WTCC: SEAT-boss responds to diesel criticism / Diesel discussion

[JMeissner]

We posted a column about the diesel in the World Touring Car Championship at TouringCarTimes earlier:

http://www.touringcartimes.com/columns.php

We then met up with the WTCC-teams at the Oschersleben test where, among others, SEAT Motorsport-boss Jamie Puig responded to the diesel criticism:

The introduction of diesel cars in the WTCC has stirred things around. SEAT introduced the Léon TDi at Anderstorp last year and the car was an immediate success. The SEAT 1-2-3-4-5 at Puebla confirmed the domination of the diesel. The voices within the WTCC are separated and TouringCarTimes had a chat with a number of key figures about the diesel cars.

"I do not know what the problem is. It is the same discussion as between rear wheel-drive cars and front wheel-drive cars," said SEAT Motorsport boss Jamie Puig to TouringCarTimes.com.

Full story:

http://www.touringcartimes.com/news.php?id=2294

Thoughts?

[trebor901]

i think they should be banned as they have an unfair advantage with a turbo, and i dont see how he can make the argument its the same as the rear wheel drive and front wheel drive argument because i dont see RWD as being any type of advantage.

SEAT knew they would win nothing with the petrol powered car so they've bent the rules to bring in a Turbo Diesel so they do nothing else other than win.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by trebor901

i dont see how he can make the argument its the same as the rear wheel drive and front wheel drive argument because i dont see RWD as being any type of advantage.

Please explain me why rolling start was introduced in WTCC?

[Bramzel]

Rickard Rydell hit the nail on the head:

"I do not understand the discussion. In Brazil the BMW's were the fastest cars and in Mexico we were fastest. But look at Tom Coronel, he finished sixth at Mexico with a petrol-powered SEAT. I think it is too early to discuss this. After the two coming races we can discuss it, but before it does not make any sense," said Rydell.

I completely and utterly agree on this. All this whining about Diesel is hysteric panicing before we've even seen the proper balance of the field.

[JMeissner]

Well, i thought S2000 was about reducing the costs from the previous rules - Super Touring.

As it seems the costs for S2000 have landed not far from Super Touring, and adding a new type of engine doesent exactly go in hand with the original thought of reducing costs. The diesel engine might cost as much as running a petrol engine as Puig says, I have no idea.

But that is not the point, the cost of developing a new diesel engine with shady rules is the problem.

And as for adding engines that doesent sound and have a completely different rev band compared to petrole engines just adds to the problems that WTCC/S2000 currently are facing.

[Ellmau]

Originally Posted by Bramzel

Rickard Rydell hit the nail on the head:

I completely and utterly agree on this. All this whining about Diesel is hysteric panicing before we've even seen the proper balance of the field.

Perhaps, but Rydell isn't completely telling the truth. Both races at Brazil were won by a SEAT TDI and most points were scored by SEAT TDI's, so the BMW's were absolutely not the fastest cars in Brazil. They were much closer than they were in Mexico, and even very close to the TDI's.

[PorscheFanNo1]

Originally Posted by Ellmau

Perhaps, but Rydell isn't completely telling the truth. Both races at Brazil were won by a SEAT TDI and most points were scored by SEAT TDI's, so the BMW's were absolutely not the fastest cars in Brazil. They were much closer than they were in Mexico, and even very close to the TDI's.

Even tho they didnt win, BMW was still fastest, didnt you watch the race?

[Bramzel]

Exactly, the only reason why BMW didn't win was because the Seat had that little bit of extra oomph at the end of the straight, which has been terminated by the new limitation.

[JMeissner]

It feels like people are missing the point.

The WTCC and S2000 is in trouble.

The last thing it needs are things that cost more money. Diesel is introduced - more money, bigger differences between the cars and cars that sounds like fans.

[PorscheFanNo1]

I understand you very well Meissner, and I share your conserns, but its nothing new that S2000 are in trouble, they constantly find new ways of making it worse.

[JMeissner]

Puig ignores that very well, pointing at that the difference between rwd and fwd should be the same thing as petrol/diesel.

Well, yes, perhaps. But thats missing the point completely.

