Blogads button

blog advertising is good for you
Longlife Button Banner
American Muscle Banner

Editorials and Commentary

Find Us on Facebook

Sponsor icon

Slickcar.com is the auto accessory superstore, offering the latest in car and truck performance parts.

User Login



Auto Parts Nerd

Search Ate Up With Motor

FTC Disclosure Notice


Paid advertising and sponsored links on Ate Up With Motor are identified with the words "Sponsor," "Sponsors," or "Sponsored Links." In the event we receive any other compensation or consideration for any content herein, the nature of that compensation will be disclosed on the final page of the article or content, or otherwise adjacent to it. See the Terms of Use for important additional information regarding Ate Up With Motor's advertising and commercial endorsements.


Designed by
SiteGround web hosting Joomla Templates
Definitions: Homologation Print E-mail

Tags: homologation | racing | terms

Written by Aaron Severson   
Monday, 02 March 2009 11:08
In some of our past and upcoming articles, we've been throwing around the word homologation, and it occurs that we should pause to explain what it means.

The etymology of the word is Greek; "homologate" is derived from homologeo, Greek for "to agree." It means the granting of official approval after demonstrating adherence to a set of regulations or requirements. In an automotive context, it usually refers to racing.

Homologating a car for racing means obtaining approval from the officiating body to enter a car in a specific  racing class or category. Homologation rules vary depending on the form of racing, and they often change from year to year. They generally include things like engine displacement, wheelbase, minimum weight, production quantity, and allowable modifications. For example, a particular class might require that all entrants be production cars, with engines between 1.6 and 2.0 liters.

Homologation is not the same as qualification. Most racing organizations require that each car undergo technical inspection to confirm that it conforms to the rules -- racing teams have a tendency to bend the rules as far as they can (i.e., cheat). It's entirely possible for a car to be homologated and still be technically disqualified. A Mazda MX-5 (Miata), for example, might meet the homologation requirements for the hypothetical class described above, but if you show up to a race with a Miata powred by a 5.0 L Ford V8, the inspectors will still disqualify you.

The biggest issue in racing homologation is typically the production requirements. Racing officials prefer to keep production cars separate from one-offs or prototypes, so as to maintain a more level playing field -- naturally, matching a purpose-built race car against a stock street car is not going to make for fair competition. The problem is trying to decide what qualifies something as a production car. Homologation rules usually set a requirement for minimum annual production; it might be 5,000 cars, or it might be 500. The production cars rarely have to be identical to the racers, but if the racers are to use certain configurations or components, the stock cars usually have to, as well. For example, if the racer is going to have an intercooled, turbocharged engine, the production cars must also have turbochargers and intercoolers. The rules might allow the racer to remove emissions control equipment, run higher boost pressure, and use different camshaft and ignition timing, but require that the racing engines use the same basic engine block and heads as the stock car.

The intricacies of homologation have led to the creation of various interesting limited-production cars known as "homologation specials." An homologation special is a car offered for public sale to ensure that some equipment or specification needed for racing is sold in sufficient quantities to meet homologation requirements. Homologation specials are usually rare, expensive, and not necessarily well suited to normal driving, but they have a tendency to become coveted collector's items. Famous examples include the Dodge Charger Daytona and its Plymouth Road Runner Superbird cousin; the fearsome Porsche 959; and the original BMW M3.

# # #
Comments (4)
  • Mad_Science  - Aiding Street Cars, too

    Homologation seems to be the best way to ensure racing efforts follow through on their promise that racing developments can help make better street cars.

    In the best cases, tweaks are made to the design of the base car to help the race version: things like engine configurations or chassis design.

    The US would do well to trade NASCAR for series' more like BTCC or DTM.

  • Administrator
    Quote:
    In the best cases, tweaks are made to the design of the base car to help the race version: things like engine configurations or chassis design.

    Well, sometimes. Historically, that's really been hit and miss. Look at the Group B cars of the mid-80s -- Porsche applied a lot of the 959's technology down the line, but for a lot of the manufacturers involved, it seems like they just dropped it and had to reinvent it later. There are some cases where racing technology has filtered down (I think modern AWD is a key example), but also a lot where one hand just didn't talk to the other.

    I think NASCAR has become far less interesting since their cars stopped having any resemblance to stockers in the early 70s. At the time, it was a reflection of political realities -- the automakers could no longer get away with offering side oilers and Hemis for public sale, and they needed to turn their resources toward emissions controls and safety standards -- but it rendered NASCAR largely irrelevant from a technological standpoint. On the other hand, a lot of the improvements developed for NASCAR and Trans Am (particularly the aerodynamic addenda) never really went anywhere, anyway, so maybe it doesn't matter that much.

  • Mad_Science  - Hit and miss...

    I guess that's the point I'm getting at.

    I see the whole point of homologation rules as encouraging/forcing race teams to pursue solutions that might benefit road going cars in some way.

    I'd love to see a GT-esque series that had a fixed fuel quantity for any given race. It'd be just enough to get it done if you're clever, but would force teams to think about fuel consumption.

    Maybe allow active aero features, too. Wouldn't it be cool to see cars get all slippery in the straights, then puff up like a pufferfish going into a corner?

  • Administrator
    Quote:
    I see the whole point of homologation rules as encouraging/forcing race teams to pursue solutions that might benefit road going cars in some way.

    Well, that can be a benefit of it. I think the principal rationale is to try to keep deep-pocketed manufacturers from dominating series with cost-no-object one-offs. I think the fixed-fuel series would be a good exercise, though.

    Active aero has been controversial for 40 years. Do you know/remember the Chaparral? Active downforce -- basically sucked itself to the track. Amazing thing, but started enormous controversy.

    My understanding is that the prohibitions against active aero have to do with trying to keep maximum speeds out of the stratosphere, on the principle that 300-mph F1 cars are bad for safety.

Write comment
Your Contact Details:
Comment:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img]   
Security
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.
Please note that user comments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Ate Up With Motor, and we accept no responsibility for their content. Publication of a comment does not constitute Ate Up With Motor's endorsement of any opinion, product, or service. Please click here to read our Comment Policy.