New Rules are up

#41

I can’t find a picture, but I have seen several (non-spec cars) that have cells with extra cage protection around it. I think you could easily make a loop around the back side of the cell without adding an attachment point.

#42

Age wrote:

If you promise to always finish behind me, I promise I won’t protest no matter what you do :wink:

#43

On second thought I might just leave it in…:laugh:

#44

Steve - I hear you I remember the pictures and know what you’re saying.

When we redo it, the plan is to move it up farther in from the bumper as possible with extra reinforcement.

It certainly isn’t ideal and to everyone’s point the stock tank is in a much better protected area.

#45

9.3.11.3. Welding to create a “locked” differential is permitted.

Can I ask what may be a really noob question?

Since we are permitted a “locked” differential by welding, why are we worrying about the torque at which an unmodified factory limited slip differential breaks away?

#46

IndyJim wrote:

FYI - the below is from SirGary’s blog.

…When I came around turn 15 the corner workers had the red flag out and stopped all the cars. They pointed to turn 1 and the fire which was blazing. As it turns out 4 cars slammed into the turn 1 tire wall and the fuel cell of a 87 E30 325e (running in ITA) ruptured and started the fire. This very fast race car was totally destroyed by the fire. All the drivers escaped without injury which was the only good thing. The fire continued and the track fireman couldn’t put it out, so the Sebring Fire Dept was called out to finish the job. The tire wall was so destroyed that the last 3 races were canceled…

#47

kregg wrote:

[quote]9.3.11.3. Welding to create a “locked” differential is permitted.

Can I ask what may be a really noob question?

Since we are permitted a “locked” differential by welding, why are we worrying about the torque at which an unmodified factory limited slip differential breaks away?[/quote]

Good question!

discuss amongst yourselves…

#48

And, a second noob question:

Since Appendix 10 requires the use of the 3.73 ratio differential, all of which to my understanding are LSDs, why does the new rule state “…IF a LSD is fitted”?

#49

haven’t tried one myself, but I’ve heard that a welded diff has some benefits, but also some negative handling aspects. You can modify an LSD to have better than stock handling behavior and it is that that we’re trying to stiffle to keep costs down.
thanks,
bruce

kregg wrote:

[quote]9.3.11.3. Welding to create a “locked” differential is permitted.

Can I ask what may be a really noob question?

Since we are permitted a “locked” differential by welding, why are we worrying about the torque at which an unmodified factory limited slip differential breaks away?[/quote]

#50

leggwork wrote:

[quote]haven’t tried one myself, but I’ve heard that a welded diff has some benefits, but also some negative handling aspects. You can modify an LSD to have better than stock handling behavior and it is that that we’re trying to stiffle to keep costs down.

Does it cost more to “modify an LSD” by other methods than it does to “modify an LSD” by welding? If not, I don’t understand the “cost stifling” issue. What I DO see is the law of unintended consequences kicking the teeth of any driver who DQs because his unmodified diff doesn’t break the way its supposed to in scrutineering…

#51

kregg wrote:

[quote]leggwork wrote:

[quote]haven’t tried one myself, but I’ve heard that a welded diff has some benefits, but also some negative handling aspects. You can modify an LSD to have better than stock handling behavior and it is that that we’re trying to stiffle to keep costs down.

Does it cost more to “modify an LSD” by other methods than it does to “modify an LSD” by welding? If not, I don’t understand the “cost stifling” issue. What I DO see is the law of unintended consequences kicking the teeth of any driver who DQs because his unmodified diff doesn’t break the way its supposed to in scrutineering…[/quote]

The stock lock-up % and ramp angles are not optimized for a race car.

Allowing the welding of an open diff was originally put in the rules to help those that did not want to pay to put an LSD into their car and did not want the enormous disadvantage of an open diff.

#52

There are advantages to be had from a higher-lockup (but not locked/welded) differential.

There are several ways to increase the lockup, by way of specialized machine work. I.E. running more than the stock two clutches, changing the ‘ramp’ angles, and so on.

Specialized machine work is likely to cost much more than a few minutes of shade-tree welding.

That is the terrain that was in mind when writing the rules to prevent people from re-engineering the differentials. Since the insides of a diff are tough to examine trackside, a way to measure compliance via an external method was desirable.

#53

ctbimmer wrote:

[quote]There are advantages to be had from a higher-lockup (but not locked/welded) differential.
[/quote]

Chuck,
I think that there are advantages to having a locked over a stock LSD. The advantages may be track-to-track.

As Jon mentioned, it’s a nice thought to give the option to weld a locker instead of fitting an LSD, but why not keep it SPEC? Get rid of the locker option.

-Vic

#54

Looks like we’ve been around the block and are now back to the original post (sort of).

Good discussion brings out the idea of keeping this a spec series and deleting the reference to the welded differential.
I’d urge those in charge to do so.

Back on topic. Discussion on the lock-up that you’ll see should you try “differential lubricants may be substituted” types of differential lubricants.Is there a difference and is Vic disqualified (borrowing from his original post)?

Regards, Robert Patton

#55

Patton wrote:

[quote]Is there a difference and is Vic disqualified (borrowing from his original post)?
[/quote]

Robert, please don’t give Carter any ideas on retroactive DQ’s. My $80 diff is a bad mamma-jamma.

#56

Patton wrote:

[quote]Looks like we’ve been around the block and are now back to the original post (sort of).

Good discussion brings out the idea of keeping this a spec series and deleting the reference to the welded differential.
I’d urge those in charge to do so.

Back on topic. Discussion on the lock-up that you’ll see should you try “differential lubricants may be substituted” types of differential lubricants.Is there a difference and is Vic disqualified (borrowing from his original post)?

Regards, Robert Patton[/quote]

I assume that since people are welding 3.73s that there must be an open version but I can find 3.73 LSDs in my local wrecking yards all day long and could most certainly do more dollar damage with a welder on an open diff than I could EVER do by bolting up a $75 LSD unit. I would presume that modifying the ramp angles or performing any other internal modification to a diff would be cheating in the same way doing a high-tech valve job or boring the cylinders would be. All of these cheats are pretty difficult/time consuming to detect trackside but at least the detection methods don’t place otherwise innocent drivers in jeopardy of DQing because of an LSD that locks up on it’s own because of heat, metal chips, lubricant, etc…

#57

this is not a hyper series with $ on the line - it is just for fun. If someone is DQ’d and they profess innocence, the circumstances will be investigated and the rules updated if a mistake has been made. And just because the rules say you can substitute diff lubricant (substituted means OEM equivalent, BTW), with the new rule specifying a breakaway value, you have to meet that spec. The check procedure is simple enough that anybody can try it before a race weekend.
cheers,
bruce

kregg wrote:

[quote]Patton wrote:

[quote]Looks like we’ve been around the block and are now back to the original post (sort of).

Good discussion brings out the idea of keeping this a spec series and deleting the reference to the welded differential.
I’d urge those in charge to do so.

Back on topic. Discussion on the lock-up that you’ll see should you try “differential lubricants may be substituted” types of differential lubricants.Is there a difference and is Vic disqualified (borrowing from his original post)?

Regards, Robert Patton[/quote]

I assume that since people are welding 3.73s that there must be an open version but I can find 3.73 LSDs in my local wrecking yards all day long and could most certainly do more dollar damage with a welder on an open diff than I could EVER do by bolting up a $75 LSD unit. I would presume that modifying the ramp angles or performing any other internal modification to a diff would be cheating in the same way doing a high-tech valve job or boring the cylinders would be. All of these cheats are pretty difficult/time consuming to detect trackside but at least the detection methods don’t place otherwise innocent drivers in jeopardy of DQing because of an LSD that locks up on it’s own because of heat, metal chips, lubricant, etc…[/quote]

#58

leggwork wrote:

[quote]this is not a hyper series with $ on the line - it is just for fun. If someone is DQ’d and they profess innocence, the circumstances will be investigated and the rules updated if a mistake has been made. And just because the rules say you can substitute diff lubricant (substituted means OEM equivalent, BTW), with the new rule specifying a breakaway value, you have to meet that spec. The check procedure is simple enough that anybody can try it before a race weekend.
cheers,
bruce

Bruce,

I would wholeheartedly agree with your comment on dollars and fun - its why I"m building a car for this series. I guess I’m more afraid of getting a DQ for “cheating” when I didn’t intentionally cheat. That would be incredibly embarrassing to me to be accused of cheating the other racers/friends I run with for “illegally modifying” my car when I didn’t actually do anything to cheat. In the end, this is an “honor” series in that a whole lot of things can be cheated without anyone ever knowing it because we don’t do automatic tear-downs of the top three after every race, etc., and so a DQ for an unmodified but balky LSD that failed a post-race 65lb. test is kind of a stab at that honor in my view…

#59

kregg wrote:

I guess I’m more afraid of getting a DQ for “cheating” when I didn’t intentionally cheat.
[/quote]

Trust me, you don’t have to worry about this…just ask Steve D. :wink:

#60

" And just because the rules say you can substitute diff lubricant (substituted means OEM equivalent, BTW), with the new rule specifying a breakaway value, you have to meet that spec. The check procedure is simple enough that anybody can try it before a race weekend."
cheers,
bruce

Guess that covers it. Beware of your lubricant choice. I’ve seen things happen with different lubes that were substituted, but not really substitutes.

Yes, it is a slippery slope.

Thanks Bruce.

Regards, Robert Patton