Very nice read. Didn't read the external links as i have to study, but it was an excelent article non-the-less.
I'm pretty sure that power figure is wrong. Engineers haven't tuned WRC engines for maximum power ever since the WRC specs replaced Group A. The focus has been on flat power delivery and torque. The Impreza engine is one of the weaker ones at only around 320BHP, the most powerful engine is rumoured to be the Peugeot engine at around 350BHP ballpark. There is only so much one can do with a 34mm restrictor.
Yes, I remember RBR had 600Nm for torque.
if they want to allow different technologies to compete in the same series, it's really silly to have two different sets of rules to cover each, because it will always come down to the rules favouring one technology over another.
i think it would make more sense to have the rules stay far away from any details related to the specific fuels used. for example, the rules could state something like, "combined weight of motor and (full) fuel system must be less than 300 kg" and then leave it to the teams to figure out the best comprimise between displacement, reliability and economy.
i think it would make more sense to have the rules stay far away from any details related to the specific fuels used. for example, the rules could state something like, "combined weight of motor and (full) fuel system must be less than 300 kg" and then leave it to the teams to figure out the best comprimise between displacement, reliability and economy.
saw that about 400+ in a japaneese show. It is weird since torque is more important as the top speed is about 200 kph anyway (man its hard to write on the phone
I'm not going to go into the general topic of this thread, but rather into the part related to WTCC, specifying this at the start so you can skip on reading if not interested.
I think the diesels on WTCC make for a more balanced series as of now, since you grow to have all brands to compete for the title, which makes it more to most spectator's liking (more action, cars with closer specs, and such), so the BMW's are faster on the turns (mostly because they're RWD) and the SEATs on the straights (thanks to the TDI engine mostly and being slower on the turns because they are FWD, so more understeer leads to lower turning speeds), can't comment on the Chevrolets of this year since they didn't have a great race, but I think they'll catch up with the rest.
That said, it makes for more exciting series all around, each car has a special part of the race where they're better than the other, so driver's mind need to be making calculations all the time, since it's no longer the same thing having one car behind of you or one of another make. Thus it makes things more exciting and balanced -for the spectators-, at the cost of an artificial 'level ground'.
People who's into racing might not like it too much, but people who enjoys watching race events will most probably do like it (same distinction as people who plays football/soccer to those who enjoy watching it, different points of view on the same matter).
Another oppinion worth two cents
I think the diesels on WTCC make for a more balanced series as of now, since you grow to have all brands to compete for the title, which makes it more to most spectator's liking (more action, cars with closer specs, and such), so the BMW's are faster on the turns (mostly because they're RWD) and the SEATs on the straights (thanks to the TDI engine mostly and being slower on the turns because they are FWD, so more understeer leads to lower turning speeds), can't comment on the Chevrolets of this year since they didn't have a great race, but I think they'll catch up with the rest.
That said, it makes for more exciting series all around, each car has a special part of the race where they're better than the other, so driver's mind need to be making calculations all the time, since it's no longer the same thing having one car behind of you or one of another make. Thus it makes things more exciting and balanced -for the spectators-, at the cost of an artificial 'level ground'.
People who's into racing might not like it too much, but people who enjoys watching race events will most probably do like it (same distinction as people who plays football/soccer to those who enjoy watching it, different points of view on the same matter).
Another oppinion worth two cents
Disel car can use Turbo, but gasoline car can't, it is unfair
It's not really that straight forward TBH, did you read any of the previous posts?
Really it is. Making up for the fact the diesel is rubbish without higher manifold pressures, and not allowing gasoline engines the same technology isn't fair. They could at least mandate a smaller capacity limit or something. But the best, fairest and most likely to cause technical innovation (which is the point, according to this thread to promote the unclean fuel diesel over the slightly less unclean fuel of petrol) is to limit energy flow rate in the fuel lines.
