The only race that matters

Just to complete the record on Craig's car. We read the rules very carefully and I built it accordingly, that's why the front suspension was declared legal to the letter of the written rule. It was not because they didn't want to disallow it or liked it, it was because they couldn't do any thing about it. It was very trick but the stupid thing about it, and I think the rule, was that the most expensive part on it was the modified front lever shock which we couldn't get around. They cost more than a set of coil-overs and springs.
 
I support ideas that give the LBCs more power when deemed needed. I've contemplated the idea of making a classification for the 1380 Spridget for awhile. Why not? It would have to carry the right ballast, of course. It helps keep the cars viable and they are run in vintage now anyway. It needs to be optional....not replacing the 1275.

I don't think we can chain HP to the 948 anymore. I say that, even though I know Dan Collishaw could beat my car in a straight line at the crazy light weight it runs (actually it could at the Runoffs in 2008 with more weight). To me, the car is as light as it can get and it makes as much power as it can make. If the class needs to go faster, it's one of the few cars that can't reasonably do it.

I've said it many times before on here, but the fact that the Runoffs now bounces around makes it really hard to keep parity at the Runoffs track. I've also said (and read) before that roadsters and FWD economy cars don't race well together. They make their times differently. I don't know of a good solution as long as we are constrained to 3 prod classes.

Adding weight to modern cars and reducing weight of LBCs only makes them race more differently.
 
The data does not lie .

Ron's 2:38 shows that it has enough engine power and lateral power to win HP. Sebring is not a large radius ,flowing lateral power track. It is 5 straights connected with fairly slow turns. The LBC kill it inT17, T1, T13, T16. The exit speed from these turns along with the light weight under brakes, has generated competitive lap times. Adding a big bore LBC plus weight makes sense but the car will give away some of it's advantage for every pound.
Somebody also pointed out that the Sargis Spitfire still holds lap records. Is this true?
Maybe allow a little interbreeding of TR and MG. The Spit runs at 1550 or so.

The 998 is done . Cant make weight needed for 92HP. And the weight moves lap times very fast @ 1400#. 25# might be a couple of tenths.
Doing some power estimates shows that the HP class has about a 15/1 target HP/#. The newer cars are a little higher maybe @ around 16/1 plus real world correction. The Boards real world correction is why many of us are here IMHO.
 
A lot to cover:
Mike - Yes my car is fast. It has two National Championships, eight front row Runoffs starts, six Runoffs poles. It doesn't get beaten very often during the regular season. The 2:38 at Sebring is still two seconds slower than the lap record held by a VW. But, it's the Runoffs that we are talking about, and it hasn't finished on the podium nor has any Spridget had a chance to win since 2009, which is the year that the former G Production cars started getting their act together. Homestead this year showed me that it would have been lucky to crack the top ten at the Daytona Runoffs.

Chima's car was done previous to G Production being eliminated but would do pretty well against the current crop of fast tin tops, assuming it was legal and driven by Craig. Maybe it would be racing for third or fourth place, when it could have dominated the Runoffs at the time except for a couple of driver miscues.

I now have ten years invested in the LP 1275 motor and it is doing very well for me relative to the other Spridget competition, so of course I would like the motor to stay the same as it is and somehow become magically competitive against the tin tops on a power course. Having said that I would crack it open in a heartbeat if I was given something that allows us to make more power. Yes it will upset everyone that has one and require new jetting, maybe different gearing, and they won't last as long, but it would be worth it IMHO because it is probably the only way we will have a chance at the big one against the sedans with bigger motors if the current class situation is retained.

Keep in mind what has happened over the last seven years: one type of car has won the Runoffs five out of seven times with the same car winning with four different drivers and a podium for a fifth. The only two other wins were with former G Prod cars.

So what do we do? Being an optimist I think that the LBC’s should be well represented and have a very good chance at this year's Runoffs, especially one driven by a former Indycar driver in a Huffaker Midget. If he can't get the job done, then it will be very clear to all the extent to which the H cars have been screwed by the inclusion of the G cars, and it should be easy to convince everyone that something needs to be done.

So maybe it is OK that nothing is done for 2016. The season has started and we need to understand how competitive the LBC’s will be at Mid O. We may hear from the tin tops asking to take weight off.

Here is what I would do if I were king:

• In 2017 Re-instate G Production. Bring all of the former G cars back into G including those bumped up to F, as well as the full-prep Spit and 1098 Spridget. These two full prep roadsters (especially the Spit) are time bombs just waiting for someone to do a motor program on them and clean up if left in H. Take weight off if they move to G and add weight to the F cars returning to G.
• Take weight off of the current tin tops in H and bring them back to somewhat where they were in G before.
• Create a spec for a G Production version of the 1275 motor – maybe 12 to one compression with a ported head and stock carbs, or 12 to one with higher valve lift, roller rockers and stock head and carbs (Better minds than me could come up with something – ask Joe H., Bachman, Griffith, or others). Do this for the 1300 and 1500 Spit motor as well - something between LP and full prep.
• Consider creating a Production Car spec for the 1.6 Miata that would make it competitive in G but not an overdog. This might help the Spec Miata problem with the 1.6.
• Make H an essentially limited prep roadster class. LP 1275 Spridget, LP 1300 Spit, and LP 1500 Spit and Spridget in both LP and Hybrid form. Of course full prep 948 Spridgets or 850 Fiats if any are left. If after a couple of years we don’t have a reasonably healthy class, let us die a noble death and fold us into G with the power improvements formulated above. That would be an easy switch at that point.

This course of action will give the LBC’s a place to play in both G and H Production as well as continuing on in F. In G the power and weight disparity will be much less and guys like Rick should be happy. H will be the domain of limited prep roadsters where it should be easy to obtain parity by adjusting weight. If H fails then we can be brought into G with an existing spec line.

If that can’t be done and we need to retain a hole in our Category where G used to be, then do this in 2017:

• Take weight off the tin tops – at least 100 lbs.
• Give the limited prep Spridget 1275 and Spitfire 1300 and 1500 higher compression and valve lift, or ported head as defined above. (again better minds could come up with something)
• Leave the full prep 1147 Spit and 1098 Spridget as is.
 
If one wanted to help the LP 1275, it wouldn't take moving the earth, or even tearing a engine completely down. I thinking a point more CR, like 12.0 to 1, and more carb liberties, you go to modded HS2, or even have a open carb rule, not like the engine can go faster with more carb than needed, this would allow a racer who did not want to go with the thru bore HS2s to maybe use twin unmodded HS4s, or even a DCOE, just limit how any butterflies you can run to 2, and let those guys figure out what works best.

As for vintage race engines, well believe it or not, that is a much more elevated game, take a look at the gist of vintage race engine, and think how crazy you go with this rule set.

Bore: .047" over same as SCCA
Stroke" stock, same as SCCA
No dry sump unless the car came with it
No crank fire ignition, must use a distributor
Roller rocker arms allowed

Then the all important ending sentence in vintage race engine rules.

All other internal engine components are free.

Now think about that one for a moment compared to SCCA rules.
No ferrous metal rules, use whatever alloys you want, wherever your heart desires
Use the biggest valves you can stick in the head, smaller stem diameters, titanium, its all good.
Want a longer rod, shorter piston, go for it
Billet crank made from anything, got for it, want to get a custom crank, custom rods made, change the journal sizes, after all it all is custom made, got for it. Never thought I see the day when I thought a Moldex crank was low tech, but guess what we are there.

Here's what a vintage race engine components look like these days, it's all sitting in my shop right now, guarded by guys with assault rifles :)
 
A few more pics for your drooling pleasure :)

That last pic is the stock 1.31 1275 intake next to the 1.410" smaller stem titanium valve, you could damn near buy everything to build a damn good LP 1275 engine for what these valves cost.

While this is all neat shit, be thankful you have LP rules, these parts cost more than most runoff level SCCA cars could be sold for. :) Oh and trust me folks have went well beyond this in vintage.

Tom on the 1380 in FP, it's just a bore job and different pistons, believe it , or not you could built a 1490cc these days out of 1275 block, this a a popular deal in the UK with the Minis.
 
Parity is always a struggle to achieve. Before GP merged into HP, there was another Honda that dominated HP. The Hondas in GP were not competitive yet. The LP cars (tin tops) were brought in to save GP and eventually the Datsun 510s made the other original GP non-competitive. The Spridgets and Spitfire were moved to HP before the demise of GP because they were all leaving GP due to being under-dogs.

Putting effort into making things work with the classes we have now will probably have the most benefit. I don't expect to see more Prod classes in the future as history has shown it to go the other way. We essentially sacrificed GP and HP to save both classes. HP just became a slightly slower GP and the original HP cars slowly started going away just like what happened with the original cars in GP. Changes were made to help keep some of the roadsters in HP and maybe more help is needed but it takes time to make sure the changes don't go too far.

I like having more cars in class to race with. I used to run against 1 or 2 cars in GP and HP and have run solo in class also. This coming weekend we have 7 cars in HP. I stand a much less chance of coming in first but that is preferred to winning a race because I was the only car in class.
 
Am I understanding some of the proposed ideas correctly? You want to create a class specifically for little British Cars? Isn't there already a class for that, Vintage? :evil:
 
I'd be curious to know whether or not D.Finch will dust off the Kirby 914 and return to MO with M. Hotchkis behind the wheel...in "the only race that matters".

That was a pretty stout car/driver combo back in 2005...albeit the S. Sargis Triumph was close behind.

We had ten (10) 914's attend that race(2005) spread over three classes
(E,F GT2). In 2016 we'll be lucky to see one and it won't be me or Les Handley(RIP).

Tom B.
 
mcfoo":27c8618x said:
..albeit the S. Sargis Triumph was close behind.
Tom B.
Click to expand...

Just because Mark let him be, Steve drove his ass off, and never stood a chance to win that race. That 914 was the maybe biggest overdog ever in the FP runoffs. I watched that race from from the keyhole, I am not saying the car wasn't right, but I know a cat playing with a mouse when I see it. Mark would slow up in the keyhole to make look a bit closer, then pull Steve 6-7 car lengths down the back straight, that race was a bad joke.
 
The race was a joke because Steve was racing a E car. For years 914s won E/p races, including the 1972 National championship with EFR driving, later DQsd. It was only put in F after people lost interest in them, and the remaining 914 racers couldn't keep up, a poor reason to make a whole class change. With 1700 and 1800cc motors they should never have been put in F, which could be said for a lot of cars in a number of class's. That win wasn't the only farce there has been, but it was one of the worst.
 
Come on, Rick. Didn't a Midget sit on the pole, qualifyig below the lap record, that race and make a come back through the field to finish 3rd after going off track with the 1800cc MGB you had a hand in building on the 2nd or 3rd lap???

That's the same MG that won the Runoffs the year before, sat on the pole and was winning at Topeka before losing an axle, and the same one, with a different driver, that obliterated the FP field at Laguna.
 
Acme Speed Shop":u02keyh6 said:
mcfoo":u02keyh6 said:
..albeit the S. Sargis Triumph was close behind.
Tom B.
Click to expand...

Just because Mark let him be, Steve drove his ass off, and never stood a chance to win that race. That 914 was the maybe biggest overdog ever in the FP runoffs. I watched that race from from the keyhole, I am not saying the car wasn't right, but I know a cat playing with a mouse when I see it. Mark would slow up in the keyhole to make look a bit closer, then pull Steve 6-7 car lengths down the back straight, that race was a bad joke.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately , I didn't share the same view you had because I was also on the track at that time...but I'd have to say that if you're correct it may be the only time I'm aware of that any competitor " not under team orders" has purposely allowed another competitor to remain close behind "to make it look a bit closer". After all, what would be the incentive? The car was allegedly being "retired ' after the race.
Yes, its a well known fact that a kings ransom was spent on preparing that car but if it was built to the letter of the rules and then passed post race tear down you're disparaging remarks seem unwarranted.
If you believe there is a chance the car could show up at the Runoffs this year, you've got plenty of time to start writing letters to the CRB requesting the car be re-classified or adjustments be made.
Cheers :D
Tom B.

BTW, I'll be showing up(I hope) in a FP Miata...another car considered by many over the years as an "overdog" . I thought so too, but instead of continuing to fight them , I decided to join them (even at the ripe ole' age of 67).Hope to see you there come Sept.
 
Hap,

It was a blank check car with a race winning Indy Lights driver racing in a amateur championship. There is no reason it shouldn't have won. 6-7 car lengths would be about 100hp worth...

fter graduating from the Bob Bondurant School of High Performance Driving and the Elf-Winfield School first in class Hotchkiss started competitive racing in karting in 1993. Hotchkis made his auto racing debut in 1993. In the regional Formula Dodge championships. Hotchkis won the Rookie of the Year title in the Western and Midwestern championships. The driver from Pasadena captured another five wins in the Eastern championship.[1]

For 1994 Hotchkiss graduated into the Barber Saab Pro Series. In his first race at Bicentennial Park in Miami Hotchkiss finished eleventh. Near the end of the season with three rounds to go Hotchkiss was placed third in the championship. As Hotchkis won both races at Road America and placed second in the season finale at Phoenix International Raceway the American beat Juan Pablo Montoya for the second place in the standings. The following year Hotchkis moved into Indy Lights, finishing 7th in points. He captured his first win the following year from the pole at the Milwaukee Mile and finished a career best 5th in points. He drove for Team Green in 1997 but failed to win and again finished 7th in points. He competed part-time in 1998 and won his final Indy Lights race, the season finale at California Speedway.
Click to expand...

One thing it didn't do was have a 14 second lead over the rest of the field half way through the race... oh wait, that was a Midget. :boohoo: :D

2005 SCCA Runoffs FP qualifying:

John Saurino - MG Midget - 1:36.85
Steve Sargis - Triumph Spitfire - 1:36.931
Craig Chima - MGB (1800cc) - 1:37.222
Mark Hotchkis - 914 - 1:37.27
Pratt Cole - Miata - 1:37.300
Harold Flesher - MG Midget - 1:37.353

2005 SCCA Runoffs FP Race:

Mark Hotckiss - 1:36.292
Steve Sargis - 1:36.825
John Saurino - 1:37.138 *

* fell back to dead last and passed ~40 cars to get back to third. Fastest lap turned in traffic.

The year before, Steve Sargis was turning 1:36.4s in qualifying..
 
Not the point at all as I see it. I raced a Midget for years at IRP, Mid-Ohio, Nelson, Gratten, Summit, and maybe other places, and seldom ever got beat by a E/p car, Porsche, MGB, or what ever. And nether did Steve or Craig. But I have gotten beat by even poorly driven E/p cars a Road America. So whats the solution? Slow the Midget and Spit down? Speed the bigger cars up? What would you do? Then all you get a new imbalance to be debated. The problem is the wide difference in motor sizes and weights with in the class's now. Unless the club corrects that it will continue to be a runoffs location lottery.

As to the 914 driver and all his abilities. I raced him earlier in the year on a very hot and slippery track and won. He was no better than Steve or Craig, Drivers I have
spend years racing with.
 
hoffman900":3cbshps5 said:
Hap,

It was a blank check car with a race winning Indy Lights driver racing in a amateur championship. There is no reason it shouldn't have won. 6-7 car lengths would be about 100hp worth...
Click to expand...

Well, not exactly. The car was built originally by Finch developed for many years, then sold to Kirby. Finch, a professional race engineer, learned many important lessons over 30 years of developing 914s and other race cars. The car in its final iteration benefited from that all of that experience. There was nothing illegal about the car, nothing, that given the opportunity any of us wouldn't pursue. Then build the car specifically for that one race and you have a winner.

Its worth noting that as soon as that car one, a certain group of veteran production British racers pitched such a fit that the 914 was NAILED hard the following year only to have that change reversed a few years later. Thanks for the lead trophy.

The EP results from the same race:
1 7 Kim Knapp Caterham 1:36.192
2 20 Erik Madsen Porsche 914-4 1:36.523
3 83 Sam Halkias Triumph TR6 1:36.095
4 62 John Schmitt Honda Prelude 1:36.057
5 3 Jeff Dernehl Mazda RX-7 1:37.332

I'm not really seeing where the 914 was a huge overdog. The lap times just don't reflect that. Besides its past history. Nothing gained arguing about it.

Should SCCA keep adding lead and restrictors as the new cars keep moving further and further away from the 50+yo LBCs? Can't fight physics.
 
So much to complain about........so little time.

If you boys truly just want to just crown the best driver (racecraft, not just a hot qualifying lap) look to SM or maybe SRF where NO amount of engineering or $$$ can put you in the winner's circle. I tried to improve my SM performance through superior engineering and soon found it to be hopeless.

If spec racing is not your thing (everyone should try it though I feel).......... you'll need to be satisfied with a bumpy playing field of car potential, goofy SCCA rules, superior engineering, work ethic, mass quantities of $$$............and do the best you can. After all, this is just a fun hobby and nothing more. Roger Penske is never going to call.

If you feel you are the club's best driver who is getting hosed by big bad SCCA man........prove it by hopping in a spec car.
 
Jay Lutz":3892kj1b said:
So much to complain about........so little time.

If you boys truly just want to just crown the best driver (racecraft, not just a hot qualifying lap) look to SM or maybe SRF where NO amount of engineering or $$$ can put you in the winner's circle. I tried to improve my SM performance through superior engineering and soon found it to be hopeless.

If spec racing is not your thing (everyone should try it though I feel).......... you'll need to be satisfied with a bumpy playing field of car potential, goofy SCCA rules, superior engineering, work ethic, mass quantities of $$$............and do the best you can. After all, this is just a fun hobby and nothing more. Roger Penske is never going to call.

If you feel you are the club's best driver who is getting hosed by big bad SCCA man........prove it by hopping in a spec car.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute, I was under the impression money bought you the wins in Spec Piniata. You mean ceramic wheel bearings, coated pistons, boxes of custom camshafts, lightening parts, acid porting, etc don't make a winner in that class as well? :shock:

Just kidding, you make a great point, we all want multi-make racing and want to spend our time engineering and building the best car we can. That is what makes Prod such a great class. You can't have perfectly matched multi-make racing because there is no way to control all of the variables on any given track at a time. You can't expect every car to perform the same at every track. This is why NASCAR uses different cars for different tracks. I doubt any of us would like to spend the time building to that level. You certainly can't expect the classes to perfectly integrate 50 year old tractor motors in with modern designed four valve race engines without some problems. Its also unfair to keep throwing lead at cars that are inherently faster simply because they have a better foundation from which to start.
 
Protech Racing":2nr0i2sr said:
I think that it is very fair to add weight to the consistently winning cars. Otherwise the rest just give up for lack of ammo.
Click to expand...

At what point do you stop that though? Anyone remember the lead trophy the Integra carried in World Challenge back in the day. I think the weight was about to break through the floor boards and they kept winning.

At what point to you draw the line and decide that certain cars are just no longer competitive against the rest of the cars in the field. (I don't really see that in EP and probably FP), obviously its huge problem in HP. Perhaps the really fast HP guys would be better served in FP with less weight? However that puts us back to a single class for LBCs with only a handful of cars. That doesn't help participation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top