Grrr. Yet more s2ki.com theory

Well im only going from my own experiences having tried both, but make of it what you will. For me trackdays are a fun hobby and i still come home with a smile on my face Try it you may like it.

 

I would say no.
Having fettled my car to what I believe to offer the best cornering in my budget and that suits my style.
(<2k and experienced amateur)
There are gains but the law of diminishing returns always applies in any course of modification.
E.g. another £2k of suspension mods above what I have done really can't give much more.
You are always constrained by power to weight.
I find I am flat out so much more now, and the car so stable that only a power upgrade is the next on the list.

And remember how long straights are compared to corners.
Ten MPH over a 1/4mile at Spa will never be reigned in by the following car cornering 10mph faster on the next bend unfortunately.

 

power is everything.

 

Does that make sense?

If the "Cornering" car is 10mph quicker round the corner, then at the end of the straight, the two will be travelling at the same speed, as the "Power" car will have made up the difference. It depends on the length of the straight of course, the longer it is, the better things will be for the P car.

I remember very well at Anglesey, I was reeling in Graham's Caterham along the "straight" and then he disappeared through the corners. I suppose it's related to Jonny's "Turbo Nutter Barge" syndrome.

Jenson Button's "cornering" Brawn did rather well against Lewis Hamilton's "Power" Mclaren last year.

 

Yes it makes sense, I'll try to explain my logic

Because the TIME spent in the corner by travelling 10mph faster (overestimate- more like 5mph or less) may save a second or so.

But the TIME LOST on the straight to a more powerful car is likely several seconds due to the time spent on that straight.

The faster car can make up that one second after corner exit and open a large gap of say three seconds on the straight.

Even if the less powerful car then reels in another second on the next bend, its still two seconds off the pace of the more powerful car now.



Which is why braking zone gains are small (short), corner exit speeds matter (onto a long straight) and cornering lines matter most - all of the time

 

But the exit speed of the C car is 10mph higher, meaning the P car is playing catch-up at the beginning of the straight, and only begins to make ground once speeds are equalised, which is some way down the straight.

EDIT: I have some data which I used for comparison purposes for an E39 M5, the power car, and an S2000, the cornering car in this example. We'll ignore the actual cornering ability of these cars and concentrate on the performance difference.

Lets say the P car can take a corner at 40km/h, and the C car can take it at 50km/h, not too unrealistic.

After 10 seconds, the P car will have covered 303m. And the C car will have covered 293m, so a win for the P car here, the P car being a lot more powerful (400PS)than the C car with 240PS.

Essentially, the answer is, "it depends". If the power (to weight) differential is over a certain level, and/or if the straight is long enough, the P car will be faster, but if the straights are shorter and the power to weight differential is below a certain threshold, then the C car will win.

It would help explain why I was faster round a short handling track today than a Morgan Aero 8, 996 C4, Audi S4 etc...On a longer track, they'd have mullered me.

 

Now that depends on the acceleration rate - power to weight wins here.

If you were in your S2000, and I was in a 400bhp Evo.
Would I not pass you and put two seconds between us at say, Kemmel (Spa)or
Folly (Coombe)?

PS 10mph is unlikely amongst road cars, an over exaggeration.
In an ideal line with two road cars I expect the delta is only a few mph.

 

Over 0.25 miles :-

If your average speed was 80mph then it takes 11.25 seconds
If your average speed was 100, its 9.0 seconds to do that 1/4 mile.

 

See my edit above, and here's a graph to illustrate:



It takes 6.7 seconds for the M5 to have covered the same distance as the S2000.

A charged S2000 with maybe 300PS would take even longer to make up that difference. I expect that on most tracks, the distances made up through the twisty bits exceed those made up on the straights. Last year's Spa F1 race was a great example. The Force India got its pole position because it was the quickest car round the twisty section from Les Combes to Stavelot.

The Ferrari won because it was quicker (thanks to KERS) from La Source to Les Combes, and being in front, it messed up the FI's advantage through the twisty section.

 

LOL.

Is that a 1985 model M5 in your graph?

Take one E39 - its about 4.5 to 60mph.
Somewhat quicker than any S2000.
So I would question that graph data IMO.