Remote Reservoirs?

[shwah]

Oh Hell, it's the weekend and I'm feeling stupid, so I'll bite... You're gonna do WHAT???

...hoping this is a ploy to get us off the subject of RR shocks.

Again.

Gonna make a set of wheel fans. Blackhawk is pretty brake hungry, and I run puny 13" wheels, so I figured why not make a set of carbon fiber plates, and attach some vanes to make some lower brake temps. Of course I'm lucky in that my production racing buddy already has the molds made, so the plates will come easy. Then decide between making carbon fins, or just using angle AL.

Yeah - silly, but fun to do, and gives me some composite practice before I try and make a new front air dam.

[lateapex911]

So, after remote resovoir shocks are allowed, what's next? ......... Custom fabricated suspension components? Non stock cams, injectors, intake manifolds? Where is the line drawn? We all have commonaly availble options, and if you want to sink big money, you can have somthing custom build. Hell, I could spend time on a shaker table to tune my koni's, how's that for a big dollar waster. You can't tell me that making RR-shocks avalible will make anything cheaper. That's nuts, because how much will it cost for the extra resovoir with a pressurized seal and a braded steel hose. Materally, it's got to cost more. Also, don't tell me that it can't be better than an integrated resevoir shock, because you've got a larger resevoir with more oil, the oil temp stays cooler, and shock resistance to movement is more consistant. ..............
James

James, James James....that's some apples to oranges comparisons going on there, but I guess I can see how you arrived at that point.

When the subject initially came up, I thought, "Again? This RR thing is sure controversial, what IS the truth on them?" (I wasn't convinced they were the be all end all of dampers but some sure think they are, and I wanted to learn more) So I did some research.

And you know what? It's like nearly anything, advantages and tradeoffs. Your "runs cooler" advantage, according to sources I contacted in the shock manufacturing world, is merely an old advertising ploy. More consistent? Again, there are companies that feel thats not limited to a RR architecture. It has been argued that some companies use the RR architecture as a crutch, because they don't have the manufacturing capability to make the dampers operate effectively, and adjust in a standard architecture. And, that an RR design can actually hurt certain aspects of a dampers performance.

So, I am not convinced that allowing the architecture (while keeping the two adjustment rule) is similar to opening Pandora's box, and I certainly think it's not in any way comparable to allowing cams or intake or injector changes. (Custom suspension components have been allowed for a looooooong time)

Now, I can see both sides of the issue, but I stop short in thinking that it will cost everybody money, because "the bar will have been raised". Critical thinkers will do their homework, and they will find that there's no simple trade....they won't send off a check for $4K, and bolt on 2 seconds of improvement. They'll find that it's way more complex...and smart money will look at the bigger picture, and find ways to spend that same amount more effectively.

The inverse is true too....the dumb money might just jump at the chance, and they will turn the same lap....which, to a guy like you, who spends his resources wisely, would be a good thing.

Bottom line, I don't buy the 'sky will fall' prediction, but......all rules changes have costs, and I realize there needs to be a strong motivation to change a rule, as the advantages need to be greater than the costs.

[Chris Wire]

......all rules changes have costs, and I realize there needs to be a strong motivation to change a rule, as the advantages need to be greater than the costs.

It will be interesting to see what ultimately drives this if indeed the rule ever gets changed again. Certainly market forces have driven the costs down for RR shocks, but what about the strut-type setups that are prevalent in IT? Those with more traditional dampers could easily transition to RR type, but the strut based cars will be left hanging in the breeze. And since our cars are 5 years old minimum by the time they reach IT, what is the incentive for manufacturers to develop RR strut packages for 5+ year old street cars? Not much, I'd guess.

I'd remind those in favor to look at the relative health of IT now, with great competition and good car counts, compared to what IT was and where it was going before the rule changed about 5 years ago or so.

We're back to "if it ain't broke....".

[Gary L]

Gonna make a set of wheel fans. Blackhawk is pretty brake hungry, and I run puny 13" wheels, so I figured why not make a set of carbon fiber plates, and attach some vanes to make some lower brake temps.

Okay then, I've got it. Guess I've been watching too many NASCAR things on TV... I thought you were talking about electric fans inside the ducts.

[Gary L]

I'd remind those in favor to look at the relative health of IT now, with great competition and good car counts, compared to what IT was and where it was going before the rule changed about 5 years ago or so.

We're back to "if it ain't broke....".

Well put.

[JeffYoung]

I have actually thought about this -- in line fans in the ducting line. Brakes may be ventilated....so what prevents us from doing this?

