| zzyzx | 03-25-2004 03:48 PM |
Sebring WCGT Cadillac Debacle
�
�
If you paid attention to the WCGT race in Sebring, you noticed how the Caddys romped the field, leaving other GT cars looking like they were standing still. Well, this was pretty much predicted based on the allowed mods to the CTS-V and has created a hellstorm of feedback on the SCCA Pro bulletin board. Here's one relevant thread (there are many):
[url]http://bbs.sccaproracing.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/003180.html[/url]
There has been so much debate, even Steve Johnson, SCCA CEO, posted a response in this thread:
[quote]
I want to thank our fans, competitors and I think other competitive sanctioning bodies and series for giving us input. We have listened to what you have had to say and are in the process of studying the data from the race. Will there be adjustments made? Absolutley...
This has happened in the past and I am sure will happen in the future. Just ask Audi, BMW, Corvette, Acura and others that have been on the receiving end of competition adjustments. Our goal is to deliver the most entertaining form of racing today which features close racing, many makes, exciting passes, talented drivers and great return on investment for our sponsors, teams, manufacturers and track partners.
Because of our Fans, Sposnors, Teams and track partners, the Speed World Challenge series is the healthiest, fastest growing road racing series in the world today.
On behalf of all of us at SCCA, I thank you for your feedback and support of our series.
Steve Johnson
[/quote]
What do you guys think?
- Steve
[url]http://bbs.sccaproracing.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/003180.html[/url]
There has been so much debate, even Steve Johnson, SCCA CEO, posted a response in this thread:
[quote]
I want to thank our fans, competitors and I think other competitive sanctioning bodies and series for giving us input. We have listened to what you have had to say and are in the process of studying the data from the race. Will there be adjustments made? Absolutley...
This has happened in the past and I am sure will happen in the future. Just ask Audi, BMW, Corvette, Acura and others that have been on the receiving end of competition adjustments. Our goal is to deliver the most entertaining form of racing today which features close racing, many makes, exciting passes, talented drivers and great return on investment for our sponsors, teams, manufacturers and track partners.
Because of our Fans, Sposnors, Teams and track partners, the Speed World Challenge series is the healthiest, fastest growing road racing series in the world today.
On behalf of all of us at SCCA, I thank you for your feedback and support of our series.
Steve Johnson
[/quote]
What do you guys think?
- Steve
| GuidoThePenguin | 03-25-2004 03:55 PM |
I could tell during the first day of practice at Sebring that that Caddy's were faster than everyone else. The fact that Andy was able to run down the field after the poor start (couldn't get in 1st gear) and finish 1-2 with teammate Max only confirmed the cars were sick fast. Maybe some of Andy's speed was him driving the car right to the edge the whole time trying to make up for his bad start.
But the one thing that stood out in my mind was Pilgram pulling about 2-3 car lengths on one of the other top competitors (think it was the Woodhouse Viper) in just the pit straight where I was watching from atop an RV. :eek:
But the one thing that stood out in my mind was Pilgram pulling about 2-3 car lengths on one of the other top competitors (think it was the Woodhouse Viper) in just the pit straight where I was watching from atop an RV. :eek:
| 10th Warrior | 03-25-2004 04:19 PM |
hmm, biggest budget team being the fastest?!?! how odd :rolleyes: that's the nice thing about Touring Series, is comp adjustments are a way of life. i think its cool that GM has raised the bar.
| dwx | 03-25-2004 05:11 PM |
Well they made alot of concessions and allowed way too many modifications for the Cadillac team to start with. Everyone pretty much knew from looking at the allowances they would beat everyone. I think they'll be seeing alot of penalty weight in the near future or something to restrict the power of the car. The body and engine mounting/etc are radically different in the CTS than the road-going car, I'm not sure the other teams can say that. Like it says in that posted thread, the body isn't the same height, and the whole engine compartment and front end is pretty much built from scratch.
| kfoote | 03-25-2004 05:20 PM |
The issue is not that the Caddys finished 1-2, but the ease in which they did it and the modifications allowed to the CTS that aren't allowed in any other car. The Vehicle Technical Specifications (VTS) sheets with those mods are all available for public viewing at [url]www.world-challenge.com[/url]
What was the real convincer for me (Even after noting while I was there that the Caddy's sound EXACTLY like the ALMS GTS Corvettes) was watching the race on TV. Seeing the on-board camera of Pilgrim leave Phil McLure in the dust going down the back straight after McLure got a MUCH better run coming out of the corner leading onto said straight in a car that has the same engine from the factory was a bit much.
What was the real convincer for me (Even after noting while I was there that the Caddy's sound EXACTLY like the ALMS GTS Corvettes) was watching the race on TV. Seeing the on-board camera of Pilgrim leave Phil McLure in the dust going down the back straight after McLure got a MUCH better run coming out of the corner leading onto said straight in a car that has the same engine from the factory was a bit much.
| driggity | 03-25-2004 06:49 PM |
Some more thoughts and a link to another thread on the SCCA board here.
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=526748[/url]
Unfortunately I haven't seen the race but its interesting that depending on the POV people are either saying that Cadillac wasn't that dominant or that they won very easily and were still sandbagging.
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=526748[/url]
Unfortunately I haven't seen the race but its interesting that depending on the POV people are either saying that Cadillac wasn't that dominant or that they won very easily and were still sandbagging.
| HoRo1 | 03-25-2004 07:32 PM |
Simple solution. Add 100lbs to the Caddies and subtract 100lbs from everyone else and fine tune from there.
| elgorey | 03-25-2004 10:58 PM |
Cadillac doesnt have an overdog rules package, its simply a worldclass program with a lot of money, running in a series that simply does not have world class drivers or programs. The Cadillac team is basically derived from the C5-R program. With that kind of money and that kind of the team, they could have spanked the field with just about anything. Im not so sure I am a fan of punishing a team for doing the best it absolutely can. These rules are encouraging mediocrity and punishing innovation.
Now if you want to talk overdog...how about the TSX in Touring that the first time it hit the track was up the ass of a big team BMW w/ years of development experience driven by a world class driver. PK is good, but he is no Auberlen. Realtime is good, but so is Turner.
