Engine Equivalency - The Facts

[Jason Plato]

Ladies, Gentlemen, Boys and Girls

There is a tremendous amount of nonsense being talked about on various forums regarding the equivalency of the Turbo and Non-Turbo cars.

For the record here are some facts:

• S2000 chassis with Turbo engines are running the same base weight as Non Turbo cars.

• At Brands Hatch: Qualifying
Best Non-Turbo car was 0.373 secs off pole time. Qualifying P3
The pole time in 2011 is 0.437 secs faster than the Pole time from 2010
Jordan is 0.706 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 with same weight
Matt Neal is 0.570 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 but is carrying 36kgs more ballast in 2010

• At Donington: Qualifying
Best Non-Turbo car was 1.233 secs off pole time. Qualifying P8
The pole time in 2011 is 1.2 secs faster than the Pole time of the AON LPG Turbo car from 2010!
Gordon Shedden is 1.276 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 with same success ballast
Matt Neal is 1.475 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 but is carrying 27kgs more ballast in 2011
Plato is 0.215 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 with same success ballast
Jordan is 1.161 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 despite carrying 36kgs more weight!
Chilton is 0.591 secs faster in 2011 than his 2010 Pole time in the AON LPG Turbo!
Nash is 1.821 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 despite carrying 27kgs more weight!

• At Thruxton:Qualifying
Best Non-Turbo car was 0.962 secs off pole time. Qualifying P5
2nd best Non-Turbo car was 1.636 secs off pole. Qulaifying P11
The pole time in 2011 is 0.981 secs faster than the 2009 pole time of Giovanardi (On pole by 0.320 secs)
The pole time in 2011 is 0.977 secs faster than the 2010 FP2 of Giovanardi (quickest by 0.273 secs, Q wet)
Shedden is 1.581 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 FP2 with same weight
Neal is 1.037 secs faster in 2011 than in 2010 FP2 despite carrying 36kgs more ballast in 2011
Neal is 1.088 secs faster in 2011 than 2009 despite carrying 36kgs more ballast in 2011
Boardman is 1.272 secs faster in 2011 than 2010 FP2 with same weight
Jackson did same time in 2011 and 2010 FP2, however 2010 P3, 2011 P8

• 2009 Brands Qual .............. 2010 Brands Qual ................ 2011 Brands Qual
1. 48.857 – Neal..................... 1. 48.647 – Plato ................. 1. 48.210 – Neal - Turbo
2. 48.877 – Giovanard............. 2. 48.780 – Neal .................. 2. 48.465 – Jordan - Turbo
3. 48.926 – Collard................. 3. 48.791 – Shedden ............ 3. 48.583 - Plato
4. 49.022 – Turkington............ 4. 48.830 – McDowell ........... 4. 48.623 - Nash - Turbo
5. 49.073 – Jordan ................. 5. 48.871 – Chilton - Turbo ... 5. 48.658 - McDowell
6. 49.121 – Adam ................... 6. 48.885 – Jackson ............. 6. 48.667 - Jackson - Turbo
7. 49.180 – Shedden ............... 7. 48.902 – Nash ................. 7. 48.668 - Chilton - Turbo
8. 49.514 – Jelley .................... 8. 48.947 – Tordoff .............. 8. 48.752 - Boardman - Turbo
9. 49.514 – Plato ..................... 9. 49.100 – O’Neill ................ 9. 48.849 – O’Neill
10. 49.611 – Jones ................. 10. 49.110 – Onslow-Cole .......10. 49.036 – Neate - Turbo

• 2010 Donington Qual ....................... 2011 Donington Qual
1. 11.328 – Chilton - Turbo ................... 1. 10.129 – Neal - Turbo
2. 11.409 – Onslow-Cole -Turbo ............ 2. 10.172 – Shedden - Turbo
3. 11.448 – Shedden ............................ 3. 10.477 – Nash - Turbo
4. 11.577 – Plato .................................. 4. 10.556 – Jordan - Turbo
5. 11.604 – Neal ................................... 5. 10.737 – Chilton - Turbo
6. 11.717 – Jordan ................................ 6. 11.074 – Smith - Turbo
7. 11.822 – O’Neill ................................. 7. 11.309 – Jackson - Turbo
8. 11.834 – Collard ................................ 8. 11.362 – Plato
9. 11.916 – Boardman ............................. 9. 11.425 – McDowell
10. 11.919 – McDowell ........................... 10. 11.440 – Collard

• 2009 Thruxton Qual ............ 2010 Thruxton FP2 .................... 2011 Thruxton Qual
1. 17.985 – Giovanardi ............. 1. 17.981 – Giovanardi .............. 1. 17.004 – Shedden - Turbo
2. 18.305 – Neal ...................... 2. 18.254 – Neal ....................... 2. 17.066 – Jordan - Turbo
3. 18.326 – Plato ..................... 3. 18.325 – Jackson .................. 3. 17.217 – Neal - Turbo
4. 18.354 – Jordan ................... 4. 18.534 – Jordan ................... 4. 17.759 – Chilton - Turbo
5. 18.407 – Turkington ............. 5. 18.542 – Chilton - Turbo ....... 5. 17.966 – Plato
6. 18.708 – O’Neill ................... 6. 18.585 – Shedden .................. 6. 18.122 – Onslow-Cole - Turbo
7. 18.830 – Jones .................... 7. 18.946 – Plato ....................... 7. 18.249 – Smith - Turbo
8. 18.916 – Thompson ............. 8. 19.077 – O’Neill ..................... 8. 18.325 – Jackson - Turbo
9. 18.952 – Eaves .................... 9. 19.259 – Glew ....................... 9. 18.327 – Boardman - Turbo
10. 19.018 – Jackson ............... 10. 19.280 – Pinkney ................. 10. 18.341 – Nash - Turbo


TOCA have promised all teams that equivalency in performance will be regulated for the 2011 and 2012 BTCC Seasons.

Below is how Alan Gow answered some questions on his personal forum on BTCC.NET

Question on: Turbo and Non-Turbo car equivalence – 18th April 2011

Dear Alan,

Thanks for giving us an entertaining start to hopefully another great season.

