Jump to content

Hey guys.. Need your opinion on this..


JVR127

Recommended Posts

cstreit911
In my opinion, the only way a DETUNED car should be legal for a class (and this includes e36 in gts2 and e46 in gts 3) is by implementing a mechanical restrictor. Then they could do what ever you wanted with the software, and you can only push so much air, and the biggest thing is there are NO after dyno, in car or other adjustments. It is what is.

 

just my .02 cents

 

Benzito

 

 

Quick question for you. How would you validate that the mechanical detune was the only detune used? EX.

 

Build a 500 HP engine that needs to be 300HP to be legal. Put a restrictor on it. Lets say 20% of total intake diameter. How does GTS validate that it is this 20% restrictor that is the only reason the car is legal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A restrictor would at least ensure that all cars are in the ballpark of their targeted legal HP...effectively limiting the degree of cheating.

 

Without the "hard stop" of a restrictor, (i) the lack of effective on-the-fly compliance checking (or, frankly, a proper, consistently applied dyno testing procedure) and (ii) the power of a variety of OEM ECUs made within the past 15+ years means we are heavily reliant on the honor system to protect us from power of "optimized shift points" and "ultra low friction wheel bearings."

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote="cstreit911"

Quick question for you. How would you validate that the mechanical detune was the only detune used? EX.

 

Build a 500 HP engine that needs to be 300HP to be legal. Put a restrictor on it. Lets say 20% of total intake diameter. How does GTS validate that it is this 20% restrictor that is the only reason the car is legal?

 

hi Chris,

I have a quick question for you actually. Why would anyone build a 500 hp engine for a 300 hp class? the whole idea here is that we have STOCK ie: from the factory cars with about 330 hp that we detune to run a specific power to weight class. This is a known property. So a mechanical restrictor is for a car that comes FROM THE FACTORY as a car in a higher class and you are DETUNING a STOCK engine and computer to compete in a lower class.

I feel your argument only adds to the opinion of not allowing detuning. If someone took a 944 turbo and built a 500 hp engine, why would they go through that expense to then detune it to 300 hp?? This just makes no sense. No one would ever build a car for gts4 then spend money to detune for gts2. Im sorry, I dont get what your trying to say. If you had an 8v 944 and built a 500 hp turbo engine for it, then realized it wasnt competitive and decided to move down a class, you wouldnt be mechanically restricted because the car stock is a gts2 car. As such it wouldnt have the other advantages associated with taking a factory gts4 car and detuning for 3. I hope that makes sense and you see what I am trying to say.

and this goes to another post I saw about someone detuning a car to save money, and wear and tear. The detune software is just as expensive tuning software, and then take into consideration that you are spending 60k plus to purchase a car then race prep it and take away 200 hp? The price of admission is more than double so how does this save money? or wear and tear? I think we can all agree that a stock engine will run for a couple hundred thousand miles these days. So we need to detune even further to save wear and tear? as an example, we can run an e46 m3 stock in gts4. change the oil, and your good. does detuning save wear and tear on this engine from a stock engine with a stock computer? The way to save money is by leaving it alone. I just dont think its about wear and tear on the engine.

 

Benzito

Link to post
Share on other sites
RJ's325ITS

I've been staying silent since I'm the direct person affected. I'm going to keep this post simple, scientific, and fact based, no opinion.

 

I was happy to see AIM coming on board with a new way to scrutinize the series. As soon as it was announced I personally contacted AIM motorsports with a simple request - I want to make sure I'm legal for the championship and I have years of AIM data of 777. At the time I was turned down by "We are still in the testing phases, so we can not share any information." I left it alone for a good while and inquired again, the answer was "we are not at liberty of sharing this info, please contact NASA".... So I proceed to go to the ECC race, untested, unverified, just making sure the dyno and weight was compliant to the supplied rules.

 

5 days after the race, NASA says they reviewed the data and you are DQ'ed. This was the same data they reviewed and ok'd before the race. Who did the analysis? what method of analysis was used? God and them only know, I've requested that information at least 3 times in writing!!!! The only OFFICIAL answer I got was "we sent you the data that was used to dq you." Only after my appeal, NASA said that the expert made a mistake, but did not say what that was. This data is posted in a public google folder for everyone to see.

 

So I contacted an engineer to do a unbiased data analysis and perhaps explain to me how/why I was DQ'ed.... The analysis was also sent to nasa as part of the appeal you can find it here ( https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0gXucaqzPflYXBzTzR0MmZLa1E/edit?usp=docslist_api ). The analysis from some one with the expertise & education needed to analyze it proves that NASA's decision was not objective, but rather subjective. The engineer didn't make that stuff up, it's based on the laws of physics, and at some point he had to make assumptions to even try to justify their decision, and the conclusion was that 186 had the same acceleration as 777, and 336 was the slowest of all, but more or less the delta was insufficient to make an educated disqualification call.

 

He is not the only one that came to the same conclusion based on the data provided by NASA. I am gathering written independent analyses from electronic engineers, mechanical engineers, SAE/INDY/IMSA/ALMS/USCCR series race engineers that have agreed and come to the same conclusion as the analysis posted above..... I will post these in due time, when I have everything.

 

These guys are not making this stuff up!!!! and if you have the education & expertise the data is here ( https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wiOGEjRGM530TVrS3Eeq2Kjc1PJnm6qE2Gf9m-nMlTY/edit?usp=docslist_api ) for you to analyze!!!

 

My personal opinion:

If I were to stand in front of a judge and provide 5 analyses of professional Motorsport engineers, I would have to say very little, since science would be doing all the talking for me.

 

I'm really frustrated, disappointed, and will see thru the end of this, because when the scientific facts back me up I feel this championship was stolen from me, and perhaps there is a hidden agenda!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...