Page 2 of 6
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:06 pm
by Anonymous
engine swaps?
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:13 pm
by Loren
Yep. That would be wise to address.
Bump up a class for a displacement change of more than... 500cc?
I don't see the need to reclass for a basic swap like a Miata 1.6>1.8 or Toyota 1.5>1.8 or anything along those lines.
Or bump to the class that has the appropriate catch-all?
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:26 pm
by Charles
Jeremy wrote:engine swaps?
yup, engine swaps and/or added forced induction in the process....
Mine's an oddball example but factory motor was a 2.4L , my swapped SR is only a 2.0L and with very minimal mods is putting out ~ 100hp more than that 2.4.
So in this example I would only be bumped once for going turbo because displacement on the swap went down?
Another example is Kenny's Suby........... I guess he wouldn't get bumped at all.
I think he's still running a 2.0 and Turbo (same as factory) even with a 100+hp bump from his swap.
I know we will never cover everything and it's rare to see more than 3 swapped 240's at any event including mine, but just throwing these examples out there.
I won't complain one way or another......
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:58 pm
by Anonymous
Why does Kenny have to ruin everything?
He has an ESP car, but he has swapped the engine from a BSP car (sorta). So Kenny would end up in BSP with the STi.
I guess we would need to bump to the donor class for engine swaps, then add on a forced induction penalty after that if applicable.
Someone could take a crap civic (FSP), add a vtec motor (from a DSP car), that would bump them up one class, then add a turbo and that would bump them up to the top class.
And that makes sense to me.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:52 am
by Anonymous
Results from last 2 events using SCCA Street Prepared classes.
Code: Select all
Brooksville December
Class 1 (ASP/BSP/CSP)
1) Ronald Croft 04 Mazdaspeed MX-5 74.629 BSP
2) Jason Ball 06 Mazda Miata 75.274 CSP
3) Charles Stowe 240sx 76.611 DSP, turbo add bumps to Class 1
4) Kenneth Gardner 04 Subaru WRX 77.751 ESP, with BSP swap bumps to class 1
5) Ron Marchini 04 Honda S2000 79.263 BSP
6) Victor Crichton 01 BMW M Roadster 79.286 ASP
7) Brian Bode 01 Honda S2000 77.862+1 BSP
8) Philip Hart 94 Mazda Miata 84.222 CSP
9)John Kilpatrick 95 Nissan 240sx 86.525+1 DSP assuming bump for turbo added?
Class 2 (DSP/ESP)
1) Andrew Scoda 87 Ford Mustang 76.790 ESP
2) Jeff Girardello 9 Ford Mustang Gt 76.859 ESP
3) Rydell Huff 1 Impreza 2.5RS 80.234 DSP
Class 3 (FSP)
1) Loren Williams 07 Sloyota Yaris 77.617 FSP
SPC January
Class 1 (ASP/BSP/CSP)
1) Ronald Croft 04 Mazdaspeed MX-5 60.591 BSP
2) Kenneth Gardner 04 Subaru WRX 61.353 ESP, with BSP swap, bumps to class 1
3) Mark Jones 96 Mazda Miata 64.635 CSP
4) Carl McKim 96 Mazda Miata 65.620 CSP
5) Ron Marchini 04 Honda S2000 63.717+1 BSP
6) Brian Bode 01 Honda S2000 64.746+1 BSP
7) Juan Rodriguez 04 Mazda RX8 64.797+1 BSP
8) Tim Allen 93 Mazda Miata 66.859 CSP
9) William Ensminge96 Nissan 240sx 68.803+1 DSP, turbo add bumps to Class 1
10) Doug Anderson Nissan 240sx 75.375 DSP, turbo add bumps to Class 1
Class 2 (DSP/ESP)
1) Rydell Huff 1 Impreza 2.5RS 62.723 DSP
2) Robert Vincent 05 Legacy GT 63.503 ESP
3) Andrew Scoda 87 Ford Mustang 63.994 ESP
4) John Kucek 00 Honda Civic Si 63.831+1 DSP
5) Jeff Greenhaus Acura Integra 64.013+2 DSP
6) Chris Wells 00 Honda Civic 68.034+1 FSP, turbo add bumps to class 2
7) Keith Pecha Pontiac Firebird 72.297 ESP
8) John Dellacosta Ford Mustang 71.327+2 ESP
9) Lisa Vlaming 91 Honda Prelude 91.758+5 DSP
Class 3 (FSP)
1) Loren Williams 07 Sloyota Yaris 61.633 FSP
2) Evan Warner 04 Ford Focus 67.458 FSP
3) Michael Houtz 99 Toyota Corolla 68.996 FSP
4) Mark Warner Ford Focus 65.455+2 FSP
5) Jeff Klein Toyota Carolla GTS 80.461+1 FSP
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:10 am
by Anonymous
And I wouldn't worry about using SCCA classing...
1. They (corporate) don't like it, but there is nothing they can do.
2. Yes it changes (every 5 years there is some kind of shake-up), but you just have to check a pdf once a year and make sure your car is still in the same class.
3. You aren't going to lose anyone to the SCCA. There is a large possibility SCCA won't even exist in Tampa next year. It almost didn't make it this year.
4. Gulfcoast AX is an independent club in Ft. Myers that uses straight SCCA classing and as far as I know, they don't have any problems.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:14 am
by Loren
Regarding bumping to the donor car class for an engine swap:
That works if the donor car is in a higher class, like the STI swap. But, what if it's a swap to an engine from the same class? We've got DSP and ESP lumped together... so let's say someone takes a DSP BMW and does a V8 swap from a Mustang GT. (it could happen!) That car needs to bump up a class.
I think it would be simpler just to do an across the board class bump for any significant engine swap. Significant = adding cylinders or more than a certain amount of displacement.
Maaaaybe if someone took an FSP car and did a BIG engine swap on it, it might warrant a 2-class bump... but I kinda doubt it. (but if they flared the fenders, put big meats on it, and did up the suspension... maybe)
We can add a "program director's discretion" clause to catch silly stuff like that. Like Lisa's Prelude should be in FSP. (but if she had big fat tires and an awesome suspension, she should be in DSP)
I like the way this is shaping up better than I thought I would. Is it worth the effort to try to retroactively rework this season's events so far (4 events) to use a new system, or do we just ride it out until August and make it happen next season?
And, lest anyone think I'm supporting this to get a trophy in the new bottom-feeder class, unless Rydell doesn't want me in his class
, I'd be happy running in the middle class. Give someone else a chance to do something meaningful in the lower class. I'll just lie and say I added a turbo.
(most of the newbs think I did, anyway!)
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:21 am
by Dave-ROR
Loren wrote:I think it would be simpler just to do an across the board class bump for any significant engine swap. Significant = adding cylinders or more than a certain amount of displacement.
That still leaves Kenny, he didn't increase the # of cylinders or displacement...
Maaaaybe if someone took an FSP car and did a BIG engine swap on it, it might warrant a 2-class bump... but I kinda doubt it. (but if they flared the fenders, put big meats on it, and did up the suspension... maybe)
We can add a "program director's discretion" clause to catch silly stuff like that. Like Lisa's Prelude should be in FSP. (but if she had big fat tires and an awesome suspension, she should be in DSP)
Sounds like the old NASA points thing...
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:23 am
by Alizarin
I'm having deja-vu for some reason to last year. Replace "Class E" with "Class G" in Loren's first post and it's like you're stuck in a time warp!
And Loren, if you just make the rule for a "significant" engine swap, I stay in the middle class (2) by the rules you put down. Fine with me, since I don't have to compete against Ron.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:27 am
by Loren
I don't know the details of your swap, Kenny... but even if it's an STI swap and the STI is a BSP car... could you have achieved the same power with just a turbo and computer upgrade and keeping the same engine you had? (I mean, before you munched the bearings, of course) If so, then does it really warrant a class bump?
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:35 am
by Dave-ROR
Loren wrote:I don't know the details of your swap, Kenny... but even if it's an STI swap and the STI is a BSP car... could you have achieved the same power with just a turbo and computer upgrade and keeping the same engine you had? (I mean, before you munched the bearings, of course) If so, then does it really warrant a class bump?
Peak power, or under the curve? Peak power isn't hard to make but good usable power, the higher redline, etc make his swap a lot better than adding a bigger turbo and an ECU to his original motor..
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:36 am
by Anonymous
Loren wrote:Regarding bumping to the donor car class for an engine swap:
That works if the donor car is in a higher class, like the STI swap. But, what if it's a swap to an engine from the same class? We've got DSP and ESP lumped together... so let's say someone takes a DSP BMW and does a V8 swap from a Mustang GT. (it could happen!) That car needs to bump up a class.
How about a Street Mod type rule, regarding motor swaps have to be from the same manufacturer. So if the DSP BMW swaps in a bigger ESP or DSP BMW engine he stays. But if he puts in an ASP BMW engine, or a DSP Ford engine, he bumps to the donor class or one class bump for engine swap not from the same manufacturer.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:55 am
by Loren
We don't want to be "restrictive" like SCCA, we want people to be able to have a reasonable class to play in with whatever weird swap they already had done BEFORE they ever came to one of our events.
Try to keep whatever we come up with as simple as possible.
I look at it this way: The car was originally classes as a "whole". A significant engine swap had to have been done for a reason, that reason is typically more power. Add power to the package and the car should go up a class. (regardless of whether the engine came from another car that's in the same class or not)
Cars with factory turbos are always iffy, but since SCCA is allowing boost mods now, we can assume that they've adjusted for that and classed cars according to their boost potential.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:12 am
by Anonymous
-Installing forced induction on a car that did not come with it from the factory will result in a one class bump.
-Engine swaps bump to the class of the donor car.
-Engine swaps which offer a significant advantage will be bumped up one class.
--Significant advantage is defined as more than 300 cc displacement increase or addition of engine technology that wasn't present originally" (such as VTEC, 4-valve head, turbo, fuel injection, etc.)
edited per below...
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:34 am
by Loren
How 'bout "more than 300 cc displacement increase or addition of engine technology that wasn't present originally" (such as VTEC, 4-valve head, turbo, fuel injection, etc.)
Specifying that, we can ditch the "from the same class" bit. The engine can come from a higher or lower class... as long as it's not more than 300cc bigger and doesn't bring anything else to the table.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:44 am
by Anonymous
I don't know about the tech bit. Seems kinda picky. I would leave it at displacement.
There are actually some cars in which the variable cam version is less desired. ie Celica GT vs. GTS in stock class. Probably not common but still.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:52 am
by Loren
We need more input. We're making good progress here, but it's primarily you and me working this... what does everyone else think? Other ideas? Other refinements? "This sucks, leave it as it is"?
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:57 am
by Alizarin
I would like to point out that designing a rule to stick me in a specific class may do more overall harm than good. Just an observation. I can't really compete with Ron or Loren, so class 1 or 2 (under the currently proposed divisions) really doesn't matter much to me.
That said, the notes aboot adding engine technology that wasn't present originally will catch me, as the new engine has AVCS (variable valve timing on the intake side) where as the old one didn't.
And yes, Loren, I could have gotten about 300 whp out of the old engine if I wanted to. TurboXS stage 4 kit is a front mount, new turbo, a piggy-back ecu, and larger exhaust. It would have been peaky, though, and nowhere near as smooth as the current engine. AVCS really does help smooth things out.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:20 pm
by Loren
Alizarin wrote:AVCS really does help smooth things out.
Which is exactly why I think the addition of any sort of active valve timing control needs to be addressed... or at least considered.
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:22 pm
by WAFlowers
Loren wrote:It's just like the classic race tires in stock class SCCA argument. To allow race tires is to require them because you can't compete without them.
This is the sort of thing that I really detest about SCCA and what I like about FAST. With the class splitting that was done in the production street tire classes FAST has become an even better club, IMHO.
It won't be as simple to split this modified class, but if it can be one in an equitible manner it will go that much further to improve FAST!