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

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 21 Oct 2006, 14:56 (Ref:1744152)   #26
JAG
Veteran
 
JAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
England
Posts: 10,500
JAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridJAG should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Seems to be the case.

I could quite easily see teams being given the option to use restricors or electronic limiting once the system is perfected.
JAG is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Oct 2006, 15:20 (Ref:1744163)   #27
Animeishdwarf
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
United States
Pennsylvania
Posts: 35
Animeishdwarf should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
GT1 cars like the Corvette and DBR9 get up to speed through the Mulsanne and can keep up with P1 if unrestricted, but it's definitely in the corners where the P1's have the advantage, with all the downforce, and less weight.
Animeishdwarf is offline  
__________________
"The American Contingent"
Quote
Old 21 Oct 2006, 15:21 (Ref:1744164)   #28
Bob Riebe
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location:
Minnesota
Posts: 2,351
Bob Riebe User has been fined for unsportsmanlike behaviour!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ger80
Why are the new engines that dont use a normal restrictor cheaper than the normal engines? The maximum power must be mostly the same. Is it so much easier to create the same amount of power with other valves etc if you dont have to use a restrictor?
Because as long as the engine functions mainly on mechanical improvements, there are ways to cheat the system, i.e. special cylinder heads only factory Corvettes have.
How fast you go, depends entirely on how much money you want to spend before the laws of physics make it a dead-end street.

If the car is entirely limited electronically, unless you hire a computer hacker to out and out cheat, you are screwed, you will get no more power than the electronics say you can.

Both systems will NOT be allowed because the big buck boy will spend whatever it takes to stay in front, if they care enough to build a car, and the boys with the cheaper electronic cars will stay back, way back, in the also ran area.
Bob
Bob Riebe is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Oct 2006, 15:26 (Ref:1744167)   #29
Bob Riebe
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location:
Minnesota
Posts: 2,351
Bob Riebe User has been fined for unsportsmanlike behaviour!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Animeishdwarf
GT1 cars like the Corvette and DBR9 get up to speed through the Mulsanne and can keep up with P1 if unrestricted, but it's definitely in the corners where the P1's have the advantage, with all the downforce, and less weight.
This is why I find ACO, and FIA rules so asinine; take the diffusers and wings off of the GT1 cars, and their cornering speeds will drop even further.
If they also take the restrictors off, even with the huge HP increase they will get nowhere near the P class due to much lower cornering speed, and the skinny tires they must use.
Add to that it would be far more entertaining to watch the drivers to the balancing act between applying power and not over driving the tires.
Bob
Bob Riebe is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Oct 2006, 20:40 (Ref:1744346)   #30
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
Seems to be the case.

I could quite easily see teams being given the option to use restricors or electronic limiting once the system is perfected.
The scruteneers can use the vacuum test with the restrictors to test possible out put. Plus restrictors may be changed or rules changed at the event depeding of practice lap times.

Not every team uses the same electronic system. as in the Bosch Engine Managment system.

a few electronic systems can have multiple programs so the driver can just flip a switch or push a button to have a higher or lower out put.

Now they can only have a control of the fuel delevery, from "full lean to full rich"
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 21 Oct 2006, 20:44 (Ref:1744347)   #31
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
With many differnt cars, and power plants if gives so many differnt varriables to reach the same HP output.

The scrutineers are high technical ppl so they can catch every possible form of cheating there is.

the idea of "if it does not say it is illegal" they do it is not possible. If it is not written down in the rules then it is illegal.

