Eurasian Engines - Proposal?

[coreyehcx]

All engines still have to be under the STL limitations for compression, lift, and obviously the rest of the rules so it doesn't really matter unless someone is running a cheater motor.

Pop the hood and that would be pretty easy to identify if someone is running a JDM/EDM S54, B16B, and on and on....a quick search on a smart phone.

I dont see why some are so worried about this, Hondas/Acuras would be easy enough to police. The Mazdas, BMWs, VWs, Toyotas and other makes Im sure all have experts for each one that could supply data in terms of what to watch for or police. I could easily put together a cheater list and submit if that would help for Hondas, I know others are very knowledgeable about their makes and their over seas counterparts like Chip and his Toyota's, knestis with his, and many others.

Would that help at all?

I was questioned a little bit even about my B18B1 at Drivers School by the head instructors. Hey nice car, is that an oem manifold, is that the oem throttle body.....ha ha yes and yes..he so happened to be very familiar with Hondas.

[Rabbit07]

:026:

Chris, hey, I'm not trying to attack you...
But, look at what you wrote. I'm sure you were just typing off the top of your head, but really....and I'm not trying to be the biggest dick around... that statement makes little sense.
First, are you REALLY going to look at it if it doesn't do well???? And if so, based on what sample size? (Forgetting the whole what defines the 'that far off' aspect). Basicaly, you're saying that the STAC is going to mointor performance and make adjustments. I really don't think thats the case, but, obviously, I could be wrong.

Second, you said you were sure it would do fine. Well, yea, maybe against unprepared STL cars, or double dippers, but who cares about that? I can't see how the motor has a snowballs chance in hell of competing when it's hundreds of pounds heavy.

Listen, I'm of the philosophy that if you list an engine, make it so that it fits. If it doesn't fit,* then don't list it. I'm not sure I see the point of listing it, but thats based on my philosophy.

*It seems that it misses the class standards because you consider it to be 2.6L, above the max size, and it's stock rating is well above the max allowed. IIRC the stock rating is (was?) 238, which is right with the S2000 2.0L (240) that is excluded.

So, I'm sorry to piss you off, but your comments seemed at odds with my perception of reality.

Yes, we will monitor.

[JS154]

That's why we'd review and approve each and every non-US engine... Though that thing would slot nicely into STU (and would drop right into Eric's car...) - GA

That would be an awesome engine for STU...if it had been delivered in a street car, which i don't believe it was. (S42)

The P54 would be a super cool motor to run in STU as well (E90 3er 2.0L BTCC/WTCC motor) ...I think they are still available form BMW at aroud $60k each.

the 2.0L S14 however, was delivered in street cars, in the E30 320is. It's a destroked 2.3L, same block, heads, etc. That would be a viable engine for STL, if it were to be allowed. With the compression and cam lift limits it would be a player in STL, doubtful it would be a winner, but certainly fun nonetheless. It would be cool in STU as well, but I think getting a BMW down to 2200# under the rules is not going to happen.

If I were doing this fresh, I would probably be looking at the N54 Turbo motor in the newest Z4 (2.0L Turbo).

[Z3_GoCar]

From the thread over on RRAX:
I suggested that they do some adders along those lines, James. So for, Peter doesn't seem to love it, LOL.

Between '98, when BMW stopped importing four cylinder motors into the US, and '12 BMW's built several metric tons of 2.0 liter motors, most are economy motors designed for low-mid range inexpensive commuters, and they make the same HP as the 1.8l m42 and my 1.9l m44 ~143hp. They're designed as decent hp, good torque motors for a relatively heavy (~3000lbs) car.

The only motor that would be interesting would be the N-45 2.0 liter; however, they only made 2600 of these in '06. It's a 173hp motor, even race built it won't match up with an Acura 1.8 at 150-200lbs lighter and making the exact same hp. So, to even get close takes a very limited production homologation special, and then it's still off by a country mile.

[Knestis]

I'm just a dork but for the life of me, I can't find the "feedback requested" item re: non-USDM engines in ST anywhere... Help?

K

[Chip42]

letter 7402, under suggested rules for 2013, page 3 of the may fastrack.

[Knestis]

Thanks, Chip! Letter of support submitted.



Plot of an actual stock example (blue) compared to the VW factory published output using the DIN std of measurement and correction (red).

Power - Torque - Conditions
VW claims 110kW (150PS) @6000 rpm - 180Nm (133 lbft) @4800 rpm - DIN 70020
Actual 154bhp @ 6300rpm - 138lbft@4300 rpm- Dyno Dynamics ATMC2 correction used

K

[shwah]

Kirk - seems to me that the 1.8 and 2.0 20v motors might have a better shot than the ABF 16v, simply due to a less crappy exhaust side port design. Would need cam development, and still might not ever make it up to asian specific outputs...

[Knestis]

Could be. I'm starting with what I'm reasonably familiar with (from rallying) but I'd love to get additional info on those options.

K

[Mrsideways]

If I were doing this fresh, I would probably be looking at the N54 Turbo motor in the newest Z4 (2.0L Turbo).

Rumors I've heard state that this motor is derived from the Peugeot 1.6's currently in all the Mini's. That motor is Not getting a good rep for being reliable. If it's true the new bimmer motor is essentially the same thing it's not going to be good news. Can you confirm it's of the same family?

[Greg Amy]

From July 2012 Prelim Fastrack:

1. #8268 (Matt Blehm) Support 2013 rule change for non-US engines.
Thank you for your support. This item was presented and approved by the BoD June 1-2, 2012. You should now submit your VTS.


PLEASE NOTE: the STAC does not currently have a procedure in place for reviewing and approving non-North American engines. But I can tell you with much confidence, that you CANNOT provide enough information for your VTS requests. FSMs, specs, expected output, dyno charts, throttle body sizes, manifold part numbers, EVERYTHING the committee may need to consider it and EVERYTHING scrutineering will need to enforce it. This VTS information will be posted publicly for download.

If you send us a request with nothing more than "allow the Honda B32x3s engine" and I assure you it will be replied to with "thank you for your input."

Also note that non-US engine are NOT automatically approved, and are ONLY approved on a case-by-case basis. If your non-US engine is not listed in the alternate engine table, it is not approved for use.

This should be fun...

GA

[Matt93SE]

Heh.. yeah, it's definitely going to be fun for you guys. I applaud the STAC for taking this on, but hope you're not ready to kill each and every one of us.

I'd like to chat a bit more offline on this regard-- I got a phone call from Eric a few weeks ago and just haven't had time to do anything about it. (Eric, if you're reading, thanks for the call! It wasn't ignored!)
Things are down here for the next few months with no races until September, so I'm going to spend some time on the subject so I can hopefully start getting ready for next year.

[Knestis]

Interesting indeed!

K

[CRallo]

Thank you!

[Z3_GoCar]

Letter #8568... Any questions, just e-mail me, I'll get all the spec's I can. But I'm sure that Eric can also get some of these spec's too.

[Knestis]

I'm doing outreach to find specs on the VW ABF engine and have a couple of helpful leads. I'm assuming that I need to get PDFs of VAG documentation - as opposed to "I saw on VWVortex that..." kind of "evidence." Is that accurate?

And can I get some guidance re: what the STAC actually needs in terms of the specific specs? If I get everything in the engine section of the current VTS, do you have what you need for approval...?

TIA

K

[Greg Amy]

I would think those PDFs are a good thing to have.

I suggest the STAC will want every bit of information that may/will affect performance that is NOT "open" to the STCS. For example, we probably don't care what the rods, flywheel, or crankshaft material is, as that's free in ST. We do care about valve sizes, throttle body sizes, and intake manifold (part numbers?). Probably can't hurt to include pertinent cheatable info, like port configuration and sizes, if available.

I think the macro following stuff is mandatory, including but not limited to:

- bore/stroke
- Exh/Int valve sizes
- throttle body size and configuration. If you wish to swap from fly-by-wire, provide detailed info on old and requested TB.
- Crankshaft configuration (not material)
- Fuel injector number and mounting location
- Compression ratio, if above class maximum
- Manufacturer's rated output
- Anything else significant to engine output that is not allowed to be changed by the STCS...

GA

[Knestis]

Groovy. Thanks!
K

[Matt93SE]

So, question...

Assume I send in a request for a bone stock SR20DET with factory compression and cams, and it's approved.
Would I be allowed to change compression and cams after approval, within the limits of STU rules just as if I were a USDM engine?

(i.e. My plan is to throw a stock SR in the car for next season while I'm building a better one)

Or would I need to submit an additional VTS for these changes?

If we have to ask for additional VTS stuff every time someone wants to change an engine tune (i.e. camshaft), that's going to make STAC's life a living hell trying to keep up with the changes..

[Greg Amy]

My inference is the engine will be approved or denied, with very little - if any - further restrictions. So if it goes as inferred, you would be required/allowed to follow all other STU regs.

GA