[BTCC] BTCC 2018 - Knockhill - Rounds 22, 23, 24

[Racer65]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

That's curious about checking the sides of the car with the roller. I guess the cars don't run a lot of rake like they used to. Years back the teams just ran the front splitter as close to the ground as they could get away with (45mm minimum).

So do the Subaru's get measured with a different roller then than the other cars? If they have this variable ride height calculation that they can adjust? In fact if it is adjustable, how can they have one roller for all cars?

The CoG rules are a mixture of weight and ride height. Earlier in the season BMR tried raising the height which presumably meant they could lose some weight. No matter what they do they can't go below the minimum ride height just like all the other cars. Being able to go lower would give them an even bigger advantage after all.

[Robin Marriott]

Originally Posted by Racer65

The CoG rules are a mixture of weight and ride height. Earlier in the season BMR tried raising the height which presumably meant they could lose some weight. No matter what they do they can't go below the minimum ride height just like all the other cars. Being able to go lower would give them an even bigger advantage after all.

I think the question being asked is if the minimum ride height across the board is 75mm (ignore the numbers, just an example) and BMR have been told they can lose 10kg for every 10mm height they add to the car, HOW is this policed? The test equipment only seems to be set for the standard minimum height, not BMR’s infinitely adjustable minimum.

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by Robin Marriott

I think the question being asked is if the minimum ride height across the board is 75mm (ignore the numbers, just an example) and BMR have been told they can lose 10kg for every 10mm height they add to the car, HOW is this policed? The test equipment only seems to be set for the standard minimum height, not BMR’s infinitely adjustable minimum.

your getting confused. the subaru ride height can never go below the minimum for everyone. if they choose to run it above that minimum ride height and take less weight (or vice versa)then that doesnt alter what the minimum ride height they must run is. they can never run the car below the same regulation minimum for all cars

[Robin Marriott]

Nope, definitely not getting confused.

Let’s say the minimum height across the grid is 75mm and the minimum weight is 1300kg

If BMR have been told they need to run an extra 100kg to run at 75mm by can remove weight for a height increase, let’s say 10kg per 10mm for ease of calculation...

If they run at 85mm and at 90kg over the min weight, the weight is easy to measure but how can anyone be sure they’re not running under the new 85mm height their sliding scale would allow?

If they’ve been told they can run higher and lose weight, their minimum height is not as straight forward as everyone else’s.

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by Robin Marriott

Nope, definitely not getting confused.

Let’s say the minimum height across the grid is 75mm and the minimum weight is 1300kg

If BMR have been told they need to run an extra 100kg to run at 75mm by can remove weight for a height increase, let’s say 10kg per 10mm for ease of calculation...

If they run at 85mm and at 90kg over the min weight, the weight is easy to measure but how can anyone be sure they’re not running under the new 85mm height their sliding scale would allow?

If they’ve been told they can run higher and lose weight, their minimum height is not as straight forward as everyone else’s.

its really simple. they have larger height rollers to use for the Subaru if its running at the higher minimum ride height.

[mickb]

So in both Tingram and Suttons case, the standing water caused damage which resulted in the ride height requirements not been met.

[BertMk2]

Originally Posted by mickb

So in both Tingram and Suttons case, the standing water caused damage which resulted in the ride height requirements not been met.

That was certainly the defence BMR put up in their appeal (unsuccessful) against the penalty. I don't think Speedworks appealed.

[porsche962fan]

if Turks has a crash in race 1 or 2 or in practice is there any rule to prevent WSR to put him in the Collard car, quickly change number plates and names and done ??

Ditto for Sutton in Plato car or the now unused 3rd car

[Robin Marriott]

Originally Posted by porsche962fan

if Turks has a crash in race 1 or 2 or in practice is there any rule to prevent WSR to put him in the Collard car, quickly change number plates and names and done ??

Ditto for Sutton in Plato car or the now unused 3rd car

There IS but I would think if Gow wanted to bend the rules there he would. The cars all have a chassis number which will be declared to TOCA and ‘allocated’ to a driver.

http://www.btcc.net/wp-content/uploa...egulations.pdf

section 1.15 says no spare car is allowed at the circuit but doesn’t say about swapping cars

[Racer65]

Turks is on his last warning so he's going to have to think twice when fighting for position.

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by Robin Marriott

There IS but I would think if Gow wanted to bend the rules there he would. The cars all have a chassis number which will be declared to TOCA and ‘allocated’ to a driver.

http://www.btcc.net/wp-content/uploa...egulations.pdf

section 1.15 says no spare car is allowed at the circuit but doesn’t say about swapping cars

it actually says 'no replacement cars are permitted within the venue'. so they would not be allowed to replace his car with another from within the team.

[porsche962fan]

in the old DTM in was common practice tha it the lead driver had car issues the secondary driver had to hand it over but guess here other rules apply

in the old IMSA races it was even more bizzare as a driver could start race with a car/team and mid race switch to a total different car/team !!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

it actually says 'no replacement cars are permitted within the venue'. so they would not be allowed to replace his car with another from within the team.