Look at all the discussions and ideas here on the forum. Do we all agree on the same thing?? I bloody hope not, they it would not be any fun
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 21 Oct 2006, 21:01 (Ref:1744351)   #32
vorsprung
Veteran
 
vorsprung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Finland
Posts: 530
vorsprung should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by AU N EGL
The scrutineers are high technical ppl so they can catch every possible form of cheating there is.
Illegal operations can easily be hidden in computer code if you have enough coders. That's way FIA allowed tc and launch control again in F1. The scrutineers could never find those strings of code from the engine management software.
vorsprung is offline  
Quote
Old 22 Oct 2006, 19:56 (Ref:1745364)   #33
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by vorsprung
Illegal operations can easily be hidden in computer code if you have enough coders. That's way FIA allowed tc and launch control again in F1. The scrutineers could never find those strings of code from the engine management software.
Absoulty. and why mechanical restrictions are easer to regulate.

Winning is not going the fastest, it is going as slow as possible, AND staying in front of all other competiters when crossing the finish line.
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 22 Oct 2006, 20:58 (Ref:1745444)   #34
Viper GTS-R***
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Belgium
Belgium
Posts: 91
Viper GTS-R*** should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
VBM - Thevenir & Bornhauser takes the third place in the second race this week-end at Magny-Cours in the French GT Series with the low budget F550 of CareRacing-Prodrive.

http://www.ffsa.org/res_circuit.php?id=419

Quote:
1. Oreca Saleen S7R
2. SRT Corvette C5-R / 14.429 sec.
3. VBM Ferrari 550 / 34.145 sec.
4. SRT Corvette C5-R / 1 min. 6.635 sec.
5. Tarrès Team Viper GTS-R / 1 min. 7.659 sec
I guess we will see a couple of more such LowBudget F550's next year in French GT. Next VBM, also Sport Garage has interest in the 550.
Viper GTS-R*** is offline  
Quote
Old 22 Oct 2006, 23:36 (Ref:1745583)   #35
Félix
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
MagnetON
Québec
Posts: 785
Félix should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridFélix should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
They complained about poor power from the new customer Ferrari engine at the end of the race. How can it lack power if it runs unrestricted and is only limited through the electronics? Just turn the button and you get the power you feel you need, why restrict it to an inferior value?
Félix is offline  
Quote
Old 23 Oct 2006, 18:43 (Ref:1746599)   #36
Viper GTS-R***
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Belgium
Belgium
Posts: 91
Viper GTS-R*** should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Patrick BORNHAUSER (Ferrari 550 Maranello, VBM), 3ème : « La réputation de la Ferrari n’est plus Ã* faire. Elle a un très bon châssis, des freins supers, et le moteur, qui est expérimental, est encore perfectible, car il lui manque un peu de puissance pour rivaliser. Nous ne savons pas de quoi demain sera fait, on va regarder les opportunités, mais les Saleen me font peur. Affaire Ã* suivre ! »

In English:
Bornhauser speaks about the F550 Low Budget:
Very good chassis, great brakes, and an engine who is experimentel and still can be improve to more speed. But he's missing the power for battling with the Saleen and the C6-R.

Resolution: all vieuws to next year are still open, they dont say they will buy the F550, it's a possibility but they will see if there are other choses.
Viper GTS-R*** is offline  
Quote
Old 1 Nov 2006, 18:15 (Ref:1755501)   #37
ChironWSC
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
United Kingdom
Worcester UK
Posts: 86
ChironWSC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Bin the air restrictors

The current air restrictor regulations in FIA and ACO GT regs are severally restricting the grids especially in National GT championships running to FIA GT2 regs like in the UK.
Air restrictors massively increase the cost of building engines and massively reduce the rebuild intervals.
For example LS7 engine GT3 spec stock engine with dry sump suitable for racing approx £12k and will probably run full season without rebuild. LS7 GT2 engine build to run with air restrictors £35K+ life approx 25hrs.
Most road cars that GT2 race cars are based on can produce approx 400bhp and with very few changes will produce the 450bhp needed for GT2. Yet manufacturers are having to spend tens of thousands of pounds to make these engine work with air restrictors. These engines needing high compression ratios etc and hours of dyno time to regain the lost BHP due to the restrictors. These engines are working much harder than they need to.

