Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by gorgias1976, Sep 7, 2012.
Dialog taken from the movie "Grand Prix"
Yup so crazy in real life
Yes. Love that movie.
I love "Brianza" too but I was a bit disappointed when I easily got trough the first banking with full throttle at first try It's too easy!
Love that movie too... going to watch it again real soon.
Wise words indeed.
I agree Hedlund... I too thought it would much more of a challenge on the banking but it`s not as hard as I thought it was going to be.
Maybe that`ll change in the future?
I seem to be able to pass underneath on the flat part of the track with no loss of traction or control. This seems wrong. Watching Nascar at Daytona some years ago several cars lost it in similar moves. (I mention this only to help out with the development of this sim which i like spend time with daily.) I agree the banking seems too easy(never been on one.)
banked tracks were made so the banking compensated for the centrifugal forces so you could go through them easilly flat out.
Monza banks were notorious for their hard surface and certainly I see everything blurred in there, cannot focus at all.
Going flat in them sure is easy but racing others Im not so sure its easy.
I feel the opposite, I think they are modelled close to perfection here.
This is my favorite quote from Le Mans --> "Racing is life - Everything else is just waiting"
I think so.
In a simulator you don't get the accelerations, centrifugal forces, bumps....and what's more, the real fear of dying if you make the slightest mistake.
Yo could climb in a real F1 simulator and take Eau Rouge completely flat out without a problem the very first time. But then, get in a real F1 car and I'm sure your right foot will always lift aproaching there.
You can simulate the banking by getting a friend of yours to give the back of your chair a big whack with a baseball bat a few times each banking. Should pull up about as sore as the drivers did the next day after the Monza weekend after a couple hundred smacks of the bat.
If you crash just let them absolutely beat the %^&% out of you to get a true simulation of the crash and maybe even get them to set fire to your chair this should bring a bit of realism to it. Im sure you'd be pretty careful about crashing if you knew you'd get the full physical treatment.
Heck, just let your friend lift you up and throw you across the room, that should give you a little idea of how badly they got beat up back then
It *should* depend on the car. The Brabham is spectacularly light. I have way more trouble in the EVE or Spark cars, and there were much heavier real cars in '66, too.
Yeh that`s a good point, I`ve usually driven it in the BT20 so maybe I`ll have to try a bit more with the Eve`s etc.
First of all, Grand Prix is just absolutely AMAZING. One of the greatest films ever made. I picked up both this and Le Mans on blu-ray recently
Second, although I haven't driven the banking on "Brianza" since it was first released, I had a semi-difficult time keeping the car on the track and I had to adjust my FFB because I was getting rattling on the actual road for the first time--it's VERY bumpy. I drive the EVE and it loves to dance around, which is pretty consistent with what they say in Grand Prix.
I definitely think it's realistic that you can "easily" go flat-out. The reason being that the banking is ridiculously steep. Maybe Tim or somebody can chime in on what accurate info they modeled the track after, but I've seen internet estimates that the banking was anywhere between 36º and 45º.
That's pretty nuts when you consider Talladega--the steepest superspeedway in the United States--has 33º banking and pretty much anything can go flat-out around there. Rusty Wallace drove a NASCAR without a restrictor plate and hit 228mph with a 221mph lap average--they normally "only" hit 205 or so on the non-restrictor plate tracks (e.g. Atlanta).
You throw another 5-10º of banking in there and yeah, I can easily see how 60's F1 cars could sustain 180mph through a long turn like that. Just as a point of comparison, Mario Andretti took pole in the 1966 Indy 500 (in a more powerful Indycar) at 165.89 MPH. I just read a book ("The Indy 500: Thirty Days in May") which claims they were doing nearly 215 down the straight by 1970, when the pole speed was 170.22...
Check this then
not a film, but a small jewel with tons of hype.
Just go there in Google Earth, check the many photos on the banks (its still there!! though in bad shape) and youll agree that ISI modelled it well.
Yeah, Rendezvous is spectacular. I've never been able to justify buying the DVD though; it's a poor transfer (non-anamorphic) and there are no special features. It's only 9 minutes and costs as much as something from the Criterion Collection. So I just hit up Youtube when I want to indulge
I've seen hundreds of photos but it's impossible to know the exact degree of the banking from just photos. It's definitely steeper than Talladega, which is the steepest banking I've personally stood on...it definitely looks to be near 45º to me, but I'd be interested in an exact measurement.
The other thing is, sometimes the banking looks curved/progressive, as opposed to straight/linear.
It is curved banking, not sure of exact angle though.
I used the Brabham only up till your post and just tried the Spark...I am now officially dead ten times over, not one minor shunt every crash a killer. How those guys did it for real is mind boggling.
The steepest angle is 38 degrees.
Just to clarify the wise words - Grand Prix is a fictional film and the banking wasn't used for F1 cars in 1966. The last time it was used for an F1 race was 1961.
FWIW Bob Bondurant ran a Daytona Coupe flat out on the banking in 1965 - a bit faster than a 66 F1 car, twice as heavy and with a much less sophisticated suspension (though more ground clearance).
Nice info, thanks.
Yes, Grand Prix did have inaccuraces, but in the end Im glad they did it, made the bankings known to lots, Im among them.
Separate names with a comma.