View Full Version : Weight rule
seppefan
29th March 2008, 06:54
New weight rule
Barnhart explained the new weight rules in effect for this season. Essentially the drivers will be divided into 5 groups, A thru E. Groups A, B and C will add weight to their cars. Group A (lightest drivers) will add the most weight, B the next most, and so forth. Group D will add or subtract no weight and Group E will remove weight from their cars. This will make all the cars with drivers almost the same weight and therefore make the weight differences almost negligible.
The drivers will be weighed just once before the season starts.
----------------------
A) Do we know if the drivers have been officially weighed yet before this race and what the results are vis a vis the five categories ?
B) Seems that the one weigh rule is leaving the rule open fun and games. So two weeks before the weigh the driver eats like a pig, pops on two stone or whatever, gets into category E, then diets and hey presto a weight advantage.
What am I missing?
ChicagocrewIRL
29th March 2008, 08:15
I think this weight rule stinks.
It's penalizing an athlete for being in good shape. Varying body types suit different types of sports. Basketball players are tall, jockey's are small and light.
Race car drivers shouldn't be penalized for weighing less and being in good shape. Race car cockpits weren't intended for linebacker, basketball player, or wrestler physiques. Nor are they suited to fat out of shape people either, oh except for NASCAR.
Don't penalize Danica or anyone else for being small and light. She has her own disadvantages on courses where physical strength plays a role although power assist steering may alleviate some of that this year.
Dr. Krogshöj
29th March 2008, 10:25
I think this weight rule is too complicated.
I'd just say that a car with the driver should weith at least X pounds at any time during the race (measurement would take place with no fuel in the tank). So it would be up to the team to adjust the amount of balance to each driver. Small driver, more ballast, big driver, less ballast but the overall weight of the car with the driver in it would be the same for everybody regardless body weight or physical shape.
Haddock
29th March 2008, 10:50
I think this weight rule stinks.
It's penalizing an athlete for being in good shape. Varying body types suit different types of sports. Basketball players are tall, jockey's are small and light.
Race car drivers shouldn't be penalized for weighing less and being in good shape. Race car cockpits weren't intended for linebacker, basketball player, or wrestler physiques. Nor are they suited to fat out of shape people either, oh except for NASCAR.
Don't penalize Danica or anyone else for being small and light. She has her own disadvantages on courses where physical strength plays a role although power assist steering may alleviate some of that this year.
Not convinced. Apart from anything else, in Indycar, the heavy drivers tend not to be fat, but tall. Justin Wilson is one of the heaviest of all, but he doesn't look like a man in need of a diet.
Most forms of motorsport now include the weight of the driver within the weight limit. And on ovals especially, it is the only way to give drivers over 5 foot 8 a chance.
Lousada
29th March 2008, 11:30
A) Do we know if the drivers have been officially weighed yet before this race and what the results are vis a vis the five categories ?
B) Seems that the one weigh rule is leaving the rule open fun and games. So two weeks before the weigh the driver eats like a pig, pops on two stone or whatever, gets into category E, then diets and hey presto a weight advantage.
What am I missing?
Let's say for example a car in category D weighs 1300, and a driver 150. In Category E it is 1250 and 200. The combined weight for everyone is therefore 1450. So we have a D driver that eats himself to E. His car is now allowed to weigh 1250. Than he takes a diet before the season to fall back in D. Now he weighs 150 and the car 1250. After the first race they weigh the car + driver and it's 1400 combined, instead of the 1450 they assigned. Therefore he is underweight and cheated.
Chris R
29th March 2008, 12:03
Why did they make this so complicated? just set a minimum weight with driver and that's it not A, B or C. Weigh the combo for each race and have the teams adjust accordingly.....
Alexamateo
29th March 2008, 13:29
I think this weight rule stinks.
It's penalizing an athlete for being in good shape. Varying body types suit different types of sports. Basketball players are tall, jockey's are small and light.
Race car drivers shouldn't be penalized for weighing less and being in good shape. Race car cockpits weren't intended for linebacker, basketball player, or wrestler physiques. Nor are they suited to fat out of shape people either, oh except for NASCAR.
Don't penalize Danica or anyone else for being small and light. She has her own disadvantages on courses where physical strength plays a role although power assist steering may alleviate some of that this year.
I disagree completely. What you are saying is that the driver is nothing more than a horse jockey. You want to penalize talented drivers like Justin Wilson and Graham Rahal for being tall.
If it were up to me, I'd make the cockpit rules for the next generation car have space to accomodate drivers up to 6' 4" and a rule for driver weight plus ballast = 250 lbs. A smaller driver would still have the advantage of being able to place ballast as low as possible, but maybe even a guy like Boris Said could come in compete. I think the trend of having drivers become more like horse jockies hurts the sport as talented drivers who just happen to be bigger move on to other disciplines such as Nascar.
DBell
29th March 2008, 13:45
I disagree completely. What you are saying is that the driver is nothing more than a horse jockey. You want to penalize talented drivers like Justin Wilson and Graham Rahal for being tall.
If it were up to me, I'd make the cockpit rules for the next generation car have space to accomodate drivers up to 6' 4" and a rule for driver weight plus ballast = 250 lbs. A smaller driver would still have the advantage of being able to place ballast as low as possible, but maybe even a guy like Boris Said could come in compete. I think the trend of having drivers become more like horse jockies hurts the sport as talented drivers who just happen to be bigger move on to other disciplines such as Nascar.
Agree completely. It makes too much sense, so it probably won't happen.
Rogelio
29th March 2008, 13:57
I disagree completely. What you are saying is that the driver is nothing more than a horse jockey. You want to penalize talented drivers like Justin Wilson and Graham Rahal for being tall.
If it were up to me, I'd make the cockpit rules for the next generation car have space to accomodate drivers up to 6' 4" and a rule for driver weight plus ballast = 250 lbs. A smaller driver would still have the advantage of being able to place ballast as low as possible, but maybe even a guy like Boris Said could come in compete. I think the trend of having drivers become more like horse jockies hurts the sport as talented drivers who just happen to be bigger move on to other disciplines such as Nascar.
I gotta concur with you. We need to attract talent not discourage talent because of their size. I could be wrong, but do recall Tommy Kendal wanting to race in CART, but his size made it difficult at the time. Aslo, size does not equate strength, however weight does equate an advantage, which can be unfair. Sorry, Danica but I disagree with you. We need to level the playing field when it comes to weight.
harvick#1
29th March 2008, 14:44
I think this weight rule stinks.
It's penalizing an athlete for being in good shape. Varying body types suit different types of sports. Basketball players are tall, jockey's are small and light.
Race car drivers shouldn't be penalized for weighing less and being in good shape. Race car cockpits weren't intended for linebacker, basketball player, or wrestler physiques. Nor are they suited to fat out of shape people either, oh except for NASCAR.
Don't penalize Danica or anyone else for being small and light. She has her own disadvantages on courses where physical strength plays a role although power assist steering may alleviate some of that this year.
The wieght rule has to be in affect to equalize the cars.
you just said its a disadvantage to Danica yet why does she get steering and assist
WTF is that, you let her get power steering while everyone has to earn their win doing it without it. thats more unfair than anything else, maybe she needs to quit being a ***** and just drive the car, or go become a model, either way, she ain't neither
seppefan
29th March 2008, 15:27
Let's say for example a car in category D weighs 1300, and a driver 150. In Category E it is 1250 and 200. The combined weight for everyone is therefore 1450. So we have a D driver that eats himself to E. His car is now allowed to weigh 1250. Than he takes a diet before the season to fall back in D. Now he weighs 150 and the car 1250. After the first race they weigh the car + driver and it's 1400 combined, instead of the 1450 they assigned. Therefore he is underweight and cheated.
Thanks
seppefan
29th March 2008, 15:29
I disagree completely. What you are saying is that the driver is nothing more than a horse jockey. You want to penalize talented drivers like Justin Wilson and Graham Rahal for being tall.
If it were up to me, I'd make the cockpit rules for the next generation car have space to accomodate drivers up to 6' 4" and a rule for driver weight plus ballast = 250 lbs. A smaller driver would still have the advantage of being able to place ballast as low as possible, but maybe even a guy like Boris Said could come in compete. I think the trend of having drivers become more like horse jockies hurts the sport as talented drivers who just happen to be bigger move on to other disciplines such as Nascar.
Totally agree. A single make formula, chassis, engine, tyres and then they allow a weight differential which allows the lighter to have an advantage which has nothing to do with talent. Makes a mockery of the other factors mentioned.
Hoop-98
29th March 2008, 15:49
Not sure why they don't want to tech with drivers, but it sounds like it's 95 per cent equal, on high speed ovals the weight is much less important than on a road course.
Of course weight and center of gravity are important, but we tend to exaggerate the effects in discussion, note I DID NOT SAY IT DOESN'T MATTER, see chart below. You don't see cars picking up a tenth after every lap.
As far as the power steering goes, that was always an open area of the rules, anyone could try it.
Now they all have the same steering I believe.
The smaller driivers will be at an advantage even with a weight rule, as they can put the ballast where they want it.
Last year Wilson and Tracy couldn't make minimum weight until they removed the starters, and they still had a higher CG than the lighter drivers.
I would like to see more room for taller drivers, myself.
FYI:
http://i26.tinypic.com/2hoeg7d.jpg
rh
BobbyC
29th March 2008, 16:37
Danica will still get an advantage. Even if she's a class-A driver on weight, she will be the lightest of the lights, and the weight classification will be based on the heaviest of the "class A" drivers -- probably a 30-pound weight break is still there.
They want to let tall drivers to stay in the sport. NASCAR is full of 6-footers in the sport. Michael Waltrip, at 6'5", is up in Tom Kendall's range.
Marbles
29th March 2008, 17:31
How anyone can see something wrong, or more to the point here, unjust about this rule is beyond me. This rule is designed to "include" not "exclude" based on ones physical build, not conditioning.
