Poll

[slow24]

Leave the ECU stock and keep the big buck mods out of H2/H5. I don't want to sound like a cheap ass but this is club racing, ie fun! Like they say money vs. racing! ITA/H4 cars should be a driver class with limited mods. Sure I would like to race an H1 car, just not in the budget.

[JeffS]

Just another suggestion for discussion from out of left field, by a non-H1 guy. How about a lb/hp ratio for H1, like AI and AIX use? Would this be workable?

 

Geezer, on the surface, this appears like a good system - although there's a ton of work involved in inforcing it (which I think noone wants to spend).

 

I would be against it for the following reason. Currently, the two popular engine choices are to go with a high-reving, high HP B16/18 (with the ability to raise compression via CTR pistons) or run a B20vtec producing more torque but lower HP numbers. Everyone has their preference, and although neither option has been fully built to the limits yet, the perception is that these two options will yield the same end-result. Now... as soon as you enact a HP/weight rule you've penalized the B16/18 crowd and suddenly made the B20vtec the engine of choice. I'm not discussing the H22 because noone's running one yet. A B20vtec hatchback will destroy a B18/16 hatchback given equal hp/weight ratios.

 

What I'm saying is that a HP/weight rule hurts the majority of the current (and on the verge) H1 field. GRM had an article recently discussing exactly this issue using AI as their example.

 

The proposed minimum weight rule's goal is to equalize the field and prevent any one chassis options from being "the one" to have. My stance is that a HP/weight rule would do the opposite, creating "the one" engine to run in the series and would go against my percieved goals of the series.

[6ghatch]

Guess I'll copy this post here too... and add to it a bit.

 

 

minimum weight for H1 - A good rule that will solve the argument over carbon fiber, etc, will help to equalize the fields, and will allow multiple chassis to be competitive. I don't see a downside (unless you built a CRX expecting to have a weight advantage).

 

engine specs and classing - I have two lines of thought on this - in both of them, the maximum engine prep allowed in the premier class will not be increased. No built bottomends, nor anything else to further increase power levels beyond current standards.

1) Leave H1 specs as-is with the addition of the minimum weight rule and the allowance of any kind of *bling* you want to add...

2) Leave H1 specs as-is with the addition of the minimum weight rule and the allowance of any king of *bling* you want to add and rename the class the HU/HX. AND, create a new H1 class that consists of any honda chassis running any OEM honda parts. Same minimum weight as HU/HX. Restrictions: no head porting, the ENTIRE engine must consist of OEM honda parts (except rings, per current ruleset), brakes must be OEM honda parts, engine control limited to rechipped OEM ECU's.

 

This gives you a premier "show" class for the WC people and the current EC people without sending budgets through the roof. At the same time, it gives you an "entry level hybrid" class. Throwing out open head and open brakes knocks $5000+ off the potential pricetag of the car. I vote to keep standalong ECU's in the open head class to help maintain reliability of these more volatile engines, and disallow it with the stock parts engines because the additional features aren't compulsory to maintain reliability, and class costs can be further reduced.

 

-----------------------------

 

spec tire - isn't doing much to equalize these non-spec classes. Sure, all the integra's are on the same tire, but what about the prelude's in the same class with them? I understand the benefit of NASA making deals like this. Unfortunately, it's with a company without the correct sizes for this series, and who seems to have supply line problems. There are a lot of people who are fine with running Toyo's... people who will be running them even if it weren't a spec tire. Deleting this rule will bring a new group around complaining that some people are bringing out a new set of Hoosiers every weekend and buying an advantage. The biggest problem I see is supply. If that could get fixed I would personally be ok - if it can't get fixed, then it's a serious, serious problem and Toyo should be cut loose.

 

engine management - As I stated above, I want to see engine mgmt stay open for any class running an open head. The ability to tune easily at the track is something that's going to save these people money in the long run.

 

I really like Jeff's second suggestion on the H1-HX/H0 topic. As (hopefully) a future Honda Challege racer, I would love a "budget" hybrid class. Then by allowing the HX/H0 to run aftermarket body panels but sticking with the stock bottomend, unlimited head, and engine managment will keep them within the speeds to safely race along with H5.

