2013 Silly Season (Merged)

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

The air inlet, similar to NASCAR.

Or rally or GT3, take your pick!

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by DX20VT

Easy when you run a 4 barrel carb,

not so easy when you run 8 individual throttles in a not 100% sealed airbox.

Originally Posted by touring fan01

NASCAR don't use carbs.
They use fuel injection.

Yes, NASCAR have changed to injection, not sure if it's a single point throttle body unit though.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by DX20VT

Easy when you run a 4 barrel carb,

not so easy when you run 8 individual throttles in a not 100% sealed airbox.

Also not so easy when the airbox is not a controlled design part - in other words, teams can do their own thing on design.

To go to air restrictors, there'd need to be a design and test process for a control part air box, also where it draws it's air from on the car and aero testing to confirm parity across brands on external airflow and airbox flow, then testing done on restriction (can be more or less effective depending on push rod, OHV or multi valve engine design).

It CAN be done but it ain't quick and it ain't easy.

Maybe the issue with the Nissan and Benz engines is partly the teams building them. You'd have to look at how those teams' engines performed over the last couple of years but maybe there's still catch going on in terms of engine dept at the teams concerned.

Not convinced that the multi valve engines are that big an advantage with the 7.5K rev limit and despite the various comments made over time about "dinosaur" engines in V8s, ultimately a pushrod engine works pretty well in a class of racing like this (see how Corvette go against the multi valve opposition in sports cars for example). For one thing, a pushrod engine has a much lower centre of gravity than a multi overhead cam engine - in a class as tight as V8s, that alone is a benefit.

[Umai Naa]

So the torque sensor on the back of the crankshaft of all CotF-spec V8SCs has not yet established any disparity?

[Mixer]

[QUOTE=Tourer;3284940Maybe the issue with the Nissan and Benz engines is partly the teams building them. You'd have to look at how those teams' engines performed over the last couple of years but maybe there's still catch going on in terms of engine dept at the teams concerned.[/QUOTE]

This is a pretty pertinent question, SBR were never a slouch with engines but AMG are building the engines now.

I'm really not sure what to say about Kelly's Holden engines, they were not terrible but I am not sure they were rocketships either.

[bluesport]

The issue here is that some teams were reportedly complaining earlier in the season about a perceived power advantage that Nissan and Erebus might have, and parity applied. OK, now they should get their wish and have parity applied before Bathurst.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

The issue here is that some teams were reportedly complaining earlier in the season about a perceived power advantage that Nissan and Erebus might have, and parity applied. OK, now they should get their wish and have parity applied before Bathurst.

Why? I don't recall teams complaining but if they did, I don't think any parity adjustment was applied (although that may be my memory at fault).

If a parity adjustment wasn't made then, why should one be made now?

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Why? I don't recall teams complaining but if they did, I don't think any parity adjustment was applied (although that may be my memory at fault).

If a parity adjustment wasn't made then, why should one be made now?

It was reported here that Skaife was to periodically check the power output of the Nissan and Erebus engines following the concerns of some teams in the paddock.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

It was reported here that Skaife was to periodically check the power output of the Nissan and Erebus engines following the concerns of some teams in the paddock.

Yep remember that. So no parity has been applied & none needed now - if it were needed (due to the measurement of outputs) it would have shown up & been applied.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Yep remember that. So no parity has been applied & none needed now - if it were needed (due to the measurement of outputs) it would have shown up & been applied.

Or is parity only a "one way street" to be applied to Nissan and Erebus?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Or is parity only a "one way street" to be applied to Nissan and Erebus?

Never been a "one way street" but the logic is simple - with the engines' output being measured and with evaluation of on track pace there has been no parity adjustment made so far this year so why would one be justified now on what might happen at Bathurst.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Never been a "one way street" but the logic is simple - with the engines' output being measured and with evaluation of on track pace there has been no parity adjustment made so far this year so why would one be justified now on what might happen at Bathurst.

It's really simple, if Nissan and/or Erebus would have been found to have more power than the push-rod V8s, parity would have been applied so that they had no advantage, now that it has been found that they have less power it is only right to assume that the Ford and holden engines be paritised to suit. Otherwise in the future if the Nissan and AMG engines produce more power they will be correct if they refuse to have parity applied.........the game has changed and this should be an ongoing process.

[Tourer]

Really? Has it been 'found' that they have less power? Where has that been announced?
You may also recall that there was some discussion about making allowances for the development curve both of the new engine programs were going through - with steps in the pipeline, what they had one race ago could be redundant at the next race etc.
Anyway, look forward to the info on those measured & confirmed lower power levels.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Really? Has it been 'found' that they have less power? Where has that been announced?
You may also recall that there was some discussion about making allowances for the development curve both of the new engine programs were going through - with steps in the pipeline, what they had one race ago could be redundant at the next race etc.
Anyway, look forward to the info on those measured & confirmed lower power levels.

Are you aligned to any particular team in any way?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Are you aligned to any particular team in any way?

Nup, not at all - why do you ask? Dare say if I was I'd know more about the current state of affairs from the inside.

[Bell_End]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Really? Has it been 'found' that they have less power? Where has that been announced?
You may also recall that there was some discussion about making allowances for the development curve both of the new engine programs were going through - with steps in the pipeline, what they had one race ago could be redundant at the next race etc.
Anyway, look forward to the info on those measured & confirmed lower power levels.

Pretty sure it has been confirmed (larko has spoken about it and have seen other people talk about it) that the new guys don't lack outright power, but the area under the curve is not the same so they lack power throughout the rev range.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Nup, not at all - why do you ask? Dare say if I was I'd know more about the current state of affairs from the inside.

I just thought that you may be..........I guess that you just don't want to see your favourite teams lose any advantage.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

I just thought that you may be..........I guess that you just don't want to see your favourite teams lose any advantage.

Don't have any favourite teams and again, I've yet to see any factual evidence that a particular team, engine, whatever has an advantage.

What I DO see is newcomers developing their package and getting closer to the benchmarks race by race. Supposedly good power but working on driveability etc from the engine. Both teams running the new brands seem to now be performing at a roughly similar level in the field to last year.No doubt been a learning curve for both the teams and the offshore engine development input. Kinda reminds me of when Prodrive first got involved - they had these hyper expensive engines built in the UK but the engines were dogs in the cars - very little driveablity, down on power on top of that. They got themselves sorted though.

Nissan and Mercedes need to do the same thing - not easy but they're getting there.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Don't have any favourite teams and again, I've yet to see any factual evidence that a particular team, engine, whatever has an advantage.

What I DO see is newcomers developing their package and getting closer to the benchmarks race by race. Supposedly good power but working on driveability etc from the engine. Both teams running the new brands seem to now be performing at a roughly similar level in the field to last year.No doubt been a learning curve for both the teams and the offshore engine development input. Kinda reminds me of when Prodrive first got involved - they had these hyper expensive engines built in the UK but the engines were dogs in the cars - very little driveablity, down on power on top of that. They got themselves sorted though.

Nissan and Mercedes need to do the same thing - not easy but they're getting there.

Can't disagree with what you have said, but there is no way that they will let Nissan or Erebus have an engine performance advantage no matter whether they work harder or smarter than the others.

[Bell_End]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Don't have any favourite teams and again, I've yet to see any factual evidence that a particular team, engine, whatever has an advantage.

What I DO see is newcomers developing their package and getting closer to the benchmarks race by race. Supposedly good power but working on driveability etc from the engine. Both teams running the new brands seem to now be performing at a roughly similar level in the field to last year.No doubt been a learning curve for both the teams and the offshore engine development input. Kinda reminds me of when Prodrive first got involved - they had these hyper expensive engines built in the UK but the engines were dogs in the cars - very little driveablity, down on power on top of that. They got themselves sorted though.

Nissan and Mercedes need to do the same thing - not easy but they're getting there.

Pretty sure it was sorted by letting the guys in Australia do the engines again

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Bell_End

Pretty sure it was sorted by letting the guys in Australia do the engines again

Yep - that was how it was done.

[bluesport]

Let's hope that Nissan and Erebus are allowed to be competitive at Bathurst so that it doesn't end up another commodore fest.

[Reload]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Let's hope that Nissan and Erebus are allowed to be competitive at Bathurst so that it doesn't end up another commodore fest.

With that comment, you are dismissing Ford as a contender ?

[smokin'joe]

Originally Posted by Reload

With that comment, you are dismissing Ford as a contender ?

they have many pitstops at Bathurst.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Let's hope that Nissan and Erebus are allowed to be competitive at Bathurst so that it doesn't end up another commodore fest.

They're allowed to be competitive now - but they're developing their stuff and haven't got themselves to the level they COULD be at under the rules - in other words, it's in their hands.

Like Reload, I'm a little surprised that you've given up completely on Ford already as a competitor for the commodore teams - seems to me that the falcons have been competitive all year and it does seem that (for now anyway) FPR have got to the bottom of their earlier pit stop issues.