August Fastrack out!

to satisfy my own curiosity, what's the benefit of triggering spark from the crank rather than conventional methods?
 
Well this is one time I hope the BOD uses it power to kill this deal before it gets started. If your not with this rule then write the BOD cause the CRB stepped on it here.
 
i doubt that's going to happen joe. a little birdie told me letters were about 3 to 1 in favor of this move. if you ask me, we're digging our own grave. maybe there's a special place for us right next to SS.
 
i doubt that's going to happen joe. a little birdie told me letters were about 3 to 1 in favor of this move. if you ask me, we're digging our own grave. maybe there's a special place for us right next to SS.
[/b]
Click to expand...


The question total letter count.
 
924Guy you are correct about the crank trigger.

However this is the biggest and most expensive piece of rules creep that I have seen in my 15 years of IT racing. I replace the stock ECU with a Megasquirt system last year on my F/P Volvo 142. The time and expense of implementing this change are going to have a significant impact on the cost of building an IT car. If you have a simple old car, do it all yourself, have lots of time, go low budget with Megasquirt, are good with computers, and get lucky it will cost $1000. Don't forget to factor in dyno time. Many racers will spend multiple thousands on this.

To put my feelings in perspective, my ITB Volvo will benefit from this rule change. I already have the hardware and it's fully sorted out already so this costs me nothing. But I think this is a bad move for IT. We are having fun and spending plenty of money with the current rules. Will we have more fun with an expensive change like this?

Charlie Broring
 
TNORD: Accuracy...usually within 1/4 degree. That way you can set the timing to the optimum advance without worrying about scatter. The old way was to retard the timing from optimum to account for scatter and prevent detonation. CB
 
924Guy you are correct about the crank trigger.

However this is the biggest and most expensive piece of rules creep that I have seen in my 15 years of IT racing. I replace the stock ECU with a Megasquirt system last year on my F/P Volvo 142. The time and expense of implementing this change are going to have a significant impact on the cost of building an IT car. If you have a simple old car, do it all yourself, have lots of time, go low budget with Megasquirt, are good with computers, and get lucky it will cost $1000. Don't forget to factor in dyno time. Many racers will spend multiple thousands on this.

To put my feelings in perspective, my ITB Volvo will benefit from this rule change. I already have the hardware and it's fully sorted out already so this costs me nothing. But I think this is a bad move for IT. We are having fun and spending plenty of money with the current rules. Will we have more fun with an expensive change like this?

Charlie Broring
[/b]
Click to expand...

?? I thought all the 140s and 240s were CIS?
 
Guys, yer all not seeing the black helicopter over head. :bash_1_: This whole rules creep deal is a conspiracy to bring IT to it's knees so that the IT cars can be absorbed into Production so that Production classes meet their numbers. :cavallo:
 
well, i don't think i'd go THAT far.

i don't like the change, but i don't think the CRB is trying to kill off IT either. it's hard to argue against the change if an overwhelming number of leters asked for it. doesn't necessarily mean it's good for the class though, just ask the SM guys about Spec Toyo.
 
924Guy you are correct about the crank trigger.

However this is the biggest and most expensive piece of rules creep that I have seen in my 15 years of IT racing. I replace the stock ECU with a Megasquirt system last year on my F/P Volvo 142. The time and expense of implementing this change are going to have a significant impact on the cost of building an IT car. If you have a simple old car, do it all yourself, have lots of time, go low budget with Megasquirt, are good with computers, and get lucky it will cost $1000. Don't forget to factor in dyno time. Many racers will spend multiple thousands on this.

To put my feelings in perspective, my ITB Volvo will benefit from this rule change. I already have the hardware and it's fully sorted out already so this costs me nothing. But I think this is a bad move for IT. We are having fun and spending plenty of money with the current rules. Will we have more fun with an expensive change like this?

Charlie Broring [/b]
Click to expand...



Charlie, this isn't manditory! You really don't have change a thing on your car.
 
Charlie, this isn't manditory! You really don't have change a thing on your car.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Unless you want to win, then you need to spend a billion more hours learning about this stuff, nevermind the cash that many IT racers don't have for tires let alone a computer system to run their race cars.

I don't like the idea and sent in my letter to the CRB.

Raymond "Just what I want to see, faster Volvo's :rolleyes: " Blethen
 
I support the proposed rule, I think it is fair and can actually help
some tune their cars on a tighter budget. Some who do not have good
options can now use open source engine management to tune their cars
for only a few hundred dollars.
I would be in support of this rule to be adopted as it appears in the
August fastrack.
 
Isn't it interesting that the letters to the CRB seem to want this "uber expensive" change, yet they don't want to move the battery to a safer location because of "rules creep". It's times like these that I'm glad I have a POS carb to fight with at every event. Of course, if this means I can install a cranfire ignition, then I'll have to do it...to the tune of about $2 large. :blink:
 
It beats the hell out of the STOCK ECU BOX rule now. That rule makes you want to find a car with a big box. In the long run I think they (CRB) made a good move.

Mac
 
924Guy you are correct about the crank trigger.

However this is the biggest and most expensive piece of rules creep that I have seen in my 15 years of IT racing. I replace the stock ECU with a Megasquirt system last year on my F/P Volvo 142. The time and expense of implementing this change are going to have a significant impact on the cost of building an IT car. If you have a simple old car, do it all yourself, have lots of time, go low budget with Megasquirt, are good with computers, and get lucky it will cost $1000. Don't forget to factor in dyno time. Many racers will spend multiple thousands on this.

