Jump to content

Rodger Coan-Burningham

Technical Advisory Committee
  • Posts

    1,646
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    47

Everything posted by Rodger Coan-Burningham

  1. Well, it is listed this way: but we'll see how tech rules.
  2. In general, the headgaskets have orifices of different size that the pressure from the pump create the proper flow through the head along the way to the back of the engine. Depending on where the flow comes off on the heater hose and where you return it to, you can help or hurt by looping it. Not sure on the M20 where this is, but the general consensus on most engines is you can block it off with no issue. If you loop it back to the water pump, you are bringing coolant that has made a trip through the head and picked up heat back into the flow that will tend to go back to the engine. Granted, some of that will be directed to the radiator by mixing and then through the thermostat to the radiator. As mentioned, some times blocking off makes getting air out a bit more difficult. A whole bunch of words and no answer to your question. I should be in Washington DC.
  3. As Roger Waters would say you don’t need no education. The calculator only uses hp as the input for the swap. Torque, weight, efficiency are not considered.
  4. I assume you are astute enough to know that vehicle is on the list so someone can rob the engine and put it in a race car.
  5. Among other things, it will prevent the unintended consequence of a particular swap that could come into play. As you say, a lot of the newer cars are fuel limited, but put one of their power plants in an older car with fuel, it may result in an overdog. And don't forget, there are currently already something like 240 cars on the list of models made after the year 2000. How many do we need? I am not against bringing in new cars, we must do that to remain relevant over several years. But doing it slowly over time seems to be a prudent approach. There are lots of ways to do it, we chose the method of using -x years from present to be able to add to the list.
  6. Yeah the best thing to do is not keep up with how much you spend. That way you can honestly deny when you get pressed.
  7. There is a Boxster on Copart in Raleigh for $1750. Probably has a bad engine. But you wanna go through that engine anyway. But I get your point you’re going to have to spend some money on some of the cars. We probably won’t be adding any new cars to the list that are less than 10 years old. I’m not really sure why we did that anyway.
  8. No they won’t. It’s just another hypothetical you are operating in. Name one car that has been built more than 520 points and is competitive. There aren’t any. There are plenty of cars on the list above that number. Just no serious builder is going to do it.
  9. Actually in most cases we would have been better off if we had done that. The new cars that have added to “speed creep” have been some that were given values below 500 points. If the boxter had been given 500 instead of 475 it probably would have been fine. The approach the last couple of years has been to be more conservative on assignments. All that said, there really is no point in adding a car to the list if it is much over 500 points. Nobody serious about racing in the series would ever build it. Anybody that argues that, please list an example because there are plenty of fast cars that could be built that are already on the list over 500. This whole notion of speed creep being only due to free parts is a narrow view. Cars get faster without any of that. Drivers in the series get better. Most teams on the pointy end do something every race to make the cars faster. If you don’t you are going backwards.
  10. Everything in life involves compromises. Responses to latest radiator ruling: More free parts, speed creep. True No longer have to buy expensive, non available stock radiator, saves me money. True Previous rule kept me from using my 3 core radiator I just bought based on previous ruling. True Some people are happy, some aren't. We made a decision based on where we were at that moment in time, seemed to be the best compromise all considered.
  11. For our team, I own the car. We all work on it pretty much together so we treat it like all are owners in that respect. Like Chip said, that's usually as much fun as racing weekends. One guy provides the shop and supplies. I credit him an appropriate amount for cost of the shop/supplies. They split one set of tires and brake pads. We all split the gas. I pay for all car general expenses, upgrades, etc. We all split the entry fee, sometimes if I have a lot of car or prep costs then I have them split the entry fee or maybe I pay the deposit and they split the rest. I usually end up paying about double what they do on a race weekend, but I am good with that, just my choice, the price of being the benevolent dictator. If we bring in a guest driver, I work that off line since I end up trading out stints with other teams a lot. But I show the guest driver as an additional teammate on the spreadsheet to spread out the expenses by that additional person to keep it fair from a driving time standpoint. I have everybody send me their receipts of stuff they bought, plug it into the spreadsheet and it divides out by the formula above, it spits out who owes who how much. Nice totalizer on the side to assure the net transfer of funds is zero just to make sure something isn't missed.
  12. We will talk about it in the next board meeting. But it sounds like Chris has been working all of the ones he can into the next ruleset, but it just takes time to get through the list.
  13. The only problem with that is the VPI table would have to be adjusted since the fuel load, burn rate, and power are taken in to account along with that 5 min stop considered in assigning those values. But that is one option for sure.
  14. Yep, not a good track for that tire for sure.
  15. I wouldn’t use that as a race benchmark. I sat that by coming in cooling the tires and then go blast on it for a few laps playing around and trying different tunes. Not a sustainable pace. We had broken a hub and were out of race contention. Plus it was like a 114.9 if I remember correctly. But the boxters? Yeah you are right they may be able to sustain that after traffic clears out.
  16. Probably not, but reading some written notes by participants in a meeting isn't so great either. But that's not saying it shouldn't be available, it should. I don't think there is a BOD member that is against being as open as possible given the constraints of time and resources. But, a lot of this stuff can get complex, earlier reference to my discussion with Ed on tires is an example. We talked for like 10 or 15 minutes just about tires and a potential tire rule. And I wasn't even in on the BOD discussion. It's all about time. It takes time to write, organize, publish notes. It takes time to meet. It takes time to come on here and discuss things. It takes time to get on farcebook and discuss things. Not complaining, but time is just something there is a finite amount of, where does the membership want people running the show to focus their time? It's like a lot of other things in life, how good is good enough?
  17. Yes it is legal in a car on the list at 520 points.
  18. I think a lot of the petitions should have another avenue to be addressed since they are more clarifications. Also, multiple petitions were submitted on the same thing because the board had said in previous years the petition had to be approved/nixed simply as it was written and not by the merit of the requested change. We need to clean this up, make it very simple so people don't look at it and say ah hell that's too much and I have other stuff to do.
×
×
  • Create New...