Racing is more interesting when the cars aren't mandated to be identical.
31st July, 2013 @ 1:30 a.m. (California Time)
I'm confused was Chevy using turbochargers or superchargers?
First "Chevrolet squared dual superchargers"
Then later "Chevrolet... it decided to use a dual turbo rather than Honda's single turbo"
Turbochargers are different than superchargers, where as superchargers derive their power to compress more air into the engine directly from the crank shaft turbos use the exhaust gases from the engine. Each have their benefits and draw backs. The supercharger provides air to the engine at low RPMs as it is physically connected to the drive shaft but this also causes more load to be running on the engine reducing power gained from the extra air. Turbocharges tend to provide more power in the high RPM range and suffer from something called turbo lag. Turbo lag occurs because the turbo is power by the exhaust gases which take moments to build up pressure. Turbo systems also cause more back pressure on the engine decreasing the advantage of more combustible air in the engine.
31st July, 2013 @ 8:37 a.m. (California Time)
Agreed with Pin... This is dumb! Where is the innovation?!
31st July, 2013 @ 9:08 a.m. (California Time)
@Pin: I don't agree. When you have a runaway car, like the Chevy motors enabled, or a runaway tire (think Michelin vs. Pirelli in WRC a few years ago) you get something very boring. You have a few that completely dominate and everyone else is an also-ran. That's not fun for anyone.
31st July, 2013 @ 9:11 a.m. (California Time)
Give me one of the 195 hp axial vector engines putting out 610 ft. lb. tq. weighing @ 200 lb.. and getting @ 40 mpg. designed in built in the UK back @ 2006 possibly 2007 and I will wipe the field clean... vroom,vroom,vroom... what a joke.
31st July, 2013 @ 9:19 a.m. (California Time)
I agree with Pin. And identical cars may squash innovation.
31st July, 2013 @ 9:56 a.m. (California Time)
Pin, you are correct... They keep losing their fan bases, and wonder why... It's because the fans can no longer root for their favorite car or engine manufacturer. Just like NASCAR, (National Association of SAME CAR Auto Racing). It's sad that the controlling bodies have gotten away from the intent of these races (entertainment for the fans, rivalries between manufacturers, and development of better engines, cars, etc.)...Oh well
31st July, 2013 @ 10:20 a.m. (California Time)
Hang on a minute- by what standard is a 2.2 litre engine considered 'small'? Most of the cars in Europe are powered by engines smaller than this!
Back in the late 70's and through much of the 80's Renault's V6 turbocharged and twin turboed Formula 1 engines developed between 500 and 1200 bhp- from 1.5 litres!
So this Chevy engine hardly represents progress...
31st July, 2013 @ 12:55 p.m. (California Time)
Pin -- You must be an American, likewise. Where's the ingenuity to become stronger through engineering. What happened to America being the strongest, and more dominant force in building better performing vehicles. Should we just sit back and watch racing for the drivers? BORING! I'd rather sit and watch my grandson play in the sandbox.
31st July, 2013 @ 1:28 p.m. (California Time)
Making the cars have identical performance limits the cost to get in.
I would be much more interested in true stock car racing. The cars having to be identical the cars on the showroom floor, no additional safety equipment, options, or stripping. Just bare boned, base model econo-boxes. It would be all driver cheap cars and you can drive a car identical to the one your hero drove Sunday to work on Monday.
Alternatively limiting the rules to; 250cc maximum displacement engine. 3m-3.1m long, 1.7m-1.8m wide, 1m -1.1m tall. Four tires on the ground. 20liter maximum fuel capacity. 2tonne weight as handicapped with the cars dry except for the brake fluid. The same crash cage specifications as say Indycar.
31st July, 2013 @ 8:21 p.m. (California Time)
A 250cc engine is what I call small! But I can't think of any viable road vehicles past or present that uses or used such a tiny engine, with the exception of the Piaggio Ape (that is Italian for 'bee', not a large furry simian), which is a range of tiny 3 wheeled delivery vehicles or auto rickshaws (or Tuk-Tuks) which are designed to operate at low speed in urban environment, or on faster roads very close to the kerb so that faster vehicles can pass.
