I am sad to say.......
02-18-2010, 04:18 PM
#166
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Scroll down for the dyno of such an engine, which happens to be built built by one of PCA's scrutineers. A custom stock Euro SC with 210rwhp, as opposed to the factory stock 204 flywheel hp.
How much are they?
What am I missing?
I understand that "stock" rebuilds can be beneficial. Time and money is all it takes but anytime a stock class PCA car has to ballast up for Nasa GTS it's going to get questioned. PCA stock is notoriously heavy.
Just sayin.
02-18-2010, 06:04 PM
#168
Drifting
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultimately, if you're skeptical...protest. Everyone talks about who must be cheating on the internet but few rarely put their $$ where their mouth is.
02-18-2010, 07:33 PM
#170
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
15% isn't "accurate", as every dyno is so very, very different. I've seen 10% differences of the same car on different dynos. Comparing dyno numbers is silly unless you're talking of the same car on the same dyno on the same day, or using a single dyno to track changes on a single car/motor. It's all about relative power and not really about absolute numbers. Lest I digress into more of a dyno rant...
Everyone I've ever talked to uses 15% as a rough estimate of hp loss from crank to wheel. Without a dyno in my garage I'll just have to rely on that. I'm not comparing dyno numbers. I'm using the numbers from the website advertising the headers. They claim 210. What they don't show is the before dyno so we can't really see the improvement. They said 10 hp, not me. Chris is saying a base hp of 204 at the crank and they are putting up 210 on a dyno sheet. Dynos do vary but I would assume, since they are putting the 10 hp gain as achievable, that it is valid. Some of the math is not adding up.
It doesn't say that the headers are the only work done to the motor. Based on Chris' post, I assumed he knows something about this motor as he seems to indicate it's an "optimized" stock motor (where he says it is built) of the type I posted about earlier.
It says that the headers are mated to a stock Euro SC 3.0. I take that to be stock stock. That's whats written. They are advertising bolt on hp from the header installation, not a rebuild plus header installation. Even if it is a rebuild it doesn't really matter as the starting point is the starting point rebuild or not. If it's massaged and ran 200 rwhp before the headers and 210 after then great. Chris is implying a crank of 204 with a final hp number of 210 at the wheel. Well above a 10 hp gain. Again, we don't know the starting point but from the language I'll assume Chris is right and the stock hp was 204.
With this particular car, perhaps...but what if someone decides they want to run a slower class with a heavier, more powerful car? Just because a car is GTS3 legal at the power/weight it must run in PCA doesn't mean you can't add weight and get the car down into GTS2. Surely there are some PCA cars that find themselves at the bottom of one class who would rather add a little weight to be at the top of the next class down in GTS?
Ultimately, if you're skeptical...protest. Everyone talks about who must be cheating on the internet but few rarely put their $$ where their mouth is.
Everyone I've ever talked to uses 15% as a rough estimate of hp loss from crank to wheel. Without a dyno in my garage I'll just have to rely on that. I'm not comparing dyno numbers. I'm using the numbers from the website advertising the headers. They claim 210. What they don't show is the before dyno so we can't really see the improvement. They said 10 hp, not me. Chris is saying a base hp of 204 at the crank and they are putting up 210 on a dyno sheet. Dynos do vary but I would assume, since they are putting the 10 hp gain as achievable, that it is valid. Some of the math is not adding up.
It doesn't say that the headers are the only work done to the motor. Based on Chris' post, I assumed he knows something about this motor as he seems to indicate it's an "optimized" stock motor (where he says it is built) of the type I posted about earlier.
It says that the headers are mated to a stock Euro SC 3.0. I take that to be stock stock. That's whats written. They are advertising bolt on hp from the header installation, not a rebuild plus header installation. Even if it is a rebuild it doesn't really matter as the starting point is the starting point rebuild or not. If it's massaged and ran 200 rwhp before the headers and 210 after then great. Chris is implying a crank of 204 with a final hp number of 210 at the wheel. Well above a 10 hp gain. Again, we don't know the starting point but from the language I'll assume Chris is right and the stock hp was 204.
