CMS-GT4":1beaj6su said:
eric thompson":1beaj6su said:
No IG profile for me... Too much T n A rotting my brain
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Self control.
Only porn I look at on there is car porn. I use it for business though, and people see what you like.
eric thompson":1beaj6su said:
I have plenty of build pics and updated components to add to this thread but time is limited. I do have two videos though...
https://www.scca.com/videos/2029784 This is the SCCA live broadcast. If you cant bare to watch the whole thing I get some good coverage at about the 17 & 30 minute marks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwTQqKxBzOY This is the in-car video from the same RunOffs championship race.
And unfortunately the front hubs/bearings failed again that weekend, twice! The second time being during the race. I started losing the brake pedal gradually and had to finish the last two laps with the handbrake... but finishing is what counts!
That was a good video. Nice coverage. I don't know how I missed it. Car seems pretty strong considering you have a few things to work out.
Confidence when threshold braking should account for improved laptimes... But if you notice my fastest laptimes was still 2.5 seconds off the fastest guys... Theres a lot more behind the scenes within the class regarding parity and how I personally view certain rules. Everyone thinks the Lotus should be removed mainly because it's a factory built race car, it's flat bottom, real down force generating vehicle that also makes good power, is light, and handles extremely well. Personally I like it! It's very limited beyond how it came from the factory and it's a hanging carrot as far as I'm concerned...
But I think the SCCA needs to wake up and stop limiting areas that would help other vehicles, especially forced induction, catch up...
Plus their balance system is antiquated. Power to weight makes sense but there's more to the equation.
A given vehicle must use the Turbocharger originally equipped on the installed engine or 1 of 3 other approved alternates, Garret GT2554, K04, or VF30... None of which will give any performance advantage over a CT27.
Then there the Turbo inlet restrictors based on weight. My car would get a 37mm but all RWD & AWD vehicles take a -2mm penalty. So I get 35mm... Which raises one of my concerns...
Where in any of these Forced induction restrictions does engine displacement get factored in?? Yes, in the end airflow will be the limiting factor, but common sense tells me(for example) that comparing a 2.0L alltrac with a 35mm and a 2.5L STI at the same weight and 35mm, the engine with 25% more displacement will have a broader more usable powerband and make more power comparatively. And if the TIR is the best single limitation device, then why restrict what Turbocharger is allowed to be installed?? No matter how big it can only pull "X" amount of air through the TIR...
Next is the Hondas, a built H22 or K24 will be, and obviously is, a powerhouse and they weigh between 2500-2700 lbs. A good 300-600lbs less than my alltrac. Making way more WHP.
Insult to injury, the Lotus' also only weigh 2200-2400 lbs making more WHP too...
Trust me when I say I am fighting the balance scales and also trying to squeeze everything I can from our CT setup. Contemplating running an 8cm 64 AR single scroll Turbine housing on a tubular exh manifold and ext WG just to reduce the restrictions on the hotside and give better boost control... I'm sure the difference will be negligible though.
That's my rant for now
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk