HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ajd@DIALix.oz.au (Anthony Doig)
Subject: Re: BMW quits the GTCC
Organization: DIALix Services, Perth, Western Australia
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 04:42:33 GMT

In <1992Nov4.142601.5243@gdr.bath.ac.uk> bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Andrew Henry) writes:

>BMW has announced its withdrawal from the GTCC (German Touring Car
>Championship).

[... stuff deleted ...]

>			Andrew  Henry
>Sempre  Gilles					bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk

If BMW has withdrawn factory support in both the German and British TCC,
they really don't have any active involvment in motor sport at this time.

Could this mean they will get into F1 (with McLaren) ?????  If not next year,
then in '94 (McLaren run Ford HB's next year).

Doigman.
-- 
Anthony Doig					| E-mail : ajd@Dialix.oz.au
Corporate Systems Development			| Voice  : +61 9 321 2442
Perth, Western Australia			| Fax    : +61 9 474 2553
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: cpalmer@dingo.rtp.dg.com ()
Subject: Re: BMW quits the GTCC
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 17:40:02 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, Westboro MA

In article <1992Nov4.142601.5243@gdr.bath.ac.uk> bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Andrew Henry) writes:
>BMW has announced its withdrawal from the GTCC (German Touring Car
>Championship).  They had lobbied to for an International Touring Car
>series, with a free reign of technology, but this never came to pass.
>
>A technical dispute prompted the withdrawal.  For the new M3 BMW have
>found that the straight six engine is mounted too far forward.  They
>asked for permission to mount it 10 inches further back, and this was
>granted.  However, they were then told that this would only be for one
>year and then they would have to put the engine back in its original
>position which would not have been cheap.  As it is only four Formula

Oh, I feel soooo sorry for BMW.
Of course it was BMW who persisted in protesting the Audi cranks
(which had been cleared in 2 or 3 prior protests) and eventually
caused Audi to withdraw. 
And now BMW pull out because they can't have a special set of
rules just for themselves.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Palmer                            "Ashes to ashes,
Data General Corporation                 dust to dust,
Network Systems Development Division     If Lillee don't get you,
cpalmer@dingo.webo.dg.com                Thommo must!"
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: EHP@snowyt.me.psu.edu (PADDOCK, EVERETT H.)
Subject: Re: Re: F1 Stuff
Organization: Pennsylvania State Univ., Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 21:09:18 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <184267@pyramid.pyramid.com> danjones@pyrps5.eng.pyramid.com writes:

> >>I have been curious about this for some time, from what i see on TV dont the 
> >>wings on F1 and Indycars put the weight on the chassis, where, as Bob 
> >>suggests, it would make more sense to put the weight on the suspension.
> >>Am i mistaken or is there a rule that covers this.
> >
> >Well, even though I am sure a lot of postings will say this, I won't
> >let the tyranny of distance keep me quiet (chorus of groans) - 
> >the first real wings used in F1 cars _did_ put the weight directly 
> >on the rear suspension
> 
> I wonder where F1 got their ideas from?
> 
> Dan Jones

Although I am not familiar with the F1/Indycar rulebooks, there is a very good
reason not to mount wings directly on the suspension.  In fact, there is quite
a benefit to mounting wings as far from the tires as possible.  This allows the
downforce to act on the tires through a moment arm.  So the resultant normal
force on the tires is greater than the downforce produced by the wing(s).  I
think the guy who figured this out was Colin Chapman.  The first cantilevered
wings appeared on the Lotus 72 in 1973 (I'm 75% sure of the car/year).



=============================================================================

Everett Paddock 				email: ehp@snowyt.meZ.psu.edu
Center for Acoustics and Vibration		phone: (814) 863-1986
Department of Mecanical Engineering
Penn State University


	          "I don't just draw cars ..." - John Barnard

=============================================================================
From: bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Andrew Henry)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Audi Quits (Was: BMW quits the GTCC)
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:23:48 GMT
Organization: School of Biological Sciences, University of Bath, UK

KXN2@psuvm.psu.edu (Karl Nordstrom) says
>cpalmer@dingo.rtp.dg.com () says  
>>
>>Of course it was BMW who persisted in protesting the Audi cranks
>>(which had been cleared in 2 or 3 prior protests) and eventually
>>caused Audi to withdraw.
>
>Could you explain what it was about the Audi' cranks the BMW protested?

The crankshaft on the production Audi V8 engine the crankshaft has a 90
degree angle between,  if you'll excuse a bit of techno-jargon, the
bits for adjacent cylinders.  They made a new crankshaft for the race 
car with the angle increased to 180 degrees.  Apparently this made it 
stronger with a loss in refinement that made it unacceptable for a 
production car.  


			Andrew  Henry
Sempre  Gilles					bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk
From: min@isis.Kodak.COM (Mark Niedzielski)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: F1 Stuff
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:30:19 GMT
Organization: Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY

In article <dpq1zzh@rpi.edu> parfrk@rpi.edu writes:
>IMHO section ----------------------
>
>Let F1 get out of hand.  The manufacturers want to play and they
>will no matter what the rules.  Williams, McLaren, et all have budgets
>that they're going to spend whatever way they can and if you 
>ban technology they will find new things to buy.
>
>If you want to de-tech the sport then revert to the old 1.5 liter
>formula with lovely little Lotus 25-esque cars.  Ponder this:
>
>small cars -> less surface area -> less advertising -> less $ -> less tech
>
>... a roundabout way but I think just as effective and a lot easier
>than banning the gimmick of the month.  With smaller cars you might
>actually see someone pass at Monaco!  What a novelty!

Exactly!!

I think the three simple rules (and the later added corollary) for
controlling F1 cars suggested by Colin Chapman still apply:
(feel free to correct my attribution)

	Limit engine displacement
	Limit wheel width
	Set minimum weight

	Limit wing size

These controls work by limiting the advantage various technical
innovations offer.  An (admittedly poor) example: perhaps traction
control devices might be less of an advantage if displacement
was smaller - and thus developed less torque?

So I repeat:

>
>small cars -> less surface area -> less advertising -> less $ -> less tech
>

I think the time has come for the 2L two-stroke formula.  Or maybe
1.5L. Seriously.  After all, I suspect production two-strokes are probably
in our future.



Mark - looking forward to the 2-2 formula for 1994!



--
-------
Mark Niedzielski	min@kodak.com
Eastman Kodak Co.	Rochester, NY
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: s1072964@giaec.cc.monash.edu.au (SHERLOCK)
Subject: Re: Mansell and Senna
Keywords: Mansell and Senna
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:14:55 GMT

irw@bharh58.bnr.co.uk (Ian Woollard) writes:


>Explanations:

>a) Senna deliberately running into the back of Mansell
>b) Mansell 'brake testing' Senna
>c) Mansell and Senna jointly making a mistake
>d) Problem with either car

>We might rule out d) since Mansell complained to the authorities,
>he had little to gain by doing so, if there was a failure in his car.
>There was a report in one newspaper that Mansells traction control
>system failed, but as far as I know this has not been substantiated.
>Senna didn't report a failure to his car either.

>a) seems unlikely: Senna could only lose in the points by such a manouevre.

>Jeff:
>>
>>In fact, it almost looked like Mansell "brake-tested" Senna, although I'm
>>sure that isn't what happened.
>>

>I'm alot less sure.

>The options b), c) remain likely, lets look at b).

>Facts:

>1) Mansell doesn't like Senna (and vice versa one assumes)
>2) Mansell doesn't need to win at Australia, Senna would have gained much-needed points
Mansell was going for another record, why would he throw this away by sinking
to Senna's level of driving.

>3) Patrese needed the points, and was in third place in the race
>4) It was a good place on the circuit to do it (nice run-offs...)
>5) Who would believe Senna, if he claimed that Mansell did it deliberately?
>6) On the other hand, Mansell running to the authorities after would be
>extremely smart, especially if he did slow suddenly... (Mansell has generally not shown
>signs of being that politically smart however...)

>7) He ran away afterwards

    Nigel said in the papers the next day that he saw Ayrton coming towards
    him and he felt that he would most likely hit Senna so he walked away from
    him.
>The only people who really know are Williams/Mansell: they have charts of
>when the brakes were applied/he knows what he did(nt) do.

