Jump to content
SAU Community

V8 Supercars Rumor

macdog

By macdog,
in General Automotive Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

dkbcleaner Proficient

dkbcleaner

Posted
Posted

so whats the point of having all these new teams if there going to be running the same cars with just different looking shells? Apart from making it more even and shit who cares if nissan and mercedes are going to join than

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted

I think the idea is to welcome in different sponsors who will be attracted with more manufacturers and exposure to different markets. This means more funding to various teams and hopefully some closer competition.

I don't mind that they have some control parts under the skin. They get flogged because they are not production cars....but then they get criticised for not bing proper race cars...you only have to look at how GT1 has fallen over again. GT3 with it and the rise and fall of various classes OS and you have to say that the local series is at least reasonably healthy. Hell they are now the support series for 3 F1 rounds. Now with 4 manufacturers who tweak the design windows for optimum performance. No cars are alike under the skin even if they are given the same broad brush strokes to work within

Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted

Still may as well be NASCAR :-(

Bring back 1990's style Group A touring car racing!!

I am not trying to be rude but how old are you? Did you actually ever watch Grp A races? Maybe Winton, maybe Lakeside gave us reasonable races with M3s vs Sierras vs Skylines. But generally it was a cake walk for particular makes of cars/teams and there was not any racing. I loved it due to the variety of cars, but there was little racing.

dkbcleaner Proficient

dkbcleaner

Posted
Posted

I think the idea is to welcome in different sponsors who will be attracted with more manufacturers and exposure to different markets. This means more funding to various teams and hopefully some closer competition.

I don't mind that they have some control parts under the skin. They get flogged because they are not production cars....but then they get criticised for not bing proper race cars...you only have to look at how GT1 has fallen over again. GT3 with it and the rise and fall of various classes OS and you have to say that the local series is at least reasonably healthy. Hell they are now the support series for 3 F1 rounds. Now with 4 manufacturers who tweak the design windows for optimum performance. No cars are alike under the skin even if they are given the same broad brush strokes to work within

Ok cool that makes sense

Plus it will upset bogans! So it's automatically a win! :P

Haha good enough reason for me too

Yeedogga Experienced

Yeedogga

Posted
Posted

I am not trying to be rude but how old are you? Did you actually ever watch Grp A races? Maybe Winton, maybe Lakeside gave us reasonable races with M3s vs Sierras vs Skylines. But generally it was a cake walk for particular makes of cars/teams and there was not any racing. I loved it due to the variety of cars, but there was little racing.

Fair point, I was quite young then so maybe i wasnt as critical of the quality of the racing.

I just like the idea of "improved" production cars as opposed to tube-frame chassis cars with 'car make' body panels and control motors etc.

I daresay that in any discipline of motorsport there will always be teams/manufacturers who have bigger budgets and more backing which often means that they will be harder to beat.

Id still prefer that and be able to hear a R35GTR with a dirty side pipe or a grumpy sounding Evo blasting around alongside the Ford/Holden contingent. From a marketing/fan perspective, I also think it means more for enthusiasts and does wonders for 'brand' loyalty.

My 2 cents

*LOACH* Veteran

*LOACH*

Posted
Posted (edited)

I am not trying to be rude but how old are you? Did you actually ever watch Grp A races? Maybe Winton, maybe Lakeside gave us reasonable races with M3s vs Sierras vs Skylines. But generally it was a cake walk for particular makes of cars/teams and there was not any racing. I loved it due to the variety of cars, but there was little racing.

Fair point, I was quite young then so maybe i wasnt as critical of the quality of the racing.

I just like the idea of "improved" production cars as opposed to tube-frame chassis cars with 'car make' body panels and control motors etc.

I daresay that in any discipline of motorsport there will always be teams/manufacturers who have bigger budgets and more backing which often means that they will be harder to beat.

Id still prefer that and be able to hear a R35GTR with a dirty side pipe or a grumpy sounding Evo blasting around alongside the Ford/Holden contingent. From a marketing/fan perspective, I also think it means more for enthusiasts and does wonders for 'brand' loyalty.

My 2 cents

I absolutely agree with the Group A idea. Watching the different cars in different classes go at each other was way more fun. Nowadays they have to do reverse grid positions etc to try to bring back some excitement. To me racing doesn't always have to be about driver skill. It is about having a solid team and that includes the unseen guys trying to get sponsors and organise the cars. If those people are doing their job well and that means their team is dominant for a season or two so be it. If a driver is dominant do we suddenly chop a leg off to bring him into line with the rest? Having the different classes in one race will always keep the interest up. Having those cars more closely related to ones that can be bought at a dealer, even if it is some homologated limited production run should be better for the industry as well.

Edited by *LOACH*
Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted

I absolutely agree with the Group A idea. Watching the different cars in different classes go at each other was way more fun. Nowadays they have to do reverse grid positions etc to try to bring back some excitement. To me racing doesn't always have to be about driver skill. It is about having a solid team and that includes the unseen guys trying to get sponsors and organise the cars. If those people are doing their job well and that means their team is dominant for a season or two so be it. If a driver is dominant do we suddenly chop a leg off to bring him into line with the rest? Having the different classes in one race will always keep the interest up. Having those cars more closely related to ones that can be bought at a dealer, even if it is some homologated limited production run should be better for the industry as well.