Grey area I guess, but ended up not doing it as it seemed a too aggressive read of the rules and I solved my brake issues other ways that I think are far more defendable.

But on this one, is it simply ITDSYC that is why you think they are illegal? Fair position to take I think, but just curious.

Oh Hell, it's the weekend and I'm feeling stupid, so I'll bite... You're gonna do WHAT???

...hoping this is a ploy to get us off the subject of RR shocks.

Again.

[JLawton]

Grey area I guess, but ended up not doing it as it seemed a too aggressive read of the rules and I solved my brake issues other ways that I think are far more defendable.

But on this one, is it simply ITDSYC that is why you think they are illegal? Fair position to take I think, but just curious.

You may think twice the first time you go over a curb and rip the whole system out!!!


Or are the North East tracks the only ones that have big ass curbs?? :eek:

[Gary L]

I have actually thought about this -- in line fans in the ducting line. Brakes may be ventilated....so what prevents us from doing this?

Grey area I guess, but ended up not doing it as it seemed a too aggressive read of the rules and I solved my brake issues other ways that I think are far more defendable.

But on this one, is it simply ITDSYC that is why you think they are illegal? Fair position to take I think, but just curious.

I'm of the opinion that if the intent was to allow fans in the ducts, the rule would have mentioned "fans" or something similar. The paragraph simply says "Air ducts may be fitted to the brakes...." with some limitations on layout. Incidentally, your statement that "Brakes may be ventilated...." is somewhat inaccurate. The paragraph says that backing plates and dirt shields may be ventilated, not the brakes.

In any case, there are definitions for "duct" and "ventilation" in the technical glossary, and again... no mention of "fan" (which is also defined separately).

In keeping with my certitudinal nature, here's the bottom line... It's a duct that's allowed, not a duct with a fan in it.

I will admit to some bias here, probably due in part to the fact that I chose to race an IT car that, despite being a 40+ year old design, actually has brakes.

[JeffYoung]

My conclusion as well. I ALMOST installed them on the theory that I would only run them on my cool down lap and in the paddock as I suspected that it was the after session heat soak that was killing my caliper seals. Eventually decided that was a slippery slope I didn't want to go down.

BTW, on a totally unrelated matter, I have two 3" marine in line fans for sale, new in box, been sitting on my shelf for over a year....anyone want them? lol

Jeff L., the tracks down here are for the most part fairly smooth and other than at RA and CMP, we don't do much curb hopping. Plus, this stuff would be, on my car anyway, high enough up that I wouldn't be too concerned about it.

[924Guy]

BTW, on a totally unrelated matter, I have two 3" marine in line fans for sale, new in box, been sitting on my shelf for over a year....anyone want them? lol

Secret here - they make EXCELLENT defrost fans. Of course, then I got my stock heater core etc working, and don't need 'em anymore, but... you may want to keep 'em.

[JeffYoung]

That would assume that I had the talent to race an 85" live rear axle 195 wtq race car in the rain! lol...which I don't...................

[jimmyc]

It will be interesting to see what ultimately drives this if indeed the rule ever gets changed again. Certainly market forces have driven the costs down for RR shocks, but what about the strut-type setups that are prevalent in IT? Those with more traditional dampers could easily transition to RR type, but the strut based cars will be left hanging in the breeze. And since our cars are 5 years old minimum by the time they reach IT, what is the incentive for manufacturers to develop RR strut packages for 5+ year old street cars? Not much, I'd guess.

I'd remind those in favor to look at the relative health of IT now, with great competition and good car counts, compared to what IT was and where it was going before the rule changed about 5 years ago or so.

We're back to "if it ain't broke....".

You have it backwards sir.

You are just making assumptions here which are completly wrong.

JRZ, and moton (the only two RR companies i will comment on as they are the only ones i have experience with) are MORE then willing to build custom one off sets of struts for anything you want. This is largely due to the fact that everything they make is custom and built to order. The strut guys would have a much easier time getting better struts, well all of the odd low after market supported cars would. One would simply get in contact with one of the two companies give measurements, and wait the 6 to 8 weeks. These would be complete struts ready to bolt on.

[Jason Saini]

Don't forget (to the Strut argument,)... and I'm going to make this bold. The current rule does nothing to discourage people from building ultra-custom 4-way adjustable $16,000 struts.

The rule does NOTHING. It's pointless, and it just makes the haves and have nots further apart. Sigh. Some of you guys just don't get it.

[jimmyc]

Don't forget (to the Strut argument,)... and I'm going to make this bold. The current rule does nothing to discourage people from building ultra-custom 4-way adjustable $16,000 struts.

The rule does NOTHING. It's pointless, and it just makes the haves and have nots further apart. Sigh. Some of you guys just don't get it.

change the 4 to 2 way and you have a point. Their is another rule in the book that limits adjustment to 2 adjustments.

[planet6racing]

Jason:

If people have the money to spend on the ultra-expensive shocks without RRs, what will prevent them from spending the same on shocks with the RRs?

What does having RRs get someone that can't currently be gotten without RRs? Saving money is not acceptable tech.

[jimmyc]

Jason:

If people have the money to spend on the ultra-expensive shocks without RRs, what will prevent them from spending the same on shocks with the RRs?

What does having RRs get someone that can't currently be gotten without RRs? Saving money is not acceptable tech.

More option, then the currently limited options.


The rule was put in to try and control cost. End of story. Rules can't control cost.

I don't see why people are so scared, many cars are running ~$3600-3800 shocks currently.

[GregMeindl]

I personally love this topic because I fought long and hard in T2 to get reserviours approved.
I couldn't get any shocks for my SRT-4 that were worth a damn. I had Koni's in it and some others just ran stock struts out of frustration. Meanwhile the ol' Dodge Motorsports camp had custom made shocks from Dynamic that none of us could get. Ya know until after the Runoff's 2004 where Fernandez and Toby ran way up front banging away while the rest of the SRT's followed up the rear. Well after enough kicking and screaming we were told we could buy them at a HEFTY price. Just bolting them on was good for 2 seconds out of the box. Full blown custom shocks magically inside a stock dodge cartridge. Sold that car.

Then move on to a 2001 Firebird with Penske's. Pure heaven except for the fact you can't get at the adjustment knobs easily if at all. Cost $6,000 + for those baby's. Then I fought to get reserviours added so I could adjust the shocks. Add now another $500 per canister. Think shocks don't matter ??? well that car was 3rd at the Runoff's in 2005 with Don Knowles. The other birds just weren't as fast. (See the add in Sportscar where the black bird punts the Subaru in the SCCA Credit Card add !!)

Spending money doesn't make the racing better. Thats why I switched to SSC. Then I got Car of the Year syndrome from SCCA. Here I am having a lot of fun racing IT with you guy's and its starting all over again with the damn open computers. Do you expect me to spend $4000+ for a Motec when other can just flash their ECU ? I am screwed. The cars worth $4-5000 at best.

Now we are starting the shock spending spree. I have a working knowledge of these shocks and have raced them in my 95 Cobra R's in MotorolaCup/ Grand Am Cup and then in the T2 Firebird. If you feel the need to waste money in this economy open up the shocks and kill the ECU rule. Keep it to 2 way adjustable's only. Hell its only $1000-1500 a corner. Whats money ??? Nice coil overs from Koni only $850 vs. $4-6000 !!!!

People complain about Lime Rock's entry fee's and then add Mosport into the Calendar. Seen diesel prices lately or the toll prices ? $32 on the GW Bridge. But hey Millville surely will be cheaper entry fee's. This weekend Summit tow was $125.40 in tolls and $286 in diesel ( $411.40 total ). Lime Rock is less than 1 tank in diesel ($84) and $19 in tolls ( $103 total). Yeah saving on entry fee's really matters. Shouldn't we watch were all this spending is going ?

[shwah]

Off topic in a different direction...

The 'ECU rule' was opened up YEARS ago. Lots of us think that was a mistake. Some think it had to be done because of the cars that can simply flash thier ECU for custom programming.

Regardless, it has been on the books. The only recent change is that the size and shape of the box that the ecu resides in is no longer restricted, and you are allowed to add or substitute specific sensors to allow use of off the shelf, rather than custom ecus.

People love to trot this one out as an allowance that was just made, but that's not true.

But yeah - I say let RR shocks back in. I won't be running them either way.

[lateapex911]

Greg, i think you are comparing apples to oranges.

If I am not mistaken, Touring cars are running stock, or mandated springs, correct? My understanding was that cars like the Dodge, (that, IIRC, have no spring provisions) used the dampers to add spring rate, and the RRs were integral to that concept.

In IT, you are allowed to swap in $50 springs, saving buckets of exotic damper money.....

[WillM]

I agree with Jason.

Allowing dual adjustments, but disallowing remote dampers, reduces one's options and/or makes it significantly more expensive to attain that 2nd adjustment.