Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Classic Cars Monthly Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Historic Racing & Motorsport History > Motorsport History

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 17 Jan 2012, 05:01 (Ref:3012674)   #76
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA View Post
As you say, Bemani did a pretty good job considering they were running without factory support, and had a car which was both overweight and underpowered compared to their main 'big' class opposition, the RS500 (Even at 340bhp, the Supra would have been a good 100+bhp down on a competitive Sierra!) Thinking back to the couple of times I saw them, they certainly seemed to be in exactly the kind of position you describe in the races- behind the factory-backed Schnitzer & Bigazzi M3s, but usually ahead of most of the privateer ones...
100% agree ,just to add on the weight - I have a many reasons to believe that Bemani Supras were over 1100KG ,IIRC in "Auto Illustrate"'s article about the car a figure as high as 1200KG was mentioned! This is the FIA regulation minimum for 2.0 Turbo (RS500)!!
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jan 2012, 11:12 (Ref:3012776)   #77
T-Man
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Germany
Germany
Posts: 47
T-Man should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Just had a quick look into the 1990 DTM yearbook and it states that the weight of the Bemani Supra was 1050kg, with the regulations allowing it to be as light as 1040kg. Power is said to be at 330 bhp.

It also looks like there was a second Bemani car in the 1990 Nürburgring-Nordschleife round driven by Toni Seiler. He ran #26 while Philipp Müller used #25. But Seiler had a DNS at his one and only attemp. He posted a time that was almost 40 seconds slower than his teammate and actually would have qualified as 29th and last (no 107% rule back then).

There might be at least 2 ways to explain his DNF then:

1. He trashed his car during the qualifying beyond repair, or
2. he actually shared one car with Müller which is somewhat unlikely.


About the 1989 DTM cars:

The Bemani run car for Müller used #50
And the Bloemer run Supra used #52 for Reinhard Schall and #64 for Gerhard Müller in his one-off.

I somehow think that the Bloemer car was one of the old RAS Bastos/FINA cars, as the Bloemer car had a rear wing which the Bemani team didn't use untill 1990. My theory of different rollcage colours (Bemani=red - Bloemer=white) didn't really turned out to be helpful, as the early ETCC bemani cars also had white cages.
T-Man is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jan 2012, 12:29 (Ref:3012818)   #78
KA
Veteran
 
KA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,402
KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post
I somehow think that the Bloemer car was one of the old RAS Bastos/FINA cars, as the Bloemer car had a rear wing which the Bemani team didn't use untill 1990. My theory of different rollcage colours (Bemani=red - Bloemer=white) didn't really turned out to be helpful, as the early ETCC bemani cars also had white cages.
From vague memory, was the rear wing only originally homologated on the Supra Turbo, rather than the 3.0i? Bemani's cars (in the ETC at least) were the non-turbo version, and never had the wing, while the Japanese cars and MIL's BTCC cars (all turbos) always did.

If you look at pics of the RAS/Bastos cars at Spa in '87, where they ran one of each, the turbo #14 has a rear wing
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-08-02-014.jpg

while the 3.0i, #15 doesn't
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-08-02-015.jpg
KA is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jan 2012, 18:08 (Ref:3012948)   #79
T-Man
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Germany
Germany
Posts: 47
T-Man should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
It would make sense that the rearwing was originally only homologated on the Turbo model, but looking at the 2 RAS FINA cars in the 24h Spa race in 1988, both were the 3.0i non-turbocharged version and had the rear wing.

http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-029.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-030.jpg

and in 1988 the japanese works cars obviously had yet another homologation version. This time the rear wing ends were connected to the main body, also the front bumper had a a small "bridge" covering the gap to the hood and also the 3 square holes beneath it to help with cooling i guess.

http://www1.odn.ne.jp/~aac76820/minolta02.jpg
T-Man is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jan 2012, 19:15 (Ref:3012978)   #80
KA
Veteran
 
KA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,402
KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post
It would make sense that the rearwing was originally only homologated on the Turbo model, but looking at the 2 RAS FINA cars in the 24h Spa race in 1988, both were the 3.0i non-turbocharged version and had the rear wing.

http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-029.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-030.jpg

and in 1988 the japanese works cars obviously had yet another homologation version. This time the rear wing ends were connected to the main body, also the front bumper had a a small "bridge" covering the gap to the hood and also the 3 square holes beneath it to help with cooling i guess.

http://www1.odn.ne.jp/~aac76820/minolta02.jpg
Yes, from vague memory I think there was an Evolution version of some kind homologated in '88- the revised front bumper with the cooling ducts, and the different spoiler.
These only seem to have been seen on the Japanese factory/TOM'S cars, and the Australian cars (which originated from Japan I think)- note John Smith's TTA car
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eytl/63...57607220639240

The MIL cars in the BTCC never had it as I recall:
http://tentenths.com/forum/newreply....eply&p=3012948

I'd always assumed the RAS-Fina cars at Spa in 1988 had been turbos, but both versions on the result online (Racingsportscars and Frank de Jong) list them as 3.0. Could there also have been an evolution for the 3.0 which allowed the rear wing? I can't see how RAS would have been allowed to run it (or Bemani not to run it!) otherwise...?
KA is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jan 2012, 19:19 (Ref:3012983)   #81
T-Man
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Germany
Germany
Posts: 47
T-Man should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Actually at first the Bloemer car didn't had the rear wing.

The car first appeared at the 2nd round at Hockenheim, having no rearwing and a somewhat odd grey/white/red livery
http://forums.lorddigital.com/Projec...oemer-Zoom.jpg

The team obviously skipped the next 3 races and returned for the support race of the 24h race on the Nürburgring. Now the car had the white/red colours of Sponsor Test&Tuning and the mentioned rearwing.
http://www.tourenwagen-revival.de/in...nent&Itemid=96#

They then skipped the race at the Norisring and returned for the second race of the season at Hockenheim, this time the car was driven by Gerhard Müller.
http://forums.lorddigital.com/Projec...cs/Bloemer.jpg

The team then skipped another race at Diepholz and Schall was back in the driving seat for the remaining 2 races at the Nürburgring and Hockenheim.
The car is here shown at the Nürburgring, WITHOUT the rearwing
http://www.tourenwagen-revival.de/in...nent&Itemid=96#

Haven't been able to find any pictures from the final round at Hockenheim.


I may have another theory on the origin of the Bloemer car. In the picture of Müller at Hockenheim, there seems to be some kind of fuel filler cap/cover on the center roof pillar. This is a feature none of the other group A supras had. But the TTE-ran rally cars featured a fuel filler cap there as seen in the picture below.
http://www.rally24.com/res/img/produ...s-15900_1l.jpg


So could it be that the Bloemer car was an ex-TTE rally car, which TTE sold after they sacked the supra programme in favour of the Celica?
T-Man is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jan 2012, 19:55 (Ref:3013002)   #82
KA
Veteran
 
KA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,402
KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordDigital View Post
It actually appears that the the second Supra who participated in 88 SPA was I.M.C. Toyota ,are you sure that these were RAS Sport/Bastos Supras with Fina colour scheme?

Entry List here:
http://www.racingsportscars.com/cove...988-07-31e.jpg

Pictures:
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...988-07-31.html

As I remember, yes they were the RAS cars- the only time they appeared in 1988. If you look closely at this pic, there's an 'RAS Sport' logo on the front spoiler, just below the intake slot:
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-030.jpg

These 'IMC Toyota' entries have puzzled me for a while- there were always a lot of them at Spa (if you look at the 1600 class, all the Corollas apart from the Spanish Camac car are entered by IMC!), and they include cars which can be clearly identified as run by well-known Corolla teams, such as Bob Holden's car from Australia (#133), a TOM'S car from Japan (#139), and a British Chris Hodgetts CHMS entry (#148).

Were IMC something like the Belgian Toyota importer, or a club, and a lot of regular ETC Toyotas were entered under their banner at Spa for some reason?

Last edited by KA; 17 Jan 2012 at 20:03.
KA is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jan 2012, 20:18 (Ref:3013016)   #83
KA
Veteran
 
KA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,402
KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post
I may have another theory on the origin of the Bloemer car. In the picture of Müller at Hockenheim, there seems to be some kind of fuel filler cap/cover on the center roof pillar. This is a feature none of the other group A supras had. But the TTE-ran rally cars featured a fuel filler cap there as seen in the picture below.
http://www.rally24.com/res/img/produ...s-15900_1l.jpg


So could it be that the Bloemer car was an ex-TTE rally car, which TTE sold after they sacked the supra programme in favour of the Celica?
No idea- certainly it seems to be a feature unique to the Bloemer car- none of the others...

TOM'S/TTA
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-23-036.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eytl/63...57607220639240

RAS
http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...57627283400681
http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...57627283400681

Bemani
http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...57627283400681

or MIL
http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...er/6050567430/

seem to have had fuel fillers/vents there
KA is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jan 2012, 05:22 (Ref:3013196)   #84
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post
It would make sense that the rearwing was originally only homologated on the Turbo model, but looking at the 2 RAS FINA cars in the 24h Spa race in 1988, both were the 3.0i non-turbocharged version and had the rear wing.

http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-029.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-030.jpg

and in 1988 the japanese works cars obviously had yet another homologation version. This time the rear wing ends were connected to the main body, also the front bumper had a a small "bridge" covering the gap to the hood and also the 3 square holes beneath it to help with cooling i guess.

http://www1.odn.ne.jp/~aac76820/minolta02.jpg
This is correct the rear spoiler changed internationally at the end of 1988. The so called "facelift" included 3 peace rear spoiler and change in the front bumper/rear headlights. Toyota probably filed a form of extension to the original homologation (issued 1987) ,I can't find this one in my scans.

87 TOMs supra with 1 peace rear wing:
http://cjsupra.kendra.com/graphics/M...e/Tom87A-L.jpg

89 TOMS supra with 3 peace rear wing:
http://cjsupra.kendra.com/graphics/M...e/Tom89A-L.jpg

What KA is saying about Rear Wing delete for N/A due to homologation makes sense , unfortunately I have only the Turbo homologation book and can't confirm for sure.

Are we sure that the two IMC/RAS Supras in SPA'88 were N/A? On most web site it says that the two RAS Supras entered in 1987 were also N/A and that is not correct...
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jan 2012, 05:26 (Ref:3013197)   #85
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA View Post
As I remember, yes they were the RAS cars- the only time they appeared in 1988. If you look closely at this pic, there's an 'RAS Sport' logo on the front spoiler, just below the intake slot:
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-07-31-030.jpg

These 'IMC Toyota' entries have puzzled me for a while- there were always a lot of them at Spa (if you look at the 1600 class, all the Corollas apart from the Spanish Camac car are entered by IMC!), and they include cars which can be clearly identified as run by well-known Corolla teams, such as Bob Holden's car from Australia (#133), a TOM'S car from Japan (#139), and a British Chris Hodgetts CHMS entry (#148).

Were IMC something like the Belgian Toyota importer, or a club, and a lot of regular ETC Toyotas were entered under their banner at Spa for some reason?
I also counted over 10 entries under the IMC ,seeing lots of IMC entries in previus entries mostly related to Belgium teams and the fact that RAS (RING AUTO SPORT) were also based in Belgium could mean that I.M.C. was local Toyota importer.
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jan 2012, 05:38 (Ref:3013199)   #86
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post

I may have another theory on the origin of the Bloemer car. In the picture of Müller at Hockenheim, there seems to be some kind of fuel filler cap/cover on the center roof pillar. This is a feature none of the other group A supras had. But the TTE-ran rally cars featured a fuel filler cap there as seen in the picture below.
http://www.rally24.com/res/img/produ...s-15900_1l.jpg


So could it be that the Bloemer car was an ex-TTE rally car, which TTE sold after they sacked the supra programme in favour of the Celica?
Good lead ,I'm sure that only TTE rally cars had this future ,and also know that they left a lot of their cars here and there but had a few for sale after the scrap of the program in Germany. And they had a lot of MA70 Supras!:

http://forums.lorddigital.com/Projec...E%20SUPRAS.jpg
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jan 2012, 10:43 (Ref:3013325)   #87
chunterer
Race Official
Veteran
 
chunterer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location:
Down the end of my road
Posts: 15,697
chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordDigital View Post

Are we sure that the two IMC/RAS Supras in SPA'88 were N/A? On most web site it says that the two RAS Supras entered in 1987 were also N/A and that is not correct...
Apologies for just quoting this part of your post LordDigital, but like KA I always thought that the 1987 model cars were 'atmo' at least in Europe, particularly the ETC entries, and that the Turbo car didn't come on stream until 1988....

I'm not as sure about the Japanese cars though as the factory and TOM's cars would be out racing before anyone elses!
chunterer is offline  
__________________
"Double Kidney Guv'nah?"
"No thanks George they're still wavin a white flag!"
Quote
Old 18 Jan 2012, 12:43 (Ref:3013388)   #88
KA
Veteran
 
KA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,402
KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chunterer View Post
Apologies for just quoting this part of your post LordDigital, but like KA I always thought that the 1987 model cars were 'atmo' at least in Europe, particularly the ETC entries, and that the Turbo car didn't come on stream until 1988....

I'm not as sure about the Japanese cars though as the factory and TOM's cars would be out racing before anyone elses!
I'm a bit vague on this without wading back through a stack of 1987 Autosports, but the Turbo was definitely around in 1987, but not from the start (was the homologation of the Turbo delayed?).
RAS didn't debut until some way into the season, although their first couple of appearances ended as DNQs They appear to have started with the 'atmo' version until the turbo was ready.

They may have had one of each at Spa (the entry list in the programme doesn't distinguish), before downsizing to a single car entry for the TT- the entry list in the TT programme clearly describes this as a Supra Turbo of 4136cc (in other words 2954cc x 1.4 turbo equivalency factor).
A Bemani entered 3.0i is also on the list, but didn't appear. It did turn up for the Nogaro ETC round a week later though, and the Japanese TOM'S cars appeared at Fuji

As far as I can tell, based on the race results listed on Frank de Jong's site, the 1987 Supra entries were:

7 June, Zolder ETC:
#14 Micangeli/Calderari (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ
#15 Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ

12 July, Nurburgring WTC:
#14 Micangeli/Calderari (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ
#15 Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ
#25? Muller/Zeller (Bemani, 3.0i)- DNQ

(all three cars were on the entry list for Brno, but I don't think any of them appeared)
http://www.racingsportscars.com/cove...987-08-16e.jpg

1-2 Aug, Spa WTC
#14 Joosen/Heyer/Jelinski (RAS Sport, Turbo)- DNF
#15 Olofsson/Thiebault/Bachelart (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNF
(Maurizio Micangeli & Enzo Calderari had jumped ship by then- Calderari appearing in various M3s for the rest of the European WTCC rounds)

6 Sept, Silverstone TT
#14 Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, Turbo)- DNF
(#25 for Muller & Zeller on the entry list, but a no-show)

13 Sept, Nogaro ETC
#14? Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, Turbo)- DNF
#25? Zeller/Muller (Bemani, 3.0i)- 6th

15 Nov, Fuji WTC
#36, Elgh/Baldi (TOM'S/Minolta, Turbo)- DNF
#37, Lees/Hoshino (TOM'S/Minolta, Turbo)- 9th

The Fuji WTC round might have been the debut for the TOM'S cars( not sure if they did any JTCC rounds before that?), but a pair then went on to Macau, for Hoshino and Alan Jones- I think both were DNFs

IN 1988, Bemani's ETC entries were always 'atmo', but I had thought the Fina cars at Spa were Turbos, rather than the 'atmo' versions listed on both websites. I'd have to dig out the Autosport reports to be sure though...

Last edited by KA; 18 Jan 2012 at 12:57.
KA is offline  
Quote
Old 18 Jan 2012, 14:40 (Ref:3013432)   #89
chunterer
Race Official
Veteran
 
chunterer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location:
Down the end of my road
Posts: 15,697
chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!
So there were Turbo's at the TT then? Crikey, I didn't know that and I was there!!

Wonder what happened to all my programmes!!
chunterer is offline  
__________________
"Double Kidney Guv'nah?"
"No thanks George they're still wavin a white flag!"
Quote
Old 18 Jan 2012, 15:51 (Ref:3013503)   #90
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA View Post
I'm a bit vague on this without wading back through a stack of 1987 Autosports, but the Turbo was definitely around in 1987, but not from the start (was the homologation of the Turbo delayed?).
RAS didn't debut until some way into the season, although their first couple of appearances ended as DNQs They appear to have started with the 'atmo' version until the turbo was ready.

They may have had one of each at Spa (the entry list in the programme doesn't distinguish), before downsizing to a single car entry for the TT- the entry list in the TT programme clearly describes this as a Supra Turbo of 4136cc (in other words 2954cc x 1.4 turbo equivalency factor).
A Bemani entered 3.0i is also on the list, but didn't appear. It did turn up for the Nogaro ETC round a week later though, and the Japanese TOM'S cars appeared at Fuji

As far as I can tell, based on the race results listed on Frank de Jong's site, the 1987 Supra entries were:

7 June, Zolder ETC:
#14 Micangeli/Calderari (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ
#15 Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ

12 July, Nurburgring WTC:
#14 Micangeli/Calderari (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ
#15 Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNQ
#25? Muller/Zeller (Bemani, 3.0i)- DNQ

(all three cars were on the entry list for Brno, but I don't think any of them appeared)
http://www.racingsportscars.com/cove...987-08-16e.jpg

1-2 Aug, Spa WTC
#14 Joosen/Heyer/Jelinski (RAS Sport, Turbo)- DNF
#15 Olofsson/Thiebault/Bachelart (RAS Sport, 3.0i)- DNF
(Maurizio Micangeli & Enzo Calderari had jumped ship by then- Calderari appearing in various M3s for the rest of the European WTCC rounds)

6 Sept, Silverstone TT
#14 Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, Turbo)- DNF
(#25 for Muller & Zeller on the entry list, but a no-show)

13 Sept, Nogaro ETC
#14? Heyer/Joossen (RAS Sport, Turbo)- DNF
#25? Zeller/Muller (Bemani, 3.0i)- 6th

15 Nov, Fuji WTC
#36, Elgh/Baldi (TOM'S/Minolta, Turbo)- DNF
#37, Lees/Hoshino (TOM'S/Minolta, Turbo)- 9th

The Fuji WTC round might have been the debut for the TOM'S cars( not sure if they did any JTCC rounds before that?), but a pair then went on to Macau, for Hoshino and Alan Jones- I think both were DNFs

IN 1988, Bemani's ETC entries were always 'atmo', but I had thought the Fina cars at Spa were Turbos, rather than the 'atmo' versions listed on both websites. I'd have to dig out the Autosport reports to be sure though...
I belive that we have the 1987 Turbo puzzle figured out Look on my website at the first page of the FIA Homologation Book for "Toyota Supra Turbo MA70" ,the picture of the car was taken Jan-1-1987 ,BUT the homologation was delayed untill 01-JUL-1987!

http://forums.lorddigital.com/Projec...OOK/img001.jpg

That all explains the late sesson appearance of the Turbo version i. I actually have an interview with Hans Heyer where he explains the absolute need for the turbo ,he says "<Atmo RAS Sports Supra> is 65 Kilo under the Limit" (RAS/Bastos Supra was quited to be 1100 Kilo(s)). ,he also says that further weight reduction will be very very dificult becouse the HardTop chassies is not too different than the Targe version (HEAVY). The interview ends where Hayers Prediction "We Will Win ONLY WHEN WE GET THE BOOST".

Many years later I learned that above Hayers statement for the boost was wrong (I owned many MA70 Supras ,including 3 evolutions of my track cars). Boost could not save the 7M engine ... an engine that was basically junk when it comes to motorporst for many reasons the main one beign the uber long stroke. RAS did their best in using the Turbo version ,but failed. Toyota Factory Teams also had a super hard time finding a way to get the Turbo engine to be reliable and to make the horsepower needed to be competitive. Toyota had to produce in 1988 500 cars called "Turbo A" to get extension to the original homologation for despertly needed head improvements ,but even after that they kept suffering engine failures when the turbo pressure was boosted up ,a good example is BHG in Toyota Racing Tom's in 1989 SPA:
http://wsrp.ic.cz/nonchamp1989.html

Toyota Finally resolved their engine issues with the introduction of the 2.0Turbo (1G-GEU) and Yamaha 2.5 twin turbo engine (in Supra MA70 1990 with engine code 1JZ-GTE) ,unfortunately it was late too late for the Group A - what a waste of otherwise excellent chassis.
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jan 2012, 10:27 (Ref:3014019)   #91
KA
Veteran
 
KA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,402
KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordDigital View Post
I belive that we have the 1987 Turbo puzzle figured out Look on my website at the first page of the FIA Homologation Book for "Toyota Supra Turbo MA70" ,the picture of the car was taken Jan-1-1987 ,BUT the homologation was delayed untill 01-JUL-1987!

http://forums.lorddigital.com/Projec...OOK/img001.jpg

That all explains the late sesson appearance of the Turbo version i. I actually have an interview with Hans Heyer where he explains the absolute need for the turbo ,he says "<Atmo RAS Sports Supra> is 65 Kilo under the Limit" (RAS/Bastos Supra was quited to be 1100 Kilo(s)). ,he also says that further weight reduction will be very very dificult becouse the HardTop chassies is not too different than the Targe version (HEAVY). The interview ends where Hayers Prediction "We Will Win ONLY WHEN WE GET THE BOOST".
IIRC the turbo would also have had to run heavier than the Atmo version- Group A employed a form of equalisation based on linking engine size to minimum weight and tyre size, with an engine size equalisation factor (the 1.4 multiplier) for turbo cars- so a 4.9 litre Holden Commodore would always have a higher minimum weight than a 2-litre turbo RS500
http://homepage.mac.com/frank_de_jong/Pages/part5.html

The Supra turbo, treated as a 4.1 litre car was therefore looking at a minimum weight of 1255kg (1260 for 1988) compared to the 1035kg of the 3-litre (reduced to 1020 for 1988)....
KA is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jan 2012, 13:41 (Ref:3014099)   #92
chunterer
Race Official
Veteran
 
chunterer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location:
Down the end of my road
Posts: 15,697
chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA View Post
IIRC the turbo would also have had to run heavier than the Atmo version- Group A employed a form of equalisation based on linking engine size to minimum weight and tyre size, with an engine size equalisation factor (the 1.4 multiplier) for turbo cars- so a 4.9 litre Holden Commodore would always have a higher minimum weight than a 2-litre turbo RS500
http://homepage.mac.com/frank_de_jong/Pages/part5.html

The Supra turbo, treated as a 4.1 litre car was therefore looking at a minimum weight of 1255kg (1260 for 1988) compared to the 1035kg of the 3-litre (reduced to 1020 for 1988)....
The equivalency factor always confused me a little, not in terms of what cars it was applied to, but why it changed from 1.4 to 1.7 between 1987 and 1988?

I'm just wondering if there had been some lobbying from a manufacturer that may have been penalised under the old level or something, but then again if a cars capacity was marginal at, say, the Class A, B engine size cut off point of 3000cc, you would rather your car go up against an M3 than an RS500 if it was a 'cc' thing.

On the other hand, nothing could touch either of those cars in their respective classes, at least not in Europe.

Just thought's for discussion as it might be relevant to the Supra!!
chunterer is offline  
__________________
"Double Kidney Guv'nah?"
"No thanks George they're still wavin a white flag!"
Quote
Old 19 Jan 2012, 14:57 (Ref:3014123)   #93
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA View Post
IIRC the turbo would also have had to run heavier than the Atmo version- Group A employed a form of equalisation based on linking engine size to minimum weight and tyre size, with an engine size equalisation factor (the 1.4 multiplier) for turbo cars- so a 4.9 litre Holden Commodore would always have a higher minimum weight than a 2-litre turbo RS500
http://homepage.mac.com/frank_de_jong/Pages/part5.html

The Supra turbo, treated as a 4.1 litre car was therefore looking at a minimum weight of 1255kg (1260 for 1988) compared to the 1035kg of the 3-litre (reduced to 1020 for 1988)....
I often forget about the 1.4x factor (I always multiple by 1.7).Do you know if the 1.7x rule was applied for the calendar 1988 ,starting Jan-1-1988? Following the 1.7x rule ,Supra turbo will be 2954.2 x 1.7 = 5022.14 cc or 1400KG -> it would've been madness for RAS to use turbo cars in 1988.

Also on the weight subject ,are we sure that the "frank_de_jong" link that you gave me has the correct displacement to minimum weight relation table? I was also always using it as 100% correct ,but now I have some doubts - the other day when I was looking for the "Debut HOMOLOGATION" of the atmo MA70 I found 350+ page FIA document that shows totally different displacement to minimum weight relation table ,see (Page 92) of the following:
http://www.bps-racing.com/iso_album/...e-09-bd-ok.pdf

I belive that this may be "new" Homologations book for all cars with expired Homologations ,but I'm not sure?
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jan 2012, 15:09 (Ref:3014126)   #94
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by chunterer View Post
The equivalency factor always confused me a little, not in terms of what cars it was applied to, but why it changed from 1.4 to 1.7 between 1987 and 1988?

I'm just wondering if there had been some lobbying from a manufacturer that may have been penalised under the old level or something, but then again if a cars capacity was marginal at, say, the Class A, B engine size cut off point of 3000cc, you would rather your car go up against an M3 than an RS500 if it was a 'cc' thing.

On the other hand, nothing could touch either of those cars in their respective classes, at least not in Europe.

Just thought's for discussion as it might be relevant to the Supra!!
I guess it is more like general FIA policy towards "banning the turbo" - remember 1 year earlier in 87 they limited the boost pressure to 4.5barr in formula1 and increased the atmo engines there to 3500cc ,and then in 1988 they limited the boost yet again to 2.0 and the turbo formulas were still faster - finally our french friends completely banned the turbo. Perhaps they had plans for GroupA and wanted to also see less turbocharged cars ,I can't imagine the amount of Lag of a Turbocharged RS00 running 2.5+ barrs of boost with power levels north of 600bhp!
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jan 2012, 17:15 (Ref:3014184)   #95
KA
Veteran
 
KA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,402
KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!KA has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chunterer View Post
The equivalency factor always confused me a little, not in terms of what cars it was applied to, but why it changed from 1.4 to 1.7 between 1987 and 1988?

I'm just wondering if there had been some lobbying from a manufacturer that may have been penalised under the old level or something, but then again if a cars capacity was marginal at, say, the Class A, B engine size cut off point of 3000cc, you would rather your car go up against an M3 than an RS500 if it was a 'cc' thing.
I don't know about lobbying, but the big losers under the change were Alfa- 1762cc x 1.4= 2466, so safely in the 2.5 litre class. 1762cc x 1.7 =2995, firmly in the 'big' class and up against the Sierras.
Combine that with a rule change meaning that the turbocars had to run their standard homologated intercooler, and the 75 Turbo was out of International Group A....
It would have made more sense perhaps for the FIA to shift the class break from 2.5 to 3 litres, (IIRC the BTCC did just that?), as it would have made it possible both for Alfa to continue, and Bemani to drop down to the 'middle' class and race against the M3s as you suggest...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordDigital View Post
I often forget about the 1.4x factor (I always multiple by 1.7).Do you know if the 1.7x rule was applied for the calendar 1988 ,starting Jan-1-1988? Following the 1.7x rule ,Supra turbo will be 2954.2 x 1.7 = 5022.14 cc or 1400KG -> it would've been madness for RAS to use turbo cars in 1988.

Also on the weight subject ,are we sure that the "frank_de_jong" link that you gave me has the correct displacement to minimum weight relation table? ?
I think it was applied from the start of the '88 season, as the Alfa 75 Turbos disappeared from the series altogether- I can't swear to the accuracy of Frank's table, as I dont know the source of his information

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordDigital View Post
I guess it is more like general FIA policy towards "banning the turbo" - remember 1 year earlier in 87 they limited the boost pressure to 4.5barr in formula1 and increased the atmo engines there to 3500cc ,and then in 1988 they limited the boost yet again to 2.0 and the turbo formulas were still faster - finally our french friends completely banned the turbo. Perhaps they had plans for GroupA and wanted to also see less turbocharged cars
As I remember, our French friends did indeed have plans for Group A- dropping it at international level in favour of Bernie's pet project- Procar...
http://classic2.alfisti.net/media/mo...ge/procar1.jpg
KA is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jan 2012, 18:51 (Ref:3014220)   #96
T-Man
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Germany
Germany
Posts: 47
T-Man should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Looking at Franks site, apparently Volker Strycek entered a Bemani Supra in the last round of the 1988 DTM. He qualified 35th out of 46 cars but did not start the race.

This could have been an evaluation test for Bemanis 1989 DTM attemp and with a driver who knows the track, the championship and the car, as Strycek has driven the Supra on various occasions in 1988.
T-Man is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Jan 2012, 04:40 (Ref:3014830)   #97
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post
Just had a quick look into the 1990 DTM yearbook and it states that the weight of the Bemani Supra was 1050kg, with the regulations allowing it to be as light as 1040kg. Power is said to be at 330 bhp.
Hey T-Man ,do you have online access to the DTM yearbook or it is a hard copy that you own?

If it a hard copy could look up the listed weights for the BMW M3 Evo and Mercedes 190 E 2.3-16 ,I need the information to 1.determine if the Bemani weight of 1050KG was actual or simply the regulation minimum 2.figure out if Franks site has incorrect displacement to minimum weight relation table for the post 88 regulations.

Thanks in advance.
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Jan 2012, 09:28 (Ref:3014865)   #98
T-Man
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Germany
Germany
Posts: 47
T-Man should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordDigital View Post
Hey T-Man ,do you have online access to the DTM yearbook or it is a hard copy that you own?

If it a hard copy could look up the listed weights for the BMW M3 Evo and Mercedes 190 E 2.3-16 ,I need the information to 1.determine if the Bemani weight of 1050KG was actual or simply the regulation minimum 2.figure out if Franks site has incorrect displacement to minimum weight relation table for the post 88 regulations.

Thanks in advance.
I've got the hard copy of Tourenwagen-Story 90, 92, 94 and 95. Great books with a load of information and great pictures. Most articles were taken from the german Rallye Racing magazine. Wish i had the older ones 88+89 aswell.

Here are the weights for the 5 cars the book mentions (sadly no Kadett or Mustang and only the 2.5L 190E Evo2)

Audi V8: Base weight=1220kg Regulation Weight=1220kg/1300kg/1250kg (was changed twice during the season)
BMW M3 Sport Evolution: Base weight=940kg Regulation Weight=1040Kg
Mercedes 190 EVO2: Base Weight=1040kg Regulation Weight=1040kg
Opel Omega 3000: Base Weight=1120kg Regulation Weight=1120kg
Toyota Supra 3.0i: Base Weight=1050kg Regulation Weight=1040kg

what wonders me is that the Omega has the same engine capacity as the Supra, but has a lot higher regulation weight.

I'd say the regulation weights on Franks site are fairly accurate, as the DTM usually had their own weight rules anyways.

I'm thinking about putting up a specific DTM discussion thread (like the BTCC and ATCC ones), as there are loads of things that are a mistery to me and probably everyone else surrounding the early years of that championship.
T-Man is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Jan 2012, 15:05 (Ref:3015006)   #99
chunterer
Race Official
Veteran
 
chunterer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location:
Down the end of my road
Posts: 15,697
chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!chunterer is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post

I'm thinking about putting up a specific DTM discussion thread (like the BTCC and ATCC ones), as there are loads of things that are a mistery to me and probably everyone else surrounding the early years of that championship.
Yes please feel free to start whatever threads you wish to discuss T-Man.

Last edited by chunterer; 27 Aug 2013 at 16:38.
chunterer is offline  
__________________
"Double Kidney Guv'nah?"
"No thanks George they're still wavin a white flag!"
Quote
Old 29 Jan 2012, 18:00 (Ref:3018569)   #100
LordDigital
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 25
LordDigital should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Man View Post


what wonders me is that the Omega has the same engine capacity as the Supra, but has a lot higher regulation weight.

I'd say the regulation weights on Franks site are fairly accurate, as the DTM usually had their own weight rules anyways.
T-Man ,thanks for posting these. I forgot that DTM had different weight rules according toI belive DMSB regulations? DTM thread is a good idea!

I agree that Franks site is probably fairly accurate I did a little more searching to confirm the source of my info and found a nice list of FIA regulations on their web site:
http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations...ndixj_pdf.html

Displacement to minimum weight relation table in Article 255 "Specific Regulations for Touring Cars (Group A)" is defenetly different than the 1988 table on Franks site:
http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations...rticle255.html

In addition to that - the table listed in Article 256 - Specific Regulations for Grand Touring Cars (Group B) appears to be the same as Franks GroupA table:
http://www.fia.com/resources/documen...935__256_a.pdf

Again it could be a rule change for after the 1988 season ,FIA is not so good at keeping record of their changes - they appear to be publishing them on top of the existing regulations as seen here:
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/C0EE321FCFA14CA2C125784D005EC091/$FILE/255%20(11-12)-080311.pdf
LordDigital is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Group A Toyota Celica Supras - History trace (super merge!!) ART Racing Motorsport History 121 10 Aug 2017 10:01
[FFSA-GT] Toyota Supra GT2 infos mirkob Sportscar & GT Racing 5 25 Oct 2006 05:01
Toyota supra killa GeminiT Road Car Forum 6 26 Jul 2005 10:34
89/90 DTM Toyota Supra/Opel Kadett??? kmchow Touring Car Racing 10 29 Mar 2005 01:16
Toyota Supra Diabando Road Car Forum 5 28 Jan 2003 13:38


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:44.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.