 |
|
How about an engine stay rod. “Fastener”?
It would be much cheaper to run the car with one. Due to engine mount flex I had a bent shifter linkage at Charlotte a couple years ago. Caused a couple ziiiiiiiing missed shifts. Engine rebuild was 'spensive. Can I put in a stay rod because it will be cheaper to operate my car without missed shifts?
How about an engine stay rod. “Fastener”?
It would be much cheaper to run the car with one. Due to engine mount flex I had a bent shifter linkage at Charlotte a couple years ago. Caused a couple ziiiiiiiing missed shifts. Engine rebuild was 'spensive. Can I put in a stay rod because it will be cheaper to operate my car without missed shifts?[/quote]
I submitted a rule change last year to allow metal motor mounts. It was approved. You’re welcome.
If I’d have been thinking tho, I’d have requested metal tranny mounts too. I was in a hurry tho and I forgot. It’ll go into the next batch of rule changes this Fall.
[quote=“Ranger” post=71016]I submitted a rule change last year to allow metal motor mounts. It was approved. You’re welcome.
[/quote]
I was kidding.
I would never put metal motor mounts in a Spec E30. It’s not powerful enough to need them IMHO and the lack of vibration isolation can’t be good for all the 25 year old degraded plastic connectors and electronic components.
To me, solid motor mounts and a brake booster stay rod are ridiculous in the context of the wet noodle springs and streetracerwannabe shocks on these cars. That’s the only area that needs stiffening and it ain’t changing.
If your brake pedal was moving 12-16mm solely to move the MC around you might think the “Ranger Strap-On” less ridiculous.
The justification for metal motormounts wasn’t so much to keep the engine stationary under normal conditions, I agree with you there. The rule change was to address the problem of the right mount failing due to heat. Then the failed mount allowed the engine to move enough that the alternator cut cut the lower coolant hose. When I wrote the rule change last Fall that scenario had happened to two of us in 2 months, IIRC.
First, I’ll give you $20 to never use that phrase again.:sick:
Second, if it is moving consistently and predictably, 12-16mm ain’t no big deal.
If, on the other hand, you try some trick “low drag” Spec Miata rear calipers and forget to tap the brakes on each straight to reset them, that extra couple inches of pedal travel IS a big deal. 
First, I’ll give you $20 to never use that phrase again.:sick:
Second, if it is moving consistently and predictably, 12-16mm ain’t no big deal.
If, on the other hand, you try some trick “low drag” Spec Miata rear calipers and forget to tap the brakes on each straight to reset them, that extra couple inches of pedal travel IS a big deal. [/quote]
Re. “Strap-On”. Ahh shucks, that was my best joke of the day.
Re. soft pedal. You own a Porsche. You know what firm brakes are like. Don’t begrudge a firm brake pedal to the rest of us.
[quote=“Ranger” post=71012][quote=“cosm3os” post=71008]Where is this “restraint strap” allowed in the rules?[/quote] Under “fasteners”.
Here we may be on the cusp of figuring out the most interesting development ever in SpecE30 braking and your response is to throw sand in the works?
Where does it say you can clearance a subframe bushing so that there’s room to get a tool on an adjustable RTAB? Where does it say you can imagineer a solution to help keep an rtab from moving? What we’re trying to do here is make something work properly. In order to figure out solutions, sometimes a person has to experiment a bit at the outer edge of the rules. If it works, fine, one can submit a rule change, and the community is done a big service because a problem is solved. If the idea doesn’t work then the community learns from that too and we try different solutions.
One can be trying to fix problems, standing on the sidelines and waiting for someone else to figure it out for them, or they can throw sand into the works. I’m not suggesting that everyone go out and slap some strap on their MC, I’m just trying to figure out a problem. Maybe the result will be an awareness that Girling boosters are superior. Maybe the result will be acceptance of a strap on the MC as a “fastener”. Maybe the result will be a rule change. But lets give me some space so I can figure out what’s going on and test solutions, eh?[/quote]
I’m all for testing stuff for the good of the class, but it should not be a license to put illegal parts or mods on your car. Test it on your own “time” not during competition.
Do what you want, but I don’t want my drivers to think they can start reengineering their cars to compensate for 25 years of wear and tear on 25 year old technology. That’s GTS. Spec means we all have to live with these “quirks”.
[quote=“cosm3os” post=71023]
I’m all for testing stuff for the good of the class, but it should not be a license to put illegal parts or mods on your car. Test it on your own “time” not during competition.
