HP Limit rule? Thoughts?

#1

http://944spec.com/944SPEC/forum/rules-changes/14174-dyno-cap-for-2013-944-spec

#2

Having come from GTS, I’m generally against a dyno rule cause you never know the variance in dyno/conditions from day to day. I like 944S idea that no annual is required–it’s expensive and I’m not worried about my engine cause I know its legal.

#3

[quote=“mcmmotorsports” post=69173]http://944spec.com/944SPEC/forum/rules-changes/14174-dyno-cap-for-2013-944-spec[/quote]Interesting. If it works out well for them the idea might well come our way.

#4

What brand dyno?

What if we are both ‘legal’ at a SE30 limit of 165… :huh: ? Who is going to win?

[attachment=1904]se30dynoexample.jpg[/attachment]

#5

So this would open up the world of restrictor plates, tuning and detuning. The only good that can come of this is that we won’t need the spec exhaust anymore.

#6

[quote=“Steve D” post=69176]What brand dyno?

What if we are both ‘legal’ at a SE30 limit of 165… :huh: ? Who is going to win?

[attachment=1904]se30dynoexample.jpg[/attachment][/quote]
If you’re looking for a perfect solution, you won’t find it here. Sometimes perfect is the enemy of good enough.

#7

I’m not looking for a perfect solution, just a better one than what we have now.

On the surface, this sounds like the kind of tech method that makes everyone equal.

The reality is that some people will spend hours and hours on the dyno testing different parts and settings to maximize their curve. Others will show up and hope for the best. The class is no tighter than it was, you didn’t catch anyone you wouldn’t have before, and the cost goes up. Way up – unless you don’t have dynos at the track each weekend.

And if you don’t, how is that an improvement?

#8

[quote=“Steve D” post=69176]What brand dyno?

What if we are both ‘legal’ at a SE30 limit of 165… :huh: ? Who is going to win?

[/quote]

probably grace or palacio

#9

I’m not looking for a perfect solution, just a better one than what we have now.

On the surface, this sounds like the kind of tech method that makes everyone equal.

The reality is that some people will spend hours and hours on the dyno testing different parts and settings to maximize their curve. Others will show up and hope for the best. The class is no tighter than it was, you didn’t catch anyone you wouldn’t have before, and the cost goes up. Way up – unless you don’t have dynos at the track each weekend.

And if you don’t, how is that an improvement?[/quote]

Don’t get me wrong, I mildly support the idea, but I’m not attempting to be a strong advocate of it. That said…I’d have to say that I dont’ really understand your response.

Scenario 1, status quo. There’s no hp limit and some people play on the dyno to try to get some more power.

Scenario 2, status quo plus 160 hp/torque rule. Some people play on the dyno to try to get a fatter curve. Now that there is a hp limit, their constrained in the peak hp/torque that they acheived the year prior.

If I interpret what yoru saying correctly Steve, you are suggesting that a dyno rule will somehow encourage people to game the rules and gain advantage. I see it as making it harder to game the rules. If a dyno rule makes it harder to gain advantage, why not support it?

#10

I’m saying that the dyno rule would become the one everyone focuses on. Maybe it shaves some real outliers, but those outliers aren’t dumb enough to show up at big events with beeeeg mota anyway.

It won’t result in tighter fields. It will result in people using it as a tech crutch (ie not investigating further of the dyno says the car is below X hp).

It adds cost and complexity with no real tightening of competition.

That being said, I’d love to see a dyno rule personally. Granted, the 944 “fuel quality” switch and open exhaust are 2 things we can’t play with. But there would still be enough knobs to twist in search of the mythical flat curve.

PS - Tower’s best post ever.

#11

There aren’t many knobs to twist now. You’re motor is worn out or it’s sorted out. Between the motor’s that are sorted out how much difference can there be.

I read the whole original post on the 944 site and a little bit of their rules. It sounds like they are opening it up to anything goes. If you have low power shave the head. If you have to high of power put in a restrictor plate.

Now you have to worry about a DQ for power. Dynojet is what NASA uses and it’s the cheapest in the business. Can I believe that their adjustments for atmosperic conditions are correct. Not if I’m DQed I won’t.

What are we trying to do? Make an even playing field for the junkyard motors. Compared to the rest of the car the motor was a minor expense. If you’re motor makes more white smoke than it does HP your probably also the guy running factory rtabs etc.

I’ve run with NASA MA, SE and MW. The only time I’ve seen Dyno’s was with the MA region, so it’s not going to help the MW police the field.

If we want an HP rule why not let 318s and 325s back into the field. They can run a cam or something.

I’ve only been weighed after a race or qualifying. The only thing that actually keeps us from cheating is integrity.

#12

Right on.

#13

[quote=“Steve D” post=69185]I’m saying that the dyno rule would become the one everyone focuses on.[/quote] Why? The other engine related rules wouldn’t change any. The dyno idea is an additional tool in the enforcement arsenal, not a substitute for the current arsenal.

#14

So the dyno will be the justification to tear a motor apart. I like the protest system. If you think someone is cheating put your money where you’re mouth is.

#15

So the dyno will be the justification to tear a motor apart. I like the protest system. If you think someone is cheating put your money where you’re mouth is.[/quote]

There will be no need to tear the motor apart if found over HP. DQ’d is DQ’d.

Not sure how much I care about this. I don’t think it will affect my finishing position much if at all. I’m certainly neither in danger of being found over the limit, nor of finishing high enough to justify being put on the dyno in the first place.

#16

I haven’t dyno’ed my car but I believe my brother who built my motor is a genius, and if I’m under the hp limit I’m going to protest him.

#17

So the dyno will be the justification to tear a motor apart. [/quote]
A Strawman argument is when you invent things to complain about.

#18

The RacerX in me loves the dyno rule idea. I don’t think it is good for the class though. It takes away some of the (almost nonexistent) threat of a tear-down. Pass the dyno test? “Carry on, my good man. This way to the scales…”

Why not show up with a small plate at the beginning of the weekend, look around for a dyno, see none, and pull the plate? If you set the HP limit low, the junkyard guys can achieve it. If you do that, you have to provide means to detune. If you do that, there are means to un-detune.

If, as Turbo states, there’s not much you can do to affect the motor, why don’t we just tech those things? I’m pretty sure a whistler is easier to bring to the track than a dyno. Has anyone ever pulled a rocker cover in tech just to have a look around?

If we all cede the fact that there won’t be invasive tech and we will use the dyno as the pass/fail mechanism, that will result in de facto open engine rules.

If instead we step up tech for the stuff that matters, THAT will level the playing field.

#19

Nicely said.

#20

This is where we disagree. Adding an additional restraint does not result in less restraint.