Printable View
Just a reminder to everyone that the CRB is looking for Feedback concerning the subject of opening up crank pulleys, as discussed on this board many times.
Please be sure to drop a quick note with your thoughts on the matter to:
[email protected]
Thanks,
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg
what's the rule now? (I've been out a few years). I thought you could replace the crank pulley with a single row pulley anyway? (or are you talking about ALL the pulleys?)
If I'm way off base here, I would like at least the crank pulley replacable if not all of them.
Thanks!
Currently you may replace all but the crank pulley. It currently must remain stock.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
DOH!Quote:
Originally posted by Geo:
Currently you may replace all but the crank pulley. It currently must remain stock.
Looks like I got it (and $250 spent) backwards.. Grr. Its a dumb rule anyway. Every 16 year old in a civic has done this. The IT rules REALLY need to be updated to reflect the real world. My street cars have always been in a higher state of prep than the rules allow for my race car!
Well you see, this is why Darin posted. Don't just tell us. Write to the CRB! Send an e-mail.Quote:
Originally posted by Spinnetti:
DOH!
Looks like I got it (and $250 spent) backwards.. Grr. Its a dumb rule anyway. Every 16 year old in a civic has done this. The IT rules REALLY need to be updated to reflect the real world. My street cars have always been in a higher state of prep than the rules allow for my race car!
As for a street car being in a higher state of prep, that doesn't even phase me. My last two road cars were prepped WAY beyond what I'd want in IT engine-wise. When you have no rules it's easy to modify an engine cheaply.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
i seemed to recall that it did not have to be stock but had to be stock diameter.
i may have been breaking the rules but mine was stock diameter but had the A/C pulley section removed and additional holes drilled to lighten it.
Stock diameter and material. You weren't breaking the rules, and I did the same thing - except I made no additional holes, just machined off the front pulley section.Quote:
Originally posted by tom91ita:
i seemed to recall that it did not have to be stock but had to be stock diameter.
i may have been breaking the rules but mine was stock diameter but had the A/C pulley section removed and additional holes drilled to lighten it.
That figures - Now it's going to be obsolete instead of "limit of the rules".
As the rule is now, you are wrong. Stock is stock. Nowhere does it say you can change it, unless you have a rotary engine. No extra holes. No removing extra grooves. No modification. Stock = stock.
Chris Albin (yes, it's really him)
Well, not exactly...Quote:
Originally posted by OTLimit:
As the rule is now, you are wrong. Stock is stock.
From the 2004 ITCS, page 11:
So, in the right circumstances, you can substitute...Quote:
n. Alternate water pump, alternator and power steering pulleys of any diameter or material may be used. Crankshaft pulleys with fewer grooves than stock may be substituted if air conditioning compressors and/or emission control air pumps are removed. Diameter and material of crankshaft pulleys shall remain as stock. Type of accessory drive (e.g., V-belt, toothed belt, etc.) shall remain as stock.
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg
Thanks, Darin, for pulling my head out of my a**. Maybe I should sleep more than two hours a night, turn on my brain, and THEN get the GCR out before posting.
Or not.
Chris Albin
I had always interpreted the substitution rule to mean a factory pulley without the AC / emission groove may be used. I don't think substitue and modify (drill or otherwise alter) are interchangable.
Of course that;s why I asked the CRB to consider allowing either all pulleys to be replaced or crank pulleys only.
------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96
They are not. But if you can substitute, modification becomes a moot point.Quote:
Originally posted by Matt Rowe:
I don't think substitue and modify (drill or otherwise alter) are interchangable.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Okay, then my question is substitute what? An alternate stock pulley or any pulley? Typically if any pulley is allowed the language is written as something along the lines of "pulleys are free." That's not what the rule says in this case so altering a stock pulley would appear to be out of the question, which is what I was gettig at with the people that have lightened their stock pulley. If you don't have alternate stock pulleys than without that substitution there are no other options. Right?
------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96
Matt here has a valid point. It makes no sense whatsoever to allow someone to "subsitute" the OE part with an aftermarket bit, while NOT allowing someone else to "subsitute" the OE part with a modified OE part.
