Awww i made it all the way to 4th before my engine went bang bit more cooling next time.
Iâm surprised that there were four cars that consumed more fuel than my Battle Wagon. Clearly my efforts need a lot more work, though it is interesting that my two contrasting designs should be so close performance-wise.
Strictly average in the design competition, but 19th in the race? Iâm okay with that. I may try something a little different come the full 1976 season.
21 and 22 ⌠so close to being mentioned in top 20 
still REALLY good for first brc, considering my cars and strategy both had some flaws and being 51 in practice and 39 in qualifying 
was expecting high 20âs and actually really hyped when I saw the 16&18 at about half the race time but 21&22 it is 
Ok, thatâs a TON of information to process. Starting with âwhen somebody states 2:22 is competetiveâ it means âit is about 2 seconds behind a non competetive carââŚ
In any case, got bit in the ass by deciding to adapt an existing KHT car for racing, tire wear, engine size limitaton, tire wear, bad drivability, tire wear⌠more tire wear⌠sighâŚ
Yeah lol I know right. It was easy enough to get to 2:22 but the competition kept heating up.Keeping the drivability up and lopping another 2,3 let alone 4-5 seconds off the time requires some serious exploration at which point I realised I simply didnât have time.
Had a great race considering this was the first BRC event Ive entered into. The sports tires worked pretty well and both cars finished right by eachother in 10th and 11th although one was slightly screwed over by a last minute driver change that cost it 2-3 positions. I do have a little bit of an idea what i need to change for the actual season but a genereally good performance still.
Also can someone add up the total amount of fuel that we used in these 6 hours?
If Iâm reading the spreadsheet right ⌠48.46 metric tons. 26.4% by the top ten vehicles alone. 11.1% by the top three vehicles alone.
Edit: âŚthatâs not actually as much as it sounds, I think. Tank trucks with 43,900 L arenât unheard of; two of those would be enough to fuel the entire field with plenty to spare.
1 Like
I won?? My car didnât crash or explode? This canât be real.
Actually, the turbo car was designed for me to have a laugh, have a very fast gas guzzler, that should explode halfway around the race, but it turned out rather sensible on the tyres and still very fast. However, the serious, carefully designed and balanced entry was the NA one, and that finished 13th. Shows how much I know about these challenges.
18th design wise ainât half bad.
Likewise my good man, sensible just doesnât seem to rise to the top, except in extraordinary circumstances.
Then again in real racing, the winner is the one who stays closest to the precipice the longest without falling off, to paraphrase Casey Stoner.
@Leonardo9613 Remember it was only a single race and the fast car might explode in 1/3 of the races of a season. And this race was done on the fastest of all tracks of the season. So the faster cars had an advantage and you have been lucky that your car did not explode. For the whole season believe a more sensible approach might be better.
1 Like
I won the last place on the design poll at least.
I didnât wanted to touch the appearance of the car since changing the color made the change performance stats also.
I was running positive camber on both of my cars. The first one had a bit more aggressive strategy and was around 0.4s / lap quicker. On dry one stint the fuel lasted 50+ minutes with a wear wear so small, the difference between new and worn tires was merely 2 seconds. But since there were a LOT of more pitstops because of weather I should put more negative camber on it and shorten the fuel. I was overthinking and decided to lengthen my stints as I wasnât accounting possible weather changes.
For my car the limit where camber was actually increasing the wear so much it started to be slower over the whole stint was around -0.3.
One funny thing about my engine. It was so tight on regulations, it just fitted in the engine bay at idle and at 4000+ rpm it was already too big.
Awesome race to observe, grats to @Leonardo9613. Also hat off to @AirJordan for the nuttiest contender. When a car consumes its own body weight of fuel in five hours, you know the engineers meant business.
Since I only came around after entries were already closed, would some contestants be willing to share the cambers you ran? Iâd like to enter the 1976 championship, but to be competitive I should have some sort of understanding about the effect of camber on tire wear and the effect of tire wear on speed loss as this race would have provided. Pyrlix mentioned on the stream he ran -3.00 (and won the tire wear competition). Anyone around -1.00, -1.50, -2.00?
1 Like
I had -1.20° front, -1.80° rear.
On a mid-engine car with conservative fuel consumption this gave me about 25-27% rear tire wear whenever I needed to pit for fuel.
I ran this camber setting because it gave me fast laps in automation, for the endurance race I think less rear camber would have been faster overall.
@Der_Bayer will the full 76 season come soon? Canât wait to build new BRC cars 
i canât remember the camber i used on this one.
btw, i won the eco car challenge on this one at least. the car consuming least fuel but still finishes the race.
@HowlerAutomotive
I would like to mention that the tire wear was tied between Pyrlix and me, but I ran less kilometer than PyrlixâŚ
Just made sure my car would win at least in one category 
haha
I used max camber since my car was so thirsty tire wear wasn´t my limitation. For the full season I already designed a more sofisticated car, just have to tune it to the new regulation, but I believe it has the potential to run in the top 20 and eventually score points
Both of my entries ran semi-slicks, RWD, and -2.3 / -2.1 camber, decently high wear, but I was aiming for fuel stop at the same time tires were hitting 25% wear. The wear may have been too high, but I was trying to strike a balance between time loss from wear and staying out longer than the other cars based on the practice session. It seems that either going for extreme track stay or burning fuel like crazy and pitting continuously seems to get you to the top 3.
Well, considering both my entries died due to damage (the fall of nerd2 was expected however, it does have 0 drivability after all) Iâll probably focus on durability (safety and eng. reliability)
My second entry was running about -0.50 front with -3.00 rear. I forgot on my 1st one.