Del Sol VTEC - Please Contact me

[Bob Roth]

Does anybody know anybody who drives a Del Sol VTEC in ITS? In consideration of our recent 220 pound weight increase, I would like to contact other Del Sol owners to understand what their cars actually weigh and what their actual racing results were.

Also, if anybody has does or dont's on who to contact or how to appeal competition adjustments, please advise. I can be contacted at [email protected]

thanks
Bob Roth

[R2 Racing]

Wait a minute, they added 220lbs to the ITS Del Sol? Are you kidding me?

There use to be a guy in CenDiv who ran one a couple of years ago, but I have no idea what happened to him or the car since I haven't seen either in probably 2 or 3 years. He by no means was blazing the ITS fields or anything.

[charrbq]

If its the same guy I saw run the ARRC a couple of years ago he was by no means a threat to win. His car was very quick and tempting, but no BMW. That guy hurt his car pretty much towards the end of the race when it found the side of a spinning car. Haven't seen it since then.

I don't understand how the rules makers justify adding weight to some cars. It's as though rather than embrace new cars in a class, they penalize them for being competitive. Integras get popular and competitive and they slap weight on them. I suppose there's a reason, but I doubt I'll ever understand it.

[stevel]

In consideration of our recent 220 pound weight increase

[/b]

You sure? When did it come out? I did not see it in the Feb. Adendum, nor the March or April fasttrack?

s

[Bob Roth]

The weight add happened in the April Fasttrack. To be honest, I haven't paid that much attention to these adjustments as to date they weren't about anything I've been running, I'd love to understand what's happening.

tks
bob

[R2 Racing]

Wow, I wouldn't believe it if I didn't go and see it myself.

Both the Honda Civic Del Sol VTEC ('94-'96) and the Honda Civic si ('99-'00) use to be classified at 2360lbs. In the April FastTracks, effective April 1st, they have both been changed to 2580lbs. Geez, at that weight, I think I'd take a 2690 GSR instead (yet still not be seriously competitive).

Bob, I'm just wondering, how light were you actually able to get your Del Sol down to? At 2360 I think the car could be quite competitive but I doubt it could actually be made that light.

[Andy Bettencourt]

These cars were looked over during the Feb correction. Both of these cars were VERY underweight given their power potential and 160 stock hp. I think you would agree that at 2360 and given the specs this car was a major issue. Both cars now fit the process. (please ignore the current 2850 BMW for comparison - it's an anomoly)

AB

[R2 Racing]

Both of these cars were VERY underweight given their power potential and 160 stock hp. I think you would agree that at 2360 and given the specs this car was a major issue.[/b]

I do agree, but I also believe that 2360 in either of those cars was a ficticious and unreachable number. I'd just like to see what Bob was able to get his car down to previously.

Personally, I think 2480 would be a reachable and possibly competitive weight for them. But remember that now since it has been changed, it's guaranteed to be looked at again during the next off season. Just keep on racing hard and we'll see how things shake out after this year in ITS.

[Catch22]

As I mentioned on another board this morning, this is another instance of VTEC hurting the classification of a Honda.

Andy, those cars weren't going to be ITS competitive at the old weight. Now they are dead.
Sure, they do make 160hp, BUT they are very peaky 1.6 liter motors that make no torque at all. And as a local Atlanta driver (a good one) found a few years ago, that 1.6 liter engine WILL NOT hang with BMWs and RX7s and 240s on the last half of a straight. That was at the old weight with a King Motorsports powerplant.
He gave up on that project. I think that car is being regionally run in EP now.

I understand the process and I mostly agree with it. But this is a case (and I'm sure there will be others) where the process got it wrong. Really really wrong.
I'm starting to think "the process" is weighted such that the high revving, high peak power, low displacement and low TQ Honda products are in big trouble. With FWD and a lack of grunt, weight kills these cars, but the high peak HP numbers are getting them the weight.

Its a tricky situation.

[gran racing]

I primarily know about the '00 civic si (I owned one for a few years) and that weight will kill it. It does seem like a lot of weight for both of these cars, esp. as Scott said with the VTEC impacting the final HP numbers.

