Re: Bathurst 2010

Postby Spyder on Thu 14/Oct/10 12:04pm

mudguard wrote:I'll say this really slowly this time.
I know the rules are for parity. It's what makes it exciting. It is why they got rid of Group A.
Drag motors are low tech.
Can you explain what is advanced about a push rod, cast iron block with two valves?
130bhp per lite? My 16 year old motor pushes out 110bhp per litre and it's done 200,000 km's!


Yes, but I'm betting you don't have 5 litres to play with. It's the 650hp (or whatever) that makes the racing exciting. How it is produced is somewhat irrelevant. Hence my comment earlier about the Suzukis (yes it was me). Parity, twin-cam efi goodiness, just not powerful enough to make for an exciting spectator sport - likely to be quite different as a driver though.
Spyder
User avatar
"A little inaccuracy sometimes saves a ton of explanation."
Member for: 10 years 11 months

Re: Bathurst 2010

Postby mudguard on Thu 14/Oct/10 12:26pm

Spyder wrote:Yes, but I'm betting you don't have 5 litres to play with. It's the 650hp (or whatever) that makes the racing exciting.


I'm not debating whether it's exciting, I'm debating the fact that surfbum suggests the motor's are high tech.

I love the supercars. But I struggle to see how anyone can suggest the engines are high tech.
The GT3's only lap 2 seconds slower with much less capacity.
And supercars lap around 6 seconds quicker than the GTR's, which doesn't seem like much in 19 years, though I don't whether the track is too different from then.
mudguard
User avatar
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Bathurst 2010

Postby surfbum on Thu 14/Oct/10 1:40pm

actually my last statement didn't come accross well so sorry about that.Alot of designs have been around for along time and didn't work that well first time around are now working well with the help of modern materials and computors.
surfbum
Member for: 13 years 0 months

Re: Bathurst 2010

Postby Conners on Thu 14/Oct/10 2:00pm

mudguard wrote:And supercars lap around 6 seconds quicker than the GTR's, which doesn't seem like much in 19 years, though I don't whether the track is too different from then.

The Chase was built in 1987, so it's essentially the same track - execpt for resurfacing etc (which isn't going to be worth multiple seconds)
Conners
User avatar
"Seeing Double"
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Bathurst 2010

Postby mudguard on Thu 14/Oct/10 2:05pm

I couldn't remember any mods since I've been watching. Still I think it would be cool if they let other manufactures use their bodywork, even if it's just simply for variety.
mudguard
User avatar
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Bathurst 2010

Postby Conners on Thu 14/Oct/10 2:18pm

You've just got me thinking....
The Chase was built following the tragic death of Mike Burgmann in the 1986 event, he hit the Bridgestone Bridge. I think Conrod also exceeded a regulation of being more than 2km long?

Anyway, what I'm getting to is; what would've happened to Fabian Coultard on Sunday if the chase hadn't been there? I guess to be honest he would've been better off, as his left rear wouldn't have been loaded up the same, and he wouldn't have turned right again until the top of Mountain Strait. Which would be pretty gnarly too...

But heading towards Murray's at 300 odd kph? Sheesh... :crazy:
Conners
User avatar
"Seeing Double"
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Motoring | Motorsport | Sifting - Latest Posts

Who is online

59 Users browsing this website: arch24, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], pushbikerider and 54 guests

REMEBER TO CLICK THE LINKS WHEN BUYING FROM VORB SUPPORTERS


  • ProBikeKit
  • Torpedo7
  • Vorb Shop
  • Wiggle
  • Chain Reaction Cycles
  • GT Bicycles
  • Merlin Cycles