First, please write or email the CRB in regards to your preference as to the ECU rule. Second, once you've done that, please anonymously select one of the items above as to how you "voted".
Please, no discussion of the various merits of the options; we've got plenty of discussions all over this board on that already. In fact, if someone tries to open discussion on the proposals here, I'm probably going to move your post to the appropriate existing topic (hey, it's my topic, dammit, and I can do with it what I want...
).
However, if you do choose option 4, "Other", it would be interesting to hear from you what you suggested... - Greg
Below is the solicitation for membership input, as posted in the March 2007 Fastrack (typos mine):
Improved Touring
The CRB and the ITAC wish to get member feedback on a modification of the existing rules regarding the ECU (Engine Control Unit) allowances in Improved Touring.
The existing rule, known as the “inside the stock housing” rule, creates an arbitrary situation that allows some, but not all cars, to modify or replace their ECUs at varying degrees of cost and complexity. As it stands, the wording of the existing rule constrains certain cars from doing anything, while allowing others to run complete engine management systems, including, in some instances non stock sensors.
Significantly, all cars in IT are classed using a process that includes presumed gains from the ECU change. As not all cars can affect those changes, competition inequities result.
Increasingly, more and more cars are delivered with complex and interwoven systems that interfere with racing by limiting engine rpms, top speed, stability management as well other issues, some as yet unseen.
Therefore, the CRB would like to solicit member response to three options:
1. Keep the current rule and wording. In this case, there would be no changes to the existing wording.
2. Allow chip replacements and reprogramming of stock chips. The intent with this option is to eliminate the practice of replacing the stock ECU with aftermarket control systems. Chips may be removed and replaced or reflashed. All modifications must be done through the original chip solder points. This will give options, but the complexity of such changes and the availability of commercially available solutions will vary from car to car. The intent with this option is to simplify the possibilities, but the performance parity may suffer compared to other options.
9.1.3.D.1.6 :
ECUs may be altered by reprogramming the stock chip(s), or by removing the stock chip(s) and replacing with any assembly using the same connection points. Any assembly must fit within the stock ECU enclosure. Installation of fixed resistors is allowed between the sensor and the OEM wiring harness. Adjustable fuel pressure regulators are allowed.
3. Allow open engine control system replacement. The current state of electronics has spawned a number of inexpensive EMS (Engine Management Systems) that are more approachable to the average racer. For these reasons, it seems prudent to open up the existing rule by removing the “in the box” clause, so as to allow the substitution of these systems. Furthermore, as some systems operate better with certain sensors, specific sensors will be allowed to be added.
However, the existing Air Flow Meter (AFM) or equivalent device, must be retained and operate as delivered from the factory completely unaltered.
By opening up the ECU rule to aftermarket systems, it is felt that more racers will be able to achieve “process power” and at lesser price points. As the IT classing process already presumes ECU gains, no performance increase is anticipated over what is currently achievable or predicted.
9.1.3.D.1.6
Altering or replacement of the engine management computer is allowed. The addition or substitution of a throttle position sensor and/or a MAP sensor and the associate wiring is permitted. Existing sensors, excluding the stock air metering device, may be substituted. Adjustable fuel pressure regulators are permitted. Where possible, wording has been removed that reminds competitors of things not permitted, such as the modification of the stock ECU box. As the category is based on the cornerstone principle that nothing may be modified unless specifically authorized, the extra wording can be counter productive.
Please forward your comments to the CRB.
Please, no discussion of the various merits of the options; we've got plenty of discussions all over this board on that already. In fact, if someone tries to open discussion on the proposals here, I'm probably going to move your post to the appropriate existing topic (hey, it's my topic, dammit, and I can do with it what I want...
).However, if you do choose option 4, "Other", it would be interesting to hear from you what you suggested... - Greg
Below is the solicitation for membership input, as posted in the March 2007 Fastrack (typos mine):
Improved Touring
The CRB and the ITAC wish to get member feedback on a modification of the existing rules regarding the ECU (Engine Control Unit) allowances in Improved Touring.
The existing rule, known as the “inside the stock housing” rule, creates an arbitrary situation that allows some, but not all cars, to modify or replace their ECUs at varying degrees of cost and complexity. As it stands, the wording of the existing rule constrains certain cars from doing anything, while allowing others to run complete engine management systems, including, in some instances non stock sensors.
Significantly, all cars in IT are classed using a process that includes presumed gains from the ECU change. As not all cars can affect those changes, competition inequities result.
Increasingly, more and more cars are delivered with complex and interwoven systems that interfere with racing by limiting engine rpms, top speed, stability management as well other issues, some as yet unseen.
Therefore, the CRB would like to solicit member response to three options:
1. Keep the current rule and wording. In this case, there would be no changes to the existing wording.
2. Allow chip replacements and reprogramming of stock chips. The intent with this option is to eliminate the practice of replacing the stock ECU with aftermarket control systems. Chips may be removed and replaced or reflashed. All modifications must be done through the original chip solder points. This will give options, but the complexity of such changes and the availability of commercially available solutions will vary from car to car. The intent with this option is to simplify the possibilities, but the performance parity may suffer compared to other options.
9.1.3.D.1.6 :
ECUs may be altered by reprogramming the stock chip(s), or by removing the stock chip(s) and replacing with any assembly using the same connection points. Any assembly must fit within the stock ECU enclosure. Installation of fixed resistors is allowed between the sensor and the OEM wiring harness. Adjustable fuel pressure regulators are allowed.
3. Allow open engine control system replacement. The current state of electronics has spawned a number of inexpensive EMS (Engine Management Systems) that are more approachable to the average racer. For these reasons, it seems prudent to open up the existing rule by removing the “in the box” clause, so as to allow the substitution of these systems. Furthermore, as some systems operate better with certain sensors, specific sensors will be allowed to be added.
However, the existing Air Flow Meter (AFM) or equivalent device, must be retained and operate as delivered from the factory completely unaltered.
By opening up the ECU rule to aftermarket systems, it is felt that more racers will be able to achieve “process power” and at lesser price points. As the IT classing process already presumes ECU gains, no performance increase is anticipated over what is currently achievable or predicted.
9.1.3.D.1.6
Altering or replacement of the engine management computer is allowed. The addition or substitution of a throttle position sensor and/or a MAP sensor and the associate wiring is permitted. Existing sensors, excluding the stock air metering device, may be substituted. Adjustable fuel pressure regulators are permitted. Where possible, wording has been removed that reminds competitors of things not permitted, such as the modification of the stock ECU box. As the category is based on the cornerstone principle that nothing may be modified unless specifically authorized, the extra wording can be counter productive.
Please forward your comments to the CRB.
