Silverstone BTCC
Discussion
Munter said:
The effect of this is that if the Honda head flows much better than say the VW, then the Honda will make more power than the VW at the same boost level.
This the point at which I always find myself shaking my head in confusion. On what planet is building a better engine to the same rule set regarded as undesirable... I could kind of understand it in the transitional phase where manufacturers with a large investment in N/A engines had to be placated to keep them in the series but as I understand it everyone's now running NGTC spec turbo engines so unless we really are saying that building a better car (and I'd say choosing or building a better engine package comes under this heading just as surely as coming up with a better suspension/geometry/aero package) why (beyond a "global" factor to allow for those teams still running S2000 spec chassis) are we fiddling around with boost pressure at all?
It's not a "spec" series (and I personally wouldn't want to see it become one), there's the "success ballast" system to make it a little harder for one driver/car combination to score a runaway series win and keep up the entertainment levels so why pretend that it is and try to run it as though it was?
The NGTC package (both chassis and engine) was designed to constrain costs and make it easier and cheaper for teams to build and run competitive cars, all the evidence is that it has suceeded, bringing more teams into the series with different cars than we've seen for ages. Would bringing a bit more consistency and transparency back into things by letting all the teams run the same boost (subject to whether they're running S2000 or NGTC chassis while the two co-exist) and allowing teams who're able to wring a little more power out of their engines from a given level of boost to do so, possibly making more use of success ballast (maybe adding a little "success boost reduction" on the same basis as the ballasting is done if ballasting isn't enough on it's own) to make series runaways a little harder really be such a bad thing?
Oh, and I'd still like to see BTCC subject to the same driving standards rules as every other series - there are plenty of other "tin top" series which manage to deliver close, exciting, entertaining racing on a non contact basis, with officials generally being able to recognise a genuine "racing incident" when it happens, applying or withholding sanctions appropriately so why does the "premier league" series need to be different?
StoatInACoat said:
That would suggest that this "plan" of TOCA's to raise all the cars to a 400bhp output next year is going to be a non starter for some teams and require new engines for others including RAR who have built a car to meet full NGTC specs 
A bit slow in response. But judging by the power we're putting out and our straight line speed then there are plenty of cars already running 400BHP, or at least putting out a hell of a lot of torque compared to us.egomeister said:
fatboy69 said:
If that is the case, & my knowledge of engineering is virtually non existant tbh, surely the simple answer is to give all the teams the same engine.
Built by one supplier, seal the engines so they cannot be tampered with in any way which then means that any 'performance' advantage is down to the car design, the aero, the set up &, dare I say it, the talent/skill of the driver....
Simple.
Isn't it?
Not really...Built by one supplier, seal the engines so they cannot be tampered with in any way which then means that any 'performance' advantage is down to the car design, the aero, the set up &, dare I say it, the talent/skill of the driver....
Simple.
Isn't it?
What attraction is there for manufacturers if they aren't allowed to use their own engine? By all means have a spec engine as an option, but it shouldn't be mandatory.
To use F1 as an example, theres rule inplace then that whole industry has been made of designers / engineers pushing the envelope, sometimes too much etc etc, but its a blast to see it all come together, when Red Bull nailed it after alot of hard work and hard cash, how unfair that season would it of been to then start pegging them back and giving HRT a chance.
Teams should 'aspire' to be as competitive as the best team, they shouldn't be given a chance to beat them just because more boost allowed them too....its a hollow way to win.
some folks are bang on the money here, some arent. But winning races due to having more boost (= more horsepower more torque) than another driver / team....is a joke frankly....
Edited by decadence on Wednesday 10th October 10:17
Cheers for the response 
Instead of HOW the engine puts down the power and at what rev range etc wouldn't it make more sense to limit all the cars to something like 350bhp and leave them to it? They could be rolling roaded like the Ginettas to ensure they aren't cheating by going over but otherwise free to do what they want to the engine and how they map it for tourque/power delivery.
