PDA

View Full Version : Results, rumours and inuendo...



lateapex911
11-09-2007, 08:56 AM
OK, I'm jonesing to be in Atlanta, but due to a house closing and bad timing, can not.

So, who's heard what?

So far I've heard that test day dawned cold...really cold, but times were fast . A Moser was reported in the 42s in ITA. (um, that's a fast time folks. Draft assisted? Not known)

Unsubstantiated rumours have Jeff Lawton and Joe Diminio hooked together in a gravel trap, but, oh,...well, nevermind! (Inside joke)

Bowie Gray, in Kirk Knestis' Golf ran within a half second of Randy Pobsts track record, set a fairly long time ago! Bowie is double dipping, and doing the ITA race in his 1.6 me-otter as well.

What hear you??

Knestis
11-09-2007, 09:40 AM
...and I heard from a reliable source that Pablo and Bowie were going to run Thursday practice on 13 Hour take offs.

Mwah-hah-hahh!

On the downside, I'm going to be stuck here with the rest of you, rather than trekking to RA this evening. I'm still sick from last weekend and need to stay on my couch.

K

bobpink
11-09-2007, 12:21 PM
And your ARRC webmaster is going to let everyone know that results will be slow to show on the ARRC website. I have an annual fundraiser to attend all weekend and will get results online best I can.

Best to go where everyone goes for immediate results, mylaps.com

Knestis
11-09-2007, 12:24 PM
Just got an update from my man-on-the-ground...

Bowie/Pablo were second in ITB in the morning session (46.8), with the rest of the field within a couple of ticks. Trevor was back in 4th, I think he said but the interesting news was Beran Peter (MkIII Golf, NER) 1.1 seconds up in first, in his first visit to RA. Make of that what you will.

ITA - Mosers, then Gray, Lymanator, Capt. Panities, everyone else.

K

Harvey
11-09-2007, 02:01 PM
Kirk:

I am to understand that Bowie ran a 46.8 which is way below the track record and that Beran ran a 45.7.
How about Chris Albin??

Les Chaney

Knestis
11-09-2007, 02:13 PM
That's my information. I didn't hear where Albin was, particularly. We kind of went in thinking that Trevor's Accord was going to establish the benchmark for "legitimate shot at a win," so Cameron made a point to mention he was fourth.

This all assumes I heard right, which under the cold-medicine-induced circumstances may NOT be the case.

K

Harvey
11-09-2007, 02:20 PM
Wow

If they are turning laps 2 seconds faster than the track record I really wish I could be there to watch. It sounds like you have your car hooked up, Tell Bowie good luck.

Les Chaney

KelleyHux
11-09-2007, 08:42 PM
Keep in mind, with the new paving at Road Atlanta this year, it's going to be a fast weekend!

Any additional news about Albin would be most appreciated. Last year's ARRC was a totally awful weekend for him, and I'm hoping this year is much better!

Kelley Huxtable
DMVR
"PLAY SAFE"

RSTPerformance
11-09-2007, 08:47 PM
what??? 45's & 46's in ITB??? That is crazy fast... What has changed? Can anyone confirm???

Raymond "good luck everyone!!!" Blethen

Colin Harmer
11-09-2007, 09:08 PM
The track is certainly faster...but everyone is faster still. In my case in ITA, I qualified 3.3 s faster then last year (p7) and am currently in 9th! ITA pole is is 42.7!!!

The B class is close except for the pole. I can't remember the times, but the yellow 0 golf is something like a 46.0, I can't recall where P2 is, P3 is Derek Lugar is 46.7, Rob McCabe is .05 behind him, and Trevor is .1 behind Rob, so it's all really close except for P1...

On the upside Jeremy from SCCA has showed up with both the Whister and the cam doctor, so tech may be a different deal this year.

I was a little put out that tech didn't weigh many classes in qualifying, not ITA or ITB, so maybe they are saving all the rules enforcement for the race!

There are a ton of cars here, the Pro IT ran tonight with 65 cars, and it was a VERY busy start!

Tomorrow is supposed to be sunny and clear and in the mid 60's, so the racing should be fast and fun.

Andy Bettencourt
11-09-2007, 10:13 PM
On the upside Jeremy from SCCA has showed up with both the Whister and the cam doctor, so tech may be a different deal this year.

[/b]

Boooya!

RSTPerformance
11-09-2007, 10:38 PM
go jeremy!!! I wonder if they will check any track record cars... Even if they are not in the top 6...

gran racing
11-09-2007, 11:15 PM
That would be fantastic! If cars are going that fast, it sure would be nice to have their times some-what validated.

Andy Bettencourt
11-09-2007, 11:27 PM
Remember, guys are saying the repave is worth about 1.5 seconds.

11-10-2007, 12:13 AM
Congrats to David Spillman for a 1st in the Pro-IT Friday night.

I saw something that I have never seen before on the start. The starter shook her head very deliberately left to right as the front row was coming through 12. Then after shaking her head 4-5 times, she threw the green!?!?!?!?! David was caught off gaurd by that, and lost two positions by the top of the hill. He did a great job of climbing back to the top, 2nd overall and first in class. Excellent drive on his part, but too bad he had to do it. In my book, and the one called GCR, I think that you either start the race or wave it off. I wasn't on the start stand, so I can't speak to what she saw. Probably made perfect sense to call it as she did from where she was. But from my arm chair.....

Mike

Andy Bettencourt
11-10-2007, 08:41 AM
I agree Mike - to me that is something I have never seen and think it's a wave off.

erlrich
11-10-2007, 09:05 AM
FYI, results for qualifying are up on mylaps - http://www.mylaps.com/results/showevent.jsp?id=265565

Joe Moser's ITA record from 2005 (:42.05) has held up so far, as has Wittel's ITS (:39.91) record. The ITB record was beat by 2 seconds, with the top 8 cars faster than's Pobst's old record. And the ITC track record was beat by the pole sitter, by over .5 sec.

Also heard (through another board) that our Summit Point record holder Chris Perera rolled in practice Thursday, but was back up and running in time for the second qual session Friday. Haven't heard any details, but apparently it was one of those "over easy" rolls.

lateapex911
11-10-2007, 11:13 AM
http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.j...181&highligh... (http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.jsp?id=698181&highlight=2)

just posted to my laps

and here is ITA:

http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.j...187&highlight=7 (http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.jsp?id=698187&highlight=7)

I'd say the bar in A has gone up. Thats a tight front pack. A half second covers the top 5. Damn, wish I was there to watch the race! Way to go AJ, thats a honking lap.

ITR/ ITS/ http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.j...190&highlight=5 (http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.jsp?id=698190&highlight=5)

Updates:
Ruck lost a clutch yesterday, missed the AM qual session, but is back in gear running fine.
Fandozzi in a NEON, is 8th!!! Thats right, a NEON!
Everyone in ITB smoked the record down to 8th! (Odd that they are so far under, but the others aren't)
Amy over revved the motor yesterday, broke some parts, but has it back together, all is well there.
Diminio looks strong, reports he's found 15hp over last year.
Observers say Beran Peter is magic going up the hill in 1, visibly faster than the class.
Robert Moser had a number of reported spins.
Perrera's roll didn't twist the chassis, he reports it's driving well, he should see improvements in his time Mark Carpenter was one of the guys helping put it back together.
Bowie Gray is double dipping A and B, his A time is very stout. We'll see how the car races.
His B time is equally stout, and that car should race well.
THe ITA race should be a barnburner.
The ITB race should be a barnburner.

Knestis
11-10-2007, 12:15 PM
This just in...

Peter
Gray
Lugar

MkIII Golf sweep as the race moves to the tech shed.

The way Cameron described it, it could have been any of the three when the flag fell.

K

bonespec
11-10-2007, 12:35 PM
So Ruck didn't get any morning qualifing laps, only 5 in the afternoon and is 5th overall for todays race?

http://www.forumspile.com/That-Is-Excellent-MrBurns.jpg

Off Camber
11-10-2007, 01:19 PM
No Dog in this hunt but
top 4 slots on ITB grid VW Golf
And I think they finished 1-4 as well. Looks like some one needs to look at the classification or weight of this car.
The Honda was trying to spoil that till one of the GOlfs turned hiim into the wall comming onto the front straight.
Porsche and BMW 5 & 6

That said it was a good race to watch the golfs go back and forth.

Cheers SteveP

lateapex911
11-10-2007, 03:22 PM
On site observers say that car was the Golf of Peter beran, and the result was a penalty from the officails. Revised order has Boie Gray as the winner, in Kirk Knestis "Pablo" VW Golf. Congrats to Kirk, Cameron, and of course, Bowie!

ITA is in the tech shed if my clock is correct, but no word yet.


This just in-
Joe Moser, Rober Moser, and AJ Nealy, all in CRXen. (Clearly the pundits were correct, it's NOT the car for RA, LOL>
Then Greg Amy (from 7th on grid) Then Ruck (teg) in 5th, Tom Lyman (teg) in 6th, and joe Diminio in the Sentra in 7th.

Bowie Gray had a one car issue in 7 on the first lap and couldn't continue. More as it develops.

Knestis
11-10-2007, 06:00 PM
... Looks like some one needs to look at the classification or weight of this car. ...[/b]

I'm going to beat everyone to the punch and be the first to demand that the minimum weight of the Golf be increased 100# to 2450. It's not a competition adjustment, even though the request is based on the finish of a handful of cars at one race. :)

K

RSTPerformance
11-10-2007, 06:09 PM
I think the Golfs are fine, we just need the Audi's to loose a 100, then it can be back to VW/Audi domination and those rice rockets can stick with ITA ;)

Congrats to all the winners, looking forward to the stories!!!

Raymond "JK -> Just Kidding!!!" Blethen

gran racing
11-10-2007, 06:43 PM
Kirk, I beat you to that punch a long time ago; just ask Jake G. & Andy. :P

Did I hear correctly that your rental rates just jumped up by $500?

tk49
11-10-2007, 09:16 PM
I hope you guys will post provisionals,when available

Thanks

GKR_17
11-10-2007, 09:40 PM
Results are up on mylaps.

www.mylaps.com/results/showevent.jsp?id=265565

Fastfred92
11-11-2007, 12:04 AM
WOOOOW, I was worried all those light weight 944's would stink up the ITA race........... Oh wait I mean the ITS race

Parrish57
11-11-2007, 09:32 AM
Observations from race 6:
ITR:
Taylor Robertson was strong in the 944 in ITR, but it's probably a good thing that the SPU overall leader lapped him. The left rear wheel might not have made another lap. Wheel bearing failure.
ITS:
Huffmaster was wicked fast. New track record of 1:39.564. I've never seen an ITS car carry so much speed in turn 1. Kip VanSteenburg was not far behind in the Miata until an unknown mechanical failure. Likewise for John Williams keeping his 240Z within striking distance of the lead until something under the hood caught fire. It was rumored that he kept going for a lap and a half until it gave out. Those retirements handed 2nd and 3rd to Tom Rogers and Kent Thompson in their RX7s. (Come to think of it, that was an RX7 1,2,3. Maybe we should "reward" them with some weight :P ) The battle between Tom and Kent was exciting from my viewpoint on the frontstretch but sounded even more thrilling through the voice of Greg Creamer on the PA. The no. 42 of Brian Ehmer was in 4th up until the end but faded to 9th. 4th was Rich Walke (RX7).

