160 replies to this topic

[Kyle Disque]

Just curious.  For the parts found that were found to be non-compliant (including the whistler CR car) was GCR 8.33.a.f.2.c.2. 1&2 enforced?

 

These rules are:

Parts found non-compliant

1. Will be marked as such.

2. Will be retained by the SCCA.

 

In other words, did the stewards/tech officials keep the non compliant parts?

 

In the case of the guy who called the whistle "close enough", I'm curious what would/was retained by the stewards.

 

I'd bet this rule was missed.  

 

-Kyle

[Jim Drago]

Just curious.  For the parts found that were found to be non-compliant (including the whistler CR car) was GCR 8.33.a.f.2.c.2. 1&2 enforced?
 
These rules are:
Parts found non-compliant
1. Will be marked as such.
2. Will be retained by the SCCA.
 
In other words, did the stewards/tech officials keep the non compliant parts?


 
In the case of the guy who called the whistle "close enough", I'm curious what would/was retained by the stewards.
 
I'd bet this rule was missed.  
 
-Kyle

They did keep the heads of Steyn and Buras.

[Parity]

Jamz, I for one would be all over that. Last race of last year I had to replace a trans in the paddock. Tried to hire a few guys but no one was interested. I didn't have all the tools so it took me slightly (waaaaaaay) more than 45 minutes. I don't mind turning my own wrenches and doing basic prep but a full teardown would be tough. I like the idea.

[Andrew Charbonneau]

Im really glad that the dirty political problems are going away  and that the  Richard Nixon of Miata is gone sorry mister pres.

 

you administration failed . but the mafia still lives be worried.

[Andrew Charbonneau]

would like to say I had a great weekend even with todd burasss block at 130 mph class act . 

[suck fumes]

Lol!

[Jim Drago]

Ok, to summarize; we need invasive tech to give everyone comfort that we are all competing on a level playing field. We also need to make this doable for the guys without the ability or finances. I see the former as a situation with no solution, no way around us needing tech. Therefore we have to work on the latter; provide tech to guys without the means to do so or even the desire to do so. Just as a side note before going into a possible solution. I saw Charlie Hayes pull the gearbox out of the car in about 45 min. and then go on to pull the head with just as much speed. How many of a 40 deep field can do that?  How many want to do that?
 
The solution I think is to provide a way for a guys car to get stripped down by someone other than himself while he goes and has a beer after the event with all of his friends. Further the car needs to be put back together for him as well so he can load up his car afterwards and go home without having to spend additional money to get it back together for the race. What type of person does this kind of work??? A mechanic!!!! So the next step is how to pay a mechanic to perform this work.
 
First, not all people will want a mechanic regardless even if that mechanic is a trusted East St , OPM, Tiley, Rush ETC mechanic. Danny will always have the track side support to have OPM do all of his tech work. So no matter if there is a paid mechanic there qualified to do it, Danny will not take advantage of that and he will have his builder tear down and reassemble. Me, I can afford a mechanic or a pro shop to do my tear down, but I have extreme trust issues so I would never have either a 3rd party mechanic, or a major shop mechanic do my work. So I will never take advantage of the on call mechanic either and do my own work.
 
This mechanic will be able to go as deep as anyone wants. If consistently fewer cars are taken deeper than they are today, we can reduce the number of cars being torn down at any particular event. For example, if at every big regional with over 10 cars, one or two cars are asked to go deep in tech, and what is teched is changed every event, we dont have to do 10 cars at only huge events. You have to do so many cars right now at the huge events because these cars aren't checked for anything at 99% of the other events. This is a long game program. But if you knew that some sort of really invasive tech was going to be done at most well attended regionals, and you only check one or two cars, eventually you get around to having a look inside most cars for most things. This alone puts the brakes on a lot of the things we are seeing right now. It also gives the class time to make adjustments before the entire top 10 are DQed for the same thing.
 
So back to how do we fund this?
 
