Swift 016

[Rick Ross]

The new Fastrack contains the long-awaited proposal for the introduction of the Swift 016 into the class effective 1/1/2010. A 32mm SIR and spec airbox will be required. Min weight is to be 1420 lbs.

Does anyone have any reliable info regarding the performance of this configuration relative to current club Atlantics (014, 008, RT41, etc.)?

[Rick Ross]

Hmm......not much interest in this topic apparently. Has anyone heard any specifics regarding the power/torque of the restricted 016 engine? I assume that the CRB conducted comparative dyno tests. Can anyone on the CRB provide more info?

I'm not necessarily opposed to this idea.....but it would be nice to know more about the rational behind the proposal.

[Rennie Clayton]

Rick,

I don't have access to any official data, but my guess is ~255hp / ~155lb-ft at a pretty low RPM (compared to the 1600's). The 016's are restricted to using their stock bodywork and wings, plus they're saddled with a ton of extra weight, so this is a nod toward getting them off the corners and down the straights in a reasonable fashion.

I suspect solid mid-pack potential, but not yet up to the sharp end of the grid. The added HP is offset by being a wider car with more wing / downforce, and the added torque is offset by being something of a pig of a car. I can't say as I'm looking forward to getting t-boned by one of these monstrosities, but I've been on track with worse.

All in all, good to have more "Atlantics" to bring into the fold.


Cheers,
Rennie

[Rick Ross]

Rennie,

Thanks for the comments. I was just curious if anyone had any specific information regarding the process followed to determine the SIR size. Obviously the CRB and others put some thought into this.....it would be nice to know the actual hp/torque numbers of the restricted motor, and how lap times are expected to compare to current club FA's.

When this idea was first mentioned a year or so ago I was somewhat skeptical, given that the 016 does not comply with many of the FA class rules, and the obvious potential for the car to dominate and make all the existing cars obsolete overnight. Although I am sure the 016 is a nice car.....it is not a club Atlantic.

However, it appears that the immediate goal of the CRB is to allow the 016 to have something more like "mid-pack" performance. I would also assume that the CRB could modify the SIR size in the future if necessary to make performance adjustments. Like you, I am not necessarily thrilled with the idea of sharing the track with a 1400+ pound car, but I also agree that there are definite benefits to having more "Atlantics" racing in SCCA.

[bill gillespie]

The CRB has used some objective, and some non- objective data to arrive at the 32mmSIR, which is different than the 31mm SIR spec'd for new motors. This was not an accident.

I believe the 16 will be a bit faster off the corner, but give up a little on the straight. It is a bigger, heavier car, but hardly a monstrosity. IIRC, the original pro spec was 300hp, but has been detuned to 280hp due to reliability issues.

Under the proposed rule table, the 2.3MZR will be unresticted, other than 32mmSIR. New owners will have to source ECU/ignition and have their new engine mapped. Cosworth currently keeps the ECU and you only get it at a pro race, or official test day.

Seems like new engine builders will be entering the field. Based on the last pro-atlantic race at Road Atlanta, the cars were about 5 sec/lap quicker than the current Club lap record, at 280hp, so a 32mm SIR may NOT put the car back in mid-pack with an equal driver.

The CRB has expressed determination to equalize performance with restrictor size, but the Enterprise airbox/restrictor has not been completed yet, so definitive dyno tests can't have been completed.

Instead of worrying about the Swift, we should be wondering about the Stohr, especially since Toyota has a 2.5l 4-cyl base engine, and I'm sure Wayne and Arnie are looking at it, and a variety of other options.

Lastly, Rick, at my one and only vintage race ,I got t-boned by an Indy car, so I share your concern about weights. However, I would be more concerned about speed differentials ....as in mixed class IMSA events....scary closure speeds.

Rant over,
Bill

[Rennie Clayton]

Bill,

The early engines were detuned while Cosworth worked out those reliability and vibration issues, but in recent years they have been running the cars fully uncorked at their intended HP levels. No more cracked rollover hoops, and no more mysterious engine pops at low mileage - both of which were common occurrences during the first season.


Cheers,
Rennie

[bill gillespie]

I didn't know about the engine uptweak....was that all ECU based? Also, do you know how they fixed the vib/harmonics?

I'm no flow guy, but my dart on the wall says the 32mm SIR goes sonic around 270hp...10% reduction......do you have more accurate numbers? Finally, as a Toyota guy, have you asked Arnie about the 2.5l used in the RAV 4 ?

Enquiring minds, and all that!
Bill

[VehDyn]

I wonder how many of these cars are out there? I watched the race today on TV and there were only 10 cars on the grid. Very unfortunate.

[Rennie Clayton]

Bill,

The ECU's were constantly being fiddled with by Cosworth in year one - I remember getting emails from them with revised ECU maps and the resulting dyno results about once a month, as they were searching for a map which would allow the engine to survive and still make power. At first, less than 280 reliably, and ending up somewhere north of 315 - it was not the ideal engine platform to begin with, never terrifically efficient at making power despite having 43% more displacement than the 1600's and being totally unrestricted otherwise. So my somewhat snarky prediction is that even if a 32mm SIR is theoretically capable of flowing enough air to support 270hp, I don't think this engine will use it all to 100% efficiency. Even at 270hp though, they are still underpowered compared to an 014.

Anyway, the whole process with Cosworth was a bit of a mystery. They would just kind of show up in your paddock and announce an update which they needed to apply to your car, and that was that. Stand back and let the mysterious update commence. Engine rebuilds would come back with updated specs or they would announce a new spec as being available, but hardly ever would they discuss specifics outside of "unattributed" one on one conversations with their engineers. More than once they showed up in our paddock to "adjust" the mapping for unknown reasons.

Oh, and the "mandatory" updates were always fun...

We have not yet settled on an engine platform decision for next year, but FWIW, we are not limiting the discussion to Toyotas.


Ken - there were 40 cars made in the initial build, and I believe around 5 "spare" cars which eventually made it into the field as a result of tub breakages. Don't know the exact numbers, but this is the ballpark for what's out there in the wild.


Cheers,
Rennie

[bill gillespie]

As you can imagine, our Ralt conversion to Cosworth ended up being a BIG project. There are a number of attractive engines out there, but many have reversed inlet/ exhaust designs, and I fear the ol' Staffs may bear close scrutiny.....Thanks for the history lesson on the 016 engine.

regards,
Bill

[Rick Ross]

So....would it be reasonable to expect more info from the CRB regarding this proposal? For example, hp/torque numbers compared to a Toyota 4AGE? Predicted lap times at representative tracks?

I can see definite advantages to allowing more "FA's" on the grid.....but it would be nice to do this with full disclosure. I think that a change like this would be better received and accepted if all the relavent data was made available to the SCCA membership.