Self-policing +

Right now I would welcome a tear down on someone else's dime. I am planning on rebuilding after the next race as I hurt it a bit at the SIC and now down 10psi on 2 of the 4 cylinders.

Would suck to get torn down after I made the trip to the track.. but hey..

So it sounds like a blanket protest is not the best. hmm...
 
seckerich said:
I had a weekend at Roebling where Kent Thompson and I got together and asked that all the BMW's be checked for restrictor plates. This was in the days AFTER the SIR because we were being told they were not really that fast and that most were just not running them.
Click to expand...

Did you mean after? Otherwise I can't make sense of the inquiry into the BMW drivers.
 
If memory serves, we tried flat plate restrictors on the BMWs before we went SIR.

Related note: a lot of folks ask "why won't the scrutineers tear down engines?" Simple answer is that unless it's put into the supps (such as it is for the ARRC and Runoffs) if a tear-down is done then the Region has to pay for the repairs if the engine is found compliant. No one's going to do that.

It's easy to get away with non-destructive tests (e.g., Whistler, weights, track, brake size, checking for plates, etc) but you'll be hard-pressed to find a region and/or its scrutineers that will take the initiative to do tear-downs. - GA
 
To your question, Steven, I had zero idea when I started the process with Hileman, what I was looking for. I started by asking around (including here) what the easy cheats would be for a MkI Rabbit GTI - cam came back as number one since there are lots of cheap easy options that still idle OK, 2.0 bottom end (which would be visible externally, as there's a mark cast in the block, and the throttle body off of an Audi 5000 of the same age. I did some internet research and found pictures of the two parts, which (luckily) were visibly different from the outside since the bore diameter of the wrong one was so much bigger.

I decided in advance I didn't want to go so far as to tear anyone's junk completely down, but knowing that looking at the cam (the cheater versions of which would also have marks or evidence of where the marks were removed) wouldn't cost a ton or leave him with a pile of parts in the grass, I was prepared with a stack of 20's to do that.

I presented my protest with the items in order from cheap and easy to find, to pulling the cam cover. The stewards asked if it would be OK if they started with the visible issues and then if necessary came back for a bond to pop his top. Sure. Off the tech guy goes to make a housecall, with my paperwork and fee on file. 30 minutes later he's back. Guilty.

Short answer is that you have to do your homework. I recommend being strategic. It might sound like being a chickenshit to protest something that's minor but visible, but if you're confident someone is cheating, that will be a shot across their bow.

This topic comes up pretty regularly here, and in the paddock, and sadly we ARE influenced by reluctant stewards as well as the desire to not turn a fun weekend into a bummer. I didn't mention it but I also did my homework re: next steps if I'd been stonewalled by the guys/gals with whom I was supposed to file my complaint.

They are protestable, too. And they don't require a bond for teardown.

K

EDIT - I went to the SIC a few years ago ready to file a protest too, with specs and part numbers and stuff. I elected on that weekend to NOT file it because I frankly thought I was driving like crap and didn't deserve to beat the guy. There's no right decision for everyone.
 
seckerich said:
To not single anyone out we did all of them. I had a driver come up very hurt we would ever think he was cheating and I realized you never do a blanket protest. Lesson #1



Protests suck, period.

.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm.... next year I will most likely be protesting every ITR and ITS BMW on bore and stroke. It's a common and easy performance enhancer to swap in a 3.0 crank. This year a few of them had done it and when asked it was rumored that I would be surprised at how many did. I find that hard to believe but to keep it simple and not single out anyone I was going to do all of them. I had made a plan that each weekend if a new car showed up I would do that one as well. To stop the rumors and make sure everyone was playing fairly.

Now maybe I am thinking that isn't the best idea.?.

Stephen
 
StephenB said:
Now maybe I am thinking that isn't the best idea?
Click to expand...

Why are we worried about hurting someone's fragile ego? If they're compliant, then they should look at it as an opportunity to demonstrate that.

If we don't want to hurt feelings, maybe we should give everyone a trophy? I know I've been unhappy sometimes not getting one.

- GA
 
I totally agree on do your homework. Probably our biggest failing in our protest.

I had no idea what it took took to protest a 13b rotary, how to determine if it had been ported, the effectiveness of a lollipop, etc. All of that really handicapped the protest because we didn't know exactly what we were looking for.

Of course, after taking a hard look at rotary legality issues after the protest, and talking at lenght with a lot of folks, I'm not sure it is always possible to determine if a rotor housing has been ported or is stock.
 
StephenB said:
Hmmmmm.... next year I will most likely be protesting every ITR and ITS BMW on bore and stroke. It's a common and easy performance enhancer to swap in a 3.0 crank. This year a few of them had done it and when asked it was rumored that I would be surprised at how many did.
Click to expand...

Really? Those cars can make a lot of power legally, do they need to resort to that in order to get more power?

There aren't a lot of these cars running down in the SE, but there are a few. They seem to be a bit faster than the ITS cars which is what I'd expect and I think they're legal down this way.


Greg Amy said:
If memory serves, we tried flat plate restrictors on the BMWs before we went SIR.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, I vaguely remember that.
 
Knestis said:
He got bounced out of the points but was allowed to run, on a plea deal after admitting guilt to the tech guy for the obvious stuff that didn't require a teardown. I didn't have any additional trouble with him, although I did put an extra GoPro in the car so I had video front and back - just in case. :)

Now, I have zero idea if he came back this year legal. I would hope so...
Click to expand...

I'm not certain, having not been out there, Dan would have to comment... but I didn't get the impression the car was any different this year. :shrug:
 
Why are we worried about hurting someone's fragile ego? If they're compliant, then they should look at it as an opportunity to demonstrate that.
Click to expand...

I don't care if someone protests me if done in a some-what friendly manner. Meaning not just done to be malicious. In the past when a few people mentioned in passing about protesting the top ITB drivers, I told them they should do it and I welcomed them to also check out my car even without that. I took that as a compliment.
 
Yes, it was during the flat plate restrictor days when they just moved them off center and made a little more power. CRB said we were crazy, and they were just not running them if they were still that strong. Bad days for all involved and made bad feeling for what should have been good friends. Never want to be in that position again. Deal with the problem child, not the group. You take one down the rest get the picture. :023:
 
I don't think I was racing then, or if I was I don't remember it.

So they had to put a flat plat restrictor in front of the TB? How much smaller than the TB plate was it? And they could move it to one side or the other to negate it?
 
Isn't there an instrument that looks like a lab in a suit case that connects to the spark plug hole and once the engine is rotated it calculates both displacement and compression ratio, all without having to open the engine.

Thanks,
 
Ron Earp said:
I don't think I was racing then, or if I was I don't remember it.

So they had to put a flat plat restrictor in front of the TB? How much smaller than the TB plate was it? And they could move it to one side or the other to negate it?
Click to expand...

The flat plate restrictor was in the 06 timeframe. It's a 0.06" thick steel plate with a 56mm hole, with a 0.25" spacer for clearance for the butterfly, no radiusing allowed. In my 06 GCR is mistakenly listed under the 89-91 e30 325 and not the 92-95 e36 325. There's nothing about it having the hole concentric to the TB, it just says you will have a plate with this size hole in it. I just measured a stock butterfly it's a hair over 2.5" so I'd say 65-66mm. There's a 90* elbow directly in front of the TB so it makes sense that having it off set would minimize the effect of the flat plate as the inside is probably seperated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top