Do what you want, but I don’t want my drivers to think they can start reengineering their cars to compensate for 25 years of wear and tear on 25 year old technology. That’s GTS. Spec means we all have to live with these “quirks”.[/quote]
Spec doesn’t mean we quit thinking. What I’m describing is hardly “reengineering” the car. The alternative to studying the flaws of the car is “not knowing”. There’s a word that means “not knowing” but it’s not a pretty word.
I have figured out solutions to a lot of our problem areas over the years, all of which have been documented here, many of which have resulted in rule changes that have helped to make our cars more robust. If I had instead used a strict “no re-engineering” approach over the past years, none of those solutions would exist. I think that’s a pretty good indicator that one can try to help the community with issues without crossing any line.
It is irksome to spend all sorts of time and energy on reliability improvements, get a couple dozen rule changes approved, publish all sorts of mod solutions for issues that didn’t require a rule change, and then hear someone express concerns that I’m encouraging [strike]illegal[/strike] “reengineering”.
An easy example is my recommendation to use the oil pressure switch threaded into the hole in the block where the coolant barb went for the tbody as a coolant pressure switch. You would call that illegal too? Lets not be all knee-jerk about this, each issue needs a reasonable decision.
Just being able to remove the coolant hose from that barb was, once again, allowed because of one of my rule change requests.
Again, thinking and tinkering is a good thing for the life of the class, but when a driver (particularly a very popular and vocal one) says on the public forum “I’m going to skirt the rules, if I win DQ me” that sends the wrong message. Do what you always do–submit a rule change and if it truly improves the class (and not just help one guy get around a weak spot in his particular car), it’ll probably be added.
Here’s why its not in the spirit of “spec”. You are a tinkerer (as are alot of folks who love this chassis and class). Some of us are not. If there is a perceived or actual weakness with this car and you are able to tinker a solution that is not legal, you now have an advantage. Although I applaud your willingness to share the information, in order to meet that advantage I, the non-tinkerer, have to now go pay someone to do the modification for me. In this case, that might be cheap. In the case of the RTAB things you reference, its damn expensive to pay someone to do it.
Ultimately, all this tinkering that leads to new rules may not be a good thing. It’s like the argument against liberals–just because its a good idea, doesn’t mean it needs a mandate. If we start making rules to correct every flaw in 25year old 25 year old technology, we end up with a complicated and expensive class.
I also own a GMC Sierra, the king of the looooooooooooong brake pedal. But it is consistent, which means it is completely drivable.
If the required brake force isn’t changing, there isn’t a problem.
I would like the front bar stiffer or rear bar softer, or rear springs stiffer… None of those are permitted under our “spec” rules.
Ranger -
Part of the reason I feel compelled to debate some of these “problems” you discover is for the benefit of folks trolling the forums, thinking of joining the class.
If they read your posts they would think that a SE30 is the most unfit car for competition ever envisioned. Truth be told, these aren’t really much more difficult to live with than the ultimate in never-touch-the-car-during-the-race-weekend, the Miata.
The rules allow you to build a fun, reliable, cheap (by racing standards) car.
I have been racing my car since 2008 and have had two transmissions and one engine (rebuilt once due to my bad driving at Charlotte - not due to design or rules weaknesses).
Please temper your “ohmygodwehavetodothisrightnow” posts so new guys don’t decide to take the easy path and buy a Thunder Roadster. We don’t need any more of those. :laugh:
[quote=“Steve D” post=71046]Ranger -
Part of the reason I feel compelled to debate some of these “problems” you discover is for the benefit of folks trolling the forums, thinking of joining the class.
If they read your posts they would think that a SE30 is the most unfit car for competition ever envisioned. Truth be told, these aren’t really much more difficult to live with than the ultimate in never-touch-the-car-during-the-race-weekend, the Miata.
The rules allow you to build a fun, reliable, cheap (by racing standards) car.
I have been racing my car since 2008 and have had two transmissions and one engine (rebuilt once due to my bad driving at Charlotte - not due to design or rules weaknesses).
Please temper your “ohmygodwehavetodothisrightnow” posts so new guys don’t decide to take the easy path and buy a Thunder Roadster. We don’t need any more of those. :laugh:[/quote]
I see the merit in your point. But the other side of that coin is that newbies come here and see people helping each other.
I’ve started or participated in a bezillion discussions here trying to figure out how things work, and scheming up the odd idea now and then on reliability improvements or ways to simplify things. Chicks complain about their husbands and engineer types try to figure out how things work. It’s how we’re wired. Sure, there’s going to be folks that might interpret those threads as the e30 is difficult to race with. Interpretations can be surprising. But the discussions and experiments behind the classic Ranger mods, like losing the oil cooler, being allowed to remove useless coolant hoses, being allowed to install a motormount that won’t melt, the free coolant pressure switch, the discussion of removing the tstat, etc etc… I feel strongly have a useful place in the community’s body of knowledge. Those that are interested, will go find those old threads, made all the easier since I reorganized all the technical discussions into their own subforums a year or two ago. They will see folks with different backgrounds all chiming in to figure out an issue, and often helpful ideas come out of it. Sometimes cautions against bad ideas come out of it. Sometimes rule changes come out of it. Those that aren’t interested in those kinds of discussions won’t bother to go find those discussions.
I talk to newbies a lot. Especially since we’ve now vetting each newby registration to keep out the spammers. Their #1 comment upon getting their own account here is something along the lines of having read the forums here for months and how excite they are about joining a community so clearly made up of buddies that help each other. Those technical discussions that might scare some off, are “buddies helping each other”.
Well, the Girling vac booster is no slam dunk.
I got a Girling vac booster via ebay. It arrived busted, sigh, so first I had to fix it. Today I installed the booster. With much anticipation of seeing the MC standing firm like the Rock of Gibraltar, I put wifey in the car. And the MC moved about as much as it did with the ATE booster. It’s devilishly hard trying to figure out how much movement is deformation of the booster and how much is deformation of the firewall. I do think that the firewall is moving, but I’m not yet “sure” that it’s moving.
One variable that is not really accounted for is just how much pedal pressure I should be applying. Wife has long resisted calibration and I can’t simultaneously be both pedal person and MC watcher. The vac boost adds force to the MC w/o putting stress on the firewall. If wifey is applying too much pedal pressure then the 3-4mm of movement I’m seeing is less of an issue. The question becomes…how much MC movement is there at normal race brake pedal pressures. Is there anyone that is logging brake line pressure? That would be a good start in figuring this out.
Ranger, FWIW I’ve always been told by someone who should know (BMW master tech who also preps race cars) that the booster and MC should always be used in pairs (ATE or Girling). I don’t know exactly why, but his advice has always been good enough for me.
Probably not germane to your tale of excessive flex, but thought I’d put that out there.
There was some thread a year or two that discussed this. For a while folks thought there was a fitment issue, but as more chimed in it became clear that mixing was common. I had no firsthand knowledge.
I’ve gone thru a number of MC’s over the years and didn’t even know I was supposed to pay attention to brand. I don’t even know what brand my current MC is.
If you want to firm up the pedal feel of the ate systems the ate master from I think an e31 part number 34311156643 will greatly improve pedal feel over the stock ate master. We put this master in our lemons car, you don’t get any extra braking performance but the pedal feel is completely changed. I know it is not spec legal but if you’re asking for a rule change ask for that.
I remember a couple years ago when the Policios sp? second car was brand new Julio was complaining about the same soft pedal on the new cars ate system. They disabled the abs for a run and the pedal feel problem was fixed. Maybe look at replacing your abs pump.
I’ve got an ate system in my car and this last part is important…If you are using a vacuum bleeder STOP and do it the old fashion way.
[quote=“87isMan” post=71142]If you want to firm up the pedal feel of the ate systems the ate master from I think an e31 part number 34311156643 will greatly improve pedal feel over the stock ate master. We put this master in our lemons car, you don’t get any extra braking performance but the pedal feel is completely changed. I know it is not spec legal but if you’re asking for a rule change ask for that.
I remember a couple years ago when the Policios sp? second car was brand new Julio was complaining about the same soft pedal on the new cars ate system. They disabled the abs for a run and the pedal feel problem was fixed. Maybe look at replacing your abs pump.
I’ve got an ate system in my car and this last part is important…If you are using a vacuum bleeder STOP and do it the old fashion way.[/quote]
An e31 MC is a larger dia. therefore pushes more fluid and therefore requires more foot force to achieve same line pressure. So altho the human feels a stiffer pedal, he also has to press his foot with more force.
Pressing the pedal with more force would make the MC move more than it is already. It was the exact opposite I was looking into. Some sources say there is a range of MC sizes installed in our cars. I was looking into getting a smaller dia. MC with the idea that there would have to be more pedal throw, but less pedal force. Less pedal force would mean less MC movement and therefore a more rigid system. But it turned out that I already have the smallest MC that came in our cars.
I don’t think I’d get a rule change for swapping in an e31 MC for ours. Off the top of my head I can’t come up with a decent reliability or cost savings argument in support of it.
The ABS theory is an interesting one, but my brakes aren’t so mushy that I think something’s wrong, I just think the design of everything supporting the MC isn’t all that stiff. Because of the 4:1 ratio of pedal to MC, the 3-4mm of MC movement means >12mm of pedal movement. If I could just get the MC to hold still, I’d be a happy camper.
Some of this may be a perception issue. What one person thinks of as nice and firm brakes may not be anothers. Devinney is a good measuring stick because he’s race a couple different kinds of cars and he owns a 911. 911s have awesome brakes.
[quote=“Ranger” post=71144][quote=“87isMan” post=71142]If you want to firm up the pedal feel of the ate systems the ate master from I think an e31 part number 34311156643 will greatly improve pedal feel over the stock ate master. We put this master in our lemons car, you don’t get any extra braking performance but the pedal feel is completely changed. I know it is not spec legal but if you’re asking for a rule change ask for that.
I remember a couple years ago when the Policios sp? second car was brand new Julio was complaining about the same soft pedal on the new cars ate system. They disabled the abs for a run and the pedal feel problem was fixed. Maybe look at replacing your abs pump.
I’ve got an ate system in my car and this last part is important…If you are using a vacuum bleeder STOP and do it the old fashion way.[/quote]
An e31 MC is a larger dia. therefore pushes more fluid and therefore requires more foot pressure to achieve same line pressure. So altho the human feels a stiffer pedal, he also has to press his foot harder.
Pressing the pedal harder would make the MC move more than it is already. It was the exact opposite I was looking into. Some sources say there is a range of MC sizes installed in our cars. I was looking into getting a smaller dia. MC with the idea that there would have to be more pedal throw, but less pedal pressure. Less pedal pressure would mean less MC movement and therefore a more rigid system. But it turned out that I already have the smallest MC that came in our cars.
I don’t think I’d get a rule change for swapping in an e31 MC for ours. Off the top of my head I can’t come up with a decent reliability or cost savings argument in support of it.
The ABS theory is an interesting one, but my brakes aren’t so mushy that I think something’s wrong, I just think the design of everything supporting the MC isn’t all that stiff. Because of the 4:1 ratio of pedal to MC, the 3-4mm of MC movement means >12mm of pedal movement. If I could just get the MC to hold still, I’d be a happy camper.
Some of this may be a perception issue. What one person thinks of as nice and firm brakes may not be anothers. Devinney is a good measuring stick because he’s race a couple different kinds of cars and he owns a 911. 911s have awesome brakes.[/quote]
The e31 master is a good 50 dollars cheaper than the e30 ate master so that is a decent cost savings. A few years ago I remember the member from down under stating that it was the only ate master they used in their class.
I’m not an engineer so I don’t really understand the harder pedal put less fluid movement argument. It seems to me any firmer pedal will require more human force and you are trying to fix your mushy brake pedal correct? I can’t see the MC moving a bit when you mass the brakes hindering the system, it should still be pushing the same fluid whether it flexes a bit or is stable.
What I’m ultimately saying is your MC flex is not the cause of your squishy brake pedal. How do you bleed your brakes?
Re. harder pedal and MC dia. The objective is to increase the fluid pressure. Pressure = Force / Area, or P=F/A. So if the objective is to achieve 500psi you can use a woman’s high heels or you can use an elephant’s foot. The heavy elephant’s weight is distributed across a large foot print. The woman’s high heal creates the same pressure with much less force.
Turn that into MC’s. It takes more force to get 500psi out of a larger MC, so you have to press the pedal with more force. Since pressing the pedal with more force makes the MC move, a larger MC will create more unintended flex of the braking system.
It’s that unintended flex that I’m working to minimize. Because of the 4:1 pedal ratio the 3-4mm of MC movement means that >12mm of pedal movement does nothing more then bend the firewall or booster. Think about that…the brake pedal moves enough to put the pads in firm contact with the rotors, but then the pedal certainly does not feel rock hard, even tho pressing harder really doesn’t move the pads anymore. When I think about how much my pedal moves at that point, I think in that ballpark of 12mm. Therefore if I can hold the MC still, I think I can significantly reduce that softness.
I’ve raced in 3 SpecE30’s. The brakes on all 3 felt the same. Soft.
The charm of a bigger MC is that it moves more fluid. A small MC can’t handle big slave cylinders because it doesn’t push enough fluid to move the slave pistons far enough in their cylinders.