I think the pertinent rule here is 1.11.1.c.iii) 'Any driver, including substitute drivers, who takes-over the registered car of another driver will also take over the success-weight ballast (1.11.1.c) of the departing driver up to that time, or 45kg, whichever is the greater. '

I'm guessing that is in addition to their existing ballast - (e.g. Turkington takes over Collard's car and drops to 45kg).

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I think the pertinent rule here is 1.11.1.c.iii) 'Any driver, including substitute drivers, who takes-over the registered car of another driver will also take over the success-weight ballast (1.11.1.c) of the departing driver up to that time, or 45kg, whichever is the greater. '

I'm guessing that is in addition to their existing ballast - (e.g. Turkington takes over Collard's car and drops to 45kg).

thats not pertinent at all. a driver cant have a replacement car during the race meeting regardless if its being used by another driver or not.

[S griffin]

Didn't they bring in the rule after Muller borrowed Radermecker's car at the Snetterton meeting in 2000? Although didn't John George have to sit out the third race at Oulton in 2010, because his team mate O'Neill had borrowed parts from his car or something?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

thats not pertinent at all. a driver cant have a replacement car during the race meeting regardless if its being used by another driver or not.

I'm wondering why the rule states driver, including substitutes.

What would constitute a driver who wasn't a substitute? Is that not the case being queried - Turkington takes over the registered car of Collard?

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

But can't Turkington 'substitute' for Collard?

of course not. turkington would have already participated so it would be a replacement car, which is not allowed.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

of course not. turkington would have already participated so it would be a replacement car, which is not allowed.

What would be the (hypothetical) situation that would see a driver, who is not a substitute, take over a car registered to someone else (as the rules permit)?

Just curious why the rules are written that way, rather than simply stating 'any substitute driver'....

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

What would be the (hypothetical) situation that would see a driver, who is not a substitute, take over a car registered to someone else (as the rules permit)?

Just curious why the rules are written that way, rather than simply stating 'any substitute driver'....

not during a race meeting.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

not during a race meeting.

Rule 1.11.1 - the rule that describes drivers taking over another driver's registered car, describes championship balance. Outside of a race meeting, championship ballast is not applicable.

So we have a rule for success ballast (so only applicable during a race meeting), which describes the amount of ballast given to driver who takes over another driver's registered car. This driver may, or may not, be a substitute. I have still not seen any rule that prevents Turkington from taking over Collard's car during a meeting.

Rule 1.15 is for replacement cars - not for existing cars that are already within the venue. I don't see Turkington taking over Collard's car as using a replacement, it is taking over another driver's car.

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Rule 1.11.1 - the rule that describes drivers taking over another driver's registered car, describes championship balance. Outside of a race meeting, championship ballast is not applicable.

So we have a rule for success ballast (so only applicable during a race meeting), which describes the amount of ballast given to driver who takes over another driver's registered car. This driver may, or may not, be a substitute. I have still not seen any rule that prevents Turkington from taking over Collard's car during a meeting.

Rule 1.15 is for replacement cars - not for existing cars that are already within the venue. I don't see Turkington taking over Collard's car as using a replacement, it is taking over another driver's car.

if a driver took over another car during a race meeting then it would be replacement for the car that he's already entered with and used! so no replacement cars allowed.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Rule 1.11.1 - the rule that describes drivers taking over another driver's registered car, describes championship balance. Outside of a race meeting, championship ballast is not applicable.

What do you mean that 'championship ballast is not applicable'? If one driver takes over from another (between meetings) then the new driver takes over the old driver's championship ballast at the first race of the next meeting.

Rule 1.15 is for replacement cars - not for existing cars that are already within the venue. I don't see Turkington taking over Collard's car as using a replacement, it is taking over another driver's car.

Collard's car mean through scrutineering as Collard's car and remains his car for the remainder of the meeting. Ditto Turkington's car was scrutineered as Turkington's car. Turkington using Collard's car after that point would be considered a replacement.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by redshoes

What do you mean that 'championship ballast is not applicable'? If one driver takes over from another (between meetings) then the new driver takes over the old driver's championship ballast at the first race of the next meeting.

I mean if a car is driven outside of a race meeting - then they do not have to run with championship ballast.

I get what everyone is saying about it being a replacement - but within rule 1.11.1.c.iii), what would constitute:


Driver A taking over a car registered for Driver B, and not be a substitute?

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I mean if a car is driven outside of a race meeting - then they do not have to run with championship ballast.

I get what everyone is saying about it being a replacement - but within rule 1.11.1.c.iii), what would constitute:


Driver A taking over a car registered for Driver B, and not be a substitute?

cant happen during a race meeting

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I mean if a car is driven outside of a race meeting - then they do not have to run with championship ballast.

If it's outside a race meeting then championship regs are irrelevant. Baring any restrictions on testing, any driver can drive any car, with any weight, with any engine, with any aero, with any engine, etc. There would be nothing in the championship regs to cover things outside of the championship.

Driver B taking over for driver A for a limited number of races is a substitute - eg Ricky Collard is a substitute for Rob

Driver A leaving and driver B taking over is a replacement - eg Dan Lloyd was a replacement for James Nash

Driver B taking over driver B's car for part of a race meeting having already raced his own car - doesn't matter what you call it, it isn't allowed