Not sure where I found it at originally but I've had it saved for a while. Figured I'd share.
What's It Like To Drive
We had the opportunity to test drive both Daytonas the day after the IMSA race at Portland in '88. Schroeder finished 3rd behind the Berettas after an "eventful" race, in his words. Showket ran 4th until side lined by a shift selector problem.
An hour long briefing by Showket and Schroeder prepared and entertained us. Showket talked about the cars; Schroeder retold some of his better on-track stories.
"As I spun off in a cloud of smoke, Charlie [Cook, team manager] came on the radio and asked me if I was on fire. I looked through the little gap between the windshield and bodywork and could see flames. I hit the mike button and yelled, 'matter of fact, it is; I'm outta here.' "
When he was serious, Schroeder identified the biggest difference in performance. "My car stops better. Kal's car does nearly 90% of its braking with the front tires alone. The extremely light rear end just can't do that much work."
In terms of cornering, Schroeder feels the reardrive Daytona is better in slower turns. "Since slower corners need a faster rate of direction change, I can rotate the car in toward the apex with trailing brake and balance this slight oversteer with throttle. Like most reardrivers, this helps the car change direction quickly.
"But it also makes the car more nervous," he's quick to add, "with 250 horsepower and so little weight, I have to be careful of wheelspin. Too much throttle generates oversteer, making the car hard to balance cleanly." In slow turns, the frontdriver isn't as nervous, but it's not as quick off the corner, either. "With the larger front tires and more weight on the nose," says Showket, "it turns in very well, perhaps faster than Dorsey's car. But, once you apply power, it eventually understeers. This limits its acceleration off slow turns."
Originally, the team focused a major effort on reducing the understeer. "We tried everything. Switching from a locked to a limitedslip differential helped, but we couldn't get rid of the push," commented Showket. "So we turned our attention to the rear. We've tried to create a slight instability in the back to help point the car in slow corners."
Yet this limitation in slower turns is an asset in the faster stuff. First, the faster the corner, the slower the rate of direction change. Showket feels that, "in this case, the front drive is quicker. In fast turns, less front tire is necessary for cornering and more is available for acceleration, thus less understeer." And once I get on the throttle, there's no chance for oversteer. The car is rock stable.
"The faster you go, the better it feels," he adds.
The other advantage comes in straightline speeds. "Since I don't have to worry about gluing the back end down to help traction coming off the corners, I can run considerably less rear spoiler than Dorsey. That gives my car better trap speeds."
To establish a baseline, we drove Schroeder's No. 07 RWD Daytona first. As he predicted, it was twitchy. The brakes were phenomenal, far exceed ing our trust during the few laps we drove around the 1.8mile PIR road course. The car was fast, but liked to be driven neatly-not a lot of rotation or power-induced oversteer. It re quired a delicate touch and quick hands to drive near its limits. The car turned in well, accepted a good bit of power before the apex, and, unless we got a bit enthusiastic with the throttle, drifted to the track-out cleanly, putting its power down and accelerat ing off the corner strongly.
With a deep breath, we climbed behind the wheel of Showket's No. 00 FWD car. What did we expect? First, we must confess a preference for rear drive. We're not closeminded, but everything we've ever raced, owned, or liked has driven its rear wheels. The few front drivers we've played with at speed haven't left us smiling.
From those experiences, we expected a car that understeered badly and would accelerate well with much steering dialed in. We also anticipated heavy steering, a lack of feel or feedback through the wheel, and with unequal-length driveshafts and 245 hp on tap, plenty of torque steer.
Brother, were we wrong!
By the second lap, we'd clean forgotten which end delivered the power. Not that the car didn't behave some what differently, but it was so incredibly stable that we didn't care.
Regardless of what Showket says, this car stops. Not quite as well as the rear-driver, but close. Better than we anticipated. The non-power-assisted rack and pinion felt somewhat heavier than its sister car's, but no more so than many rear-drive race cars we've driven. We didn't notice any torque steer or kickback over bumps. With power on, its self-centering tendency was gentle and predictable. Under hard throttle from the apex on, the steering provided just the right feel to read the front tires' balance between cornering and acceleration.
Showket was right about one thing. His Daytona was sensitive to the input of our right foot at the turn-in point. It liked power on when turning into fast corners. Suddenly trailing out of the throttle in the corner induced a fair amount of oversteer. But the same scenario occurs with rear drive. The difference is that the oversteer tends to dissipate itself more quickly with front drive. First, there's less momentum, less inertia in the rotation of the rear end. Less mass, as Showket describes it.
And, characteristic of front drive, power can help. Adding a touch of throttle to pull the front end ahead tends to neutralize the oversteer instantly. In that sense, trailing-throttle or trailing-brake oversteer is easier to correct with front drive. With rear drive, precise throttle and steering adjustments, the "nervousness" feeling Schroeder described, are necessary to catch and hold the back end. And dealing with this oversteer delays acceleration.
With the front-drive Daytona, once we rolled into the throttle after turning in, the right foot controlled the arc through the rest of the corner. Adding power increased the radius. A slight breath on the gas tightened the line. And the big Goodyears generated high cornering forces under acceleration, much higher than we expected.
Yes, if we added a lot of power befor the apex, a typical result from relatively low entry speeds, we got understeer with a capital "U." But raising the entry speed and turning in a bit early, leading the apex, let us get on the power sooner and control the radius with the throttle.
Wait a minute. Control the radius with the throttle-that sounds like a good rear-drive characteristic.
It is. Except with front drive, the front tires dictate radius, not the rears. In fact, this car doesn't much care what the rear tires are doing once the throttle is opened. And since the basic characteristic we experienced from the apex on was understeer, we found the front-drive Daytona exceptionally easy to drive quickly. It inspired confidence, never felt like it wanted to leap out from under us, and always went where we pointed it. What more could we ask for?
Our biggest surprise came when we climbed out. After just a handful of laps, we were basically up to speed, much closer than we expected. Why surprised? Because we never drove the car beyond a secure level of comfort. Hey, Showket and crew were generous enough to let us drive the cars, the last thing we wanted to do was fall off the road.
Yes, we were trying, but the car's stability and predictability made it easy to go fast quickly.
The few laps in Schroeder's RWD Daytona confirmed the difference in personalities. As with any high-powered rear-drive car with the potential for exit oversteer, we needed more laps to creep up on the car's limits, taking little bites and making small changes. Avoiding the big mistake was No. 1 on the priority list.
Showket's FWD car was a joy to drive. It told us what and how much to do. If the radius was increasing too much after the apex, common sense said to modulate the throttle a bit. As long as it was headed in the right direction, adding power came naturally and comfortably.
Our conclusions? Outside of the difference in straight-line braking, it's more a question of feel than speed. From the pure performance point of view, tires are the key. As long as the car has enough tire, and race cars generally do, it does well what it's supposed to do. And if the ratio of tire to power is about equal, it doesn't seem to matter much which end drives the car. In slippery conditions, it matters a great deal. On a wet or greasy track, better traction off the corners puts the front-driver in a class of its own.
Which Daytona is faster? At this point in the ongoing development program, the rear-driver is still a bit quicker. But it depends on the racetrack. At Road Atlanta, the two cars were within a tenth or two. At tighter tracks, Mid-Ohio, for example, the gap was larger. But on faster circuits like Watkins Glen and Lime Rock, Showket believes the front-wheel drive may give him an edge.
Which is better? Take your pick. Just remember to reprogram the driver to adapt his driving techniques to meet the car's requirements.
Given a choice, which car would we race? How 'bout we flip a coin, Kal?
-P.B.
