|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
View Poll Results: Should britcar adopt power-to-weight parity? | |||
Yes | 12 | 50.00% | |
No | 4 | 16.67% | |
My cat's breath smells like cat food | 8 | 33.33% | |
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
7 Nov 2006, 18:43 (Ref:1760224) | #1 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
|
EERC to possibly adopt power-to-weight parity
In the programme from last Sunday's EERC/Britcar event, EERC chairman James Tucker mentions that they are investigating devices for classifying cars in the same way that Dutch Supercar and Belcar do.
I think this is a great idea with regard to sharing events with DSC and Belcar, but it is totally different to the typical method of parity across motor racing. Whether this unique method is good or bad, I don't know. Maybe it is something we'll see more of in the future in touring car classes and Britcar could benefit from getting on early! Either way, from my spectator perspective, I think it is the best direction for the series. Page 4 of this PDF document has information on the DSC classifications. http://www.supercarchallenge.nl/uplo...UK%20Final.pdf Could anybody who has competed under these regulations give some input into whether it makes it easier or harder to enter a car (ease of entry should always be a high priority to boost grid numbers in my opinion)? And if you're a punter, cast your vote on whether you like this direction or not! Last edited by zac510; 7 Nov 2006 at 18:46. |
|
|
7 Nov 2006, 21:47 (Ref:1760354) | #2 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 8,941
|
Not as unique as you think. Athough not in seperate classes the VW Cup uses a power-to-weight eligiblity limit. Wasn't the now cancelled Britcar V8 series going to use a similar idea for class structure.
The arguement will always be accurately measuring power. Reading through the DSC regs they have provition for a mobile rolling road to attend event, which realistically is the only sensible option. Seems to work in DSC so why not. |
|
|
7 Nov 2006, 22:13 (Ref:1760370) | #3 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,436
|
Kumho BMWs also use power to weight ratios as a class structure.
From a non technical point of view, I feel it isn't a bad idea for it does mean that cars of comparable performance are grouped together, which I feel is important with a championship being awarded next year. One reservation could be that it may be possible to ballast a car when testing in order to be allocated to a lower class and then dominate. I guess this could be prevented by testing at all events (perhaps after qualifying and the race), although the problem with this is that someone would need to pay for a rolling road to be present at all rounds of which the funding of could be controversial. |
||
|
7 Nov 2006, 22:36 (Ref:1760389) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Nice idea but a powerful and light car will always beat a more powerful and more heavy car even if the power ratio on both is the same so what will it prove? Eg lets say a lightweight Pegueot 205 coming in at what 700kgs and punching out say 225bhp against my IROC weighing 1400kgs and with a 450bhp engine. We would presumably both be in the same class but that Pug will run rings around me as it will out corner and out brake my car at every track.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
7 Nov 2006, 23:02 (Ref:1760402) | #5 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
|
Bit more interesting when it allows modified cars of different makes as they are notoriously hard to equalise!
kipper, when the DSC attended Brands Hatch with Britcar in, June I think it was, they towed their dyno all the way over here for scrutineering! I saw them running up a car after one of the races as some protested that the car was going a little quick. There maybe some who tweak the boost up or remove ballast but they deserve no respect. That could happen in any racing series anyway! Here they are arguing about it: http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...eerc_bh-83.jpg The DSC document doesn't specify precisely, but the power figure must refer to the power output derived at the wheels of the car. Al, just for example sake, if that Pug were to be put into the DSC it would be competing in the top GT class based on the power/weight. I guess DSC have thought about this already and have slapped an 1100kg minimum weight on the category. That minimum weight effectively restricts the cars in the top class to the big power and expensive cars, the marketing spectacle if you will Your car would be in the same category but could afford to lose 275kg I didn't really mean to start this thread for me to defend it, but it is a nice start to the discussion nonetheless! |
|
|
7 Nov 2006, 23:13 (Ref:1760414) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Fair comment then if they have covered that scenario.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
7 Nov 2006, 23:21 (Ref:1760426) | #7 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,436
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
7 Nov 2006, 23:26 (Ref:1760428) | #8 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
|
Yeah, safe to say they have applied a little bit of 'marketing' to the categories in the form of the engine size limits and the weight limits to specify the general type of car that would appear in that category rather than simply relying on the power:weight ratio.
|
|
|
8 Nov 2006, 09:32 (Ref:1760677) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 4,380
|
The problem with testing power on a dyno for eligibility purposes, is that the ECU could always be programmed with a separate map, which provides less power. Could be activated with a hidden switch somewhere.