At multiple regional events with NASA and at the championships there was a dyno on track to help with identifiying outliers. At the nationals, Drennan's car was on the dyno I believe no less than 3 times. Might have been no less than two. At least 4 or 5 other guys also had multiple trips to the dyno. There was also a whole slew of tech personnel on hand. That dyno cost. I would imagine the dyno cost was north of $1000 to have it available. However it is diced up, there is money currently involved with even the level of tech we are doing now. So what I am asking is, can we have a qualified mechanic on call at appropriate events that would accept a couple of hundred dollars to tear down one or two cars to any level the stewards decide for a singular thing? Would a mechanic take the job if he captured that couple of hundred dollars per event, but only had to do the work a percentage of the time ( considering the Danny and James affect where we wouldn't take advantage of this mechanic but he still gets paid)?
 
The SCCA is talking about something similar to this suggestion with their roving tech team idea.The only difference is that I would have this roving tech team equipped to conduct the tear down and inspection.......... on fewer cars per event. Consistency is the secret here. Consistency allows you to look at fewer cars more often. Anyway, SCCA obviously has some sort of financial model they are considering for this roving tech team. So we are looking at the delta on how there are planning to pay this team to inspect to one man actually performing the tear down. I think that for about $250 we could find a qualified person to do the necessary mechanical work to conduct just about any tech request. I feel this way because I have asked a few. And when you consider that not every tech session would require the gearbox or engine stripped all the way down, and that they wouldn't have to actually do the work for some percentage of the weekends, I have found a few different mechanics willing to handle that contract. At some events maybe it is the intake manifold or the exhaust manifold and doesn't require the engine or box to be pulled. So with these assumptions, I think we can figure out a way to fund an on call mechanic program to allow the guys to come and compete without worry that they are coming home with an incomplete car and a sunday afternoon filled with work that they are not interested in doing.
 
Now of course there is going to be a million reasons why this idea won't fly. But glorious is the man that can find a single way for it to work!! All I know is that there is some really really smart people here and in racing in general. When we look at the problem simply, I am confident that there is a solution if we put our minds to it. Lets figure out a way for racing to be fun again and not put off people that really don't feel like paying a lot of money to not have fun on the weekend.
 
So there it is. Rip it up, toss it out or whatever. As I said before, no one touches my car so I am saddled with doing the tear down anyway. So if we never figure it out,,,,, so much the better for me when people are DQed and or suspended. Less competition and I have the same amount of fun anyways. I don't need there to be 40 cars on track to have fun. I have fun even when I am the only car on track. I just like to drive. I'd prefer to be driving with you guys, but if the class loses car counts to the point where there isn't any competition, I'll pay even less money to drive and go to track days or HPDE events and still be smiling.
 
Ron, I am okay with your response to this idea taking a few weeks. I know I have written more words on this post than you can handle in a week. Take a couple of weeks to get through it all.  That said though, you have written more in the last few months than you have in the few years I have been on this forum so maybe I am having an influence on you. All kidding aside...... I know you have had a big influence on me and for that I am thankful. Hope to see you soon.

Ok you cant start a post with to Summarize and follow that with a two hour read!

[FTodaro]

I think the rules are pretty clear about your obligation to tear down your motor if asked, and i think no one should be exempt if you will, from the rule.

 

But a little bit of common sense will go along way here. If I were king for the day i would do less invasive tech after the top 5 in a big race, and would not be going after a mid pack car for head removal. So much more is holding those drivers back, and its not the motor at that point.

 

I fear that there are many mid and back pack outfits who do not have the ability or the help do to tear downs, and at some point that could hurt the class.

 

So I think a little common sense will go along way.

 

I know I am a mid pack guy at Atlanta for example, (some will argue everywhere)  I am a one man show. when we are done racing Sunday, i leave and drive home, to arrive at 1am. Then I get up and go to work on Monday. So if i place 15th and need to remove my head before i go. I would be thinking about how much fun i am having the next time i decide to go to that race.

[38bfast]

The problem I have seen is the deeper in the pack you go the bigger the cheats. Just saying. Some are just due to ignorance of the rules. Some are "I suck so bad I need all the help I can get". And some are "I don't give a f.ck."

I do wish we could come up with a way to only penalize for items that actually mean somthing and not .001 out of spec on one axis in the hot sun of June betwen 3:14 and 3:18 pm on odd years. Some way to apply comon sense to the rules.

This last weekend great people have had their weekend ruined over somthing that does not amount to anything.

I ran tech in offshore racing years ago. In one conpetiors motor 1 out of 6 reed cages were out of spec by .003. It was handled by crushing it with a hammer and saying we will never have a problem with cage again. all the competition was made aware of the noncompliance and how it was handled. Everybody was good with it because they all knew it could have been them in the hot seat and appriciated the comon sense approach.

I am sure than Danny would have no problem with getting his head destroyed and be able to keep his position. I would challenge anyone that would have issue with that.

The key would be able to determin how much is too much.

Of course at the Runoffs go by the letter of the rule.

[Ron Alan]

Love the pre-emptive James

 

I've been trying the JJ theory(Johnny/James)! Add enough words so know one has to interpret but keep it short enough no one falls asleep! I like your ideas. Maybe SCCA can add to the Major supps a cost if anyone needs assistance? A little pre-emptive all can take advantage of gives 0 excuses. If competitors balk after they signed up and read the rules...6 months hard time!

 

Ralph, 

 

Just so i understand, what are you referring to when you say .001? If this was Dannys exhaust valve relief cut, which failed the no-go tool, then according to what Jim said, the tool is built .007 over spec which would mean Danny was .008 out of spec? Jim also said his head(Todds)was .25mm off which is .009+

 

A line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere does it not? Maybe 3 positions for every .001? Would that be common sense?

 

I'm still hoping someone can explain how they measured .009 at the STR?

[38bfast]

Ron my interpretation that all the holes were good in Danny's head but one. And the one only by a few thow. Is there any equipment on the planet that could measure the performance advantage to the wheels. I would belive not.

I very well know that there is a rule that says out of spec is out of spec no mater what performance advantage or not. It just seems to be cutting our nose dispite our face. I also relies the slippery slope of making a judgment call.

It's never ending problem in any type of racing.

And I am with you how can you measure to that accuracy the STR intersection.

[Jim Drago]

Im really glad that the dirty political problems are going away  and that the  Richard Nixon of Miata is gone sorry mister pres.
 
you administration failed . but the mafia still lives be worried.

Richard is still here.. Unfortunately it looks as if "Dick" is still here as well.

[Steve Scheifler]

I'm with you Ralph. In a less imperfect world a degree of subjective common sense would be best. First reaction from many would be "no way, will never happen", but the new no-appeal tech guy changes everything. If you trust him to be judge, jury and executioner with the final say, then allowing him to add common sense is hardly a drastic step except that it goes against so much precedence. I like the idea that the decisions be made public so the masses have an opportunity to debate them and object if too lenient. The toughest part of course is where he draws the line. In this latest case, based on what we have heard, I would probably put Danny and Todd on probation for awhile because each had just a single tiny and meaningless infraction on one cylinder. By contrast, all but maybe one of the Runoffs infractions would have been a DQ (not just back of field) because regardless of the real benefit they were blatant, intentional and on most/all cylinders. In between those examples is where it gets tricky, but I think worth a try.

[Ron Alan]

Ron my interpretation that all the holes were good in Danny's head but one. And the one only by a few thow. Is there any equipment on the planet that could measure the performance advantage to the wheels. I would belive not.

I very well know that there is a rule that says out of spec is out of spec no mater what performance advantage or not. It just seems to be cutting our nose dispite our face. I also relies the slippery slope of making a judgment call.



And I am with you how can you measure to that accuracy the STR intersection.

Sorry Ralph...I was just trying to correct you. If the no-go tool falls in...the cut is out way more than a few thou. Again i base this on what Jim said which is that the tool is already built a little big. .001 and .009 sound a lot different! BUT...to your point, any meaningful gain could not possibly be measured either way more than likely.

 

SO...before we cut off our nose...can/should/will Stewards penalize based on severity? gain? Is this not a judgement call as well?

 

I know in Tennis, if the ball misses the line by .001, it is out...point lost! I also know the guy getting the 75mph speeding ticket is going to pay a bigger fine than the guy getting a 65mph ticket. 

 

I hear there is a picture of the tool SCCA used to determine material removal of the STR out there floating around! Maybe that can be posted?

[LarryKing]

Would sealing all SM motors eliminate the need for teardowns?
Why won’t sealing motors work in SM?
How are SM motor seals defeated?
What makes sealed motors work in other classes?
Are SM racers less trustworthy than other classes?
Is that why sealed motors won’t work?

 

(Bear with me, just a few more)

 

Who put the bomp in the bomp bah bomp bah bomp?
Is Taylor Swift really all that?
Is six enough? Is eight too many?

 

Just askin

W~

[Dave D.]

Are these no-go tools available for purchase by the engine builders? To me it seems like one big waste of time and thousands of dollars for each failure(lost parts that were paid for,labor to assemble,travel costs,etc...) to put together a car in hopes that your interpretation of the measurements given in the rules matches with the tech stewards. I'm sure no two people or machines machine the plunge or relief cuts the EXACT same way.  Doesn't NASCAR sell tools like the body templates and carb tools to the teams so these things can be checked at the shop before time and money are wasted? I would like to be able to check for compliance BEFORE the engine ever got assembled and installed.

[Parity]

Would sealing all SM motors eliminate the need for teardowns? - No
Why won’t sealing motors work in SM?  - Cheaters
How are SM motor seals defeated? - Cheaters cheat
What makes sealed motors work in other classes? - No SM cheaters in other classes
Are SM racers less trustworthy than other classes? - I'm in this class so yes.
Is that why sealed motors won’t work? - Yes


Who put the bomp in the bomp bah bomp bah bomp? Barry Mann
Is Taylor Swift really all that? - "While you've been getting down about all the dirty dirty cheats in this world, you could have been getting down with this sick beat"
Is six enough? Is eight too many? No - Yes

 

Hope this clears things up. 

[Parity]

Are these no-go tools available for purchase by the engine builders? To me it seems like one big waste of time and thousands of dollars for each failure(lost parts that were paid for,labor to assemble,travel costs,etc...) to put together a car in hopes that your interpretation of the measurements given in the rules matches with the tech stewards. I'm sure no two people or machines machine the plunge or relief cuts the EXACT same way.  Doesn't NASCAR sell tools like the body templates and carb tools to the teams so these things can be checked at the shop before time and money are wasted? I would like to be able to check for compliance BEFORE the engine ever got assembled and installed.

This is the part I can't understand. There's been plenty of  discussion about rules, dq's, inspection and why would racers show up to a high level event with non-compliant equipment. But, the SCCA is using a method of inspection which to my knowledge is still undisclosed to racers and engine builders. We know we have a tool but we don't know it's actual dimensions is like saying we know we have a rule but we don't know the details. It's arbitrary. 

 

Why hasn't this been disclosed? 

[Jamz14]

Jim, I was summarizing the previosly stated premise of the problem I posted previously but you are right a summary in tge begining doesnt make much sense.

Ron, I think you misunderstand. Im suggesting that this teardown service if called to tech is not something each guy has to spot buy. But is something already paid for and usasable by anyone thst needs it and paid for by all of us through our dues or race fees.

If we absolutely cant afford the $25 additional race costs, then the charity we all talk about in the class maybe an oprion. A commitment by all that we will help our fellow competitors complete their teardowns.

[Jim Drago]

Again i base this on what Jim said which is that the tool is already built a little big. .001 and .009 sound a lot different! BUT...to your point, any meaningful gain could not possibly be measured either way more than likely.

I asked for a picture of the tool they are using.


Clarification on the relief tool..
I added this .007 after discussion with builders.. This is really NOT a .007 tolerance. It defies logic, but I have seen a tool .004.-005 larger than the relief cut drop into the reliefs cuts in some places. Usually right around the corner where the relief cut meets the chamber. So what looks like a tool that is .007 too large is actually .002 or so large IMO. Also important to consider when decking a head, the radius in some heads grows in that same corner as the chamber gets wider as it is decked. So your compliant relief cut at 5.258 may not be compliant at 5.250. Since 2012 runoffs, we have intentionally made all our relief cuts .005 under spec which is way too conservative, but the gains are not worth the risk there IMO.