Now if you want to talk overdog...how about the TSX in Touring that the first time it hit the track was up the ass of a big team BMW w/ years of development experience driven by a world class driver. PK is good, but he is no Auberlen. Realtime is good, but so is Turner.
| Lightning Jack | 03-26-2004 09:32 AM |
Elgorey u r funny about the Caddies
| GarySheehan | 03-26-2004 12:27 PM |
Elgory,
Brand new car, first race and 3 seconds/lap faster than last year's championship winning cars?! Sorry, that's a performance imbalance, not impeccable prep and world class driving. Don't get me wrong, I know that Andy and Angelelli are great drivers, but not 3 seconds/lap better great drivers. Neither of them could get into the Champion Audi and knock that amount of time off of Probst's or Galati's times.
The World Challenge rules are not encouraging mediocrity and punishing innovation. The rules are designed to generate close racing across many very different platforms, which is a very difficult job. The SCCA is looking to put on a show, racing, not technological exhibitions. There are other racing series, like ALMS and the Rolex GA series that cover that.
I think SCCA World Challenge is one of the most exciting racing to watch in the US. I'd rather see drivers fight it out in equal cars than see one make streak away because they were given a break.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
Brand new car, first race and 3 seconds/lap faster than last year's championship winning cars?! Sorry, that's a performance imbalance, not impeccable prep and world class driving. Don't get me wrong, I know that Andy and Angelelli are great drivers, but not 3 seconds/lap better great drivers. Neither of them could get into the Champion Audi and knock that amount of time off of Probst's or Galati's times.
The World Challenge rules are not encouraging mediocrity and punishing innovation. The rules are designed to generate close racing across many very different platforms, which is a very difficult job. The SCCA is looking to put on a show, racing, not technological exhibitions. There are other racing series, like ALMS and the Rolex GA series that cover that.
I think SCCA World Challenge is one of the most exciting racing to watch in the US. I'd rather see drivers fight it out in equal cars than see one make streak away because they were given a break.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
| kfoote | 03-26-2004 01:19 PM |
FWIW, I work for Turner Motorsport.
The rules concessions that were given to the Cadillacs are simply too much. Only one other car is allowed to move the engine (Mustang), and no other car is allowed to chop the entire body of the car. From having seen the GT car and the stock CTS-V side by side in person, the two are vastly more different than any other street version and SPEED GT version cars (and yes, I have seen the RS6 street and GT versions side by side). To imply that Champion doesn't have a world class program or a lot of money is ignorant. 3R Racing has one Mr. Archer racing for them this year, who helped devlop the Viper Competition Coupe for Dodge. Had Cadillac had the same results with a stock bodied car with the engine in its stock location, and been running the stock transmission, I would not have nearly the problem with the outcome, because yes, the team does have two of the best drivers in the series and a very good team, but the changes that the Caddilacs were allowed is well beyond what any other car is allowed.
Realtime has spent a lot of time developing the TSX, and Pierre is one of the best front wheel car drivers in the world. The TSX has some advantages over the RSX where it should be faster. The level of prep of the Turner and Realtime cars are both very good, and I think that the difference was due to the nature of the track as much as anything else. BMW's have always been strong at Sebring (and Lime Rock, for that matter), but the TSX should be better at places like Mid-Ohio, Portland, and Mosport.
The rules concessions that were given to the Cadillacs are simply too much. Only one other car is allowed to move the engine (Mustang), and no other car is allowed to chop the entire body of the car. From having seen the GT car and the stock CTS-V side by side in person, the two are vastly more different than any other street version and SPEED GT version cars (and yes, I have seen the RS6 street and GT versions side by side). To imply that Champion doesn't have a world class program or a lot of money is ignorant. 3R Racing has one Mr. Archer racing for them this year, who helped devlop the Viper Competition Coupe for Dodge. Had Cadillac had the same results with a stock bodied car with the engine in its stock location, and been running the stock transmission, I would not have nearly the problem with the outcome, because yes, the team does have two of the best drivers in the series and a very good team, but the changes that the Caddilacs were allowed is well beyond what any other car is allowed.
Realtime has spent a lot of time developing the TSX, and Pierre is one of the best front wheel car drivers in the world. The TSX has some advantages over the RSX where it should be faster. The level of prep of the Turner and Realtime cars are both very good, and I think that the difference was due to the nature of the track as much as anything else. BMW's have always been strong at Sebring (and Lime Rock, for that matter), but the TSX should be better at places like Mid-Ohio, Portland, and Mosport.
| ShockWave | 03-26-2004 02:39 PM |
A couple of thoughts. The CTS-V race car has been in development for over a year. I know early pictures of it revealed the car did not have headlights in it (rather there were headlight stickers a la Trans Am). My first thought is that they shoehorned the car into the rules to make sure it competed.
Another possiblity is that SCCA allowed the CTS-Vs to come in as they were as an enticement to get them invovled. We may now see a slow rollback of the modifications, or stiffer weight penelties to even things out. SCCA has been very good about keeping any one car from dominating and I think they know the dangers of turning this series into the 'CTS-V show.'
That said, I do think the Cadillacs were sandbagging, perhaps even with Pilgram's amazing run.
The solution is clear. The incredible discrepancy and sizable list of modifications between the CTS-V race car and CTS-V road car can not be allowed. GM must improve the CTS-V road car to near race car specs as soon as possible :D
Another possiblity is that SCCA allowed the CTS-Vs to come in as they were as an enticement to get them invovled. We may now see a slow rollback of the modifications, or stiffer weight penelties to even things out. SCCA has been very good about keeping any one car from dominating and I think they know the dangers of turning this series into the 'CTS-V show.'
That said, I do think the Cadillacs were sandbagging, perhaps even with Pilgram's amazing run.
