G force during braking (F1)
03-11-2006, 07:46 AM
#1
Safety Car
Thread Starter
G force during braking (F1)
So I'm watching the qualifing in Bahrain. Coming into turn one the Gforce on braking into turn one is hitting 5 g's Wow.
So any one have an idea just how many G's we might see in a vette?
I'm sure no where near that. But any one know just what our cars are capable of?
So any one have an idea just how many G's we might see in a vette?
I'm sure no where near that. But any one know just what our cars are capable of?
03-11-2006, 11:14 AM
#4
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2003
Location: Raleigh / Rolesville NC
Posts: 43,084
Likes: 0
Received 24 Likes
on
24 Posts
Originally Posted by GTB/ZR-1
And w/ race pads & big, front race tires--I'd bet it approches 1.5-1.7g peak 
When you go into a high speed braking zone and you brake so hard that your ears pop.
that is just over 1 G. So I would agree 1.5-1.7 Gs
03-11-2006, 01:44 PM
#5
Safety Car
5-6 gs empties your lacrimal/tear glands onto your shield. I think that's amazing!
And your pumpkin weighs 150+ pounds. Autoracing isn't a sport.
And your pumpkin weighs 150+ pounds. Autoracing isn't a sport.
03-11-2006, 01:48 PM
#6
Pro
Member Since: Dec 2002
Location: Fort Lauderdale FL
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well a balanced car at peak cornering is *in theory* getting everything it can out of the tires, so if it can 1.0g cornering, then it stands to reason it would also pull 1.0g braking. However when you consider that wheelbase is longer than track (less weight transfer), the air is helping you slow down, and the contact patches are more stable under longitudinal loads....then it makes sense that your braking force would exceed your cornering force by some margin.
03-11-2006, 04:49 PM
#7
Le Mans Master
Originally Posted by Bink
5-6 gs empties your lacrimal/tear glands onto your shield.
What other modes of transportation approach or exceed the dynamic
performance of an F1 car on all axis? I expect that high-performance
aircraft are on the list but I'm not sure about their deceleration figures.
.
03-11-2006, 05:15 PM
#8
Instructor
Member Since: Jan 2005
Location: Portland Oregon
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well deceleration is negative acceleration, it's simply giving dierction to... nevermind....
Fighter planes can pull up to around 10 G's. However I believe the limiting factor is really the dude in the pilot seat, drone planes would be capable of much more. As it is the pilots have to wear G suits that put pressure on their body to keep the blood in their brain so they dont pass out and even still you can only sustain those high G's for a few seconds.
Which begs the question whell will F-1 adopt G-suits? I belive the reason they adopted the hanford device (is that what it was caled) was to slow the champ cars down on the super speedways because they where pulling I belive 10gs (becasue of the banking most of the force is downward not lateral) for sustained periods through the long corners lap after lap and many of the drivers were getting dizzy, which at 240mph is bad.
Fighter planes can pull up to around 10 G's. However I believe the limiting factor is really the dude in the pilot seat, drone planes would be capable of much more. As it is the pilots have to wear G suits that put pressure on their body to keep the blood in their brain so they dont pass out and even still you can only sustain those high G's for a few seconds.
Which begs the question whell will F-1 adopt G-suits? I belive the reason they adopted the hanford device (is that what it was caled) was to slow the champ cars down on the super speedways because they where pulling I belive 10gs (becasue of the banking most of the force is downward not lateral) for sustained periods through the long corners lap after lap and many of the drivers were getting dizzy, which at 240mph is bad.
03-11-2006, 05:34 PM
#9
Pro
Member Since: Dec 2002
Location: Fort Lauderdale FL
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by psycho-mullet
Well deceleration is negative acceleration, it's simply giving dierction to... nevermind....
Fighter planes can pull up to around 10 G's. However I believe the limiting factor is really the dude in the pilot seat, drone planes would be capable of much more. As it is the pilots have to wear G suits that put pressure on their body to keep the blood in their brain so they dont pass out and even still you can only sustain those high G's for a few seconds.
Which begs the question whell will F-1 adopt G-suits? I belive the reason they adopted the hanford device (is that what it was caled) was to slow the champ cars down on the super speedways because they where pulling I belive 10gs (becasue of the banking most of the force is downward not lateral) for sustained periods through the long corners lap after lap and many of the drivers were getting dizzy, which at 240mph is bad.
Fighter planes can pull up to around 10 G's. However I believe the limiting factor is really the dude in the pilot seat, drone planes would be capable of much more. As it is the pilots have to wear G suits that put pressure on their body to keep the blood in their brain so they dont pass out and even still you can only sustain those high G's for a few seconds.
Which begs the question whell will F-1 adopt G-suits? I belive the reason they adopted the hanford device (is that what it was caled) was to slow the champ cars down on the super speedways because they where pulling I belive 10gs (becasue of the banking most of the force is downward not lateral) for sustained periods through the long corners lap after lap and many of the drivers were getting dizzy, which at 240mph is bad.
03-11-2006, 05:35 PM
#10
Le Mans Master
On Grand Turismo I pull a bunch of G's................
....then I crash!
....then I crash!
03-11-2006, 06:18 PM
#12
Drifting
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 1,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Per a Castrol Motor Oil website: 
"Hanging in their safety harnesses, drivers are subjected to deceleration forces of 5g under maximum braking and up to 4.5g in cornering forces – equating to a load of 35kg being exerted on the driver’s neck muscles."
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:...s&ct=clnk&cd=2
"Hanging in their safety harnesses, drivers are subjected to deceleration forces of 5g under maximum braking and up to 4.5g in cornering forces – equating to a load of 35kg being exerted on the driver’s neck muscles."
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:...s&ct=clnk&cd=2
03-11-2006, 07:35 PM
#14
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Jul 2004
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new ZO6 stops from 60mph in around 108 feet. This equates to 1.12 g. Now if it had very sticky tires AND a lot of downforce/drag I could see that figure go up some. For most of us our cars are capable of a little over 1g. Because of their high drag numbers F1 cars experience over 2g of decell from top speed just by lifting . 
03-11-2006, 08:29 PM
#15
Pro
Member Since: Feb 2002
Location: Virginia Beach VA
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last weekend I ran a NCCC AutoX at Southern National Speedway in Kenly NC. My 2000 FRC, on Kumho 710s - Hawk HT10s - and NAPA rotors - As per my Gtech RR pulled 1.2G on the brakes going into turn 1. I'll bet it could pull higher if I was trying to hit bigger numbers.
03-11-2006, 08:30 PM
#16
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by bpirate
The new ZO6 stops from 60mph in around 108 feet. This equates to 1.12 g. Now if it had very sticky tires AND a lot of downforce/drag I could see that figure go up some. For most of us our cars are capable of a little over 1g. Because of their high drag numbers F1 cars experience over 2g of decell from top speed just by lifting .
I guess none of us has actually done this with a Gmeter. I have one but never used it on the track. I have seen 1.1G on the street in my C4
Guess I'll have to set it up & see just how much it is.
I know My Z stops much quicker than my old car. (stock)
03-11-2006, 09:16 PM
#17
Instructor
Member Since: Jan 2005
Location: Portland Oregon
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TGrits10
However they were never close to 10 G's. In practice at Texas Motor Speedway they were pulling 3+ G's and getting dizzy drivers so they cancelled the race, I think that's the incident you're referring to.
03-11-2006, 09:16 PM
#18
Racer
Originally Posted by TGrits10
especially in places like the banking at Indy.
As to other forms of self abuse, I remember seeing a documentary on the guy who used to pilot an F-16 in airshow routines. He was experiencing 5 to 8 g's almost continuously for a 25 minute show.
03-11-2006, 10:22 PM
#19
Safety Car
Member Since: Nov 1999
Location: S.E. WI.
Posts: 4,243
Received 69 Likes
on
50 Posts
St. Jude Donor '08-'09-'10
Originally Posted by TGrits10
Yeah the Hanford Device was/is kind of a double-whammy. The added drag slowed the cars down some (safety), and the loss of downforce forced the cars to slow down a bit for the corners (more safety). However they were never close to 10 G's. In practice at Texas Motor Speedway they were pulling 3+ G's and getting dizzy drivers so they cancelled the race, I think that's the incident you're referring to. I wish I could remember what kind of G's the F1 cars pull in cornering, especially in places like the banking at Indy.
The only option to run @ Texas Motor Speedway was to slow the cars down.
