Main Menu

To Standardise or not to standardise

Started by Andrew Bull, September 07, 2006, 14:13:25

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Should we remove performance modification allowances and return to a more stock engine?

YES
3 (16.7%)
NO
15 (83.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: September 07, 2006, 14:13:25

Andrew Bull

Andrew Bull
Tête Rouge Racing with Habitabull & Propolis
Rookie Champion       2022
team champions         1998 2000 2008 2009 2013
24hr winners               2005 2006 2009 2010 
championship winner 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2013

Catherine Noble

Can I vote maybe on this one as it would depend on how far you were letting the modifications go

Nathan Pasho

Another option, if people are opposed to a more stock engine, may be to have all engines provided by a single builder.  That would allow both improved performance AND standardization.  It is also a method used by some other spec series.

Benefits would be controlled costs the same for everyone, and closer racing, by limiting differences between the cars to driver skill and chassis preparation.  It would put an end to concern over races being dominated by the team with the biggest budget if the major components, namely the engine and gearbox, were standardized, as I guess the gearbox already is.

It may also help with recruitment, if people would have a better idea of the figures required to be competitive.

You could have some of the engineering minded club members settle on a fixed set of components and specs for the engine, and put together a complete package for all members.  

Also, it should help all members to have a strong engine at a modest price by means of bulk ordering of parts and services for the engines.

TerryCollier

Hi

Everyone can be relieved that I will be away from my computor for the next week so will not be able to do any more posts.

This thing about standard engines is a bit like the Holy Grail. The question is so simple but the answer is very complex. I have spent time with series that do this and still have variations in performance. Even my engines which have been built to the same spec vary in output by as much as 3 HP.

Where does the standardisation start and begin? Is the whole engine standard up to and including the carb? Who will be the supplier/s? How will we manage the cost? Has anyone thought that we will need to have a minimum of 60 engines per year to include the 24 hours.

Just thinking if one starts with a standard donor engine, then upgrades the various parts including heads, cams and cranks plus others, then a finished engine would cost about £1500. So for the season the cost would be £3000 per car. All repairs would have to be done by the supplier as the engine could not be unsealed. Just mechanical failure would just mean a rebuild, around £500, the parts would be covered on insurance. A serious fault, such as a valve bounce, would probably mean a complete rebuild and would cost the same as a new engine. At the end of a season the whole engine would need to be sent back for overhaul and a few parts replacing. Probably this would cost £1000.

So the concept seems great in principle but has serious problems in practise. Depending upon the supplier the variance between engines would be small or large -- and you would not know. The cost will expand the known budget by at least £3000 per car. All work, apart from cleaning the outside, must be done by the supplier, which has a distribution cost. Overall the concept does not solve problems, it just creates new ones.

Regards

Terry
Team Collier Racing

Andrew Bull

Terry,

I was not generally trying to suggest a 'crate' engine series, but just to reduce the expenditure required on machining, part mods, etc etc.  I never considered it to be anything other than the way we build engines now.   Build it yourself, to a set of technical regulations.  That was where the concept of being able to reduce costs comes from.  You are perfectly correct about 'crate' engines, if we have to buy / lease on a season by season basis, then the costs would more likely increase rather than decrease.  

So being able to build an engine from standard parts, yourself, would be the only viable cost reduction option,  but I reiterate to all readers of this post, we will end up with an un-policeable engine, or tolerances on specs so wide we leave ourselves wide open.
Andrew Bull
Tête Rouge Racing with Habitabull & Propolis
Rookie Champion       2022
team champions         1998 2000 2008 2009 2013
24hr winners               2005 2006 2009 2010 
championship winner 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2013

Steve Panas

We must be able to police our existing regs before considering new.

Geoff Archer

Quote from: "Steve Panas"We must be able to police our existing regs before considering new.
i agree steve, for example wot is the standard of the cam?? has the club had say 3 diferent cams checked to see if they are the same by an independant person, i guess not!!!!


"You could have some of the engineering minded club members settle on a fixed set of components and specs for the engine, and put together a complete package for all members"  
the club cant decide on how it wants to race, then when it dose the races are not supported!!! never mind this, this would cost money as parts would need to be standardised and re manufactured to match!!

"Another option, if people are opposed to a more stock engine, may be to have all engines provided by a single builder. That would allow both improved performance AND standardization"
ideal in an ideal world, so all engines would be 1200 is plus vat, sounds good to me can i put a tender in????
NES 2cv Speed Shop
+44 (0)1609 771313

Nathan Pasho

I guess that was not such a good idea then. :P

Mazda MX5 racing is very popular over here, and some clubs do similar things, is where I got the idea.

I guess the size of the club is a major factor in allowing this to work.

Quoteideal in an ideal world, so all engines would be 1200 is plus vat, sounds good to me can i put a tender in????

Actually, I was thinking someone such as yourself might be the one to get the job! :P

When you've got an engine with 200 h.p., a variance of 2 or 3 isn't such an issue.