aerodynamics

Originally posted by jhooten:
How about this from the ITCS? "Any exhaust header and exhaust system may be used. ...."


My point is that (a) there is no clause in the exhaust rule that specifically allows heat shields to be added, (B) therefore, doing so hinges on the very open-ended statement allowing "any...exhaust system," so © putting a heat-shieldish looking thing that is NOT part of the exhaust system, hasn't got an ITCS leg to stand on.

I think that's an example of the associative property of rules interpretation.
smile.gif


K

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited June 22, 2005).]
 
I use to race a rabbit GTI in ITB. I had such a box that was fitted behind the grill, IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. I used a stock radiator. I ran this for two years. Our angle was the same as many of you, that it was in the engine compartment. Before I did this I talked to several techs about the definition of RAM AIR and they all said what I was doing WAS ram air even though I pointed out to those folks the GCR def. of RAM AIR. Everytime those techs got angry with me.

At the time there were other famous ITB cars that ran a very similar setup. I ran that for two years until a race at Road Atlanta where they were checking people out for this very thing after a race and they got dqed. I know how the GCR is worded, I also think that it is not worded how they intended to be worded. I took my set up off my car. My general rule of thumb now is, if you have a question in your mind that you think it is not right, then it probably isnt. I would rather not have to worry about one techs interpretation vs. another ones. And after you have seen several dqed for the same thing you think twice.

Derek Ketchie
 
I would disagree. I read the rulebook, and try to use it whenever possible to determine definitions that are related, and use the words and their meanings to form my plan of action.

In a case like this, I would read the rulebook and the definitions, and make my mods. And I get DQ'ed at tech, because a tech official thinks that the "intent of the rule is bla bla bla, ...even though it says bling bling bling", then we have a larger problem that will most certainly get appealed most aggressively.

It is up to the rules writers to write effective and clear rules that result in conditions that meet their intent.

It is up to me to meet the letter of the rule, regardless of the writers intent.

If they do their job well, we won't have any tech officials deciding what is, and what isn't meeting intent.

In your case, it appears you were wronged by an over agressive rules interpreter.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited June 26, 2005).]
 
But we don't have all the information. The BOX may have been in the engine compartment, and the filter may have been in the engine compartment, but if it was flush up against the front - AND PULLED AIR FROM OUTSIDE THE ENGINE BAY, it doesn't matter where the set-up was.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
New England Region, R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
 
mayyyybe....maybe not! LOL...the rule is an intereting one from a definitions angle, I will say that!

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
I had heard of a guy named Kaz Busch who raced a swift in the NE, winning often, and getting protested so much he quit racing.

The gentleman's name is Kaj, not Kaz, and he converted the ITB car to a G-Prod car and raced it for a couple of years. I'm not sure why he is no longer racing.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt:
but if it was flush up against the front - AND PULLED AIR FROM OUTSIDE THE ENGINE BAY, it doesn't matter where the set-up was.

Andy, I am not sure we have a concesus on that point yet. how many millimeters back does it need to be before you can say the air is being sourced inside the engine compartment. On the other hand one point your statement brings up is that a modification may be legal or not based on how well it is executed.
dick patullo


[This message has been edited by dickita15 (edited June 27, 2005).]
 
<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">...how many millimeters back does it need to be...</font>

Especially given - as far as I know - no engine air is created and/or stored inside the engine compartment, and must find its way into there from somewhere outside the compartment...

This is a good rule where the intent should be codified. - GA
 
Speaking of quotes, how about this one:

"Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines." -- Enzo Ferrari

G
 
Not many cars have large enough "extra" holes in the core support to make your design practical, unless you leave something out of your core support assembly (like the air direction flaps that seal the radiator to the core support), which would disqualify your design.
Renaultfool
 
bill, did Kaj get protested on a regular basis? While he was in IT?

Well, I've decided to just leave well enough alone on all this. I dont think it's needed for me to win anyways.

All I need is about 10 or so more HP and some hoosiers, and I'll start winning...

Cant be bothered with people protesting me, especially if the performance enhancement is so low...
 
Originally posted by zooracer:
bill, did Kaj get protested on a regular basis? While he was in IT?

Well, I've decided to just leave well enough alone on all this. I dont think it's needed for me to win anyways.

All I need is about 10 or so more HP and some hoosiers, and I'll start winning...

Cant be bothered with people protesting me, especially if the performance enhancement is so low...


Kaj had already moved to Prod when I started racing the MARRS series. I don't know how often he was protested, but I can only remember one IT protest at Summit Point (based on parts) in the last few years.


------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
A few weeks ago while I was in line at Tech, a last generation (I think) Prelude was getting its annual tech and had the hood up. It had an aftermarket air tube running from the top of the engine, where I assume the metering device is, to AND THROUGH the "floor" into the fender well forward of the tire, where I assume it had a filter. Is that the stock air-source location on a Prelude?

------------------
Bill Denton
87/89 ITS RX-7
02 Audi TT225QC
95 Tahoe
Memphis
 
Not sure which prelude you mean, but the ones I have seen do pick up their air from that exact point, through the fender in front of the wheel.
 
I'm not so sure about that...My prelude (2nd gen) does have a tube go down in that location but at the end there is a resonator box. From what I understand I can not put the air intake there nor can I even remove the box. I would love to hear otherwise (and be legal)!!

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si
 
I believe you can remove the resonator box as it was part of the origional filter system (attached) but the filter needs to stay in its origional location...that is probably a cold air set up and im pretty sure they are not legal...anyone else??

------------------
Evan Darling
ITA Integra
 
If the original air intake was in that LOCATION then you can do whatever you want with the intake, as long is it is FROM ORIGINAL LOCATION. It does not have to incorporate the original air box.
 
The original air intake was NOT in that location. I have not personally seen this item protested in person but have heard of it being protested and it to be deemded illegal many times. (There have been several threads about this type of mod in honda-tech.)

And to the best of my knowledge, it is not legal to take the resonator box out. I had orignally thought about cutting the end off in hopes of getting more air to the intake filter.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si
 
Back
Top