[DTM] BMW to DTM?

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

I think describing it as an "unfair advantage" isn't that accurate as SEAT and Chevrolet would have had the same advantages (and disadvantages) if they built a RWD car.

And if Audi and Subaru would be allowed to race with 4WD all the others would only need to build their own 4WD cars...
The fact still remains, BMW getting a weight break because they only have an advantage in 1 race makes no sense. And BMW certainly is not too heavy realitive the competition currently. That they have faild to take advantage in points from their advantage on track is a mix of incompetense and bad luck, not due to an underperforming or too heavy car.

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by helgi

Excuse me,but how can you transform 'unfair RWD advantage' into kilograms of ballast? Is it quantum mechanics of some sort?

Part of the weight penalty for rear wheel drive car is for the benefit they get at a standing start. Depending on the situation they can jump 2-4 rows of cars.

No its not an exact science, but then neither is weight compensation in its entirety.

Why not have no weight penalties at all. Why not just say every car has to be 1000Kg and thats it?

[helgi]

I suppose they use weight handicaps for entertaining and not only for fairness. I've watched some BTCC races and saw that starts from BMW.
I'm sure that 'equalizing' leads to dead-end. Why must real sportsmen (mean cars,of course) be equalized with usual clerks? With that stupid steps done by Touring Bureau I won't be surprised if BMW really quits WTCC. I can't understand why 320 that was always a mark for real tourer,why it lost plenty of races for Korean sedan and FIAT grandson. It's a nonsense. From that point of view BMW really needs a step into DTM. You can say that DTM races are boring but they are fair and regulations are standart for everybody. I'm only afraid DTM will go into GT2 technical regulations and cars won't be as quick as now. But if it helps to invite a new manufacturer it will be great.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Why not have no weight penalties at all. Why not just say every car has to be 1000Kg and thats it?

Since a FWD design is compact and light weight compared to RWD, your statement is an oxymoron. If both are the same weight, and everything else is equal, in essence you have put a penalty weight on the FWD car...

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Part of the weight penalty for rear wheel drive car is for the benefit they get at a standing start. Depending on the situation they can jump 2-4 rows of cars.

Out of interest I took a peak at the actual weights of a BMW 320i Rear drive and drive shaft. The weight of those 2 parts and connections is >35kg. And that doesnt even count the extra weight for structural changes to hold that weight in place.

So the "penalty" RWD getting is somewhere in the range of -5 to -10kg, possibly even more. Good penalty IMO I bet the opposition would like such "penalties" as well.

Anyway, to claim BMW should have a further weightbreak, because they don't have an unfair advantage in BOTH races, is beyond ridiculous.

If you are looking for true equality, 100% rolling starts and +40kg for RWD is closer to actual reality.

Ref
http://bmwfans.info/parts/catalog/E9..._drive_output/
http://bmwfans.info/parts/catalog/E9..._swivel_joint/

[helgi]

And FWD cars eat front tyres rapidly. How we can transform that in weight handicap?
I'm sure nobody will be 100% pleased with any decision. It's a policy there.
RWD cars are real sportsmen with racing in the blood. And this is their problem. They say there're 'real' cars in WTCC. So,if they are really real,then BMW has no opposition. Standart 320 has more sport than dozen of spanish buses. All that daily horses were not designed for active driving. I can't imagine a person with enough money thinking: 'I'll better buy that Daewoo. It's as fast as BMW and I'll be unbeatable at NRing.'
If Lotti go the equalised way,then he should ban RWD to get rid of quarrels. It's pity that people remember about 90% of market,but forget completely about sport. Teams go racing but not advertising. All that FWDs are good for national or club racing. But when daily horses are to compete on the world scene... World Tin Cans Championship. And there's no place for BMW there. It's nonsense when an usual tuning shop makes more powerful cars than those which compete in races of such a high level.
In real life competitors for BMW are Audi and Mercedes. And only history tides Bayern with tourers. But if that 'tourers' become FWD... And authorities give all their best to do so. Where should real sportsmen go? GT2, LMP2, DTM.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helgi

In real life competitors for BMW are Audi and Mercedes.

I think you accidentally put Audi in there. After all, Audi is not a real car. It's been an FWD/4WD brand since 1932/33...

[helgi]

I know that Auto Union,NSU,Audi were/are FWD. But it has enormous experience with Quattro,and it's not a FWD sheep. Trans-Am machinery were not 300hp granny's cars too.
Were they succesful with FWD? I don't know, what was there in STW, but rally,DTM,BTCC were conquered with Quattro. It's not a FWD. And from marketing point of view, Audi is much closer to BMW,and Quattro - to RWD (sometimes).

[Valenok]

Originally Posted by helgi

RWD cars are real sportsmen with racing in the blood.

You mean BMW Isetta?

Originally Posted by helgi

I can't imagine a person with enough money thinking: 'I'll better buy that Daewoo. It's as fast as BMW and I'll be unbeatable at NRing.'

All theese cars are just moving adertising shields. So there is no difference with solhuoettes or stockcars.

Originally Posted by helgi

All that FWDs are good for national or club racing.

What the difference between club racing and world championship? Just geografy and number of competitors.
Can you say that World Karting Championship is not a sport?

RWD have advantage just on standing start. But FWD is better on wet track. In other cases they not so different.

Originally Posted by helgi

In real life competitors for BMW are Audi and Mercedes.

And Alfa's?

Mercedes and Audi need to promote C-klasse and A4, so how they can do it with GT rules in DTM? May be GT2S? So they must forget about Le-Man. What about Audi's AWD and Merc's bigger capacity engines? It would be point of split.

[helgi]

Ok. Let's say I'm thinking with 1970's categories and live in the past. I don't understand lots of things that take place in today racing ruled by manufacturers.

[helgi]

Originally Posted by Valenok

You mean BMW Isetta?

http://www.adac-eifelrennen.de/index...id=4&Itemid=84

Freitag, 25. September 2009

09:00 – 10:30 Uhr Markenclub-GLP II Nord 1. Prüfung
09:00 – 09:30 Uhr BMW Isetta GP Corso
09:45 – 10:15 Uhr Eifelsprint (GTC – TC / 100 Meilen) GP 1. Training
10:45 – 11:45 Uhr Eifelrennen (FHR / Youngtimer / Triumph) Ges 1. Training
12:00 – 13:30 Uhr GLP I (Baujahre bis 1966) Nord 1. Prüfung
12:05 – 12:35 Uhr HTGT (Historische Tourenwagen und GT) GP 1. Training
12:45 – 13:15 Uhr FIA Lurani Trophy (Historische Formel Junior) GP Training
13:30 – 14:15 Uhr DTM-Legenden GP Revival
13:45 – 15:15 Uhr GLP II (Baujahre 1967 – 1979) Nord 1. Prüfung
14:25 – 15:05 Uhr FIA Historic Formula 1 Championship GP 1. Training
15:20 – 15:50 Uhr HTGT (Historische Tourenwagen und GT) GP 2. Training
15:30 – 17:00 Uhr Markenclub-GLP I Nord 1. Prüfung
16:05 – 17:05 Uhr Erlebnis Nordschleife GP Einsteiger-Lehrgang
16:55 – 17:55 Uhr Revivalfahrten Nord Demofahrt

(racing!)

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by stedevil

Out of interest I took a peak at the actual weights of a BMW 320i Rear drive and drive shaft. The weight of those 2 parts and connections is >35kg. And that doesnt even count the extra weight for structural changes to hold that weight in place.

So the "penalty" RWD getting is somewhere in the range of -5 to -10kg, possibly even more. Good penalty IMO I bet the opposition would like such "penalties" as well.

Anyway, to claim BMW should have a further weightbreak, because they don't have an unfair advantage in BOTH races, is beyond ridiculous.

If you are looking for true equality, 100% rolling starts and +40kg for RWD is closer to actual reality.

Ref
http://bmwfans.info/parts/catalog/E9..._drive_output/
http://bmwfans.info/parts/catalog/E9..._swivel_joint/

Sorry, did not understand that at all, unless you meant to put +40kg for FWD at the end.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Sorry, did not understand that at all, unless you meant to put +40kg for FWD at the end.

In real life, RWD weighs 40kg more than FWD. So BMW is getting of easy with only +30kg. In short, forget that nonsense about 30kg penalty because of standing starts. BMW is getting standing starts for free and an extra -10kg off the weight as it is.

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by stedevil

In real life, RWD weighs 40kg more than FWD. So BMW is getting of easy with only +30kg. In short, forget that nonsense about 30kg penalty because of standing starts. BMW is getting standing starts for free and an extra -10kg off the weight as it is.

Ah, I see what you are saying.

The fact that having a prop shaft and a rear drive train makes the car 40kg heavier even on road models, and the FIA regs state that the rear drive has a 30kg penalty.

I would assume though, that the BMW's are made down to the minimum weight, and they simply shove in 30kg of ballast?