F1 isnt the only one set for radical change

Major Rules Overhaul Put More Grunt into V8 Supercars

The Touring Car Entrants Group Australia Pty Ltd (TEGA) today announced a major overhaul of the Technical Regulations governing V8 Supercars

The Touring Car Entrants Group Australia Pty Ltd (TEGA) today announced a major overhaul of the Technical Regulations governing V8 Supercars, a move designed to put more emphasis on driver skill, ensure tighter racing and contain costs for all teams.

The sweeping changes are arguably the biggest single introduction of across the board modifications including the limiting of adjustable aerodynamics, extending engine use time, using a sequential gear shift and controlled brakes.

The planned integration of the new regulations will commence in 2005 and continue through until the introduction of new models in the Championship, expected to be in 2007/8.

The reduction in aerodynamic effectiveness from the start of 2005 will give the immediate and very obvious benefit of an enlivened racing spectacle on the race track.

Technical stability post regulatory change is a TEGA commitment to provide a stable platform for the efficient and effective operation of teams.

"What this means for fans of V8 Supercar racing is close quarters racing, a greater emphasis on driver skill, and overall improved racing and entertainment," TEGA chairman Kelvin O'Reilly said.

"The cars will look and sound the same, they will just perform in an even more entertaining manner than the current crop of V8 Supercars as a result of reduced aerodynamic effectiveness.

"Successive TEGA Boards have considered the issues of cost containment and enhancing V8 Supercar racing in a non-contrived manner and the decisions reflect the responsible natural progression for our sport.

"This is great news for V8 Supercars and great news for our fans."

No significant areas of the cars have escaped review. The final rules with precise specifications will be released in the coming weeks.

"The cars will utilise a mixture of controlled components, tightly controlled specification of components, individual team homologated components and model specific homologated components," O'Reilly said.

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

I am niether a huge fan nor expert of V8 Supercars, However I know you are both. How do you feel about this? are they welcomed changes, or are they ruining the sport?

wrc is chaging as well with the superrally system in 2005 .... and if this system is implemetated i think that carlos sainz will go out of WRC :(

"The new SupeRally points system that is planned for introduction in 2005 could be tried out on a World Rally Championship event sometime this year, according to a story in this week’s Motorsport News.

The dramatic idea has apparently been raised at the recent meeting between the WRC’s leading manufacturers and FIA president Max Mosely. Teams and drivers have expressed concern about the introduction of the SupeRally points system, which awards points at the end of each leg of an event and allows cars to effectively ‘re-enter’ a rally if they are forced to retire. This could allow them to try out the system to see how it works.

Whether championship points would be awarded on the SupeRally system to count towards this year’s drivers’ and manufacturers’ title chase, or whether the system would effectively be tried ‘behind the scenes’ is unclear."

[QUOTE=stratos]wrc is chaging as well with the superrally system in 2005...[/QUOTE]

I reckon it's about time they reintroduced Group B, but with more comprehensive safety regulations. I'm too young to have seen it first time round, but I was watching a video of one of the rallys earlier this year, looks absolutely phenomenal.

[QUOTE=bk4uyeah]I am niether a huge fan nor expert of V8 Supercars, However I know you are both. How do you feel about this? are they welcomed changes, or are they ruining the sport?[/QUOTE]


In 2002 a new scheme for the V8 Supercars called "Project Blueprint" was introduced to try and level out the mechanics of both the Ford V8 Supercars and Holden V8 Supercars, which was inplemented for the 2003 season. So far that hasnt come under fire, but perhaps only because in 2003 was a model change as well so whilst the Holden teams were getting used to a double wishbone front end instead of the struts that got replaced, they were also trying to find speed from a new chassis. In the midst of all the confusion of new models and Project Blueprint though, the sports biggest team, HRT (Holden Racing Team), has had to step over to SBR (Stone Brothers Racing) as the dominant team and in a year where HRT's lead driver, Mark Skaife was dealing with more and more trouble, SBR's lead driver, Marcos Ambrose, delivered Fords first championship win in 6 years. SBR ended up winning 8 of 13 rounds (6 of those went to Marcos Ambrose) from a total of 9 round wins to Ford.

From that, something small like Project Blueprint has made the racing very interesting indeed, and kept the teams on their toes during the development stages. What CAMS are proposing now could very well give us a different race winner everytime the cars are on the grid, but unfortunately thats going to put more attention onto the pitstops and qualifying then the actual racing itself. V8 Supercars is already far from production racing and using several control formula's, so an across the board formula shouldnt really change much. Teams will always have an edge over someone else in particular areas

BAH the first step to becomming NASCAR! i dont like it...i dont like it at all....

well thats one way to look at it i suppose. they need to make it so that its an even mechanical field without making everyone drive the same stuff, like let the holden teams do things their way and the ford teams do things their way, and at the end of the day have 2 cars from each side that still perform pretty much the same as each other

No motorsport code stays the same for ever. Even NASCAR has undergoing numerous changes over the years, and its probably one of the most stable forms of motorsport in terms of its rules and regulations.

