Sports Sedan racing weights

[Ricey88]

Phil this is your table but expressed as a calculation
(Engine cc) x (.1kg) + 600kg

[FalconEL]

For what it's worth Ricey, I think your weight proposal has merit. It is much fairer and whatever was decided as the constant number, it's easily worked out for anyone.
Also, I don't see why we wouldn't want to have engines sealed? Just recently a competitor has shown enormous amounts of power, everyone is having a go suggesting that he's cheating. Whether he is or not, I could care less. To cheat you are only cheating yourself. But if the engines were sealed, we could stop whining about other people and get on with the business at hand, which is get these things on the track and race 'em. After all, that's what they're for aren't they?

Yeah, that ^^^^^^^ :) Well said loser!

I also agree the proposal has merit. Let's get this right, keep it simple and CAMS will probably like it!

[Toyzda]

Even though I have agreed this is a fair idea, i am interested to know how many people believe if this will even out any of the different capacities?

In the categories around the world that penalise winning cars with a 50kg increase they will usually only slow down a few tenths of a second. With this linear system competitors who are currently most disadvantaged by the weights will stand to gain up to 100kgs. Maybe 0.5sec quicker laptimes? Although I would never give up 0.5sec willingly, I don't see the fields being more competitive as there are seconds between the current capacity differences.

Having said that, If the goal of this is not to bring a 2L car closer to a 6L, but purely to bring a over u3500NA car closer to a 6L car, then maybe it will have a slight impact?? I just don't see the core direction Ricey is trying to go with this.

[Ricey88]

Toyzda

I think you are hoping for far more than what my proposal has to offer.
It was a simple idea to make things a little fairer, that was it, no massive changes
No solving all the problems of 3D.
You have already said that yes it seems fairer, thankyou for your support with that.
To clarify one thing. The classes you have raised, they are not classes recognized
by the 3D Rules. One is a Kerrick class. The others are Victorian state and club classes.
I still don't see any detriment to any of the Kerrick and State classes.

[Phast Phil]

At the end of the day a 5900 - 6000cc car will always be faster than a 200cc car or even a 3000 cc car. Given the performance of the Muscat 20B naturally aspirated Mazda in recent times including the straight line speed it is possible to build an under 3500cc car that can challenge for outright honours, especially if the 5900 - 6000 cc bracket moves up to a minimum weight of 1200kg's.

For the very few that may actually presently be lighter than that, or even on the 1125kg minimum, and easy solution to lift the weight is to either put a thicker steel or ally floor under the car (will lower the centre of gravity for better handling) or add some more crash protection (not a bad thing).

Given this then maybe a simple system of 3 classes; under 2000cc / 2000cc to 4000cc / 4000cc - 6000cc is attractive. We could set RPM limits at 7800 for 4-6 ltr, 8400 for 2-4 ltr and 9000 for under 2ltr. All the above and the weights from 800 - 1200 are nice round numbers.

Do we need a multi valve extra weight adjustment, I do not think so. If required in the 4-6 ltr class parity would be best achieved by reducing the RPM on a multi valve engine by 200rpm or whatever is proven to be fair from a torque and horsepower dyno reading but i seriously dout anyone would be able to build a multivalve engine that will produce over 750hp as many of the new nascar engines are capable of at 7800 RPM.

[MrBoost]

all sounds okay except your making the current tyre issue worse and worse. Our cars are getting heavier and destroying tyres quicker and quicker. And now you want to make it worse again?
I think the current maximums are fine, there are definately cars out there that are clsoe and on the weight. some are way over. Your also just taking sports sedans closer and closer to trans-ams. I want to go quicker not slower! If a car is built properly at 1125 it can definately be very safe.
You have the change the rev limit thing for rotaries and turbo's though. as they dont make any power down low like the v8's. The calibra would be ok we dont rev it over 8 but anything smaller than 3L turbo would need some extra legs for sure.

[Ricey88]

As much as I dislike the way the multi-valve penalty is applied I don’t think
It can just be dropped, as at the moment it keeps the 3500 multi-valve Turbo’s
In check/ balance with 6000cc NA.

Having said that is there much difference in the performance and reliability
Between a 3500 turbo 2 valve and a 4 valve?

[Toymax]

Do we need a multi valve extra weight adjustment, I do not think so. If required in the 4-6 ltr class parity would be best achieved by reducing the RPM on a multi valve engine by 200rpm or whatever is proven to be fair from a torque and horsepower dyno reading but i seriously dout anyone would be able to build a multivalve engine that will produce over 750hp as many of the new nascar engines are capable of at 7800 RPM.

I agree Phil, we don't need the multi-valve penalty, certainly not for NA cars. My 4-litre multi-valve NA V8 will never challenge the Chevs, nor the smaller turbo engines. My engine choice is enough of a penalty!

I wonder about Ricey's question regarding multi-valve turbo engines though. Is it maybe still needed for turbos only?

[Toyzda]

a forced 2V and 4V with make quite similar power. The advantage gained by 4V in reduced valve train weight is most seem at higher rpm. Turbo engines cannot rev hard on high boost, especially not all race long.

I also wonder why Ricey doesn't care about Phil going off topic... favourtism...

[Phast Phil]

Boost, we need more different winners and that may come about by altering the rules to allow closer competition. If the tyres wear out on some cars then that could be an equaliser.
Once again we need closer competition with more competitors able to win, not just more speed. If tyres wear out then we need tougher tyres or better drivers.

By the way, where did I go off topic toyzda, this topic is about weight and parity by my observance.

turbo cars need to be addressed separately as they perform uniquely. Recent performance from the Graham smith Calibra proves that a car of his configeration can be competitive at the front of the field speed wise with an older part itme driver (or should that be experienced). What has to happen to most of the turbo cars that I observe is they need to become reliable and finish races, they do not need a free get out of jail card as they should be winning in the right hands with the right amount of perparation.