To put my feelings in perspective, my ITB Volvo will benefit from this rule change. I already have the hardware and it's fully sorted out already so this costs me nothing. But I think this is a bad move for IT. We are having fun and spending plenty of money with the current rules. Will we have more fun with an expensive change like this?

Charlie Broring [/b]
Click to expand...

Charlie & Raymond....keep in mind this rule isn't actually going to change anything in ITB, as you've been racing against cars already running open ECUs. This rule is merely changing the limitations of the previous rule, which allowed open ECUs, but at sometimes incredible costs.
 
Charlie & Raymond....keep in mind this rule isn't actually going to change anything in ITB, as you've been racing against cars already running open ECUs. This rule is merely changing the limitations of the previous rule, which allowed open ECUs, but at sometimes incredible costs.
[/b]
Click to expand...

What would prevent me from having a computer screen dash that allowed me to make changes to the engine management as you were racing???

I don't know anything about the computer side of cars, other than the Volvo above can now get more power and i still can't change anything to my car... do I get a weight break since all these computer mods that help others don't help me?

I think others are correct, I support you Andy and the others, but why do we keep F'ing with the IT rules???

People are happy how the rules are written now. IMO YOU (ITAC & CRB) keep opening up rules for things that you don't understnad and con't govern, thus whipping your hands of responsability to understand and figure out a way to govern. But yet you maintain stupid rules like the batter, headlights, washer bottles, stock useless wiring harnesses to removed windows and interior lights, etc that do almoast nothing as far as performance. Older cars are getting outclassed by technology. Opening the rules for this technology just outclasses those cars even more...

Just my opinion, I think it is time to finish your "fixing" and let us know the long term goals...

Raymond
 
Guys, yer all not seeing the black helicopter over head. :bash_1_: This whole rules creep deal is a conspiracy to bring IT to it's knees so that the IT cars can be absorbed into Production so that Production classes meet their numbers. :cavallo: [/b]
Click to expand...

Visionary stuff there, DD.
 
I do find it interesting that people think the new ECU rule will cost people more money. Those who are going to spend money to go fast have likely already gone out and spend considerable funds on a custom ECU that would work with the stock harness and case. For reference, it cost us over $10,000 for a customized unit that didn't really give us comlete control over all the functions we really wanted. Dyno time was considerable especially as the first few units weren't correct and motors either wouldn't start or wouldn't run. But it was the only game in town within the rules. We aren't alone, many had to do the same thing if they weren't willing to run the stock unit. Now there is a far wider range of units available, and for 1/10th to 1/5th the price, including dyno time. It cost money to have a chance of running at the front, this rule actually makes it possible for others to catch up at far less expense than others incurred previously.

to satisfy my own curiosity, what's the benefit of triggering spark from the crank rather than conventional methods?
[/b]
Click to expand...

Travis, years ago we dyno tested 5 different motors. All gave the same overall result: if the "standard" ignition system was optomized and functioning properly, there was no real gain (anything less than 2% generally is considered no gain as it often can't be repeated from one dyno session to the next, even with a computerized dyno such as the Superflow 901 we used). Our experience is that it's easier to live with because it's more reliable. But as a matter of real power gain, not if your current parts are correct and you've tuned it as well as possible (only possible to do this on a dyno in my opinion).
 
People are happy how the rules are written now.
[/b]
Click to expand...
That's not what the letters said. The ITAC asked about three options: 1) leave things alone; 2) try to put the genie back in the bottle; 3) open things up. I think there was only one letter that picked option 1, and a great majority picked option 3.

You might be comfortable with the current rule, but don't put words in other member's mouths.
 
OPEN ECUs??? :blink:

We'll, it's happened... And IT WAS heading is such an excellent direction...

This is going to go down as one of the worst things to ever happen to IT... Things were just starting to get in balance, now the gauntlet has been laid down, the doors thrown wide open...

I'm glad I got out of car racing when I did... becuase this one would have ended it for me anyhow... Not sure how many of you can afford $2,000 + ECU systems, but have fun guys... If you think you are going to be able to compete with the Motecs of the world with your "Mega-Squirt" or whatever, you're dillusional... There is a reason why Motecs are $2,000+ and Mega-Squirts are "do-it-yourself"... Have fun... "off the shelf" can be equated to "also-ran"... Your "bolt-in" ECU systems just aren't going to cut it guys... not anymore than the Wolf units could against a Motec... Have Fun...

I want to appologize to those of you who were assured by me and others about the direction IT was headed a couple of years ago... it seems, at the moment, that I was wrong... The reassurances I gave have proven to be wrong now, and it seems that it's only a matter of time before IT is swallowed up and combined with Production, or GT, or wherever sedans go these days when they cost twice as much to race competitively...

If there are any rational racers left out there, you need to get a letter to the BOD IMMEDIATELY and get them to STOP this non-sense before it's too late... You still have a voice and it's up to you to preserve your class... "they" aren't going to do it for you...

Good Luck...



For reference, it cost us over $10,000 for a customized unit that didn't really give us comlete control over all the functions we really wanted.
[/b]
Click to expand...

EXCELLENT... PERFECT... It's all fixed and "fair" now... NOW EVERYONE get's to go through this! :rolleyes:

Nice job! :018:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top