296 replies to this topic

[MPR22]

A part that many are missing is the ability to true the heads and get back to stock compression.  Yes they blocks can still be decked but now they have taken away the ability to clean up old heads that may or may not be flat. 

[Brian129]

so 3 years ago to keep costs down machining heads was put in place. 

This allowed the use of many more heads that were either non-compliant, or just undesirable. Hence helping to keep head core cost down. 

 

now, because the rules allowing head performance balancing were written with an unclear section and others decided to blatantly ignore the rules, this is pulled.  Thus going back to exactly the situation that was in place before that was proven not to help the community.

 

again, a place where logic and reasoning has no place.  

 

so back to the whole club thing,  no members had input on this, it was decided for the group;  so where do we write the letters to?

[Tom Sager]

 

Again, this is unofficial and comes from my attending the Topeka meeting as a consultant to the group as Chairman of the CRB.

As someone who has raced in our class, understands it and as chairman of the CRB, I'm going to assume that you pushed back hard on some of this in the meeting and that you were simply overruled by others who are not as familiar.  

[Caveman-kwebb99]

 

 

so back to the whole club thing,  no members had input on this, it was decided for the group;  so where do we write the letters to?

 

did that work last time?

[James York]

An unofficial explanation:

If you have stock heads with a three angle valve seat as required in the current GCR, you can run at the regular weight.  In order to not require that all the heads out there be dumped immediately, there will be a way to run the (legal) plunge cut heads with an amount of weight that has yet to be determined.  If you have the plunge cut and your short radius has been cleaned up (currently non-compliant), (say by 3 mm or so - also TBD) you will have to carry additional weight, but you can still run the heads.  If your short radius is blended, ported and cut back, shame on you and don't run the heads at any weight.  By the end of next season only the stock heads will be compliant for the Runoffs.  NASA will determine at which point the stock heads will be required for their Championship races.  

Dyno testing is underway to determine how much the plunge cut and blending are worth.  Expect the weight to be sufficient to encourage everyone to change to stock heads sooner, rather than later.

All of this will be coupled with an aggressive tech program.  So, declare what you are running and expect to be called on it at some point.  This tech program will not be just for the Majors.

Again, this is unofficial and comes from my attending the Topeka meeting as a consultant to the group as Chairman of the CRB.

 

Wheel,

So are you saying that outside SCCA Championship event for 2 years, each model year will have 3 weight listed on the spec line?

 

1)  Stock head

2)  Head plunge cut are presently defined (with clarification) in the GCR

3)  Head plunge cut and deburred (but no excessive blending)

 

And that's in addition to the overbore in each of the first three

 

I have been thru tech when they don't even understand the overbore weight difference so do you really think this is even practical? 

 

And while I welcome additional tech, I would wager anyone that anything substantial will ever take place.  There was a reference in the press release about taking the class back to bring out those presently sitting out due to deviation from the intent.  Do you think those have fun,budget guys are going to pull their heads at the track when (if) a compliance team ever shows up?

 

I would have thought a better decision would have come out from the meeting.  Pretty dissapointed in those people and the club.  It makes zero logic for the club to reverse its position on the plunge cut that they put in place in the first place to REDUCE cherry picking and suspect head fabrication.  Doing this will do nothing to allowing the "stock" junkyard, low budget folks be competative.  So the rule change does nothing toward achieving the fluffy PR statement about returning the class to its roots.  In fact, it was just made worse.

[Brian129]

did that work last time?

 

hahaha, 

Doing the same thing and expecting different outcomes is the definition of insanity isn't it? 

[Caveman-kwebb99]

hahaha, 

Doing the same thing and expecting different outcomes is the definition of insanity isn't it? 

 

not calling you crazy just stating the obvious... How many letters can the CRB produce from members asking for stock heads?

[FTodaro]

It is important to note that this was a collective decision not an individual one. So we will not know who voted for what and likely they cannot talk about the specifics of that. So my point don't shoot the messengers.

 

The message we have to send is to the group as a whole, so if you do not like the way your club is handling this then voice your opinion there also, otherwise its just noise.

 

http://www.crbscca.com/

 

Edit:

 

the working group

 

www.clubracingboard.com

[Caveman-kwebb99]

it like asking if you if you like oranges or apples and and then saying you really wanted a kiwi fruit, so here it is eat it and be happy.

[ner88]

Extremely Disappointed!

Sad Day for SM racing!

[Brian129]

not calling you crazy just stating the obvious... How many letters can the CRB produce from members asking for stock heads?

 

 

it just seems dumb to me,  so now to have a reasonably competitive car I need to hoard heads over the winter, and flow all to find the "good" ones. 

 

of course this is all a joke as the 1.6 is toast anyway, and there are a group saying just leave them behind. 

so my new car, with new fresh motor are all useless. 

 

I guess I should get my Formula Continental prepped for next season.

[Johnny D]

Wheel,

So are you saying that outside SCCA Championship event for 2 years, each model year will have 3 weight listed on the spec line?

 

1)  Stock head

2)  Head plunge cut are presently defined (with clarification) in the GCR

3)  Head plunge cut and deburred (but no excessive blending)

 

And that's in addition to the overbore in each of the first three

 

I have been thru tech when they don't even understand the overbore weight difference so do you really think this is even practical? 

 

And while I welcome additional tech, I would wager anyone that anything substantial will ever take place.  There was a reference in the press release about taking the class back to bring out those presently sitting out due to deviation from the intent.  Do you think those have fun,budget guys are going to pull their heads at the track when (if) a compliance team ever shows up?

 

I would have thought a better decision would have come out from the meeting.  Pretty dissapointed in those people and the club.  It makes zero logic for the club to reverse its position on the plunge cut that they put in place in the first place to REDUCE cherry picking and suspect head fabrication.  Doing this will do nothing to allowing the "stock" junkyard, low budget folks be competative.  So the rule change does nothing toward achieving the fluffy PR statement about returning the class to its roots.  In fact, it was just made worse.

 

He said weights but I hope they haven't left the plate off the table either.

 

And if everyone was really close and happy, let the rule stand.

J~

[Caveman-kwebb99]

it just seems dumb to me,  so now to have a reasonably competitive car I need to hoard heads over the winter, and flow all to find the "good" ones. 

 

of course this is all a joke as the 1.6 is toast anyway, and there are a group saying just leave them behind. 

so my new car, with new fresh motor are all useless. 

 

I guess I should get my Formula Continental prepped for next season.

 

Brian, there in lies the problem...

 

Guys like you that may or may not have or know what they have in their cylinder heads are punished as if you did something wrong.  Even the protestors at the runnoffs if they had re plungged their heads all have to replace theirs and therfore are being punished even what what they did was right and justifiable.  I would think that less then 5% of those racing in this class actually are racing with a Bone Stock head, I know of at least one.  many have stock bottom ends but most of us make our first performance purchase with a Pro built head to get a few ponies.  Once anyone has done that they will now need a new head within the limited time and will have to take weight penalty before such time.  

 

And one last thing you can flow heads till your blue in the face, you will need to actually dyno test to know for sure one is better then another, and who wants to do all that or be left behind, that is alot of damn work for the front runner and damn near impossible for anyone else.  If I had a FC car it would be an easy choice for me right now. 

[Parity]

Letter written to NASA and SCCA.

 

Blow up their inbox folks.

[Kyle Freiheit]

not quite sure why everyone is so pissed about this. Looks like you can do a plunge cut to the existing rule depth you just have to do it concentric to the valve guide. That's what the plunge cut rule was intended to do in the first place!

 

You guys should be mad at those that rewrote the rules in 2009 and then exploited them.

 

1)They knew that doing a plunge cut that was not concentric with valve guide was not in the spirit of the class(the way that Mazda made them) 

2)They wrote or didn't rewrite the rule to exclude that loophole AND even spec'd tools to measure those plunge cuts and they made the non-concentric cuts legal. 

3)They exploited the rule to fullest extent including going so far as to cleanup the sharpness of the short turn radius transition that this illegal cut made.

 

Kyle Freiheit

[dstevens]

What will be entertaining for me is to dig this thread up mid 2015 and compare who said they were leaving the class to those that are out racing.

[James York]

not quite sure why everyone is so pissed about this. Looks like you can do a plunge cut to the existing rule depth you just have to do it concentric to the valve guide. That's what the plunge cut rule was intended to do in the first place!

 

You guys should be mad at those that rewrote the rules in 2009 and then exploited them.

 

1)They knew that doing a plunge cut that was not concentric with valve guide was not in the spirit of the class(the way that Mazda made them) 

2)They wrote or didn't rewrite the rule to exclude that loophole AND even spec'd tools to measure those plunge cuts and they made the non-concentric cuts legal. 

3)They exploited the rule to fullest extent including going so far as to cleanup the sharpness of the short turn radius transition that this illegal cut made.

 

Kyle Freiheit

Kyle,

 

You didn't read close enough.  If you plunged cut exactly compliant to the rules as in the GCR in 2014, your head going forward will be NON COMPLIANT in two years and immediately disallowed at championship events.  And if you want to utilize the 2 year grace window, you need to run some yet to be determined additional weight.

[Danny Steyn]

I suspect that Kyle is reading RM-14-20 and not the FULL SM realease

[Kyle Freiheit]

Kyle,

 

You didn't read close enough.  If you plunged cut exactly compliant to the rules as in the GCR in 2014, your head going forward will be NON COMPLIANT in two years and immediately disallowed at championship events.  And if you want to utilize the 2 year grace window, you need to run some yet to be determined additional weight.

I read the release. Possibly confused?

 

 

-        Permit plunge cuts and unshrouding per the current rules, but with clarification of concentricity, as well as some level of blending of the plunge cut (language TBA). These modifications may require that additional weight be added to the car.

[FTodaro]

not quite sure why everyone is so pissed about this. Looks like you can do a plunge cut to the existing rule depth you just have to do it concentric to the valve guide. That's what the plunge cut rule was intended to do in the first place!

 

You guys should be mad at those that rewrote the rules in 2009 and then exploited them.

 

1)They knew that doing a plunge cut that was not concentric with valve guide was not in the spirit of the class(the way that Mazda made them) 

2)They wrote or didn't rewrite the rule to exclude that loophole AND even spec'd tools to measure those plunge cuts and they made the non-concentric cuts legal. 

3)They exploited the rule to fullest extent including going so far as to cleanup the sharpness of the short turn radius transition that this illegal cut made.

 

Kyle Freiheit

 and

 

-Weight additions will compensate for the power gains from the head modifications, while also encouraging the behavior of changing back to an unmodified head as soon as possible.

-The allowance of these modifications will have a sunset period of one to two years, based on parts availability.