Rules overhaul by TEGA...

[vortexo]

click here and be surprised

(I fixed the link)

[Bedford]

vortexo, you forgot the 'h' in http:// etc.

[Timu]

The major initiatives are:

Aerodynamics

Minimal working aerodynamics solely to achieve parity. The cars are to have the same external appearance.

· Removal of front under tray from 1 January 2005
· Rear wing to be fixed or with minimal adjustment from 1 January 2005

Brakes

· Control brake rotor from 1 January 2005
· Control brake pad from 1 January 2005
· Restricted list of specified calipers available for use in 2005
· Control brake caliper from 1 January 2006

Data logging / telemetry

· Live car to pit telemetry is to be banned from 1 January 2005
· Control dash unit from 1 January 2005
· Reduction in the duplication of data collected from 1 January 2005.
· Reduction in the number of channels of data available to teams from 1 January 2005.

Transmission / driveline

· Immediate consideration of gearbox specification – sequential/h pattern shift. Any change to be effected 1 January 2005
· Control specification of internal gearbox components from 1 January 2005
· Minimum flywheel weight from 1 January 2005
· Control carbon clutch from 1 January 2005
· Control crown wheel & pinion from 1 January 2005
· Minimum rear axle (drive shaft) weight – solid component from 1 January 2005
· Minimum tail shaft weight and gauge of metal from 1 January 2005. To be a TEGA recommended part.

Engine

· Engine specification will be adjusted to provide extended life.
· As many engine components as is practical and possible are to have a minimum weight and specification applied to them from 1 January 2005
· As many engine components as is practical and possible will be reviewed and specified as a control component (either by specification or supply) from 1 January 2005
· Maximum valve lift to be stipulated from 1 January 2005
· Specified number and size of piston rings from 1 January 2005
· Restricted list of specified engine peripheral components together with designated position requirements from 1 January 2005.
· Engine peripherals to be control components from 1 January 2007
· Minimum engine block weight for both Ford and Holden to be identical from 1 January 2007

Suspension

· Restricted list of specified shock absorbers available for use from 1 January 2005
· Control sealed shock absorber from 1 January 2006
· Individually team homologated stub axle to be available for use and sample logged with TEGA from 1 January 2005 - control component from 1 January 2006

Wheels

· Control aluminum alloy wheel from 1 January 2005. All other wheel specifications to remain unchanged. Current stock of wheels to be marked.

General items / non-performance components

· As many non-performance components as is practical and possible will be control components for any new car that is built from 1 January 2005
· Control fuel tank in all new cars built from 1 January 2005.
· Specified identical location of the fuel tank in all new cars built for application with the introduction of new model cars.
· Control on board jacks in all new cars built from 1 January 2005.
· Control rattle guns and associated equipment from 1 January 2005

ISN'T THIS GOING A BIT TOO FAR? THE WHOLE GRID WAS SEPERATED BY 1.35sec TODAY AND THEY WANT ALL THESE CONTROLS?

[Onlooker]

Well you would have to say that apart from the fuel injection it is kind of like a NASCAR for beginners isn't it.

In the end it seems O'Rielly has turned TC's V8's into our version of the his BTCC,by stealth
and TC didn't even hear his duds hit the floor

[vortexo]

Originally posted by Bedford
vortexo, you forgot the 'h' in http:// etc.

Iv'e gotta get rid of this dam keyboard it keeps making mistakes - try this one

[Onlooker]

Well one thing ,those rules should make it fairly impracticle to run the old Chev engine in 2005,unless the shortage of bits makes it easyier to re develop the old one and given how HRT are going to really struggle on the long straights at HV Brighty and co might have to get one of them new engines NOW

[Sol]

Yeah HRT and 'Not So' are struggling for speed in qualifying - NOT.

[TSR]

Gearboxes

The new rule set down by TEGA say's that nothing??????
Will the v8supertaxis be running H- pattern
or sequentail

Please explian TEGA

[vortexo]

another piece to the puzzle here

[vortexo]

just a thought that if they ban pit telemetry where do all the IT guru's go???????

[1200Datto27]

They sit in the pits twiddling their thumbs until the car comes in, and then they work on the data.

[TSR]

Sounds like TEGA have not thought this whole rule change out properly.

[1200Datto27]

TEGA and intelligent, rational thought are mutually exclusive, I would have thought.

[TSR]

Ditto

[Rick]

sounds like a step in the right direction - controls are to keep costs down - not parity, the bit I like is the "minimal working aerodynamics" - doesn't matter how close all 30 odd cars are, if you can't overtake you end up with... what we've got!!

[Chucky]

They won't do a thing to keep costs down at all. They'll just figure out some other way to spend money.

And none of this stuff contributes any sizable chunk of a V8 teams operating budget. I'd be talking about salary caps before worrying about what brand of shock someone uses.

Only Kelvin O'Reilly can legislate a successful series to a standstill like this! First TOCA then ........

[D.R.T.]

I dont see the point of the rules, the cars are identical anyways, why fit them with new identical parts.

V8 taxi's, Australia's fastest 1 make category

[GTRMagic]

A few things noticed by some motorsport heads yesterday:

- Taking the front splitter out of the cars will make them understeer even worse than usual. Despite the balance front to rear with the splitter/wing package, taking the front aero away will mean the cars will not turn in without substantial suspension revisions, and for the most part, likely not able to be fully tuned out.

The example given... imagine doing 292km/h into Caltex Chase without a front splitter to get the car to turn in...

- No news on the mandatory implementation of Aurora, will the Holden teams retain a reprieve here for a few more years

- What news of the Konica series, do they have to reconfigure to this new format/configuration, or will all the old cars stay in Konica such that the specification will not be the same as main game?

A wag suggested yesterday that perhaps this is coming in so that the main series cars and Konica cars arent the same next year, as the possibility existed for a single car L2 team to run testing with a main series unit and a Konica series unit (cars to the same spec) under the same test days without penalty (just like a L1 operation!)

- Does having control dampers actually fix the cost issue, or is the problem more the $300k dude the teams have to find to interpret the data and make meaningful changes?

By the same token, teams often run different brands and/or specifications of damper front to rear, with varying levels of adjustability.. you would hope that TEGA would be taking advice from their teams as to what specification to set if there is a tender for a control damper.

- Aluminium wheels sound interesting. Maybe I missed something but arent the current OZ and Speedline rims in use currently magnesium based.. as were the unloved Tecno Magnesio?? Even the CSA wheels the Nissan boys used back in the Group A days were primarily magnesium alloy based.

- Does this go far enough in control suspension components? Should Holden Motorsport and Ford Racing be forced to design and homologate a common package front and rear, including mounting points, construction and manufacture, to be sold on to all the teams running that brand?

Surely this is where the costs come into it... where a Holden team has a $400k CNC machine in the workshop making bits just for itself and its own use, when instead they could be making stuff for the whole Holden field.

Dont want to get excited by intellectual property arguments though but pick say HRT and SBR as the control component designers, get them spread thru the field

- Are bodyshells and roll cage designs to be included here? If you are controlling everything else, is this the next logical step? Or is this the last bastion of tuneability teams actually have in the new regime?

Just a few thoughts....

[vortexo]

I heard with interest recently HRT are making steering racks for other teams - perhaps being a component maker is the way to go.

And on a cynical note weren't HRT in a lot of bother for sharing components amongst their 6 cars.........

Must be the cost savings struck a note with TEGA during the investigations.:-( and even more cynical just clone Skaife and Ambrose as the 32 drivers .

[Gaz170]

Seems to be a lot of un-necessary **** in these.

[mmciau]

And will lead to processional racing more so than now
I sat at HV today and jeez, it's a bore!
Mike

[vortexo]

Originally posted by mmciau
And will lead to processional racing more so than now
I sat at HV today and jeez, it's a bore!
Mike

Mike - was a pretty good weekend on TV - no complaints from me.

[B!tchie Renault]

As I said before, the way it is heading is for Paul Pickett to build 32 cars, skin 16 each as Holden and Fords and them place them with the teams to race.

Imagine that, a control race team.

[louonline]

I don’t know about the possible cost savings but once they start using “controlled components” innovation dies. How is anybody going to develop a new and better component if they are not allowed to use it?
I fear that if they go down this ‘controlled” path they will become ‘super taxis’ as some people call them already!
Look elsewhere for cost saving, don’t stifle innovation and ingenuity with controlled components.

[Onlooker]

Originally posted by B!tchie Renault
As I said before, the way it is heading is for Paul Pickett to build 32 cars, skin 16 each as Holden and Fords and them place them with the teams to race.

Imagine that, a control race team.

32 Cars all performing like the Chance of a Lifetime unit,OMG
There is no way you could share a boom anyway,so the tracks would need to build new pitlanes