WAU To Ford???

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Casper

No, not possible and absolutely impractical. You only have to look at the debacle Nissan/Mercedes turned into and they were V8's but had different engine architecture. After that little lesson what manufacturer would even try and consider using a different architecture motor. I repeat the question above, how long did it take to make the two current motors reasonably close?

The ATCC is the one that needs to attract new manufacturers, not the other way round. The BOP concessions for the Toyota Supra, Nissan Z or BMW M4 would need to make sure that those cars are competitive and winning races with their turbo engines.

Why did the Nissan and Mercedes not get close? Because the ATCC regulators didn't provide enough concessions, be it more compression ratio, variable vale timing, or more revs, to make sure they were competitive. Boost is a variable that can be easily tweaked on turbo engines, more easily even then adding compression ratio to a DOHC V8. Rev limits can be easily tweaked.

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

GT3 might have problems but theirs is a different methodology that is worth looking at in developing answers.

Exactly. A variety of configurations with different strengths with a balance of performance is the way to go. GT3 successfully balances a 3.0 twin-turbo V6, with a 4.0 twin-turbo V8, with a 4.0 naturally aspirated flat-six with a 6.2 naturally aspirated V8! Boost, rev limits, air restrictors: there's lots of tools that can be used. The Ford Mustang and Nissan Z have different engines in the real world, why shouldn't they have different engines on the track in touring car racing? Too easy.

I maintain that 7500rpm for both a 5.4 Ford and 5.7 Chev was wrong. They should have been done 6400rpm on a 6.2 Chev and 8200rpm on a 5.0-5.2 Ford to make them sound different. After all, the baritone Corvette GTEs raced without issue against the wailing Ferrari 458 GTEs!

[Casper]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

The ATCC is the one that needs to attract new manufacturers, not the other way round. The BOP concessions for the Toyota Supra, Nissan Z or BMW M4 would need to make sure that those cars are competitive and winning races with their turbo engines.

The present system has one big advantage and that is it removes any squabling, arguing etc about who might or might not be getting the best engine advantage. Manufacturers changing motors as Mercedes have just done would be a nightmare requiring all the engine work to be done again and who is supposed to do all the work to get to parity? I can't see a full on manufacturer effort allowing an outside party to change the spec on the motor they want to race to ensure parity. It may all be an argument that has a finite end when BEV's are dominant in the market and manufacturers are not making and developing new ICE's and that day is not too far off for Europe and V8's are on their death bed in the US.

[bathurst77]

I believe ATCC award should go to TCR Australia and Supercars just be Supercar championship. SC never use the title anyway (except in some very inhouse awards etc) They have no interest in promoting ATCC and the cars arent really touring cars they are closer to sports sedans.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

I believe ATCC award should go to TCR Australia and Supercars just be Supercar championship. SC never use the title anyway (except in some very inhouse awards etc) They have no interest in promoting ATCC and the cars arent really touring cars they are closer to sports sedans.

I believe Australia's most profession touring car series would have run races during the entire year of 2020.

And this "touring car" argument is old and tired.

Bespoke racing chassis are cheaper and easier to repair, while also being far safer.

B12 saw people sourcing 2 brand new race cars after crash damage.

TCR recently also saw a competitor into a spare car after a crash.

The level of teams and drivers in TCR Australia is nowhere near the standard required to make a claim for the ATCC. even second rate Supercars drivers wipe the floor with most of the TCR drivers.

Tim Slade had driven a TCR car once and qualified fourth in his first outing. It does not flatter the talent pool.

Potentially you could say it is presenting an upcoming alternative to Super2 but I don't even think that is valid yet.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[Matt K]

Originally Posted by Mixer

I believe Australia's most profession touring car series would have run races during the entire year of 2020.

And this "touring car" argument is old and tired.

Bespoke racing chassis are cheaper and easier to repair, while also being far safer.

B12 saw people sourcing 2 brand new race cars after crash damage.

TCR recently also saw a competitor into a spare car after a crash.

The level of teams and drivers in TCR Australia is nowhere near the standard required to make a claim for the ATCC. even second rate Supercars drivers wipe the floor with most of the TCR drivers.

Tim Slade had driven a TCR car once and qualified fourth in his first outing. It does not flatter the talent pool.

Potentially you could say it is presenting an upcoming alternative to Super2 but I don't even think that is valid yet.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Amen.

[ford71]

Yep, well put, can't be said much more simple than that.