[BTCC] BTCC Rounds 22/23/24 Rockingham 2017

[swooshiain]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Excuse my ignorance - one race or one weekend (3 races)?

One race.

[Akrapovic]

Odd one, a partial weekend ban. But it works, since it puts him at the back for race 2 as well. Cheers.

[luckn002]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Odd one, a partial weekend ban. But it works, since it puts him at the back for race 2 as well. Cheers.

Shame, he was going really well in the MG around Rockingham and probably would've been up there too at Silverstone. Taylor-Smith was nowhere though.

But at least it shows the BTCC are getting serious about driving standards now that bans are starting to be enforced. Hopefully it'll have a knock on effect on the other drivers and they'll calm down a little bit.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

oh please that's why the meeting at end of season are for, nothing is ever truly set in stone

Subaru will leave the BTCC sooner or later anyway, that's how things work out


if even Mat Jackson who is not in the championship fight laments this aspects it can become dangerous to protect interests of ONE team versus the interest of the entire other field specially with TCR looming at the door

When are Honda leaving?

So if the rules protect ONE team, then there is no longer a problem with BMW RWD?

What should TOCA deal with - RWD, boost or CoG?

[Alfaholic]

Originally Posted by Jon411

...which surely suggests that the speed is coming from how the car is handling in the corners so if anything is the Centre of gravity where the car is getting it's advantage?

Wasn't this was partially negated at the start of the year by TOCA adding weight to the bulkhead(?) of the Subarus to raise the CoG. There was a lot of discussion about it on here.

[pimmy]

While BOP systems create close racing, they also breed entitlement. I'd rather see the whole thing scrapped and have the best teams win.

[MagicBoy]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Then let Neal sail off into the distance and then turn in later. Don't drive into the side of a car that's clearly about to have an off.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

As for Subaru having an unfair advantage, I'd agree ... however it's mostly Sutton. He's been outdriving the car all season.

[Sodemo]

I don't think anyone can beat Sutton now, it's going to take a non finish for Turks to have any chance.

[Craner Curves]

I wouldn't mind Sutton winning, but I can't get past the thought of Plato's smug face when "his project" wins.....

I can see the Subaru struggling a bit at Silverstone. If you think about the revival in form they've had, it's been at tracks with slow corners or hairpins. Oulton, Croft, Snett, Knockhill and Rockingham. Silverstone is point and squirt. I expect Toyotas, VWs, MGs and anything else that's slippery with a TOCA engine to excel. It should be damage limitation for the Subarus and BMWs.

[S griffin]

What a drive through the field in the second race from Tingram. And not a scratch on his car, unlike Cook. First he punted Cole out of the way, then Jackson, while the incident with Neal looked like the Smith/Plato incident at Knockhill.

Anyway couple of facts, not only have 33 drivers scored, but 29 of them would have under the old system. And for the first time since 2005 Plato will not be in the final round title fight, as I predicted

And I agree with Pimmy, maybe it's about time BOP was scrapped, after all we have success ballast to keep it close

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

And I agree with Pimmy, maybe it's about time BOP was scrapped, after all we have success ballast to keep it close

I agree that BoP should be dropped, however the ballast does need to be capable of affecting cars enough to make a difference.

In order to address the situation, perhaps all cars should be assessed to provide a similar height of CoG, then make the ballast as high as 150kgs?

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I agree that BoP should be dropped, however the ballast does need to be capable of affecting cars enough to make a difference.

In order to address the situation, perhaps all cars should be assessed to provide a similar height of CoG, then make the ballast as high as 150kgs?

The cars are already wallowy and clumsy looking in the corners, I don't personally want to see that increased with extra weight. Personally I'd rather the weight penalties are scrapped, then give the FWD cars a 30kg weight break where they can lose 30 kilos from their cars.

[S griffin]

So I take Cook's 4th strike was him taking out Jelley? It's funny how we felt sorry for him after Flash took him out at Oulton, now he's the one doing the dirty driving

[thlbtcc]

Can't help but think the day would have been very different if Ingram had started race 1....

