Engine Restrictor Proposal

[James Michael]

Any rumors on the engine restrictor proposal to 170 hp?
I know they're still studying it!

[Don Conner]

I'm new to the FB stuff but having been around motorsports a while I strongly oppose restrictors as a method to manage power on FB cars. And would much rather see a universal RPM limit if the club sees a need to do something about it.

Pro's to REV limit:
-The engine's will likely last longer.
-It will run normally out of the box, as they do now.
-No additional cost to implement, assuming an existing datalogger.
-Easier to police

Con's to restrictors:
-Cost of re-developing the engine's(mapping) to maximize the restrictor, possibly never-ending.
-Cost of airbox development/construction could exceed the cost of a few engines at least.
-Complex to police.

Don Conner
www.JDRmotorsport.com

[Jnovak]

I'm new to the FB stuff but having been around motorsports a while I strongly oppose restrictors as a method to manage power on FB cars. And would much rather see a universal RPM limit if the club sees a need to do something about it.

Pro's to REV limit:
-The engine's will likely last longer.
-It will run normally out of the box, as they do now.
-No additional cost to implement, assuming an existing datalogger.
-Easier to police

Con's to restrictors:
-Cost of re-developing the engine's(mapping) to maximize the restrictor, possibly never-ending.
-Cost of airbox development/construction could exceed the cost of a few engines at least.
-Complex to police.

Don Conner
www.JDRmotorsport.com

This might be the best idea of all.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Brian.Novak]

Agree with Don if we must do something, but I'd prefer no restrictors at all.

[Jnovak]

If we limit RPM we effectively limit HP and we get better engine reliability. This is how they do it in FM and it seems to work for them.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[JerryH]

Using rpm limits to equallize the power levels of the various engines allowed in F1000 is a great idea! Any engine can be used.....it's easy to police......it's effective.....it's inexpensive.......and no current engine will be outdated. what more can you ask for?

Compared to any kind of inlet restriction....or weight adjustments....it's a no brainer. And let's face it....at some point a BMW or new Kaw will be made to work well in a car and we will either have to all switch to one of those.....or come up with some kind of performance adjustments.


Thanks

Jerry

[10rmotor]

How would you go about limiting RPM with the various motors, and how would you police it?

[Christopher Crowe]

Limiting the RPMs sounds like a great idea for keeping the competition keen and the cost low.

Policing it should be relatively easy; you could even do spot-checks sonically if someone is suspected of fudging. Even a tamper-proof box to record engine speeds if something simpler proves difficult.

Looks like a very clean, simple, logical way of proceeding -- and totally in line with what I believe F1000 was always supposed to be.

Anxious to hear what George Dean (et al) thinks about the idea; he'll doubtlessly know of any potentials for this giving someone an unfair edge.

Great idea, Don. This should be further explored -- and right away.

[Alex Pate]

Restrictors are bad mmkay
Wouldn't different motors possibly still have an advantage even if their max hp at said rpm is te same? Wouldn't they still have different power levels at say 10,000 rpm

[10rmotor]

Limiting the RPMs sounds like a great idea for keeping the competition keen and the cost low.

Policing it should be relatively easy; you could even do spot-checks sonically if someone is suspected of fudging. Even a tamper-proof box to record engine speeds if something simpler proves difficult.

Looks like a very clean, simple, logical way of proceeding -- and totally in line with what I believe F1000 was always supposed to be.

Anxious to hear what George Dean (et al) thinks about the idea; he'll doubtlessly know of any potentials for this giving someone an unfair edge.

Great idea, Don. This should be further explored -- and right away.

So all the regions will need to buy a sonic RPM checker, AND monitor it for all FB sessions? Really? At what point on the track? Unless this checker can monitor the entire track thats not going to work. A "tamper proof box"? Does this currently exist, and if it does, then all FB competitors will need to buy and run it, and then every session it would need to be downloaded and the rpm data verified? By who?

Sure, limiting RPM is a good idea, but its all about the implementation.

[Jnovak]

So all the regions will need to buy a sonic RPM checker, AND monitor it for all FB sessions? Really? At what point on the track? Unless this checker can monitor the entire track thats not going to work. A "tamper proof box"? Does this currently exist, and if it does, then all FB competitors will need to buy and run it, and then every session it would need to be downloaded and the rpm data verified? By who?

Sure, limiting RPM is a good idea, but its all about the implementation.

They have an RPM limit in FM. They check the rev limiter in tech for the top 3. I do not know the actual process but it works.

Perhaps this would require an aftermarket rev limiter that piggy backs on to the ecu. If it costs a few hundred $$ this is a very inexpensive way to limit the engine technology. With very highly developed engines the only way to get more power is more RPM. Let's say the limit was 13,000 rpm (just to pick a number) The BMW makes peak power at 13,600 rpm (depending on the dyno sheet). In this particular case it would knock the last bit of peak power off of the motor.

I do think IIRs will also work but there will then be lots of $$$ spent on the dyno. If you have an rpm limit (what ever it is) then it will not do any good to get the next great 14,000 rpm motor.

Just some thoughts ... Jay Novak

[John Mosteller]

I fail to see how these three engines (BMW,Suzuki and Yamaha) in this dyno comparison that George posted could be equalized with RPM.You could equalize peak HP by having no limit on the Yamaha,restricting the Suzuki to 10500 RPM and the BMW to 10000 RPM but the BMW would still have 7-10 HP more for a significant area under the curve.

[Jnovak]

I have seen different data from George. I suggest that we get with George on this.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

PS: We won the Runoffs with a George Dean GSXR motor that made more HP than the above dyno curve shows.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[KenT]

I agree Jay. It all depends on the day. George dyno'd my 2006 at 171 to the wheels.

[Daryl DeArman]

Clipping all motors at the same rpm results in substantially different areas under the curve.

Clipping all motors at whatever rpm results in the same peak HP (say 160 in the graph above) you end up with vastly different max rpms. Given that the factories generally do a pretty good job of optimizing gear ratios for stock power curve, one engine package may be affected to a substantially different degree.

If this was a one make/one engine model class a max rpm would be a great solution to capping engine performance and cost.

I think capping engine rpms to a certain level solves a few problems. I'm just not sure if you are looking to create engine parity that it's the best solution.

[John Mosteller]

I think the comparison was done with stock motorcycles on a motorcycle chassis dyno with stock exhaust and untouched ECU's. So all the engines will have more when put in our cars with different exhaust and reprogramed ECU's.

[Jnovak]

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/atta...9&d=1326508750

Here is George's latest dyno results for the zx10r & the gsxr. It is very clear that the zx10 has more peak power and that the gsxr has more torque. If you limit both engines to 12000 rpm the zx10 will have about 6 more peak hp but a much narrower effective power band. The net result will be a minimal difference between cars with these 2 engines.

You will never make things perfect just better. Besides, the class needs new motors to grow.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Christopher Crowe]

I would think, limited to 12,000 r's, these two engines would be pretty evenly matched at most tracks. But RA? I dunno... And the BMW on any track? Don't know that one either.

I absolutely love the idea of a 12K limit from the engine longevity point of view. Maybe that rev limit should be mandated even if it's not to level the playing field. Everybody limited to 12,000 rpms. Everybody doubles their engine life. Everybody saves money and more people enter the class. Good deal all around.

Can't wait to hear from GDRE on this whole area of study.

[Daryl DeArman]

You will never make things perfect just better. Besides, the class needs new motors to grow.

I agree with your first sentence. The second one not yet. Look at the current grid; how many 2012, 2011 or 2010 motors? How many 2009 or older? In my opinion allowing a new "motor to have" every year will hurt the class, it hasn't yet, but it will and then trying to get that genie back in the bottle will be a bit on the painful side. Constantly changing restrictor sizes or rpm limits in an attempt to achieve/maintain parity will hurt the class as well because of the politics and constant bickering. Rules instability is rarely cheap.

I absolutely love the idea of a 12K limit from the engine longevity point of view. Maybe that rev limit should be mandated even if it's not to level the playing field.

If that's the intended goal, it's a great solution, if it's reasonably easy to enforce.

[Jnovak]

The problem with the current motor issue Daryl is that the GSXR is the current engine of choice. The 07-08 is prefered as it appears that the 09-11 GSXR motors have some issues. So that said it is getting much tougher to find GSXR motors and something will be needed to fill the gap.

I am sure the AMA guys have figured out the 09-11 GSXR oiling issue but the fixes have yet to trickle down to the FB arena. Why?

I think that another popular low cost motor needs to come into play otherwise costs will escalate. They have already escalated for us as we destroyed 2 motors this year and finding a nice low milage 08 GSXR was tough. We should have the car together in a couple of weeks if all goes well.

My main interest is reliability. The performance of the current motors is certainly adequate imo. I am very convinced that engine reliabiity will improve with an RPM limit or restrictors and I think at this time I prefer an RPM limit.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Alex Pate]

The problem with the current motor issue Daryl is that the GSXR is the current engine of choice. The 07-08 is prefered as it appears that the 09-11 GSXR motors have some issues. So that said it is getting much tougher to find GSXR motors and something will be needed to fill the gap.

I am sure the AMA guys have figured out the 09-11 GSXR oiling issue but the fixes have yet to trickle down to the FB arena. Why?

I think that another popular low cost motor needs to come into play otherwise costs will escalate. They have already escalated for us as we destroyed 2 motors this year and finding a nice low milage 08 GSXR was tough. We should have the car together in a couple of weeks if all goes well.

My main interest is reliability. The performance of the current motors is certainly adequate imo. I am very convinced that engine reliabiity will improve with an RPM limit or restrictors and I think at this time I prefer an RPM limit.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

As far as the 09/10 gsxr motor they are sorted in the firman package. Alex mAyer had some very unfortunate luck. Something must have been different from the oiling methods that have now proven successful over the last 2 years in the Firman chassis

[Thomas Copeland]

There are no problems with the 09/10 Suzuki if you use the Firman West Cars dry sump that we developed with Ralph Firman and George Dean and do the correct block mods. We've sold dozens of these dry sumps including to customers overseas without issues.

As I mentioned in another thread Terry Biner has had the 09 Suzuki in his Firman since 2009 using one of our dry sumps. We also ran in it in 2009 as well. Nicholas Belling set a new FB track record at Willow Springs with the 2009 Suzuki.

[Jnovak]

There are no problems with the 09/10 Suzuki if you use the Firman West Cars dry sump that we developed with Ralph Firman and George Dean and do the correct block mods. We've sold dozens of these dry sumps including to customers overseas without issues.

As I mentioned in another thread Terry Biner has had the 09 Suzuki in his Firman since 2009 using one of our dry sumps. We also ran in it in 2009 as well. Nicholas Belling set a new FB track record at Willow Springs with the 2009 Suzuki.

Thanks Thomas, what are the block mods?
Do you use an electric water pump with the dry sump?

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[DonArm]

Thomas,

What are the block mods? And are they legal in FB, I thought that the engines must be stock, that includes any modification to the block, am I correct or incorrect with this thought?

Thanks

[starkejt]

If the mod were strictly to the oiling passages of the block, I would think that would be legal.

[Rob E]

The way to regulate these two engines (GSXR and ZX) in my opinion would be to set the maximum RPM for the GSXR at 12,500 and the ZX at 12,000. This will have the ZX with a slight HP advantage at the top (in the area that you are only in for short periods of time each gear) and the GSXR apparently a slight advantage in "area under the curve" as you approach maximum RPM. This will still truncate the RPM on both engines. A good point was made about the OE Mfg. matching everything up to the stock power. The mapping may be able to be adjusted to make a bit more torque on the ZX but without hard parts changes it will be minimal. These are the reasons that I would suggest these limits.

(Taken from the George Dean Racing Engines Superflow graph)

[Wren]

Oiling system is free. The BRD dry sump for the 07-08 GSXR1000 requires some internal mods also.

Hitting the stock rev limiter is one of the worst things you can do to a 07-08 GSXR engine. Bringing the rev limiter closer to peak HP is going to just make it easier to blow up engines that are already too fragile.

[DonArm]

Thanks,

Good to know

[Thomas Copeland]

The mods, if any, were only to assist the oiling system (the engine is still very much stock). George Dean has most of the details as he worked with us on getting the dry sump to work with the 09 Suzuki.

[Mike Devins]

with a little work this may be the answer to controlling the HP of these motors and also significantly increase durability to a level that would be acceptable to most of us.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIS5n9Oyzsc

The real issue will be to have the CRB write a rule that can keep the technology from driving the car for us.

(Sorry, I just had to share this and did not know where else to put it )

[brownslane]

Thanks Mike!

The best input on rules I have seen in a while.

Rev limiting would be an effective way of limiting output, slowing the cars (if needed), and lowering the demands on oiling/cooling systems. This lowering of demand may well address the perceived weakness of the later GSXR's...and thereby opening up more options for Ebay motors....as we have seen, 2008 engines are starting to be harder to find....

To address the concern of "hot-rodded" rev limiting boxes, simply mandate one manufacturer of rev limiter. If there is a question of legality, simply swap out the box for another one. Sort of like claimer motors in stock car racing, if a competitor feels that another competitor was using a modified box, then a claiming fee is paid to SCCA, and the competitors rev boxes could be changed... If there is a standardized box with a standardized connector used, the change out is simple.

In Race Car Engineering this month there is an interesting article that outlines new uses for data acquisition by scrutineering. Either tapping into the competitor's data or piggy backing a scrutineer package.... Not an easily implementation unless all competitors used a similar system...not recommended.

There are simple and easy ways of ensuring equality if there is a commitment. And you are right, it seems to work fairly well in FM.

Best, Tom