June 2018 Prelims

The DQ of the oil filter was based on a protest, not Tech looking at it or for it and calling it out.  Lets just say that there is some history with the drivers involved and protests were thrown in multiple directions.   After reading the rule and discussing it with Tech, I believe the correct ruling was made, due to a poorly written rule and the DQ was warranted.

 

I asked for the rule to be clarified, which it was and is now posted in Fastrack.  If we did not clarify the rule, then it could be interpreted by tech that you would be required to run a Mazda only filter which most people are not running for various reasons.

 

Please read the new rule carefully.....  The filter must be from a Miata, not a truck or any other Mazda product but a Miata.  The SMAC spent a good 45 minutes on this and all the shenanigans and interpretations that could come from any one of our recommendations.

 

If anyone has any questions about the new wording I would contact Rick Harris at the SCCA Topeka office.

 

Sean

Sean so my question is why did you not rewrite the rule to allow an open filter? I suspect most motor builders and racers run a larger capacity filter than the OEM filter, In theory they do a better job and improve engine life.

 

Why not just make the rule open since there is no performance advantage?

 

I stick to my comment we have better things to focus on. I am glad i am not racing with guys who are going to protest an oil filter.

Sean so my question is why did you not rewrite the rule to allow an open filter? I suspect most motor builders and racers run a larger capacity filter than the OEM filter, In theory they do a better job and improve engine life.

 

Why not just make the rule open since there is no performance advantage?

 

I stick to my comment we have better things to focus on. I am glad i am not racing with guys who are going to protest an oil filter.

 

Exactly the what I was thinking when I read the rule, which is still "preliminary".

Dumd dumb dumb dumb, dumb dumb dumb dumb. And dumber.

BTW, any manufacturer or re-brander or even retailer could list any compatible oil filter as being for a Miata. I guess I’ll buy a crate of Wix, print some lables and put up a web site.

Idiots, idiots, idiots. Just when you think it can’t get any dumber...

Those doing your car with wrap instead of paint, look out, we’re coming for you next!

I’ve seen some metal valve stems out there. Protest!!

Unlike the water pump and alternator, I don’t see an allowance for non-OEM starter motors or forward/back datings. LOTS of violations out there!!

For anyone with a functioning brain, this should imply that the oil filter is not restricted (at least if attached directly) unless I’m missing a more explicit reference. Certainly nothing under 9.1.7.

Idiots.

9.1.7 C
...

All engines and internal components used in rebuilding or refurbishment must have been offered for sale by Mazda in the US for the correct year and VIN of car, except as otherwise provided for in these rules. This rule prevents use of aftermarket parts or Mazda parts of incorrect specification or application.
...

Last I looked the filter isn’t ”internal”.

Did I mention, Idiots?

Dumd dumb dumb dumb, dumb dumb dumb dumb. And dumber.

 

Tell us how you really feel Steve! 

GCR Glossary:

 

Engine – The primary power plant of a car, including all physically attached ancillary components necessary for power production.

GCR Glossary:

Engine – The primary power plant of a car, including all physically attached ancillary components necessary for power production.

The oil filter is not necessary for power production. But the throttle cable is, at least more so than the filter. How about the spark plugs? Plug wires? Coils? Cam & crank sensors? Temp & pressure sensors? Starter? Coolant hoses? Vacuum hoses & 1-way valves? Fuel lines? All attached to the engine and more “necessary” than the oil filter. About the only thing explicitly allowed is the air filter. The rest are not mentioned because it would be dumb to do so, and even dumber to DQ someone over them. Like the oil filter.

If you are going to torture the rules then please do so uniformly.

To my eyes the 1.6 STR with a 3 power mirror, the edge or transition is very clear. All anyone should care about is a 1.6 and they damn well should have had a compliant 1.6 sample in tech before DQ'ing someone.

No 1.6 to compare. Is anyone here aware of a 1.6 head being looked at in tech for compliance items(podium car)since the STR rule was put into the GCR in 2015? 

 

We took a dozen random core heads off the pile after this event and put them on a table...the inconsistency was very striking. Not only from head to head but valve hole to valve hole within a head. "Core shift" is a real thing! In this particular case of heads there was no question all were OEM plunge cuts. Because of core shift, the STR really varied on how much aluminum was cut below the ferrous metal. But were that transition stops between the plunge and the casting on the STR is obvious as you say Bench. But that stock transition is at a far lesser angle than that of a 99+ head...making the need to "de-burr" a sharp edge a moot point(this is MY observation).

 

I was at the table when the confiscated head was looked at and saw what was in question. Because I and others are hoping more experienced eyes look at this I want to leave it at this. I've asked via specific measurements that the tech team verifies their conclusions. They said this decision could no be appealed but i hope they will consider our concerns.

Did they use go/no-go guages to check for valve unshrouding? I ask because last I heard the tools/guages did not even exist for checking the 1.6. Simple fact is that the NA cars aren’t expected to be in tech so there has been very little effort to prepare for careful scrutiny of them.

^^^I was not at the table when they did this...but I was told they tried to stick the 1.8 in there...the head was going to fail based on this until they realized their mistake. No 1.6 tool I was aware of.

Damn... Spec Miata must have the most DQ's per class in all of racing with how often these topics pop up...

Plunge Cutting and the STR (short turn radius)

 

"4. No aluminum in the bowl area (other than that specified for the plunge cut) or the ports may be removed, added, or manipulated for any reason. It is understood that heads may look slightly different from bowl to bowl due to casting irregularities. No material may be removed or added from the short turn radius in the port."

“The intersection of the machined

surface of the plunge cut to the port casting shall not be altered, except that the area under

the short turn radius may be de-burred, with the de-burring not to exceed 1.5 mm in width.”

Steve, my take on the "oil filter"  situation is that Sean's customer was the subject of the protest so He is not the instigator, as it was explained to me, "but for " the protest this would not be an issue, but since there was a protest, the rule needed to be addressed. I understand that.

“The intersection of the machined

surface of the plunge cut to the port casting shall not be altered, except that the area under

the short turn radius may be de-burred, with the de-burring not to exceed 1.5 mm in width.”

Duh, I need to read better. I was aware of it ^. Thanks

Damn... Spec Miata must have the most DQ's per class in all of racing with how often these topics pop up...

 

Name one class that has a more invasive tech than SM. You would have even more DQs in other classes if they had the same level of tech, imo.