Where to you locate an alternate engine?

[Z3_GoCar]

Good start on it Tom, but I think we need to insert a tolerance in any positional measurement. Stock mounts do sag and move over the years, maybe say +/- 0.125" In my case I even used the motor mount brackets off my original motor. I looked it up and they were all the same part number.

[Knestis]

Where do you locate an alternate engine?

An auto breaker's yard in Brighton?

K

[Greg Amy]

These are good ideas as a concept, but lack the ability to enforce. First, show me where in the factory documentation the location of the engine is listed (show me the spec in the FSM where it says the location of the engine's centerline), within the tolerances you're specifying, and second, tell me how that's going to be measured at the track. And it does have to be measurable at the track. No SCCA region is going to pay a bond to quarantine a car to take it to some frame shop for measurement of the engine location, assuming it can even be done. I doubt any competitor will pay that bond either; hell, we can't even get people to drop a $25 protest down for incorrect weight stickers!!!

But secondarily, no one has simply answered the question: so what? Who cares? Who cares if alternate engines and transaxles are not in the close-to-stock location? You can't use "cost" as a reason for limiting them, as cost cannot be contained. Convince me the downsides of simply saying the engine has to be maintained in the engine compartment with no mods to the car. Convince me the performance benefit of leaving it open like that.

I'm becoming more convinced that trying to create regs to limit engine location will not only be ineffective, it will result in only keeping the honest people honest while the dishonest person will just spend a lot of money to get around it.

GA

[Chip42]

I'm just trying to help, I think ST has huge potential but it has a lot of growing up to do. when I was a kid, I was going to be an astronaut, too. now I'm a middle-level engineer who sells racecar safety parts on the side and tries to eek out a few hours a week in the garage.

cost and all that is irrelevant - agreed. engine position should be controlled for ALL engines, stock USDM, non, etc... the intent SHOULD be to locate the thing in what is the stock position and orientation, or roughly where it would have been from the factory had it come in that car. not lowered, rotated, set back, etc... it's a matter of weight distribution and driveline alignment. if a swap gains you benefits over stock in this regard alone, it's a problem. find a way to make sure engines are located in acceptably stock-like locations. the all in the unmodified engine room rule is a start.

prod has such rules. (no engine movement from stock and allow limited rotation of transverse about the crank and vertical motion of "RR" engines) see 9.1.5.E.1.m.6 and 9.1.5.E.1.o.6
IT has such rules - stock position only. see 9.1.3.d.1.s
hell, even STO has restrictions on engine position. see 9.1.4.1.E.3 and 3.a. these USED TO be more lenient, I guess there's precedent that allowing too much freedom was a bad idea, eh? STO will show you your problems because that is where the big money shops first.


it's not that hard, just be big picture. place a reasonable restriction on the location and orientation of the engine. you WILL see rotation SOON, of stock and otherwise. it's natural law. stop it before it becomes an issue.

and trackside check the cam in just about ANY IT car. oh, right, unless it's a miata AND you have a cam doctor on hand, you can't. don't worry if the rule is trackside enforceable. you are specifying an intent, egregious over-runs of that intent will be dealt with by competitors and will be obvious. otherwise it's not going to BE protested.

the last thing you need to worry about is tech, half the time they can't even figure out what GOES in ST, and at what weight. I love tech guys, hell I am one (well, not so much since my daughter came to be, but we'll correct that as soon as possible), but they are being asked to "know" a whole hell of a lot. many of us can't agree on "simple" rules. it's up to experts and COA per the protest process, not trackside tech.

[Greg Amy]

it's not that hard, just be big picture. place a reasonable restriction on the location and orientation of the engine....you are specifying an intent, egregious over-runs of that intent will be dealt with by competitors and will be obvious.

Bingo. Completely agree.

So that brings us back to the current reg. The current reg specifies an intent, and offers reasonable common-sense interpretation. It will NOT stop the guy that wants to play the "letter of the rules" game, but it will make the honest guys honest that understand and wish to comply with the spirit of the rules. If we start getting into body shop manuals, and plus-or-minus 1 inch, and coaxial location and all that, we're effectively codifying and inviting that "letter of the rules" game. And I just don't think that short of explcitly listing all allowed combinations with all possible engine permutations and detailing location of the same, along with a full team of educated technical inspectors to enforce it, that we can win that game.

We do have a request on the table to clarify this issue, but I don't think getting into minutiae is going to resolve it. - GA

[Knestis]

Been watching this conversation with some interest...

...and have come to agree with Greg that there's really only so much that can be done to contain this issue, in practical terms. How about the proposition that the confines of the engine bay, firewall, subframe, and bodywork will define practical (if not absolute) limits? Absent any provision to modify those elements, there's really only so much latitude for locating an alternate engine.

It's not like we can flip the entire engine around and tip it over like was done on some Euro touring cars, possible because it could be bolted to an aftermarket dog box...

K

[Chip42]

but you CAN bolt it to an aftermarket sequential and MAY use an adapter plate for any stock box or with a swap, and I see no reason that with allowed dry sump (even of 2 scavenge stages max) and and those allowances an engine could not be rotated, in some engine bays substantially (particularly for transverse engines). I think that's out of line with intent.

I don't write ST rules, so maybe I'm wrong. yeah, fine, unmodified engine bay/cradle/subframe but there will need to be some exceptiosn to allow instalation of a swap for mounts and pans and the like, so a clear "what we intend to allow here, play nice and no hanky pnaky please" clause is needed IMHO. I agree that a toleranced set of offset and setback dims is probobly too constrictive, but I'm going to hold firm on my oppinion about rotation of components.

engines have stock tilts all the time. that's easily documented with the required FSMs for the chassis and engine.

a rule that allows some degree of rotation from the stock orientation might be desireable. if so, make the allowance for it a hard limit, its easy to enforce. additionally, consider a rule to limit the position of the trans. something like trans must be located along the same in/output shaft axis as the stock for longitudinal engines, and axle flange/inner CV joint cup axis should be at the stock position relative to the crank for transverse / transaxle cars. consider the nominal references to be from the stock installed drivetrain.

end result is no rotated mils except as allowed for fitment and some axle alignment for transaxles. otherise it fits within the confines of the stock chassis structure with limits and allowances for modifications specific to allowing instalation of swaps such as notched subframes, relocated or fabicated chassis side motor mounts, clearancing of the inner fender walls and fire wall for manifolds and accessories, etc...

keeps the crazy down, specifies your intent with an understandable and tech-applicable set of rules, is relatively simple and concise, and allows for some freedom to be creative with swap fitment. and, if needed, it's protestable though liekly to go COA for a real ruling and yes, requiring confiscation and large bonds.