603 replies to this topic

[Rob Burgoon]

That's like telling the heart surgeon you think your Gardner can do a better job with your triple bypass. He doesn't really need to explain when he tells you your nuts!

No, but it's my job to tell the surgeon to f* off if he wants to cut and won't say why.

But James clarified for Jim so all is well.

[Bruce Wilson]

You guys crack me up. Danny, you said something about "applauding the protestor". Who might that be? Trust me it's pointless.

Ready, I'll say it again. National: 99 and newer, seal the motors, return to stock fuel pressure and timing disk. allow the computers to be programmed. That's as simple as you can make it and the only way you find out who has the talent. Up to this point nobody has proven driving talent. This has been a scam. Mike will agree with me Jim will rub his wallet and break into a sweat.

Yeah those early cars are messing everything up

Seal only works when done by Enterprises.

I do wish we could open ECU, but probably not in the cards

For those who think seal/dyno works, take a look a this thread http://mazdaracers.c...ta-rule-update/ 113hp to 121hp mistery!

-bw

[Ron Alan]

I do not agree that it is MUCH cheaper to buy an older donor. The older donors cost significantly more to replace worn parts and bring up to a capable running race standard. I have a PERFECT '99 on a trailer in front of my house now that we purchased for $1,000 with a blown head gasket.

When you sped away from the little old ladies house did you look in the mirror?

[dmathias]

By the way, is this the 6th or 7th annual silly season debate?

[Zauskycop]

I'm no pro at this, but is it possible to have a spec ecu from an aftermarket vendor that can be "locked"?

[Ron Alan]

Danny,

Here is another specific bullet point...this would go to parity.

-The 94-97 cars were specifically hurt when the 4.3 diff was mandated for all cars due to the lower factory rev limiter. Where our shift points were once very close to the 1.6, they are earlier now which has handicapped this car. Of course I speak only for the tracks in the SFR, but a new driver who expects to run up front here would not be wise to go this route. Shifting when know one else has to or mid-corner when you never had to before sucks! Not sure if there is a viable solution but would love to have one of the experts here post up their thoughts

I posted on this in another thread and nobody touched it...may be falling on deaf ears but I will try again.


Rob...get your effort to have things explained, even if you know the answer Following your lead

[Bench Racer]

I really don't see all the "perception of rampant cheating"

Jim Drago, because I'd like to be totallly clear about what your saying ^ how many SM cars were seriously teched at the 2011 SCCA Runoffs after the race and how many of those cars that were seriously teched were DisQualified? If we have the offical number we are all capable of calculating the DisQualification percentage.

EDIT:

After two people responded to this post ^ I'll post the info that I asked for. All my post asked for was clearification. Let's say six SCCA Runoffs competitors cars were seriously checked in the tech shed. We know that two were DQ'ed. That would be 33% were DQ'ed. If it were eight cars were seriously checked that woould be 25% which is still a very big percentage. I didnt ask the question to screw with Danny's thread, I asked the poster a question about cheating. Now if 33% were DQ'ed from the Runoffs, how many people are out there working beyond the grey area on a regular basis. IMHJ cheating a little bit is the same as being a little bit pregnant. If we want to talk in circles about cheating ya all please have a & carry on.


Edit:

Mellen, if you have an extra 2 grand laying around drop it off by me & I'll return what's not used.

[Tom Sager]

Danny,

Here is another specific bullet point...this would go to parity.

-The 94-97 cars were specifically hurt when the 4.3 diff was mandated for all cars due to the lower factory rev limiter. Where our shift points were once very close to the 1.6, they are earlier now which has handicapped this car. Of course I speak only for the tracks in the SFR, but a new driver who expects to run up front here would not be wise to go this route. Shifting when know one else has to or mid-corner when you never had to before sucks! Not sure if there is a viable solution but would love to have one of the experts here post up their thoughts

I posted on this in another thread and nobody touched it...may be falling on deaf ears but I will try again.


Rob...get your effort to have things explained, even if you know the answer Following your lead

Agree. While the 4:30 was helpful in one way, it does hurt on some parts of some tracks due to the lower rev limiter. I think there is a growing opinion that opening up ECUs is a positive step for a variety of reasons. It is, however, an added cost but there is a return on the investment IMO in terms of parity.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Jim Drago, because I'd like to be totallly clear about what your saying ^ how many SM cars were seriously teched at the 2011 SCCA Runoffs after the race and how many of those cars that were seriously teched were DisQualified? If we have the offical number we are all capable of calculating the DisQualification percentage.


Edit:

Mellen, if you have an extra 2 grand laying around drop it off by me & I'll return what's not used.

