Fuel formula

[The Badger]

I would like to know what you people think about the Group C fuel formula ?

I know it had its drawbacks but , if these rules existed today , maybe we wouldnt have all this debate over diesel V's petrol .

The first sportscar race that I went to see was 1986 Brands Hatch . RLR won with their 956 and Joest were 2nd with old faithful 956-117 , which had to stop in front of the start-finish line and wait for the RLR car to do another lap , cuz Joest was too low on fuel to complete another lap ..... that was a sad end to the race i must admit .

But at the end of the day , it was fair , it was up to the engine manufacturer to work out fuel efficiency , and not simply go hell for leather , or you might run outta fuel .

Im just interested in hearing peoples views on this , cheers .

[Speedblood]

Though I never saw a geniune Group C or "Consumption" race I really would of loved to.
I think at the end of the day it was a brilliant way to even out the competition. Yes you may of had gentle starts and cruises at the end but it was interesting to see the variety of solutions that manufacturers came up with. (V12's, V8's, flats, rotary etc)
Shame the FIA made an arse of the rules and made World sportscar racing dissapear! Though we probably wouldn't have seen the wonderful 3.5 litre racers of the early 90's
I hope the way the rules are in sportscars today, we don't end up seeing a field made up entirely of turbo-diesel's!

[Asa]

People often complain that with fuel formulas, you always end up with people cruising around saving fuel. But the way I see it, many slow down to save on something (brakes, tyres, clutch, engine, etc) in an endurance race anyway. If they want a flat out endurance race (is this a contradiction in terms?) then they should also allow engine changes, so no one has to save on engine.

For me fuel formulas work just fine and I think it would open up the competition.

[chewymonster]

Audi R10 has an engine that is all about getting more power out of less energy.

[The Badger]

In the currant world climate , would the fuel formula not be important to promote more efficient engines as well as being seen to be on the "green" side ?

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by The Badger

In the currant world climate , would the fuel formula not be important to promote more efficient engines as well as being seen to be on the "green" side ?

Yes and that is why the E10 VP Racing fuel is used for the ALMS races.

Keeping the fuels consistant between competitors also prevents one team from having an unfair advantage. Or also prevents any team from embearsment if they choose a 'politicly correct' but energy poor fuel.

[minimangler]

i think its a great idea, but maybe not to easy to find a diesel/petrol equivalency formula? but it could definitely even out the playing field. after all, group c was arguably sports car racing's best period.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Yes and that is why the E10 VP Racing fuel is used for the ALMS races.

Keeping the fuels consistant between competitors also prevents one team from having an unfair advantage. Or also prevents any team from embearsment if they choose a 'politicly correct' but energy poor fuel.

It issupposed to be a competitive event, i.e. the best one wins, not grade school--that's not faaaair--childrens games.

If one is not fast enough, then make it faster. If one get embarassed, tough luck bunky!

Weight to displacement worked the best, but the fuel formula was not bad; plus with the fuel formula, one can change the amount of fuel available without forcing the car builders to rebuild a car.
Just limit tank size so pit stops must be calculated.

Bob

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

It issupposed to be a competitive event, i.e. the best one wins, not grade school--that's not faaaair--childrens games.


Bob

Of course it is supposed to be a competitive event. With sponsors and manufactures wanting this or that. Is it really any more??

[Justin Moran]

Originally Posted by The Badger

In the currant world climate , would the fuel formula not be important to promote more efficient engines as well as being seen to be on the "green" side ?

That has to be some of the most common sense I've seen around in quite a while! Coupled with a bio type fuel it would show the way to other motorsport and really promote "Prototype" racing at the same time!

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by C9/89

That has to be some of the most common sense I've seen around in quite a while! Coupled with a bio type fuel it would show the way to other motorsport and really promote "Prototype" racing at the same time!

It is racing, it is NOT the latest incarnation of the old Mobil Fuel Economy Run.

If they want an economy run, contact Mobil, I am sure they would love the publicity.

[The Badger]

You never had half the *****ing with the fuel formula as you have now .

It would promote more fuel efficient engines ..... it would be seen by the greenies as being helpful ...... or you seem to think that it would do none of these ?
Its only in the last few years that sportscar racing as we know it has changed into a full blown sprint race ...... some of the best sportscer racing is the older stuff .

[AU N EGL]

Fuel is like the old Chips comercial. Go ahead, eat them, we will make more.

Fuels the same way. Go ahead and use it, the oil companies will pump and refine more.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by The Badger

You never had half the *****ing with the fuel formula as you have now .

It would promote more fuel efficient engines ..... it would be seen by the greenies as being helpful ...... or you seem to think that it would do none of these ?
Its only in the last few years that sportscar racing as we know it has changed into a full blown sprint race ...... some of the best sportscer racing is the older stuff .

IN the US anyway, the older stuff was racing engines running on racing gasoling.

Badger this part of his rhetoric:"Coupled with a bio type fuel " makes fuel efficiecy irrelevant, what you will get is either a larger amount of fuel allowed, shorter races, or cars slowed down.

"Bio" bs means either alcohol, now that's great for fuel mileage, or its diesel equivalent.
You want to see how "fuel efficient" alcohol is, put a quarter tank of E85 in you car next time you fill up, and then calculate the mileage.
Bob

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Fuel is like the old Chips comercial. Go ahead, eat them, we will make more.

Fuels the same way. Go ahead and use it, the oil companies will pump and refine more.

...if you can afford it. It's surely getting more expensive and that alone should be a reason for people to think about more fuel efficient engines. And that's not even a greenie-argument!

[minimangler]

and honda could power a sportscar on hugs, and go on forever...

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

...if you can afford it. It's surely getting more expensive and that alone should be a reason for people to think about more fuel efficient engines. And that's not even a greenie-argument!

The old saying comes in, If you have to ask the price, you cant aford it.

When your right foot goes to the floor on the start of your race, and other cars are flying by you, you dont give a dam about fuel efficiency. You cuss like heck because you dont have the HP you thought you had.

Scew the fuel efficiency, give me the HP and TQ.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

"Bio" bs means either alcohol, now that's great for fuel mileage, or its diesel equivalent.
You want to see how "fuel efficient" alcohol is, put a quarter tank of E85 in you car next time you fill up, and then calculate the mileage.
Bob

I agree with BOB.

Bio-fuels will kill auto racing. and it is no fun watching a pair of worms crawl accorss a sidewalk, as that is what the speeds will be sooner then later.

If ppl want to buy a fuel efficent car, that is their choice. Dont force me to do it too.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

... more fuel efficient engines. !

What is your definition?

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

The old saying comes in, If you have to ask the price, you cant aford it.

When your right foot goes to the floor on the start of your race, and other cars are flying by you, you dont give a dam about fuel efficiency. You cuss like heck because you dont have the HP you thought you had.

Scew the fuel efficiency, give me the HP and TQ.

I meant that not for race cars, but for road cars. Yet race cars should mirror to a certain degree the developement of road cars and in the ideal case be a test bed for designs and concepts that are later applied on the road. So if road cars manage to give one the same amount of HP (and torque) with less fuel consumption, so should race cars. It's called progress.

Just as an example: The car I'm driving (being a poor university student) is a 1992 Volkswagen Golf/Rabbid III with tiny 75 HP, it's gasonline powered and consumes about 9 liters per 100 kilometers. My Dad's car is a 1999 Volkswagen Passat TDI with 90 HP (which is even for Europe pretty low) and consumes more like 6 or 7 liters per 100 kilometers and has 15 extra horses under the hood. Even if you consider the fact that a Diesel contains more energy per liter and a gasoline powered car would probably consume 8 or 9 litres, you have a gain in HP of 15-20%, without more fuel consumption.

So if road cars get better fuel efficiency, why shouldn't the same apply for race cars? After all endurance races can be won on fuel efficieny, when you have to pit less than your competitors.

I agree that it should be loud and fast, but i don't think there's a need to grandfather dinosaur-technologies that have absolutely nothing in common with the technology you see on the road.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

What is your definition?

For road cars: Making me pay less on the gas station...

(I know taxes are an issue as well, though)

[dj choc ice]

if there were a fuel formula re intorduced ala group C with no air restriction the diesel cars would be at a massive disadvantage in terms of power, current diesel race engines without a restrictor would be making around 750bhp.

the powerful petrol engines would be pushing out atleast 750bhp, its already known the katech 7.0 V8 in the chevrolet corvette C6R makes around 900bhp unrestricted, the judd 5.5 V10 would probably push out around 800bhp.

the diesel cars without air restriction compared to the petrol cars would be at a disadvantage in terms of power by a big margin, put it this way:

BMW 335D- 3.0 in line 6, twin turbo, diesel-270bhp

BMW 335- 3.0 in line 6, single turbo, petrol-330bhp

and BMW remember make THE best performance diesel engines on the planet, audi take a back seat in that department, and as well BMW's petrol engines are renowned, only recently audi's FSI engines have become respected.

it would be fantastic to see a fuel formula back, no air restrictions, but i think the ACO would put BIG restrictions on aero, the cars would definetely not generate the downforce they do now if they were making 800bhp+.

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

I agree with BOB.

Bio-fuels will kill auto racing. and it is no fun watching a pair of worms crawl accorss a sidewalk, as that is what the speeds will be sooner then later.

If ppl want to buy a fuel efficent car, that is their choice. Dont force me to do it too.

what i would do is this, buy one of those lexus GS430 things with the 3.5 V6 with the electric motors in, no road tax because its a hybrid, 35mpg which is good, and roughly 270-300bhp, stick two fingers up at the politicians and turbocharge it.

simple, 500bhp hybrid enviro friendly car

[FLGTFAN]

Do air restictors make engines less fuel-efficient? Although it's not a "fuel formula", we could get rid of the air restrictors so HP is naturally increased, then limit displacement and/or revs. The low-reving turbo-diesels could get displacement limits, high-reving NA's could get rev limits.

Perhaps top speeds would require ridiculously low displacements/revs, but efficiency would be increased.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

the diesel cars without air restriction compared to the petrol cars would be at a disadvantage in terms of power by a big margin, put it this way:

BMW 335D- 3.0 in line 6, twin turbo, diesel-270bhp

BMW 335- 3.0 in line 6, single turbo, petrol-330bhp

Air restrictors should of course be replaced by fuel restrictors.

Taking the same example (average consumption):
BMW 335D: 7.5 l/100km and 270 bhp
BMW 335i: 9.6 l/100km and 306 bhp