[iV8SC13R01R02] Clipsal 500, Adelaide: 28 Feb-3 Mar

[Umai Naa]

What's wrong with double-file restarts?

I think it's a great idea, personally.

[lshnz]

Originally Posted by ForumNick

Every time V8s (incl. Dunlop Series) are on track!

Link to Supp Regs HERE !

(NB. Times are Local [Adelaide] Time]

Interesting in Sub Regs rule 5.1.1 additional brake rotors allowed.I thought this year everything was the same on the cars except basically engines.I know this could be a safety related issue but if some teams run different rotors to others some may have problems and some may not.Will have to wait and see.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by lshnz

Interesting in Sub Regs rule 5.1.1 additional brake rotors allowed.I thought this year everything was the same on the cars except basically engines.I know this could be a safety related issue but if some teams run different rotors to others some may have problems and some may not.Will have to wait and see.

There were reported brake failure issues in initial testing. At the Eastern Creek test day they ran thicker rotors which seemed to be less of a problem. I'd imagine that these part numbers are for the thicker rotors.

[birtek]

Looks like Red Flag caused by J Reid 4 laps into P1 - he is the only one not listed in the pits at least

[GTRMagic]

On the live timing app, why would Mercedes be black, and Nissan white?

[Mixer]

WP cars not muckin around! Scotty Mclaughlin not doing too bad either.

Tander very quick. 4/10ths.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

On the live timing app, why would Mercedes be black, and Nissan white?

While SvG is gold?

[GTRMagic]

HRT would have to be pleased... #2, #22, #66... has that ever happened for them before, 3 cars in the top 3?

The 4th one is in 26th

[kittle]

There is some quick times out there for the first run.

Good to see the WP cars start strong.

Bring on the next practise.

[sizzle]

Lot more to come you would think seeing the Dunlop series pole is down in the 21s

[GTRMagic]

So... 19's to come?

[kittle]

By the look of Developement series times we could see high 19's for the V8 Supercar Series.

[pascofi m-sport]

especially for Clipsal, no double-file restarts, but all drivers should maintain the same speed until the control line, make it fair for everyone.

and, as an added suggestion for these cost-cutting measures, we should make every driver be restricted to one engine for the weekend, if they have to change an engine during an event, it's an automatic rear-of-field start (yes, it's a bit NASCAR but rules are rules)

the only exception to this suggested rule is Bathurst, where they are allowed to change an engine, but if they change the engine out of the same car twice, then it's automatic rear-of-field start.

harsh...bur fair.

[sizzle]

Still slower than the Dunlop cars

[kittle]

Originally Posted by sizzle

Still slower than the Dunlop cars

I would have thought they would have gone alot quicker in that practise

[AussieTimmeh]

Originally Posted by pascofi m-sport

and, as an added suggestion for these cost-cutting measures, we should make every driver be restricted to one engine for the weekend, if they have to change an engine during an event, it's an automatic rear-of-field start (yes, it's a bit NASCAR but rules are rules)

the only exception to this suggested rule is Bathurst, where they are allowed to change an engine, but if they change the engine out of the same car twice, then it's automatic rear-of-field start.

harsh...bur fair.

There is no malice in this question, can you (or anyone) explain to me why restricting engines is a cost-cutting feature? I've never understood it.

So a team goes out and spends some money developing a fast engine, and they have a component failure which lunches the engine. So the team were penalised once by the loss of a result and secondly by the loss of an engine. So now in race two, the suggestion is made to start from the rear, so it's a third penalty.

So teams are forced to spend more on RnD to make their engines more fool-proof to be reliable AND fast.

Where is the cost saving?

I would think it would be in control parts or specifying non-exotic materials.

As far as I know, V8 Supercars don't run around with brand new qualy-only engines every event. I understand why F1 would do it when qualy engines were lucky to last a lap or two.

Serious question, keen to understand more.

[kittle]

1 Jamie Whincup Holden Commodore VF 1:22.0021*
2 Shane Van Gisbergen Holden Commodore VF 01:22.0 00:00.0
3 Russell Ingall Holden Commodore VF 01:22.1 00:00.1
4 Craig Lowndes Holden Commodore VF 01:22.1 00:00.1
5 Fabian Coulthard Holden Commodore VF 01:22.2 00:00.2
6 Mark Winterbottom Ford Falcon FG 01:22.2 00:00.2
7 Jason Bright Holden Commodore VF 01:22.2 00:00.2
8 Alexandre Premat Holden Commodore VF 01:22.2 00:00.2
9 Scott McLaughlin Holden Commodore VF 01:22.3 00:00.3
10 Garth Tander Holden Commodore VF 01:22.4 00:00.3

[Chappelli]

Nissan's look quicker than the Mercs... Can't say I would have picked that.

Looks like the DJR cars are running to a budget

[nasdriv87]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Justin.tv

or live streaming from v8 supercars 1ª round is free minus for NZ

read it here

can't wait!!!!!

[davelise]

GLOL @ 7. Great start to the year...

[rich07]

Originally Posted by davelise

GLOL @ 7. Great start to the year...

??

[Umai Naa]

I'd say some possums got into the outside broadcasting van overnight.

[davelise]

Originally Posted by rich07

??

Someone hit rewind half way through Matt White's intro.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by AussieTimmeh

There is no malice in this question, can you (or anyone) explain to me why restricting engines is a cost-cutting feature? I've never understood it.

So a team goes out and spends some money developing a fast engine, and they have a component failure which lunches the engine. So the team were penalised once by the loss of a result and secondly by the loss of an engine. So now in race two, the suggestion is made to start from the rear, so it's a third penalty.

So teams are forced to spend more on RnD to make their engines more fool-proof to be reliable AND fast.

Where is the cost saving?

I would think it would be in control parts or specifying non-exotic materials.

As far as I know, V8 Supercars don't run around with brand new qualy-only engines every event. I understand why F1 would do it when qualy engines were lucky to last a lap or two.

Serious question, keen to understand more.

The theory seems to be that an engine in this development path would be built to a certain spec and not developed further. Similar to the F1 plan, of needing to use engines at a number of grand prix during the season.

Indeed some V8Supercar engine suppliers were getting almost 5,000km of running out of their engines before needing a full top to toe rebuild... while others were pulling them apart in less than 1,000km...

In the new world of seemingly unlimited development paths where there are 4 brands of engine, establishing a spec at the start of a season, and forcing that spec for the year, and a number of engines to be used during that year, is a cost containment exercise. Development budgets are slashed because there is no change in spec happening.

Getting the spec homologated would likely be a challenge for V8Supercar, given that there are a number of engine suppliers (FPR, Innov8, WP, KRE, NRE, Nismo, AMG) some of which develop the same powerplant style (i.e. 2 sources of Ford engines, 3 sources of Chev engines)

Maybe it would work if the engines for the whole brand came from a single source. The development process would be pooled, the costs shared, and wins for all. This would have to be a cost saver...

[STEALTHY]

Good to see the below par telecast is up to spec.

They're listing the drivers as '1ST LOW'

Some of the names arent even in the same format.

Dear channel7, drop the ST, and have the same format for everyones name (First initial, and first 4 digits of last name), and add in 15 or 20 names. Then change it all to the same as motoGP colours (transparent) and job done!