STEWARDS REPORT RE PENSKE ENGINE

[Terry S]

The Penske penalties have been mentioned in both the Bathurst and Sandown race threads, but as the issues straddle both threads I considered it advantageous to start a separate thread.

Attached is the Stewards Report on the issue' I commend it to your reading as there has been a lot of ill-informed comment in social media.

https://www.cams.com.au/docs/default...rsn=81f5ebfc_2

On the bottom of page 1 it notes the maximum allowed valve lift is 0.710 inches. The highest measurement on the Penske engine was 0.7135 inches. The difference is 0.0035 inches. This is only 0.5% out. Surely an acceptable tolerance, particularly as there is some ambiguity over measurement procedures.

I note they still use inches whereas the rest of us went metric long ago.

Three interesting comments by the Stewards half way down page4:

The engine had trouble with water vapour being emitted from the oil tank. "the possibility that that the issue had some bearing on the valve lift COULDN'T be dismissed"

After the Technical Department ran the engine it did not exceed the mandated maximum power.

"There was NO demonstrated performance advantage from the Maximum Valve Lift exceedance".

In the light of these three statements I ask what is all the fuss about?

[bluesport]

The fuss is about RBR and the holden biased media trying to bully Scotty and Roger Penske out of supercars so that they can win.

[djr81]

The figure of 0.71 inches includes a tolerence.

An interesting point is within the DJRTP submission. The measuring technique used by CAMS is prescribed and appears to have shortcomings - atleast going by the submission below from djrtp. DJRTP engine builder measured lift at 0.706".

- The build sheet for the Q Engine demonstrates that the valve lift had been measured as within spec before the Bathurst Event;
- Because the ESD prescribes a procedure for measuring valve lift, the issue is not a simple question of the valve lift measurement but rather it is the measurement using that specific procedure;
- There are shortcomings in the specified procedure because a ‘foot’ or plate on the indicator shaft will mean that the indicator shaft will not be on the same axis as the valve stem;
- Before this issue was discovered, DJRTP measured its own valve lift using an analogue instrument which did not have the “foot” at the bottom of the indicator shaft. Nor did Supercars Technical personnel regularly use the Mitutoyo 432-492B digital indicator. Therefore, what has been discovered is the result of a change in circumstance.

Anyway blah, blah, life ban, million dollar fines, how dare they smile ever again, blah, blah.

[Forda]

It appears to be simply about trying to hang DJRTP on anything they can, any which way they can.

Possibly to artificially create 'interest' in the series, or artificially create a series 'bad guy' / nemesis, or maybe show the other teams (that) anyone getting too many favourable results (other than 888) will be micro-scrutinised to the Nth degree.

It might well have something to do with this rumor, too:

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

The other story was that Mr Penske looked behind the couch cushions, found a few bucks, and bought the series from Archer.

One is right, or none, or both.

Let’s see...

Hopefully the full truth will wash out in due course.

[Denosaur]

Interesting, they did a number of power runs and stopped beucase they expereinced the same issue as at the track.

I wonder, what would happen if they lunched the engine on the dyno whilst doing this??

I'm wondering what else they're going to come up with....

[thunderbolt]

Triple Eight boss Roland Dane responds to Scott McLaughlin's 'toxic' claim
https://wwos.nine.com.au/motorsport/...2-a967134153aa

[Trevor]

Will Supercars be happy when both Penske and McLaughlin walk away, coz that is what potentially could happen with this short sighted behaviour

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Terry S

The Penske penalties have been mentioned in both the Bathurst and Sandown race threads, but as the issues straddle both threads I considered it advantageous to start a separate thread.

Attached is the Stewards Report on the issue' I commend it to your reading as there has been a lot of ill-informed comment in social media.

https://www.cams.com.au/docs/default...rsn=81f5ebfc_2

On the bottom of page 1 it notes the maximum allowed valve lift is 0.710 inches. The highest measurement on the Penske engine was 0.7135 inches. The difference is 0.0035 inches. This is only 0.5% out. Surely an acceptable tolerance, particularly as there is some ambiguity over measurement procedures.

I note they still use inches whereas the rest of us went metric long ago.

Three interesting comments by the Stewards half way down page4:

The engine had trouble with water vapour being emitted from the oil tank. "the possibility that that the issue had some bearing on the valve lift COULDN'T be dismissed"

After the Technical Department ran the engine it did not exceed the mandated maximum power.

"There was NO demonstrated performance advantage from the Maximum Valve Lift exceedance".

In the light of these three statements I ask what is all the fuss about?

So 5 cylinders over the limit the worst of which was 0.0035" or 0.0889mm over the lift limit! So the biggest error that was measured was less than 9 hundredths of a mm. I think that questions should be asked if the "officials" are capable of measuring these tolerances, what temperature they were measured at, what is considered acceptable drag on the gauges etc. etc.

Agree with you Terry, this looks like a complete fit up to me!

[djr81]

Originally Posted by wnut

So 5 cylinders over the limit the worst of which was 0.0035" or 0.0889mm over the lift limit! So the biggest error that was measured was less than 9 hundredths of a mm. I think that questions should be asked if the "officials" are capable of measuring these tolerances, what temperature they were measured at, what is considered acceptable drag on the gauges etc. etc.

Agree with you Terry, this looks like a complete fit up to me!

But wait, according to the CAMS report:
The inlet and exhaust valve lift is regularly checked by Supercars Technical personnel. Indeed, the valve lift on the DJRTP’s engines had been checked approximately 10 times this season, including on the Q Engine, with no issue observed.

So presumably there was correlation between Supercars measurements and Mosquips before Bathurst. The Q motor was different after Bathurst because...

[bludvl_x19]

Originally Posted by djr81

But wait, according to the CAMS report:
The inlet and exhaust valve lift is regularly checked by Supercars Technical personnel. Indeed, the valve lift on the DJRTP’s engines had been checked approximately 10 times this season, including on the Q Engine, with no issue observed.

So presumably there was correlation between Supercars measurements and Mosquips before Bathurst. The Q motor was different after Bathurst because...

Because the rockers had been replaced prior to Bathurst?

In support of his submissions the DRD tendered:
- A copy of ESD SC-2-221 being the ESD for the Ford Boss 302;
- A copy of the Engine Log Book for the Q Engine which recorded the replacement of the Rockers
in that Engine immediately prior to the Supercheap Bathurst 1000.

[billy bleach]

More tellingly why has the team not appealed ? If there are questions surely they would,they must have access to some pretty smart legal brains

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by billy bleach

More tellingly why has the team not appealed ? If there are questions surely they would,they must have access to some pretty smart legal brains

Why bother, they have already won.

[Johno.UK]

Originally Posted by billy bleach

More tellingly why has the team not appealed ? If there are questions surely they would,they must have access to some pretty smart legal brains

Appeal what? They're not disputing that the valve lift was too much. As with many rules in motorsport it's irrelevant if performance was enhanced or not. However if the dyno tests had shown the engine making more power I'm sure the punishment would have been more severe.

[Gaz170]

Originally Posted by billy bleach

More tellingly why has the team not appealed ? If there are questions surely they would,they must have access to some pretty smart legal brains

Maybe they were told if they appealed and lost, they would be excluded from the event. Better to cut your losses and keep the win.

[djr81]

Originally Posted by bludvl_x19

Because the rockers had been replaced prior to Bathurst?

What changed in the correlation was the question. Obviously you are going to refresh the valve train before the most important race of the year.

[gravin]

Originally Posted by djr81

What changed in the correlation was the question. Obviously you are going to refresh the valve train before the most important race of the year.

Wouldn't that require the engine to be resealed. If I remember correctly (haven't time check now) Todd Kelly explained something to that extent.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by gravin

Wouldn't that require the engine to be resealed. If I remember correctly (haven't time check now) Todd Kelly explained something to that extent.

The engine was tested and sealed by Supercars
The spec sheet that Supercars generated for the engine before qualifying was withing the limits.

The engine was then changed because it was dropping water into the combustion chambers.

Supercars has confirmed that they could only do 2 runs on the Dyno before getting water vapour present, and the engine produced no more than the specified power.
Was the minute increase in lift caused by the overheating?
Why do Supercars measurements differ between sealing the engine and breaking their own seals to re-open it?

Why would the specs have changed?

Looks like Supercars didn't like what happened at Bathurst and set about a witch hunt to try and disqualify DJR.

Seems as stupid as it just brings the whole sport into disrepute and damages their own brand.

[Forda]

Yep - Supercars have made a complete mess of the series this year, and this Q engine folly appears to be the icing on the cake.

It might net them an easy $30k for the wine fund, but at what cost to the series and their own brand?

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Forda

Yep - Supercars have made a complete mess of the series this year, and this Q engine folly appears to be the icing on the cake.

It might net them an easy $30k for the wine fund, but at what cost to the series and their own brand?

Roland Dane and RBR have introduced a toxic culture into pit-lane and supercars need to address this very quickly.

[Just Do It!]

Originally Posted by Forda

Yep - Supercars have made a complete mess of the series this year, and this Q engine folly appears to be the icing on the cake.

It might net them an easy $30k for the wine fund, but at what cost to the series and their own brand?

You do realise that the fines go to CAMS, right?

Listening to the Below The Bonnet podcast is interesting as the lads ring an engine builder - everyone who is sceptical should hear that call.

I had limited understanding before I heard it and a mass of questions afterwards.

Disclaimer: I'm about the category, rather than individual teams and my feelings would not change irrespective of the team caught out

[drftin]

Originally Posted by Just Do It!

You do realise that the fines go to CAMS, right?

if people we smart enough to realise that it would ruin their illusion of thinking that Roland runs everything

[Forda]

Originally Posted by Just Do It!

You do realise that the fines go to CAMS, right?

Indeed; however the main point being missed is DJRTP are currently a soft target, in that they will readily pay fines for trivial and other matters at this stage in the game.

Anyone else, without a Bathurst win and a Championship and.a Teams' championship to risk, would challenge/appeal/litigate against such nonsense.

[Just Do It!]

Can other teams appeal a decision?

For example, Barry Ryan was quite animated about Penske retaining the Bathurst win.

Roland has been, by his standards, rather quiet throughout. Is Penske his exit strategy?

[bludvl_x19]

Originally Posted by Just Do It!

Can other teams appeal a decision?

For example, Barry Ryan was quite animated about Penske retaining the Bathurst win.

Roland has been, by his standards, rather quiet throughout. Is Penske his exit strategy?

Roland is being quiet because he and some mates want the value of Supercars to drop.

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Just Do It!

Roland has been, by his standards, rather quiet throughout. Is Penske his exit strategy?

People in glass houses...?