K
Kirk, you trying to have your Rules Nerd badge confiscated?Quote:
Originally posted by Knestis:
Matt here has a valid point. It makes no sense whatsoever to allow someone to "subsitute" the OE part with an aftermarket bit, while NOT allowing someone else to "subsitute" the OE part with a modified OE part.
K
Substitute is substitute. A modified OEM part is fine. Substitute mades modification irrelevant. You can substitute a stock OEM part with a modified OEM part. Well, except it must comply with the rest of the rule.
The diameter shall remain as stock.
Material must remain as stock.
Fewer grooves may be used if smog pumps and AC are removed.
Type of accessory drive must remain as stock.
Nothing above precludes using a modified OEM pulley does it? I don't think so.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
George, the implication of the rule is that the crankshaft pulley can be substiuted with the unmodified factory one for without those accessories. I've never read that rule to mean an aftermarket part could be used.
Of course, this could very quickly devolve into the spherical bearings/Motec/porting allowances we're starting to become used to lately...
Greg
P.S., it's because of "interpretations" as these that when I wrote up the Modified Touring rules a couple of years ago, I added the following:
These rules were written with clear intent and no hidden agenda, and the organizers Modified Touring 2 rules committee will not tolerate “creative interpretation” of the rules. A web site with specific competitors’
questions will be maintained; if any competitor has any question about what is and is not allowed, these should be directed to the rules committee for formal interpretation and publication. “Creative interpreters” run significant risk of having their modifications nullified without prior
notification.
Greg, while I understand your interpretation and why, I've always regarded this rule as written.Quote:
Originally posted by GregAmy:
George, the implication of the rule is that the crankshaft pulley can be substiuted with the unmodified factory one for without those accessories. I've never read that rule to mean an aftermarket part could be used.
If it says you can, you bloody well can.
So, you can substitute (that word is taken directly from the rule) within the limits specifically stated within that rule. Absolutely no where does it say you can install another OEM pulley. Furthermore, it wouldn't need to because if it's an OEM part for the car, you can freely use it without a rule stating so.
Open your mind and read this critically again. Give up your preconceived ideas and simply go by what it says. Regardless of intentions, my interpretation is 100% within the written rule. It's not tortured.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
But if you're trying to say that a stock pulley drilled for lightening is allowed I think that is over the limits of the rule. Drilling or machining a stock pulley is a modification, not a substitution.
At heart the real problem is the wording "substitute" which is ambiguous at best. Considering the CRB is reviewing a rule change based on requests to allow aftermarket pulleys is a good indication that they don't see as much latitude in the rules.
But, the gist of the requested rule change is to allow alternate materials and diameters for those makes of cars where aftermarket crank pulleys are cheaper or more common than aftermarket accessory pulleys.
Now, if you can show me where the aftermarket makes steel pulleys of stock diameter but lighter than I might be willing to accept that they can be substituted for a stock pulley.
------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96
So ask yourself this..
How do you measure the diameter of a pully?
In order to tech this current rule, you would have to wrap the belt that is used around the stock oem pully, measure the diameter, and then do the same with the suspect pully.
Right?
... Chris.
Get to work on the truck, no posting allowed!
Perhaps. I'd have no qualms about taking a modified OEM pulley through the COA. I'd argue that a modified OEM pulley is indeed a substitute. The choice of the word substitute simply allows you to machine one from billet IMHO.Quote:
Originally posted by Matt Rowe:
But if you're trying to say that a stock pulley drilled for lightening is allowed I think that is over the limits of the rule. Drilling or machining a stock pulley is a modification, not a substitution.
At heart the real problem is the wording "substitute" which is ambiguous at best.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
So, if your particular manufacturer offered a different pulley for non/AC cars, you can buy and use it. But if they put the same double groove pulley on all cars and offered no substitute, you're screwed. Right?? Hogwash!Quote:
Originally posted by GregAmy:
George, the implication of the rule is that the crankshaft pulley can be substiuted with the unmodified factory one for without those accessories. I've never read that rule to mean an aftermarket part could be used.
In that case, I have a substitute pulley that meets the letter (and spirit) of the regs. The fact that it is a modified factory pulley that I chose as a substitute renders your argument irrelevant. And if you want to carry it further - it is a true substitute, because it came off another engine (I think - I have something like 7 in the shop http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif ).
[This message has been edited by ITANorm (edited November 18, 2004).]
You might have a pulley that follows the intent of the rule if all you do is remove an extra grove. I've heard many people interpret the rule differently but I haven't seen a conclusive ruling. But, if you go and take off more material than just the groove, a line has been crossed. Drilling holes to reduce mass is not evident in the spirit of the rule.
Again what is the steward going to define as a substitute? Having gone back and forth on this who can say. It depends on the weather and the alignment of the planets probably on which way the ruling goes and there is always the appeal.
A substitute pulley still doesn't change the fact that I can buy a crank underdrive pulley from 3 manufacturers, but that's illegal under the current rule. That rule only allows alternate accesory pulleys which means having them custom made for big bucks. So why not change the rule and end all of this confusion?
------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96
I'm one of those. And you have my ruling.Quote:
Originally posted by Matt Rowe:
Again what is the steward going to define as a substitute?
The CRB board member I talked to last weekend would seem to disagree. Again, it depends on the phase of the moon when the rules are so open to interpretation.
------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96
[This message has been edited by Matt Rowe (edited November 18, 2004).]
Yeah, there's no conflict of interest in *that* ruling...Quote:
Originally posted by ITANorm:
I'm one of those. And you have my ruling.
http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif
Come on Greg. You are insinuating something here with zero data to support it. How do you know that the CRB member in question doesn't race in Production or GT or FF or whatever?Quote:
Originally posted by GregAmy:
Yeah, there's no conflict of interest in *that* ruling...
http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif
What I will say is that a CRB member can have an opinion like the rest of us, but until either the COA makes a ruling, or the CRB makes a rule change, it's just an opinion, same as mine. Same as yours.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
How do you know? Are you Jean Dixon or something? Ok, I'm messing with you, but the point is, you and I DO NOT KNOW what the spirit or intent of the rule is. If you're making decisions based upon your idea of the spirit of the rule, all I can say is I hope you're in my region. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gifQuote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Drilling holes to reduce mass is not evident in the spirit of the rule.[/B]</font>
As I've said many times, once a rule is written, the spirit and/or intent of a rule (unless spelled out) is irrelevant. What matters is the written law. This has been born out by the COA in the past. Just keep in mind that if you find a particularly clever solution, nothing prevents the CRB from changing the rule for the following year. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Which part of the "Winky Eye" did you miss there, George?Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Come on Greg...</font>
I saw it. Combined with the words it looked like you were implying something.Quote:
Originally posted by GregAmy:
Which part of the "Winky Eye" did you miss there, George?
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
wow! good discussion! i think there is room for intepretation and that is why i made the "substitution" with a modified crank pulley from another engine. i am not trying to cheat but i am trying to maximize the potential of the car. if i thought there was anything "wrong" with this, i would not have shared it.
i will continue to run this pulley when i resume racing next spring, God willing.
look for me in CenDiv events (michigan) with my new to ITB CRX (if I don't go to the Honda Challenge and run H5).
my handle will remain tom91ita even if i am in itb.
What is the advantage of an underdrive crank pulley if you already have underdrive pulleys elsewhere? I guess less rotational mass is an advantage. I'm asking out of ignorance here. If you are already 'underdriven', why would you need to underdrive even more?
Is it just to remove weight?
Tom
Tom, in my particular example, no one makes underdrive pulleys for the SR20DE that doesn't also encompass a matching crank pulley. Unorthodox, for example, offers everything as a "system", and buying just their accessory pulleys makes things worse (they're actually slightly *smaller* diameter than stock). Furthere, there's very littel space between the two pulleys (water pump, power steering pump) that you just can't go much bigger at all.Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">What is the advantage of an underdrive crank pulley...</font>
Greg
Thanks. That makes sense. The matched set is probably cheaper and more effective than custom made accessory pulleys as well. Kind of like the coil-over situation.
Tom,
For my car no one makes underdrive accessory pulleys so the only option I have under the current rules are to have custom made parts. However, there are the vendors I can buy an underdrive crank pulley from. It's the difference between calling up and ordering a $75 dollar part or having to design and have a shop make a $300 part.
------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96
[This message has been edited by Matt Rowe (edited November 19, 2004).]
I have yet to hear a compelling argument against allowing crank pulleys when accessory pulleys are allowed. I one is allowed the other should be as well.
------------------
David Rierson
#53 ITS Honda Prelude
Texas Region
OK, before continuing, please realize, the original intent of the rule change (yes I know the intent, since I share a brain with the person making the request) was to allow for a speed change of accessories for the purposes of 1) reducing water pump cavitation at high RPM and 2) reducing accessory speed to extend the life of parts, and sure, if there's a performance gain to be had, we'll take it. As far as I can glean from the rule the does exist, this allowance was made by permitting different diameter accessory pulleys. Problem is, it costs more to make custom pulleys (plural) than to get one pulley that is available, and also some vehicles have space issues that make is extremely difficult to work with the rule as written. Given that the Purpose and Intent sections of the ITCS specifically mention the idea of low cost, it makes no sense to disallow something that is cheaper to do when that can also be achieved in a much more expensive fashion, and this new method gives no other real benefit. Yes, I realize the Pandora's box I just opened here and I'm sure everyone will correct me about how wrong those statements are. Nice thing about being me is that I, probably much like most of the other intelligent posters here, realize that this makes NO DIFFERENCE in the grand scheme of things, and therefore I don't have to care http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif I am simply posting this so that I could hopefully encourage others who have the similar philosophy that there are those of us around here that just want to play with a race car that is truly cheap to run, and who gives a crap if we win- we just don't want to replace stuff every race. That's what GT cars are for.
So why would anyone want to vote against this rule change? The only thing is does is reduce costs. In fact, the way the rule change was written and sent to CRB, it included a disclaimer to prevent a pulley change in the event of the pulley being part of a damper assembly if applicable, but of course some moron decided to withhold that part of the request from the "request for input" thereby changing the "feel" of the rule change...
So George, since you're one of the people on here that I typically respect, I have to ask-Quote:
Originally posted by Geo:
Perhaps. I'd have no qualms about taking a modified OEM pulley through the COA. I'd argue that a modified OEM pulley is indeed a substitute. The choice of the word substitute simply allows you to machine one from billet IMHO.
Where does it say you "bloody well can" machine one? It says is that you can make your own and/or modify the crap out of a stock one? Yes, I see the part that says "Crankshaft pulleys with fewer grooves than stock may be substituted if air conditioning compressors and/or emission control air pumps are removed. Diameter and material of crankshaft pulleys shall remain as stock. Type of accessory drive (e.g., V-belt, toothed belt, etc.) shall remain as stock." but I'm really thinking that this is one of those "strained or tortured interpretations" specifically prohibited by GCR Section 1.2.4. If you really want to get technical, the alloy of steel typically used for billet is very different in chemical structure than the stamped steel typically used for pulleys. I bet my strained interpretation can beat up your strained interpretation... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif
If you need me, I'll be out hogging out my ports, stuffing a MOTEC into my ECM housing, and chucking up a stamped steel pulley on the old lathe to machine the thing down to the thickness of the skulls of some of the posters on the boards here... Oh wait, I wanted to REMOVE material... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif
------------------
Matt Green
"Ain't nothin' improved about Improved Touring..."
[This message has been edited by ShelbyRacer (edited November 19, 2004).]
OK, the ITCS allows you to substitute a pulley with fewer grooves. So it says you can. From there you have to look at limitations. They are few and we have both repeated them. So, if you substitute within those limitations, you're golden, even if you modify an OEM pulley IMHO.Quote:
Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
So George, since you're one of the people on here that I typically respect, I have to ask-
Where does it say you "bloody well can" machine one? All it says is that you can make your own and/or modify the crap out of a stock one? Yes, I see the part that says "Crankshaft pulleys with fewer grooves than stock may be substituted if air conditioning compressors and/or emission control air pumps are removed. Diameter and material of crankshaft pulleys shall remain as stock. Type of accessory drive (e.g., V-belt, toothed belt, etc.) shall remain as stock."
I'll be in the garage under the hood feeding the hamsters caffine. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gifQuote:
Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
If you need me, I'll be out hogging out my ports, stuffing a MOTEC into my ECM housing, and chucking up a stamped steel pulley on the old lathe to machine the thing down to the thickness of the skulls of some of the posters on the boards here... Oh wait, I wanted to REMOVE material... http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com