150 replies to this topic

[Johnny D]

Hey Tom, don't start running the numbers, it will start sound worse and worse.

 

We don't want to talk about if there is 14 cars.

J~

[Todd Green]

Im the stupid one without experience but even I could easily defeat the dyno with GPS triggered switches of all sorts. Doesn't even have to be as sophisticated as a GPS switch. If VW can do it, you smart guys can.

Sounds great if you are making a sci-fi movie, probably not so great in practice.  Easy as mandating that GPS antennas are disconnected.  Data acq etc. is powered off/disconnected.  Look through the car for anything splicing into the harness, measure voltages and resistances, swap out ECU's etc. etc.  But as has been said, just have a stiff penalty.  Someone tries some shenanigan like that and they are banned for a year+.  Second offense is a life ban. It's one thing to argue back and forth about minuscule measurements within the engine.  You add some switch that changes your output on a dyno and there is no arguing.

 

Do you really think that if we are tearing cars down to engine/tranny/diff pieces that if we started using a dyno that cars wiring harnesses etc. wouldn't be gone over with a fine tooth comb?  So again for every cheat you can come up with, it is going to have to be undetectable in tech.  So again, enlighten me to how you are going to defeat a dyno.

 

Also the VW argument is a red herring.  They have programmable ECUs.  We do not.  It isn't like we have multiple maps to flip to.  The 1.6 ECU's don't even have an EEPROM.

[Tom Hampton]

The numbers are important.  Fundamentally, this is an politico-economic discussion.  Its effectively a taxation question.  Its one thing to say, "I want a flat tax." Its another to say, "I want my taxes to go up by $700." 

 

And the poorly attended majors SHOULD be scrutinized.  They make ZERO sense, economic or otherwise.  If a majors participant's goal is as I've stated above, and each major is afforded a tech-budget based on entry fees, then THAT major is not going to be able to afford to tech anything other than weight/plate/shocks.  In which case, participants who are expecting better will stop attending---and that major SHOULD be put out of its misery. 

[Bench Racer]

So because a competitor is a better driver or has a better race, he should have to spend 6000 plus to make the rest of us feel good? I disagree. Not a personal attack, but knowing this wont likely be you spending this money, it is easy for you to have this position.
 
All of them as it will be mandatory, just like SRF.. We as a class want compliance, we as a class should share the financial burdens as well

Not arguing, making points. Me not spending the money has nothing to do with my points being made.

 

Do the Runoff production car folks share their tear down/reassemble costs? Opp's I know the answer, no. 

This year the F production cars had head off, intake manifold off, a couple valves out, piston and rod out, trans did not come apart but had to prove what type transmission, sycro, dog box, whatever.

 

And as the fee whatever the cost becomes Majors mandatory for SM the fields will shrink.

[Todd Green]

So because a competitor is a better driver or has a better race, he should have to spend 6000 plus to make the rest of us feel good?

 

Devil's Advocate:  Why not?  All the contingency goes to the top drivers just because they did better.  This is amateur racing.  Why not spread the love around the field and just have tires, brakes, etc. given out via a lottery?  When you get your wrist band you also get a ticket.  Winners are pulled at the awards banquet.  Must be present to win.  (And yes I won 4 sets of Hoosiers this year, so it would suck for me, but I think it'd be better for the class.)  If the entire field is footing the bill, they deserve to partake in the riches.

 

Jim's Advocate: I hear your pain.  I'd certainly find something else to do with my time if I had to tear down my car even once a season.  I don't even care if it was free or I was paid to do the work.  For many of us this the whole point is to have fun.  Ideally a spec class is supposed to come down to the human, not the machine.  It's sad that SM has become so competitive that it seems like most of the time is spent trying to make one car less spec than the other. 

[Blake Thompson]

So because a competitor is a better driver or has a better race, he should have to spend 6000 plus to make the rest of us feel good? I disagree. Not a personal attack, but knowing this wont likely be you spending this money, it is easy for you to have this position.
 

 

I so hate to agree with blowhard, but, those of us that self support do not spend those numbers to self-reassemble a head.  Yeah, it's 5 hours of labor and a $60 head gasket.  I don't see any justification for me to pay Dave's shop rate via his reassembling a competitors car when I choose not to use that service in the first place.  The argument you're making isn't from an equal and rational place.

[Blake Thompson]

  The 1.6 ECU's don't even have an EEPROM.

 

I won't abide this slander, you take that back!

[Jim Drago]

I so hate to agree with blowhard, but, those of us that self support do not spend those numbers to self-reassemble a head.  Yeah, it's 5 hours of labor and a $60 head gasket.  I don't see any justification for me to pay Dave's shop rate via his reassembling a competitors car when I choose not to use that service in the first place.  The argument you're making isn't from an equal and rational place.

I see both sides.. Trying to point out the other side. Personally it is no issue, I don't even do any of the work, just pay employees. I also get paid to put lots of this stuff back together, it helps my reputation every time they take this stuff apart and it passes. I just think we can come up with something better for the guys who don't work on their own stuff, they are getting hammered. It is not fair.. As I tell my kids, life's not fair.. I get it. But I think we can come up with something better than what we have.

[LarryKing]

I wish someone would pay me $1500-$2000 to put my head back on my motor. After buying a gasket set and maybe a timing belt for good measure the rest is pure profit.

 

Jim's idea sounds kinda like ObamaCare. Hey, I know, let's call it DragoCare !

[Jamz14]

Sounds great if you are making a sci-fi movie, probably not so great in practice.  Easy as mandating that GPS antennas are disconnected.  Data acq etc. is powered off/disconnected.  Look through the car for anything splicing into the harness, measure voltages and resistances, swap out ECU's etc. etc.  But as has been said, just have a stiff penalty.  Someone tries some shenanigan like that and they are banned for a year+.  Second offense is a life ban. It's one thing to argue back and forth about minuscule measurements within the engine.  You add some switch that changes your output on a dyno and there is no arguing.

 

Do you really think that if we are tearing cars down to engine/tranny/diff pieces that if we started using a dyno that cars wiring harnesses etc. wouldn't be gone over with a fine tooth comb?  So again for every cheat you can come up with, it is going to have to be undetectable in tech.  So again, enlighten me to how you are going to defeat a dyno.

 

Also the VW argument is a red herring.  They have programmable ECUs.  We do not.  It isn't like we have multiple maps to flip to.  The 1.6 ECU's don't even have an EEPROM.

Todd, Extremely easy to do and not even close to sci fi. I have converted a 79 motorcycle over to such things with ease.As far as mandating GPS antenna being disconnected; you will never see the antenna!! Do you see the antenna in your phone or the AIM solo? And the electronics have to be turned on to run a car on a dyno. I don't disagree on stiff punishment, but when has the punishment ever stopped anyone from doing something like this? Going to jail isn't the reason I don't rape, and a $500 ticket doesn't prevent me from speeding.

 

A cheat doesn't have to be undetectable. A cheat has to be not worth someones time trying to detect. And yes, I think it would be quite easy to mess with the harness and have it not attempted to be discovered. Take a recent cheat; weighted rear subframe brackets. It is certainly detectable. And it being detectable didn't stop those that did it. Those that did it counted on it not being inspected and therefore it was a functional cheat. Also, just because we have sealed ECUs doesn't mean that there aren't those that have messed with them. If it was as easy as saying you can't do something and it being detectable and measurable we wouldn't be having this conversation. You don't even need multiple maps in a singular ecu. All you really need to do is to switch to a secondary ECU that is hidden. Again, I am not smart or in possession of your experience. These are not my ideas. The secondary ECU was actually done. How long was it run until it was detected? Until a tech official decided to pull the ecu and discovered the car was still running? How many events did he rob from others? And does it matter that that person might now be facing steep fines or penalities to those that may have lost to him in the past but those victories can not be overturned? Right now there is a track record in good standing in socal from a competitor that is known to have cheated significantly that year. How about a cheat where a combustion additive is used during the race but is consumed and not detected on the post race dyno?

 

All the top guys have said that dynos can be defeated so I acquiesce to them. But they aren't commenting. So one non championship winners silly comments on how to defeat a dyno can be easily dismissed and we can all agree that dynos can't be defeated and dyno testing is a sure way to catch all the cheaters. Oh, I forgot though, a dyno doesn't say anything about the suspension!! But speaking of suspension, how could you manipulate a dyno with the suspension and have it not detectable by voltage tracing? Speaking of voltage tracing, how many tech officials could conduct proper voltage tracing? Compression numbers were inaccurately calculated at the runoffs from what little I hear. If they can mess that up, good luck with finding missing voltage. And what kind of appeal cases could be made to explain missing voltage?

