98 replies to this topic

[Caveman-kwebb99]

An there lies the problem and why I've kept my head down most of the week.  I stopped reading the posts because few see the big picture and by that I mean there is no correct answer for a fix.

 

Those throwing stones and saying toss 'em all need to be sure what they have and how it will be interrupted under this new and IMO flawed/subjective definition.  Meaning, unless you stood next to or was the machinist milling your head you'd be taking the word of someone else who last week thought (for the most part) that they did the plunge cut correctly.  Some went to far and they knew it and Charlie's grandma could see it...  But those who hit the edge with some emery cloth or a brass wheel on a dremmel???  Yeah, should that be considered out of bounds?  We can fix the slippery slope by defining it and illustrating it.

 

Not allowing any or some deburring will:

• require mostly everyone to pull their heads, dismantle and inspect what they have.  Most folks don't want to or can't do this so they'll be spending to do this instead of buying tires and entering races.
• cause an even larger parts source problem with a spike in core prices
• eliminate so many cars the class may not recover from the exodus
• probably not be the reason someone beats you

You can't stand atop your high horse screaming toss the cheaters out while ignoring the fact that this protest has the potential to kill the class dead.  The economics of having +80% of the heads possibly tossed in the bin is a killshot unless Mazda starts production on heads again.

 

IMO the devil here is deep within the details...  Getting the measurements for a rewording of the rule (or a clarification) that corrects and spelling out EVERYTHING that can and cannot be done in the drivetrain is the only way to proceed.  It makes it crazy tedious and error prone but something has to be in place to remove the creativity that has plaged our class since nearly it's inception. (it was clutches when I built my first car).  

 

John IMO you are on the right track!  at least you understand the gravity of this situation and what it means.  many can barely see past their front bumper on this whole thing, and we all know that leads to a potential crash in the very next turn!

 

I wish everyone luck at the NASA west champs race!  

[Craig Berry]

Mueller, some of the best, most common sense thoughts I have read! Not only are you thinking about short term solutions, but you seem to also be thinking about the real world ramifications of the natural inclination to overreact. Hope other leadership has the same level head.

[Ron Alan]

An there lies the problem and why I've kept my head down most of the week.  I stopped reading the posts because few see the big picture and by that I mean there is no correct answer for a fix.

 

Those throwing stones and saying toss 'em all need to be sure what they have and how it will be interrupted under this new and IMO flawed/subjective definition.  Meaning, unless you stood next to or was the machinist milling your head you'd be taking the word of someone else who last week thought (for the most part) that they did the plunge cut correctly.  Some went to far and they knew it and Charlie's grandma could see it...  But those who hit the edge with some emery cloth or a brass wheel on a dremmel???  Yeah, should that be considered out of bounds?  We can fix the slippery slope by defining it and illustrating it.

 

Not allowing any or some deburring will:

• require mostly everyone to pull their heads, dismantle and inspect what they have.  Most folks don't want to or can't do this so they'll be spending to do this instead of buying tires and entering races.
• cause an even larger parts source problem with a spike in core prices
• eliminate so many cars the class may not recover from the exodus
• probably not be the reason someone beats you

You can't stand atop your high horse screaming toss the cheaters out while ignoring the fact that this protest has the potential to kill the class dead.  The economics of having +80% of the heads possibly tossed in the bin is a killshot unless Mazda starts production on heads again.

 

IMO the devil here is deep within the details...  Getting the measurements for a rewording of the rule (or a clarification) that corrects and spelling out EVERYTHING that can and cannot be done in the drivetrain is the only way to proceed.  It makes it crazy tedious and error prone but something has to be in place to remove the creativity that has plaged our class since nearly it's inception. (it was clutches when I built my first car).  

Some great points John.

 

Since Mazda is involved, I hope they have pulled together representatives and mechanical experts(outside SM) from both SCCA and NASA so that any solution that comes forward will have all contributing.

 

The 3 year rules freeze is also up at this point...or very soon. Might be a great time for those who feel there is ANYTHING else within our rules that need to be clarified or words added to speak up!! God forbid in 3 years another we have another issue on something written or not written in the rules that is known now. 

 

I'm with Danny on this statement...especially the last sentence

 

Sad that it got to this level. I do not fault any of the protesters at all. As a class we have been blurring the lines for too long. This is a very public and vocal correction, that is probably well overdue, and we will be in a better place for it. I just feel so sad for the guys that drove their hearts out at the Runoffs, drivers that I have the utmost respect and friendship for.

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

An there lies the problem and why I've kept my head down most of the week.  I stopped reading the posts because few see the big picture and by that I mean there is no correct answer for a fix.
 
Those throwing stones and saying toss 'em all need to be sure what they have and how it will be interrupted under this new and IMO flawed/subjective definition.  Meaning, unless you stood next to or was the machinist milling your head you'd be taking the word of someone else who last week thought (for the most part) that they did the plunge cut correctly.  Some went to far and they knew it and Charlie's grandma could see it...  But those who hit the edge with some emery cloth or a brass wheel on a dremmel???  Yeah, should that be considered out of bounds?  We can fix the slippery slope by defining it and illustrating it.
 
Not allowing any or some deburring will:

• require mostly everyone to pull their heads, dismantle and inspect what they have.  Most folks don't want to or can't do this so they'll be spending to do this instead of buying tires and entering races.
• cause an even larger parts source problem with a spike in core prices
• eliminate so many cars the class may not recover from the exodus
• probably not be the reason someone beats you

You can't stand atop your high horse screaming toss the cheaters out while ignoring the fact that this protest has the potential to kill the class dead.  The economics of having +80% of the heads possibly tossed in the bin is a killshot unless Mazda starts production on heads again.
 
IMO the devil here is deep within the details...  Getting the measurements for a rewording of the rule (or a clarification) that corrects and spelling out EVERYTHING that can and cannot be done in the drivetrain is the only way to proceed.  It makes it crazy tedious and error prone but something has to be in place to remove the creativity that has plaged our class since nearly it's inception. (it was clutches when I built my first car).

John, I agree with what you said and no one wants to hurt the class. But once again we will be bending (changing) the rules to protect the class. I feel this kind of attitude needs to change or it will keep happening. How many 90-96 cars are out there that do not attend races because they know they are not competitive anymore yet I don't see anyone making a change to the rules to get them back. So what I feel they need to do is to get 3-4 of these engine builders together and all sit down and write the rules cristal clear so none of them can venture outside the lines. So if they find something in tech in the future they have no one to blame but them selfs.

[Keith Andrews]

John - Great thoughts.  Your leadership is greatly appreciated.  It's refreshing to hear a reasoned response. 

[john mueller]

 So what I feel they need to do is to get 3-4 of these engine builders together and all sit down and write the rules cristal clear so none of them can venture outside the lines. So if they find something in tech in the future they have no one to blame but them selfs.

 

thats the 'ol fox in the hen house all over again.  IMO car builders, shops and engine builders should not be in advisory positions for our class, they should be used as references instead.  Since I've been the NASA Nat Dir I've witnessed that most of them have the class first & wallet after...  Notice I said most.

[RazerX]

John, I agree with what you said and no one wants to hurt the class. But once again we will be bending (changing) the rules to protect the class. I feel this kind of attitude needs to change or it will keep happening. How many 90-96 cars are out there that do not attend races because they know they are not competitive anymore yet I don't see anyone making a change to the rules to get them back. So what I feel they need to do is to get 3-4 of these engine builders together and all sit down and write the rules cristal clear so none of them can venture outside the lines. So if they find something in tech in the future they have no one to blame but them selfs.

 

I think some participation research does need to be done.  I see, or believe, a lot of these posters tend to be the top 10 type of folk.  Passionate about our sport and hobby.  But we would all be sad if we only had 10 car fields.  We need those guys who want to start racing cheap and grow to the love the sport.  So where i hear 'most' have these types of heads I am not sure that is really fact.  Yes, most of the fast guys who pay big $ for a pro motor probably does.  But out here in CA, I would GUESS that half the field does not recent pro motors or pro motors at all.  These are the guys that show up to half the races a year but provide half the car count.  I know several of them personally and can attest that HP war has disenchanted them over the last year.  So I am not making an point about a decision with is post.  Just reminding those, here in the thread, that we are the vocal majority and likely at best 50% of the field.  There are others out there who we need in this sport.  

[john mueller]

So where i hear 'most' have these types of heads I am not sure that is really fact.  Yes, most of the fast guys who pay big $ for a pro motor probably does.  But out here in CA, I would GUESS that half the field does not recent pro motors or pro motors at all.  These are the guys that show up to half the races a year but provide half the car count.  I know several of them personally and can attest that HP war has disenchanted them over the last year.

 

I see your point, however this is not just a SM pro motor builder issue...  From what I've researched, "deburring' after performing our legal plunge cut would be common practice for any machinist.

 

I intend for the HP war to come to an end in NASA come 2015.

[Johnny D]

Honestly there is a ton a info that we (you John) I believe you don't have yet.

 

What were the Violations at the runoffs, I heard there was a few.

How much of a advantage is there.

Can it be adjusted with weight/rp and how much.

 

How many people are really illegal?, you said 80%+, I like to know for sure, not assume.

Can we do a mandatory head check before the next annual sticker/tech check.

 

With all the info you can make an informed decision/rule change/adjustment.

 

Otherwise your just guessing and hoping and I don't think that's your style.

J~

[john mueller]

Honestly there is a ton a info that we (you John) I believe you don't have yet.

 

What were the Violations at the runoffs, I heard there was a few.

How much of a advantage is there.

Can it be adjusted with weight/rp and how much.

 

How many people are really illegal?, you said 80%+, I like to know for sure, not assume.

Can we do a mandatory head check before the next annual sticker/tech check.

 

With all the info you can make an informed decision/rule change/adjustment.

 

Otherwise your just guessing and hoping and I don't think that's your style.

J~

 

I may say some crazy shit from time to time but it's part of my process to see where folks are coming from...  That being said, I have a pretty good handle on what been happening and I really don't give a fudge about it anymore.  It's forward that needs to be the focus and I feel I'm working with the best folks that will get it right.

 

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/fDaONrHK1f8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Jim Drago]

I saw this on FB today
http://www.allenskil...cut-details.pdf

[Johnny D]

LOL, fine, carry on.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=ubIpoPjBUds

J~

[Bench Racer]

We all (those that truly care about SCCA classes) know slippng rules downhill (opening rules for the benifit of those that have selective reading capabilites SCCA) is negative trend for race classes. If folks don't understand the previous statement please educate your selves of over the past 30 years with SCCA classes. As far as massaging the plunge cut periphery to the cast bowl, the OEM plunge cut periphery to the cast bowl is not massgaed. The current SCCA massaging rule is easy reading/understanding. It shoud stay, if you massge the periphery, your illegal and it don't throw any weight if you knew or didn't know. The short turn radius I would need to know exactly wht was found it Runoffs tech. For the time being, as long as there is no plunge cut diameter larger than the maximum outside diameter (first line of the external angle) specification, with zero corner massage at the second line of the short turn radius (external angle) everything will be legal.

Wow, pretty simple right, untill one finds a plunge cut OEM bowl at 12mm or less that has sharp corner ridge. If youinspect and understand the refurb plunge cut will not clean up the sharp corner ridge, don't use the head or use the head in the OEM condition. THE OEM BOWLS ARE ALL PLUNGE CUT, and OEM DOES NOT MASSAGE THE PLUNGE CUT PERIPHERY TO THE CAST BOWL...........................

[Bench Racer]

The facebook article is very explanatory, interesting enging builder stuff.

A plunge cut bowl question would be, in picture 13 and 14, it views as tho the plunge cut is parallel with the inside diameter of the valve seat and there is a shelf at the in this case 9mm deep that per say would interupt the flow. Is my view crrect in what the pictures shows? Also the port paths and bowls are galss beaded. SCCA rule: My take is glass beading would be illegal per SCCA rule .4.

Just saying, or asking.  

[RWP80000]

 Bench Racer

Posted Today, 11:46 AM

We all (those that truly care about SCCA classes) know slippng rules downhill (opening rules for the benifit of those that have selective reading capabilites SCCA) is negative trend for race classes. If folks don't understand the previous statement please educate your selves of over the past 30 years with SCCA classes. As far as massaging the plunge cut periphery to the cast bowl, the OEM plunge cut periphery to the cast bowl is not massgaed. The current SCCA massaging rule is easy reading/understanding. It shoud stay, if you massge the periphery, your illegal and it don't throw any weight if you knew or didn't know. The short turn radius I would need to know exactly wht was found it Runoffs tech. For the time being, as long as there is no plunge cut diameter larger than the maximum outside diameter (first line of the external angle) specification, with zero corner massage at the second line of the short turn radius (external angle) everything will be legal.

Wow, pretty simple right, untill one finds a plunge cut OEM bowl at 12mm or less that has sharp corner ridge. If youinspect and understand the refurb plunge cut will not clean up the sharp corner ridge, don't use the head or use the head in the OEM condition. THE OEM BOWLS ARE ALL PLUNGE CUT, and OEM DOES NOT MASSAGE THE PLUNGE CUT PERIPHERY TO THE CAST BOWL........................... 

