HP and Weight

#1

So we had a discussion at RA centered around potentially influencing the current ruling. Here’s my comments and questions.

I think the weight rule is unreasonable, let alone the weight penalty. The e30 built and stripped is under 2500 lbs without driver. I weigh 200 and have all the items like a cool shirt and water bottle. I also have a spare and a rotor in the car to make 2740’ish pre-run according to the scales that were at RA. I can’t imagine what some of you lil guys (hehehe) have to do to make weight.

How do they do the dyno’s at Nats? Is it a “random” plus podium or will all cars be required? I’ve heard the dyno will at the RA Aug1 race, is there a way to sign up for these to see where you are?

Will there be any changes to the existing rule for Nationals(re: weight penalty)? I would assume no, but thought I would ask for clarification.

What’s everyone’s thoughts on this?

#2

As discussed at RA, the rule to expect at Nationals is a hp max of 162. It’s not been formally approved, but that’s what you should expect. This has been in effect in NORCAL for some months and the SE drivers voted at RA to go to the new rule immed.

There is no weight penalty associated with this rule. You are either under the hp cap or you’re dq’d.

There’s also a dyno curve reference to prevent craziness at mid-rpm.

I would expect that all of us will be dynoed at Nationals. It might not happen that way, but there’s no harm in expecting it. The outfit doing the dyno testing at Nationals is supposed to also be at RA at the early Aug event. They will also be at RA doing dyno runs the Thur test and tune day just before Nationals starts on Friday.

Keep an eye on the NASA-SE facebook page and the NASA forum for info re. signing up for the dyno in early Aug.

It wasn’t long ago that our weight was 2750. The rule change to 2700 is I think 15months old. A search will find the debate that surrounded our request for the weight reduction.

#3

Just want to say thanks to all the directors for keeping up the trend and again changing the HP rules only a mere 2 months before nationals (2 years running strong maybe 3 with the fuel mandate?).

Let me know if I should be on the look out for a new rule change the week before.
I’ll make sure to have the enormous amount of spare $$ I have laying around ready to make some last minute changes in order to be at the top level for nationals.

#4

[quote=“epalacio19” post=77494]Just want to say thanks to all the directors for keeping up the trend and again changing the HP rules only a mere 2 months before nationals (2 years running strong maybe 3 with the fuel mandate?).

Let me know if I should be on the look out for a new rule change the week before.
I’ll make sure to have the enormous amount of spare $$ I have laying around ready to make some last minute changes in order to be at the top level for nationals.[/quote]

+1 to that ^, BUT here in NorCal since the rule change we are talking about racing and not NASA as much, its a nice change!

#5

A body in motion tends to stay in motion.

#6

[quote=“epalacio19” post=77494]Just want to say thanks to all the directors for keeping up the trend and again changing the HP rules only a mere 2 months before nationals (2 years running strong maybe 3 with the fuel mandate?).

Let me know if I should be on the look out for a new rule change the week before.
I’ll make sure to have the enormous amount of spare $$ I have laying around ready to make some last minute changes in order to be at the top level for nationals.[/quote]

I gotta agree with Eric. We have a rule book for a reason and it hasn’t changed at all this season as it shouldn’t. It specifies what weight you have to run for what amount of hp you are running. Now it gets decided during the year that everyone should have 162 whp? Some of us have 100% legal built motors that have never touched 162 whp, and never will. If you want to change the rule, make a proposal at the end of the year.

#7

[quote=“King Tut” post=77497][quote=“epalacio19” post=77494]Just want to say thanks to all the directors for keeping up the trend and again changing the HP rules only a mere 2 months before nationals (2 years running strong maybe 3 with the fuel mandate?).

Let me know if I should be on the look out for a new rule change the week before.
I’ll make sure to have the enormous amount of spare $$ I have laying around ready to make some last minute changes in order to be at the top level for nationals.[/quote]

I gotta agree with Eric. We have a rule book for a reason and it hasn’t changed at all this season as it shouldn’t. It specifies what weight you have to run for what amount of hp you are running. Now it gets decided during the year that everyone should have 162 whp? Some of us have 100% legal built motors that have never touched 162 whp, and never will. If you want to change the rule, make a proposal at the end of the year.[/quote]
There were lots of complaints re. the complexity of adding weight every 2hp. Considering the measurement tool seemed to have an accuracy of +/- 4hp, these were pretty darn legit complaints in my opinion. So now we moving towards a greatly simplified standard where you’re not going to get punked for not adding enough weight and…still there’s complaints?

The rule has been eased up considerably. You will simply have to get used to the idea that it is far less likely that you will be DQ’d for hp/wt. Live with it.

#8

So now there’s no weight penalty above 155HP?

As it was, at least those of us on the low end of the HP spectrum could count on the guys with unusually strong engines carrying up to 140lbs extra. Now I feel like I need to spend more $$ to keep up. NOT what this series is supposed to be about.

Matt

#9

[quote=“Matt H.” post=77500]So now there’s no weight penalty above 155HP?

As it was, at least those of us on the low end of the HP spectrum could count on the guys with unusually strong engines carrying up to 140lbs extra. Now I feel like I need to spend more $$ to keep up. NOT what this series is supposed to be about.

Matt[/quote]
No weight penalties. DQ at 162.1hp.

A year ago there was no limit to hp at all. Compared to that, there’s nothing in this new rule that would encourage one to spend $$.

The rule that existed for the last 10months was never going to work. We can’t be required to set weight at 2hp intervals when our measurement tool is +/-4hp.

#10

I agree that the tiered weight penalty system was heavily flawed. I like the idea and simplicity of the HP cap and I’m glad to see us moving back towards a simple rule.

#11

That’s great that it is going to much simpler rule set… however that should be done after nationals.
Had I known this was going to be case at the BEGINNING of the year I would have had my head refreshed, maybe even cheated up a bit or a lot on the head while I was at it since we are now just looking at peak HP with no limit on TRQ.

Who knows, maybe I’ll fasttrack a cheater level 162.099/173 monster motor in time for nationals since money is no object.

Eric 154/2700

#12

[quote=“epalacio19” post=77503]That’s great that it is going to much simpler rule set… however that should be done after nationals.
Had I known this was going to be case at the BEGINNING of the year I would have had my head refreshed, maybe even cheated up a bit or a lot on the head while I was at it since we are now just looking at peak HP with no limit on TRQ.

Who knows, maybe I’ll fasttrack a cheater level 162.099/173 monster motor in time for nationals since money is no object.

Eric 154/2700[/quote]

I hear ya. I recently sold one of my spare motors and that sucker pumped out 162hp. I have another spare motor that will be probably in that power range as well. I can’t afford to keep this motor sitting in the garage either, so it’s up for grabs. Plenty of time to procure/install for nationals. :woohoo:

#13

Granted I am a new person to the community, but I will offer my opinion. From a positive perspective, I think the new rule is more clear and concise, thus better in the long term.

From the negative perspective, If you change something so quickly there was a problem with the original rule. I think everyone may not like it, but agree that the old rule wasn’t even close to perfect and impossible to police if a dyno wasn’t present that weekend. So the lessons learned should be taken to heart.

  1. Introduce rules or changes to rules towards the end of season and implement at the beginning of the year.

  2. We need to very deliberate about future rules and see these easy issues that would arise. Anyone familiar with the unpredictability of a dyno would tell you the existing rule is impractical due to variance on one dyno, let alone from dyno to dyno.

Calling engine builder… lol

#14

Couldn’t have said it better. +1 for the strict HP cap, a strict minimum weight, and just going racing.

#15

Ok so i like the new simple rule

If that is the rule? Sounds like ranger u have the official word the rule will be changed , ?? ( I hope so)
so far it is just a discussion on a regional Internet forum

Also if max hp is 162
Does that mean 162.9 is legal ( 162.9 is under the current official rules)

#16

[quote=“harper” post=77510]Ok so i like the new simple rule

If that is the rule? Sounds like ranger u have the official word the rule will be changed , ?? ( I hope so)
so far it is just a discussion on a regional Internet forum

Also if max hp is 162
Does that mean 162.9 is legal ( 162.9 is under the current official rules)[/quote]
We’ll have to see what comes out in final form from NASA HQ to be sure, but the NorCal spec is that 162.0 passes and 162.01 is a DQ.

There is also a hp and torque curve with an allowed 3% variance. So no funny business with mid-rpm torque.

Finally, there is wiggle room for the series director to make a judgement call that is intended to create some flexibility if a dyno shows up one day that reads cars significantly higher than they all measured prior. Each time we do dyno runs, our body of historical info increases. We’ve lots of cars that have dyno’d at Balance Performance, and also at D&D Dyno…and ~4 that did both. This gives us the ability to fix a problem where a guy’s car is suddenly measured in the DQ zone to the very great surprise of the driver.

Keep in mind tho that I’ve no more influence at Nationals then what I can win with charisma and a big smile. So if a SE car runs into dyno trouble at Nats, well, I don’t know. I’ll do what I can to help.

#17

[quote=“Rob in VA” post=77504][quote=“epalacio19” post=77503]That’s great that it is going to much simpler rule set… however that should be done after nationals.
Had I known this was going to be case at the BEGINNING of the year I would have had my head refreshed, maybe even cheated up a bit or a lot on the head while I was at it since we are now just looking at peak HP with no limit on TRQ.

Who knows, maybe I’ll fasttrack a cheater level 162.099/173 monster motor in time for nationals since money is no object.

Eric 154/2700[/quote]

I hear ya. I recently sold one of my spare motors and that sucker pumped out 162hp. I have another spare motor that will be probably in that power range as well. I can’t afford to keep this motor sitting in the garage either, so it’s up for grabs. Plenty of time to procure/install for nationals. :woohoo:[/quote]

I’ll take that spare motor Rob…I’m in the same boat you are. I am running in the 155 Hp 147 Tq area…oh, and I weigh 325 lbs. Try corner weighting that hot mess! :blink:

#18

[quote=“epalacio19” post=77503]That’s great that it is going to much simpler rule set… however that should be done after nationals.
Had I known this was going to be case at the BEGINNING of the year I would have had my head refreshed, maybe even cheated up a bit or a lot on the head while I was at it since we are now just looking at peak HP with no limit on TRQ.

Who knows, maybe I’ll fasttrack a cheater level 162.099/173 monster motor in time for nationals since money is no object.

Eric 154/2700[/quote]

Eric,

162.01 is DQ’d If I recall correctly, anything over 159 TQ is also a DQ.

The sample engines they are using as a baseline (+3%) made all their torque between 4,000 and 5,000.
2,500 - 135.1
3,000 - 135.4
3,500 - 138.2
4,000 - 156.9
4,500 - 159.0
5,000 - 154.1
5,500 - 151.6
6,000 - 141.1
6,300 - 130.2

HP ran:
2,500 - 65.6
3,000 - 76.8
3,500 - 92.2
4,000 - 119.3
4,500 - 136.8
5,000 - 145.7
5,500 - 159.2
6,000 - 161.6
6,300 - 154.5

#19

A: Without a doubt the rule should not be changed mid season.

B: While there are issues with the current rule, the intent of keeping large amounts of money from being spent on motors on a regular basis is still a good one. While yes racing is expensive, I don’t think we should hide behind that as justification for not trying to find a spec that encourages equality and dollars going to entry fees and large car counts instead of motor rebuilds.

Our motor has been 154whp the past few times on the Region dyno. Our teammate has 161whp and there is a noticeable difference on track without the ballast.

Anybody have ideas that doesn’t require people to spend $3500-5500 every couple of seasons to stay competitive? One option I wonder about is allowing ECU chips (stock rev limits). Much cheaper than motor builds, power cap stays the same. My thought is it would help the budget racers more than the deep pockets. Personally I can afford the rebuilds, although it may cut into the enduro/chump seat time, but I don’t think it’s the best thing for the class.

#20

If you feel that the rule change should not be made mid-season, you need to speak up to Jerry at NASA and your National Director. They are the only two who are able to make that decision. Your local director and asst. director are only a voice to them and you are the customer.

But you are 100% correct Jeremy, 154 hp vs 161 hp is a tough thing to battle against, especially if you are at places like Road Atlanta where there are looooooong straights and the extra hp will make a big difference. Or Laguna Seca where going up the hill out of turn 6 will give the hp car a huge advantage. Not to mention the front straight, too.

As far as the chip idea, that becomes a slippery slope. How are you going to regulate the chip? Or are you suggesting that there is either a) open chip rule…run whatever you want or b) a spec chip? If you are suggesting “b”, what chip are you thinking of and who will distribute it?

On the plus side, this is like the exhaust rule. You can run the stock exhaust or not. Using the stock version is only for those driving to the track and even then, it can be changed out at the track…or not.

If you have an idea, think it through and discuss it with your Regional Series Director/Asst. Director and, if they feel it is a good rule change suggestion, ask them to present it to the National Director for consideration.

Just so you know, there has already been some chip usage in others have been found to have a stock appearing chip that was reprogramed. I say this so you consider the option of open chip use. There is no need to regulate it and you can only get so much out of a chip.