While I am not Jim, I can count there were 5 or 6 cars teched to the best of my knowledge I may be wrong. Two were DQ'd! But as an earlier explanation of one of the DQ's went it was purly an accident that his head was out of spec. I beleive the other DQ revolved around shocks? I think the whole shock thing may have happened before almost like GROUND HOG DAY.

[Jim Drago]

Jim Drago, because I'd like to be totallly clear about what your saying ^ how many SM cars were seriously teched at the 2011 SCCA Runoffs after the race and how many of those cars that were seriously teched were DisQualified? If we have the offical number we are all capable of calculating the DisQualification percentage.

I don't remember mentioning the Runoffs or any percentage of anything?
Here ya go http://rhetoric.byu....20questions.htm
Does it sound better for some reason when I post it?

I'm sure I will get blasted here as well...
Rampant Cheating vs the DQ's at this years runoffs are two different things IMO... ( Looking at each event as a single offense and not getting into past history or patterns) I don't think I can even comment on what the offenses were as a volunteer, but I think it is common knowledge at this point? NEITHER IMO as a single instance would fall into the " Rampant Cheating category" . More of a case of trying to get to the edge of a spec. They were too close or over and were found non compliant. I certainly have no reason to "protect' either driver. Many could have the same two offenses in their cars right now and have no idea, so we should all be careful when throwing stones from our glass houses.

THAT IS MY OPINION, you can disagree

[Keith Novak]

Agree. While the 4:30 was helpful in one way, it does hurt on some parts of some tracks due to the lower rev limiter. I think there is a growing opinion that opening up ECUs is a positive step for a variety of reasons. It is, however, an added cost but there is a return on the investment IMO in terms of parity.

+1
I've also noticed that compared to some other cars they have better power at the top end, it's a double whammy when they get the extra power AND the extra revs.

[Steve D]

I also fear we have self interested parties on the rules committee. Guys that own businesses that service SM and would benefit from the arms race probably shouldn't be making rules. Let the racers make the rules.

In my opinion, this is an incredibly myopic view.

I know a few of the guys who have been involved in rules making (Mueller at NASA, Drago & Fowler at SCCA). Those guys don't make rules for self interest. Even if they could or would, think for just a second about the size of the market they serve in SM vs the size of the market of their REAL businesses.

The hours and hours and hours they burn on rule making would be so much better spent by them - from a capitalist's perspective - on their real businesses. Why do they do it? They love the sport. They love the clubs.

None of these guys are getting rich from ANY part of SM. I think it is insulting to imply otherwise.

You want the racers to make the rules? Guess what. They do. These guys are racers to the core.

It's already a thankless job. Let's not be insulting on top of that.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

In my opinion, this is an incredibly myopic view.

I know a few of the guys who have been involved in rules making (Mueller at NASA, Drago & Fowler at SCCA). Those guys don't make rules for self interest. Even if they could or would, think for just a second about the size of the market they serve in SM vs the size of the market of their REAL businesses.

The hours and hours and hours they burn on rule making would be so much better spent by them - from a capitalist's perspective - on their real businesses. Why do they do it? They love the sport. They love the clubs.

None of these guys are getting rich from ANY part of SM. I think it is insulting to imply otherwise.

You want the racers to make the rules? Guess what. They do. These guys are racers to the core.

It's already a thankless job. Let's not be insulting on top of that.

I could not agree more +1,000,000 well.... maybe Fowler is rich... he does have a pretty big Toter Home

[Chris70]

+ 10000000000000000000000000000000000000.............

[dstevens]

This is my tenth season in SM. A lot of people started after me and have quit long ago. My perception is that many simply lost HOPE. Hope that they could ever be competititve on a budget.

I think you'll find that true in all forms and classes of motorsport. Some run out of money, some desire. Others don't realize how much time is required and that it's not as easy as it looks. Those things aren't specific to SM.

[5X Racing]

Ready, I'll say it again. National: 99 and newer, seal the motors, return to stock fuel pressure and timing disk. allow the computers to be programmed. That's as simple as you can make it and the only way you find out who has the talent. Up to this point nobody has proven driving talent. This has been a scam. Mike will agree with me Jim will rub his wallet and break into a sweat.

Wow, this topic is becoming hard to keep up with and seriously eats up some time! Plus I can't help but create long posts that only add to that problem!

I've been thinking about this topic since it started, and while I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling about splitting the class NA/NB, and if dyno checks/certifications, sealing engines, etc don't seem feasible or a likely solution (and I agree that it would be tough to do in some regions with low car counts, like NASA FL), then this is really the only way to make things truly "spec", as trying to make the three different generations of cars is impossible with the different factors (tracks, rev limiters, suspension geometry, etc...).

Also, I don't see anyone here agreeing on a common solution that the majority will be satisfied with except for "we need to have tech", which is obviously true, but some things need to be realized about tech, which has its own problems embedded within. Well, I believe we should all think for a minute about how many times you've experienced being evasively tech'd after a race. We all know that Jim D, Danny, Mike C, and any other big National front runners I didn't mention have experienced many in their time and have seen the compliance program we all paid for at work, as they should because the spotlight is on them at any big event and they have the biggest targets on their backs, or will be the most willing and able, or easy to cooperate with as they are prepared for this type of action. As a regional SCCA racer, I've NEVER been tech'd further than my weight. One time after a podium finish at the SARRC Invitational Challenge I had to pull my air intake (not manifold) off, but then the tech inspector realized it was a 1.6 and I wasn't supposed to have a restrictor anyways, so it went back on and I was out of there. As a NASA racer, for the better part of a year and a half, in addition to racing in the SM class I was in an official position with NASA FL where I called the shots with the SM class for a year, then the entire race group for the first 6 months of 2011. I wanted nothing more than to have an evasive tech at every race, not necessarily to catch cheaters, but to show the SM racers of Florida that "yes, it can and will be done". You know I found out something quickly? It cannot be done easily at a regional (or any race that is not a major national event, such as the Champs or June Sprints for example) level. It takes a huge effort and is not desirable to the event directors (as in: they don't care), here's why:

• For starters, as people have said before, there is just not enough volunteers to want to help accomplish this. This trumps all other reasons and makes them a moot point, but for the sake of conversation the rest follow.
• Nobody is going to want to pull a head and spend their Saturday night putting their car back together for Sundays races. They want to drink beer and socialize with their friends, because they are their for fun and that's not their idea of fun. I wouldn't be surprised if most people said "Nah, just keep my trophy and DQ me, cause it ain't worth my time". Who could blame them? Yes, Jim D is right, I believe only the front runners are prepared and have the time, knowledge, willingness, and equipment to comply with a teardown. That's not the majority of the racers, ESPECIALLY at a regional race.
• Every post race tech would have to have an SM expert or knowledgeable volunteer, such as Mike C, Glenn, a special guest in the form of an SM engine builder to run the teardown. These people need to be compensated for their time, which most regions cannot, or will not pay for. Jim Creighton laid out the numbers for us, it's not possible for every race. I had 4 people helping me with NASA FL events, none had any interest in being a tech inspector. This is a hired position and if you have somebody willing to do it for free, you'd better kiss their ass.
• Event directors have no interest in the trouble a teardown brings at a regional level. They do not want people getting pissed and never coming back because they spent their party time rebuilding the top end of their engine, putting a tranny or rear end back in, or whatever the case is. They need happy participants to stay in business, teardowns are nervous and volatile times for racers as Jim D said, how many weekends do you submit to a teardown before it's not fun anymore? You'll actually lose people if consistent teardowns are done on the regional level, which is why a National 99+ SM and a NA Regional SM would work better. National guys are willing, able, and agreeable to a teardown at every race because the National scene is more like "semi-pro" racing. It costs more, there's a higher level of competition, more bragging rights, contingencies, and a more serious, competitive nature'd attitude.

Having serious tech at all races is tough to do. Having a dyno at races is tough to do too. Finding people that are willing to volunteer their time to run tech just to shut the SM people up about cheating is almost impossible. The future of SM needs to be built without the need for tech at every race because it is too much to ask of the clubs providing us a place to race. So I think the question is more: "How do we figure out a way to not need tech and teardowns at every race to ensure legality?"

[Danny Steyn]

For those who think seal/dyno works, take a look a this thread http://mazdaracers.c...ta-rule-update/ 113hp to 121hp mistery!
-bw

Dean - I actually think that thread, more than any other, says that a Dyno DOES work - look at the cars - everyone within a very acceptable tolerance, except for one car and so easy to see that he is out of spec. I read that thread at the time it was alive, and I re-read it today. See numbers below

While I did not think that a track dyno test had any relevance, the more I see the issues with tech / teardown / time / cost / compliance fee/ lack of skills / etc., the more I think about it the more I like the "LIE DETECTOR" as long as the pulls can be done immediately after the session

Yes I know Mike C and Drago and York with his wonderful switch have their doubts, but maybe this is the place to discuss why a track dyno will NOT work. I know I am all ears at this point, cos I can see why the tech part is not working.

