422 replies to this topic

[Andy Mitchell]

or is Toyo the big looser? They put up the money and many may never buy a Toyo again.

 

Honestly, what planet are you living on? One of the best sponsors your class has (which just put a really, really big prize) is somehow at fault because some individual competitors attempted to get creative with the rules? That doesn't make any sense to me. 

[LarryKing]

I don't think EricJ is saying anything is Toyo's fault, rather their name is attached to a NASA cluster fok.

I think Toyo will be OK.

[Johnny D]

Not the 1st, not the last, there's SM Man Drama on FB for a reason.

Made it through Laguna Runoffs.

Danny made it through, what indy?

Whistlegate

and on and on.

Just another event but I'm sure SCCA will really like this to go smoothly.

 

J~

[Andy Mitchell]

Yeah sorry, I guess I was a little snarkey with my response. My apologies.

 

But (by way of explanation) Toyo is really good to us up here. They sponsor a whole bunch of grassroots motorsports stuff. I don't think they were intending to alienate anyone by putting up a big prize like they did, and I don't think it's fair to hold them responsible for whatever transpired between some racers and the sanctioning body.

[Johnny D]

Speaking of NASA being a big loser...

Does anyone know how well they did? It's not a cheap track to rent...

WAG with car count ?

J~

[OrangeCrush86]

Sucks for the DQs, but hopefully the SCCA handles items like this better.

[powerss]

First, Congratulations to Danny Steyn, Preston Pardus and Peter Ensor as well as all the people who help in their efforts to get their cars on track.  Regardless of my opinions of these findings, it had nothing to do with these competitors and I am sure they would have preferred to have won on track and not this way. So, my congratulations to you guys.

 

As most know I am the builder of the 156 car driven by Todd Buras.  The goal here as always is to build and prep a car that can win these events and pass all technical inspections.  The driver has no part in any of this other than driving the car.  While many may be expecting an apology, I have only one apology to make, that was to the driver and has already been done.   

 

Regarding the axle cages.. most have formed their own opinions.  Hard to claim any of those opinions are “wrong” and not trying to change anyone’s opinion with this post. Just figured I owed the community an explanation.  Unlike SCCA,  NASA can and does basically do what they like and then try to use whatever rule they feel is appropriate to validate what they don’t like.  My interpretation of the rules is the same now as it always has been and it won’t change moving forward. I won’t be debating anyone regarding this opinion moving forward either. Once this was opened up to the aftermarket industry certain things had to change. Most have read by now that all remanufacturers grind cages as needed to rebuild them. it is the industry standard procedure. That implicitly allows cage modification, (ironically what we were Dq’ed for).  It also completely does away with the old “if it doesn’t say you can, you can’t.  While not spelled out, it is clearly allowed as that is exactly what remanufacturers do. When you allow remanufacturers the ability to grind cages, you allow competitors the same ability to grind cages. So you have the ability to grind the cages and the only specification would be to be to stay within half of the next decimal point in terms of tolerance.  Any cages within that tolerance with or without tool marks should be compliant to the current rules. Not the “spirit of the rule, Not the intent of the rule, but it does comply with the written rule. There is no rule that says you need to have company ABC reman your axles. There is no rule that says your axle cages need to comply and look exactly like the cages from reman company ABC. There is no rule that says your ball can’t pass through the cage window. To be clear, the axles in car 156 and most of our builds, the axles are built here, by us. They were NOT bought from a reman company.  Despite the attempt by the NASA tech photographer to make our axle cages appear coated, polished or remmed, in person they all looked the same in terms of finish. NONE were polished etc. The picture with the huge gap at the bottom is also another attempt to sway public opinion. The ball is overlapping on the top of the cage window to exaggerate the gap on the bottom of the cage window. The axles would likely lock up and most definitely LOSE efficiency with a gap that large. You only need to clearance these cage a few thousandths of an inch if the goal is to allow the balls to pass through the cage. We built the axles to insure smooth operation and hopes that there would be less friction. Claims of 1-2 hp gains in our executive appeal made by the NASA “expert” (sited as a former Sm competitor) are pure ignorance. Most know this‘expert” and you would be hard pressed to find anyone in SM that agree with his status as an “expert” There is also a clear bias evidenced in his misleading facebook posts.  Moving forward, we will not be changing anything regarding how we prep axles here. While I regret and disagree with the findings of NASA, our team will likely will never race NASA again. Through the end of the 2018 season at a minimum, the axles will be compliant in the SCCA. Expect to see a race memo in the next few days. There may be a rule coming for the 19 season that addresses this, if so we will certainly change and comply to the new rule. So it is entirely possible that the winner of the 18 Runoffs could be running the same axles that were dq’ed here.  

 

Rumors of how this was the most invasive and complete tech are VERY far from the truth. I’m sure many will look at this as sour grapes. It isn’t. I have never hid that we build our cars and push the rules, however it has never been our intention to run a part we feel will be found non-compliant in any technical inspection.  In 40 plus times, twice now the sanctioning body has pushed back. I am ok with that and I understand their position.  I have no problem with that, its racing. However, there were MANY issues in tech that were simply inexcusable.  

 

The tech shed was honestly a disorganized mess. There were no passes, hundreds of people walked in and out tech that had no business being there. Tech was not locked up overnight. All the parts were left out for anyone to see or touch. Many procedures and rules were broken. The chain of custody on almost every part touched was broken at some point.  Haldemans shocks and Buras shocks were mismarked and even now we have no idea which shocks each of us have.  Our parts, against the rules and procedures were taken apart by the tech staff after hours with none of us there to witness. Our CV joints were disassembled, after hours by tech against the rules and by tech( which they denied btw).  That should have completely been the end of this. The chain of custody broken completely. Who is to say that any of those cages weren’t mixed up just like our shocks? We were not there to witness any of it.  However, it is NASA and they can choose to ignore their own rules and supps when it suits their agenda it seems. 

 

About the worst part of tech was that in this “most invasive tear down ever” the tech staff did not check actual compression on the cars or pull fuel samples from top cars. While I am certain axle cages are what won this race, I would like to think that something as small and insignificant as compression and fuel may also have a small effect ? Granted not as much as these cages, but perhaps a little.  I can only assume that tech did not have the knowledge or confidence to properly CC the engines.  We have all seen and know the games played with the whistler.. You can’t rely on that tool in a race of this caliper. If competitors/builders knew this going into the event and I firmly believe some did, compression was basically open. FWIW, none of the top five had compression measured other than with a whistler and only p3,p4 and p5. Ironically P1 and P2 were not checked by ANY METHOD!  Not saying any were wrong, just that we will never know as none were even checked.

 

Lastly, this was aimed at me and me only.  I apologize to Chris and Brian as I think in NASA’s attempt at “getting me”, Chris and Brian were caught in the crossfire. I won’t bore you with the long history. But it is there. I will simply say while in tech waiting for Henderson's engine to clear tech. This was about four hours after Henderson’s axles cleared and a full day after Haldeman's cleared.  I asked the chief scrutineer if I could sit at the table and examine the axle cages. I had provided 4 samples after the event as I was asked to do by NASA tech. So there were two piles of cages on this table.. I assumed mine and the samples as all the other competitors were CLEARED by this point. Upon examination, I noticed that a ball bearing on the table( no idea who it belonged to, probably the Mazda sample axle)  it went through all six holes on all four cages that I examined. I asked Xavier which cage from the 156 car, assuming the cages were the 156 and the samples I provided. He pointed to what they claim was Todd's cage .  I responded, well which are these pointing to the remaining three in the stack.  To which Xavier responded "Haldeman, Henderson and one of the samples". THAT IS A CLEAR VIOLATION. I should have never been allowed to touch or see any competitors parts, NEVER! Let alone handle and inspect them. Then you must ask, how screwed up is this that they wanted me so badly that they would ONLY DQ my customer for something that they felt was somehow wrong in my car, but not wrong in the others? This was intentional. For the damage caused to Chris and Brian, I wish I never even looked at those cages and let them just serve us up. That was the goal from the start it seems. From this point forward they knew they had an issue they could no longer hide and IMO why it took a week to make a decision.  A week later, NASA sent Chris and Brian, who were already cleared tech  btw a DQ letter.  If I were Chris(the only one with enough on the line IMO) , I would absolutely sue NASA and he would absolutely win in real court. The facts and the rules matter there.  IMO, NASA does not have a leg to stand on.  You can’t pick or chose what rules you want to apply and which you don’t.  His axle was well within all specifications, they have NO case against him whatsoever IMO!  Chris will always be the real winner of this race and IMO it was taken from him unfairly and against the rules, regulations and procedures.  

