166 replies to this topic

[Alex Bolanos]

Tom,

 

I unfortunately was not there, but was talking to both John Wilding (JW) and Alex Bolanos during and after the weekend.  

 

JW thought Alex drove better, but towards the end of the session, had good power on Alex.  I think I can speak for Alex, who said he felt Cory Collum (driving cliff brown's VVT car), and JW's '99 car...could pass him at any given time. I just watched JW's video right now, and I think it is accurate to what both of them are saying.  No offense to JW, but Alex absolutely killed him from T3-T6 (carousel) every lap. and JW would make up the gap before getting to the brake zone into the hairpin.

 

It looks like the NA1.8 does okay in the draft, but it has no chance leading.  The car in the top of 4th just gets killed. It also appears to lose a lot of power at the end of the session so maybe there is some heat soak issue there.  Hopefully JW is able to post the video soon to youtube and comment his thoughts directly.

 

 

Basically this.  The top 3 cars (before Collum pulled off) were:

 

1) Collum in Cliff Brown's VVT: top shelf car, slightly faster than the White AT shop car that I drove in January.  This car could win any Major/Super Tour.

2) Wilding's 99: Top 5-15 car at a Major/Super Tour, probably down 3hp or so to the front cars.  A top flight motor could put this car in the same league as the Brown car and the White AT car.

3) Bolanos/Badia '97: Very optimized regional car, although AT built the motor no real time was spent flowing anything and trying different things (which is now REQUIRED as there is no plate).  Jeff can chase this pony and provide about 2-3hp more but that would make it slightly slower than Wilding's car and 5hp down on an AT/Drago front car. 

 

So basically the 1.8 is a great regional car, it really has NO prayer at anything with an entry fee over $350.  It straight up dies mid to top of 4th and does not pull in 5th (low compression) and weighs the same as a '99 with a worse intake manifold, computer, header (arguable), etc.  I don't believe this car will get any more help rules wise, we will probably not change anything on it and use it at regionals/NASA etc.  Building a new one is now as much of a pain as a 1.6 because you have to flow everything due to lack of plate, I don't see why anyone would.

 

I've never worked so hard to finish 2nd, reminds me of my first car (94) where the ceiling was 6-9th no matter what I did.  

[Rob Burgoon]

How about performance early vs performance later in the race Alex?

[John Wilding]

How about performance early vs performance later in the race Alex?

 

I can confirm that it was way easier to catch him late in the race, even with my occasional over-driving and errors in the carousel. It was also hot, especially for February. 

 

The video is almost ready, I'll post a link to it tonight after dinner. 

[Rob Burgoon]

I can confirm that it was way easier to catch him late in the race, even with my occasional over-driving and errors in the carousel. It was also hot, especially for February. 

 

The video is almost ready, I'll post a link to it tonight after dinner. 

 

 

Thanks for your efforts guys.

[John Wilding]

Here is the video link:

 

 

I would like to add that this is my 3rd weekend in the car, coming out of a 1.6; so I often get excited and still over drive the car occasionally. I think the additional torque gets the best of me mid corner, especially in the carousel and on the exit of 16. Also, you'll see that Alex's car did seem to slow in the last bit of the race, I could have been more aggressive and passed him sooner once his car began to fall off, but when I was in front of him earlier in the race my mistakes would increase exponentially, so I took a gamble and wanted to follow him and wait for an opportunity on the last lap to pass for the lead. 

 

Truthfully, my goal for the weekend was to be able to see Cory and Alex at the end of the race, I never thought I would be competing for a win, so I was ecstatic just to be able to be racing in the same proximity with these guys. Racing with them was an honor, and I hope to do more of it soon. 

 

Lastly, I am always looking to learn new things, so feel free to beat me up on my driving. I'll always take a tip or two on where, or how to improve. 

 

Enjoy!

 

PS: This is Preston Pardus' old car with a Rossini engine. It was dyno'd before the race with 124hp on a Mustang Dyno. I don't have a dyno sheet or torque numbers, but requested it from the guy who ran the car on the dyno to check the AFM for safe numbers before the weekend. 

[Alex Bolanos]

I can confirm that it was way easier to catch him late in the race, even with my occasional over-driving and errors in the carousel. It was also hot, especially for February. 

 

The video is almost ready, I'll post a link to it tonight after dinner. 

 

Yep, the 1.8 doesn't have an intake air temp sensor like the 99 so once the stock coolant sensor decides that we're racing and not driving to the grocery store it starts to pull timing and get lazy.  I have raced against 1.8s that have "fixed" this but I haven't researched it and done it to this car.  I'm going to throw a new sensor at it before NASA at Homestead on March 4th and drag race Mark Gibbons to see if it worked.

[Tom Sager]

Here is the video link:

 

 

I would like to add that this is my 3rd weekend in the car, coming out of a 1.6; so I often get excited and still over drive the car occasionally. I think the additional torque gets the best of me mid corner, especially in the carousel and on the exit of 16. Also, you'll see that Alex's car did seem to slow in the last bit of the race, I could have been more aggressive and passed him sooner once his car began to fall off, but when I was in front of him earlier in the race my mistakes would increase exponentially, so I took a gamble and wanted to follow him and wait for an opportunity on the last lap to pass for the lead. 

 

Truthfully, my goal for the weekend was to be able to see Cory and Alex at the end of the race, I never thought I would be competing for a win, so I was ecstatic just to be able to be racing in the same proximity with these guys. Racing with them was an honor, and I hope to do more of it soon. 

 

Lastly, I am always looking to learn new things, so feel free to beat me up on my driving. I'll always take a tip or two on where, or how to improve. 

 

Enjoy!

 

PS: This is Preston Pardus' old car with a Rossini engine. It was dyno'd before the race with 124hp on a Mustang Dyno. I don't have a dyno sheet or torque numbers, but requested it from the guy who ran the car on the dyno to check the AFM for safe numbers before the weekend. 

 

Nice drive John and congrats on getting a couple wins during the weekend. 

 

Regarding the performance of the cars, there are times when your NB car appears to be accelerating a bit better than the NA1.8 driven by Alex at the upper ranges of 4th gear which surprises me. That should be a strength for the unrestricted NA1.8 as a well prepared one should be making more power than an NB above 6000 RPM.  Handling-wise it looks like you had an edge here and there which is the greater concern I have with my '95, the added weight. 

[Tom Sager]

Yep, the 1.8 doesn't have an intake air temp sensor like the 99 so once the stock coolant sensor decides that we're racing and not driving to the grocery store it starts to pull timing and get lazy.  I have raced against 1.8s that have "fixed" this but I haven't researched it and done it to this car.  I'm going to throw a new sensor at it before NASA at Homestead on March 4th and drag race Mark Gibbons to see if it worked.

My '95 doesn't seem to have this problem, different ECU than a '96-'97 so that might be a difference.  I run with the water temp as low as possible but above 160 degrees which is temp at which the '95 is in "open loop".  Often the car races below 170 degrees water temp and the dyno says it likes that cooler temp. 

[Erik Hardy]

Why would you expect the NA1.8 to have better top end speed than the NB cars? The 48mm plate to unrestricted has a small effect on overall power. Weight has very little effect on top speed (Rolling resistance vs. aero load), the higher hp car will always be faster at the top. Unrestricted NA1.8 still makes less power than the 1.6 and NB cars. If the NA1.8 wants to be competitive at speed, it needs more power, not monkeying around with weight. 

 

Regarding the performance of the cars, there are times when your NB car appears to be accelerating a bit better than the NA1.8 driven by Alex at the upper ranges of 4th gear which surprises me. That should be a strength for the unrestricted NA1.8 as a well prepared one should be making more power than an NB above 6000 RPM.  Handling-wise it looks like you had an edge here and there which is the greater concern I have with my '95, the added weight. 

[Tom Sager]

Why would you expect the NA1.8 to have better top end speed than the NB cars? The 48mm plate to unrestricted has a small effect on overall power. Weight has very little effect on top speed (Rolling resistance vs. aero load), the higher hp car will always be faster at the top. Unrestricted NA1.8 still makes less power than the 1.6 and NB cars. If the NA1.8 wants to be competitive at speed, it needs more power, not monkeying around with weight. 

Removing the plate adds 4+ HP at the top of the RPM range on my '95.  It'll make more peak power than a 1.6, a '99 or a VVT based on what I've seen on a dyno.  Still a little short on torque and power down low.  The NA1.8 should run lighter IMO because it is handicapped with older front suspension and probably doesn't handle as well as an NB at the same weight. 

 

I'm hoping to get my VVT and '95 to the same dyno over the next month to see the difference. 

[Erik Hardy]

Ahhhhh I understand your statement now. I'm amazed your 1.8na car will dyno higher than all the others!!!

[Tom Sager]

Here is dyno plot '95 with and without plate 4th gear pulls

 

 

Album: Pics

4 images

0 comments

 

 

 

Don't ask me about the title "shoes?"

[UCFBrett]

"It also appears to lose a lot of power at the end of the session so maybe there is some heat soak issue there."

 

It could be heat soak and that the NA 1.8 has hydraulic lifters. As the race continues, the oil thins and the lifters don't stay as "pumped up" as they are when the oil is thicker, which reduces valve lift. 

 

And an NA 1.8 only has, about .350 total lift to begin with.

[Tom Sager]

"It also appears to lose a lot of power at the end of the session so maybe there is some heat soak issue there."

 

It could be heat soak and that the NA 1.8 has hydraulic lifters. As the race continues, the oil thins and the lifters don't stay as "pumped up" as they are when the oil is thicker, which reduces valve lift. 

 

And an NA 1.8 only has, about .350 total lift to begin with.

Some have speculated that the HLA's get "squishy" when hot or if you run really light oil.  Probably best to run over 40PSI oil pressure hot and keep the water temp down. 

[Diller]

Just some thoughts to pile on and keep the parity flame a burnin.

 

Now that the NA8 and NB1 share the same weight, what would the argument be against a full drivetrain swap or full suspension swap?

 

I assume that the goal of the no plate and extra weight was to make the power the same and thus needed the weight to make them the same. What better way to make them the same than to make everything interchangeable?

 

I realize this is opening Pandora's box but logic would tell me that in order to make things "equal" they must be made the same or one should have an advantage in one area and the other an advantage in another area to offset the strengths/weaknesses. Basically the sum of the total components would be the same. 

 

Based on the changes (and logic above) we should see that the 99 and NA8 are now identical. If not, we need to make them different to make them equal or allow them to be exactly the same.

[Jamz14]

But per a respected expert the cars are not equal and the NA 1.8 doesn't have a prayer at major events. So to fix that means more power or better handling, or both (less weight). And if true, then they are not equal anymore as you are describing equal and using your logic, the NA 1.8 wouldn't be eligible for interchangeable part swaps with the NB.

[Diller]

To muddy the waters even more, NASA has a dyno guideline established (assuming based on no restrictor plate because it is used in the 2017 rules) that shows they are not equal by admission:

 

Appendix G:

Engine Horsepower Torque

90-93 1.6L 123 TBD

94-97 1.8L 125 120

99-00 1.8L 127 120

01-05 1.8L 125 122

 

So by showing they are not equal power, the NA1.8 must have an inherent advantage in order to require the same weight but less power.

[Bench Racer]

To muddy the waters even more, NASA has a dyno guideline established (assuming based on no restrictor plate because it is used in the 2017 rules) that shows they are not equal by admission:

 

Appendix G:

Engine Horsepower Torque

90-93 1.6L 123  NE     (Not enough)

94-97 1.8L 125 120

99-00 1.8L 127 120

01-05 1.8L 125 122

 

 

[Rob Burgoon]

To muddy the waters even more, NASA has a dyno guideline established (assuming based on no restrictor plate because it is used in the 2017 rules) that shows they are not equal by admission:

 

Appendix G:

Engine Horsepower Torque

90-93 1.6L 123 TBD

94-97 1.8L 125 120

99-00 1.8L 127 120

01-05 1.8L 125 122

 

So by showing they are not equal power, the NA1.8 must have an inherent advantage in order to require the same weight but less power.

 

Those are just guidelines for when to tech someone harder, I wouldn't read too deeply into them for parity.

[Diller]

Those are just guidelines for when to tech someone harder, I wouldn't read too deeply into them for parity.

 

 

I can acknowledge that the intended purpose is not to be hard and fast number but they did originate from something (anecdotal, facts, or otherwise) and at the time was noted that the NB1 makes more power than the NA1.8 and now must share the same weight.