Del Sol VTEC - Please Contact me

bob roth
timmy chapman here . i just built a 99 civic si and in the same boat as you are.food for thought,if you built the car to the exiting gcr rules,the cage is now illeagal with the addition of 220lbs.that was probably not factored into the "process".if the pca process is implemented correctly and according to the gcr,how do you follow the rule for building a safe racecar, as far as determining the roll cage tubing size
timmy chapman
 
bob roth
timmy chapman here . i just built a 99 civic si and in the same boat as you are.food for thought,if you built the car to the exiting gcr rules,the cage is now illeagal with the addition of 220lbs.that was probably not factored into the "process".if the pca process is implemented correctly and according to the gcr,how do you follow the rule for building a safe racecar, as far as determining the roll cage tubing size
timmy chapman
[/b]
Click to expand...
You might want to go back and reread the roll cage specs. Your tube size is determined by the spec weight of the car MINUS driver (180#) so you are still very legal at the new weight I believe. Fat but safe. :D
 
Bob,

In response to your original question WAAAAAY back on page 1:

I was one of the first ones to run a Del Sol in ITS (since I was the one that got it classified). It's been a while since we ran the car in ITS spec (2003 or so), but here's what I recall off the top of my head:

In IT trim, the car weighed around 2,500# w/driver depending on fuel load. Other than it's brief pro career, the car was mostly run at Road Atlanta in ITS races. With a few modifications (lighter shocks & wheels, 0.95 instead of 1.20 wall tubing in the cage), the weight might get down to around 2,450 in IT trim. A Civic Si may actually get closer to 2,350, since in my experience the regular civics are usually 100# or so lighter than the Del Sols.

The fastest lap time we got was a 1:45.6, and the best result we had was qualifying 4th in the rain.

Mike Cottrell did a little better with one at RA, if I remember correctly he's gotten at least one podium finish and lapped about a second faster.

After 2003 we converted the car to NASA H1 specifications, becuase as an IT car the Del Sol had no torque and it was very easy to fry the front brakes (even with ducting) after about 15 minutes or so of running flat-out. The more open rules allowed us brake upgrades, extensive lightening, and more horsepower (via putting an Integra TYpe R drivetrain in the car).

If you've built a Del Sol for ITS, I apologize, since it really is my fault. The only weay you are ever going to win is if it rains, or nobody shows up, or an eartquake or tornado swallows up the top six. Realistically, a Del VTEC or a Civic Si would make failry competetive ITA cars, but SCCA has VTEC-phobia (in spite of not a single VTEC-powered car dominating anywhere that I know of).

Your best bet with the Del Sol VTEC is to either race NASA, convert it to production or ITA specs, or sell it to someone to use as a track-day or school car.



Some general notes of interest and things to consider for FWD cars in ITS:

1) As has been stated before, high horsepower is a big handicap with FWD. When we first put a type R engine in, and went from less than 160hp at the wheels to 198, it took a year of development just to get back down to ITS times with the car. We ended up re-doing everythinig (spring rates, sway bars, and shocks).

2) There does need to be some re-thinking about the horsepower formula with the VTEC engines, particularly the 1.6. In ITS trim we used to get beat down the back straight by top-prepped CRX's, and utterly destroyed by the RX-7's, 240's, & 325's. Even with some of the R&D we've made since converting our car, you'd still be hard-pressed to beat a well-prepped ITA CRX or Integra. I'll have to look through my records, but I recall about 158 HP & 105 fl-lb out of the ITS motor.

The best numbers I've ever been able to get out of a B16 are 192 hp at the wheels & 125 ft-lb of torque, and that was with a World-Challenge spec motor with a host of extremely illegal-for-IT modifications (ported head, aftermarket cams & cam gears, extrude-honed manifold, forged pistons, lightened crankshaft, & aluminum flywheel). Even then the torque dropped off fairly quickly, and the peak horsepower wasn't until 9,400 rpm.
 
Thanks, great comments. It kind of makes one wonder why a car 6 years after its listing would get a +220 pound weight add competition adjustment whan nobody runs it and nobody is successful with it. I will be asking the competition board to explain this.
 
Thanks, great comments. It kind of makes one wonder why a car 6 years after its listing would get a +220 pound weight add competition adjustment whan nobody runs it and nobody is successful with it. I will be asking the competition board to explain this. [/b]
Click to expand...

Bob,

I don't know what else to tell you. The first page of this thread gave you the explanation. It's not a comp adjustment.

You may not agreee with it, but it was part of a shift to restore category-wide equity. I will tell you that I am looking hard at changing the 'adders' for FWD in ITS to reflect, what most pereceive to be, not enough 'allowance' for the difficiency in design. Initial modeling would show lower weights for most FWD cars in ITS. If you want to write something that will get you somewhere, as for a serious look at more consiederation for FWD in ITS.

AB
 
Heres some race results. I ran at Blackhawk last week against avery good second gen RX-7. Richard Walke Ex firehawk car, original owner. He ran 1:20s in qualifying, thought he set a new lap record. 2680 pounds minimum.

I have run about 90 races at blackhawk The last time I ran there in a CRX at 2180 pounds I turned a 1:23.6. (about a second off of lap record.) My Del Sol, which now weights with ballast 2612. My best qualifying was 1:24.48 and best race was 1:24.60. I ended up being beat by two Spec Miata's - One who's best race time was mid 23's and the other was mid 24's.

I got the jump on the Miata’s at the start and could hold off the miata’s for a while but within 5 laps I was passed by the one and by 15 laps I was passed by the other because my tires were going off and I had concerns about serious abusing the brakes for a half hour. And this was a race at 70 degrees in april. Its going to be a lot worse when it gets hot.

My car ended the race at 2612 pounds with a weight balance 63% front 37% back. In comparing the Del Sol to my ‘88 CRX, the Del Sol is marginally quicker down the straight but I give most of the speed back in Blackhawk turns 1, 6 and 7. In a CRX Si, using the same tires, I can run even with most Miata’s through those turns turns at blackhawk, not in a Del Sol.

Here is the problem,

1) In my CRX the front weight was about 1450 pounds. In a Del Sol, the front weight 1640 pounds. As a result, in the same speeds that the CRX can drive through a turn, the Del Sol washes out the front end. When I go into a turn, the best strategy is trail brake it in and scrub (have the front and back end slide) through the apex and get on it as soon as possible which is about the outside edge of the track. The problem with this is three fold.

a)I am scrubbing off a lot of speed compared to a lighter CRX B) I can’t put power down until the turn’s exit. Whereas on a CRX, I am floored from the apex on.
c)All this sliding the front end kills the front tires

2)My Del Sol has a 63%/37% FR weight balance. This 1650 pounds on the front tires causes 2 problems.

a)The front end weighs a lot more than comparable rear drive IT cars. For example, the RX-7 I was racing against might weigh 2700 pounds with a 55/45 weight balance. That’s 1485 pounds on the front tires which is comparable to my CRX at its old un ballasted weight. A 1:20 time is no surprise then when it pulls like or better than my Del Sol down the straight but brakes like a miata (50/50 weight balance) and turns like a CRX in the turns.

b)It also limits the amount of braking I can do. If I make some hard braking, it locks up the rear and tries to swap ends especially under trail braking. Granted, I can try biasing more brakes to the front but as I mentioned before, I ran out of fronts before the end of the session.

The bottom line is that any set of rules that puts a Porsche 944 with a 50/50 weight balance or a RX-7 with a 55/45 (my guess) weight balance as the same as a 63/37% Honda front drive Honda may need som re-thinking. This is the gist of what I will be communicating to the ITAC

bob
 
Bob,

I have written - and deleted about 3 responses to your post realizing that there isn't much more to say that hasn't already been posted.

Bottom line for you? I have been working on developing new 'standards' for the allowance made for FWD in ITS. In ITC, ITB and ITA; the realative lack of power makes our process work well. In ITS, it seems as if there is something else on the table. While individual reace results are impossible to use, the trends have shown that no FWD car in ITS is considered when you talk about 'what to race in ITS'.

My proposal is before the ITAC now and would result in many (not all) FWD cars in ITS losing weight under a revised 'process' should it make it's way past the ad-hoc and then the CRB.

If this is something that you think is a good idea, send in your support or conversly, if you think FWD cars in ITS are just fine where they are, send it a letter of opposition.

Something like:

"It is my understanding that the ITAC is considering changing the 'adders' applied to FWD cars in ITS to more appropriately class and reclass cars in this perfomance envelope. If these new considerations result in lower weights for some FWD cars, I would support (or not support) this thought process......."

Blah Blah Blah :)

AB
 
Once again, thanks for the hard work, Andy.


Richard Walke is real fast in that RX-7 and I wouldn't expect any ITS Del Sol to be anywhere close to being able to compete with him at Blackhawk. I'd like to know though, who was driving the Miata's?

In their defense, Tony Coello in his SM actually beat my once in my ITA Integra at Road America (a huuuuge power track!). Granted it's a phenomenal driver on his home track, but holy crap, that's moving!
 
While individual reace results are impossible to use, the trends have shown that no FWD car in ITS is considered when you talk about 'what to race in ITS'.

My proposal is before the ITAC now and would result in many (not all) FWD cars in ITS losing weight under a revised 'process' should it make it's way past the ad-hoc and then the CRB.[/b]
Click to expand...

:happy204: :happy204: :happy204:

Andy,

Thanks for the hard work. You really are a breath of fresh air for this club. I have been turned off many times by the lack of progress and red tape in IT. I hope this and the ITR proposal move forward.

If this is something that you think is a good idea, send in your support or conversly, if you think FWD cars in ITS are just fine where they are, send it a letter of opposition.

Something like:

"It is my understanding that the ITAC is considering changing the 'adders' applied to FWD cars in ITS to more appropriately class and reclass cars in this perfomance envelope. If these new considerations result in lower weights for some FWD cars, I would support (or not support) this thought process......."

Blah Blah Blah :)

AB
[/b]
Click to expand...

Where should we send the letters of support? [email protected]?

Thanks!
 
Thanks andy. Actually I have posted two letters to the CRB.

The first was sent two weeks ago is to request taking the DelSol back to 2360 because the change does not conform to the CGR 2006 Section 17.1.4 C. This section requires (to paraphrase) changes after the fourth year "for restoring equity in the vehicle's class" to be based on "actual racing performance". When my weight was changed, my car was in its fifth year of classification. To the best of my eforts, I have found no '95 Del Sol "actual racing performance" for a justifying a competitive adjustment to restore "equity". Given this. I believe this change does not conform to Section 17.1.4 C requirements and that the committee is well justified to restore the weight to 2360.

The second letter which I sent last night is to request that weight subtractors be given the Del Sol to bring it back to 2360 based upon subtractors for torque, FWD weight balance, and brake size compared to typical front running cars in the class. This letter was based upon various observations in this string.

I believe both positions are valid and am looking forward to an affirmative reply to the committee.

As a comment, I don't believe that my first letter affects any car other than the ITS 94-95 Del Sol as its these are the only ITS cars I could find that are non competitive while having a weight add and being more than 4 years old. As to the second letter, I would encourage all cars having similar metrics (Torque, FWD, Brakes) such as Civic Si '99 and Integra's to send in your own comments ASAP to the committee so they can be discussed at the same time.

regards
bob
 
I believe both positions are valid and am looking forward to an affirmative reply to the committee.

regards
bob
[/b]
Click to expand...

The 1st letter you sent has been reviewed by the ITAC and will receive a 'thank you for your input'. The ITAC and CRB do not agree with your position on the 'illegality' of the moves. Explanations why have been posted in this thread.

I hope to see the 'adders' modified. Getting back to EXACTLY 2360 won't happen, but it will certainly be much closer to that than the current weight if the process is modified for ITS/FWDers. I think the proposal I did makes a lot of sense and hope the ITAC does too.

AB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top