MikeR
|
| posted on 11/3/10 at 02:26 PM |
|
|
I think my point was i'm starting to see why the decision was made - two lightweight cars went by comparison VERY quickly in the wet when other
cars where sliding off.
Luckily the lightweight cars had very capable drivers - if in another year they have muppets (me) driving then the risk of a serious accident is
hughly inflated. This is something the organisers want to avoid. The knee jerk reaction was to ban the cars lightweight cars (ie BECS).
I suggested that the rules should have been changed to mean you have to average you laps over the hour & the amuont of laps should be adjusted to
take into account conditions. This would then have been a proper endurance test - having to consistantly drive your car at a consistent high ish
speed whilst tracking laps and conditions & adjusting as necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 11/3/10 at 04:17 PM |
|
|
Spot on Mike, we did ask the question before the start as it really was monsoon conditions early doors and was given politely I must add the reply,
"its the same weather for everyone" so we went out in the same weather for everyone and did the required 40 per hour consistently for 3
hours, and yes we must have looked fast compared to some of the others as I recall two occasions of passing the same car twice in a 10 lap stint but
what to do ? I cant help it if the guy cant get 6000cc or whatever of power down in the wet or doesn't realise the "racing line" is
not the place to be round Gerrard's the longest corner on a UK circuit in the wet ? This corner is about a 1/4 of the lap, 15-20mph quicker
round there your gonna lap pretty quickly compared to others ? Doesn't realise there's no grip on the recognised racing line breaking into
the hairpin ? I would have used my head and followed me, its what I always used to do in qualifying wait for the guy on the pace, follow and learn
where he is getting the pace/time from, in this case not a race as we all well know but it was the 40 lap/hr required pace and where to find it or
maybe more to the point where to find the grip at Mallory in the wet.
It was an endurance event after all that required 40 laps per hour or face penalties, honestly we only just scraped in the required laps within the
hour with little or no time to spare, remember two car and four driver changes within that hour to.
Madness, we left the circuit with not one blade of grass on the car, never even looked like leaving the circuit.
As previously posted had it not rained we would not be having this conversation.
|
|
|
bitsilly
|
| posted on 13/3/10 at 07:02 PM |
|
|
Does the team have two cars on at once, or is it one car, then the other?
And can the cars be completly different?
Would you recommend it?
ps I have a BEC but may be able to borrow a k-series midget, and convince someone else to come along.
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 14/3/10 at 08:51 PM |
|
|
1 car out at anyone time, all 4 drivers must drive at least once per hour with both cars out at least twice per hour, cant remember minimum laps per
driver per hour but there was one.
Would I recommend it, 100% yes that's why I'm so disappointed not to be able to enter.
Yes some teams last time consisted of two completely different cars.
|
|
|
bitsilly
|
| posted on 15/3/10 at 09:02 AM |
|
|
Cheers Jon,
just hope I can sort something now.
|
|
|
bitsilly
|
| posted on 18/3/10 at 05:16 PM |
|
|
It seems that the scrutineer will be checking to see how my roll over bars on the cobra are mounted. That is not a problem as I triangulated them etc
to take the belt mounts, however they are made of shiney stainless so would never work in the event of a roll, and my impression is that the
scrutineer wants them to.
I won't risk the whole thing on that so the Cob is out.
ps There are other cars on the 'teams so far' site, and they have even less effective bling bars. The 1.8 westfield in particular. I drove
a westfield with a bar like that through a hedge and it folded. I guess they could be at risk?
|
|
|
Peter Davis
|
| posted on 20/3/10 at 11:04 AM |
|
|
Bike engined cars speed differential
Hi, it's 20th March, and I've been directed to this forum to read your comments regarding bike engined cars (note cars, not three
wheelers) being banned from the Guild of Motor Endurance Six Hour 2010, 21st May, due to their observed speed differential with car engined
sportscars.
You’ll have to excuse me if I don't respond to comments made individually. What does come across within your discussions was the enthusiasm for
the 2008 Six Hour. Hence the reaction of bike engined car owners to not being able to enter the 2010 event.
For a moment put yourself in the seat of a slower car. Why you are travelling slower isn’t relevant. You are approaching a corner and looking in your
mirrors. The track behind you is empty. Before the tyres of your car have started to distort in the corner, another car is passing you at undiminished
speed. A bike engined car. Regardless of whether it’s a bec’s power to weight ratio, it’s handling, the drivers ability and confidence, their closing
speed is blindingly fast. These cars are able to close in, allow sufficient room, and are gone in seconds.
The Six Hour not being a motor sporting competition but an endurance test. And being open to drivers without a racing licence. And a good majority of
those taking part having never experienced a race circuit before. For this reason, following the 2008 Six Hour the decision was taken to remove bike
engined cars for safety reasons. I should add, the driving standards of bec drivers was never an issue.
Firstly, and this is a genuine question. Am I correct in thinking bike engined kit cars have their own races, separate from car engined kit cars? If
so, why did the organisers of these races take this decision?
Secondly, in some racing formula, where cars of differing performance compete together, some cars are handicapped. Whether this is in the form of
added ballast, restrictions on electronic management, or restriction of inlet orifice etc. The differential is balanced out so all can take part as
equally as the organisers can make it.
And yes, we are talking about the difference between BEC’s, and all other car engined cars. Never mind whether it’s a 39bhp Reliant engined Liege or a
5000cc V8 Lola T70 replica. No other cars have the bec’s intensity to get up to speed.
Despite our numerous discussions on how to balance the differential, and dare I say it, slow down the bike engined car’s acceleration, to-date we have
not come up with an answer. Do you have the answer?
Peter Davis
Guild of Motor Endurance
[Edited on 20/3/10 by Peter Davis]
[Edited on 20/3/10 by Peter Davis]
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 20/3/10 at 11:58 AM |
|
|
Peter - is this only an issue in the wet or was this an issue all day long?
From reading the comments made prior to yours, i'd taken it the issue was exaggerated in the wet.
|
|
|
adithorp
|
| posted on 20/3/10 at 03:14 PM |
|
|
Peter, I'm confused. Were the cars in question doing the speed specified by the organisers? Or were they going faster than the event
required?
If they were doing the speed specified then it's the organisation thats at fault and the organisers who are responsible for the danger they
created by setting the speed that high. Not making any plans lower speeds in adverse conditions is also the fault (and short sightedness) of the
organisers not of the drivers.
adrian
"A witty saying proves nothing" Voltaire
http://jpsc.org.uk/forum/
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 21/3/10 at 06:31 PM |
|
|
Nice to see you here Peter, welcome, I trust you note my comments to "100% recommend" the event even though my car is not welcome.
However, reading your post above I have to take issue, you mention.....
"For a moment put yourself in the seat of a slower car. Why you are travelling slower isn’t relevant. You are approaching a corner and looking
in your mirrors. The track behind you is empty. Before the tyres of your car have started to distort in the corner, another car is passing you at
undiminished speed. A bike engined car. Regardless of whether it’s a bec’s power to weight ratio, it’s handling, the drivers ability and confidence,
their closing speed is blindingly fast. These cars are able to close in, allow sufficient room, and are gone in seconds."
You then go onto write........
"Despite our numerous discussions on how to balance the differential, and dare I say it, slow down the bike engined car’s acceleration, to-date
we have not come up with an answer. Do you have the answer?"
Now then, you don't accelerate until you exit the corner, the corners tend to come after a period straight stuff by which time any
"quicker acceleration" advantage of the BEC is lost, for example if we was to park up at the Mallory hairpin my BEC, Hicost and the Lola,
I would be 3rd into Gerrards, probably 1st around the devils elbow but definitely 3rd into Gerrards, I will have run out of rice to burn. My only
speed advantage would be out of corners not the 1/2 mile approach to them.
Want a MSA sanctioned series that as BECs running with salons ? Click
here
If the winning team completed the laps credited then they must have been going the same pace as us during the morning which was just and only just
enough to cover 40/hour, no more no less, we went on in the afternoon to do consistent 60 second/1 minute laps which is exactly what most others seem
to be claiming, they are either exaggerating the claim or where circulating at exactly the same pace as now banned cars, ours can be clearly seen on
DVD, genuine 1 minute, no more no less, that's not to quick a pace over the hour to allow 4 driver and car changes, it leaves 4-5 minutes spare
if all goes to plan during changes.
Of course a speed differential was evident between the quicker and slower cars, guess what you will see the same difference this year, there are cars
on the entry list that lapped exactly the same pace as us after all ?
To put myself back behind the wheel of the slower car you mention and to assume the only car to pass me would be a BEC is ludicrous beyond belief.
I close with one final question.
Did the winning team cover the laps credited ?
If Yes, why are they not banned ?