David Kim put his Z car in position for a respectable 5th place while David Spillman, Friday's Pro IT winner, struggled with a busted transmission and limped home in 11th.....

Congratulations to everyone!!!

lateapex911
11-11-2007, 10:48 AM
Great info, Steve. Was Taylor the only ITR car?

So, the ITS race, at one point, was: RX-7, Miata, Z car, ???, RX-7, RX-7, Z car.
But in the end, it was: 7, 7, 7, 7, Zcar?

Were there any BMW E36s or E46s in ITS or ITR?

jmark
11-11-2007, 11:07 AM
David Spillman winning the PRO IT ITS class in his 240Z. Sorry for the quality. Shot was taken at 1600 ISO. It was cloudy & dark by the time the race started.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b163/jmark240z/ARRC%202007/DSC_8694-1.jpg

JeffYoung
11-11-2007, 11:10 AM
I think there were at least 3 ITR cars - Taylor, Gerald Potts (BMW) and Dan Jones.

ITS had Huffmaster (RX7), KVS (Miata), John Williams (240z), David Spillman (240z) running up front.

By the end it was Huffmaster (RX7), Rogers (RX7), Thompson (RX7), Wahle (RX7), Kim (280z).

Flynn did not come up with his E46 323, or did the guys from the Northeast come down with theirs. There was I believe a Prelude, two 944s, a 300zx, and several other RX7s in the field. Kind of down a bit this year compared to the variety we've seen at other places.

Parrish57
11-11-2007, 12:02 PM
Great info, Steve. Was Taylor the only ITR car?

So, the ITS race, at one point, was: RX-7, Miata, Z car, ???, RX-7, RX-7, Z car.
But in the end, it was: 7, 7, 7, 7, Zcar?

Were there any BMW E36s or E46s in ITS or ITR?
[/b]

Sorry for the misconception... I couldn't remember the other ITR cars. There was a total of 4 starters, 3 finished. There was never a challenge in that class for the lead. Taylor was the only IT car that stayed on the lead lap. According to Mylaps Dan Jones was 2nd and Gerald Potts 3rd in ITR.....

kthomas
11-11-2007, 01:26 PM
Were there any BMW E36s or E46s in ITS or ITR?
[/b]


E36's in ITS? Ha! Why bring a car that can't compete?
The whiners wanted it gone and they got their wish.

JeffYoung
11-11-2007, 02:04 PM
Keith, I respect you, your knowledge and your willing ness to help anyone who posts on this board. Much appreciated, and I frankly consider you one of teh best guys on the board.

I do have a few observations on the above though.

1. This year was by far the "healthiest" year in ITS since I started racing in 2003. 15+ car fields at every track. Z cars, RX7s, 944s, Miatas, Acuras, hell even Triumphs running up front. While I disagree with the restrictor solution, I have to say that the problem with S in the 02-06 time frame was the BMW 325 and its either real or perceived overdoggedness.

2. At this point, with you guys not running the car anymore, can you tell us what a full tilt Sunbelt 325is made at the wheels unrestricted?

3. Would you consider running the car again at 3100 lbs?

4. Why not build a restricted 325is and prove them wrong -- show that it is competitive?

I never wanted the car gone. What I was in favor of is doing something about a 205-215 whp, independent suspension car with good brakes at 2860 lbs running in a class where the "gold standard" is about 170 whp at 2500 to 2600 lbs. Back in taht time frame, when I was first starting racing, nearly everyone I talked to talked about parked Zs and RX7s due to the BMW. At the time I didn't fully believe it, but given the full fields I saw in S this year compared to years past, I have to think there was somethig to it.

RSTPerformance
11-11-2007, 05:14 PM
sweet another thread about bmw's... Please keep the thread on topic (ARRC) some of us are interested in the races!!! How did both beren and trever get penalized? Same incident or two seperate incidents?

wbp
11-11-2007, 07:00 PM
As the title of the topic includes "rumours", I can report that they are: The bumping between 0 (Beran) and 60 (Trever) started over at turn 10, continued down the hill past 11, and the final contact on the front straight. Perhaps that gave justification for the one position each outcome.
I didn't see all of this of course, and I suppose no one person could unless they were in a following car.

Harvey
11-11-2007, 08:48 PM
go jeremy!!! I wonder if they will check any track record cars... Even if they are not in the top 6...
[/b]

It is my understanding that the only thing checked on the ITB and ITC cars was gear ratio's. I would certainly like to see more checking across the board at this event. Tech was too busy at the time checking the Spec Miatas.

Les Chaney

924Guy
11-11-2007, 10:38 PM
Wow what a race! JUST got home... had to go online of course and see what's up! ;)

Yeah, the Wreck-Me-Otters were keeping both the stewards and Tech busy, seemed like the ITB/C tech was a little lighter, though they guys were there for a while... I didn't stick around the whole time to see all the details, though.

Had an absolute blast, first time there of course - I was the 9th qual, the guy not in the track record territory (pre-race, anyway) - put it down to inexperience there, some less-than-ideal chassis setup (though not horrendous), and mainly a less-than-fully-productive test day, rewarding as it was, due to some ignition misfire issues resurfacing (finally sorted out during qualifying). Right behind Albin, with Spencer in front of us.

Completely whiffed the start, got run over by a bunch of freakin' C cars up the hill (!) but of course there was a straight to fix that. Still between that and other traffic issues, getting by Chris, after the first two laps we'd given up seems like a couple hundred yards to the front 5 pack of B cars... who were all over eachother in a very tight, exciting race! We held ground for most of the rest of the race, but were too far back to really close back up and come to grips with them... we all messed around a little, then Albin dropped out just past halfway after Spencer got by him - not sure what happened there.

Had numerous other moments of excitement; most notable was lap 1 or 2 going 3-wide through 7 in the middle of a VW sandwich between Albin and the orange ITC Scirocco!! Pulled it out down to 9, though... :D Pretty exciting getting through a corner on 12 tires!

I had the occasional bobble, letting Spencer by, but he just didn't have the motor or aero to hang on the straight, so it was pretty much a no-brainer... about 5 laps to go we come onto the front straight as the waving yellow pops out for Trevor who's been escorted over to a nice piece of concrete, it seems, but I heard he hopped out and jumped over the barrier after the car was set. Some back and forth with Doug (Spencer), and working through the lap traffic, and managed to bring 'er home in 5th! :birra:

Nice to meet and play with so many great people and fellow competitors - looking forward to doing it again sometime!!! Just don't quite sign me up for next year just yet... still have to recover from all that towing! ;) And a HUGE thanks to Off-Camber (Steve P.) and my other teammate Chris Marsh (#55 ITB 924) for the use of their rigs to get my stuff safely down and back without issue!

GKR_17
11-12-2007, 01:05 AM
Why not build a restricted 325is and prove them wrong -- show that it is competitive?
[/b]

It's worth noting that none of the three unrestricted and lighter ITR E36's could run with the ITS leader. Not much chance of finding one competitive in ITS trim at this race.

Conover
11-12-2007, 08:56 AM
It is my understanding that the only thing checked on the ITB and ITC cars was gear ratio's. I would certainly like to see more checking across the board at this event. Tech was too busy at the time checking the Spec Miatas.

Les Chaney
[/b]

+1 I would've loved for them to break out the cam doctor for us at least. It really felt like they brought us in because they had to. They were still finishing the impound tech inspection on SM on Sunday when I was loading up to go home, SM was the first race Saturday morning.

Congratulations to Bowie and Derek, Condolences to Trevor that was not a nice way to end a race.
The ITB race was awesome with some evenly matched cars battling for the top spots lap after lap. You do wonder sometimes though when hearing about at least one sideways slide and one off how a guy can recover and motor back to the front in a short sprint like that.

gran racing
11-12-2007, 09:48 AM
I'm glad they did the gear check on the Golfs, as Kirk has mentioned that is one area that would be easy to cheat. It is too bad they didn't do anything else; like you said, having the cam doctor there... Hopefully next year they'll do a more through inspection.

Conover
11-12-2007, 10:20 AM
It seems like also they would do a cursory check for compliance with the IIDSYCYC rule. like a 4 door should be able to roll down it's rear windows. Most cars are shipped with two wipers bolted to the cowl, you know, stuff like that.

wbp
11-12-2007, 10:40 AM
I wouldn't want to be the guy that went to the Tech guys to ask them to do more work than they did. I noticed some of them coming into the Chalet for dinner about an hour after the last of the food was gone. And this was after working thru lunch.
How do we talk people into doing this stuff? Big Thanks, Scruitneers!

shwah
11-12-2007, 10:46 AM
The ITB race was awesome with some evenly matched cars battling for the top spots lap after lap. You do wonder sometimes though when hearing about at least one sideways slide and one off how a guy can recover and motor back to the front in a short sprint like that.
[/b]
Not picking on you specifically here - but the online IT racing community in general seems to have assumed from the first session that Beran was cheating, and talked thier way around it without coming right out and accusing him.

There is no requirement in the rule book that we search out other racers online and get to 'know' each other (although I sure enjoy doing so, and look forward to meeting a lot of you guys at events in the future - next year will be my 'go race in other divisions' year). You can in fact be fast and have other people not know you well.

I don't know they guy, but I think the inuendo is crappy. Write paper if you think a guy is cheating.

RSTPerformance
11-12-2007, 10:46 AM
so was Jeremy's attendence mostly in an effort to continue checking Miata's??? How well were the other IT classes checked?

Raymond

Andy Bettencourt
11-12-2007, 10:51 AM
so was Jeremy's attendence mostly in an effort to continue checking Miata's??? How well were the other IT classes checked?

Raymond [/b]

Understand that SM is goig to a compliance fee just like SRF. This type of attendence and conpliance checking by Jeremy and his team is exactly what that money is for.

For events like the ARRC and ITSpecTacular, I would be willing to bump up my entry fee by as much as $10 in order to have this level of scrutiny for those key IT races.

Harvey
11-12-2007, 11:07 AM
so was Jeremy's attendence mostly in an effort to continue checking Miata's??? How well were the other IT classes checked?

Raymond
[/b]


From what I saw I would say Yes to your question.

Les Chaney

Conover
11-12-2007, 11:22 AM
Not picking on you specifically here - but the online IT racing community in general seems to have assumed from the first session that Beran was cheating, and talked thier way around it without coming right out and accusing him.

There is no requirement in the rule book that we search out other racers online and get to 'know' each other (although I sure enjoy doing so, and look forward to meeting a lot of you guys at events in the future - next year will be my 'go race in other divisions' year). You can in fact be fast and have other people not know you well.

I don't know they guy, but I think the inuendo is crappy. Write paper if you think a guy is cheating.
[/b]

We didn't want to throw any paper, because we were giving the impound process a chance to work, but they did not check ITC or ITB for anything but trans ratios, then we waited and waited, assuming that we were waiting for the miatas to be finished, next thing we know is that we are being released. we actually did encourage the scrutineers to check our engines, but they did not. I am very thankful for the workers and officials, and I know that they worked hard, and I appreciate that. But from my perspective of having a dog in the fight in ITB and wanting the track record not to be awarded to an illegal car and so on, it really did seem like ITC and ITB competitors were basically informed that they weren't important enough to spend any time on. I've spent countless hours trying to build a fast and legal ITB car, years actually, and had I known that we weren't going to be checked I would have initiated a protest probably, to preserve the validity of those hours and years of hard work.
I can tell you there was a lot of low hanging fruit on that car, I could stand 10 feet from it and list at least three things that I would consider illegal.

RacerBowie
11-12-2007, 11:30 AM
I was driving the Conover car this weekend.

I made the decision to NOT throw paper at the 0 car. There were several things missing from the car, but none were major, all were "ticky-tack" little things. I didn't want to win that way. I didn't want to win the way we did, either, but the stewards made a tough decision, and I am quite positive they did not take it lightly.

Especially since he is not active on the internet, I plan to contact the driver of the 0 car personally and invite him back to the ARRC next year to try again. When we talk, I will mention each of the several things we saw and ask him to go over his car carefully before bringing it back. I did not mention this to him Saturday afternoon in person, as with all that was going on it didn't feel like it was the right time.

The ARRC is our National Championship, and it is doing a disservice to our class, our sport, and our community as a whole to show up with a car that laughs in the face of our rule book, even on little things like that.

edit: this will be my only input on this discussion. I can only hope it does not turn into an internet war that will distract from the great racing that happened this weekend.

m glassburner
11-12-2007, 11:41 AM
I'm still needing more ARRC info !! How about a play by play of the race bowie?? ...mike. :eclipsee_steering:

shwah
11-12-2007, 11:47 AM
Fair enough. Also, considering that you two raced directly against that car for much of the race - you do have more room to comment than anyone else. It just seemed like a lot of people were painting that picture from the get-go, often from a spectating position.

Congratulations on the win!

Parrish57
11-12-2007, 11:55 AM
How well were the other IT classes checked?

Raymond
[/b]

I went to the tech shed after the group 6 race, ITR and ITS. Only the winners in each class were brought into the shed. The 2nd and 3rd cars were held outside. The ITR winner, a 944 S2, was checked for bore and stroke through a spark plug hole (whistler?). The ITS winner, RX7, was asked to remove his exhaust for a port check (lollypop). I believe the whole process was less than 45 mins. Meanwhile, the tech guys were still busy with the Miatas.....

JoshS
11-12-2007, 01:09 PM
This sounds just like the bitching that happens after the Runoffs every year -- "tech didn't check the #xx car, and it had stuff I knew about!"

Folks, this is a competitor-policed sport. Expecting an impound check to find what you know about it asking WAY WAY WAY too much. If you know about something, write paper. It's that simple. If you don't write paper, you have no rights to bitch. YOU knew, and YOU didn't tell anyone. ("You" is used in the generic sense here, I'm not talking to anyone in particular.)

And doing it publicly about a particular car is really unfair.

trhoppe
11-12-2007, 02:13 PM
From a spectator standpoint, watching one ITB car run ITA speeds down the back straight was kind of "wierd". As was watching said ITB car driving literally around the other ITB cars down the back straight, not having to draft or otherwise, while getting a worse exit speed.

I'm not "saying", I'm just saying....

-Tom

JLawton
11-12-2007, 05:50 PM
This sounds just like the bitching that happens after the Runoffs every year -- "tech didn't check the #xx car, and it had stuff I knew about!"

Folks, this is a competitor-policed sport. Expecting an impound check to find what you know about it asking WAY WAY WAY too much. If you know about something, write paper. It's that simple. If you don't write paper, you have no rights to bitch. YOU knew, and YOU didn't tell anyone. ("You" is used in the generic sense here, I'm not talking to anyone in particular.)

And doing it publicly about a particular car is really unfair.
[/b]


Yes, but when they have done complete tear downs the last couple of years, you kind of expect it.........Plus, this IS the ARRC. How could they have written paper if they didn't know there wasn't going to be tear downs until they were released??

Harvey
11-12-2007, 06:16 PM
Yes, but when they have done complete tear downs the last couple of years, you kind of expect it.........Plus, this IS the ARRC. How could they have written paper if they didn't know there wasn't going to be tear downs until they were released??
[/b]


There has not been teardowns for the last couple years. The race has gotten so diluted with so many non IT classes I suppose that it would be all but impossible to do teardowns across the board. I for one hate to see what this race has turned into.

Les Chaney

lateapex911
11-12-2007, 06:25 PM
This is the first year the heads haven't come off all the top IT cars, right? But it's also the first year for gear ratio checks. I like surpises when it comes to tech.

But...I'd rather have MORE checks, than less.

Maybe we should create a compliance commitee, and seek assitance in scrutineering, perhaps from HQ. I imagine everyone would or should be willing to pay an increased entry.

Harvey
11-12-2007, 06:31 PM
No if I am not mistaken this is the second year at least that the heads have not come off the cars.

Les Chaney

Conover
11-12-2007, 06:36 PM
This is the first year the heads haven't come off all the top IT cars, right? But it's also the first year for gear ratio checks. I like surpises when it comes to tech.

But...I'd rather have MORE checks, than less.

Maybe we should create a compliance commitee, and seek assitance in scrutineering, perhaps from HQ. I imagine everyone would or should be willing to pay an increased entry.
[/b]

I would think that a modest increase in entry fee should be tolerated if it ensures that things will actually be checked. Which protects the interest of those showing up with legal cars expecting some nice clean and close racing. Jeff has me pegged, they were pulling the heads on the miatas, they pulled heads on ITA, I expected the same treatment, I found out we weren't getting that by them releasing us, and at that point it's too late. . .

shwah
11-12-2007, 06:39 PM
I don't have an axe to grind with Spec Miata, but if this is the 'National Championship' for regional classes, and/or those that don't go to the runoffs - why are the Spec Miatas at the ARRC?

From every account I have heard they completely monopolized the resources that were available to the tech shed. This is not unexpected for a class like that, but they can go see who's fastest in October no?

trhoppe
11-12-2007, 07:08 PM
No if I am not mistaken this is the second year at least that the heads have not come off the cars.

Les Chaney
[/b]
At least for ITA, you are mistaken.

-Tom

RSTPerformance
11-12-2007, 07:29 PM
I don't have an axe to grind with Spec Miata, but if this is the 'National Championship' for regional classes, and/or those that don't go to the runoffs - why are the Spec Miatas at the ARRC?

From every account I have heard they completely monopolized the resources that were available to the tech shed. This is not unexpected for a class like that, but they can go see who's fastest in October no?
[/b]


Agreed 100%...

I am glad that I didn't make the $5,000 investment for the one weekend... The track is fun and the competition is also good (not the hardest), but one reason I liked the event was because I knew that I was racing people whom would actually be penalized (without effort from me) if they were not in compliance.

I would not expect to have to file paper at this event.

All that said, I am not in anyway pointing out one or more ITB cars, but for my own piece of mind I would have liked to have seen all the Golfs (top 3) torn down as they are dam fast IMO and I am sure that all those Golfs would also like to see my car torn down as well if I were to beat them in future "ARRC" events.

Raymond

Harvey
11-12-2007, 07:30 PM
At least for ITA, you are mistaken.

-Tom
[/b]

I am glad that it did not go across the board then. I would have bet money that they didn't pull heads in ITB last year but I suppose I am wrong

Les Chaney

bobqzzi
11-12-2007, 07:52 PM
It is unfortunate that they didn't pull the heads from the ITB cars- failing to do so always leaves doubts in people's minds. Of course, I know Beran (car 0) expected to be torn down. I built the engine for that car, and for what's it's worth, I was absolutely scrupulous about it being completely legal. In fact, I almost went insane trying to find legal overbore pistons. After qualifying, Beran was so concerned about his speed that he called me to ask if there was ANYTHING that could be illegal in the engine. There isn't.

Again, FWIW, I don't build illegal engines- as some have rightly pointed out- too much hard work and development goes into amatuer racing to cheat. Please don't assume Beran is a "new guy"- he has been racing since the early 1990s- he is fast and so is his car.

As for other issues about (I assume) body work- please do contact Beran about them as I'm sure he will want to fix them.

Sounds like it was a hell of a race.

Regards,

Bob Quindazzi

Knestis
11-12-2007, 08:08 PM
...too much hard work and development goes into amatuer racing to cheat. ...[/b]
Very well put, Bob - thanks for that. It's precisely the reason that we'd really hoped - expected - that we'd get poked, prodded, and measured before the trophies got handed out.

In the weeks leading up to the ARRC, Cameron gave in to anxiety and tore the head off to check the compression ratio himself, having trusted the machine shop guy to get the math right with the initial build. It's that important.

I think maybe the way to handle this in the future is to write the paper in advance regardless, then let the stewards tell us if it becomes unnecessary because they intend to look at whatever has been protested...

Kirk

PS - we had similar frustration with the piston issues. :)

OTLimit
11-12-2007, 08:33 PM
Chris retired from the ITB sprint race because of a failed wheel bearing.

Personally, I was very disappointed that the level of tech seemed to be racheted down several steps this year. Why in the world wouldn't you have heads pulled on the top 3 in the IT classes (at least ITR, S, A, B, and C). Why the ARRC continues to cater to cars that have a national class in which to race, I have no idea (but I assume it has to do with cubic $$). But it is unfair for the ASM and SSM classes to take up so much of the finite time that the tech shed has. Additionally, THERE ARE TOO MANY CLASSES!! Doing justice to "championships" for that many classes in that short of period of time is impossible for the number of people manning the tech shed.

Also, personally, I would like to see more of the national staff in attendance, as well as $$ so that the CRB could attend, and some committment from the IT ad hoc members to attend, also.

(the above is a personal rant from the author and may not reflect the opinion of others within this household)

jinxcrx
11-12-2007, 10:32 PM
When this event started it was "the" IT event of the year.
It drew competitors from all over the country. Now, it is
basically a southeast event with a few others who are
willing to travel. "ARRC" Spec Miata is a cash cow that
dilutes the event. Go back and look at the level of
entries in IT classes from 1994. Now we have been
shoved to the back burner.
We are promised split starts every year before we get
there and then the Chief Steward pulls the rug out from
under us when we get there.
I'm with Les. This event for IT has become a joke. Yes some
of the races were good but the participation numbers are
weak.
I think I will try to support the festival at Mid-Ohio to
become "our" National Championships similar to
what Kansas did in the 90's and the "ARRC" was in the
mid-90's when they torn 'em down and you went home
knowing a legal car won.

Jinx Jordan

RSTPerformance
11-12-2007, 11:26 PM
jinx-

Problem is it fest doesn't check anything but weight...

Raymond "sorry were off topic" Blethen

IPRESS
11-13-2007, 12:51 AM
Actually for you that were not there........ It was a GREAT event, well run, staffed by nice folks, had great track announcers that kept a pretty large crowd of spectators informed, and did this with a FULL PADDOCK!

Contrary to the theme of this post. ARRC is still THE event for Regional cars.

If you have constructive suggestions (ie tearing down engines in your class,) contact Butch and I bet they will do their best to get it done in the future. He has been very open to suggestions from racers.

Again.... for those not there, it was pretty dang good for the 300+ mob of drivers.....not many hitches ifor an event that big.


Now.......back to your previous unhappiness! :P

RSTPerformance
11-13-2007, 01:49 AM
Actually for you that were not there........ It was a GREAT event, well run, staffed by nice folks, had great track announcers that kept a pretty large crowd of spectators informed, and did this with a FULL PADDOCK!

Contrary to the theme of this post. ARRC is still THE event for Regional cars.