The solution is clear. The incredible discrepancy and sizable list of modifications between the CTS-V race car and CTS-V road car can not be allowed. GM must improve the CTS-V road car to near race car specs as soon as possible :D
| kfoote | 03-26-2004 03:20 PM |
FWIW on the headlight sticker issue, it was mid-season last year before SCCA announced that headlights would be required for 2004, after testing for the Cadillac started. Until 2004, working headlights were not required, and headlight decals were acceptable.
| pio!pio! | 03-26-2004 04:52 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by kfoote [/i]
[B]FWIW on the headlight sticker issue, it was mid-season last year before SCCA announced that headlights would be required for 2004, after testing for the Cadillac started. Until 2004, working headlights were not required, and headlight decals were acceptable. [/B][/QUOTE]
what abot RTR's front grille sticker..that still makes me feel iffy about that car
[B]FWIW on the headlight sticker issue, it was mid-season last year before SCCA announced that headlights would be required for 2004, after testing for the Cadillac started. Until 2004, working headlights were not required, and headlight decals were acceptable. [/B][/QUOTE]
what abot RTR's front grille sticker..that still makes me feel iffy about that car
| SolbergWRCfan | 03-26-2004 05:07 PM |
Why the CTS isn't a good car for SWC
�
�
The Cadillac CTS is simply in a different league than the other cars out there. This is not because of GM money or better drivers, it is because of rules concessions. The engine setback in the CTS reminds me of a DTM car, and the body is also DTMish in its configuration. I find it quite amusing that the SCCA allows this level of modification when they weight handicapped the PTG BMWs last year even though they were underpowered compared to the majority of the field and were simply winning because they drove circles around the competition when it came to handling.
Jon
Jon
| kfoote | 03-26-2004 05:41 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by pio!pio! [/i]
[B]what abot RTR's front grille sticker..that still makes me feel iffy about that car [/B][/QUOTE]
IMO, the front grille sticker is an issue and I think they should use a real hood. However, having seen that particular car up close, there are other concessions that were given to it (most notably a complete redesign of the rear suspension) that are bigger issues. That having been said, the concessions did not have such an impact that they made the other cars uncompetitive. As it stands now with the current speed relative to the team the car comes from and the other cars in the series, there is not really any reason to change anything.
[B]what abot RTR's front grille sticker..that still makes me feel iffy about that car [/B][/QUOTE]
IMO, the front grille sticker is an issue and I think they should use a real hood. However, having seen that particular car up close, there are other concessions that were given to it (most notably a complete redesign of the rear suspension) that are bigger issues. That having been said, the concessions did not have such an impact that they made the other cars uncompetitive. As it stands now with the current speed relative to the team the car comes from and the other cars in the series, there is not really any reason to change anything.
| elgorey | 03-28-2004 11:42 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by GarySheehan [/i]
Brand new car, first race and 3 seconds/lap faster than last year's championship winning cars?! Don't get me wrong, I know that Andy and Angelelli are great drivers, but not 3 seconds/lap better great drivers[/quote]
I know it doesnt require math skill to be a good driver, but come on Gary ;)
1 Max Angelelli 2:09.076
2 Lou Gigliotti 2:10.188
3 Randy Pobst 2:10.661
4 Andy Pilgrim 2:10.795
Thats less than [b]ONE[/b] second for Angelelli on pole, and Pilgrim barely made the second row. Note both a vette and RS6 ahead of him.
[quote]The rules are designed to generate close racing across many very different platforms, which is a very difficult job. [/quote]
so why is it a "debacle" all of the sudden when the rules for a brand new car [i]might[/i] have been slightly off? No one bitched and whined last year when club racers took their stock viper comp coupes and whipped ass.
[quote]The SCCA is looking to put on a show, racing, not technological exhibitions.[/quote]*cough* Nascar *cough*
Bottom line: the Cadillac team went to the absolute limit of the rules, to the level other teams were not willing to do.
Brand new car, first race and 3 seconds/lap faster than last year's championship winning cars?! Don't get me wrong, I know that Andy and Angelelli are great drivers, but not 3 seconds/lap better great drivers[/quote]
I know it doesnt require math skill to be a good driver, but come on Gary ;)
1 Max Angelelli 2:09.076
2 Lou Gigliotti 2:10.188
3 Randy Pobst 2:10.661
4 Andy Pilgrim 2:10.795
Thats less than [b]ONE[/b] second for Angelelli on pole, and Pilgrim barely made the second row. Note both a vette and RS6 ahead of him.
[quote]The rules are designed to generate close racing across many very different platforms, which is a very difficult job. [/quote]
so why is it a "debacle" all of the sudden when the rules for a brand new car [i]might[/i] have been slightly off? No one bitched and whined last year when club racers took their stock viper comp coupes and whipped ass.
[quote]The SCCA is looking to put on a show, racing, not technological exhibitions.[/quote]*cough* Nascar *cough*
Bottom line: the Cadillac team went to the absolute limit of the rules, to the level other teams were not willing to do.
| dwx | 03-29-2004 09:56 AM |
I think the problem is they went to liimits other teams can't go to... They likely made a list of things they wanted the SCCA to allow them, and the SCCA allowed them, that's what made everyone so mad before and after the race. Especially after the race. Had the Cadillac been an also-ran then nobody would care, but the fact they dominated the race kind of changes things.
| kfoote | 03-29-2004 11:59 AM |
Fastest race laps:
1. Pilgrim 2:10.249
2. Angelelli 2:11.526
3. McClure 2:12.034
4. Archer 2:12.113
5. Galati 2:12.284
6. Reese 2:12.726
7. Giglotti 2:13.234
8. Gaples 2:13.462
9. Young 2:13.509
10. Culver 2:13.625
11. Tonelli 2:13.637
In the race, the time difference in fastest laps from Pilgrim to McClure (1-3, 1.8 sec) was more than the difference from McClure to Tonelli (3-11, 1.6 sec), and that's a better indication of the real potential of the cars than qualifying times.
1. Pilgrim 2:10.249
2. Angelelli 2:11.526
3. McClure 2:12.034
4. Archer 2:12.113
5. Galati 2:12.284
6. Reese 2:12.726
7. Giglotti 2:13.234
8. Gaples 2:13.462
9. Young 2:13.509
10. Culver 2:13.625
11. Tonelli 2:13.637
In the race, the time difference in fastest laps from Pilgrim to McClure (1-3, 1.8 sec) was more than the difference from McClure to Tonelli (3-11, 1.6 sec), and that's a better indication of the real potential of the cars than qualifying times.
| Butt Dyno | 03-29-2004 04:19 PM |
[url]http://www.world-challenge.com/competitors/vts/2004-VTS-CADILLAC-CTS-V.pdf[/url]
It does say that starting at Lime Rock they will have to use the production Tremec 6-speed instead of the 5-speed dogbox they used at Sebring...
john
It does say that starting at Lime Rock they will have to use the production Tremec 6-speed instead of the 5-speed dogbox they used at Sebring...
john
| dmitrik4 | 03-29-2004 04:39 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by elgorey [/i]
[B]Now if you want to talk overdog...how about the TSX in Touring that the first time it hit the track was up the ass of a big team BMW w/ years of development experience driven by a world class driver. PK is good, but he is no Auberlen. Realtime is good, but so is Turner. [/B][/QUOTE]
that was impressive for the TSX's first race.
more impressive (to me, at least)? tripoint's 4th place finish in the proteges last race w/ only 1 day of testing. altenburg is a great driver...it will be interesting to see how the 6 does.
