What's the point of that other than flat out trolling?
What's the point of that other than flat out trolling?
I'm still waiting on anyone to post a link,email or phone number to the contact who still sells brand new 593 motors.......Originally Posted by dc
What's the point of that other than flat out trolling?
Richard, send a letter into the CRB. Easy as pie.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
Before I get back to the carb topic; everyone I've encountered in the F500 community has been nothing but super helpful. If one asks reasonable questions people are more than happy to help. It's a good class.............period.
While $6000 is more than I have in my car, for a race motor it's not the least bit outrageous. I build my Datsun engines myself, they are about 75-80% of a professional built race engine and they still cost me almost $2000 and that doesn't include my labor. My competitors are spending $7000-$10,000 for vintage racing! I have a friend who runs a shifter Kart and he's spending $7000 on an engine.
Now back to the carbs; one of the reasons many people prefer the bike engines is they don't want to have to do jetting and CVT set ups. So anything that makes the two stokes more user friendly is a good thing. I personally don't believe the cockpit adjustable option is going to bring huge dividends but I wouldn't oppose it either. I don't think is matters either way
f 500 carbs
Arctic Cat used a battery less FI system back in the mid 1990s on there sleds. Could be done pretty economical if you can find a aftermarket supplier that sells throttle bodies or some type of upgrade kit. This could be a better solution than fiddlin with a adjustment knob.
Google it
Thanks
Rick
Just for you Clint,
https://leadersrpmshop.com/ski-doo-n...SABEgKImvD_BwE
And here:
https://leadersrpmshop.com/cart.php
Richard
I guess that my $6000 engine package was a real bargain!
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
Your $6000 engine package is a PILE OF JUNK that break crankshafts and destroys crankcases!
IT"S A $6000 70lbs BOAT ANCHOR!!!
Just a thought
Is it possible that the performance issue goes beyond simple motor equalization? In my humbkle opinion, the performance disparities being cited relate also to the chassis technology over the last decade or so in a significant manner. Using other formula car classes as obvious examples, it may never be possible to equalize a more modern technology car to one based on a design from the early 1990's. I loved driving my Invader, and we did well in them (3 Runoff wins), but the newer technolgy car is infinitely faster regardless of motor. I honestly believe adjustable jetting would not have made a significant difference. The real difference was that Jonathan and Bryan could really drive.
I'm switching to a four stroke more from an economic standpoint. Please keep in mind that I demand new equipment and choose to pay for it and I acknowledge not every can or is willing to. That is part of racing and spending choices run the gamut from tires, entry fees, testing days etc..
My humble opinion.
J. Swank
I submitted this external jetting device rule because I’d prefer not to carry around a hand full of jets and be able to make changes by the turn of a knob. The sales hype about any performance gains from these devices is just that sales hype in my mind. So, my intent was for convenience and ease of adjustment. These rules are used by SCCA Autocross, Road Racing, Time Trial, and Hill Climb. This year I may only autocross locally co-driving with a friend and pit crew for another friend at regional races it depends on other events.
I am wondering why so many racers have had broken cranks and or crankcases and we have never broken a crank or a case ever?
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
High Cycle Fatigue is based on statistics and one data point is NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT!!!!
To get an FI 2-Stroke approved in this class and on the track will take at least 2-3 years. IMO a FI 2-Stroke is currently not cost effective or practical, especially if this is a Regional Class in 2-3 years. So, an FI 2-Stroke would be a bad Investment of both my time and money at this current point in time.
The other reason I submitted this external jetting device rule was the constant talk about FI 2-Strokes Engines and how the carbureted engines can only be adjusted with discrete jets. These external jetting devices are relatively low cost, easy to use, and don’t have any electronics. In fact, the rule may need to be changed to Any Automated adjustment of external jetting devices is prohibited.
As long as you are trying to get ahead of the game. . .might as well suggest the wording to read: "any automated adjustment of devices that effect air/fuel ratio is prohibited."
That hopefully keeps an argument over what jetting devices are internal/external from starting. As well as keeping folks from jetting really fat and then introducing an adjustable air intake leak downstream of the carb.
