BRC 1976 - Under Pressure [E8-Q]

Community Challenges & Competitions
1418

The problem with going for a super lightweight car like I wanted to build is that any increase in engine capacity more than makes up for the extra weight up to around 1100kg, which seems to be the peak as the top 6 in the current standings are all around about 1100kg (of course this may change on different tracks), I also found my own car could use more power but had to force myself not to go over my 1000kg goal.

Then you have the likes of @NormanVauxhall , @Der_Bayer and myself sneaking into the top 10 with lighter cars. So I have to commend anyone that made something radically different for whatever reasons they had (personal preference, added challenge, lore friendliness etc).

1419

I did a little testing with mid engined cars and with most of them the biggest engine you can get is a 2 litre. if you have a mid engined car, its time to flaunt that engine.:alien:

1420

You can fit far bigger one using a mid-transverse set up in the body I used

1421

Really? but isn’t mid transverse too expensive for this brc?

1422

Not for my car!

1 Like
1424

(psst @Pboy123 use the like button, don’t comment… useless things unnecesarily like "oh’)

1425

I’m running a mid transverse 4.3 V8. Definitely more expensive than an ultra-lightweight but still got some positive quality on it.

1426

seriously? how much does the engine weigh?

1427

4.2L Mid-trav V8 here too :slight_smile:
194kg

2 Likes
1428

cast iron 4.3L V8, 247kg. I assume yours is an alu block then.

1429

Alu block and head.
didn’t want to get too much weight in the rear.
but tbh it’s still quite bad :slight_smile:
35:65

1430

32:68

For MR the heavy engine doesn’t hurt as much as for RR or FR. I thought the money is better invested in more power or better aero.
Our approaches to this season are actually very similar, yet different :wink:

1 Like
1431

But you have less power. :stuck_out_tongue:

1432

Thats nothing compared to my 25/75 (although mine is RR)

1433

True. But I experimented with different cam profiles and this one gave me the best time.

Also, I threw tons of quality at the aero. With longer gears I could do well over 300kph ^^

1434

I limited myself to 280kph, since my car won’t drive any faster with longer gearing anyway. Tested that on hockenheim.
Could still lose time when drafting, but i hope to drive in front anyway. :stuck_out_tongue:
Otherwise i could get up to 308kph with longer gearing.

1435

306kph on flat ground. Gone past 310kph downhill at Spa, but not worth the loss at other tracks.

1436

Oh, absolutely. I kept getting better results when I was testing up to around 1100kg where I felt the additional weight was getting a bit much for the 265 tires and the additional cost too much for the budget. TheBobWiley has gone a bit beyond 1100 and the car looks very good so it probably isn’t a hard limit.

But it’s much better at high speed than low speed! Quite possibly due to 200kg of downforce on the rears.

I just made that car because you guys were discussing how light you could go and still meet the 110% limit. After another quick half hour job (and assuming the 110 time based on Absurdist’s 2:03.8 lap is 2:16.18) you can go far lighter than 720kg…

Now that is superleggera. :slight_smile:

2 Likes
1437

Jesus. That’s F1 car weight there! And I suppose that if it’s light, it’s also efficient? As that would make up for the slightly off the pace lap times. But then again, you haven’t even really tuned it yet so…

1438

#[color=#ffee00]Diepholz P&Q Results[/color]

Time to send in your strategy updates in case you want to adapt to the track and qualifying results. The deadline for that will be announced soon!

E2PQ-Results.zip (2.3 KB)

6 Likes