Sports Racer Rules for 2002
Recommend the following:
1) In view of Jacek's car at the runoffs, recommend comp board leave, but clarify, INTENT of 45% wheelbase floorboard rule for both C and DSR.
2) Simplify engine rules:
A. CSR
1. Any 4 stroke piston engine to 1615cc, with 42mm venturies or restrictors, at 1300 lbs
2. Any 4 stroke piston engine to 1310cc, unrestricted air, at 1300lbs
3. Leave VW 2 valve 1835cc option intact, 37mm restrictor, at 1300lbs
4a. Leave Mazda 12A option intact, 34mm venturies, GT-3 prep, at 1300lbs
4b. Maxda 12A, non peripheral or bridgeport, unrestricted induction, at 1300 lbs
5. Any two valve 4 stroke piston engine to 1615cc, unrestricted air, at 1200 lbs
6. Allow any legal DSR to compete in CSR under DSR rules (without weight penalty)
7. For 2 strokes, leave rules as written
Logic: In CSR, mostly everyone runs either: VW 1835, Toyota Atlantic, BDA/BDD, 12A, or motorcycle powerplant.
Why not keep the rules simple - all of these listed powerplants fall clearly within these simpler rules.
Are there really any Olds Sports Racers out there that people want to run in CSR? Haven't most been converted to run in either S2 / ACRL?
Floorboard - easy to clarify; just after the 1 inch deviation part add "in all directions".
Engine rules - Still too complicated. DSR and CSR rules should not overlap. There's already an identity problem with people asking: "what's the difference between C and D?" The DSR guys should have a maximum of 1100 cc's to eliminate the overlap. Sorry Marc Hoover! But Marc's car is a perfect example of my point. Couldn't he just add weight and run in CSR? I'm not sayig that's a problem, just that if the only difference between two classes is 200 punds of lead, then there wil always be an identity problem and competition between the two classes for cars.
Isn't #2 covered in #1? Or are there 1300's with larger than 42mm venturies? Same goes for #5. I suggest that you leave #1 and delete the other two.
Why would you allow DSR's to run in CSR without a weight penalty? Is this another attempt at getting car counts up?
As for your comment regarding the chain drive weight "gift", I agree with you. In fact, maybe the car count would go up in DSR if the minimum was raised to 1100 pounds across the board. (See the weight survey posts elsewhere).
Here in the SF region the CSR and DSR cars consistently finish mixed anyway. Usually a DSR wins. If you really want to shake up the ranks; limit the DSR class to 750 cc MC engines ONLY and move all the DSRs up to CSR! (Kinda what you suggested by allowing DSR in CSR without a weight penalty) Edited by: T A Treat at: 10/4/01 7:54:54 am
RobLav
Unregistered User
(10/4/01 9:00 am)
Thanks For Replying
I wanted to get discussions going concerning our rules. Appreciate your comments. Here's mine back:
- Floorboards - Excellent suggestion
- Agree that my recommended engine rules are still too complicated.
- My #2 is for those engines less than 1300cc with larger than 42mm inlets. The M/C engines may need greater than 42mm to get a roughly equivalent power level. If that is not the case, then get rid of my #2.
- My #5 is giving non VW 1835cc two valve engines a weight break to 1200 lbs. If that is no longer necessary, then get rid of my #5 as well.
Your CSR vs DSR comments leads to a deeper issue: Should we try to differentiate the classes more? This should lead to discussions with DSR guys as well.
Thanks again for your comments. I hope they lead to more. Now I'll check how badly blasted I got on the DSR site.
Re: Thanks For Replying
Actually, Ted is handling this one pretty cool. He can be blistering at times, but I've met him in person and he's a good guy and knows his stuff.
I replied over there too. Class separation is a valid pursuit. If you cruise over to the S2 site, you'll find a thread regarding speed that has valid points. A "green" driver would have concerns about DSR or CSR from the sheer speeds. The idea of a 750 cc MC engine only class would keep the speed way down. Maybe we need an ESR class for them! seriously, I don't imagine that the SCCA is interested at all in adding more classes.
Your point about inlets and MC engines is valid. Maybe you need a separate rule for the MC engine listing induction as "open". You're on the right track. Is this something that will eventually be presented to the Comp Board? It seems like there are a couple of FA conversions in the works that would need to know before they buy an engine.
Re: Thanks For Replying
Thanks Tim!
One point about a slower 750cc class is that while the car may be slower, the other classes (FM, FC, FA) in the same session will be going the same speeds (I assume "750SR" would go in the same group). Either you are a passer, or a passee. We need all the advantages possible when dealing with the mazdas! I would think that a greater speed differential would be more intimidating than raw speed potential which can be overcome by time and experience IMO.
What do others think of this? I promise not to use the torch
Re: Thanks For Replying
We can always choke the FM's down some more! Hope they are peeking...
The "dream" situation would be to have enough SR's to run ALONE like we now enjoy in FF/SF/CF. Wouldn't it be a great race without all the FM/FC and the rest of the alphabet in there too?
(The S2's and SS2's can stay, right?)
This is mostly all fun bench racing anyway. But, growing the numbers large enough to "push" out the open wheel groups is an achievable goal, at least in our region.
Re: Thanks For Replying
Tim
That would be great to have an all SR group. I assume that SRF would not be included in that group I'd be happy if just the FMs went to the FF group. There are so few of the FC and FA cars that they are insignificant and tend to be better drivers (well, almost all...)
I didn't think FM was restricted. If they weren't such tanks maybe there would be less body contact. I always though FM and SRF would be a good combo.
RobLav
Unregistered User
(10/5/01 10:29 am)
Rules
This has been a good topic. Thanks again for the return comments.
- I had read the S2 Speed comments. I didn't realize there were people who wanted to run a real racecar but not at high speed (and S2's are not really that high speed).
- Don't think we need another class
- I won't propose anything to the comp board unless there is some consensus. I'm willing to push valid issues though and work with people to gain that consensus if necessary (but only if other people want me too...)
- I'm currently planning a VD FC conversion to either C or DSR and am exploring the options. I like the idea of less restrictive rules and home fabrication. So I want to clarify what the current edges of legality are.
Re: Thanks For Replying
FM's to the FF group? You're killing me! We already have 30+ cars in our group. Yes, I was not considering SRF in your SR group.
Hey, I have an idea. Let's put FM and SRF together. Then, all the "one-design" cars are together.
OLDS CSR
In response to Rob's question regarding the OLDS CSR cars - Yes, there are those of us who plan on running them in the OLDS configuration. The Club has published its intention of allowing the OLDS CSR cars to use alloy brake calipers. It will help some, although the main disadvantage comes from the tires required and lack of aero aids allowed. (All things in their own time.)
As an associated question, does anyone have any suggestions as to specific calipers as opposed to the ACRL spec units?
J Mikes
Unregistered User
(10/9/01 5:14 pm)
Olds CSR
I wold venture to guess that if someone supplied reliable horsepower data to the CB, they would be very open to freeing up the tire and aero rules.
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies