Engine Rebuild

#21

IndyJim wrote:

[quote]
So I build a 100% legal motor to the rules outlined I go to the dyno and make 160hp and the ‘limit’ is 159hp. Lets say for arguments sake there is time penalty of 1 sec. Which means now instead of winning this theoretical race I’m now 10th. I say “Balls to that tear it down I’m legal”. The motor is torn down and nothing illegal is found, but I’m still penalized because of the dyno? How exactly does that work.[/quote]

The two rule set makes sense. The problem is getting the second rule defined correctly.

Here is an example of how two rule set works;

There is the first rule on how the car should be built. What do take out and what to leave in. You follow the rule and build the car to the spec.

Now the second rule comes in which is the minimum weight rule. It says the weight has to be at least 2750 lbs. So even if you have followed all the rules to the letter in building a proper car, it still has to meet the second rule to keep the field level between the cars.

As I have stated before, the second rule for the engine power is harder to define than just measuring a car’s weight.

Spec Miata series has suffered because even thought they have a very good first rule, they do not have the second rule in place.

#22

allenr wrote:

[quote]
We will probably have issues with the dyno and I’m sure we’re going to have a lot of angry drivers in '09. And of course there will be some guys saying “I told you so” but I haven’t heard any better ideas.[/quote]

I’ll be waiting to say I told you so. There are better ideas but no one is listening. And if someone chooses the teardown, its their choice at that point. Alternatively they can take the penalty.

I used to think that Femme Fatale was Vic, now I’m wondering if Rallen is Carter?

I race in the SouthEast so I’m sure whatever crazy nonsense is come up with we’ll mitigate with good ole’ medicore common sense.

#23

Every approach has flaws. There will be no perfect solution. All we can do is find control measures such that their sum has the least flaws. The motor spec all by itself is clearly an inadequate rule because it’s too hard to verify. There has to be a more easily verifiable standard to ensure that the playing field remains even. And the dyno standards seems to be reasonably verifiable.

As the data comes in from different cars and different dynos a picture should emerge of the relative calibration differences of the dynos.

But it would be nice if a Dyno could come to a couple events.

#24

Is having the guy who writes the rules also being a competitor a conflict? I don’t know, (personally I don’t believe it is) but considering the incredible misery of the job, how much would we have to pay somebody to manage the rules who DIDN’T race in the series. I’ve been trying to think of a figure that I’d have to be paid, and haven’t come up with one yet. Then, let’s say I was going to be the rules guy for SM or 944 cup. What the hell do I know about those cars? Less than nothing.

If you keep complaining about Carter the dictator, to the point that he says ‘screw it’ and quits, then what are you left with? I think having the inmates in charge of cutting the cellblock keys is not a smart move either. Let’s get past the personalities and try to come up with a way to keep the racing fair and legal and fun without making it impossible to administer or live with.

We can’t have it both ways guys. The existing rules on engine internals are, as a practical matter, impossible to enforce until we are willing to get with the the protest/teardown process. Nobody really wants to do that.

At the same time, if somebody shows up blowing 10-16 HP more than the rest of the field, and there are some known freshly built motors in the rest of the field (as apparently happened in MA this season) the howls of protest will sound like…the recent comments on this board.

The tricky balancing part is coming up with the limits and how much ‘tolerance’ is in them. I suspect the majority of racers will never have to deal with it, because we won’t be running motors built enough to push the envelope. If racer X wants to get within 99% of the limit and occasionally, due to variables A, B or C, is found to be illegal and penalized, I’ve got less of a problem with that than I do if 30% of the field is facing a DQ or some type of time/performance penalty.

If it turns out over time that half the field wants to build to 99%, then at that point, we might as well disband SpecE30 and fold into some PT or GTS classes, so that the big spenders and the budget people can separate and race against their own kind.

I don’t think that’s where you want this to end up, but in this type of series, it is, as a practical matter, impossible, just impossible, to come up with an engine mod/max HP rule that is 100% consistent, enforceable, predictable, and so on. Can’t do it.

If you read through all the stuff in these threads relating to motors and HP/TQ limits, there is some good thinking, which I expect we will give consideration to as the rules are drafted.

I believe we should draft the best ideas we can come up, put them in play, and see how they work in the real world. Give us a little credit that we can react as the situation unfolds next season.

#25

[quote]I’ll be waiting to say I told you so. There are better ideas but no one is listening. And if someone chooses the teardown, its their choice at that point. Alternatively they can take the penalty.

I used to think that Femme Fatale was Vic, now I’m wondering if Rallen is Carter?[/quote]
Its not that nobodys listening. I (and others) have heard your ideas and respectfully disagreed. We’re all just speculating anyway. You take that too personally.

Its obvious you are not going to cooperate with anything that comes from this. Its a big conspiracy by carter and cobetto, who seceretly meet to discuss how to make your life miserable while guarunteeing that they win all of the races and get rich off of administering spece30.
They are trying to do whats best for you and me but you are making it more difficult by trying to pick a fight every time someone has a different opinion.

#26

I guess I take it personally because I am the one paying for my motor.

But re-reading this I have to agree having an arbitrary,inconsistent, semi-reproducible way of ruling the most expensive part of a race car is a great idea fellas. Sure its got its problems but its the best we can do. Heck GTS hasn’t had any issues with dynos have they. I’m sorry that I haven’t been drinking the Kool Aid.

Everything is fine in SE30 land, the spec exhaust went great no complaints there, and that was a $100 part. Not a $1, 3, 5,7k part. And really all the problems that came up after that was implemented were addressed immediately I only had to buy two and then modify my ‘spec’ part to fit.

I’m done with this again I’ll sit over here with Vic in the timeout corner. The good thing is a SE30 easily becomes KP, ITS, or GTS 1/2.

You guys have it all under control. See you at the racetrack.

#27

:lol: You’re not the first to pull that card. I usually hear it at the track in the form of an excuse…
FYI just paid an $800 dollar bill for spec exhaust repairs(and other racing stuff) today with my own money that I made from sweeping and re-sweeping the floor in a 110 deg. garage this summer. I bet I’ve worked just as hard as you to be here… even if its not always my name that goes on the check.

Im participating in this thread because my '09 season is completely dependant on this decision- not because I get a kick out of bashing those in authority.

#28

Hey… Weigh-in Wendy, What don’t you have an opinion on? And I say that with all due respect.

I’m totally cool reading your thoughts on every single topic discussed on this board. But I think you need to step away from the keyboard for a while. When you start directing commentary towards your fellow racers for having opinions that differs from your own… I’d say it’s time for you to take a break.

You don’t have to weigh in on everything. And while I know that goes for me too… I’m just saying this for your own good.

peace out

#29

Am I weigh in wendy?
If so I try not to say anything unless its productive. This is not just a grabass board :). Things we say can make a difference in the rules for next year. We’ve had a lot of talk about this stuff recently, so I have been active. If it were all for the sake of discussion then I would just look on, but its not. The people who make decsions read this forum for input. This is a thread about something that is very important to me so I want to make sure I have a say. I would very much like to see the rules turn out a certain way so I voice my opinion in a productive way… until someone starts making personal attacks on people he doesnt know who happen to be my friends. I never start any of the fights on this forum intentionally (I admit the mediocre comment was not well said), but if you start publicly attacking good people who have done a lot for me, I’m not just gonna turn the other way.

I also know I am in a minority here with opinions, and that I absorb a lot of the dislike for my region. I’m not trying to win any popularity contests. Reread the thread and you’ll see Im just defending myself.

If you have another opinion about the hp cap (other than that you dislike the people in authority and will refuse to follow the rule when it comes out) then please give it.

#30

allenr wrote:

[quote]until someone starts making personal attacks on people he doesnt know who happen to be my friends. I never start any of the fights on this forum intentionally (I admit the mediocre comment was not well said), but if you start publicly attacking good people who have done a lot for me, I’m not just gonna turn the other way.

I also know I am in a minority here with opinions, and that I absorb a lot of the dislike for my region. I’m not trying to win any popularity contests. Reread the thread and you’ll see Im just defending myself.

If you have another opinion about the hp cap (other than that you dislike the people in authority and will refuse to follow the rule when it comes out) then please give it.[/quote]

I guess I’m the one making personal attacks, probably as mediocrally (which isn’t a word) as I race.

