|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
13 May 2020, 08:10 (Ref:3975859) | #126 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 301
|
Gow suggestions to Supercars
The current BTCC cars are in the ballpark of Aus$500K Suggests basic mechanicals and no telemetry. https://www.speedcafe.com/2020/05/13...-masturbation/ I think Gow overlooks the value of the training and experience Down Under engineers can obtain by working with Supercar teams, that they have (in the past) later transferred to the International, US and European motorsport series that use telemetry. |
||
|
13 May 2020, 13:08 (Ref:3975914) | #127 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
I think Gow's CV gives him some idea of what works and what doesn't. Give an engineer a million dollars and he always spends that and more besides. They have some ludicrous way out there ideas and sometimes need a stern talking too in my very limited experience. I had a true stand up with one because of the stupid stuff he was trying to foist on us.
|
|
|
13 May 2020, 13:19 (Ref:3975916) | #128 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
Without the Frank Dernies of the world saying "let's write a computer program to optimise suspension geometry" (computing was radical stuff in the mid-1970's) "let's get a wind tunnel", "let's build an active suspension system" and so on, Williams Grand Prix Engineering (emphasis) wouldn't have got where they did... [Interview with Frank Dernie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRQDbB0EJU ] If that was quashed under "racing teams don't need wind tunnels, those are for eggheads building airplanes, I'm not wasting money on a three-axis force balance and data logging equipment to go with it either, what on earth is that for", they would not have found their advantage with Jones in the ground-effect years. Similarly, "a racing car with a CVT, that's stupid" would have not allowed for development of this Williams FW15C CVT prototype banned for it's potential (increased) dominance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3UpBKXMRto Of course a plentiful supply of sponsor dollars helped. But I think it's exactly that abundance of radical thinking that keeps race teams like Red Bull Racing (the rumours of systems of borderline legality like flexi-wings during the Vettel years are too many to mention ) and Mercedes Grand Prix at the head of the pack. Recall the McLaren-Mercedes with the knee-operated fluidic "f-duct" to stall the rear wing and gain straight line speed... radical, crazy but it worked and found an improvement in laptime. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9QMYTiYHIk Just this very year, Mercedes Grand Prix exploited the loophole that moving the steering wheel fore and aft is considered 'steering', to introduce a system that toes in as the wheel is pulled back on the straight (for reduced aero drag and better straight line stability) and toes out in the corners as the wheel is pushed forward: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_uKHNJLSQs Chief engineer James Allison had a wry grin when talking about this cleverness to the press, just as he should have. I supposed you would have quashed this idea as radical thinking for minimal benefit and a waste of money? A concept drawing or working study, like say active suspension concepts that seemed impossibly radical in the early 1980's, can within 5-10 years be turned into a real innovation on the race car with laptime benefit after all! ...Ever since Supercars in the early to mid 2000's caught up to the build quality of 1990's Super Tourers: everything placed on the floor, the driver as far back as possible, plenty of carbon and weight-saving; there hasn't been much in the way of interesting widespread technical progress in Supercars, which is a shame. Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 13 May 2020 at 13:45. |
||
|
13 May 2020, 14:09 (Ref:3975929) | #129 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
Is another person's new industry standard: Jim Rathmann's radical, laughed-at, Indy 500 car was the right idea, but just not implemented quite right (too big, too much drag!). -------- I actually forgot, there's actually an example in the Frank Dernie interview of fitting the softest front springs Williams had ever used on Montoya's Williams-BMW that took pole in Monaco... A radical suspension gamble, with the springs made by turning down the existing Williams torsion bar springs on a lathe, so they weren't sure the springs would even last the whole race. But they took the risk, and the springs did the trick to unlock the maximum potential of the Michelin tyres, and Montoya went on to win the race! [If you recall, the Michelin tyres themselves were also tricky 'cheat' tyres... Within the maximum allowed width when new, but they wore down nearly to slicks (recall the F1 grooved tyre rule to slow the cars down) and become wider during the race...] Don't you think it's exactly the stuff like this, and the Penske pushrod engine at Indianapolis, Brabham fan car, Lotus twin-chassis and so on that make motor racing interesting? Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 13 May 2020 at 14:20. |
