Quote:
Originally posted by Fogelhund
Bob, sorry, but what you say makes no sense, at least the way I read it. Despite using "artificial" restrictors, it still seems that factory designed Audi's, are faster then the competition. It would seem that the factory design is afterall relevant, and that the NASCAR contrived competition comment is irrelevant.
|
The huge amount of money spent by Audi is spent the same way it is spent in NASCAR, how to overcome the restrictions that was imposed by the sanctioning body.
Do not try to say these recent restriction rules are the same as the old basic displacement and weight rules. Beyond those, one could develope engines systems to create as much horse power as one wanted
Companies used to develope better engines for racing, which could then be taken back to the production cars. Any engine improvement here are worthless as street cars are not articficially regulated. This is one reason Cadillac could see no future developing a sports racer with an engine program that has zero relationship to the street cars.
You are probably to young to remember well, but back in the IMSA GT era, teams were continually trying to improve different aspects of the cars to meet the ever improving performance gains. Chevrolet engines had more than enough horsepower and tire companies were making increasingly large and better tires to handle this, but Chevy never improved the transmission available for the Corvette so rather than using the available power to run away from the Porsches, the drivers were more concerned about not destroying the tranny and having a dnf.
This aspect of racing was destroyed by the contrived rules first introduced by NASCAR and now being copied by other series including ALMS.
If you do not see the relevance it is probably that you simply have not been around long enough to get a birds eye view of how things have changed.
Bob