 

Of course with a will, all of this can be detected by smart and motivated people. But that isn't the point. The point is that the dyno is not the panacea for our woes. Nor is a sealed engine. And the whole case being made for a dyno is in order to prevent needing to tear the car down so far. Tech doesn't want to do it and the competitors don't want to do it. So the odds of a wiring harness mod being detected after dyno and/or sealed engines rule goes into place is very very low. Why? Because people will have a false sense of security and stop looking as hard as they are right now.

 

I believe there is a nice middle ground to this discussion. A consistent teching of cars on fewer competitors and to a list that includes deep and not so deep tech. That and with a couple of curve balls thrown in to ensure that someone that was just teched for an item sometimes get reteched at the next event for the same thing should suffice.  Consistent tech on the podium and one random field. Sometimes the head comes off, sometimes the shocks are dynoed. IMO, fuel should always be teched. I am no expert but I am failing to understand why fuel is teched at almost all the karting events I participated in but has never been done on my car in four years of running.

 

I am hoping that my comments are taken with good spirit. I don't wish to continue arguing over such things with you and wish peace.

[Blake Thompson]

But I think we can come up with something better than what we have.

 

[KW78]

This is the type of idea I'd like to hear more about with SIR sonic restrictor. If it has holes in the idea let me know and I'll drop it.
I don't see a dyno involved unless it only used to check the SIR.

Doesn't this restrict the HP to a set number ??

So if you have a 125hp engine or a 120hp with a 118HP SIR all run at 118 ??
Please explain.
J~

 

This is the promise of the technology, so yes.  I am going to attempt to verify this as it pertains to SM in the most scientific way I can, which won't be perfect but pretty good.

 

Briefly, the SIR is simply a better restrictor.  Its restriction can be looked at as variable - not because of size but because of air speed.  When the airspeed aproaches speed of sound, the sound wave is your restriction and can't be overcome.  This "choke flow" point is x amount of air, period.  A FLAT PLATE RESTRICTOR does not work this way.  A flat plate restrictor is continual nuisance to air flow.  It is like a partially plugged air filter.  THE PROBLEM IS that if you have a motor with a minor amount of better volumetric efficency, it will pull more air thru the nuisance.  (it is like a current clamp vs controlling current with an inline resistor for you EE types... )

 

A flat plate restrictor has worked pretty good because we have a spec motor with extremely close VE values to each other.  Well, until you increase that by 2 to 5% by all the things good engine builders do, then you get 2 to 5% more air, and 2 to 5% more HP. 

 

Like all things, the sooner we get started the sooner we can work it out.  The flat plate restrictor (and weight) have gotten this class a long way to great racing.  Now it is the opinion (of at least the vocal minority) that this is not enough, and we need a better situation.   We are up against the limitations of the flat restrictor.

 

I think any motion that can't address the realities of the situation we are in is a red herring. 

 

One reality is that not everywhere has enough racing.  Not everywhere has enough volunteers to run a tech well or at all.  It is all tech in RMDIV can do to weigh each class.

 

Another reality is that tech will never do the level of scientific analysis that is being presented here.  Tech is overworked and entering numbers wrong in a formula almost cost Goring thousands of dollars (along with the non-transparent process).  Measuring a restrictor plate with a beat up harbor freight caliper has been mentioned.  Using a radius tool on a dirty motor has more error than the out of spec value, and even CC'ing a used motor is pretty iffy.   The fact that motors were low time at the runoffs was a big factor.  (BTW how did they figure above top ring value?  If they sealed the piston with a little silicone for physical measurement then that is lost and you have a couple percent error back in the mix...)

 

Another reality is that the class needs new drivers, so people are always evaluating if this is a class they want to enter. 

 

IMO, a SIR may fix several things in one stroke.   MANY tech problems at the runoffs level would be addressed, uniform tech throughout the field pertaining to the HP output can happen which is important to the battling and hard driving in mid pack.  Feeders from the regional level will also have a tech procedure that is easy in the stall test.

 

If any or all of this proves viable, why not try it?  It is the cost of 2 tires, and we have a natural installation point that is easy.  We don't have to make an airbox like GTL (which is one of the biggest variables for a SIR program). 

 

I am convinced it is worth pursuing, because the current prevailing  tech procedures in this class just have too many issues.

 

My .02

Kyle

 

BTW I disagree that a single source motor is viable.  Using the comparisons to enterprises, enterprises only promise about a 3% HP window.  This will be true with any engine source, and we are already near that now.  What is forgotten about this comparison is it also is a single spec ECU, air box, exhaust, intake hose - in short anything that influences the motor - to get that 3%. 

[Todd Green]

Jamz, I did not dismiss your comments.  I asked for a concrete example. Here's where I'm coming from.  How many hours does it take to inspect everything in a full tear down?  Now take that time and apply it to finding dyno.cheats. (Since this has no cost to the competitor.)  The whole premise of the thread is how can we avoid large costs to competitors who are being torn down every event.  There isn't a good answer to that question without compromises.  I never said that a dyno was the end all be all (nor does NASA treat it as such).  But I don't think it is going to be as easy to defeat as people make it out to be.  Sure if you work hard enough you'll probably find a way and might get around tech for awhile, but eventually all things come out in the wash.  The point is whether a dyno test would help in this and be worthwhile.  Obviously if it is easy to defeat and those who are inclined to cheat would do such, then there is no reason to bother.  That's why I'm asking for examples of how you'd defeat it. (And no I'm not really expecting to get ways to defeat it.  What I expect is a bunch of answers that aren't really all that hard to deal with in tech.)  I've yet to hear anything that would easily defeat it.  (E.g. you can't drop in a GPS chip and have it work.  You need power and you need decent reception. You need some sort of a logic board to run it and process the signals etc. This all takes space and would need to be hidden.  You'd have to load track maps and have some interface for that.  (It'd be pretty funny to do the dyno testing at the end of the day on the front straight. ) The point is that it is non-trivial.  Not to mention the average Joe isn't a EE.  Who's going to be making this stuff and selling it and still able to keep it hush hush?)  Granted this is all just a straw man.  You're not going to cheat via a GPS receiver, so we might as well stop debating about how well you can hide one.  A simple "cool shirt" (or whatever) switch that goes into a rat's nest of wires and eventually tweaks the signal(s) from your AFM/MAF would be 10x easier and more effective.

 

> punishment ever stopped anyone from doing something like this?

 

Quite often actually.  If the punishment for speeding was the death penalty, cop's discretion on the spot, I guarantee you you'd see much less speeding and you'd be thinking about the cost vs benefit a bit more than if you just had to pay $500.

 

> Right now there is a track record in good standing

 

Was it set at a Majors?  We're not talking Regional racing.  If people want to cheat there, they will easily.  The only realistic way of dealing with that is either via peer pressure or protesting.

 

> Speaking of voltage tracing, how many tech officials could conduct proper voltage tracing?

 

If we can find people who can operate a cam doctor, shock dynos, etc.,  I'm sure we can find someone who knows how to use a multimeter and can read the FSM.

 

> I don't wish to continue arguing over such things with you

 

You might want to stop with the ad hominem snide remarks in every post then.

[Ron Alan]

 

 

Jim's idea sounds kinda like ObamaCare. Hey, I know, let's call it DragoCare !

That coming from your fingers is hilarious!!!!

[Jim Drago]

That coming from your fingers is hilarious!!!!

And equally hilarious that I advocating anything resembling Obamacare

[Bench Racer]

Kyle, curious, are you referring to a Raetech SIR?  I am aware of Raetech and I just looked at the SCCA GTL restrictor specifications and expected to view some manufactures SIR number which there is not. The GCR Glossary defines a SIR, but it's no where near a Raetech SIR.

[Michael Colangelo]

I won't abide this slander, you take that back!

 

Not to sound like a grammar nerd, that's libel, not slander.

 

But is it libel if it's true? 

[Tom Hampton]

Not to be a usage nerd, but that a usage error, not a grammatical one. 

[Johnny D]

Too much of a good thing isn't good.

I don't want to be afraid to post.
J~

[Tom Hampton]

To quote yoda: "You will be!"