If you have constructive suggestions (ie tearing down engines in your class,) contact Butch and I bet they will do their best to get it done in the future. He has been very open to suggestions from racers.

Again.... for those not there, it was pretty dang good for the 300+ mob of drivers.....not many hitches ifor an event that big.
Now.......back to your previous unhappiness! :P
[/b]

Mac-

I certainly wouldn't argue that... however we have great events all the time in the Northeast, and arguably some of the regulars that seem to run at the front of the pack in ITA and ITB at these events run just about every weekend in our backyard. I am leaning towards budgeting ourselves to run locally rather than travel as we get the same caliber event with a lot less expences... (Although I admit the tracks are not as fun)

In 08 prove that the event is "national championship" caliber and I will try to plan again for 09

Raymond "I am sure that Butch is reading" Blethen

tom91ita
11-13-2007, 09:03 AM
i ran the IT spectacular and spectated at the ARRC for my first time to Road Atlanta.

for 2008, those two races go into the budget first and everything else will be adjusted.

nomonasafome unless literally in my backyard.

tom
#91 ITB
CRX Si

jmark
11-13-2007, 09:24 AM
I gotta agree with there being too many classes. Other than the IT classes the race has too many SP classes with only one or two cars entered. It has got to be confusing to many spectators. FWIW the ITS, ITA, ITB & ITC races were pretty good races and well attended.

gran racing
11-13-2007, 09:46 AM
I think maybe the way to handle this in the future is to write the paper in advance regardless, then let the stewards tell us if it becomes unnecessary because they intend to look at whatever has been protested...[/b]

Maybe the field collectively needs to write three papers, leaving the cars / drivers names to be protested left blank until the race is complete? Put a few “must check” items such as compression, cams, ??? and a few various surprise items that could be checked in a hat and let chance determine what gets picked. I also am fully aware of the man power it takes to accomplish this, and sympathize with that. At the same time part of the lure of the ARRC for IT racers is the tear downs, and getting a little better comfort feeling with the cars that won.


Also, personally, I would like to see more of the national staff in attendance, as well as $$ so that the CRB could attend, and some commitment from the IT ad hoc members to attend, also. Lesley[/b]

That would be great, but it all costs money. As long as there are people who have the knowledge to properly use the equipment (and of course have the necessary equipment at the event, including a cam doctor even if loaned from National), that’s all that is important to me.


Problem is it fest doesn't check anything but weight...[/b]

Ray, they did test my fuel, although Jake G. told me it was just a matter of getting more gas for their generator. LOL

tom91ita
11-13-2007, 09:54 AM
don't forget the reality of needing enough cars to pay for the weekend.

i would rather have these other cars here than have to increase my entry fee by 50%.

Maddog
11-13-2007, 10:43 AM
That would be great, but it all costs money. As long as there are people who have the knowledge to properly use the equipment (and of course have the necessary equipment at the event, including a cam doctor even if loaned from National), that’s all that is important to me.
[/b]

Jeremy Thoennes from Topeka was there with the "Cam Doctor".

Andy Bettencourt
11-13-2007, 10:57 AM
For those that don't know, "ASM" is ARRC Spec Miata. If you attended the SCCA Runoffs, you were not eligible to run in ASM at the ARRC.

IT should be the primary focus of tech and teardowns at the ARRC if it wants to bill itself at the Unofficial National Championship. Period.

Don't ignore other classes but most certainly remember your primary targets.

IPRESS
11-13-2007, 11:20 AM
Raymond,
No doubt the NE is a hotbed of IT racing and has great quality events during the year. I can also understand the stay closer to home idea as yesterday I bought two new trailer tires in Meridian, MS, a new trailer hub in Shreveport, LA and still hadn't gotten back to good ol TX.
But, since 2000 I have been going to ARRC and although it has slight changes most years, the quality and the REP of the event is still one of the, if not the best, of any Reg. events. Without a doubt it is the most well known.
It is still just Club Racing and even though the competition is very high it is the people you meet or see again from year to year that makes it a great event. You guys who do it like the Runoffs (travel a million miles) and basically just run the sprint race amaze me. Going all that way for one short race is a big committment. Not what I would do, but then again at that level running top ten is where my win would be.
I don't know if the event needs tweaking or maybe some of you guys expectations are different. (I agree I expected the IT classes to all be looked at close in the Tech shed) One of my favorite racers (and we are just "hi how are you" friends) is Chris Albin. Chris to me seems to be the RIGHT kind of IT Club racer (not saying anybody is wrong), he shows up prepped to win, bringing ability to win, but also just wanting to race. It seems if they throw a green flag he is in the race and it looks like he does it because he just likes to race. That seems like what Club Racing (especially regional Club Racing) is all about.
Once again Raymond, you guys have some of the best racing in the country up in the NE and none of the above is a knock on the talent pool up there, it is just the way I look at ARRC as the top event of the year and why it is so.

Mac

ddewhurst
11-13-2007, 05:51 PM
***Understand that SM is goig to a compliance fee just like SRF. This type of attendence and conpliance checking by Jeremy and his team is exactly what that money is for.***

I have zero comments if the Spec Miat runs at the ARRC or not............ :D

I do have a comment about the compliance fee that Spec Miata "Regional racers" will be required to pay for each Regional event they enter in 2008 when the SCCA admits they will check only 15 events during 2008. Lets call their checks once at a National race for each Divison with a couple others thrown in for the 15 checks. WHY should "Regional racers" pay to check National cars? Please keep in mind the 75% of event fees come from "Regional racers".

Have Fun ;)
CenDiv Spec Miata #14
David

PS: Curious question, did the IT cars get lesser checks because the folks from Topeka (J) were there doing the checking ?

GKR_17
11-13-2007, 08:36 PM
I gotta agree with there being too many classes. Other than the IT classes the race has too many SP classes with only one or two cars entered. It has got to be confusing to many spectators. FWIW the ITS, ITA, ITB & ITC races were pretty good races and well attended.
[/b]

I assume it was an oversight, but technically, the SPO and SPU cars were not elligible to compete per the supps. See rule 3. I think there were more that didn't fit the SPO/SPU requirements here: "Vehicles must not be other wise classed in the GCR and Category Specifications." Not that this really matters, but why have a rule if it's not enforced?

Grafton

rabbidmk1
11-13-2007, 09:29 PM
No Dog in this hunt but
top 4 slots on ITB grid VW Golf
And I think they finished 1-4 as well. Looks like some one needs to look at the classification or weight of this car.

Cheers SteveP [/b]


Ok, not to continue any bad blood here but why all the animosity against mk3 VW's. I seem to remember that only a few years ago the car was classed in ITA and was not competitive.

Chris Shafsma (SP? sorry) in CHI. region has consistently kicked my butt on shorter courses in his MK2 (which is very much a B car). From my experience (having a track record at Road America) the mk3 chassis belongs on a longer course like what was witnessed at the ARRC this year. I can promise all that if the race was on a 2 mile course, the results would be much different.

In all honesty this is the first year that many people including myself have gone out and done 10/10 builds on this chassis. It is a natural progression for the sport and I feel it belongs in B at the same weight.


On to the tech and tear downs...

I am all for an increase in entry fee to have complete tear downs after the race, it is the only way to 100% eliminate any issues fairly.

Also please excuse my ignorance here and explain how these are done.

What is a Whistler and a Cam Doctor? How do they check gear ratios? With the open final drive rule it seems like they would have to tear every case apart to do this.


A little confused,

Aaron

Butch Kummer
11-13-2007, 10:14 PM
I assume it was an oversight, but technically, the SPO and SPU cars were not elligible to compete per the supps. See rule 3. I think there were more that didn't fit the SPO/SPU requirements here: "Vehicles must not be other wise classed in the GCR and Category Specifications." Not that this really matters, but why have a rule if it's not enforced?

Grafton
[/b]

Yes, it was an oversight. I actually left quite a few classes out of Item 3 on the Supps. I'll make sure and correct that before the 2008 event.

GKR_17
11-13-2007, 11:53 PM
What is a Whistler and a Cam Doctor? How do they check gear ratios? With the open final drive rule it seems like they would have to tear every case apart to do this.
[/b]

As I understand, the whistler is able to measure volumes inside the combustion chamber by access through the spark plug hole. With it, you can check the displacement at both ends of stoke, so in the end you have displacement and compression ratio. I haven't actually seen the device, so someone with better information could elaborate.

The cam doctor measures the profile of a cam, which can then be compared to the known specs.

Without knowing the final drive, you can't determine the exact ratio of any one gear, but you can get the ratio change between each gear, which is really all that matters. This is such an easy check I'd like to see it done on everyone under the shed (at least the top 3). There are only a few cars classed (TR8 for example) that wouldn't see huge benefits from a minor tweak to a gear or two.

RSTPerformance
11-14-2007, 12:19 AM
Without knowing the final drive, you can't determine the exact ratio of any one gear, but you can get the ratio change between each gear, which is really all that matters. This is such an easy check I'd like to see it done on everyone under the shed (at least the top 3). There are only a few cars classed (TR8 for example) that wouldn't see huge benefits from a minor tweak to a gear or two.
[/b]

How do you check it?

Raymond

GKR_17
11-14-2007, 12:51 AM
With the drive wheels off the ground, put the transmission in first gear, turn the engine a known number of revolutions while counting the revolutions of the drive wheels (the higher the number of revs the more precise the measurement will be). Repeat for each gear. The result is a total ratio (including the final drive) for each gear. Then compare the relative ratio between gears to what it should be in the spec.

To use simple numbers, let's say the car is supposed to have a 1.0:1 4th gear, and a 1.1:1 5th gear. Assume the engine is turned 10 revs, and the drive wheels turn 2.5 times (if 4th gear is legal, this implies the final drive is a 4.00, but that's not important at this point). Now when 5th gear is checked, the engine is again turned 10 revs, the drive wheels had better turn 2.5x(1.1/1)=2.75 times. If not, one of the gears isn't legal.

ScotMac
11-14-2007, 02:40 AM
Ok, not to continue any bad blood here but why all the animosity against mk3 VW's. I seem to remember that only a few years ago the car was classed in ITA and was not competitive.

Chris Shafsma (SP? sorry) in CHI. region has consistently kicked my butt on shorter courses in his MK2 (which is very much a B car). From my experience (having a track record at Road America) the mk3 chassis belongs on a longer course like what was witnessed at the ARRC this year. I can promise all that if the race was on a 2 mile course, the results would be much different.

In all honesty this is the first year that many people including myself have gone out and done 10/10 builds on this chassis. It is a natural progression for the sport and I feel it belongs in B at the same weight.
On to the tech and tear downs...

[/b]

Or we could just start calling ITB Spec-Golf, instead.

If this is the first year that people have done 10/10 builds, and the car is ALREADY dominating, what will happen when people REALLY get them tuned. It is really a shame that the defacto national championship for IT only really has one car competitive for ITB.

Edit: Well, that is not totally true. Vaughan's 924 and Douglas Spencer's 320i were SOMEWHAT close...but after that, the rest of the field was 3sec+ back!

RacerBowie
11-14-2007, 08:54 AM
Or we could just start calling ITB Spec-Golf, instead.

If this is the first year that people have done 10/10 builds, and the car is ALREADY dominating, what will happen when people REALLY get them tuned. It is really a shame that the defacto national championship for IT only really has one car competitive for ITB.

