Quote from duke_toaster :

Er, FIA GT and many other series use championship ballast. It also balances the cars up, a little.

Using ballast is just silly certain cars/drivers should be faster than others and adding ballast or reversing grids or in some cases just rewriting the rules is something one does for TV entertainment not a proper sports event.

Quote from danowat :

You only have to look at the laptimes and results to see that is exactly what WTCC have got.

That's no way to make it fair from an engineering/sports point of view. By doing so your basically just adjusting it so every car/driver combo laps at the same speed which defeats the point of motor racing, you may as well have a one car formula with drivers ballasted to ensure they lap at the same pace.

There must be a better more scientific way of regulating racing cars without having to resort to artificially making things even.

I don't like Seats too. But BMWs are surprisingly fast compared to the specs - officialy 275 bhp and 242 Nm for the BMWs and 280 bhp and 450 Nm for the Seats.

And another great read from Tristan (and some others too):P

EDIT: oh, what help is it if the BMWs were .3 faster a lap, if they can't pass? They caught up on braking and mid-turn, then almost rammed the Seats on the apex and then the Seats flew away.

Quote from Hyperactive :

Because when you switch from petrol to diesel you switch to new fuel which you simply don't know as well as you knew petrol. Basically it is all about making the transition easier and more tempting. Diesel engines in racing are not as advanced as petrol engines are (yet) so the transition phase evens out the differences. After a while the diesel gets better and the rules need to adapt and make diesel slower or petrol faster.

It is a bit like in F1, when they switched from V10s to V8s the first V8s weren't as sophisticated and refined as the latest V10s.

It is all about getting teams to use diesel and develop it better.

Sure it's about getting more diesels into the field, but it won't make them better if they have advantages anyway... Why bother researching, testing and generally spending lots of money to get an engine perfect when you can get another much cheaper without extensive researching because that one got artificial advantages? With those advantages, a diesel engine doesn't need to be perfect, it only needs to be sufficient...
That certainly isn't true to the spirit of motorsport or fair competition in general, that's rigged results to cater to a marketing illusion... And that makes it nothing like the decrease in cylinder count in F1...

Quote from tristancliffe :

But they don't in Le Mans

Hardly any point making a direct petrol vs. diesel compare based on the results from past two years because there have not been a big factory team with petrol. Currently the two big factory teams (in LMP1) happen to use diesel. Private teams has no chance against a factory teams, whether the engine is using diesel, petrol or urine.

For a fair compare we have wait if Aston Martin joins the game. Aston's interest in the top class arised after ACO allowed GT1 homologated production engines to be used in both LMP classes (obviously after a kind request). Already this year the engine from DBR9 will be used in the new Lola, but that's still a private team running the car, altough supported by Prodrive. *Puts tinfoil hat on* in 2009 it's going be exactly 50 years since Aston's first and only win in Le Mans...

Quote from Niels Heusinkveld :

I don't know about Le Mans

Page 9 from regulation jargon:
http://www.lemans.org/sport/sp ... lement_lmp_fr_gb_2008.pdf

What it all boils down to in the end is snobbery from petrolheads, they still think diesel has no place in racing, and the engines should be left in tractors and lorries, rather than look at it as another technology that has yet to reach it's full potential.

Bottomline for me, if it produces fun, exciting and close racing, I couldn't really care less if is was diesel or petrol powered.....

Quote from bbman :

Why bother researching, testing and generally spending lots of money to get an engine perfect when you can get another much cheaper without extensive researching because that one got artificial advantages?

Because diesel is the hawt now. Diesel is seen as the more eco-friendly by the viewers so the series hopes that they get more money if they allow diesels to race too.

It is very simple. People think diesels are great and all but then almost no one uses them on race cars. In wtcc they do use diesels and therefore the wtcc hopes to get some extra visibility along with the car manufacturers with their diesels.

Of course there is no point to start using diesels if the performance isn't comparable to the current tech, petrol. In the beginning the diesels will be slower because they are less advanced than the petrol tech cars. So the rules must articficially balance the two so that diesel is tempting choise.

Need I go on?

Give turbos to petrol cars too and then see who's faster.

Quote from Primoz :

Give turbos to petrol cars too and then see who's faster.

Have you read any of the previous posts?

I'm happy to see more types of power sources in motor sports.

the core technology of auto---4 Stroke I.C. Engine had never changh in more than 100 yrs, & it is a very low efficiency machine.

The way to make more power in Euro racing now is the lowest efficiency way: high rev

It is not the end of motorsports, but a new life.

I think the amount of energy produced to move the vehicle by using petrol as a fuel is about 10% of the total energy produced, I think diesel is about 50-60%.

It's clear that there is much more scope for improving diesel technology, and hopefully having them in motorsport will drive this improvement.

It's unfortunate that diesel engines NEED forced induction to produce a decent amount of power, but it's just down to the differences in the way diesel engines work.

The trouble is that, lack of development or not, a diesel engine will never behave as well as a comparible petrol in a racing environment. It's just how diesels work, and there isn't much scope to change that. Petrol still is under-developed, and once throttleless stratified lean burn high CR engines are made regularly (i.e. basically a diesel engine, but using petrol) then diesel won't have any single good point except in very high torque very low rpm use - like lorries and tractors.

It's got very little to do with development, emissions (diesels harm the environment just as much, and give people cancer), costs or performance. Diesel just isn't a very good technology and will never be (in comparison to petrol). Even if you stopped development on petrol engines it'll be 100 years before diesel closes the gap.

they should run a indepenant league for diesels if they are not competative with petrol cars under the same rules, run a diesel only touring car championship,

wait ive got it i'll enter a hybrid into the wtcc, its just different technology after all

Quote from deggis :

Hardly any point making a direct petrol vs. diesel compare based on the results from past two years because there have not been a big factory team with petrol. Currently the two big factory teams (in LMP1) happen to use diesel. Private teams has no chance against a factory teams, whether the engine is using diesel, petrol or urine.

Well, Pescarolo Sport was very competitive in the 2006 and 2007 Le Mans 24 hour races. In 2006 they placed 2nd behind Audi, and in 2007 they were third behind Audi and Peugeot. Rollcentre Racing used the Pescarolo/Judd to place fourth in 2007 too.

Although Pescarolo isn't a mainstream manufacturer, they performed competitively against the diesels, especially against Peugeot.

I wish Porsche would come up with an LMP1 car and engine and challenge the Audis and Peugeot. Their RS Spyder should be a good base upon which to build up an LMP1 design. I don't know why they won't go for LMP1.

Quote from andybarsblade :

wait ive got it i'll enter a hybrid into the wtcc, its just different technology after all

Not such a weird idea - there was a hybrid rally car a couple of years ago.

doesnt pescarolo run under a completely different special set of rules which allows bigger engines with less aero? they did years ago but i dont know if the aco still offers that option in their regs

Quote from samjh :

Well, Pescarolo Sport was very competitive in the 2006 and 2007 Le Mans 24 hour races. In 2006 they placed 2nd behind Audi, and in 2007 they were third behind Audi and Peugeot. Rollcentre Racing used the Pescarolo/Judd to place fourth in 2007 too.

Although Pescarolo isn't a mainstream manufacturer, they performed competitively against the diesels, especially against Peugeot.

I wish Porsche would come up with an LMP1 car and engine and challenge the Audis and Peugeot. Their RS Spyder should be a good base upon which to build up an LMP1 design. I don't know why they won't go for LMP1.

Porsche will never make an LMP1 as long as Audi is 'running' the LMP1 show for VAG. Porsche will buy an additional 20% of VAG to become the major owner. That's why the R8 has a V8 8the road car) - a V10 woul come in the Gallardo territory.

Dan are you sure about 50-60% of energy going into motion at diesels? That would make them hugely efficient and i don't see why we would still use petrol then. Honestly i kind of doubt the number is that high (although it can be higher than petrol). But on the other hand, i think it's 30% for petrol engines, if i'm not mistaken.

EDIT: yes, i have read it. But it's quite obvious for me that if you want it to be fair, give turbos to all. But it won't be fair then. Or take the turbos off for everybody. And it's not fair again (performance wise ofcourse). But it's obvious what a turbo petrol engine can do - WRC. A diesel has no place there. IIRC those engines can go up to 600 Nm of torque (is the number that high or is it lower?).

Quote from nihil :

Not such a weird idea - there was a hybrid rally car a couple of years ago.

maybe a hydraulic hybrid car in future

Hydraulic???

Quote from Primoz :

EDIT: yes, i have read it. But it's quite obvious for me that if you want it to be fair, give turbos to all. But it won't be fair then. Or take the turbos off for everybody. And it's not fair again (performance wise ofcourse). But it's obvious what a turbo petrol engine can do - WRC. A diesel has no place there. IIRC those engines can go up to 600 Nm of torque (is the number that high or is it lower?).

Not sure about WRC cars, but I think power over 330BHP and torque over 600Nm is very likely.

Even well-prepared PWRC (Group N) cars are formidable: A Mitsubishi Lancer Evo IX can generate up to 280BHP @ 4200rpm and 570Nm @ 3250rpm, while a Subaru Impreza STi can pump out 275BHP @ 4500rpm and 560Nm @ 3250rpm. These are latest figures.

WRC mandates 34mm restrictor, while PWRC mandates 32mm.

Quote :

Dan are you sure about 50-60% of energy going into motion at diesels? That would make them hugely efficient and i don't see why we would still use petrol then. Honestly i kind of doubt the number is that high (although it can be higher than petrol). But on the other hand, i think it's 30% for petrol engines, if i'm not mistaken.

Wikipedia quotes 45% for diesel, and 30% for petrol. I tried to follow the source link (from Volvo), but the page no longer exists.

Well it was said that the 2003 (i think, or maybe older) Imperza is (was) rumored to have over 430 bhp. And the limit is supposed to be 300 (via the restrictor). 600+ is IMO very likely, yes. The 2003 scooby had 600 written in RBR.

Quote from samjh :

Wikipedia quotes 45% for diesel, and 30% for petrol. I tried to follow the source link (from Volvo), but the page no longer exists.

Take efficiency-percentages of diesel versus petrol with a lot of salt.
The problem is that when you calculate the efficiency of a diesel engine against the theoretical maximum you choose a different scale than when you calculate it for a petrol engine, and incidentally the scale for diesel is lower, which thus gives the diesel higher efficiency-ratings.

That issue is one of the mayor problems when comparing diesels to petrols. Don't trust those numbers unless you've thought a lot about it.

That said, diesels are good for efficiency, especially at low load, like in daily trafic.

Vain

But pretty darn equal, with petrol taking the lead, in high load applications. Like racing.

Quote from Primoz :

Porsche will never make an LMP1 as long as Audi is 'running' the LMP1 show for VAG. Porsche will buy an additional 20% of VAG to become the major owner.

Here's a good article about this:

http://sportscaranalytics.com/?p=394