V8 Supercar is currently at the point where many regard it as the best touring car series in the world. There are 32 cars within a second at the moment, and most of the drivers (given the right circumstances) are potential race/round winners. The DTM on the other hand has smaller fields, but arguable even better drivers. However, the DTM is in a building phase still. So, for now the V8 Supercar series is the best in my opinion.
However, costs in V8 Supercar are escalating rapidly. Both the Fords and Holdens are very even in terms of times and performance. So, in order to gain just a few hundreths of a second, both teams and the two manufacturers are spending big dollars. We already have Triple 888 and Prodrive with massive budgets, and HRT and SBT are up there as well.
I would suggest that V8 Supercar is at roughly the same point as the BTCC was in 1996/97. By that, I mean the BTCC for Super Touring was regarded as the world's best touring car series by the time of the 1996/97 season, following several years of growth. The entire field of 26 or so top flight cars and drivers was seperated by less than a second. The rules had resulted in pretty even performance between all the manufacturers and FWD, RWD and AWD configurations. Not much could be gained from horsepower increases. Gains in terms of hundredths of a second came from improvements to suspension and other uncontrolled components. These incremental gains in performance to gain a slight advantage cost millions of dollars. As costs escalated there were suggestions that these costs should be curbed. Several suggestions were proposed. All came too late. The manufacturers started to withdraw. The BTCC was in terminal decline by 2000. It took less than 3 year for the BTCC to go from world's best series to an ordinary home series.
The V8 Supercar series has undergone several sustained years of growth. The field has become more professional, and the times much closer. But, that can quickly come undone. Worst case scenario sees all but the 5 or 6 top teams (Triple 888, FPR, SBR, Perkins, HRT and maybe one two others) leave the series as escalating costs force them out. We'd see V8 Supercars return to the small grids and lack of interest of the '94-96 period in no time at all. I've no wish to see that happen. Costs need to be contained now, before the V8 Supercars follows the path of the BTCC to second rate series.
So, I agree with all the proposals to reduce costs. Sequential gearboxes may cause some to cringe, especially those who see skill in changing gear in an H-pattern box. However, the sequential is the standard type of gearbox in most motorsport series now. Only lower open-wheeler formulas, Porsches, NASCARs (which tend to sit in top gear all the time on the ovals anyway) and production cars still use H-pattern gearboxes. In each case, the H-pattern gearbox suits these formulas. But V8 Supercars is now one of the most professional series in the world, and should be running sequentials. Also, sequentials are much cheaper to maintain than H-pattern gearboxes. They last longer, and there is no risk of blowing up an engine through a missed downshift (though the rev-limiters on V8 Supercars prevent that anyway). Also, it will make it much easier for overseas drivers to adapt to the V8s without having to relearn an H-pattern as well as the cars and circuits. You may well ask why we should care if overseas drivers came to race V8 Supercars?
Simple - in the enduros if you want to see 32 top cars, teams need to look overseas. Simply put, there are not 64 top flight racing drivers in Australia who are able to win at V8 Supercar level. Once all the regular drivers have teamed up and top Konica and Aust Porsche, one or two young FFord drivers and top Aust internationals are put into co-driver seats, there are still quite a few seats left over. I'd rather see top internationals in those seats rather than reduce the number of potential race winners and put slower Aust drivers in them.
My main concern with the proposals for the V8 Supercar rule changes concerns the aero kits. Removing the front undertrays will return us to the parity wars of past. It will slow the cars down, but I can't see any cost benefits. The renewed parity lobbying would cost lots for example.
I'd rather they kept the current aero kits.
Also, Larry Perkins has raised the spectre of driver kits if the aero kits are reduced. He's right to be concerned. Anyone who remembers either the old Group C or Group A cars with minimal aero will remember how much those cars moved around, especially at Bathurst. Watch in tape of an 80s touring car race at Bathurst and you will be struck by how much the cars move around through the corners. The old Nissan Bluebird Turbos and 86/87 Skyline Turbos were particular evil looking handlers.
If the aero kits are removed from V8 Supercar they will look spectacular, particularly at Bathurst. They will move around A LOT. However, V8 Supercars are considerably more powerful than the 70s or 80s producton based touring cars, and have much more sosphicated suspensions. They are still relatively undertyred with only 17 inch rims. More power, better suspension, undertyred and no aero kit. There will be less drag in a straight line, so they will be faster down Conrod. A V8 Supercar with aero kits may be lethal in a straight line at Bathurst without downforce to keep it on the track. Something to consider with the new rules.
So, in conclusion, I support the changes. Cost must be contained, or we risk seeing V8 Supercars decline very quickly.