XR4Ti - Rally Car?

Quote
Josh Wimpey
Sorry Keith, the things that I have mentioned above all came from you, Darryl, or Jorge in the SS thread so you can't act like they weren't brought up as justifications for the rules.

Do me a favor and find where any of us said those things.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
So why the rules to attempt to slow 2wd --If attempting to slow 2wd was a concern at all (more moving goalposts)?

The only 'slowing down' of 2wd cars was restrictions on Gr5 to try and level the playing field with Gr2 cars.
Again when the committee looked at a 4 class system, the idea of combining G2 and G5 meant that you either told the G2 drivers their cars needed mods to make the most out of the rules or you told the G5 drivers their cars needed mods to be within the rules. I think it is 3/4 of the 2wd cars were Gr2 cars and Gr2 has always been well subscribed so why would you not use it as the 'standard' for the class and then restrict the Gr5 cars to bring them down to the potential of the Gr2 cars?

Without a doubt, good drivers in Gr2 cars can and will beat moderate drivers in Gr5 cars most of the time. it is also clear very few Gr2 or Gr5 cars are built to the limit of the rules.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
On point #2 -- You can't seriously think that putting G5 cars in 4wd class for national events is really not the equivalent of banning them from national competition.

My preference of wording would be to have them scored in the overall but not recognised as a class (if the class were to go away.) Before anyone jumps on that, I don't personally think Gr5 should go away if it has competitors.

How is that any different than having them run in a championship that doesn't get recognised at the end of the season anyway.

Also, to be clear, I'm reasonably certain the EVENTS can recognise Gr5 as a class within a national length event if they wanted to!

Quote
Josh Wimpey
On point #3 -- I didn't bring up the manufacturer- -- You Jorge or Darryl did.

But only as far as saying 'if we wanted to attract manufacturers' - not as far as 'we're doing this in order to attract manufacturers.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
Second, it is disingenuos to pick an oddity of Production Class rules (Golf vs EVO & STI example) to justify limitations to open 2wd (G2 & G5) cars.

I didn't. It is one example of why the class structure needed to be looked at.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
This is especially true if you are not trying to court manufacturers --- the only people who should be interested in production class.

Except that the concept driving the 'new' Production class is one of an entry level class where people can build cars without a lot of modifcations and rally them in a class where they won't be over-run by 'built' engines. You'll note that we don't have the innane 'stock and year-correct door panel' restrictions in this new class and it would probably make a lot of cars that shouldn't be Gr2 legal for production again.
Certainly the Production 4wd rules were aimed at bringing a whole bunch of 'open' class cars back into 'production 4wd.'
Most of the 'open' cars at any north american event are probably further away from the top 3 or 4 in their class than a Gr5 car is anyway.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
On Point #4 -- You are simply flat wrong. In fact, the more open US G2 rules that you cite show as much and weaken your case, not strengthen it.

If you mean that canadian Gr2 cars are doing just fine in the US, this is where things go off the rails. As JVL regularly says, in North America Drivers beat other Drivers because no one is driving the cars to their limits. I fully agree with this, we've even seen a production car beat up on 4wd cars in the right hands in the right conditions (Sprongl on ice and snow)

Anyway - this has been beaten to death and I really don't have time or desire to fall down that rabbit hole again.

---

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.

Quote
Morison
Anyway - this has been beaten to death and I really don't have time or desire to fall down that rabbit hole again.

Then you should tar and feather the original poster that created this thread.

Wait....

---

Kirk Coughlin
Woodbury, MN and River Falls, WI

Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.

Quote
NoCoast
Wasn't this thread supposed to convince me to keep the car?
I have a firm offer of $6k for everything provided I put the brake stuff back on the car (lines) and complete the fuel system (mounting cell, pumps, making lines, etc.) Sweet right, only a few days of work right? Well, those few days of work (combined with reinstalling body panels and such for shipping) make me start to wonder if I'm going to go through all that work, why wouldn't I just keep the car since then it's even closer to being back to driveable. Man I'm a spaz...

Yep, you are and I say that as a friend.. You know it too that you get caught up in the excitement of "new shiney things"... You will argue forever why ditching a perfectly good, and easy, and relaible car----which we saw with Sean's build and running---- for some theoretical, potential something in a BMW with a stock box, stock ratio diff, stock brakes and extremely expensive parts for EVERYTHING..

Just as an example, a realy nice guy up in Quebec, the ideal clubman type person the sport needs, not piss away millins but in for the long haul, he picked up a "Compact" and just did P class at Pierce Niege, had lotsa fun in the typical condition... but now the car is jumping out of gear. he knows what he knows, he knows I do gearboxes for decades so he writes, I write back, he digs a bit and finds:

Quote

MODEL: E36 with S5D-250G (Getrag manual transmission) and M42, M44, M50 or M52 engines.
Situation: The transmission may jump out of 1st or 2nd gear with engine load.
Cause: The guide sleeve for 1st and 2nd gear may have been incorrectly machined on Getrag S5D-250G
transmissions installed on E36 vehicles with the above listed engines produced up to 4/98.
A new machining process for the 1st and 2nd gear guide sleeve which eliminates the above situation
on all S5D-250G transmissions was introduced in production on vehicles produced from 4/98.
Correction: If a customer complaint is received, first verify that the external gear shift linkage and clutch system
are operating properly. Refer to S.I. 23 01 99 for diagnostic tips.
If the external gear shift linkage and the clutch system are functioning correctly and the problem of
1st or 2nd gear jumping out is still present, the transmission should be replaced.
Procedure: Refer to the appropriate repair manual group 23 for transmission removal and installation
instructions.
Note: As outlined in S.I. 23 01 99 Esso UNIREX S2 grease BMW part number 83 23 9 416 138
should be used on the tapered splines and guide section of the transmission input shaft before
installation.
Parts Information: All Getrag S5D-250G transmissions in PDC inventory incorporate the new 1st and 2nd gear guide
sleeve machining process which eliminates the above situation.
Warranty Information: Covered under the terms of the BMW New Car Limited Warranty.

So a defect in the gearboxes, not a worn out thing, a design defect.. Wonder what that is going to cost? BMW gearbox parts are typically WAAAAAAY fawkin 'spensiv-er than T5..

And:

Quote

Oh! and also the diff we had at perce neige started slipping so we’re rebuilding the lsd and we’ll be trying to add 2 other clutches, we have the small diff, so not a lot of meat to machine(opened and measured), for sure there’s room to add 1 clutch and 1 dog plate, which would make it a 3 clutch Lsd. We actually have another spare, but decided to rebuild this one anyway.

will let you know just for fun how this turns out!

Marc.

Great, the diff needs work...

And of course we're already looking at what he can do about the rather feeble "power" the motor makes..

Making a motor make power costs money one way or the other...

But a boring cast irobn POS Lima with a Thunderchicken ECU makes---with a stock exhaust syetem---205 bhp and 235 ft/lbs of torque...
That combined with a 4.3 axle is more than enough for anybody to have a whole shit-ton of giggles---with the reliability of a stock street car..

For free basically...

Now Dave K, he did a BMW but I think he works from a slightly different perspective called full time employment that pays well..
OK, more power to him..

You have the thing, you have recovered all costs---extragavant as some of the things were---but its long ago spent, so your costs in: just a little time and a few bucks to refresh a motor; dingle ball and bearings.

Put the fawkin thing back together, drive it and you'll get a brand new stiffie for it again, and then go stomp on Dave...

---

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.

+1 on JVL's post. Dude, you have a great car that has worked. It has power, gearbox, suspension, brakes, and other stuff that match up well with the bed cars out there right now. 6000 is pennies on the dollar for it, so keep it!

Final notre on the idiocracy ruining Canadian rally:

When Gp2 was in the embryonic stages back in 1991-92 I suggested as simple a plan as befits my simple brains: 2.0, 2wd, 2000lb min, 2 man crew..

Then series steward John Boofman (boof is French you silly monolinguistioc so its a joke on his "Stuff 'em Buffum" nick name: you hit something it goes BOOF) was asking me of all people about our PNW regional "Rally-light" class. I told him the details he said and I quote verbatim "Wot da fawk".

He instantly saw that if people were lured in in shitboxes like real shitbox 1.3, once the hook was set and they were infected with the rally disease, their little shitboxes would VERY SOON become boring---and all the money and effort poured into it would be pissed into the sand since they reasonably couldn't up-engine the things when the INEVITABLE perv-twich craving kicked in..

The class as then proposed ---and pushed thru was this dumb "If 4 valve then max 2000cc, if 3, max 2200, if 2 v max 2400 and 0.8 for pushrod...and then--openly admitted (on the phone---but never in public---or print) as a political sop to Mid-west PGT whiners, 1.05lbs per corrected cc.
My answer to the weight thing was "Oh fawkin great WE have a weight rule for our weeenie widdle put put cars, YOU have no min weight for the Quattro or Hyund-i-bitchy, sounds real fair" (no do you see the exasperation of the similarly idiotic 32mm restrictor for CARS cars nowhere on the same planet in terms of development as l Open (BIG RICH GUYS) 4wd with 34mm? Bullshit)

When I suggested my simple-minded 2000cc, 2000lb, 2wd, 2 man crew. Buffum said "Great! Simple. Clear but whaddya gonna do about Omnis with 2,2 or Volvo with 2,1 or 2,2 (Yeah Mr Audi, biggest budget in the country asked about these people with their lowly cars) or Colts with 2,6?? Kinda leaves them hanging. Nope can't do it.."
I was wrong and he was right, and with clear simple direct answers..

So we live and learn..
And when I saw the success and enthusiasm in Finland for F-cup with their intelligent "If this cc then this weight" table, there was a simple answer.. Years of agitations and lobbying and silly tactics---like getting others to be front men putting forth the suggestion as if it was "their" idea----the concept was adopted---after the tech geniuses at Rally America decided that they, in this tiny less than one club there worth of cars series knew better.. Not perfect but better, more flexible..

Maybe somebody with patience to deal with bullshitters could gently hint to the technical geniuses at CARS, you know the guy who doesn't build motors or gearboxes or weld or evidently DO anything technical except ask Richard and 4 -Star and Can Jam what they want the rules top be like---that Canada could, with a few keystrokes, revise their rules to the F-cup weight to CC table...and solve a lot of problems
I'd be happy to find it again if somebody was willing to take on Senor Don Q and Sancho Pansa mantle.

---

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.

Quote
frumby
+1 on JVL's post. Dude, you have a great car that has worked. It has power, gearbox, suspension, brakes, and other stuff that match up well with the bed cars out there right now. 6000 is pennies on the dollar for it, so keep it!

$6k for a pile of parts I get. $6k for the car with all that assembly time back in it doesn't make sense since once you get started on sticking it all back together, you'll probably find the motivation to actually make some real progress on it. Sure there's the wiring and motor choice stuff, but you'll get that figured out.

Unless you need the cash right naoW, push it into the spare container and deal with it after the ChumpCar race. If you don't need the cash right away....get working on Ted's compact and the rental car and you'll have some coin soon enough. Besides, you'll probably need something with a turbo in it for 2014 if you want to be anywhere near the CHCA 2wd records set in 2013.

Dave

Quote
DaveK
Near the CHCA 2wd records set in 2013.

You have enough faith in me that I'll be able to set records this year eh.

I don't really want CHCA records though. Then you'd just end up doing the Dave thing and before we know you're buying TR30Rs to turbo it or something silly like that.

---

Grant Hughes

Quote
NoCoast
Wasn't this thread supposed to convince me to keep the car?
I have a firm offer of $6k for everything provided I put the brake stuff back on the car (lines) and complete the fuel system (mounting cell, pumps, making lines, etc.) Sweet right, only a few days of work right? Well, those few days of work (combined with reinstalling body panels and such for shipping) make me start to wonder if I'm going to go through all that work, why wouldn't I just keep the car since then it's even closer to being back to driveable. Man I'm a spaz...

---

Kirk Coughlin
Woodbury, MN and River Falls, WI

Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.

Quote
john vanlandingham

I was wrong and he was right, and with clear simple direct answers..

Quote
john vanlandingham


I was wrong and he was right,

Quote
john vanlandingham


I was wrong

ALERT THE MEDIA!! Feb. 27, 2013, a day that will live in infamy! John Vanlandingham typed the words "I was wrong" and he was referring to himself!

Carry on...

(Just teasing, John. )

@ JVL

It's no secret that you don't like CARS decision to change the class structure, who does?

You engineered the destroking of the 4G54B.

As the ultimate snub to CARS, would it be possible to destroke and 2.3L to 2.0L?

Quote
RWD4ME
@ JVL

It's no secret that you don't like CARS decision to change the class structure, who does?

You engineered the destroking of the 4G54B.

As the ultimate snub to CARS, would it be possible to destroke and 2.3L to 2.0L?

More advantageous would be to reduce bore size down from 96mm to the common as dogshit 2,0 Ranger size... That would help in a couple of ways: reduce the tendency toward detonation (since the flame doesn't have 96mm to travel, by the time its gone 85-86mm temp and pressure has risen high enough that there is a tenedency to light off whatever is left.
the 2,0 with smaller bore of 89.4 would suffer from high boost less..)
Here's some figures --unfortunately in inches:
Major engine specs are
.......................................2.0........ .2.3 Early....2.3 Late.....2.5
Bore...............................3.520........3. 780.........3.780......3.780
Stroke............................3.126........3.1 26.........3.126......3.401
Bore Spacing...................4.173........4.173...... ...4.173......4.173 same
Main Journal Dia..............2.3986......2.3986.......2.2055.. ....2.2055
Rod Journal Dia...............2.0468......2.0468.......2.0468. ....2.0468
Con. Rod Length..............5.2047......5.2047.......5.204 7.....5.457<---oh, lookie longer rod same journal
Crank Center to deck.......8.368........8.368.........8.368......8 .368
Piston pin height...............1.583........1.583.........1. 583.....1.2105

But they only made them for 8-9 years, versus 20 years for the 2.3 and the point of something like a 2300 turbo Ford or volvo is that with just an exhaust, they make OK HP and beaucoup torque---such that the average numbskull foolish ebnough to build a car doesn't have to give any thought or---and this is the part the "techincal geniuses" overlooked because they aren't building anything---they don't have to go out and spend several thousand dollars to build an engine that in the end makes the HP and FT/LBs they have in the thing they bought..
And when a couple of thousand here is going for a cage, a couple of thousand for suspension , a couple of thousand for seats and harnesses etc
NOT SPENDING $2000-4000+ dollars HELPS get guys in the woods less painfully, while still making enough power to have a lt of fun---until they recover from the initial build costs...

So just to spite idiots, it's not a very bright idea. Because no matter what it would be an expensive proposition...

A better course of action would be to vote out the admittedly unqualified tech nerd people and get people on the board that can undertsand WHY people chose to not spend thousands of dollars on the whim of a few "volunteers" who obviously, clearly are out of touch with ordinary rank and file clubbies---or at least those with some desire to TRY to go fast on limited budgets.

---

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.

Quote
john vanlandingham
A better course of action would be to vote out the...

I always chuckle a little when I read this sort of comment.

Generally speaking, if someone wants to get involved with CARS at the national sanctioning body level and have input and influence on the direction the association is taking all they have to do is stick their hand up and offer to get involved.

It isn't always that easy, and it does take initiative and drive from the people who want to step forward but it isn't an onerous task by any stretch.

The outlier in this might be people who are transparently single issue driven, particularly when it comes to elected positions. I doubt anyone who wants to get involved to 'fix this problem' won't gather much popular support.
That said, much can be done rather effectively from board or committee appointed positions!

---

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.

Quote
Morison

Quote
john vanlandingham
A better course of action would be to vote out the...

I always chuckle a little when I read this sort of comment.

Generally speaking, if someone wants to get involved with CARS at the national sanctioning body level and have input and influence on the direction the association is taking all they have to do is stick their hand up and offer to get involved.

It isn't always that easy, and it does take initiative and drive from the people who want to step forward but it isn't an onerous task by any stretch.

The outlier in this might be people who are transparently single issue driven, particularly when it comes to elected positions. I doubt anyone who wants to get involved to 'fix this problem' won't gather much popular support.
That said, much can be done rather effectively from board or committee appointed positions!

Yes, and why do it? Because RALLYCAR

---

2015 Subaru WRX
Traded the Audi for the above
Sold the 1993 Honda Civic EG w/B16A Conversion to the Raw Racing boys
6 bicycles because, you know, global warming and all

Quote
NoCoast
Wasn't this thread supposed to convince me to keep the car?
I have a firm offer of $6k for everything provided I put the brake stuff back on the car (lines) and complete the fuel system (mounting cell, pumps, making lines, etc.) Sweet right, only a few days of work right? Well, those few days of work (combined with reinstalling body panels and such for shipping) make me start to wonder if I'm going to go through all that work, why wouldn't I just keep the car since then it's even closer to being back to driveable. Man I'm a spaz...

The car is too well thought out and too far prepp'd to give up on now. YOU MUST COMPLETE THE MISSION. There will be Group 5 for the long term in Western Canada so please know you will be welcomed up here when you are ready.

Best regards,
Tony

---

2015 Subaru WRX
Traded the Audi for the above
Sold the 1993 Honda Civic EG w/B16A Conversion to the Raw Racing boys
6 bicycles because, you know, global warming and all

Hi Tony,

"There will be Group 5 for the long term in Western Canada".

Say in the case of a new build in Canada if the car is built to the specs of the old CARS Group 5 rules. How does one get this logbooked if the class and structure doesn't exist.

Would CARS still issue a log book if the log book was sought in 2014 or later?