OK, guys, I am almost finished shoveling, so.....
First, the CRB is on your side. They are not going to make any decision that could endanger the competiveness of the E36. If it means pushing back the implementation date, then they are open to that. I like your comment DJ, about radicals and rationals. What I saw this weekend was the CRB being very rational, and bending over backwards to get this resolved properly. I know that we got off on the wrong foot with the timing and the lack of data.....the CRB and the ITAC agree, and are going to attend to those issues.
Second, this is a tricky bit of business, as has been pointed out. Where do results come from? If I had MY way, I would hire Sunbelt to build me a top notch legal motor, and then go testing, with lots of SIRs, application parts, and on every dyno I could find. I would end up with a ton of data points and a lot of confidence in my final decision.
But this is the real world. So we are relying on an effort that is being put forth by members of the CRB, the ITAC guys, and actual competitors, like yourselves. Obviously, it's a difficult process, and to some degree, judgement and trust are part of the formula.
So, we are pressing forward with an evolving plan to aquire as many data points as possible.
This weekend was a major step, and we got to do some good back to back to back testing of various setups, and we owe a debt of gratitude to a competitor and a CRB member who opened his personal shop up for the day so we could make noise and burn gas.
One downside to the testing is that we are using real guys and real cars, and their privacy needs to be respected when requested. Another is that of course, no two dynos are created equal. Another reason we are trying to get many data points.
We have scheduled another test this coming weekend, with a different car, and a different size SIR, then, the weekend after that, we will be back at it with more SIR sizes, plus the ones already tested for repeatability, and at this point it looks like we will have the car we tested this weekend, AND another car.
At that pont, we will have a better picture, and can make more decisions. I have a further plan in mind, but I am not sure of it's liklihood, as it is rather ambitious.
I hear what you guys are saying about repeatabilty, legality concerns, and so on, and I assure you that we will do the best we can. I can promise that the effort will be far and above anything IT has ever seen.
Now, I know you want data and numbers, but at this point I can't release them. I can say that we see the need to do more testing, as the numbers that we have gotten so far from various sources are not showing the repeatability that is desired.
This is a process, and we are at the begining, with much more to come.
The dyno used in this test was a Clayton, a roller based chassis dyno. It uses lighter rollers, and the standard procedure is to bring the car up to speed, then drag it down, gradually increasing the load. It will not be the only type used, as we have scheduled testing on other makes as I mentioned above.
Stay tuned!
prize!