Numbers from the SFR thread
SSM HP/Torque Recap *

Date HP Torque
10/23/08 112.40 99.14
10/23/08 112.52 100.45
10/24/08 113.18 100.06
10/25/08 113.22 100.61
10/25/08 113.97 100.52
10/26/08 112.16 101.13
10/26/08 112.52 100.92
10/26/08 113.02 97.71
10/28/08 112.47 101.07
11/1/08 108.69 96.81
11/22/08 114.21 100.57
1/3/09 108.45 99.86
1/3/09 110.40 102.61
1/3/09 113.52 102.15
1/4/09 103.22 99.95
2/27/09 112.21 98.48
2/28/09 113.63 102.70
2/28/09 113.75 98.78
3/1/09 108.65 96.00
3/14/09 105.32 95.18
3/14/09 110.12 98.85
3/14/09 113.75 102.00
3/15/09 104.95 99.40
3/20/09 113.27 101.08
4/10/09 109.11 97.41
4/11/09 111.25 97.35
5/12/09 112.01 100.03
5/21/09 109.69 95.33
5/23/09 113.91 102.14
5/24/09 112.65 99.64
8/30/09 99.25 97.24
9/25/09 112.59 100.89
10/15/09 107.98 95.51
10/21/09 113.20 100.01
10/22/09 101.39 96.57
10/23/09 112.89 100.71
10/23/09 114.05 102.62
11/16/09 108.37 97.41
12/5/09 111.99 98.30
1/2/10 113.38 101.35
1/3/10 112.75 99.47
2/25/10 112.29 100.69
2/28/10 113.48 100.65
3/19/10 112.42 98.21
4/8/10 114.40 99.40
4/10/10 112.72 99.96
4/11/10 104.72 93.25
4/24/10 113.28 102.38
6/19/10 108.64 96.74
7/10/10 111.60 101.54
7/23/10 113.54 100.50
8/30/10 114.37 100.63
4/1/11 107.46 96.78
4/9/11 111.67 100.21
4/10/11 111.34 97.79
4/10/11 113.89 98.78
4/10/11 121.15 103.78

[Alex Bolanos]

• Event directors have no interest in the trouble a teardown brings at a regional level. They do not want people getting pissed and never coming back because they spent their party time rebuilding the top end of their engine, putting a tranny or rear end back in, or whatever the case is. They need happy participants to stay in business, teardowns are nervous and volatile times for racers as Jim D said, how many weekends do you submit to a teardown before it's not fun anymore? You'll actually lose people if consistent teardowns are done on the regional level, which is why a National 99+ SM and a NA Regional SM would work better. National guys are willing, able, and agreeable to a teardown at every race because the National scene is more like "semi-pro" racing. It costs more, there's a higher level of competition, more bragging rights, contingencies, and a more serious, competitive nature'd attitude.

I was with you until this comment. What makes you think that us "National guys" wouldn't rather be drinking beer and laughing in Charbonneau's general direction rather than tearing our cars apart? Nobody likes to have to prove they're legal, it comes with running up front so we deal with it. Splitting SM into regional and national makes zero sense, as long as I have the desire/money/ability to prep both my '94 and '99 to the same level I will. When I don't, I'll sell them and take up fishing.

What this means is that I will show up to a regional with my top prep (because I want to and it's part of racing) '94 which will be within 2-3% lap time of my '99 depending on the track.... Are you not going to let me register for the event because I have a National license?

[Alex Bolanos]

Dean - I actually think that thread, more than any other, says that a Dyno DOES work - look at the cars - everyone within a very acceptable tolerance, except for one car and so easy to see that he is out of spec. I read that thread at the time it was alive, and I re-read it today. See numbers below

While I did not think that a track dyno test had any relevance, the more I see the issues with tech / teardown / time / cost / compliance fee/ lack of skills / etc., the more I think about it the more I like the "LIE DETECTOR" as long as the pulls can be done immediately after the session

Yes I know Mike C and Drago and York with his wonderful switch have their doubts, but maybe this is the place to discuss why a track dyno will NOT work. I know I am all ears at this point, cos I can see why the tech part is not working.

Numbers from the SFR thread
SSM HP/Torque Recap *

<snipped the dyno numbers>

Danny, I don't think that will cure the whining because:


4/10/10 112.72 99.96
4/11/10 104.72 93.25

The 104 guy will still complain about the 112 guy and claim that he should be entitled to be competitive even though he doesn't prep his car correctly.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Nobody likes to have to prove they're legal,

There is another +1,000,000 lots of honest SM'er in my opinion, being fast does not equal cheater!