Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

but what has the v8's devoping old tech got us... sfa. The only thing it's done is help people build awsome classic tarmac rally cars, which when you look at it is pretty poor. Our top level racing series tech 'advances' filtering to cars that are 30-40 years old.

The road commo and coona have had IRS for 15 years or so.

compare that to the advances group a gave us. would we have cars like the M3, GT-R, WRX, EVO if there was no group a....probably not. And the bigger question, would we still have a group a wtcc if Burnie wasn't running the show back in the late 80's

If group a continued, Nissan would not have ruled for long. Remember there was plenty of awd rally cars that could have removed there restricters and moved to the circuit.

actually they were spawned from rally, and not from group A, but even rally is a bad example as you don't see any awd ford focus for sale, only fwd.

look i am all for the step foward to DOHC engines, etc, but to say that it will see more devolpment in road cars is stupid. look at the premier racing category, F1. do you see many small capacity v8 and v10 engines in production these days? nope, yet f1 and indy cars have been running them for a long time now. and with more and more emissions restrictions coming out, that makes it even less likely for there to be engine advances coming from race cars.

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

actually they were spawned from rally, and not from group A, but even rally is a bad example as you don't see any awd ford focus for sale, only fwd.

and wrc was run under group a regs +restricter from 87 to the mid 90's.

most likely cockrone will keep the current regs to please the flanel wearing bogans, and demolish some more circuits.

f1 and indy cars have been running them for a long time now. and with more and more emissions restrictions coming out, that makes it even less likely for there to be engine advances coming from race cars.

filtered down F1 technology is so 1990. space technology is where its at:

http://io9.com/374912/how-space-technology...ing-cars-faster

This says it all, "The formula calls for a spec chassis"....... so yeah, call it what you will, it's just Nascar by another name, paint the Ford grill on to be a Ford, a Holden grill for a Holden, and so on......

I just wish the entire V8SC thing would just crawl up and die and that somehow "Group A" style could be re-introduced. Not gonna happen, but I'm allowed to dream.

I love the fact they even stole the name from nascar - car of the future = car of tomorrow. tony turns out such bad copies of good ideas that he should run a chinese manufacturing business

Yeah, to be frank I'd rather watch V8SC than that appalling BTCC, underpower buzz boxes they are.

i dont mind them at all...very close, aggressive racing.

I just wish the entire V8SC thing would just crawl up and die and that somehow "Group A" style could be re-introduced. Not gonna happen, but I'm allowed to dream.

I think we all wish that.

It's called evolution and we have refused to evolve for far too long !

:D

Yep I agree 100%..What is the actual benefit of developing these old school 5 litre engines.? I mean Ford doesnt sell a Falcon with a 5 litre Windsor,Holden doesnt sell a Commodore with a 5 litre chev.These engines havent been used in our road cars for years.Yet people still valiantly fly the Holden or Ford flag...Little do they realise there really isnt many parts left in the car thats actually manufactured by Holden or Ford. Engine blocks maybe....

Well Auto fiction stated today that Merc or Amg wasn't interested in getting involved.

You can take that 2 ways,,,either they are flatly not interested or they are very interested and don't want Bmw getting in 1st.

Now I'm not saying I have inside info because I don't,,, but,,,you can bet your left nut if merc says yes bmw will be in as well.

From what I've read this car will have a standard floor,,,much like the cut and shut one used now but with proper hanging doors and panels,,,rear 1/4's will be removable for easy damage repairs.

Neil.

Nissan and Hyundai are reportedly also considering entries in the championship. Tip of the hat to Scott for the tip!
DTM organisers have recently been in talks the Japanese Super GT rule makers about common regulations. That could open up the possibility of Toyota, Honda and Nissan which all use similar-sized DOHC, 24-valve V8 engines in Super GT.

Nissan Australia has previously expressed an interest in returning V8 Supercars following its brief run as official safety car supplier last year. Hyundai has also been linked to the sport when the new CoF rules come into force, repeatedly refusing to either confirm or deny any interest in going racing.

The fact Nissan are considering, can only be a good thing no???

  • 2 weeks later...
Yep I agree 100%..What is the actual benefit of developing these old school 5 litre engines.? I mean Ford doesnt sell a Falcon with a 5 litre Windsor,Holden doesnt sell a Commodore with a 5 litre chev.These engines havent been used in our road cars for years.Yet people still valiantly fly the Holden or Ford flag...Little do they realise there really isnt many parts left in the car thats actually manufactured by Holden or Ford. Engine blocks maybe....

