Quote Originally Posted by Chip42 View Post
or made compliant to both, which is really not likely given the cam.
Concur. It's possible to make a Type R compliant to both on all aspects...*except* the camshaft. Ignoring the intake camshaft, you could run 17x7 wheels and 225 tires, and only build your engine to 11.0:1 compression ratio (that extra 0.1 won't make a significant difference.) All those aspects are compliant.

However, here's where the conflict in the regs comes with the cams. IT doesn't now allow anything but stock cams, and the stock intake cam on the Type R is about .460" total valve lift (official cam specs show less lift, but that's from 1mm lift measuring for duration). But STL only allows .425" total valve lift. So the IT cam is not compliant to STL regs, and you can't change the cam to the lower STL specs because that would be non-compliant to the IT regs. Otherwise, you could easily double up and run - likely reasonably competitively - in the Majors in STL.

Your next question is, "would you approve the ITR Type R into STL as-is?" No, not right now. Getting the B18C5 approved into STL was a bit of a fight, and there are some that expect it to be an overdog. There's also significant concern about "scrutineer-ability" with the "factory head porting". And both of those concerns have good basis. I suggest that if someone seriously runs one of these in STL for a couple years, we see its progress and get some dyno runs, could re-address it, but not for the next couple racing seasons. Let's let this shake out and see where it ends up.

- GA