||
|
13 May 2020, 14:53 (Ref:3975941) | #130 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,477
|
Alan Gow is very rarely wrong IMHO. I've been a big fan of the BTCC here in the UK and I also follow the Aussie series from afar and to quote AG:
“We looked at things like the engine, no one on the side of the spectator bank cares about the internal workings of the engine. “No one cares what the gearbox is like. No one cares what sort of diff a car has. No one cares what the electronics are like. No one cares how much telemetry there is between the cars and the pits or if there is any. “All the spectator wants to see is good, hard, close racing. If you can deliver that, whilst stripping away all the unnecessary costs, then you’ve found the formula." Nothing wrong with simplicity, the minefield of rules and regulations that exist F1 today is the very reason for its' demise in attracting spectators. |
||
|
13 May 2020, 20:28 (Ref:3975971) | #131 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,454
|
Quote:
That one I do. H-pattern with a clutch, please. Let's make them drive it properly. Sequential shift semi-auto gearboxes are near the top of my list of 'things that have ruined motor racing.' |
|||
__________________
Bill Bryson: It is no longer permitted to be stupid and slow. You must choose one or the other. |
13 May 2020, 22:30 (Ref:3975985) | #132 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,589
|
Quote:
This is a Supercar discussion and to let engineering run that free would blow budgets left, right and centre - precisely the outcome that is trying to be avoided. Quote:
|
||||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
13 May 2020, 23:59 (Ref:3975992) | #133 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,882
|
Quote:
Today, maybe I don't care as much, but I think that as come about because of the sameness of the specifications of most cars in most series. We have moved a long way from multiple chassis in IndyCar, multiple engine configurations in F1 and Touring Cars. |
|||
__________________
"Your biggest auto race may one day become a Camaro playground", Chris Economaki, Bathurst 1979 |
14 May 2020, 01:55 (Ref:3975999) | #134 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
I first heard the term "engineering "w**kfest" in a motorsport video interview with Ross Brawn regarding F1 and he should know all about that. I think it is very apt and engineering will require different approaches at different levels that are appropriate at that level of racing. There is no way live telemetry is needed for SC but it is allowed so engineers use everything they can.
A funny story, I was involved in discussions when I was very young and totally naive about racing with someone who wanted to run a Cooper S at Bathurst when they were the big thing. I off hand suggested we needed a radio system that could be seen in the pits to monitor oil pressure and water temps and everyone laughed as then it was simply impossible no matter how much money you had. I often thonk of that discussion when stuff like this is raised because it was in the 1960's and that stuff was simply unheard of in motor racing. |
|
|
14 May 2020, 07:05 (Ref:3976020) | #135 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
Quote:
The engineers designed the DJR Falcon in '92 in good faith on the basis that the rules did not prohibit using the engine as a stressed member of the chassis, only to be told this was not allowed at the last moment. PS. So much for the up to 2.5L runners who were assured the V8s would only have 450hp and would produce the same laptimes as their light and nimble vehicles with smaller engines too... The Larko-mobile forms another great story. The right idea, but not executed quite right at the time. Time attack seems to be the only place where you see such radical engineering in Australia these days , shame that out-of-the-box thinking is regulated in most other classes. Quote:
Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 14 May 2020 at 07:20. |
||||
|
14 May 2020, 07:11 (Ref:3976024) | #136 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
The trouble is that when a category engine is suggested, the Holden fans complain so much about their beloved GM vehicles having a Ford Coyote engine fitted to them. I don't understand why they are so offended! If the rules require all the engines to perform all-but identically anyway, then who cares if they all use the same crate engine!? |
||
|
14 May 2020, 07:15 (Ref:3976026) | #137 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
Quote:
|
||
|
14 May 2020, 08:03 (Ref:3976038) | #138 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
||
|
14 May 2020, 08:16 (Ref:3976041) | #139 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Category engine
Mispost.
