Rule changes for 2020

M

Mike Crayne

Team Owner
Joined
Jan 10, 2017
Messages
981
Points
323
Cost cutting even more.


https://nascar.nbcsports.com/2019/1...s-will-reduce-cup-road-crew-members-at-track/

  • The current extended parts freeze will remain in place through 2020 (teams are not permitted to design any new parts for the current car).
  • Each car number will be permitted to have a maximum of 12 certified chassis at any given time. In addition, each organization will be permitted to have a maximum of 10 unique chassis designs.
  • Teams must compete in a minimum of eight events with a long block sealed engine and at least eight with a short block sealed engine (this year teams had to run three long block sealed engines and 12 short block sealed engines.)
  • Each team will be allowed three roster spots regardless of number of vehicles in the organization. In addition, a maximum of 10 road crew personnel will be allowed on each roster.
  • Organizations will be permitted a total of 150 wind tunnel testing hours per calendar year.
 
Next year:

Chassis: 12 "Active" allowed per number. 4 allowed as "inactive" for future use. Total of 10 unique designs allowed.
(That's a hell of a lot of cars. HMS alone could have as many as 60 cars around)

Wind Tunnel time is limited to 150 hours per year.
(Per number or team? My guess is per number)

Engines: "Teams must compete in a minimum of eight events with a full long-block sealed engine and at least eight events with a short-block sealed engine. Previous rules dictated three full long-block seals and 13 short-block sealed engines."
(Fewer calls to "burn it down" in 2020 I guess).

Parts "Freeze" currently in effect until the Gen 7 car debuts.
(We got inventory to use up!).

My thought is it's all about reducing costs, but you can count on the top tier team$ using every available cha$$i$ and engine allowed.

https://www.nascar.com/news-media/2019/10/01/nascar-cup-series-2020-rules-updates/
 
I would have liked to have seen a tweak to the short track/road course aero package but overall these are good changes that will save teams $$$
 
I would like to have seen the full 750 hp used at pocono and darlington, aka the short track package.
 
Good rules, IMO. The chassis limit and wind tunnel limit are two new mechanisms of cost containment. The specific limits imposed seem pretty liberal to me, but it's important to see if this works and what the enforcement issues are. The limits will be tightened further in coming years, I suspect. There has been talk of ~6 chassis per car number with Gen 7 spec chassis!

The manpower limit and multi-use engine rule are tweaks of prior cost containment mechanisms. I absolutely expect further moves to extend mileage between engine rebuilds in future years. Good stuff, IMO.
 
Some organizations will have 300 hours in the tunnel.
 
Hawaii808 said:
Next year:

Chassis: 12 "Active" allowed per number. 4 allowed as "inactive" for future use. Total of 10 unique designs allowed.
(That's a hell of a lot of cars. HMS alone could have as many as 60 cars around)

Wind Tunnel time is limited to 150 hours per year.
(Per number or team? My guess is per number)

Engines: "Teams must compete in a minimum of eight events with a full long-block sealed engine and at least eight events with a short-block sealed engine. Previous rules dictated three full long-block seals and 13 short-block sealed engines."
(Fewer calls to "burn it down" in 2020 I guess).

Parts "Freeze" currently in effect until the Gen 7 car debuts.
(We got inventory to use up!).

My thought is it's all about reducing costs, but you can count on the top tier team$ using every available cha$$i$ and engine allowed.

https://www.nascar.com/news-media/2019/10/01/nascar-cup-series-2020-rules-updates/
Click to expand...

You should see how many they have now! ;)
 
I like the limited chassis rule. Let the teams do some of their own design work on that end, just limit them to the number they can manufacture per season
 
Switchback said:
How are they going to track wind tunnel time for a team that owns there own?
Click to expand...
It might be similar to the FIA's methodology of keeping track of wind-tunnel time in this article, there is a formula used to keep track of wind-tunnel time:
https://www.racecar-engineering.com/featured/tech-explained-2018-f1-cfd-regulations/2/
Keep track of how much time, how much data is used, etc.

Page 2 is the older formula used from 15-17. Page 3 displays an up to date formula, my bad wrong page.
 
Switchback said:
How are they going to track wind tunnel time for a team that owns there own?
Click to expand...
It seems there are only 4 approved wind tunnels. Not sure if any of the ones listed belong to teams, most likely the Penske one does
 
If a team owns a wind tunnel I think its pretty hard for NASCAR to say, "yeah well that thing that you spent millions on, you can't really use it that much anymore"
 
Cat and mouse games as the Teams work with and around the new rules.

It would be even better if we could see the games being played while NASCAR attempts to police and enforce their rules.
 
Looks like they are trying to cut out the manufacturer wind tunnel testing for next year. As I have read it, the Manufacturers buy up the wind tunnel time and dole it out to the teams. Wind tunnel testing can run upwards of $8000 an hour.
 
Those of you wondering how it will be policed, it will be and the ramifications of trying to circumvent those rules will be on par with running an oversized engine, soaked tires and hot fuel. Devastating to say the least.
 
wi_racefan said:
If a team owns a wind tunnel I think its pretty hard for NASCAR to say, "yeah well that thing that you spent millions on, you can't really use it that much anymore"
Click to expand...
A lot of this was requested by the owners so they dont have a problem with it.
 
Unfortunately most of these cost saving rule changes just end up being now I have more money to spend elsewhere

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
The vast majority of teams aren't thinking that I would believe and the large teams and OEM's have budgets that need to be approved
 
This is why they invented manufacturers.

Have they been mentioned anywhere regarding reporting and compliance?
 
ReturnTrip said:
Stop making sense. They need to spend money making a 3400lb turd with 550hp aerodynamic with a 10 inch spoiler out back.
Click to expand...
That same car was called the "Twisted Sister" and it made Nascar a fortune and built the fan base
to its highest. It was the modern car and CEO Brian that made it collapse.
All the fans that keep clamoring for more speed forget that slow speeds at short tracks also built the huge fan base.
 
Team Penske said:
That same car was called the "Twisted Sister" and it made Nascar a fortune and built the fan base
to its highest. It was the modern car and CEO Brian that made it collapse.
All the fans that keep clamoring for more speed forget that slow speeds at short tracks also built the huge fan base.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking this is the final year or two for major wind tunnel testing before spec bodies squash the need for it.
 
Acs said:
I would have liked to have seen a tweak to the short track/road course aero package but overall these are good changes that will save teams $$$
Click to expand...


Here is the reason, it isn't Nascar but the team owners, money also it looks like

WHY NO CHANGES TO THE PACKAGE FOR SHORT TRACKS, ROAD COURSES?

Even if not everyone agrees on the changes to the racing product for intermediate tracks, everyone seems to agree that the high downforce has had a significant negative effect on short tracks and road courses.

The reason NASCAR didn’t order a reduction in downforce for short tracks and road courses for 2020 is the same reason why it didn’t for 2019: team owners.

The team owners did not want to develop two aero packages simultaneously, in addition to two different engine packages.

https://autoweek.com/article/monste...wnforce-makes-big-cost-containment-swing-2020
 
I think the short track and road course rules are fine. I think they should also use those rules at darlington and pocono. The iroc package ie the low hp,package Also doesn’t race well on more abrasive 1.5 mile tracks either
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom