TBK-Light.com

The optimal racing line should move further away from the inside kerb, giving room for both inside and outside pass. With negative camber the best line would be closer to the inside, making it easier to hog the turn and forcing other guy to go outside majority of the the times and going for a longer distance. With positive camber the speed difference should make cornering more difficult and blocking even more so. That's in theory, though. I'm sure F1 boys can somehow make this upgrade look worse.

In case if someone is wondering how much is one meter in height.

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

Frustrating? You mean agonising. The car seems so slow, so prone to slide to the outside, the corner seems to take much more time than it should to complete, especially long turns like this one (Luffield at Silverstone, I'm looking at you).

It could arguably bring more action when it comes to line choice and side-by-side action, I agree.

Martin Brundle often say's that off-camber corners are easier to make errors on & that teams often refer to them as error generators & that Tilke often uses them because of that. The hope been that drivers will be more prone to making mistakes which will help generate a bit of racing/overtaking if a car is close behind.

But like others have already said, There not really all that fun to watch & I suspect there not all that fun for the drivers either.

off camber corners are stupid - little satisfaction and not helping the racing one little bit

_________________
Follow me on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

Even in racing games I hate them.

so that's why I hate racing at this track on videogames

Abu Dhabi should be used as an example of how not to design a race track

while Ascari racing resort should be a good example

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: everything is a bad taste joke now

Do you guys remember that PS One game, "Rollcage"?



It had a ridiculously off-cambered corner (45 deg) on a suspended track. You had to take it just at the right speed; too low, you slide down and off the track due to lack of "downforce"; too fast, you fly off. It took some tries to figure out.

/ridiculously specific, old and obscure off-topic reference

What if the inside of the corner is flat and the outside becomes more and more banked, therefore creating multiple lines that would be equally fast?

I don't think it works with hairpin corners on road courses. Car without brakes would use the banking as ramp, you know...

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

You could make an uphill gravel trap so that it doesn't become a ramp, but I find the idea curious. Is there any track with such a corner?

they could reprofile the final corner to become like Tarzan, but that was a turn that don't suit heavy downforce F1 cars

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: everything is a bad taste joke now

I was only thinking about T15 at Sepang modified to be what you described. But yeah, maybe the Tarzanbocht at Zandvoort is the closest thing to that, like LucasWheldon said. Except that it doesn't have two differently banked profiles. If it had two significantly different bankings, would it work? I don't think it would, the radius would be too small and the best braking point would still be located in the same spot for the entry. And with F1 levels of downforce, I don't think it would be that easy to out-gun the inside line driver from the outside with pure power and mechanical grip that extra banking would provide.

So thinking it the opposite way. Make hugging the inside corner more difficult with positive camber and diving to the inside gives better reward than diving the outside on highly banked corner.

I don't know, positive camber corners are rare and so are corners with two different negatively banked profiles. It's hard to tell which one is the best way to go, both have their pros and cons. But what I do believe is that T15 is now the most extreme positive camber corner in racing so it's going to be interesting to see how that is going to work.

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

Interested to see how it looks, but the funny thing is that Sepang already has a lot of places where you can overtake. Seems a bit of a waste of time, but we'll see.

If I read it right, it's not about the racing, but more about the monsoon problems on the first place. Let's see if that helps any. But said that, I think this will be a nice corner. Yeah, adverse camber normally looks bad, but this will be THE turn about it. Not just some car driving strangely slow with no apparent reason. Here we can really see the camber. And being sit in-between 2 big straights will really make it one of a kind.

As for progressive banking, I would like to see it on some parts of any new circuit. Surely would be nice to shake things up. But normally would make things like New Hampshire, just one good line on the middle. But cars still can get trough it side-by-side better than a normal turn.

Interesting thoughts I'll have a look at the Tarzanbocht

Tarzan is one of the best corner layouts ever designed. You can run side by side through it and it also offers a decent driving challenge for one driving by themselves.

If I was ever designing a circuit, I'd never hesitate to replicate Tarzan in one way or another.

_________________
Follow me on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

Heh, I wonder if the sort-of-sequel GRIP has similar? http://store.steampowered.com/app/396900/

Some ovals have progressive banking, Homestead has that I think in order to promote side-by-side racing.

It's a very tiny difference though, about one degree between the top and bottom line from memory (they mentioned it in the broadcast of the first IRL race they held there after modifying the track from flat to banked turns). It's very sensitive, overdo it and you end up with the outside line becoming much faster than the inside and thus back to single-file racing.

As others pointed out, this is only practical for large radius turns where you don't need to turn sharply across the whole race track to get the apex, hence why it's more suited to ovals, otherwise drivers would quickly find the fastest length-to-banking ratio and exclusively use it as the racing line.

bring back avus imo

Nah, they'll ruin it with two DRS zones.