Equal energy in. Most efficient, by whatever means, wins. A smaller high revving engine might be up against a slow revving large capacity diesel, both with turbos, perhaps only the diesel with a turbo. It doesn't matter, as long as both fuels are on an equal ground, and may the best fuel win.
Unfortunately this won't make diesels better, because petrols would kick ass. What needs to be done is ignore diesel, and get some throttleless gasoline engines out in the market so that petrol can enjoy all the benefits of diesel, reduce emmisions AND go quicker.
Equal energy in. Most efficient, by whatever means, wins. A smaller high revving engine might be up against a slow revving large capacity diesel, both with turbos, perhaps only the diesel with a turbo. It doesn't matter, as long as both fuels are on an equal ground, and may the best fuel win.
Unfortunately this won't make diesels better, because petrols would kick ass. What needs to be done is ignore diesel, and get some throttleless gasoline engines out in the market so that petrol can enjoy all the benefits of diesel, reduce emmisions AND go quicker.
Seeing as BMW are developing a diesel WTCC car, and Alfa are looking to comeback under diesel power, it's not beyond the realms of doubt that the whole series will become diesel based.
and from what i've heard of the initial testing speed of the BMW, it'll be interesting to see how soon SEAT start lobying for BMW to be further handicapped as their RWD allows them to make far better use of the high torque produced by diesel, added to which it appears their diesel engine is capable of producing significantly more power than SEAT's.
as an enthusiats i think there should be a law passed to prevent ALFA running a diesel as its a crime against their heritage, nothing against diesels, just alfa's have always been associated with high reving, sweet sounding sharp throttle response engines that you take to the redline for the fun of it and with the best will in the world those are not attributes you normally think of with diesels. AUDI's le mans cars have their own sound but you can't say it's a traditional racing engine sound. it would be like ( in the UK) the national trust deciding to build new housing estates !
oh hang on they are !! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/7200946.stm
Alfa have been making decent diesels for years, their 2.5 JTD engine is a lovely lump.
As for RWD/FWD, why not, you could say either has an unfair advantage over the other, so why not ban FWD and make RWD the only option, or vice versa.
It's the same as diesel v petrol, bottomline, diversity is a good thing, also as they are balanced in some way to provide close, exciting racing, it makes for good racing.
As for RWD/FWD, why not, you could say either has an unfair advantage over the other, so why not ban FWD and make RWD the only option, or vice versa.
It's the same as diesel v petrol, bottomline, diversity is a good thing, also as they are balanced in some way to provide close, exciting racing, it makes for good racing.
the alfa thing wasn't that serious a point as i've nothing against their diesel road engines, just don't feel its right for a diesel race alfa, bit like a diesel ferrari though i wouldn't be surprised for a diesel lambo in af ew years given their owners.
re the rwd/ fwd its another example of the rules being used to balance cars for a closer championship, whilst i can sympaphise with the need to provide a show, it does rather grate with the idea of competition. can you imagine if they decided to slow the ferrari's down in f1 if they won the first 4 races this year?, how about man utd players being forced to play with their hands tied behind their backs when playing derby? ( this actually happened in the thirties for an england men vs woman match ! ). how about the olympics 100m final with the fastest runners being made to also be the fattest runners ? ian thorpe being forced to tow a sea anchor behind him? etc etc.
it happens in horse racing to a certain extent but they wouldn't penalise a 4 legged horse because it could start faster and be more sure footed than a 3 legged one.
re the rwd/ fwd its another example of the rules being used to balance cars for a closer championship, whilst i can sympaphise with the need to provide a show, it does rather grate with the idea of competition. can you imagine if they decided to slow the ferrari's down in f1 if they won the first 4 races this year?, how about man utd players being forced to play with their hands tied behind their backs when playing derby? ( this actually happened in the thirties for an england men vs woman match ! ). how about the olympics 100m final with the fastest runners being made to also be the fattest runners ? ian thorpe being forced to tow a sea anchor behind him? etc etc.
it happens in horse racing to a certain extent but they wouldn't penalise a 4 legged horse because it could start faster and be more sure footed than a 3 legged one.
A little OT, but did anyone else read or hear somewhere that Alfa is planning to switch their range to RWD (except for the 147, that is)? I'm sure I read it somewhere, but I can't seem to find a confirmation for it...
And when is Alfa planning to come back to WTCC?
And when is Alfa planning to come back to WTCC?
Dunno, it's all rumour ATM
I was wondering what this throttleless petrol engines are before, so, what is it? Audi's FSI? (direct injection)?
Actually, the system you're talking about would make real sense, but I very much doubt it could be implemented on WTCC, which compared to other race events is rather 'low-cost' (it's not cheap, but rules set to equal team's performances, aerodynamics, electric aids and such are to lower developing costs and make the races more enjoyable to watch to most people), so they don't have such DTM or F1 budgets to go and make complete new cars that work under the specifications.
However, even if tech is important, the point of WTCC, considering the ruleset, it's rather to give a certain technical level as a base so the best driver might win, not the best car.
In many other racing series, I would agree with you, but it seems that all the FIA-controlled series move towards standarization, low cost to allow for lower budget teams and such to play a role and be able to win and limiting car's performance.
Even though I would like it to be without so many limitations, it's the way it seems to be heading, which is far away from those new technologies.
On a sidenote, it makes audience drop when you have a team that is far superior to the other ones, and one of the biggest financement options of nowadays racing is sponsoring to get advertisement, and as such they need to atract people to watch the series. And I'm sure that with the current level of driving of most people, they would find it 'dull'.
...
On a normal petrol engine, the throttle controls the air flow into the engine, and fuel is added in the correct ratio either by injection (requires metering) or carburettors (self-metering). At low throttle you have a high restriction (the throttle butterfly), which causes a pressure drop (intake depression, from which brake servos and older ignition advance systems etc are run), and limits the air flow. This causes work to be done on the top of the piston, which reduces efficiency. The fuel is added to suit the air flow into the cylinder to maintain ~ lambda = 1
On a diesel engine, there is no throttle, so as much air as gets sucked in gets sucked in, and the 'throttle' controls the amount of fuel injected. At low 'throttle' openings you have lots of air, and not much fuel = lean.
However, if you can make an engine burn petrol at any concentration without overheating, detonating, pre-igniting, and burn completely, then you can get rid of the nasty, restrictive throttle as well, meaning that petrol engines can be more efficient. If you can also get it to burn well at higher compression ratios as well, then petrol engines will have NO DRAWBACKS over diesel engines at part load (they currently have no drawbacks at high load).
Lean burn, stratified injection, throttle-less petrol engines are the future. BMW currently has a de-throttled petrol engine on the market, but I forget it's name, and I've not had the chance to look at it in any great detail. It's only half (or even a third) of what is required, but it's progress.
The days of the dirty diesel are numbered. Hurrah for everyone!
Hope that makes sense.
On a diesel engine, there is no throttle, so as much air as gets sucked in gets sucked in, and the 'throttle' controls the amount of fuel injected. At low 'throttle' openings you have lots of air, and not much fuel = lean.
However, if you can make an engine burn petrol at any concentration without overheating, detonating, pre-igniting, and burn completely, then you can get rid of the nasty, restrictive throttle as well, meaning that petrol engines can be more efficient. If you can also get it to burn well at higher compression ratios as well, then petrol engines will have NO DRAWBACKS over diesel engines at part load (they currently have no drawbacks at high load).
Lean burn, stratified injection, throttle-less petrol engines are the future. BMW currently has a de-throttled petrol engine on the market, but I forget it's name, and I've not had the chance to look at it in any great detail. It's only half (or even a third) of what is required, but it's progress.
The days of the dirty diesel are numbered. Hurrah for everyone!
Hope that makes sense.
The FSI technology is very difficult to control. The aim is to create a small ignitable load of gas around the spark plug so you can open the throttle fully and still get a good combustion while not at full load. That increases efficiency (while not at full load).
However, this only works at low revs because gasoline will distribute too much in the cylinder when the airflow gets more turbulent at higher revs. Thus current gasoline direct injection engines still have throttles so they can fall back to the old and well known method of homogeneously distributing gasoline in the whole cylinder and limiting the amount of air using the throttle at high revs (> 3000rpm).
By now this concept has been dropped due to thermodynamic, cost and practicality reasons. FSI engines are now normally throttled engines with the fuel injection within the cylinder instead of the inlet manifold. This propably won't change until HCCI-concepts work properly, which basically makes gasoline self-ignite so it works like a diesel.
Vain
However, this only works at low revs because gasoline will distribute too much in the cylinder when the airflow gets more turbulent at higher revs. Thus current gasoline direct injection engines still have throttles so they can fall back to the old and well known method of homogeneously distributing gasoline in the whole cylinder and limiting the amount of air using the throttle at high revs (> 3000rpm).
By now this concept has been dropped due to thermodynamic, cost and practicality reasons. FSI engines are now normally throttled engines with the fuel injection within the cylinder instead of the inlet manifold. This propably won't change until HCCI-concepts work properly, which basically makes gasoline self-ignite so it works like a diesel.
Vain
First round of LMS, 1000km Barcelona was run last weekend and the newcomer Lola B08/60 Aston Martin (V12 unit from the DBR9) was the fastest petrol car and not that much off the pace compared to "the diesels" which was surprising because the car had done little testing and this was first race for the car. Finished 3rd after one of both Audis and Pugs got problems, altough still 3 laps down because there was a major pitstop screwup.
Qual times:
http://www.lemans-series.com/d ... celone/results/lmsent.pdf
Race results:
http://www.lemans-series.com/d ... arcelone/results/lmsr.htm
Peugeot was clearly in its own class because it's simply even faster car than Audi (was already in Sebring). This newcomer's pace was very close the Audi. Hard to say how much of this is thanks to the engine but obviously the new closed cockpit Lola is very good too.
All petrols have now also 3% larger restrictors, which at least is a nice gesture... Also iirc these homologated GT1 engines fitted in LMPs has larger restrictors (this is the only one so far, certain other manufacturers involved in GT1 must be licking their lips). I underline that it's still private team, altough very much supported by Aston Martin - more than just supplying the engine. Still can't make final judgement about the diesel vs. petrol balance as long as there isn't full factory effort.
I don't prefer the diesels (though hard to like or dislike something you can't hear) but the lack of real competition from the petrol side has just made the balance look worse than it really is. Hopefully ACO gets their French Le Mans victory this year so they can open up the game little bit more...
Qual times:
http://www.lemans-series.com/d ... celone/results/lmsent.pdf
Race results:
http://www.lemans-series.com/d ... arcelone/results/lmsr.htm
Peugeot was clearly in its own class because it's simply even faster car than Audi (was already in Sebring). This newcomer's pace was very close the Audi. Hard to say how much of this is thanks to the engine but obviously the new closed cockpit Lola is very good too.
All petrols have now also 3% larger restrictors, which at least is a nice gesture... Also iirc these homologated GT1 engines fitted in LMPs has larger restrictors (this is the only one so far, certain other manufacturers involved in GT1 must be licking their lips). I underline that it's still private team, altough very much supported by Aston Martin - more than just supplying the engine. Still can't make final judgement about the diesel vs. petrol balance as long as there isn't full factory effort.
I don't prefer the diesels (though hard to like or dislike something you can't hear) but the lack of real competition from the petrol side has just made the balance look worse than it really is. Hopefully ACO gets their French Le Mans victory this year so they can open up the game little bit more...
We'll see the real balance next year with a Prodrive run LMP. Well i guess that will be the case since the rumours are there and the 50 year anniversary will be next year too. Though it would be quite a feat to win in their 'first' year. Would be nice though.
Engines; Normally aspirated, turbo, vs Diesel engines. How to compare?
(71 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG