944-Spec Dyno Day?

[JamesWilson]

The new Dyno Dynamics chassis dyno has been installed and tested at our new shop location in Kearny Mesa (San Diego area). I want to arrange a 944-Spec Dyno Day/Shootout soon for those who have built new cars, or have made some changes since the last time around. With weather/altitude/machine conditions being similar, I think it would be a fun opportunity for the Spec guys to save some money on dyno testing as well as further help out some of the rule change proposals in the works.

 

Timmy, can you help arrange this?

 

Thanks,

 

James Wilson

Competition/Motorsports Director

JMC Motorsports, Inc.

4783 Ruffner Street

San Diego, CA 92111

858-268-2244

[Packfill]

.... as well as further help out some of the rule change proposals in the works.

 

Please tell me we are not going to dig up and beat this dead horse again...

[944-Spec#94]

Well solid even dyno results means that those looking for rules changes should go stuff it. (in a nice way of course).

 

 

I'd be there, but it is one hell of a long way for me.

[Tim Comeau]

I'd love to do anything to help ensure the success of both your business and this class, James. I'll probably drop by today.

 

Jim,

Just because you disagree with what's best for the future of this class doesn't mean the horse is dead. It's just dead to you. That's ok.

The rules still have a couple horses that need to be slayed asap.

Have you seen the cost of a competitive spec Miata lately?

That isn't going to even start to happen in this great class if I have anything to say about it.

The rules are stable for now.

[Packfill]

Just keep in mind that any change to NASA rules ruins the parity between NASA and POC... Given the current disparity of attendance between the two organizations, do we really want to make rule changes? Add to this the effect it has on lurkers who are thinking about joining the class, but dont want to do anything if there are NOT stable rules, I still (and will always) feel that rule changes are bad....

 

Besides, Tim, dont you hold the fastest lap ever run at Willow with a car that would already conform to any changes you are considering???

[Tim Comeau]

It's important that the rules remain close between all the different clubs, even the SCCA.

I would posit that lurkers would be more supportive of cost saving measures than the thought of rules changes, especially when the rules change is a positive one for the future cost of building a competitive car. It's great fun for me to use everything I know, while adhering to a set of rules, to make a car as fast as possible.

 

Rules changes are not something I take lightly, however, the original set of 944 spec rules was really flawed. There were way too many gray areas that caused bickering. There were short-sighted parts inclusions. We've cleaned them up alot in terms of being clear and fair and every single new person to the class has expressed the feeling that they are here because of the tight, cost cutting rules.

[944-Spec#94]

In my opinion the best way to deal with some of these concerns is with an Open engine policy.

 

What I mean is if you think your engine is strong bring it out and run it. The goal of all engines is to have one that makes good power and is reliable. Good power means one that fits in the class with most other motors. Really if you make 150 whp (crazy number, not real) and everyone else is a 130 whp... well that means you should be DESTROYING everyone at the track. If not you suck. If not what is the fun in that?

[DavidH]

We need to be VERY careful when looking at changing an existing set of rules. Cars are and were built with the existing rules. If there are changes, then these existing cars may have to be changed ($$$).

 

With that said, I am looking at the rules as my motor is down on hp (121 without the chip). Rather than doing a rebuild, I am looking at smaller dollar components to make sure that they work well and any other options that are not a $4-$5k rebuild. I am hoping to eventually have hp numbers that are close to the rest of the group.

 

We need to make sure that there is consistancy between NASA, POC and PCA. That too is one of the appealling aspects of this terrific class.

[Packfill]

As I have stated many times on this forum, that I am VEHEMENTLY against rule changes... the current rules work. There isn't a single car in this field that can't be beat on the racetrack... I have heard no talk of inequality of race cars..

 

I have heard talk of rule changes regarding headers and shocks though neither of these improvements have been shown to improve lap times. This year, we have only had a total of 11 Southern Caifornia cars enter at least one race... 4 different cars have won a race, and 3 of 4 of these race winning cars had either Konis or a stock header... 7 of 11 different cars have finished on podium...

 

Any additional restrictions on either headers or shocks, if enacted, would value at least a dozen cars, (just off the top of my head) all of which run both POC and NASA, out of spec. Out of the 11 So Cal cars that started a NASA race this year, 8 of the cars are run POC as thier first series and cross over to NASA. Of those 8, 6 (and from what I hear, possibly 7) would be deemed illegal in a proposed shock and header rule change. This would leave 3 cars legal in southern california... great odds to win a race, but not that much fun and not great for NASA. (by the way, of the remaining 3 legal cars, 2 of these cars, ran less than 3 races...

 

POC graciously accepted the rules put forth by NASA without change. POC has a very strict requirement for rule changes and they are NEVER just made by directors, or others without the concent and input of the racers....and I can tell you the racers in POC dont want the rules changed.

 

Perhaps the directors of this series should start a thread on this forum, 1) indicating whether or not there is a movement to change the rules, 2) what if any rule changes are being considered, 3) why they feel this is necessary, and 4) what timeframes are being considered for any possible rule changes... This would give the people whose hard earned dollars are supporting this class, a chance to offer their valuable opinion... It seems to me that each and every time this subject is dicussed, the racers (who absolutely have the knowledge to know what is best for the class) seem to overwhelmingly vote against it...

 

My $.02

[DavidH]

Jim,

Very well said. Those that have read his post should read his last paragraph for a second time. I agree wholeheartedly and that if anything is being concidered we need to ALL have some input.

 

So far, we have worked very well as a group both on the track and off. Lets keep the good work up.

[Spec-944#70]

I don't run headers or have the Bilstein but I would fight against rule changes like this. Why? The cars that have these options are LEGAL. To make changes would force them to redo their cars. Not just buy Koni's and stock headers but then they get 25 cents to the dollar for their used parts which won't have that much of a market. Plus now they are froced to spend time dyno/track to redo thier cars. The POC has passed it's time to put in for rule changes so if NASA changed something the POC couldn't even adopt the changes till 2008. I usually run with NASA 1 or 2 times a year to keep my lic and membership alive and I REALLY enjoyed the last race at WS. If I can attend more weekends I will, but I will also only support smart changes and the ones I've herd are not smart.

If you want this to be truely a Spec class it's too late. Maybe 5 years ago it should have been spelled out 1 shock, stock headers, no chip, blah, blah, blah!!!! Like Jim said there is not 1 car out there that can't be beat on any given day. When I get down to 1:38's and then get to see my car on the podium and doing 1:36's it tells me I suck not that the other cars are faster!!!!

Before any changes are made I sure hope the racers get to have some say in it!!!

[Bill Addy]

I think the whole purpose of James post was lost James:(, it would be nice to get together with local spec cars at you're new shop and do a Dyno test day . Anytime a sponsor or supporter makes such a generous offer, we should treat it with respect.

 

Thank you James, I'm in !

[mfoley]

I've been busy at work for the last couple of months and I even took a vacation. I'm getting excited to get my car back on the track so I hopped on the forum to to see what's been going on. When I got to this thread I was extremely disappointed with what I was reading. I am also against rule changes except for safety or reliability. I think I'm aligned with Eric's opinion here.

 

The cost of racing is different for everyone. Who's to say that if someone pays a shop for work it's expensive and if a DIYer does the same work in his garage it's cheap? I don't have the time to work on my own car and my time is worth more than what I pay my shop. Some people spend hours and hours on their own cars and I don't hear any complaining about those people driving up the cost of racing our 944 Spec cars.

 

I also agree vehemently with Jim that if there are any anticipated rules changes being contemplated they should be discussed first right here on the forum.

 

Tim - I'm specifically addressing you here because you are our director. I know a little about leadership and I can tell you from my experience when you are dealing with a bright, informed and interested group, as is the case here, it is always better to error on the side of openness and complete disclosure. At my company I hold a weekly all-hands meeting every Friday to make announcements, listen to my employees and have open discussions. It is time to step up on this issue. We're waiting to hear from you.

 

Thanks,

Mark

#39

[JamesWilson]

Thank you, Bill, that was the original intent. You Spec guys are used to reading between the lines, the whole point was a possible Dyno Day, not any rule changes that may or may not have been offhandedly discussed over a few drinks.

 

I have found myself no longer with JMC Motorsports, but I will be more than happy to help arrange for a special day for the Spec guys.

 

-JW

Independently Unwealthy

[Norman#99]

I have been on the East Coast since our last weekend at WS, so I haven't read the forum this week. This seems to be a very emotional issue for a lot of us. I wanted to get into this series for two reasons (1) DE'ing a 911sc since 1993 then racing it since 1997 till 2006 was getting really expensive and the power differance between the 911's in the same class was pretty large at times. When I shared this with Joe Stubblefield several years ago, a friend since I moved to AZ in 1997, he said that there are lots of people that feel the same way as I do, so he was working on a spec-944 series were all cars are the same with no mods to keep it simple and cheap. THAT TURNED MY HEAD!!!!! (2) I wanted to be in class that was as close to 100% driver than who has the fastest car. So, I sold the 911 after 13 years and bought my current spec car in 2006. I can see that there is a pretty good differance on the long tracks were a couple of HP make a differance, short tracks don't seem to be as big a deal. If I had spent all the money that some have spent on R&D for the extra power, I would not be happy with changes either. So, here is a thougt to keep all cars equal with out having to spend money to undo what has been done.

 

This series SHOULD have equal power to weight ratio!!! If the average car is at 130 hp with 2600 pounds car and driver, (I think that is 1 hp for 20 pounds) (not sure but you get the point) What if we all have that ratio? If your car is at 140 hp which is 1hp for 18.5 pounds, add the appropriate weight to be equal for all cars.

 

I can only speak for myself on this, what are your thoughts? I will race either way because of my passion for racing. This is the best of any class there is at this point, so the big stuff is in place, now it's just a thing of fine tuning.

 

Norman #99

[Packfill]

If I had spent all the money that some have spent on R&D for the extra power, I would not be happy with changes either.

 

Norm, this is the perception we are fighting against. 1) The only HP related rule change that is being considered (as far as I know) is $5-600 headers. This mod is the same price as a set of tires...not much in whole scheme of things...and there has been NO PROOF WHATSOEVER, that anyone is getting "extra power" from them. We have never seen a dyno sheet with a spec car over 138 HP, and we have never seen a car run away from the pack... Quite the contrary, there are a number of cars running up front, PDilly, TC... that we know are in the 130-135 range. I, for one do not think HP is the end all to winning races in this class...

 

This series SHOULD have equal power to weight ratio!!!

 

I agree. I had a conversation with TC a year ago suggesting that instead of tampering with the rules, if he felt that HP was a big deal, I could make him 50 restrictor plates for $20 a piece (probably more like $5)... a simple plate that bolted to the AFM intake and all cars instantly make 130HP... (assuming they were making it to start with....) easy to police, even power...

 

There is really no other way to police HP...in order to add weight... limiting headers will do nothing but keep the guys with older motors from doing cheaper mods to get a few more ponys and make them do 5K rebuilds instead....Good for the shops... not good for the racers...

 

I am in no way suggesting this rule change... but it sure makes more sense then trying to delete current options that no one has proven makes HP... show me a car making 140 (legally) and I will shut up.... until then, if you have a car making 130 and you are getting beat handily be a car making 135... learn to drive... its not the car!!

 

The single proveable difference between the cars up front and others is track time... just wade through the results of this year and see who has driven the most... I would bet that if you ranked each car by time on track, and then ranked each car by finishes? The list would look about the same....

 

My $.02

[944spec92]

1. First and foremost, thanks to James Wilson for the initial sponsor dyno day offer and the subsequent follow-up to make that day happen. Hope you find gainful employment soon. Keep us posted as to when a dyno day that most can attend will be scheduled.

 

2. Secondly and almost as important, any rule changes that come in to affect in the near future has to include the ability to run fully synthetic blinker fluid. For those who are new to this forum, I am the rep for such unobtainium go fast parts. Seriously, any rule changes in any sanctioning body should have the support of the participants. Without that support, future participation may dwindle or even migrate towards one specific series.

 

3. This topic, or rumour to the affect of any potential rules changes, be it in NASA, or through PCA Club Racing, or POC, or even SCCA does affect everyone currently participating, those on the license bubble, and those considering this 944spec class for future involvement. Maybe this should be its own topic and not buried on a tangent?

 

4. With all that has been written so far, it would have been great if the original rules stipulated; one shock make/model, one type header, one suspension size, ride height minimums, my blinker fluid, no chips, no race gas, as just examples of ways to keep the initial and running costs down. This may also have leveled the playing field even more and allowed for better driving ability (as opposed to cubic dollar ability) to shine and podium. Too late now.

 

5. Best money spent, as seen in fact and well documented by Jim Marks, is still seat time. Most seat timers are also seeing best lap times and best results. Ponies and reliability help. As does good car set-up. Obviously some driving ability is also needed to be competitive. Good to be the master of the obvious.

 

6. Money is being spent and more will be spent. No rules package can ever limit that. LSD's, frequently newer tires, my offered blinker fluid, headers, chips, dyno development, alignment and corner balance dialing in all seem to be on everyone's mind. Bigger wallets may not always spend good dollars but it is still their choice to do so. As Mark Foley highlighted, how can you compare shop built to home built on a dollar vs. time value? Difficult to do. As is any retro-active rule changes.

 

7. A tremendous amount of good work has been done to promote this great class, grow the numbers, assist newbies, keep it safe and sane, and have some fun both on and off the track. Let's not turn off those who are concerned about rumored and supposedly proposed rule changes that affect current participants. Open forum please!

[Spec-944#70]

Hey Ray!!

Glad to see your not lurking. Where's my blinker fluid? You cashed my check!! It looks like alot of us are in agreement that any proposed changes should be brought up for discussion first and at least get some input. If changes were submitted (only a rumor) then I hope it doesn't have any repercussions. I love this class and really enjoy the comraderie so lets keep it as is and not stir the pot.

Is there anyone running an illegal car that is running away from everyone? Answer - NO!!!! Anyone running a legal car running away from everyone? Answer - NO!!

So why make any changes if they don't save anything except to force people to redo their currently legal cars!!

Sorensen out!!!

[944spec92]

Eric - not only am I lurking, but some may call it stalking.

 

Ass to your blinker fluid delivery, due to the current heightened security concerns and ban on liquids, I will be able to deliver your go fast requested parts only in solid form and by required hand delivery. On my way to the next track event that you and I will be attanding (possibly Buttonwillow in Sept?), I sincerely hope that I will be passing a cow field so that I am able to pick up in a solid state the naturally derived blinker fluid conveniently packaged in puck form for easy delivery directly to your pit stall. There will be no additional charge for this fine service. Sharing left over amounts is up to your discretion. Disposal of any unused portions will be your responsibility. Batteries not included. Results may vary. There may be an odor side effect, but this will be due to the freshness of material and high temperatures involved.

 

As to any rule changes, seems like most are in agreement and all wondering why so quiet on the directorial front?

[Spec-944#70]

You crack me up!!

See ya in Sept!!

[genikz]

As to any rule changes, seems like most are in agreement and all wondering why so quiet on the directorial front?

 

I think Tim was attending the Nor-Cal event at Thunderhill this weekend. He's probably still driving...and driving...and driving.

 

He'll surely be able to pick up a blinker fluid "puck" on the way down though

[944-Spec#94]

 

1) The only HP related rule change that is being considered (as far as I know) is $5-600 headers. This mod is the same price as a set of tires...not much in whole scheme of things...and there has been NO PROOF WHATSOEVER, that anyone is getting "extra power" from them. We have never seen a dyno sheet with a spec car over 138 HP, and we have never seen a car run away from the pack... Quite the contrary, there are a number of cars running up front, PDilly, TC... that we know are in the 130-135 range. I, for one do not think HP is the end all to winning races in this class...My $.02

 

Jim,

This I believe is the reason for doing some spec dyno runs.

 

Ok...

Over the past few months Tim and I have been talking about these headers you mention. They are RUMORED to make 8hp. Now I am right now at 134 rwhp with stock headers. So if I put these on am I at 142 hp? That would be pretty cool and I could probably run away from most of you guys with that hp.

 

HOWEVER.... most of what I have seen in these cars is NOTHING makes HP. MSDS headers run $250 or so and are supposed to make 10hp. Well they DON'T. The make squat. Heck stocks are probably better. How do I know? I have dyno charts from guys with MSDS making the SAME HP as everyone else.

 

Now the problem is that I don't have the cash to buy these headers in question and test them. If they could add 8hp to everyone's car well we have two choices. 1) ban then because they create and un equal playing field. or 2) Allow them and simply expect them to be the header used by all.

 

Problem right now is preception. They are preceived as some super power thing and my guess is they are not. However how can we be sure.

 

Now what are we going to do about headers... Well probably nothing... However it sure would help to have someone show their hp levels. Who really has the most hp in the class? Who has the best torque cruve?

 

The Dyno is one way.

 

David... you say you are at 121 hp? Well that is not correct did not Dilly get you to 128 hp? Probably all you need to get to in the 130's is stock valve job. My guess is the valves old and need to be cleaned and reseated. In effect your engine is probably "below" stock hp. Bottom end work probably will gain you nothing. Spending 4k on and engine rebuild won't get you more than 2-3 hp from the stock headwork. It will add relablity and seal off all those old pesky oil leaks. Remember the bores on these engines are pretty hard and wear very little even over 100-200k miles.

 

Hey guy just remember the NASA rules are made by the series directors, but there are 4 of us now.

 

So-Cal - Tim Comeau

Nor-Cal - Ken Huey

Arizona - Joe Paluch

Colorado - Chuck Taylor

This means any rules changes needs input by all 4 of us. Like I said earlier Tim and I have been taking about this for a while. Nothing has come of it for two reasons. 1) lack of hard data on true hp impact 2) clear negative impact on our existing drivers. It is my feeling that if we are going to put our drivers into situations where they need to give up parts on their cars it better be for the right reasons.

[DavidH]

Joe,

To clarify, Dilly got me from 121 to 126 by adding a chip. Then he did some AFM adjustments that got me to 128. If you keep it a stock motor, then I am at 123. I am thrilled to be at 128. The prior owner did a top end rebuild so possibly that may not be an issue. I will explore the other recommended avenues before I concider a rebuild.

 

My only point is that I am off the 134hp average number and I will have to confirm to see what people are getting without a chip. I was just using that as an example of using the rules as a guide as to what our options are.

 

The main issue here is that we all need to discuss rule changes in an open environment to get everyones input. We need to be very careful when concidering retroactive adjustments.

[Packfill]

Joe,

 

Thanks for a well written and reasonable response... Let me give you my (humble) opinion...

 

I believe that there are a lot of ways to get to 136... I think that an exhaust, header, tuned intake, proper spark plugs, well tuned afm, all help... but the restrictng fact is the AFM. The 944 AFM is why the 944 is such a great spec-car. I believe you could spend 10K on a motor, lighten, polish, balance, titanium jenson rods, uraniam keepers, the whole deal, and hook up THE STOCK AFM and you will get 136-138HP. You just cant get enough air into these motors...

 

With that said, the little leeway the racers have just allows them options to tune their motors to the same HP. I truly believe that I can help David get his motor to 134, with a combo of intake, exhaust, etc... But he (or anyone else) will never get past that.... so why make a change.....

 

PS: I dont run the super secret headers in question... I got out a bender, and some stainless and we made our own!!

 

My $.02

[Helldin]

Looking at the numbers I think my future Supercup car will be doing ok.

I just dynoed at Buttonwillow. 183HP/187TQ , bone stock with 172K miles. That is 15.8 lbs per horsepower at the 2900 weight limit. Will kick ass in EO Enduro class at about 2700

 

Per Helldin