IT Fuel Rules

[mossaidis]

HI folks,

Rules state that IT cars must gasoline w/ no added oil that has a DC (dielectric constant) max of 15.

I am assuming some gas additives like Lucas Oil fuel treatment is probably out of the question. Can I use any octane fuel? Can I use octane booster like 104+?

What kind of flexibity do we have when using fuels? Or we just stuck using "pump" or race gas?

THanks,
Mickey

[rsx858]

Off the top of my head without reviewing the rules i would say an addative like octane booster is a no no, besides you can purchase legal fuel from the track at a much higher octane than that 104 booster scam product.

An exception to the rule that is very common is RX7 owners like myself who add a bit of 2 stoke oil to every tank purly for engine lubrication/health. It has no performance value and is important for a rotary engine.

With that in mind, i dont know anything about lucas oil addatives but if it is some performance booster thing forget about it. Lucky for me my car doesent gain anything from high octane fuel so im a fan of bringing my own pump gas to the track. cheaper to:). What kind of car are you running just curious?

[mossaidis]

I am getting my car, a 92 Civic Si (ITA), ready for April NHMS shool.

I think Lucas Fuel Treatment is actully a no-no... it's classifies as an oil. See MSDS sheet. oh well...

http://www.lucasoil.com/products/display_products.sd?iid=26&catid=2&loc=show

PS The car does run smoother with the treatment in the gas... makes for a small difference.

[tnord]

SCCA fuel rules are fairly useless actually.

if you're looking for added performance through fancy fuels....there's product out there available that will do that. it'll cost you though.....about $30-$40/gallon depending on which variation you go with.

[Knestis]

...which Travis thinks is a terrible thing and shouldn't be allowed. Which is why he's promoting it.

Errr, waitaminute...?

:)

K

[tnord]

...which Travis thinks is a terrible thing and shouldn't be allowed. Which is why he's promoting it.

Errr, waitaminute...?

:)

K


you're right....i do think it sucks. i've written letters to SCCA asking for more stringent fuel rules that prohibit these things since it seems at least a couple of them are harmful to your health.

did it sound like i was promoting it? sorry bout that. i most certainly do not.

<----runs 87.

[jhooten]

The last guidance I was given from the puzzle palace concerning fuels was that we would not routinely take samples and test fuels at post race tech. If a worker or another racer suspects a competitor of using improper fuel it should be handled as a protest item and referred to the stewards. Then, if the steward so orders, a bond covering the cost of the test is to be collected, a sample will be taken, logged as evidence, and sent to a lab to be properly tested.

Write those protest guys or tech cannot do much about it.

[tnord]

The last guidance I was given from the puzzle palace concerning fuels was that we would not routinely take samples and test fuels at post race tech. If a worker or another racer suspects a competitor of using improper fuel it should be handled as a protest item and referred to the stewards. Then, if the steward so orders, a bond covering the cost of the test is to be collected, a sample will be taken, logged as evidence, and sent to a lab to be properly tested.

Write those protest guys or tech cannot do much about it.

but that's just the problem Jerry....these things DO pass SCCA fuel tests.

[Matt Rowe]

There has been some discussion and investigation on having the sealed samples tested by labs, not reagent/dielectric tests done at the track. The tests are more accurate, and significantly more expensive which is why a bond is required. I seem to remember a figure in the several hundred dollar range in fastrack.

[tnord]

There has been some discussion and investigation on having the sealed samples tested by labs, not reagent/dielectric tests done at the track. The tests are more accurate, and significantly more expensive which is why a bond is required. I seem to remember a figure in the several hundred dollar range in fastrack.

and i would say that is just fine if they figure out a set of parameters that can isolate the exotic/harmful stuff from all the varieties of pump gas.

[Z3_GoCar]

and i would say that is just fine if they figure out a set of parameters that can isolate the exotic/harmful stuff from all the varieties of pump gas.

Ha, good luck. The reason these blends are avalible is because they are used to improve emissions performance during winter months. So basically half of the year "pump" gas would be illegal. So, your war with exotics is also with pump gas too.

James

[mossaidis]

Clearly an emotional topic. :) I think I will stick with 93 for now.

http://www.plainoldgas.com/

INteresting site... I like the concept and just might buy into it

[dickita15]

What Jerry is describing is the testing procedure that is under consideration by the CRB for the future because the current test has proven unreliable but it is not the rule yet.
But whatever I run 87 octane.

[shwah]

You can get your fuel tested if you like to see if it passes spec. This is important because of the aforementioned problem of some pump gas not passing, yet exotic lung burners passing just fine...

[jhooten]

Yes, some do pass the reagent and DC test. That is why the suspect fuel will be sent to a real lab for testing.

That was not the big problem as far as I was concerned. Every race weekend we would test all five grades of gas available at the track. Straight from the pump at the track 3 of the 5 failed the DC test. So some drivers trying to follow the rules were getting DQed. I do not like to write referals for RFAs on drivers trying to do right while blatent cheaters were beating the system.

Oh, BTW, Be careful with 87 pump gas. They are putting up to 15% ehtanol in it in most states now and that will cause you to fail the fuel test.

[shwah]

I would expect that any new rules would specifically allow ethanol, probably up to E85, with the recent 'green' veneer that everyone wants to put on their racing series these days.

[mossaidis]

It's seems only reasonable that IT and SM (of course P, SS and T/ST would also included here) be limited to use pump gas from E85 to 93. No additives or oil. I guess only people that would stink for would be folks that have tuned their cars for 94+ and rely on track gas. It would interesting to see what the rules committee finds out about testing and reasonable limits on hazardous fumes and cost.

Like I read before and agree with, IT - in the sprit of the rules - is meant to be a low cost class - burning up to $1000 in fuel for the weekend does not fit that mantra. I also think teams that spend over $20K/car in IT have a few screws loose, but who knows... maybe I will get there someday.

[shwah]

The current rule does not acheive what I beleive the goal to be.

I also don't think it is as simple as limiting octane that folks can use. The octane rating is not what makes more power on the 'outside the spirit of competition' fuels. Not to mention that some of us choose to run higher octane as a safety measure to protect our 'cheap' (relative to real race motors, but expensive relative to our budgets) engines. I run Sunoco 100 unleaded (purchased at a local Citgo for about $2-2.50/gal less than track fuel) in my car because I don't want a simple failure in my fuel mixture control to destroy an engine that should last me for many seasons. And this season I ran 3 or 4 races with a leaner than intended mixture, which very likely would have damaged my motor had I been running the 93 that should work fine in my 10.48:1 motor.

It would be a bummer if someone took away that source of 'cheap insurance' that I use for my car.

[mossaidis]

This site was so insightful.
http://www.vpracingfuels.com/vp_01_fuels.html

I like the language...

"SR1™
Designed to meet SCCA fuel rules; for CRs lower than 10:1. Produces more power than any other fuel that has to meet these rules.
• Color: Light Yellow
• Oxygenated: Yes
• Motor Octane: 91
• Specific Gravity: .720 at 60° F"

[tnord]

http://www.ercracingfuels.com/ercA19aA19k_a.htm

i think this is one of the other major fuels being used. i know it's from ERC, but i'm not sure exactly which blend it is.

[mossaidis]

Thanks everyone... I think we're sticking to 93 pump! see you in April (NHMS)