[.RJ]

Just an observation - the only vote for retaining the spec tire was cast by Ryan F - the people are speaking.....

[civicrr]

Leave the ECU stock and keep the big buck mods out of H2/H5. I don't want to sound like a cheap ass but this is club racing, ie fun! Like they say money vs. racing! ITA/H4 cars should be a driver class with limited mods. Sure I would like to race an H1 car, just not in the budget.

 

The problem is that most if not all ITA cars out west are running chipped ecu's which is IT legal. This is a legal IT mod.

 

My H5 guys run 15"s.

[Geezer]

quote="Geezer" Just another suggestion for discussion from out of left field, by a non-H1 guy. How about a lb/hp ratio for H1, like AI and AIX use? Would this be workable?

 

What I'm saying is that a HP/weight rule hurts the majority of the current (and on the verge) H1 field. GRM had an article recently discussing exactly this issue using AI as their example.

 

The proposed minimum weight rule's goal is to equalize the field and prevent any one chassis options from being "the one" to have. My stance is that a HP/weight rule would do the opposite, creating "the one" engine to run in the series and would go against my percieved goals of the series.

 

Good point. I hadn't thought of it that way. Maybe drag chutes?

[speedracer33]

Greetings all.

 

Just to add in my opinions. I was originally very much in favor of a spec tire, but the more it develops, the more I'm changing my mind. I liked the idea of not having to spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on Hoosiers just to compete. However, this Toyo thing is getting really ugly. What happens if they sell out of a particular size that one of our competitors needs? They can't race with us?!? I don't want to lose half of our grid because Toyo can't get us tires, and that doesn't seem too far fetched considering their current problems. I would like to spec Kumhos if anything, but if we can't do that....

 

I don't think we should change any rules currently in place about engine prep, because it isn't fair to those who have already made changes based on those rules. We aren't big enough to do that to our racers.

 

I'm fine with minimum weights for H1, I doubt they would be high enough to effect most of us. It leaves the possibility of more competition in the class, once somebody develops an earlier Civic for the class.

 

Matt

[chad]

NO being able to buy your competitors stuff!!!! Honda/Acura parts aren't like the ford choveit stuff.....honda/acura parts are expensive and not all of the knowledge to build this stuff is out there! I don't want my competitor being able to pick up the knowledge from the last 8 years of me working on hondas when he hasn't done the leg work or the trial and error!!!!!!

 

not all chipped ecu's are availible to everyone!!! you can get someone to program yours special.....so no buy out or whatever it is.....that is not fair to those of us who have been in this industry (imports) for awhile!

 

 

h1 minumum weights yes, if hybrids have them then s2000 and nxs weights will need weight limit INCREASES! Yes i know there are no s2k's or nsxs' out there but when a shop decides to build one i'm pretty sure a prep'd one is gonna destroy a hybrid over 2150lbs.

 

engine work and ecu's for H1 hybrids as the rules are now. stock bottomend but head and ecu free. if you go with "stock hybrid" (meaning no cams ecu etc) with a minumum weight we will barely be competitive with h2! why because an ITR can out handle a hybrid! this is based on personal experience. NO HP/WEIGHT ratio....as jeffs stated then everyone will have an H22 or B20 and that will destroy a hp/weight ratio car. plus that wil be hard to enforce.....weighing and dyno's at each race!

 

 

spec tire....hey i dont' think anyone really cares if there is a spec tire there AS LONG AS SUPPLY is there and no one hording and jacking up the prices.

 

there should not be any max safety rules, ie cage etc.

 

for this SERIES to suceed we must keep the "family" atmosphere that we have. the only reason i came back out east is cause i wanted to race with friends. i didn't want to have to go out and race with a bunch of strangers. i'm shy and don't make new friends fast! so this is the reason i'm out east plus DAVE at R and D Motorsports is hooking me up!!!!

to draw new drivers we need to show them the comradery amoungst ourselves and that we are safe but fast drivers! Yes i'm sure there would be the same comradery that would develope on the west coast if i would have raced out there.....and yes i do plan to try and make a race sometime this year if the money for a cross country trip comes to me...so anyone want to donate money to the chad to the west coast tow fund let me know~~~~~~

 

nasa must also develope the honda hpde drivers for the honda challenge. this is how the east coast honda challenge developed! most of us were just hpde drivers when talk of the HC started out! i believe the ECHC will be bringing in 3-5 H1 drivers this year alone! developement of a great program that is in place!

 

jsut my rambling thoughts....

[Ryan F.]

Chad (and all other ECHC racers)-

 

A) Thanks for your input again- most valuable perspective

 

B) I will sponsor any ECHC driver with an entry fee and a $250 tow fund payment to come participate in any of the WCHC races. I know it wont cover the cost of the trip but it will help defray some of the costs if any of you guys want to come claim some bragging rights.

 

C) I would love to see the Slagg/Bota/Hope or Slagg/Lepper/Vanni Battle

[El Pollo Diablo]

Ryan, here is another standpoint from an EC H1 "Racer"

 

1. My current car is probably a perfect example of a proposed "limited/budget" H1 class. Straight engine swap, no headwork, no cams, no valves, VAFC, and OEM Honda brakes. And as such I would love to see the H1 and HU take flight, but....in order to be competitive this season I have to undertake at least a cam swapover to be able to keep up with the rest of the pack, so if the H1 and HU wont happen next season I will crack the engine open.

 

2. Open head = $$$$, the way it reads there is nothing stopping someone from putting huge money into it, welding/reshaping combustion chamber, welding/reshaping/rerouting runners, etc. It could get ugly if someone really wants to win. Just because no one is doing it on EC (yet) does not mean it wont happen. So maybe that should be limited to only p&p + cam/valvetrain change, and maybe shaving?

 

3. ECUs, if HU does not take place then I think the ECUs should remain open, I don't think there is a huge price advantage in running a Hondata system vs a AEM EMS w/ wideband. Sure the starting costs of the AEM is much higher but it will pay for itself in the long run since you can do the tunning yourself in realtime and a dyno is not required. Hondata either forces you to have someone burning and reburning chips for you, or getting the more expensive package that includes the ROM burner and such.

 

4. Body panels, I think a limited amount of CF/fiberglass should be allowed to help with the min weights (which I agree are much needed,) but I think they should be limited to a few body panels (hood/fenders perhaps) Otherwise who will make sure that the aftermarket/custom body panels are same shape/areo as the stock units? Even small changes could have advantagous areo effects, especially where the front bumper is concerned.

 

I would like to see an HU class happen, but I still think the bottom end should remain OEM, and only headwork should be allowed to be modified, and only in the way I described above (p&p/cams/valvetrain), so basically take the current H1 rules and make them into the HU rules, and have the H1 contain stock OEM honda motor swaps. This will open way for people like me that have stock motors and would allow them to be competitive, while still remaining on a budget. I think this could mean a huge influx of cars and drivers as a OEM hybrid could be built for less than an ITR based H2 car.

 

With that said, I have one question.

What do you think is the schedule for rule changes? If H1/HU changes take place, will they be for the next season or the season after that? This will affect how/when/if I make further changes/mods to my car.

 

Also, current ruleset question:

 

It is stated that tires cannot stick out beyond the bodywork as viewed from above, but it is also stated that Hybrids can run unlimited wheel width, is the above (tires sticking out) rule still governing hybrids?

 

Matt Dudek

H1 Civic Hatch

[AdamITR]

I'm fine with:

 

H1 Class

 

Adding H1 Mininum Weights

 

Keeping the current H1 engine specs - stock bottom end/open head/open engine management

 

Could care less about other body work / carbon fiber / etc. (since there would be mininum weights - may help some H1 cars get to min. weight)

 

H2-H5 Class

 

Use the existing National Rules, modify min. weights if neccessary

 

 

Other

 

- Run the Toyo Spec Tire - as long as we can get them ... if there becomes a shortage, then we MUST allow other tire options

 

BUT ...

 

- Give the East Coast the option to run or NOT run the spec tire depending on a vote

 

- No spec tire = no points

 

Adding a H0/HX class ... I would rather have this than modify H1 rules to make them fit.

[Crack Monkey]

Why don't you simply break it down into three classes:

 

1) Stock

2) Modifed w/hp:wt ratio limits

3) Unlimited

 

And let everything else be determined by those three factors -

 

#2 is unenforcable (or at the least very expensive to enforce) and potentially dangerous. You'd need to impound the entire field and dyno them post race (and who's to say some hotshoe does wire in some sort of ignition retard to be activated when he gets the checker). Dangerous b/c it's less expensive to remove weight than build a good engine (so you have people building lightweight and possibly illegal cages and skimping on optional safety gear).

[krshultz]

So far this looks like it's actual constructive dialog, so I'll jump in.

 

Min. H1 weight: I've gone on record with National saying I'm okay with this.

 

Carbon fiber and other body stuff: Given a minimum weight I honestly guess I don't care anymore. BUT...it's the principle of the thing that bothers me. This looks, from over here in North Carolina, like NASA wants to put this into the rules to accomodate a handful of existing USTCC cars, while input from the Right Coast doesn't always get the same consideration. Mere speculation on my part though.

 

Not to mention that I've already told people in months past that the carbon hoods and JDM front clips had to be replaced with stock pieces. The more I tell people "take that off the car" and NASA comes in behind me and says "we let people put that on their cars," the more frustrated people you're going to have.

 

Each region doing their own thing WRT rules: I'd really rather avoid this.

 

ECUs: I quickly realized that we don't have the time, equipment, or expertise to police ECU rules.

 

Free heads in H1: We did it this way because we asked the potential H1 guys what we should do, and what they had already done.

 

Classing cars by power to weight ratio: I actually think this is a pretty cool idea. Couple problems though. Time spent on enforcement goes WAY up, and you've added a lot of dependencies on outsiders. What happens to us if the guy with the portable dyno is a no show? There are also problems with going from five classes to the two or three like AI has. We've got half a season of points we'd have to recalculate mid-season, and I personally don't think it's fair to whoever leads H2 to drop him into the backmarkers of "HX" in the middle of June.

 

Now on to what IMO i the biggie - spec tires.

 

Some of you here may remember that we [ECHC, Scott and I] went down this road at the end of 2003. There were a lot of drivers who t wanted the spec Toyo RA-1. I'd say it was the majority. Scott and I researched the idea and came up with the following list of downsides.

 

- Down economy. Not only does this mean less people buying new tires, it also means we lost some drivers due to unemployment and relocation. What does this have to do with spec tires? EVERYTHING. Because if you mandate a spec tire, that SCCA guy who might want to try us out for a weekend can't. Or even if he can, he runs and waives points (certainly not ideal) or buys new tires and/or wheels. Assuming he can get them in his size. Or get them at all. If we're trying to fill a grid, we need to consider this stuff.

 

- Sizing. I'll be the first to admit that the sizing thing really bugs me on a personal level. I've bought RA-1s before and really liked them. But they don't make the optimal size for a lot of our cars.. If memory serves, Ryan, you went and asked them for a size (225-45-15) on our behalf, and they basically told you to take a hike as they were too busy working on World Challenge sizes. And that too is fine...but it needs to be surfaced as an issue BEFORE we mandate it as a spec tire for club racing.

 

- Availability. We all know that this is a big problem. Looks to me like Toyo signed all these deals with NASA and Spec Miata and SVWC and now they can't make enough to meet the demand. And no tire guy in his right mind is gonna *not* sell some of his RA-1 stock to an HPDE instructor "just in case" a Honda Challenge driver needs them.

 

- Trackside support. These tire guys don't make much money on Toyos because Toyo doesn't give them a break on pricing in order to cover the overhead of taking the truck to the track. Hoosier apparently does. So, spec tires probably spells the end of trackside support. At least as far as I am aware.

 

- Contingency. I know we've got one with Toyo and I think that's great. But we had one with Hoosier last year, and a good one at that. So let's not call contingency an upside of going to the spec tire.

 

It was for these reasons that we nixed the spec tire idea for ECHC 2004. And I must say I find it very interesting to see some of those formerly in favor of a spec tire coming around and seeing the other side.

[chad]

cost for my h1 car

370 chasis

600 fastbrakes brakes

2000 engine swap

500 b20 block

225 itr intakemanifold

1000 cams,valve train

100 cam gears

600 rims

150 seat

150 chipped ecu

650 cage

20 big pedals for mad tight heal toe shifts (hehe)

150 brake pads

600 tires

150 intake manifold

225 header

200 cheapo exhaust

20 fuel pump

150 fpr

90 fuel rail

400 bearings, headgasket, tbelt

300 dyno time

 

 

8650 total

 

forgot suspension

400 shocks agx's and illumina's

200 for 700 and 600 lb springs 50 bucks each....even still that is an affordable daily driver/racer! and no....i will never do the daily driver/race car! from now on i will have a race car and a daily driver!

 

that's a pretty cheap race car....but not everyone is gonna be able to find a 500 chasis plus do the work themselves. I would not sell my car for under 14000 and would NOT race if a competitor was able to buy my engine or ecu for the CLAIM RULE!

even if you add 3000 for chasis that is 11650 which is a low 13 second drag car and a pretty competive road race car!

 

now remember i bought most of my parts used or someone was going out of business and i was able to do my OWN work, most guys out there don't do their own work so then the cost of that race car just doubled!!!

 

 

Matt i don't think a h1 class with just a stock swap will be appealing to most guys. i could just put my ITR/CTR cams back in and i would have a stock swap and still pull on an ITR powered civic.

[Ryan F.]

El Pollo has mentioned something that I was thinking about as well

 

1) What about the limiting the head to shaving and port and polish intake and exhaust ports no more than 1" into the port (same head prep rules as H2-H5)? It seems nobody has built a head that could be legal under the current rules so why not put a cap on it now and never have to worry about it.

 

2) Leave cams & valve springs open. With a relatively stock head the aftermarket cams will perform really well without custom grinds which will make everything more even as well.

 

3) Should we mandate stock valve sizes and OEM material. This has not been addressed but open head means I can cut bigger holes and run titanium valves. With a 9-10RPM motor this advantage is huge. I am not sure many people have given thought to this but probably does not make send sense to allow.

 

4) Based on the emails and input here, it seems that people are fine if we add another upper class but don't really care. It seems more people want to get H1 nailed down for even competition and that is was I would like to see as well. It appears that most agree that a min weight makes sense and I agree that we can limit the body parts to the bumpers, hood, trunk, and fenders and glass removal. No need to have composite roofs, doors or quarter panels. All we want to do is enough to get all the cars at the even weights.

 

5) If we decide to keep H1 only and do min weights we will do that soon (this year). If people want to limit the head down to basic port and polish then that should probably take effect next year. It is easier to drop weight than do motor work and any CRX's may have to add weight to boot. The heavier H1 cars would already be running heavier so if they don't want to do go lower weight the rule change would not affect them anyway but they could lose weight if they wanted. Point is the rule will not make their lighter competitors any faster. That being said EC is not running the national rule set so not sure what the EC guys would want to do. Perhaps nothing until next year if anything at all.

 

6) Tires- That is the big can of worms. I don't think you will get one argument from the folks in the west that will want to stick with the Toyo. I also got confirmation from Toyo that the 225/45/15 has been slated from production and will be available next year. I am getting the info on what month. Therefore, Toyo is listening to our (and others I am sure) input and doing their best. I don't think we need to make decisions on anyone that wants to race one or 2 HC races. If they can run and have fun on any tire what do points matter? To me it is more embarrassing to have my name listed as dead last than not being listed at all. We need to get the Spec Tire vote going and you guys in the East can make your own decision with regard to tires for next year. Karl- I now see what you said to me last year. The tire debate with the guys in the East is like living in a hornets nest. There are some really passionate people with tire opinions.

 

Good news is we are all working together to come up with a solution. Not everybody will be pleased but at least it great ideas are being given.

[speedracer33]

6) Tires- That is the big can of worms. I don't think you will get one argument from the folks in the west that will want to stick with the Toyo. I also got confirmation from Toyo that the 225/45/15 has been slated from production and will be available next year.

 

Next time you talk to them, could you request 215/45/16 too? Thanks.

 

 

Matt

 

P.S. Nobody else seems to be mentioning it again, but I would not race in any series that would let somebody else claim my engine!

[chad]

P.S. Nobody else seems to be mentioning it again, but I would not race in any series that would let somebody else claim my engine!

 

yeah did....and you will not take my daily driver engine away from me!

[JeffS]

1) What about the limiting the head to shaving and port and polish intake and exhaust ports no more than 1" into the port (same head prep rules as H2-H5)? It seems nobody has built a head that could be legal under the current rules so why not put a cap on it now and never have to worry about it.

 

Personally, I have two B16 heads, and NEITHER of them would be legal if the this rule was put into effect. Selling them in-favor of a stock ITR head, then spending the money for the new level of prep would likely end up costing me even more money.

 

Either people are not seeing this mentioned, or I've overestimated the level of prep going into some cars. Either way, I do know that I'm not the only one that would be effected by this change. Here's another way to look at it though...

 

B16 head - $300

typical honda headwork - $1000 - (portflow, alaniz, JG, etc)

 

ITR/CTR head - $1000+

 

- I'm going on the assumption that springs/retainers/etc are going to be replaced anyway - and that if you limited headwork that most people will be forced to buy one of the factory ported heads versus one of the cheaper heads and have the work done themselves. As such, I'm not really seeing the cost-savings. What about you B20 guys? are you opening the chambers up to 84mm? or a partial opening similar to what Alaniz does? This would effect you too...

 

There's no hiding the fact that I'm argueing to keep my own car legal, but I really fail to see the costs-savings of such a rule. The only exception would be people who have already purchased an ITR head, but there's nothing stopping them from selling it and buying a B16/B18c1 head to be ported.

The advantage gained by spending an additional $5000 (per Ryan's example) on further flowbenching is extremely minimal - if beneficial at all. The major honda shops have done all this work themselves and have spread the expense over hundreds of customers.

[Ryan F.]

jeffs- Some of the best information I have seen so far, and things I was not aware of. Thanks for the cost comparison data. For all the other folks, what level of head prep have you done and does the cost analysis he outlines match with your expectations as well?

[JHill]

Jeff's cost comparison is right on. I think it just shows just one of the anomolies in cost issues with "stock" honda parts as compared to what some of the shops are able to do for less $$.

 

One that has come to mind for me is the use of a stock Honda throttle body in H1. This means someone could spend $500 on a 62mm Type R or S2000 throttle body, but would preclude the rebore of a B16 or other throttle body to 62mm for $140. This certainly does not save anyone money with the current H1 ruleset. Since I already have the S2000 throttle body, it makes no difference to me personally, others can benefit though.

[chad]

The R & D Red Rocket's engine head is prep'd to the rules now. Would not be cost effective to go back to stock as a NEW ITR head runs 1350.

 

Jeffs pricing seems to be about right.

[tom_l]

an ITR head has thinner intake valve stems (only in port section, not within the guides). this makes it lighter and flow better. the valve and seats also have different valve angle cuts than other b heads.

 

an ITR head off a production car also has bowl work done. i have heard that if you were to buy a new head only from the factory, it does not include this bowl work, though it may depend on the year you request.

 

this puts a stickler in the proposed head work rules.

[KIWI]

Please share your input with the poll

 

It will be active for 5 days

 

I'm in favour of a minimum weight

 

I'm in favour of a spec tire

 

I'm also in favour of creating a new class H'0'?

 

Kiwi