Not saying this would happen, but it's possible, and would be quite hard to detect. |
||
__________________
This planet is mildly noted for its hoopy casinos. |
8 Nov 2006, 10:58 (Ref:1760754) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,523
|
That was a subject we discussed for the V8 Supercars.
It's so easy to have a two way ignition switch, or even a process where by you turn the ignition on a number of times to trip it into a different may. With microprocessor control, it's so simple. After all, Benneton managed to keep "Menu 13" in their car for a season without being thrown out of the championship. There was also a legal argument relating to "what if my engine is blown up while YOU test it on YOUR dyno?", which is another reason why it was decided not to go down that route. I know, if an engine goes pop on the dyno, it's just as likely to go pop on the track - probably more likely as it's then not under "controlled" conditions. A very difficult one to police, and make work. Rob. |
||
__________________
There is no substitute for cubic inches. Harry Belamonte - 403ci Vauxhall Belmont!! A 700hp wayward shopping trolley on steroids!! |
8 Nov 2006, 11:07 (Ref:1760763) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Great in theory so why not use theoritical and known outputs, example small block chevy at 5.7 say 500bhp, at 6,2 say 550bhp and upwards depending on kit fitted, then take a multvalve 4 pot, modern engine, 2 litre normally asperated say 225bhp and work something on those lines for the individual motor used, there must be pleanty of documented evidence of outputs out there, or get the engine dynoed and sealed by a reputable operator nominated by the club and before the unit is installed.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
8 Nov 2006, 11:24 (Ref:1760776) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,523
|
Don't like it.
Prefer inlet restrictors to level the playingfield. No amount of electronic trickery will fool a piece of alloy or carbon fibre that will only pass enough wind to let the engine generate (x)bhp where, that figure is based on the weight of the vehicle. Therefore, you get your power to weight limits set. If (x) is set at 450bhp, and without the restrictor the engine produces 550bhp, then it restricts it down to 450. If the engine only produces 400bhp, then the restrictor has no effect. So simple. All you need is a set of accurate scales, and a calculator with the formula. You can then trim competition, if you so decide, with weight penalties for winners. Or open up the restrictors, or reduce the weight, of the stragglers. It means constant meddling to even the field, but that's the only way to make it all work. Rob. |
||
__________________
There is no substitute for cubic inches. Harry Belamonte - 403ci Vauxhall Belmont!! A 700hp wayward shopping trolley on steroids!! |
8 Nov 2006, 12:02 (Ref:1760806) | #13 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
|
I see, so you restrict on power:weight ratio and then restrict the left side of that ratio with the air inlet restrictor. Provides a little extra security that the power level cannot be exceeded.
|
|
|
8 Nov 2006, 12:19 (Ref:1760820) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,523
|
Exactly.
If you have classes based on Power to Weight, you have a top class, where it's "greater than Xbhp/tonne" that doesn't make a car that just falls into the class competitive with a car that has over 1000bhp and weighs 1400Kg, which would be easy with a twin turbo Chevy in a V8 Star. Or blowing a Dodge Viper...... By restricting the air that they can breathe, you can set a maximum. In some ways, it helps making the more powerful cars more reliable and un-stressed. For cars with carbs, it's a simple restrictor plate between the carb and the intake manifold. Just bolt it in. If the carb is calibrated correctly beforehand, no adjustments are required. It's just like putting a brick under the throttle! The argument against is that the injected/managed engine will need to be re-mapped to work with the restrictor - unless the engine produces less power than the restrictor is designed to allow. You can never please all of the people all of the time! |
||
__________________
There is no substitute for cubic inches. Harry Belamonte - 403ci Vauxhall Belmont!! A 700hp wayward shopping trolley on steroids!! |
8 Nov 2006, 12:36 (Ref:1760844) | #15 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
|
Like the old saying that democracy is the 2nd worst political system. Neither of them are good, but one is the lesser evil!
