Pie in the sky rule change requests - 2012

[drivinhardz06]

It's calculating HP from the acceleration of the car so TM is looking at WHP. Multiply that by one minus your drive train loss in decimal form and that's your crank hp.

 

My TM with the proper weight/cF inputed, shows a max of 409 rwhp from nats MO. Nats dyno was 353 rwhp.

 

Joel it was bizzare, as the 2 dyno's around here were within a couple of hp of each other. There is a 3rd around here I haven't been on, I guess I should go try it sometime and average the 3

[kbrew8991]

And you are using the correct SAE factors and smoothing, right?

[drivinhardz06]

And you are using the correct SAE factors and smoothing, right?

 

yessir, checked it myself when I did a 2 hr tuning session in June before RA.

[Grifkylian]

It's calculating HP from the acceleration of the car so TM is looking at WHP. Multiply that by one minus your drive train loss in decimal form and that's your crank hp.

 

Was your car read in the gear that you would normally dyno test in?

Edited October 27, 2011 by Guest

[Vettedoctor]

And you are using the correct SAE factors and smoothing, right?

 

The 20 hp differance they saw was on Modular Depots dyno from Tuesday (when they paid to be dynoed) to Friday - when NASA dynoed them. It was just odd because I've always found the MD dyno to be very repeatable and pretty much right on with the dyno that I use here in WI.

 

Now to further back this up (the repeatability of the MD dyno) our cars have been on the MD dyno at Miller in Sept(thin air - 09 and 10). This year we were on at Autobahn in April (in the 50's), Putnam in May (changing conditions while on the dyno) Mid-O in July (hot), Aug.(rainy) and Sept.

Again reasons why I think I should buy into the damn thing!

[nasa ser]

Dynos vary as much as anything, ask Scott williard to talk about the variance he has had on the midatlantic dyno

[Vinny]

does the trackmate guess whp or flywheel? I'll have to look back at my data, but im not sure if i put in all my info correctly.

 

It's calculating HP from the acceleration of the car so TM is looking at WHP. Multiply that by one minus your drive train loss in decimal form and that's your crank hp.

 

 

Well going through my traqmate with my ratios and car info entered it's showing anywhere from 184-193 for July, the same session i was dynoed at 135whp right off track. This car couldnt smell 180whp if it wanted to with this blower. October showed similar, summit aug showed 160ish. I check the car before every event and its been consistent all season.

[sperkins]

All NASA is doing is comparing data - they are not using the number that TM comes up with - they have TM data of top cars and they compare the cornering, braking and acceleration over the run.

 

Now that's the best explanation I've heard yet for the use of TM in checking legality, but it certainly has it's flaws.

What happens when I show up in TTS or ST2 on 275" true slicks and no aero at a place like RA or Rd Atl?

I would be disappointed if anyone ever got DQ'd for TM data only.

[dans2k]

hey since we are getting near 50 pages how about we let S2000's run the Mugen hardtop?

I mean its practically the same as the OEM!

[awdracer]

does the trackmate guess whp or flywheel? I'll have to look back at my data, but im not sure if i put in all my info correctly.

 

It's calculating HP from the acceleration of the car so TM is looking at WHP. Multiply that by one minus your drive train loss in decimal form and that's your crank hp.

 

 

Well going through my traqmate with my ratios and car info entered it's showing anywhere from 184-193 for July, the same session i was dynoed at 135whp right off track. This car couldnt smell 180whp if it wanted to with this blower. October showed similar, summit aug showed 160ish. I check the car before every event and its been consistent all season.

 

 

I think that you need to talk to a good TM guy. Some of your inputs must be off for your HP estimate from TM to be that far wrong. There's always something.

[Varkwso]

hey since we are getting near 50 pages how about we let S2000's run the Mugen hardtop?

I mean its practically the same as the OEM!

 

You going to crash test it for us?

[Varkwso]

All NASA is doing is comparing data - they are not using the number that TM comes up with - they have TM data of top cars and they compare the cornering, braking and acceleration over the run.

 

Now that's the best explanation I've heard yet for the use of TM in checking legality, but it certainly has it's flaws.

What happens when I show up in TTS or ST2 on 275" true slicks and no aero at a place like RA or Rd Atl?

I would be disappointed if anyone ever got DQ'd for TM data only.

 

TM is a tool. A very good one. With a good standard to calibrate off of it is even a better tool. It can detect multiple maps and push to pass. Wheel slip, slip angle and aero can hide HP. It is all in the data.

[jason]

All NASA is doing is comparing data - they are not using the number that TM comes up with - they have TM data of top cars and they compare the cornering, braking and acceleration over the run.

 

Now that's the best explanation I've heard yet for the use of TM in checking legality, but it certainly has it's flaws.

Yeah, if this would have been put out in the first place lot of confusion would have been prevented.

[awdracer]

Dynos vary as much as anything, ask Scott willard to talk about the variance he has had on the midatlantic dyno

 

 

LOL. I only have time for ONE story......

 

Showed up at VIR in April and put my car on the dyno Friday night. I did three runs right around 140whp.

 

The next day after the race, I dyno'd after a 2nd place finish and hit 160whp (which was ok b/c I was good to 162whp). My home dynojet said 155whp.

 

I never touched anything on my car between the Fri night dyno and the Sat race. There was no harm done but it's just one more thing that left me pulling my hair out.

[Vettedoctor]

All NASA is doing is comparing data - they are not using the number that TM comes up with - they have TM data of top cars and they compare the cornering, braking and acceleration over the run.

 

Now that's the best explanation I've heard yet for the use of TM in checking legality, but it certainly has it's flaws.

What happens when I show up in TTS or ST2 on 275" true slicks and no aero at a place like RA or Rd Atl?

I would be disappointed if anyone ever got DQ'd for TM data only.

 

I would think that they would take the data they got from your car at Mid-O (even if you did only have 7 cylinders) and assume that you'll have more cornering grip and braking but a little less top end (because of the slicks). They're not going to compare your cars data to Wally or Forbis since they have aero. They have plently of data on C5's so I really don't think that there will be a combo that suprises them. If anything the car that scares me more is some obscure car that they just don't have data for - like a Super 7 or a CTS-V Wagon - just something odd that they don't have any good info on.

[Varkwso]

All NASA is doing is comparing data - they are not using the number that TM comes up with - they have TM data of top cars and they compare the cornering, braking and acceleration over the run.

 

Now that's the best explanation I've heard yet for the use of TM in checking legality, but it certainly has it's flaws.

What happens when I show up in TTS or ST2 on 275" true slicks and no aero at a place like RA or Rd Atl?

I would be disappointed if anyone ever got DQ'd for TM data only.

 

I would think that they would take the data they got from your car at Mid-O (even if you did only have 7 cylinders) and assume that you'll have more cornering grip and braking but a little less top end (because of the slicks). They're not going to compare your cars data to Wally or Forbis since they have aero. They have plently of data on C5's so I really don't think that there will be a combo that suprises them. If anything the car that scares me more is some obscure car that they just don't have data for - like a Super 7 or a CTS-V Wagon - just something odd that they don't have any good info on.

 

I go with the physics. Engineering and operational judgement will be applied.

 

Jason - you must have missed how I treat TM data. And yes I could DQ based on it. Have not yet. But I reserve the right.

[Vettedoctor]

Dynos vary as much as anything, ask Scott willard to talk about the variance he has had on the midatlantic dyno

 

 

LOL. I only have time for ONE story......

 

Showed up at VIR in April and put my car on the dyno Friday night. I did three runs right around 140whp.

 

The next day after the race, I dyno'd after a 2nd place finish and hit 160whp (which was ok b/c I was good to 162whp). My home dynojet said 155whp.

 

I never touched anything on my car between the Fri night dyno and the Sat race. There was no harm done but it's just one more thing that left me pulling my hair out.

 

There is a really good article in GM High Tech this month on dyno tricks they tested a bunch of different "tricks" hood up/hood down, increase tire pressure, strapping technique and finally the weather station. All tests were done on a 405 rwhp Camaro (baseline hp - hood open - "normal" tire pressure - regualr strapping and a freshly calibrated weather station.)

By closing the hood they saw a 1.8% drop / 7 rwhp (well everyone has to run with there hood open during a NASA dyno run - as far as I've seen) so that one isn't an issue.

Increasing tire pressue saw a 2.4% drop / almost 10 rwhp- NASA officials look for this (at Nationals at least) so you can't really do anything about that one. I found this kind of odd since you would've figured more air in the tires would make more power. But who knows.

Strapping technique - tight straps dropped 5 rwhp and loose straps where the same - nothing we can really do about that one. Except ask the guys to make sure she's really tight.

The last test was the weather station where they used a wet rag and a hair dryer to "trick" the station into thinking it was hot and humid this showed a differance of 18 rwhp. 118 degree air vs 83 degree air, this is one area that I would keep an eye on when you are dynoing. Most dyno's are in doors so the placement of the weather station doesn't really matter, it's within 10 feet of the dyno and the air quality is going to be the same as what's going into your car.

Now with the dyno (and your car) being outside I would want to make sure that the weather station is getting an accurate reading and that it's not sitting in direct sunlight or it's stuffed up in the trailer where the air may be a little cooler.

To be honest I've never really looked or asked about the weather station, but I sure will be paying more attention now.

 

BTW all of the dyno pulls were done with engine coolant temps around 180 - 183 degrees and all of the intake temps were between 83 - 90 degrees (except for the closed hood 106.5 degrees).

[kbrew8991]

also how well (or poorly) your car compensates for the weather changes can affect readings.

[jason]

Jason - you must have missed how I treat TM data.

I meant that should have been put out from the Home Office in Walla Walla, Washington from the first time the use of TM data was ever mentioned. The "gathering of data for comparison" has never been mentioned before on the board or at Nats. All that has ever been said from the National level is that "when all the variable are inputted correctly, there is very little variation, so you guys must be doing it wrong." We've been hearing that, or a resounding silence, for the past two years. At the local level, I know you are trying to use it as effectively as you can, and I would hope you were recieving more guidance on this than we are, but as someone posted above the methods used were supposed to be open for observation and until the above posts about collecting and comparing data from different cars I don't think the majority of us knew this.

[sperkins]

Change of direction here.

 

There are some classes in certain regions that have little if no participation. I've heard of folks winning regional championships by only running one or two weekends in a dead class. I'd like to see a rule that requires the class to have at least 30%-40% active participation throughout the entire season before a champion can be crowned. Example, if TTD has only one guy that ran only one race the entire season in the FL region, that class should not have a regional champion.

 

20 races (10 weekends) should require +/- 5 or 6 points earning (daily) events or no champ.

[kbrew8991]

That's already handled locally, we don't need another one-size-fits-all rule added to the rulebook that nobody reads telling the regions exactly how to run every minute detail, especially since it is handled to start with Weren't you the same guys that wanted the rule about no passing first lap to be removed? I agree with that btw, but more from a "trust your local directors to write their own supps that make sense for their locales" standpoint. If you don't have any faith in your local leadership to take care of things like this, then there are bigger problems to address imho.

 

Anywho TX's # is 50% iirc. I'd have to double-check with Blangit to make sure, but its the same % for TT and racing since they'll be ordering the same nice etched crystal trophies for each series and want people to have run enough events to have earned them.

[sperkins]

Anywho TX's # is 50% iirc. I'd have to double-check with Blangit to make sure, but its the same % for TT and racing since they'll be ordering the same nice etched crystal trophies for each series and want people to have run enough events to have earned them.

 

Sounds like TX already has it figured out then. I didn't know regions had their own say in that.

I don't see the big deal in adding a short paragraph to the national regs just so there's no misunderstanding or room for argument.

[TurboShortBus]

There are some classes in certain regions that have little if no participation. I've heard of folks winning regional championships by only running one or two weekends in a dead class. I'd like to see a rule that requires the class to have at least 30%-40% active participation throughout the entire season before a champion can be crowned. Example, if TTD has only one guy that ran only one race the entire season in the FL region, that class should not have a regional champion.

 

It's already there. 2011 TT rules, section 7.3, "Regional Championships," page 37:

A driver must participate in a minimum

of four (4) points event days (per class) to be eligible for championship series trophies, awards,

or prizes at the end of the year (unless your Regional TT Director has announced otherwise).

Also, we require a minimum of 6 event days per class per season down here in order to be eligible for awards. As we have 14 event days in 2011, 6/14 = 43%. For 2010, 6/16 = 38%. In 2009, 6/12 = 50%.

 

In our championship results, just because the name with the most points is highlighted in yellow doesn't mean that they got anything other than yellow highlighting.

 

I hope this doesn't nosedive into "there should be championship awards for 2nd and 3rd place in all classes," as I would hate to see that monster rear its ugly head again.

 

Mark

[kbrew8991]

Sounds like that one is written properly - has a guideline but also allows regional people to do what makes sense (as in my case where we're directed by regional mgt to mirror the race groups). Perfect!

 

I recall Jim telling me a minimum number of days for a season-end bowling type trophy when I was back with the SE from ~2006-2009 as well. Maybe it's changed?

 

And McKay- why no 2nd and 3rd? Especially if it is a tightly contested class I think you've gotta have it. I think my now nearly 20 points scoring people in TTA would lynch Sean and myself if we didn't have a 2nd and 3rd at season's end, especially since the top 3 will probably be separated in the end by no more than 20-25 points and will also likely come down to tiebreakers between 3rd and 4th to boot 20-25 points is nothing when most spots each day have a 5 point spacing (ie 90 vs 85 for 2nd vs 3rd), The top 4-5 finish within the same tenth of a second like this past Saturday, and we're talking 800 points being a perfect score after drops (25pts is 3% of that total, so very tight)

 

I wouldn't nessecarily mandate having a trophy for 2nd and 3rd, but if your regional mgt is ok with buying them I see no reason not to hand them out to 2nds and 3rds if they've met the same requirements you'd need to meet for 1st. Again, mirroring what your regional people do for race groups might be a good call here, but the best call would be nationwide to have a bit of discretion so that each region can do what makes the most sense for their people.

Edited October 27, 2011 by Guest

[sperkins]

It's already there. 2011 TT rules, section 7.3, "Regional Championships," page 37:

 

Thanks Mark.

 

My "ADD" (adult dumbazz disorder) rears it's head again.