NaroEscape

YES!!

What exactly is a 'black box'?

Sean F

what about an in car dyno

http://www.jegs.com/p/AEM/AEM-Dyno-S...25271/10002/-1

tomburdge

Glen(a.k.a. NINJABONES)

I hope you submit your proposal ( as written )to the club for consideration.
I'm not a big fan of NASA in general but I sure do like the way they determine class participation.
Now that we have points,championships and contingencies, it's time for PCA to take the program to the next level.
The existing rules have served us well for 20 years (+/-) but its time for them to evolve.
If I can be of any assistance beyond morale support let me know.
Tom B.

jrgordonsenior

+1... Maybe we could even get tire manufacturers to consider PCA for their contingency programs. PCA racers are a huge supporter of Hoosiers....

Jarez Mifkin

There's some good things in this thread, but unless you submit them, they are nothing more than internet garble....

SoClose

A question for those that want to change the GT rules:
Did you submit these proposals during the 2 year time period when the GT rules were studied, and then ultimately changed? It was not too many years ago that the new rules were proposed, and then accepted, by PCA Club racers.
I may have forgotten, but I don't remember that what is now being proposed was a significant part of the discussion at that time.

ninjabones

first step is to elicit feedback and find out if there is enough support to warrant a proposal. I'd only be willing to submit it I get enough positive feedback and a commitment that a bunch of guys would run. If I'm rocking the boat and the majority of GT class racers want to leave well enough alone, then I'll back off. I agree that further dividing the GT classes is not desirable, unless it eventually would lead to tighter, larger fields, with better parity, and a reasonable mechanism to ensure compliance. If I get a lot of support and it looks like we could reach critical mass, then I'll make the proposal.

Don't know the answer to that... I was having fun back in H-prepared two years ago and foolishly starting tinkering with my car on a cold winter night... before you know it, I was in GT. Stupid move.

Essentially, the black box is a data logger. They stick it in your car prior to a race or qual (I had a black box in my car for the lightening race two weeks ago). Basically, there are ways to use accelleration data at certain portions of the track (like coming out of a slow corner onto a straight) to approximate horsepower (taking aero out of the equation, etc). I got a pretty good explanation of the way it is done by one of the NASA guys at Lightning two weeks ago. The process is not perfected, but I believe it can detect gross violations (like the guys who are running 20 or more HP over where they should be).

The black box makes sense to me as an adjunct to the annual dyno run, as just relying on dyno pulls doesn't catch the guys with programmable engine management who run one tune for the dyno and one tune for the race... even having a dyno at the track doesn't prevent a cheater from flipping a switch between the race and a compliance dyno pull at the track.

Even if the margin of error for the black boxes was 20 HP (and they tell me it is more like 2-4 HP margin), i can accept that level of handicap... that's not totally insurmountable. But right now, just as an example, in GT4S, there is an identical car to mine in almost every way (chassis, aero package, wheels, suspension) that has in excess of 100 HP more than what I'm putting down at the wheels... totally within the rules and fair. I'd just prefer a way to have parity without having to write a $40,000 check and then rebuild every 50 hours.

jrgordonsenior

And your point is?

jrgordonsenior

I've had those installed in my car countless times at NASA So Cal races and at the 2010 Nationals where a unit lived in my car. Every time they'd download them and tell me my car has excess of 300 WHP when I'd just dyno'd at 272 or in the case of the Nationals 280 (3 times in 3 days). Either I'm the greatest cheater around or those things are full of crap. So Cal stopped using them last year...

ninjabones

That may be an issue with the operator/analyst rather than the entire concept of the black box. However, I have to admit that my understanding of the actual mechanism by which HP is calculated is rudimentary. I'd certainly like to hear some feedback from those who actually know something about the reliability of these units in accurately approximating HP (and perhaps how it is done in some of the professional series).

Astroman

That's ridiculous.

ninjabones

sounds ridiculous... but absolutely 100% undeniably true.

Gary R.

My car is in the meat of NASA GTS2 and so is Pablo Crespo's maxed out 210++ HP 968 with wings/diffuser/tray/god knows what else car that runs 2 seconds faster (a lifetime) at Limerock (and he had never been there before!).. NASA HP/Weight is not the answer here. As far as those "dyno's" that compute HP/TQ from G forces and GPS position? GARBAGE. Bad enough you can go to 5 different dyno's the same day and get 5 different results, you want to depend on some JC Whitney POS to decide something??

SoClose

My point is:
Where were you when these rules were studied, then voted upon by those that race in PCA? A committee was formed, and after one year they felt that more time was needed. Two periods, over two years, when input was sought by that committee. I certainly may have forgotten, but I remember no suggestions for certified dyno runs or black boxes.
All GT classes have a range, upper and lower, where a GT car fits. My GT3S car was closer to GT4 than GT3, but I didn't want to bolt extra weight into it, so I did my best. Never beat Musante, and maybe never would have if I had the same power. It was my choice to run a car not optimized for the class, and have had one hell of a good time doing so.
Would you run a car in World Challenge, then ask Grand Am to change their rules so that you wouldn't have to make changes to your car in order to win there?
My suggestion is to add weight, move to another class, and win it all.

67King

Interesting persective. When I had the cage put in my car, I ended up deciding to gut it, more along the lines of SP3. The reason is simple. Simplicity. It is a whole lot easier to fix things when you don't have any extraneous stuff in the way. That was what I really liked about SP3 - seemed to be a good nod towards the cost considerations of stock with the maintenance considerations of a more simple car.

Unfortunately, right after I got the car together, bought a couple of sets of wheels, etc., they allowed wide fenders in SP3. And big wings. I understand the desire to pull in NASA cars, but it is starting to look more like a GT class. Haven't "Prepared" classes historically been primarily just that, removal of stuff not needed? I know racing in general is expensive, but I really dislike the notion of every SP3 car out therre having to go buy multiple new sets of wheels, which are certainly not cheap, in order to have a competitively built car. Especially considering the challenges that have been had in filling up a field large enough for a contingency to kick in.

So I guess a question I have is, for SP3 questions, we start with 944 Cup, rather than PCA, for rules qustions/suggestions?