 

 

JIm

 

One question......Why?

 

It can't be cheaper to spend time reworking these yourself instead of just buying a new or reman part.  From all the literature I have seen this is not something that should be done in someones garage and it can't be a cost issue especially for top prep shops.

 

https://www.aa1car.c...ary/cvgrind.htm

 

PRODUCTION GRINDING

The key to reconditioning a CV joint by grinding, say those who do it, is to duplicate the original arc in the housing and race, a process which requires precision grinding on a CNC machine. It simply cannot be done by hand.

If someone buffs out a dimple in a track by hand with a die grinder, it may create a low spot or pocket in the track. It does not fix the problem nor does it restore proper clearances inside the CV joint. The entire length of the track must be precision ground on a CNC machine to duplicate the arc of teh original track.

 

SP

[Johnny D]

NASA Speed News November edition appears to be covering Toyo Classic

 

Page 75

"In Inpound

When the racing is done, the mechanic and tech go to work.

After the Toyo Classic,  tech inspectors did a deep dive in to the cars that finished up front.

Look for full coverage of the Toyo Classic and the NASA Championships presented by Toyo Tire in the Novenber Issue of Speed News"

I guess will see their side...

J~

[chris haldeman]

JIm

One question......Why?

It can't be cheaper to spend time reworking these yourself instead of just buying a new or reman part. From all the literature I have seen this is not something that should be done in someones garage and it can't be a cost issue especially for top prep shops.

https://www.aa1car.c...ary/cvgrind.htm

PRODUCTION GRINDING
The key to reconditioning a CV joint by grinding, say those who do it, is to duplicate the original arc in the housing and race, a process which requires precision grinding on a CNC machine. It simply cannot be done by hand.
If someone buffs out a dimple in a track by hand with a die grinder, it may create a low spot or pocket in the track. It does not fix the problem nor does it restore proper clearances inside the CV joint. The entire length of the track must be precision ground on a CNC machine to duplicate the arc of teh original track.

SP

As typical for those making the findings and fighting so hard you choose the 1 part of the entire article that had nothing to do with the cages in question. Cages are not the races. The arc referred to is the concave and convex curve on the center race and outer joint. Cage is simply there to hold the balls in place. Not that I would expect any intelligence as none has been displayed by anybody involved

[Johnny D]

Convex baby !!  Full range of travel contact. Assumming the cage is completely modified so the ball goes through.

But that's just me.

 

And once again. I hate when that happens

 

You're going to get checked at the Runoffs so what are you bringing ??

Kind of suck running mid pack legal after traveling so far.

J~

[powerss]

As typical for those making the findings and fighting so hard you choose the 1 part of the entire article that had nothing to do with the cages in question. Cages are not the races. The arc referred to is the concave and convex curve on the center race and outer joint. Cage is simply there to hold the balls in place. Not that I would expect any intelligence as none has been displayed by anybody involved

 

Chris 

 

Your response seems very arrogant to me.  I posted the entire article for everyone to read and I just pulled out the part that said this is not a part that states these parts should not be worked on by hand.

 

Please enlighten me with your intelligence. And I will ask you the same question. Why? 

 

I don't care who won or if anyone was DQ'd personally because it did not affect anything for me in 16th place.  I just want to know why anyone would waste/money time remaning these parts themselves.  Its simply cheaper and easier to buy professionally remaned parts.  

 

I have no idea right now if there is a benefit from this but if not WHY do it?

[chris haldeman]

I do t know why either. I didn’t but was dq’d saying I did. I was called a liar when I provided the balls found in my trunk measured 16.00 a standard oversized ball and the very next available ball size. I can’t attach photos on here because I don’t know how but I have them and will ship the balls to anybody who wants them. My shaft was a reman shaft purchased from Mazda in 2013/14. Never touched since then. The car I drove was built solely to win races it was driven by 2 drivers 7 times in the last few years including pole at Watkins and Sebring race winner. IMG_5301.HEIC Tell me how I faked this picture???

[powerss]

I do t know why either. I didn’t but was dq’d saying I did. I was called a liar when I provided the balls found in my trunk measured 16.00 a standard oversized ball and the very next available ball size. I can’t attach photos on here because I don’t know how but I have them and will ship the balls to anybody who wants them. My shaft was a reman shaft purchased from Mazda in 2013/14. Never touched since then. The car I drove was built solely to win races it was driven by 2 drivers 7 times in the last few years including pole at Watkins and Sebring race winner. IMG_5301.HEIC Tell me how I faked this picture???

