Bnjmn Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 This should be feasible with 9mos of lead time, right? This will allow NASA to uniformly abide by its practice of dyno'ing the faster cars. Also, I think there is a typo in section 15.3, my addition is underlined: If an AWD Dyno is not available at the track on Thursday, the driver must arrange to have an appropriate Dyno test completed off-site before TT session #4 or subsequent TT sessions will not count toward competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperkins Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 9 months may not be enough time, but there's always the TM data. (opens door to whiners who think they are exempt from the rules) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperkins Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Jason had the best interpretation of that rule yet. "All cars will be required to submit to dyno testing during National Championships, except AWD cars. We'll just take their word for it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra4B Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Subscribed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 LOVE that quote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbrown8439 Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 This should be feasible with 9mos of lead time, right? This will allow NASA to uniformly abide by its practice of dyno'ing the faster cars. Also, I think there is a typo in section 15.3, my addition is underlined: If an AWD Dyno is not available at the track on Thursday, the driver must arrange to have an appropriate Dyno test completed off-site before TT session #4 or subsequent TT sessions will not count toward competition. I REALLY don't have a dog in this fight so take my opinion with a grain of salt. Do any of you really think that if someone wanted to cheat they couldn't cheat the dyno?? Aren't most if not all of the AWD cars turbocharged? Have you ever looked into how easy it is to vary boost to change the HP number? If they do get a AWD dyno there it most likely won't be a Dynojet so then we will have to argue about the accuracy between the two brand of dynos. I understand you being frustrated that you have to get on the (our ) dyno and they don't but if it were me I would take the track mate data and be happy with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 Right, but GPS and dyno should apply to any car, especially those in which maps can be switched with windshield wiper flicks etc. Why should AWD/enhanced ability to skirt the rules get you a pass from what everyone else goes through? It is simply one more enforcement check. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obzezzed350 Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Just ban them..n/a or the highway! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 4, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 4, 2012 Right, but GPS and dyno should apply to any car, especially those in which maps can be switched with windshield wiper flicks etc. Why should AWD/enhanced ability to skirt the rules get you a pass from what everyone else goes through? It is simply one more enforcement check. Ben, we had the ability to do it if we decided to! We have done it before. I personally escorted a car over an hour north to a Mustang Dyno in Ohio at the Championships in the past (based on GPS data when it first came out many years ago). We did not find any discrepancy in our GPS monitoring of the AWD cars at this event. In fact, we were pleasantly surprised that we didn't, and waited for the other foot to drop on the last day of competition. Well, our AWD drivers were compliant with the rules to the end. I and the rest of the TT Officials are confident that we had a fair (and probably the best officiated) Championships competition. Greg is right about the turbo AWD cars and Dyno testing. They are and have always been problematic. I have, again, personally expelled three turbo AWD drivers from NASA TT competition in the past for various forms of non-compliance (without having to get a Dyno to do it). We have paid for AWD Dyno's to be at some of the Championships, and they end up sitting there collecting dust most of the time (while NASA is paying for it), and we have never DQ'd anyone based on the results. If there are only three or four AWD cars out of 400+ competitors (just an example, I don't have the real numbers with me), it just isn't worth passing that cost on to all the drivers in their registration fees. Now, if Greg will just sell his Dyno, spend $50K or whatever it costs, and build an AWD Dynojet that is mobile, we would have the ideal situation. So, really, this is the other Greg's fault... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 4, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 4, 2012 Just ban them..n/a or the highway! It has seriously been considered. As well, we have considered making any AWD car with FI run in TTR/SU, or just any AWD car run in TTR/SU. But then, who would the TTA 350Z's run against in Florida? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperkins Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 We have paid for AWD Dyno's to be at some of the Championships, and they end up sitting there collecting dust most of the time (while NASA is paying for it), and we have never DQ'd anyone based on the results. If there are only three or four AWD cars out of 400+ competitors (just an example, I don't have the real numbers with me), it just isn't worth passing that cost on to all the drivers in their registration fees. Greg - with all due respect, that is not an acceptable answer. Not to those who compete and not to the principles of the series itself. How you can publicly announce that it's not economically viable to test certain competetors for compliance? I don't care how much it costs. The money is being paid by the competitors. We spend thousands of dollars each year to compete in whatever series we choose. I doubt it sits well with most folks that are spending their hard earned money to know that some cars can't and won't be dyno'd because it costs the organization too much. We had over 400 entrants this year. How much would NASA have to rasie the entry fee to get the dyno to the track? I don't pretend to know, but it can't a lot. BTW - I know there were at least 10 AWD cars at the 2011 national event. I personally don't have any suspicion that any of the AWD cars were illegal this year, but that's not the point. It's a matter of principle. Why not just save the money, forget dyno testing all together and just use TM data for everyone? Not being a wise guy here. If it's ok with one, why can't it be good for all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 I am fine w/TM data for all if the program & procedure is released so we can do self testing. I'm sure traqmate would be thrilled with the potential sales too, since the base unit isn't much more than a few trips to the dyno. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 4, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 4, 2012 We have paid for AWD Dyno's to be at some of the Championships, and they end up sitting there collecting dust most of the time (while NASA is paying for it), and we have never DQ'd anyone based on the results. If there are only three or four AWD cars out of 400+ competitors (just an example, I don't have the real numbers with me), it just isn't worth passing that cost on to all the drivers in their registration fees. Greg - with all due respect, that is not an acceptable answer. Not to those who compete and not to the principles of the series itself. How you can publicly announce that it's not economically viable to test certain competetors for compliance? I don't care how much it costs. The money is being paid by the competitors. We spend thousands of dollars each year to compete in whatever series we choose. I doubt it sits well with most folks that are spending their hard earned money to know that some cars can't and won't be dyno'd because it costs the organization too much. We had over 400 entrants this year. How much would NASA have to rasie the entry fee to get the dyno to the track? I don't pretend to know, but it can't a lot. BTW - I know there were at least 10 AWD cars at the 2011 national event. I personally don't have any suspicion that any of the AWD cars were illegal this year, but that's not the point. It's a matter of principle. Why not just save the money, forget dyno testing all together and just use TM data for everyone? Not being a wise guy here. If it's ok with one, why can't it be good for all? Scott, with all due respect, here is the rest of my quote: Ben, we had the ability to do it if we decided to! We have done it before. I personally escorted a car over an hour north to a Mustang Dyno in Ohio at the Championships in the past (based on GPS data when it first came out many years ago). I didn't say that that we couldn't or wouldn't test them, just not at the track this past year. Remember, there are not too many options for bringing an AWD Dyno to the track. It comes down to Dynapack often, which requires a full size garage to operate it, etc. It is more expensive than you think to get one of these to Ohio, because there are no locals willing to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Last year how many dyno's were at nats? I know availability is small for the awd mobile dynojets, but they are out there, also just because they are an awd dyno...doesn't mean they cant run 2wd vehicles also. You can also contact dynojet directly and they can refer you to someone who has a mobile awd unit. I actually had a lengthy conversation with a rep from dynojet a few months ago about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted January 5, 2012 Author Share Posted January 5, 2012 Will you guys as least add the word "not" in Section 15.3? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 5, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 5, 2012 Will you guys as least add the word "not" in Section 15.3? Ben, I thought that you were joking about that in the first post. Read the full sentence again as it is in the Rules. It is correct. If an AWD Dyno is not available at the track on Thursday, the driver must arrange to have an appropriate Dyno test completed off-site before TT session #4 or subsequent TT sessions will count toward competition. This has not been a problem, but we wanted to make it clear that if an AWD car that requires a Dyno sheet does show up without one, and there is no AWD Dyno at the track, we will not let that driver compete in anything except TTR if he doesn't go off-site and get one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxercask Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I think one of the things I would worry about is that if they TM/GPS a car, what time did that person put down when it had the TM/GPS in it compared to it's best time. There were some guys at Nats I recall running almost 2 seconds slower when the TM/GPS was in the car. If people want to cheat, they will find a way. There is only so much you can do about it. About the AWD thing...most if not all of them are boosted and can easily change a tune with the flick of button/switch or whatever. Like Greg said, they even considered forcing them all to run in TTR/S/U. They gain a lot more power switching a tune than any NA car ever will. I would say force them into TTR/S/U or just have an AWD class, but that could lead into a whole different mess and too many classes. Maybe keep a closer eye on them when you decide to put a TM/GPS in their car. Look at the lap time they put down when that was in their car compared to the other times they've put down at the event. There was an AWD/turboed car at a regional event I was at this season that was running at the front of the pack with us, then he put down a 2 second faster lap time on one session and then never even came close to it again the rest of the weekend. Maybe he put on stickers for one session, but you would think he would have done it again the 2nd day, but he ran with the rest of us the 2nd day and didn't have any "out of nowhere" insane laps to put down. Just sayin....a possible instance? Just my $.02. I'll now go back into hibernation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted January 5, 2012 Author Share Posted January 5, 2012 If an AWD Dyno is not available at the track on Thursday, the driver must arrange to have an appropriate Dyno test completed off-site before TT session #4 or subsequent TT sessions will count toward competition. Sorry to be a bother on this but it looks like the driver has two options: 1. arrange for dyno offsite before session 4 (a hassle) OR 2. don't arrange for an offsite dyno (avoid the hassle), in which case no problem b/c the later sessions will count toward competition anyway How are you reading this? I think my edit is consistent with the third sentence from the same paragraph. If you are planning to kick cars to TTR, why not add that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperkins Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) How are you reading this? It says that sessions 1,2 and 3 will count. Anything after that will not. Right? Re-worded. Could be completely wrong. If an AWD Dyno is not available at the track on Thursday, the driver must arrange to have an appropriate Dyno test completed off-site. If not, TT session #4 or subsequent TT sessions will not count toward competition. Edited January 5, 2012 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 5, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 5, 2012 I think one of the things I would worry about is that if they TM/GPS a car, what time did that person put down when it had the TM/GPS in it compared to it's best time. There were some guys at Nats I recall running almost 2 seconds slower when the TM/GPS was in the car. If people want to cheat, they will find a way. There is only so much you can do about it. About the AWD thing...most if not all of them are boosted and can easily change a tune with the flick of button/switch or whatever. Like Greg said, they even considered forcing them all to run in TTR/S/U. They gain a lot more power switching a tune than any NA car ever will. I would say force them into TTR/S/U or just have an AWD class, but that could lead into a whole different mess and too many classes. Maybe keep a closer eye on them when you decide to put a TM/GPS in their car. Look at the lap time they put down when that was in their car compared to the other times they've put down at the event. There was an AWD/turboed car at a regional event I was at this season that was running at the front of the pack with us, then he put down a 2 second faster lap time on one session and then never even came close to it again the rest of the weekend. Maybe he put on stickers for one session, but you would think he would have done it again the 2nd day, but he ran with the rest of us the 2nd day and didn't have any "out of nowhere" insane laps to put down. Just sayin....a possible instance? Just my $.02. I'll now go back into hibernation. We definitely were comparing best lap times to GPS readings. If we had found a car anywhere close to the limits, yet running 2 seconds off pace from a prior session without GPS, we would have had to pack them up and take them to the off-site Dyno. We are really trying to head toward having a GPS in these cars every session so there is no guess work. When the number of GPS units was limited, we definitely picked "strategic" times to GPS certain cars. Also, there was an AWD class that was attempted in NorCal a few years back, but it didn't gain momentum and died. I think you got it right that without alienating the AWD owners completely, we would have to add a few AWD classes, leading to too many classes as you stated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 5, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 5, 2012 How are you reading this? It says that sessions 1,2 and 3 will count. Anything after that will not. Right? Ok, lets bring the whole rule here. It appears fine to me as written: Failure to submit an appropriate Dyno sheet (when one is required, as above) will be penalized by disqualification in TT sessions #1, #2 and #3, and the car will continue to be disqualified for subsequent TT sessions until an appropriate Dyno sheet is submitted. All FWD and RWD cars that require and are lacking an appropriate Dyno sheet will be Dyno tested on Thursday by NASA, and the driver will be charged $150. If an AWD Dyno is not available at the track on Thursday, the driver must arrange to have an appropriate Dyno test completed off-site before TT session #4 or subsequent TT sessions will count toward competition. It says that all AWD sessions will be DQ'd if there is no Dyno sheet provided and one is required (first numbers 1, 2, 3, and then 4 and on). If the driver moves himself to TTR, then it is no longer required. If he doesn't, then it is required, and he continues to be DQ'd until he goes off-site and gets it done. Ben, adding the word "not" would change the wording to essentially, "must have a Dyno test before session 4 and others will not count" The appropriate wording would be as written, "must have a Dyno test before session 4 or other subsequent session will count" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 5, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 5, 2012 Ok, Ben, I see what you are reading now. If there was a comma before the word "or", you would be correct. "...the driver must arrange to have an appropriate Dyno test completed off-site before TT session #4, or subsequent TT sessions will count toward competition." There is no comma, and the subsequent TT sessions goes with the entire preposition "before TT session #4 or subsequent TT sessions will count..." If we added the comma, we would basically be saying that if a driver did not get their AWD Dyno before session #4, that they would be DQ'd for the entire event, which is not what we would do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperkins Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I edited my last post while your were typing Greg. I wasn't sure either. Thanks for clearing it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 5, 2012 National Staff Share Posted January 5, 2012 Guys, the bottom line on this issue is that we will try to get an AWD Dyno to the Championships if possible, but not if we have to pass on a large cost to the competitors for something that we don't really think will help us verify compliance. To date, having one there has not lead to any change in the results, but did add a substantial cost to an event that often loses money anyway. It would make more sense to buy 10 more GPS units than to rent an over-priced AWD Dyno for 4 days, that will end up getting used on maybe 4 cars. Just because there are 10 AWD cars at an event doesn't mean that they all need to be Dyno'd anyway. Those in TTR, Super Unlimited, and GTS Unlimited do not need to be Dyno'd. And, just as those at the bottom half of the 2WD standings are generally not sent to the Dyno, there is no need to Dyno AWD cars that are not in the running....especially when we have the more accurate GPS testing. As Greg B. stated, anyone that wants to cheat with an AWD car, and especially an AWD turbo car, will get away with it if we rely on Dyno Testing alone to find out. We need the GPS monitoring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlkGt3 Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Should be all Turbo cars have the ability to cheat a dyno that's why we need GPS testing. Just saying. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.