Thanks for the suggestion. I don't think adding an automated control system is the right thing to do! It's going add cost and complexity. It's a Cost Benefit Analysis! Does the Benefit justify the added Cost and Complexity? Are you going to spend $5000 to research and build a prototype automated control system and get a 0.001 second reduction in lap time that you can’t even measure?
Nope. I don't believe it's the right thing to do either. I believe the solution is to either make it really easy for everybody to do (cockpit adjustable) or make certain you don't have to get stupid creative to do so.
As to the reduction in lap times, I know you're speaking in hyperbole to make your point. However, the difference in lap time from a perfectly-tuned A:F ratio and one that is close enough is more than many might think.
However, I don't believe that to be the biggest advantage. The biggest advantage is having the proper tune every time without losing a session. 99% of SCCA racers don't spend enough time in the seat much less at a specific track to become truly proficient at the craft. All we are trying to do is get more proficient than the next guy. When one session can represent 20% of your track time on a given weekend, optimizing how you utilize that limited time is often the biggest advantage.
I was exaggerating to make my point!! I agree with all your points. What the reduction in lap time would be by making the adjustment manually in the cockpit vs. an automated system is still open in mind in terms benefit vs. cost.Nope. I don't believe it's the right thing to do either. I believe the solution is to either make it really easy for everybody to do (cockpit adjustable
As to the reduction in lap times, I know you're speaking in hyperbole to make your point. However, the difference in lap time from a perfectly-tuned A:F ratio and one that is close enough is more than many might think.
However, I don't believe that to be the biggest advantage. The biggest advantage is having the proper tune every time without losing a session. 99% of SCCA racers don't spend enough time in the seat much less at a specific track to become truly proficient at the craft. All we are trying to do is get more proficient than the next guy. When one session can represent 20% of your track time on a given weekend, optimizing how you utilize that limited time is often the biggest advantage.
From the 2020 GCR
9.1.1. Formula 500 (F500) Specifications
14. Snowmobile Derived Engines
A. Carburetors: The induction system is restricted to two (2) 38mm Mikuni VM 38 round slide carburetors (except AMW). No modifications are permitted to the carburetor bodies. The use of any jets or jet needles is permitted. External carburetor jetting devices such as Mikuni Power Jet, Thunder PowerJet, Dial-A-Jet, IntelAJet, or other similar devices may be used, provided they are plumbed to the float bowl and body of the carburetor for which they are installed. Cockpit adjustment of external jetting devices is prohibited. Any automated adjustment of devices that effect air/fuel ratio is prohibited.
These are the suggested changes to the rule based on the discussion so far (strike the words in yellow, add the words in red). Any other input?
Scott as someone who does contracts for a living my thought is you should spell out whether or not cockpit adjustable is ok. The SCCA philosophy as always been if doesn't say you can then you can't. You may also want to spell out if cockpit adjustable will be by mechanical or electronic means.
The language about automated adjustments works for me.
From the 2020 GCR
9.1.1. Formula 500 (F500) Specifications
14. Snowmobile Derived Engines
A. Carburetors: The induction system is restricted to two (2) 38mm Mikuni VM 38 round slide carburetors (except AMW). No modifications are permitted to the carburetor bodies. The use of any jets or jet needles is permitted. External carburetor jetting devices such as Mikuni Power Jet, Thunder PowerJet, Dial-A-Jet, IntelAJet, or other similar devices may be used, provided they are plumbed to the float bowl and body of the carburetor for which they are installed. Manual Cockpit adjustment of external jetting devices is allowed. prohibited Any automated adjustment of devices that effect air/fuel ratio is prohibited.
Tom, Thanks for your input! I've also written technical SOW's for large contracts and your right it takes some time to get the language right. Here are the changes (strike what's in yellow, add what's in red) I think the wording Manual Cockpit adjustment should work along with the last sentence.
If your turning a mechanical needle valve or a pot that controls an electronic servo valve it shouldn't matter if it's Mechanical or Electronic as long as it's Manual and not Automated.
Last edited by sathorp; 01.08.20 at 11:21 PM.
Thanks for posting! This will certainly help new guys that want a new motor as well as others currently in the class. I didn't expect the price to be that high , but at least there's the option to purchase new motors!
I do not agree! An outlier data point can be very important in itself!
Last edited by Jnovak; 04.25.20 at 4:23 PM.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
I don't care!!!
Go talk to the Crickets!!!
10 Hours - Crickets Chirping and Forest Ambience
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOfVUBLKYQE
Richard:
I think this is the final language for this rule change. So, if you could write the letter to the CRB and submit this rule change it would be greatly appreciated. I have other things I need to get done this week.
Scott
Scott,
I think that this last suggestion is good. However I am no longer a SCCA member so I will not be submitting a rule change even though it is a good idea.
Richard
P.S. I already had the basic concepts for the auto tune on paper.
Okay, thanks for starting this thread and your input! For me personally I don't think the cockpit adjustment is going benefit me after reading about karts tuning while driving. I'll write this up and submit it to the CRB when I get some time! They could accept it as written, change it, or reject it.
Scott
PS, if someone really wants auto tune then they'll have to make a rigorous technical & cost case for it and change the rule.
Crb letters
Go here
WWW.crbscca
it will take about 10 minutes
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
GCR change
Does anyone know if the SCCA CRB agrees the change the wording as proposed, can the change be implemented this year?
I seem to recall that the Board Of Directors once said that they would not change the rules in mid-year.
Richard
If the change is implemented it will not be immediate!
Of course you can become an SCCA member.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
They may have, but I'm thinking they changed that stance mid-year.
CRB Request for Input
FASTRACK NEWS MAY 2020
CLUB RACING BOARD MINUTES | March 31, 2020
What Do You Think
F5
1. #28359 (Scott Thorp) Request for Cockpit Adjustment of External Jetting Devices
Should the rules allow cockpit adjustment of external jetting devices on two cycle cars?
Please reply via the letter log system.
Send all comments & input to the CRB Log System website: https://www.crbscca.com/
Over $6800 unprepared. No clutches etc.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
Just wrote a letter in support of letter 28359
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
Isn't the 593 HO in the link above different than the 593 approved for F500?
Cory
The May 2020 SportsCar had a article from the CRB on BoP - Balance of Performance.
What level Balance of Performance is the CRB attempting to implement on F500 ??????
I am still asking a serious question!
Why have we (Brian and i) NEVER broken a crankshaft?)
I am pretty sure that i know the answer.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
I don't own a Rotax 593 Engine and I have no intention of ever owning a Rotax 593 engine.
I also never plan to overrev any Rotax 2-Cycle Engine by approximately 10%. So, you may
have a serious question in your mind! But I have no interest what so ever in discussing Rotax
593 crankshaft breakage or High Cycle Fatigue of Rotax 593 Crankshafts with anyone.
You need to go find someone who owns a Rotax 593 engine and wants to discuss this issue
with you. Because I don't care, I own 10 Rotax 494 engine and 2 Rotax 493 engines I don’t
have crankshaft breakage problem!
Scott.
Exactly what do you think they're doing with the restrictor and weight adjustments? What adjustments do you think should be done above and beyond what they've been doing?
Runoffs winners
2014-two-stroke
2015-four stroke
2016-two-stroke
2017-four-stroke
2018-two-stroke
2019-four-stroke
Restrictor and /or weight changes for a two-stroke:
2014-2020 =0
Last edited by clint; 04.26.20 at 12:06 AM.
As a curious bystander and a lover of the smell of Blendzall. . . what breakage problem do you have that warrants the need for 12 engines? Or is it just a collection to ensure the future needs of the class participants are met?
How many folks are actively campaigning that engine package?
The metric used is acceleratiopn from 60 to 100 mph in a straight line for casrs with the scca data aq system on the car.
However they have been ignoring that metric in F500 for years.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
There are currently 11 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 11 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote