[BTCC] Race 4, 5 & 6 - Thruxton, Hampshire - 26th April 2009

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

What do you think about Dunlop providing a slightly harder tyre for Thruxton?

IIRC, Dunlop already do supply a different compound for Thruxton, and they also advise the teams on the best way to use the tyre.
The problem arises from cold sidewalls going over the kerbs in the final corner, which some drivers avoid and others risk.
If no driver made contact with the kerbs, I'm pretty certain no-one would get a puncture.

[Dani Filth]

A surprisingly clean 3 races at Thruxton .. wasn't expecting that, but was expecting a little(only a little) more from Gio. He made a few points on both Turkington and Neal but not too many

[Craner Curves]

Originally Posted by Icebaby

I have no offence to these drivers, its understanding the money spent vs the results.

It's not your money that's getting spent, so why does that bother you?

Martyn Bell, John George and Martin Johnson are spending their money and I bet they're really pleased with what they get from it. They could race in something like Britcar, but why bother when they can easily afford to be in Britain's premier racing series? I'm sure if you asked them, they'd tell you they're happy with what they get out of it.

[gregc]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

IIRC, Dunlop already do supply a different compound for Thruxton, and they also advise the teams on the best way to use the tyre.

Yep, they do indeed. As well as drivers whacking kerbs, the other big problem is teams ignoring the advice from Dunlop. I got chatting to a team engineer last year there and apparently some of the bigger teams tend to push the envelope a little when it comes to the settings (tyre pressures are particularly critical if memory serves) in search of extra speed.

[Craner Curves]

Classic case of ignoring the techicians from Dunlop was Chilton in 2005. Extremely fast on his return to the series after his DTM deal collapsed, but the tyre predictably exploded about halfway through the race, as Arena used unadvisable levels of camber.

[awrb]

Originally Posted by Icebaby

I have no offence to these drivers, its understanding the money spent vs the results.

So do you think Tech-Speed and Dynamics should give up if they can't afford two professional drivers? Just quit rather than try and make it work? I take it Sunshine.co.uk think the results are worth the money spent (I just booked a holiday with them, so it does work!), backing Bell for a second season, so that's a happy team, driver and sponsors. I honestly don't see what the problem is.

[crmalcolm]

Taking the example of Bell, after Brands he said “I'm thrilled to bits with how the weekend went for myself, the team and the sponsors. I now have a car that will allow me to show what I can do and I wasn't a million miles away on the times. To be less than 20 seconds behind race winner Jason Plato in race three shows how far we've come.

“Brands Hatch has never been my best circuit, so hopefully there is more to come as the season goes on, and while I was aiming for top tens this weekend, I now want to try and be getting towards the top eight. I also can't wait for Paul to join me in the second car, as he is a proven race winner and will only help to push me on. There is no reason why we can't have the two sunshine.co.uk cars battling for points.” which to me sounds like he's happy.

He is enjoying racing, getting to do something many of us only dream of. His money is also helping to put O'Neill on the grid, and has allowed Bell to be part of a team that might regularly be winning races. So if the results vs. money spent are the criteria, the result is two happy drivers, a happy team, a whole team of engineers happy with a contract and the possibility of another driver to push VXR in races this season. After losing SEAT last season, it is precisely the results that the money from Bell et al provides that the BTCC needs.

[Minicross424]

I see Liam Mcmillians car is for sale on Touring car spares saying it will be rebuilt before sold.
End of the line or change of car?

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by Minicross424

I see Liam Mcmillians car is for sale on Touring car spares saying it will be rebuilt before sold.
End of the line or change of car?

He's got three Toledo's (2 complete and a shell) and has already said they are building up a fresh one for the next round.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by Minicross424

I see Liam Mcmillians car is for sale on Touring car spares saying it will be rebuilt before sold.
End of the line or change of car?

Neither.

Maxtreme brought 2 complete cars plus a spare shell and a truck-load of spares. They are simply selling off what they don't need.

[glossysanta]

The origin of BTCC version of so called Chevrolet Lacetti is very humble (horrid in driving experience) Korean designed Daewoo Optra (in some places got a bit Italian name Lacetti).

On BTCC they use the same chassis as the original car, but can change the suspension, stiffen the body, change engine, gearbox and differentials....

The chassis of the car is very important and Lacettis have a horrible one. Therefore, I cannot understand how this trash car can go fast? The only thing on which I can think (as a reason) is that most of other competitors or their cars (excluding Vauxhauls and few others) are just trash...

Fellows, any ideas?

[crmalcolm]

Stiffen the body, change the engine, etc. and the car is radically altered from it's standard characteristics. In essence, do exactly what RML have done and rebuild the car totally.

Added to a total rebuild, stick in a very potent GM powerplant and get a quick pedaller in the seat and you have a race winner.

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by glossysanta

The origin of BTCC version of so called Chevrolet Lacetti is very humble (horrid in driving experience) Korean designed Daewoo Optra (in some places got a bit Italian name Lacetti).

On BTCC they use the same chassis as the original car, but can change the suspension, stiffen the body, change engine, gearbox and differentials....

The chassis of the car is very important and Lacettis have a horrible one. Therefore, I cannot understand how this trash car can go fast? The only thing on which I can think (as a reason) is that most of other competitors or their cars (excluding Vauxhauls and few others) are just trash...

Fellows, any ideas?

Troll!

[andy_b]

Just because its old and relatively basic design does not mean you cant make a good race car out of it with the right Engineering talent. A S2000 car is still very different to a road car...

...plus three special letters make all the difference in design, engineering, building and running a team

R, M and L

[andy_b]

Originally Posted by Icebaby

I have no offence to these drivers, its understanding the money spent vs the results.

its not just results, its brand awareness, working with with sponsors at race-circuits etc and for some its a hobby.... If you dont have a big chance of winning you focus your efforts with sponsors on this area.

..been this way for decades, look back to the 70's and 80's and their were 'Gentlemen drivers' in the BS(T)CC back then, difference now, they bring so much money, so the likes of Tommo can drive...which can only be good for the sport

+ its not as if the BTCC is over-subscribed....

but we've done this topic to death recently

[sceptic]

Originally Posted by andy_b

Just because its old and relatively basic design does not mean you cant make a good race car out of it with the right Engineering talent. A S2000 car is still very different to a road car...

...plus three special letters make all the difference in design, engineering, building and running a team

R, M and L

Indeed look at Lada in the WTCC, running a car which is effectively 25 years old?

[glossysanta]

Originally Posted by sceptic

Indeed look at Lada in the WTCC, running a car which is effectively 25 years old?

Running a rubbish car indeed... Have they (Lada) won at least one race?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by glossysanta

Running a rubbish car indeed... Have they (Lada) won at least one race?

So what you seem to be saying is;

The Lada is not a very good car because it is not competitive in S2000,
Every S2000 car is not very good because it is being beaten on occasion by the Lacetti.
If Lada had a win would every S2000 car be rubbish?
Are all S2000 cars rubbish?
Do you feel that all S2000 cars are, by comparison to the Lacetti, not worthy of your viewing?

[helterskelter]

To be honest it's starting to get quite absurd. Come on, the road cars have nothing to do with the s2000, just look at the the AR 156. Of course when you build a race car you hardly think about how good it looks or how recent the project is.
I believe that a racing car is always magic, from my 90hp Citroen C1 up to the Lamborghini Gallardos or whatever.

[awrb]

Yeah, i think it's most likely that the factory BMW, SEAT, Vauxhall teams etc are all just really really bad, and not that RML have built a good car. The other teams probably just can't be bothered.

If you don't like touring cars, don't bother watching them.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by glossysanta

On BTCC they use the same chassis as the original car, but can change the suspension, stiffen the body, change engine, gearbox and differentials....

The chassis of the car is very important and Lacettis have a horrible one. Therefore, I cannot understand how this trash car can go fast?

From my limited technical understanding, the Lacetti is constructed in a monocoque fashion whereby there is no specific chassis. The body and suspension come together to make a 'chassis', and as you've stated the body and suspension can be altered.

You also state as fact that the Lacetti has a horrible chassis - what part of the Lacetti 'chassis' is horrible that cannot be modified within the S2000 regulations?

If I am wrong in my understanding here, and the Lacetti does have specific components that could be deemed as a seperate 'chassis', then identifying these may allow some of the more experienced on here to elaborate on the methods used to overcome these deficits.

[glossysanta]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

From my limited technical understanding, the Lacetti is constructed in a monocoque fashion whereby there is no specific chassis. The body and suspension come together to make a 'chassis', and as you've stated the body and suspension can be altered.

You also state as fact that the Lacetti has a horrible chassis - what part of the Lacetti 'chassis' is horrible that cannot be modified within the S2000 regulations?

If I am wrong in my understanding here, and the Lacetti does have specific components that could be deemed as a seperate 'chassis', then identifying these may allow some of the more experienced on here to elaborate on the methods used to overcome these deficits.

Thanks for the elaborate, correct and valid approach. The cars today are indeed made in monocoque, which is also called integral-frame structure. However, suspension is not a part of the monocoque and is rather connected to the frame.

On the following drawing, the bottom picture is an example of integral-frame.



To the best my knowledge BTCC rules do not allow performing changes to the integral frame, which I called "chassis" in my previous posts. I presume that they can switch the doors, hood to lighter ones, but not the integral frame.

