Silverstone BTCC
Discussion
egomeister said:
Being a self developed, single car team must be a real hinderance - I'm imagine its all to easy to lead yourself down a blind alley with set up and not realise until you are in the middle of qually wishing you'd had a second opinion to rely on at the start of the day!
To be honest we've got enough data to tell and (with my day job) I generally know when it's not quick, and usually we can make good guesses at what it needs. One problem we have is the car needs to be absolutely perfect and I need to extract absolutely everything it's got for it to be knocking on the door of top ten finishes. The other problems are that we dont have another car to take a risk with and when the guesses are wrong we don't always have time to change it back!That's what happened at Silverstone in Quali, all logic told us that running stiffer than at Rockingham would be better, but we obviously went beyond the limit of the shell or tyres and it was horrendous. Because we were also doing development on other parts of the car that didn't work out we had stacks of stuff to change between FP1, FP2 and Quali, ultimately meaning we didn't have time to change the front springs, so I had to live with it. The car was put back overnight but it still wasn't tuned for the track so we had to sort the balance out between the races. We only had the chance to get it right by race 3.
If we had a back catalogue of setup data from a big team we wouldn't have tried it. If we'd had two cars we'd have found it out earlier in the season and we'd have been able to try variations of setup out quicker as we'd effectively had had double the running. If we had two cars we'd also have effectively double the number of mechanics to put things right.
Also with the constant setup changes ive not always had enough experience of it the way it is before a competitive session and I'm not always sure what its going to do. Fine on circuits like Silverstone as I can chuck it in safely in the knowledge that there's plenty of runoff and big gravel traps to stop me, not so great at places like Oulton or Brands where I have to maintain an element of caution lest I stick it in the wall in quali or the first couple of laps of a race.
Edited by The Wookie on Wednesday 10th October 20:20
drakart said:
That's why we all go racing!! No point doing it if you're not enjoying it. Keep at it, it's great to see someone with a "normal job" racing at such a level by being sensible. (any chance you might be tempted back to racing the Caterham R600?)
In all honesty the C400 made me poo a little bit every time I raced it, I don't much savour the prospect of another 50bhp! I'll hopefully be doing a fee Mag7's rounds in the 400 with my mate Jez next year though!The Wookie said:
To be honest we've got enough data to tell and (with my day job) I generally know when it's not quick, and usually we can make good guesses at what it needs. One problem we have is the car needs to be absolutely perfect and I need to extract absolutely everything it's got for it to be knocking on the door of top ten finishes. The other problems are that we dont have another car to take a risk with and when the guesses are wrong we don't always have time to change it back!
That's what happened at Silverstone in Quali, all logic told us that running stiffer than at Rockingham would be better, but we obviously went beyond the limit of the shell or tyres and it was horrendous. Because we were also doing development on other parts of the car that didn't work out we had stacks of stuff to change between FP1, FP2 and Quali, ultimately meaning we didn't have time to change the front springs, so I had to live with it. The car was put back overnight but it still wasn't tuned for the track so we had to sort the balance out between the races. We only had the chance to get it right by race 3.
If we had a back catalogue of setup data from a big team we wouldn't have tried it. If we'd had two cars we'd have found it out earlier in the season and we'd have been able to try variations of setup out quicker as we'd effectively had had double the running. If we had two cars we'd also have effectively double the number of mechanics to put things right.
Also with the constant setup changes ive not always had enough experience of it the way it is before a competitive session and I'm not always sure what its going to do. Fine on circuits like Silverstone as I can chuck it in safely in the knowledge that there's plenty of runoff and big gravel traps to stop me, not so great at places like Oulton or Brands where I have to maintain an element of caution lest I stick it in the wall in quali or the first couple of laps of a race.
Yes, I was going to suggest that the day job should leave you with fewer excuses than most other drivers!That's what happened at Silverstone in Quali, all logic told us that running stiffer than at Rockingham would be better, but we obviously went beyond the limit of the shell or tyres and it was horrendous. Because we were also doing development on other parts of the car that didn't work out we had stacks of stuff to change between FP1, FP2 and Quali, ultimately meaning we didn't have time to change the front springs, so I had to live with it. The car was put back overnight but it still wasn't tuned for the track so we had to sort the balance out between the races. We only had the chance to get it right by race 3.
If we had a back catalogue of setup data from a big team we wouldn't have tried it. If we'd had two cars we'd have found it out earlier in the season and we'd have been able to try variations of setup out quicker as we'd effectively had had double the running. If we had two cars we'd also have effectively double the number of mechanics to put things right.
Also with the constant setup changes ive not always had enough experience of it the way it is before a competitive session and I'm not always sure what its going to do. Fine on circuits like Silverstone as I can chuck it in safely in the knowledge that there's plenty of runoff and big gravel traps to stop me, not so great at places like Oulton or Brands where I have to maintain an element of caution lest I stick it in the wall in quali or the first couple of laps of a race.
Edited by The Wookie on Wednesday 10th October 20:20
It's great that you are able to explain things like this openly, so that people get a better understanding of what is happening behind the scenes. It's all too often hidden away with teams being secretive fearing rivals will get one up on them, when everyone is probably doing the same thing anyway!
egomeister said:
Yes, I was going to suggest that the day job should leave you with fewer excuses than most other drivers!
It's great that you are able to explain things like this openly, so that people get a better understanding of what is happening behind the scenes. It's all too often hidden away with teams being secretive fearing rivals will get one up on them, when everyone is probably doing the same thing anyway!
Generally it's handy for suggesting changes that work and understanding the impact that changes are going to make, which helps with feedback, but funny enough sometimes it can be a disadvantage as its very easy for me to concentrate too much on what it's doing and thinking about what I think it needs rather than leaving it to my race engineer and focusing on getting on with the job of driving the damn thing as fast as possible!It's great that you are able to explain things like this openly, so that people get a better understanding of what is happening behind the scenes. It's all too often hidden away with teams being secretive fearing rivals will get one up on them, when everyone is probably doing the same thing anyway!
Yeah I like to share as I know it's stuff I would have found interesting before I started racing!! Plus everyone's cars are different and everyone does their own thing, so I'm not sharing anything useful to other teams or anything they don't know!!
MGJohn said:
In previous rounds, I did not need Plato to tell me the car was handling like a pig. It clearly was.
Race three at Silverstone to my aged but, quite experienced eyes, the MG was really handling better than I have seen in any of its races all season. So, again, I did not need Plato to tell me that, it was all too bleedin' obvious even to my aged minces.. however, whilst it was not news to me, it may be to others so well done to JP for giving credit to the car and not being accused of taking all the credit for being theee 'driving God' like some folks I could mention...
IncanDecadence ~ how many more dead horses are you going to flog?
....
So the MG dominance at silverstone had nothing to do with having a nice dose of extra boost then? it was all down to finding the sweet spot? bRace three at Silverstone to my aged but, quite experienced eyes, the MG was really handling better than I have seen in any of its races all season. So, again, I did not need Plato to tell me that, it was all too bleedin' obvious even to my aged minces.. however, whilst it was not news to me, it may be to others so well done to JP for giving credit to the car and not being accused of taking all the credit for being theee 'driving God' like some folks I could mention...
IncanDecadence ~ how many more dead horses are you going to flog?
....
ks mate. Anyway if the MG is so great, why isn't it pegged back then? why is it winning a race from 20th on the grid? EXPLAIN!
decadence said:
MGJohn said:
In previous rounds, I did not need Plato to tell me the car was handling like a pig. It clearly was.
Race three at Silverstone to my aged but, quite experienced eyes, the MG was really handling better than I have seen in any of its races all season. So, again, I did not need Plato to tell me that, it was all too bleedin' obvious even to my aged minces.. however, whilst it was not news to me, it may be to others so well done to JP for giving credit to the car and not being accused of taking all the credit for being theee 'driving God' like some folks I could mention...
IncanDecadence ~ how many more dead horses are you going to flog?
....
So the MG dominance at silverstone had nothing to do with having a nice dose of extra boost then? it was all down to finding the sweet spot? bRace three at Silverstone to my aged but, quite experienced eyes, the MG was really handling better than I have seen in any of its races all season. So, again, I did not need Plato to tell me that, it was all too bleedin' obvious even to my aged minces.. however, whilst it was not news to me, it may be to others so well done to JP for giving credit to the car and not being accused of taking all the credit for being theee 'driving God' like some folks I could mention...
IncanDecadence ~ how many more dead horses are you going to flog?
....
ks mate. Anyway if the MG is so great, why isn't it pegged back then? why is it winning a race from 20th on the grid? EXPLAIN!
The honda has the better package so in the wet at both rockingham and thrxton it was the best car different tracks suit different cars try seeing that before making stupid comments.
MG CHRIS said:
decadence said:
MGJohn said:
In previous rounds, I did not need Plato to tell me the car was handling like a pig. It clearly was.
Race three at Silverstone to my aged but, quite experienced eyes, the MG was really handling better than I have seen in any of its races all season. So, again, I did not need Plato to tell me that, it was all too bleedin' obvious even to my aged minces.. however, whilst it was not news to me, it may be to others so well done to JP for giving credit to the car and not being accused of taking all the credit for being theee 'driving God' like some folks I could mention...
IncanDecadence ~ how many more dead horses are you going to flog?
....
So the MG dominance at silverstone had nothing to do with having a nice dose of extra boost then? it was all down to finding the sweet spot? bRace three at Silverstone to my aged but, quite experienced eyes, the MG was really handling better than I have seen in any of its races all season. So, again, I did not need Plato to tell me that, it was all too bleedin' obvious even to my aged minces.. however, whilst it was not news to me, it may be to others so well done to JP for giving credit to the car and not being accused of taking all the credit for being theee 'driving God' like some folks I could mention...
IncanDecadence ~ how many more dead horses are you going to flog?
....
ks mate. Anyway if the MG is so great, why isn't it pegged back then? why is it winning a race from 20th on the grid? EXPLAIN!
The honda has the better package so in the wet at both rockingham and thrxton
it was the best car different tracks suit different cars try seeing that before making stupid comments.
OK your senario from what I can gather is thus:
888 engineer a racing car with an MG shell. Car is a total "pig" to drive as says the driver, Jason Plato.... car wins race in first race weekend... but it's a "pig to drive"... 888 you should be ashamed of yourselves.
So this pig of a racing car by YOUR senario is then allowed to stay within reach of the drivers championship due to pegging back the other factory team of Honda ?
Suddenly it all comes together at Silverstone (after moaning about otger teams boost like the fords) where it looks like its in a different class, cause finally those idiots at 888 worked out how to put the car together right...
is that what your saying?
Why was a pig of a car allowed to still be within a sniff of a title ??
huh?
I put to you that as I have said 888 can make awesome race cars and they played at the "pig to drive" to benefit themselves.. either senario is bad but yours is worse... a bad car that is a pig to drive should not win you a championship....
Why shouldn't a pig of a car win a championship?
Remember the age old saying 'to finish first, first you have to finish'.
I seem to recall a certain Keke Rosberg winnng the F1 World Championship in a car that wasn't particularly good - & he only one one GP didn't he?
A not particularly good car, a good (very good) driver, consistency & a title. It can be done even if you are not in the best car.
Remember the age old saying 'to finish first, first you have to finish'.
I seem to recall a certain Keke Rosberg winnng the F1 World Championship in a car that wasn't particularly good - & he only one one GP didn't he?
A not particularly good car, a good (very good) driver, consistency & a title. It can be done even if you are not in the best car.
The Wookie said:
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.
I was told by a good source within a frontrunning team that the Audi was supposedly kicking out 350BHP last year. Back in the middle part of the season when it was setting fastest laps, but DNFing or finishing mid-pack. Although you saying that engine has it's limitations makes me wonder. It's still the same Lehmann unit as the Golf isn't it?decadence said:
a bad car that is a pig to drive should not win you a championship....
In which case it's down to the driver. I still maintain Plato makes the difference here. Take your paranoia about the boost and put it to one side. Look at 2005. Muller somehow got the title to a last meeting decider, despite the fact the Astra SportHatch was an enormous pile of crap. A few DNFs for Neal and he could well have driven that "pig" to the title. Same goes for Plato this year, he's got the ability to take that car to where it maybe shouldn't have been at times. Yes 888 are a very talented team, but with the amount of control parts in these new cars, it's not quite as simple to produce a good package out of the box. Now it's at the stage where it's coming good. Similar to 2009 when the Chevy Lacetti finally clicked on the Dunlops and he was in with a shout at the title. Stick Neal in a less than perfect car and he's nowhere. Stick Plato in one and he'll drag it kicking and screaming into places it shouldn't be.But that is the point, the "pig" is there due to the regulations giving everyone a fair crack. So actually a bad car can win due to pegging back the front runners. That's as Plato explained it and others. More boost increase is the difference between the top drivers that's why Sheddon was struggling along with Neal at silverstone...
Your doing this for me....your circling around and soon it's going to be obvious youve done a loop. In fact at least one of you already has..
bless.. night night.
Your doing this for me....your circling around and soon it's going to be obvious youve done a loop. In fact at least one of you already has..
bless.. night night.
fatboy69 said:
Why shouldn't a pig of a car win a championship?
Remember the age old saying 'to finish first, first you have to finish'.
I seem to recall a certain Keke Rosberg winnng the F1 World Championship in a car that wasn't particularly good - & he only one one GP didn't he?
A not particularly good car, a good (very good) driver, consistency & a title. It can be done even if you are not in the best car.
Big difference was that he didn't win due to other better cars being pegged back to make it equal or 'parity'....Remember the age old saying 'to finish first, first you have to finish'.
I seem to recall a certain Keke Rosberg winnng the F1 World Championship in a car that wasn't particularly good - & he only one one GP didn't he?
A not particularly good car, a good (very good) driver, consistency & a title. It can be done even if you are not in the best car.
try harder.
The Wookie said:
Generally it's handy for suggesting changes that work and understanding the impact that changes are going to make, which helps with feedback, but funny enough sometimes it can be a disadvantage as its very easy for me to concentrate too much on what it's doing and thinking about what I think it needs rather than leaving it to my race engineer and focusing on getting on with the job of driving the damn thing as fast as possible!
Yeah I like to share as I know it's stuff I would have found interesting before I started racing!! Plus everyone's cars are different and everyone does their own thing, so I'm not sharing anything useful to other teams or anything they don't know!!
Question for Mr Wookie Yeah I like to share as I know it's stuff I would have found interesting before I started racing!! Plus everyone's cars are different and everyone does their own thing, so I'm not sharing anything useful to other teams or anything they don't know!!
Do you think TOCA should possibly allow extra track time/practice sessions for teams at the lower half of the grid to help get the car dialled in to the circuit for race day? Lets say the bottom 10 drivers on the points get an extra hour or two hours track time to help either learn the circuit or help with setup.
I can see how it may not be a good idea, extra cost in tyres and fuel, and then do they have the time in day to simply fit it in?
Honestly cannot be arsed anymore tonight. You don't like JP no matter what he does or how he does it. That is clear for all to see.
This Is getting nowhere tbh. It just a race series that might or might not be won by the best driver in the best car or the best driver in the worst car or the worst driver in the best car.
Or whatever might happen. We all have our own thoughts, our own point of view & our own preferences.
Speaking personally so long as the racing is clean & no one - Jason, Matt, Gordon, Andy et al - shoves one of the others into the barrier to gain victory - then I don't really care.
Unless of course Matt Neal wins the title again because, as much as you dislike Plato, I dislike Neal & cannot think of a less deserving champion.
Purely personal opinion based on what I like & what I dislike.
As for the turbo boost hassle - I stand by my previous comments - get rid of turbo charged engines!
That way at least one argument will be banished. Won't it? Or maybe not. Who knows......
FFS this is getting tiresome so I'm out of it for tonight.
TTFN & looking forward to more nonsense chats tomorrow before I go & see Dara O'brien & get paid to see him!!
Night night all.
This Is getting nowhere tbh. It just a race series that might or might not be won by the best driver in the best car or the best driver in the worst car or the worst driver in the best car.
Or whatever might happen. We all have our own thoughts, our own point of view & our own preferences.
Speaking personally so long as the racing is clean & no one - Jason, Matt, Gordon, Andy et al - shoves one of the others into the barrier to gain victory - then I don't really care.
Unless of course Matt Neal wins the title again because, as much as you dislike Plato, I dislike Neal & cannot think of a less deserving champion.
Purely personal opinion based on what I like & what I dislike.
As for the turbo boost hassle - I stand by my previous comments - get rid of turbo charged engines!
That way at least one argument will be banished. Won't it? Or maybe not. Who knows......
FFS this is getting tiresome so I'm out of it for tonight.
TTFN & looking forward to more nonsense chats tomorrow before I go & see Dara O'brien & get paid to see him!!
Night night all.
LiamM45 said:
Question for Mr Wookie
Do you think TOCA should possibly allow extra track time/practice sessions for teams at the lower half of the grid to help get the car dialled in to the circuit for race day? Lets say the bottom 10 drivers on the points get an extra hour or two hours track time to help either learn the circuit or help with setup.
I can see how it may not be a good idea, extra cost in tyres and fuel, and then do they have the time in day to simply fit it in?
