Delberts Wallet Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Looking at the regs for class 2. It states that induction must be via standard induction plenum. Does this mean any rover induction plenum ie VVC etc or do I have to run the plastic one on my 1.6 K series? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mav Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 There goes another giant sized can of worms......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delberts Wallet Posted January 27, 2004 Author Share Posted January 27, 2004 guess I should of added Ducks for cover! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Area Representative Richard Price Posted January 27, 2004 Area Representative Share Posted January 27, 2004 I think this is one of the issues that needs to be discussed at the forthcoming Forum ❗ My personal feeling is that what ever changes are proposed, should be clear, and easily policed to minimize accusations of cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Perry Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 Keeping out of this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 I think i have seen that can of worms somewhere else[E] Richard - I agree, however think the regs for ths year are pretty much set so we would be discussing 05 regs... I am making the assumption that it is the same as last year and that it has to be the original style plenum the engine was delivered with, so I am guessing the original question would be no. rob PS now what about throttle bodies 😬 Edited by - robmar on 28 Jan 2004 08:22:06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bl0498 Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 Gareth/Richard, As Graham hasn't come along just yet to clarify this the intention with the class 2 and 3 regs this year for 1600k cars is that nothing has changed - the standard plastic induction plenum is what is expected to be seen. The only change to class 2/3 for this year is the addition of some lower powered 1800k cars dropping from classes 4/5. One of the major aims of the meeting at the Rolls place next month is to try to reach an understanding of what the class definitions will be for 2005. No matter what is decided I am sure there will be some people whom will feel that they are adversely affected! Hope this helps. Brian Trainee Clerk of the Course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Area Representative Richard Price Posted January 28, 2004 Area Representative Share Posted January 28, 2004 Standard plastic induction plenum Edited by - Richard Price on 28 Jan 2004 19:17:49 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delberts Wallet Posted January 28, 2004 Author Share Posted January 28, 2004 OK, that seems fair enough. Until someone else comes along and says I can run with the VVC one of coarse. Hmm, if I spray it black do you think it will look plastic 😳 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Area Representative Richard Price Posted January 28, 2004 Area Representative Share Posted January 28, 2004 No 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 I believe that Caterham have fitted ally manifolds to 1.8K's for sometime and no longer use the plastic plenium ❗ Mark D Su77on Se7ens Making plans for the 2004 Sprint Season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Locust Posted January 28, 2004 Share Posted January 28, 2004 But the question originally queried their use on a 1600 - which are plastic. The plastic plenum is the 'standard production plenum' for a 1600 but the regulation does not state what the 'standard production plenum' is from. It could be a 'standard production plenum' for a RB211 jet engine or the Snorkel pipe on one of HM Submarines (if that could be fitted and be seen to give some material advantage). Hence the current debate about the 'spirit' and the literal interpretation of the regs. It is obvious what is meant by the regs but maybe it could have been more specific but without going over the top. Surely retention of the standard TB type and size should be specified as well? Maybe a schedule of approved part numbers is required if the items are clearly marked. This would assist on the policing issue. I have also seen photos of Caterhams fitted with the standard Rover 25 style trunking and airbox arrangement which takes a panel filter, wheras my car was supplied with the Caterham branded Pipercross filter. Should the regs also state that air filters should be of approved types a, b, c etc, or specifically stated as 'free'. The knee bone's connected to the...........where to stop? Now then. Who's going to start the debate on catalysts being required to make post '98 (or whenever the cut off was) cars compliant in accordance with construction and use regulations for road going vehicles? Dives for cover due to flying cans and worms 😬 Ian Green and Silver Roadsport 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Area Representative Richard Price Posted January 29, 2004 Area Representative Share Posted January 29, 2004 On the point of the cat, I would favour a regulation that specified the standard, short 4 into 1 manifold and the standard Roadsport exhaust. Whilst a significant number of last years class 2 runners run with various Caterham or aftermarket 4-2-1's or long 4 branches, I think it's pertinent that at last years Llandow and Curborough 2 sprints, class 2 was won by Academy spec. cars with 115bhp, standard plenum, and short 4 into 1 manifold running a cat ❗ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 The key point is the retention of the std air metering unit . As Caterham produce more and more variations the regs will become ever more difficult to write . There will be winners and losers along the way ☹️ One other thought - I doubt very much that some mods would even produce a power advantage ( the VVC plenum was shown to loose power on emeralds rollers !!) large enough to make 1mph difference along any straight at the venues we visit . I think this should be remembered , and only the larger performance upgrades or packages ( inlet , manifold , ecu ) should be focused on . For instance would a VVC inlet mean that you get your arse kicked at Llandow ? - no I doubt very much , the performance of the driver will be the key thing - as seen with 115bhp academy cars winning ! . If the rules try and tie down every last possible tweek then the regs *will* fail and the championship will become regs dependant and petty . I say we try and just focus on more significant upgrades or combinations of these . 