[B]Now if you want to talk overdog...how about the TSX in Touring that the first time it hit the track was up the ass of a big team BMW w/ years of development experience driven by a world class driver. PK is good, but he is no Auberlen. Realtime is good, but so is Turner. [/B][/QUOTE]
that was impressive for the TSX's first race.
more impressive (to me, at least)? tripoint's 4th place finish in the proteges last race w/ only 1 day of testing. altenburg is a great driver...it will be interesting to see how the 6 does.
| mav1c | 03-29-2004 07:37 PM |
[QUOTE]I'd rather see drivers fight it out in equal cars than see one make streak away because they were given a break.[/QUOTE] Be Careful what you wish for. This is basically the logic behind NASCAR rules.
| afpdl | 03-29-2004 08:50 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by mav1c[/i]
[B] Be Careful what you wish for. This is basically the logic behind NASCAR rules. [/B][/QUOTE]
Thats the logic behind most series rules. I dont like nascar but that is not the reason I dont like it.
[B] Be Careful what you wish for. This is basically the logic behind NASCAR rules. [/B][/QUOTE]
Thats the logic behind most series rules. I dont like nascar but that is not the reason I dont like it.
| GarySheehan | 03-29-2004 09:00 PM |
The references to NASCAR are a bit silly. In NASCAR, the vehicles are virtually identical with different paint. That's very different than taking MANY different platforms and making them as close to the same lap times as possible. Even though the laptimes are the same, how they get there will be different. Anyone that watched the battle between Young in the Saleen and Probst in the Porsche at Road Atlanta last year knows exactly what I'm talking about.
The Cadillac team built their car to the limit of THEIR rules, which the SCCA gave them. The Cadillac's rules are different than all of the other car's rules. Cadillac didn't do anything wrong, the SCCA did. It will be corrected as we've been told.
Coming from a stall on the grid to sharing the checkered flag with the winner is a bit of a stretch. If you ask me, the Caddy team and Andy were a bit foolish to show their cards like that.
Elgory,
By the way, I'm pretty good with math :) At times during the race the Caddy was 3 seconds faster than any car on the same lap. If you think those guys weren't sandbagging in the qualifying session, then shame on you.
Also, you really believe no one was bitching when the Vipers came out and kicked ass last year?! Come on. Be serious!
Finally, there's nothing wrong with NASCAR's format, other than the ovals. If NASCAR was run on road courses, I'd be glued to the TV set. Have you ever watched the V8 SuperTouring cars in Australia? THAT'S what NASCAR should be.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
The Cadillac team built their car to the limit of THEIR rules, which the SCCA gave them. The Cadillac's rules are different than all of the other car's rules. Cadillac didn't do anything wrong, the SCCA did. It will be corrected as we've been told.
Coming from a stall on the grid to sharing the checkered flag with the winner is a bit of a stretch. If you ask me, the Caddy team and Andy were a bit foolish to show their cards like that.
Elgory,
By the way, I'm pretty good with math :) At times during the race the Caddy was 3 seconds faster than any car on the same lap. If you think those guys weren't sandbagging in the qualifying session, then shame on you.
Also, you really believe no one was bitching when the Vipers came out and kicked ass last year?! Come on. Be serious!
Finally, there's nothing wrong with NASCAR's format, other than the ovals. If NASCAR was run on road courses, I'd be glued to the TV set. Have you ever watched the V8 SuperTouring cars in Australia? THAT'S what NASCAR should be.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
| afpdl | 03-29-2004 09:08 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by GarySheehan[/i]
[B]
Finally, there's nothing wrong with NASCAR's format, other than the ovals. If NASCAR was run on road courses, I'd be glued to the TV set. Have you ever watched the V8 SuperTouring cars in Australia? THAT'S what NASCAR should be.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url] [/B][/QUOTE] But they actually sell those cars in Australia with v8s!! NASCAR has 2 problems ovals and fwd 6cly's become rwd v8s.
[B]
Finally, there's nothing wrong with NASCAR's format, other than the ovals. If NASCAR was run on road courses, I'd be glued to the TV set. Have you ever watched the V8 SuperTouring cars in Australia? THAT'S what NASCAR should be.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url] [/B][/QUOTE] But they actually sell those cars in Australia with v8s!! NASCAR has 2 problems ovals and fwd 6cly's become rwd v8s.
| Bonzo | 03-29-2004 09:24 PM |
who cares if teh cars came with a 6cyl. the v-8's they run make some pretty freekin big horse power.
another spec class is Barber Dodge Pro Series.
another spec class is Barber Dodge Pro Series.
| mav1c | 03-30-2004 08:25 PM |
Well...NASCAR used to have cars that were MUCH closer to prouction, and as the rules evolved over the years thay now have the basically the same cars with different stickers. Maybe that's a stretch, but I think you get my point. If rules are taken too far to try and keep competition close, it's just as bad as rules that give one car an unfair advantage. It's a catch 22.
| elgorey | 03-30-2004 09:49 PM |
Really what Im trying to say is that on paper, the Caddies needed a lot of help.
It has the same engine as the Z06, but it is 500lbs heavier, worse weight distribution, worse aero, worse gearing.
So it falls to reason that to make it competitive it would need to be able to have some more power, be able to cut out a lot of weight, move the motor for better weight distrib, etc. This falls in line with the rules it was given
What scca wasnt counting on was the level GM would prepare the car.
So now that the caddy has done well, all the armchair internet quarterbacks with 20/20 hindsight look at the specs and talk like monkeys could have done a better job with the rule package.
I think if a "regular" team prepped this car, it wouldnt even make the top 10.
I actually feel bad for the caddy team, because they have spent $$ developing the car, and they are going to get the rules rolled back on them, wasting their effort.
They will also get a hefty weight adjustment, like the M3s did last year.
fair is fair I suppose. Its nice to see Caddies on the track though. I just hope they dont get pissed like PTG did and take their toys elsewhere.
PS- I dont know what you are smoking but racing is NOT at ALL the best evidence of lap times. 1 or 2 cars that can get in the front by a little will _always_ run faster that the opposition fighting amongst themselves behind them.
It has the same engine as the Z06, but it is 500lbs heavier, worse weight distribution, worse aero, worse gearing.
So it falls to reason that to make it competitive it would need to be able to have some more power, be able to cut out a lot of weight, move the motor for better weight distrib, etc. This falls in line with the rules it was given
What scca wasnt counting on was the level GM would prepare the car.
So now that the caddy has done well, all the armchair internet quarterbacks with 20/20 hindsight look at the specs and talk like monkeys could have done a better job with the rule package.
I think if a "regular" team prepped this car, it wouldnt even make the top 10.
I actually feel bad for the caddy team, because they have spent $$ developing the car, and they are going to get the rules rolled back on them, wasting their effort.
They will also get a hefty weight adjustment, like the M3s did last year.
fair is fair I suppose. Its nice to see Caddies on the track though. I just hope they dont get pissed like PTG did and take their toys elsewhere.
PS- I dont know what you are smoking but racing is NOT at ALL the best evidence of lap times. 1 or 2 cars that can get in the front by a little will _always_ run faster that the opposition fighting amongst themselves behind them.
| GarySheehan | 03-31-2004 09:51 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by elgorey [/i]
[B]PS- I dont know what you are smoking but racing is NOT at ALL the best evidence of lap times. 1 or 2 cars that can get in the front by a little will _always_ run faster that the opposition fighting amongst themselves behind them. [/B][/QUOTE]
Right, which is why Andy Pilgrims race time was half a second faster than his qualifying time as he was driving through 30 other cars in traffic?!
Honestly, did you watch the race? Were you not surprised that Andy Pilgrim could just pop out from behind a front runner like Phil McClure or Tommy Archer (both have huge power) and just walk away from them on the straights?
It seems like everyone else is aware that there is a performance discrepancy except Cadillac and you. The Cadillac won the race because they had an unfair advantage. Hey, how many other competitors get to channel their chassis so that it's lower to the ground with better aerodynamics. A channeled chassis is not even close to stock and no one gets to do it except Cadillac.
You must be right, it's a level playingfield...:rolleyes:
I'm not sure what you are arguing about. SCCA is making modifications to bring the Caddy back to the field. That's what the SCCA wants and that's what the fans of World Challenge want. I am looking forward to the next race.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
[B]PS- I dont know what you are smoking but racing is NOT at ALL the best evidence of lap times. 1 or 2 cars that can get in the front by a little will _always_ run faster that the opposition fighting amongst themselves behind them. [/B][/QUOTE]
Right, which is why Andy Pilgrims race time was half a second faster than his qualifying time as he was driving through 30 other cars in traffic?!
Honestly, did you watch the race? Were you not surprised that Andy Pilgrim could just pop out from behind a front runner like Phil McClure or Tommy Archer (both have huge power) and just walk away from them on the straights?
It seems like everyone else is aware that there is a performance discrepancy except Cadillac and you. The Cadillac won the race because they had an unfair advantage. Hey, how many other competitors get to channel their chassis so that it's lower to the ground with better aerodynamics. A channeled chassis is not even close to stock and no one gets to do it except Cadillac.
You must be right, it's a level playingfield...:rolleyes:
I'm not sure what you are arguing about. SCCA is making modifications to bring the Caddy back to the field. That's what the SCCA wants and that's what the fans of World Challenge want. I am looking forward to the next race.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
| Patrick L | 03-31-2004 01:54 PM |
Hey Gary, by the rules in GT. If some one have the money. Could they convert a WRC Impreza into a WCGT car? Strip out all the un needed stuff. I notice how BIG the fender flares are getting. In point is the Audi, wow! I wish Prodrive would campain some Imprezas in GT with the 2.5L trubo.
| kfoote | 03-31-2004 03:17 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by elgorey [/i]
Really what Im trying to say is that on paper, the Caddies needed a lot of help.
It has the same engine as the Z06, but it is 500lbs heavier, worse weight distribution, worse aero, worse gearing.[/QUOTE]
Here I agree. By letting the Caddies run to the same engine rules as the Z06, let it weigh 100 lbs lighter, and give them the option of the Z06 transmission, I would have no problem with that. The 100 lb lighter weight would counter the effect of the weight distribution not being as good.
[quote]So it falls to reason that to make it competitive it would need to be able to have some more power, be able to cut out a lot of weight, move the motor for better weight distrib, etc. This falls in line with [b]the rules it was given[/b][/quote]
The debate here is not the legality of the cars as the rules are written. The issue is the rules themselves.
[quote]What scca wasnt counting on was the level GM would prepare the car. [/quote]
Uh, do you honestly think that SCCA thought that the cars that were being prepared by Pratt & Miller with factory GM backing, a team that has won LeMans and ALMS Championships, and has been testing the car for ELEVEN MONTHS prior to Sebring would turn out a car that wasn't at the maximum potential allowed by the rules?
[quote]So now that the caddy has done well, all the armchair internet quarterbacks with 20/20 hindsight look at the specs and talk like monkeys could have done a better job with the rule package. [/quote]
People in GT have been complaining about this car since the first pictures surfaced in October or November. This debate is not new, it just has been fueled by an actual race result now and confirmed the concerns prior to the race.
[quote]I think if a "regular" team prepped this car, it wouldnt even make the top 10. [/quote]
I very sincerely doubt that. This is a gross underestimation of the quality of the teams in WCGT.
[quote]I actually feel bad for the caddy team, because they have spent $$ developing the car, and they are going to get the rules rolled back on them, wasting their effort. [/quote]
If you think that in the last 11 months this car hasn't been tested with heavier weights, different restrictor plates, narrower tires, or in any other potential configuration that SCCA could come up with to slow the cars down, that's a gross underestimation of Pratt & Miller. Consider the extra $$ spent as bringing them closer to the budgets of the other WCGT teams.
[quote]They will also get a hefty weight adjustment, like the M3s did last year. [/quote]
The problem is that SCCA can only add so much weight before it becomes a safety issue. The items that really need to be addressed would require totally new cars, which I don't see SCCA doing.
[quote]fair is fair I suppose. Its nice to see Caddies on the track though. I just hope they dont get pissed like PTG did and take their toys elsewhere.
PS- I dont know what you are smoking but racing is NOT at ALL the best evidence of lap times. 1 or 2 cars that can get in the front by a little will _always_ run faster that the opposition fighting amongst themselves behind them. [/QUOTE]
Gary covers this one for me
The WRX STi is legal for WCGT. At this time, no one has applied for the car to be homologated that I know of, but it could be done.
Really what Im trying to say is that on paper, the Caddies needed a lot of help.
It has the same engine as the Z06, but it is 500lbs heavier, worse weight distribution, worse aero, worse gearing.[/QUOTE]
Here I agree. By letting the Caddies run to the same engine rules as the Z06, let it weigh 100 lbs lighter, and give them the option of the Z06 transmission, I would have no problem with that. The 100 lb lighter weight would counter the effect of the weight distribution not being as good.
[quote]So it falls to reason that to make it competitive it would need to be able to have some more power, be able to cut out a lot of weight, move the motor for better weight distrib, etc. This falls in line with [b]the rules it was given[/b][/quote]
The debate here is not the legality of the cars as the rules are written. The issue is the rules themselves.
[quote]What scca wasnt counting on was the level GM would prepare the car. [/quote]
Uh, do you honestly think that SCCA thought that the cars that were being prepared by Pratt & Miller with factory GM backing, a team that has won LeMans and ALMS Championships, and has been testing the car for ELEVEN MONTHS prior to Sebring would turn out a car that wasn't at the maximum potential allowed by the rules?
[quote]So now that the caddy has done well, all the armchair internet quarterbacks with 20/20 hindsight look at the specs and talk like monkeys could have done a better job with the rule package. [/quote]
People in GT have been complaining about this car since the first pictures surfaced in October or November. This debate is not new, it just has been fueled by an actual race result now and confirmed the concerns prior to the race.
[quote]I think if a "regular" team prepped this car, it wouldnt even make the top 10. [/quote]
I very sincerely doubt that. This is a gross underestimation of the quality of the teams in WCGT.
[quote]I actually feel bad for the caddy team, because they have spent $$ developing the car, and they are going to get the rules rolled back on them, wasting their effort. [/quote]
If you think that in the last 11 months this car hasn't been tested with heavier weights, different restrictor plates, narrower tires, or in any other potential configuration that SCCA could come up with to slow the cars down, that's a gross underestimation of Pratt & Miller. Consider the extra $$ spent as bringing them closer to the budgets of the other WCGT teams.
[quote]They will also get a hefty weight adjustment, like the M3s did last year. [/quote]
The problem is that SCCA can only add so much weight before it becomes a safety issue. The items that really need to be addressed would require totally new cars, which I don't see SCCA doing.
[quote]fair is fair I suppose. Its nice to see Caddies on the track though. I just hope they dont get pissed like PTG did and take their toys elsewhere.
PS- I dont know what you are smoking but racing is NOT at ALL the best evidence of lap times. 1 or 2 cars that can get in the front by a little will _always_ run faster that the opposition fighting amongst themselves behind them. [/QUOTE]
Gary covers this one for me
The WRX STi is legal for WCGT. At this time, no one has applied for the car to be homologated that I know of, but it could be done.
| elgorey | 03-31-2004 11:19 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by kfoote [/i]
Here I agree. By letting the Caddies run to the same engine rules as the Z06, let it weigh 100 lbs lighter, and give them the option of the Z06 transmission, I would have no problem with that. The 100 lb lighter weight would counter the effect of the weight distribution not being as good.
[/quote]
Car would not have a chance in hell.
Whether you believe it or not, the SCCA has a lot more experience than you do at making a rules package. But I guess you know everything. 100lbs would not do a damn thing against a z06, it would still be 400 lbs heavier than a z06. On paper, its a fairly reasonable ruleset. Its the team that made the difference.
[quote]
Uh, do you honestly think that SCCA thought that the cars that were being prepared by Pratt & Miller with factory GM backing, a team that has won LeMans and ALMS Championships, and has been testing the car for ELEVEN MONTHS prior to Sebring would turn out a car that wasn't at the maximum potential allowed by the rules?[/quote]
you have to be kidding me.
It is not the SCCAs job to take into account the team or who is running the cars when putting together a rules package. Furthermore, those rules were put together [b]before[/b] testing was done. If anything, you are proving my point. With the experience of this team, they could have taken any car in the series and built it into a top car. This team was successful because they built a [b]PRO[/b] car, not the halfassed semi-pro junk that fills the majority of a SWC lineup. The stakes have been raised in SWCGT, and thats what people are whining about.
And Gary comparing Phil McClure with Andy Pilgrim is a joke.
[quote]People in GT have been complaining about this car since the first pictures surfaced in October or November. [/quote]
of course they were. They saw the team putting it together and knew they would get their asses handed to them no matter what the car
[quote]I very sincerely doubt that. This is a gross underestimation of the quality of the teams in WCGT.[/quote]
You grossly overestimate the teams in WCGT. How many teams do you personally know? I know several and they are all struggling or near bankrupt. Sponsors and money are hard to come by, even for a televised series. Bottom line, SWC has not been an international caliber [b]PRO[/b] series, but with the big teams filling out more and more of the field each year it is becoming one.
I really dont know what you guys are whining about. Its business as usual with SWGT, certainly not a "Debacle"
Rest assured that the caddies will be evened out, for better or for worse and you all can get your panties out of a bunch.
Here I agree. By letting the Caddies run to the same engine rules as the Z06, let it weigh 100 lbs lighter, and give them the option of the Z06 transmission, I would have no problem with that. The 100 lb lighter weight would counter the effect of the weight distribution not being as good.
[/quote]
Car would not have a chance in hell.
Whether you believe it or not, the SCCA has a lot more experience than you do at making a rules package. But I guess you know everything. 100lbs would not do a damn thing against a z06, it would still be 400 lbs heavier than a z06. On paper, its a fairly reasonable ruleset. Its the team that made the difference.
[quote]
Uh, do you honestly think that SCCA thought that the cars that were being prepared by Pratt & Miller with factory GM backing, a team that has won LeMans and ALMS Championships, and has been testing the car for ELEVEN MONTHS prior to Sebring would turn out a car that wasn't at the maximum potential allowed by the rules?[/quote]
you have to be kidding me.
It is not the SCCAs job to take into account the team or who is running the cars when putting together a rules package. Furthermore, those rules were put together [b]before[/b] testing was done. If anything, you are proving my point. With the experience of this team, they could have taken any car in the series and built it into a top car. This team was successful because they built a [b]PRO[/b] car, not the halfassed semi-pro junk that fills the majority of a SWC lineup. The stakes have been raised in SWCGT, and thats what people are whining about.
And Gary comparing Phil McClure with Andy Pilgrim is a joke.
[quote]People in GT have been complaining about this car since the first pictures surfaced in October or November. [/quote]
of course they were. They saw the team putting it together and knew they would get their asses handed to them no matter what the car
[quote]I very sincerely doubt that. This is a gross underestimation of the quality of the teams in WCGT.[/quote]
You grossly overestimate the teams in WCGT. How many teams do you personally know? I know several and they are all struggling or near bankrupt. Sponsors and money are hard to come by, even for a televised series. Bottom line, SWC has not been an international caliber [b]PRO[/b] series, but with the big teams filling out more and more of the field each year it is becoming one.
I really dont know what you guys are whining about. Its business as usual with SWGT, certainly not a "Debacle"
Rest assured that the caddies will be evened out, for better or for worse and you all can get your panties out of a bunch.
| GarySheehan | 04-01-2004 01:09 AM |
Elgory, you are starting to piss me off.
I never compared Phil McClure with Andy Pilgrim! I was comparing their CARS down the straight. It's a dragrace. No skill, just horsepower and aerodynamics. And the way Pilgrim was able to pull out from behind McClure and rocket past him with what had to be a 10mph advantage down the straight shows that the huge power to weight and aero advantages of the Cadillac. We're not even talking about handling here. AND DON'T START IN ON CORNER EXIT SPEED, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. Go back and watch the tape. I'm not an idiot, although a lot of your comments towards me have been leaning that way.
I'm shocked that you even came to that conclusion. You participate in motorsports and spectate. And you know me as well. I figured you would know better.
I think the SCCA is handling this properly. They made a miscalculation on the capabilities of the package and they are pulling it back. I don't have a bug up my a$$ about it. They've got a tough job and they are pretty damned good at it.
If you think that the first race of the season was "fair" and you don't see why the SCCA is reigning in the ruleset for the Cadillac team, then you'd be better off watching another series.
I'm done here.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
I never compared Phil McClure with Andy Pilgrim! I was comparing their CARS down the straight. It's a dragrace. No skill, just horsepower and aerodynamics. And the way Pilgrim was able to pull out from behind McClure and rocket past him with what had to be a 10mph advantage down the straight shows that the huge power to weight and aero advantages of the Cadillac. We're not even talking about handling here. AND DON'T START IN ON CORNER EXIT SPEED, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. Go back and watch the tape. I'm not an idiot, although a lot of your comments towards me have been leaning that way.
I'm shocked that you even came to that conclusion. You participate in motorsports and spectate. And you know me as well. I figured you would know better.
I think the SCCA is handling this properly. They made a miscalculation on the capabilities of the package and they are pulling it back. I don't have a bug up my a$$ about it. They've got a tough job and they are pretty damned good at it.
If you think that the first race of the season was "fair" and you don't see why the SCCA is reigning in the ruleset for the Cadillac team, then you'd be better off watching another series.
I'm done here.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
| kfoote | 04-01-2004 12:32 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by elgorey [/i]
Car would not have a chance in hell.
Whether you believe it or not, the SCCA has a lot more experience than you do at making a rules package. But I guess you know everything. 100lbs would not do a damn thing against a z06, it would still be 400 lbs heavier than a z06. On paper, its a fairly reasonable ruleset. Its the team that made the difference.[/quote]
My bad, for clarification I meant the Caddy should be 100 lbs lighter than the Z06, not than the factory weight.
[quote]you have to be kidding me.
It is not the SCCAs job to take into account the team or who is running the cars when putting together a rules package. [/quote]
Theoreticlly, yes, but realistically SCCA does take the drivers into account.
[quote]Furthermore, those rules were put together [b]before[/b] testing was done. [/quote]
The first VTS for the car came out on 01/09/04. The cars began testing in April of 2003. Many of the rules allowances that were given were at the request of the team.
[quote] If anything, you are proving my point. With the experience of this team, they could have taken any car in the series and built it into a top car. [/quote]
Exactly. Why they were given rules concessions well beyond anything else is the problem. With the nature of Sebring, if they had built a C5 corvette to the existing rules, they probably still would have finished 1-2, but it would have been a lot closer.
[quote]This team was successful because they built a [b]PRO[/b] car, not the halfassed semi-pro junk that fills the majority of a SWC lineup. The stakes have been raised in SWCGT, and thats what people are whining about.[/quote]
Were you at Sebring? The people building the new semi-pro junk have won races and championships in other series such as ALMS and Trans-Am, and the majority were very well prepped.
[quote]And Gary comparing Phil McClure with Andy Pilgrim is a joke.[/quote]
The pass in question did not have anything to do with the drivers. McClure got a better run out of the corner leading onto the back straight, and Pilgrim blew by him like he was standing still. If the drivers were swapped in that particular pass, the result would have been identical.
[quote]of course they were. They saw the team putting it together and knew they would get their asses handed to them no matter what the car [/quote]
There would not have been nearly the uproar if the same team had built a C5 to the existing rules. The problem is the degree of the rules allowances
[quote]You grossly overestimate the teams in WCGT. How many teams do you personally know? [/quote]
WCGT teams that I have spoken to members of in the paddock at some point over the last 4 years:
Champion
3R
McMillan
Realtime
PTG
At Speed
Driven Performance
Tiger racing
Jimmy Adams Racing
and I worked for G&W in the 2001 season
Since the start of the 2001 season, I have been to all but one WC race (Sebring 01) where both GT and TC were running working for either G&W or Turner.
[quote]I know several and they are all struggling or near bankrupt. Sponsors and money are hard to come by, even for a televised series. Bottom line, SWC has not been an international caliber [b]PRO[/b] series, but with the big teams filling out more and more of the field each year it is becoming one. [/quote]
All privateer race teams are concerned about money. Racing is expensive. To do everything that a team owner or manager would want to do in a perfect world would require a $5 mil/year/car budget in WCGT. The same is true for every other racing series on the planet, the issues in SWC GT are found in every other racing series (Jordan F1, for example)
[quote]I really dont know what you guys are whining about. Its business as usual with SWGT, certainly not a "Debacle"
Rest assured that the caddies will be evened out, for better or for worse and you all can get your panties out of a bunch.[/QUOTE]
I challenge you to find a WCGT race since they went to the current format in 1999 where the difference from the fastest race lap to the fastest race lap from the next fastest kind of car is 1 sec, never mind the 1.8 at Sebring.
