i like the 60’s/70’s idea a lot.
that means i can do me more
yeah I myself like to have really close turnings for comps but it doesn’t work out in Automation world I was thinking we could still have a max capacity at say 427ci and still only use a single 4bbl and only 2 valves per cylinder with leaded fuel and no loudness limit and keep in mind we will not be looking at a race for another 2-3 weeks until my excel program arrives. yes it really takes that long to order shit here in Australia when you do not live on the coast
Allright, step by step.
- First and foremost are we all happy with only allowing one body with no morphing and a set amount of cooling and down-force front and rear i.e between 50kg’s -150kg’s front 300-400kg’s rear or something like that?
I’d say go with no downforce at all. Allow for 1 lip on the front and one at the back at 0 downforce settings.
2: Would people rather a classic NASCAR of the 60’s-70’s with a much more open engine design phase or would we all rather the choice of a set off spec engine’s that everybody has to use but can tune however they wish (ie a ford engine a chev and a dodge I would do this by using different bore stroke ratio’s however the engines would all be MOHV)?
I’d go with “cubic capacity limit is this, heads must be that, injection (or carb) is that” with limitations on high tech solutions like VVT and VVL
3: I would like the chassis to all be the same between competitors with the same suspension used what do you guys want?
Chassis materials and structure is a good limitation, suspension setup is not really.
4: I was thinking that there would be a power cap but not torque.
Power cap would be taken care of with a good fuel consumption formula, no need for that
5: A total cost or total combined production unit level which is not huge?
Total cost + engine cost, imo
6: standardized tyre sizes and quality with the option of semi-slicks +8 (which would wear out faster) or semi-slicks +4
Nascar does not compete in rain usually. So I’d say give everybody the same tires
7:It will be an 6hr event and pitstops will be important and will take fuel/tyres/damage into account
I would rather a distance based event than a timed one, honestly. Makes sure an option of yellow flag pitting
8: Drafting will be a set figure and will depend on whether you have a car in front of you or behind
Interested on how you will implement this
9: There will be a weight limit of no lighter than 1497Kg’s and no heavier than 1550kg’s
I’d go with the lower limit only, heavier guys will penalise themselves
11: There would be a spec fuel cell for each vehicle say 55L
That is a good option.
1: I would go with free cooling (you can undercool but there must be some penalty for bad reliability like a chance of blowout) or minimum required. Aero 2 lips one wing if 60s-70s or 2 lips with downforce undertray if modern.
2: open
3: Chasis tab should be the same for everyone.
4: No power cap. Maybe a capacity cap. No economy cap either…if you can take more stops go for it.
5: brc like model cost seem fair.
6: Same tires for all.
7: nice
8: nice
9: no need for limiting heavy cars.
10: ok
11: ok
well that’s what I think and I’m looking forward to this 
-
I’m fine with a set body and I encourage a set maximum level of cooling. Teams should be free to “tape up the grille” to their liking, just like in the real series. A downforce range would be appropriate.
-
I would love to see an old school 60s-70s series with open engine design. However, I think we should set some CID regulations.
-
Chassis should be of the same materials and geometry. I’m fine with some minor tweaks here and there.
-
Don’t cap engines if it’s an old school series. Honestly, if we stay true to engine designs, you’re not going to see huge power differences. I don’t think this is needed at all. The tech will do it. Besides, finding the most power is half the battle with identical cars.
-
Sure. I want to see what the competition looks like with a budget.
-
I say everyone should run the exact same tires, down to the sizes. This is NASCAR not F1.
-
Good idea, but 6 hours??? What is this the Coca-Cola 600?
-
Please explain how this is going to work.
-
I say just set a minimum weight.
-
Not up for discussion.
-
I’d like to go back to the old school 22 gallon tanks, but a uniform size would be a good idea.
second draft:
1: we all use a standard body with no morphing one front lip and one rear wing and cooling can be set as low as -10% of minimum cooling.
OPTION 1
OPTION 2 my preferred option
2: Year and trim will be 1967.
3: Engine must be cast block v8 up to a maximum capacity of 429ci with alloy 2 valve heads and must use a single 4bbl or a twin set of dcoe (as both use the same intake manifold) and race intakes on super leaded fuel.
