Bench Racin!

[Hoop-98]

Performance comparisons, or 'bench racing" are an entertaining diversion for the off season.

Based on actual data from Renault at Adelaide and published figures for Max DF configurations of the other cars, and estimates of Power I have come up with the following mythical evaluation of several cars of interest.

This probably underestimates the braking of the F1 car ( no known data) and the acceleration of the Indy Light, less drag due to less downforce. However, there seems to be pretty good real world agreement with these estimates and real performance.

The assumption a high downforce track, no special tires and P2P not used,

http://i48.tinypic.com/vmxkkn.jpg

Enjoy...

rh

[NickFalzone]

So the current Dallara is about even with the Lola, moderately behind the DP01, and a far cry from a current F1? Can't say these are surprising findings :) Interesting, nonetheless.

[Hoop-98]

So the current Dallara is about even with the Lola, moderately behind the DP01, and a far cry from a current F1? Can't say these are surprising findings :) Interesting, nonetheless.

Well Nick, as we see here daily, one fan's moderation is another fan's chasm.

The type of track will make a lot of difference, as seen by the fact that the DP01 was marginally slower than the Lola on several tracks.

But, we gotta have something to argue about eh?

Happy Holidays

Hoop

[Easy Drifter]

Hoop: I do not know if you are actually a team race engineer but you should be. You grasp the theory and praticality of the data. I wish I had had you working with me when I was running cars. Of course back in those days we did not have the computers and it was instinct and old fashioned experience but I sure respect your knowledge and ability to interpret data.
Even if not an on track engineer you could help many a team with later studies.
And yes even back in my era we tried to study separate sections of the track when testing. Nelson Ledges was good for this as you could divide the track into 3 separate sections visually from the control tower and time each section to see what the every change meant in each section plus the overall plus or minus. Each section had completly different characteristics so the info could be applied to many other tracks.
Today of course with data aquisition visual observation is not required as the data can be collected constantly.
What the average fan does not understand is that a driver when testing needs to run at a consistent pace so as to not skeewer the data. Easier said than done. Running hard consistetnly but not trying to set lap records is what is needed. Some great racers are not good testers and some good testers are not top racers. Luca Badoer is an example of the latter.

[Hoop-98]

Hi Easy, no I am definitely not a racing engineer. These days I consult on automotive business performance, on the service side.

I look at rates of repair, human performance in vehicle inspection and maintenance, and other such exciting things.

I have been involved in motorsports for over 40 years from karts to ARCA.

The engineering and understanding of the performance of cars, boats, planes, trains, and rockets has been a lifelong passion.


happy holidays

Hoop

[NickFalzone]

Well Nick, as we see here daily, one fan's moderation is another fan's chasm.

The type of track will make a lot of difference, as seen by the fact that the DP01 was marginally slower than the Lola on several tracks.

But, we gotta have something to argue about eh?

Happy Holidays

Hoop

Well, I don't see it more than a moderate difference between the DP and the Dallara, at least on your charts. I've always felt that the DP01 was a step up from the Dallara, just not the significant leap that the IRL needs in the next generation of car. I'll repeat that, I think the next gen IndyCar needs to be at least a moderate step up on the DP01, so that means a significant step up from the Dallara. Speed is important to me as a fan, and if/when the IRL says the high speeds (at or near record breaking) is no longer of great significance, then I will no longer be a fan. I actually think the Dallara is a decent road course car, but I cut it a lot of slack because it was designed primarily for oval racing, much unlike the DP01. Now that we're entering the stage of a new car design, for a series that is an even mix of ovals and roads/streets, they sure as heck better make this is solid road racer that needs no apologies. That along with providing better racing on the ovals, including less turbulence. Yes, it's a tall order, but I don't think an impossible one.

[Easy Drifter]

Nick: I do not know if I can make sense of this to you. If I don't it is me. Taking it to a bit extreme back in the early heyday of the Can Am around 1.23 to 1.21 was a reasonable time at Mosport for a Can Am car. Every year 2 to 3 seconds were chopped of that time until mid teens were the standard.
Now an ALMS car is down to low 1.05 times.
Today because the speeds are so high a reduction of time by .25 of a second is basically the same as 2 or 3 seconds years ago.
Now I have not done the type of study Hoop has but that quarter of a second is as big or bigger a quantum leap as 2 or 3 seconds used to be.
Remember I am not using actual real life figures but just say a 2 second drop in time when it was 1.23 would be 2 or 3 mph.
Today a .25 second drop in time would be 2 or 3 mph.
In other words on a 1 mile oval a decrease in an almost immeasurable time might be an actual major increase in speed.
I hope that makes sense to you.

[Hoop-98]

If the new car is quicker on a road course because of a better P/W ratio I would agree. If we just allow more aero I would disagree.

rh

Just out of interest Hoop, are you sure the Renault data is from Adelaide and not Melbourne?

Only ask, because the last time a Renault F1 car went around Adelaide was 1985.

[Hoop-98]

oops no kidding, I'll have to see which track it was, was last year in testing.

rh

[Mark in Oshawa]

Hoop..you educate me and give me great knowledge.I hope you have more morsals of racing goodness!!!

[Chamoo]

Hoop..you educate me and give me great knowledge.I hope you have more morsals of racing goodness!!!

Yea, I've got to agree with Mark, these posts of yours are very enlightening. Even though I usually don't understand 50% of what is being said (and thats being generous), I find it very enjoyable to read your posts and hope you continue to post your thoughts and knowledge for the rest of us to soak up.

[Hoop-98]

Thanks guys! Just sharing what's been shared with me...

[Mark in Oshawa]

Yea, I've got to agree with Mark, these posts of yours are very enlightening. Even though I usually don't understand 50% of what is being said (and thats being generous), I find it very enjoyable to read your posts and hope you continue to post your thoughts and knowledge for the rest of us to soak up.

Try harder Chamoo, Hoop does explain this stuff to us lay people. A lot of what I had assumed about Indycars was confirmed or denied by Hoop's excellent research. My assumptions about the superiority of the old CART cars compared to the IRL cars being just one. The Dallara is a better car than I thought (still goofy looking tho), and it took Hoop's posting for me to understand the dynamics of the different cars with different motors. It was all done in layman's language for the most part.

Like I said Hoop, keep teaching us, we will get it sooner or later...

[Hoop-98]

Just for the curious, the 92-94 cars accelerated a little better than the 03 and up Champcar but cornered more like the Indy Light. (Hard tires/less downforce). So they would be a "step down" from the Dallara but many would suggest they were more entertaining to watch.

I don't think increasing corner speeds with downforce makes for a more exciting car to watch, but it certainly gives better lap times (within reason).

I think the Dallara with 100 more HP would get pretty exciting on road courses. About the same lap times as a DP01 but higher trap speeds.

Of course, if the new car is 200 pounds lighter, 670 would be like 750 with today's car acceleration wise.

A 1550 pound car with driver and 750 HP would have as much acceleration as we have ever seen in an Indycar.

rh

[Mark in Oshawa]

Hoop, I am all for any formula that would up the hp but slide and be harder to driver. I am thinking that early 90's Lola on hard tires would be that sort of car. I think reducing the wings and putting a flat bottom on that sort of car would make it a great formula.

[Hoop-98]

As far as road courses, I would be fine with a lighter car, similar aero but more from tray. and 75 more HP.

FYI from Mulsannes Corner Aero database.

2003 Lola
Downforce:
3039 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 966 lbs. of drag
4376 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 1391 lbs. of drag
5402 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 1718 lbs. drag
Lift-to-drag ratio: 3.14:1

Long Beach configuration: 99 Lola
Downforce:
2712 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 907 lbs. of drag
3906 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 1307 lbs. of drag
4822 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 1613 lbs. drag
Lift-to-drag ratio: 2.989:1

Road track configuration: 92 Galmer
Downforce:
2512 lbs. @ 150 mph, with 884 lbs. of drag
3618 lbs. @ 180 mph, with 1273 lbs. of drag
4466 lbs. @ 200 mph, with 1572 lbs. of drag

rh