Given the number of cars that are coming with turbos what do you do to stay relevant?
Nov '12 Prelim Minutes & Tech Bulletin
- Thread starter erlrich
- Start date
Given the number of cars that are coming with turbos what do you do to stay relevant?
erlrich
Super Moderator
ShelbyRacer
New member
Let the st guys figure that out
Did Greg put you up to that? (I'm KIDDING Greg- no rum-induced hate mail please...)
I'd personally LOVE to run my old turbo car in IT. I can tell you from experience, limited to IT mods and 1 bar of boost, I could make 240+ hp- I put down 208 to the front wheels (146 flywheel hp stock)- at 85% development. I'm pretty sure that 260hp is possible.
2.0 multiplier anyone?
It would be a good fit for R, but I tremble at the thought of trying to classify cars without completely screwing the pooch. SIR would be a viable option, but even then, ugh.
BTW- please take this all at the "talking out my ass" that it is at this point. We have to make sure we don't screw up the class now before we even look at new ways to screw it up.
How many dyno sheets does it take to move a car off the 25%?
And for the record, I think every car in the ITCS should be run through at 25% unless there is compelling documentation and evidence to do so otherwise. Can't find those dyno sheets from 10 years ago, then they don't exist. Can't find that microfiche, it doesn't exist. The evidence has to exist today and can't be an e-mail of someone saying their friend saw a car on a dyno. It has to be documentable. I'm not sure if this is what Dr. K's spreadsheet was about, but if it was then I'm all for it.
Last edited:
You write rules for a category without turbos. It's not necessary for IT to capture every car out there.
K
Existential truth/proof....
"To refresh everyone....
What we have is a case of multiple (and findable) sources that list 110 and a microfiche (and unfindable) source that lists 120, correct?
- Is the microfiche for an unmodified US car as sold in the US?
- What is the source of the microfiche (factory publication? trade magazine?)
- What is the citation for the microfiche so that those with an axe to grind can go to a research library and do some digging?
- Was the 120 BHP, SAE Gross, SAE Net or SAE certified?"
"Can't find that microfiche, it doesn't exist. "
The truth about this was put out to this community from several members.
This repetition of the "microfiche" untruth reminds me of this election season-if you repeat misinformation enough, it will become the truth.
The 120hp specification for the Coupe motor is found in the VW/Audi factory dealer parts information system known as EKTA, which is disseminated to every factory authorized VW and Audi dealer in the US and exists as a digital file on their computer systems.
It is the only system the factory provides authorized service and parts departments to use for parts ordering/identification purposes. It also lists all engine and transmission codes, including certain specifications and applicability, as well as many other minutia needed to understand what fits what and when it was in production, etc. Many people involved in the service and repair of VAG vehicles, like Phils Foreign Car Service, or VAG parts re-sellers, or VAG car developers, have acquired bootleg copies of the files because they are the latest, official factory information. AFAIK, the information from the engine spec section can be printed from my computer just as any parts illustrations and accompanying printed info can be and I would gladly do for any who's interested if it's possible.
And on another planet, far away...... You're collectively killing this class with a death of a thousand cuts. I reluctantly approved of the attempts to quantify performance using "the process", but feared it would come to this bullshit. Everyone and His Highness' Royal (RIGHT) opinion screaming for attention! And whoever is the loudest gets listened to. A long time ago I opined that this "club" should be ruled by an enlightened dictatorship. That's still true.
If the most vocal of you spent half the energy you spend on this forum and put it into learning and pursuing car development/tuning, you would be a lot faster and satisfied!
"To refresh everyone....
What we have is a case of multiple (and findable) sources that list 110 and a microfiche (and unfindable) source that lists 120, correct?
- Is the microfiche for an unmodified US car as sold in the US?
- What is the source of the microfiche (factory publication? trade magazine?)
- What is the citation for the microfiche so that those with an axe to grind can go to a research library and do some digging?
- Was the 120 BHP, SAE Gross, SAE Net or SAE certified?"
"Can't find that microfiche, it doesn't exist. "
The truth about this was put out to this community from several members.
This repetition of the "microfiche" untruth reminds me of this election season-if you repeat misinformation enough, it will become the truth.
The 120hp specification for the Coupe motor is found in the VW/Audi factory dealer parts information system known as EKTA, which is disseminated to every factory authorized VW and Audi dealer in the US and exists as a digital file on their computer systems.
It is the only system the factory provides authorized service and parts departments to use for parts ordering/identification purposes. It also lists all engine and transmission codes, including certain specifications and applicability, as well as many other minutia needed to understand what fits what and when it was in production, etc. Many people involved in the service and repair of VAG vehicles, like Phils Foreign Car Service, or VAG parts re-sellers, or VAG car developers, have acquired bootleg copies of the files because they are the latest, official factory information. AFAIK, the information from the engine spec section can be printed from my computer just as any parts illustrations and accompanying printed info can be and I would gladly do for any who's interested if it's possible.
And on another planet, far away...... You're collectively killing this class with a death of a thousand cuts. I reluctantly approved of the attempts to quantify performance using "the process", but feared it would come to this bullshit. Everyone and His Highness' Royal (RIGHT) opinion screaming for attention! And whoever is the loudest gets listened to. A long time ago I opined that this "club" should be ruled by an enlightened dictatorship. That's still true.
