[WTCC] Equalisation...

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

50 years history make the Btcc more prestigeous IMO

Agreed.

Well for now Wtcc is just trying to make it 'greener', let's see if they do something before saying they're only using empty words. Certainly 5% to 10% doesn't look like much, but I've been told it's the best you can do without rebuilding the engine.

Well, the "rebuilding" required to switch everybody to eg E85 is reprogram the electronics or put in larger nozzles in the injectors. You won't get 100% efficiency from that, but if everybody uses the same fuel, it's not a problem since everybody will have the same "issues" and the performance would be similar to regular Petrol cars (fully optimized engines run better on E85 than regular pump fuel). Even the Camaro Cup with their carburator engines are happily racing on E85 after some basic ignition tweaking.

Any technical promlem tends to be grossly exaggurated by the people who don't want to see a change. Above Camaros eg was according to some impossible to run on E85. Turned out it wasn't a problem at all.

But the real problem in WTCC is how they keep delaying full E85 regs that they have promised for years and years already. There must be really strong powers blocking it from happening, because both S&BTCC has had E85 rules for several years now.

In fact, you made it to my point. I cannot say that Stcc was worse than Btcc 15 years ago

Well, I can, and I do

So, if we agree that the crisis has hit UK more hardly than Sweden

Can we? Do you have % of workforce that lost their jobs or % of business that has gone belly up lately so we can compare properly? Very few people works in banks, so that Swedish banks are not going belly up doesnt mean the rest of the industry isn't. Remeber, this is a global crisis that hits very hard on any country relying much on exports, Sweden included.

SOME of the tracks in Sweden need to be renewed.

Definitely.

I put forward the entry list because you were saying that Btcc is going down, and I assure you lots of Italian Series would love to go down as much as they are, believe me. It's not going down, it has 24 cars on the track.

Well, 22 is max so far on track this season. Last year we had 26 most of the season. 26 > 22. And we already know 3 cars that wont be there next season. Hopefully money will be less scarse so several new cars can be added to the grid. The driver lineup this year should be good enough to rekindle some public interest.

Finally, the fact that Btcc is relying on gentlemen drivers is not quite exact.

No, but they do make up a considerably larger % of the grid in BTCC than in STCC. In Sweden the gentlemen usually prefer Carrera Cup and the STCC backmarkers tends to be younger drivers trying to get experience and hopefully a place in a top team some day.

Anyway, manufacturer support is not crucial, IMO.

No, definitely not, but IMO it does affect the status of "currently most important E-TCC" simply by bringing with it techology advances and payed professional drivers.

[helterskelter]

The growth in the UK this year should be around -1,9%, Sweden +0,1%. Be proud of it, your country has worked well to defend itself from this kind of events.
As far as I know it's not only about electronics. You can find the words of PANTA Racing's Luca Perani here.
WTCC don't introduce the E85 rules because it's still in discussion wether it gives unfair advantages or not. DTC thinks it does, as TCT reported a few days ago.
Of course STCC was worse, but due to a local crisis, so it would be an unfair comparison.
Anyway, STCC have lost some works cars, too, like Honda Sweden. Times are hard for everyone.
The gentlemen driver thing is true, but every TCC is based on the presence of paying drivers. Where would we be without them?
IMO it's not about the manufacturers coming in, it's about the people going to the racetracks and entering the championship. Anyway, STCC is a great championship, I hope they keep this growth rate up, it's always great to have s2000 on the tracks and not in the garages.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

The growth in the UK this year should be around -1,9%, Sweden +0,1%.

'something might happen'

What about actual numbers of what has happened so far?

As far as I know it's not only about electronics. You can find the words of PANTA Racing's Luca Perani here.

...Bio-fuels are far more aggressive with tanks, pipes and injectors, that need to be changed when their percentage is increased;...

That is mostly BS. For the low amount of driving a racingcar does it doesnt matter (the racecar will be retired long before plastic/rubber hoses wear out) and even if it did matter, the costs to change the fuelhose and racing car fuel tank is peanuts compared to the total cost of running an S2000 car. The injectors as I said has to be adapted for the fuel being 40% larger in size (so bigger holes, higher injection preassure or longer injection time).

Also many people run their own private cars without problems or changing anything for decades already. It's a myth that it's difficult or expensive to switch to more etanol. It's the same as when we were switching from leaded to unleded Petrol, all sorts of general engine problems where predicted, and none of it happened. The truth is that a lot of companies where sitting on huge stocks of leaded fuel and the reasons this time I'm sure are strongly connected with money.

