Jump to content

H4 new weights


honda318dx

Recommended Posts

 

CRX- 121/108 = 17.76:1 (HP)/ 19.90:1(TQ)

CRX is more like 130 And there is proof.

 

Civic- 131/107= 17.21:1 (HP)/ 21:1 (TQ)

I have seen D16Z6 make 139HP, Also why do the civic have integra sized brakes?

 

2ndTeg-148/133= 16.75:1 (HP)/ 18.64:1 (TQ)

That 148 was a fluke I have never gotten more than 143 ever.

 

 

 

What I wrote is in Bold.

 

i don't know what your basis is for the d16z6 hp but those HP figures are Off.

 

I have seen 6 different motors built to HC limits, 3 were by the same builder, the other 3 were all different builders, one of whom builds alot of honda motors, and have NEVER EVER seen an d16z6 make over 130hp.

 

Every one seems to THINK that the z6 makes alot of power because it has 'vtec' when infact, IMO it actually hurts the performance of the motor.

 

and i have never seen the z6 make any were over 110lbs/tq. It just doesn't happen, with a legal motor.

 

about the integra sized brakes, becuase of the update, chassi swap rule the 92-95 honda civic's can pick ANY year in that range of the SI to duplicate. Most people pick the 1994-1995 honda civic SI w/abs. And since racers have the option to keep or ditch abs the rules allow them to run the 10.3 inch front brake rotors and that corosponding caliper, with the 15/16th master cylinder. All completly ALLOWED by the rules.

 

I do think that the CRX will be too fast with this weight adjustment but time will only tell.

 

IMO the DA had to much power/tq with weight in comprassion to the other cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ITAIntegraLS

    17

  • slammed_93_hatch

    13

  • honda318dx

    12

  • civicrr

    7

4.) Still, why wasn't weight just simply added to the 2nd gen integra. I'll be the first to commend a good decission, but to simply say "bam, new rules" without any rationale and not have people react is pretty crazy..

 

Ok, I'm done venting.

 

that is not how it happens, the last time something like this happend was at the start of the year, with the edition of HU, every one got all pissy about adding a new class and said all sorts of stuff.

 

Something constructive came out of it though, a formal way for documentation of rules requests was implemented.

 

If you have issue about the accord and prelude wieghts, fill this out, provide data, list results of cars that are built and driven by good drivers. and something may be done.

http://www.hondachallenge.com/HC-Rule-Request.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I really have to say is.... So far I have not seen anything but improvements by the rule changes that HC has made since its beginnings..

 

3.) Were the other cars in the class (accords/preludes) even considered when this rule was decided? Did anyone ask what even the dyno numbers for my car 5th gen accord, the 3rd gen prelude, or the 4th gen accord put down that run on the East Coast? Last I checked, they arn't dominant at all, but they just lost 50lbs to the front runners.

 

Did anyone summit a request to reduce the weight of any of these cars? If no one says anything (by filling out a rule request form) then they do not know to look at the cars.

 

 

about the integra sized brakes, because of the update, chassis swap rule the 92-95 Honda civic's can pick ANY year in that range of the SI to duplicate. Most people pick the 1994-1995 honda civic SI w/abs. And since racers have the option to keep or ditch abs the rules allow them to run the 10.3 inch front brake rotors and that corosponding caliper, with the 15/16th master cylinder. All completly ALLOWED by the rules.

 

Just to clarify, IF you use the chassis swap rule you have the make sure EVERYTHING in the car conforms to the year you are swapping to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cant buy this argument, it ALWAYS easier to add weight than take it off. the weight should have been raised.

 

Too many cars are already carrying significant ballast. To me, it makes sense to lower the min weights of cars that are already having trouble making min weight with little to no extra lightening done to them. At the crossover, I saw several cars (including mine) carrying > 50 lbs ballast. IMO, it should be harder to get down to minimum weight than to get up to it.

 

Ryan - what do you guys use as the average driver weight when you do your calculations?

 

- Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the purpose of class parity, some of the minimum weights are being adjusted in the H4 class. Per rule 5.1.1, these changes will take place 10 days from this announcement.

 

88-91 Honda Civic & CRX (D16A6) are being changed to 2150 from 2175.

 

92-95 Honda Civic (D16Z6 SOHC VTEC) are being changed to 2255 from 2305.

 

94-01 Acura Integra (1.8L B18B, non vtec) is being changed to 2480 from 2525.

 

 

Parity with what Ryan?? Do you know that 3rd gen Integras and CRXs DOMINATE on the east coast, and you just lowered the weight even more? Why wasn't the weight droped in the Accords/Preludes??? Are you just trying to slow down the 2nd gen tegs?

 

The new weights do not slow down the 2nd gen integra - remember its weight stays the same. The CRX loses 25 lbs, which isn't even at the SCCA weight for the comparable ITA class. I guarantee you that 25 lbs will not all of the sudden make the CRX dominate. The world isn't going to spin off it's axis because of these weight changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have issue about the accord and prelude wieghts, fill this out, provide data, list results of cars that are built and driven by good drivers. and something may be done.

http://www.hondachallenge.com/HC-Rule-Request.pdf

 

Why the hell should I have to request a weight reduction? The cars were decently competitive as they were. There WAS no issue. Now the front runners here on the east just got faster. Next thing you know everyone is going to request for less weight because they all want to go faster.

 

As for adding weight, 50lbs is nothing. I had to put 125lbs of ballast in my prelude to run H2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you post just to get a higher user status or something? you dont even drive a freakin honda you moron....

 

 

No I don't post for that reason. As Ryan expained a few posts later this had nothing do to with 944's. I fully expected that. We had discussion on the 944 forums with few Honda guys. Although the subject itself was a little touchy (literally) we had nice discussion with no name calling or degrading.

 

I looked and naturally became interested in the H4 change. Given the already close speeds this may give the H4 cars a bit of edge such that there will be less H4 battles mixed with 944-spec battles. I really did not think it was goal of the rules change, but would not be surpised when the h4 cars seem to have little more speed next time out.

 

My posts on this subject are very tongue in check, but do have some logical thinking involved as well. As to the real reason the change was made... Talk to Ryan F he seems to have throught this through. I personally don't know as I don't race one of these cars. Happy now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the hell should I have to request a weight reduction? The cars were decently competitive as they were. There WAS no issue. Now the front runners here on the east just got faster. Next thing you know everyone is going to request for less weight because they all want to go faster.

 

 

Maybe the front runners in the east are the frontrunners because of reasons other then their cars' classification and minimum weight. Maybe they set their cars up better, or have invested more time and money into their car, or, dare I say, "dare, dare" they may just be better drivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Corey has said many times and what I'm thinking is.

 

Why are we changing the weights of three or more cars instead of one?

 

True, we could have raised the weight of the 2nd gen 'teg. If we did that, we still would have had to change the weight of one of the other cars. So, we changed three instead of two. This 'keeps' the class fast as opposed to slowing it down. Actually, with the weights as changed, to get the same exact numbers, weights would been changed on all four car models that are affected.

 

Personally, I would rather have cars remove ballast as opposed to adding it. I think that it is safer to not have the extra weight in there. Anytime we bolt something extra in, it can pose a hazard to the driver. One of the cars damaged @ the Infineon crossover had a failure that could have ended tragically!

 

I will repeat what I posted on another forum. The Honda Challenge world doesn't just exist in one region. Cory, you state that you don't have well developed or even much participation from 2nd geg 'tegs. We do. Have you ever considered that there is a need for an adjustment but you haven't seen it yet? Of course the 3rd gen 'teg is doing well on the east coast. I know there are ex-GA cars that were fielded by Planet Earth. You can bet they were well developed by the Nonamakers. The 2nd gen, in its best form, makes 2 less hp & the same tq @ the same rpm points. It in effect has the same suspension, brakes, etc. IMHO, it has better tranny ratios & a lower cg. (An interesting side note is that we have had competitors telling us they should be able to use this engine because they are the 'same' & easier to get. Now they say 'that engine is better & it isn't fair' since the weights are the same.) The ironic thing is that we have people on the west coast complaining about the 3rd gen since it is realatively 'new' out here. Again, we need to think about this stuff Nationally not just regionally.

 

Since I am laying stuff out here, I will be honest & say that we classed the Accord conservatively (in regards to min. weight). The thought was that it could always be adjusted, if needed. Torque is huge for this class & the Accord has (relatively) a bunch of it.

 

In the end, this adjustment is not going to really change the world that much. It is a minor competition adjustment. Lets run a few races. Maybe we made a mistake. Maybe other cars will need an adjustment. If that is the case, put in a request so we can address it. FYI, these adjustment(s) were driven by requests. In the end, we won't be able to make everyone happy & every car competitive. We can only strive towards that goal.

 

PS I would love to have dyno runs & build info on the Accord & Prelude. The more info we have the better we can make the classes & rules fair for better competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2nd and 3rd gen teg

It in effect has the same suspension,

 

1..Im sorry but they do not have same suspension, Do more reasearch.

 

2..It was asked to use a B18B with 3rd gen weigt at 2525. Do more research before u say something that doesent make sense. No one asked to use the B18B with 2480.

 

3..The B18A and B18B do not make the same torgue. Research that as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ryan - what do you guys use as the average driver weight when you do your calculations?

 

- Scott

 

LMAO.. definetly not your whole 85lbs!!! Sorry I couldn't resist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2nd and 3rd gen teg

It in effect has the same suspension,

 

1..Im sorry but they do not have same suspension, Do more reasearch.

 

2..It was asked to use a B18B with 3rd gen weigt at 2525. Do more research before u say something that doesent make sense. No one asked to use the B18B with 2480.

 

3..The B18A and B18B do not make the same torgue. Research that as well.

 

 

 

 

I said it 'in effect' has the same suspension. It does.

 

Tell you what, I will look up the emails. I could be wrong but I remember it going a different way. You really want to go thru all this here?

 

Could be wrong on the torque. It was off the top of my head.

 

added in edit: I was wrong. 126ft/lbs vs 127 ft/lbs

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1..Im sorry but they do not have same suspension, Do more reasearch.

He didn't say "exactly", I think he meant they were reasonably similar, compared to other configurations in h4.

3..The B18A and B18B do not make the same torgue. Research that as well.

 

According to the brochures, the 92LS makes 140/hp,126ftlbs. The 95LS makes 142hp/127ftlbs. We are splitting some pretty small hairs if we can't call these the "same" at least for the purpose of conversation.

 

It never made sense to me why a DC had to weigh more than I did(I am on of the "well prepped" DAs out west.) I had a "nearly" identical engine, and had a significantly lower CG, not to mention that the frontal area of the DA is alot less than a DC too, which really could effect the top speeds if all else was equal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1..Im sorry but they do not have same suspension, Do more reasearch.

 

it is not exactly the same meaning that you can't swap parts around.

 

BUT all the cars being discussed here are, HONDA double wish-bone suspension. Not one single car has a huge difference in suspension.

 

There is an addition to the DA though, that i thought after much research was found TO BE BETTER then the DC suspension. i felt it was a moot point, but several other people who know alot more about suspension design then me felt it was was better.

 

 

and to corey and Karl i submit to you fill out a rules request form it is how things get changed IF change needs to be taken in the eyes of the 4 people who make up the rules commette.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMAO.. definetly not your whole 85lbs!!! Sorry I couldn't resist.

 

Heh. Maybe I should try to get a ride w/ IRL since they weigh the cars w/o driver. Oh well, it's like I told Travis, I'd rather have my ballast in my car than in my body. That was right before he gave me a big middle finger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I didn't know this develop into quite a commotion.

 

I'm not affected, and will stay out of the discussion. But let me tell you this. It is impossible to make everyone happy. The rule comittee have a darn tough job trying to reach a parity in the class. I sure don't envy their job.

 

I'm sure they are doing their best to come up with a rule that will seem fair to everyone. Why don't we all take a step back and discuss this without getting too rile up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It never made sense to me why a DC had to weigh more than I did(I am on of the "well prepped" DAs out west.) I had a "nearly" identical engine, and had a significantly lower CG, not to mention that the frontal area of the DA is alot less than a DC too, which really could effect the top speeds if all else was equal.

 

The aerodynamics of the rear of the car actually has a great effect on top speed that the front of the car, or so I've been told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still wondering why the other cars in the class weren't considered with this change.

 

Oh, and the people that bitch/moan about lead in their car. Try running a prelude at 2725 or more in H2.. 125+ lbs in the car

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said it 'in effect' has the same suspension. It does.

 

Im not sure how a Double Wishbone 3Gen is the same as Radious rod front suspension of a 2Gen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you asking a question, or just making another poorly articulated statement.

Both suspentions work the same they gain camber.

In my opinion the DA is better, it's easy to buy and put a spherical in the radius rod and the lower control arm, and eliminate deflection, and the car can be lowered more both very important things to do.

The DC would need a expensive and custom piece made for the rear of the lower wishbone to eliminate the deflection, and in my experience the car can't be lowered as much.

Edik

In one forum you say in a very cocky tone your not worried about this weight change, but you continue to post everywhere about this and you haven't made one single constructive statement about the issue, all I've seen is a selfish and insecure attitude out of you on this subject. It's pretty disappointing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Edik,

 

In the photo you posted on honda-tech of the engine you blew at infineon, why can't I see the adjacent pistons? In the above photo of the head, I can clearly see the adjacent valves. Did you already remove the pistons to be reused?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Im just having Fun till i get to the track. It feels I havent raced for 2 months. Since my car broke at SP.

Im a very nice guy, So no race fo 2 months makes edo a anxious guy.

Im heating up the competition you know.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Edik,

 

In the photo you posted on honda-tech of the engine you blew at infineon, why can't I see the adjacent pistons? In the above photo of the head, I can clearly see the adjacent valves. Did you already remove the pistons to be reused?

 

 

NO. nothing from that engine will be used. The holes are filled with Oil and water. I have a Picture when we cleaned the water and oil out. If you woild like that pic let me know.

Link to comment
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...