HST @ COTA Feb 2 - SMACK

but you are a national champ!

"Half-a-National Champ"!

 ... Eiether apply the 1-2 mulligan rule, the zero tolerance rule or one wheel inside the outer white ( no real rule)  Pick one and stick to it and enforce it

"Half-a-National Champ"!

but the east in the only part that matters -- right?

but the east in the only part that matters -- right?

You brought up a very good point. Sorry Michael, you really are a national champ!

Just to follow up here.. At this race a few shocks, mainly mine and Voyteks originally seemed like they were not fitting within what SCCA compliance team expected. 

they did take my rear shocks and Voyteks to confirm that they were not tampered with.  The Compliance team sent the shocks to Billstein and had them disassembled and checked for compliance. I assume they did the same with Voyteks. 

Here is the email I received:

So here is my question???? I saw the graphs and they were now where even close to the other tested shocks. 

It was my understanding that the "graph" or standard by which all shocks should compare to is no longer available? Is this only publicly? Is it still being used by SCCA? And if what Chris is saying is true...will this graph now have a larger tolerance swing? Or will there be no more shock dyno...only sent to Bilstein to check if altered internally???

NOW...with no available shocks in the Country, testing that cannot be done on the spot...does anyone else see the storm brewing??

Will we have a delayed announcement at this years runoffs when the results of a shock compliance will take a month to get back?

Though I'm 100% good with the new shock rule...the unintended consequences may be more than can be overcome? Maybe shock dyno it will have to be? I hope SMAC is all over a new shock design and supplier

So here is my question???? I saw the graphs and they were now where even close to the other tested shocks. I know for almost 100% fact that all 4 cars tested had legal purchased from Bilstine shocks. 2 looked them same and 2 others matched each other but not the other 2. And from separate teams ect. Is the problem the shock or the testing? I will add I have faith and respect John Bauer and Rick Harris as well as there ability to test,inspect,and judge so with that I blame the shock

It was my understanding that the "graph" or standard by which all shocks should compare to is no longer available? Is this only publicly? Is it still being used by SCCA? And if what Chris is saying is true...will this graph now have a larger tolerance swing? Or will there be no more shock dyno...only sent to Bilstein to check if altered internally???

NOW...with no available shocks in the Country, testing that cannot be done on the spot...does anyone else see the storm brewing??
Will we have a delayed announcement at this years runoffs when the results of a shock compliance will take a month to get back?

Though I'm 100% good with the new shock rule...the unintended consequences may be more than can be overcome? Maybe shock dyno it will have to be? I hope SMAC is all over a new shock design and supplier

I also saw all of the graphs and what Chris said is 100% accurate.  I think there were 4 that looked very similar and then mine and Voyteks that looked nothing like the other four, but the same as each other. If "I" were looking at these, I would have likely bounced both mine and Voyteks if that was the only data i was comparing. I think the fact that I had several conversations with John previously asking if he had the dyno sheets for my old shocks and were the compliant by the rule etc. He couldn't find the graphs and the rule basically emphasized you cant open, so I said, well, I know they were opened, so I will just order new. We Had 3-4 cars to build, so I ordered four sets of shocks dynoed them all.. Sent the Graphs to John Bauer for reference and Ralph Provitz asked Ralph to pick me four shocks for my car.  I also spoke to Dave Wheeler yesterday, his shocks were also compliant per Bilstein.  IMO, had either myself or Voytek been tested alone, we would have been declared non compliant and IMO that decision would make sense.  Which basically tells us what we already know.. Our shocks suck   I think from here forward they will send to Billstein rather than dyno, but I am not certain.

The background in a nutshell. At COTA 5 cars where impounded, top 3 plus 6 and 12 IIRC. They managed to get a car from East Street (Drago), Advanced (Voytek), X-Factor (Halderman), Flat-out (LeVerone) and OPM(Styen). All cars had left rear shocks dynoed. Drago's and Voyteks looked the same, but different from the rest ,which matched the SCCA graph. SCCA had both Drago and Voytek remove their right rear shocks. Their right rears matched their left rears, which did not match the SCCA graph.

I know, that Voyteks shocks where fresh out of the box, never dynoed and never modified. So I am also 100% confident that Drago's shocks where out of the box, unmodified also.

SCCA kept Drago's and Voytek's shocks (2 rear from each) for further testing. Fortunately both teams had spares in the trailer. I got the same email from SCCA the other day stating the shocks where found compliant.When I will recieve the replacements/rebuilds are unknown.

I completely agree with Jim's statement from above "  IMO, had either myself or Voytek been tested alone, we would have been declared non compliant and IMO that decision would make sense.  Which basically tells us what we already know.. Our shocks suck  :)"

My theory is that Bilstein had to have made a running change to the shocks. But with the world wide backorder, we will probably never know.

Dave

I'm no shock expert but would love to see the graphs.

I have the graphs of the socks from a local dyno... But not the ones on SCCA dyno.  I doubt they would have allowed it, but I should have snapped a picture. I know little about shocks, but a blind man could look at the graph and point to mine and Voyteks as the outliers.   

I have the graphs of the socks from a local dyno... But not the ones on SCCA dyno.  I doubt they would have allowed it, but I should have snapped a picture. I know little about shocks, but a blind man could look at the graph and point to mine and Voyteks as the outliers.   

So do you want what everyone else has or does everyone else want what you and Voytek have?

So do you want what everyone else has or does everyone else want what you and Voytek have?

I think you want a decent shock, so likely neither.  But of bad shocks, mine and Voyteks should have been better

I have the graphs of the socks from a local dyno... But not the ones on SCCA dyno.  I doubt they would have allowed it, but I should have snapped a picture. I know little about shocks, but a blind man could look at the graph and point to mine and Voyteks as the outliers.   

Well if you want to share I can overlay with data of my 2015s out of the box as well as some taken off an old car labeled "new 2007" that matched remarkably well.  The Holiday Inn Express I stayed at last night had a dyno.  SMAC seems to have some sort of NDA.

Dave, Jim and all. Looking at this from the outside. Would it make any sense that all shocks come from a single provider such as SCCA Enterprises who would purchase the shocks, dyno them all and make sure they are all within a given tolerance? If the manufacturer can not be trusted to meet tolerance, how can the competitors be held to a set standard?

At this point, I would just like the manufacturer to manufacture. Shocks are still on back order since November and I am now hearing August.

I think we are overdue for a change to a shock that:

• Performs better
• Is readily available
• Has tighter tolerances

someone told me that the back order is not just our shocks its all shocks. I also heard in rumor mill that they were considering selling the company and that they were reducing inventory, I have no clue what is fact, but no shocks till august to me says that we need an emergency measure of an approved replacement. People will not be able to race if they damage a shock and no spare?

 

I think we are overdue for a change to a shock that:

• Performs better
• Is readily available
• Has tighter tolerances

 

Better, as long as everyone has the same problem we have a level playing field. Performs better is not always a positive.

Readily available is an issue currently. They have only been back ordered once before. But it could be an issue this summer.

Tighter tolerances will mean more costly. Remember this is a street car shock. Originally used on the M-Edition Miatas in the mid 90's. Thousands have been built and Mazda paid for the design work 20+ years ago. A true race shock with everything we want will probably be $200 each. Maybe somebody with more time than I, should start a poll. Would you be willing to pay $1000 for a set of shocks that would be rebuildable, repeatable, inspectable.

dave