[quote=“juliancates” post=69209][quote=“Ranger” post=69208]
You know my wife? She has a way of saying that she agrees, yet nothing she says really sounds like she agrees.
Steve’s point, which I agree with, was:
What I was getting at was exactly this. Regardless of whether you pass or fail on the dyno, there is no motivation to do any engine teardown. Hence, the presence of a dyno and the enforcement of a max HP rule will effectively result in “de facto open engine rules”.[/quote]
My point is that the dyno idea doesn’t change the impact of the other rules. There is currently no motivation to do an engine teardown. The dyno idea doesn’t change the degree of motivation to do an engine teardown. There is no “hence”, as you put it.
IMO we’re never going to get to engine teardowns. What a godawful pita for all concerned that would be. I’ve been pretty involved in engine building and engine management experiments now for quite a while. I can guarantee that a supplemental 160hp dyno would make it harder to gain advantage. Nothing realistic will prevent it in certainty. The challenge is to make the cost vs. reward such that the cars are more equal.
I don’t mean to imply that this is really important. The cars are already pretty darned equal already. A couple hp one way or another doesn’t make any difference.
Let me ask you guys this…in what way does the dyno test at Nationals result in a culture of “open rules engine”?