August 2012 Prelim Minutes and TB
- Thread starter pfrichardson
- Start date
Matt Brannon
Well-known member
More and more 1.8L cars being classed and competitively adjusted in H-Production....
Glad the powers that be were careful enough to not allow 2.0L
Is it just me, or is the displacement/straight-line speed bar moving higher?
At last count there are 11 cars with H-Prod spec lines between 1700 and 1800cc.
-M
Glad the powers that be were careful enough to not allow 2.0L
Is it just me, or is the displacement/straight-line speed bar moving higher?
At last count there are 11 cars with H-Prod spec lines between 1700 and 1800cc.
-M
Dayle Frame
Well-known member
Don't think I didn't see that, Matt.
But you're right.....a 1.8L roadster may be an overdog.
Dayle
But you're right.....a 1.8L roadster may be an overdog.
Dayle
kruck
Well-known member
Come on, guys. That 1.8L 914 in HP isn't a new classification. It's been there for a while now, and no one races one, because you'd have to be clinically insane to do so. The design of that 1.8L engine is just awful. Yet now it loses 50lbs and gets .030" more cam lift, and it's all of a sudden an overdog? Really?
Yet there's no comments about a 1.5L Honda being classified into HP at the highest weight in all of HP, 250lbs heavier than that 914? Hmm, could it be because displacement doesn't have everything to do with how fast a car could potentially go? :wink:
Yet there's no comments about a 1.5L Honda being classified into HP at the highest weight in all of HP, 250lbs heavier than that 914? Hmm, could it be because displacement doesn't have everything to do with how fast a car could potentially go? :wink:
What Kevin said. The 1.8L 914 was in GP when it was still around. It was 2000# in G. When G went away the 914 got 150# added. The 84-87 CRX got 50. So how is that correct. Plus the 84-87 CRX makes 92hp stock and the 1.8L 914 make 73 hp. So I am not sure how you see the 914 as being a killer car. The 2.0L914 engine only make 92 hp stock. There are plenty of cars in H at the moment that make more then that in stock form. Displacement is not always the reason for horsepower.
Blake Meredith
Blake Meredith
Dayle Frame
Well-known member
Sorry. I admit that I know nothing of Porsches and I stand corrected. As a roadster guy, I'd like to see more of them and if taking a bunch of weight out of this one makes it more competitive and brings a few out, then thats Ok with me.
Dayle
Dayle
Matt Brannon
Well-known member
I wasn't whining about a potential overdog. What I was calling attention to is the no replacement for
displacement rule and the precident that these larger displacement cars have, and will continue to set in HP.
Unless the stock rods are prone to breaking or some silly variant-specific intake is their version of an SIR, a properly built Limited Prep 11:1 engine has some very-predicatable HP and Torque numbers that are direclty tied to displacement and I can predict this car will have the same 10MPH trap speed advantages that other big-displacement cars have shown.
Yes, the 914, MGB and others have been there for a long time, but the 1.8 VWs are clearly illustrating what can be achieved.
I'm sure that the 948 guys were saying the same thing about my 1300/1500 cars a few years ago, so I'm commenting as respectfully as possible here.
Kevin, welcome to the HP mix. I don't have hearburn on this one since the displacement is right given the traditional HP/FP splits. I assume you'll quickly be at the pointy end of the stick in the class given the capabilities of the car and your past accomplishments with it in ITB trim at the same weight.
Blake, original HP/Torque specs mean little. The 1.8L 914 was intentially hobbled as stock with low compression to make emissions numbers. They bored it 3mm (over 100cc) to help overcome that. At 11:1 with prod-prep, comparisons to stock are relatively moot.
-M
displacement rule and the precident that these larger displacement cars have, and will continue to set in HP.
Unless the stock rods are prone to breaking or some silly variant-specific intake is their version of an SIR, a properly built Limited Prep 11:1 engine has some very-predicatable HP and Torque numbers that are direclty tied to displacement and I can predict this car will have the same 10MPH trap speed advantages that other big-displacement cars have shown.
Yes, the 914, MGB and others have been there for a long time, but the 1.8 VWs are clearly illustrating what can be achieved.
I'm sure that the 948 guys were saying the same thing about my 1300/1500 cars a few years ago, so I'm commenting as respectfully as possible here.
Kevin, welcome to the HP mix. I don't have hearburn on this one since the displacement is right given the traditional HP/FP splits. I assume you'll quickly be at the pointy end of the stick in the class given the capabilities of the car and your past accomplishments with it in ITB trim at the same weight.
Blake, original HP/Torque specs mean little. The 1.8L 914 was intentially hobbled as stock with low compression to make emissions numbers. They bored it 3mm (over 100cc) to help overcome that. At 11:1 with prod-prep, comparisons to stock are relatively moot.
-M
Dayle Frame
Well-known member
blamkin86":3l41fzd2 said:
That was in FP. Mark Hotchkiss (sp?) smoked the FP guys at the Runoffs in Kirby's BEAUTIFUL 914. What motor it had, I don't know.
Dayle
It was a full prep 1.8 with carbs and a ton of money spent on it for that one race. The H 914 has to run the stock FI with a stamped steel intake plenum. I am building an HP 914 for a customer to run. We will see how it does next year. There is one other being built as well. So that will be two of them.
Protech Racing
Well-known member
I have a customer 914 that will go down to HP, if we can find the injection parts. It has no chance in E or F. It may just run vintage.
FWIW our 1.8 Rocco runs about 40# of tire pressure to pick up the top speed. I trim around the tire pressure. So far it has worked well,. but the driver is also running the SM.
FWIW our 1.8 Rocco runs about 40# of tire pressure to pick up the top speed. I trim around the tire pressure. So far it has worked well,. but the driver is also running the SM.
Chris Schaafsma
Well-known member
bam914ep":36mmszkn said:
I thought fuel injected cars can now run any electronic injection, though with the spec line manifold.
Matt Brannon
Well-known member
I believe the PCS says you have to stick with stock "type" injection, which means you can't convert a mechanical injection system to electronic. Any Bosch L-Jetronic can be converted to an aftermarket ECM controller, sensors and injectors as long as the stock un-modified manifold is retained.
Mark Coffin
Well-known member
I see that G-Production is shaping up nicely. :wink:
MC
MC
c mathis":2lo8wfb1 said:
It is not listed in the 'Master Technical Bulletin including July 2012 Fastrack" and the "Recommended Rules Changes (July 2012)" shows a 2013 effective date but it is listed in the July 2012 Updated GCR Page 505 and 510 of the PDF http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/assets/2012GCR-updatedJuly1.pdf
blamkin86":2lo8wfb1 said:
Based on race results, I believe Inness' car is a 1991 E30 318iS with the M42 1.8 ltr 4 valve engine which is already EFI so he is not effected by the EFI changes right or wrong.
In the Nov 2011 Fastrack, Letter #6081 (R. Inness Eisele) requested to classify 1991 BMW 318i/iS in F Production at 2400/*2460/**2520. This is listed as changes for 2012.
In the Dec 2011 Fastrack, Letter #6081 (no name listed on letter) was voted on and passed by the BoD. This was a request for the 92-95 E36 318i/iS to be moved from EP to FP. This is the same letter number that is listed in Nov 2011 Fastrack for Inness' request. It appears that when the CRB sent the letter to the BoD for approval they made a mistake and maybe wanted to add the E36 into the change along with the E30 that was requested by Inness' letter #6081.
In the Feb 2012 Fastrack letter 6939 from Inness was requesting to classify BOTH the E30 and E36 318's in FP. Letter 6939 is listed has a suggested change for 2013.
I see that the (92-95) BMW 318i/is E36 is listed under the FP class in the January 2012 GCR. The 1991 E30 318iS is only listed under EP in the July 2012 GCR.
This should have been handled by a Race Memo correcting the issue in the GCR.