nasaforums.com

Official Forums of the National Auto Sport Association
It is currently Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:47 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 9:43 am 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 7:47 pm
Posts: 10
There are a couple of things that I think should be considered for 2017 American Iron:
1- change ride height from 5" to 4". Many of the newer cars and suspension systems are designed to function better at a lower height.
2- for those of us who have worn present engines beyond their functioning life, the present crate engines exceed the hp and torque limits of the present rules without significant down-tuning., so increase the weight/hp and weight/torque limits.
3- given that the GM and Ford engines have very different torque and hp curves with higher torque to hp from the GM engines and the opposite from the Ford engines, why not have a weight / (torque + hp) average? This would allow the different marque engines (and cars) to demonstrate their strengths and weaknesses in various segments of tracks and different track configurations overall.
I'm certain other racers have more ideas whereby to improve competition but this may be a beginning to update the dated rules/limits.
Jerry Sarsfield

_________________
RG "Jerry" Sarsfield
Team Sarsfield Racing
MidWest AI #29


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 9:35 am 
Offline
Forum Hot Lapper
Forum Hot Lapper

Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 9:39 am
Posts: 116
Jerry,
If you want to put each one of your requests in the following format and email it to your regional director (email info is at the back of the AI rule book), we can have them evaluated since we are now in the rules review/adjustment season.

Name:
Region:
Contact:
Class:
Rule #:
Recommended Changes:
Reasoning:
How I feel this will help the series:

_________________
Marshall Mosty
AI Series Director
NASA/TX AI #67


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 6:22 am 
Offline
Postmeister
Postmeister

Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 11:59 am
Posts: 1286
Location: SW Chicago 'burbs - Top 5 spoiler
RGSarsfield wrote:
There are a couple of things that I think should be considered for 2017 American Iron:
1- change ride height from 5" to 4". Many of the newer cars and suspension systems are designed to function better at a lower height.
2- for those of us who have worn present engines beyond their functioning life, the present crate engines exceed the hp and torque limits of the present rules without significant down-tuning., so increase the weight/hp and weight/torque limits.
3- given that the GM and Ford engines have very different torque and hp curves with higher torque to hp from the GM engines and the opposite from the Ford engines, why not have a weight / (torque + hp) average? This would allow the different marque engines (and cars) to demonstrate their strengths and weaknesses in various segments of tracks and different track configurations overall.
I'm certain other racers have more ideas whereby to improve competition but this may be a beginning to update the dated rules/limits.
Jerry Sarsfield


Just a data point from the "vintage" side of the fence.

1. I'm at 5" and I clobber the oil pan on everything. Pan is dented to hell and the skid plate is almost ground through. The next time the engine comes out, it needs a new pan and skid plate. If we go to 4", we have to start looking at dry sumps. I'm not interested in either (4" RH or dry sump).

2. The quick and dirty way for carb guys to knock HP out is a throttle stop. With drive-by wire cars, you may want to look into having the ECU only open the throttle 80-90%.

3. In my opinion, with the amount of drive line tuning (transmission/final drive) allowable in AI, torque is pretty much irrelevant. I likely make the least amount of torque in the country (300 ft-lb) and I couldn't care less. Everyone wants to focus on the engine package, but there is no reason to build a torque monster unless you want to leave it in 4th gear and never shift (which would actually work at some tracks).

_________________
TJ Bain - AI #134 - '85 Firechicken
'09/'10/'13 Midwest & '10 Great Lakes Champ


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2016 7:15 am 
Offline
Forum Time Trialer
Forum Time Trialer

Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:17 pm
Posts: 159
Location: Naples, FL
nape wrote:
RGSarsfield wrote:
There are a couple of things that I think should be considered for 2017 American Iron:
1- change ride height from 5" to 4". Many of the newer cars and suspension systems are designed to function better at a lower height.
2- for those of us who have worn present engines beyond their functioning life, the present crate engines exceed the hp and torque limits of the present rules without significant down-tuning., so increase the weight/hp and weight/torque limits.
3- given that the GM and Ford engines have very different torque and hp curves with higher torque to hp from the GM engines and the opposite from the Ford engines, why not have a weight / (torque + hp) average? This would allow the different marque engines (and cars) to demonstrate their strengths and weaknesses in various segments of tracks and different track configurations overall.
I'm certain other racers have more ideas whereby to improve competition but this may be a beginning to update the dated rules/limits.
Jerry Sarsfield


Just a data point from the "vintage" side of the fence.

1. I'm at 5" and I clobber the oil pan on everything. Pan is dented to hell and the skid plate is almost ground through. The next time the engine comes out, it needs a new pan and skid plate. If we go to 4", we have to start looking at dry sumps. I'm not interested in either (4" RH or dry sump).

2. The quick and dirty way for carb guys to knock HP out is a throttle stop. With drive-by wire cars, you may want to look into having the ECU only open the throttle 80-90%.

3. In my opinion, with the amount of drive line tuning (transmission/final drive) allowable in AI, torque is pretty much irrelevant. I likely make the least amount of torque in the country (300 ft-lb) and I couldn't care less. Everyone wants to focus on the engine package, but there is no reason to build a torque monster unless you want to leave it in 4th gear and never shift (which would actually work at some tracks).


Totally agree.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:39 pm 
Offline
Forum Spectator
Forum Spectator

Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:52 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Martinez, CA
I would not lower the minimum ride height. It becomes much, much more expensive to make a 1979-2004 Mustang work at a ride height below 5". An S197 Mustang is already quite a bit faster, than the 1979-2004 Mustang. Lowering the minimum ride height will just give a financial advantage to the newer cars. If the older car can't afford to run lower also, then it is at a speed disadvantage.

_________________
Jack Hidley
Maximum Motorsports Tech Support


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group