I want help on a new NASA Rally Sport class: Spec WRX

DR1665 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 99% of your Mitsubishi/Subaru guys on the street
> have no interest in rally once they see that they
> have to spend $5000 prepping their car, only to
> have the restrictor installed to turn it into a
> Camry for dirt.

They should try driving a properly prepared restricted PGT car before making that sort of comparison. PGT is interesting because you need to know how to drive well and conserve momentum if you're going to do well.

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Mitsu's don't fit into this equation.
Expensive still, too large of brakes/wheels, and a company that doesn't appear to give a fuck about rally in the US.

---

Grant Hughes

So what about rather than musical ECUs have the competitors send an extra ECU to NASA or the tuner who just hands them out at tech. This way the tuner could address any complaints from the competitors between rallies. Since it is a stock car, you could just have a stock ECU that you used to drive the car around between rallies.

It would be great if the tuner was could also provide a mediocre tune for use with a restrictor. So if you owned one of these cars and wanted to run in a RA or CARS event you could do it. Might promote the class as well if you take a restricted car and do well at another event with more highly tuned cars.

The biggest issue with a spec class I see is policing it. Not just the ECU but other parts like brakes / transmissions / etc. I think these things work better if the sanctioning body does the enforcement rather than have the competitors do it.

Also, there should be some mechanism for parts to get upgraded in the spec if they are found to break all time. Say part x is shown to need replacement more often than an inexpensive aftermarket. Allow the competitor to run either. Since these are suby's I am guessing all of these are already known.

Andrew_Frick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what about rather than musical ECUs have the
> competitors send an extra ECU to NASA or the tuner
> who just hands them out at tech. This way the
> tuner could address any complaints from the
> competitors between rallies. Since it is a stock
> car, you could just have a stock ECU that you used
> to drive the car around between rallies.
>


This is a pretty good idea. Some "stock" class R/C touring car races from I remember seeing in magazines works like this. When you pay the entry fee, you purchase both your spec tires and spec electric motor for the event.

---

Welcome to the cult of JVL drink the koolaid or be banned.

DR1665 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoCoast Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No aftermarket anything. Air filter, cat
> back
> > exhaust, . . . struts, clutch,
> > and brake pads are free. Everything else
> must
> > remain stock.
>
> This.
>
> Maybe allow a manual boost controller, but keep it
> on pump gas.

>
> Brian DR1665 | Phoenix, AZ
> 92 GVR4 - daily | 91 GVR4 - endless rally project


You can't safely just use a boost controller on these cars without some sort of engine management. The ecu can't compensate for A/F ratios and will run lean.BUT it could just be a matter of STOCK ecu's since there's no restrictor to condend with. It's still a 230hp car with AWD I can't see that being boring.

---

Gone fishing

david amor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can't safely just use a boost controller on
> these cars without some sort of engine management.
> The ecu can't compensate for A/F ratios and will
> run lean.

Really! You learn something new every day. Stock boost on a 19 year old Galant VR4 is 7psi. I run 12 daily because the old school EPROM ECU can handle. I think I could go 14psi on the stock fuel system if I was feeling saucy.

Shame. If the newer cars are that finicky, why, again, are we insisting upon a restrictor? I guess we want everyone to spend an extra $5K on engine internals and reprogramming to compensate, right?

Restrictors = archaic and stupid imo.

---

Brian Driggs | KG7KCA | PHX, AZ | 89 Pajero
alterius non sit qui suus esse potest

Here's a way to solve all the problems except one - building the critical mass to make it happen.

Six people would have to commit the cash up front and one person/entity to do it.

Just keep changing the names on the windows.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/28/2009 11:36AM by randyzimmer.

OK so I see this as a good idea which means we should have endless posts about it and not actually do anything. Could we agree on:

Min weight 3100 lbs

No restrictor

Stock ECU

Suspension, pads, clutch, intercooler/ turbo inlet hoses and exhaust may be changed.

Semplice? No?

---

Gone fishing

Thanks Dave (and you're dead on about 230hp will be fun enough ), but no.

All:

I've outlined the help I want and the structure of the car spec in the first post. Minor things like fixing a hose known to split are no problem. But it's an open AWD class car with a stock engine, no restrictor, patrolled by a custom flash for a little more omph, that can be verified. That's the only problem it's trying to solve. Stock ECU is a no-go... the reason they made it open in PGT is that there was cheating and it was unpatrolable.

I know there are other problems within the rally world to solve. This spec isn't trying to solve those problems. Other, different, things I'm working on are trying to address those. I know it's difficult to resist, when given an opportunity to change one thing, to layer on more and more stuff. The intent is not to change the Open AWD Heavy rules to make a new class or change the basic class rules. The only intent is if lots of people already want to run this car, and it's clear from entry lists that they do, I can make it a lot simpler and cheaper by putting this program together.

To be more clear: I have a five week old baby, a real job, and three rallies to organize. Not complaining, I enjoy all three of those. Well, maybe the job I'll leave off the list. I also have 8-10 other large or technical rally projects (excluding actually putting on rallies) that I'm working on. But this project requires research, calling people, and sorting out technical details, which will take some time. I need a volunteer to do it. No volunteers, no AWD rallying without a restrictor.

Remember, *MY* car has three liters of NA power. If no one works on this... it just means I'll beat everyone with a restrictor on any twisty course.

Waiting....

Anders

---

Grassroots rally. It's what I think about.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2009 08:00AM by Anders Green.

my impression is that a no-restrictor, stock-ish tune wrx will be far less drivable that one 'hobbled' by a restrictor but tuned for it. I'm not sure I understand the 'goal' of this other than getting rid of the restrictor...

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Morison Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>...I'm
> not sure I understand the 'goal' of this other
> than getting rid of the restrictor...
>
The restrictor is a barrier to participation for wanna-rallys.
(phone call to Anders,)
"Can I make my blue car safe and then rally?"
No, you have to add a restrictor.
"Ohhh, that sounds hard and expensive.
I just want to get a taste for it and try it out."

So maybe I just answered the question.
Barring an "arrive and drive" rental/lease program
with a hands-off policy for modification,
Make it a limited time offer.
Run w/o restrictor by number like one or three rallys
or by time like 11 months.
No policing necessary until there are enough cars asking for a class.

How much is it to get a restrictor? Is it really a deal breaker for people who just want to get their feet wet? It would seem the several thousand dollar safety cage, hundreds for a h&n, belts, extinguishers, thousands for a good suspension, wheels/tires, plus the rest of prep work would be the deal breaker?

Am I missing something, but a restrictor is just a machined piece of metal? The tune for it is a few hours on your local dyno, something kids with fixed up wrxs do anyway...

randyzimmer Wrote:
> The restrictor is a barrier to participation for
> wanna-rallys.

Starting in a WRX should be the deal breaker... not really the car that should be used to get your feet wet.

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

"Starting in a WRX should be the deal breaker... not really the car that should be used to get your feet wet. "

Where were you when Doug Havir got his first rally car?




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2009 05:24PM by randyzimmer.