SCCA Runoffs

[Westroc]

So explain to me how you sleeve a Zetec which was originally not designed to be sleeved and say that is legal. Especially when GCR says FORD part# unless an exception is in print. Is that blueprinting. Not in my book.
How many Zetecs got torn down at the Runoffs this year. How about none. Last year how about none. You balance 4 pistons and rods that is blueprinted. 3--No. Tech where THl are you????
If anybody deserved and earned a win John Larue is it.
No I am not saying ANYBODY cheated. My point is the Zetec is not, in it's current state, leap years from it's intended level.
You guys and the rest of us all seem to want to take a wait and see attitude on the MZR. That is the same attitude that got us to Zetec right? So now that it's won you guys are right back where we started IMO. It's done 2 Pro weekends and it wins with the Oval map already. Horse has left the barn to me.
There is always a solution but leadership and enforcement are essential. Forget consensus cause you will never get it. 3 engines Pinto longer rod, Zetec plus 25-50, MZR plus 60(?) USF and let's go from there.

[2BWise]

The Pinto numbers don't correspond to the ones I know about (- again on the QS dyno-) from 2005 when I had one. My Pinto (not a 'Nikki' but ok and fresh for the runoffs) was about 147. The Zetec I just put in my car this summer was 148+. These are hard numbers.

Who cares about peak numbers. Let's see the curves and the area underneath the two from 5-7k rpm. While the peaks numbers of a Zetec are slightly higher that's not the big advantage and I'd put my money on the fact they make more power over the usable range and the area under the power curve is greater. That's easy to do post the dyno sheets of your comparison motors together.

[Bob Wright]

I can't find the "beating a dead horse" emoticon...

2BWwise- The Pinto and the Zetec cannot be matched- they can only be approximated. The Zetec and the MZR can be matched and they have been as far as I'm concerned for our series.

GCR 9.1.1.d page 319
The blocks may be sleeved however all bore tolerances must remain stock or as otherwise provided for in these rules.

Wesroc- I think you are saying handicap the three motors and go racing? I don't believe the Zetec and USF MZR need to be handicapped to each other, including the sequential (there's a whole 'other thread) as long as it is used as a 4 speed (and yes, I've driven both). The Pinto could generally use some help, but the risk of a 'Nikki' motor is always out there and one of them can beat a Zetec.

I think what we are seeing in the GLC and the Pacific NW group is people are finding a way to race the Pinto powered FC's and making it work. That's great. At the Major's and FRP level, it is really the world of the Zetec and MZR now for many different reasons. There are close to 100 Zetec motors out there (based on proprietary manifold production numbers) and more than 30 USF MZR VDs. That should be enough to have some good racing somewhere but we're not seeing it. That is the issue.

[Westroc]

So there is a listed part number for the sleeves? I don't think there is even one for the Pinto in the GCR. GCR being enforced at the Runoffs? SCCA needs to explain to all of us why they are not even checking for 4 HOLES let alone anything else. NOBODY talking about that are they. You wonder why we have a mess. What else is it. Lots of guys want as little to do with this because it breeds suspicion, at the very least.
Look Bob just take over the open wheel stuff completely, your org does a better job.
Nobody I know is all that worried about a Niki motor. What maybe there WERE 3? Niki, Fergus and Barth(?). Don't create a boogey man where there isn't one.
Over simplifying but yes give the Zetec and MZR more weight. Consensus is that the Zetec guys will grudgingly add the weight. Then you/we can start on the rest of the "fix".
I do not believe the MZR is equal period. I have talked to Knapp yes and he makes the case otherwise. OK. Facts say 2 races and a pretty strong second and a win. What take away is there based on fact. How many guys will convert/buy MZR over say the next 2 yrs. 25%? 50%? And here we go again. Stop and fix it now.

[Steve Bamford]

So there is a listed part number for the sleeves? I don't think there is even one for the Pinto in the GCR. GCR being enforced at the Runoffs? SCCA needs to explain to all of us why they are not even checking for 4 HOLES let alone anything else. NOBODY talking about that are they. You wonder why we have a mess. What else is it. Lots of guys want as little to do with this because it breeds suspicion, at the very least.
Look Bob just take over the open wheel stuff completely, your org does a better job.
Nobody I know is all that worried about a Niki motor. What maybe there WERE 3? Niki, Fergus and Barth(?). Don't create a boogey man where there isn't one.
Over simplifying but yes give the Zetec and MZR more weight. Consensus is that the Zetec guys will grudgingly add the weight. Then you/we can start on the rest of the "fix".
I do not believe the MZR is equal period. I have talked to Knapp yes and he makes the case otherwise. OK. Facts say 2 races and a pretty strong second and a win. What take away is there based on fact. How many guys will convert/buy MZR over say the next 2 yrs. 25%? 50%? And here we go again. Stop and fix it now.

If something is "fixed" as you say, how many cars can guarantee to Bob that will take part in his series??? I think if the answer isn't significant then there is no reason for him to change anything for Bob at least.

I have raced against MZR, they are as close as I can see on track. I have overplayed data too. What basis do you have other then seeing a car win?

[Bob Wright]

Quick question- You don't believe the Zetec and MZR can be equal, even in the face of Steve Knapp's statements to the contrary? Who would you believe?

There are a lot of dynamics with these motors, some of which I don't even pretend to understand. The Zetec is term'd out. That means we will have to start adding aftermarket parts such as sleeving and pistons, then rods, then...whatever, in a motor that was not designed to be rebuilt. People will change when it is economic to do so.

What worries me and should worry everybody who loves open wheel racing is that the economics will send people to SRF, SM, T2 and other classes and it will simply die. Now, I don't think that will happen, but there is certainly some evidence to the contrary. SCCA numbers aren't all bad, only OWR numbers are bad.

We are all operating with old equipment, most of which is unsupported and some is downright antique, so we have to innovate to keep it running. I think there may have to be a cleansing in the whole OWR world with some fresh starts. Its happened before.

[NPalacioM3]

I have no beef with the MZR if Steve, Sandy, Erik all say it will work. Seems fine to me and the times I was on track with Trent during quali at NJ, I didn't notice a big difference. He was just faster than I was but down the straights, he wasn't pulling away from me.

But your last comment, Bob, is what concerns me. I think trying to bring these modern cars into SCCA or your series is a mistake. The kids that run them have a place to do so already, another place to do it is just going to muddy further the already brown waters. Focus on the people we know have cars and choose not to run them and/or guys that want to come play with one of the many cars available at all time low prices. The kiddos who want carbon tubs and flappy paddles should not be your target customer and there are lots of good cars out there already. Just my .02.

[Westroc]

OK
point taken on who I would believe but one MZR car, 1, against the might of everybody else and in 2 races it's top step. Sure it's a top team but Greg and Dixon and Larue are top step people too. MANY more.

Look about cleansing. You have STU and EP and the same guy in the same car with the same times just about wins both. Cleanse that and FIX FC. don't care who does it but we should do the start now not talk about it for 2 yrs. It will probably take that long.
Everybody knows kinda what will work and what will "sell" put it on paper and DRIVERS vote. If engine builders are licensed they vote cause it's fair.

[Steve Bamford]

OK
point taken on who I would believe but one MZR car, 1, against the might of everybody else and in 2 races it's top step. Sure it's a top team but Greg and Dixon and Larue are top step people too. MANY more.

Look about cleansing. You have STU and EP and the same guy in the same car with the same times just about wins both. Cleanse that and FIX FC. don't care who does it but we should do the start now not talk about it for 2 yrs. It will probably take that long.
Everybody knows kinda what will work and what will "sell" put it on paper and DRIVERS vote. If engine builders are licensed they vote cause it's fair.

Your info is incorrect, Bob ran a MZR the entire weekend when Trent won as well, so 2 MZR cars. Bob didn't suddenly get pole in his MZR car that weekend.

Are you forgetting the driver of the car was also running at the pointy end of the grid last season as well in a Zetec Spectrum? He beat Brandon & myself last year from time to time as well. Do you know who his engineer is & the experience he has behind him with this package?

I was there as Bob & Nick were & we are not complaining about the MZR, not sure why you are without near the same info we have & actually been on track with them.

[Wren]

The GCR is very clear that the Zetec motors can be rebuilt, but not in such a way as to increase their performance. "Blue-Printed" motors is just one of those ways.
I have knowledge of three cars with Zetec motors in different versions of build, having a 10HP difference (from a few years ago). All dynoed on the same equipment. The lowest HP one was as original and the latest showed increases from what SCCA had planned when they added Zetecs to a Pinto engined class.
No matter what, there is a performance difference between the engines that will keep the FC numbers low !

Don't get me wrong, I think John worked-out a strategy and then drove an excellant race on Sunday.

You haven't provided any evidence that the engines are illegal or for your accusation that the people who cross over between the series are cheating.

Were the dyno curves the differences between when it was first brought in at a disadvantage and after they went to the current map/restrictor?

If you have the dynor curves to prove that the engine has gained power from what was intended, it should be easy to write a letter to the CRB and get them interested in fixing things. As long as you have the proof that you claim to have.

Over simplifying but yes give the Zetec and MZR more weight. Consensus is that the Zetec guys will grudgingly add the weight. Then you/we can start on the rest of the "fix".
I do not believe the MZR is equal period. I have talked to Knapp yes and he makes the case otherwise. OK. Facts say 2 races and a pretty strong second and a win. What take away is there based on fact.

I spent a lot of time watching Trent drive around at NJMP. Trust me, he had my full attention both days. I absolutely do not believe that Trent had any horsepower on Brandon. Brandon and I discussed it at length several times over the weekend and all of the evidence supports Elite and FRP doing a great job with the equalization. Every competitor I talked to believed the same thing. Remember that the old guy fighting a crippling neck injury won the first race and led 18.75 laps on the second day.