Still, for me the idea that in theory it allows a wide variety of cars of varying modifications seals the attraction for me. Club racing is rarely bumper-to-bumper for the duration of the race anyway so we must find other attractions, or marketing angles if you're on that side of the administration! |
|
|
8 Nov 2006, 13:04 (Ref:1760864) | #16 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 31
|
TVR car club used to run a small datalogger with an accelerometer in it in each car, after the race, the power to weight ratio could be calculated (approximately) using data stored during the race.
Not sure if they still use this sustem since they now run with the Tuscan series. Pete |
||
|
8 Nov 2006, 13:15 (Ref:1760871) | #17 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 137
|
Recent comments via the EERC - comments?
The Classes ”As you know we’ve got full championship status for Britcar, Production S1 and Britsports next year,” begins James Tucker. “The rules have now been written, and as you’ll have been anticipating, we’re introducing weight and power breaks in each of the two Britcar Classes.” The two classes are GT Cup and GT3, and a sliding scale will apply as follows: GT Cup 1180 kg (with driver) 292 bhp 1230 kg 319 bhp 1280 kg 346 bhp 1330 kg 359 bhp 1380 kg 373 bhp. GT3 1180 kg 437 bhp 1230 kg 474 bhp 1280 kg 493 bhp 1330 kg 511 bhp 1380 kg 530 bhp. These are the maximum bhp figures in each weight category. The ‘miltipier figures’ for the two classes are 3.7 (divide weight by 3.7 to find power figure) for GT Cup and 2.7 for GT3. “This lets all the big cars into GT3 (Falcons, GT3 Aston Martins, V8 Stars, Monaros, Moslers etc.) to race against the lighter GT3 cars, while in GT Cup, the Marcos, the Prosports and the smaller (less powerful) BMWs can take on the Porsches etc.” explains James Tucker. Policing The Cars The horsepower will be policed by a system of ‘black boxes’, with each car carrying one. They’re modestly priced at £320, and Tucker promises to buy them back if a team leaves the series (championship!). “Satellite navigation picks up each signal using GPS, and the box measures time and distance, which will give us a figure for horsepower. The boxes will level the playing field and tell us exactly what is happening.” The boxes will be used in Production S1 and Britsports too. “We’ve been working on this for over a year – with Dick van Elk at the Dutch Supercar Challenge: his cars will run to identical weight and horsepower bands as our Britcars, so the DSCs could run in our races absolutely fairly. “Because the weights have been worked out carefully, there’s no logical advantage in going for more power, so we should be encouraging less stress on engines, and controlling / reducing costs. “The regs. will be on our website next week.” PS1 & Britsports There will be two classes in Production S1 and three in Britsports – up to 3.5 litre LMP2s, two litre ‘CN’ cars and motorcycle-engined cars in Britsports, for example. Testing ”We’ll be testing the black boxes at Brands Hatch on November 18 (the second of that month’s night races).” |
||
|
8 Nov 2006, 17:35 (Ref:1761014) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 952
|
They should do it in all racing catagories around the UK!
Since the 1st day of being on the grid I have had a massive power/weight disadvantage compared to all other competitors! I am a rugby player and I need the majority of my weight to push in the scrum. |
||
__________________
These comments are my personal opinion, they do not reflect the views of others at Carr Racing. Born into racing! Will never leave racing, ever! Its in my blood! |
8 Nov 2006, 17:44 (Ref:1761018) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Rob, So how does it work with this restrictor business? Does it mean I can just dump a 400bhp crate motor in the car knowing full well it will not be able to produce any more and will it still produce the 400bhp with the restrictor or do I still have to build an expensive balls out engine so I can achieve the 400bhp, somehow I recon it will be the later and I see no sense in this route at all. How about putting a rev restriction on all engines as a reknown engine builder once told me 'Its revs that kill engines, not power'.
Ref the other posts, it certainly looks interesting but I am not convinced by the GPS thing and accelleration figures to be honest, lets see. Last edited by Al Weyman; 8 Nov 2006 at 17:50. |
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
8 Nov 2006, 17:52 (Ref:1761024) | #20 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
|
Interesting, they must be trying to counter the wide range between (for example) 3.5-5 kg:hp in the old system by introducing smaller weight differences inside each category. So a car never has to be ballasted up more than 50kg.
Good move to partner with DSC too. |
|
|
8 Nov 2006, 19:39 (Ref:1761095) | #21 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 86
|
Britcar
I think that James has this right with the power to weight rules. It's the only feasible option for Britcar and the cheap data loggers should help control it very well. Well done James.
Air restrictors are not an option for a championship like Britcar etc. They would drive engine prices through the roof and destroy the championship. The guys with the money will be able to spend tens of thousands building there engines to work with the restrictors. You would see very high compression ratios around 14.0:1 and major cylinder head, inlet manifold work etc. And due to the high Compression ratios engine life will be very short. |
||
|
8 Nov 2006, 21:18 (Ref:1761137) | #22 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 544
|
Something like the power to weight rules seem the way forward if it is seen to be cost effective. It offers people a chance if the rules are written correct, to allow lesser powered cars (and hence cheaper engines) to run in the series and be competitive in class. it is a handy way of controlling some of the fastest cars so that they do not blow every one else away and hence deter others.
I do not think air restrictor work that well with modern cars. people have to spend alot to get the car remapped, and it cant make that much difference. I know Formula Saloons dropped the air restrictors being run for tha Class A cars (V8 and Cosworths) and from what i remember not alot changed. Rob you can ask Rick Wood what changes the air restrictor made on his Holden. I know the SRGT series runs power to weight (ok not sure how closely they keep to the rules but for a club series that is ok), and they use carbs there. but what some people (i think) have done is just add ballast to the car to go down a class. For them that works well as they have good grids. As long as the class continues to have a variety of cars of sounds and shapes then that is what most people want. and if the power to weight rules mean more cars are competitve in class then all the better. |
||
|
8 Nov 2006, 21:32 (Ref:1761148) | #23 | ||
Registered User
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 403
|
I'm all for it, anything that attempts to even the playing field is a good thing, we had something similar in Kumho and it was canned as alot of people complained about differing readings for various reasons but on alot of cars the dyno and data readings were very close, given more time and expertise I think it could have worked. If James can get this sorted properly then it has to be the way to go.
|
||
|
9 Nov 2006, 11:18 (Ref:1761547) | #24 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,523
|
Quote:
For a V8 Chevy crate motor, with a carb. Your engine produces 400bhp, with a 750cfm 4BBL Holley on a dyno. You fit a restrictor plate under it, which has been designed with the intention of capping power at 550bhp. You'll find that the effect on your engine will be nil as the restrictor will pass enough air to allow the engine to produce 550bhp, where you're one can only produce 400, so it's still got 20% more flow capacity before the engine starts to get asthmatic! I read the restrictor regs for the Formula Saloons, and they were somewhat draconian. With the pure intention of favouring the Super Tourers over the old Thundersaloons. Ric's Holden was wheezing badly with the strangulators, without.... wow! But I agree, this black box approach does have it's merits. The box records accelleration accurately, together with speeds, using accurate GPS technology. Considering a lot of electronic dynos are now much more than accellerometers, it's just a case of adding the weight of the vehicle into the calculation, and you get a torque/bhp figure that will be pretty accurate. If you monitor the data over the season, you can police it very well indeed. And the price of the box is very reasonable in my mind, especially if we're allowed to make use of the data too. When I first read the weight's, I went eeeeek thinking how am I going to add 200Kg to my car. Then I see it's with driver (time for some serious Turkey & Christmas pudding eating over the festering season!!), which makes things a little easier. Rob. |
|||
__________________
There is no substitute for cubic inches. Harry Belamonte - 403ci Vauxhall Belmont!! A 700hp wayward shopping trolley on steroids!! |
9 Nov 2006, 12:09 (Ref:1761571) | #25 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,714
|
Rob, how far are you over the power limit? You could always pop in a cam that gives more midrange and drops your overall power then retain your lower weight.
Quite an interesting conundrum you may have |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Power / weight ratio racing | ger80 | National & Club Racing | 26 | 12 Dec 2005 20:07 |
power to weight ratio | qaz | Racing Technology | 11 | 28 Jul 2004 14:42 |
Adopt-a-Racer | Chewbacca | Bike Racing | 2 | 4 Dec 2003 14:19 |
Standing Starts: Should Cart adopt them? | Jay | ChampCar World Series | 29 | 30 Jul 2003 07:13 |