I ask because for the 1st three hours we only just scraped in the required laps with absolutely zero time to spare, never once did we have time to
complete one further lap in the allotted hour yet we appear 6th in the list of total laps covered and two teams received no penalties all day so they
must have lapped the same pace in the morning and the team that did 11 more laps than us, what pace where they running at ?
|
|
|
Steve Hignett
|
| posted on 21/3/10 at 06:58 PM |
|
|
I don't have two mins to myself at the moment, so would just like to thank Jon for taking the time to put across "our" point. And in
such a respectful/well phrased manner...
Cheers Jon and welcome Peter.
Steve
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 21/3/10 at 08:48 PM |
|
|
I must admit to being surprised at the BEC issue for this event. I have done a large number of trackdays with BEC cars in attendance and have never
felt a significant difference in performance between my 2.0lt Zetec Phoenix and a similar road registered BEC. The only time I've been
impressed by a BEC was a race prepared Westfield Megabusa running on slicks which was a good 2 secs a lap faster at Lydden.
Adrian and I had a pretty fast session around Llandow last year with his R1 engined Fury verses my Zetec engined Phoenix. There was very little to
choose between them, the Fury seemed better under braking down to the bus stop (gearbox making a difference I think) and the Phoenix seemed to have
the edge coming out onto the straights.
I am entered in the 6hr this year and I would have no issue with BECs being on track at the same time....
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 21/3/10 at 08:52 PM |
|
|
Hi Peter and welcome to the forum.
I'm afraid that we seem to have given you a very misleading picture of bike engined cars.
The 750 Motor Club do indeed separate bike engined and car engined kit cars, but the reason for this is not speed differential. In fact, allowing for
similar technology and development, the lap times are actually very similar for the two classes. Admittedly the fastest bike engined cars are now
significantly faster than their car engined counterparts but this is because the fastest bike engined cars are highly focussed prototype-style racing
cars and because the car-engined class is dying and people have stopped introducing cutting-edge (in ‘clubbie’ terms) machinery.
The bike engined cars at Mallory 2008 were certainly not high-level race cars! They were kit cars, made from bits of old Fords and built by guys in
sheds and single garages. I've a reasonable amount of track experience, mostly gained post-Mallory as it happens. I have spent many an hour
contemplating what changes need to be made to my kit-car to get the base-line handling characteristics to the same level as a standard Caterham or
Lotus. A lightweight engine and gearbox is not enough on its own to guarantee a vehicle will perform well.
In addition, as Jon points out, there are numerous series that allow bike power and car power to compete at the same time. More than this, there are
several series that I can think of where car power has a far superior record to the bike powered cars. See Formula 4 or Welsh Saloons and Sports for
example.
Honestly Peter, the presumption that there is an enormous speed differential between bike engined and car engined cars is a fallacy. More than this,
the 2009 Birkett relay showed that lightweight bike engined cars on road-legal trackday biased tyres are at a huge disadvantage in wet weather. The
issue is not the technology.
There is no doubt that GOME are already being brave. By putting a Gardner Douglas T70 or Lotus Exige on the same track as a 3-wheeled Buckland or
special built with the primary purpose of driving up a grassy hill, you are already creating an event with potentially huge speed differentials.
Where does this take my thought process?
Well, either:
- The data that you are basing your decision on is not valid, in that you are not accounting for the third variable and you are either yet to be
convinced or you are reluctant to admit the mistake having made policy decisions.
- The problem is the third variable, for example driver experience, ability or attitude, and for whatever reason you are not prepared to give the
real reason.
- There's another reason altogether for the decision and you now find yourself defending the indefensible rather than articulating the real
reason.
I honestly can't tell you what the answer is. What I am certain of is that the explanation that you give is critically flawed.
I should state that I really do not have an ulterior motive. I do not have a suitable hand-built vehicle of any denomination to use in the event this
year and therefore have no intention of joining in the fun.
What concerns me is that our team may have acted in an unknowingly undesirable way and others are now having to suffer exclusion as a result. Either
way, the current situation is most unsatisfactory.
TC
|
|
|
adithorp
|
| posted on 22/3/10 at 08:31 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by jeffw
Adrian and I had a pretty fast session around Llandow last year with his R1 engined Fury verses my Zetec engined Phoenix. There was very little to
choose between them, the Fury seemed better under braking down to the bus stop (gearbox making a difference I think) and the Phoenix seemed to have
the edge coming out onto the straights.
OFF TOPIC...
I demand a re-match!... 15th May?... with no jumping the start this time 
adrian
"A witty saying proves nothing" Voltaire
http://jpsc.org.uk/forum/
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 10/4/10 at 09:00 PM |
|
|
Back on topic,
Would I be correct if I guessed the reason both team cars now have to cover the whole 240 laps, (480 per team) is due to lack of cars on circuit if it
was only one per team at any one time ?
Guess best part of a dozen cars on circuit at any one time would have looked a little thin ?
I still note a distinct silence to regarding my previous post, I would particularly like the following cleared up and put to bed, copied below.
I close with one final question.
Did the winning team cover the laps credited ?
If Yes, why are they not banned ?
I ask because for the 1st three hours we only just scraped in the required laps with absolutely zero time to spare, never once did we have time to
complete one further lap in the allotted hour yet we appear 6th in the list of total laps covered and two teams received no penalties all day so they
must have lapped the same pace in the morning and the team that did 11 more laps than us, what pace where they running at ?
|
|
|
Peter Davis
|
| posted on 11/4/10 at 01:01 PM |
|
|
yes, 480 laps per team
quote:
Originally posted by Jon Ison
Would I be correct if I guessed the reason both team cars now have to cover the whole 240 laps, (480 per team) is due to lack of cars on circuit
Hi Jon, and thanks for the welcomes all.
Yes Jon, we only have the same number of cars entered for the Six Hour 2010 that ran in the Six Hour 1998. So all cars will be on the circuit at the
same time. As you say each team having to complete 480 laps.
Busy at the moment I'm afraid but will look into your other question when I can.
Resolving this: I have nothing against BEC's, they're amazing feats of automotive engineering. In my last post I asked the question: is
there was any way the bec’s could be tamed so they could take part (maybe in the future). If you will just accept that they are phenomenally quick
compared to cec's then maybe we could forward.
I compete in enduros with an old Honda XR400. When I bought it new the Honda instructions tell you to remove the ‘emission’ rev restricting small
diameter inlet manifold, and replace it with the big bore one that they supply for competition. Also change the main jet for one much bigger. And open
up the restricted airbox opening to let it breath. Can anyone come up with a way of restricting the rpm of these bike engined cars so they can compete
on a level playing field with the car engined cars?
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 11/4/10 at 01:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peter Davis Can anyone come up with a way of restricting the rpm of these bike engined cars so they can compete on
a level playing field with the car engined cars?
Yes, place a passenger in the passenger seat.
Peter, according to the official results from 2008 plenty of cars did more laps than any of the BECS present, 2 teams received no penalties so must
have lapped quicker than anyone else and dont forget the team that covered 11 laps more than us, it dont hold water I'm afraid if you will
pardon the pun.
I fully accept there was a visible speed differential between the variety of cars entered, I trust you will fully accept the same speed differential
will be evident next month looking at the variety of cars entered?
You know there is much more of a "noise" speed differential than actual one, a car buzzing down the straight with an engine spinning at
11k revs is always going to "sound" faster than one thumping down at 5k revs.
I have to thank you for one thing though, when the entry dropped thought the door I was straight into garage to finish off the engine transplant I
started over 14 months ago, just the kick up the backside I needed, thank you.
|
|
|
PAUL FISHER
|
| posted on 11/4/10 at 01:53 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peter Davis
Resolving this: I have nothing against BEC's, they're amazing feats of automotive engineering. In my last post I asked the question: is
there was any way the bec’s could be tamed so they could take part (maybe in the future). If you will just accept that they are phenomenally quick
compared to cec's then maybe we could forward.
You must think your just banging your head against a wall Jon,when after all whats been explained to Peter in this thread,he comes out with the above
statement
For someone who so involved in cars,and car enthusiast it beggars believe.
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 11/4/10 at 02:04 PM |
|
|
Its just a real shame, weather aside we had a great day, I got to drive competitively (ish) alongside my son, we had two great team mates, team
managers running round in circles, make shift pit boards etc..... all four drivers had loads of family there it was just a great fun day, we where all
genuinely looking forward to taking part in 2010
We genuinely as the results show where no quicker then the quick cars there, yes we was quicker than some but so where all the other quick cars, think
we may have shone a bit during the wet but in the afternoon we where circulating at the same pace as everyone else seems to be claiming, then again
according to the results we where pretty slow in the wet ?
The cars ready btw.
|
|
|
Dangle_kt
|
| posted on 11/4/10 at 07:52 PM |
|
|
Oh well!
Seems there will b e no last minute repreive.
That said at least you were good enough to provide an explanation.
I don't agree with what you have said, but it is your event, you're the boss and you didn't need to answer our quesions.
Hopefuly you have seen from our posts that this does matter to us, and a possible change to the rules next year would be welcomed by all.
|
|
|