Bench Racer,

Your claim that the OEM bowls are all "plunge cut" is open to debate.  Until Mazda provides the machining details used in production it is only speculation. I don't know how they machined their heads but it is obvious they use a "shaped" cutter that was designed to blend well with their port casting.  I would not at all be surprised if in fact they made a two step operation where the valve seat bore was machined to a specified diameter and a second shaped cutter was used to provide the radius'd bowl shape below the seat in the cast bowl material.

The reason I say this is I have closely examined the stock bowl pocket (the one on the long side runner as opposed to the short side radius and have observed that the bowl below the valve seat to be larger than the straight inside diameter of the ferrous valve seat on OEM heads. The affect of this is to actually create a slight venturi profile as the bowl transition to the valve seat.  This also indicates to me they use either a multi-cut machining process or a CNC process (where the path  of the tool is computer controlled) as there is no way to get a plunge cut tool out of the head that has a larger diameter than the valve seat.

Another factor to consider is that with the increased diameter that the SCCA plunge cut specs provide, there is potential for a significant change to how the SCCA plunge cut process affects the bowl/port transitions.  That doesn't give anyone approval to do any blending/contouring for these sharp transitions. If it was determined to result in negative port flow then those in the know should not have performed the plunge cut even though allowed.

Rich Powers

[Bench Racer]

Rich, my response to your post is high lited within your post with the colored words, short word response, or don't know, don't agree.

 

 

Bench Racer,

Your claim that the OEM bowls are all "plunge cut" is open to debate.   Until Mazda provides the machining details used in production it is only speculation. Agree, but reliable source from site suggested all bowls intake and exhaust are plunge cut. Would suggest the machining centers don't differentate core shift and that all bowls are plunge cut. I attempted to get info from MazdaMotorSports and they are really closed mouth at the present and maybe allways are with their process. Talked with one guy and another was to call me, no return call is a story by it's self. I don't know how they machined their heads but it is obvious they use a "shaped" cutter that was designed to blend well with their port casting. From a OEM sales slide presentation in my position, I agree.    I would not at all be surprised if in fact they made a two step operation where the valve seat bore was machined to a specified diameter and a second shaped cutter was used to provide the radius'd bowl shape below the seat in the cast bowl material. The reason I say this is I have closely examined the stock bowl pocket (the one on the long side runner as opposed to the short side radius and have observed that the bowl below the valve seat to be larger than the straight inside diameter of the ferrous valve seat on OEM heads. The affect of this is to actually create a slight venturi profile as the bowl transition to the valve seat. Agree with the machining process to either process. The OEM sales slide shows one tool to machine the valve seat c'bore and plunge bowl simo.   This also indicates to me they use either a multi-cut machining process or a CNC process (where the path  of the tool is computer controlled) as there is no way to get a plunge cut tool out of the head that has a larger diameter than the valve seat.

Another factor to consider is that with the increased diameter that the SCCA plunge cut specs provide, there is potential for a significant change to how the SCCA plunge cut process affects the bowl/port transitions. Don't know.  That does give anyone approval to do any blending/contouring for these sharp transitions. Don't agree per the rules. If it was determined to result in negative port flow then those in the know should not have performed the plunge cut even though allowed. Agree

Rich Powers

 

 

[RazerX]

I see your point, however this is not just a SM pro motor builder issue...  From what I've researched, "deburring' after performing our legal plunge cut would be common practice for any machinist.

 

I intend for the HP war to come to an end in NASA come 2015.

 

John,

 

Not everyone takes their heads to one of these pro motor guys for $1500.  I am 100% confident that we have a large number of people who have a head they just took to a local shop and had the valves done(I can name at least 10 I know of).  So there would be NO plunge cut from them, that is way outside the 'valve job'.  Thus deburring is not relevant.  I know several who bought an used car or used pro motor that was a couple years old and they may not have plunge cut either depending when this practice started.  Only way to know is to find out from the builders when they started do this.  

 

I just reiterate this vocal lot on mazdaracers is not the majority of racers.   No derogatory statement and no implied slant in anyway.  But the politicians make rules for themselves at times and forget who the 'people' are.  I am not accusing anyone of doing this.  I just want to ensure we think about the 'normal' guy, who isn't going majors, runoffs, championships, and just heads to the track occasionally and don't invest a fortune in their SM.  This is where i started 5 years and have friends in various stages as well.  Just bringing it up to be part of the decision making process. 

 

I feel better now.  Carry on. 

 

[fotostars]

Hi Echo the previous post violently!

The majority of SM out there are not necessarily represented by the posters with opinions on this forum.

 

I am one of the "people" who is doing this on a budget. I didn't buy a pro motor and I'm not intending to do it anytime soon.

My last engine was what came with the car (when it was on the street) and my current engine I rebuilt to learn something out of the process.

I only had the block honed and skim .001 off the head so it's nice and clean.

No other machining involved. It's a '97.

I'm happy with the 119hp/110ftlbs I got and the fact that the engine is running well. That's about it... 

 

My 2cents.

[Alberto]

Let me go into my gruff NY'er mode for a minute and say: How much of the registered Spec Miata drivers nationwide give a flying fudge about Nationals?  10%?  I know I don't.  I do this for fun.  I have better things to do with my money and time - like work, pay bills and save for retirement, education, family etc. 

 

That said, I understand that some of you are really good drivers and can't get the level of competition that Nationals racing provide at a Regionals race.  That's great.  Nationals provides you an outlet.  But don't screw over the majority of the class b/c some bad apples are willing to spend metric bucks to win and some builders need/want to go into gray areas to satisfy the demands of the type A drivers looking for any advantage beyond their skill (Saul Speedwell said it best in one of these threads...).  I wish they had tested the rest of the top 20 cars.  I bet the infractions would have continued down the running order...  I know this isn't solely an SCCA problem.  It just happened that the protest was made at an SCCA race.  Many of the same people race both classes and shops support NASA racers as well.

 

 

SFR's and other region's Sealed Spec Miata is "where it's at".  No need for pro motors and thousands spent on head work or other parts.  The local machine shop rebuilt my head for $4-500 or so bucks.  The only work that I know they did is deck the head to make it level.  If they did do something else, I wouldn't know about it.  Much like the unfortunate drivers that were DQ'ed, I need to be able to place my confidence in the people building the motor or doing the machine work b/c I haven't a clue. 

[john mueller]

John,
 
Not everyone takes their heads to one of these pro motor guys for $1500.  I am 100% confident that we have a large number of people who have a head they just took to a local shop and had the valves done(I can name at least 10 I know of).  So there would be NO plunge cut from them, that is way outside the 'valve job'.  Thus deburring is not relevant.  I know several who bought an used car or used pro motor that was a couple years old and they may not have plunge cut either depending when this practice started.  Only way to know is to find out from the builders when they started do this.  
 
I just reiterate this vocal lot on mazdaracers is not the majority of racers.   No derogatory statement and no implied slant in anyway.  But the politicians make rules for themselves at times and forget who the 'people' are.  I am not accusing anyone of doing this.  I just want to ensure we think about the 'normal' guy, who isn't going majors, runoffs, championships, and just heads to the track occasionally and don't invest a fortune in their SM.  This is where i started 5 years and have friends in various stages as well.  Just bringing it up to be part of the decision making process. 
 
I feel better now.  Carry on. 
 

 
 

Hi Echo the previous post violently!
The majority of SM out there are not necessarily represented by the posters with opinions on this forum.
 
I am one of the "people" who is doing this on a budget. I didn't buy a pro motor and I'm not intending to do it anytime soon.
My last engine was what came with the car (when it was on the street) and my current engine I rebuilt to learn something out of the process.
I only had the block honed and skim .001 off the head so it's nice and clean.
No other machining involved. It's a '97.
I'm happy with the 119hp/110ftlbs I got and the fact that the engine is running well. That's about it... 
 
My 2cents.

 
 
I'd love to think what you guys think was the majority...  My reading of the class is that it's somewhere between your situation and the big money guys with a few pro-built motors sitting in the trailer for just in case.  I believe the "Plunge-cut rule" has been in effect for almost 5 yrs, I'd venture the vast majority of REBUILDS include it, but yes some folks didn't and that was their option.
 
Also, as of me posting this reply ONLY 103 folks seem to want to voice their opinion...  Thats about the same number of cars registered for both the NASA East and WEST Championships and the Runnoffs.  Kinda pathetic if you asks me.
 
I'm confident NASA has the correct tact for the upcoming Western Champs, after then is when some hard choices will be made.  Gonna be interesting.