Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

For any discussions and suggestions about the PHA series supps

Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby Speednation » Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:54 pm

Just to follow up on the discussion we had at the November meeting, I wanted to make a proposal to move all turbo cars out of Street prepared and into Street Mod or SM2 (whichever class they would be eligible for). As many of you know, Street Prepared classes we use for Hillclimbing are part of the SCCA Solo II rules. In 2006, since the SCCA admitted that they could not enforce their rule that "boost cannot be altered" in a street prepared car, they decided that as long as all of the stock turbo components (wastegate, downpipe, turbo, etc.) were unaltered, any boost by adding an exhaust, header, cold air intake (typical street prepared bolt-ons) would be acceptable. Of course, that is not to say that in street prepared, boost is now unlimited. That is neither the rule or the intent of the Solo II board. Many people have interpreted that this new rule allows for unlimited boost - that is not the case. But there are 2 problems inherent with this new ruling:
1). Aftermarket fuel management systems and computers can easily be altered to give additional boost over the stock numbers. One of the Solo II board I spoke with felt as if the extra boost gained is not much of a benefit on a Solo II course. The Turbo Neon I bought from Mark Daddio was proof of that. He originally had 15 psi of boost, but dialed it back to 7 psi because he wasn't able to use all of that boost.

I'm not sure that is the case. An extra 2 psi of boost would likely be of benefit on most Solo II courses.

2). Anyway, since this is a Solo II rule that we have inherited, all of you likely agree that any slight gain on a Solo II course would be a HUGE gain on one of our hills. A Solo II guy will not be able to benefit as much from extra boost as much as we would at, say Giants Despair.

Solo II rules were not written for Hillclimbs, but I have problem with borrowing classes form the Solo II rules. Our colleagues in Road Racing don't allow for any turbo cars in SS, IT, Prod, GT - and they have a history of not accepting turbo cars (except in the new Touring classes) because of the problems with enforcement plus the advantage of added boost would give you on a high speed road racing course.

I contend that gains you would get for even 2 psi, although no big deal in autocross, would be a BIG deal at a hillclimb. When I first started in 1995, the PHA had combined ESP and BSP, so we can make changes to the classes if we see fit.

So I propose to move all turbo cars from Street Prepared to SM/SM2 for the above reasons. Thanks for reading this - Mike Ancas
User avatar
Speednation
Racer
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:39 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Postby Tim Royer » Fri Apr 27, 2007 12:18 am

Hi all,

I would agree with all of that statement. Was anything mentioned at the last PHA meeting?
Regards,

Tim Royer
User avatar
Tim Royer
Novice
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:02 pm

Postby Speednation » Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:57 am

[quote="Tim Royer"]Hi all,

I would agree with all of that statement. Was anything mentioned at the last PHA meeting?[/quote]

I couldn't attend, but at the meeting before the banquet, we wanted to get feedback from the racers. But at that meeting, there were no racers opposed to this proposal.

One of my good friends is races an ESP Subaru Sti. It has 6-8 more psi of boost over stock, but he isn't cheating. He snagged one of the trophies at nationals this year, which was filled with nothing but EVO 8's and Sti's. No Mustangs or any other non-boosted car got a trophy. That may be fine for autocross, but on a hill, these cars meet the definition of what SM is all about. Remember, the PHA was one of the first groups (way before the SCCA) to do a SM class to accommodate the turbocharged Miatas that were supposed to come up from the SE Region to race with us. None came, but the class stuck.
User avatar
Speednation
Racer
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:39 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Postby Tim Royer » Fri Apr 27, 2007 12:42 pm

HI all,

I haven’t been to any meetings lately either I would hope that someone that was there could add to this topic. I would think even if it was changed it may not be done this year because entries have already been sent for 2 events. I think it should be talked about for next season though.

I have heard private debates on this topic also and think some of these classes should be changed. A vehicles performance in a Solo is much different in a Time Trial/Hill Climb a good example would be a turbo car. A turbo car can’t harness all the benefits of the turbo in a Solo course generally. Now on a higher speed track or hill the turbo has a chance to open up which most of time will then out perform other cars in the class.
Regards,

Tim Royer
User avatar
Tim Royer
Novice
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:02 pm

Turbos

Postby Rich Sweigart » Fri Apr 27, 2007 10:58 pm

Mike,

We did not do anything about the turbo cars in Street Prepared, mostly we talked about PHA t-shirts, roll cages and allowing enough time for the tech session. To do this right, you need to present your motion and we vote on it at the next meeting but, at this time, you are most likely too late for 2007. :(

Rich Sweigart
Rich Sweigart
Novice
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 12:20 pm
Location: Quakertown, PA

Postby Speednation » Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:10 am

Not a problem. The plan from the November meeting was to get feedback from people. By the next board meeting, there should be enough input for me to form a specific proposal that can be voted on for the 2008 season.
User avatar
Speednation
Racer
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:39 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Turbo cars in Street prepared

Postby Speednation » Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:48 pm

OK - this is your last chance to present arguments against having a ban on turbo cars in the PHA Street Prepared classes. I have a great story to illustrate my reasoning. Jeremy Deitzel (Black EVO 8 in SM) was new to hillclimbing this year, but still set 2 SM records. He went under 2 minutes at Duryea, and even beat crazy Mark's record at Weatherly. Jeremy is a VERY GOOD driver, but since he actually drives his car to the events, he purposely only pushes his car to about 90-95% of it's potential. I have never even come close to beating him on a hill. BUT, when it comes to auctcrossing, 4 out of 5 times I can beat him (he is usually only about 1-2 10ths behind me, however). I am driving my 105 HP Civic and he is driving his 400 HP EVO 8.

Remember, the Street Prepared classes we use are the only classes that we borrow from the Solo 2 rules (other than Street Mod and SM2 - which the PHA actually created well before the SCCA adopted them). The SCCA Solo 2 board has decided that if you gain boost because of legal bolt on items you add (header, down pipe, big exhaust, intake) or even the efi mods you make (modified computer or stand alone aftermarket efi system), the increase in boost is legal. Of course, you are not allowed to DIRECTLY change your boost, but if you get more boost as a result of all of the other changes you make, it is OK.

Even at the big, National level autocross events, you rarely get out of 2nd gear and don't have a lot of chances to get deep into your boost before you have to jam on your brakes. And there are usually several very tight turns in which turbo lag will negate some of the advantage your big turbo gave you on the straights. But our hillclimb roads have little resemblance to an autocross course. Remember, in autocross, the road surface is flat.

So back to my good friend Jeremy and I. When it comes to the hills, he CRUSHES me. And for those of you who know me, I don't usually leave much on the hills. I am typically running my car at 98% of its limit by the end of the weekend. Here are the numbers: I beat Jeremy by 1/10th at the autocross last weekend. He beat me by 7 SECONDS at the last hillclimb. This is an example as to the advantage boost will give you on a hill as opposed to an autocross.

So, boost may not be that much of an issue to the Solo 2 rule makers, but as everyone of us clearly knows, it is a serious advantage to anyone running a hillclimb. So I will be proposing that, for the 2008 season, we don't allow turbo cars to compete in street prepared. They will still be able to find a home in Street Mod, Street Mod 2, Rally, Special, etc. - Mike Ancas
User avatar
Speednation
Racer
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:39 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby Speednation » Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:42 pm

Thanks to Dave and Ray and everyone who supported this motion. Sorry I couldn't get to the meeting. Looking forward to seeing everyone at the next meeting and also at Spring Jefferson - Mike
User avatar
Speednation
Racer
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:39 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby Joe Foering » Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:57 pm

Unfortunately, an acute repiratory infection prevented my attending the PHA mtg. I was told after the meeting that turbo cars have been moved from SP to SM. Assuming this occurred, could someone be more specific about the wording of the action? The Supplementals for the season should reflect this change.
User avatar
Joe Foering
Novice
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 12:24 pm
Location: Fleetwood

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby jerdeitzel » Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:22 am

Okay i'm here to bring up this topic again. It seems nobody really gave a crap about this last year so it passed with no objections. I personally didn't have a stake in this either way so i kept my mouth shut. But, its time to bring this to the forfront again. I don't think this is good change to the classing of hillclimb cars without more solid info on the subject. We as a group are making this class thing even more complicated then it already is. If you have read any of the unclassifed class thread you will see that we are causing problems with this rule. I believe we need to take this out of the supps and get the classing back to the way it was. We're not helping anyone with this, and possibly hurting recruitment of future drivers.
#88 SM
Mitsubishi evo 8
jerdeitzel
Novice
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby dspgti » Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:22 pm

Let me start by asking you Jeremy, what is there about Mike Ancas's argument that you object to, or find inaccurate?