>>*                                  |                                          *
>>*  Fletch                          |     "No one rises so high as he who      *
>>*  Traralgon 3844                  |      knows not whither he is going"      *
>>* s1072964@giaec.cc.monash.edu.au  |          - Oliver Cromwell               *
>>*                                  |                                          *
>>*******************************************************************************

>>
>>Jeff

>-Ian.

         _________  __          __________  ___________   _________    ___   ___
        /  _____ / / /        / ________ / /____  ____/  /  ____  /   /  /  /  /
      /  /__     / /        /  /___           /  /     /  /   /_/   /  /__/  /
    /  ____/   / /        /  _____/         /  /     /      _     /  ___   /
  /  /       / /_____   /  /_____         /  /     /  /___/ /   /  /  /  /
/__/       /________/ /_________/       /__/     /________/   /__/  /__/
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: David_McCullum@mindlink.bc.ca (David McCullum)
Subject: Re: Senna's an ass!
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:01:35 GMT

You know I thought that we were all over this Nigel vs. Ayrton horseshit. Who
cares whether you like one or the other. Who cares what you think you saw on
ESPN/TSN/Whatever else you watch. I firmly believe that most of us are
interested in what you know about what is happening, or what you have
heard/read is or may be happening.

This chauvinistic fan-clubbing is revolting.

Go ahead....

--
      /|
     / |\                                 a470@mindlink.bc.ca
    /  | \                      david_mccullum@mindlink.bc.ca
   /___|  \                                 Vancouver, Canada
 ______|___\
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                    the water rat had it right
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: graeme@tasman.cc.utas.edu.au (Graeme)
Subject: Adelaide, F1 trivia
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 09:12:04 GMT

There were a couple of interesting interviews on Saturday.
Lauda was questioned for a while by Barry Sheene about his relationship
with Ferrari. Most of the content has already been covered here,
but I hadn't seen the comment that there were to be two new cars next year,
one at the beginning of the year, the other in June or July.
Jackie Stewart commented that the car is to be designed in Britain
(concept supported by Lauda) 
& the original design staff of 18 was rumoured to have reached 50,
(what was that about Ferrari's bottomless budget?). Cars to be constructed
in Italy. Lauda estimates about 40% of his time goes to Ferrari.

Nigel was interviewed, asked about the split with Williams,
and confirmed the comments here about the note at his press conference.
He seemed to me to fudge when asked where his first 1993 race would be,
Surfer's Paradise of South Africa. When Barry Sheene offered $50 it
would be South Africa, Nigel didn't accept, (but offered to accept a 
$100,000 bet!). Sheene responded he wasn't paid $24M, and Nigel choked in 
his coffee. Guess he isn't either next year. Nigel also commented that 
Senna's $0 drive offer was impossible anyway, because of Prost's
prohibition clause, and that anyway Senna woudn't be paid $0 if he
had joined Williams, as Senna had private backers who would pay him,
it was just that it wouldn't cost Senna's prospective team very many dollars.
No further information on 1993 except Jackie Stewart
seemed to support the South African option for Nigel.

There was also an interesting interview with Frank Williams. Williams played
a straight bat to Sheene's questions on (guess what) Nigel's first 1993 race
(Frank grinned, only time in the interview);
who was the second 1993 Williams driver, what happened about the
contract mix-up. However re: Patrese being "given" Japan,
Sheene asked "What did you think, Frank, in Japan; did you know what Nigel
was doing in the race. Had you spoken about it before?"
FW "Nigel had spoken to us on the radio for a number of laps, before he
decided to switch places with Ricardo. He was asking us principally
about the points, the situation for Ricardo and Senna if such and such
a thing happened, also the gaps to Senna as well as Ricardo. He made
the move, hung around on Ricardo's tail sort of riding shotgun; unfortunately
Nigel's engine broke so he was unable to get the 6 points he anticipated."
Sheene "He received a fair amount of criticism rightly or wrongly
for the fact of giving formula 1 races to people. Some people agree with it
and some don't. What do you think Frank?"
FW "Well I approved of what Nigel did in so far as, Ricardo has helped him
a lot this year; provided always a good buffer between him Nigel & the rest
of the opposition. Nigel and Ricardo have always got on very well. They
have been team mates, very successful team mates for 2 years, and I've
(considered (?unclear)) what Nigel did. I thought that was 
very (fair (?unclear))"
Seems FW approved.
Graeme.

Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: pmh2962@tamsun.tamu.edu (Pat Hayes)
Subject: Re: Corvette Turbos:  if ya hafta ask ...
Organization: Meteorology, TAMU, CS, TX
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 23:06:20 GMT

Christopher writes:
>	Do Corvette's come with a Turbo option? Can I get a turbo
>on a Vette?
---
 ... you don't deserve one.

-- 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Pat Hayes, Meteorology, Texas A&M University...<whoop!>...phayes@tamu.edu 
O&M 1008, TAMU, CS, TX 77843-3150....days:(409)845-1680 fax:(409)845-6331
From: bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Andrew Henry)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: BMW quits the GTCC
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:54:58 GMT
Organization: School of Biological Sciences, University of Bath, UK

In the referenced article, ajd@DIALix.oz.au (Anthony Doig) writes:
>In <1992Nov4.142601.5243@gdr.bath.ac.uk> bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Andrew Henry) writes:
>
>>BMW has announced its withdrawal from the GTCC (German Touring Car
>>Championship).
>
>If BMW has withdrawn factory support in both the German and British TCC,
>they really don't have any active involvement in motor sport at this time.

BMW Motorsport in Munich will still have its drivers on contract.
I suspect that they are looking for their local importers to run
two litre cars in the British and Italian championships.  Munich
would then loan them star drivers like Steve Soper and Roberto
Ravaglia.

>Could this mean they will get into F1 (with McLaren) ?????  If not next year,
>then in '94 (McLaren run Ford HB's next year).

Another possibility is for BMW to start an IMSA campaign.  According
to the Motoring News, they are going to enter at least one car in
the GTU class, for Grand Touring Cars under 3 litres for the 1993
Daytona 24hrs using the 2.5 litre engine from the GTCC.  

IMSA President Mark Raffauf wouldn't comment directly on BMW's
position but said, "Our attitude is that if you took Group A, GTCC
and all the big high horsepower models and took our tubeframe cars
and you put them all on the same size tire and let them have real
brakes they would probably race side-by-side quite easily." [phew]
"I'm sure they would be doorhandling."


Meanwhile ...

Audi has confirmed that it *won't* be contesting the 1993 GTCC.
They had been testing the Coupe quattro 2.5 litre V6.  Instead
their main efforts will be in the French Supertourisme series.
Audi Sporting Chief, Dieter Basche said, "We are not trusting
completely that something like what happened to us [with the
180 degree crankshaft] last year could not happen again.  We
cannot commit big investment without that trust."

This leaves Mercedes and Alfa committed to the championship.
Opel won't decide for another month or so.  If Opel pulls out,
the feeling is that the GTCC will cease to be, as it may do
even if they do decide to compete.


			Andrew  Henry
Sempre Gilles					bspahh@gdr.bath.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: ddd@cc.uow.edu.au (David Dodds)
Subject: Re:Adelaide:Senna and Mansell
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 22:02:17 GMT

This is what looked to happen...

Senna was trying real hard to get passed Mansell for the first 19 laps..
On lap 19 Senna got the benefit of traffic and was right on Mansell's Wet
Weather Light coming to the hairpin near the pits.
As they came to the corner, Mansell started braking earlier than normal
probably to throw Senna of his attack.
Senna being only metres away ( and planning to take him on the inside),
realised that Mansell was stopping, but a little too late.
Senna then proceeded to make contact with Mansell .or.
He ran him up the clacker...

It was clearly an accident. Senna said he had "no bad feelings about it".
Mansell was extremely steamed saying the stewards should do something about
it. But it was an accident. It was Senna's fault, but it was not a planned
thang'.

For those who watched the Walker/Hunt show, wasn't he great.
For example,

As the TV viewers were watching from Alesi's in car camera:
Murray: "Look up Look up the weather is clearing"

After the Senna/Mansell incident:
Murray: "And Mansell is running after Senna, I think he has something to say"
Next shot showed Mansell running away from where Senna was.

David

-- 
Internet: ddd@wampyr.cc.uow.edu.au
David Dodds				University of Wollongong
Computer Systems Officer                Locked Bag 8844
Dept. Business Systems                  South Coast Mail Centre
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: aefron@cornerstone.com (Andrew Efron)
Subject: Mansell's future career?
Reply-To: aefron@cornerstone.com (Andrew Efron)
Organization: Cornerstone Research, Cambridge, Mass.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:57:53 GMT

Just heard on the BBC: Nigel Mansell missed the cut in the Australian Open 
golf tournament, with a 164 for two rounds.  Perhaps he was distracted by the 
manual transmissions on the golf carts...

Andy


---
"I have seen the truth and it makes no sense."
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
Subject: Re: Mansell's Foot Surgery--Anyone???
From: gregb@netlink.cts.com (Greg Beron)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 22:12:34 PST
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

csroach@eng.clemson.edu (Shane Roach) writes:

> I just remembered something I noticed in the newspaper this weekend in the
> all-too-rare F1 article.  I don't recall the exact wording, but when asked
> what he'd be doing before starting testing with Newman-Haas, he said he was
> going to have some minor foot operation, then play golf with neighbor Greg
> Norman.  That struck me as a bit odd, as I hadn't heard anything about this,
> either here on the net or anywhere else.  Anybody know what the deal is?
> 
Greg Norman, AKA The Great White Shark, is a professional golfer ;)
-Greg (Not the G.W.S.)

P.S.  I assume that is your question because Mansell foot injury, 
suffered in his karting days has been discussed here and elsewhere.  He 
wants to have it done before he starts having to use a clutch again.  

P.P.S.  I just noticed another possible question.  Both Norman & Mansell 
live in Florida.

--                    
INTERNET:  gregb@netlink.cts.com (Greg Beron)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!gregb
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport
From: marti@inf.ethz.ch (Robert Marti)
Subject: More on Team Sauber
Organization: Dept. Informatik, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 10:51:25 GMT

There has been some speculation considering the tires used by Sauber
during the recent tests at Montemelo circuit in Barcelona.  As it
turns out, the Swiss-German TV station aired a 10 minute coverage
about Team Sauber in their Monday evening sports magazine.

The 1:21.51 time was set with 92 tires.  However, as someone on the
net speculated, the 1:20.04 were achieved with tires and wings complying
with the 93 regulations.

They showed Wendlinger lapping the circuit and a mechanic holding
a 21.5 sign across the wall which separates the pitlane from the
start-finish straight as Wendlinger sped by, with a beaming Peter
Sauber in the background.  (Mario Illien was also in evidence,
wearing a Team Sauber jacket ;-)

There were also a couple of interviews.  Leo Ress, who was introduced
as Team Sauber Chief Designer, said that they have a good driver and
a good engine.  He went on to say that Harvey Postlethwaite had
designed a very good chassis.  (Steve Nichols was not mentioned.)
When asked about the difference in times between the 92 and 93
versions, he felt that they could have gotten close to their record
with the 92 setup as well.  (However, in today's "Motorsport aktuell",
Wendlinger is quoted as saying that he could go about 15 km/h (10 mph)
faster on the straight thanks to the narrower tires, while being able
to use the same brake points as before ... )

Peter Sauber said he was pleased with the results.  He is still
negotiating with sponsors at the present time.  He said he hopes
to be able to announce "the complete package" by the end of
November.

Karl Wendlinger was also briefly interviewed.  He was very pleased
with the car and said that he found a good setup for the course.
He thinks that there is further room for improvment as he had not
been giving it all in those tests.

Today's "Motorsport aktuell" mentions that the team covered a
distance of about 1200km without problems.  The gearbox which had
troubled them in their shake-down test seems to be working just
fine after some modifications.  A 3-day test is scheduled in
Le Castellet, starting November 18.  Wendlinger should have a
brand new chassis, while Lehto will have the current chassis
(in 93 configuration) in order to get used to the car.  On
November 30, they plan to go to Estoril to meet their competition
for the first time.

-- 
Robert Marti                    |  Phone:    +41 1 254 72 60
Informationssysteme             |  FAX:      +41 1 262 39 73
ETH-Zentrum                     |  E-Mail:   marti@inf.ethz.ch
CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland     |