|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
18 Dec 2001, 01:56 (Ref:187142) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
One engine rule
One engine for qualifying, Practicing & racing. If I remember correctly- this was to start in 2002.
Anybody heard anything about it? |
||
|
18 Dec 2001, 02:39 (Ref:187148) | #2 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,069
|
Re: One engine rule
Quote:
|
|||
|
18 Dec 2001, 02:43 (Ref:187149) | #3 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
Well...That's alot of help.
Mind sharing? |
||
|
18 Dec 2001, 03:26 (Ref:187165) | #4 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,069
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
18 Dec 2001, 03:46 (Ref:187171) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
Ok Lars-*G* You read it-
Would you please share the information that you read. Pretty please with sugar on it! |
||
|
18 Dec 2001, 11:19 (Ref:187232) | #6 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 32
|
I'll tell you what I know. Teams will have to use one engine a weekend at most tracks-there are exceptions. (Daytona and Lowe's for the 600 come to mind). If you change engines after qualifying you have to go to the back of the starting grid. There is now a minimum weight limit for many engine parts and if you blow a motor during Qualifying or Happy Hour they will weigh the parts. I believe there will be an added penalty beyond going to the back of the grid for using too light parts but I haven't heard what it is yet. What else do you want to know?
|
|
|
18 Dec 2001, 12:49 (Ref:187271) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,069
|
Yeah....what NascarWidow said. That's about all I know too. The article I was talking about was an editoral about why it was a bad idea...in the writer's opinion. The story didn't shed any more light on the subject other than what NW just splained...sorry Rosalita.
|
||
|
18 Dec 2001, 13:26 (Ref:187277) | #8 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
Thank you Widow- (Oh & U too LARS *G*) Wonder why we haven't heard more about this all? YA know like teams complaining.....ect.
With nothing to talk about- you'd figure that somebody would get on the stick & give us something to talk about. That's a major change! Oh Well! I'll just have to go back to picking on a selected few. |
||
|
18 Dec 2001, 18:49 (Ref:187369) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 732
|
The 'one engine' rule was announced on October 14th, so its getting to be old news now. There were a few complaints at the time, but they seem to have blown over.
The Nascar Press Release said "a) a car that qualifies for a race must use that same motor to run the race, b) that if a car doesn?t start the race on the motor that was in the car during qualifying, at the discretion of the series director, that the car will forfeit its starting position and c) there will be some exceptions to the rule." There was a Technical Bulletin that Nascar distributed to the teams that was much more specific. It listed the parts that will have minimum weights (like NASCARWidow said) like pistons, rods & pins. The new rules will make a lot of cranks obsolete at the end of this year, and the story that I read said that a certain shop (with ties to Illmore Engineering) will be holding about $16m in obsolete parts! There were a few other things in the bulletin relating to specifics in the heads (valve & port location, cam location). I imagine that if parts are found that are too light, they will be deemed illegal and teams will be penalized accordingly. Apparently Robert Yates isn't too worried about the changes - he said he will save money not having to build qualifying motors, so he will spend it elsewhere. He was also quoted as saying that "Nobody in the grandstand will know the difference." Jack Roush was one who spoke against the changes, saying that he didn't think it would save much money. He plans on putting just as much effort into engine R&D as he did before. |
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 00:48 (Ref:187499) | #10 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 39
|
Question? What will NASCAR consider an engine? Can the teams change everything but the block for qualifying? I assume that if they blow up an engine during practice they will be allowed to keep their qualifying position, but if they change just because they don't like the engine they will go to the back of the field.
|
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 01:35 (Ref:187511) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
Hi Dick!
Welcome! Those are the kind of questions that I had- When I did a quick search- I really didn't find any details. That's why I asked. Maybe that's the kind of stuff that's happening at the NASCAR R&D. From my understanding on the much earlier news- No matter when- If your engine had problems- You went to the end of the line. BTW- the doof is gone- I'm glad you came to visit. |
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 03:03 (Ref:187525) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,069
|
Oh noooooooo...not another Gordon fan here...*G*
Hi dick- How ya doin? |
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 04:27 (Ref:187529) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 714
|
Ilmor eh! So that means Dogde
I don't think NASCAR want people spending money on dual qualifying & race engines, instead want the teams to invest in durable components. With the seperate qual engine: I'm sure the heavily funded teams could invest in expensive materials that are lighter, thus help their qualifying positions, lighter components = more revs = more power |
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 05:18 (Ref:187533) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
I thought that this new rule was to help the underfunded teams. Instead you make it sound like they have just helped the big buck teams out- giving them a bigger advantage.
|
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 05:26 (Ref:187538) | #15 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 714
|
Investing in durable components?
It should be a lot cheaper to find durable components that are heavyish, rather than some component that's designed for a few laps. But money will give the better funded teams the advantage. |
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 05:49 (Ref:187542) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
Well it's a good thing that my 2 fav's have good funding. Too bad for the underdogs. They are the ones to loose out.
|
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 05:54 (Ref:187545) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 714
|
Gordmunch also has money so beware
|
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 05:57 (Ref:187547) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
Gordmunch?
LMAO- Now that's a new one! & you all say that I'm bad! |
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 06:01 (Ref:187550) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 714
|
I would like you point out when we say that you're BAD *G*
|
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 06:04 (Ref:187553) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,318
|
EVERY DAY!
Well- I'm a pumpkin! (old cinderalla story!) I have to work tomorrow! |
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 11:24 (Ref:187588) | #21 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 32
|
Dick, the Technical Bulletin sort of answers the questions about what is an engine. It doesn't come out and This is the engine but it does say, "Unless otherwise specified by NASCAR, the same long block engine assemble (engine block, crankshaft, camshaft, connecting rods, pistons, cylinder heads, and valves) used to qualify a car for an Event must be used in the same car for the Event race. Once an engine has been used to qualify a car for an Event, the engine must not be removed from that car without the approval of the Series Director."
|
|
|
19 Dec 2001, 16:56 (Ref:187672) | #22 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 39
|
Thanks NW, so it looks like the only thing they can change inside the engine is the valve springs. It should be interesting, I suspect Rusty would be hit hard by this, but he hasn't done as well since they "exposed" the internals of his qualifying engine, wasn't it at Sears Point last year?
|
||
|
19 Dec 2001, 17:46 (Ref:187702) | #23 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 714
|
Quote:
They got every other team to witness them pulling apart Rusty's motor! He said it was like having your pants pulled down in public! |
|||
|
19 Dec 2001, 18:37 (Ref:187731) | #24 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 732
|
The tech bulletin actually specifies material as well as weight for some items, thereby preventing the use of expensive lightweight parts. Illmor was mentioned a few times in the article I read as having used exotic lightweight materials. Interesting that you should mention Rusty, Dick (see previous reference to $16m in obsolete parts ).
If the teams start changing valve springs (not valves) between qualifying and racing, I'm sure Nascar will close that loophole fairly quickly. Quote:
Technical details aside, it will be interesting to see how Nascar does at policing this. It could get very tricky when they start allowing engine changes "at the discretion of the series director." We'll see... |
|||
|
19 Dec 2001, 19:37 (Ref:187758) | #25 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 714
|
Daimler_chrysler who own Dodge and Mercedes, own a fairly large stake in Ilmor for their F1 deal, also Roger Penske does, mmmmm I wonder where their loyalties lie? I guess it is with Roger Penske.
|
||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Engine rule clarified? | Marbot | Formula One | 57 | 18 Mar 2005 01:10 |
Two races per engine rule. | XJR14/WSC95 | Formula One | 2 | 17 Jan 2005 11:12 |
1 engine rule | RWC | Formula One | 4 | 28 Sep 2003 12:46 |
One engine rule | Wrex | Formula One | 5 | 16 Feb 2003 06:06 |
engine rule | billiaml | Formula One | 4 | 30 Jul 2002 13:51 |