Dave Y
dspgti
Novice
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Reading, PA/ Hammonton, NJ

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby jerdeitzel » Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:27 pm

Well i'll try and list a few off the top of my head

1. Raising boost is not a magic silver bullet. There is a limit as to how much each car will gain before exploding, bye turning up the boost.

2. There are two things that you can't do in SP on turbo cars. That is a upgraded BOV and wastegate. I'll take for example my car, the stock 03's BOV will start leaking at 23lb's that is only 4lbs over the factory setting. So unlimited boost is sorta misleading.

3. Some turbo cars respond better to increase boost then others. How can we throw that all together. EX. The porsche 944 turbo, Your not going to make that car dominate ASP no matter how much you turn up the boost.



The point is that there are turbo cars out there that just turning up the boost won't make them some dominant car. Now there are 2 cars out there that will dominate their SP class on the hills. And that is a BSP Mitsubishi EVO, or Subaru STI. Both of these cars will gain significant power from turning up the boost, and this is actually year specific. A BSP EVO 9 will crush a BSP EVO8 in power. Just like a New EVO 10 or new STI will beat the older versions.

The point is there is not really a huge gain from bunching ALL turbo cars together. They are not on an equal playing field to begin with. Just because you have a turbo car and can turn up the boost will not make your car an unfair advantage at the hills. IT can make an advantage in a certain class that they dominate in SOLO. Thats why it has been talked about moving them to ASP. The fact is, the SCCA had never understood the potential of these rally cars and are still trying to figure out where they should be. So lets let them figure it out!
#88 SM
Mitsubishi evo 8
jerdeitzel
Novice
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby mrevilracing » Wed Dec 24, 2008 7:14 pm

If it was up to me, the AWD cars would all be in their own class. Turbo or not. That is the arguement to be made.
RIP Joe, my friend.

Must go faster!!!!
http://www.trueblueracingparts.com
User avatar
mrevilracing
Novice
 
Posts: 1091
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 3:24 pm
Location: Perkiomenville, PA

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby dspgti » Fri Dec 26, 2008 11:44 am

Jeremy, you seem to be pretty familiar with BSP typical cars. How about CSP and DSP? Not Huge gains by turning up the boost? What simialr adjustments can a Normaly Aspirated car do to gain ANY increase in power equal to 1 or 2 psi boost increase?

I have some time on my hands so I'll try to get into it a little. A couple of years ago, there was a guy that put together a "copy" so to speak, of a Mazda 323 GT to run in DSP. In the beginning, it was pretty much a legal car. It had the stock, untouched BOV. Due to age, the BOV was not maintaining boost pressure the way it was designed and allowed more boost pressure. It was not modified in any way. As you brought up before, a good way to handle this was to talk to the driver and reason with his sportmanship. He yeilded to pressure and reclassed his car in Street Mod but did it after making a lot of upgrades like a professionally built bottom and top ends. Components came from Fyin Miata, Mazda Speed and another Mazda Turbo specialty company that the name escapes me right now. The result was the 2WD 323 that has been refered to from the 2006 Duryea that my son drove to 2:00+ on his second run ever in that car. Aaron said he felt there was at least 2 to 3 seconds more to be had with that car. Miscommunications between him and the co-driver/owner led to wrong tire pressure changes and Aaron got sideways and came to a stop at turn 9 losing 5 seconds on his third and final run as can be seen on the videos. We timed the video and verified the 5 seconds with a stop watch. That run was still a 123. second and change. Less the 5 seconds would have been 118. Unfortunitly, Aaron never got to prove the potential of that car because the owner (his uncle) crashed the car on the next run.

Apples and Oranges you say. Yes BUT? The car was properly classed in SM. A formadable car in the right hands but not a record breaker in SM. So what's my point? 90% of the work Rob did on the car could have kept him in DSP. The retrimmed turbo was SM legal but would have been cheating in DSP but undetectable. The head work was significant but could have been dialed back to be SP legal. As far as boost, they dyno tuned the car at 15 PSI. Very achievable with stock components.

Most of you know the story about Rob being killed in that car in a tragic street accident. I had the car in my yard for a while till the family decided what they wanted to do with it. They offered it to me and Aaron. After thinking long and hard we decided that it was best to sell it and I listed it on ebay and sold it for them. Had we decided to keep it, it would have been put back in DSP trim and very well have been an awsome car (in the right hands). Aaron and I felt it might still have been a sub or close to a 2 minute car in legal DSP setup.

