Mid Ohio Dyno Results

#21

Stephen Foushee wrote:

Completely understand, but Carter clearly says even if it is legal parts-build wise if it operates outside of the bounds set, it is illegal. I’m not an engine builder, I don’t even play one on TV. I’m constantly amazed at the clever / devious / dubious ways people come up with that exploit the gray area. I’m also not looking for any technical advantage, despite my desperate need for one.

I just want to make sure if I spend $XXX on a motor it isn’t show piece in my garage but something that gets to go in the engine bay and earn its keep.

#22

Jim Robinson wrote:

Me too, which is why I like the new rule and think it is very wise. My take on what Carter is saying with the new rule is this. We know how much torque and HP can be made with a legitimate by the rules stock out of the box motor. Once you establish a base line with ten-fifteen motors, something outside of that base line is cause for suspicion. Since NASA doesn’t have a budget for tearing down motors and none of us want to do that; it is simple. If your motor makes more power than it should, the car should go home with a DQ. Obviously the owner will know why the motor made more power than baseline and will come back next month with something closer to reality under the hood.

#23

I agree with the concept of a max HP rule to discourage any "over building" of engines but I’m not sure what that max figure should be or how to determine what it will be. I’m glad to see Carter’s engine produce some strong numbers to help justify the cost of the recent rebuild. It is interesting that there are several recent rebuilds within the rules produce such a range of HP and torque numbers. One thing I do know is that I have a weak engine compared to all of the dyno’s posted above.

Here is my dyno run from VIR in July:

_74_Dyno_Results0002.jpg618x850

#24

Don’t want to seem like I don’t support this, I agree that having these numbers is the right thing. Just looking for specifics.

Besides JP has probably subscribed to this thread so he knows whether to go stroker or turbo…:stuck_out_tongue:

#25

Weight, the great equalizer. Takes away straightaway talent and punishes you in braking and in the corners.

Make too much hrsepower…here drive around with some penalty weight.

Don’t know if weight is being considered as part of the solution. Time will tell.

Regards, Robert Patton

#26

If we really wanted a Spec engine we would have to do something like SRF where they have to use sealed engines made by A builder but that would probably discourage many people from SpecE30 due to cost and the fact that you couldn’t do any repairs to the engine yourself. I like the idea of coming up with some guidelines on this subject and I am sure it will take some work to refine them as they go on. I can’t wait to read the threads when they guidelines are posted :slight_smile:

#27

Robert Patton wrote:

[quote]Weight, the great equalizer. Takes away straightaway talent and punishes you in braking and in the corners.

Make too much hrsepower…here drive around with some penalty weight.

Don’t know if weight is being considered as part of the solution. Time will tell.

Regards, Robert Patton[/quote]

Damion and I both drive around with penalty weight all the time. :wink:

#28

could also use an intake restrictor like the dreaded SIR in ITS.
bruce

Robert Patton wrote:

[quote]Weight, the great equalizer. Takes away straightaway talent and punishes you in braking and in the corners.

Make too much horsepower…here drive around with some penalty weight.

Don’t know if weight is being considered as part of the solution. Time will tell.

Regards, Robert Patton[/quote]

#29

Jim Robinson wrote:

[quote]Don’t want to seem like I don’t support this, I agree that having these numbers is the right thing. Just looking for specifics.

Besides JP has probably subscribed to this thread so he knows whether to go stroker or turbo…:P[/quote]

oooohHHHhHHOOOOHHHHHhhoooo. . . . .sooooo that’s what the back of your car looks like! :stuck_out_tongue: B)

#30

Bruce Leggett wrote:

[quote]could also use an intake restrictor like the dreaded SIR in ITS.
bruce

Robert Patton wrote:

[quote]Weight, the great equalizer. Takes away straightaway talent and punishes you in braking and in the corners.

Make too much horsepower…here drive around with some penalty weight.

Don’t know if weight is being considered as part of the solution. Time will tell.

Regards, Robert Patton[/quote][/quote]

Bruce, that will just cause everyone to slow down, not just those with big horsepower, so the gap between built, crate, and junkyard will not decrease.

#31

JP Coates wrote:oooohHHHhHHOOOOHHHHHhhoooo. . . . .sooooo that’s what the back of your car looks like! :stuck_out_tongue: B)[/quote]

LMAO JP, I almost said wouldn’t your avatar look better if it was the front of your car in a RVM. :wink:

#32

I am encouraged by the effort to try something.
The escalating motor cost is something that I worried about in considering this class.

For those of us not familiar, could someone point out what type of build/rebuild/junkyard/etc… prep these dyno graphs represent?

#33

Great question. One mississippi.

#34

Jeremy Lucas wrote:

[quote]I am encouraged by the effort to try something.
The escalating motor cost is something that I worried about in considering this class.

For those of us not familiar, could someone point out what type of build/rebuild/junkyard/etc… prep these dyno graphs represent?[/quote]

Mine is a factory "junkyard" motor from a ~150k car. I believe Mike (and maybe Ed) Davidson have stock motors with a valve job. Jon Allen and Cobetto are .020 over motors. Carter’s is rebuilt, don’t remember if he did a .020 over or not.

#35

My motor is a junkyard bottom end (with a crank scraper) with a refreshed head i.e. cleaned and new valve seals. Stock air box, platinum plugs, BMW oil filter, refurbished injectors, stock fuel pressure regulator, 173 ECU, polished valve cover(5hp), and well it’s just stock. Exhaust is a 2.25in dual all the way from the x-pipe to the glasspacks.

White car #30. Original motor with what seems to be bad injectors. This motor has been raced for three seasons now so I’m not surprised to see the hp #'s down some.

As far as motors that are being built and what’s going to happen if they make too much power. Weight is pretty much the only equalizer. If you ask me though the car drives better (for me) on certain tracks when it’s heavy.

#36

well, it could just be applied as a penalty device, just like adding weight to an out-of-spec car.
bruce

Jon McAvoy wrote:

[quote]Bruce Leggett wrote:

[quote]could also use an intake restrictor like the dreaded SIR in ITS.
bruce
[/quote]

Bruce, that will just cause everyone to slow down, not just those with big horsepower, so the gap between built, crate, and junkyard will not decrease.[/quote]

#37

Once I scan my dyno sheet I’ll send it to Carter for data as well. I was dyno’d on the same dyno that was used at Nationals but in July. My chart looked very similar to Skeen’s which makes sense because it is a similiar mileage. It is 145000 and the motor that came with the car, it has never been opened but everything else is new (afm, plugs, cleaned injectors etc, plug wires). Exahuast is the stock piece with the cats cut out and some cheapo reasonators turned around on the back, about as cheap as it comes. ECU is a 173.

#38

An SIR concept won’t work and will never work in any class. You give me an SIR and I’ll cheat even worse. Why? I’ll overbuild the engine even more. When you hit the choke point of the SIR it restricts your peak horsepower. If you have an efficient engine you’ll hit the choke point even sooner. Say stock engine hits SIR choke point at 5k RPM. Built engine hits it at 4k rpm leaving a bigger range of useable max power. This is the exact reason AUDI uses Turbos in ALMS and now a diesel.

Just do this. Choose a number for horsepower AND torque, choose a weight. You at that point don’t have to go searching for compliance because the little nit picky stuff doesn’t matter.

Make sure all the ports, valves, exhaust, throttle, AFM, air box, are stock and the cars have no obvious restrictions (for the same reason why I hate SIR’s). If you dyno over, DQ that event and all previous season points with a mandatory teardown of the top end. Nobody is going to screw around with a penalty that harsh. There’s not one single competitor that runs at the front that doesn’t show up having a good idea how much power they are making that weekend. You can use a simple benchmarking each weekend to determine how accurate the dyno is. Make it easy to catch cheaters and you’ll make the series alot cheaper.

Just to throw another wrench in the spokes. Based off a quick calculation I think a "legal" Spec E30 325 could put 170-175hp to the wheels with a crate motor by reducing drag in the driveline.

#39

Rob Keehner wrote:

[quote]
Just to throw another wrench in the spokes. Based off a quick calculation I think a "legal" Spec E30 325 could put 170-175hp to the wheels with a crate motor by reducing drag in the driveline.[/quote]

:huh: And how would reduce drag in the driveline legally. Sound like we need to open up Rob’s gear box and look REM polished internals made from titanium billets;)

#40

I’m just trying to keep attention away from my beryllium pistons. B)