Of course, it would be possible to use an extremely highly tuned engine, provided it was fitted to an extremely light chassis- but it wouldn't go far on 20 litres of fuel, and you'd need a very twisty course to make racing interesting- as top speeds would of course be rather low (an American oval circuit race would be even less exciting, if that were possible, with such cars).
The existing small displacement racing series is kart racing, which is suitable for juniors, and is fast and furious on scaled down tracks, with the riders so close to the road that the karts themselves are little more than motorised tea trays. Kart racing is an under-appreciated race format.
1st August, 2013 @ 3:31 a.m. (California Time)
Re my last comment above- when I said that I couldn't think of any viable road vehicle (with an engine of 250cc) I meant vehicles with more than two wheels...
1st August, 2013 @ 9:45 a.m. (California Time)
What happened to IRL/IndyCar/ad nauseum's claimed goal of affordable performance?
1st August, 2013 @ 12:44 p.m. (California Time)
Thinking about it I'll add one more rule. The engine has to be four stroke and have a catalytic converter on the tailpipe.
High speed is not what it takes for exiting racing. The cars are suppose to be slow enough that it will take a very very long time for the cars to get too fast for the tracks.
How much power do you think the engine can produce 20hp. Using the Indycar engines as a benchmark 73.5hp is to be expected. Now add unlimited boost and weight control on the engine not being a concern.
Why people can't envision highly boosted tiny engines is beyond be.
1st August, 2013 @ 3:52 p.m. (California Time)
Agree with Slowburn. I'd like to see 'true stock car' races.
2nd August, 2013 @ 4:14 a.m. (California Time)
These engines run much lower boost pressure and far less volatile fuels than their forebears. Also, they tend to burn less fuel, last longer and run an exhaust catalyst. I'd say thats progress. The similar car mandate comes from keeping the barriers of entry low, as well as for safety. True race fans will recall the heady days of the turbo era and the fan and multi-wheel cars of the 60s, 70s and 80s. Great times in racing and some truly innovative ideas came out of it, but quite a few racers died and the tech gave an unfair advantage to the financially well off teams.
That being said though, I would love to see a league of racing where virtually anything goes.
3rd August, 2013 @ 12:08 a.m. (California Time)
I agree with Pin. Races are getting to be nothing more than a choo choo train running around the track. Boring.
3rd August, 2013 @ 1:34 a.m. (California Time)
These races, are a test of the men and the cars. Designs learned from racing, have trickled down to street level cars, (and the other way around) with changes to suspensions, shocks and struts, tires, steering, and many other changes.
It is this need for improvement, that drives car manufacturers to tweak it just a bit here and there for better than the guy next to me performance. Matching the cars is boring, and just elevates the status of the drivers.
You want innovation? We Americans invented Nascar, while running from the Law. Street cars were modified to do what no other cars could do, more power, suspension tricks, transmissions redesigned, All so moonshiners could run 'shine' without getting caught by the cops.
Need causes competition, competition causes innovation.
Every time I hear "level the playing field", I know it is a step in the wrong direction. Set the rules to any game, and let the best man win. this PC matching crap is counter-productive.
4th August, 2013 @ 7:29 a.m. (California Time)
This is exactly why I could care less about Indy Racing , same with Nascar.
I don't car about the drivers , I wan to see developments in Hardware and technology.
The playing field should not be level, the teams that innovate more should win and there should be enough leeway in the rules to allow for innovation.
You want a level playing field that is affordable and safe? How about a series featuring 20 or 30 simulators all running the same software competing. You can make them very high tech sort of like the high end flight simulators. Then you will have a level playing field , no body will get hurt and no greenhouse gases are emitted. You can cheer for your favorite driver knowing that everything is nice and equal and if one driver proves to be to good he can be easily dialed back.
Make sure we have a good ethnic cross section of society and make sure that all of of the different sexual orientations are represented as well.
Hell, fix it so every driver wins the same number of races and the championship can be shared because God forbid , we wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings by having a loser.
6th August, 2013 @ 3:02 p.m. (California Time)