More differences/dispensations = bigger differences between cars = worse quality of racing = less interest from spectators/media = less sponsors = less money... you get the picture.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by JMeissner

Well, i thought S2000 was about reducing the costs from the previous rules - Super Touring.

As it seems the costs for S2000 have landed not far from Super Touring, and adding a new type of engine doesent exactly go in hand with the original thought of reducing costs.

That position would stand even without the diesel engines. Simply fact is that for any manufacturer based formula, sooner or later someone will do whatever it takes to win. We've already seen the start of that with BMW building a homologation special.

Before they adopted the diesel SEAT spent vast amounts of money developing the petrol engine. Do you think if they hadn't switched to diesel they wouldn't still be spending equally vast amounts. The diesel engine hasn't necessarily increased costs, it's just shifted where that money is being spent.

[JMeissner]

Of course developing a new engine increases costs. Instead of continuing to developing the already existing petrol engine over X years they now have developed a completely new engine and all the new parts that are needed - with the cost it means.

And I still cant think that parts like driveshafts, gearbox, etc. can remain exactly the same as for the petrol version.

[mattt]

heres a fairly simple solution

allow a turbo petrol engine possibly 1.6 to keep it about the same

although this wold not have an affect on the cost but if they allowed this, therefore removing the advantage of the diesel they would change and then just a quick change in the rules banning turbos. and everyone is back to na petrols

[Bramzel]

It doesn't matter which set of rules you use. Costs will go up anyways because manufacturers want to be the fastests. Look at NASCAR for example, where the cars are locked solid meaning they're cheap. What happens? Teams spend millions at high-tech tools to tune them and set them up, making it a million dollar business again anyways.

The manufacturers have money to spend, and they'll spend it anyways. No matter what rules you run. S2000 will continue for a while, become too expensive, and a new set of rules will be introduced. That one will have a livespan of a couple of years again as well, and then it'll become too expensive as wel. It's motorsport evolution, part of the deal. You see it in all classes, doesn't matter if it's WTCC, Formula 1, FIAGT or whatever.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by JMeissner

Instead of continuing to developing the already existing petrol engine over X years they now have developed a completely new engine and all the new parts that are needed - with the cost it means.

And I still cant think that parts like driveshafts, gearbox, etc. can remain exactly the same as for the petrol version.

You would still be developing new parts if you hadn't switched engines. How much of BMW's 08-spec engine is the same as the 07-spec unit? The same with gearboxes, suspension, etc - it's always an ongoing process.

If anything, continuing to develop an existing car/engine gets progressively more expensive as it get harder and harder to extract that extra hp or extra tenth of a second.

Don't think of the TDi Leon as just a new engine but as a whole new car. It's no different to when SEAT went from Toledo to Leon or BMW from 320i E46 to 320is E90 and will be the same story if/when Honda, Alfa or anyone else build a new car. The point is that's not diesel in itself that is raising costs, it's developing a new car, which would be the same regardless of fuel.

[Ed Peters]

Just as a point of interest: There is no difference between the race prepared bodyshell of a SEAT Leon TDi or Petrol run version!

[stedevil]

JMeissner> It feels like people are missing the point.

Actually, I don't think we are. It's more that you are bringing up 2 different controversies in WTCC in your article.

1) The general "random rule of the week".
2) The immediate ban of Diesels.

I completely agree with you on point 1, they should just draw a hard line in the sand, minimum 1 year ahead, and then just let whoever managed to make the best performing car out of it win. I'm not against moderate success ballast, but all the special exceptions and individual car weights crap should go as well as all racestarts should be rolling to equalize the RWD vs FWD.

That your point 2 is catching all the attention though is because you are using half truths from the 2 race weekends this year to validate exactly why Diesels need to go. We all know, you included, that the 1-2-3-4-5 SEAT win wasn't 1-2-3-4-5, but 1-2-3-4-5-6. Ie the Petrol SEAT still blew away the 2 other brands in the race both for factory teams as well as the single non BMW in the independents category. Hell I was even speculating in this very forum earlier this year that perhaps SEAT deliberately refused Coronel to get a Diesel this year just to make sure they had a good driver in a Petrol SEAT to compair Diesel performance vs Petrol performance. The second weekend SEAT wins also wasnt as clear a victory if you actually watched the races, and that was as good as it gets when it comes to Turbo vs NA advantages.