I have seen it with my own eyes and my own experiences. I agree with you that certain cars will never dominate just because they have a turbo and not all turbo cars respond well to just cranking up the boost. But, no matter how you slice it, Turbos and Supercharges have massive advantages over normaly asperated cars in the same class at a hillclimb.

At least that is the way I see it,
an Army of one,
Dave Y
dspgti
Novice
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Reading, PA/ Hammonton, NJ

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby jerdeitzel » Fri Dec 26, 2008 2:09 pm

Dave i'll look at some CSP cars and DSP and get back to you on that one. Now you ask what can a car do to gain what turning up the boost will gain you? Well lets start with car X and a car Y.

If car X comes from the factory with 200hp and is turbo charged vs a car with 220hp NA. You might be able to close the gap if you turn up the boost. Now you'll say what if its the other way around?

The fact that you agree that some cars will not have a huge advantage, just turning up the boost is my point. The fact is, there are cars (for the class) in every class of racing. Does it make it not fair? Well sometimes!

I'm already sick of this dissagreement. We can keep making up rules as much as we want. If that is what people believe will make everyone happy then so be it. I'm just going to keep my opinions to myself and race in any class that the PHA see's fit. I'll leave the rest up too you guys. I was just trying to look out for the (little guys). Guess everyone should look out for themselves! And it sounds like each region needs to have an enforcer checking each SP class to make sure they are classed right so we don't screw up any PHA series involvement. :?
#88 SM
Mitsubishi evo 8
jerdeitzel
Novice
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby dspgti » Fri Dec 26, 2008 4:07 pm

I repeated the word "huge" and ask the question, WHY should there be ANY? Both FI and NA are allowed all the same modifications. Those include changes to the engine management system. If both cars do the same changes, what keeps the NA car equal? There is NO equivalent change to increasing boost pressure available to NA and therefore "Unfair".

Gee, what am I going to do with all the time on my hands if you don't keep the disagreement going. :D
I am trying to keep the lines of communication open and encourage everyone that has a opinion for or against to be involved. I too want to look out for the small guy.

The enforcer needs to be the individuals in each class. We police ourselves and have tried to avoid the "Official Protest" but we all need to keep alert. As we said before, our Tech inspectors do not have specific knowledge of each class specification and needs the individuals from each class to point out infractions. Remember we have 63 different classes available to run in. I can barely remember what's legal in my class. That's what makes it so easy,"Got Turbo"?... "Street Mod" :evil: Now, if I could only convince the other guys,"Got V8"?... "Big Bore"! :wink:

Dave Y.

I think this has been an intellegent and logical discussion and only lacks in grammer and spell checking, especially on my part. But you all understand in the end...don't you? :oops:
dspgti
Novice
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Reading, PA/ Hammonton, NJ

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby jerdeitzel » Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:52 pm

Dave, you can't keep me away as much as i'd like to stay away. lol

Same mod on different cars, does not mean = gains! These cars sometime have 2 or 4 extra cylinders. Unfair?

I will beat you anytime in the bad grammer race. (I'm really not as dumb in person. :D )

Nobody seems to care about this issue anyways.

Now how can someone enforce the rules if there is no one else in the class?
Last edited by jerdeitzel on Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:24 pm, edited 3 times in total.
#88 SM
Mitsubishi evo 8
jerdeitzel
Novice
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby dspgti » Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:03 pm

Can't erase it! No protest in the alloted time.

You don't think that is the first time that happened do you?

Dave Y
dspgti
Novice
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Reading, PA/ Hammonton, NJ

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby jerdeitzel » Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:18 pm

No i understand it happens. I'm just alittle worried about how Matt has stated that the integrity of the event is at stake if we don't follow the supp rules?
Last edited by jerdeitzel on Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#88 SM
Mitsubishi evo 8
jerdeitzel
Novice
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Street Prepared Turbo cars should be moved to SM and SM2

Postby dspgti » Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:32 pm

Hmmmmm? Matt, you're on! I have an opinion but it is not my call. You know what they say about
opinions? It's like an A.. hole, everybodies got one.

Dave Y.
dspgti
Novice
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Reading, PA/ Hammonton, NJ

Next

Return to Supplementary Regulations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest