Oulton

[Johno.UK]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

To be honest though, BMW road car engines are fitted well back in standard form anyway and so often require removal of the scuttle panel to access parts of the engine that aren't even at the back of it!

May be so but it's still a big advantage for RWD cars being able to put the heaviest part of the car that far back. A lot of FWD cars I've worked on need the scuttle removing to work on the back of the engine. Might be more to with the large dashboard areas needed for crash regs in those cases.

[porsche962fan]

and more

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Johno.UK

May be so but it's still a big advantage for RWD cars being able to put the heaviest part of the car that far back. A lot of FWD cars I've worked on need the scuttle removing to work on the back of the engine. Might be more to with the large dashboard areas needed for crash regs in those cases.

I get that it's an advantage, but it's a legal advantage. Having a certain wheelbase could be considered an advantage, but you can't expect a Corolla to have one the same as a Passat to equalise things out.
Most of the FWD cars have their engine laying backwards don't they? Then I suppose it would be a traction disadvantage to them to have the weight too far back surely?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Johno.UK

it would appear that BMW have taken a leaf out of Subarus book and have the engine a fair way back.

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

To be honest though, BMW road car engines are fitted well back in standard form anyway and so often require removal of the scuttle panel to access parts of the engine that aren't even at the back of it!

I don't think it's a leaf out of Subaru's book, and more just a case of applying the regulations as they are written.

When building to NGTC regulations, the position of the front and rear subframes are fixed against the road going model's wheelbase (+/- 10mm).
In a FWD car, the gearbox is in a fixed position within the front subframe, and the engine mates against that - leaving no potential to adjust in a FWD car other than angle of mounting.
In a RWD car, the diff is in a fixed position relative to the rear subframe. The regulations stipulate the minimum length of the bellhousing and crank centre line, but the position of the engine is free and the propshaft is free (provided it is from ferrous materials or aluminium, but must incorporate the specified gearbox end flange).

The comparative details are:

Model	1-Series	3-Series	Levorg
Length(mm)	4324	4709	4690
Wheelbase	2690	2851	2650
Rear Wheel - Nose	3460	3650	3635

Assuming that all cars used the same minimal propshaft length (for CoG purposes), then the distance from the front of the car to the diff is longer on the 3-series than any other RWD car. This means that, relative to the front of the car, the 3-series engine can be mounted further back than even the Subaru, due to the length and wheelbase characteristics.

If all 3 models use the same propshaft, then the 3-series engine is 15mm further back than the Subaru and 190mm further back than the 1-series.

[Johno.UK]

Yes, that's what kicked off the spat between AJ and AP.

AJ tweeted that basically the Subaru was pegged back because of where the engine was and same shouldn't happen with the BMW as it's engine is in the same position as the rest of the grid.

It might be in the same vertical plane as the rest of the grid but it's obviously not in the horizontal plane.

I know they addressed the low CoG of the Subaru with a formula for ballast and ride height but is there anything in place for fore/aft CoG?

[VIVA GT]

I think that the added advantage for the Subaru was that being a boxer engine, the weight was also lower down than an in-line 4 cylinder.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Johno.UK

I know they addressed the low CoG of the Subaru with a formula for ballast and ride height but is there anything in place for fore/aft CoG?

For the 2015 season, the ballast box location for RWD cars was moved forward to provide compensation against FWD.
Obviously this only has an effect when ballast is being carried, and with the reduction this season the effect is minimised.
The effect this has on the 3-Series will also be less than it was on the 1-series (and to a certain extent the Levorg) due to the dimensions of the ROPS and bulkhead positioning.

I'm sure some drivers would happily take a front counterweight if they could use it to nudge other drivers (just don't suggest it to Matt Neal)?

[Robin Marriott]

It’s not even really a valid argument. Having the weight that far forward on FWD car isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it helps the rear rotate.

One of the teams in 2016 was trying to get as much weight as far forward as possible on their FWD car by filling the bumper bar with weight or use thicker wall tubing for it, purely to help with the weight balance. That’s about as far forward as you could get weight and still hide it.

WSR have done nothing wrong according to the rule book, the engine is a long way back but if you’re building a car from scratch, that’s what you’d look for. Everyone on the grid knows that, JP included.

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Robin Marriott

It’s not even really a valid argument. Having the weight that far forward on FWD car isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it helps the rear rotate.

One of the teams in 2016 was trying to get as much weight as far forward as possible on their FWD car by filling the bumper bar with weight or use thicker wall tubing for it, purely to help with the weight balance. That’s about as far forward as you could get weight and still hide it.