It would be easier if we had an excuse for why Trent and John beat us on Sunday, but we don't. The reality is that Trent is really good behind the wheel and John has forgotten more about making VD's fast than almost anyone else has ever known. There's no shame in losing to those guys. They just did a better job on Sunday than we did. I really hope that they come out more next season so that we can try to do a better job. I'm confident that they won't have an inherent advantage from running the MZR.

[El Guapo]

I usually stay out of these types of debate, however here are my 2 cents. Dyno numbers should be viewed with a bit of skepticism. Different brands of dynos can yield significantly different results. Ambient weather also can cause different results. In addition, dyno numbers can be manipulated by the tuner. I agree with Bob about the dyno sheets posted by RSS. I don't know RSS, therefore have no opinion of him or her. A few weeks ago I had a tuner do some work on my time attack car. On the same day, with the same map and the same fuel two different dynos had a variation of 46 WHP (these were chassis dynos). That represented a difference of 7 percent, which in my opinion is significant.

EG

[El Guapo]

Oh wait. Sorry. I just realized that RSS was joking around. I thought at first the post was serious. My mistake. Forget everything I posted before. And that's why I should stay out of this type of debate, I am just not that smart.

EG

[rickb99]

.....Were the dyno curves the differences between when it was first brought in at a disadvantage and after they went to the current map/restrictor?.......

I for one don't need dyno curves to see Zetec engined cars are winning in the FC class all over the country and from sanctioning body to sanctioning body that follow SCCA rules. We can conclude from this superior performance that Zetec powered cars are at an advantage.

Long and short of it, things aren't equal between the Zetec and the Pinto. Until you have a system where just as many Pinto's win races as Zetec's do, you don't have equality.

[NPalacioM3]

I for one don't need dyno curves to see Zetec engined cars are winning in the FC class all over the country and from sanctioning body to sanctioning body that follow SCCA rules. We can conclude from this superior performance that Zetec powered cars are at an advantage.

Long and short of it, things aren't equal between the Zetec and the Pinto. Until you have a system where just as many Pinto's win races as Zetec's do, you don't have equality.

Who is out there with a pinto actually trying to be competitive? Runoff attempts? I cannot recall the last time I saw a pinto car at an F2000 event and the one guy I know who does, is just there to have fun. Certainly not spending the time or money guys at the pointy end with Zetecs do. I'm willing to bet that if Nikki showed up with his ole Pinto VD, he would be right there or likely running away from everyone at the front. So until someone shows up with one and makes an attempt to challenge the Zetecs, there isn't really much of an argument here. In fact, didn't Nikki go to Road America several years back when F2KS was flourishing and wipe the floor with everyone in his Pinto car?

[Wren]

I for one don't need dyno curves to see Zetec engined cars are winning in the FC class all over the country and from sanctioning body to sanctioning body that follow SCCA rules. We can conclude from this superior performance that Zetec powered cars are at an advantage.

Long and short of it, things aren't equal between the Zetec and the Pinto. Until you have a system where just as many Pinto's win races as Zetec's do, you don't have equality.

As Nick already pointed out, the pinto isn't the only factor in who is winning. I had a well respected prep shop tell me what they spent on shaker rig time for an FC at the multimatic facility. It would buy several pinto VD's and some pinto rebuilds. But, that isn't necessary to win as this prep shop hasn't won in a while.

I think I have a reasonable idea where the fast guys are making their speed and it isn't horsepower.

We have machines that will literally allow you to compare apples to apples on engines. We should use them.

Pretty much all of the serious guys have switched to zetecs in club and all of them have switched in pro. The economics to run a pinto don't make sense if you are going to be serious about it.

The problem is much more that even the zetec guys aren't coming out and playing (same problem for fit guys in FF). I think that at the club level it has to do with how bad the club weekends go (combination of groupings and annoying other drivers). At the pro/FRP level, there are prep shops with zetec cars sitting and they don't seem to be trying to sell them to drivers. I don't understand this at all.

[2BWise]

People do realize that a power advantage doesn't necessarily mean straight line advantage. The real advantage is that you can run higher downforce WITHOUT the straight line penalty, so while another driver may not be pulling away in a straight line doesn't mean he doesn't have more power. He's just using it smarter and making more grip in the corners.

As Nick already pointed out, the pinto isn't the only factor in who is winning. I had a well respected prep shop tell me what they spent on shaker rig time for an FC at the multimatic facility. It would buy several pinto VD's and some pinto rebuilds. But, that isn't necessary to win as this prep shop hasn't won in a while.

That's just stupid use of funds, particularly as according to this statement they didn't even get an advantage out of it. I wholly agree that some people are winning simply by being more intelligent and crafty with how they are developing and prepping cars, but when there are two engine packages with one at an immediate disadvantage it puts those one tier below before anyone has even turned a wheel.

I took a serious consideration at the Runoffs and was extremely close to joining FRP for the Mid Ohio event last year (I even had polos made with the required logos), but when you look at the financial commitment to run 1 event and the immediate disadvantage of having a Pinto it causes you to seriously reconsider. I'd be ok running mid pack considering that gives me a whole heap of people to race against, but when you look at the results page and realize you'd be languishing in the back with a handful of people, what's the point.