 

Sorry, can't see the photo.  I think you have my email address so you can send it to me directly.

 

If you are saying that you ran a untouched remaned part then I completely agree and what happened is $hitty.(along with the chain of custody errors that Jim mentioned) I would have never checked my remaned part purchase thinking that it should be a standard OE replacement. The information of the whole process with NASA is just not common knowledge and everyone involved has been silent.  I can understand why in the midst of a appeal but now is a good time to share (unless there is a litigation action pending).

 

It just doesn't seem worth risking playing in the grey area here.

[Johnny D]

If you can post it publicly anywhere, then all you need is to post the link.

You may be able to load/uplink to the Gallery above ^^

and then post that link.

 

J~

[chris haldeman]

I sent the pictures to another forum member to post. I went into this race to win. I knew tech would be deep and would have never pushed anything. Hell I went from 24th on grid to first in 6 laps them just totes with them while saving my car and tires.

[powerss]

I sent the pictures to another forum member to post. I went into this race to win. I knew tech would be deep and would have never pushed anything. Hell I went from 24th on grid to first in 6 laps them just totes with them while saving my car and tires.

 

Completely understand.  I am no fan of how all things were run with the event, primarily the track limits and the review of on track behavior during the race.  I think more penalties should have been levied there than anywhere else and from what I can tell there was NOTHING done in that respect.

 

Nothing personal towards anyone and I am just trying to understand the "WHY" with respect to the CVs.

 

Will you be at Sonoma?  We can talk more face to face there.

[Steve Scheifler]

Sorry, took a few minutes to edit and get where I can link to them (uploads here still limited to nothing!).
Anyway, are these big enough to see clearly?

[powerss]

I do t know why either. I didn’t but was dq’d saying I did. I was called a liar when I provided the balls found in my trunk measured 16.00 a standard oversized ball and the very next available ball size. I can’t attach photos on here because I don’t know how but I have them and will ship the balls to anybody who wants them. My shaft was a reman shaft purchased from Mazda in 2013/14. Never touched since then. The car I drove was built solely to win races it was driven by 2 drivers 7 times in the last few years including pole at Watkins and Sebring race winner. IMG_5301.HEIC Tell me how I faked this picture???

Sorry I need some clarification about what you are saying here. You bought reman shafts from mazda in 2013/14. Did you work on them then?  I am trying to understand why you needed an oversized ball.

[Mark]

Soap box on.

 

This is such bs. If there are specs or rules publish them beforehand and not after. If something new is going to be considered in tech advise the competitors and add it to the list for upcoming events. Don't move the goal posts! If we rule out 'reman' parts what are the options? There are lots of places to play - alternators, water pumps, brake rotors, drive shafts, calipers, chassis stiffening, motor mounts, diffs. List goes on. Specs? Non existent really,. Where does it end? This witch hunt will kill the best class in racing.  Do you really think that if you had XF or ESR CV's you would be on the podium? Those laps from Chris and Todd at COTA are what this class is about.That is why we are here. Many could collect trophies in other classes but choose to race in this class. Why? Because of the competition and camaraderie. Don't forget that. 

 

Soap box off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Johnny D]

I'm with you but then you have the goldilocks special tech were nobody's happy, right ??

 

I thought it was a clean race, laps times were in reason, then you get into better check something, which may lead to total anal cavity search, so....

 

If you don't see anything out of "spec/possibity" lap time, do you really need to go there?? some do. Were the cages a smoking gun or the driver ?

 

Then again if it was, I don't care how you get there (to a spec/number) but you can't execede, were would be be ?? bracket racing.

Watch, look, check and your good to go. old, new, reman, RP or not, whatever and your good, throw a ton of rules out the door and reduce tech to minimal amounts.

 

Cheat whatever you want, just don't go over. Build your tired engine up, Hey that sounds like a drivers class.

 

You don't really have a spec class. You have racers that can afford a top prep car $$$$ and all the way down to a junkyard engine on a limited budget in the rear that is far from par.

 

IDK, it late.

 

In the morning I think I'll need to spend alot of money to compete.

J~