250 replies to this topic

[Alex Bolanos]

At that point, I huddled with the tech staff and we reread the whistler instructions. Even though all the motors we had already tested were not hot, we decided we would retest everyone since we had not blown air into the cylinders to remove excess fuel. And reading the instructions, we saw nothing concerning removing the cam covers so it was decided we would not remove them. None of us at the event could find a tech bulletin changing the original whistler procedures. I had received an email about it but nothing official.=

 

When we were told that the covers would stay on for the post race whistle, I asked why the latest procedure wasn't being used and was told that a tech bulletin does not modify the test procedures.  I then asked, how are the tech procedures modified and didn't get an answer.  I then asked point blank, do you (tech) have the tools to CC an engine and check compression against the rulebook (the whistler is NOT the rule) and was told no.

 

So, for those that asked:  The reason we let it go after all of us were re whistled with the covers on is that we were told that tech did not have the proper tools.  What do we do at that point?  Pay to pull engines and send them to Topeka?  How tech does not have tools to CC an engine (this affects ALL classes, not just us) is beyond my comprehension.  What good is the tool that raises the flag if there's no way to take the flag to the next level?  

 

The protest will read differently at the ARRC, count on it.  Hint: It'll include an Autotechnik car with one of the questionable engines

[Waterboy]

So is all this compression stuff the reason we have 5 hp more now then before we changed plates on the 99 which reduced the hp by 5, or is there something else? Also how is it each year another hp or two are found, and ft lbs of torque too?

Even the 99's are 15 years old and have been raced how many years now. Are we really still "finding" power or are we creating it.

[Alex Bolanos]

So is all this compression stuff the reason we have 5 hp more now then before we changed plates on the 99 which reduced the hp by 5, or is there something else? Also how is it each year another hp or two are found, and ft lbs of torque too?

Even the 99's are 15 years old and have been raced how many years now. Are we really still "finding" power or are we creating it.

 

No, there are plenty of cars in the top 15 that do not use this exploit as it is easily (we thought) found by CCing the head and doing the math.  It became evident that tech would hardly ever question the whistler so the whistler became the "tech shed" legal way of building engines for some.  I've lost count of how many times cars have blown too high and not been popped open and measured, I have NEVER seen it happen in my whole SM career (although I'm told it happened when High Chair won the ARRC in 2009?)  

 

Power levels creep in motorsports, that's a fact.  What we are talking about here is not creep, some of these engines have one more FULL point of compression than the others.  If your motor is supposed to be 10:1, how much more power is 10% 11:1?  5% 10.5:1? The math tells me 5% in an SM is ~6hp, what would you do for 6hp?

[Waterboy]

No, there are plenty of cars in the top 15 that do not use this exploit as it is easily (we thought) found by CCing the head and doing the math. It became evident that tech would hardly ever question the whistler so the whistler became the "tech shed" legal way of building engines for some. I've lost count of how many times cars have blown too high and not been popped open and measured, I have NEVER seen it happen in my whole SM career (although I'm told it happened when High Chair won the ARRC in 2009?)

So what exploits are they using? Should expose all the exploits shouldn't we?

Or are we really just still figuring the cars out?

[Johnny D]

So what exploits are they using? Should expose all the exploits shouldn't we?

Or are we really just still figuring the cars out?

 

Did you not read the 1st couple pages...

 

Valve cover off or on gives you different readings.

If you don't CC then you bank on if your taking off the cover in tech and build to that number if it gains you HP/TQ.

J~

[Alex Bolanos]

I think a few overdog cars will come back to the pack again, but then again there are others that are overdogs for a bunch of other reasons, but at least the issue of compression gaming appears to be under control. 

 

Or the overdogs can force weight and a plate on the new car you've been developing the last few years...  Sad really.

[Alex Bolanos]

This isn't Crieghton's fault. He was simply following the new Whistler procedure that was released last month, replacing the procedure that has been used since 7/2009....

The CRB, with Jim Drago's input decided that the Whistler is more accurate by measuring engines with the valve cover removed. This may be true, and it may (or may not) be coincidental that this change was made 6 weeks before the runoffs. Bottom line is that the top 6 qualifying cars (from 4 different engine builders) were correctly Whistled at the SIC with the new procedure and all 6 failed.

There was no announcement of the change, nor did it appear in fastrack, as it is not a rule change, but rather a change to the test procedure. My recommendation is for everyone to have their engine's Whistled to the new procedure ASAP!

 

If the engines are built to the compression rule and it's been proven that with the valve covers off the whistler reading more accurately matches said rule, why does it matter WHO changed the procedure and WHEN the procedure was changed?

[Johnny D]

Can I get what...is

 

CC'd

And RFA is

for my list.

TIA

J~

http://mazdaracers.c...ge-1#entry59990

[Caveman-kwebb99]

When we were told that the covers would stay on for the post race whistle, I asked why the latest procedure wasn't being used and was told that a tech bulletin does not modify the test procedures.  I then asked, how are the tech procedures modified and didn't get an answer.  I then asked point blank, do you (tech) have the tools to CC an engine and check compression against the rulebook (the whistler is NOT the rule) and was told no.
 
So, for those that asked:  The reason we let it go after all of us were re whistled with the covers on is that we were told that tech did not have the proper tools.  What do we do at that point?  Pay to pull engines and send them to Topeka?  How tech does not have tools to CC an engine (this affects ALL classes, not just us) is beyond my comprehension.  What good is the tool that raises the flag if there's no way to take the flag to the next level?  
 
The protest will read differently at the ARRC, count on it.  Hint: It'll include an Autotechnik car with one of the questionable engines

Alex, are you willing to share your wistler number from before race with valve cover off? The buras number has already been made public...

Also MacD and Topping please share your number pre race if you would be so kind? And yes I realize you guys were found compliant in the end...

[Alex Bolanos]

Can I get what...is

 

CC'd

And RFA is

for my list.

TIA

J~

http://mazdaracers.c...ge-1#entry59990

 

http://www.lmgtfy.co...c cylinder head

 

With love,

Alex

[Alex Bolanos]

Alex, are you willing to share your wistler number from before race with valve cover off? The buras number has already been made public...

Also MacD and Topping please share your number pre race if you would be so kind? And yes I realize you guys were found compliant in the end...

 

I was not in tech and did not ask as I wasn't worried, I can tell you that tech is extremely secretive about the whole process and that baffles me.  We were all thrown out of the tech area several times.

[Brocodile]

When we were told that the covers would stay on for the post race whistle, I asked why the latest procedure wasn't being used and was told that a tech bulletin does not modify the test procedures.  I then asked, how are the tech procedures modified and didn't get an answer.  I then asked point blank, do you (tech) have the tools to CC an engine and check compression against the rulebook (the whistler is NOT the rule) and was told no.

 

So, for those that asked:  The reason we let it go after all of us were re whistled with the covers on is that we were told that tech did not have the proper tools.  What do we do at that point?  Pay to pull engines and send them to Topeka?  How tech does not have tools to CC an engine (this affects ALL classes, not just us) is beyond my comprehension.  What good is the tool that raises the flag if there's no way to take the flag to the next level?  

 

The protest will read differently at the ARRC, count on it.  Hint: It'll include an Autotechnik car with one of the questionable engines

Part of the problem was that the revised procedure was new, so it wasn't in the printed manual. This provided the tech guys an out so everybody could go home, and it's hard to blame them. But the biggest problem was its lack of clarity in the revised procedure itself. It didn't REQUIRE the removal of the covers on any particular model, apparently leaving it to the discretion of the tech staff at each event. Until it is cleared up, this procedure will invite controversy. As a practical matter, the inconclusive protest probably has served most of its purpose. I suspect engine builders will build to the covers-off standard since it yields a higher number. It would be nice if the ARRC officials would announce which whistler procedure they will use (if any), but it's not really necessary. I predict that any of the top ARRC cars will pass a cc test for compression ratio. Moreover, if they use a whistler, they'll take the covers off because all seem to agree it's more accurate.

[Danny Steyn]

This thread has evolved into the Whistler "Valve Cover-On" Exploit

 

Somebody figured out two things

1. The Whistler reads way lower than the REAL Compression with the valve cover on
2. Tech almost NEVER does a cc to confirm the whistler (just as Alex stated above)

and so they started building engines to meet the Whistler test with the valve cover on and now that this exploit has been exposed, they will now need to deal with all the engines out there that will no doubt be protested at the regional and national events that are coming up. Fortunately this is a relative easy fix by using thicker head gaskets to bring the CR back into spec.

 

But I want to address one thing. As far as I know, and Jim Drago who posted above to this effect, the Whistler provides a VERY accurate measurement when done correctly and with the valve cover off. A 2009 engine that has been cc'd will read 9.5 to 9.6 every time on the Whistler with the cover off and around 9.2 to 9.3 whit the cover on. A 2001 + VVT car that has been cc'd will Whistle 10.0 to 10.1 with the valve cover off and around 9.6 and above with the valve cover on. However when a VVT car has knowingly been built to meet the Whistler specs with the valve cover on, it will whistle at around 10.5 PLUS, and this means that there are some very strong VVT cars out there that have been causing havoc in this class. We all know of a few ......

 

So what I am saying is that we need to accurately write the spec and procedure for the Whistler, point out the various ways the Whistler can be gamed, and measure with the Valve cover OFF(or determine acceptable numbers for the valve cover on, but this leads to all sorts of other attempts to game the system) and lets continue to use the Whistler to raise the flag

[Caveman-kwebb99]

I was not in tech and did not ask as I wasn't worried, I can tell you that tech is extremely secretive about the whole process and that baffles me.  We were all thrown out of the tech area several times.

I has been stated by dan Tiley that all cars including yours was found to be non complient with cover off...

I would like to know how he would know this if you do not know your number?

[Danny Steyn]

Also please note that this situation with the engines being out of spec is not just confined to the front of the pack. So much of the bitterness and frustration in our class right now is in the middle of the pack where some drivers have suddenly leapt ahead of their normal rivals, presumably due to engines delivering higher than normal output. We have all experienced the incredibly frustrating experience of the driver who cannot hang with us in the corners, but somehow miraculously is always back with us at the end of the straight. 

[Alex Bolanos]

I has been stated by dan Tiley that all cars including yours was found to be non complient with cover off...

I would like to know how he would know this if you do not know your number?

 

Dan Tiley was not there under the hood, neither was I.  Both of our statements would be based on second hand knowledge, if that's accurate enough to answer your question than good on ya.

[Waterboy]

Did you not read the 1st couple pages...

Valve cover off or on gives you different readings.
If you don't CC then you bank on if your taking off the cover in tech and build to that number if it gains you HP/TQ.
J~

Yes I did read. Did you, if so you might want to go back and read my posts and what they were in reply to again.

Suspect valve cover on or off is far from the only exploit.

[Johnny D]

Yes I did read. Did you, if so you might want to go back and read my posts and what they were in reply to again.

Suspect valve cover on or off is far from the only exploit.

 

Oh Dear, really??

 

There out to be a rule against that.

J~

[Waterboy]

Also please note that this situation with the engines being out of spec is not just confined to the front of the pack. So much of the bitterness and frustration in our class right now is in the middle of the pack where some drivers have suddenly leapt ahead of their normal rivals, presumably due to engines delivering higher than normal output. We have all experienced the incredibly frustrating experience of the driver who cannot hang with us in the corners, but somehow miraculously is always back with us at the end of the straight.

Agree BUT when the front runners are within 10ths which they usually are these "little" things help them more than the mid pack guy that doesn't have the skill.

[Jim Creighton]

OK, one more clarification and I'm going to have to start getting ready for a pro race this weekend and the Runoffs next week.

I do NOT recall anyone asking me if we had the equipment to cc a head and determine the actual compression ratio. Had I been asked, the answer would have been yes. We had the equipment at the track to do it. However, I was never told a tear down bond had been set and that we would either move the cars to a location outside the track where we could do this or secure permission from the track to stay late enough to do 7 cars.

As for being secretive, we are required to only allow the representative of the protested car in the area. All others including the protestor are not allowed to be involved. This has always been the policy. It was difficult to do and I tried not to be a butt to all of you there. The post race had more stewards there and we were asked to keep the area clear as per policy.

As I have said, the only thing I was asked to do was get the SEDiv whistler which was in my motorhome and assist as needed.