136 replies to this topic

[wheel]

I might also point out that there are about 50 letters on the CRB site (on the SMAC agenda) commenting on the head/throat cut/short radius yada yada yada issue.  If you did not post one of those letters, expect your opinion to go uncounted.  I have read them all, as have most of the CRB members and most of the SMAC members.  They have also been made available to the folks that will be meeting on Thursday.  So, you have a few days left to let all the parties know your opinion.  

 

Please, please, please make it short.  The posts that go on for pages are a problem to digest, given the volume of letters.  So, just title it "SM head compliance", or something similar and tell us if you think the rules should stay as they are (be clarified? but stay the same) or the rules should be changed to allow for some work on the short side radius.  

Go to www.crbscca.com or www.clubracingboard.com and follow the prompts.

wheel

[Keith Andrews]

I might also point out that there are about 50 letters on the CRB site (on the SMAC agenda) commenting on the head/throat cut/short radius yada yada yada issue.  If you did not post one of those letters, expect your opinion to go uncounted.  I have read them all, as have most of the CRB members and most of the SMAC members.  They have also been made available to the folks that will be meeting on Thursday.  So, you have a few days left to let all the parties know your opinion.  

 

Please, please, please make it short.  The posts that go on for pages are a problem to digest, given the volume of letters.  So, just title it "SM head compliance", or something similar and tell us if you think the rules should stay as they are (be clarified? but stay the same) or the rules should be changed to allow for some work on the short side radius.  

Go to www.crbscca.com or www.clubracingboard.com and follow the prompts.

wheel

 

 

Thank you for the links to express input.

 

As you are always a straight forward informed voice please help save the SCCA from them selves.  While I can understand a car going 55.1 in a 55 mile an hour zone is speeding, the enforcement shouldn't be the death penalty.

 

We just had a National Championship where all the cars that went through post race tech passed.  Then we had 8 cars protested for one specific rule and were DQ'd-ish.  Then the SCCA declared the winner.  To my knowledge the top three went through zero tech.

 

Thank you for your service to the club.  It needs some real help and post Runoffs review.

[john mueller]

I will be going as the NASA's representation at this meeting.  The decisions made at runoffs effects the entire class not just SCCA so I've been asked to be there as well.

[Johnny D]

We all understand you dropping out, but if you find a legal head you're more than welcome to come back.

Just kidding

J~

[Ron Alan]

Thank you for the links to express input.

 

As you are always a straight forward informed voice please help save the SCCA from them selves.  While I can understand a car going 55.1 in a 55 mile an hour zone is speeding, the enforcement shouldn't be the death penalty.

 

We just had a National Championship where all the cars that went through post race tech passed.  Then we had 8 cars protested for one specific rule and were DQ'd-ish.  Then the SCCA declared the winner.  To my knowledge the top three went through zero tech.

 

Thank you for your service to the club.  It needs some real help and post Runoffs review.

I dont think it was the death penalty...I think it was a DQ, or DQish? 

 

I don"t understand the tone of those who think this was nothing...or nothing substantial enough to make such a big deal about?

With this type of attitude what is the point of any of the rules we have? I think 50% of what is writing in our rules is minutia. But someone thought it important enough to write it! Our rules even go so far as to say if it doesn't say you can...you cant! So why would SCCA write rules and then not enforce them? 

 

Well, that question was tested this year. When it couldn't be confirmed or guaranteed by tech officials that the protested rule was going to be looked at...the process to make sure it was was put into motion. And guess what...SCCA found a reason to enforce the rules.

 

So here we are...and now Mazda(for reasons that are coming out)has stepped in with what i can imagine is some considerable leverage. Whatever the outcome, be it rules clarification/changes/addendum's, i would think they want to make sure there is nothing colored gray and that any perceived lack of oversight does not continue. My guess is they take their brand and the considerable effort they put forward in amateur and pro level racing very serious. To have there most popular race car in negative headlines could not have gone over very well...I'm glad they are involved at some level.

 

I will live with whatever is decided and move on...knowing that the process, admittedly creating casualties, does work. 

 

As always, just my  which is probably depreciating! 

[Ron Alan]

Interesting that Mazda, a third party to the Runoffs drama, is given access to all of the heads in Topeka for examination and /or testing but the drivers and engine builders who originally owned the heads cannot see them. I support Mazda's involvement but that should not come at the expense of the SM racers. Why shouldn't a Drennan or Drago or any of the other participants get a look too?

 

Tom

 

Tom

I will let those who were also there correct me if I'm wrong on this. I saw several parties...both drivers and engine builders go into the "shed" and look at their head with officials. For sure one party I spook with was able to look at other heads in question as well...because he described some of the issues to me. 3 of the 4 engine builders were there. The car owner of the 4th head(not present builder) did go into the shed I believe. Point being your statements are not accurate Tom. For sure some...if not all got to see what was being questioned. 

[Danny Steyn]

 For sure one party I spook with ...... 

 

???????? Black helicopter time !!!!

[CruzanTom]

I will let those who were also there correct me if I'm wrong on this. I saw several parties...both drivers and engine builders go into the "shed" and look at their head with officials. For sure one party I spook with was able to look at other heads in question as well...because he described some of the issues to me. 3 of the 4 engine builders were there. The car owner of the 4th head(not present builder) did go into the shed I believe. Point being your statements are not accurate Tom. For sure some...if not all got to see what was being questioned. 

 

My understanding is that none of the drivers or engine builders at the Runoffs were able to view ALL of the heads, as Mazda is doing. If I am wrong, so be it. Like you, I am relying upon hearsay.

[Danny Steyn]

Tom, personally I would prefer that anyone that has his car in impound should be able to see anyone elses car being torn down, but that is NOT the case in SCCA. At the NASA champs it was pretty neat to have all three of the top cars next to each other with crews helping each other out to get the cars torn down. We all were able to see what everyone else was doing, but no-one really paid too much attention to the others cars as they were being disassembled 

[Bill Etherington]

I was not at this Runoffs so I do not know what tear down procedures were used for the SM's. I also don't know how close the impounded SMs were placed.

From my experience at the other Runoffs where there were SMs the cars were lined up next to each other and were torn down within plain sight of the other competitors.

I know the competitors can request privacy curtains be put around the car to protect their privacy but I don't remember ever seeing a SM driver request the curtains. When the parts are taken into the tech trailer the driver and other crew (engine builder, etc) are allowed to witness the testing/measuring. Whether they can look at the other competitors parts I can't tell you.

I know during the Majors races I have been to in the last two years the SMs were grouped closely together during compliance checks.

I do believe in hoods up impounds. Tech is interested in getting your suggestions as to what you would like to be checked. We do establish a check list before the event as to not be seen as being on a witch hunt.

[chris haldeman]

Danny I was the only builder not present for tech. I was dealing with my daughter being hospitalized and didn't have time too get there. The head of my inspected was said too be the closest bit felt too smooth??? Compared too a 99 casting from who knows where instead of comparing too a vvt head. I have continued too be quiet but that time will end soon very soon. All I can say is no power tools were used. A sm head flows between 185-195 Cfm and the restricted flows 158-160cfm as I've said before there is no gain from increases flow on the intake side of a restrictor engine

[scott sanda]

 A sm head flows between 185-195 Cfm and the restricted flows 158-160cfm as I've said before there is no gain from increases flow on the intake side of a restrictor engine

 

And this might be very true at peak flow, but it is certainly not true at lower RPM/flow.

 

A blended R will eliminate detached airflow and create/allow attached air flow.  This is a nice, smooth, non roiled, non turbulent flow that will allow more air to reach and flow through the valve, especially before peak lift.

 

The gain is under the curve, not necessarily at the top of the curve.

 

If people do not think under the curve power increases, even by a few percent, is not significant, then they are misguided at best.

 

I don't run SM, I don't care what rules you write or follow. I'm just tired of people trying to say, with a straight face, that a blended lead in radius creates "no gain". That is simply handing people bovine feces and telling them it is Dove soap.

[Brian Ghidinelli]

Runoffs teardown was all done door to door with no privacy curtains and people helping each other.   The cars were close enough that we had a hard time getting them on jackstands.  Hoods were up on the first three cars for 6-8 hours straight.

 

Competitors were not allowed to view other competitors heads in the tech shed.  The exception may be if your engine builder was present and was your representative, he may have been able to show more than one of HIS heads.  I was explicitly not allowed to examine anything other than my head and the stock head.

[zoomzoom22]

preparing for early racing in the 2015 season.  So, there will be something very quickly after the meetings next week.    

wheel

 

You guys do realize the 2015 season has already started right?  

 

The first 2015 points race was goblins go.  

Has it been stated who is attending the meeting as the representatives?

[chris haldeman]

I have flow testing that shows a gain at low lift I also have flow testing that shows a loss at all lift levels. It is casting specific. Some gain some lose. The data I am referring too has been submitted

[FTodaro]

Danny I was the only builder not present for tech. I was dealing with my daughter being hospitalized and didn't have time too get there. The head of my inspected was said too be the closest bit felt too smooth??? Compared too a 99 casting from who knows where instead of comparing too a vvt head. I have continued too be quiet but that time will end soon very soon. All I can say is no power tools were used. A sm head flows between 185-195 Cfm and the restricted flows 158-160cfm as I've said before there is no gain from increases flow on the intake side of a restrictor engine

Chris let's not mess this thing up with Facts for god sake.

If we were to find ourselves back to bone stock heads. What kind of swing would you expect to find between Stock heads?

[Steve Scheifler]

Exactly the question I have.

[Alex Bolanos]

Chris let's not mess this thing up with Facts for god sake.

If we were to find ourselves back to bone stock heads. What kind of swing would you expect to find between Stock heads?

 

Much higher than what we have now, shame we can't just fix enforcement rather than change the rules. 

[chris haldeman]

I'm with Alex.

[Steve Scheifler]

OK, then if you are certain about the differences between bone stock please provide more information so we can all have better informed opinions. For example, for a given generation engine, quantify the difference between average (or median if that makes more sense) and the 90th percentile in terms of power and torque, based strictly on differences in stock heads.

Now do the plunge and repeat, comparing the average to the 90th percentile. And, how do those now compare to the stock range?

Now do whatever you propose as the spec "blend" and repeat.

Only with those kind of numbers can we hope to judge the best solution. You all sound so certain that I assume you must have a pretty good sense of them at least, so convince us.