Car would not have a chance in hell.
Whether you believe it or not, the SCCA has a lot more experience than you do at making a rules package. But I guess you know everything. 100lbs would not do a damn thing against a z06, it would still be 400 lbs heavier than a z06. On paper, its a fairly reasonable ruleset. Its the team that made the difference.[/quote]
My bad, for clarification I meant the Caddy should be 100 lbs lighter than the Z06, not than the factory weight.
[quote]you have to be kidding me.
It is not the SCCAs job to take into account the team or who is running the cars when putting together a rules package. [/quote]
Theoreticlly, yes, but realistically SCCA does take the drivers into account.
[quote]Furthermore, those rules were put together [b]before[/b] testing was done. [/quote]
The first VTS for the car came out on 01/09/04. The cars began testing in April of 2003. Many of the rules allowances that were given were at the request of the team.
[quote] If anything, you are proving my point. With the experience of this team, they could have taken any car in the series and built it into a top car. [/quote]
Exactly. Why they were given rules concessions well beyond anything else is the problem. With the nature of Sebring, if they had built a C5 corvette to the existing rules, they probably still would have finished 1-2, but it would have been a lot closer.
[quote]This team was successful because they built a [b]PRO[/b] car, not the halfassed semi-pro junk that fills the majority of a SWC lineup. The stakes have been raised in SWCGT, and thats what people are whining about.[/quote]
Were you at Sebring? The people building the new semi-pro junk have won races and championships in other series such as ALMS and Trans-Am, and the majority were very well prepped.
[quote]And Gary comparing Phil McClure with Andy Pilgrim is a joke.[/quote]
The pass in question did not have anything to do with the drivers. McClure got a better run out of the corner leading onto the back straight, and Pilgrim blew by him like he was standing still. If the drivers were swapped in that particular pass, the result would have been identical.
[quote]of course they were. They saw the team putting it together and knew they would get their asses handed to them no matter what the car [/quote]
There would not have been nearly the uproar if the same team had built a C5 to the existing rules. The problem is the degree of the rules allowances
[quote]You grossly overestimate the teams in WCGT. How many teams do you personally know? [/quote]
WCGT teams that I have spoken to members of in the paddock at some point over the last 4 years:
Champion
3R
McMillan
Realtime
PTG
At Speed
Driven Performance
Tiger racing
Jimmy Adams Racing
and I worked for G&W in the 2001 season
Since the start of the 2001 season, I have been to all but one WC race (Sebring 01) where both GT and TC were running working for either G&W or Turner.
[quote]I know several and they are all struggling or near bankrupt. Sponsors and money are hard to come by, even for a televised series. Bottom line, SWC has not been an international caliber [b]PRO[/b] series, but with the big teams filling out more and more of the field each year it is becoming one. [/quote]
All privateer race teams are concerned about money. Racing is expensive. To do everything that a team owner or manager would want to do in a perfect world would require a $5 mil/year/car budget in WCGT. The same is true for every other racing series on the planet, the issues in SWC GT are found in every other racing series (Jordan F1, for example)
[quote]I really dont know what you guys are whining about. Its business as usual with SWGT, certainly not a "Debacle"
Rest assured that the caddies will be evened out, for better or for worse and you all can get your panties out of a bunch.[/QUOTE]
I challenge you to find a WCGT race since they went to the current format in 1999 where the difference from the fastest race lap to the fastest race lap from the next fastest kind of car is 1 sec, never mind the 1.8 at Sebring.
| Ru fan | 04-01-2004 05:24 PM |
Money Cap!
�
�
All I gotta say is "MONEY LIMIT". I know that all teams would require a different amount of money since the cars require different amounts to prep. I wish Speed/SCCA would keep this a street like class that was mostly dependent on driver skill rather than budget. If it keeps going at this pace we are gonna end up with a hand full of big budget teams.
Later,
Seth E.:alien:
Later,
Seth E.:alien:
| KoneKiller | 04-01-2004 07:10 PM |
Aussie V8 cars are door slammers, too. A quick look at the rules ([url]http://www.v8supercar.com.au/downloads/operationsman/2004opman/2004%20Div%20C%20Update%202.pdf[/url]) makes me think they are really quite stock. They even have to use stock body pieces!
I think this is marvelous!
I think this is marvelous!
| kfoote | 04-02-2004 05:38 PM |
From the World Challenge website, just announced:
Cadillac CTS-V/R (2004)� Change Appendix A required restrictor to 50% (63.6mm). Change required rev limit to
7000 rpm. Increase Appendix A base weight to 3200 lbs. (+200 lbs.). Add following to �Chassis Miscellaneous�
section: �Rear weight distribution limited to 49% of total weight, including driver, as the car comes off track.� Add
following to �Engine Miscellaneous� section: �The airbox/air intake assembly design used at Sebring shall be used
for remainder of 2004 season without change.�
Also, to address the grille sticker issue in the Nissan Sentra SER from the same bulletin:
Article 2.9.1, p.50 � Insert the following sentence after the first sentence of the paragraph: �Standard body
appearance is considered to include the OEM grille. A photographic replica is not sufficient. Teams choosing not
to utilize the OEM grille opening for airflow may mount a close-out panel behind the grille.�
Cadillac CTS-V/R (2004)� Change Appendix A required restrictor to 50% (63.6mm). Change required rev limit to
7000 rpm. Increase Appendix A base weight to 3200 lbs. (+200 lbs.). Add following to �Chassis Miscellaneous�
section: �Rear weight distribution limited to 49% of total weight, including driver, as the car comes off track.� Add
following to �Engine Miscellaneous� section: �The airbox/air intake assembly design used at Sebring shall be used
for remainder of 2004 season without change.�
Also, to address the grille sticker issue in the Nissan Sentra SER from the same bulletin:
Article 2.9.1, p.50 � Insert the following sentence after the first sentence of the paragraph: �Standard body
appearance is considered to include the OEM grille. A photographic replica is not sufficient. Teams choosing not
to utilize the OEM grille opening for airflow may mount a close-out panel behind the grille.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét