john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Super Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
Morison Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > john vanlandingham Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The restrictor has forced people to do what > they > > should when building engines and that think > about > > torque. > > So are you suggesting that suspension, > differential, gearbox, tire and engine > technologies would have not advanced if there had > been no restrictors? > > > ...and even with the 34mm thing inplace the > average speed on stages > > in WRC went up apprx 5 km/hr or about 3 mph > within > > 4 years of the rule being in place. > > But what was the immediate effect of the > restrictor? > > > The restrictor didn't slow THEM down. > > Didn't it? > > Restrictors don't exist in a vacuum (even if they > regulate one) and if the same technological > advances had been made in suspension, > differential, gearbox, tire and engine > technologies without the restrictor do you not > agree that the cars would be even faster than they > are with restrictors today? > That is not the point. Both points are clear. Restricted motors did not slow down the car of those with the budget to re-do all the junk on the other side of the restrictors is the main point. The second point of you attempting to derail and obscure this first glaringly obvious point and argue just to hear your head rattle is also clear. You ain't nothing if not a consistent troll. > John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
heymagic Banned Junior Moderator Location: La la land Join Date: 01/25/2006 Age: Fossilized Posts: 3,740 Rally Car: Not a Volvo |
But John...without restrictors and todays technology the speeds would be frickin scarey..or scarier. Without restrictors these engines would be cranking out 4-600 hp and turning 7-8000 rpm. The bigger power and revs would see speeds way beyond what we see today.
The restrictor has put a fairly consistant cap on speeds and power. Nothing else will work as effectively without huge effort. Like it or not, it is the best means to an end..at this time. NASCAR has seen speeds rise after they did the restrictors to the point they redsigned the whole car. The human mind and spirit is hard to hold back. Eventually we may have to make more adjustments in the rally world for the same reasons. Having to be mindfull of "accepted practices" is a very real issue. Irregardless of our desires our actions today, whether business or personal are under great scrutiny. There are way too many lawyers just waiting for another 'McDonalds" case to present itself. |
Morison Banned Junior Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
john vanlandingham Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > You ain't nothing if not a consistent troll. Having a differing view on things doesn't make me a troll. If anything you are the one peppering otherwise good discussions with self-proclaimed 'throw away' comments. This discussion on restrictors has come up from the fact that accepted practice is to restrict the intake on all wheel drive turbo cars. You bluntly state that restrictors did not slow down the cars when, in fact, you haven't 'shown your work' on that statement. Showing that restricted cars were faster four years later is a red herring in the extreme since had the team been left without the restrictor you can be virtually certain that the same developments that gave the cars more grip and better handling would have still come to the table (although maybe not on the same timeline) Anytime we hear from someone who has driven GrpB cars and WR cars they tend to say the current cars are far easier and safer to drive at speed than the relatively in-agile Killer Bs. > Restricted motors did not slow down the car of > those with the budget to re-do all the junk on the > other side of the restrictors is the main point. But my main point is that those with the budget would have 're-done' all the junk regardless of the restrictor and would have been that much faster. The teams wouldn't have simply sat back and been happy with the power, grip and drivability they had pre-restrictor > The second point of you attempting to derail and > obscure this first glaringly obvious point... Your point may be obvious, but it is also a fallacy. If someone takes a GrpN car, removes the restrictor and remaps the ecu ... will they be able to make it faster than with the restrictor? If the answer to that is yes, then the restrictor slows the car down. Back to the original discussion - restrictors are used by the world sanctioning body to control and limit the power available at the top level of the sport. A regional sanctioning body can likely get insurance for running a class without a restrictor (underwriters typically only care that you follow the rules you make, not always what those rules are) BUT, should an accident happen and it can be suggested that the sanctioning body was negligent in allowing unrestricted cars - the insurance company will cut and run faster that you can imagine. 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 ![]()
|
SEANT SEAN TENNIS Senior Moderator Location: SEATTLE Join Date: 01/23/2006 Age: Ancient Posts: 275 Rally Car: SAAB 99, SAAB 96 850, SAAB 99T, SAAB V4 |
Faster is faster, yes ?
The power is different with restrictor versus without. Restrictor limits power, maybe. What it does is change where and how the power is delivered in the RPM's. It may slow the progress of speed, but only slows not stops at this point anyways. I say, "maybe" because there is no doubt that due to smaller intake restrictors the engineers figured out how to make the engines deliver more torque at lower RPM then they were without the smaller intake restrictors, the gas engines are almost diesel engines now ... The main out come had been that the air intake restrictor up'd the costs of engine development greatly while slowing the progression of speed slightly ... So yes restrictors are a short term slow down in speed which is overcome at high costs and more gears ... basically the poor go slower for a while longer, poor bastards always getting screwed by the man! As always IMHO SEAN TENNIS KF7JJR SEATTLE, WASHINGTON SAAB 99, SAAB 850 SAAB V4, SAAB 99T |
heymagic Banned Junior Moderator Location: La la land Join Date: 01/25/2006 Age: Fossilized Posts: 3,740 Rally Car: Not a Volvo |
SEANT Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Faster is faster, yes ? > > The power is different with restrictor versus > without. > > Restrictor limits power, maybe. What it does is > change where and how the power is delivered in the > RPM's. It may slow the progress of speed, but only > slows not stops at this point anyways. I say, > "maybe" because there is no doubt that due to > smaller intake restrictors the engineers figured > out how to make the engines deliver more torque at > lower RPM then they were without the smaller > intake restrictors, the gas engines are almost > diesel engines now ... > > The main out come had been that the air intake > restrictor up'd the costs of engine development > greatly while slowing the progression of speed > slightly ... > > So yes restrictors are a short term slow down in > speed which is overcome at high costs and more > gears ... basically the poor go slower for a while > longer, poor bastards always getting screwed by > the man! > > As always IMHO > > SEAN TENNIS > SEATTLE, WASHINGTON > SAAB 99, SAAB 850 I think that pretty much sums it up ! So for discussions sake, acknowlodging that speeds need to be somehow kept in check, what is a better way to do it? Keep in mind that policing the solution needs to be within the realm of a regional event. |
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Super Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
heymagic Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > > > I think that pretty much sums it up ! > > > So for discussions sake, acknowlodging that speeds > need to be somehow kept in check, what is a better > way to do it? > > Keep in mind that policing the solution needs to > be within the realm of a regional event. Organiser supplied pump gas. Or organiser approved gas staions as only approved gas stop/MTC NOTHING limits the POP, that makes the torque that accelerates the car like the fuel. And if they sign the entry, they sign a "no-fault" agreement regarding the use of fuel. They do it with open eyes. > > John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
Dazed_Driver Banned Elite Moderator Location: John and Skyes Magic Love liar Join Date: 08/24/2007 Posts: 2,154 |
WRC's *must* run a 2 liter engine, correct? It's FIA mandated? So while our open class OR newer wrx's come with a 2.5 liter engine, the WRCs are making more torque with smaller engines. So, if you uncork a 25% bigger engine, I'm not sure how thats supposed to stay within the range of reasonable power, even with pump gas, and especially in the hands of a newbie. Pump gas and modern high end ECU's with knock sensors, IC spray... there's ways to make power on 92 octane. Especially if you're not limited by revs.
Welcome to the cult of JVL drink the koolaid or be banned. |
heymagic Banned Junior Moderator Location: La la land Join Date: 01/25/2006 Age: Fossilized Posts: 3,740 Rally Car: Not a Volvo |
From a regional standpoint we usually don't have enough entries to afford a dedicated fuel truck.
Many rallies such as DooWops have no gas stations around. Fuel restrictions require fuel testing equipment. There is also the risk of contaminated fuel, and that has happened before. Low octane can lead to meltdown if boost is turned up too much, however piston design, ceramic coating, engine management, cam profiles all can be worked to minimize detonation. The people with big bucks can buy way more internal protection than the poor. There is also an increased risk of meltdown if the tune is a bit wrong or the weather too nice and so on. It becomes considerably more difficult and expensive for the have nots. CAMS did not implement fuel as a restrictor because it didn't limit power and increased costs due to failures. I haven't been following all the manufacturer horsepower wars but Honda is currently getting about 240 hp on nat aspirated 2.2 liters and pump gas in the S2000. That is a fully warranted consumer engine. GM is getting 260 hp out the the turboed Cobalt also a fully warranted consumer product. Both Subaru and Mitsu are hitting 300hp on pump gas with full waranties. The full warranty points out they aren't pushing the limits at those numbers. |
tedm Ted Mendham Elite Moderator Location: NH Join Date: 02/17/2006 Age: Ancient Posts: 697 Rally Car: once upon a time drove WRX, Sentra, SAAB 99 |
"organiser supplied fuel"
heard at future NRS drivers meeting "Yo drivers, see that Cumberland Farms store over there? See the fuel pumps? That there is cheap gas, children. Think you can figure out how to pour some pump fuel into yer precious little race cars? Good! I think they sell beer, too, but the event organisors feel compelled to mention that that consumption of such beverages must be severely "restricted" until competitive driving has ended for the day. Next item......." I think Anders just wanted to see the usual suspects get into it again. ;-) Ted Mendham www.rensport.net |
Morison Banned Junior Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
heymagic Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Fuel restrictions require fuel testing equipment. Even if you are pointed to a gas station and told to 'fill there' you need to test the fuel that is reaching the engines. > The people with big bucks can buy way more > internal protection than the poor. in just about everything - people with more money to spend can buy advantages ... > CAMS did not implement fuel as a restrictor > because it didn't limit power and increased costs > due to failures. Actually, CAMS does run a spec fuel in all their classes, a spec race fuel for some and a spec pump fuel for others. What they didn't do was get rid of inlet restrictors.The only classes that run pump gas are 2wd. It is also supplied by a specific fuel supplier who also, presumably, brings fuel testing gear with them. An interesting question for someone who understands the realities of an engine tune better than I do ... if you took a car and all you did was remove the restrictor what impact would that have on the engine's performance? Would it be undrivable and run lean all the time? Would the engine management be able to deal with the extra air-flow available no problem? 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 ![]()
|
NoCoast Grant Hughes Junior Moderator Location: Whitefish, MT Join Date: 01/11/2006 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 6,818 Rally Car: BMW |
Completely different tune needed.
And it really depends on the car. Some of the STIs around here have engines that are so built around the restrictor that really they just end up with a little more hp and a useable top end without the restrictor. Grant Hughes |
Morison Banned Junior Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
Completely different as in it won't run at all or will blow up without the restrictor or it just won't be optimized without a different tune.
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 ![]()
|
Do It Sidewayz Chris Martin Ultra Moderator Location: Toronto, Ontario Join Date: 01/15/2006 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 567 Rally Car: E-85 powered Impreza |
Keith,
2 different senarios. If you are running a stock WRX or STi computer which is flashed, they will use MAF (Mass Air Flow), which would be just after the air filter. In here the ECU has an idea of the volume of air going into the engine and will adjust...to a point. In the case of an aftermarket standalone, most are MAP (manifold absolute pressure), and here the ECU has no idea of the volume of air, but rather the pressure and temperature. In this case, there won't be much compensation. Mid-range probably won't be much different, because the restrictor isn't choking yet, but once you tach the thing up and get over like 5,500 rpm, the fueling is going to be pretty far off, likely very lean. Another faccett ofcourse is timing, most tuners will do some pretty wild stuff with timing in the upper RPM range, so the thing doesn't fall on it's face enough....so that will be different. Regardless, i wouldn't running my motor like i stole it with a restricted map in the ECU, with no restrictor in the turbo. If you wanted to drive to the corner store to get milk...fine, but run it in a rally...no way Chris |
Morison Banned Junior Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
Thanks Chris -
If you did re-map could you keep the 'restricted' low/mid range grunt but fix the top end to get the power there too? In otherwords, without a restrictor can you still tune in the torque increases you see with restricted engines AND get the higher RPM power too? 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 ![]()
|
Do It Sidewayz Chris Martin Ultra Moderator Location: Toronto, Ontario Join Date: 01/15/2006 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 567 Rally Car: E-85 powered Impreza |
Maybe...
i think it depends on the set-up. Generally we size our turbos with restrictors in mind, so are generally a little bit small, as we don't make top-end anyways. you are still going to get a nice midrange since optimized restricted motors are probably running piles of compression and boost in the mid range. But yeah it'll keep pulling, and get some more HP up top....look at a dyno sheet and look how the HP curve is generating, and take a guess.. Chris |