4: The Chassis will be a steel space-frame with MacPherson strut front and a solid axle coil/leaf spring rear the body will be aluminum or steel
5: No power cap
6: We will use the BRC system to calculate cost of vehicles
7: There will be a total of 134 Laps equating to 1000Km/621Miles
8: standard tyre and rims using a front tyre of 185/85R15 and a rear tyre of 205/75r15 semi slicks +6
9: I’m not sure with braking yet any idea’s? As there is not a lot of braking involved I don’t know whether to implement a rule or to leave it open.
10: drafting and pit stops are being worked out atm i will put up some maths soon. Basically drafting will be a set figure dependent on where in the pack your car is
11: Weight limit of 1497KG’s or greater
12: all cars will have a standard 22gallon (83 Litre) fuel cell
13: all cars must have a total safety of 35 to simulate rollcages etc.
Edit: with crashes I am still working out the formula but I will allow for yellow flag pitstops. When I hold the race I will be doing “live” coverage (i will PM each entrant every ten laps to let them know exactly where they are and their fuel/tyre/damage stats) which will allow the entrants to pick when and where they pit.
A random event towards crashes/failures/driver errors will happen every 10 laps with the final event at lap 130
Edit 2: I was also thinking of a beauty contest where the best looking entry gets to skip the last random event at lap 130 (as decided by the community)
Edit 3: each entrant can enter two cars either the exact same cars with different race strategies or two different cars with the same race strategy
I’m not sure about restricting morphing, especially in the early NASCAR years. The early cars did look like their original production models. Even later on when they all look almost the same, there are subtle differences in appearance.
Actually, i agree, with the weight and frame restrictions in place already, there not that much effect morphing can do. Maybe just a little weight distribution not much more
I beg to differ. Its not so much braking to a stop many times as it is consistent repetitive braking.
Period cars with big drum brakes all around will experience brake fade after the first 10 (or so) full power laps.
ok so I going to start making test cars to see how much effect morphing actually has and will get back to y’all.
And braking I’m playing with afterwards, I don’t think this will be a huge factor while racing more so for effecting reliability and braking will have a bearing on crashes
Can I just say how stoked and how much I appreciate the interest in this little side show of mine and please feal free to put our idea’s out there I am an Aussie so I don’t know that much about NASCAR and I cannot follow it over here anyway so I will miss shite
What’s the weight difference between the OHV, DAOHC, SOHC, and DOHC?
Ok so this is a quick test engine as you can see it’s not tuned but it is balanced for this comparison as you can see OHV is severely down on any other choice
BASE SPECS FOR ALL HEADS
First OHV
Second DAOHC
Third SOHC
Fourth DOHC
5th DAOHC CAST
6th SOHC CAST
7th DOHC CAST
well im actually surprised that daohc allows the engine to breathes better than 2v sohc…
i’ve always thought it was one of the most useless options that i’ve never chosen.
i guess i see a point of that now.
Then my vote is we modernize enough to get MOHV and thereby give pushrods their advantages back. I thought they would be more equal than that, honestly, hence asking the weight. (My intended plan, ruined by the information I’ve been given, would have been to handicap all but OHV with cast-iron heads to make them weigh more.)
So it looks like we’ll be starting some time later than the 60’s/70’s, but I can’t recall the first year that MOHV shows up.
MOHV is not until the 2000’s which is a problem
the other option is as Madrias says limit the other heads to cast and only allow alloy OHV. and looking at the graphs we could limit RPM to 5000 but I really dont want to do that
or we could allow the use of the modern engine say 2003 using the regs we have decided on. So a 1967 body with a 2003 trim?
My vote would be a '67 body, 200X engine/variant, 200X trim with no driving assists and with standard safety. It’s as close as we can get without limiting the other engine types to where there’s no reason to pick anything other than pushrods because you’ll have to carry cast heads and can’t use their one typically-major advantage, which is that they can rev.
I wouldn’t have cared too much about when all of them hit peak power or redline, as long as the power numbers looked similar. A low-revving engine that happens to be very light could beat a high-revving engine made from all-cast-iron, which will also harm fuel efficiency.
The problem, as you showed, is that between Pushrods and DOHC, there’s a 60 horsepower difference between the two, even before tuning really starts.
