Jump to content

Rule Addendum - 11/2/09


Recommended Posts

Posted

Ok.. so what about the B18A/B? Do they get cams too and stay at 2200lbs?

  • National Staff
Posted

Request was for B20 and all testing was done on B20.

 

I disagree whole heartedly with you Jimmy.

The B20w/cams that is now allowed can be put together for less than the B16, GSR, Type R, H22 already allowed!

 

It's the cheapest combo currently available.

 

Oh, and Crower is giving HC racers special pricing on the parts to reduce the cost on the build.

The set of cams can be purchased for $300! Valve springs and retainers, another $250!

 

That's cheaper than getting the CTR stuff for the B16!

 

(You got me on the Ninja edit Jimmy!)

Posted

So what your saying is if someone requests cams for the b18B, they will get them? B18B make about the same power as the B20 but a bit less torque. So there's no reason they shouldnt get them.

 

Looks like the B20 is the hot setup for 2010!

  • National Staff
Posted
So what your saying is if someone requests cams for the b18B, they will get them? B18B make about the same power as the B20 but a bit less torque. So there's no reason they shouldnt get them.

 

Looks like the B20 is the hot setup for 2010!

 

 

Depends on the request that is submitted.

If the request is complete enough showing back-to-back dyno's before and after of the cam change, performance data on the track, ect, ect, then it has a shot.

A request simply stating that "the B20 gets cams, so this should too" will almost certainly be shot down because there is no data to back up the case.

 

If someone is submitting a request, they should approach it with the mindset that it will be turned down unless the data shows a reason for it not to be! A rule request's purpose is allowing someone to prove why they think something should be changed. So, you need to prove your case. Without adequate info and data, it just doesn't work.

Posted

Where do i contact to get that discount Jeromy? This new rule made my week. More than this is needed just to stay with Renan.

 

 

Edo

Posted

This class was to be stock engines without cams to include the B16. Then one change, Now another. We might as well throw cams in all our cars and go back to H1. I mean thats whats happening here. Leave the class stock!!!! Come on People stop changing what already is working.

Posted

You suck!

 

I ran a H23 non vtec that made 165 whp and 155 tq, and I still hold the H2 record at sears point, at 2500 lbs, and only ran 2 dry sessions! That engine would have dominated if I would have continued to run it. Now there is a motor that makes more power and weighs 250 lbs less!!! You guys SUCK!

Posted

Excuse my ignorance, but how do these rules get submitted and approved?

 

Who requested the rule change and why?

 

And what's the voting or approval process? Do the competitors get a say in this at all? Or is it some committee? Who's on the committee? Do all regions get a vote?

 

Didn't think anybody was running a B20?

Posted

Im just wondering how a motor that should now make almost the same power/torque as a H2 prepped gsr would be able to run 150 lbs lighter? I am building my H2 prelude and a B18B (probably try to get a B20 now!) civic for my brother because they were the cheapest ways for us to go out and have fun in an awesome and affordable class.

 

I was going to work on getting as much hp out of the H22 possible to out-run the B16 on the straights and we were going to make my brothers car to try drive around it in the corners. Now a B20 is even more inviting to run instead of the B18 since it has cams. Why did they pull cams from the F series? Dont know but wouldn't a stock cammed B16 with a weight adjustment have eliminated all these requests for other motors? Sure a cammed B20 is cheap and its great that crower would help us little guys, but would it have not been EVEN cheaper to just not allow any cams except for the D series which is the only set-up that really needs it?

 

I guess it is what it is just trying to get a little better insight as to why H2 is now becoming "H1 Lite"

  • Members
Posted

The H2 engine prep rules are vastly different than H1 allowances. I would politely request that anyone ready to make a comparison to H1 make a list of allowances for H1 and ask yourself if you can do all those modifications in building an H2 engine. Furthermore, allowing the installation of one specific camshaft (a very conservative one) is also vastly different than an allowance for an unrestricted cam. Try to look at it for what it is, the rules committee working hard to offer a choice of competitive platforms which are controllable, simple, and affordable. Keep in mind that the B20 as classified was at minimum weight and was just slightly faster than a H4 car. Clearly that package as specified didn't work and removing weight was not an option.

 

The question about pulling ITR cams from the B16 is a valid one and that could have been a path. The problem with that scenario is that we don't have any technical or competition data to evaluate. Given the competition history with the current B16 configuration it would point to helping bring a non competitive platform up to snuff rather than turning a well known package upside down.

 

When looking at something we hope you can consider the positive sides instead of digging for negatives.

Posted

I understand and do not envy the job before the rules commitee. HC is a unique class with many different options for you guys to juggle. However, please don't tell us that a b20 in its old is only slightly faster then H4. An LS in H4 weighs 2500 lbs and makes anywhere from 135-145 whp, and 125-130 torque. b20's with previous h2 allowances make 155 whp and 145 torque, and at 2250 that is much more then slightly faster.This b20C as it has came to be known on the private forums, is capable of 174 whp and 155 torque, more power and torque then 2 H2 motors that have to weigh significantly more, the k20a3, and the h23a1.