So for the record (again) this isn’t personal. I’ll gratefully concede Carter’s (and others) hard work in starting the series and running it. I couldn’t do it, didn’t do it, and haven’t done it. But lets be clear about something that probably isn’t another popular opinion. NASA is a business and it is for profit. As such I’m a customer, and as a customer I expect that when I see poor service or something I don’t like I’m entitled (yes - as in a paid for right) to point it out or speak my mind. If Carter or another official is unpaid, poorly paid, feels underappreciated, picked on, etc. I’m sorry. My wife is a school teacher, she complains to me about how other (in her mind) less important jobs make more money than she does. My response - quit and do something else.

I know she won’t because she loves what she does and I imagine that is the same reason the guys that run this keep doing it too. And I’m glad they do, but if they decide they don’t, simply look to GTS. That dude ‘invented it’ and NASA doesn’t seem to have a problem putting someone else in charge. Now the flip side of that coin is that NASA can say - “things are fine the way they are like it or lump it”. Then it is on me to decide how much I really dislike things like the spec exhaust.

Since I’m a malcontent that doesn’t follow the rules, allow me to say I ran R888’s first in the SE. I wasn’t the first to put the spec exhaust on, but its on, and probably no one complained about that more than I did.

Also, here is another news flash, with one possible exception I’ve never mentioned a problem without providing an alternate (and of course in my mind) better solution. Examples (repeated for those that don’t want to search and re-read 3 yrs of threads) -

Spec Exhaust -
postion: for it in concept
problems: hand craftedness makes it not ‘spec’, poor response, fact that over 80% of the active racers already had a twin pipe glass pack unit that easily could have been adopted as the spec (and is what I suggested).

HP/TRQ cap -
position: for it in concept
problems: dyno is too variable and engine too expensive to trust to it as a hard and fast rule. Dyno should be used to indicate non-compliance but rule set should determine ultimately if the engine is legal or not. Since it can be repeated, accurately measured. Not to mention the ‘ways’ of tricking dynos, or simply if a dyno is present someone can leave before they race because ‘car isn’t running right’ or some other excuse.

I’ll suggest another way of indicating maybe the same thing. Require ‘data’ for example traqmate. Everyone submits their files and has them posted in a central location. This does require some up front expense for the unit, but offers benefits in having group participation that results in people being able to see who is fast where and how. So in addition to see if corner entry, exit, and straightaway speed you may also learn how to drive, and that it isn’t always the ‘car’ that is fast. This is portable, can be spot checked, isn’t as obvious as a dyno, and I think maybe harder to cheat around. Since ultimately if you don’t want to be fast to ‘hide’ what you’re doing you want have the results to match. It has just as much variance as a dyno though, so again this is an indication. If there is smoke there is fire. It still requires the rules to be enforced, not more rules to shift the blame and administration to other people.

Conflict of Interest -
Problem: the guy making the rules can’t be the same one enforcing (see constitution for follow up reading)
Postion: no easy answer, maybe there isn’t one. Chuck brings up valid points which is why I don’t know how to fix this. But it is a problem or at least has the potential to be one. I’ve submitted several items to Chuck for clarification. Wouldn’t you like to know what they are? Tough luck you don’t, maybe one is a competitive advantage?. Want to know when the dyno will be where, tough luck you won’t, etc. Maybe those are the ‘perks’ of the job. I AM NOT IMPLYING malicious intent with any of this, simply pointing out examples of how it could benefit someone in those positions if they so choose.

Ultimately if someone is going to cheat they’re going to cheat, people have been cheating at racing longer than most any of us (except Patton) have been alive.

I don’t think the problem is the rules as much as the enforcement. If you see someone pulling a 180 on a dyno, do you need a ‘rule’ to think that is fishy? Or does someone just need to sack up and say “Hey man you’re a cheater tear it down”. And if they are everyone knows and life goes on, and it sends a strong message to other people considering the same thing. If they aren’t shake the guys hand and apologize.

The SE works because everyone for the most part likes and respects each other and has embraced what this is supposed to be about. I don’t think anyone is cheating there and if they were I’d call them on it. My litmus test for this stuff is Skeen. If he is worried then I’m worried because at that point it isn’t the driver that is fast anymore. My car is legal and I won’t cheat because I like and respect the guys I hang out with, and would like and respect them even if we weren’t racing. No rule can mandate that and you can’t get it with a canopy or a flag.

I’m done now. [/rant off]

#31

Jim,
I could swear that I heard the Rocky theme playing while you were ranting…must have been all in my head.

For the record, IndyJim and I are not the same person - we barely even know each other - but it certainly is comforting to hear the same opinion voiced by an independent party.

Rallen,
If I might be so bold as to make a suggestion regarding your forum etiquette (HA - coming from me, right?) Imagine a bunch of us standing around in the paddock, chatting it up about racing. If I chose to speak at the end of every sentence (i was the speaker every other time), then my fellow racers might feel bullied out of the conversation. At bimmerforums, I believe these are called forum-trolls. They even give you a higher “ranking” if you post more, encouraging people to post ANYTHING. By responding almost instantly to every post, you might be cheapening the value of what you have to say.

Just a quick point on dynos,
Jim makes a very strong argument for having the dyno be a trigger for looking deeper. You cannot set a hard and fast limit, when your measuring device can’t support an acceptable tolerance. Carter himself said the he saw a 15HP difference on a mustang dyno. These dynos were meant as back-to-back tuning tools. The numbers themselves are as useless as the Dow Jones.

-Vic

#32

victorhall wrote:

Well done! That is an incredibly succinct summary. It feels kinda icky, but I agree with Vic and IndyJim.:stuck_out_tongue:

Steve D.

PS - I have a very good friend who is a player-referee in another NASA series. He handles the position well and I’ve never seen a conflict of interest arise. But he is not a front-runner, so there is less moral hazard for him. (Not at all implying that Carter does anything improper - just addressing others’ implication that he might.)

I think the benefits of having someone who has a deep vested interest in seeing the series thrive outweighs the pitfalls of not having 100% real and perceived independence of a non-SE30 director.

#33

victorhall wrote:

[quote]Just a quick point on dynos,
Jim makes a very strong argument for having the dyno be a trigger for looking deeper. You cannot set a hard and fast limit, when your measuring device can’t support an acceptable tolerance. Carter himself said the he saw a 15HP difference on a mustang dyno. These dynos were meant as back-to-back tuning tools. The numbers themselves are as useless as the Dow Jones.

-Vic[/quote]

Right, dynos have variance. But if you are comparing cars on the same dyno on the same day, with the same operator, you will get decent results. Perhaps the results should only be used for further investigation, but they need to be used. Example: if you go over the hp/tq rule, we tear down this this and this (check ECU, whatever).

As of now, dynoing cars is useless because nothing ever happens of it. Even when the dyno operator looks at the curve and says “that car has been tuned” nothing was investigated.

#34

Wow Ranger, Your thread got hi jacked. Good discussion tho.

To Ranger: Watch a couple of episode of “Hosrepower” on Spike TV, then you will be good to go to tear down that engine.:wink:

To the HP/TQ limit: As a bystander I can only say a HARD HP/TQ cap is needed. The only issue is that the tool we use to measure that HP/TQ is inconsistent. Since there is an inconsistency I see a need to offer warning/penalty system for the first offense. If you wish to play with fire and push the limit again,then it is you gambling your luck on the dyno.

Whatever rule is made, we need to keep it simple,

#35

[quote]Rallen,
If I might be so bold as to make a suggestion regarding your forum etiquette (HA - coming from me, right?) Imagine a bunch of us standing around in the paddock, chatting it up about racing. If I chose to speak at the end of every sentence (i was the speaker every other time), then my fellow racers might feel bullied out of the conversation. At bimmerforums, I believe these are called forum-trolls. They even give you a higher “ranking” if you post more, encouraging people to post ANYTHING. By responding almost instantly to every post, you might be cheapening the value of what you have to say.[/quote]
Thanks for the advice. As I said I feel strongly about this so I am active in the thread. I know you’ve had a few of those recently ;).

I think there are some very major issues with teardowns:

  1. Its not just about cheating. I have been told by an engine builder that 170hp is not unrealistic for a legal motor. We’re concerned with leveling the playing field meaning that legal motors can only be so fancy (expensive) even if they are legal.
  2. If it’s volunteer then who chooses where the work is done? If its the same shop that built the motor, the verdict would be obvious. If the shop is of someone else’s choosing, probably few will trust that shop.
  3. If teardowns were mandatory as some have suggested, this would be the death of the series. The time/effort/expense/humiliation would cause everyone I know in spece30 to quit on the spot. Whether thats justified or not, we cant race without drivers.

I think the best way to do this is to have the top 3 finishers dynoed and say that nobody can be more than a given number above the average of the three. That way no matter how high or low the dyno is reading, nobody is at a major advantage. The top 3 could theoretically have an advantage but I doubt that the podium finishers will conspire to build 170 hp. motors to run away from the rest of the field. People have proposed something similar but if I understand it, the other ideas guarunteed that the guy with a lot more power than the average of the field would be penalized. having just the top 3 makes it more predictable.

As always, my opinions are open to constructive criticism.

#36

I feel like kicking myself for even getting in the middle of all this, but I had to post on this one…

Are you really saying that as long as you finish in the top 3 you’re legal? I’m sorry, but I really don’t see the point in that. That sounds like the greatest invitation to cheat I’ve ever heard.

For the record, I share the belief that there is no perfect way of doing this. I think we should set acceptable limits, have some small “wiggle room” and move on. We have a bit of analysis paralysis going on right now and there are no real right/wrong answers. Everything I’ve heard regarding our engines is that there IS a limit to how much they can be built and how much HP they can create. We’re chasing our tails if we continue to come up with theoretical scenarios. Come up with the limit, make the rule, and then let’s all go racing.

#37

shifter11 wrote:

I feel like kicking myself for even getting in the middle of all this, but I had to post on this one…

Are you really saying that as long as you finish in the top 3 you’re legal? I’m sorry, but I really don’t see the point in that. That sounds like the greatest invitation to cheat I’ve ever heard.

For the record, I share the belief that there is no perfect way of doing this. I think we should set acceptable limits, have some small “wiggle room” and move on. We have a bit of analysis paralysis going on right now and there are no real right/wrong answers. Everything I’ve heard regarding our engines is that there IS a limit to how much they can be built and how much HP they can create. We’re chasing our tails if we continue to come up with theoretical scenarios. Come up with the limit, make the rule, and then let’s all go racing.[/quote]

+1 - the method that has been discussed by Carter is going to work for me and I for one support the approach.

#38

shifter11 wrote:

I feel like kicking myself for even getting in the middle of all this, but I had to post on this one…

Are you really saying that as long as you finish in the top 3 you’re legal? I’m sorry, but I really don’t see the point in that. That sounds like the greatest invitation to cheat I’ve ever heard.

For the record, I share the belief that there is no perfect way of doing this. I think we should set acceptable limits, have some small “wiggle room” and move on. We have a bit of analysis paralysis going on right now and there are no real right/wrong answers. Everything I’ve heard regarding our engines is that there IS a limit to how much they can be built and how much HP they can create. We’re chasing our tails if we continue to come up with theoretical scenarios. Come up with the limit, make the rule, and then let’s all go racing.[/quote]

Plus… what if something happens that takes a couple of cars out in the last lap and 2 of the top 3 finishers are cars that never would have been there otherwise? What if Al and Skeen were both in the top 3? You’d have 30 HP between the 2 of them…

Come up with the rules and before you make them the law, play “what if?”

#39

I see what you’re saying but I think there needs to be a way to try and keep people happy who just want to show up and race without having to go on a dyno every weekend. My idea is to keep the frontrunners, who are generally the ones making big power, relatively equal. I’m not saying that they matter more. I’m just saying that in general mid pack and backmarker cars are not making 160 hp and in general they will not want to be getting dynoed all the time for finishing 10th. Plus if someone shows up with 120 hp., that can make things totally unpredictable. You pretty much know (in the mid. atl anyway) that the top finishers (except one) are going to be in the 154-157 range.
Its far from perfect but I think there has to be a way to keep the people happy who arent concerned about whats happening several seconds ahead on the track, and make sure that the frontrunners have a good idea of what the cap is going to be for the weekend. It also cancels out any variation in dynos.

I dont know about you but where I come from it aint that easy. If you dont cover up every possible loophole and problem with a rule, someone is going to expose it- and they have a right to. The rules have to be well thought out. If we really want to have unhappy drivers, we can come out with a rule then realize it doesnt work and change it a few times.

#40

Jim is hatching a plan that might come up with a portable dyno for the SE region that would come to several events. That would bring SE types a lot closer to the idea of a single verifiable standard. Near as I can tell from the concerns voiced, this should take care of a lot of the issues.