WSR have done nothing wrong according to the rule book, the engine is a long way back but if you’re building a car from scratch, that’s what you’d look for. Everyone on the grid knows that, JP included.

Yep. Prodrive fitted weights behind the bumper of the Mondeo back in the supertouring days, for reasons I forget.

[Johno.UK]

Originally Posted by Robin Marriott

WSR have done nothing wrong according to the rule book, the engine is a long way back but if you’re building a car from scratch, that’s what you’d look for. Everyone on the grid knows that, JP included.

Plato isn't saying they've done anything wrong or illegal. He's actually tweeted several times now saying what a great job WSR have done and how good the car is.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Johno.UK

Plato isn't saying they've done anything wrong or illegal. He's actually tweeted several times now saying what a great job WSR have done and how good the car is.

Maybe Dan Cammish isn't the only one cosying up to WSR in case there's a vacant seat next year when AJ's Pirtek money stops?

[S griffin]

Remember how dominant Cammish was in FFord and Porsche? Maybe he's too used to that, so wants to have a go at dominating again

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Robin Marriott

WSR have done nothing wrong according to the rule book, the engine is a long way back but if you’re building a car from scratch, that’s what you’d look for. Everyone on the grid knows that, JP included.

And JP has admitted that, and recognised the work that has been done at WSR. It was all instigated by AJ lacking a bit of class and trolling on twitter. Sadly, people have fed that troll - with one of them being JP.

In the past, every time a certain car or configuration has had too great an advantage, the situation has been resolved:

A CoG calculation was introduced to compensate for the Boxer engine.
A boost adjustment was made when the Civic had an advantage.
We've seen the base weight of RWD raised, and a longer 1st gear introduced.
Even now, the boost in 1st gear is limited on the RWD cars.
Aero rules have been changed in the past, along with measures around 4WD.
The BMW flat floor was no longer permitted after a while.

Instead of accepting that WSR are currently in the great position they are, and just getting on with driving (like Turkington seems to), AJ decided to troll on twitter. Was there a need for him to massage his own ego with the comment about great drivers?
When JP pointed out that the last car to have a significant advantage led to a change in the rules, AJ claimed that the BMW is the same as every other car on the grid in terms of engine position 'the difference is there was a big difference with their car to the rest of the grid with engine position. Our car doesn’t have any differences like that to the rest of the grid'

JP pulled him up on this, which made AJ look even more foolish so he decided to retaliate.


Did the 90 million cans of Rich Energy end up in the paddock at Oulton and the teams have been drinking a bit of it?

[porsche962fan]

if the 3 series has the engine as far back which gives an advantage didn't the old 1 series also it too ? but that was hardly dominating the series !!! as Turks got a single win and was often of the pace with it

[Jiiiiiiim]

Originally Posted by btccbloke

Sorry, I know from almost all of your posts that you are a big supporter of the Hill's but you have missed a little bit of Simon's comment out which means its lost the context it needs:

Dan: A dream moment. I was honoured to be asked by Honda to drive the legendary McLaren Honda MP4/4 at Goodwood. Not only one of the greatest ever F1 cars but driven by maybe the greatest driver of them all. Heartboken to say it wasn’t to be. At 6ft 2 I simply don’t fit�� #F1 #Senna

Simon: @JakeHillDriver would fit....! #ayrtonsennawasfivefooteight

Dan: I was feeling quite disappointed but now I know your boy would fit it’s really cheered me up. Go promote your boy somewhere else

Simon: Sorry Dan - I am so sorry to have dared to make a joke with the best @BTCC driver on the grid #lightenupprincess


Dan was clearly disappointed had a completely fair point when being told Jake would fit, there is clearly bad feeling between Dynamics and Hill, so the comment was probably not best timed, Simon didn't then need to add his sarcastic comment or his "lighten up princess", and clearly isn't someone just saying "sorry just making a joke".

Simon Hill is probably an ok guy and I know he tries to look out for his son but if i were honest he comes across as a bit of an embarrassment with his outbursts (remember his issues with Team Hard last year) and I wonder if Jake would actually have had a better BTCC career to date if it wasn't for daddy in tow winding people up the wrong way and guiding him to some of his decisions.
You dont see this behavior from parents of others in his generation of drivers and whilst we may see a bit of that of the Neal's and Jordan's (not so much), they at least have the careers and results to back any arrogance up

Wow, now if you knew how hard Simon has worked to help get Jake where he is today and knew the background to what has gone on in the past you’d certainly would have another take on this. Jake and Simon work together and yes Simon likes to have some banter on social media, but the Hill’s certainly aren’t arrogant unlike some!

[Johno.UK]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

if the 3 series has the engine as far back which gives an advantage didn't the old 1 series also it too ? but that was hardly dominating the series !!! as Turks got a single win and was often of the pace with it

See the previous page of the thread. Big difference between the two.

[Liquoriceman]

Originally Posted by Jason Plato

What on earth are you talking about, what planet do you live on. I didn’t ignore the marshals, we were all having some friendly banter, at no point did they tell me I wasn’t allowed in that area. I was looking at the roll angles of all cars, etc etc. You sir to make your utterly ridiculous and fake remarks have an agenda.

What’s wrong with getting a lift back to the pits, how on earth am I responsible for the action of Matt and the Ford, I was waiting for Collard you muppet..

And what was your other stupid remark... not setting a great example to younger drivers...omg are you for real

Do us all a favour and shut up you bafoon









QUOTE=Liquoriceman;3915097]I was at Islands hairpin for the last race where Plato retired his car. Did the TV pick up that he ignored the marshals and went on to the track behind the tyre wall on the outside of the hairpin for about 5 laps? He was making out that he was observing the cornering difference between Collards car and the others, but would going beyond the marshal point be tolerated of any other driver? Not to mention he may distract the eye of drivers cornering - which may have been his tactics. Irresponsible!



And then there was the palava of him thumbing a lift of the warm down lap when Matt Neal stopped and one of the Motorbase cars rear ended him!



One rule for Jason and another for everyone else - not setting a great example to young drivers



Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

[/QUOTE]

Not my favourite driver but I would have made the same observations about any driver doing the same. If the area was safe the marshals would stand there too but they remained behind the armco. If they had stood beyond it yellow flags would/should have been waived on the hairpin approach. It appeared that they indicated that JP should have been stood where they were. There was no argument but they didn't join JP.

Not sure how saying what I saw can be fake I certainly don't consider myself a keyboard warrior.

Forums are for comments, no agenda - just giving my opinion - if you don't like it fair enough


Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

if the 3 series has the engine as far back which gives an advantage didn't the old 1 series also it too ?

In short - 190mm of wheelbase.

[Alfisti]

Forgive me as my memory could be fuddled again: a long time ago the Ford Sierra kicked butt in BTCC. Pretty much every team bought some Fords and it was effectively the Ford Sierra RS500 British Touring Car Championship. Largely because team owners and drivers saw the Ford and knew it was the car to have if you wanted to be competitive.

That mentality doesn't seem to exist anymore. Surely if you're thinking "that 3 series is really something" you'd build some yourself. Or knock on Dick Bennets door with your cheque book and say pretty please. Heck, that's effectively what BTC did on Dynamics door, the Neals earn a living whether it's their cars winning or some cars they built for others winning.

What chance it becoming the BMW Touring Car Championship. With TG floating around making the numbers with a fleet of Passats...

[btccbloke]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

With TG floating around making the numbers with a fleet of Passats...

Hes going to be running them for years still, anyone else have to laugh on Sunday when Jack Goff said on the warm up lap "we are still learning the car" ... its possibly one of the oldest cars on the grid, which Jack drove in 2014 anyway and Team Hard have been dragging around for 3/4 seasons now ... and they still have no idea! #gamechanger

[touringlegend]

WSR have never really sold their cars en masse though, in recent years Team Parker seems to have been the exception..

And would Team hard for example built a 3 series as competitive.

[S griffin]

No, a few have ended up in Trevor Turkington's collection

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

If all 3 models use the same propshaft, then the 3-series engine is 15mm further back than the Subaru and 190mm further back than the 1-series.

For comparison with the picture JP posted on twitter, this is the location of the engine in the 1-Series:


And the Focus (typical for FWD):


Is this a trick that was missed when the A4 was built?

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by btccbloke

Hes going to be running them for years still, anyone else have to laugh on Sunday when Jack Goff said on the warm up lap "we are still learning the car" ... its possibly one of the oldest cars on the grid, which Jack drove in 2014 anyway and Team Hard have been dragging around for 3/4 seasons now ... and they still have no idea! #gamechanger

Slow learner. Conical hat at the back of the class!

I did chortle but took Jacks "we" to mean "I", which would be fair enough in my books as the VW was on the different suspension and powered by coal when Jack drove it previously back in 1913/14.

[btccbloke]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Is this a trick that was missed when the A4 was built?

I may be wrong but I dont think its a "missed trick" I seem to remember hearing the A4 was derived from a 4WD car not a pure RWD and the engine and running gear had to be sat further forward than in the pure RWD cars?