 

We had an LS competing up here in norcal in an underdeveloped and overweight car, and it proved very competitive, qualifying second, and if it weren't for a rear hatch malfunction and a broken rocker arm, would have finished very well.

 

I think it would be resonable for the RC to publish the data that this new rule is based on.

Posted

**Edit to make it known I don’t envy anyone on any rules committee**

 

Wouldn't having the rule set state what modifications are allowed including an OEM or Spec Cam (specific per motor) allowance and a power to weight clause for each motor be a better way to keep things "simple and affordable"????? 3 weeks ago I posted about allowing ITR cams in a GSR but upping the weight. And it was shot down. So instead of picking up a set of $ 500-$600 cams to gain the 10 HP I'm lacking (167whp on a DynoJet) I'm now having head work done at what I'm hoping will only be $1100-$1200. For someone on a budget that may be one less race weekend. It could also bring back interest from the MFG's if there was a chance they could be the "Official B20 cam of H2"..... There would be no real additional testing required as the group seems happy with the power modifications and weights as they are know.

 

These were the power #'s that I was told in my thread I could expect with the current min weights.

 

ITR is 200whp ~130tq @ 2500 = 12.5:1

B16a is 170whp 110tq @ 2250 = 13.24:1

b18c1 is 180whp 134tq @ 2400 = 13.34:1

b18b is 150whp 135tq @ 2200 = 14.67:1

h22a is 200whp 160tq @ 2600 = 13.00:1

k20a3 is 160whp 142tq @ 2350 = 14.69:1

h23a is 160whp 155tq @ 2475 = 15.47:1

 

My idea is just if some one wants to run a B16 that is not fully prepped he can and run the car lighter. If you are someone like me who’s car seems to be a bit porky they have options as well. Including throwing in the approved cam and get the car with in the correct power to weight and go race. I mean really how much will be spent on a 170WHP B16 or a GSR that puts down 180WHP? It looks to me like its about $5-$6K. I see it as if you can put together reliable engine for a little more than half that and still make the same power let them do it. Lower cost of racing in this economy is the only way to continue to grow. And not dieing is growing.

Posted

**TAKING A VERY DEEP BREATH**

 

 

Ok these posts are all pretty much negative so in all fairness i will do a little of both.

 

Pro's to H2 in general with some specifics of the new rule thrown in

 

-cheaper than H1 as stock honda swaps are cheap and plentiful

-potential for close racing since not as many variables as H1 (H1 IS close, but this is easier to make even)

-potential for huge fields due in large part to above points

-place for people to progress to from HPDE, TT, IT and H4/5 thats not a full-blown H1 car

-not a lot of development time needed for a stock motor, honda did most of it already

-crower involvement means even more people are taking notice of HC, which is typically a great thing

-puts another motor up with the B16 and Type-R

 

Con's with the same stipulations

 

-slower (i understand thats the point im just putting it down so i said it)

-some combinations not yet proven/ developed to be competitive

-rules creep (what i would consider as cams for any motor outside the D series)

-having a "hot setup of the year" as the B20 is getting the hype for this time 'round. Like the cammed B16 before it

 

 

 

The comparison i made for H2 to H1 was because the rules are allowing the cars to become faster with more cost involved. One of the big draws for me to H2 is that i could just toss in a junkyard motor and run towards the front provided car set-up and driving were in line. Now this really wont effect me personally as i am still going to do that with my H22 prelude. The thing is that it now puts the cheapest motor around me (think 400 or so full swap), the LS, farther from a possible podium spot. The B16 losing cams puts it in the same realm speed-wise as the LS according to what ive seen with tons of "stock-swap" street cars. Would "H2 built" versions really be that much different?

 

I suck at explaining so heres an example. If im off base sorry for making you read this.

 

The type-R and the H22 make the same claimed 200whp right? So the 100 lb weight penalty comes from the diference in torque. Understandable.

 

The B16 and B20 weighed the same. The B16 made the power, but no torque. The B20 made torque but less power. So they weigh the same and just shift at different places,

 

The LS was similar curve-wise to the B20 just less, so it gets a weight break. A B16 without cams would end up about here. With less torque than the LS but more power.

 

But now the B20 makes the same power as the B16 but with torque at the same weight....

 

I am not jealous of you rule-maker dudes at all and could never do your job because i would be bald come first rule-change season. Just saying adding cost/development time to the cheap swap class is why i called it H1 Lite

  • Members
Posted

There a few critical factors that most people are missing.

 

a) My suggestion was to compare the allowances and associated costs of H1 engine allowances vs H2. Not the class differences. Example: Cylinder head porting? H1- Yes, H2- No : Cost differential $2000

 

b) You are basing your logic based on a case example that doesn't exist which is removing cams from B16. To begin, if you did that the engine platform would no longer be competitive with the B18C5. So what do you suggest for that? Perhaps GSR cams need to be installed or something. Realize one action creates another reaction which must be accounted for.

 

c) The point here is that the negativity and arguments are not based on real competition data which the rules committee review and factor into decision making. We are not considering removing ITR cams from the B16 since that would require an entire recreation of the car classification. Trust me when I say that if we were to follow that path, there would be an entirely new debate and bitching about how badly we messed everything up.

 

d) Your point about this rule putting the LS motor at a disadvantage should be viewed in a different manner. Since the B18C5 and B16 are unchanged how does anything change? I hope you realize it doesn't. The LS package sits at the same advantage/disadvantage as it did one month ago. Your point would only be valid if you have *real* data that proves the B20 is now the supreme leader and we have data that actually proves the opposite.

 

e) You should not compare the B20 to B16 in the sense that they make the same power but the B20 makes more TQ so it will be vastly superior. The RPM differences in the engines are huge and the duration the engines make power is paramount. This makes a very real effect on the track. Case in point is that the B20 with OEM power was predicted to do better than it performed in real life. The time in which it is able to deliver power to the ground makes a huge difference. If you could use a 6 or 7 speed transmission in the B20 then other factors would come into play.

 

f) Before everyone continues to post the theoretical assurances in the negative, take a look at the real world comparison. Manny Coats is the 2008 H4 National Champion. He drove this engine package (b20/crower) in the PTB National race at Miller against me. We both ran this race to get the real world true comparison. I think most people would conclude that we both are of close enough driving skill to determine if one car had a huge advantage over the other. My car is a B16 and those that know it can confirm it is well developed car. Manny's CRX is the actual car he won the 2008 event in H4 trim. In short, our cars were nearly identical each lap. We had an unbelievable race and were nose to tail the entire time. Best laps were within .1 tenth of each other http://www.nasachampionships.com/pdf/2009/Group%20J.pdf The most important thing to recognize here is that my B16 car was no match to Bayars, Almanzan, or Pecqueur's cars down the straights. Anyone who was there can confirm any of those cars would pull mine by 3 car lengths. As such, the B20 that everyone is so afraid of would have been handily crushed by the 3 National caliber machines mentioned above (purely from an acceleration standpoint).

 

To reiterate, the rules committee looks at real data and makes educated decisions. It doesn't do anyone benefit to jump to conclusions and get on the negative train based on unsubstantiated theory. We have the data, we have the real world proof. This B20 test has been in the works under controlled circumstances by Jeremy and myself for this entire season. It allows another competitive package for very low dollars. This is not something which can be labeled as "H1 lite" as this new rule will produce a $1500 engine package to compete with $5,000 ITR and B16 engine which are allowed and already proved as the dominant force.

 

I hope this sets some minds at ease but I have a suspicion my words will simply inspire more internet debate. In the end, we will keep an eye on all platforms and make adjustments as needed. If for some reason our decision was 100% off base, we add weight to the car and make it perfect. The last thing we will let happen is to allow one engine package to hold a clear advantage.

Posted

Excuse my stupidity and this is my opinion only. But I went with the ITR because we were suppose to run the series with stock swaps. So for the people like myself that bought the $5000 motor based on the original rules wasted our money because now we can get $1000 motors and partially build them. That's a slap in the face if you ask me. But selling my motor and going with the cheaper, faster, and lighter B20 with cams setup sounds better to me. Thanks!

Posted

Thats a good idea you can spend the other 4K on yourself.

 

 

Edo

 

Excuse my stupidity and this is my opinion only. But I went with the ITR because we were suppose to run the series with stock swaps. So for the people like myself that bought the $5000 motor based on the original rules wasted our money because now we can get $1000 motors and partially build them. That's a slap in the face if you ask me. But selling my motor and going with the cheaper, faster, and lighter B20 with cams setup sounds better to me. Thanks!
Posted
We might as well throw cams in all our cars and go back to H1.

 

Yeah, I'm for that

maybe the best post you've ever posted.

Posted
We might as well throw cams in all our cars and go back to H1.

 

Yeah, I'm for that

maybe the best post you've ever posted.

Well thank you very much!!
Posted
Thats a good idea you can spend the other 4K on yourself.

 

 

Edo

 

Excuse my stupidity and this is my opinion only. But I went with the ITR because we were suppose to run the series with stock swaps. So for the people like myself that bought the $5000 motor based on the original rules wasted our money because now we can get $1000 motors and partially build them. That's a slap in the face if you ask me. But selling my motor and going with the cheaper, faster, and lighter B20 with cams setup sounds better to me. Thanks!
What setup do you run in H2?
Posted

SHHSHT you sure you wanna know? I had this B20 sitting in the corner of the storage for the past 3 years.Next to the other 3 b18a and 1 B18B heheh

 

 

Edo

Posted

I would save the 4k and spend 6k on shocks.thats what im getting next.does that sound right 6k for shocks?

yes it does.

Posted

This is a "EPIC FAIL" and I could not be happier I sold my H2 car....

 

If I had finished my car and this bullshit got passed I would be so mad I would not be able to see straight...

 

The rules committee is clearly out of their minds....

 

.....I have no clue what you guys think..... I really don't....

 

sigh....

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...