Going off that i should sell my house and buy a vr38dett for my car cause the RB has been outta production for over 10 years. (which is longer than the 302)

Same with all the Cosworth D series V8s in champ car...that design dates back to the 60s

And Im sure 90% of bogan fans do realise that not even the body shell rolls off the factory line for the supercars anymore.

I would much rather have the dinosaurs for the local series than JGTC in which the closest they ever get to each other at a race meet is unloading them from the transporters in pit lane..least the supercars still occasionally rub mirrors.

and for the last part...both makes usually run Dart blocks :)

yeah its wierd you guys don't like BTCC, of all the racing codes, I find BTCC and Supertaxi's the closest to call, and most fun to watch for the mayhem side of things (other than nascar when they crash, but that's what highlights are for). JGTC is piss boring to watch, but the cars are epic.

I think it would be great to see a bit of a shake up of the V8 Supercars, but seriously, as far as racing goes...its very good racing. I think its just trendy to hang shit on the V8s because everyone thinks Nissans rule ;) I loved the variety of cars but really, for years it was a matter of which Sierra was going t win...then Mark or Jim.... The racing was actually pretty bad. The first round under the current regs at Amaroo was a revelation, a brilliant round and i think after years of pretty good racing people forget jsut how bad the Grp A racing was

The cars are practically the same bar the pannels and the engines. The engines they run are already dohc and have been for quite litterally years. IRS was introduced back when the chissis moved over to tube frames no?

anywho, this thread is all bs.... these cars have nothing in common with road cars... but they do make for some fun racing. How hard would it be to allow entrants from other manufacturers? the manufacturer needs to build a car of sufficient size to look like a realistic fake, re body pannels and fat v8 engine.

The call about the cars being nascar by another name is somewhat accurate and somewhat not, nascar run the same carburetted engine from the 70's with some restrictions to keep an even greater level of parity. it's the drivers that don't know how to steer around more than 4 corners that they lack. ever seen nascar when they hit another track, any drivers with experience turning in other directions and planning out how to overtake based on the next few corners win.

The cars are practically the same bar the pannels and the engines. The engines they run are already dohc and have been for quite litterally years. IRS was introduced back when the chissis moved over to tube frames no?

are you talking about v8's? cause they aren't a tube frame, and they still run pushrod engines, and like rear ends.

The cars are practically the same bar the pannels and the engines. The engines they run are already dohc and have been for quite litterally years. IRS was introduced back when the chissis moved over to tube frames no?

anywho, this thread is all bs.... these cars have nothing in common with road cars... but they do make for some fun racing. How hard would it be to allow entrants from other manufacturers? the manufacturer needs to build a car of sufficient size to look like a realistic fake, re body pannels and fat v8 engine.

The call about the cars being nascar by another name is somewhat accurate and somewhat not, nascar run the same carburetted engine from the 70's with some restrictions to keep an even greater level of parity. it's the drivers that don't know how to steer around more than 4 corners that they lack. ever seen nascar when they hit another track, any drivers with experience turning in other directions and planning out how to overtake based on the next few corners win.

That post, has me thoroughly confused. :)

Id love to see group C back in action...I think the current crop of cars in showrooms atm would make a great base for a group C car.

Imo the Group C cars were way way cooler than any of the group A cars.

Not sure if anyone watched V8 Extra on Sat, but Skaify was there talking about the new plans. Good news is that Nissan had reps there at the launch.

From what he was saying is that they're going to put in a standard engine "type" ie quad cam V8, all must be RWD and off course all the other regs, but they are opening it up to anyone.

Crompton asked if for example they would let Hyundai enter with a Cosworth motor and he said yes, as long as it all complies with the regs, any manufacturer/engine Combo is ok.

Also moving to 18inch wheels, to allow more tire choice, cause the 17*11 apparently has very limited tire choice, and they want to lighten the cars a fair bit.

He basically said a category that would sit somewhere between the current V8 Supercars and DTM. So they're not going for things like all out carbon body. Not yet anyway,

V8 supercars is the top level racing series in australia so the formula must not be too bad, i don't mind the racing and love watching bathurst and some of the longer races especially with the new fuel involving more strategy's.

Playing around with the set up and i think aiming to reduce costs will only mean more people involved but they would have to be careful not to upset their original customer base as the series could fail. I could see with the changes to make it more affortable that cheaper third hand track cars as well like what we see in some of the supersprints with ex v8 supercars running around.

hopefully they will run a 18in tyre that we are able to reap the benifits of cheaper tyre prices with as well,

Matt

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I think you're really missing the point. The spec is just the minimum spec that the fuel has to meet. The additive packages can, and do, go above that minimum if the fuel brand feels they need/want to. And so you get BP Ultimate or Shell Ultra (or whatever they call it) making promises to clean your engine better than the standard stuff....simply because they do actually put better additive packages in there. They do not waste special sauce on the plebian fuel if they can avoid it. I didn't say "energy density". I just said "density". That's right, the specific gravity (if you want to use a really shit old imperial description for mass per unit volume). The density being higher indicates a number of things, from reduces oxygen content, to increased numbers of double bonds or cyclic components. That then just happens to flow on to the calorific value on a volume basis being correspondingly higher. The calorific value on a mass basis barely changes, because almost all hydrocarbon materials have a very similar CV per kg. But whatever - the end result is that you do get a bit more energy per litre, which helps to offset some of the sting of the massive price bump over 91. I can go you one better than "I used to work at a fuel station". I had uni lecturers who worked at the Pt Stanvac refinery (at the time they were lecturing, as industry specialist lecturers) who were quite candid about the business. And granted, that was 30+ years ago, and you might note that I have stated above that I think the industry has since collected together near the bottom (quite like ISPs, when you think about it). Oh, did I mention that I am quite literally a combustion engineer? I'm designing (well, actually, trying to avoid designing and trying to make the junior engineer do it) a heavy fuel oil firing system for a cement plant in fricking Iraq, this week. Last week it was natural gas fired this-that. The week before it was LPG fired anode furnaces for a copper smelter (well, the burners for them, not the actual furnaces, which are just big dumb steel). I'm kinda all over fuels.
    • Well my freshly rebuilt RB25DET Neo went bang 1000kms in, completely fried big end bearing in cylinder 1 so bad my engine seized. No knocking or oil pressure issue prior to this happening, all happened within less than a second. Had Nitto oil pump, 8L baffled sump, head drain, oil restrictors, the lot put in to prevent me spinning a bearing like i did to need the rebuild. Mechanic that looked after the works has no idea what caused it. Reckoned it may have been bearing clearance wrong in cylinder 1 we have no idea. Machinist who did the work reckoned it was something on the mechanic. Anyway thats between them, i had no part in it, just paid the money Curiosity question, does the oil system on RB’s go sump > oil pump > filter > around engine? If so, if you had a leak on an oil filter relocation plate, say sump > oil pump > filter > LEAK > around engine would this cause a low oil pressure reading if the sensors was before the filter?   TIA
    • But I think you missed mine.. there is also nothing about the 98 spec that supports your claim..  according to the fuel standards, it can be identical to 95, just very slightly higher octane number. But the ulp vs pulp fuel regulations go show 95 (or 98), is not just 91 with some additives. any claim of ‘refined by the better refineries’ or ‘higher quality fuel’ is just hearsay.  I have never seen anything to back up such claims other than ‘my mate used to work for a fuel station’, or ‘drove a fuel delivery truck’, or ‘my mechanic says’.. the actual energy densities do slightly vary between the 3 grades of fuel, but the difference is very minor. That said, I am very happy to be proven wrong if anyone has some hard evidence..
    • You're making my point for me. 95 is not "premium". It is a "slightly higher octane" version of the basic 91 product. The premium product that they want people to buy (for all the venal corporate reasons of making more profit, and all the possibly specious reasons of it being a "better" fuel with nicer additive packages) is the 98 octane stuff. 95 is the classic middle child. No-one wants it. No-one cares about it. It is just there, occupying a space in the product hierarchy.
    • 98 and 95 have to meet the same national fuel standards beside the actual RON.  91 has lower standards (which are quite poor really), so 95 is certainly not 91 with some octane booster. It would be an easier argument to claim 98 is just 95 with some octane boosters. Also RON doesn't specify 'quality' in any sense, only the octane number.  Anything different retailers decide or not decide to add to their 95 or 98 is arbitrary and not defined by the RON figure.
×
×
  • Create New...