The engine boost and RWD debate around here seems to conveniently ignore that Sutton is a star. It's taking away from what he has achieved. Made a mockery of his team mates and driven superbly.

[KA]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

they could be forced to use all an inline 4 cylinders and be done with it

Maybe TOCA should just force everyone to run a Honda Civic for next year.....

If TD are suffering so much on the turbo boost and straight-line speed front, then they've got a pretty easy way out- Looking at those speed trap figures posted a few pages back, the Eurotech Hondas using the TOCA engine don't seem to have the same trouble...

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

The cars are already wallowy and clumsy looking in the corners, I don't personally want to see that increased with extra weight. Personally I'd rather the weight penalties are scrapped, then give the FWD cars a 30kg weight break where they can lose 30 kilos from their cars.

Before applying that, the overall base weight could be brought down by 100kgs or more. I feel that if the car+maximum ballast was the same as current base weight, the effect of ballast would be high and the majority of the pack would be lighter than now.

[pimmy]

Originally Posted by thlbtcc

The engine boost and RWD debate around here seems to conveniently ignore that Sutton is a star. It's taking away from what he has achieved. Made a mockery of his team mates and driven superbly.

Exactly. Over the course of the year Sutton has scored 80 more points than his three team mates COMBINED. Even if you only count from Snetterton onwards (when all of the Subarus became competitive), Sutton has still been the highest scorer on the team to the tune of 48 points. Adding BMW into the equation, Sutton has only scored 12 more points than Turkington over the course of 24 races, so he hasn't exactly been blowing everyone out of the water. And let's not forget that Shedden and Ingram, in FWD cars, have done most of the points leading this year.

Regarding RWD, let's look at some facts:

- At Rockingham, the top 27 cars qualified within 1 second. This has never happened before, not even at Brands Indy or Knockhill. Looking at this, the BOP has been a success, with so many cars being covered by a small margin.

- Within the top 27 cars, the 7 RWD cars covered positions 1-20. If they were that dominant, they'd all be at the front. The lowest RWD qualifier was also NOT the heaviest, meaning that the result was not decided by ballast.

- As we know that RWD cars have no advantage in outright pace, then the obvious and logical reason for them achieving their results is that they have better balance and more even tyre wear across the course of a race.

- Even knowing this, we can look at how each race was led yesterday:

-- In race 1, Cole's lead only exceeded 1 second consistently in the second half of the race. Even Sutton, as excellent as he is, struggled to pass Goff in a FWD car, only managing to do so on the last lap, even though he spent the entire race (bar one lap) less than a second behind.

-- In race 2, Sutton led most of the race by around 3 seconds, aided by Cole carrying and amount of ballast that he'd had no experience with (he eventually finished mid-field), as well as a fierce battle for 2nd-back where the competitors were slowing themselves down.

-- In race 3, Jordan lucked into pole with the reverse grid draw. He led the entire race, but his lead didn't exceed 1 second until lap 11. He did get a good restart after the safety car though, which allowed him to pull away a bit in the last couple of laps.

So looking at this, do RWD cars have a great or unfair advantage? No. They're just better, like 4WD was better than 2WD and Diesel was better than Petrol. There's a reason why single seaters, GTs and Prototypes are RWD. It's that RWD is better at what it does than FWD is. You can't change the laws of physics.

[Akrapovic]

Sutton is an absolute star. Has the ability to become one of the legends of the sport if he keeps going that way. But that doesn't mean everything was just fine does it. We're using the Rockingham mixed grids as a good example of a good BoP, but when it was pointed out that everybody run in team formation at Knockhill and therefore it was a bad BoP, it was shouted down with "but it's a RWD track!!". You can't have it both ways.

Similarly, on this very forum we were told that Knockhill was a RWD track and it'd be different at Rockingham. But the winners were the same, and even with full ballast the Subaru was unstoppable. The only race they can't win is a reverse grid with full ballast. So the argument conveniently changes to "Well Rockingham is more of an equal track, not FWD". That's a bit of moving goal posts, right?

So looking at this, do RWD cars have a great or unfair advantage? No. They're just better, like 4WD was better than 2WD and Diesel was better than Petrol. There's a reason why single seaters, GTs and Prototypes are RWD. It's that RWD is better at what it does than FWD is. You can't change the laws of physics.

Right, but this is the problem. BTCC is a BoP Series. So you cannot say RWD should have an advantage because it's better, because that's what the BoP is meant to negate. I have no problem what-so-ever with a performance based series which has the best car win. I have absolutely no issue with that and would love to see it. But that isn't what BTCC is, it isn't what they are claiming to be. So if we're going down the route of the best car should win, there's going to be some very unhappy people here when they unstrangle the Honda and Team Dynamics throw money at everything, because that's what the BoP is trying to stop.

You either run a BoP Series, or you run a performance based series. But if you're running a BoP based series, you should expect people to start questioning things when one car wins 4 out of 6 races, and does so on full ballast. I actually want Sutton to win the championship because it'd be a huge breath of fresh air, upsetting the established teams (although I'd like Ingram to be second, but that ship has sailed unfortunately), but I don't want him to win through poorly balanced cars because it devalues the championship. He has the ability to earn the championship and doesn't need this sort of BoP mess.

If it's a BoP series then something has gone wrong. If it's meant to be the best car wins, then we shouldn't be balancing the cars anyway. Cake, eat it, etc.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Similarly, on this very forum we were told that Knockhill was a RWD track and it'd be different at Rockingham. But the winners were the same, and even with full ballast the Subaru was unstoppable. The only race they can't win is a reverse grid with full ballast. So the argument conveniently changes to "Well Rockingham is more of an equal track, not FWD". That's a bit of moving goal posts, right?

Where was it claimed that Rockingham was a FWD track?

Things were more equal, just that the FWD cars messed up.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by thlbtcc

Now on to Rockingham where FWD will be good in qualifying, RWD strong towards the end of the race and therefore interesting battles.

Originally Posted by sceptic

Except we've just come off a run of three circuits that favour rear wheel drive cars. The next three circuits will suit front wheel drive cars: Hondas in particular at Rockingham, MGs and Toyotas at Silverstone.

FWD good in qualifying...RWD car on pole? The RWD were certainly strong towards the end of the race. And the start...and qualifying.

Would also like to point out that at Knockhill it was pretty obvious that Newsham was down on power. I said that, got told I was wrong and got some snarky comments about it. And then the speed traps are posted and Newsham appears to be towing a parachute. How about those apples?

Why is it when it comes to BTCC, people are unable to look at things in an unbiased way? I'm not taking the porsche route of deciding all RWD cars are the devil and should be banned. But just because I want Sutton to win the title, it doesn't mean I'm blind to the issues we have here. When RWD cars are winning 5 out of 6 races, one meeting they run in team formation, and the Subarus are unbeatable with full ballast, something is wrong somewhere.

I don't think RWD cars should be banned. I personally want to see a performance category where the best car wins. But BTCC is not a performance category and chooses to balance the cars, and I accept the reasons for doing so. (But if you balance cars, you lose the right to say "the best car should win", because there's no longer a best car). However it is pretty obvious that currently they are not balanced and I'm not going to let me supporting Sutton get in the way of that. The guys a superstar of the future, but things just aren't correct right now. BTCC isn't unique in getting a BoP wrong (SRO ballsed up it royally in 2016!), but it is unique that people seem to pretend it isn't wrong, and keep talking about performance, as if balancing isn't happening.

[Sodemo]

Any time you have a BOP based system you will get whinging.

I personally think teams should all start with the same weight of car (if they are good enough to get down to the base weight) and have all the engines dyno'd so that they are all producing the same power, then its down to the teams to develop the chassis (within reason and limits).

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Why is it when it comes to BTCC, people are unable to look at things in an unbiased way?

Because BTCC is marketed as a heroes and villians contest, where fans should back their favourite and follow the story, ignoring the technical factors that go into producing a top-level race car.

Best team (car/driver/engineers) wins leads to a different kind of series to what we have now. And the majority of fans don't want that. They choose to back a driver or car that when it does well will be hailed as heroic, but when it gets beaten the enemy must be evil/cheats/unfairly advantaged.

[pimmy]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Right, but this is the problem. BTCC is a BoP Series. So you cannot say RWD should have an advantage because it's better, because that's what the BoP is meant to negate. I have no problem what-so-ever with a performance based series which has the best car win. I have absolutely no issue with that and would love to see it. But that isn't what BTCC is, it isn't what they are claiming to be. So if we're going down the route of the best car should win, there's going to be some very unhappy people here when they unstrangle the Honda and Team Dynamics throw money at everything, because that's what the BoP is trying to stop.

I agree with the bold parts and I mentioned earlier in the thread that I'd like to see BOP done away with, although I wouldn't mind the same system that's used in Australia being implemented. Equalise things as best as you can before the first race and just leave it for the rest of the year. The constant fiddling we have now is a nightmare. Regardless of whether BOP stays or goes, there's always going to be someone who's unhappy with the situation.

I completely understand that you can't have it both ways (being equal and having the best car win), but the point I was trying to make is that the current situation is about as close as everyone is going to be and there isn't much else that can possibly be done. The the only thing that springs to mind is that FWD cars could be made lighter in relation to RWD, as was the case in Super Touring and S2000. But then you'll probably have FWD cars setting faster lap times and a load of *****ing and moaning from the RWD side.

BOP works well in GTs (what happened in 2016?) and TCR because all of the cars are driven by the same wheels. The mixture of front and rear in the BTCC is a royal pain in the backside.

[Akrapovic]

In 2016 it all went a bit wrong for SRO, and series using SRO regs. Mercedes and BMW tried to game the system hugely in VLN and the rung up the N24 and Blancpain races. In the early VLN races, BMW had the cars running to a delta lap time so they could get a BoP break. Unfortunately there was an error (presumed an engineer programmed it wrong), and they ended up with one car setting an incredibly impressive lap time. They then got slapped with a huge BoP penalty for the N24, which allowed Mercedes to turn up and absolutely walk the race, with nobody even getting close to them.

Then turn up at Spa for the 24, and Mercedes locked out the top 6 positions on the grid. They actually got penalised for homologation issues and got given 5 minute penalties, ending up losing 3 laps right from the start, but still managed to claw back 2 of those laps, showing they were still easily fastest.

On the ACO side of things, on the run up Le Mans, Ford ran around sand bagging. during the test day and free practice. The onboards were embarrassing as drivers short shifted, lifted early, took the wrong lines etc. Then come qualifying the Ford is magically 5 seconds (!!) a lap faster than it had previously gone.

2016 was a bad day for BoP in GT racing. WEC now has a completely computerised BoP, but it hasn't been great so far either. Cars ran in team formation at the 6 Hours of the Ring, and the changes it's made for Mexico seems odd.

---

My problem with BTCC isn't so much that they messed it up. Fine, we're all human, and we've had many years where it hasn't been an issue, so a mistake was bound to happen. Get on top of it and get the problem fixed, all good. My problem is the people who flat out deny there is an issue because they don't like certain drivers. Whether that's Plato haters who love seeing him struggle, or Honda haters who think it's great seeing Neal fly off the track and Shedden whining.

Nobody seems to be willing to take a step back from who they support and say "ok, this isn't quite right". RWD wins 5 out of 6 races, and people actually sit here and say a FWD car is third in the championship, therefore there's no problems. The mental gymnastics that people do to try and justify it is just barmy, and ruins the fun.

I want Sutton to win the championship, because it'd be amazing for the sport and him. I actually wanted Ingram to win, but that ship has sailed, and we'll get the same effect if it's from Sutton. That doesn't mean I'm blind to the very blatant issues that we see. pimmy is absolutely right that it's a nightmare to balance RWD and FWD. But that's what BTCC is trying to do, so that's all we can judge it on, and currently it's wrong. So they can either try harder, they can ban RWD (hope not), or they can allow more open development, with less balancing.

[S griffin]

Let's just forget about which specification of car is winning and enjoy the close competitive racing we're getting. Nobody complained when FWD teams dominated in the past

Autosport are saying that Cook is the first driver to get banned since Phil Bennett, but didn't Pyper also get banned for one meeting in 2002?