Standard Daewoo Optra car reviews revealed that the frame of the Optra car has driving issues partially caused by factors such as low frame stiffness, weight distribution in the frame and its dimensions (not the best location for the suspension to be attached).

While stiffness and weight distribution can be improved, some other failing factors have to stay intact.

Therefore, I do not know how this BTCC car (having the same integral frame as the Daewoo Optra) is competitive. Can someone shed the light?

BTW, there is a nice book out there about vehicle design and structure techniques: "An introduction to modern vehicle design" by Julian Happian-Smith.

[davyboy]

This thread has gone pretty far off topic but let me give my two cents worth.

o The 'frame', 'chassis', 'monocoque', call it what you will, of an S2000 car is very different from its roadgoing equivalent. Yes the shell is the same, but the design and installation of the 'rollcage' dramatically changes its characteristics and this allows engineers such as those at RML to make silk purses out of sow's ears.

o The second point is aero. A 3 box or fastback shape has better aero characteristics when compared with a hatchback. If you factor in the subtle tweaks allowed under the S2000 regs to the front and sides of the car, there's another performance window to be exploited. Strangely, the aero on very modern cars is actually slightly inferior to those of the Lacetti's generation because of improved car->pedestrian collision protection.

o The third point is the engine. The motor in the Lacetti has a great power curve... much of that can be put down to the development work undertaken by RML... but they started from a pretty good base for an S2000 plant.

So in essence that's why an RML Lacetti is a potent piece of kit in S2000 trim and will give most things a run for their money on track.

Having said all of that, S2000 as a concept doesn't allow for the kinds of cars you'd like to see racing. Cast our minds back to the 1970s and 1980s for a moment. The rules back then dictated that you had to start with a very potent road car - c.f. Ford Capri 3.0S, Rover Vitesse, BMW M3, Sierra Cosworth etc... These machines were rare and desireable on the road and just seeing breathed on versions of them racing on track was incredibly exciting. I agree that SEAT Toledos, Chevy Lacettis and Vauxhall Vectras don't stir the same level of emotion at all.

[Power Bulge]

IMHO it is the drivers further down the grid that gives the BTCC its appeal, where battles are raging. The weight penalties mean that seemingly uncompetitive cars can mix it with some of the others.
The 'gentlemen' drivers work very hard entertaining their sponsors - just have a walk around the paddock late at night and again early the next morning, and you will see the same people still working in the hospitality suites. Martyn Bell and his family are the nicest people you can meet in BTCC (and the breakfast is the best in the paddock )
At Thruxton, in the bar on Saturday night, the biggest grins on faces were the Tech Speed guys who were understandably and quite rightly delighted with qualifying. Full marks to sunshine.co.uk for sticking with the team and this year will give them their reward.
My biggest concern is with John George: I don't mind if he throws himself off the track, but it is getting dangerous to be in his vicinity. 2 big shunts in the last 3 meetings and he keeps taking out other drivers

[glossysanta]

Originally Posted by davyboy

This thread has gone pretty far off topic but let me give my two cents worth.

o The 'frame', 'chassis', 'monocoque', call it what you will, of an S2000 car is very different from its roadgoing equivalent. Yes the shell is the same, but the design and installation of the 'rollcage' dramatically changes its characteristics and this allows engineers such as those at RML to make silk purses out of sow's ears.

o The second point is aero. A 3 box or fastback shape has better aero characteristics when compared with a hatchback. If you factor in the subtle tweaks allowed under the S2000 regs to the front and sides of the car, there's another performance window to be exploited. Strangely, the aero on very modern cars is actually slightly inferior to those of the Lacetti's generation because of improved car->pedestrian collision protection.

o The third point is the engine. The motor in the Lacetti has a great power curve... much of that can be put down to the development work undertaken by RML... but they started from a pretty good base for an S2000 plant.

So in essence that's why an RML Lacetti is a potent piece of kit in S2000 trim and will give most things a run for their money on track.

Having said all of that, S2000 as a concept doesn't allow for the kinds of cars you'd like to see racing. Cast our minds back to the 1970s and 1980s for a moment. The rules back then dictated that you had to start with a very potent road car - c.f. Ford Capri 3.0S, Rover Vitesse, BMW M3, Sierra Cosworth etc... These machines were rare and desireable on the road and just seeing breathed on versions of them racing on track was incredibly exciting. I agree that SEAT Toledos, Chevy Lacettis and Vauxhall Vectras don't stir the same level of emotion at all.

Thanks for the elaborate description!
Would you, please, reply if the engine used in S2000 Lacettis comes from a standard vehicle (and tuned) or it is purpose built block?