Strange Days get STRANGER

[SOseth]

All the fuel rules are changing for 2010; this language was out for member input over the summer but I don't have a moment at work now to find the reference. Dave Gomberg can chime in here if he's listening, but the Honda will run legally in SCCA on pump gas is what I was told when I was doing my due diligence. I'd probably run 93 octane from BP (which is not an ethonal blend) instead of 87 to hedge any bets that it may have a FSCCA type problem on a blend.

My understanding is that the above statement is 100% correct. I am not a fan of this move by SCCA but they have specified certain components in some fuels that they feel they can identify. Dave G will correct me but next year I think we can run unleaded or leaded fuel as long as we identify what we are running.

Why do I feel very uncomfortable with this....

SteveO

[SOseth]

[quote=KevinFirlein;237487]most all of this is fear of the unkown. Like Agnif ,Ive dealt with multi engine classes and in many cases they completely suck. not so sure it is quite as much of a problem when ther are only 2 choices, and I dont want to hear about the original motor as a 3rd choice. The problem is further extended because of fear that the Honda will come online late enough that it can steal a Runoff win right out of the box if its too fast. Possibly true. I just cant get to worked up about something that isnt even on track yet. Bottom line to me is that both JRII and Steve Oseth are onboard with Honda. they're both multi time Runoff winners, ie no doubt about their programs. You get this in other classes, If you arent Huffaker, Chima,Peterson, or Davis your results are ignored. Not an issue with here. Both know full well what their cars can do with a top flight Pinto. If Steve goes to Suumit Point and can only run 17's the Honda needs more, If he runs low 14's it may need less. ( I say may because I have no doubt I can run our DB1 in the high 14's at Summit Point) Any map/restrictor change can be made at anytime without need for fastrack notification if its to level the field. quote]

Unfortunately Kevin we have no National at Summit next year. Very sad situation.

SteveO

[KevinFirlein]

yeah I know Steve but figured, like the cars I work with , that you would still get in some test time at SP.

Whether its you at Summit or John at Atlanta or another SE track I was just pointing out accurate info would be available with drivers that meet any criteria anyone can come up with

I've never sand bagged a day in my life but Agnif is correct in that it is of course possible.

[TimW]

All the fuel rules are changing for 2010; this language was out for member input over the summer but I don't have a moment at work now to find the reference. Dave Gomberg can chime in here if he's listening, but the Honda will run legally in SCCA on pump gas is what I was told when I was doing my due diligence. I'd probably run 93 octane from BP (which is not an ethonal blend) instead of 87 to hedge any bets that it may have a FSCCA type problem on a blend.

Well, i guess it was a cool summer in Chicago because it was in the January Fastrak, page 5
(http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastra...rack-jan.pdf):

Item 3. Effective 1/1/10: Change section 9.3.25 as follows:
9.3.25. FUEL
All cars shall use fuel, as defined below, unless a specific exemption is made in the provisions for a specific category/class.
A. Permitted Fuel
Permitted fuel is herein defined as gasoline meeting specified dielectric constant standards and not containing any prohibited substance in excess of stated limits. Gasoline is a mixture of refined hydrocarbons. Gasoline is an electrical insulator and its relative effectiveness as an insulator is represented by its dielectric constant (D.C.). The D.C. of gasoline, will be measured by an SCCA
Fuel Check Meter (Precision Fuel Testing HDE G-01 Fuel Analyzer), is defined as “0.0”. Gasoline may be tested and certified at SCCA events by the determination of the dielectric constant using the SCCA Fuel Check meter and through the application of various chemical (sic)



I would suspect that once the Fit is finalized, then via 9.3.25 they will amend the fuel standards table to allow FF with Fit in the first row with FSCCA, as they have also done for the SRSCCA car in CSR but not for all CSR.

[LJennings]

So will VP's "Street Blaze 100", "Motorsport 109" or even "C10" fuel be legal for use in the Fit?

How will they perform compared to use in the Kent?

[dc]

Because of the closed loop ECM in the Fit, it will adapt to any fuel and compensate accordingly. The end result is, 110 octane CAM2 will perform exactly the same as 93 octane pump gas from the local BP. The ability to run 93 octane pump unleaded is one of the big benefits to this package for a lot of people. They ran the test car at RA for the 40th all day on gas from the corner gas station and it would sit on the grid and purr like a kitten.

[LJennings]

Because of the closed loop ECM in the Fit, it will adapt to any fuel and compensate accordingly. The end result is, 110 octane CAM2 will perform exactly the same as 93 octane pump gas from the local BP. The ability to run 93 octane pump unleaded is one of the big benefits to this package for a lot of people. They ran the test car at RA for the 40th all day on gas from the corner gas station and it would sit on the grid and purr like a kitten.

That maybe on the on the low end fuel choice but I think we should request that a test be ran just to cover the bases.

[Dave Gomberg]

While Tim did indeed find the proposal as it appeared in the January Fastrack, it had some errors in it. The complete and correct rules as passed by the BoD in May (but which didn't get published in the BoD minutes for reasons unknown to me) have been in the Master Tech Bulletin (http://www.scca.com/documents/Club%2...20Fastrack.pdf) on pages 5-6. Since that time, two additions have been made to these rules: one sets standards for diesel fuel (the Jetta TDI will be classed in SSC and the TDI Cup car will be classed in STU for 2010); the other added another prohibited compound to that list.

The resulting rule as it will appear in the 2010 GCR is in the attached PDF. (Note that some renumbering now puts the fuel rules in 9.3.26).

In addition, there was an article in the October SportsCar explaining the new fuel program (pages 42-43).

Dave

[Wren]

How well do those rules prevent oxygen bearing fuels?

I know that in an FB, with a stock ECU and internals, you can pick up real horsepower by running oxygenated fuels and still meet the D.C. requirement.

[LJennings]

How well do those rules prevent oxygen bearing fuels?

I know that in an FB, with a stock ECU and internals, you can pick up real horsepower by running oxygenated fuels and still meet the D.C. requirement.

I believe even more so on a FI engine. compared to a carburetor.

[Wren]

I believe even more so on a FI engine. compared to a carburetor.

But do the new rules prevent oxygenated fuels?

[LJennings]

But do the new rules prevent oxygenated fuels?

I can not tell, but VP website has new fuels available that claim to be for pump gas classes and some are oxygenated.

[Dave Gomberg]

Oxygenated fuels are not in themselves a health and safety issue. The primary purpose of the new fuel rules are to protect the health and safety of racers, crew, workers and spectators. Ethanol is an oxygenate. We allow ethanol up to 10% by weight. There are, however, some oxygenates that have other properties that are not so benign. Those are excluded in the prohibited substances list.

Dave

[LJennings]

There have been lots of posts back and forth about the specifications which are being developed for the inclusion of the Honda Fit engine in FF and whether they will work equitably for all in the class. I believe that all are expressing opinions based upon what they believe is best for the class and upon their best perceptions of what can be accomplished in equalizing the two powerplants. I am sure that all are speaking in good faith (except maybe some funny and sarcastic guys, which I am at times, but not now). However, I believe that a lot of the arguments are hypotheses about what can be accomplished and remedied through the course of the season. I am not so sure that these hypotheses will hold true. They may, but perhaps they may not. I think that one way to partially account for these uncertainties and the possible effects upon those competing for the championship would be to have two 2010 FF champions - one FF Kent and one FF Fit. This is not a completely satisfying solution, but I think it would address some concerns.
- Frank Chambers
Edit to address John's post below - I was thinking along the lines of one Run Offs race with two 1st Place trophies and championships. I think there is more to it than just horsepower. For example, will the Honda, with EFI, use less fuel than the Kent - does this matter to those getting right at the weight limit? Throttle response, center of gravity, etc.

I do not believe the engine will have that much effect on the national drivers but I do believe the FIT at the regional level will be the equivalent of the introduction of the Swift back in 84.

If you are the typical regional guy and do not have the engineering or fabrication skills / equipment to adapt an "older" chassis to the FIT you are going to be left behind. If regional participation drops how are the regions going to fund already low turnout Nationals?

Does anyone know ifl the Fit be eligible for the EWC races?

[stonebridge20]

Because of the closed loop ECM in the Fit, it will adapt to any fuel and compensate accordingly. The end result is, 110 octane CAM2 will perform exactly the same as 93 octane pump gas from the local BP. The ability to run 93 octane pump unleaded is one of the big benefits to this package for a lot of people. They ran the test car at RA for the 40th all day on gas from the corner gas station and it would sit on the grid and purr like a kitten.

Doug, Is this info from HPD?

[John Robinson II]

Art,
Are there other organizations in your area that run Formula Fords? Are their rules the same as SCCA? If you are not satisfied with how "this club" makes their rules then maybe you should participate somewhere else. If after the Honda situation gets worked out and you are happy with the rules then renew your membership and join the fun. Unlike with the government, you can choose to participate in many different organizations.

Respectfully,
John

[EACIII]

I don't see how the ECU can control HP that results from the use of different fuels. It is not a dyno, it controls fuel rates and ignition not final output. Every new FI production car that recommend 93 octane fuel will run on 87 but make less power. Run the higher octane, make more power. Isn't the Fit a production motor?

This of course is to the limit the ECU hs mapped in for max fuel and ignition timing. But wouldn't you want to run a fuel that would allow the engine to run at max power at all times. Does the Fit motor have a knock sensor and is it being retained for the race motor?

ECU's generally use a Oxygen sensor to control the fuel mapping, wouldn't leaded fuel foul it?

The next two year will be very interesting. I will enjoy watch while I race my old Kent motor.

Ed

[Matt King]

ECU's generally use a Oxygen sensor to control the fuel mapping, wouldn't leaded fuel foul it?

Yes, and pretty quickly. It also wouldn't be uncommon for high octane leaded or unleaded fuel to make LESS power than pump gas. Octane is basically a resistance to detonation and the higher the rating, the slower the flame front in the combustion chamber. I've ran a few "pump gas" V-8s that made considerably more power on 93 unleaded on the dyno than on 110 leaded.

[stonebridge20]

Art,
Are there other organizations in your area that run Formula Fords? Are their rules the same as SCCA? If you are not satisfied with how "this club" makes their rules then maybe you should participate somewhere else. If after the Honda situation gets worked out and you are happy with the rules then renew your membership and join the fun. Unlike with the government, you can choose to participate in many different organizations.

Respectfully,
John

John, I'm not responding for Art. He's a big boy and can take care of himself.

There have been issues over the years that neither you nor I like but we work to try and get those issues resolved and keep coming back to SCCA because that's where the top 1% of the Ff's chose to race. There are plenty of other organizations here in the NE to race FF but they unfortunatly do not have a once a year get together of people from across the country to see who's "best in the land". Because of that fact and that fact alone is why I'm in SCCA and will keep voicing my opinion on what I think is right and wrong or how I would change something. Should everything I voice an opinion on go my way? Absolutly not! I have no illusion that a group as large as SCCA populated with 99% of the members being type A's that I will ever see a general concensus on any one topic. If I didn't care about the class passionately, there would never have been a word out of me for the last 6 months. The class of Formula Ford in SCCA is no longer. It is now Formula f . Until SCCA creates a class called Formula Ford I will race my car in Formula f and work as hard as I can to make sure there is as level a playing field as possible for everybody. Some type A's will not be happy with me but it's a two way street and I can accept that.
Asking people to "step away" if not happy with the product will make for a small club in short time. In asking Art to "step away" you just asked me and many other people to do the same. Some people will take that offer and that's not a good thing.

Thanks, Mike

[LJennings]

Yes, and pretty quickly. It also wouldn't be uncommon for high octane leaded or unleaded fuel to make LESS power than pump gas. Octane is basically a resistance to detonation and the higher the rating, the slower the flame front in the combustion chamber. I've ran a few "pump gas" V-8s that made considerably more power on 93 unleaded on the dyno than on 110 leaded.

What about this years INDY 500. It seems that having a "few gallons of methanol" floating around in the ethanol increased speeds by about 5 to 6 MPH. And the INDY Fit sealed ECU did not detect.

And Methanol carries more oxygen that ethanol.

[stephen wilson]

Ed,
I believe you have the cause/effect backwards. Running lower octane can reduce power output, but running higher octane than an engine was designed for won't increase power.
Steve

[John Robinson II]

Mike,
I did not ask Art to "step away". I just wanted to point out that there are other options. Unfortunately, here in the SE my options are very limited, SCCA is about the only game in town. I expressed my views on the situations and have to accept that the people WE voted in will be responsible enough to look out for everyone's best interest based on good judgement and our responses to them.
Point in case, I am totally dissatisfied with the undertay/diffuser rule. Yes, it clarified what is acceptable, but I feel that it is over the line of what was originally intended. DO I openly bitch and complain about how this came about and claim there has to be a payoff somewhere?? No, I get even more determined and apply even more time and effort to my program to adapt. If that means adding more undertray, then that is what I will do.

I am not saying we have to drink the koolaid, just that not all koolaid is tainted. Before we go yelling the sky is falling, maybe we should check and see if it was just a passing bird.

John

[Matt King]

What about this years INDY 500. It seems that having a "few gallons of methanol" floating around in the ethanol increased speeds by about 5 to 6 MPH. And the INDY Fit sealed ECU did not detect.

And Methanol carries more oxygen that ethanol.

Oxygenated fuels are a whole different subject. Used to have some Union 76 oxygenated 100 unleaded that would pick up 1-2 percent HP on the dyno all the time, but it was the extra oxygen in the fuel that did it, not the "octane" rating.

[stonebridge20]

Mike,
I did not ask Art to "step away". I just wanted to point out that there are other options. Unfortunately, here in the SE my options are very limited, SCCA is about the only game in town. I expressed my views on the situations and have to accept that the people WE voted in will be responsible enough to look out for everyone's best interest based on good judgement and our responses to them.
Point in case, I am totally dissatisfied with the undertay/diffuser rule. Yes, it clarified what is acceptable, but I feel that it is over the line of what was originally intended. DO I openly bitch and complain about how this came about and claim there has to be a payoff somewhere?? No, I get even more determined and apply even more time and effort to my program to adapt. If that means adding more undertray, then that is what I will do.

I am not saying we have to drink the koolaid, just that not all koolaid is tainted. Before we go yelling the sky is falling, maybe we should check and see if it was just a passing bird.

John

John, You and I are on the same plane with the undertray "clean up". Now,....bitching is one thing and bringing points and facts are another. They both can resemble each other very closely. Somebody needs to point out facts that may not be good for the class as a whole. Unfortunatly most times it looks like bitching. The vast majority of people that frequent Apex come to read only. Take a look at the bottom of any page from the "Honda post of the day" There are a bunch of people reading but never post an opinion. I chose to be the jacka$$ and "argue" the Honda proposal because I just didn't see too many other people willing to get their a$$ pounded like I did, and still do. I do NOT like doing this stuff! I am willing to take the heat and bring up every point pos/neg and take the heat if it makes for a better class. I will NOT roll over and just sit back to see how things go just because the Honda is in and should accept that fact. Just as you shouldn't sit back and let the undertray wording that bothers you stay the same. As a driver, I am not at your level but we both have been rewarded by this class handsomely. I'm just trying to do my best and give some back.

[Bill Steele]

Unlike Al Gore, I was actually involved in the creation of the internet, or at least, some of the guys that actually did contribute to its creation worked for me.

Being a Type A person like Mike A. refers to, nothing would frustrate me more than to sit in meetings and listen to guys like Carl Sunshine and Dave Kaufman debate for hours on end a minute detail on the implementation of one of the hundreds of network protocols that were created in those early days. It drove me nuts while I listened to all these infinite pedantic arguments about "what if this" and "what if that".

The truth is, it was just because these early guys and thousands like them over the years engaged in these exercises that the internet is what it is today. The fact that we don't have massive breakdowns, that the services are so robust is owing to people like these guys and their infinite pedantic arguments.

So, as frustrating as it is to sit and read all this back and forth about getting the HP parity right, getting the fuel right, etc. etc., the truth is, things are improved in the process. Issues most would have never thought of are uncovered, discussed and refined.

Frustrating yes, a good thing, for sure.

[John Merriman]

Regarding the potential dropoff of Regional participation because of the FIT coming in and screwing up FF1600, Regional Road Racing Boards and BODs can simply do the right thing and designate a separate class for FIT engined cars. And nothing says they can't. As an example, when a few of us submitted the proposal for Club Ford to the NER in 1983, it was approved in less than five minutes.

As for older chassis being converted, who's kidding who? VERY few, if any, older cars - Club Ford Lolas, Z10s, Crossles, etc. - will be converted.

Lastly, even though I don't agree with SCCA's decision, Dave and Stan can be counted on to assure this situation works out in the very best way possible because they truly care about the sport and its participants. As Bill points out, these discussions will inevitably help the process and should be seen as being valid and valuable. Hats off to Mike and Bill whose posts right above show that sanity and reason can still prevail in the midst of this maelstrom.

[Jim Garry]

Unlike Al Gore, I was actually involved in the creation of the internet, or at least, some of the guys that actually did contribute to its creation worked for me.

http://www.boutell.com/newfaq/history/gore.html

http://www.ontheissues.org/askme/internet.htm

http://websearch.about.com/od/internet101/f/al-gore.htm

[Bill Steele]

http://www.boutell.com/newfaq/history/gore.html

http://www.ontheissues.org/askme/internet.htm

http://websearch.about.com/od/internet101/f/al-gore.htm

Thanks for clearing that up, now my history of the internet is complete.

[Jim Garry]

At any party you will find those with no sense of humor

For some, the humor is negative and always pointed at one specific group of people. In this case, it's those not on the same political side of the fence. That ain't humor. It's a political attack and is based on distortions. And after 9 years of pushing the distortion over and over, it's enough already.

[dc]

This thread gets stranger and stranger... let's dial it back a notch, eh?

[John Nesbitt]

This thread gets stranger and stranger... let's dial it back a notch, eh?

I'll bet it turns out that black helicopters are powered by Fit engines.

[dc]

Hehehe, VTEC helicopters. That'd be AWESOME!

[John Merriman]

Clearly, the "off season" is not a good thing for racers........nor for golfers !!

[Larry]

...and who says political attacks aren't warranted? I'm sure we all have our beliefs about who the anal orifices in public life are. Excuse me, but I've got to go take a Pelosi.

Larry Oliver