Jump to content

What happened to your ChampCar today 2021 ??


 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, TiredBirds said:

We just hogged out our stock heads real good. (305) was a TPI (88) car running it as an 84 w/ carb. You get way more rpm that way. But we start at 200 so we have a lot of room to work with. 

 

Yeah, it's mainly the intake that's the limiting factor on them; the TPI setup is designed for low torque but not high flow. That and the LSA on the cam is absolutely atrocious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bandit said:

They are great for torque

As demonstrated @ Daytona, the only v8 ranger out there was stooopid fast but broke down for half dozen reasons. Knowing them, I went to talk, small cam, tall gear, revs low...

 

Almost had me convinced to give it a shot as I know how to mitigate most of those nags, the only thing stopping us is the consumables. (12+gph, big tires/brakes, more frequent overhauls then Infiniti)

Edited by Team Infiniti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Team Infiniti said:

As demonstrated @ Daytona, the only v8 ranger out there was stooopid fast but broke down for half dozen reasons. Knowing them, I went to talk, small cam, tall gear, revs low...

 

Almost had me convinced to give it a shot as I know how to mitigate most of those nags, the only thing stopping us is the consumables. (12+gph, big tires/brakes, more frequent overhauls then Infiniti)

I used to rail against TPI for road racing but had a bit of an epiphany a year or so ago. Lower RPM is good for reliability and a heavy car needs torque to get off corners.  They are not as peaky either, meaning easier to drive with fewer shifts. Theoretically a bit easier on gas as well. (Still bad)

 

Subliminal's performance at Autobahn seems to bear it out. (I was surprised as I don't consider that a Vette friendly track) I'll guess the Ranger at Daytona is running the old Ford long runner from the 80's Mustangs?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chrysler long ram

spacer.png

 

Chevy TPI note the visible runners on the passenger side feed the ports on the driver side of the engine. That is how they get the length desired.

spacer.png

 

Same idea, and similar runner lengths as I recall. Just more elegant packaging on the newer design.

 

SBC LT1 intake. Very short runners. Makes more horsepower and revs much higher

spacer.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RandomTask said:

 

Yeah, it's mainly the intake that's the limiting factor on them; the TPI setup is designed for low torque but not high flow. That and the LSA on the cam is absolutely atrocious. 

we run a 280/480 comp roller cam. The 84 engine had 9.5:1 the 88 is like 9.3:1 :( Not sure what the 350 get but we are burning about 10 gal/hr. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bandit said:

Chrysler long ram

spacer.png

 

Chevy TPI note the visible runners on the passenger side feed the ports on the driver side of the engine. That is how they get the length desired.

spacer.png

 

Same idea, and similar runner lengths as I recall. Just more elegant packaging on the newer design.

 

SBC LT1 intake. Very short runners. Makes more horsepower and revs much higher

spacer.png

Didn't the 305TPI have shorter runners? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Moog springs are zero points if you find them that fit within the rules.

 

Corvettes have transverse leaf springs iirc.  Adding a moog spring would not be free.

I was talking about front springs, not rear leaf. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TiredBirds said:

I was talking about front springs, not rear leaf. 

They are double a arm suspension with a transverse leaf spring front and back.

 

No coil springs.  No way to make a camber plate either. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

They are double a arm suspension with a transverse leaf spring front and back.

 

No coil springs.  No way to make a camber plate either. 

ahhhhh I thought they were coil for some reason, or at least front strut. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, TiredBirds said:

Not sure where I'd use the 50 points

there are quite a few places.  Aftermarket Oil Pan, Acusump, alumn rad (hopefully free next year), we have MSD so aftermarket ignition system / distributor.  I am sure i am missing something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way at Daytona we were pretty fast as well with the TPI.  We shift right at 5K and let the torque pull us out of the corners.  I think the TPI is a great fit for road racing because it keeps the RPM low which is good for the SBC longevity and the torque is where it is at on exit.  

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, smitham32803 said:

there are quite a few places.  Aftermarket Oil Pan, Acusump, alumn rad (hopefully free next year), we have MSD so aftermarket ignition system / distributor.  I am sure i am missing something...

Oil pan for sure. We run one w/ no acusump or cooler. No issues. We shift at 5800. If your car stays cool don't waste the points on the rad. Once it is full of water there isn't much difference in weight. We are going to try and get to Daytona in the spring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TiredBirds said:

Didn't the 305TPI have shorter runners? 

Nope. Same intake/runners/plenum/throttle body used on both 305 and 350.

 

Supposedly TPI was designed for the 305 as they were going to phase out the 350. Don't know if I believe that, but there were no changes made between the two engines.

 

A 350TPI would have been an awesome truck engine at the time with all the torque.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, smitham32803 said:

there are quite a few places.  Aftermarket Oil Pan, Acusump, alumn rad (hopefully free next year), we have MSD so aftermarket ignition system / distributor.  I am sure i am missing something...

Points for modification to add camber I'd assume. Oil cooler. 

 

eta-Headers

 

Z51's came with a power steering cooler which is nice. As I recall they found it was needed for showroom stock racing.

Edited by Bandit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, smitham32803 said:

By the way at Daytona we were pretty fast as well with the TPI.  We shift right at 5K and let the torque pull us out of the corners.  I think the TPI is a great fit for road racing because it keeps the RPM low which is good for the SBC longevity and the torque is where it is at on exit.  

 

The one 350 in the field with a normal intake was 5 seconds faster. 😀

Edited by Bandit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TiredBirds said:

was that PintoDave? Black/Copper Gen IV Camaro? 

The C3R aka GBU with iron heads. Ran very few laps before apparently having overheating issues.

 

I still chuckle thinking about @Bill Strong reaction on the video broadcast. Something along the lines of "Holy....cow! GBU just FLEW into turn 1!" The rest of the commentators were not as enthused.

 

I didn't see PintoDave's car in the timing but I know in the past it's time's were quicker as well. An LT1 isn't lacking for power. Starting with 5 penalty laps in a C4 is the problem that is solved with the L98.

 

I look at TPI motors as being similar to 2 barrel restricted circle track engines. Can make decent power and with the proper cam can hang onto power past the power peak versus falling off a cliff, but the same engine will always make more power with a good flowing intake in place of the TPI or 2 barrel.

 

Gaining 80+HP with just an intake swap is not unusual on a modified 350 or 383 TPI engine. It will also lose torque down low with the intake swap, but the top end power makes up for it.

 

Champcar is kind of unique with the endurance angle along with the timed pitstops and driver stints. A TPI being a bit slower than an LT1 may not be a real hinderance when looking at the big picture. Especially if my theory of slightly better mileage due to taller gears pans out.

 

To further compare to a restricted circle track engine (two barrel/iron intake); Getting off the corner fast is important and they will often only really pull part way down the straight, with the power just kind of hanging on to the braking point as the power peak may be 6200 but they are geared for 7000.  A TPI will pull you off the corner hard as well, but won't have the top end charge. Kinda similar, with much lower revs with the TPI obviously, and more time is made up on the first half of the straight than the second.

Edited by Bandit
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Bandit said:

The C3R aka GBU with iron heads. Ran very few laps before apparently having overheating issues.

 

I still chuckle thinking about @Bill Strong reaction on the video broadcast. Something along the lines of "Holy....cow! GBU just FLEW into turn 1!" The rest of the commentators were not as enthused.

 

I didn't see PintoDave's car in the timing but I know in the past it's time's were quicker as well. An LT1 isn't lacking for power. Starting with 5 penalty laps in a C4 is the problem that is solved with the L98.

 

I look at TPI motors as being similar to 2 barrel restricted circle track engines. Can make decent power and with the proper cam can hang onto power past the power peak versus falling off a cliff, but the same engine will always make more power with a good flowing intake in place of the TPI or 2 barrel.

 

Gaining 80+HP with just an intake swap is not unusual on a modified 350 or 383 TPI engine. It will also lose torque down low with the intake swap, but the top end power makes up for it.

 

Champcar is kind of unique with the endurance angle along with the timed pitstops and driver stints. A TPI being a bit slower than an LT1 may not be a real hinderance when looking at the big picture. Especially if my theory of slightly better mileage due to taller gears pans out.

 

To further compare to a restricted circle track engine (two barrel/iron intake); Getting off the corner fast is important and they will often only really pull part way down the straight, with the power just kind of hanging on to the braking point as the power peak may be 6200 but they are geared for 7000.  A TPI will pull you off the corner hard as well, but won't have the top end charge. Kinda similar, with much lower revs with the TPI obviously, and more time is made up on the first half of the straight than the second.

we have a SBC circle track 350 that makes about 400hp with a 2bbl, would need a "refresh".  Not sure what heads, they are a "spec" iron part. I'm guessing if we used stock 350 heads we could run it for the same amount of points as our 305. I liked our stock quadrobog, but we eliminated the computer so it won't work anymore. We are going to try a knock off air gap w/ a race Holley 2bbl. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TiredBirds said:

we have a SBC circle track 350 that makes about 400hp with a 2bbl, would need a "refresh".  Not sure what heads, they are a "spec" iron part. I'm guessing if we used stock 350 heads we could run it for the same amount of points as our 305. I liked our stock quadrobog, but we eliminated the computer so it won't work anymore. We are going to try a knock off air gap w/ a race Holley 2bbl. 