But appart from this, when saying Diesels must go, I think you are dead wrong. Racing shouldnt just be marketing, it should also spur development for future road car technology. What we absolutely do NOT need is millions of € ploughed down into the naturally aspirated petrol engine. So sure, keeping costs down is important, but RELEVANT research in future tech will naturally have a much bigger research budget available from the factory teams. So I'm saying, we don't need LESS different engines, we need MORE. So lets keep the diesels and add the Turbo Petrol, the Bio Diesels, the E85s and whatever else a manufaturer would like to develop, because this is the area where we actually DO need research money to be spent. NA Petrol is a dead end.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Ed Peters

Just as a point of interest: There is no difference between the race prepared bodyshell of a SEAT Leon TDi or Petrol run version!

I don't know about the rest of the car, but the fronts definitely look different.

http://www.seatsportuk.co.uk/BTCC/20...asp?ID=3130352

http://www.seatsportuk.co.uk/BTCC/20...sp?ID=20112836

[Bramzel]

There's an extra vent in the bumper and an extra vent on the hood, that's all difference there is regarding the bodywork. So yeah, the bodyshell ain't different, it's under the hood where the difference is.

[Nortad]

if you build a bad road car you should have a bad race car. compensations should be keapt to a minimum.

seat should leave their minivans at home and build something proper for racing.

i know im being a bit extremist, but if i recall, touring car racing peaked in a time when you could see everything from 4cyl. 1.6l corollas up to V12 XJRs on the same track.

[Sodemo]

Diesels belong on the roads, not racetracks.

With regard to their performance advantage, well, I just think they should have given a restrictive fixed pressure limit on the turbo.

[Dead-Eye]

Well, I guess there will be another diesel car soon...BMW announced that Farfus and Müller will drive a 320d in the Nürburgring 24h. Ostensibly to give them Ring experience...or maybe to give them Diesel experience?

[JMeissner]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

Well, I guess there will be another diesel car soon...BMW announced that Farfus and Müller will drive a 320d in the Nürburgring 24h. Ostensibly to give them Ring experience...or maybe to give them Diesel experience?

Continue that discussion here:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...79#post2203479

[Martin Haven]

Ban diesels because they don't SOUND right???

What next? Ban cars because you don't like the way they LOOK??

Or, because they come from the wrong country?? Or company??

The whole point of the S2000 rules was only in part to try and reduce costs. That will only happen when manufacturers find they can't spend unlimited amounts of money - as, seemingly, might shortly start to be the case...

The main thrust was to give a fairly catholic set of rules, under which AS MANY MANUFACTURERS AS POSSIBLE migth be able to participate, in racing AND rallying, with the same basic 2.0 family econo-box...

Given 5 minutes and two bottles of red wine, any fool (yes, even me) can draft a set of rules for rorty-snorty, fire-breathing, opposite-lock-friendly, prototypes... but who can afford them? Even DTM, that German bastion of extremes, has gone for common components, like NASCAR has done...

As has been pointed out... if you give ANYONE a F1 budget to go touring-car racing, they'll spend it... every last cent... no matter WHAT the rules...

1.6 n/a engines???

Some fool will make them rev to 16,000rpm if they have enough time and money, thereby either forcing everyone else to spend the same, or quit... thus killing the formula, either way...

Making F1 engines smaller has not made them cheaper...

I think S2000 is having a most bizarre effect, in fact.

Most formulae make cars more and more alike. Who can REALLY tell any F1 car from another???

WTCC cars appear to be getting more diverse... the cars are LESS liek each other in performance than they were one, tow or three years ago...

SEAT's diesels will not be the best cars everywhere... Don't forget how James Thompson's elderly Alfa whupped everyone at Valencia last year - no-one else won both races of a weekend... and the Chevrolets ruled the streets, comfortably better than anything else... BMWs still have that standing-start advantage and there will be tracks that suit them better than Brazil and Mexico (and Valencia)

I like the way the formula is going... or perhaps everyone else would prefer to know in advance which cars are going to be at the front... in which case, tune in to Formula 1