Originally posted by lateapex911@Aug 29 2005, 06:04 AM
The cage situation HAS seen exceptions, and DOES have some irregulaties and inconsitancies, however, there is an awareness of that among the rulesmakers, and a desire to clean things up in that regard. So, at this point, exceptions are pretty much a non issue.[snapback]59175[/snapback]
Let's not get carried away here... There have NOT been cage exceptions in IT... Additionally, in an environment where liability issues are becoming more and more prevelant... what do you guys think the likelihood would be that one would be approved??? (we've already been told NO WAY...)
SM, American Sedan, etc... they are their own deal that was done at a different time, for different reason, and really doesn't matter in this situation...
OH, and for whoever suggested that the SM 1.8 was "way over"... Even though we've told you before, I'll say it again... IT WAS NOT... The car, as currently classified, fits the process... in fact, I personally think that we overestimated the HP potential, but it's better to be a little on the conservative side...
As for an SIR... The GT rules are experimenting with the use of a Single Inlet Restrictor... A device which looks a lot like a venturi that goes at the beginning of the airstream... You'll see them on certain proptotype cars, Formula 3, etc...
I don't know all the science, but the way it works is that it creates a situation where the restrictor is basically invisible to the system until the airspeed reaches a particular velocity, at which point it will flow NO more air... The air goes terminal and that's it...
According to the GT committee, it IS a science... You decide what you want to limit the HP to, and the formula tells you a size... Pretty slick, really....
Darin E. Jordan
Renton, WA
Bookmarks