I'd guess they are World S/R's. S/R stands for stock replacement. They are made as a legal replacement head for IMCA and such series as 40+ year old heads that haven't been rebuilt and shaved multiple times and/or without cracks have been getting harder to find for years. The S/R's are cheaper than rebuilding old heads as well. They flow about the same, or worse,  as the old factory heads but getting CC to allow them is probably not likely.

"A stock S/R head flows 195 cfm intake and 135 cfm exhaust. 

https://www.castheads.com/cylinder-heads/world-products-heads/world-products-sr-street-replacement-heads/

 

Stock “double hump” heads flow 202 cfm intake and 141 cfm on the exhaust. 

https://www.castheads.com/cylinder-heads/factory-chevy/chevy-double-hump-heads/

 

As far as the carb I'd put a non electronic Q Jet on it as the small primaries give excellent throttle response at part throttle. If you are really nice maybe they won't charge points for it. 😀

 

That circle track motor would be fun in your F-Bird but the T5 probably wouldn't be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bandit said:

As far as the carb I'd put a non electronic Q Jet on it as the small primaries give excellent throttle response at part throttle. If you are really nice maybe they won't charge points for it. 😀

If viewed from impound, while I’m not the protesting type, I would poke the car owner and ask him where the electrical plugs to the carburetor were if it wasn’t on the declaration list as a swapped carburetor.

 

Saying that

 

with a couple of carburetors laid out on a bench one could easily swap around enough parts to make a combination that wouldn’t need electricity.

 

or


IF you are a real CCC3 nerd and masochist...

 

With the abundance of little electronic devices out there now, one could easily make a rudimentary feedback system to change hertz of the MC solenoid based on a wide band and TPS signal. 
With a little ingenuity The driver could be presented with a switch to select power or fuel save.

 

Edited by Team Infiniti
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've avoided working on a CCC QJet and plan to keep it that way.😀 Saying that, I always assumed they couldn't be converted to a standard power piston.

 

As far as points go, the 500 Holley is 25 points so a standard QJet would at worst be the same.

 

The idea of switching between power and economy is interesting. I assume one would modify the output voltage of the TPS?

 

Considering the amount of WFO time it probably wouldn't save a lot in the end as the secondaries are not part of the computer control. Interesting thought though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bandit said:

I'd guess they are World S/R's. S/R stands for stock replacement. They are made as a legal replacement head for IMCA and such series as 40+ year old heads that haven't been rebuilt and shaved multiple times and/or without cracks have been getting harder to find for years. The S/R's are cheaper than rebuilding old heads as well. They flow about the same, or worse,  as the old factory heads but getting CC to allow them is probably not likely.

"A stock S/R head flows 195 cfm intake and 135 cfm exhaust. 

https://www.castheads.com/cylinder-heads/world-products-heads/world-products-sr-street-replacement-heads/

 

Stock “double hump” heads flow 202 cfm intake and 141 cfm on the exhaust. 

https://www.castheads.com/cylinder-heads/factory-chevy/chevy-double-hump-heads/

 

As far as the carb I'd put a non electronic Q Jet on it as the small primaries give excellent throttle response at part throttle. If you are really nice maybe they won't charge points for it. 😀

 

That circle track motor would be fun in your F-Bird but the T5 probably wouldn't be happy.

 

 

we have a T-10, but it needs a rebuild, We do have the original intake and a non-electric Q-jet. It needs a rebuild I'm sure. I wish the E-Q-Jet would work, it is a good carb. 

 

9 minutes ago, Bandit said:

I've avoided working on a CCC QJet and plan to keep it that way.😀 Saying that, I always assumed they couldn't be converted to a standard power piston.

 

As far as points go, the 500 Holley is 25 points so a standard QJet would at worst be the same.

 

The idea of switching between power and economy is interesting. I assume one would modify the output voltage of the TPS?

 

Considering the amount of WFO time it probably wouldn't save a lot in the end as the secondaries are not part of the computer control. Interesting thought though.

 

We claim everything and still have 100 points. I wanted to run a small Holley DP carb, but one of our guys was a circle track guy and wants to try the 2bbl. I plan on brining a rebuilt Q-jet and a holley. I think the intake is spread bore thou. 

I don't fully understand the function of the electronic carb, I know it was for economy/emissions, I think it only operates under a certain RPM?? At tracks like NJMP we are in 3rd pretty much all the way around the track until we hit the straight. 

One teamate is an aerospace engineer that works for NASA, i'm sure he could figure something out

Edited by TiredBirds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TiredBirds said:

We claim everything and still have 100 points.

Stab the circle track stove in and see how long she goes on fuel. 😀 You have the points for the heads.

 

Sounds like Ed has a lot of experience with the CCC QJets so he'd have the answer for exactly how they work. As I understand it uses a solenoid to run the primary metering rods versus the power piston in older carbs.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...