L-O-Freakin'-L. I love these forums.cuda6666 wrote:I think we should replace the cones with sturdy trees.
The cones are a point of reference, no more, no less. The real issue with the cones is that they move, and as such, are unreliable. Immovable reference points, like the crack in the pavement at NHMS T6, the lone birch at Tremblant, and the Continental Tire bridge at Mosport, are much more reliable (though I have yet to actually see or use the lone birch). I think any professional racer is likely to have and use many more reference points than the typical weekend track fanatic. Personally, I pick up as many visual cues as I can and sometimes use the cones as a reference point. Often times, the cones are off place by a foot or two, sometimes even more. Every track I have been to have turn-in, apex, and track-out points demarcated with spray-painted dots. The dots are visible when the cones aren't on top of them. All of these locations were identified by the track engineers.
This brings up a good point. If you have a chance, take a ride with an instructor. You will probably be surprised by the things you see on-track. There is an incredible amount of visual information that you can pickup from the passenger seat. Ask any instructor. Our recent Monticello event was my first time there. I learned more about the track from the passenger seat than I did in the driver seat.
There is a big difference between being shown the points and connecting them, and an even bigger difference between knowing the line and driving it.