2p in the slot Edited by - Dave Jackson on 29 Jan 2004 07:53:35 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 I agree Dave we should keep it simple and not get tied up in detail that is difficult to 'Police'. We should remember that first and foremost competing in the sprints is a bit of fun Mark D Su77on Se7ens Making plans for the 2004 Sprint Season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 IMO the regs are pretty simple now and very well understood (yes there s a little ambiguiity around some areas of the 1.6K's) however as seen by last years regs there is a lot of very close competitioin in all classes between different specs of cars... rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bl0498 Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Guys, All useful discussion for those of you planning to attend the RR event! I agree with many of the sentiments here. The whole concept of the classes are to categorise cars as closely as possible to ensure reasonably close competition. At the same time we clearly don't want to have a vast number of classes, each with a very small number of competitors. so the knack is in drawing the dividing line, particularly in potentially ambiguous areas like class 2/4 split. As Dave has suggested we can't seriously button down every little potential upgrade...we have lives to lead!! There is also clearly an element of trust here. Given we don't have sealed engines etc then the only realistic way we can visibly assess the performance of one car versus another (apart from a driver bhp declaration) is to look at the visible bits hanging onto the engine that may impact on performance. Clearly these are the induction mechanism, the exhaust mechanism and the ECU. If any of these have changed it could be argued that the innards have probably been upgraded too - head work, cams etc. (Perhaps the argument is a little weaker for the exhaust) One of the whole philosophies of the club with the sprints is to be able to offer a class for the person who does not seriously race their car - they want to turn up at a sprint once a year etc and enjoy themselves but they don't want to necessarily spend oodles on new pistons/crankshafts/emerald etc. We don't necessary want to encourage the 'who pays the most wins' concept either. As has been correctly observed the driver and his/her driving is usually the weakest performance link - it certainly is in my case! So we could say Class 2 (and 3 of course) would be only for 1600k cars which have a completely factory standard induction/ECU/exhaust (short 4-1+cat) -and 1800k cars up to 140bhp with the same spec ANY upgrades to ECU/Induction/Exhaust puts you in class 4 (and 5) - as the competitor has demonstrated a desire to upgrade. This should be nice and easy to police by our elegibility scrutineer and is relatively impervious to whatever Caterham does with factory offerings. It should make competition in Class 2/3 even tighter and will encourage more upgrades for those in classes 4/5 that you can tell the wife only cost £200!! As others have correctly pointed out whilst we enjoy competitive sprints - the key word is 'enjoy'. Brian Trainee Clerk of the Course. Edited by - bl0498 on 29 Jan 2004 12:52:25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy. N Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 I agree with Dave - let's agree to keep it as simple as possible so that we can keep the main focus on driving the car and not tinkering with reg's. For my 2p worth: the "spirit" of the class structure (however that is defined in the reg's) should allow for at least 1 class for cars that are largely unmodified (eg "Roadsport" type cars as they left the factory)- that's good for those who want to dip a toe into the water, and those who have no desire/wallet to upgrade; where Caterham have changed the spec of something (eg the plastic plenum is now ally), there seems no merit in asking all competitors to retro fit a part that has now been made better - IMO the rules should be framed to allow for the latest factory spec; the spirit of the above would allow for drivers of post 1996 or '98 (or whenever cars needed a Cat) cars to run without a catalytic converter if they chose - no competitor should have an advantage due to a quirk of the age of their car (which works both ways with non-cat exhausts and plastic/ally plenum) - allow everyone to upgrade or retro fit the best option; Finally, I think i'll wait a while to see if i upgrade anything for this year!! Who opened that can - there's bloody worms everywhere.......... 😬 Andy Nicholls C7 AJN Edited by - Andy. N on 29 Jan 2004 13:24:41 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 OK - I am going to be Devils Advocate on some of the points made, this is mainly for discussion purposes . The potential rule changes being discussed do effect me directly so I have a vested interest. Please do not flame all I am doing is trying to help the debate. . Feel free to tell me I am talking out of my 🙆🏻 ... and I very much appreciiate the hard work of everyone involved in organising the champioship Whatever the changes I will most likely be competing in which ever class come 2005 One of the whole philosophies of the club with the sprints is to be able to offer a class for the person who does not seriously race their car - they want to turn up at a sprint once a year etc and enjoy themselves but they don't want to necessarily spend oodles on new pistons/crankshafts/emerald etc. I whole heartedly agree that this overall guiding philosophy (of the sereis and the club in general) is one that should be maintained, it is what help to tempt me into competing in the L7 champioinship. So my discussion points are as follows... *arrowright*1. If i turn up to 1 event per year I am expecting to be competitive 🤔 I can still enjoy myself can't I *arrowright*2. The classes / engines being talked about (2 & 3 K sereis..) you can currently midly tune the engine with limited funds , without touching the head, pistons, crankshafts etc. Only once you get above wanting to go beyond 155-160 (in a 1.6) are you stating to look at oodles. And in fact you can utilise most of the parts again (e.g. emerald, exhaust...) *arrowright*3. The club championship is now 9 events, I wonder how many competitors now do not even consider doing othere sereis 🤔 From my understanding that the original signal events at Cubourgh where designed to encourage was for peopleto