There are so many ways of controlling the power of GT cars with out air restrictors.
Here are a few options.
All GT cars in FIA and ACO events have to be homologated. Could for example the Porsche 996RSR's not all be supplied with the same homologated ecu with a homologated map with the ecu locked. A spare ecu is supplied to the FIA ACO that has the homologated map on so if there is any suspicion of tampering with the ecu the organisers just put the spare unit in the car.

Another option, Horsepower =(torque x rpm)/5252 so all GT cars must have fitted driveshaft or prop shaft torque sensors, you know what the engine rpm is add a simple data logger and bingo you have power info on all cars to check that they are running to the required power.

I hope that the FIA/ACO are involved with or at least keeping an eye on the Care Racing/Prodrive project this is the sort of thing that GT racing so desperately needs.
Comments please!!!!

Henry
ChironWSC is offline  
Quote
Old 1 Nov 2006, 18:51 (Ref:1755530)   #38
Bob Riebe
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location:
Minnesota
Posts: 2,351
Bob Riebe User has been fined for unsportsmanlike behaviour!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChironWSC
There are so many ways of controlling the power of GT cars with out air restrictors.
Henry
This contrived competition conundrum is what makes racing expensive, without regards to method used for artificial equalization.

Racing is about what a car is capable of, not reducing one make, so another lessor one can catch up without improving its product.

There are ways of slowing the cars down without artificial restriction: eliminate wings, make them run at a weight to displacement or engine type, production trannies and gear ratios only, etc.

Bob
Bob Riebe is offline  
Quote
Old 13 Nov 2006, 17:08 (Ref:1765128)   #39
ChironWSC
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
United Kingdom
Worcester UK
Posts: 86
ChironWSC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
How they doing it?

Does anyone know exactly how the Care Racing 550 are controlling engine power with out the air restrictors? They say it is electronically done but that could mean several ways. Is it through special ecu or locked ecu etc? Any one know?
ChironWSC is offline  
Quote
Old 13 Nov 2006, 17:13 (Ref:1765138)   #40
Ranald
Racer
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
England
Oxford
Posts: 281
Ranald should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I imagine it's the mapping of the ECU. Injection timing, mxtures...etc

The car is entred for the FIA GT race at Dubai next week.
Ranald is offline  
Quote
Old 13 Nov 2006, 17:41 (Ref:1765171)   #41
AU N EGL
Veteran
 
AU N EGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
United States
Raleigh, North Carolina
Posts: 4,418
AU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridAU N EGL should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I think it is more then ECU restriction. Ferrari engines are strong but unreliable. I would bet Prodrive is making differnt parts, stronger and more reliable construction of the 550 engine, first. Then a differnt ECU contoler.

ProDrive is building the engines for Care-Racing's Ferrari 550 customer program
AU N EGL is offline  
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG
Quote
Old 13 Nov 2006, 17:43 (Ref:1765176)   #42
ChironWSC
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
United Kingdom
Worcester UK
Posts: 86
ChironWSC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Yes that will be how they control the power but how are they going to stop teams from changing the mapping etc. Are they non reprogrammable ecu's once set they cant be changed? What make of ECU are they running?
ChironWSC is offline  
Quote
Old 15 Nov 2006, 20:54 (Ref:1767166)   #43
Spiteful
Racer
 
Spiteful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Belgium
Posts: 134
Spiteful should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
This contrived competition conundrum is what makes racing expensive, without regards to method used for artificial equalization.

Racing is about what a car is capable of, not reducing one make, so another lessor one can catch up without improving its product.

There are ways of slowing the cars down without artificial restriction: eliminate wings, make them run at a weight to displacement or engine type, production trannies and gear ratios only, etc.

