V8Supercar - Car Of The Future (Merged x4)

[nickyf1]

at the moment a typical S2000 car costs around £400,000 and needs frequent engine rebuilds. An NGTC car can be built for around £100,000 and needs less frequent rebuilds, plus there is the choice between the TOCA Engine or developing your own engine.

[FIRE]

I understand a S2000 car costs around €250k

[GTRMagic]

COTF Delayed to 2013!!

Signed off... finally!

[peckstar]

a meeting of all 17 V8 team owners and their commercial and marketing representatives, a wide range of topics were discussed regarding the future direction of the sport. The biggest agreement that the teams reached was the immediate implementation of the Car of the Future program – starting in 2012.

So we will see it in 2012, its considerable lighter so i would expect there will be an early move to it by some of the big teams

[Matt]

Does anyone know what this car is gonna look like yet?

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Matt

Does anyone know what this car is gonna look like yet?

Won't look different to current cars, but will be very different under the skin to make it cheaper to build, cheaper and quicker to repair, and more cost effective to run.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Won't look different to current cars, but will be very different under the skin to make it cheaper to build, cheaper and quicker to repair, and more cost effective to run.

Ah okay. I thought the outside of the car was gong to be changing as well as under the skin. I'm glad it's not gonna.

[GTRMagic]

COTF Phased Introduction

The logical question you would have to ask... WHY!!

Why cant the teams switch off from one style of car at the end of season 2012, and show up in the Middle East in 2013 in the new one?

Give the teams plenty of testing days, get the things up to speed, learn about them in the off season.. then BANG! Go race them

Two sets of cars means two sets of costs doesnt it?

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Why cant the teams switch off from one style of car at the end of season 2012, and show up in the Middle East in 2013 in the new one?

Everyone has a different cycle of builds and parts inventory, having a phase in period allows the team owner to pick their time. Its normal for most of these kind of big changes.

[GTRMagic]

If they were doing this next year, and had 6 months notice, I would agree with you!

This is a full 2 1/2 seasons away!

[racer69]

Dick Johnson, in interviews over the years, has always been critical of rule changes in the past that forced teams to scrap everything after 1984, then again after 1992....... one assumes given that the teams run the thing these days, this is their solution of a 'better way'.

[GTRMagic]

How is grandfathering old cars to compete with new ones 'a better way'?

These new cars are supposed to be so cheap you can pick them up in a Corn Flakes packet aren't they, so why not mandate a conversion date?

Mr Johnson was sort of correct in saying that junking the old equipment was an expensive proposition, however the series participants geared up for that change, with only the big budget squads (MHDT & Roadways in Group C, GMS in Group A) actually building any new equipment in the last year.

If you know a change is coming, a team doesnt build new cars. If you believe the stories, it is why WP hadnt built any new chassis until the COTF timeframe was confirmed...

Set a date in stone.. 1/1/2013... see how easy that was

[GTRMagic]

It would be hard to argue that an engine building program like the one
Here would make sense for the Ford and Holden sides

Hendricks claim to use 82 people look after 700 builds a year.... in the much less hungry V8Supercar series, its likely 10 builds a year per car... 19 cars (Holden)... 190 builds... maybe 25 people... 10 cars (Ford)... 100 builds... maybe 13 people?

A more interesting solution than having Ford and Holden funding tangential engine development paths per team...

[Mixer]

Did you read this?

Every engine is disassembled completely after each time it runs at the racetrack. Following testing and analysis, components either are replaced or reused for the next build-up. Bearings, pistons, rings, valves and springs are replaced every time. Mileage and mean rpm are used to track cycle lives for every component. On average, the engine as a whole will usually run only 15-20 times before being retired.

Dear god! Use carbs to reduce costs eh!

[Denosaur]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Hendricks claim to use 82 people look after 700 builds a year.... in the much less hungry V8Supercar series, its likely 10 builds a year per car... 19 cars (Holden)... 190 builds... maybe 25 people... 10 cars (Ford)... 100 builds... maybe 13 people?

A more interesting solution than having Ford and Holden funding tangential engine development paths per team...

That would be all the people associated with the engine shop, from the guy that strips the engine, the one that crack test, the one who dyno's it, engineer's and the cleaner. There was a series produced about 3 years ago that went into the behind the scenes of Waltrip racing as they where setting up. They paid a visit to TRD and look at the program there, and those guys had even more people on the floor, but looked after engines from Truck series up to Sprint Cup.

I remember listening to Garry Rogers talking about his engine shop and how they where re-freshing the valve train every round and the bottom end every seconded. But that was GRM operating at there budget, but when you look at HRT, they would be re-freshing the whole engine after every round. Hence why VESA bought in the minimum weight rules on the internals.

You have to remember that with NASCAR those engines are on the limit at 9500rpm, and same goes with here with VESA with the small blocks at 7500rpm. If VESA was to adopt the NASCAR size blocks and run those at 7500rpm, you would find that they would last a bit longer. Same as when in F1 they turn the engines down and move the red line.

[GTRMagic]

Back in the JPS BMW 635 days, Mr Crichton's car always got the engine/gearbox out of Mr Richards' car from the previous meeting, with a fresh set installed into the lead car for that team.

Allegdly, some teams/engine suppliers do something similar... a fresh package in the lead unit, the one from the lead unit into the next car, that engine into the next one in sequence and so on... the 4th string car then gets an engine/drivetrain already 3 events old by the time it gets to their vehicle.. not beyond life, but perhaps a cause of some serious component failures in that vehicle..

The point I was making in the comparison to Hendricks is that it is possible to centralise an engine build program, that it probably makes sense for the car maker to build engines in that facility, and supply them to teams, while Ford and Holden reduce the amount of money they throw at teams, to become parts & technical data flow, rather than compensating for a lack of operating budget and/or poor commercial terms with sponsors.

If the car makers were serious, they would want to spend money on bits they can directly control, in the engine shop would be a solid place to start. Better to pay to develop engines rather than pay for $17,000 coffee machines (TM 00 Motorsport)

The other advantage is that each engine would be within a poofteenth of each other in performance (one less thing for #7 to talk about) and also that any parity adjustments, or spec parts implementation can be planned centrally, and implemented in a controlled process....

Or is this too logicial?

[racer69]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Back in the JPS BMW 635 days, Mr Crichton's car always got the engine/gearbox out of Mr Richards' car from the previous meeting, with a fresh set installed into the lead car for that team.

Allegdly, some teams/engine suppliers do something similar... a fresh package in the lead unit, the one from the lead unit into the next car, that engine into the next one in sequence and so on... the 4th string car then gets an engine/drivetrain already 3 events old by the time it gets to their vehicle.. not beyond life, but perhaps a cause of some serious component failures in that vehicle..

The point I was making in the comparison to Hendricks is that it is possible to centralise an engine build program, that it probably makes sense for the car maker to build engines in that facility, and supply them to teams, while Ford and Holden reduce the amount of money they throw at teams, to become parts & technical data flow, rather than compensating for a lack of operating budget and/or poor commercial terms with sponsors.

If the car makers were serious, they would want to spend money on bits they can directly control, in the engine shop would be a solid place to start. Better to pay to develop engines rather than pay for $17,000 coffee machines (TM 00 Motorsport)

The other advantage is that each engine would be within a poofteenth of each other in performance (one less thing for #7 to talk about) and also that any parity adjustments, or spec parts implementation can be planned centrally, and implemented in a controlled process....

Or is this too logicial?

Where is the fun in making it the whole series that 'spec' (or control) though??

There needs to be some difference in the cars. Its interesting that in the current worldwide fad of controlling all the stuff on the cars, we have Indycar going old school and seemingly wanting to encourage competition on the track, not competition for whomever provides the best tender bid (ie..coughs up mroe $$$ for the series owners)

[GTRMagic]

The 'fun' is that the cost of bits that make no difference to the punters in the stands falls to a level where they are affordable, reliable and good fun

That there would be 2 manufacturers in the series means that there is still a point of genuine competition... dont see any particular issue with this...

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

The point I was making in the comparison to Hendricks is that it is possible to centralise an engine build program, that it probably makes sense for the car maker to build engines in that facility, and supply them to teams, while Ford and Holden reduce the amount of money they throw at teams, to become parts & technical data flow, rather than compensating for a lack of operating budget and/or poor commercial terms with sponsors.

How is this different to what is happening now. WP supply HRT, BRR, BJR, GRM, TDR, LDR. All apart from T8 & PMM, who have a common supply right?

FPR & SBR work together, DJR do their own thing. Who else?

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Mixer

How is this different to what is happening now. WP supply HRT, BRR, BJR, GRM, TDR, LDR. All apart from T8 & PMM, who have a common supply right?

FPR & SBR work together, DJR do their own thing. Who else?

BJR are not supplied by WP, they have an independent supply for all 3 cars thru Noonan Engine Services... which means there are technically 5 Holden Motorsport engine providers in the series - PMM, KRE, NES, WP, KR...

FPR & SBR still run independent engine shops, KRE supplies FFF, DJR run their 3 cars..

Its not a manufacturer-inspired integrated solution.. although back when SBR did 888 & BJR engines as well, it was headed in the right direction

[GTRMagic]

CotF Prototypes To Be Built

... by Paul Ceprnich's Pace Innovations group

[Just Do It!]

Does Paul's operation have a connection to any teams? Isn't he ex-PMM?

[GTRMagic]

Built FG01 with FPR's assistance, and nailed together the first of the PMM VE's...

Local dealer/engineering resource for Reiter Engineering & their GT3 Lamborghini Gallardos from memory...

[GTRMagic]

Is this car the CotF?

[Pro Racer]

hmmm. and it seems ol'mate Bradley has the jump on everyone in this regard.