mossaidis
New member
I believe a true STL car (non-IT or non-SM) will need a fuel cell only if the gas tank is behind the rear axles (or something like that).
December 2013 Fastrack
- Thread starter Greg Amy
- Start date
I believe a true STL car (non-IT or non-SM) will need a fuel cell only if the gas tank is behind the rear axles (or something like that).
Odd...I posted a reply earlier and it's gone...
Stephen, there are still hurdles to running your ITR RX-8 in STL, primarily brakes too large (front and rear), wheels too large (17x7 max), and tires too large (225 section width max). The transition between ITR and STL is not easy for the RX-8, nor is it intended to be.
Concur, mostly. However, the CRB chose to plate the RX-8 (no personal idea on its effects) to be able to remove the 100# from it, since we were adding more weight for RWD and it was getting quite piggy (half a ton heavier than the 1.6L CRX).
Stephen, there are still hurdles to running your ITR RX-8 in STL, primarily brakes too large (front and rear), wheels too large (17x7 max), and tires too large (225 section width max). The transition between ITR and STL is not easy for the RX-8, nor is it intended to be.
B18C5 still has to meet all STL specs, including max valve lift. The 2% was to accommodate that its prepped output will exceed STL expectations (same reason for the plates for the K20 and MZR). If it exceeds it even with the extra 2%, it also risks a plate (I will likely be building and dyno'ing one for 2014, given I sold my B17A1 at the Runoffs).
A bit of a generalized mis-characterization, as the CRB does not knee-jerk lead-trophy Runoffs winners. However, if you lead the Runoffs by half a minute in the only car of your kind in the class, two years in a row with two different drivers, you certainly expect additional scrutiny... - GA
STCS 9.1.4.I.1:
The use of a fuel cell is required unless the stock
fuel tank is located between the axle centerlines and within the
main chassis structure (i.e., frame rails, etc.).
fuel tank is located between the axle centerlines and within the
main chassis structure (i.e., frame rails, etc.).
StephenB
New member
I think ITR to STL was just brakes, and tires... stock parts from an auto and not a huge thing to tackle. I will look into the restrictor. Anyone know who sells them?
I think I well still sit and wait while STL goes through the growing pains and gets a bit more stable.
Stephen
I think I well still sit and wait while STL goes through the growing pains and gets a bit more stable.
Stephen
Good catch!i'llget that fixed ASAP
Final Dec2013 Fastrack: http://www.scca.com/assets/13-fastrack-dec.pdf
I still think the Miata/RX-8 is the chassis to have. We only added 2% to RWD, and Drago has demonstrated that the Miata 1.8L can make some good power. That ~+50 pounds isn't gonna kill it.
We dropped a restrictor plate on the RX-8, but we also removed 100# (+ the 2%). Mazda has made some very good RWD chassis, and this is one of them. I don't think this plate will hurt the car.
The Honda S2k is now in the mix, but someone is going to have to build an engine that drops the compression ratio *and* reduces the cams. But this engine has a long history of high-revving - just like the Renesis - so this is one to watch.
But...if the question is "what is the FWD Honda package to have", then I'd suggest either a K20-powered Civic Si - about the #1 best-geometry strut-equipped FWD chassis ever made - or a K20-powered Integra - probably the #1 best-geometry multi-link/control arm FWD chassis ever made. The 50mm plate we added to the K20 (60/62mm throttle body stock) should not, theoretically, hurt the power a lot. From what I'm hearing, computer sims showed the throttle body was intentionally oversized to improve part-throttle drivability and had less to do with ultimate airflow (what we're really worried about in racing). *IF* these sims are correct, we're only talking about a 10-ish hp hit on the K20.
And I'm not convinced that weight is a big disadvantage in STL (versus smaller engines/less weight). My personal experience at Road America was +20hp and +135# with the 1.8L engine (versus 1.7L) and I dropped 3s per lap. Given the Civic is a strut car, and struts get an additional 2.5% weight break, I'd be tempted to build up a K20-powered Civic Si as my "FWD Honda car to beat". Second Honda choice would be a K20-powered "anything else". Third choice would be a B18C5 (Type R, add 2% weight) or B18C1 (GSR) powered "anything else".
But in the end, I still think a well-built, well-developed, high-quality RWD chassis is still King of the Road. I'm waiting for someone to spend some serious money on an MX-5.
I'm not clear the smaller-displacement cars are in good positions right now, except at tighter tracks. I'd take a 1.6L Miata at Lime Rock any day, maybe even at Mid-Ohio. Daytona? Same at Road America: they'll line up based on wheel torque.
Then again, we've approved the VW Euro 2L 4-valve engine, which I've yet to see built...
We'll see, eh?
- GA
Hot "Honda" package in STL? Or hot STL package?
I still think the Miata/RX-8 is the chassis to have. We only added 2% to RWD, and Drago has demonstrated that the Miata 1.8L can make some good power. That ~+50 pounds isn't gonna kill it.
We dropped a restrictor plate on the RX-8, but we also removed 100# (+ the 2%). Mazda has made some very good RWD chassis, and this is one of them. I don't think this plate will hurt the car.
The Honda S2k is now in the mix, but someone is going to have to build an engine that drops the compression ratio *and* reduces the cams. But this engine has a long history of high-revving - just like the Renesis - so this is one to watch.
But...if the question is "what is the FWD Honda package to have", then I'd suggest either a K20-powered Civic Si - about the #1 best-geometry strut-equipped FWD chassis ever made - or a K20-powered Integra - probably the #1 best-geometry multi-link/control arm FWD chassis ever made. The 50mm plate we added to the K20 (60/62mm throttle body stock) should not, theoretically, hurt the power a lot. From what I'm hearing, computer sims showed the throttle body was intentionally oversized to improve part-throttle drivability and had less to do with ultimate airflow (what we're really worried about in racing). *IF* these sims are correct, we're only talking about a 10-ish hp hit on the K20.
And I'm not convinced that weight is a big disadvantage in STL (versus smaller engines/less weight). My personal experience at Road America was +20hp and +135# with the 1.8L engine (versus 1.7L) and I dropped 3s per lap. Given the Civic is a strut car, and struts get an additional 2.5% weight break, I'd be tempted to build up a K20-powered Civic Si as my "FWD Honda car to beat". Second Honda choice would be a K20-powered "anything else". Third choice would be a B18C5 (Type R, add 2% weight) or B18C1 (GSR) powered "anything else".
But in the end, I still think a well-built, well-developed, high-quality RWD chassis is still King of the Road. I'm waiting for someone to spend some serious money on an MX-5.
I'm not clear the smaller-displacement cars are in good positions right now, except at tighter tracks. I'd take a 1.6L Miata at Lime Rock any day, maybe even at Mid-Ohio. Daytona? Same at Road America: they'll line up based on wheel torque.
Then again, we've approved the VW Euro 2L 4-valve engine, which I've yet to see built...
We'll see, eh?
- GA
stevestratton
New member
I am hoping that this year we can close the NA - NB gap for Miata's and 1.6 cars overall, but I have to agree with Greg. If I only had $50K to build a NC...
Thanks Greg
Right now I do not think a 1.6L anything is going to take it home at a national level. MVS here in the SE is building/built a 1.6L STL miata. He was testing it during the same test day I was at before the SIC. Though he still has more to do for a full STL build, he was at his ITS times.
He is registered in the car at Sebring for the Turkey Trots, so we will see what it can do.
We will see after this year of the displacement multiplier is correct. In theory this year at the runoffs a great handling car should be the ticket. This is where the smaller, light weight, nimble cars should do very well. If not then IMHO the multiplier will need to be looked at if the ticket is still grab a chassis and throw in the biggest motor you can.
In Continental challenge the lower hp MX5s I think finished 1-2 their this year at Seca. So we will see.
Marcus Miller
New member
I'll disagree; the winner to this years' runoffs will be the torquiest car that handles halfway decently; Laguna is a very hilly start and stop kinda track. If a torquey car can get in front... :026:
if that is the case, that is not good. The turque cars were the ones that dominated the last run off. where and how are they load displacement car's supposed to win?
Z3_GoCar
New member
Marcus, no one seems to believe me that Laguna is a series of up hill dyno pulls, power to weight wins every time. If they'd scheduled it at Sear Point, that would be a horse of a different color. I fear you'll have to wait until the RO's get to Mid-O.
Marcus Miller
New member
I believe you!
Hp and torque will be winners. Laguna is not a handling track. It's point and shoot with hills.
Sears or Thunderhill would be very different.
Already pursuing some, mostly Mee-Otters (though I am in discussions with a Honda guy). I'll keep you posted with what I come up with. - GA