National Staff Greg G. Posted January 15, 2014 National Staff Share Posted January 15, 2014 It may drive the competitor "batty", and not NASA. Depending on our findings with OEM/BTM vehicles, modified vehicles, carb'd vehicles, ultimately, a rule may be written that requires the competitor to ensure compliance in all gears (whether or not some additional factor is needed). Ultimately, the goal would be that any car that has not been modified, should be legal under this type of testing. Go with a lightweight clutch, a re-flashed ECU, a lightened driveline and you are responsible to make sure it is still legal. This all may be temporary as NASA takes us into the future of racing---what? So Greg, will we be legal or illegal when we have different mapping in different gears in order to be compliant, when the rule says we can't have multiple mapping in different gears It will depend on how the rule is written, and what the mechanism is to tech inspect whether a vehicle is compliant or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 15, 2014 National Staff Share Posted January 15, 2014 A non-gear dependent tune is surely a safe harbor for a rule meant to prevent a gear-dependent tune, no? Presumably. But, what if the OEM is placing a gear dependent tune in the BTM vehicle, and it turns out that real-world Dyno testing shows an issue once that vehicle has other (non-ECU) mods? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Not to further sidetrack, but... In addition to gear-dependent tunes, take into consideration MPH-dependent tunes. I saw an electronic boost controller for turbocharged cars at PRI a few years ago that would be perfect for shenanigans like this. It could be set to have a nice dip in the boost curve at a MPH range that corresponded with that car's 1:1 gear while making a flying lap. Or, if it detected no vehicle speed (by monitoring a non-powered wheel, aka the one that gets strapped down on a dyno), then it would default to a weak boost curve with no secondary tunes to upload, no buttons to push, no hidden switches to throw, etc. On the flip side, having a gear-dependent tune means that a car could be tuned (whether up or down) to its maximum legal HP in all gears, instead of just tuning for max legal HP in the 1:1 gear and exceeding that HP in all other gears. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I see a lot of reference to BTM here. Are the BTM ECU considerations you are laying out for TTB to TTE cars? Given the vast array of mods allowed under TT1-3 rules and the ST rules, it would seem odd to reference a BTM tune. In any case, it would be good to establish a safe harbor rule now, while people are in the midst of preparations, to avoid a mid-season gnashing of teeth and another $$/PITA trip to the dyno for a lot of competitors...and it sounds like this could affect everyone. Obviously a tune triggered by a moving front wheel is a pretty good illegal idea. And a gear or speed or whatever-based boost controller (like this one - http://www.ams1000.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=50&Itemid=59) has a tune that could be reviewed. If you guys want to get serious, then datalog the boost, TPS, spark and fuel signals on the track and compare to what shows up on the dyno. Upgrading the GPS monitoring program seems like a good initial line of defense, in terms of readily spotting an outlier in a given class that warrants further investigation, even if the GPS system doesn't give an accurate HP figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 16, 2014 National Staff Share Posted January 16, 2014 The reference to the BTM tune is that we need to make sure that if we end up Dyno testing in multiple gears for any ST/PT/TT class, that a newer BTM vehicle doesn't "appear" non-compliant by showing higher HP "readings" in alternate gears. If that is the case, then testing will be very problematic, because as you stated, any car that does not have a re-flash or gear dependent tuning should be legal under any potential rule. But, this is off topic....back to the FRS............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Yes...back to FRS... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 16, 2014 National Staff Share Posted January 16, 2014 A decision has been made, and the FRS and BRZ are both getting weight added to the Base Weight. There will be no additional asterisk added this season unless something extreme happens (as is the case for any vehicle model out there). Both are getting 110 lbs added, making the base weight 2885 lbs. Our testing and data show that the car will be a top contender in PTD and TTD with the extra weight. The TT Rules that will be posted tomorrow will show this, and we will post a revised set of PT Rules with a few typo's corrected that were found when editing the TT rules. Thanks to all of you who submitted your data, as well as our own test drivers for their time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 16, 2014 National Staff Share Posted January 16, 2014 Ok, so maybe some of you would have rather not gone back to the FRS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 *looks at entry list for TX event this weekend* *notes two BRZs* effective on what date - today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmanuel B. Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Ok, so maybe some of you would have rather not gone back to the FRS. ^^^^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmanuel B. Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 86 Dyno Day this Saturday on a Dynojet with SAE. I hope to have a large sampling of dyno results and .drf files to make available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 16, 2014 National Staff Share Posted January 16, 2014 *looks at entry list for TX event this weekend**notes two BRZs* effective on what date - today? I will leave it to the discretion of the Regional TT and PT Directors. Since the rule isn't getting posted until tomorrow, I would lean toward giving a waiver to any driver who is unable to add the ballast by Saturday/Sunday. However, if it was my region, I would also want to see the car with a full tank of fuel at the start of each session as a "good faith" effort. Sound reasonable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 I'll put that information out to the drivers in that manner then. Seems fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hhdinyuma Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 That seems pretty fair to me. Better than a * or **. Should put the car very close to the Weight/RWHP ratio's I have seen given out for cars on a dyno reclass. Bad news for me is I am already running a full tank but I guess re-installing the Passenger seat and front pipe with stock Cat will get me close. I was at 2828 Lb. last weekend with a full tank-5 laps. Wish I hadn't invested in the $100.00 per pound CF drive-shaft though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmanuel B. Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Looks like I need to go see a guy about molding 200 lbs of metal to secure in the spare wheel space of the twins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted January 16, 2014 National Staff Share Posted January 16, 2014 That seems pretty fair to me. Better than a * or **. Should put the car very close to the Weight/RWHP ratio's I have seen given out for cars on a dyno reclass. Bad news for me is I am already running a full tank but I guess re-installing the Passenger seat and front pipe with stock Cat will get me close. I was at 2828 Lb. last weekend with a full tank-5 laps. Wish I hadn't invested in the $100.00 per pound CF drive-shaft though. CF driveshaft is still a benefit. Forget about the passenger seat and the Cat, and put in real ballast, low lying, and exactly where it's needed to balance the car with you in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Doc Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 -> Off to the scales with some lead. With some creative balancing, we can probably get the car close to "square", and with CG at your shins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hhdinyuma Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 CF driveshaft is still a benefit. Forget about the passenger seat and the Cat, and put in real ballast, low lying, and exactly where it's needed to balance the car with you in it. That is what I will do then WTB:...Lead...67 Lbs....Need it before 2/7/14 It's all good. I think this was for the best and will only make the competition better. Just hope it doesn't slow down this 32 page train!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 second hand weightlifting plates + drill + 1/4" (or thicker for overkill) bar stock to make backing plates = easy ballast. shouldn't be much over $0.50-$0.75 per lb. New is closer to $1.00lb if you want nice shiny unused stuff. Weighs the same though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 just as a point of note it seems that thus far the non-FRS/BRZ TTD competitors in the TX region event this weekend (that I've been able to reach anyway) are not willing to hold the car to the 2885lb listing for this event. One of them can even be quoted as "not skurrrd!". Pretty nice sportsmanship to let them off the hook since it was such short notice before the event that the weight got raised. :beer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hhdinyuma Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 just as a point of note it seems that thus far the non-FRS/BRZ TTD competitors in the TX region event this weekend (that I've been able to reach anyway) are not willing to hold the car to the 2885lb listing for this event. One of them can even be quoted as "not skurrrd!". Pretty nice sportsmanship to let them off the hook since it was such short notice before the event that the weight got raised. Only 1320 miles from Yuma AZ to Angelton TX for one more chance to run at reduced weight.....hmmmmmmmmmmmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 I have a cold Shiner with your name on it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubiePig Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 I will throw in one too! We need a bigger class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILIKETODRIVE Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Only 1320 miles from Yuma AZ to Angelton TX for one more chance to run at reduced weight.....hmmmmmmmmmmmmm Haha. DO IT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 if he leaves now he'll make it just in time... 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.