Bob
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...t=90450&page=3
(How the do you link to an exact post again?)
I think we share some opinions... However, I have a feeling that I would hate to discuss politics with you

But seriously, there are some arguments against making the cars too production based. Mandatory production boxes, suspension etc. could keep some interesting cars (and engines) from being competitive. After all, the design requirements for a racecar and a roadcar are quite different in some ways. When pushed too far, these sort of regs could mean that manufacturers need to build a batch of totally impractical homologation specials to come up with a competitive car.
I think the point of gt racing is, in part, to have a good variety of roadgoing models that qualify for a 'real sportscar' racing against each other on a fairly equal basis (NOT to make all different models run at exactly the same pace!!! ). So some tinkering with track performance is inevitable, IMO. In that light, wings for example can be a good equalizer between different types of body shape, drivetrain layout etc. Good weight to displacement rules seem valid to me too. Can't quite think of any objections to that, really...
But air restrictors...
You'd think that any idiot with some interest in motorsport could have foreseen that that would lead to very specialized and very pointless designs, for atmospheric engines at least. For protos the situation is even more absurd IMO, can't think of a good reason why the rulemakers would want bigger engines with less power in those. Electronic restrictions make more sense then. You probably could make a watertight system that restricts power output to a specific value. No doubt that AM and GM would still spend -illions to eke out a little more performance, but 650 bhp is still 650 bhp. Weren't the restrictors originally meant to keep down revs? Well, is there any better way to do that than by electronics?
And last but not least, I can imagine that a free breathing engine has onehellofalotofan easier time to make 650 bhp than one with a cork in it.
Spiteful is offline  
__________________
We are the ones that want to choose, always want to play, never want to lose. -
Quote
Old 16 Nov 2006, 04:00 (Ref:1767326)   #44
Bob Riebe
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location:
Minnesota
Posts: 2,351
Bob Riebe User has been fined for unsportsmanlike behaviour!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiteful
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...t=90450&page=3
(How the do you link to an exact post again?)
I think we share some opinions... However, I have a feeling that I would hate to discuss politics with you

But seriously, there are some arguments against making the cars too production based. Mandatory production boxes, suspension etc. could keep some interesting cars (and engines) from being competitive. After all, the design requirements for a racecar and a roadcar are quite different in some ways. When pushed too far, these sort of regs could mean that manufacturers need to build a batch of totally impractical homologation specials to come up with a competitive car.
IF, and that is a big IF, they are not prod. based then do not pretend, they are.
The rules as now are on the limit, of not being a lie, but it still makes no sense to limit HP and let them gain speed, in the corners with aero add-ons.
One can be required to use the production system and still improve the handling by hundreds of percentl
It takes more talent, but not one damn red-cent more money, than what they are doing now.
It is the lax regulations, that allow big dollars to do serious adjustments, to a suspension, that has little, if any, to do with the prod. unit, that also hurts a privateer.
If they were req. to use the same basic stock based system, especially pick-up points, of the original, you would be surprised just how different a theoretically similar set-up can get, but there would be nothing a privateer would not know probably could be tried.

Quote:
I think the point of gt racing is, in part, to have a good variety of roadgoing models that qualify for a 'real sportscar' racing against each other on a fairly equal basis (NOT to make all different models run at exactly the same pace!!! ). So some tinkering with track performance is inevitable, IMO. In that light, wings for example can be a good equalizer between different types of body shape, drivetrain layout etc. Good weight to displacement rules seem valid to me too. Can't quite think of any objections to that, really...
But air restrictors...
You'd think that any idiot with some interest in motorsport could have foreseen that that would lead to very specialized and very pointless designs, for atmospheric engines at least. For protos the situation is even more absurd IMO, can't think of a good reason why the rulemakers would want bigger engines with less power in those. Electronic restrictions make more sense then. You probably could make a watertight system that restricts power output to a specific value. No doubt that AM and GM would still spend -illions to eke out a little more performance, but 650 bhp is still 650 bhp. Weren't the restrictors originally meant to keep down revs?
With restricted breathing high revolutions are less efficient, but really not limited.
How soon an engine loses power,is determined by cubic dollars.
IF an cheat free elect. system was used, Detroit, and probaly more, would show the IMSA nothing but buttocks and elbows.
Only a fool allows another to jam the one into a sardine can.

Wings for me are a maybe yes, maybe no thing, but get rid of the pointless rear diffuser.

Bob
Bob Riebe is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Nov 2006, 07:17 (Ref:1767396)   #45
The Badger
Veteran
 
The Badger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location:
Innsbruck , Austria
Posts: 13,763
The Badger has a real shot at the podium!The Badger has a real shot at the podium!The Badger has a real shot at the podium!The Badger has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
Wings for me are a maybe yes, maybe no thing, but get rid of the pointless rear diffuser.
Do you think Prodrive , Corvette & their like have a diffuser on the car because it looks good ? Or perhaps it actually does do something !!!

Wings ..... Maybe ? Im glad your not in charge of sportscar racing or we would all be watching supertouring mate
The Badger is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Nov 2006, 08:58 (Ref:1767462)   #46
Bob Riebe
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location:
Minnesota
Posts: 2,351
Bob Riebe User has been fined for unsportsmanlike behaviour!
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Badger
Do you think Prodrive , Corvette & their like have a diffuser on the car because it looks good ? Or perhaps it actually does do something !!!

Wings ..... Maybe ? Im glad your not in charge of sportscar racing or we would all be watching supertouring mate
Hmm, you seem to think they need items like wings and diffusers to go fast, but are silent as a church mouse about engines that produce greatly reduced horse power, do to artificial contrived restrictors.

They can go just as quickly without the diffusers, or wings, it justs takes a more talented or determined driver to do so.
Bob
Bob Riebe is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Nov 2006, 09:46 (Ref:1767509)   #47
ChironWSC
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
United Kingdom
Worcester UK
Posts: 86
ChironWSC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
They can go just as quickly without the diffusers, or wings, it justs takes a more talented or determined driver to do so
.

Bob are you serious? If so i am worried that you are even posting on this thread.

Last edited by ChironWSC; 16 Nov 2006 at 09:49.
ChironWSC is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Nov 2006, 09:50 (Ref:1767516)   #48
WouterM
Racer
 
Join Date: May 2006
Netherlands
Posts: 306
WouterM should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChironWSC
Bob are you serious? If so i am worried that you are even posting on this thread.
You were not aware of this? Planes can fly without wings, it just takes a very determined pilot to do so. The only reason they have wings right now is to store fuel.
WouterM is offline  
__________________
No soup for you!
Quote
Old 16 Nov 2006, 10:03 (Ref:1767526)   #49
ChironWSC
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
United Kingdom
Worcester UK
Posts: 86
ChironWSC should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by WouterM
You were not aware of this? Planes can fly without wings, it just takes a very determined pilot to do so. The only reason they have wings right now is to store fuel.
Ok maybe you are right!!!!???? But we are talking about a race car not a plane. Any downforce on a race car produced by the rear wing, diffuser etc will help push the car down in the corners so enable the car to go faster around the corners.
I cant believe i am even having this conversation about this!!!
I am sure if you tell Renault F1 and Alonso that if he is a more determined driver he will go just as fast without the wings on his car he will at you.
ChironWSC is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Nov 2006, 10:23 (Ref:1767549)   #50
ger80
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Germany
Birmingham
Posts: 1,710
ger80 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by WouterM
You were not aware of this? Planes can fly without wings, it just takes a very determined pilot to do so. The only reason they have wings right now is to store fuel.
Ah ok, now I understand why there is done so much wind tunel testing on plane wings ....
ger80 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
Sauber get customer BMW engines from 2006 Kicking-back Formula One 74 26 Feb 2005 16:29
Customer Engines... DKGandBH Formula One 20 9 Aug 2004 01:50
Did Mercedes say something about customer engines? X-ecutioner Formula One 14 14 Jun 2004 13:35
Customer engines mirwin Formula One 4 23 Feb 2003 08:46
Customer Cars / Engines bobdrummond Formula One 1 30 May 2000 17:28


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:31.


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.