Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 742
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A decidedly different summary, keepin' it real as always

(ps. was it really $100 entry for 2 days? :O)

100 for Jenna and I for Saturday. It's only 140 for us to go to the f1 in Melbourne for the Sunday

Commentary lol.... f**k me if you charge v8 taxi entry fees put on some pa on and some screens around the track

If its a super sprint charge 10 bux entry and i expect to get f*k all

I agree that watching 3 cars do 3 laps in each pro session is annoying, Cut it down to 1 group and make it 5mins longer or open it up to 30 spots so that we can actually see some cars.

EVO-GSR

I was a pit lane official there...plenty of poorly fitted aero cars made it out on track that I saw over the 2 days.....????

Yes correct there is some poorly fitted aero on cars, but you have to deem if it’s very unsafe not to let them run. I had lot of chats with guys with aero that needs to be mounted better in the future and even made around 5 cars remove their rear wings if they want to run or re-design mounts and recheck them once that was done.

I know of one wing failure on track were the carbon blade broke not to do with mounting point looked like a cheap eBay wing, and even stoped cars running today due to stress cracks appearing on them and one was the Panspeed RX8.

Any cars you would like to mentions that caught your attention would be interested to know….

I agree that watching 3 cars do 3 laps in each pro session is annoying, Cut it down to 1 group and make it 5mins longer or open it up to 30 spots so that we can actually see some cars.

Quite simple

You sir rock and should be on the board of the special people that run the show

Well final placings were posted up, would suck if you coughed up $600 to protest and then nothing came of it! :D

Apparently you have 24 hours after the event to lodge a protest so still waiting to see what the outcome is.

The broken wing was APR, but it appeared to fail due to a lot of lateral movement in the mounts so not really a wing quality issue. The car it was on was very quick but among the roughest I saw with wing mounts mig'd directly to the rear qtr's.

So it's a money making thing?

If someone doesn't have $600 to spare for a protest then tough luck?

How rediculous

$600 to protest an obvious breach is rediculous. Went back and re-read the rules after seeing the number of club sprint cars with obvious aero outside what was defined in the rules. If I was paying 900+ to enter i would expect easily visible stuff to get picked up without protest. I agree it should have been a case of mentioning it at scrutineering - take that off or move to open. Simple quick fix right there and no controversy, let the drivers in breach of the rules pay to protest then.

I'm not saying thats the scrutineers fault, that directive needs to come from the organisers.

The broken wing was APR, but it appeared to fail due to a lot of lateral movement in the mounts so not really a wing quality issue. The car it was on was very quick but among the roughest I saw with wing mounts mig'd directly to the rear qtr's.

Yes the mounts were mig’d directly to the rear qtr’s on the EVO although it did look rough that point was quite strong compared to other just bolting to the boot lid. If that was a genuine APR wing I would not buy one of that model in my life time, material quality seemed quite bad and well below what I would expect from APR….

Here is an image of the broken section:

post-36356-0-75016200-1344724814_thumb.jpg

post-36356-0-69261500-1344724899_thumb.jpg

I’m no expert in aero but been in motorsport for 16 years and was happy to volunteer my time to try and make a difference to make the event safer, we could not send people home unless it was deemed very unsafe as there is no requirements to mounting aero in WTA, but have talked to a lot of entrants who know this will change next year and will be enforced.

Anyone else wanting to help out next year would be appreciated it’s hard to keep on top of everyone when they are modifying aero over the weekend and not representing the car for scrutineering.

$600 to protest an obvious breach is rediculous. Went back and re-read the rules after seeing the number of club sprint cars with obvious aero outside what was defined in the rules. If I was paying 900+ to enter i would expect easily visible stuff to get picked up without protest. I agree it should have been a case of mentioning it at scrutineering - take that off or move to open. Simple quick fix right there and no controversy, let the drivers in breach of the rules pay to protest then.

I'm not saying thats the scrutineers fault, that directive needs to come from the organisers.

Don't know what goes on in this odd form of Gen Y play. If it is obvious, it's then a sure fire bet and putting it on the CC won't be a prob. The 600 gets refunded, the other car gets excluded, win/win I would have though?

Scrutineer's job isn't to check eligibility, other forms of the sport have eligibility officers to check on legalities, the money making venture here should have some budget surely! The protest and appeal process is the best way of deciding what's ultimately kosher though, as it's not unknown for State interpretations to cloud various EOs rulings.

No-one checked the cars for class specification.

The safetly scrutineres were great, sensible team. Good to see aero being checked for safety.

There too many aero breakages over the weekend to mention. Front and rear splitters breaking away and the odd rear wing.

Every 3rd open car had something rubbing on the track they had the aero that low.

It's a serious competition now, it needs written rule book. Not pub rules.

What was the story with the Cyber evo this year?

Did it seem to be a case of C West not having the new aero package working for the chassis or more so mechanical issues?

What was the story with the Cyber evo this year?

Did it seem to be a case of C West not having the new aero package working for the chassis or more so mechanical issues?

Forgetting to put hose clamps on breather hoses was the first problem with oil going every where, the 2nd problem looked to be an oil line on the turbo lose or came off which resulted in this....

post-36356-0-30409900-1344738335_thumb.jpg

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

    • Very nice - I also have a 92 GTST and hardly see any others around these days
    • When I need something else to edit, I use Movavi. A friend who does video editing on a daily basis recommended me) it's an easy video cutter to use for beginners
    • I need to edit some videos for work but I'm not good at all this. Which video editor can you recommend?
    • 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
×
×
  • Create New...