It's a massive cart/horse discussion about cost vs entries. More entries, cost goes down for everyone, but step one would be equalize things better. I don't even think the Zetec guys would claim that the Pinto is equal. Maybe for argument sake to prove their point but when those with the information won't even overlay the dyno sheets (this isn't the Cold War) then no one will believe the other side.

[Steve Bamford]

Forget Pinto's for a minute, even the Zetec's aren't coming out to play...it is more then an engine issue.

Also the cars that are winning championships such as John's car, Tim's car, have so much development I don't know of Pinto that has been set up close to them. Of course these cars should be faster but that has nothing to do with engine differences.

Can we at least agree to those two statements?

[eospeed]

I have taken the time to compile all the available info from all parties involved.

Pinto Drivers, Zetec Drivers and Engine builders

Please see the attached dyno sheets of supporting data from each camp.



With this much info available we should be able to solve nothing as usual.

Those sheets were from our shop an not ment to be compared im sure. Without you knowing what the engines were I dont see how that is relivent at all. The top 2 have been altered as well not to mention out of date more than likley.

[ccoffin]

This thread has turned especially entertaining. There is so much I would like to say, just as there is so much that you all want to say to try fix the current situation (a lack of FC entries at an event that you feel there should be more at). But, I'm only going to leave you with one thing that you can interpret however you want (because that's what we do here).

You all sound like the guy who posted the other day about getting to f1 by buying a budget club ford. Bundles of people told him what the issues were with what he was doing, but he didn't want to listen much and got a bit hostile. He's going to keep pushing s*it up a hill as a result. If you guys decide to keep brushing the pinto inequality (whether perceived or real, I fall firmly on one side of this in interest of full disclosure) under the rug, you're going to keep pushing s*it uphill too until you won't have enough cars showing up to justify a class (100 cars nationwide across multiple sanctioning bodies isn't actually enough as is currently being proven, but there are hundreds of pintos out there too).

[DaveW]

Those sheets were from our shop an not meant to be compared im sure. Without you knowing what the engines were I dont see how that is relevant at all. The top 2 have been altered as well not to mention out of date more than likley.

I'm hoping RSS's dyno sheet post was done in jest.

If not, I agree the top 2 are irrelevant and almost certainly fictitious.

[problemchild]

Come on guys. Just ignore the fake dyno sheets.

We have a troll inflaming a difficult situation that some of us take seriously.

[RSS]

What is it about Dyno sheets that sends everybody off the cliff? I tried to do as poor of a p-chop job on those graphs as possible and with some ridiculous numbers and comments to make sure they were seen as the joke that they are. But obviously not obvious enough.

So I shall explain.

Graph 1 title Pinto Owners Data: Zetec vs Pinto.

So this is the Pinto owners view of the situation showing the crazy amount of power the Zetec makes with a straight line across the whole graph at 165 for Tq (Area under the curve joke). While HP has crept up to 170hp at 7000rpm while still trending upward (Ongoing development joke). Meanwhile the Pinto HP is down at 135HP and is labeled Top National Pinto (Even the best pinto is down on power joke). The torque for the pinto barely makes and appearance on the graph with just a blip at 5200rpm the sad reality that a pinto owner feels about his torque situation.

The peak numbers on the right side continue to go off the ridiculous scale as it states the Zetec is making 185hp and 220 ft/lbs at 12 000 rpm.

The session notes on this graph point out that the Zetec motor has been blueprinted (A joke for Keith) and is even down a cylinder while still making these numbers. It also notes that this is the greatest Pinto ever made on the dyno running a shot of nitrous just to make the numbers it did. Then the fake dyno name to once again show that this is all made up.

Graph 2 title Zetec Owners data: Zetec vs Pinto

This graph is the view of Zetec owners and the state of things. It shows a good HP curve for the Zetec motor around 152hp or whatever the number being thrown around these days is. It also shows a straight line across the graph for Tq at 140ft/lbs acknowledging the fact that it does have good area under the curve. For the Pinto motor it shows a massive peak HP value 170HP at 6800rpm and is labeled The "Niki" Pinto (The everyone is afraid of Niki coming back and destroying the world with his Pinto Joke) The Tq curve for the pinto barely shows up on the graph again (Zetec owners poking fun at the lack of Tq).

The peak numbers on the right side are the commonly quoted #s for the current Zetec 152hp @ 6200rpm etc etc

The session notes make fun of the Pinto only lasting 7 seconds on the Dyno and needing to be rebuilt between each run to hit those numbers. ( A joke about Pinto longevity) The next note is that this is a junkyard Zetec that hasn't been touched since it was installed in 2001. The final comment is another silly Dyno Name.

Graph 3 title Quicksilver Dyno sheet provided to Zetec Owners

This is the engine builders dyno sheet which shows that the traces have been covered over with a sharpie all the graph axis numbers are blacked out, everyone's name is blacked out and everything is labeled classified. ( A joke about how they have all the data about these motors but unless you are them or know the secret FRP handshake you will never get to see it)

The peak numbers on this graph are shown as RPM : Yes HP: Good and Torque:Lots once again not telling us anything as it's a secret.

The session notes are all blacked out and labeled classified except the words Ran and Pro Map.


The last graph is an actual dyno sheet that came with my car from 2008 and is labeled 1.295 map. This is also the last time that we know of that the Zetec was looked at maybe time for a rebuild but hey it's a Zetec they run forever right?

[RSS]

Come on guys. Just ignore the fake dyno sheets.

We have a troll inflaming a difficult situation that some of us take seriously.

If was trolling i would have made the graphs look legit and put in numbers at least somewhat near reality to pass them off as authentic. Plus i would have likely taken a side on the matter to make other side mad. You should know this as you do it fairly frequently on here.

On the note of taking it seriously you do know I help run the NWFC series right? We are tackling this very same issue and we are actively changing things every season to try and make this situation better for our series and it's drivers. I believe we where the first to institute the weight penalty for Zetec's. This past season we changed around our scoring system to balance out Zetec vs Pinto overall and the season ended with just a few points between the top Zetec and top Pinto driver. The thing is for us that we will poll our drivers and we will look at the data and make a decision based off that. Even if we don't think it's the right thing to do we will still give it a go as that's what the group wants. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't but we will continue to try things out instead of having the same arguments over and over again with nothing getting done. We also provide our drivers with any and all information we can find nothing held back Gearing/Lap times/Video/On board Data anything to help them be as fast as they can be.

[stonebridge20]

I'm hoping RSS's dyno sheet post was done in jest.

If not, I agree the top 2 are irrelevant and almost certainly fictitious.

Dave, read the session notes.

[Wren]

People do realize that a power advantage doesn't necessarily mean straight line advantage. The real advantage is that you can run higher downforce WITHOUT the straight line penalty, so while another driver may not be pulling away in a straight line doesn't mean he doesn't have more power. He's just using it smarter and making more grip in the corners.

Yeah, I think we all get that.

That's just stupid use of funds, particularly as according to this statement they didn't even get an advantage out of it. I wholly agree that some people are winning simply by being more intelligent and crafty with how they are developing and prepping cars, but when there are two engine packages with one at an immediate disadvantage it puts those one tier below before anyone has even turned a wheel.

It may or may not be a stupid use of funds. It's not really possible to know. It is indicative of the level of effort being put in to the top cars.

I will give you a quick, simple example from guys who are winning. We started making our own wheels(one piece forged). There were several reasons for it, but the performance advantage from having the lightest wheels on the grid was a part of the decision. That's one very small thing out of a lot of things that are done to try to run at the front.

The cars at the front are really well developed cars with people putting a lot of work or a lot of money into the cars. I've no doubt that is the most important part.

I took a serious consideration at the Runoffs and was extremely close to joining FRP for the Mid Ohio event last year (I even had polos made with the required logos), but when you look at the financial commitment to run 1 event and the immediate disadvantage of having a Pinto it causes you to seriously reconsider. I'd be ok running mid pack considering that gives me a whole heap of people to race against, but when you look at the results page and realize you'd be languishing in the back with a handful of people, what's the point.

The point is that you would have had a lot of fun at a great weekend of racing. Last year we ran the MO FRP event as our first event with them. We finished in the back on Saturday and broke on Sunday. It was a great weekend. I'm not sure when we ever had that much fun at the track before. We were treated well, like our presence was valued and they wanted us to come back. The racing was clean, competitive, and I think that every car that beat us (most/all of the cars did) was a legal car. We didn't have any of the required logos on our shirts since it was our first weekend and the FRP guys didn't care (note, they do start to care once you start showing up more often). We had intended to run the FRP event as a one-off event, but we changed our mind and ran the rest of the season with them.

The Mid-Ohio FRP event this year was one of the best events of the year in terms of racing and atmosphere. I'm confident you would have had a great time if you had shown up. The paddock is friendly and I think that you would be surprised just how free people are with their advice/experience.

but step one would be equalize things better.

Are we equalizing horsepower or results?

I don't even think the Zetec guys would claim that the Pinto is equal. Maybe for argument sake to prove their point but when those with the information won't even overlay the dyno sheets (this isn't the Cold War) then no one will believe the other side.

I'm making no claim that they are equal. I don't have the data. If the data exists to show that the zetec has a horsepower advantage, lets see it. I will be the first one to write a letter to equalize them. A map adjustment to the zetec is not a high burden at all. Has anyone talked to the engine builders about it? What do they say?

What data do you want to overlay? I think it would be interesting too. Maybe I would be surprised by the difference in acceleration. Maybe you would be surprised by corner min speeds.

If everyone decides that throwing weight at the zetec will bring the pintos back out, then write the letters. It's probably worth a hail mary at this point.

Forget Pinto's for a minute, even the Zetec's aren't coming out to play...it is more then an engine issue.

Exactly. Is it cost to run? Mixed run groups? Track time quality? Perceived lack of competitiveness of some chassis?

I wish I understood why some prep shops have stopped participating in FRP racing. I don't understand.

Also the cars that are winning championships such as John's car, Tim's car, have so much development I don't know of Pinto that has been set up close to them. Of course these cars should be faster but that has nothing to do with engine differences.

Yes. I'd be surprised if putting a pinto in the back of John's car would have changed the results.

Can we at least agree to those two statements?

It makes sense to me. I have seen how hard those guys have worked.

We are tackling this very same issue and we are actively changing things every season to try and make this situation better for our series and it's drivers. I believe we where the first to institute the weight penalty for Zetec's.

Serious questions: are you trying to equalize power/weight or results between zetec and pinto cars?

What data are you basing it on?

Even if we don't think it's the right thing to do we will still give it a go as that's what the group wants. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't but we will continue to try things out instead of having the same arguments over and over again with nothing getting done.

That seems like a really reasonable way to do things, but the SCCA doesn't always work like that as a result of the processes that are in place. Running your own series offers you a lot of flexibility and I'm curious how it has worked for you. Based on what I read here, it seems like you guys are providing a good experience/fun weekend for your competitors. I still believe that all of the decisions that we make should be run through that filter.

Are there really a lot of pintos across the country that are sitting because they don't feel competitive? I've gotten kind of jaded towards the group that is always sitting on the sideline saying they would participate if only this or that would change.

[BrianT1]

I can tell you it takes a big commitment to run fast in SCCA and in FRP. Either way you slice it if you feel the pinto is at a disadvantage then buy a zetec or convert your car. But there is only ever going to be one winner and races are not scripted so things can happen to allow anyone a chance of victory.

In the end it does come down to having fun by running with a lot of our own cars. Big packs and fighting for every spot. Pinto and Zetecs should be out running.

[RSS]

To Wren's Question:

Both. We are working on performance to balance on track competition and then points wise to balance the overall championship. If the on track performance gets balanced out then we can remove the later.

On track data from our drivers lap times/data etc. We aren't expecting a perfect balance as you can never actually find it but if both packages are close enough that either have a shot at any given weekend that would be good enough for us.

[John LaRue]

The issues are well framed and whether the problem is simply perceived or actual it still is a problem. The question in my mind is whether this is a Balance of Performance or Balance of Power exercise.

The problem in the Pinto (and Kent) world is that we are dealing with a moving target. There are various states of build (aluminum head, lightened flywheel) not to mention the inherent differences in power between these engines that is significant. So while some of these engines are under powered there are likely some that are not. With this in mind where do we set the baseline? To further complicate the situation it is quite unlikely that any serious effort has been made to improve the performance of these engines over and above a normal rebuild in the recent past so what performance remains untapped in these engines?

What the PNW series appears to be doing is to handicap the cars and work out a point system to make all equal. This is more akin to what IMSA does in its Balance of Performance program. Why would you stop at the engines in this instance? Why not look at the car, dampers, brake calipers, gear box prep, advanced aero, driver ranking, etc.. to achieve parity? For example if I have a certain year car with these components then this is the weight and restrictor that I run. The effort would be to balance performance of various combinations of critical components. Again, this is what IMSA does. Currently they are engaged in an effort to balance the performance of the new P2 cars. There is testing currently going on with regard to engines and weeks of time at the Wind Shear tunnel to balance various cars from an aero perspective. Once all of that is done the teams with the resources will exploit the uncontrolled areas looking for an advantage and the lobbying will begin anew. I have firsthand witnessed the gamesmanship that takes place at the January test in Daytona when IMSA is monitoring the performance of the various cars in order to set the final regulations for the 24. Consider if you will the BOP issues that arose at LeMans this year as it concerned the Corvette and the Ford.

As Wren points out, to some extent this may be possible within a private series but is seemingly impossible at a level such as SCCA due to the limited resources and the time it would take to monitor and react to the variations. P1/P2 are now involved in this process and I wonder if those participants prefer the new spec line type rules to the old open CSR/DSR type rules. Be careful what you ask for.

[Steve Bamford]

To Wren's Question:

Both. We are working on performance to balance on track competition and then points wise to balance the overall championship. If the on track performance gets balanced out then we can remove the later.

On track data from our drivers lap times/data etc. We aren't expecting a perfect balance as you can never actually find it but if both packages are close enough that either have a shot at any given weekend that would be good enough for us.

Isn't the only way to actually measure the engine difference really on a dyno? You are equalizing entire packages including drivers from what I can tell. I know we don't race on dyno's but there is a lot more that goes into creating lap times then simply the engine & trying to make different cars do the same lap times by penalizing one car over another & thinking it is fixing HP issue is incorrect.

I'm not saying there isn't an issue with the Pinto to Zetec, I just don't believe the way you are approaching it is proof but I am glad it seems to be bringing out more cars. I would like a scientific approach done.

With this said I have said I don't have an issue running with the MZR right now based on seeing on track performance, not dyno info. Currently the MZR has to run under the USF specs so that makes dyno info not 100% critical as there are other differences that limit it to how it makes lap times unlike the open Zetec or Pinto rules.

[RSS]

Isn't the only way to actually measure the engine difference really on a dyno? You are equalizing entire packages including drivers from what I can tell. I know we don't race on dyno's but there is a lot more that goes into creating lap times then simply the engine & trying to make different cars do the same lap times by penalizing one car over another & thinking it is fixing HP issue is incorrect.

I'm not saying there isn't an issue with the Pinto to Zetec, I just don't believe the way you are approaching it is proof but I am glad it seems to be bringing out more cars. I would like a scientific approach done.

With this said I have said I don't have an issue running with the MZR right now based on seeing on track performance, not dyno info. Currently the MZR has to run under the USF specs so that makes dyno info not 100% critical as there are other differences that limit it to how it makes lap times unlike the open Zetec or Pinto rules.

True about the dyno but when is the last time and engine builder put out a bunch of data for everyone to look at? Hell when has the SCCA gone and done that?

There is a large variance in what we are doing but we aren't aiming for the ten tenths guys we are doing it on a club level and hopefully we get the packages close enough that the driver can decide the difference.

I think most would be happy with that level of balance and a bunch of guys to run with.

I wouldn't mind trying the older map with the 1.29 restrictor if it ran on pump gas.

[BrianT1]

Trying to equalize the engines is very difficult and there are to many variables to equate equality. Even if you do there is only ever going to be one winner. So if your idea of running is just to have fun and be with a large group of like minded drivers then quite complaining about motor equalization or unfair advantage.

Just get out there and run. If you want to win then you'll need to spend what is necessary and if not, just come out and race.

[Bob Wright]

I was unaware that the Zetec couldn't run on 93 pump gas....The original map and the 1.295 restrictor (that we started with in 2006) was clearly inferior to the Pintos in the paddock at that time, otherwise we wouldn't have changed it.

I think lost in this discussion is that most serious FRP and SCCA competitors moved to the Zetec because of economics, not performance. The Pinto is a high maintenance motor and we offer a lot of track time per weekend- sometimes as many as 5 hrs when counting a test day.

I also keep wondering why every general thread about FC degenerates into a Zetec vs Pinto equalization argument that started in 2003. That's 13 years, folks! This is not what's ailing OWR.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

I also keep wondering why every general thread about FC degenerates into a Zetec vs Pinto equalization argument that started in 2003. That's 13 years, folks! This is not what's ailing OWR.

Because we are looking for a reason for smaller grids and the thought is that Pintos are parked because of the Zetec. Its a lot easier to point to that change rather than the other things that have changed on these cars.

Just get out there and run. If you want to win then you'll need to spend what is necessary and if not, just come out and race.

Yep.

[reidhazelton]

My 2 cents...

Time moves on, and society progresses. Same with engines. There is good and bad in both scenarios. The new engines are much cheaper to run, and far easier to maintain. Once you are in a Fit/Zetec, life is good. The 'bad' is the cost to convert, and you are bound to push out some people along with that. If you bring in a new engine, don't complain about why all those old pinto/kent cars are staying home. That's a given 'bad' that will happen with some people who can't convert. The gamble you are taking is the new engine will bring more new people in, than current people you will lose.

As for making the Fit/Kent and Pinto/Zetec equal, the best way is on the dyno. Will this be perfect? Nope. On my Kent, my EGTs are substantially different at 7k rpm in 1st gear, than they are in 4th gear at the same rpm. A fuel injected car....they are far closer to being the same all the time. That's the advantage. Unless you have a gnome under the engine cover with jet kit and a weather station who can jet that carb 50 times a second, you're not going to be equal. That's just how it is. To make that issue equal would take an insane amount of on track testing, and various tracks, with identical drivers and cars. It's just not logical or realistic.

Now, bringing in a different fuel injected engine to run with the Zetec, that is a far, far easier thing to do. Injection v injection. In the future, when carb'ed cars are out of the picture bringing in new engines will be as easy as a few days (if that - more like hours) on a dyno. Getting the MZR dead-nuts equal to the Zetec is easy, and has been done.

So, like I said - time moves on and it's time to move on from the parity debates. It is what it is and we knew this was bound to happen going in. But, if numbers tank don't start begging for the older cars to come out and then tell them they are wrong about why they decide to stay home.

Wanna get nuts.....
If you really want the older Pinto-shod cars to come out, then give them a HP advantage and put this whole tired, played out parity bitchfest to bed. Knock 3 hp off the entire curve on the Zetec to silence the parity pirates. The older cars will still not beat the new Citations and Mygales and no one with a new Citation or Mygale will build it or convert back to a pinto for the small advantage, and that's been proven. The pinto/kent just cost too much to run with the amounts of track time FRP provides. I'd say give it a shot for an event next year - at Mid Ohio load up a slightly lower power map on all the injected cars and invite the carbies out. If they don't show, all you have lost is .5 sec a lap. Like Wren said, at this point what do you really have to lose?

[Bob Wright]

The voice of reason...I love it

[ccoffin]

I wouldn't mind trying the older map with the 1.29 restrictor if it ran on pump gas.

Literally the only reason we haven't ran this yet as a series is pump gas.

[Wren]

The question in my mind is whether this is a Balance of Performance or Balance of Power exercise.

I think that this is a great summary of the discussion.

The perception is that the pinto is down on power. I don't know what the reality is.

So while some of these engines are under powered there are likely some that are not. With this in mind where do we set the baseline? To further complicate the situation it is quite unlikely that any serious effort has been made to improve the performance of these engines over and above a normal rebuild in the recent past so what performance remains untapped in these engines?

I'm not sure that is a good enough reason anymore to avoid doing something. FC numbers are down and making an effort to make things better is probably worthwhile at this point. With things this bad, we probably shouldn't let perfect be the enemy of good. Are those engines out there? Yes. Are they going to show up in club racing if we take some horsepower off of the zetec? Probably not since they are either in Niki's shop or they have gone to vintage or S2000 racing.

It's probably worthwhile for either the FSRAC or the CRB to talk to some engine builders and see if they would be willing to say where the zetec falls in comparison to a "very good" pinto or a 90th percentile pinto or some other performance standard that they might propose. I don't think that we have a lot to lose at this point. Maybe the perceived lack of competitiveness is the single biggest factor in FC participation. If so, this could be good for the SCCA and for FC. Pushing new maps to the zetecs is a quick, low burden fix if further fine tuning is necessary. My understanding is that these kinds of adjustments are done at the CRB level and can be taken through the process quickly.

I agree with everything you said regarding BOP and how it works and how it relates to what Ave said.

To Wren's Question:

Both. We are working on performance to balance on track competition and then points wise to balance the overall championship. If the on track performance gets balanced out then we can remove the later.

On track data from our drivers lap times/data etc. We aren't expecting a perfect balance as you can never actually find it but if both packages are close enough that either have a shot at any given weekend that would be good enough for us.

Thanks for the answer.

I totally respect what you guys are doing and think it's great that you guys have found a solution as a group, but that isn't the road that I want the SCCA to go down.

Ultimately, my desired end state would be that everyone starts from an equal basis whether they have a zetec or a pinto, not that we have equal results between the pinto and zetec. Maybe that is the wrong thing for class growth, but we have spec classes for people who don't want to do the development work. The appeal of the open formula classes for me is that building a better mouse trap will show up on the results sheet instead of showing up as a lead trophy or a smaller restrictor. I don't want to see the best driver win(supposedly that is what the spec classes determine), I want to see the best overall package/team win.

True about the dyno but when is the last time and engine builder put out a bunch of data for everyone to look at? Hell when has the SCCA gone and done that?

My understanding is that the engine builders have been pretty forthcoming with the SCCA about their results. The SCCA doesn't have the funding or the time to go out and do that. The typical standard is that the SCCA expects people to bring the data to them when they write in for engine changes. This isn't too unreasonable and it has met with varied levels of success. At the moment, it appears that the participants in this thread don't have that data.

Wanna get nuts.....
If you really want the older Pinto-shod cars to come out, then give them a HP advantage and put this whole tired, played out parity bitchfest to bed. Knock 3 hp off the entire curve on the Zetec to silence the parity pirates. The older cars will still not beat the new Citations and Mygales and no one with a new Citation or Mygale will build it or convert back to a pinto for the small advantage, and that's been proven. The pinto/kent just cost too much to run with the amounts of track time FRP provides. I'd say give it a shot for an event next year - at Mid Ohio load up a slightly lower power map on all the injected cars and invite the carbies out. If they don't show, all you have lost is .5 sec a lap. Like Wren said, at this point what do you really have to lose?

I like it. I'm not sure that MO is the right place to do it as I don't think there is a tougher track in America. Do it at Road Atlanta and get it out of the way early. My personal belief is that the results sheet doesn't change and we get a fresh set of excuses. I don't think that the pinto guys will enjoy having to do a head every weekend either. That will get expensive fast. I hope I'm wrong.

[reidhazelton]

The voice of reason...I love it

I must be getting old...never been called that before!

[reidhazelton]

I like it. I'm not sure that MO is the right place to do it as I don't think there is a tougher track in America. Do it at Road Atlanta and get it out of the way early. My personal belief is that the results sheet doesn't change and we get a fresh set of excuses. I don't think that the pinto guys will enjoy having to do a head every weekend either. That will get expensive fast. I hope I'm wrong.

Good point about Mid-O. I was just thinking what track had the best chance at drawing Pinto cars (centrally located). Hotlanta would likely be better. There are a lot of southeast pintos in hiding I suspect.

I doubt it would change the entry count either. You almost certainly will not get the same cars to come out all year, but I would hope you get a few different ones at each event. But, there is only one way to find out and I bet if you get even one Pinto car that would cover the cost of having Sandy or Eric flash all the ECUs.

[rickb99]

If you want an idea of how the Northwest FC program is doing at equalizing things, look here. You can compare the results with the 'drivers' page and see what engine cars they are driving (intake manifold side).

http://www.northwestfc.net/

As you can see there are plenty of Pintos racing in this series and more every year.