You can read more here about running your regular car on E85 or your own mix of E85 & regular petrol http://www.etanol.nu/ (unfortunately you need to know Swedish, but I presume there are similar webpages in other languages).

WTCC don't introduce the E85 rules because it's still in discussion wether it gives unfair advantages or not.

That is just a scape goat reason. All you need to do is equalize performance, just like you do between cars already today. And you need to do that in any case when a new car joins the championship, whatever engine it uses.

[helterskelter]

UK had a growth rate of -1,8% last year. You are Swedish, you will surely find the data from your own government, TBH I can't understand a single word of your language. Anyway, the data I told you about in the last post were predictions made by International Agencies, not by me
If you mean the fuel companies, I don't think you are right. They did change the fuel, so they had to produce a new fuel which is different from the one they had before, so no stocks to get rid of.
To be honest, I wouldn't risk running my diesel car on E85 without a manufacturer's test telling me it won't kill the engine. It is not demonstrated, so you might be right, but what if you're wrong? I don't think PANTA have a reason not to introduce the E85, maybe the manufacturers do, since they want to sell the petrol cars, or the diesels.
About equalizing, yeah, but then we might go back to the SEAT-BMW situation, in which there is weight compensation but each one claims the other to be faster. We wouldn't want it again, would we?

[stedevil]

2008 4th quarter Sweden had a -4,9% growth rate.
Swedish government agency (konjunkturinstitutet) predicts -3,9% growth rate in Sweden 2009. Heavily export oriented countries have no way to avoid the current global crisis.

So can we finally stop this nonsense now about how the global crisis is more severe in UK than Sweden?

Also, nobody would be stupid enough to put Ethanol into a Diesel engine. As for putting it into a Petrol engine, that works just fine as has been proven by many time and time again, year in and year out, even some racing series. But you please provide 1 single example of an engine getting damaged from using Ethanol.

As for equalization, I'm perfectly happy with the BMW-SEAT-CHEVY-LADA thing going on and hope to see several new manufacturers added to that list, just like eg STCC or BTCC. Only problem with equalizations is when people are so brand/driver biased so the lose track of reality and can't see when performance is equal, and that is something we can never get away from in multi brand racing.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by stedevil

2008 4th quarter Sweden had a -4,9% growth rate.
Swedish government agency (konjunkturinstitutet) predicts -3,9% growth rate in Sweden 2009. Heavily export oriented countries have no way to avoid the current global crisis.

So can we finally stop this nonsense now about how the global crisis is more severe in UK than Sweden?

Also, nobody would be stupid enough to put Ethanol into a Diesel engine. As for putting it into a Petrol engine, that works just fine as has been proven by many time and time again, year in and year out, even some racing series. But you please provide 1 single example of an engine getting damaged from using Ethanol.

As for equalization, I'm perfectly happy with the BMW-SEAT-CHEVY-LADA thing going on and hope to see several new manufacturers added to that list, just like eg STCC or BTCC. Only problem with equalizations is when people are so brand/driver biased so the lose track of reality and can't see when performance is equal, and that is something we can never get away from in multi brand racing.

No, you gotta check for the whole year. And there were 2 predictions, one if the crisis were longer and one if shorter. You took the prediction for the longer crisis. Please let me add that Italy is the second exporter in Europe in terms of manufacturing, and yet we had a slightly positive growth rate last year, so maybe it's not as tragic as you think for exporters.
I don't have an example, but I suppose that PANTA Racing knows better than you and I do. If you believe you are more competent than they are, though, try for a job application
I'm not getting again into that endless discussion. I was saying, matter of fact, that BMW think SEATs are faster and SEAT think BMWs are faster, and you go back to that offending, saying I'm biased and you are objective, which is pretentious, and that I've lost track of reality, which said to a journalist is pretty offensive, as usual from you, though. Let's say that not everyone is satisfied, which is matter of fact, and let's stop it here, I'm fed up of discussing that topic with you. What I said is that there's no need to put another element of possible quarrels between the manufacturers at the moment.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

No, you gotta check for the whole year.

No you don't, in fact the very definition of a recession is 2 quarters in a row with negative growth. The reason is, looking at only full years you risk not noticing a recession until after it's over. And it also leads to broken inaccurate analysis like eg how Sweden currently is doing just fine when the actual reality is about -4% growth the last 6 months. Yearly numbers are only good comparisons across decades, not current real life crisis analysis.

And there were 2 predictions, one if the crisis were longer and one if shorter. You took the prediction for the longer crisis.

Indeed, the same people that predict a short crisis tend to be the same that didnt see it coming in the first place. If I would listen to optimists instead of realists I wouldn't have sold all our stocks 2 years ago and anything NA connected 3 years ago. Luckily I seem to be better at a hobby than many so called professionals are at their work and that saved me quite a lot of money. This recession will be long because most of the western world is heavily in debt due to many years of over optimism and continous overspending. There is no quick fix to that.

I don't have an example, but I suppose that PANTA Racing knows better than you and I do.

What Panta knows, and what panta sais on record is not the same thing. They can't warrant other peoples products (cars) and car makers have absolutely 0 interest in issuing insurances of E85 compability. That only leads to less sales of NEW cars insted of a potential increased sales because people want the "new thing not possible with old cars". A marketing responsible at a car company that suggested "we should tell people they can buy a small gizmo for 100€ and people can run their old cars on E85" would get fired the next day for incompetence. Their job is to make people want to buy new cars, not help people find reasons why they don't need to.

I'm fed up of discussing that topic with you.

So stop writing complete nonsense about how equalization is completely impossible because [insert scape goat reason here]. Then I won't have to point it out for you. As you are well aware, both BTCC and STCC manage to equalize what you say can't be done for years already. And it's not me that keep bringing up how you are a fancy journalist all the time.

[stedevil]

I btw stumbled over this pdf, take a good look at the graph on page 1 for how well Italy is really doing and where things are heading.
http://www.indexmundi.com/italy/gdp_...owth_rate.html

[stedevil]

Sorry bout the wrong link above, this was the intended one
http://economic-research.bnpparibas.com/applis/WWW/recheco.nsf/EcoFlashByEconomistEN/6E772CFCA986A00CC12575770037BD0D/$File/EcoFlash102_english.pdf?OpenElement

[helterskelter]

As for Italy, I was only looking at the manufacturing sector, which is what I was talking about. I have the data as I am in the Young Entrepreneurs' association of Naples, and here we all work in the clothing industry. The data goes down because a lot of small factories have closed down.
We were not looking for a recession but for the performance of the country's economy, and 3 months are not enough to express that, it only indicates a trend in those 3 months.
If you read the newspapers, a lot of the European central banks are saying that 2009 will be less though than 2008, and 2010 should be ok. I'm glad you saved your money, but our Minister of Economy predicted this crisis 12 years ago, so you discovered nothing new. The people you luckily didn't rely on were just doing their job (inaccurately and uncorrectly, of course).
The opinion about Panta is totally yours and lacks of trust in such professionals. I know the guys and they are ethically correct, I know it from the AR 147 GTA Cup days, when they took back a fuel that was damaging the engines of our cars and gave us the new fuel without making us pay anything, because the mistake was theirs (and Alfa's). You can think whatever you want, I think otherwise.
Again, you're offending: how can I get you to being polite? Seems like you don't know what politeness is. I hope you understand someday. I'm not talking rubbish, I have a respectable opinion, if you don't respect it it's probably because it puts your absolute certainities under discussion, which you can't accept, so you start being aggressive. I never said equalization wasn't possible, I said that it's hard to equalize a Turbo Diesel and a normal engine, which is what the likes of Jorg Muller, Rob Huff, Fabrizio Giovanardi and Nicola Larini think. Go to them and tell them in the face what you're saying to me in the same terms you are using now, and see which answer you will get. I'm even too polite to you. So, your 'BTCC and STCC manage to equalize what you say can't be done for years already' makes no sense. I remember very well the Etcc days in which Alfa and BMW were into such a close fight, which means there was equalization, and at that point, win the best driver who can make the best out of his car. I don't need you to teach me Touring Car history, don't worry

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

The data goes down because a lot of small factories have closed down.

And you don't see the connection with the global crisis???

We were not looking for a recession but for the performance of the country's economy

I'm amazed. You claim to be in a Young Entrepreneurs' association yet you don't understand the connections between recession, GDP and "performance of countys economy". Why are you making a big point of having the data if you dont understand what the numbers mean?

you discovered nothing new

Definitely not. The signs were so obvious even an amateur like me couldn't avoid to see them. My point was, there are lots of so called analysts are not capable of performing their jobs properly, and listening to more of their over optimistic prognoses is IMO a bad move.

and 3 months are not enough to express that, it only indicates a trend in those 3 months.

Yes.... it's when you add several of those quarter reports into a graph (like in the PFD I link to) that things start to make sense.

If you read the newspapers, a lot of the European central banks are saying that 2009 will be less though than 2008, and 2010 should be ok.

The same central banks that 6-12 months ago were stating how things are going fine, 2009 would see continues GDP growth, and eg in Swedens case increased the interest to "combat inflation"? Well, right now those banks are trying to combat deflation, and it imploded in 3-6 months, world wide.

In any case, whatever the future will bring, I think I have beyond any doubt shown that Sweden is very severly affected by the current crisis with a massive -4,9% 2008 Q4 GDP. That is not a prediction, but the actual number. And personally I don't care if you try to count things backwards or upside down to try to fit into your fantasy.

The opinion about Panta is totally yours and lacks of trust in such professionals.

I think you need to read what I wrote again, because that reply just can't be a reply to what I actually wrote.

Seems like you don't know what politeness is.

Since for you politeness is apparently for others to shut up as soon as you wave some fancy journalist job or entrepreneur association membership around, I'm not really worried about what you consider polite.

I judge peoples posts by what they actually write, not which memberships they brag about.

I never said equalization wasn't possible, I said that it's hard to equalize a Turbo Diesel and a normal engine,

It is also hard to equalize FWD vs RWD vs 4WD. It's also hard to equalize different chassis. It has all been done, many times, in many series, and will continue to be.

[helterskelter]

This all started when a bank collapsed. It was impossible to predict WHEN this was going to happen. Maybe you knew it, since you know everything perfectly
I'm not discussing economics anymore with you. It's so clear that you are lacking the main knowledges to understand the climate that it would be pointless and boring, I'd need you to come to my university and attend some courses before. I understand the data perfectly, and saw it discussed by Emma Marcegaglia and Luca Cordero di Montezemolo, just to tell you some names, and they had this opinion, Ah, but again, if you're a better entrepreneur than they are, please apply for the job at Fiat, they will surely hire you. Just to tell you, the factories have closed down because the small Italian banks were connected to the banks who collapsed, they had to stop giving money and the smaller factories had to close down. This is what happened in Italy, of course it has to do with the global crisis, but you were talking about totally different stuff. I repeat, I'm not discussing it anymore and will ignore if you continue to do so.
About Panta, you wrote that what they say is not what they know. I told you that they wouldn't do that.
I'm not boasting about my membership, I was telling you where the data I had came from. You think I'm trying to look superior compared to you, which is an inferiority complex, obviously. So, your problem, not mine. I don't think I'm better than anyone, I just want people to respect me, and you don't, obviously. If you don't care about what I think, why even take the time to respond? Politeness is not for the others to shut up, that's what you would want from me. Politeness is not saying 'you live in a fantasy, you twist the reality, you don't understand stuff...'. You are nobody to tell me what to do and what not to do, and yet you try to do so. Luckily, I have never fallen into the trap of offending you, while you did many times. Try not to get too angry, it hurts the liver!
Infact, 4WDs have been banned in the Wtcc and people have always complained that BMW was faster and therefore always thought that RWD were unfairly faster. This discussion is endless, and you want to be completely and absolutely right. Try to tell the interested parties the stuff you put forward and let's see what they tell you.

[FIRE]

Can we go back on topic?

Discussing the global economic crisis is a topic which belongs more to the Parc Ferme forum of Ten-tenths.

[helterskelter]

Agreed, sorry, already stated I won't discuss the matter anymore.

[werner]

Fascinating stuff. In most discussions people would brag about their favorite [fill in any topic of conversation, be it soccerclub, city, beer], butt in this forum fans of 1 carbrand are shouting that their favorite brand is slowest, and citizens of several countries are arguing, not about who's countrie is running best, but worst!

On the topic, is everybody just as annoyed as me that apparantly -60kg's is not enough for Chevy, and they need some more waivers?

[awrb]

I'm annoyed that there's any equalisation going on at all. The cars will never be equal. Even in a one make series, one team will have more resources than the rest, set their car up better, do something to get ahead. That's what motorsport's all about. So either run all cars from the same operation, one team with 20 generic, no-brand race cars, all turned out exactly equally so it's all up to the drivers, or let the teams do what they do best, make their cars go as fast as possible, within a set of rules, and if one car's better, let it win. The organisers need to stop messing about.

[helterskelter]

awrb, it'd be a wonderful dream, but car manufacturers would pull out and, of course, no manufacturer involvement=no wtcc. It's not a national series, as you can see less than 10 independents make it to the grid, this is a very expensive championship. There needs to be equalization.
werner, I was sticking upon my country actually About the brand, discussion is still ongoing. Anyway I'm not after the brand, I'm after a driver who drives for a brand, and I look at the results and wonder if it's fair that the situation is like this, when the goal of the rules is to make the championship as equal as possible. As simple as that.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

This discussion is endless, and you want to be completely and absolutely right.

It's hard to not be completely and absolutely right when just stating facts of reality. Meanwhile you endlessly keep claiming how eg SEATs are unpassable and equalization is incorrect after a weekend where Andy alone passed all SEATs except Rydell and the only reason for that is that in race 1 he had a BMW between him an Rydell and in race 2 Rydell was never even ahead of Andy. And several other BMWs were passing SEATs right left and center. Now tell me, how is anybody supposed to take your opinon seriously when you can't even see cars being passed on the track? And to make things even more laughable you yarp on about how I offend you by eg saying you are extremely Andy/BMW biased. If you find it offensive, better take a long look at yourself, because that is a spot on opinion of what you actually do. The same with the bragging btw, several people other than me has also pointed it out before.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by stedevil

It's hard to not be completely and absolutely right when just stating facts of reality. Meanwhile you endlessly keep claiming how eg SEATs are unpassable and equalization is incorrect after a weekend where Andy alone passed all SEATs except Rydell and the only reason for that is that in race 1 he had a BMW between him an Rydell and in race 2 Rydell was never even ahead of Andy. And several other BMWs were passing SEATs right left and center. Now tell me, how is anybody supposed to take your opinon seriously when you can't even see cars being passed on the track? And to make things even more laughable you yarp on about how I offend you by eg saying you are extremely Andy/BMW biased. If you find it offensive, better take a long look at yourself, because that is a spot on opinion of what you actually do. The same with the bragging btw, several people other than me has also pointed it out before.

He said they're unpassable on the straights. Reading comprehension > you.

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by Matt

He said they're unpassable on the straights. Reading comprehension > you.

LOL!

'Stedevil' will find a way to get out of that one.

He's NEVER wrong and anyone that doesn't go along with his POV is an idiot

[helterskelter]

Matt and touring fan01, I waited for a long time until discussing with someone who understands what I write. Anyway, just check how Yvan was slower then Rob and he didn't find a way past the SEAT, and we're not talking about Andy
I don't find it offensive, I find it unfair that you state I'm Andy/BMW biased and you're not SEAT biased. Again, you said that my opinions are laughable. If that's not offensive...

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Matt

He said they're unpassable on the straights. Reading comprehension > you.

He did not, he said on the very first page "Funny thing is, if they work well in quali, BMW will never be able to pass them due to Seat's super top speed."

So for reading comprehension, where do you matt see "straights" in there?

Besides, "overtaking on the straights" is usually about getting the slipstream on the straight, stepping out and then outbreaking the opponent in the following corner. Rarely do you see "pure straight" passes in any case, and SEAT certainly wheren't doing those either in Mexico.

[werner]

Huff may not have been able to pass Muller, he did pass other Seat-drivers on his way from 8th to third. So the Seat's are passable. Muller is not World Champion without a reason: he may be a good racingdriver, able to defend a position? I'm sure he was very annoyed by his mistake in the first race, and very determined not to let that happen again.
If you only want the fastest driver to win, you should go watch rally.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

Again, you said that my opinions are laughable. If that's not offensive...

I can pick at least 10 things from as many posts by you in this very thread that is offensive towards me. I just prefer not to constantly whine like a 5-year-old about how evil other people are to me.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by werner

On the topic, is everybody just as annoyed as me that apparantly -60kg's is not enough for Chevy, and they need some more waivers?

I assume you mean the flat floors? That was granted to them already for the first race, the cars had just been shipped already when the decision came in. If they would have had them from when they got the waiver, they would not likely have 60kg less right now, put potentially a lot more points as trade-off.

I presume they will be putting back a bunch of lead into the cars for next weekend, so it should even out soon enough.