if your premise about it not being TC is all about this word - automatically - then yes, this manual modification of torque is not TC.

From my point of view I was not thinking about, nor do I see the word - automatically - as being a decisive defining key to TC. I think of TC as anything other than the driver's foot that limits wheel spin.
I'd have to agree, that unless the system has a feedback loop the manage the torque reduction it is not TC. Its just a different engine torque map that limits power/torque. I'd imagine that by limiting the power without feedback it is possible to 'over limit' the output thus making the cars slower?
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 08:19 PM
  #38  
Birel186's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Borbor,Jul 23 2008, 02:51 PM
And on the flipside, the driver is just as important in F1 because Alonso is taking the car to where it was no business of being.

Or if you need a history lesson, Senna has done the same in inferior cars in 93 and 94 (but only during qualifying) before he slammed that stupid wall.
that was just like JPM, he could make an inferior car (williams) go on pole. but couldn't maintain that knife edge speed for more than a few laps a.k.a. the race.
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 08:30 PM
  #39  
Birel186's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Penforhire,Jul 23 2008, 03:50 PM
I am curious what advantage this is, as we think it works, versus just short-shifting? Aren't F1 shifts lightning quick?
well what it does is just apply the power smoother, if u short shifted u wouldn't be using any power.

like say u drag race someone. u both get wheel spin and u short shift to second. the other guy stays on it till it stops... continues to redline and shift. When u shifted into second, instead of going from 8k rpm at the end of first gear to rpm to say 5k rpm at the beginning of 2nd gear. You went from 6k rpm where you short shifted to 3k rpm at the beginning of second. Now the other car is 7 car lengths ahead.
Reply
Old Jul 23, 2008 | 08:36 PM
  #40  
Birel186's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Default

the way i see it, is TC knows when your tires are slipping and automatically limits wheel spin, torque, w/e to maximize traction. This second paddle is just like the basic torque and differential knobs on the steering wheel. The difference is that the second paddle is probably a preprogramed torque setting thats less than what full throttle is. So instead of adjusting the know whick would apply this change from now on; the paddle allows him to apply this lesser amount of torque on tap whenever he feels the car has wheel spin. It isn't maximizing the cars torque delivery, its just maybe a slower exit to the corner in ideal circumstances/conditions but better than spinning the tires.



Also i noticed these 4 paddles at the beginning of the season when they show the onboard video of lewis hamilton, looking at his face. I just thought it was a way to say up-shift using his left hand, which would usually be only for downshifting and vice versa... in the case where one hand is off the steering wheel adjusting knobs. Like you all know i know all these steering wheels. Ferrari made their paddles of one pivoting center point, so an up-shift moves the down shift paddle away from the steering wheel... same thing as pushing out the down-shit paddle to do an up-shift. Most steering wheels are an individual paddle w/ an individual spring and microswitch.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:29 AM.