compete in other sereies. Is that still the case 🤔 I for one do not intend to compete in any other sprint/hillcliimb series as the L7 championship is ideal for me... ANY upgrades to ECU/Induction/Exhaust puts you in class 4 (and 5) - as the competitor has demonstrated a desire to upgrade. *arrowright*1. whilst this could be an easy policy to police what about the following scenarios.. how can you tell if my car was delivered with a factory competition exhaust or the standard what happens if my ECU or exhaust goes tits-up, do you force that competitor to spend more money on a factory part than on a potential better 3rd party part the desire to upgrade worries me, for my car I have upgraded all manner of things, is upgrading say from factory supplied 21's to 32's and other such upgrades going to be considered... I bought my car 2nd hand, it was originally fitted with a cat, but the previous owner took it off, do I have to put it back on I have upgraded my car to a removable aeroscreen, which is eligble for class 2 or 3 In all these scenarios there would be very limited gains in performance if any but now your standard car and potentially first time competitor is in class 4 & 5 with the r500's, SLR's, vauxhalls.... I will also repeat what I have said many times with regard this issue. The current regs in class 2&3 permits and single cam engine of any size, this includes 1800 all steel all singing and dancing x-flows giving out 190 bhp plus. The owners of these cars have spent oodles upgrading them and from last years class 3 results x-flows won 6 out of 7 events, the only k to win was at the wet cuurbugger where I suspect additional power would have been of little benefit. The overall champion and 3rd place went to x-flow runners. The current regs will allow a 1.6K up to about 155 bhp potentially (see my proposal lower down 😬, in reality there are very few if any modfied k's in class 3 except for exhaust systems. So IMO if there are going to be strciter restrictions on the k's then there should be some reciprocal restrictions on the other categories of cars in this class. Another impact of this potential change is that it would push numerous current competitors out of classes 2&3 into classes 4&5 where their mildly tuned cars would be very out classd. Class 5 is already large enough andd potentially this would see a reducttioin already in the smaller numbers in class 2&3. I also belive there should be room for those that do not want to radically modify their engines in the championship and only tweak them mildly. So what would I propose I hear you cry 😬 how would we police them 🤔 I do not know but we should be able to trust each other I think... 1. everything as it is now with the following additions (this is for the 1.6K's & 1.8K's), 2. no head modifications to the inlet or exhaust valves or anything else that would improve gas flow. Obviously a head skim after a head gasket failiure would need to be accomodated somehow 3. original size throttle body as well as plenum in reality I would expect this would limit 1.6's to around the 150-155 and 1.8's to 160-165, which can be achieved with well documented upgrades (ecu/exhaust/vernniers plus RR time to get everything set up) at easily less than 1500 quid. The next step for more power is also well documented head work, tb's etc and this would clearly send you into class 4&5 as now. just my 2p's worth, just think if I had 5 p to spend how much I could say. Looking forward to feb and the discussions rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenEvans Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Are things a bit quiet there this afternoon Rob? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 how can you tell 😬 rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 I support your view Rob , in that class 2&3 have to accomodate a wide spectrum of cars , of different ages , engines and power outputs - 115 - 190 bhp . Just as class 4& 5 does , with a 160bhp R300 ( throttle bodies) going up against a 260bhp VX !!! The issue in class 2&3 is repeated in 4 & 5 ......... As more and more R300's are sold then these owners will realise this an start voicing their concerns . What is the answer ?? - I dont know . But whatever anyone comes up with , it must be possible to police other wise there is no point in regulating it . You cant regulate valves , compression ratio or other internal mods , you cant even regulate timing changes with verniers . The use of a catalyst makes buggar all difference in power , the windscreen adds very little at most venues , All you can regulate is ECU , plenum ,tyres and MOT/road registration in my view . ................................................................................................................. On a different note ..... I think we should have class 5 - as is ,on 1b tyres EXCEPT ACB10 ( other than sport or 30/31 compound ) . And class 6 as current 5 but WITH ACB10 (anything goes) ie A24 etc etc , then class 7 for all other ( as current class 6) This will help manage costs for many , and eliminate the need for a second set of wheels , which then means that the car is brought to the event on a trailer cos the 300mile drive will knacker your A24's ! . I for one dont want to budget for a set of wheels and A24 tyres as I have stated previously ,BUT *what about the everyday owner of a R400 or SLR or VX that justs wants to be competitive without the wallet racing ???* I feel in 2004 A24's will be a must have in Class 3 & 5 ! ?? The racing wont be any different as everyone will end up on A24 ACB's , then the class will deminish ....... Dave Lotus 7 Club Speed Champion 2003 South Wales Area Organiser C7 TOP Edited by - Dave Jackson on 29 Jan 2004 15:34:25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kipper Jnr Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Rob, I take it you have a standard head and plenum Ford: Engineered for life - built to rust!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Dave - can't argue with anything you say there will alwys be someone who will be dissapointed, I am just trying to make it is not me 😬 rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Kipper Jnr - yes, in all the events I have competed in the only 'engine' mod I have made is the exahust which is non-standard I do have however verniers, 52 mm tb and emerlad waiting to go on the car for this year... the rest is pretty much standard SL or standard caterham parts rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now