I was kind of shocked at how Patrick seemed to be miffed about this rule? I thought she would have had more of a "bring it on, I don't need no stinkin' weight advantage" attitude about it then the poor girl who was being penalized because of her "God-given" stature. She also claimed that she couldn't get a straight answer out of the Barnhart gang as to why it was being introduced. This claim striking me as absolutely absurd; as much the asking part as the answer part!
BobbyC
29th March 2008, 17:39
The weight rule could be an advantage to Danica; the boys at AGR might just make heavier front wings, and have more balance in the weight at places that matter. Weight not in the driver could be put in places for downforce, stability, or other crucial areas of ballast that affects handling. Another place for engineers to play the handling game is here.
Hoop-98
29th March 2008, 18:35
The weight rule could be an advantage to Danica; the boys at AGR might just make heavier front wings, and have more balance in the weight at places that matter. Weight not in the driver could be put in places for downforce, stability, or other crucial areas of ballast that affects handling. Another place for engineers to play the handling game is here.
Kind of like the advantage Sebastian had over Justin and Paul, funny not much compaining about that one.....
rh
Marbles
29th March 2008, 18:39
The weight rule could be an advantage to Danica; the boys at AGR might just make heavier front wings, and have more balance in the weight at places that matter. Weight not in the driver could be put in places for downforce, stability, or other crucial areas of ballast that affects handling. Another place for engineers to play the handling game is here.
So the weight isn't being applied in the form of ballast near (I was originally going to say in... oops) the driver's arse (centre of the car)?
Hoop-98
29th March 2008, 19:31
You would put it in the center of mass as low as possible, never at the end. You want to add weight low and centered, it would increase the polar moment out there.
rh
Marbles
29th March 2008, 19:52
You would put it in the center of mass as low as possible, never at the end. You want to add weight low and centered, it would increase the polar moment out there.
rh
Ah... Bach!
I was confused by your reference to Bourdais but I think I get your point now.
Hoop-98
29th March 2008, 20:05
With the driver and car on the scales for overall weight you can lift the rear of the car and scales ( 10 inch pedestal) and reweigh. Using a formula you can then calculate the Vertical Height of the CG. The lower the CGh the less weight will move forward.
If you equalized the weight and CGh you would be much more fair than just equalizing the weight. This was my suggestion years ago.
The DP01 couldn't meet min weight with the heavier drivers most of the season so Justin and Paul gave up weight and CGh to lighter drivers like Bourdais. And of course KL had better "mass centralization", but that's a different topic :)
rh
nigelred5
30th March 2008, 03:15
How anyone can see something wrong, or more to the point here, unjust about this rule is beyond me. This rule is designed to "include" not "exclude" based on ones physical build, not conditioning.
I was kind of shocked at how Patrick seemed to be miffed about this rule? I thought she would have had more of a "bring it on, I don't need no stinkin' weight advantage" attitude about it then the poor girl who was being penalized because of her "God-given" stature. She also claimed that she couldn't get a straight answer out of the Barnhart gang as to why it was being introduced. This claim striking me as absolutely absurd; as much the asking part as the answer part!
Her reaction is all the proof anyone needs that her weight delta on the rest of the field is a marked advantage, however I don't understand why the solution has to be so complicated.
F1 weighs every driver as they get out of their cars then adds that weight to the car weight to calculate the minimum, so teams even have to factor in driver dehydration into the minimum weight.
Jag_Warrior
30th March 2008, 04:55
Get Gloria Allred involved. She'll have this sorted out in no time.
Hoop-98
30th March 2008, 05:06
Maybe Gloria's new best seller will be "Fight Back and Finish 6th"?
:)
Easy Drifter
30th March 2008, 20:47
Being an airhead as well as apparently deficient in other areas at least Danica's weight is low down.
Jag_Warrior
30th March 2008, 22:21
And of course KL had better "mass centralization", but that's a different topic :)
rh
:p
DanicaFan
31st March 2008, 06:47
Danica proved that her weight doesnt matter at Homestead. She ran a good race and look at how good she qualified. The weight rule will not hurt her.
cartpix
31st March 2008, 18:22
How anyone can see something wrong, or more to the point here, unjust about this rule is beyond me. This rule is designed to "include" not "exclude" based on ones physical build, not conditioning.
I was kind of shocked at how Patrick seemed to be miffed about this rule? I thought she would have had more of a "bring it on, I don't need no stinkin' weight advantage" attitude about it then the poor girl who was being penalized because of her "God-given" stature. She also claimed that she couldn't get a straight answer out of the Barnhart gang as to why it was being introduced. This claim striking me as absolutely absurd; as much the asking part as the answer part!
Am I the only one that finds it strange that Danica wants equality, i.e. the ability to "race with the boys". Then when the seriesa wants to make the field "equal", she cries foul. She wants to be equal but she doesn't want to be equal. Odd...
Jeff
nigelred5
31st March 2008, 18:37
I would expect it to be more apparent on the street and road courses, as well as the smaller ovals where the weight advantage would be more apparent. We do have to remember she still enjoys being in an AGR ride.
anthonyvop
31st March 2008, 22:55
Just window treatment for a serious rules issue.
Every Major Racing series includes the driver in the total weights.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.