38 replies to this topic

[Jim Drago]

One note of caution..
Less checking a head with these tools there is no way to know for certain that ANY head from ANY builder is 100% compliant. I feel all East Street engines as well as all of the reputable engine builders are within this tolerance. Since the 2012 Runoffs, most have brought their relief cuts back .005 under the spec to be safe. However, there are heads that come right off a crate engines that will fail if tested with these tools. I don't want to put anyone in a panic as these tools will see very few cylinder heads and there is 95% or better chance that all of the reputable builders heads will pass no problem. Just caution using a blanket statement after checking a few heads over a few days. We will get pictures of untouched heads at some point like we did with plunge cuts where the head is non compliant. We know this.

[Jamz14]

Hey Jim,

 

Question for you. If it is possible for some stock heads to fail the spec, why not open the spec up a bit past the variance you would see from a stock head? Racers are going through the expense of reworking the head anyway so there wouldn't be a cost difference. In contrast, I would be out quite a bit of money if I bought a new or used head only to find out afterwards that it is non compliant. It is widely accepted that you would need a race head to be competitive anyway, so there wouldn't be a competitive disadvantage any greater than what exists today. It would also eliminate any excuses given to tech for non compliance, though it should be easily detectable whether it was machined out of spec or was stock out of spec ( if this statement is true, maybe different ramifications for failed tech would be in order) .

 

I wouldn't think that the stock variances could be that much over the current spec values.

[Jim Drago]

Jamz
We did what we felt/feel encompasses 95% of the competitors and keeps all the heads VERY close. Most feel the specs did an excellent job controlling development and encompassing almost all of the heads. We could have drawn the line in many different spots, we felt this was the best spot if that makes sense. Respectfully, there is VERY little chance of these specs being changed.

Lets not forget, these specs outlined what can/can't be done and allows non Miata Pro shops to build a very competitive head. While many don't bring it up, since the introduction of these head specs, the performance of all the engine builders has tightened up dramatically and I feel the competition is better now than at any time in the past.

[Jamz14]

Hey Jim,

 

I was just curious. Not trying to have anything change. I just didn't know why we couldn't incorporate 100% of the heads and not just 95%. Any non miata pro shop that is still doing the work to take stock heads to the spec limit should also be able to take the head to a spec limit slightly beyond what is already in place. Unless you are saying that non miata head shops are only cleaning the heads and doing a standard valve job. If that is the case it would also suggest that you are saying that a stock head that is freshened with just a valve job and new parts could actually be competitive at the front. Yeah maybe in a regional field of 5 cars, but probably not.

 

You don't have to be overly respectful for suggesting that there is no chance in having the rules changed. I know that. . And I am not saying in anyway that the competition isn't tight and needs adjustments because the current rules are unfair. Just didn't know why we couldn't have all head cores viable for reworking instead of having to be concerned about this when buying crate engines or just a new head core.

 

Again, this is not an issue with me. Just conversing and curious. Thanks Jim for the response. Have a great weekend!!!

[Bench Racer]

One note of caution..
However, there are heads that come right off a crate engines that will fail if tested with these tools. I don't want to put anyone in a panic as these tools will see very few cylinder heads and there is 95% or better chance that all of the reputable builders heads will pass no problem. Just caution using a blanket statement after checking a few heads over a few days.

This post would be as Jamz14 commented, "conversing and curiouys".
 
Hypothetical story:
 
So a 1.6 crate engine is procured from Mazda for a bit more than $3,000.00 these days and the OEM valve shroud surface from the crate engine head measures outside the maximum spec. Let's say a different crate head (if available) costs $1,000.00. Somehow this new Mazda OEM grate engine cost the buyer $4,000.00. Minus the re-sale value of the non-compliant head. Doesn't sound fair/correct from this hypothetical story point of view. This story has nothing to do with race finishes, it totally has to do with cost fairness procuring a new crate engine.

 

YES, I understand if Jim or other engine builders don't post this sort of info, many of us never know the info. Thanks motor guys.
 

That being said, the same brainstorming process used to improve the shroud measuring tools should be used to improve the engine specification rules under, "Errors and Omissions, Competition Adjustments, Clarifications, and Classifications". Errors in that it was unknown previously that the valve shrouds could OEM be over the maximum specification,

[Kyle Freiheit]

Bench,

  In your hypothetical world. How often is this crate engine 1.6 going to be anywhere near a podium where it would get torn down... or even known to be non compliant by the owner.

 

just curious.

 

Kyle

[Johnny D]

Getting back a little to the Realm of Reality, the odds are very low, IMO.

Put in your % in the blanks.

 

Regional have _ % of stock head in the field, and get the head checked, podium?, and had this problem from Mazda.

National, (less)

Majors (Any?)

 

So how likely?

J~

[Johnny D]

Keeping with my current theme.

 

[Jamz14]

Johnny,

 

I find myself in the very uncomfortable place of having to defend the comments of Bench. His case had to do with finances, not race results. Which was my point too.

[Johnny D]

Everyones comment are what they are, you shouldn't feel the need to defend them, express them (in one page or less), IMO.

YM(opinion)MV depending on conditions anyway, maybe your right or wrong or you could learn something.

 

So...Aren't Finances connected to race results?

J~

[Jim Drago]

Bench
The likelihood of this hypothetical happening is very small. However, it is a possibility. The smac/crb is VERY comfortable where this line was drawn. Between all involved in these specs, I would say well over 1000 heads experience. If for some reason we start to see more outside these parameters we will address at that time. We have amended the specs twice since implemented. Once to be more encompassing on min head thickness, once to allow 12 mm plunge cuts on all heads to encompass more of the donor heads.
I don't see this being an issue moving forward, if it is, we can address. To try to encompass every cylinder that Mazda put out would pretty much open the head specs and that is not something we are willing to do. While your hypothetical would be unfortunate, we would not change the rules for that one possible scenario. The needs of the many far outweigh the needs of the few in this scenario.

[Jamz14]

Jim,

 

Good enough for me!!!!!

 

Johnny,

 

Yes, you can make a connection between finances and race results. But in this case I feel that you unnecessarily conflated the two issues. The comments by Bench and myself had nothing to do with the connection you drew. It was strictly a finance comment and I was very careful to state this as I was afraid that my comments might be misunderstood when Jim had mentioned that he felt the competition was currently very tight with the current head spec. Short and concise enough?

[Johnny D]

Sorry I conflated all over the place, I'll clean it up. You got me.

 

J~

[Tom Hampton]

Sorry I conflated all over the place, I'll clean it up. You got me.

 

J~

 

I agree with Ron.  Love the new persona.

[Bench Racer]

Thank you and congrats Jamz14 and Mr. Drago, you both know how to read.    Jim, I undersatnd.

 

Johnny D., you leave some question marks relative to reading capability. The post was all about fininaces.

 

A general comment with total respect to Jim as a CRB member. Remember, I'm older than dirt. Jim is only the second guy CRB other than Stan Clayton to truly openly discuss SCCA stuff to within limits. Yes, Jim Wheeler throws a bit here and there. Note, I didn't include the SMAC because part of their responsibility is to openly gather info/data. Thanks to all. 

[Jim Drago]

Thanks Dave, That means a lot!

Jim

[Johnny D]

"Johnny D., you leave some question marks relative to reading capability. The post was all about fininaces.  "

 

Dave, PM me if you want.

 

 

 

"A general comment with total respect to Jim as a CRB member. Remember, I'm older than dirt. Jim is only the second guy CRB other than Stan Clayton to truly openly discuss SCCA stuff to within limits. Yes, Jim Wheeler throws a bit here and there. Note, I didn't include the SMAC because part of their responsibility is to openly gather info/data. Thanks to all. "

 

Total agree, big  for everything Jim does.

J~

[john mueller]

 I will try and get a short video together in the next few days to show the tools and how they work.

 

Like you don't have anything else to do....  But it'd be very helpful for us tech dummy's. 

[Jim Drago]

Will do!

I was at the Machine shop today picking up last years runoffs head. Yeah, It passed every hole as I knew it would. If all goes as planned, they may have a chance to measure it again

 

I will try and get a video together next week, just been swamped

Jim