|
|
|
14 May 2020, 11:09 (Ref:3976108) | #140 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,704
|
Give me all the cars with the Erebus engine with the flat plane crank.
|
||
|
14 May 2020, 21:14 (Ref:3976248) | #141 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,589
|
Quote:
For sure there needs to be some capacity for good engineering but not the complete free-for-all that you were advocating in your earlier post. I look at the example of HRT when it was dominating in the early noughties - rarely took the engines to the rev limit as they were built for flexibility, used 2-way dampers when the other leading teams used 4-way, used slightly older brake specs but good engineering and management had the team at the front consistently. That to me is good engineering - taking what you have and making the absolute most out of it, rather than creating a spend-a-thon of new ideas because you can't get more out of what you already have. |
|||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
7 Apr 2021, 22:43 (Ref:4045028) | #142 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,589
|
Resurrecting this thread as it seems the best sport to fit this article with Mr Adderton claiming to have shown interest in buying Supercars.
He claims that he didn't go ahead because the current structure is unworkable with the teams having the shareholding that they do - he mentions TC as an example of someone who ran a successful sports business as a benevolent "dictator". Mr Adderton seems to be conveniently forgetting that when TC was in charge, the teams owned MORE of the company than they do now but TC was able to show them the path and be a genuine leader. Perhaps Mr Adderton needs to put in the hard work as well if he wants to own it and run it - for sure there are a bunch of competitive team owners to win over but TC showed that it could be done - but it ain't easy. |
||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
8 Apr 2021, 06:32 (Ref:4045045) | #143 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,339
|
Quote:
|
||
|
8 Apr 2021, 19:02 (Ref:4045193) | #144 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,589
|
Quote:
He could win them over with the right approach though - but it appears that he doesn't want to work at it. |
|||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
12 Apr 2021, 00:35 (Ref:4045635) | #145 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,546
|
Quote:
I would not be interested in running a team under the rules according to Adderton & nor would a series original in Gary Rogers. Is trying to find a buyer for the unused RECs a financial measure? |
|||
__________________
more torque than a climate change conference |
12 Apr 2021, 00:57 (Ref:4045637) | #146 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,589
|
Not sure that it would be. Cocho had 75% team ownership that he needed to convince - the teams only have a minority shareholding now. Regardless, to run the series successfully you need to engage / convince all stakeholders and Cocho did that successfully - quite why Mr Adderton doesn't think he can I don't know.
Presumably but it also fills out the field, has more in reserve if others decide to stop. |
||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
12 Apr 2021, 04:08 (Ref:4045646) | #147 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
Cocho was a leader. Everyone since has been not much more than a figurehead.
|
|
|
12 Apr 2021, 12:44 (Ref:4045694) | #148 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,339
|
||
|
12 Apr 2021, 22:14 (Ref:4045758) | #149 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,391
|
Quote:
Most of Tony's departure seemed to be driven by Archer trying to move to a more formal corporate structure. |
|||
__________________
Tranquillity - What happens inside Shane's race car. Chaos - What happens outside Jamie's race car. |
12 Apr 2021, 23:12 (Ref:4045763) | #150 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,339
|
||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Archer Capital Sets The Price! | GTRMagic | Australasian Touring Cars. | 1 | 16 Feb 2017 23:54 |
[Rumours] CVC Capital Partners to sell FOM to Abu Dhabi Sovereign Wealth Fund??? | duke_toaster | Formula One | 1 | 8 Jan 2011 03:32 |
Tommy Archer on Windbag Tonight | Liz | Sportscar & GT Racing | 12 | 26 Aug 2004 23:16 |