Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper
No, not possible and absolutely impractical. You only have to look at the debacle Nissan/Mercedes turned into and they were V8's but had different engine architecture. After that little lesson what manufacturer would even try and consider using a different architecture motor. I repeat the question above, how long did it take to make the two current motors reasonably close?
|
The ATCC is the one that needs to attract new manufacturers, not the other way round. The BOP concessions for the Toyota Supra, Nissan Z or BMW M4 would need to make sure that those cars are competitive and winning races with their turbo engines.
Why did the Nissan and Mercedes not get close? Because the ATCC regulators didn't provide enough concessions, be it more compression ratio, variable vale timing, or more revs, to make sure they were competitive. Boost is a variable that can be easily tweaked on turbo engines, more easily even then adding compression ratio to a DOHC V8. Rev limits can be easily tweaked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenMachine
GT3 might have problems but theirs is a different methodology that is worth looking at in developing answers.
|
Exactly. A variety of configurations with different strengths with a balance of performance is the way to go. GT3 successfully balances a 3.0 twin-turbo V6, with a 4.0 twin-turbo V8, with a 4.0 naturally aspirated flat-six with a 6.2 naturally aspirated V8! Boost, rev limits, air restrictors: there's lots of tools that can be used. The Ford Mustang and Nissan Z have different engines in the real world, why shouldn't they have different engines on the track in touring car racing? Too easy.
I maintain that 7500rpm for both a 5.4 Ford and 5.7 Chev was wrong. They should have been done 6400rpm on a 6.2 Chev and 8200rpm on a 5.0-5.2 Ford to make them sound different. After all, the baritone Corvette GTEs raced without issue against the wailing Ferrari 458 GTEs!