With this particular car, perhaps...but what if someone decides they want to run a slower class with a heavier, more powerful car? Just because a car is GTS3 legal at the power/weight it must run in PCA doesn't mean you can't add weight and get the car down into GTS2. Surely there are some PCA cars that find themselves at the bottom of one class who would rather add a little weight to be at the top of the next class down in GTS?
Ultimately, if you're skeptical...protest. Everyone talks about who must be cheating on the internet but few rarely put their $$ where their mouth is.
There was nothing to protest since this was at a Nasa GTS race and he was legal for that event. Besides, I truly think he got a bad dyno much like my first dyno experiences. He decided that the dyno was legit and pursued the ballast route. Makes you scratch you head. Now when he comes to a PCA race . . .
This is what actually happened. No hypotheticals. No what ifs. No made up scenarios. Just facts and a reasonable understanding of basic math.
02-18-2010, 07:51 PM
#174
Rennlist Member
Damn, every race I have ever been involved in with PCA...... the best time for the fastest "D" car is faster than that of an "E" car. Are all the best driver's in "D" ? 
02-18-2010, 08:08 PM
#176
The times I've looked at class records at various tracks, it's almost always true that the best D time is slower than the best E time.
02-18-2010, 08:24 PM
#177
NASA Racer
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I agree with Brian. Completely depends who is there.
Just happens to be the case that some of the best drivers in PCA racing are in D and E right now (now F since Hupfer and Crossman have moved to F). If Fred (one of the best drivers in the country) wasn't in D - it wouldn't be the case. I get lots of seconds behind Fred and I don't beat all the E cars, he's just that much better. Fred couldn't touch Roach, Hupfer or Crossman at Sebring - why, because they are equal drivers with equally prepared cars and the different classes show in the results. Another example - Mike I was a terror in D and now he's one of the top GTC3 drivers (and won a sprint in spbox at sebring first time in the car as well as a GTC3 sprint at Sebring). When Bill Richter was running D he would beat everybody and believe me when I tell you that his car was not optimized. He was a great racer. Watch what happens when Charlie moves to spbox from GTC1 (along with the rest of the C4 gang - Colin, Jenks). All depends on the mix of cars and drivers. For me, Sebring was the proof case. A bunch of great drivers with extremely well prepared cars..
02-18-2010, 08:31 PM
#178
Rennlist Member
The 10hp gain is from the headers alone. So, this optimized Euro SC build supposedly put out 200rwhp with "the most popular racing headers currently available" installed, and 210 with the Buckley/Henderson headers. The rest of the gains, I assume, were realized from some of the techniques Bryan talked about like blueprinting, flowed heads, etc. I'm sure a call to Buckley Racing will answer your questions.
Fixed it for ya.
I had my car dynoed for the first time last Fall. It showed 163rwhp, which I had raced with all year. We found that the timing was off, advanced it, and it came up to 181rwhp. My exhaust is pre-74 heat exchangers, and the engine is the factory original with 112xxx miles. I am around 25hp down on the leading Euro SCs out there. Yours?
Fixed it for ya.
I had my car dynoed for the first time last Fall. It showed 163rwhp, which I had raced with all year. We found that the timing was off, advanced it, and it came up to 181rwhp. My exhaust is pre-74 heat exchangers, and the engine is the factory original with 112xxx miles. I am around 25hp down on the leading Euro SCs out there. Yours?
02-18-2010, 08:37 PM
#179
NASA Racer
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I had my car dynoed for the first time last Fall. It showed 163rwhp, which I had raced with all year. We found that the timing was off, advanced it, and it came up to 181rwhp. My exhaust is pre-74 heat exchangers, and the engine is the factory original with 112xxx miles. I am around 25hp down on the leading Euro SCs out there. Yours?
02-18-2010, 08:53 PM
#180
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In the pasture.
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is great to get some Dyno #s to compare to. I will be having my car dyno-ed by NASA this year. Now I will be able to get an idea of what condition my engine is in.
I bet in PCA 95% of all lap time variables, for equally prepared cars, are driver ability. The other 5% is tire condition, rim size on a certain track, cheating, etc.
I bet in PCA 95% of all lap time variables, for equally prepared cars, are driver ability. The other 5% is tire condition, rim size on a certain track, cheating, etc.