Eurasian Engines - Proposal?

[Knestis]

So if a guy were to want to request that non-US market engines be allowed in STL, what's the most compelling way to present it?

It seems like a dead-nuts cinch, logic-wise, but (1) I don't know what the actual objection is among the CRB members apparently opposed to it, so (2) don't know how to gain traction on proposing a change.

Thoughts appreciated...

K

[Greg Amy]

We have a proposal pending to re-submit to CRB recommendations for non-US market engines. You may recall this was rejected in the July 2011 Fastrack:

Non-USDM engines will not be permitted in ST due to limited availability of some non-USDM engines and difficulties in compliance enforcement.

GA

[Chip42]

compliance is the responsibility of the entrant and his competitors, and is no more difficult than something obscure it IT, GT, etc..

allow these motors upon individual request, require full documentation be submitted, and float the allowance WITH RELEVANT NUMBERS under suggested rules in fasttrack for responses from the rest of membership. if the submitted data is wrong, it can be protested and the classification updated.

[Knestis]

I did know that it had been shot down - root of my question - but didn't know you all had another proposal going forward. If there are specific aspects of how it's being angled that we can support with emails to the CRB, let us know.

thanks!

K

[mossaidis]

Lookin at it from the other side...

Since the B18C5 (Type R) motor is disallowed by the STAC/CRB, then how can STAC determine which Eurasian motors have similar factory prep levels so that they can disallow those as well? Unless you ask the STAC to research each Eurasian motor that is requested, they would have no idea and doing so would seem like an bad administrative nightmare, more so than seemingly in IT. The other option here would be to allow ANY 2.0 liter or under motor.

Somewhat tanglible, perhaps the STAC would also consider being more specific regarding brand relationships. HONDA-ACURA, FORD-MERCURY, etc

[JS154]

Somewhat tanglible, perhaps the STAC would also consider being more specific regarding brand relationships. HONDA-ACURA, FORD-MERCURY, etc

Are you suggesting the rules wording about the manufacturer of the chassis and engine being the same are not clear enough already?

[mossaidis]

Are you okay with folks placing a Fiat engine in a Chrysler or vice versa? or a saab into GM? This is nothing new. in our new world or corporate hierachy and subs, where do we draw the line?

[TStiles]

When are the rules going to stabilize ?

One week we get a weight increase ( I hear there is a proposal for another weight increase for the RWD cars ) now we're taking a second look at non USDM engines.

I've already made my decision to just run my ITA package in STL until this thing shakes out , but I'm concerned that few people will build a car until the rules are stable.

BTW : Thanks to you guys on the STAC , I don't always agree with there your going , but you guys have invested a ton of time into getting this thing going.

[Z3_GoCar]

Are you suggesting the rules wording about the manufacturer of the chassis and engine being the same are not clear enough already?

Mercedes Benze makes Honda under license in South Africa since the mid 80's, and since MB was the owner of Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep through Daimler/Chrysler, which only fell apart a few years ago, does that mean that Acura/Honda <-> Dodge/Chrysler? When the whole automotive world gets involved, it starts getting a little less clear.

[Greg Amy]

Non-US engines, if approved, will be on a case-by-case approval basis, and all allowed engines will have to be investigated prior to allowance. All engine specs, such as compression ratio and camshaft lift, will still have to be met (i.e., if the stock Euro-cam has too much valve lift, you will not be allowed to run it). As you noted, without prior research there's no way to know if another sub-2L engine can/will produce more than what the class currently allows; that limit is inferentially around 170 hp*.

As for what engines are allowed for swaps, there is currently a debate within the STAC about that issue in regard to low-volume/alternate engine manufacturers. The reg currently states:

Alternate engines may be used, if the manufacturer of the vehicle and engine are the same (e.g., an Acura engine installed into a Honda car) and was available in a car delivered in North America.

"Some say" this rule is unclear, especially when applied to specialty/low-volume chassis manufacturers that installed engines sourced from another manufacturer; e.g., Toyota engines installed in Lotus; can any Toyota engine thus be installed in said Lotus? Or can only Lotus engines (which don't exist) be alternately-installed in Lotus cars? "Others say" that since the engine and chassis manufacturer are different, only the original, installed engine can be run.

There's also some limited debate regarding familial relationships. The reg above specifically implies that familial engines (Honda/Acura) are allowed, not just "Honda engines in a Honda" (for example). "Some say" that this familial relationship should be one of very close, obvious ties (Honda/Acura, VW/Audi, Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, etc). "Others say" that these relationships should be much looser, even to the point of very loose co-ventures (e.g., Saab engines can be installed in a Pontiac). Unfortunately, this last issue is very difficult to determine, as if one stays too tight then some opportunities are lost; on the other hand, if one gets too loose then using the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" logic you could pretty much install anything into anything.

As of right now the obvious ones are, well, obvious. But short of explicitly listing each and every possible combination within the Super Touring regs - which we have no interest in doing - it will be left up to the competitor to use their best judgement. Part of that "best judgement" may be to submit a clarification request to the CRB and ask for explicit "blessing" for the combo before you start, lest you risk spending time/money/motivation and subsequently being subjected to the protest/appeal process.

But, IMO we did ourselves no favors last year when we explicitly "blessed" a request to install a VW 4-banger into a Porsche 944.

If you believe you may have found a short-term competitive advantage in a combo (short term because once you've run it, the cat's out of the bag), you might consider using the GCR rules clarification process which, if your request is approved, will not be published in Fastrack (rejections are published).

You takes your chances otherwise.

GA

* That just my WAG; there's no hard-coded limit. That is based on the fact that the Integra GS-R's 170hp is allowed, but the Type R's 190hp is not. On the other hand, we just approved the 220(?)hp Renesis in STL at a very high weight (3000+?) so that "horsepower limit" is quite grey right now...

[Z3_GoCar]

The difference is that GM used to own Sabb, same as they own Holden in Austrailia or used to own Opel in Germany. Now if we're talking joint ventures, that'd be like putting a Subaru in a GM product, since Sabb partnered with Sabaru in the last few years while the Government Motors owned them, and share a chassis. Speaking of chassis sharing, what about Mazda and Ford, lots of chassis swapping there, Mx-6/Probe, Mazda 2/Fiestiva...

[Knestis]

Thanks, Greg. I'm serious about the possibility of something different for Pablo in 2013, mostly because it might revive the enduro rental market for us...

K

[Matt93SE]

Mx-6/Probe, Mazda 2/Fiestiva...

Mitsu and Chrysler..
Isuzu and GM..
Toyota and GM..
Toyota and Lotus..

And since FF specs both Ford and Honda engines, one could extrapolate using a Honda engine in their Focus......

[lateapex911]

Non-US engines, if approved, will be on a case-by-case approval basis, and all allowed engines will have to be investigated prior to allowance. All engine specs, such as compression ratio and camshaft lift, will still have to be met (i.e., if the stock Euro-cam has too much valve lift, you will not be allowed to run it). As you noted, without prior research there's no way to know if another sub-2L engine can/will produce more than what the class currently allows; that limit is inferentially around 170 hp*.


* That just my WAG; there's no hard-coded limit. That is based on the fact that the Integra GS-R's 170hp is allowed, but the Type R's 190hp is not. On the other hand, we just approved the 220(?)hp Renesis in STL at a very high weight (3000+?) so that "horsepower limit" is quite grey right now...

The way I've come to think of it is that the grand Poobah who dreamed up the concept and drew the line in the sand for numbers based it on the numbers Greg mentioned, BUT, what he REALLY did was to base it on 1.8 liter engines than can breath to that level. I say that since, as Greg points out, the higher hp version Type Arrrr, is forbidden, as is the S2000 version Making 120hp/litre) And they clearly feel there is something OTHER than cams and compression that make those numbers happen.

Now the Renesis motor is an interesting addition. IT makes 210 (WHP) or so in IT trim. Stock, it's under 200, by a significant amount, I think. Which, if in stock form, put's it right in the TEg engine wheelhouse. What was the reason for the extreme weight, I wonder?

[Andy Bettencourt]

What was the reason for the extreme weight, I wonder?

They don't want rotards. They want them as field fillers, but not real competitors. They specifically only allow piston engines but put them in at crazy weights to give people places to play without a chance of competitiveness.

It's simple.

[StephenB]

Honest question which may be answered by Andy's answer...

Why can the S2000 run at ITR spec but the RX8 has to add weight? Why can't I run my RX8 as an ITR car?

Stephen

PS: Jake you are spot on for IT gains and stock they have 170-180. Biggest issue with any Rotary Dyno number is that none are really set up for them specifically so the user error is pretty high.

[lateapex911]

Honest question which may be answered by Andy's answer...

Why can the S2000 run at ITR spec but the RX8 has to add weight? Why can't I run my RX8 as an ITR car?

Stephen

PS: Jake you are spot on for IT gains and stock they have 170-180. Biggest issue with any Rotary Dyno number is that none are really set up for them specifically so the user error is pretty high.

Well, you know how I know, right? The thing committee guys do called homework.

[Greg Amy]

Why can the S2000 run at ITR spec but the RX8 has to add weight? Why can't I run my RX8 as an ITR car?

Displacement. The "displacement equivalency" of a rotary engine is 2x, thus your "1.3L" Renesis is actually considered to be 2.6L and is thus ineligible for STL absent the specific allowance(s). You are allowed to run it in STU as an ITR car.

In my personal opinion, the philosophy of Super Touring engines is one of allowed intake/engine modifications and classification based purely on displacement. Thus, in my mind an unmodified rotary engine does not fit into the philosophy of STL on two fronts.

But, obviously, that's only one person's opinion.

GA

[Ron Earp]

"Others say" that these relationships should be much looser, even to the point of very loose co-ventures (e.g., Saab engines can be installed in a Pontiac). Unfortunately, this last issue is very difficult to determine, as if one stays too tight then some opportunities are lost; on the other hand, if one gets too loose then using the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" logic you could pretty much install anything into anything.

Why worry about it at all? An engine is an engine. Pick an engine, put it in a chassis.

What "Super Touring" principle, or SCCA core value, are we upholding by only allowing engine swaps within the same company?

Why is Honda <-> Acura swap okay, but a GM <-> Ford swap not okay?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Honest question which may be answered by Andy's answer...

Why can the S2000 run at ITR spec but the RX8 has to add weight? Why can't I run my RX8 as an ITR car?

Stephen

So Greg answered a bit but let me simplify for you. There are only a few ITR cars that fit the allowance rule for running in STL in IT-spec. Has to be below 2L. Since the rotards are considered 2.6, they aren't eligible for that specific allowance. However, they did make a specific allowance for the RX-8 (or any Renisis-equipped Mazda product) at 3000lbs. Why, I have no idea, but that is 'better' than not being able to run in STL at all if that is where you want to double dip. Most IT cars go to STU and some even to STO.