Edit: Well, that is not totally true. Vaughan's 924 and Douglas Spencer's 320i were SOMEWHAT close...but after that, the rest of the field was 3sec+ back!
[/b]

The Mark III Golfs that were at the front are no-stone-unturned builds. The one I was driving has 5 years of development. Derek Luger has raced VWs seemingly since the earth cooled; his car was beautiful too. So was Rob's Mark II Golf that was RIGHT FREAKING THERE until he lost the draft due to traffic. Are you telling me that shouldn't be an ITB car? It has been for at least the better part of a decade. What about Trever's Accord that was also RIGHT THERE until it wrecked? Then there was the 924, in its first trip to Road Atlanta that stayed pretty close the whole race. I bet Vaughn can't wait to tweak that car a bit next year and come back to race for the win. The fast Volvos weren't there this year, that could have changed things too. Would anyone have bet against Sam Moore had he dragged that car out?

Where was all this outrage last year when Accords went 1-2-3?

Frankly, I'm getting a bit insulted by this stuff. I bet the ITAC is too. The car fits the class. It has strengths and weaknesses. You don't know that of which you speak.

gran racing
11-14-2007, 09:39 AM
Are you telling me that shouldn't be an ITB car?[/b]

It absolutely is an ITB car, although I do continue to think it is a bit lite. I know Jake and Andy. :dead_horse:

There are plenty of cars that I've run with and am on the look out for. Here's a few that are great ITB cars (I know there are others, but quickly off the top of my head):

Audi - mad torque monsters!
Accord
Golf II
Golf III
Rabbit
Alfa
Volvo
Prelude
924
BMW (which model was it that destroyed me on the straight?)
Civic - this could be one of the cars to have in ITB
Soon to be...Mini - this will be a big threat

Fastfrogracing
11-14-2007, 09:57 AM
HI,

Congrats to the the winners. I believe the Golfs are the cars to beat in ITB now. I know the drivers with those cars drove well and the cars were well prepared. I don't think the cars were illegal. I too have a 10/10ths prepared car. I have spent 4 years racing it and feel that I am a pretty good driver. I had no chance of catching any golf on the straights. If you look at the specs I am compleatly outclassed. 2.0 vrs 1.8 advantage golf, 4 wheel disk vrs disk/drum advantage golf, modern F.I. vrs Bosch C.I.S. advantage Golf, 2350 vrs 2460 advantage Golf. Vaughan's car is outclassed also at 2600 lbs. He has spent years tweaking that car to get it as fast as it is now. I race with him alot and he is very dedicated, but I dont think he could keep up with the golfs. He may feel differently, i havn't asked him about it. Anyway I guess I have to write some letters about a weight reduction for my car or buy a golf. I had a great time and what a beautiful racetrack, I wish i could have been more competetive though. Again congrats to the winners.

Douglas Spencer
ITB BMW #66

Knestis
11-14-2007, 10:06 AM
... I guess I have to write some letters about a weight reduction for my car ...[/b]
Absolutely do write the letter but please make sure the case is in terms of the system for classifying/specifying cars in IT classes. I'll beat this drum long and loud, as I would for any request for adjustment, that we can NOT make our cases - one way or the other - based on finishes.

If I had been driving that same Golf, it would have been several seconds slower - would that be fair evidence that an entire make/model is fine where it's currently listed? No. Equally, a podium sweep at one race in one year means exactly nothing.

K

EDIT - BTW, if I were building a sprint-optimized Golf III, I'd use rear drums instead of discs.

Ron
11-14-2007, 10:44 AM
Not related to the ARRC, but, at the 13 hour my Mustang was only a couple of seconds slower than Pablo and I feel preety good about that. Plus, I'm a bit of a hack behind the wheel. Our car is not good at tracks with lots of stopping and then long straits for a bunch of reasons. Poor or limited suspension design, heavy weight to start with, gearing etc... With that said, it does work well at flowing tracks like Roebling Road. I would race anyone there and feel I have a chance. Different cars work well at different tracks. Thats what makes this fun. Road Atlanta is our home track and we go there all the time. If my 3 daughters didn't play soccer and the ARRC always fall on the last weekend we would run, not up front, but we would try.

Andy Bettencourt
11-14-2007, 11:23 AM
Where was all this outrage last year when Accords went 1-2-3?

Frankly, I'm getting a bit insulted by this stuff. I bet the ITAC is too. The car fits the class. It has strengths and weaknesses.
[/b]

Welcome to the wonderful world of 'half the people think you are doing a good job and half thinking you are idiots.'

:birra:

Knestis
11-14-2007, 11:25 AM
...and because I have faith in the system:

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l52/Shiftlink/DSC00511Large.jpg

K

EDIT - Special TT "race" chip and adjustable FPR. We're leaving a few on the table because we're not fully programmable.

Conover
11-14-2007, 11:29 AM
EDIT - BTW, if I were building a sprint-optimized Golf III, I'd use rear drums instead of discs.
[/b]

You'd better write a letter, I'm going to tell you for the eleventy billionth time, the spec line says rear discs, thank god. . .

Knestis
11-14-2007, 11:38 AM
Oops. Cameron's right. I keep forgetting.

K

Andy Bettencourt
11-14-2007, 12:06 PM
...and because I have faith in the system:

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l52/Shiftlink/DSC00511Large.jpg

K

EDIT - Special TT "race" chip and adjustable FPR. We're leaving a few on the table because we're not fully programmable. [/b]

And lets take this to a stupid extreme - I know the numbers are massive estimates but:

110hp on a PAK is about 119 on a Jet. 119 on a Jet is about 140hp at the crank for a FWDer. 115 stock hp * the estimated 25% increase = 143hp.....................................guess what? It fits.

shwah
11-14-2007, 12:09 PM
Well done Kirk. The torque is as I expected, and you can see the effect of the weak stock cam in that hp number.

I can tell you that I do use the prep level that you have demonstrated with that car as motivation for my own race car at times. It is just so damn clean, and well done.

Knestis
11-14-2007, 02:12 PM
>> It is just so damn clean, and well done.

Thanks, man but I wish it were currently as clean as the web pics make it look. It's been "rode hard and put away wet" a lot this season - something over 55 hours of racing this year...

K

RacerBowie
11-14-2007, 02:37 PM
>> It is just so damn clean, and well done.

Thanks, man but I wish it were currently as clean as the web pics make it look. It's been "rode hard and put away wet" a lot this season - something over 55 hours of racing this year...

K
[/b]

We had CJ there working his detailing magic on Pablo this weekend. Aside from the sandblasted paint on the front and that one ding from the 13 hour, he looks like a show car again! He will still need some offseason lovin', but considering the season he had it's not too shabby.

Knestis
11-14-2007, 03:21 PM
<kirk is extra sad he couldn&#39;t be at the ARRC>

:(

K

RacerBowie
11-14-2007, 03:27 PM
<kirk is extra sad he couldn&#39;t be at the ARRC>

:(

K
[/b]

Quote of the weekend from CJ: "Just give me that bottle of polish and some red rags and get out of the way."

He worked on the Pumpkin a little too, but pronounced the paint toast and wandered off.

JeffYoung
11-14-2007, 03:37 PM
I want to weigh in here on something, especially about the Golf. I&#39;m not an ITB driver, but I have known and been around Kirk since his return to IT racing. As a new guy to the sport, his perspective from being in on the ground floor of IT back in teh 80s, along with his experience in a spec series (Renault Cup I think) and trying to get sponsorhip for an RX7 SS car is extremely illuminating. When Kirk speaks, if you are new to racing, listen up.

In any event, I have seen with my own eyes the evolution of Pablo I and II and the Knestis racing team development. It is amazing. Pablo I, while well done, was basically a street car with a cage.

As Kirk and his team learned what had to be done to run up front in the new world of 21st century IT racing, they did it. I saw that car get progressively faster. As with all programs there were some setbacks, but if you go to his web page, or just e-mail him, you can learn a lot about making the right, and legal, choices with IT race car development.

That is a very impressive effort and it is come a LONG way in a SHORT time. But the result -- the ARRC win -- isn&#39;t due to a too light weight classification, or anything else untoward. It sure looks to me like it was hard work, good development and great driving that got the win.

ScotMac
11-14-2007, 04:01 PM
The Mark III Golfs that were at the front are no-stone-unturned builds. The one I was driving has 5 years of development. Derek Luger has raced VWs seemingly since the earth cooled; his car was beautiful too. So was Rob&#39;s Mark II Golf that was RIGHT FREAKING THERE until he lost the draft due to traffic. Are you telling me that shouldn&#39;t be an ITB car? It has been for at least the better part of a decade. What about Trever&#39;s Accord that was also RIGHT THERE until it wrecked? Then there was the 924, in its first trip to Road Atlanta that stayed pretty close the whole race. I bet Vaughn can&#39;t wait to tweak that car a bit next year and come back to race for the win. The fast Volvos weren&#39;t there this year, that could have changed things too. Would anyone have bet against Sam Moore had he dragged that car out?

Where was all this outrage last year when Accords went 1-2-3?

Frankly, I&#39;m getting a bit insulted by this stuff. I bet the ITAC is too. The car fits the class. It has strengths and weaknesses. You don&#39;t know that of which you speak.
[/b]

I don&#39;t think ANYONE is saying that the car doesn&#39;t belong in ITB...i know i was not, just that it is a bit light.

In fact, now that i see that HP chart, and get a better idea what the "process" entails, it makes me more and more sure that the ITB fiero is overweight (2550 vs. 2350 for the golf, and the fiero has LESS hp, and similar torque). I gotta write two more letters! :D

And yes, the Fiero *can* get to a lighter weight. Mine is very close to the 2550, and i haven&#39;t even taken out the window glass yet.

RacerBowie
11-14-2007, 04:12 PM
I don&#39;t think ANYONE is saying that the car doesn&#39;t belong in ITB...i know i was not, just that it is a bit light.

In fact, now that i see that HP chart, and get a better idea what the "process" entails, it makes me more and more sure that the ITB fiero is overweight (2550 vs. 2350 for the golf, and the fiero has LESS hp, and similar torque). I gotta write two more letters! :D

And yes, the Fiero *can* get to a lighter weight. Mine is very close to the 2550, and i haven&#39;t even taken out the window glass yet.
[/b]

What sort of power do you make? What is your engine development like? What sort of suspension do you have? What about cage, what sort of design there?

ScotMac
11-14-2007, 04:27 PM
What sort of power do you make? What is your engine development like? What sort of suspension do you have? What about cage, what sort of design there?
[/b]

I am not talking about my car, just in general. As Andy showed, the process figures 25% of stock HP. So, we have:

Golf: 25% added to 115 stock HP = 143.75 HP
2350/143.75 = 16.3lbs/hp

Fiero: 25% added to 98 stock HP (using high number here) = 122.5 HP
2550/122.5 = 20.8lbs/hp

Yes, this is a gross simplication, and the fiero obviously has other advantages (aero and mid-engine), but i can&#39;t see them adding up to 4lbs/hp.

Edit: Just looked it up, and the stock torque on the two cars is similar (~122ft-lb)

gran racing
11-14-2007, 04:37 PM
I&#39;ll share my Prelude&#39;s numbers. 110 HP stock. 113 HP max at the wheels with a pro built engine from Kessler Engineering, Anthony Serra custom exhaust, Justin Poole (&#39;05 ARRC Accord winner and previous track record holder prior to RA repave) custom header. The weight of my car is at 2,450. Rear struts on the car which Koni NA wasn&#39;t so keen on.

Andy Bettencourt
11-14-2007, 05:03 PM
I&#39;ll share my Prelude&#39;s numbers. 113 HP max at the wheels with a pro built engine from Kessler Engineering, Anthony Serra custom exhaust, Justin Poole (&#39;05 ARRC Accord winner and previous track record holder prior to RA repave) custom header. The weight of my car is at 2,450. Rear struts on the car which Koni NA wasn&#39;t so keen on. [/b]

Betting that is on a Pak. If it is, you are in the 122-124whp range in DynoJet land. Similar power as Kirk but a much more desirable suspension.

Boo-hee asked it a while ago to the masses - why no outcry when the Accords dominated last year? The way I see IT going from here on out is a simple ebb and flow of what people THINK is the hot car....it will vary from Region to Region. People lean toward what they see is fast.

(Now on the 924 - If *I* were running one, *I* would think it would fit better in ITB at, say 2450... :D )






I am not talking about my car, just in general. As Andy showed, the process figures 25% of stock HP. So, we have:

Golf: 25% added to 115 stock HP = 140 HP
2350/140 = 16.8lbs/hp

Fiero: 25% added to 98 stock HP (using high number here) = 122.5 HP
2550/122.5 = 20.8lbs/hp

Yes, this is a gross simplication, and the fiero obviously has other advantages (aero and mid-engine), but i can&#39;t see them adding up to 4lbs/hp.

Just looked it up, and the stock torque on the two cars is similar. [/b]

Don&#39;t forget you have 20% more displacement to work with....

gran racing
11-14-2007, 05:05 PM
What makes the Prelude&#39;s suspension much more desireable than the Golf IIIs? Or we can talk privately since it doesn&#39;t matter too much for this discussion.

ScotMac
11-14-2007, 05:27 PM
Don&#39;t forget you have 20% more displacement to work with....
[/b]

I realize that, but on such an inefficient engine, that does nothing. That is why the stock HP is soo low, and that is why the duke based cars never produce much horsepower, even when tuned. ie, that is all already taken into account in the "25% added to stock HP", the assumption being that the stock HP would be higher if this engine was really able to take advantage of the displacement. GM tried for quite some time, and picked up about 8 hp!!! Duke info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Iron_Duke_engine

In fact, Andy, that statement about displacement implies to me that the committee was just afraid of what MIGHT be done w/ that displacement. 2.5l in a mid-engine form, w/ that 2.5l being massively oversquare. They were afraid someone would figure out how to take advantage of that 2.5l and oversquare&#39;ness by getting this car to rev past 6500 rpm&#39;s (stock redline is 4800!!!), and produce a bucket-full of extra HP. That would be nice :026: , but is just not possible, as has been proven over many years of trying.

shwah
11-14-2007, 05:38 PM
It&#39;s going to be a long winter.
:026:

Fastfrogracing
11-14-2007, 05:44 PM
I guess I just don&#39;t understand how cars are classified. I also think the Golf should be an ITB car. I am not taking anything away from the people who built the top 4 golfs in ITB at Road Atlanta. They spent many hours and money with lots of knowledge to make those cars work as well as they do. Also the Drivers did a great job, they still had to race each other. When Vaughan and I race it makes sense to me. His Car is 2600 lbs but has a 2.0 engine. He has bigger brakes but also carries more weight. It works out. And we raced each other from start to finish at road atlanta. The Volvos the same. Great breaks, great suspension, good power, 2600lbs. I drove a fast volvo for 2 years in ITB. They are great cars that you love to hate.

I said before I had a great time at the ARRC. I even managed to be one of the 8 cars to beat the old track record. The BMW held its own on the corners, but I knew in qualifing that I had no chance when every lap a Golf passed me on the straight easily. Can someone tell me how the cars specs are qualified? Even the BMW E30 chassie is 60lbs lighter than my car and has a better F.I. system. Just looking for some help.

Thanks,
Douglas

ITB 320i #66

gran racing
11-14-2007, 05:47 PM
Andy, I forgot to include the torque numbers. Kirk&#39;s golf = 126. My Prelude TorqFly = 110.

I just have a hard time believing that a Golf III should be at the weight it is compared to other ITB cars out there. As you know, my belief in this goes quite a long ways back and isn&#39;t due to on track results.

Fastfrogracing
11-14-2007, 06:09 PM
Yes I was at MID O but I never passed you. I got close and then you lost a rear wheel. There was a 2002 BMW that was very fast on the straight. Durring the race I actually got next to him exiting the keyhole and after the straight I would be 4 or 5 car lengths behind maybe more. That car has the 2.0 and is 180lbs lighter. I dont think it handles as well, but not bad. I know I have a great handling car and that almost makes up for the lack of power. I do pretty good at all the tracks I go to. Its just frustrating to get passed so easily on a straight that takes no effort.

Douglas

Knestis
11-14-2007, 08:16 PM
TTIWWODP = This thread is worthless without dyno plots.

Post &#39;em up there, guys! I showed you mine, so you should show me yours. :)



What makes the Prelude&#39;s suspension much more desireable than the Golf IIIs? Or we can talk privately since it doesn&#39;t matter too much for this discussion.
[/b]

I don&#39;t know my Hondas all that well but is it the same basic beast as is on the front of the Integras? Oh, Captain Panties - your opinion?

K

Conover
11-14-2007, 08:24 PM
If it&#39;s like the integra, it doesn&#39;t rely as heavily on static camber as a strut type car. they actually gain some neg camber under compression, which is nice. And why I can&#39;t ever understand why some people will risk metallurgical integrity just to add static camber to a Honduh. . .

924Guy
11-14-2007, 08:40 PM
My quick 2cents - I have nothing but respect for the B guys in front of me, I think the cars were expertly driven and prepped, I&#39;m just happy in my first outing there to have been so close... heck, first car with a home-built motor! :P I couldn&#39;t get enough to compare, but would have to rely on the guys up there to assess how legal or not they were. When there&#39;s a general feeling that they&#39;re all legit, I&#39;m OK with that... fer now... ;)

I don&#39;t think the class is dominated by Golfs, any more than it&#39;s dominated by Porsches and Bimmers (as anyone who visits our home track of Waterford would think). I&#39;m not even as down as everyone else as far as our performance on the straights; I think we might be able to add a little with a proper pro-built motor, but in my book the major areas for improvement are experience (got some already!) and chassis tuning, not motor.

Oh, yeah - dyno plots... no plots handy (I&#39;m away already on a business trip, back south again) but peak was just 100rwhp/ft-lbs...).

Andy Bettencourt
11-14-2007, 08:56 PM
What makes the Prelude&#39;s suspension much more desireable than the Golf IIIs? Or we can talk privately since it doesn&#39;t matter too much for this discussion. [/b]

What is the front suspension design on your Prelude? That will be your answer. All suspensions are not created equal but I don&#39;t know many who would say that a strut-based car was the equal of a double A-arm front suspension.

Greg Amy
11-14-2007, 09:03 PM
Oh, Captain Panties - your opinion?[/b]
Oh, no you don&#39;t... ;)

Actually, I&#39;m fairly ignorant on the Prelude engine...but I can offer that Dave&#39;s info is from the same DynaPack I use. - GA

tom91ita
11-14-2007, 09:58 PM
If it&#39;s like the integra, it doesn&#39;t rely as heavily on static camber as a strut type car. they actually gain some neg camber under compression, which is nice. And why I can&#39;t ever understand why some people will risk metallurgical integrity just to add static camber to a Honduh. . .
[/b]

sorry, but i don&#39;t understand what you mean about risking metallurgical integrity to add camber to a honda.

do you consider the 1st gen 84-87 crx&#39;s not to be a strut car? or are you referring to 88-91 crx&#39;s?

ScotMac
11-14-2007, 09:58 PM
It&#39;s going to be a long winter.
:026:
[/b]

Gotta love the bouncing blue ball!! :D

Beran
11-14-2007, 10:10 PM
k,
My motor was completed just in time to get it in the car and in the trailer and on the road to Road Atlanta. The planned dyno time never happened. I think we will try to get some dyno time in this winter. When we do then I will share. I ran all season with a good head but a 150K block/lower end etc. Shine did do a ton of development and research for another customer for the same motor so there has been lots of development put into the motor and car.
IMHO the 924 is one of the killer cars for ITB. Once hooked up it will be hard to beat. Maybe it&#39;s a little heavy now but a couple letters and it might get adjusted.
I am not too familiar with the Prelude but doesn&#39;t it have a lower and upper control arm? If it does then it is a much better setup then what the VW has.
The three VW&#39;s up front were very close in power. Derick and I were very very close. if he was behind me he could easily draft by me on the back straight without me being able to do anything. Honestly the three of us could have come into 10a every lap three wide if we wanted to. Since the Golf is such a brick it really gave the guy in back a huge advantage over the person in front.
What an awesome track - i loved it.
I look forward to going back.
Beran

ScotMac
11-14-2007, 10:11 PM
TTIWWODP = This thread is worthless without dyno plots.

Post &#39;em up there, guys! I showed you mine, so you should show me yours. :)
I don&#39;t know my Hondas all that well but is it the same basic beast as is on the front of the Integras? Oh, Captain Panties - your opinion?

K
[/b]

No problem, but it is not a pretty sight, as compared to that golf one. Just a sec, i gotta find the software to read it again...

Conover
11-14-2007, 10:27 PM
sorry, but i don&#39;t understand what you mean about risking metallurgical integrity to add camber to a honda.

do you consider the 1st gen 84-87 crx&#39;s not to be a strut car? or are you referring to 88-91 crx&#39;s?
[/b]

I&#39;m referring to the guys that put their uprights on the press and bend them a little to get that extra degree of static camber. I&#39;m mean in reality it&#39;s probably not that big of a deal, and sure, why not, right, but in my opinion most of those cars don&#39;t need it. I can&#39;t tell you the difference between 87 and 88 on a CRX, give me a couple of weeks and I&#39;ll be on the same page with you. . .

Andy Bettencourt
11-14-2007, 10:41 PM
I&#39;m referring to the guys that put their uprights on the press and bend them a little to get that extra degree of static camber. I&#39;m mean in reality it&#39;s probably not that big of a deal, and sure, why not, right, but in my opinion most of those cars don&#39;t need it. I can&#39;t tell you the difference between 87 and 88 on a CRX, give me a couple of weeks and I&#39;ll be on the same page with you. . . [/b]

Here&#39;s your answer - NIGHT AND DAY!

The 86-87 cars are Torsion bar fronts and the 88-91 is double wishbones. The TB fronts I would not consider a strut based set-up obviously.

Bill Miller
11-14-2007, 10:46 PM
Don&#39;t forget you have 20% more displacement to work with....
[/b]

What&#39;s that supposed to mean Andy? Are you saying that the process assumes greater gains from an IT tune on motors w/ larger displacement?

Andy Bettencourt
11-14-2007, 10:53 PM
What&#39;s that supposed to mean Andy? Are you saying that the process assumes greater gains from an IT tune on motors w/ larger displacement? [/b]

It is most certainly a consideration on the subjective side of things. Not part of the &#39;formula side, but always a consideration. (Not speaking specifically to the Fiero and it&#39;s weight, just pointing out that apples that look like apples may not be apples) IIRC, the ID 2.5 Fiero was one car that was &#39;left alone&#39; in the great correction due to the lack of knowledge base, participatory drivers and large displacement (potential for atypical torque numbers in ITB).

ScotMac
11-14-2007, 11:02 PM
Here ya go...oh, in terms of the engine, as Andy brought up, the displacement is not AT ALL taken advantage of in this engine. ie, it doesn&#39;t breath well at all. Focussing on that, my car has hooker super comp header and the head has been port matched (as much as allowed by the rules) to match that header and the intake manifold. I believe it is an 020 overbore, and the head was leveled a bit (dynojet based):

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2398/2026570189_55264cad6a_o.jpg



It is most certainly a consideration on the subjective side of things. Not part of the &#39;formula side, but always a consideration. (Not speaking specifically to the Fiero and it&#39;s weight, just pointing out that apples that look like apples may not be apples) IIRC, the ID 2.5 Fiero was one car that was &#39;left alone&#39; in the great correction due to the lack of knowledge base, participatory drivers and large displacement (potential for atypical torque numbers in ITB).
[/b]

Thanks Andy. That answers a question i have been trying to get an answer to and confirms my suspicions.

As far as i have seen, the Fiero HP numbers are well off the other ITB cars. It is true that the torque numbers are better, but only to the extend of allowing the torque to be on a par w/ the rest of the cars, not higher.

shwah
11-14-2007, 11:25 PM
That torque beyond on par with an A2 VW, but we weigh less, so it should wash out.

I just keep wondering if our local Fiero was pulling my leg with the 190lb-ft comment...

ScotMac
11-15-2007, 01:23 AM
That torque beyond on par with an A2 VW, but we weigh less, so it should wash out.
[/b]
No idea how much torque on the A2 VW, but it is even lighter than the mk III, right? 2280? So, it&#39;s torque is less than 120ft-lbs, rear wheel on dynojet in IT trim?

Figuring in weight, the fiero is about the same torque as Kirk&#39;s mk III golf, tho the golf is still better. Golf is 18.36lbs/ft-lb, and Fiero is 18.75lbs/ft-lb. It is much worse for HP. Golf is 21.36lbs/hp and Fiero is 27.13/lbs/hp.

But, as i said, this is just specific individual examples...not the best thing to base classing on. As i showed before, the stock numbers are worse for torque, but a bit better for HP, though still show a very large disparity (15.4lbs/ft-lb vs 16.5lbs/ft-lb and 16.3lbs/hp vs 20.8lbs/hp, golf vs fiero, respectively).



I just keep wondering if our local Fiero was pulling my leg with the 190lb-ft comment...
[/b]
That&#39;s what i said!!! ;) I think that would be difficult for the v-6 (ITA)...it isn&#39;t imaginable for the 4 banger.

shwah
11-15-2007, 09:40 AM
My motor is a full build.
.40 over
balanced internals
machine work by AMT Racing Engines
built by the same builder of Chuck Mathis podium GP motor (Chuck)
fresh head (edit - IT legal porting, factory valve job, new guides/seals/lifters, resurfaced)
10.47:1 compression ratio
Techtonics header
fueling is very right
underdrive pullys

The result on a Dynapac was 109hp 105ft-lb once we got her all together.

We altered timing and fuel on the dyno as expected, and also tried different intake tubes from the fuel distributor to the throttle body - whoda thunk that the stock pipe would perform best...

Knestis
11-15-2007, 09:53 AM
I&#39;m fairly ignorant on the Prelude engine...[/b]

I was thinking you might have an opinion about A-arm vs. strut suspension after driving an Integra. Of course it might not apply if the Prelude isn&#39;t A-arms, although I think it is...?


The result on a Dynapac was 109hp 105ft-lb once we got her all together.[/b]

Thanks for those numbers, Chris. It&#39;s a very interesting comparison of the 1.8 and ABA engines. I&#39;m pretty confident that the differences between those two options are truly within "different horses for different courses."

Something that i may have missed - where would the 4-cyl Fiero be weight-wise, just looking at the stock quoted power/torque figures and other typical adjusters? I did know that it hadn&#39;t been through the Great Adjustment.

K

shwah
11-15-2007, 11:02 AM
No idea how much torque on the A2 VW, but it is even lighter than the mk III, right? 2280? So, it&#39;s torque is less than 120ft-lbs, real wheel on dynojet in IT trim?
[/b]

Realizing that my info is just one data point, and that not everyone here knows the VW stuff like Kirk and I, here are the salient differences between the A3 and A2 Golf:
A3 has 2 liter vs. A2 1.8 liter - much of this is longer stroke, thus my comment about expected torque gain
A3 has crossflow 8v head vs. A2 counterflow 8v head
A3 has an ever so slightly less desireable cam profile
A3 chassis is pretty close to a 11/10ths scale version of the A2
both cars can run rear drum or disk - and yes some think drums are better (I started this way, but changed to disks for ease of maintenance, and lower rotational inertia despite higher assembly weight).
A3 has 10.1" vented front disks vs A2 9.4" vented front disks
EDIT - A3 can run 14x6 or 15x6 wheels vs A2 13,14 or 15x6 options
A3 has a more advanced &#39;Motronic&#39; engine management system, A2 can run Bosch CIS-E continuous flow system or VW Digifant electronic system (I run CIS-E, the A2 that ran at the front of the ARRC was Digi)
A3 is speced at 70# higher weight.

They are similar on the macro scale, but are different cars in the details, and have different strengths. I do think the A3 is the car to start with between the two if you want to go as fast as possible, but I am also a bit bull-headed and think I can build an A2 that can beat them - and hope to do that. Success or failure will both provide some fun times, but the former would be much sweeter.

You won&#39;t find me complaining often (hopefully at all, and if I come across that way it is not intended) about the competitiveness of my car of choice, as I beleive it is a &#39;prototypical&#39; ITB car. I also appreciate that it has had a long run as one of the the front runners in ITB in general. A2 Golf owners are the last ones in the world that have a reason to complain about classing IMO.

ScotMac
11-15-2007, 12:49 PM
My motor is a full build.
.40 over
balanced internals
machine work by AMT Racing Engines
built by the same builder of Chuck Mathis podium GP motor (Chuck)
fresh head (edit - IT legal porting, factory valve job, new guides/seals/lifters, resurfaced)
10.47:1 compression ratio
Techtonics header
fueling is very right
underdrive pullys

The result on a Dynapac was 109hp 105ft-lb once we got her all together.

We altered timing and fuel on the dyno as expected, and also tried different intake tubes from the fuel distributor to the throttle body - whoda thunk that the stock pipe would perform best...
[/b]
Thanks for the numbers. Interesting. I don&#39;t have a lot of knowledge of dynapac, but i hear quotes that it is lower than dynojet. Dynojet numbers probably wouldn&#39;t put you over 120ft-lbs, but might it be close? ;)



Something that i may have missed - where would the 4-cyl Fiero be weight-wise, just looking at the stock quoted power/torque figures and other typical adjusters? I did know that it hadn&#39;t been through the Great Adjustment.
[/b]

That&#39;s is exactly what i would like to know. Andy, can you help us?

I can guess, based on those A3 Golf numbers, though...

If we are really using a 16lbs/hp mulitplier (like the Golf), let&#39;s say we add a pound or 2 for mid-engine and aero, and torque (though torque is same A3 Golf). That puts the fiero at 2200lbs for ~18lbs/hp. That would be a little low for torque, though : 14.3lbs/ft-lb. So, maybe around 2300lbs? 2300lbs puts the Fiero at 18.8lbs/hp and 15lbs/ft-lb, as compared to the A3 Golf at 16.3lbs/hp and 15.4lbs/ft-lb.

The car is light, so i believe it could probably get to that weight. Even stock it was 2590-2790lbs.

tom91ita
11-15-2007, 01:27 PM
okay, with regards to the honda and camber, here is the 88-91 civic/crx front knuckle:

https://www.hondapartsdeals.com/honda_parts...component=B++27 (https://www.hondapartsdeals.com/honda_parts_list.php?hp_queried_components=0&hp_series_id=594&hp_series_model=CRX&hp_series_year=1990&hp_series_door_ext_grade=2DR+HF&hp_series_transmission=5MT&hp_series_slsareacd=KA&hp_system=F&hp_component=B++27)

here is the first gen (84-87) front knuckle that the shock goes into and then up to the upper shock mount and typically camber plates to get camber adjustment:

https://www.hondapartsdeals.com/honda_parts...component=B++27 (https://www.hondapartsdeals.com/honda_parts_list.php?hp_queried_components=0&hp_series_id=268&hp_series_model=CRX&hp_series_year=1986&hp_series_door_ext_grade=2DR+SI&hp_series_transmission=5MT&hp_series_slsareacd=KA&hp_system=F&hp_component=B++27)

shwah
11-15-2007, 01:47 PM
Thanks for the numbers. Interesting. I don&#39;t have a lot of knowledge of dynapac, but i hear quotes that it is lower than dynojet. Dynojet numbers probably wouldn&#39;t put you over 120ft-lbs, but might it be close? ;)
That&#39;s is exactly what i would like to know. Andy, can you help us?

I can guess, based on those A3 Golf numbers, though...

If we are really using a 16lbs/hp mulitplier (like the Golf), let&#39;s say we add a pound or 2 for mid-engine and aero, and torque (though torque is same A3 Golf). That puts the fiero at 2200lbs for ~18lbs/hp. That would be a little low for torque, though : 14.3lbs/ft-lb. So, maybe around 2300lbs? 2300lbs puts the Fiero at 18.75lbs/hp and 15lbs/ft-lb, as compared to the A3 Golf at 16.8lbs/hp and 15.4lbs/ft-lb.

The car is light, so i believe it could probably get to that weight. Even stock it was 2590-2790lbs.
[/b]
Scott - You will kill the class with that kind of torque and less weight (or the same weight) than an A2 Golf. I do want to see where the thing falls in the process, but something is going awry in your logic there. The 2.5 liters of displacement does make a difference - even if flow is not ideal for the motor. This is evident in the torque performance of the motor, which is what actually moves our cars down the track. My understanding is that the Duke is typically not a rever due to mechanical challenges (weak crank) as much, or moreso than top end breathing. Yet it makes great low end torque because, well it has almost 50% more displacement than my motor.

The one thing we need to remind ourselves, is that it is all well and good to share our dyno data, and talk about it, but these graphs are in no way comparable to each other, other than on very basic terms - even if all generated on the same brand of machine. There are too many variables at play that impact the data collected on a dyno to consider a factor to compare data from one type to another, or even to compare my numbers to Kirks on an apples to apples basis. I have also not found the same correlation that Andy mentioned about dyna-pak reading lower than other dynos, I have found that to be the case with dyno dynamics machines though.

My previous motor was a stock 60k mile engine, with a header and correct fueling/timing. It returned 96hp and 103ft-lb on the same dyno, this at least removes one of the other variables, and is the best way to use a dyno - as a before and after measurement. It does tell me that we did not get the oft quoted 25% improvement. Yes we had done some easy mods before, but the numbers for my used motor were not that far off the numbers for a healthy stock motor on that dyno.

