Has Anyone Talked to Ray Korman?

#1

Yep, I’ve been doing this stuff a while. Nope, I don’t have the answers to many of the problems (oil pressure/oil pans, engine rebuilds) that are comming up in conversations on this board.

No, I do not have the answer to what horsepower can be expected from a fresh rebuild. No, I do not know what the magic “number(s)” should be for the forthcomming horsepower rules.

Suggestion to those in charge of this popular and growing series: Korman raced these engines in the mid-80s. I’m thinking that he may have already been there and done this a million times over.

It is a shame that noone has spent the money on a Korman rebuild or asked for his counsel.We’re all floundering around trying to discern if the torque value of the rodsponder is an important number.Is it?

How do you check the torque of your torque converter?

Is Mr. Korman the answer? Could he be brought on as counsel? Other engine builders? James Clay at Bimmerworld? West coast builders? Others in high reguard?

Regards, Robert Patton

#2

What are you suggesting?:huh:

#3

That all this discussion has taken place before and someone may already know the answer?

I agree that a lot of work in this area has probably already been done, but it’s still important for us to understand the reason or explanation an expert might give us.

#4

Good “question”, Robert…

Ray’s less than 10 minutes from my door. And i don’t think I’ve ever taken or really had any conversations about SE30. I used to take my M Coupe up there… He is a vast pool of knowledge.

“those in charge” (and the rest of us for that matter) would benefit from picking such a brain

+1

#5

drumbeater wrote:

That we need some help. It is disheartening to see us struggle with some of these problems. I know how we all enjoy this hobby.

That I don’t know squat and that those with less experience know less squat.
.
That the series needs a senior advisor?

That horsepower rules need to be established before too many horses get out of the barn?

Or, we can continue down the expensive path of inexperienced mistakes.

Regards, Robert Patton

PS, it will take a special person(s) to act as an advisor less the old conflict-of-interest, there’s no profit for my business problem rears its ugly head.

#6

Patton wrote:

Robert -

I think it would be great to have a Ray Korman to provide some technical advice. The larger issue I see is that we have a class comprised of some who want to get a $400 motor at the u-pick-it and some who would spend that amount on half a set of new rockers.

Even if we could get some experts to tell us what power a “fresh rebuild” would put down, we can’t even agree on what is included in a “fresh rebuild.” On first blush, our rules have a few allowances. On further pondering, they are pretty damn wide open.

If you wanted to do an all-out, legal-max motor, I am guessing there’s a 10 hp spread over a nice, fresh, DIY rebuild.

For this reason, I think it makes a lot of sense to pick an arbitrary power number achievable by the masses and we all tune or de-tune to get whatever number we are comfortable with. The measuring stick needs to be widely available and repeatable (read: pick one brand of dyno).

I have been waiting for the power rule to be set. I assume that the powers-that-be want the number picking process to be scientific and statistically valid. I’m not that concerned about how we get to a number provided that the way we measure against that number has some validity.

Steve D.

#7

I have talked with Ray extensively over the last 7 or so years. I even ran one of the AutoThority chips he developed for the eta motors in the 80s. Yes he ran baffled oil pans then, and no he no longer does them.

I think it would be an excellent idea to approach him about advertising on this site in return for technical support. I think it mutually beneficial and I’m sure he would, too. Chuck

#8

Well, Mr. DeVinney, I see that, yet again, we’re in 100% agreement on the power side of the discussion. But, I’m not sure…

Now, can you help me with the rodsponder torque value?

Regards, Robert Patton

PS, be careful, it’s been rumored that you timing belt has slipped a notch or two. Do you know how to fix it?

#9

Steve D wrote:
de-tune to get whatever number [/quote]

Steve, how you would you detune? No adjustable parts are allowed or am I missing something.

Jeremy

#10

Patton wrote:

[quote]Well, Mr. DeVinney, I see that, yet again, we’re in 100% agreement on the power side of the discussion. But, I’m not sure…

Now, can you help me with the rodsponder torque value?

Regards, Robert Patton

PS, be careful, it’s been rumored that you timing belt has slipped a notch or two. Do you know how to fix it?[/quote]

The powers that be wanted a scalpel. The problem is that the butter knife (dyno) was deemed to not be a scalpel, so we are now looking at a potato (data acq).

Let’s agree that the butter knife is good enough.

Steve D.

PS - To know how to fix my timing belt, I’d have to be able to find it in the engine bay first. :wink:

#11

jlucas wrote:

[quote] [quote] Steve D wrote:
de-tune to get whatever number [/quote]

Steve, how you would you detune? No adjustable parts are allowed or am I missing something.

Jeremy[/quote]

My assumption was that the HP/TQ rule would include some mechanism. Restrictor plates seem to do a good job of balancing the various Miata powerplants. You could also detune the AFM, right?

Steve D.

#12

From the reading I’ve done, it would seem to me that trying to manage “horse power wars” has always been the “holy grail” of racing. Pretty much everything has been tried and it would seem that the only viable solution is a sealed crate motor. That doesn’t work well in a low budget Spec series and has its own problems (crate motors are not necessarily equal).

Dyno data would seem attractive at first glance, by if limited to the use chassis dynos scattered about the results will scatter for any of a number of reasons. In a like manner in-car data can be influenced by a number of factors. And then there is the issue of where to set the max numbers (pro-built motor, crate motor, average rebuild, junkyard motor?). This a problem that doesn’t have an easy solution.

That said, even an imperfect solution would be better than no attempt at a solution. I suspect that a workable solution probably exists, but it would not look anything like what’s been done so far and would probably cost more than the series would be willing to invest. I suspect you could get reasonable results by basing the numbers on BMW "crate’ motors tested on a very limited set of chassis dynos. Ideally, one would like to test a collection of new and just broken in cars, but we can’t do that…

Returning to the original subject (negative thread drift?)…

There are quite a few folks out there with extensive experience in M20B25 engines (Korman, MM, etc). Their input probably would be helpful, but not necessarily applicable to a Spec rules class. It certainly would not hurt to talk to them and see what they have to say.

#13

I love the idea of negotiating to secure an M20-experienced expert as our “engine czar” in hopes to increase reliability and equality.

The idea of a sealed crate motor scares me out of my wits… let’s definitely not go there!

-Matt

#14

mrussell wrote:

I think it would be great, too. I just don’t know how much applicability their knowledge base has to us - running mostly high mileage, stock internals, limited rules motors.

I think we already possess information/experience/data to support or reject ideas to increase reliability. Don’t we represent most of the “stock” M20B25 engines being raced?

mrussell wrote:

“Sealed” and “crate” don’t have to go together. We’re seeing a lot of traction on the Showroom Spec Miata side of things with people wanting to seal their motors to the spec output & curve shape.

I will have more to share on the sealing procedure once the document is public in a couple weeks.

I agree that it is impractical to get everyone to buy a new sealed crate motor - assuming you can even purchase an M20B25 crate.

Steve D.

#15

Patton wrote:

[quote]Now, can you help me with the rodsponder torque value?
[/quote]

It is rather entertaining how universally fruitless these attempts at on-track horsepower monitoring have been…

http://forum.specmiata.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?/topic/48/4.html#000009

Short answer is that with data acq you still need someone to review the data and make a call. I personally think that judgment calls in motorsports are a bad policy. Throw a dart at a dartboard with numbers ranging from 145 to 160 and pick a damn number and let’s race! :woohoo:

  1. Spec a max HP/TQ and a stock set of HP/TQ curves
  2. Everybody who wants to can go dyno-tune to that number
  3. Big races have dynos and everyone gets checked to identify outliers
  4. Small races without dynos still need guys to throw paper if you think the other guy is illegal
  5. Rinse and repeat.

Steve D.

#16

Steve D wrote:

[quote]

I agree that it is impractical to get everyone to buy a new sealed crate motor - assuming you can even purchase an M20B25 crate.

Steve D.[/quote]
I haven’t checked availability lately but I know Keith Hammitte bought one for his KP car no more than 2-3 years ago. I can check and see.

#17

All of the motors I have built made in the 164-166hp range on the stock ecu. I think a good reasonable number would be 170hp, and torque of around 165ft/lbs. Anything above that and I would seriously suspect a chipped motor.

Another way of looking at this hp cap is this: allow racers a cap…like 170…and let them get there any way they can. They could build or chip to get the motor to that point. Obviously chipping will be somewhat cheaper than a build. :woohoo: but by the same token, when built, the chip would have to go. Jes thinkin…Chuck