If thats what you want to see then go and watch the state and national rounds of the Production Cars.

34GeeTeeTee Grand Master

34GeeTeeTee

Posted
Posted

The cars are so close together now, there is no way they will let that change, more weight, less aero etc etc.... There will be no make that can dominate due to the rules....

Although when u see now the same teams winning over and over it makes u wonder....

*LOACH* Veteran

*LOACH*

Posted
Posted

If thats what you want to see then go and watch the state and national rounds of the Production Cars.

If all you want to watch is a bunch of the same cars racing go and watch the Suzuki Swift or HQ Holdens series :)

Roy Grand Master

Roy

Posted
Posted

If all you want to watch is a bunch of the same cars racing go and watch the Suzuki Swift or HQ Holdens series :)

I wasn't being a smart ass. Just pointing out what you are wanting to see already exists in another category. So copying another less successful category isn't going to be a very good model

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I mean I can be OCD'y but this is really over the top. At that point why not just run a full wideband fuel controller? Especially if you run 3 widebands. The system works pretty well, which is trimming low load stuff to be within a few percent of the base map. Pre-engine _change_ the base map was only 1-2% off, depending on ambient temp, elevation, etc. Under load the LS is really very straightforward to tune, enough that a wideband closed loop would be overkill. If I really cared (and I hope I don't) I can always just go back to the MAF system the car actually came with. Which does all those nice calculations for me (temp, altitude, etc), now that you can buy 102mm MAF's that do not cause restrictions.
    • Pac
      Who has a Infiniti Q60, Q50 (V37)?

      By Pac · Posted

      Good afternoon Team , just a quick update on performance mods  Current Mods list (Installed) HKS - Power Editor (Came with the car) looks to be some kind of boost controller RV37 Skyline 400R (SKYLINE) | FUJITSUBO  - Cat Back  RV37 Skyline 400R (SKYLINE) | FUJITSUBO  - Front Pipe AMS  - INFINITI Q50/Q60 RED ALPHA COLD AIR INTAKE KIT AMS  - Performance Heat Exchanger Intercooler Not Yet AMS Alpha Performance Full Race Down Pipes  - to be installed in May 
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I'd be installing 2x widebands and using the NB simulation outputs to the ECU.
    • GTSBoy
      R33 GTS25 NA - Stalling when vehicle is at operating temp

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, it's different across different engines and as the years went on. R32 era RB20, and hence also RB26, the TPS SWITCH is the idle command. The variable resistor is only for the TCU, as you say. On R33 era RB25 and onwards (but probably not RB26, as they still used the same basic ECU from the R32 era), the idle command is a voltage output of close to 0.45V from the variable resistor.
    • dbm7
      R33 GTS25 NA - Stalling when vehicle is at operating temp

      By dbm7 · Posted

      It's actually one of the worst bits of Nissan nomenclature (also compounded by wiring diagrams when the TCU is incorporated in ECU, or, ECU has a passthru to a standalone TCU).... the gripe ~ they call it the TPS, but with an A/T it's actually a combined unit ...TPS (throttle position switch) + TPS (throttle position sensor).... ..by the looks of it (and considering car is A/T) you have this unit... https://www.amayama.com/en/part/nissan/2262002u11 The connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit, is the TPS (throttle position sensor) ...only the TCU reads this. The connector on the unit body, is the TPS (throttle position switch) ...ECU reads this. It has 3 possible values -- throttle closed (idle control contact), open (both contacts open, ECU controls engine...'run' mode), and WOT (full throttle contact closed, ECU changes mapping). When the throttle is closed (idle control contact), this activates what the patent describes as the 'anti stall system' ~ this has the ECU keep the engine at idling speed, regardless of additional load/variances (alternator load mostly, along with engine temp), and drives the IACV solenoid with PWM signal to adjust the idle air admittance to do this. This is actually a specific ECCS software mode, that only gets utilized when the idle control contact is closed. When you rotate the TPS unit as shown, you're opening the idle control contact, which puts ECCS into 'run' mode (no idle control), which obviously is a non-sequitur without the engine started/running ; if the buzzing is coming from the IACV solenoid, then likely ECCS is freaking out, and trying to raise engine rpm 'any way it can'...so it's likely pulling the valve wide open....this is prolly what's going on there. The signal from the connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit (for the TCU), should be around 0.4volts with the throttle closed (idle position) ~ although this does effect low throttle shift points if set wrong, the primary purpose here is to tell TCU engine is at idle (no throttle demand), and in response lower the A/T line pressure ... this is often described as how much 'creep' you get with shifter in D at idle. The way the TPS unit is setup (physically), ensures the idle control contact closes with a high margin on the TPSensor signal wire, so you can rotate the unit on the adjustment slots, to achieve 0.4v whilst knowing the idle control contact is definitely closed. The IACV solenoid is powered by battery voltage via a fuse, and ground switched (PWM) by the ECU. When I check them, I typically remove the harness plug, feed the solenoid battery voltage and switch it to ground via a 5watt bulb test probe ; thing should click wide open, and idle rpm should increase... ...that said though, if it starts & idles with the TPS unit disconnected, and it still stalls when it gets up to operating temperature, it won't be the IACV because it's unused, which would infer something else is winking out...  
×
×
  • Create New...