I thought that's how WRC used to work in the Scooby/Evo era?
The V8 idea is crazy. The whole point of BTCC is that the cars relate to stuff the average Joe has at home. That's a big part of the appeal. Most people have a Civic, Vectra or a Golf equivilant, most do not have a V8 sports saloon.
Instead of HOW the engine puts down the power and at what rev range etc wouldn't it make more sense to limit all the cars to something like 350bhp and leave them to it? They could be rolling roaded like the Ginettas to ensure they aren't cheating by going over but otherwise free to do what they want to the engine and how they map it for tourque/power delivery.
I thought that's how WRC used to work in the Scooby/Evo era?
The V8 idea is crazy. The whole point of BTCC is that the cars relate to stuff the average Joe has at home. That's a big part of the appeal. Most people have a Civic, Vectra or a Golf equivilant, most do not have a V8 sports saloon.
StoatInACoat said:
Cheers for the response
Instead of HOW the engine puts down the power and at what rev range etc wouldn't it make more sense to limit all the cars to something like 350bhp and leave them to it? They could be rolling roaded like the Ginettas to ensure they aren't cheating by going over but otherwise free to do what they want to the engine and how they map it for tourque/power delivery.
I thought that's how WRC used to work in the Scooby/Evo era?
The V8 idea is crazy. The whole point of BTCC is that the cars relate to stuff the average Joe has at home. That's a big part of the appeal. Most people have a Civic, Vectra or a Golf equivilant, most do not have a V8 sports saloon.
^ this.Instead of HOW the engine puts down the power and at what rev range etc wouldn't it make more sense to limit all the cars to something like 350bhp and leave them to it? They could be rolling roaded like the Ginettas to ensure they aren't cheating by going over but otherwise free to do what they want to the engine and how they map it for tourque/power delivery.
I thought that's how WRC used to work in the Scooby/Evo era?
The V8 idea is crazy. The whole point of BTCC is that the cars relate to stuff the average Joe has at home. That's a big part of the appeal. Most people have a Civic, Vectra or a Golf equivilant, most do not have a V8 sports saloon.
why isnt it possible?
what is the fear for ToCA?
Its the notion that somehow Honda are winning cause they have done something wrong which baffles me, theres a creeping smear campaign from certain camps. Honda did nothing wrong but have the best car / driver / team package.
Now its all faked to make sure that they cant run away with the title.
Heres a novel idea how about the rest try to get better instead of making the best get worse?
Its like modern day school sports day, you have to make the crap kids look good instead of celebrating the good ones....a total joke and farcical really....
No other sport would make the best look crap by faking things to this extent....
StoatInACoat said:
Cheers for the response
Instead of HOW the engine puts down the power and at what rev range etc wouldn't it make more sense to limit all the cars to something like 350bhp and leave them to it? They could be rolling roaded like the Ginettas to ensure they aren't cheating by going over but otherwise free to do what they want to the engine and how they map it for tourque/power delivery.
I thought that's how WRC used to work in the Scooby/Evo era?
The V8 idea is crazy. The whole point of BTCC is that the cars relate to stuff the average Joe has at home. That's a big part of the appeal. Most people have a Civic, Vectra or a Golf equivilant, most do not have a V8 sports saloon.
That was precisely the idea of flow testing all of the engines, everyone gets to design their own engine if they want, but the power remains in the same ballpark. Whether it worked or not is open to interpretation of speed traps at the start of the year, but IMHO the boost adjustment process defeats the object, as obviously a Honda with 0.5 bar of base boost is going to get a different increase in power with a 0.125 bar increase in boost than a VW with 0.8 bar of base boost.Instead of HOW the engine puts down the power and at what rev range etc wouldn't it make more sense to limit all the cars to something like 350bhp and leave them to it? They could be rolling roaded like the Ginettas to ensure they aren't cheating by going over but otherwise free to do what they want to the engine and how they map it for tourque/power delivery.
I thought that's how WRC used to work in the Scooby/Evo era?
The V8 idea is crazy. The whole point of BTCC is that the cars relate to stuff the average Joe has at home. That's a big part of the appeal. Most people have a Civic, Vectra or a Golf equivilant, most do not have a V8 sports saloon.
Rolling road testing works in single make series with identical, heavily regulated cars, but with a multi marque series it's too open to gamesmanship with the power testing. Restrictors can also increase cost as teams try to minimise its impact and it can also shorten the life of the turbo as far as I'm aware. FWIW boost monitoring is actually a good way of working things, but personally I think it would work better if it was a common limit along with restrictions on things like port and valve sizes.
That way if a team chooses to waste a load of money trying to maximise what they've got, they still see an advantage (which might keep manufacturers happy) but you're talking about a few mph and a couple of tenths down the straights from front to back rather than 10 and probably up to a second a lap like you have now. The current system is almost self defeating and causes too much inequality if you ask me.
It was ok when you only had S2000 cars hampered by their standard layout, but with NGTCs having a common suspension setup and layout I don't think it really works.
Edited by The Wookie on Wednesday 10th October 10:39
Dave Bartrum is quoted as saying, regards teams voting for this 'parity' boost equalisation it was like:
"the turkey voting for Christmas"
Im getting the impression no one is liking it much, drivers or fans, its certainly not working...and if anything it will keep manufactures away from the series not draw them in...in fact i wouldn't be suprised if Honda take a step back as 'factory' support.....
"the turkey voting for Christmas"
Im getting the impression no one is liking it much, drivers or fans, its certainly not working...and if anything it will keep manufactures away from the series not draw them in...in fact i wouldn't be suprised if Honda take a step back as 'factory' support.....
decadence said:
Dave Bartrum is quoted as saying, regards teams voting for this 'parity' boost equalisation it was like:
"the turkey voting for Christmas"
Im getting the impression no one is liking it much, drivers or fans, its certainly not working...and if anything it will keep manufactures away from the series not draw them in...in fact i wouldn't be suprised if Honda take a step back as 'factory' support.....
My point made a couple of days ago. The b"the turkey voting for Christmas"
Im getting the impression no one is liking it much, drivers or fans, its certainly not working...and if anything it will keep manufactures away from the series not draw them in...in fact i wouldn't be suprised if Honda take a step back as 'factory' support.....
hing will drive the sponsors away. End result? A poorly supported race series that no one will want to watch.Something has to be done before it implodes.
fatboy69 said:
decadence said:
Dave Bartrum is quoted as saying, regards teams voting for this 'parity' boost equalisation it was like:
"the turkey voting for Christmas"
Im getting the impression no one is liking it much, drivers or fans, its certainly not working...and if anything it will keep manufactures away from the series not draw them in...in fact i wouldn't be suprised if Honda take a step back as 'factory' support.....
My point made a couple of days ago. The b"the turkey voting for Christmas"
Im getting the impression no one is liking it much, drivers or fans, its certainly not working...and if anything it will keep manufactures away from the series not draw them in...in fact i wouldn't be suprised if Honda take a step back as 'factory' support.....
hing will drive the sponsors away. End result? A poorly supported race series that no one will want to watch.Something has to be done before it implodes.
Edited by decadence on Wednesday 10th October 11:41
Boost increase - many many years ago when I was working for a race team we couldn't understand how another team with, at the time what was said to be identical spec cars & engines, were very much quicker than us.
We later found out it was due to an 'extra' 250cc on the engine..........
We later found out it was due to an 'extra' 250cc on the engine..........
There will never be a level playing field will there?
All this best team will win on merit is failure to appreciate the true scenario. The team with the best access to funds usually wins, which is not always the same as the best team. Hence the various resources leveling rules currently in F1 otherwise teams could simply buy a result.
To be fair to the organisers, they have tried to address the financial resources imbalance within BTCC and in trying to provide a level playing field, there will always be those who will be advantaged or disadvantaged as a result. Hence the outcry which many here equate to whinging, moaning and the female dog verb...
All this best team will win on merit is failure to appreciate the true scenario. The team with the best access to funds usually wins, which is not always the same as the best team. Hence the various resources leveling rules currently in F1 otherwise teams could simply buy a result.
To be fair to the organisers, they have tried to address the financial resources imbalance within BTCC and in trying to provide a level playing field, there will always be those who will be advantaged or disadvantaged as a result. Hence the outcry which many here equate to whinging, moaning and the female dog verb...
MGJohn said:
There will never be a level playing field will there?
All this best team will win on merit is failure to appreciate the true scenario. The team with the best access to funds usually wins, which is not always the same as the best team. Hence the various resources leveling rules currently in F1 otherwise teams could simply buy a result.
F1 doesn't really have resource levelling rules as such. It has rules which attempt to constrain overall costs and keep the point that diminishing returns start to kick in something like within sight of the smaller teams (testing restrictions, engine RPM restrictions, restrictions on use of exotic materials in engine components, key mechanical component life requirements, etc, etc, etc). It doesn't however allow Marrussia an extra 500 RPM on the rev limiter or an extra 5 seconds of KERS to narrow the gap to Red Bull or for that matter allow Red Bull an extra 500 RPM to bring their straight line speed figures in line with (say) Force India (who seem to have a penchant for "slippery" designs and setups which work well on low downforce circuits) in the name of "parity".All this best team will win on merit is failure to appreciate the true scenario. The team with the best access to funds usually wins, which is not always the same as the best team. Hence the various resources leveling rules currently in F1 otherwise teams could simply buy a result.
I approve of realistic budgets, I approve of NGTC which seems to have made it significantly easier/cheaper/quicker for new entrants to put a competitive car on the grid. I don't approve of tinkering with the rules on a car by car, event by event basis which is what we seem to have now.
Teams don't have to spend a fortune developing a super engine or adapting unsuitable units, they have the option of buying or leasing the "official" TOCA package which, if it's not guaranteed to be the quickest thing on the grid puts a floor on output and a ceiling on costs, and that's a form of resource levelling I can live with...
The Wookie said:
StoatInACoat said:
That would suggest that this "plan" of TOCA's to raise all the cars to a 400bhp output next year is going to be a non starter for some teams and require new engines for others including RAR who have built a car to meet full NGTC specs
A bit slow in response. But judging by the power we're putting out and our straight line speed then there are plenty of cars already running 400BHP, or at least putting out a hell of a lot of torque compared to us.Err.... No offence
EDLT said:
The Wookie said:
StoatInACoat said:
That would suggest that this "plan" of TOCA's to raise all the cars to a 400bhp output next year is going to be a non starter for some teams and require new engines for others including RAR who have built a car to meet full NGTC specs
A bit slow in response. But judging by the power we're putting out and our straight line speed then there are plenty of cars already running 400BHP, or at least putting out a hell of a lot of torque compared to us.Err.... No offence
At least I think it was in here.
EDLT said:
I was under the impression that some of the slower cars got a boost increase to keep them competitive, why don't you get one?
Err.... No offence
None taken, you've only got to look at our speed traps to see where we were suffering at Silverstone, in fact it contrasted rather nicely with where I finished at Rockingham in the wet I think! Err.... No offence
As said, we're running the maximum increase over base but it produces little extra power over the base level due to the limitations of the engine.
VictoriaYorks said:
Certainly looks like Shaun has made an announcement with that ad! I don't think he's really made it a secret that he wants to be running an NGTC next year though mind you.Love that he chose that shot for the ad though!
The Wookie said:
Certainly looks like Shaun has made an announcement with that ad! I don't think he's really made it a secret that he wants to be running an NGTC next year though mind you.
Love that he chose that shot for the ad though!
I hope you already knew :/Love that he chose that shot for the ad though!
Will it be another Golf? Will it be you next year?
PS: If we win Euromillions it will be my O/H in the Golf next year, lol
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff