Unofficial HC National results

[brian g]

I saw that, but to me thats not right to have 2 definitions. OEM is OEM that means any honda/acura to me. it should apply to all engines in HC.

 

another example H2 100% oem for the b16b and b18c type R engines. to me I can use any honda acura part, thats 100% OEM ..but not. strange

 

 

You don't seem to get it...

 

brian g

[SMSP]

...but there is also a spec for bushing ID. After the modification was the bushing ID within factory spec for the K24 wrist pin? IMO, for the mod to be legal under the "blue printing" clause, ALL measurements must be within factory specs.

 

Where in the rules does it define blue printing to mean within factory specs? I just did a quick look and couldn't find it. Blue printing means setting a target/magic number for each clearance set (i.e. piston to wall, rod bearing, main bearing, etc.) and then trying to get each of the 4 piston to wall clearances (for example) exactly the same. The target clearance may or may not be within a given factory spec.

 

If every Honda supplied dimension in the manual for every Honda OEM part is the constraint then Bernardo's engine is illegal. However, it has been deemed legal so that must not be the constraint. Therefore, the rules for 2008 MUST allow the use of larger pins in smaller rods with the obvious modification.

 

I'm sorry, but the Rules Committee has allowed this one aspect the ability to get out of line. When more people look at it more loop holes will become evident.

 

I feel the RC has a hell of a job ahead of them. I think you guys will need to have the H1 rules bullet proof. I hope they will be issued for comment prior to approval.

 

To make this stuff clear, they will either have to change pistons and rods to being unrestricted with the exception of material, or stick with an all OEM bottom end but allowing modification to any part (probably the most expensive), or making the Bernardo modification illegal for 2008 or specifing what can be done to each part to make it "fit" in the engine (even bigger headache).

 

mikeski38 brings up a good point, because the Bernardo rod does not meet the specs given in the Honda Manual anymore but only the clearance spec.

 

Also, I think the RC should get away from the H1 rules being part of H2-H5 and make them stand alone. Having to go back and forth is really for the birds.

[JW Racing]

[SMSP]

I understand I may be new but I would like if people would contribute to my learning instead of flaming. tell me why i dont get it, maybe I can understand

 

It would have been different if it stated B18C OEM Cams. Then the ITR cams would be allowed.

[Another Drew]

I understand I may be new but I would like if people would contribute to my learning instead of flaming. tell me why i dont get it, maybe I can understand

 

It would help if you asked questions, rather than tell people what to do or how to fix things.

[mikeski38]

...but there is also a spec for bushing ID. After the modification was the bushing ID within factory spec for the K24 wrist pin? IMO, for the mod to be legal under the "blue printing" clause, ALL measurements must be within factory specs.

 

Where in the rules does it define blue printing to mean within factory specs? I just did a quick look and couldn't find it. Blue printing means setting a target/magic number for each clearance set (i.e. piston to wall, rod bearing, main bearing, etc.) and then trying to get each of the 4 piston to wall clearances (for example) exactly the same. The target clearance may or may not be within a given factory spec.

 

 

Very good point. It would appear that a definition of blue printing needs to be added to the rules. I think blue printing means assuring that the dims are exactly manufacturer target measurements, not just within the factory spec.

[mikeski38]

ALL measurements must be within factory specs.

 

factory spec for wich car? The car that the pistons came from? the car that the rods came from? The car that the block came from? ect.... The rules don't tell us that either.

 

The car the wrist pin comes from of course.

 

In the Hybrid rules, OEM means any model, domestic market or generation. So the OEM spec is correct for what we are measuring. Namely wristpin clearance for the S2000 wristpin.

 

brian g

 

My argument is that although the clearance is within spec for the S2000, the bushing size in the rod is now not within the K24 spec, since it is a K24 rod, not an S2000 rod. I would imagine that the bushing thickness after the modification is not within ANY honda spec. If the modification requires machining to the point that any spec is no longer with tolerance, it should not be legal. I believe that it is in the rules that any unmodified OEM honda part is legal, not modified ones, I sure someone will cut and paste for me.

[6ghatch]

If every Honda supplied dimension in the manual for every Honda OEM part is the constraint then Bernardo's engine is illegal. However, it has been deemed legal so that must not be the constraint. Therefore, the rules for 2008 MUST allow the use of larger pins in smaller rods with the obvious modification.

 

 

Has it? Just because nobody protested it does not make it legal. There are still some things left up to interpertation that will need to be clarified and the 08 rules could be clarified either way.

Edited September 26, 2007 by Guest

[6ghatch]

.

 

I do value your opinion, and would like to hear your input on how to maintain equality in H1 for 2008?

 

Ditto.

 

Here is what I posted on K20a.org

 

"Brian, your entitled to your opinion but you have not tried to offer a solution to keep the balance in H1. Do you think weight adjustments alone will do it? What do you propose for the B series guys? What about the S2000's? Do you expect to have the rules "opened up" for the other H1 cars and expect everyone to rebuild their motors to put out more hp? Honestly it would be easiest for Andrie and myself because we already have the K24 swap. IMO, it is essential that we keep the rules so the B series and K series motors can be competitive with each other. There are big fans of both and to make one obsolete will destroy H1.

 

My concern is for the class as a whole, I've been racing in H1 for 4 seasons now and I've seen a lot of people come and go. There were some guys on the west coast who felt like you and thought H1 needed to be more of a progressive class and fought hard to get aftermarket rods allowed. Finally they gave up and left to start Honda Cup. Guess what happened to that, it fell right on it's face.

 

There is a fine line that H1 walks between being advanced enough for the big guys to race and economical enough for the average guy to race. I'd like to keep it that way.

[mikeski38]

If every Honda supplied dimension in the manual for every Honda OEM part is the constraint then Bernardo's engine is illegal. However, it has been deemed legal so that must not be the constraint. Therefore, the rules for 2008 MUST allow the use of larger pins in smaller rods with the obvious modification.

 

 

Has it? Just because nobody protested it does not make it legal. There are still some things left up to interpertation that will need to be clarified and the 08 rules could be clarified either way.

 

I didn't write that...

[6ghatch]

 

I didn't write that...

 

Sorry, fixed.

[brian g]

 

My argument is that although the clearance is within spec for the S2000, the bushing size in the rod is now not within the K24 spec, since it is a K24 rod, not an S2000 rod. I would imagine that the bushing thickness after the modification is not within ANY honda spec. If the modification requires machining to the point that any spec is no longer with tolerance, it should not be legal. I believe that it is in the rules that any unmodified OEM honda part is legal, not modified ones, I sure someone will cut and paste for me.

 

Bearings are urestricted

[slammed_93_hatch]

i was reading a definition of blueprinting on some site, maybe WC or maybe GA. It stated that you may pick the lightest rod, piston, ect and get the rest to that weight. Pretty good IMO, and this is what i have always understood blueprinting and balancing to mean.

 

bearings are unrestricted

 

correct i can use ANY bearing i want to, weather it be OEM, or an aftermarket company.

 

But saying that bearings are unrestricted doesn't not mean that clearances may be out of spec. At least i don't read it that way. If clearances were allowed to be out of spec, then wouldn't it say, "clearances may be out of FSM specs"

[Andrie]

Why are we still arguin about the past? Let's move on. The car was deemed legal. End of the story.

 

Let's start thinking of 2008 rule! What should we do?

[ekim952522000]

Why are we still arguin about the past? Let's move on. The car was deemed legal. End of the story.

 

Let's start thinking of 2008 rule! What should we do?

 

I say we all try to come up with a suggestion on what would be the easiest way to maintain the balance of H1 and then go from there. What would you like to see done Andrie? How bout you Mike? Chris? You guys are three of the top H1 people I would like hear what you guys think should be one.

 

I'll throw one out there.

 

How about allowing the K24 to only use OEM parts out of K24 series engine? This would mean that they could not use cams out of a k20, or pistons from a s2000. (this would basically mean the best you could do is a tsx motor)

 

Same thing goes for the k20 you could not use any parts other than k20 parts (for the k20 this would basically mean the best you could do is a jdm k20a)

 

Is there any merit to the idea of putting compression limits on motors in H1?

[brian g]

i was reading a definition of blueprinting on some site, maybe WC or maybe GA. It stated that you may pick the lightest rod, piston, ect and get the rest to that weight. Pretty good IMO, and this is what i have always understood blueprinting and balancing to mean.

 

bearings are unrestricted

 

correct i can use ANY bearing i want to, weather it be OEM, or an aftermarket company.

 

But saying that bearings are unrestricted doesn't not mean that clearances may be out of spec. At least i don't read it that way. If clearances were allowed to be out of spec, then wouldn't it say, "clearances may be out of FSM specs"

 

It doesn't say that aftermarket bearings are allowed, it says they are unrestricted. That means they are not subject to any restrictions, such as manufacturer, size, material, thickness, etc.

 

brian g

[SMSP]

Why are we still arguin about the past? Let's move on. The car was deemed legal. End of the story.

 

Let's start thinking of 2008 rule! What should we do?

 

I'm not.

 

But that engine has set a precedent due to what was allowed. So it will be used as an example for the future discussions. Hell, it's the engine that started all this talk.

 

What I'm saying is if it was OK for the K24 rod to be machined/modified to allow the use of a larger pin (for whatever reason) then the same should be allowed for other engines. Especially, when those engines are of an older technology. But from what I've read it would be deemed illegal to use a 22mm pin in a B series (21mm) rod based on the 2007 rules since there is no bushing in the rod. Do you agree Andrie?

 

I don't see why the H1 rules are caught up on this OEM thing. Even in H2-H5, most of those guys probably aren't running OEM pistons but OEM copies since Honda doesn't sell .040" over pistons.

 

So I see 3 scenarios, please add if you think there are more.

 

1. Any OEM block, any OEM crank, any aftermarket piston and any aftermarket rod and the corresponding machining that may be required to install them.

 

2. Any OEM block, any OEM crank, any OEM rods and any OEM pistons and the corresponding machining that may be required to install them.

 

3. Only OEM parts from the engine's family classification can be used in said engine. i.e. only K24 parts in a K24 engine, B parts in B engines, etc.

 

Weights for 1 & 2 above.

 

D: 1950

B16: 2100

B18/20: 2250

K20&H:2450

 

K24s I think should stay in the TSX and go into H1 Restricted Prep

 

Now if #3 above was law, then the K24s could run in the Hybrid class.

 

And of course a stand alone rule set for H1. Maybe a departure from the norm and release the rules for comment before the approval process???? I realize the RC has the final say but there is no way that they can think of all the possible glitches that could come from a change.

[slammed_93_hatch]

i was reading a definition of blueprinting on some site, maybe WC or maybe GA. It stated that you may pick the lightest rod, piston, ect and get the rest to that weight. Pretty good IMO, and this is what i have always understood blueprinting and balancing to mean.

 

bearings are unrestricted

 

correct i can use ANY bearing i want to, weather it be OEM, or an aftermarket company.

 

But saying that bearings are unrestricted doesn't not mean that clearances may be out of spec. At least i don't read it that way. If clearances were allowed to be out of spec, then wouldn't it say, "clearances may be out of FSM specs"

 

It doesn't say that aftermarket bearings are allowed, it says they are unrestricted. That means they are not subject to any restrictions, such as manufacturer, size, material, thickness, etc.

 

brian g

 

That is a slippery slope i wouldn't want to go down. Seen it happen before and the results were not good.

 

The cam shaft rules used to state that cam shafts were "unrestricted". So a few people ran Toda Vtec killers. I don't know the specifics but to use these cams something in the rocker assembly needs to be removed or replaced, and or modified. These cams were deemed illegal.

 

Why? camshafts are unrestriced. true

 

But because one thing is unrestricted doesn't mean that you can change something else that isn't addressed in the rules.

 

The HC rule books says that "if this book doesn't say it is legal then it isn't."

 

 

Andrie i think discussions like this are great. Every one has kept it extremely mature, and professional. If we don't/ there is not discussions like this, then problems like this can still come up.

 

I would bet some cash that when the rules for the k20 and k24 were written, the RC members thought 100% that they had all the bases covered. In terms of power potential.

 

Now it is clear that this isn't the case. The whole bearing issue and allowing a bigger wrist pin probably wasn't on there mind.

 

The more we dig and respectfully question each other, IMO, the tighter the rules can be. Assuming of course the RC people are reading this over and taking something from this.

 

Think about when the B18c, b16a, and b16b were all out around the same time. I am sure it took awhile for it to become "common knowledge" that they all share the same bore size, that the b16a has a shorter deck height, and the b16b and b18c both have the same deck height, and that you can through a b18c crank and rods (or is it just the crank that is needed) in an b16b and have a 1.8l motor.

 

If h1 was around during that time period there would probably be something extremely similar to this discussion going on.

 

as to H1 rules for 08-

 

work towards more class equality in h1 among all of the motors. It was fairly close before this motor came along, figure out a way to get it back to that spot, and/or improve it.

[SMSP]

 

That is a slippery slope i wouldn't want to go down. Seen it happen before and the results were not good.

 

The cam shaft rules used to state that cam shafts were "unrestricted". So a few people ran Toda Vtec killers. I don't know the specifics but to use these cams something in the rocker assembly needs to be removed or replaced, and or modified. These cams were deemed illegal.

 

Why? camshafts are unrestriced. true

 

But because one thing is unrestricted doesn't mean that you can change something else that isn't addressed in the rules.

 

 

OK, slammed you got me confused now.

 

9.3 states camshafts are unrestricted and

 

9.3.1 © states “Above the engine blockâ€

[Grumpy]

This is my humble opinion and does not infer the opinion of NASA Pro Racing or any other NASA Official.

 

In other words, it carries NO WEIGHT at all within the NASA Organization.

 

The motor was never DECLARED illegal or legal. It just got through the Nationals with no inspection just as other cars that might be illegal also got through without inspection and were not declared legal or illrgal.

 

Therefore no position was taken by the officials as to its legality.

 

NASA officials chose the post race inspections that it wanted to do. Other competitors decided that they didn't want to bet $1000 that the motor was illegal. So the motor was not torn down.

 

I also believe that a bushing is a bearing and therefore not restricted in any way. However I also believe that rods are restricted. If the rod was machined in any way other to OEM specs, that makes the rod illegal not the bearing.

 

If anyone has any NEW evidence to consider, my opinion may change.

 

 

This is my humble opinion and does not infer the opinion of NASA Pro Racing or any other NASA Official.

 

In other words, it carries NO WEIGHT at all within the NASA Organization.

[JW Racing]

Why are we still arguin about the past? Let's move on. The car was deemed legal. End of the story.

 

Let's start thinking of 2008 rule! What should we do?

 

I say we all try to come up with a suggestion on what would be the easiest way to maintain the balance of H1 and then go from there. What would you like to see done Andrie? How bout you Mike? Chris? You guys are three of the top H1 people I would like hear what you guys think should be one.

 

I'll throw one out there.

 

How about allowing the K24 to only use OEM parts out of K24 series engine? This would mean that they could not use cams out of a k20, or pistons from a s2000. (this would basically mean the best you could do is a tsx motor)

 

Same thing goes for the k20 you could not use any parts other than k20 parts (for the k20 this would basically mean the best you could do is a jdm k20a)

 

Is there any merit to the idea of putting compression limits on motors in H1?

 

I like all 3... thats the way it needs to go. Though it limits engineering potential, competition will be more fair.

 

 

Grumpy said it well too. This motor was overlooked because nobody wanted to pay to protest.

 

If it is not stated it is legal it is not.As for the rule book, how is the 7. rule unclear?

 

7. Allowed Modifications- H1- H5

OEM, stock and/or factory refers to the same model, domestic market and generation as the listed vehicle.

When allowed modifications permit other models, domestic markets and/or generations, it will be specified as

part of the allowed modification.

 

Im sure the head was fully ported, see rule below

 

h) K Series cylinder head must use unmodified OEM camshafts and rocker assembly that is sold with K

series cylinder head. JDM is considered OEM and permitted. Cylinder head preparation must conform to

rules in 9.3.1© unless otherwise stated herein.

 

Chris D said it had a RBC intake manifold. You have to heavily mod the coolant passage to fit. not legal.

Edited September 26, 2007 by Guest

[brian g]

That is a slippery slope i wouldn't want to go down. Seen it happen before and the results were not good.

 

The cam shaft rules used to state that cam shafts were "unrestricted". So a few people ran Toda Vtec killers. I don't know the specifics but to use these cams something in the rocker assembly needs to be removed or replaced, and or modified. These cams were deemed illegal.

 

Why? camshafts are unrestriced. true

 

 

But because one thing is unrestricted doesn't mean that you can change something else that isn't addressed in the rules.

 

What else was changed?

 

brian g

[Andrie]

Me personally would like to go faster, thus allowing the S2K pistons.

 

That being said, I have no clue how to make parity if that is allowed. Like I said, it is not an easy job the rule maker has.

 

So the answer, I don't know. I would like to hear input, though.

[SMSP]

 

 

Chris D said it had a RBC intake manifold. You have to heavily mod the coolant passage to fit. not legal.

 

In the original 2007 rules your statement would have been correct, but in the Rule Addendums - 2007 thread, coolant passages was removed. Could have been just for this use but also I know guys who were running the B series with coolant passages block so that rule change makes that legal now.

[JW Racing]

got you. thanks for the correction

so I CAN put an RBC on my k20....

 

I would like to see the s2k piston as well for the progression but there will be no pairity. maybe allow aftermarket cams for k20 and allow b series to sleeve ,s2000 to use oem cranks from K,finally H to use B trannies or something along those lines...

 

adding weight goes against why we got Hondas in the first place