STL engine builds?

[Ron Earp]

Okay, so rotarties are not invited, period. I think that is a strategic mistake but it is stated STL is a sub-2L piston engine class.

But why let the ITS RX7 run at its ITS weight? Somewhere it was written the intent was to prevent poaching of ITS entries. That seems a bit counter-intuitive as the best way to prevent poaching ITS entries is to simply not allow the car to run in the class at all. Indeed, it is clear that class isn't receptive to rotary engines. Was the allowance made to bolster STL entries and get the class off the ground? Seems like a logical path to start a fledgling class although it could have an impact on existing classes.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Okay, so rotarties are not invited, period. I think that is a strategic mistake but it is stated STL is a sub-2L piston engine class.

But why let the ITS RX7 run at its ITS weight? Somewhere it was written the intent was to prevent poaching of ITS entries. That seems a bit counter-intuitive as the best way to prevent poaching ITS entries is to simply not allow the car to run in the class at all. Indeed, it is clear that class isn't receptive to rotary engines. Was the allowance made to bolster STL entries and get the class off the ground? Seems like a logical path to start a fledgling class although it could have an impact on existing classes.

Of course it was Ron. Double dippers artificially raise entry numbers promoting National status. What we have to understand is that currently, it was an 'allowance', not intended to be competitive.

I don't get the 'poaching' thing either. I actually call BS. If the rules are better than IT and draw some people from another class, all you have done is created a better mouse-trap for that racer. What is that bad? Finally a National class that has very similar chassis prep rules to IT...it could be so big.

[Ron Earp]

Finally a National class that has very similar chassis prep rules to IT...it could be so big.

If the SCCA would remove its head from its ass over the "National" and "Regional" distinction of classifications, allowing some of these legacy poorly subscribed classes to die, then we'd all be better for it.

I don't get the 'poaching' thing either.

Poaching or class bolstering, depends on what side of the fence you are on.

[Matt93SE]

Except that simply is not how a smart competitor, OR an enthusiast chooses a racecar. The NASA crowd pics the chassis and motor first, then finds a class. The SCCA racer pics the chassis, then the class, then preps the motor accordingly.

New class, new philosophy. Try something different for a change! you might just find out you like it!
If you get mad at SCCA, you can always go play in Performance Touring.

[Chip42]

The Honda 1,8L B18B1 (single-cam engine) won't make as much power as the Honda 1,8L B18C1 (dual cam)?

all B engines are DOHC. the B18B1 is non VTEC with OK breathing. the C1 is VTEC with long ports and good torque (P72 head) the B16/17/18C5 have a very good flowing head (P30/PR3) and VTEC, the B18C5 has hand polished ports IIRC. There are also very good flowing non-USDM non VTEC heads, as Corey has mentioned. major geometry differences between 16/17/18 are in the stroke and RSR, while the 20 does increase the bore and has a number of block differences.

best intake is the B16A2/3 and 17, and B18C5.

the B20 is a "truck" motor for the most part and sometimes has crap vtec more like that in the conomy civics. this is why B18 head on B20 block setups are popular.

also, FWIW, there are 8, 12, and 16 valve versions of the D series, with VTEC only on the intake side of some 16 valve setups. all are SOHC except the D16A1 (1st gen 'teg) which is non VTEC. most of the VTEC setups in the D series are tuned for efficiency, the good ones are the Z6 (92-95 Si/EX) and the Y8 (96-00 EX), the Z6 having the better head. the best head in the bunch is probobly the D16A6 from the 88-91 CRX Si and 90-91 Civic EX and Si. Best intake is the Y8.

FWIW I think the MZR-LF 2.0L mazda motor stands a chance, but any platform it goes in will obviously be heavy. the 2ZZ-GE Yamaha/Toyota (Celica GTS, lotus Elise) should be strong, too. maybe a nissan SR-20DE. maybe.

pretty much nothing else has a chance in L, yet.

[Andy Bettencourt]

New class, new philosophy. Try something different for a change! you might just find out you like it!
If you get mad at SCCA, you can always go play in Performance Touring.

It doesn't work like that Matt. I either pick a class I like, then look for a car (like ITR) or I pick a car I like and look for a class. I don't pick an engine, then car. And I submit that in IT and NASA PT, it's very similar. Who are we trying to attract with a 'business' model like this? Guys who love their engines?

The sheer amount of motors that could provide the appropriate power to weight right now is VERY limited...and so will the class. I just don't see any way around it. Even if the Miata can make the HP one guy predicts, it's a two dog hunt. Profit? I think not.

Still want to understand the crank vs WHP target numbers. I don't get it.

[Andy Bettencourt]

FWIW I think the MZR-LF 2.0L mazda motor stands a chance, but any platform it goes in will obviously be heavy. the 2ZZ-GE Yamaha/Toyota (Celica GTS, lotus Elise) should be strong, too. maybe a nissan SR-20DE. maybe.

pretty much nothing else has a chance in L, yet.

That 2.0L MZ I am willing to bet you is cammed beyond spec in order to make 205whp in Grand Am trim...AND it's a grenade. I can get the cam specs we are running now from Sunbelt. That GTS motor is legal? Thought it wasn't.

[lateapex911]

It doesn't work like that Matt. I either pick a class I like, then look for a car (like ITR) or I pick a car I like and look for a class. I don't pick an engine, then car. And I submit that in IT and NASA PT, it's very similar. Who are we trying to attract with a 'business' model like this? Guys who love their engines?

The sheer amount of motors that could provide the appropriate power to weight right now is VERY limited...and so will the class. I just don't see any way around it. Even if the Miata can make the HP one guy predicts, it's a two dog hunt. Profit? I think not.

Still want to understand the crank vs WHP target numbers. I don't get it.

Well, Andy, the class will only be limited if the guys running want to be competitive. As a national class, yes, it's more likely that you'll get guys who want to win.
Now, who knows, it might attract guys who love engine swaps for the sake of doing it, and are less concerned about their competitive level. But I know what it costs to go racing, and I personally don't want to bring a knife to a gunfight. Been there, done that.

Greg, I GET the way it works. I'm saying that to MY eye, that's the way the class works. To OTHERS, it might be a fun swap class. I'm not trying to put words in anyone's mouth.
So, to me, the Specific output is the crux...... if you want to be competitive, assuming the class has entries to compete with. Given that, I'm trying to develop a list of candidates. I'm trying to educate myself. Simple as that.
I GET that the STAC doesn't want rotaries in STL if they could be competitive. I GET that. I didn't say a peep about it on my last post.

I'm just trying to figure out what you guys on the STAC have in mind. What you're expecting. The vision. What you expect to 'see' in a year or two. What cars, what power levels, how many, etc.

[JS154]

So, knowing that, what ARE the potential candidates?
My list:
Various Hondas (I can't keep the numbers straight). But the 1.8 in the Teg and the CRX motor seem to be 'breathers' that can hit the targets.
Mazda?? Can a 1.6 make 160? or the 1.8 make 180???
Toyota? Hmmmm, not familiar with any that have any real hope, but maybe I missed one.
BMW. You say an M42. (whats that?)
Nissan?
Dodge: You say a Neon motor? 2.0L? Is that the 150Hp stock one?
Then Subarus new 2.0 170hp flat four maybe?

So the short list in my mind: (with your suggestions: Hondas, Dodge 2.0, BMW M42, Mazda, and Subaru.

For chassis, I guess it's a Miata, Neon, CRX, Integra, Civic, and maybe the new Toyobaru BRZ/FRS?

So, what else is there guys?

And:
What do we expect to see at the wheels for:
The CRX engine?
The Teg engine?*
The Miata engine?**
The neon engine?
The BMW M42?

B16A2 has good power and a lower race weight.
--

BMW M42 won;t have the output to weight to compete with the Honda engines. It would be cool to drop one into an E30 M3 Chassis.

SVT Focus could be a player.

Isuzu/Geo Storm possibly

maybe an early mr2

all are going to have a hard time against the hondacuras and mazdas

perhaps limit max rpm for the class?

[lateapex911]

B16A2 has good power and a lower race weight.
--

BMW M42 won;t have the output to weight to compete with the Honda engines. It would be cool to drop one into an E30 M3 Chassis.

SVT Focus could be a player.

Isuzu/Geo Storm possibly

maybe an early mr2

all are going to have a hard time against the hondacuras and mazdas

perhaps limit max rpm for the class?

"Good power" is what??
An E30 M42 would be an expensive way to be non competitive! LOL
Early Mr2 would weigh about 2125. Not sure if it could get that low. But, even if it could the AW11 guys will tell you, I think, that there's no way that car can make 160Hp. IT versions struggle to hit 110....

[StephenB]

can any model Mazda RX? run a piston engine such as a miata engine and run in stl?

Stephen

[JS154]

"Good power" is what??
An E30 M42 would be an expensive way to be non competitive! LOL
Early Mr2 would weigh about 2125. Not sure if it could get that low. But, even if it could the AW11 guys will tell you, I think, that there's no way that car can make 160Hp. IT versions struggle to hit 110....

yeah too bad non-USDM engines such as the 2.0L S42, the 2.0L S14 or the 2.0LN45 or the 2.0L P45 (all B20 versions) are not allowed, that would be cool, as would allowing some of the cool JDM engines that are out there. But it is what it is.

[Chip42]

That 2.0L MZ I am willing to bet you is cammed beyond spec in order to make 205whp in Grand Am trim...AND it's a grenade. I can get the cam specs we are running now from Sunbelt. That GTS motor is legal? Thought it wasn't.

it isn't specifically illegal, but it does need to have some lift chopped out of it to be legal. I figured the MZR-LF was the least grenadeish of the family, what with the goog RSR and shortish stroke. my thinking was re: the heads being pretty modern and good, though I don't have hands on with them.

Early Mr2 would weigh about 2125. Not sure if it could get that low. But, even if it could the AW11 guys will tell you, I think, that there's no way that car can make 160Hp. IT versions struggle to hit 110....

a cam and compression would help us a LOT!!! but you wont get the output of a B16 and really can't make the weight, like you say. 2ZZ (1.8L) or 3SGE (2.0L) swaps would do, and the mills both have the architecture to work well. kits and/or know how exist for the swaps, too. the 2L would be a heavy pig though and the USDM versions wont make the grade. the JDM version from the 1997-ish MR2 G-Limited (NA) is where it's at but...

either way, despite my love of the car, the AW11 MR2 isn't the caliber of chassis you need in thsi class (and barely so for IT!)

[coreyehcx]

Has anyone completed a true engine build yet?

Greg, how is your setup coming along?

Ruck, thanks for the input. I think I can get to an acceptable whp level even if its not 195.


I should be completed and headed to the dyno soon.

[lateapex911]

it isn't specifically illegal, but it does need to have some lift chopped out of it to be legal. I figured the MZR-LF was the least grenadeish of the family, what with the goog RSR and shortish stroke. my thinking was re: the heads being pretty modern and good, though I don't have hands on with them.



a cam and compression would help us a LOT!!! but you wont get the output of a B16 and really can't make the weight, like you say. 2ZZ (1.8L) or 3SGE (2.0L) swaps would do, and the mills both have the architecture to work well. kits and/or know how exist for the swaps, too. the 2L would be a heavy pig though and the USDM versions wont make the grade. the JDM version from the 1997-ish MR2 G-Limited (NA) is where it's at but...

either way, despite my love of the car, the AW11 MR2 isn't the caliber of chassis you need in thsi class (and barely so for IT!)

Chip I understood the head and intake to be issues on the first gen MR2 motor (AW11), so I was thinking, even with cams and compression, it was anon starter.

What about the 2ZZ in a second gen MR2??

[coreyehcx]

What about a late gen vvti 1ZZFE?

It looks to be around the same crank hp as a b18b.

[Chip42]

Chip I understood the head and intake to be issues on the first gen MR2 motor (AW11), so I was thinking, even with cams and compression, it was anon starter.

What about the 2ZZ in a second gen MR2??

Jake, head / ports are far less than optimal. True. Intake is, oddly, too big in stock form. Cams do get a very positive response up to about 140-160 hp, at which point its a whiz bang. But with a spec cam and compression, the 4AGE will never touch the B16 which has the same bore stroke and general architecture (dohc 16v 4cyl, distributed spark driven off ex cam and belt driven cams)

2zz in a mkII? Should be 2400#, doable. Sounds like a fun winter project. Who's buying? MkIII is probably the best option though.

Corey, 1ZZ isn't good for spinning. Should be fine in IT but cammed and whatnot it'll just eat the bottom end. Same with the 2.2L 5SFE from the mkII NA car and camry.

[R2 Racing]

I have no idea what the B18A1/B1 is allowed to do in STL, but my FP B18A1 most certainly doesn't make 195whp. That's a 11.5:1 compression and .450 valve lift build, with a stand-alone ECU, IT port matching and intake manifold rules, pimpy exhaust, cold air intake, .040" overbore, balance, blahblahblah.

I don't know why I typed 11.5:1, as that's incorrect. The FP classification is 12.0:1.

The Honda 1,8L B18B1 (single-cam engine) won't make as much power as the Honda 1,8L B18C1 (dual cam)? Shocked, I am.

You're so not a Honda guy....

These are all 1.8L, DOHC engines:
B18A1 - non-VTEC, and produced from 90-93.
B18B1 - exact same as a B18A1, but produced from 94-01 with a little more exhaust lift, 1mm bigger throttle bore, OBD2, and +2hp & +3tq.
B18C1 - the "GSR" VTEC version, with +30hp over the B18A1/B1.

[coreyehcx]

I don't know why I typed 11.5:1, as that's incorrect. The FP classification is 12.0:1.

So where are you at with that setup? (Im guessing 170 based off your site)

STL is at 11.0:1, .425 lift, port matching/gasket but no additional mods to the intake. So I would assume those increases alone would produce pretty decent power on a b18a/b1 with that type of compression and lift for FP.

I would have thought you could be at the 200+ mark with the allowances in FP but I guess not.


b18b1 had different fuel maps on the factory tune as well to help produce the additional power .



I just thought about the bastard rare b17a1 vtec motor. edit: i saw what i was looking for on this.

[mossaidis]

^ b17a1 I *think* hits the sweet weight min spot for my EG. Rare is an understatement.