The bottom line is that there are physical characteristics of engines that impact their performance and performance potential, just as there are for a chassis, or braking system. The process, from my understanding, tries to take some of this into account to get us in the same ballpark and sends us racing to sort the rest out. If we want to use dyno runs to class our cars, we should look at what classes NASA has to offer, because that is not an IT consistent approach IMO.

Like I said, I would like to see where the process puts your car - if it was not reviewed in the Great Adjustment, but IMO if it comes out as close to the A2 Golf as the numbers you just quoted, it will be off the mark, and that car will dominate the class on most tracks.

JeffYoung
11-15-2007, 02:16 PM
Not an ITB guy, but will weigh in here with one bit of anecdotal evidence only. For the Fiero guy, I&#39;m a lot like you, but in S: class leading torque (or close to it) but a bit down on hp. 195 ft. lbs, 160 whp last time I checked.

What you give up at the very end of the long straights you can make up (and more at shorter tracks) getting off the corner and getting up the hills.

A torque advantage can be as significant if not more significant than a corresponding hp advantage in my experience. After last year, I&#39;m pretty confident that if I can solve my rear end "hook up" issues, the car is a top 3 car in the SEDiv (top 5 or so right now).

Don&#39;t dismiss the torque advantage, and learn how to use it. It&#39;s not all about that last 1/8 of a mile on the straights.

Knestis
11-15-2007, 04:16 PM
Interesting asides aside, we&#39;ve got a blurb and great Tom Hoppe pics up on the site at...

http://www.it2.evaluand.com/gti/arrc07.php

http://www.it2.evaluand.com/gti/images/mk3.2/PabloARRC2.jpg

K

ScotMac
11-15-2007, 04:34 PM
Scott - You will kill the class with that kind of torque and less weight (or the same weight) than an A2 Golf. I do want to see where the thing falls in the process, but something is going awry in your logic there. The 2.5 liters of displacement does make a difference - even if flow is not ideal for the motor. This is evident in the torque performance of the motor, which is what actually moves our cars down the track. My understanding is that the Duke is typically not a rever due to mechanical challenges (weak crank) as much, or moreso than top end breathing. Yet it makes great low end torque because, well it has almost 50% more displacement than my motor.
[/b]
What, is there a new VW i don&#39;t know about, at 1.5 litre? If not, then come on Chris, the statements here have been close to accurate...let&#39;s keep it that way. .7 is 39% of 1.8, not 50%. Yes, my displacement is greater than yours, but how relevant is that if the engine doesn&#39;t use that displacment to produce greater HP and Torque?

Yes, the engine does have mechanical challenges (tho not necessarily the crank). But the top-end breathing was definitely not designed to handle the revs, which can easily be seen on my HP chart.


The one thing we need to remind ourselves, is that it is all well and good to share our dyno data, and talk about it, but these graphs are in no way comparable to each other, other than on very basic terms - even if all generated on the same brand of machine. There are too many variables at play that impact the data collected on a dyno to consider a factor to compare data from one type to another, or even to compare my numbers to Kirks on an apples to apples basis. I have also not found the same correlation that Andy mentioned about dyna-pak reading lower than other dynos, I have found that to be the case with dyno dynamics machines though.
[/b]
That is what i have been saying ALL along. That specific examples mean little. However, the process has to base it&#39;s number on SOMETHING, and i believe it is the more generic stock numbers, along w/ other factors. And the stock numbers actually agree pretty well w/ the specific examples here.


My previous motor was a stock 60k mile engine, with a header and correct fueling/timing. It returned 96hp and 103ft-lb on the same dyno, this at least removes one of the other variables, and is the best way to use a dyno - as a before and after measurement. It does tell me that we did not get the oft quoted 25% improvement. Yes we had done some easy mods before, but the numbers for my used motor were not that far off the numbers for a healthy stock motor on that dyno.
[/b]
Andy can correct me if i&#39;m wrong, but i do not beleive the 25% number AT ALL means that each car will acheive that. My car obviously has not yet. It was simply chosen as a method of allowing consistency in the initial classing of cars via the process.


The bottom line is that there are physical characteristics of engines that impact their performance and performance potential, just as there are for a chassis, or braking system. The process, from my understanding, tries to take some of this into account to get us in the same ballpark and sends us racing to sort the rest out. If we want to use dyno runs to class our cars, we should look at what classes NASA has to offer, because that is not an IT consistent approach IMO.
[/b]
I don&#39;t think that anyone here is proposing that we use dyno runs to class our cars. That is a whole different topic.


IMO if it comes out as close to the A2 Golf as the numbers you just quoted, it will be off the mark, and that car will dominate the class on most tracks.
[/b]
I disagree that it will dominate any MORE than the MkIII Golf. The numbers i chose put it OVER 2lbs/hp worse than the MkIII Golf, at about the SAME torque (using *stock* hp and torque).


Like I said, I would like to see where the process puts your car - if it was not reviewed in the Great Adjustment.
[/b]

That&#39;s all i am asking, for it to be reviewed via the process.

shwah
11-15-2007, 06:03 PM
What, is there a new VW i don&#39;t know about, at 1.5 litre? If not, then come on Chris, the statements here have been close to accurate...let&#39;s keep it that way. .7 is 39% of 1.8, not 50%. Yes, my displacement is greater than yours, but how relevant is that if the engine doesn&#39;t use that displacment to produce greater HP and Torque?

Yes, the engine does have mechanical challenges (tho not necessarily the crank). But the top-end breathing was definitely not designed to handle the revs, which can easily be seen on my HP chart.[/b]
OK. So your car has a much larger engine (40% or 50% are both big differentials), and makes more torque, despite not breathing well up top (if we were taking the dynos literally I could argue that your car makes more ft-lb than mine for 3/4 of the rev range). Maybe I&#39;m reading this wrong, but it comes across that you think your car is disadvantaged because it does not make high rpm hp and should recieve some &#39;consideration&#39; in the process. Maybe we see what the process says before jumping to that conclusion.

My opionion is that a 2200 or 2300lb Fiero would be an easy car to win in at a 7 or 8/10ths build.

As an aside, yes there were two 1.5 liter vw motors back in the early Rabbit/Scirocco days :D .



That is what i have been saying ALL along. That specific examples mean little. However, the process has to base it&#39;s number on SOMETHING, and i believe it is the more generic stock numbers, along w/ other factors. And the stock numbers actually agree pretty well w/ the specific examples here.[/b]
I agree that the specific examples are illustrative only, not true data for classing purposes.


Andy can correct me if i&#39;m wrong, but i do not beleive the 25% number AT ALL means that each car will acheive that. My car obviously has not yet. It was simply chosen as a method of allowing consistency in the initial classing of cars via the process.[/b]
I am not in any way complaining about the gains we achieved. My comment about gains realized are germane to the conversation, because you began lobbying in post 109 that your car does not acheive typical gains, due to airflow restrictions. Lots of cars fall in that boat. Not to mention that you appear to have top shelf torque despite that handicap, despite potentially not being a full build motor (CR?, balanced?, fueling?, .40?). We all give something up in some places and gain something in others.


I don&#39;t think that anyone here is proposing that we use dyno runs to class our cars. That is a whole different topic.[/b]
I agree.


I disagree that it will dominate any MORE than the MkIII Golf. The numbers i chose put it OVER 2lbs/hp worse than the MkIII Golf, at about the SAME torque (using *stock* hp and torque).[/b]
One event does not define dominance, and one dyno plot does not define performance of a single model in this class.


That&#39;s all i am asking, for it to be reviewed via the process.[/b]
And this is a valid request.

Asking for a car to be reviewed is fine, but trying to couple that to annointing another car that fits the class well as an overdog, while lobbying that your particular car cannot acheive the goals needed to be competitive in the process - before we even know where it will fall out is more than that.

Maybe it&#39;s just the poor communication method that is internet posting, and I am totally misunderstanding you. :024:

ScotMac
11-15-2007, 06:58 PM
Chris, i agree, the MkIII-Golf and Fiero issue are different issues. It was just so glaringly obvious that the Fiero needed to be evaluated when i saw the numbers for the Golf as compared to its weight. Also, since we conveniently had numbers for Golf, it was used as way of deriving numbers for the Fiero, since it hasn&#39;t been evaluated.

I am glad we mostly agree. The only real disagreement being my numbers. Note, those numbers are AGAIN simply derived directly from the STOCK numbers for the Golf HP and Torque. Obvoiusly they don&#39;t take into account other factors (aero, brake, suspension, ...), but they are accurate for HP and Torque. In fact, i EVEN gave the Golf a *better* power-to-weight ratio by *2* lbs/hp, to allow for any slop in the other "process" parameters.

Anyway, rather than arguing about it, lets just wait and see how it plays out (i have already sent the letter).

Andy Bettencourt
11-15-2007, 07:25 PM
If *I* were to run the 2.5 Fiero through the process for ITB assuming 98 stock HP, it would fall around 2265lbs.

Of course, the other 8 guys get a vote too...:)

shwah
11-15-2007, 07:33 PM
Well there we go :emgift:

Does it take more than this discussion to have the car reviewed, or are those gears already in motion?

EDIT - and to think it&#39;s not even thanksgiving yet. Too bad we can&#39;t share a round of :birra: after days like this.

Knestis
11-15-2007, 07:42 PM
Is that 98hp the most potent engine available from among the years/derivatives listed on the spec line in question? If so, that&#39;s cool. If not, you need to use the most powerful up-/back-date option, or put them on different spec lines.

Otherwise, heck yeah - review away ITAC.

K

924Guy
11-15-2007, 07:42 PM
If *I* were to run the 2.5 Fiero through the process for ITB assuming 98 stock HP, it would fall around 2265lbs.

Of course, the other 8 guys get a vote too...:)
[/b]

OK, so given such processing, and the opinions weighed in by Beran and others, I have to ask - where does the 2.0L 924 come out of the ITB process at, given 115hp stock? Anywhere south of 2600#?? :blink:

Andy Bettencourt
11-15-2007, 08:48 PM
OK, so given such processing, and the opinions weighed in by Beran and others, I have to ask - where does the 2.0L 924 come out of the ITB process at, given 115hp stock? Anywhere south of 2600#?? :blink: [/b]

Sure does. About 100lbs South IMHO.

ScotMac
11-15-2007, 09:07 PM
Is that 98hp the most potent engine available from among the years/derivatives listed on the spec line in question? If so, that&#39;s cool. If not, you need to use the most powerful up-/back-date option, or put them on different spec lines.

Otherwise, heck yeah - review away ITAC.

K
[/b]


Yes, 98hp is the most powerful. I purposely used the 88&#39;s stock hp, since it was the most powerful. Also happens to be what i have? ;)

Bill Miller
11-15-2007, 09:24 PM
Chris,

Interesting dyno numbers. Based on Andy&#39;s &#39;pack vs. &#39;jet correlation approximation, and the corresponding estimated crank numbers, looks like you&#39;re getting somewhere around a 35% gain over stock hp w/ that build. Pretty impressive.

shwah
11-15-2007, 10:29 PM
As I stated before. A stock motor with port matching, header and coolant temp sensor enrichment was 95 (or was it 96?) hp and 103 tq on this very dyno in my car. I don&#39;t buy for a second that I have 35% over the stock 105hp GTI.

2nd edit - Bill I think you are kidding, but don&#39;t know whether others would get it.