[BTCC] Engine Equivalency - The Facts

[Jason Plato]

Ladies, Gentlemen, Boys and Girls

There is a tremendous amount of nonsense being talked about on various forums regarding the equivalency of the Turbo and Non-Turbo cars.

For the record here are some facts:

• S2000 chassis with Turbo engines are running the same base weight as Non Turbo cars.

• At Brands Hatch: Qualifying
Best Non-Turbo car was 0.373 secs off pole time. Qualifying P3
The pole time in 2011 is 0.437 secs faster than the Pole time from 2010
Jordan is 0.706 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 with same weight
Matt Neal is 0.570 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 but is carrying 36kgs more ballast in 2010

• At Donington: Qualifying
Best Non-Turbo car was 1.233 secs off pole time. Qualifying P8
The pole time in 2011 is 1.2 secs faster than the Pole time of the AON LPG Turbo car from 2010!
Gordon Shedden is 1.276 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 with same success ballast
Matt Neal is 1.475 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 but is carrying 27kgs more ballast in 2011
Plato is 0.215 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 with same success ballast
Jordan is 1.161 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 despite carrying 36kgs more weight!
Chilton is 0.591 secs faster in 2011 than his 2010 Pole time in the AON LPG Turbo!
Nash is 1.821 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 despite carrying 27kgs more weight!

• At Thruxton:Qualifying
Best Non-Turbo car was 0.962 secs off pole time. Qualifying P5
2nd best Non-Turbo car was 1.636 secs off pole. Qulaifying P11
The pole time in 2011 is 0.981 secs faster than the 2009 pole time of Giovanardi (On pole by 0.320 secs)
The pole time in 2011 is 0.977 secs faster than the 2010 FP2 of Giovanardi (quickest by 0.273 secs, Q wet)
Shedden is 1.581 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 FP2 with same weight
Neal is 1.037 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 FP2 despite carrying 36kgs more ballast in 2011
Neal is 1.088 secs faster in 2011 than 2009 despite carrying 36kgs more ballast in 2011
Boardman is 1.272 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 FP2 with same weight
Jackson did same time in 2011 and 2010 FP2, however 2010 P3, 2011 P8

• 2009 Brands Qual .............. 2010 Brands Qual ................ 2011 Brands Qual
1. 48.857 – Neal..................... 1. 48.647 – Plato ................. 1. 48.210 – Neal - Turbo
2. 48.877 – Giovanard............. 2. 48.780 – Neal .................. 2. 48.465 – Jordan - Turbo
3. 48.926 – Collard................. 3. 48.791 – Shedden ............ 3. 48.583 - Plato
4. 49.022 – Turkington............ 4. 48.830 – McDowell ........... 4. 48.623 - Nash - Turbo
5. 49.073 – Jordan ................. 5. 48.871 – Chilton - Turbo ... 5. 48.658 - McDowell
6. 49.121 – Adam ................... 6. 48.885 – Jackson ............. 6. 48.667 - Jackson - Turbo
7. 49.180 – Shedden ............... 7. 48.902 – Nash ................. 7. 48.668 - Chilton - Turbo
8. 49.514 – Jelley .................... 8. 48.947 – Tordoff .............. 8. 48.752 - Boardman - Turbo
9. 49.514 – Plato ..................... 9. 49.100 – O’Neill ................ 9. 48.849 – O’Neill
10. 49.611 – Jones ................. 10. 49.110 – Onslow-Cole .......10. 49.036 – Neate - Turbo

• 2010 Donington Qual ....................... 2011 Donington Qual
1. 11.328 – Chilton - Turbo ................... 1. 10.129 – Neal - Turbo
2. 11.409 – Onslow-Cole -Turbo ............ 2. 10.172 – Shedden - Turbo
3. 11.448 – Shedden ............................ 3. 10.477 – Nash - Turbo
4. 11.577 – Plato .................................. 4. 10.556 – Jordan - Turbo
5. 11.604 – Neal ................................... 5. 10.737 – Chilton - Turbo
6. 11.717 – Jordan ................................ 6. 11.074 – Smith - Turbo
7. 11.822 – O’Neill ................................. 7. 11.309 – Jackson - Turbo
8. 11.834 – Collard ................................ 8. 11.362 – Plato
9. 11.916 – Boardman ............................. 9. 11.425 – McDowell
10. 11.919 – McDowell ........................... 10. 11.440 – Collard

• 2009 Thruxton Qual ............ 2010 Thruxton FP2 .................... 2011 Thruxton Qual
1. 17.985 – Giovanardi ............. 1. 17.981 – Giovanardi .............. 1. 17.004 – Shedden - Turbo
2. 18.305 – Neal ...................... 2. 18.254 – Neal ....................... 2. 17.066 – Jordan - Turbo
3. 18.326 – Plato ..................... 3. 18.325 – Jackson .................. 3. 17.217 – Neal - Turbo
4. 18.354 – Jordan ................... 4. 18.534 – Jordan ................... 4. 17.759 – Chilton - Turbo
5. 18.407 – Turkington ............. 5. 18.542 – Chilton - Turbo ....... 5. 17.966 – Plato
6. 18.708 – O’Neill ................... 6. 18.585 – Shedden .................. 6. 18.122 – Onslow-Cole - Turbo
7. 18.830 – Jones .................... 7. 18.946 – Plato ....................... 7. 18.249 – Smith - Turbo
8. 18.916 – Thompson ............. 8. 19.077 – O’Neill ..................... 8. 18.325 – Jackson - Turbo
9. 18.952 – Eaves .................... 9. 19.259 – Glew ....................... 9. 18.327 – Boardman - Turbo
10. 19.018 – Jackson ............... 10. 19.280 – Pinkney ................. 10. 18.341 – Nash - Turbo


TOCA have promised all teams that equivalency in performance will be regulated for the 2011 and 2012 BTCC Seasons.

Below is how Alan Gow answered some questions on his personal forum on BTCC.NET

Question on: Turbo and Non-Turbo car equivalence – 18th April 2011

Dear Alan,

Thanks for giving us an entertaining start to hopefully another great season.

My post is about turbo and non-turbo car equivalence, Jason Plato commented on a TV interview after last weekend’s races at Donington that you gave your word that you would adjust the rules for them to fight at the front, and it was now time to see how honourable you and TOCA were to their word..! Is this true? And if so can you tell us what the adjustments are when they happen?
Thanks and keep up the good work.

Alan Gow – 18th April 2011
“Clearly we have always stated that there should be performance parity between the two types (normally aspirated and turbo) for the next two seasons. That is not an issue and is a policy known and agreed by every team - and one we have publicly stated many times over the last 18 months.

In very simple terms; the performance of the fastest/best of each type should be comparable for 2011 and 2012 – of course given that they are of a comparable level of quality of driver/team/car/preparation and that, at times, each car will have their own strengths and weaknesses at differing circuits.

Obviously we need to analyse the data thoroughly but, as a guess, I would say it's likely there will be an adjustment before Thruxton. I fully expect more tweaks will be made throughout the season (either way) as teams continue to refine their cars....all of which makes for a fascinating championship, as we are already seeing. “
________________________________________

Question on: NGTC/S2000 engine parity –20th April 2011
Hi Alan,
Last year there appeared to be parity between the NGTC and S2000 engine cars. As far as I'm aware there was no need to restrict the NGTC engines during last season and were allowed to run without change. Yet the NGTC engine cars were still among the faster cars through the speed traps. I'm assuming the engines are still running under the same parameters this year but where the teams have been able to develop their cars and engines in other ways have been able to outperform the S2000 engine cars as we saw at Donington. My concern is that although we all wish to see some sort of parity with the two engine types, any sort of handicap would be penalising them for all the hard work the teams have done in developing their cars to get them working better.

Alan Gow – 21st April 2011
“Your statement is based on the incorrect assumption that the engines are running under the same parameters as last year - which they are not.”

This year all NGTC engines have a significantly revised turbo system, which has changed their engine performance/characteristics.”
________________________________________

The simple facts are that despite a reduction in turbo boost prior to Thruxton, it is still totally impossible for a non-turbo car to get anywhere near pole position and therefore the only way that a non-turbo car can win races is by lucking in on the reverse grid or waiting for cars ahead to fall off, breakdown or make large mistakes.

Racing cars nearly always overtake on the brakes into corners unless mistakes happen, how then can a non-turbo car overtake a turbo car when the turbo cars accelerate much faster due to increased torque and produce a higher top speed due to increased power. The turbo cars are so far ahead when it comes to the braking zones, any passing is by and large impossible.

This is not a whinge, it is the simple facts of the problem all the teams and drivers of Non-Turbo cars face.

TOCA have promised equivalency, we all want to see it, before it is too late.
In my opinion, based on my years of experience, we need a massive reduction in turbo boost pressure AND a substantial air restrictor fitted prior to the next BTCC round.

Hopefully this should put an end to the churlish, biased and factually incorrect forum statements people make.

I hope this has cleared a few things up.

Kind regards,

Jason Plato
2001 and 2010 BTCC Champion
More Wins, Podiums and Fastest Laps than any other driver in the history of the championship.

[Icebaby]

Its always good to see drivers like Jason take the time to post whether its in agreement or dissagreement to the views of turbo reduction boost.

With no disrespect to Jason I would use Paul O'Neill as a bench mark to how far away the non turbo cars are, Paul is in the winning car from last year and is highly regarded as a top line driver yet is struggling for top tens, this just can't be right.

I don't doubt the turbo's will be further restricted, Jason has identified the main issue that in clear air he can defend but to pass is another story, some reflect back to when Jason had the Seat turbo and that it suited him then to have an advantage but not when it swings the other way but the situation is different now.

Assuming the turbo advatange remains could RML change the engine to a turbo unit?

Whilst all the talk is about turbo's I still think the driver contact punishments need looking at as same contact/results are being given very different penalties, to draw a comparision McDowell at Brands hitting Neal off, Neal hitting Collard at Thruxton last year, both out of the race due to braking contact yet the fines and endorsments a world apart.

[dyewat808]

Great to have all the facts in one place, thanks Jason.

I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the best BTCC seasons we've had in recent times are when we didn't have equivalency issues and I think that's right. 2009 when Turkington () won didn't have any equivalency issues (that I can remember) and that was a great season, even if you take away my personal bias that my favourite driver won.

You have a good point though, I was hoping that the whole argument about equivalency would go away after last year and it hasn't. Whatever anyone's view on the subject, surely it needs to disappear as an issue so that the BTCC is once again as little about politics as possible, and all about the racing!



Good luck with the championship this year by the way JP! It will be a tough uphill struggle, but would make it all the more impressive at the end if it happened again!

[aland]

cheers for posting the basic facts JP, you should make a post on BTCC.net but Gow/McKellar would probably ban you lets face it according to most on BTCC.net you are just a moaning barsteward that cant take defeat, but never let the facts get in the way of a good *****fest

I hope guys like you, alex and paul can get things sorted out so that all the cars on the grid are equal but the phrase "if your face fits" comes to mind and yours atm isnt fitting

have to agree with everything you are saying in the press/TV you are getting shafted bigtime, keep the head up champ

[awrb]

The thing is, wasn't it always obvious that the turbo's would have an advantage? The greater torque means on the straights they would always be hard to pass. And we know that from experiance with the SEAT's. The only way to negate that is to have the turbo's turned down so much the cars are basically just NA, but then there'd be no incentive for the teams to move to the new engine, so they'd just stick with the old engine and not embrace the new rules.

This is a new era for the BTCC, and short term pain in the form of the equivalency issues will be made up for with a, hopefully, solid and strong BTCC in the future.

But all in all, it was kind of obvious the NGTC cars would have this advantage, and nigh on impossible to negate.

[VIVA GT]

Lets face it though, equivalency formulas never work whatever you do, there is always some advantage (and an equal disadvantage) to one or the other. Plus, if the cars are all totally equal, how can we have racing (never mind overtaking), surely we'll just have a procession of identically performing cars folowing each other around the circuit? Please don't say that this is where driver skill comes in, I don't think that would make a big enough difference with the majority of BTCC drivers. (I admit that Plato & Co would run rings around me in a BTCC car, but then I'm not in the championship!).
There never has been total equivalency in the BTCC, and surely this has to be part of the appeal? Some cars have more power, others are better under braking, and there are differences in cornering speeds. There does have to be a difference in performance to give the opportunity for racing.
Think back to the turbo era of Touring Car Racing when the classes were based on engine size. Initially any cars with forced induction had a multiplier of 1.4 applied to their engine size, meaning that 2.0 litre turbo cars should compete against 2.8 litre non-turbos. As development of the turbos increased, the multiplier was increased to 1.7 so the 2.0 litre turbo cars were now officially 3400cc, but they were soon running rings around the 2.5 litre Rovers.
One other final point about equivalency & the last turbo years of the BTCC. Obviously the Sierra Cosworth RS500 dominated the championship, but there was still a huge variation between the performance of these cars, and that was down to the skills and budgets of the teams, and the abilities of the drivers.
If you want to see (supposedly) equivalent cars racing, go and watch one of the many one-make series. You should also generally see a far better standard of driving too as. without the BTCC size budgets, these guys can't afford to use B(ash) T(he) C(ar) C(lear) tactics to get past!

[Craner Curves]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

You should also generally see a far better standard of driving too as. without the BTCC size budgets, these guys can't afford to use B(ash) T(he) C(ar) C(lear) tactics to get past!

You haven't seen the Clio Cup or Ginetta championships then....

[Bramzel]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Lets face it though, equivalency formulas never work whatever you do, there is always some advantage (and an equal disadvantage) to one or the other.

FIA GT3 disagrees judging from today's races...

[Spanner monkey]

Cheers for the info J.P! But have you got the same relavent info for 2008 aswell? (Remember - you had the SEAT TDi)

[Craner Curves]

Oh god, not that old chestnut again!

[Malfunction Junction]

Jason,

Based on the one-hour highlights show we get here in Australia, your lack of hp is obvious. However, it seems that since the turbo is the way of the future, you're not going to beat 'em, so you might as well join 'em.


BTW - Bathurst awaits your return.....

[Spanner monkey]

Anymore news now Jason?
After hearing that the
Hondas have 1.6bar boost
Fords/Seat/Golf have 1.7bar
Vx vectras have 1.9bar

You were also 70kg lighter than Matt Neal for qualifying this year & lighter than your qualifying weight last year but you went slower than your qual time last year...