My post is about turbo and non-turbo car equivalence, Jason Plato commented on a TV interview after last weekend’s races at Donington that you gave your word that you would adjust the rules for them to fight at the front, and it was now time to see how honourable you and TOCA were to their word..! Is this true? And if so can you tell us what the adjustments are when they happen?
Thanks and keep up the good work.

Alan Gow – 18th April 2011
“Clearly we have always stated that there should be performance parity between the two types (normally aspirated and turbo) for the next two seasons. That is not an issue and is a policy known and agreed by every team - and one we have publicly stated many times over the last 18 months.

In very simple terms; the performance of the fastest/best of each type should be comparable for 2011 and 2012 – of course given that they are of a comparable level of quality of driver/team/car/preparation and that, at times, each car will have their own strengths and weaknesses at differing circuits.

Obviously we need to analyse the data thoroughly but, as a guess, I would say it's likely there will be an adjustment before Thruxton. I fully expect more tweaks will be made throughout the season (either way) as teams continue to refine their cars....all of which makes for a fascinating championship, as we are already seeing. “
________________________________________

Question on: NGTC/S2000 engine parity –20th April 2011
Hi Alan,
Last year there appeared to be parity between the NGTC and S2000 engine cars. As far as I'm aware there was no need to restrict the NGTC engines during last season and were allowed to run without change. Yet the NGTC engine cars were still among the faster cars through the speed traps. I'm assuming the engines are still running under the same parameters this year but where the teams have been able to develop their cars and engines in other ways have been able to outperform the S2000 engine cars as we saw at Donington. My concern is that although we all wish to see some sort of parity with the two engine types, any sort of handicap would be penalising them for all the hard work the teams have done in developing their cars to get them working better.

Alan Gow – 21st April 2011
“Your statement is based on the incorrect assumption that the engines are running under the same parameters as last year - which they are not.”

This year all NGTC engines have a significantly revised turbo system, which has changed their engine performance/characteristics.”
________________________________________

The simple facts are that despite a reduction in turbo boost prior to Thruxton, it is still totally impossible for a non-turbo car to get anywhere near pole position and therefore the only way that a non-turbo car can win races is by lucking in on the reverse grid or waiting for cars ahead to fall off, breakdown or make large mistakes.

Racing cars nearly always overtake on the brakes into corners unless mistakes happen, how then can a non-turbo car overtake a turbo car when the turbo cars accelerate much faster due to increased torque and produce a higher top speed due to increased power. The turbo cars are so far ahead when it comes to the braking zones, any passing is by and large impossible.

This is not a whinge, it is the simple facts of the problem all the teams and drivers of Non-Turbo cars face.

TOCA have promised equivalency, we all want to see it, before it is too late.
In my opinion, based on my years of experience, we need a massive reduction in turbo boost pressure AND a substantial air restrictor fitted prior to the next BTCC round.

Hopefully this should put an end to the churlish, biased and factually incorrect forum statements people make.

I hope this has cleared a few things up.

Kind regards,

Jason Plato
2001 and 2010 BTCC Champion
More Wins, Podiums and Fastest Laps than any other driver in the history of the championship.

[BDunnell]

Alan Gow – 21st April 2011
“Your statement is based on the incorrect assumption that the engines are running under the same parameters as last year - which they are not.”

This year all NGTC engines have a significantly revised turbo system, which has changed their engine performance/characteristics.”

Very interesting. Would this be part of efforts to encourage entrants to go down the NGTC route, despite the claims that there would be parity at present?

[Allyc85]

Thanks for taking the time to present the facts, looks like Mat Neal was a second out when he said he was doing the same lap times as last year at Thruxton!

[VX_Rules]

It's funny how people react when at the opposite end of the argument. Were the SEAT TDi days that long ago they cannot be remembered?

[Brooklands78]

Interesting statistics from JP - and the equivalence argument potentially has more far reaching consequences than just how it affects the n/a drivers!

When, on 2nd June 2009, TOCA announced their “Next Generation Touring Car” proposals and the introduction of turbocharged engines, their press release included a section headed “Performance Parity”. This is what it says:

“A policy of equivalence in overall performance between the current S2000 and the ‘Next-Gen’ cars will be maintained until 2013, to provide asset protection for the S2000 cars and parity of competition throughout that period.

In simple terms, the two specifications of cars will be equally eligible for outright honours – and be equivalent in overall performance – until 2013”

Based upon those assurances, RML and WSR chose to keep running existing normally aspirated cars, whilst TechSpeed and Geoff Steel Racing invested in S2000 cars with normally aspirated engines, with the not unreasonable expectation that their cars would be competitive. TechSpeed and Geoff Steel Racing have persuaded sponsors to put up substantial sums of money in the expectation of their logo’s and liveries being afforded the kind of media exposure that “equivalence on overall performance” should bring.

Those sponsors parted with their cash expecting to see their cars competing for podiums, not scrapping amongst themselves for a top ten place, out of sight of the TV cameras.

At Brands Hatch, Dave Newsham pointed out to me that he’d crossed the finish line at 123.4mph in the Geoff Steel BMW, making him the slowest through the speed trap in race 3. In 2010, in the exact same car, Mat Jackson went through the same speed trap at exactly the same speed - 123.4mph. Jackson was 2nd fastest, with only Tom Chilton in the turbocharged LPG-powered Ford Focus going faster.

Newsham’s own press release after Brands Hatch stated “It has also become apparent that the turbo-engine cars are 8mph faster than non turbo S2000 cars down the straights, that equates to approx half a second advantage per lap!” and, “the power of the turbo cars really showed". He said that he "was a sitting duck down the straights”. After Donington, where he qualified 19th and finished only one of the three races, in 15th place, Newsham jumped ship to join Special Tuning, citing in another press release “irreconcilable differences”. That same press release also noted that Special Tuning’s SEAT Leon “has a strong turbo charged engine”. Whatever his reasons for leaving Geoff Steel Racing, clearly turbo power was enough of an issue for him to repeatedly refer to it in his press releases! And GSR was left with two S2000 n/a cars not being used at Thruxton. So much for "asset protection"!

Something has to be done to quickly redress the balance - whilst JP has had some success this year, Rob Collard and Paul O'Neill are struggling to pick up points. They haven't become bad drivers overnight!

[BDunnell]

It's funny how people react when at the opposite end of the argument. Were the SEAT TDi days that long ago they cannot be remembered?

I don't recall the diesel SEAT being on a level of performance so far ahead of the petrol cars as the turbos are today ahead of the normally-aspirated machines.

[Jason Plato]

Just in case we hear the argument .."but what about the diesels?"

Here are some facts regarding the Diesel Turbo

The regulations for Diesel powered S2000 cars had been written and in the public domain for years before SEAT Sport took the gamble on developing Diesel technology for S2000 cars. Any manufacturer could have done the same and produced an engine. What there certainly was not, was any promise of equivalency from either governing body. The regulations and technical specifications were available to all.

It is fair to say SEAT Sport saw an opportunity to have an advantage in straight line performance with the Diesel. However it should be noted that there are huge differences between Turbo Diesel and S2000, namely
* Diesel engines are very heavy compared with modern S2000 race engines
* Diesel power delivery is not race track friendly, very low revs and huge torque surge
* absolute zero engine braking

But the differences are irrelevant to any argument, what is totally relevant is that no governing body promised teams and drivers an equivalency in performance during a specific period, namely a period of phasing in new NGTC regulations in 2011 and 2012.

So, please do not bring Diesel into the current debate in the 2011 BTCC, it is totally and absolutely irrelevant. The situation then is at polar opposites than what is today.

Just one other point, which should also go some way to help people understand.

If TOCA had made no promises of equivalency during the phasing in of NGTC equipment in 2011 and 2012 from the point of view of performance, asset protection et all, then we would not be having this debate.

I repeat, if promises of performance equivalency had not been given by TOCA, I and all the other Non Turbo teams would not be protesting. We would have no argument and in fact, in reality, we would have less cars on the grid and many of the non turbo teams would have gone to a Turbo engine package.

I hope this makes things crystal clear for all.....

Kind regards,

Jason Plato

[MrJan]

Jason, interesting to see that you gained a second on last years Thruxton time, did a 18.946 in 2010 FP2 and a 17.966 in Qualy this year. If those were similar conditions then that's an astounding jump, especially given the difference between times was 'only' a few tenths at the other two tracks. What do you think this could be down to, tyres, track conditions or simply a better setup (or perhaps more agressive) this year?

[Bruce-1980]

Obviously all cars are going to be quicker than they were the previous year! Its called development! Just because Gow promised equivalencey, that doesn't mean RML don't have to bother developing the car over winter then expect the other cars to be reigned in to suit you!

Even O'Neil (124.6mph) and Collard (125.6mph) were faster than you (124.3mph) through the speed traps at Brands! (3 race average from the fastest speed trap) Are you telling me WSR and Tech-Speed (both relatively small teams running n/a cars) improved their cars more over the winter than RML improved your 2010 championship winning Cruze!? The Cruze, however, was the fastest na car by Thruxton so it has improved since the first race. Remember last season? Chevy were nowhere for the first part but were unbeatable by the end! Are you sure its not partly complacency on RMLs part that has left you a little behind at the early stages of the season?

Comparing your car to Mat Neals at Thruxton, he was only 2.2mph faster! (3 race average from the fastest speed trap) This is Thruxton, the fastest track on the calendar! "Every car will have its own strengths and weaknesses at each track" so surely the 2.2mph difference is just the Turbos strength on a fast circuit!

Last season you had the best car, this season you don't! Last season the championship, eventually, came to you,! This season you're gona have to work a bit harder for it! Or we could just make every car thats a threat to your title defense drive round on 3 wheels!?

[Andrew Webster]

Well said Sir!!! (Bruce-1980). All I see from the above data is that you are CONSISTANTLY off qualifying pace EVERY YEAR.

2009 Brands you were 0.7 seconds off pole... 2011 you were 0.3 seconds off pole.
2009 Thruxton you were 0.4 seconds off pole... 2010 you were 1.0 second off pole!!... 2011 you were 0.9 seconds off pole.

So relatively you are qualifying better this year than previous years.

Your data shows that only ONCE have you had a pole position in the quoted races. You blatently ignore that other teams have developed their cars further and suggest that it is just the addition of a turbo that has made them quicker.

How about some RACE data? That would be a more interesting to read. Fastest laps? Race wins? put things into perspective and stop trying to manipulate the situation to suit your now slower car.

[MrJan]

How about some RACE data? That would be a more interesting to read. Fastest laps? Race wins? put things into perspective and stop trying to manipulate the situation to suit your now slower car.

Or how about people open their eyes and look. Any idiot can see that the turbo cars are clearly much quicker out of corners and along the straight, it was even noticeable at Brands where the straight is relatively short.

[beckyboo82]

Or how about people open their eyes and look. Any idiot can see that the turbo cars are clearly much quicker out of corners and along the straight, it was even noticeable at Brands where the straight is relatively short.
Agreed! Its not fair, and needs sorting.

[Bruce-1980]

They reduced the boost on the turbo before Thruxton and there was a measly 2mph difference! You really think they should penalize them even more? What happens at the tight twisty circuits? Yes the cars weigh the same but the weight distribution on the turbos is more over the front which ain't good for the tyres, the torque out of the bends ain't good for the tyres and the lack of engine breaking ain't good for the breaks! I recon a small 2mph advantage on the fastest circuit in the country (which we won't be visiting again till next year!) is already a big enough price to pay!

[inimitablestoo]

Equivalency formulas don't work. Period. See F1 in the late turbo era, up against the 3.5s, for that. And indeed the CART/USAC years of the Indy 500, when they tried to run two sets of rules. Frankly, TOCA should never have made the promise to keep things equal, because it's never going to happen.

Mind you, this series hasn't been about "pure" racing since about 1997, so it's difficult to read too much into any kind of data you might produce to prove/disprove any argument. Qualifying times aren't necessarily the best indication, and straightline speed isn't either - race pace and tyre wear need to be taken into account. And with things like success ballast and reversed grids (two of modern motor racing's desperate measures to improve the "show", along with mandatory tyre stops, which the BTCC no longer does) trying to gauge accurately what the real performance levels are is difficult.

If anything, TOCA should have either mandated the turbo for everyone, or set up a two-class structure; the halfway house of the moment just looks like a desperate attempt to fill grids. I like the variety of the series - we could do with a couple less one-make series on the support package, but that's an issue for another time - but the "catch-all" mentality of the moment seems to be creating its own problems. I imagine it won't be long before the BMW squads are pleading for their first gear issues to be sorted out too, as they're going nowhere this season.

Better still - give everyone a V8. That'll stop the complaints on all levels ;)

Oh, and commiserations Jason on tonight's Fifth Gear. Beaten by a turbo again...

[Andrew Webster]

Or how about people open their eyes and look. Any idiot can see that the turbo cars are clearly much quicker out of corners and along the straight, it was even noticeable at Brands where the straight is relatively short.

Brands.... 2 wins out of 3 for Plato.... no argument.

And any idiot can read the fact that both MacDowell and Plato set fastest laps in 2 of the last 3 races. Plato couldnt be caught. Fact. Look at race wins. Its not hard to work out that if Plato hadnt been punted off or had a puncture he would be up with the leaders in terms of points.

Is Tom Onslow-Cole moaning or is he getting on with developing his car.....

[Brooklands78]

Sadly, there are too many people who won't even listen to the case for equivalence simply because it's Jason Plato who is making it. Maybe ITV should speak to Rob Collard, Paul O'Neill, Dick Bennetts or Marvin Humphries about it, because they're all affected too - probably more so.


Brands.... 2 wins out of 3 for Plato.... no argument.

Brands Indy curcuit is a short lap and the the turbo's only really had a significant advantage between Clearways and Paddock Hill. On a longer lap (like Thruxton) the turbo advantage is far greater. Expect Brands (Indy) and Knockhill to be the only circuits where the turbo's won't have as great an advantage.

The fastest cars through the finish line speed trap at Brands, in qualifying and all three races, were ALL of the turbo's except Tom Onslow-Cole and the two Toyota's (and, in race 1, Matt Neal, who was eliminated before reaching the speed trap). Fastest non-turbo wasn't even Plato - it was Rob Collard, 10th in race 3 at 126.1mph, 2.5mph quicker than his fastest in 2010 but 4.5mph off the pace of the fastest turbo this year and slower than the likes of Liam Griffin, Jeff Smith and Tony Gilham. Last year, only Tom Onslow-Cole, in the turbo LPG Focus, was quicker through that speed trap, at 127.1mph. This year, 127.1mph would have been, at best, 9th fastest (in qualifying), Gordon Shedden being fastest of all at 131.6mph in races 1 and 3. All of the leading non-turbo drivers went faster through the finish line speed trap than in 2010 - Plato's best was 2.5mph faster, MacDowell 1.4mph faster, Collard 2.5mph faster and O'Neill 1.6mph faster than he was in the Integra and 1.8mph faster than Plato was in the Cruze. But all were eclipsed by the turbo's.

Plato qualified 3rd - arguably, that would have been 4th had Gordon Shedden been able to participate in the session. You don't have to overtake anyone in qualifying!

Race 1, Plato got lucky when Matt Neal was eliminated on the first lap and Gordon Shedden was starting from the back. Once in front, Plato is good enough to stay there - but he needed the luck to get there in the first place.

Race 2 - Plato started from pole with Shedden two rows back and Neal right at the back of the grid . As Plato has said, once in front he can stay ahead of the turbos. It's passing them that's the issue.

Race 3, and with a reverse grid, Plato has 5 turbo cars ahead of him. He and Rob Collard both make better starts than Shedden, who gets back past Collard on lap 3. Plato makes up a place only when Jordan drops out, holds off Shedden for 16 laps but finally Flash got past. Neal wins from pole, never headed. And Paul O'Neill becomes the only non-Turbo runner except Plato to get onto the podium in 2011 - again, benefitting from the reverse grid.

TOCA promised equivalence, so there is absolutely no argument that RML, WSR, Geoff Steel and TechSpeed "should have got a turbo". Come 2013, the turbo's will have it all to themselves. Until then, Mr Plato, like him or hate him, is making a very valid point on behalf of ALL of the non-turbo teams!

[MrJan]

Brands.... 2 wins out of 3 for Plato.... no argument.

The point has already been made but I'll repeat it anyway. IF the difference was noticeable on Brands then any circuit with a longer straight it will be obscene. When we get to the likes of Snetterton, Silverstone and even Oulton we'll see the difference on the straights will put the turbo cars well ahead. The only reason that Plato could win and get fast laps at Brands was because the majority of the track is a corner of somesort.

And the reason that AmD are just getting on with developing is because they know that their car is a bit ****, whereas we all know that the Chevvy is a very strong car...at least for an N/A

[Bruce-1980]

Has everyone already forgot about the 0.1 bar reduction in boost for the turbos before Thruxton? Figures from Brands are now totally irrelevant! A 2.2mph advantage, at the fastest track in the country, for Neal over Plato is nothing and will be even less at every venue left on the calendar! How much more of a handicap do you want imposed on the turbos just to keep Plato happy? Much more and it'll be the turbo teams walking and we'll be left with a few Cruzes and a couple of beemers! To be honest I'd rather see all the na teams pull out than continuously begging back the best cars on track and stop holding back the progress of the cars that are ultimately the future of the BTCC!

[BDunnell]

Has everyone already forgot about the 0.1 bar reduction in boost for the turbos before Thruxton? Figures from Brands are now totally irrelevant! A 2.2mph advantage, at the fastest track in the country, for Neal over Plato is nothing and will be even less at every venue left on the calendar! How much more of a handicap do you want imposed on the turbos just to keep Plato happy? Much more and it'll be the turbo teams walking and we'll be left with a few Cruzes and a couple of beemers! To be honest I'd rather see all the na teams pull out than continuously begging back the best cars on track and stop holding back the progress of the cars that are ultimately the future of the BTCC!

You seem to be ignoring the main point, which is that equivalency, like it or not, was promised, yet has not truly been delivered. Even a cursory glance at each round so far shows that it is all but impossible for the normally-aspirated cars to actually race the turbos.

[Wasted Talent]

The Thruxton top speed issue isn't a proper comparison as the the Hondas were certainly on the rev limiter well before the end of the back straight. Turbo cars have more of a torque advantage than bhp so gain the advantage in the first part of the straights.

I didn't agree with Jason last year when he complained about the LPG turbo Focii (??) being too fast as it only related to a couple of cars and it was clear from the races that they might have more speed on the straight bits for whatever reason they soon suffered from tyre degredation and became sitting ducks near the end of races.

This year it is completely different, and agree that Jason's points are more than valid, - the majority of the field are turbo cars and there are a significant number with well sorted chassis (Honda and Vauxhall) that are able to preserve grip for most if not all of the race. It is clear as BDunnell says that it is impossible for the naspro cars to race the turbo cars and it was specifically written into the championship that there would be equivalence.

I don't really know what the solution is as further limiting boost negates the whole point of turbocharging in the first place - maybe fuel should be limited but the decline in driving standards and omni-present safety cars make that unworkable.

As above, equivalency formulas don't work......

Time to get a NGTC engine Jason.............and send the bill to Alan Gow

WT

[rwdvectra]

I understand there should be equivalence across the cars but when does the "advantage" of the turbo stop and the development/better car begin. Jordan was a mid field runner last year and this year he's up the front. He had a ngtc engine last year and it wasn't a problem but this year his car has moved on and now it's a problem. Surely it's unfair if it is partly down to having a better car to keep pegging it back until the chevrolet can keep up.

[MrJan]

I understand there should be equivalence across the cars but when does the "advantage" of the turbo stop and the development/better car begin. Jordan was a mid field runner last year and this year he's up the front. He had a ngtc engine last year and it wasn't a problem but this year his car has moved on and now it's a problem. Surely it's unfair if it is partly down to having a better car to keep pegging it back until the chevrolet can keep up.

But in Jason's post he points out that Gow has admitted that the NGTC engine from this year is different from last year. Therefore the advances aren't all down to the chassis as the engine has developed a lot.

[BDunnell]

And, again, equivalency was promised.

[Alfa Fan]

I'm truly shocked at how poor peoples understanding is of whats going on here. I can only wonder at how little the average fan trackside understands if this is beyond the grasp of people who post on internet forums about the series!

It was clear in the rules, that no matter how much development was done on NGTC engines this year, no matter how much more powerful they became, that they would be pegged in line with the S2000 rules that TOCA GUARANTEED would be in place until 2013. GUARANTEED. Part of the reason why teams were able to invest in S2000 machinery!

The S2000 teams DO NOT need to get NGTC engines. Not until 2013 at least. Imagine the NGTC cars were dominant this year and Frank Wrathall was running away with the championship? The other cars couldn't get near him and he was winning most races? Would you then say the other teams should have gone to NGTC?

What you've got to remember is, that every entrant is playing to set of rules they were told would be equivalent. Had it been the other way round and the turbo boost been set too low so as they couldn't get near the other cars, would everyone be happy with that?

It isn't about "the massive amount of work done by turbo teams over the winter", do you really think RML aren't capable? Do you really think RML have left lots of potential in the S2000 engines unused? It is clear to anyone who is willing to take a neutral view of the situation that the balance was wrong before Thruxton. Oulton Park will be the real test of whether they've got it right this time. But if Plato & O'Neill are 1-1.5 seconds off in qually again, then I'm afraid the answer is no. You could argue that Plato might be playing games, but then why would he have won at Thruxton?

[Andrew Webster]

If we look at the data published by Mr Plato and look closely at his past qualifying times then it is clear that he has always been off the pace at those races. How can anybody not see that??

To have had equivalency at these races would have put him in a stronger position than in previous years. True equivalency would have qualified him as he did last year and the year before, which is exactly what we got.

If Plato had qualified in pole in previous years for all 3 races I could see the argument, but he didnt, he is no stronger or weaker than in previous years.

To alter the rules again before Oulton would be madness.

[AndySpeed]

The thing I don't like about equivalency rules, and your argument Andrew Webster, is this - what if on last year's lap Plato made a small mistake somewhere on his best run, maybe missed an apex or something, and didn't set an amazing time as a result. Then what if this year he absolutely nailed all of the corner apexes, put in what should produced a quicker lap, but the lack of a turbo holds him back slightly to set a similar time as last year despite the fact his lap was tidier, the car may be handling better than last year, etc.

"Equivalency" is bull****.

[Andrew Webster]

The thing I don't like about equivalency rules, and your argument Andrew Webster, is this - what if on last year's lap Plato made a small mistake somewhere on his best run, maybe missed an apex or something, and didn't set an amazing time as a result. Then what if this year he absolutely nailed all of the corner apexes, put in what should produced a quicker lap, but the lack of a turbo holds him back slightly to set a similar time as last year despite the fact his lap was tidier, the car may be handling better than last year, etc.

"Equivalency" is bull****.

Then with a previous form of 9th, 1st, 4th, 3rd and 7th I would say he misses a lot of apexes :)

[I am evil Homer]

And, again, equivalency was promised.

But that starts from the premise that 'equivalency' is even possible...i'd suggest it's probably not unless you want to change boost pressures from circuit to circuit to into account the track nature.

[Rollo]

It was clear in the rules, that no matter how much development was done on NGTC engines this year, no matter how much more powerful they became, that they would be pegged in line with the S2000 rules that TOCA GUARANTEED would be in place until 2013. GUARANTEED. Part of the reason why teams were able to invest in S2000 machinery!

Wasn't the whole point of the NGTC regs to "Reduce reliance on WTCC/S2000 equipment, due to increasing costs/complexity and concerns as to its future sustainability/direction"?
Even from the outset it was suggested that "the new engine will produce more power/torque," and that an unbranded engine would be available.

It's not like there was no forewarning either, the broad announcements were made mid-2009 and we're now two whole years later. Two years in a race car may as well be the whole entire life cycle of the car for a front running team.
http://www.btcc.net/html/generalnews_detail.php?id=1489&month=6&year=2009&form=browse&searchterm=

Wasn't one one of the points of the new-spec cars to get teams to migrate to the new regulations?

[Alfa Fan]

S2000 was guaranteed until 2013. The plan was and still is that after that date the NGTC spec will become more powerful. It was suggested that the engine would be more powerful, but would be RESTRICTED UNTIL 2013. I don't see what there is that if difficult to comprehend?

I think you vastly underestimate the expected life-time for touring cars. Look at the Vauxhall Astra Coupe (4 years), BMW 320i (4 years), SEAT Leon (6 years and counting), Chevrolet Lacetti (5 years), Vauxhall Vectra (5 years and counting), Honda Civic (5 years and counting).

It was announced as long ago as 2006 that Super 2000 cars would remain the top class of the BTCC until 2013. If you go back on the S2000 asset protection scheme, whose to say they wouldn't do it with the NGTC cars too, say in 2 years time a better formula emerges. Hypothetically TOCA decide cars can now use 2.5-3 litre engines as of 2013. Would you still be as happy with this? And think that everyone who has just invested in 2-litre versions should just scrap them and build brand new ones again?

[Bruce-1980]

I think the point is the Turbos were pegged back before Thruxton and Plato, when he wasn't in the tyre wall, was well on the pace!

He qualified 5th, a respectable starting position, 2 places behind Neal.

He stuffed it in race one because he was "Trying too hard to keep up with the stupid Turbos!" (Hahaha! Oh how I laughed when I saw his 'brief' interview after the race!) Even for a racing driver, thats a poor excuse for flat spotting a tyre / hitting curbs too hard, resulting in yet another smashed up Cruze! But, before he stuffed it, his fastest lap was a massive 0.063 seconds off the fastest lap of the race!

Second race he started from the back and finished 8th with his fastest lap a whole 0.166 seconds off the fastest lap of the race! But wait a minute, the fastest lap of race 2 was set by none other than, Alex McDowell! Had he sneaked a turbo under his bonnet during the break!? A Non Turbo car setting fastest lap!? How can this be!?

Plato won race 3... and set fastest lap... by 0.376 seconds! Dont think I need to say much more about that one do I!?

2 of the 3 fastest laps set by non turbo cars on the fastest track on the calendar! If anything "Equivalencey" has tipped in favor of the Cruzes already!

[F1boat]

I think that TOCA should wait till Oulton Park to see how the limiter worked. Thruxton is a very, very fast track and racewise Chevy looked OK. It's the qualifying which is an issue - kinda like Ferrari in F1...

[BDunnell]

But that starts from the premise that 'equivalency' is even possible...i'd suggest it's probably not unless you want to change boost pressures from circuit to circuit to into account the track nature.

Indeed. But the fact remains that it was promised, and entries of normally-aspirated cars were made on that basis.

[Andrew Webster]

Well at least we now know how Plato managed to win race 3 .............................

http://twitpic.com/4sevvk

:) :) :)

[Andrew Webster]

He stuffed it in race one because he was "Trying too hard to keep up with the stupid Turbos!" (Hahaha! Oh how I laughed when I saw his 'brief' interview after the race!) Even for a racing driver, thats a poor excuse for flat spotting a tyre / hitting curbs too hard, resulting in yet another smashed up Cruze! But, before he stuffed it, his fastest lap was a massive 0.063 seconds off the fastest lap of the race!

Don't forget that he was "Driving the car faster than it was capable of going" too!!

[Bruce-1980]

Well at least we now know how Plato managed to win race 3 .............................

http://twitpic.com/4sevvk

:) :) :)

Haha! Good 'en! :)

[Tixy54]

I find it most bizarre how certain drivers moan about the turbo cars saying things like, "It's unfair", "Without a turbo we have no chance" etc. However, when they start from pole and win, flag to flag, and, the turbo powered cars can't catch them, suddenly all is well with the world.

[Bezza]

The whole situation is grossly out of order.

I think it is admirable that Jason Plato has come on this forum to clarify the situation when lots of people are just jumping to the wrong conclusions.

It is clear that there is not parity in the regulations for 2011. It is ridiculous that the season was allowed to start this way and even if resolved, has already created an unfair advantage for certain teams and drivers.

Keep pushing for it to be sorted, Jason, and while you are at it tell the powers that be to have a look at some of the dodgy driving standards that seem to be going unpunished – specifically at Donington – which you were on the receiving end of!

[AndySpeed]

If you think it's any worse in the BTCC today Bezza then I'd think again - I seem to remember James Thompson pushing Jason Plato clean off the race track at Oulton Park in 1999!

[BDunnell]

If you think it's any worse in the BTCC today Bezza then I'd think again - I seem to remember James Thompson pushing Jason Plato clean off the race track at Oulton Park in 1999!

That remains one of the worst bits of conduct I've ever seen in the BTCC — and, while I hate to criticise drivers, Thompson's attempt at an explanation when asked about it afterwards has to go down as just about the most pathetic in racing history! A rare blot on his record.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

If you think it's any worse in the BTCC today Bezza then I'd think again - I seem to remember James Thompson pushing Jason Plato clean off the race track at Oulton Park in 1999!

But what about Reid being penalised for tapping and passing Rydell in 1998 at Brands Hatch. Tim Harvey would have called that move 'a classic Matt Neal maneuver'.

[BDunnell]

But what about Reid being penalised for tapping and passing Rydell in 1998 at Brands Hatch. Tim Harvey would have called that move 'a classic Matt Neal maneuver'.

An example that goes to show how attitudes have changed in the intervening years when it comes to the lesser contact. I am sure what Thompson did to Plato in '99 would be deemed just as unacceptable today.

[Bezza]

Isolated incidents from the 90's fair enough - but Thompson and Reid were both punished. As Jon Brown says, thesedays the Reid incident is "classic move" usually a Team Dynamics Honda. In my view it is not racing. Contact will always happen and IS part of touring cars. But not a "shove up the back" - that is cynical and cowardly tactic which for some reason doesn't get punished. Side by side banging is part and parcel and is what we want to see.

[Bruce-1980]

Are Chevrolet complaining about the turbo cars in WTCC? Of course they're not because they're one of the only teams using the Turbo engine and they're kicking arse! Don't hear them complaining about 'Equivalencey' or 'Parity' over there!

[Alfa Fan]

Every serious entry in the WTCC is using Turbo engines. In the WTCC it was not said that the two different types of engine would be equivalent. In the BTCC it was. I am truly stunned as to how complicated an idea this is for people to get their heads round. I seem to have vastly over-rated the average intelligence of most people if this is anything to go by.

TOCA said NGTC & S2000 engines would be EQUIVALENT until 2013. That means, for those who don't understand big words, that there should be no advantage to running a turbo performance wise, only in cost savings. It also means that the top non-turbo teams should be very competitive with the turbo teams (which is clearly not the case).

[Bruce-1980]

Sorry, should have been a bit more clear, "Using the new 1.6T petrol engine" as a pose to the old TDi, or would you say the 6-car Sunred outfit aren't a serious entry?

and at risk of repeating myself...

I think the point is the Turbos were pegged back before Thruxton and Plato, when he wasn't in the tyre wall, was well on the pace!

He qualified 5th, a respectable starting position, 2 places behind Neal.

He stuffed it in race one because he was "Trying too hard to keep up with the stupid Turbos!" (Hahaha! Oh how I laughed when I saw his 'brief' interview after the race!) Even for a racing driver, thats a poor excuse for flat spotting a tyre / hitting curbs too hard, resulting in yet another smashed up Cruze! But, before he stuffed it, his fastest lap was a massive 0.063 seconds off the fastest lap of the race!

Second race he started from the back and finished 8th with his fastest lap a whole 0.166 seconds off the fastest lap of the race! But wait a minute, the fastest lap of race 2 was set by none other than, Alex McDowell! Had he sneaked a turbo under his bonnet during the break!? A Non Turbo car setting fastest lap!? How can this be!?

Plato won race 3... and set fastest lap... by 0.376 seconds! Dont think I need to say much more about that one do I!?

2 of the 3 fastest laps set by non turbo cars on the fastest track on the calendar! If anything "Equivalencey" has tipped in favor of the Cruzes already!

The Chevys look pretty competitive to me!

[Alfa Fan]

Only Tarquini would have a place in a "works" SEAT entry, and 3 meetings in he's got the turbo engine! Because as you saw at the first couple of meetings, they couldn't compete. The likes of Dudukalo, Barth, Nykjaer & Oriola are journeymen at WTCC level.

Tell me, how many times has a non-turbo car overtaken a turbo car without one of them having a problem? And then tell me how many times a turbo has gone by a non-turbo?

[AndySpeed]

To be fair to Bruce nine cars in the last round at Monza were using either a non-turbo or the old 2 litre turbodiesel.

[AndySpeed]

The likes of Dudukalo, Barth, Nykjaer & Oriola are journeymen at WTCC level.

Also, Nykjær is doing pretty well and to call him a journeyman is a bit unfair given the experience he's building now. He's a strong racer and didn't he win the European Touring Car Cup a couple of times?

[Alfa Fan]

The ETC Cup hasn't exactly been the strongest of fields of late. Experience =/= Talent.

WTCC Qualifying Monza

1 Turbo Petrol
2 Turbo Petrol
3 Turbo Petrol
4 Turbo Petrol
5 Turbo Diesel
6 Turbo Petrol
7 Turbo Petrol
8 Turbo Petrol
9 Turbo Petrol
10 Turbo Diesel

The best non-turbo was the FACTORY Volvo team down in 16th with an NA Petrol! Over a second off the pace.

[Iain]

Nykaer's a decent driver. He was Danish Champion as well in recent times, so he must be a handy driver to beat the likes of Jason Watt and Jan Magnussen.

Out of those drivers Alfa Fan mentioned, I'd say only Dudakolo is a journeyman. The rest are younger drivers who have all graduated from various Seat Leon series, as did Norbert Michelisz. Just goes to show the difference between the UK and other countries, which are willing to support young drivers on the way up.

[Bruce-1980]

As I said, Chevy are kicking arse in the WTCC because they have (up to now, had) a superior engine! Thank you for making my point for me! Still, didn't stop Tarquini getting his head down and winning a race at Zolder (Like the quality driver he is) rather than whinging about the other cars, did it!

Anyway, back to the original point.... Do you honestly think the BTCC turbos still have an advantage over the NA cars after watching Thruxton? (Assuming you did actually watch Thruxton...)

[Alfa Fan]

Yes of course they do. How anyone can think they don't is beyond me? Show me one example of a turbo car being passed by a NA car on merit?

[Bruce-1980]

When I said "Assuming you watched Thruxton" I was only kidding but obviously you didn't!

Correct me if i'm wrong (Which I'm sure you will) but didn't Plato start from the back in race two and finish 8th? Passing 9 cars (5 of which were Turbos) on the way!?

[Alfa Fan]

Ok. So he got past Tony Gilham, Jeff Smith & Tom Boardman. Those are the only three turbo cars he passed after the first lap. 2 Vectras with 2 pretty erratic drivers and Boardman's SEAT, a car which has often had problems at Thruxton.

You only have to compare the results to when Plato has started at the back in previous seasons. It seems like this is your first season of BTCC? That's the only assumption that makes your posts make sense. Did you happen to look at the speed traps? I doubt it. To help inform you:

Ford Focus Turbo Sector 1 133mph Finish Line 103mph
Honda Civic Turbo Sector 1 133mph Finish Line 103mph
Vauxhall Vectra Turbo Sector 1 132mph Finish Line 102mph
Chevrolet Cruze NA Sector 1 129mph Finish Line 100mph

Those figures are averaged across all the cars of that type, removing any outliers. But all the drivers in the same cars are pretty close on speed trap figures. So consistently 3mph down on the Turbos.

I actually picked the race the non-turbos were closest to the turbos in so as to not be accused of exaggerating the case. If you look at the other 2 races the differential is more like 5mph! Pretty significant margins.

It's amazing what actually look at the data and the facts does. Instead of just jumping to conclusions because of your dislike of certain drivers, you can back up your points. I'm no particular fan of Jason's, but any fool can see from the data that the equivalence promised has not been delivered yet.

Just out of interest, did you think there was an equivalency problem at Donington? Where the turbos were consistently 5mph quicker through every speed trap?

P.S. Just for comparison, the Chevy was the fastest through the speed traps at Thruxton last year, and by a reasonable margin (faster than the LPG nitro button Fords (although it was early in the season, if Thruxton had been a latter round I think it might have been a different outcome).

[Bruce-1980]

You asked me to give you an example of an NA car passing a Turbo, you never said it had to be a front running podium contender (did you mention Tom Boardman)

And, at risk of repeating myself yet again... (wish you'd read the whole thread before making a dick of yourself)


Comparing [Platos] car to Mat Neals at Thruxton, he was only 2.2mph faster! (3 race average from the fastest speed trap) This is Thruxton, the fastest track on the calendar! "Every car will have its own strengths and weaknesses at each track" so surely the 2.2mph difference is just the Turbos strength on a fast circuit!

So yes, I did look at the speed trap data and i'm aware Plato was a little down on top speed yet, despite that, set the fastest racing lap of the day.

And as for your attempt at patronisation, I've been to EVERY BTCC meeting at Oulton park since 1996... pretty much every Donnington meeting... Croft... Silverstone... Rockingham.... Even knockhill a couple of times, so recon I've got enough BTCC nouse to see you off matey! ;)

Seems to me you have a little too much man-love for Plato! Accept the fact, he aint got the best car this season so if he wants it, he's gona have to work a bit harder than he did last season!

[Alfa Fan]

I don't even particularly like Plato! Anyone who has been around here for more than 13 posts can see that. And btw, continuing with the personal attacks means your stay around here won't last long! For the record you were wrong about your BTCC nous too. Just to let you know.

Do you think the Vauxhall Vectra, Ford Focus and Honda Civic would be leaving Chevrolet for dust in the WTCC running the 1.6 turbos? I'm genuinely curious as to whether you believe this would be the case.

[Bruce-1980]

Hahaha! Woahhh! Chill out kiddo! Only a bit of banter! Thats what these forums are for aint it!

I recon if Honda entered the WTCC with a 1.6T in a couple of weeks they'd probably be a bit behind until they caught up with the development but as you know, being an avid BTCC Fan, Dynamics, Arena and 888 are a top notch teams and will always be there or there abouts!

Now if you're gona cry every time I disagree with you, you're probably best off ignoring this reply! :bigcry:

[Tixy54]

Perhaps Alan Gow might consider running a championship within a championship like they did in the days of the "Production" class (where we first met Tom Boardman), how stupid was that then compared to the silly bickering that we are getting now. If the drivers don't like it they could all join the turbo cars or get out their pipe and slippers and watch it on the telly.

[Alfa Fan]

Hahaha! Woahhh! Chill out kiddo! Only a bit of banter! Thats what these forums are for aint it!

Now if you're gona cry every time I disagree with you, you're probably best off ignoring this reply! :bigcry:

No crying here. Your diverting attention because I comprehensively demolished your arguments.

[F1boat]

As I said before, let's wait for Oulton Park. Thruxton is a track which is normally to benefit turbos and it has enormous straights. And yes, the turbos had an advantage, but IMO not as big as in Donington Park.

[Bruce-1980]

Alfa Fan, you haven't addressed a single point i've made, never mind comprehensively demolishing my arguments! (Points, not arguments. Children argue.)

I'll spell it out for you...

(All points refer to Thruxton as the boost restrictions had been applied.)

Please bear in mind, Thruxton is the fastest track on the calendar.
The turbo cars should have a small speed advantage here to compensate for the disadvantages they will face at other, tighter circuits.

Plato qualified 2 places behind Neal - Not a huge way down the field.

Plato binned it in race 1 but before he did he was 0.063 secs off the over all fastest lap of race 1.

Plato started from the back in race 2 and finished 8th, 0.166 seconds off fastest lap which was set by his team mate (who doesn't have a turbo).
On his way up the field he passed:
Tom Boardman (S2000 Turbo),
Tony Gilham (S2000 Turbo),
Paul O'Neill (S2000),
Jeff Smith (S2000 Turbo),
Andy Neate (S2000 Turbo),
Robert Collard (S2000),
John George (S2000),
Nick Foster (S2000)
Liam Griffin (S2000 Turbo)

Plato won race 3... and set fastest lap... by 0.376 seconds!

Plato was 2.2mph down (3 race average from the fastest speed trap in the country)

And you still think he's at a disadvantage!?

Were you watching BTCC last time Alan Gow was in charge? If you were, you will know he's the best man for the job! He's firm but fair, he wont take **** from anyone (Including Plato) and his main objective is to keep the racing close! Close racing make the BTCC what it is, why would anyone want one team to have an unfair advantage over anyone else? Maintaining parity between two very different types of car is an almost impossible task and Alan appears to have pretty much nailed it after only 2 meetings! I'd say he's done a good job! But as F1Boat says, lets wait for Oulton.

My prediction is, if anyones gona have an advantage at Oulton, it's gona be Plato!

[Andrew Webster]

OMG why are we hearing cries of 3mph down on the straights!! blah blah blah!!! A race is more than top speed!! To have the FASTEST lap of the race on a FAST circuit whilst being slightly down on top speed MUST mean your car is faster elsewhere! DOH its not rocket science!

Plato couldn't be caught in race 3, he was faster. full stop.

His qualifying this season is exactly on par with the last 2 seasons, if anything he is closer to pole this year then previous years.

The fastest tracks are now out of the way and considering how quick his lap times were at these circuits (remember his top speed is down so his cornering speeds must be higher) he will be in a much stronger position at the next rounds. Well assuming he doesnt drive the car faster than it will go.....

[Alfa Fan]

Well at least if I'm wrong it backs up my old hypothesis that Rob Collard is a truly terrible driver!

[Torg22]

Well at least if I'm wrong it backs up my old hypothesis that Rob Collard is a truly terrible driver!

You having a laugh?? Ive had nothing but respect for the bloke this year, hes been driving the wheels off of his beemer.

[Bruce-1980]

Must admit, I've always liked Collard!

Looks like we not gona agree on anything does it mate! ;)

[Alfa Fan]

You having a laugh?? Ive had nothing but respect for the bloke this year, hes been driving the wheels off of his beemer.

Please read what I said carefully. Rather than jumping to conclusions. I know there's lots of complicated words in there.

[Torg22]

I know there's lots of complicated words in there.

No need to be a t*at about it!

[Bruce-1980]

No need to be a t*at about it!

Haha! Torg, meet Alfa! ;)

[inimitablestoo]

Bruce. Alfa. Let's just agree you're both idiots and I'm right. V8s for everyone! :D