At the same time, the only one that’s really happy to rev out to 6k is DOHC, which was half expected. It likes to rev, but it weighs a lot more than the other heads for that advantage. (Compared to Pushrod, the Cast DOHC’s 60 hp advantage carries an additional 71.6 kg, and the Alloy DOHC’s 58 hp advantage carries an additional 28.1 kg. This is why I suggested all-cast for the non-pushrod heads: a higher weight means your added horsepower has to work harder.)
That said, I’d need to hear it from others whether a 60 horsepower advantage/disadvantage equates out to either a fart’s worth of difference, or a tornado’s worth of difference.
also keep in mind the bore/stroke I tried to be as square as possible what I am finding is as i go up in year say 69-79 the difference between the OHC heads is getting closer but there is still a large difference in torque and horsepower between OHV and any OHC. Im using a different bore stroke and getting the same kinda results so that eliminates whether it has to do with bore size
Ok so I’m now at the year 2000 and MOHV is now available and the story it tells is interesting see below
OLD OHV
DAOHC
SOHC
DOHC
MOHV
Now we can see that MOHV is within a bee’s dick of the DOHC numbers and 40kg’s lighter.
just for interest sake I’l throw up some multi valve numbers
SOHC 24V
SOHC 32V
DOHC 32V
DOHC 40V
and after real world testing using the same vehicle with the 5 types of head on the same block with the same settings I am coming to the conclusion that DOHC is too far ahead of everything else produce 2 sec faster lap times while the rest of the pack were all within 0.5sec of each other (2 valve heads only)
I have also now found that with morphing the second body there is about 0.2 a lap difference with the same setup but different morphings
However option one the gap is much larger about 3 sec a lap difference from the unmorphed body
Edit: @KLinardo Im all for OHV only, however at this stage it is good to be collecting data on the engines and affects that aero has, I’m slowly getting a larger picture of it all, and with implementing so many factor’s the more data ppl can collect for us the better I say. And with stipulating the wing again I am all for that however there will be more than one type allowed as I say I am doing a shite load of testing atm lol I havn’t even started on economy yet
1 Like
Yeah, there’s a reason that NASCAR banned the 427 SOHC after one season. It was annihilating the competition.
I say stick with '67 everything and only use OHV. Maybe we can stipulate some quality sliders in the valve tab like we do for tires, then adjust the budget accordingly. It should allow for more power and everyone will be even with the competition. NASCAR hasn’t allowed a OHC engine since the 1965 Ford 427 SOHC.
I like the idea of not morphing bodies. The NASCARs of the 60s were different designs, but that’s because they were based on different models, and not some template as used today. I’d much rather see one body with no morphs to make sure no one goes Dodge Charger Daytona on us.
You may also want to stipulate the allowed wing(s). I think there’s a good NASCAR-like spoiler somewhere. I know I have it, but I haven’t used it in a while.
Edit: @Darkshine5 that’s probably not a bad idea. I simply don’t know what group of rules will keep freedom of design and relatively close competition. This is probably the best place to figure that out though. It will make endeavors down the road much easier.
1 Like
@Darkshine5 The exhaust is too small for all the engines in your last comparison. No wonder power figures are similar. Was it your intention to limit the exhaust size?
yes it was it’s like this to keep the number together all engines are using the same exhaust as the first set of tests all the same numbers just going up thru the years to really see the difference I started in 1970 and went up every 10 years until I came to MOHV. The same engine just different heads with the same base numbers across the board this is the base numbers I used
so as you can see I have not changed any numbers from the base value’s
actually the exhaust was 3" not 3,75 i just changed to see if their was any difference and the same differences in power figures are shown with the larger exhaust not chocking the engine (looking back at it I’m not sure why i changed the exhaust I definitely didn’t check oops)
There will be more data Im still comparing everything and will be for a couple of days it’s all coming back to how drafting will work and effect engine performance as well as how the aero and cooling is affected by drafting and different engine combinations real track testing on the track is showing that DOHC is a clear winner but SOHC DAOHC and OHV are all producing very similar lap times.
I hope that all makes sense
Edit thought I may as well put the numbers up since I have them. yr is 2000
OHV
DAOHC
SOHC
DOHC
MOHV
SOHC 3Valve
SOHC 4Valve
DOHC 4Valve
DOHC 5Valve
just for another look at 1967 options after tuning a large stroke engine
OHV with single 4bbl
OHV with 2 4bbl
OHV with twin DCoe
