December 2013 Fastrack

[Andy Bettencourt]

Aren't JDM engines specifically disallowed except for specific line-item inclusion?

While I understand your position, and tend to agree with the fact that the resultant unit would be compliant, it would seem that starting with a non-USDM core is not allowed specifically by the rules and any 'core' without proof of USDM origin would be technically illegal.

Maybe a rules re-write is in order?

[tom91ita]

I guess I am thinking more along the lines that if the "A" of B16A bothers the competition then that is a reason to add one to the "B16"

[Greg Amy]

Maybe a rules re-write is in order?

Nope. Alternate parts are allowed per the regs, as long as they're the same part (dimensions and materials). As long as the specs are the same, the parts are allowed.

If you disassemble both a USDM and a JDM engine, spread the parts all across the tech shed floor and compare them, and find that they're all exactly the same part, yet the only difference is one is stamped "A" and one is stamped "B", then - as per Roffe Corollary - "if it says you can, then you bloody well can!" And if you counter that the stamps and casting marks and ink spots and everything else has to match on allowed replacement parts, then I'd counter the regulation is completely pointless, because were a supplier to attempt to sell parts with all the same casting marks and stamps and ink spots they'd get sued by the OE manufacturer.

The reg is clear: the parts must meet "dimensional and material specifications of new parts from the manufacturer".

These do. They're compliant.

And, before this board gets all high and mighty about it, maybe it should look inward to find out where that reg came from...and where else its interpretations may apply...?

- GA

P.S. Here's the reg:

Replacement parts may be obtained from sources other than the manufacturer provided they are the exact equivalent of the original parts. The intent of this rule is to allow the competitor to obtain replacement parts from standard industry outlets, e.g., auto-parts distributors, rather than from the manufacturer. It is not intended to allow parts that do not meet all dimensional and material specifications of new parts from the manufacturer, unless otherwise allowed in the Super Touring category or class rules.

"Same old axe. Replaced the handle twice and the head once, but it's still the same ole axe."

[mossaidis]

... having flashbacks... of prior... threads on UDSM vs non-USDM...

https://improvedtouring.com...ht=USDM&page=3

https://improvedtouring.com...&highlight=JDM

https://improvedtouring.com...&highlight=JDM

https://improvedtouring.com...highlight=USDM

... enjoy this long, boring, non-racing (a few exceptions) weekend.

[Greg Amy]

... enjoy this long, boring, non-racing (a few exceptions) weekend.

Give me the Cliff's Notes version...I'm busy drinking beer.

It's always been my contention that extra-US-market engine are compliant as basis for IT/ST builds as long as the components used are exactly the same as the US-spec car. This goes back to the early 2000s when someone (honestly, not me or "a friend") wanted to use a JDM SR20DE as a basis to build an ITA engine. In my opinion, it was legal to use a JDM SR20DE to build an ITA engine, as long as everything that ended up in the final assembly was the same - dimensionally and metallurgically - as the US SR20DE.

Same applies to STL. If someone wants to run, for example, a B16A (versus a US-spec B16A2) in STL in their Civic, I say it's compliant as long as the compression ratio is below 11:1 and the total valve lift is within .425" (dunno if it is). I know the B16A has different pistons and cams, but the compression ratio is within 11:1. And pistons and rods (and cams) are free (within prep limits.)

Now, if someone installs a JDM B16A engine with some wild-ass intake manifold and throttle body that was never installed in the US and tosses that into the car? Not compliant. Parts are decisively not what was installed in a US-spec car.

Otherwise, in the end, it really is the same thing, except for what the Shinto eunich ex-Ninja monk stamps on the block as it passed by on the production line. Compliant to the alternate parts letter, and compliant to the alternate parts spirit.

- GA

[Z3_GoCar]

Give me the Cliff's Notes version...I'm busy drinking beer.

It's always been my contention that extra-US-market engine are compliant as basis for IT/ST builds as long as the components used are exactly the same as the US-spec car. This goes back to the early 2000s when someone (honestly, not me or "a friend") wanted to use a JDM SR20DE as a basis to build an ITA engine. In my opinion, it was legal to use a JDM SR20DE to build an ITA engine, as long as everything that ended up in the final assembly was the same - dimensionally and metallurgically - as the US SR20DE.

Same applies to STL. If someone wants to run, for example, a B16A (versus a US-spec B16A2) in STL in their Civic, I say it's compliant as long as the compression ratio is below 11:1 and the total valve lift is within .425" (dunno if it is). I know the B16A has different pistons and cams, but the compression ratio is within 11:1. And pistons and rods (and cams) are free (within prep limits.)

Now, if someone installs a JDM B16A engine with some wild-ass intake manifold and throttle body that was never installed in the US and tosses that into the car? Not compliant. Parts are decisively not what was installed in a US-spec car.

Otherwise, in the end, it really is the same thing, except for what the Shinto eunich ex-Ninja monk stamps on the block as it passed by on the production line. Compliant to the alternate parts letter, and compliant to the alternate parts spirit.

- GA

And there you have the rub, because:

e. It is permitted to use the OEM intake and throttle body from either the chassis or the installed engine.
1. Regardless of the intake chosen, the total number of throttle bodies must remain the same as the installed engine.

and:

2. All cars shall use the installed engine’s stock air throttling device (e.g., throttle body, carburetor) and intake manifold, unless noted otherwise.

If you install the JDM motor then you have to install the JDM ITB manifold, which as you point out isn't allowed as the JDM is a non-USDM item.

[Knestis]

No.

Because in Greg's example the "installed engine" is an OE, US-spec engine. The PARTS of that engine may be from the original sold-in-'merica car, the Honda dealer, the local Pep Boys, or from his eunuch friends on Mount Fuji - as long as they are all of the spec designated for the stock car OR within requirements where allowances are provided by the rules.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

I see and understand the logic. However I also see an specific requirement for the engine to be as delivered for the USDM. The rules seem to be at odds with each other.

'You can't use anything but a USDM engine'
'You can use any part from any world market so long as it's exactly like the USDM version'

I don't see this as good rule writing.

Can't you just say, 'Only USDM engine may be used or their exact equivalents from other DM's'?

Good stuff. I see both sides - and when you do, I think a clarification is in order.

[Z3_GoCar]

No.

Because in Greg's example the "installed engine" is an OE, US-spec engine. The PARTS of that engine may be from the original sold-in-'merica car, the Honda dealer, the local Pep Boys, or from his eunuch friends on Mount Fuji - as long as they are all of the spec designated for the stock car OR within requirements where allowances are provided by the rules.

K

But, you're not installing the US-spec engine, you're installing the JDM-spec engine and calling it the same as the USDM plus allowed modifications. To do this you have to violate the stock intake manifold rule, because the JDM and USDM manifolds aren't the same. It seems pretty clear to me, you need to specifically allow the JDM motor or remove the intake manifold/throttle body number rules to make this legal.

[Bill Miller]

And there you have the rub, because:

e. It is permitted to use the OEM intake and throttle body from either the chassis or the installed engine.
1. Regardless of the intake chosen, the total number of throttle bodies must remain the same as the installed engine.

and:

2. All cars shall use the installed engine’s stock air throttling device (e.g., throttle body, carburetor) and intake manifold, unless noted otherwise.

If you install the JDM motor then you have to install the JDM ITB manifold, which as you point out isn't allowed as the JDM is a non-USDM item.

First off, let me say that I'm with Andy on this one. I agree w/ Greg/Kirk/Chip on the interpretation, but the wording of the rule could be better.

As far as the quote above, when I read through it the first few times, I thought "Yeah, that doesn't allow the JDM motor". But after the 5th or 6th reading, it occurred to me that the "unless noted otherwise" clause is covered by "it is permitted to use the OEM intake and throttle body from either the chassis or the installed engine". Otherwise, 2. would invalidate e., even if you were talking about all USDM stuff.

Hope everyone had a great holiday!

[Andy Bettencourt]

Final thoughts:

IT rules state that they are to be 'models' offered in the US and must be prepared to the MFG spec unless an authorization is given in the rules. Then they go on to deal with replacement parts and what is ok...properly circling back.

ST rules say that non-USDM engines are illegal. It's a core principle of the rules which one then has to assume is overridden by the 'exact replacement' clause regardless of origin. The confusion is created when you say something is expressly illegal and then you can override that. That isn't how the IT rules work, actually the 'no legal modification may perform an expressly illegal function' wording in the IT rules makes it different in my mind.

BUT...I agree that you can run through the wording and get to a 'legal' JDM block but I certainly don't think it's clear enough. Maybe something like 'USDM engine assemblies or their exact equivalent' would be better. Maybe not.