I too am curious what weight you were able to get down to.

[Bob Roth]

I bought it last thanksgiving so I don't know what weight the car will end up at. Based upon the previous owners, dry and a light driver was mid 2400. Given my 50 year old mass, I wouldn't have a problem at 2480.

I absolutely concur on the no torque comment though. I would be surprised if it at 5000 rpm has more torque than a 1600 cc CRX. Torque wins races, (or more acurately the area under the HP curve wins) not the HP peak at redline.

The worst distortion with this rule is the 83 to 88 2V 944 Its 2.5 Liter, has 56% more displacement than mine and probably 50% more torque when he shifts. Under the old rules it weighed 2715 and under the new rules it weighs 2575 (5 pounds lighter than the new Del Sol weight). Plus it has rear drive, 50/50 weight balance, and can probably run 245 tires.

If anybody is on the committee is reading this, what I want to say is I didn't ever expect this car to win against good ITS fields. I just wanted something new, interesting and Honda. What I object to is having to run probably 75 pounds ballast while giving up 50% torque to every time I shift.

It would do a lot of good for the committee to publish a couple things or the cars in the class.

1) Representative weights without balast
2) representative HP curve for the engine types with area under the curve for expected operating range. (They are out there)
3) Maximum tire cross section (Mine is 225)
4) Its relative finish vs other cars in the class (its an easy exercise if you havew the results)

Again, my objective is not to change how ITCC does their weight adjustments . All I am saying is that although the VTEC Del Sol and Civic Si might be a good cars against the Nissan 240s or Nissan NX2000 in ITA, its a no brainer that they don't have the stones to win in ITS. I bought the car knowing that it can't run with RX7's, and BMW's. I accept that it won't, I just object to having to look at 75 to 100 pounds balast while doing it .

thanks for letting me spew.

Bob Roth
Honda double wishbone racing since 1991

[SPiFF]

Andy, those cars weren't going to be ITS competitive at the old weight. Now they are dead.
Sure, they do make 160hp, BUT they are very peaky 1.6 liter motors that make no torque at all.
[/b]

Yup. The "power potential" is not there either. VTEC motors are rated high from the fectory and are already in a high state of tune in stock trim. IT prep is not going to give you as much as you might think.

[charrbq]

Yup. The "power potential" is not there either. VTEC motors are rated high from the fectory and are already in a high state of tune in stock trim. IT prep is not going to give you as much as you might think.
[/b]

that's a fact proven in the Integra ITS car. It's a screamer on the streets, but it's done on the track. What you buy off the showroom floor is just about it. I once thought about a Del Sol, hoping that the ITS car would get mercifully bumped down to ITA. I was told by a well informed person that it would never happen. The word VTEC puts it in ITS no matter what displacement. The board is just too afraid of every class being won by a Honda.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I don't know what to tell you guys. To say that this car wouldn't be competitive at 2360 is a little shakey. You guys talk about lack of torque but the 1.3L RX-7 puts down 130ft/lbs at the wheels. How far off are we talking on the 160hp 1.6L?

262mm front brakes. A quick look through the ITS books shows those brakes are not that poorly sized. I stopped counting at 15 cars that had smaller brakes at more weight. I realize the things aren't going rip your eyes out but lets not go over the deap end.

How about power? The 944 mentioned above is 185 crank tops in IT prep. These Honda's should go 200 to 205 crank with a full-effort. 200 is a 25% improvment. Remember, Serra has seen well over a 25% improvement on the GS-R.

Bob,

I am not sure what you want in your questions. #1 has no bearing on any classification factor. #2 is factored more of a 'adder' for cars with huge torque. Ignore the BMW because that car has never been through this process. #3 I would venture to guess (because that info is unavailable) that 90%+ of ITS runs the 225. The benefits cars with lower weight. #4 is totally irrelvant. Unless you can provide the level of prep, the level of driving ability, the track design, the conditions, etc, etc, then on-track results are impossible to interpret. I would say that they could be used for trending over the course of multiple seasons to prove or disprove process weights.

We have said all along that the cream will rise to the top. I think you guys are vastly underestimating the potential of these cars - especially the Civic with the more stable chassis. Didn't Louis from LTB have a DelSol that made 170+ at the wheels?

On Edit: Took me a little while to find it but let's make sure we have seen the best...this is from MCN/Anthony Serra - arguably one of the top HondAcura guy around...

I have tuned many cars that were built to the hilt, including some GSR's only to find big power gains in a properly tuned exhaust and ecu.I will not share numbers, but theses cars can make good power, if they are set up properly, a shorty exhaust totally kills the torque on those motors, in fact I tuned a well known ITS car that was a (fully built car) only to find he was leaving 10+ hp at the wheels with a fully built motor and his number was north of 185...[/b]

YMMV.

[bamfp]

I remember Mike Cottrel's Del Sol making 160 hp and 105tq at the wheels with his King motor. I can tell you that the ITB car I will be driving this year makes the same tq out of a sohc 1.5L.

Blake

[SPiFF]

You guys talk about lack of torque but the 1.3L RX-7 puts down 130ft/lbs at the wheels. How far off are we talking on the 160hp 1.6L?[/b]

You would need be lucky (and wealthy/cheating) to get 110 out of the B16A. Getting 130 out of the B18C1 in the GSR doens't seem too easy either.

These Honda's should go 200 to 205 crank with a full-effort. 200 is a 25% improvment. Remember, Serra has seen well over a 25% improvement on the GS-R.[/b]

I have not seen any dynos from Serra's "well over 25%" GSR. His ITA Integra makes more TQ then my ITS Integra though. 25+% for a GSR is going to be 180 WHP+. I'd like to see the dyno of that. None of the GSRs I have seen, mine, Scott Seck's, or Jeremy B's, don't make anywhere near that.

200+ HP at the crack from the B16A is going to hard as well. That would be 170+ WHP.

My stock GSR street car put down 137HP/110TQ on a dyno jet. The ITS car makes 169HP/126TQ on a dynojet.

These cars don't pull off the corners well at all, they don't have the tire under the front end to toss them in fast at corner entry, and in the case of the GSR, they don't have the brakes. The weights given to the VTEC cars just does not't fit.

EDIT:

in fact I tuned a well known ITS car that was a (fully built car) only to find he was leaving 10+ hp at the wheels with a fully built motor and his number was north of 185...[/b]

Those numbers would be very impressive!! Lemme look at the check book and get back to you. :P

[Catch22]

Well, since Blake threw out the name I will as well.

Mike Cottrel (the guy that had the pink SM on the front row at the 05 ARRC, so he can drive and prep a car) tried the del sol a couple of years ago. Fully built King motor got him the numbers mentioned above.

1.6 liters is 1.6 liters.
Please don't compare to rotaries Andy, you know better than that.

And lets not race dynos. Serra's 185whp might match up completely to the 172whp I got from my GSR on Balanced Performance's dynojet. Until you do same day same dyno... Its all theoretical.
There is an ITA CRX builder out there that claims over 130 legal whp. All I have to say is thats a mighty optimistic dyno, and I wouldn't use that number to make any sort of spec line decision.

I've seen four ITS Integra GSR dynojet dyno sheets. ALL of them were under 180whp and aout 130wtq.
The 1.6 liter cars struggle to get 110tq, but will lay down decent power with about 160 at the wheels.
This shouldn't be earth shattering news. Its a 1.6 liter motor fer chrissakes.

I'm a fairly knowlegeable Honda guy in terms of IT, and I wouldn't have built an ITS Del Sol or Civic Si at THE OLD WEIGHT. So adding weight to them seems mildly ludicrous in my mind, and demonstrates to me that there is at least one hole in the process.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Scott,

I hear you. But without good numbers we have to go with the process. Your GSR lost 20% to the wheels? That seems excessive, no?

Serra's numbers may be optimistic but there is no disputing his cars make the power. You are going to use Jeremy's car as a data point? Just bolt on's and a chip get him to 165whp? That's 206bhp using your 20% loss! His car has no head work, no .5 point of compression, no .040 overbore, no blueprint and balance, no port matching. Is the DC sports Header the top of the line? What exhaust is he running (See Serra quote)? You think that is a Sunbelt/MSN type of effort?

I don't know what to tell you other than we have to use a 25% until someone can 100% disprove it (see Porsche 944/944S on the low side and Rotories/Civic Si 1.6 88-91 on the high side.

As far as a hole in the process, the only one I can see potential for is FWD/RWD. What would you say that is worth, given all things being equal?

[Catch22]

I'm not sure I understand 100% of your post Andy, Where did my GSR lose 20%, and who is Jeremy?

I'll just restate what I know. My GSR had everything (Sunbelt motor, custom header, maximum compression, tuned on a dynojet by Ed Senf) except a pimpy Hondata setup and laid down 172/130. If I give the Hondata 8whp (which I doubt) I'm still nowhere near that 185 mark. Exhausts? I tried several and didn't see much change between them. Maybe Anthony has a magic exhaust welder of some sort up there, but I think its more likely that its an optimistic dyno.

I say that because, as I mentioned before, Mine wasn't the only GSR in the low 170s with no torque. Scott Seck and Zsolt Ferency both have fully built efforts and both land in about that same spot.

As far as data on the 1.6 cars, there isn't much, but we do have the above results from Mike Cottrell's effort a couple of years ago. We could have shared that, but you guys didn't ask (at least I never saw you ask, maybe you did). Just keep in mind that there is one constant with the Honda VTEC cars... No torque. Another example is the Type R. While it puts down about 20 more whp than a GSR, both still have the same TQ (130). The 1.6 cars have good power, but horrid TQ.
Weight KILLS when you have no TQ.

And the FWD/RWD thing does come into play when you start adding weight because the FWD cars do 90% of everything on their front tires and brakes. I'm not sure how to weight it in the "process," but it does need to be taken into account.
This past weekend the 2005 ITA ARRC winning Integra struggled with an admittedly underprepared and oil using 1.6 Miata (Bowie's) in a VIR enduro because Alex couldn't hold off the Miata and keep the front tires on the car.
Its something to keep in mind. I'm not saying these cars didn't need weight, just maybe not as much as you guys think they do because they have no TQ and are FWD.

[R2 Racing]

Andy, I'm fine with quoting Anthony as we can all agree that he is one of the foremost experts on IT Honda engine builds. But if you want to quote him, make sure to quote everything he had to say on the subject.

He goes on to say this after saying he's seen 185+whp from one, as you quoted:

the ITS Integra has a chance on any weekend regionals (arrc is another story though) you can get the power, but it will be expensive to do it, more importantly the whole package handling and brakes would have to be spot on. 2600 lbs would be the right number for the car, it really should be 2500 but that will never happen. Write the letters and see what happens, there are so many of them out there, but too many guys don't want to play, but it should be car that should be given a break at this point.[/b]

Additional comments:

I think the guys with the lower prepped cars are going to suffer the most from the changes, so intstead of closing the gap its going to get wider. The people willing to spend the money and time & effort are always going to come out on top. I expect a decline in entries from this, BMW guys are definetly going to go other places if the cars end up being slow, and there are other series for Honda's to run in that look good also.[/b]

Cost for that power:

Just to clarify costs on a GSR motor package, this would include ecu tuning,header & exhaust $11,750.[/b]

My point is that if you want to base the competitive potential of the VTEC cars based on what you quoted, look at everything that "arguably one of the top Honda/Acura guys around" had to say about it. Right there is the peak power he's ever seen, the cost it took to do it, and still yet a plee to give the car a weight break since the ARRC would still be "another story".

The Del Sol is the same story and maybe even more so since you're never even going to see over about 115lb-ft at the wheel in one of those things. There's a reason why the B16A has become famously coined "the torqueless wonder".