Idle air motors addressed , letter # 31796

[Protech Racing]

None of the actual benefits of additional air is the point. The point is that many of us are illegal by the current rule. The rule allows drilling a hole in the throttle plate for idle correction .
The cars with stock ECU should be allowed to keep the complete system and the open ECU classes should remove it, IMHO.

Plug the bypass, drill a hole untill the idle speed works and race.(, is what I do . ).

 

[Ian Green]

You’d rather do that then fix an rule that might have been written out of fear of FI? This sounds like a burden to competitors the make a manual fix to something that doesn’t pose a performance or safety risk.

I feel the difference in how the carb rule and the FI rule are based on how the Venturi is used to set the throat size and simply overlooks any alternative air paths. Both should be the same. If there’s and idle bypass as part of the original design it can be retained in stock form.

How about: “ All inducted air must pass through the throttle body and be subject to control by the throttle butterfly with the exception of originally fitted idle bypass for the purpose of idle only”.

 

[kruck]

I fully understand and agree with the issue, as the rules don't say that stock idle control systems have to be removed/disabled, yet do say that all air has to pass through the throttle body plate. Those two are in direct conflict with each other. It shouldn't ever be assumed that the use of a stock, unmodified part/system is illegal to use; that's silly. It's also silly to expect people to remove/disable their stock idle control in favor of drilling holes in their butterfly, to restore idle function.

It needs to be clarified, and will be.

 

[Sterling]

Rules also state:

"Emission system components, control devices, associated lines, nozzles and wiring must be
removed and any resultant holes plugged. The plugs must serve no other purpose."

Not hard to envision someone arguing that the IACV counted as part of the emissions system.
.

 

[Greg Amy]

Not hard to envision someone arguing that the IACV counted as part of the emissions system.

First sentence of GCR 1.2.3.A disagrees with you.

 

[Sterling]

Not hard to envision someone arguing that the IACV counted as part of the emissions system.

First sentence of GCR 1.2.3.A disagrees with you.

Which is:
Interpreting the GCR shall not be strained or tortured and applying the GCR shall be logical, remembering that the GCR cannot specifically cover all possible situations. Words such as “shall” or “shall
not”, “will” or “will not”, “can not”, “may not”, “are” or “must” are mandatory; and words such as
“may” and “should” are permissive.

Greg, Thanks for your contribution to the discussion. :applause:

 

[Greg Amy]

Which is:

Interpreting the GCR shall not be strained or tortured and applying the GCR shall be logical, remembering that the GCR cannot specifically cover all possible situations.

Greg, Thanks for your contribution to the discussion.

You're welcome.

 

[Sterling]

Here is the response to Mike's letter# 31796

"1. #31796 (Mike Ogren) Idle Air Bypass Motor Oversite
Thank you for your letter. You are correct that there are cars where all air does not enter the engine through the carburetor or
throttle body, in classes/categories where this is an issue it will be referenced in the specific rule set and not though a global
rule.



So now what ???
.

 

[Sterling]

A friend pointed out that it has been added to the March GCR.

So, I will go put it back on the car.
.