If the most vocal of you spent half the energy you spend on this forum and put it into learning and pursuing car development/tuning, you would be a lot faster and satisfied!
Last edited:
StephenB
New member
FYI Phil, I corrected many things that you posted in 2009 however you did also post a picture of the microfiche file but that has been removed. Feel free to re-post it if you can get access to it. Back in 2009 I was upset at the reason. One reason was tourque, another was on track performance, another was that it wasn't allowed per the rules in the GCR, never ever was it because of the 120HP rating. Now that the ITAC took the time to relook the data over and stands behind that 120HP reading as the reason I support them. If anyone decides to quote that... understand that I also support Obama as president, but I am not voting for him... support is different than agreeing with someone.
No disrespect for anyone on the ITAC or CRB, my hope is that you recognize that I really do support your decision and appreciate the time you put into making that decision even if I disagree with it. The great thing about a collective group of civil people is that they may not all agree on everything but they still live in peace and support one another! (ya ya I know I wasn't that civil back in 2009!)Also wanted to comment on the Turbo thing as I just posted a quick comment from my phone earlier. Honestly I don't think IT is the place for them. We have enough issues and honestly I do think that the ST ruleset will accomodate those types of cars. Let SCCA as a club stay "relevant" using the ST ruleset and lets stay as the class we are. I don't think we need to change just yet. If we REALLY want turbo cars with the same base ruleset then make a class just for them, no mixing them in. But realize if we add another IT class all it is going to do is make our fields that much smaller.
Stephen
Stephen
Last edited:
Rabbit05
New member
Phil,
Sorry I have produced a couple of Factory documents .One of which was/is used by dealerships..and one supplied by the said manufacturer to the mass that bought said car. ..So does ONE piece of evidence carry more water over TWO plus sources ?? Not in my book...
Everyone,
And I have contacted the dyno place , Jeff was right, it's around $200 bucks ,which I dont have . And from what was mentioned earlier from Andy and/or Jeff , that these dyno numbers would have little to to no matter anyways. So why should i spend money I dont have on information that wont matter ?
All in all I feel that it is fear about the Audi . This is another 10+ page thread about a car that maybe 5 people in the country own , but yet is being perceived upon that it will be the "Miata" of ITB and destroy the class . Which is laughable.
And does anyone have any of the CRB's emails so I can request a copy of the microfiche ?
ShelbyRacer
New member
Should still be [email protected], but I know most of the correspondence goes through the online system nowadays.
While I don't have individual email addresses to give, I can tell you that if you login on the SCCA page using your member number and password, look under the Resources tab for the Directory, and you'll find contact phone numbers for everyone on the CRB...
Flyinglizard
New member
Where is the Audi located?
We get 3-4 runs for 50$. I take 2 cars most of the time.
We get 3-4 runs for 50$. I take 2 cars most of the time.
erlrich
Super Moderator
I was going to say (not that it really matters) that we have a couple of shops in this area that advertise "3 pulls for $75", or something like that. Last time I did any tuning (admittedly 4-5 years ago) it was like $100-$150/hr.
gran racing
Super Moderator
How would it? If the dyno says 90 HP, what does that number mean? Since the car has not seen a significant amount of develpment, I won't be at all surprised if the HP numbers are low. I could not believe how much gains were seen from dyno tuning and testing. Then a professionally built motor, transmission, and so forth.
"Best case" in terms of putting this issue to bed is it comes out at 110 HP or so. Then it validates to many that the 120 stock number is accurate.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Mr Blethen and I have been in touch on the dyno time. If he wants to bring it, we will get it done. The issue is simple. No disrespect to their 'program' at all but these dyno sheets would have ZERO value. For cars that have NEVER been on the dyno, there has been ZERO development. What header? What intake? What allowances taken advantage of? No programmable ECU. Why in the world would you want a piece of data like this?
Makes no sense to me.
It would be the equivalent of me (ITA Miata) bolting on eBay parts to a crate motor with the stock ECU and giving you the dyno plot and expecting you to use it as a data point. Worthless time and money unless there is an effort to grow power, try new parts and install a PECU.
Makes no sense to me.
It would be the equivalent of me (ITA Miata) bolting on eBay parts to a crate motor with the stock ECU and giving you the dyno plot and expecting you to use it as a data point. Worthless time and money unless there is an effort to grow power, try new parts and install a PECU.
Last edited:
Late to the party, (new job responsibility is all time consuming). I have worked with 3 different ITAC's trying to fix the weight of the MR2. I have been told everything from just wait, not now, build it and let us know, submit what you have, etc..
This task has been all time consuming and expensive. Even purchasing engineering papers from SAE on the development and design of the motor to show EXACTLY why it is limited in IT trim and what Toyota did on following generations to fix it.
For the one MR2 at road America.. I would like to talk to the person. Just listening to the guy that was helping him and was the one finding the loop holes.. Just listening to him talk I was thinking.. that is illegal, that is illegal, that is illegal. Whether or not they are on this car or not.. I do not know.
Yes I was on pole at SIC, and got motored by on the straight EVERY lap. In which case I have no defense as I am not going to do some SM swerving. Once they are in front they can just park it in front of me and I have no ability to get back around. FYI of the cars at the SIC the A2 VW was by far the fastest of us in a straight line.
However, this is still a moot point. An accord, a mustang, and a Celica (that I have not seen in some time). all have run laps 2SECONDS faster per lap than the group of us were running. 2 seconds at RRR is ridiculous!!
Also take those same cars at CMP.. just a few months prior the guy I was racing and were all in a few tenths of each other at RRR I was 2 seconds back per lap. He was on old hoosiers and I was on brand new Hankook C71 (autocross compound). Horse for course.
This has been an exercise in patience. Is the car right? no.. I sit closer? yes. Will it net me the seconds I need at other tracks? no.. Still need torque to do that. My MR2 is still a few hundred lbs heavier than a car with a very similar hp (ex-underwoods civic).
Thank you again ITAC members.. I will continue to develop and work on my project. Like I promised I will report back with any new data that exceeds my current numbers. I do not want to hide anything.
This task has been all time consuming and expensive. Even purchasing engineering papers from SAE on the development and design of the motor to show EXACTLY why it is limited in IT trim and what Toyota did on following generations to fix it.
For the one MR2 at road America.. I would like to talk to the person. Just listening to the guy that was helping him and was the one finding the loop holes.. Just listening to him talk I was thinking.. that is illegal, that is illegal, that is illegal. Whether or not they are on this car or not.. I do not know.
Yes I was on pole at SIC, and got motored by on the straight EVERY lap. In which case I have no defense as I am not going to do some SM swerving. Once they are in front they can just park it in front of me and I have no ability to get back around. FYI of the cars at the SIC the A2 VW was by far the fastest of us in a straight line.
However, this is still a moot point. An accord, a mustang, and a Celica (that I have not seen in some time). all have run laps 2SECONDS faster per lap than the group of us were running. 2 seconds at RRR is ridiculous!!
Also take those same cars at CMP.. just a few months prior the guy I was racing and were all in a few tenths of each other at RRR I was 2 seconds back per lap. He was on old hoosiers and I was on brand new Hankook C71 (autocross compound). Horse for course.
This has been an exercise in patience. Is the car right? no.. I sit closer? yes. Will it net me the seconds I need at other tracks? no.. Still need torque to do that. My MR2 is still a few hundred lbs heavier than a car with a very similar hp (ex-underwoods civic).
Thank you again ITAC members.. I will continue to develop and work on my project. Like I promised I will report back with any new data that exceeds my current numbers. I do not want to hide anything.
Re:Audi and a dyno.
Perhaps I am mistaken... but isn't the stock HP number the issue and not the IT-trim motor? If that's the case, how would a dyno of a motor that has had any modifications illuminate the answer?
Thank you for giving the source. It still leaves unanswered the question as to how the document is measuring horsepower and whether the engines were sold in the US in the car. Using wiki, there were 4 different engines in the car:
HY= 134 BHP less 15% = 114HP
JT= 119 BHP less 15% = 101HP
KV = 131 BHP less 15% = 111HP
KX = 118 BHP. less 15% = 100HP
According to www.audiworld.com, the 84 version had 100 HP (SAE net) which corresponds to... 119BHP. And if that easily could have been 120BHP in the source.
But the Audi is a red herring. The CRB has ruled by decree on it. The larger issue is does anyone know where I can find either a Geo Prism GSi, Isuzu Stylus or Geo Storm GSi that I can convert into an ITB car?
Perhaps I am mistaken... but isn't the stock HP number the issue and not the IT-trim motor? If that's the case, how would a dyno of a motor that has had any modifications illuminate the answer?
Thank you for giving the source. It still leaves unanswered the question as to how the document is measuring horsepower and whether the engines were sold in the US in the car. Using wiki, there were 4 different engines in the car:
HY= 134 BHP less 15% = 114HP
JT= 119 BHP less 15% = 101HP
KV = 131 BHP less 15% = 111HP
KX = 118 BHP. less 15% = 100HP
According to www.audiworld.com, the 84 version had 100 HP (SAE net) which corresponds to... 119BHP. And if that easily could have been 120BHP in the source.
But the Audi is a red herring. The CRB has ruled by decree on it. The larger issue is does anyone know where I can find either a Geo Prism GSi, Isuzu Stylus or Geo Storm GSi that I can convert into an ITB car?
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
If the ITAC had as much solid data on the Audi as it does on the Miata or the MR2, they could set the weight based on the number that REALLY matters - crank HP in IT prep. This is especially applicable when the validity of the stock HP number is in dispute like it is here; is over-rated (RX-8) or under-rated (E36 325. CRX Si).
And count on this: If the ITAC goes through ITB - the Geo with the 130/140hp motor ain't gonna be in ITB for much longer...it's an ITA car all day long.
And count on this: If the ITAC goes through ITB - the Geo with the 130/140hp motor ain't gonna be in ITB for much longer...it's an ITA car all day long.
Last edited: