It is a difficult one. The Brawn was clearly superior at the beginning of the season ansd JB made the most of it. The others have at least caught up and the car/circuit match has changed - viz Force India's success. It could also be that their development budget is less than some of the others...
Having competed in both, the T is better sorted as it comes, but with some basic suspension work the DC5 is at least a match. In standard form the DC5 is a bit of a nightmare on cold tyres (did some proper track testing to establish this, rather than just being an 'opinion')- which applies to...
Just found that Kumho have the MX KU15 in 205/45x16. Might be worth following up.
Hankook only list K102 & 104 as 1a tyres. BUT for 2010 list 1b will be allowed for production cars.
Hoolio – thanks. In view of past rhubarbs, I shall try to keep my comments short(ish). The idea of lowering the car is to lower the centre of gravity (CoG), which should make the car more stable – and resistant to roll. Actually what makes the car more or less stable is the height of the CoG...
Which is why, sad as it was, I went for the DC5, as the best off the shelf option in the 2.0 litre class. So far quicker than the T, even without engine mods.
Agreed - weight is the big factor - easy to get under 800 kg, even in prod class and they do not have any emission controls - hence happliy gurgle away on Webers. I recently got near to one in the DC5, but needed super sticky tyres.
Damper stiffness does not induce understeer, unless rock solid, but spring stiffness can - it actually improves turn in by build up cornering force quicker. If too stiff it can appear to increase understeer, but normally that is because the tyre starts pattering over the road surface. Oddly...
I think that there may be a grain of truth in the re-learning thing. Road cars systems are closed loop and as such take information from the O2/lambda sensors - and so may iterate the operating parameters so as to allow for variations in the sensors. Doubt if it takes very long - it is often...
Think Marrow has all the graphs - standard - mods plus generic map and then Chipped UK. Rev limiter was raised by the generic map to 7,500. One would expect the power to fall away in the early 7's unless the cams are very aggressive - the AWT/CAT cams were very similar to standard. The...
My former car was done on a dyno race r/r - it was quite new, so I would be surprised if they have changed it. The torque is about the same, but the stunning thing is the way it hangs on after 6,500, all the way to 7,200 plus, which is a real break through - hence the high bhp. Can understand...
This does seem to be the issue - either the figures for the earlier engines are optimistic, or the later engines are more conservative - possiby for emissions. It has be suggested that the later head casting has smaller exhaust ports and I still think there is an issue re the cam retard at...
As a comparison my former Trophy was mapped at Chipped UK, and with AWT modifed inlet and mild cams, larger air feed to standard airbox and standard exhaust, it made 181.9 at 6,750 and 152.5 at 5,500. I realise that this was on a different rr, but it would seem relatively comparable. It looks...
It is very difficult to learn how to exploit a car on the road - there are various motorsport schools which are very helpful - they video you and offer advice. The ones I know of are at Curborough, Prescott and Gurston.
Basic rules are brake in a straight line (part of the JYS philosophy), try to get into correct gear before turning in, and as much as possible follow line of maximum visibility. Smoothness tends to be king.
RS Tuner has just confirmed to a friend that the inlet cam advance is cancelled at 6,600 rpm. I still think this is worth following up, as give or take a nats this is where the power starts to fall off.
Cue, you are right, the smaller the number the richer it is,theoretical optimum is iirc 13.7 (stoichemetric). Your figure depends on whether on load or not. 12.5 is OK on load for an efficient engine, higher up the rev range may need to go to the 11.5. BTW turbos can run even richer to avoid...
Just to confuse the issue when my was remapped by Chipped UK the main improvement at 6,500 plus came from more fuel iirc.
BTW Chipped UK are under new management so do not have an up to date view on them. Check with Marrow if he is happy to quote the reg no to find the file.
Think Hoolio and Marrow both have the graphs - they do show before and after - they can access them more quickly than I can. Rev limiter was already raised by the earlier AWT/RS standard re-map, so you will have to ask. As Hoolio says it was done on 1 April 2008.
A real off the wall choice would be a 123D 3 door M Sport - BMW can do some amazing deals on low mileage versions - 0-60 in 6.9 , stunning torque and reasonable economy - low 40's - handling good but a bit boring. I should have bought one as a road car.
Chirs you are so right re how dififcult it is to get weight down. The only effective route is to go to a bare shell and only replace the essentials. It is interesting tp note how heavy a modern wiring loom is - hence why the Challenge cars appear to have a lightweight simpler version.
I went through all these issues when deciding whether to stay with the Trophy or not.
LPT is a nice solution but how well the package can manage the heat may be a long term issue as well as the extra load on other parts of the system. Also who will live with it as an LPT for very long, before...