My immediate impression is that it would garner an 'it's not fair' reaction from teams on the cusp, and to be honest many teams shake the car down at an airfield during the week leading up to the race.Do you think TOCA should possibly allow extra track time/practice sessions for teams at the lower half of the grid to help get the car dialled in to the circuit for race day? Lets say the bottom 10 drivers on the points get an extra hour or two hours track time to help either learn the circuit or help with setup.
I can see how it may not be a good idea, extra cost in tyres and fuel, and then do they have the time in day to simply fit it in?
Unfortunately for us we did that on Friday, but it was colder on the Saturday and the new parts we tried didn't behave themselves as well as they did on the airstrip.
IainW said:
I was told by a good source within a frontrunning team that the Audi was supposedly kicking out 350BHP last year. Back in the middle part of the season when it was setting fastest laps, but DNFing or finishing mid-pack. Although you saying that engine has it's limitations makes me wonder. It's still the same Lehmann unit as the Golf isn't it?
If that's what power it was running it probably still is judging by the speed traps at Silverstone compared to last year. Yes it is the same engine that we run, although I believe they've switched to a different builder over the course of the season.
They've probably got more of a handle on making it more reliable than they did last year but what was quick down the straights last year is now mediocre, particularly for a RWD car that should be carrying fractionally more mid corner speed and getting good exits.
MG CHRIS said:
It's the 2nd slowest car on the grid and has the 2nd lowest boost fiqures of all the cars on the grid how hard is that for you to understand the car was a dog to start with you could see that at the start of the year with only 13 weeks to build a car it wasn't going to be perfect.
Are you referring to the Chinese car? It wasn't the 2nd slowest through the speed traps at Silverstone. Still, at least he doesn't have to lift off the throttle part way down the straights now.I love the way people believe these boost figures. It's motorsport with turbos, ECUs and intelligent engine mappers, therefore boost is more than likely a somewhat variable number...
MG CHRIS said:
It's the 2nd slowest car on the grid and has the 2nd lowest boost fiqures of all the cars on the grid how hard is that for you to understand the car was a dog to start with you could see that at the start of the year with only 13 weeks to build a car it wasn't going to be perfect. Over the year you can see the difference in how it handles and grips compared with the first race. Silverstone suites the mg it can grip better in the corners so puts the power down earlier and with it being 4 corners leading to 3 straights it had the advantage.
The honda has the better package so in the wet at both rockingham and thrxton it was the best car different tracks suit different cars try seeing that before making stupid comments.
Second quickest according to JP's info he gave us. Remember above YOU claimed 2nd slowest....hmmmmThe honda has the better package so in the wet at both rockingham and thrxton it was the best car different tracks suit different cars try seeing that before making stupid comments.
jasonplato said:
Just in case any of you are interested in facts, here are some:
Silverstone Official mph Speed Trap figures: number is an average of Q, R1,R2,R3 bests
Trap 1: Wellington Straight
Matt Jackson 137.77
Jason Plato 134.73
Matt Neal 132.00
Gordon Shedden 131.53
Trap 2: Finish Line
Matt Jackson 127.47
Jason Plato 125.85
Matt Neal 122.48
Gordon Shedden 122.80
MG CHRIS said:
It's the 2nd slowest car on the grid and has the 2nd lowest boost fiqures of all the cars on the grid how hard is that for you to understand the car was a dog to start with you could see that at the start of the year with only 13 weeks to build a car it wasn't going to be perfect. Over the year you can see the difference in how it handles and grips compared with the first race. Silverstone suites the mg it can grip better in the corners so puts the power down earlier and with it being 4 corners leading to 3 straights it had the advantage.
The honda has the better package so in the wet at both rockingham and thrxton it was the best car different tracks suit different cars try seeing that before making stupid comments.
Second quickest according to JP's info he gave us. Remember above YOU claimed 2nd slowest....hmmmmThe honda has the better package so in the wet at both rockingham and thrxton it was the best car different tracks suit different cars try seeing that before making stupid comments.
jasonplato said:
Just in case any of you are interested in facts, here are some:
Silverstone Official mph Speed Trap figures: number is an average of Q, R1,R2,R3 bests
Trap 1: Wellington Straight
Matt Jackson 137.77
Jason Plato 134.73
Matt Neal 132.00
Gordon Shedden 131.53
Trap 2: Finish Line
Matt Jackson 127.47
Jason Plato 125.85
Matt Neal 122.48
Gordon Shedden 122.80
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff