Jump to content

For current PTE civic racers – need your input on changes required to reduce costs and create more even competition


CRX Don

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Rules as discussed on this forum thread are in Appendix A below.

Gary Roberts from WCMA suggested formatting the rules using the same categories as PT preperation points. This makes sense to me.

Where the IT engine rules and PT prep points didn't quite match up some additional explaination was added. The purpose was to grandfather any engines that were previously built to IT specs, and keep all engines within IT specs.

You will notice that in some modifications "will be reviewed in 2018". The point is that if anyone starts spending stupid amounts of money on things like aero, brakes, or super wide tires we will ban these items in 2018. So don't bother.

I also added a ban on dry sump oiling systems at my own discretion. I didn't think anyone would object.

Any comments or concerns please post them here or call me.

 

Thanks

- Don

Appendix A - Honda Civic Club Class (PTE/CCC)

Eligibility:

o    Honda Civics and CRX from 1988-2000, eligible to compete PTE.

o    And meeting the following restrictions: 

 

Tires: Section A,

o    Must comply with Section A8 and,

o    Be greater than 180 treadwear DOT tires,

o    And May not be  BFG Rival S, BFG Rival S1.5 Bridgestone RE71-R, Maxxis RC-1, Kumho V700, Kumho V720, Michelin Pilot Sport Cup & MPS Cup 2, Nitto NT01, Pirelli PZero Corsa, Toyo R888, Toyo RA-1, Yokohama A048.

o    Maximum Width may be set for the 2018 season

o    Points must be claimed

 

Weight: Section B

o    Must comply with PTE rules and

§  No non-stock composite panels except for the hood.

§  Repairs using composite materials will be considered on a case by case basis.

o    Points must be claimed

 

Engine: Section C:

o    C4, C10, C22, C23, and C24 are permitted, points must be claimed

 o    C16 is permitted with the following restrictions, points must be claimed

§  Engines may be bored to a maximum of .040 inch over standard bore size. Factory oversize replacement pistons or their exact equivalent shall be used. Equivalent pistons shall provide the same dome/dish/valve relief configuration, ring thickness and spacing, pin height relationship, weight, and compression ratio as factory replacement oversize pistons. Piston rings are unrestricted. The fitting of other styles of pistons prohibited and any change in stoke is prohibited

 

o    C18 is not permitted, however Manifold and cylinder head port matching is permitted free of points if

§  No material may be removed further than one (1) inch in from the manifold to cylinder head mounting face(s). Carburetor mounting surface(s) shall not be modified and external dimensions of the cylinder head or intake manifold may not be reduced to facilitate internal porting. Two piece manifolds are not intended to be port matched at their intermediate point.

 

o    C19 is allowed to a limit of 0.5 point compression ratio increase as a no points modification:

·         Any modification that results in increased engine compression ratio (including head shaving or decking block to factory specs)

o    C1-C3, C5- C9, C11-C15 and C17-C21 are prohibited

 

Drivetrain: Section D:

o    D5, and D6 are permitted, points must be claimed

o    D1-D4 and D7-D9 are prohibited

 

Suspension: Section E

o    E3, E5, E7, E9-E11, and E16 are permitted, points must be claimed

o    E1 and E2 (shocks or struts with remote reservoir), E4, E6, E8, E12-E14 and E17-22 are prohibited

 

Brakes Chassis section F

o    All items are permitted, points must be claimed

o    To be reviewed in 2018

 

Aerodynamics Section G

o    All items are permitted, points must be claimed

o    To be reviewed in 2018

 

Rollcage Section H

o    All items are permitted, points must be claimed

 

No points Modifications Section I

o    All modifications allowed Expect D.2 – lightweight flywheels are not permitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been out of the loop on this and now I have to get #44 car ready in 16 days or less before my vacation. 

At first read it looks like we're out as i have pallets of used NT01's and a set of 4 new ones left over from two years ago. Who can I call and get the rundown on all of this and what it means? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi Don and boys, 

Who collects all our 2017 PT calculation spreadsheets? Who is in charge of this? 

Since weight is the most important part of PTE and CCC, are we going to weigh the cars after racing? 

Thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, chkdsk said:

Hi Don and boys, 

Who collects all our 2017 PT calculation spreadsheets? Who is in charge of this? 

Since weight is the most important part of PTE and CCC, are we going to weigh the cars after racing? 

Thanks. 

You can upload your spreadsheet to WCMA through Motorsportreg.com.  It's the car classification, and number request page.  

Or, email to the address Mat posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the scales, and this may not be the right thread, are we going to start tech'ing cars after races like we did two years ago? With the new rules being so weight and HP cenctric, we need to check the cars to make sure they are on point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Here is a rules change I am proposing for next year's season (2018). We don't need to debate it just yet, but here it is, well in advance.

I think we should acknowledge that some of our older honda parts are getting harder to find, so we need to be more liberal than what the PT rules would technically allow for substitutions. For example, there are several engines that are equivalent to the D16A6 but have a different engine code, like the ZC single cam. Or putting together an engine /  chassis combination from the same generation of honda that honda never produced. The point is to allow better access to parts, but not to allow a competitive advantage with these substitutions. So no you can't build a ringer car that is JDM only spec - it still needs to essentially match what was sold in Canada.

Here is some suggested wording: 

C1 (engine swaps) are permitted but only between engines and chassis of civics of the same generation. Both the engine and chassis must have been originally sold in Canada for the same generation of civic, or equivalent to engines and chassis originally sold in Canada for the same generation of civic. The resulting combination of engine, chassis, weight, and other modifications must be within the limits of PTE and CCC rules.

 

I am not totally happy with that wording yet. Perhaps we should change "engines" to "drivetrains". A list of examples of acceptable substitutions could also be helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hey Don, just curious if we might add an acceptable modification. Close ratio gear sets for our cars cost about the same as a final drive with similar effects, and since doing both is an impossibility I figured I'd ask if it may be allowed in the future. Just thought I'd share the idea at least. Let me know your thoughts on this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've mentioned this to Don directly as well as other racers. I'd like to go back to a weight spec that's attainable for any car to achieve. I suggest we use the former IT3 spec weight of 2286 for the 88-91 hatchbacks so that even the entry level guys are at a competitive weight from day one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mat said:

I've mentioned this to Don directly as well as other racers. I'd like to go back to a weight spec that's attainable for any car to achieve. I suggest we use the former IT3 spec weight of 2286 for the 88-91 hatchbacks so that even the entry level guys are at a competitive weight from day one.

Yes I agree we should discuss this for 2018. It would be great if everyone in CCC could get their car weighed and be willing to share that information (car weight and driver weight). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Here’s a few things that I’d like to see for 2018

 

As I mentioned before a minimum race weight of 2286 for a few reasons (my fat ass) also so that all the cars that were built to IT3 specs can remain competitive as well as people new to the class can easily attain the min weight. 

 

In MY opinion given the research showing that historically CRX’s were penalized we need to address this fairly. (weight)

 

Ideally follow a spec tire rule as do the formula v group. Azenis, Westlake or otherwise. I don’t feel that a TW spec is the best way to achieve linearity. (The performance and price point of the Westlake tires that Super WAYNE can secure for us are worth discussing in my opinion...I’m sure #87 and #200 would agree)

 

Regardless of us agreeing on a spec tire we need to definitely set max tire sizes. How can a 195 compete against a 225?

 

Weighing cars / Tech I understand that workers are at a premium and it’s a hassle...but it is so crucial to us tightening up our group and making every driver feel like they have a chance. Fingers get pointed. Here’s one level that we can tighten up.

 

Camshafts....a huge contention point. We all know this is covered under the DT limitations. This is the big one. If you’re using something non OEM...you’re really not racing. I find it really hard to believe that anyone is actually doing this. We should have some way of encouraging any car who seems to have a considerable edge to have to change their cam to a known oem “Marked” cam. Frankly I’m sick of the speculation here and would like  to get past this. This is something that can be done at the track. Let’s find a way to put this speculation to rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of us weighed our cars in 2017 and I think we should compare the results so we can see what's really attainable for a minimum weight, and so we can see the weight differences within CCC. I will go first: my CRX weighed in at 2137 pounds with me in it and 1/4 tank of gas. I weigh 225 lbs. My car was probably the lightest in CCC.

I have no objection to a spec tire for 2018. Let's just make sure we choose something that is cheap and available. I used the Westlake for half of race four and all of race 5 and I liked them. I wouldn't recommend the Hankook RS4 because I had chunking issues with them and the RS4s were not as good as the Weslakes in the rain. Azenis are good too and they are available in 14" sizes. If we can agree on a spec tire it might automatically limit the width as well. 

FYI - Just to be clear the rules for CCC do not allow non-oem camshafts.

I think we should also discuss some permitted parts substitutions for CCC. For example, engines that are equivalent to the D16A6, but are more available and cheaper. The point is to allow more access to cheaper parts without giving anyone a competitive advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-10-21 at 2:42 PM, CRX Don said:

Most of us weighed our cars in 2017 and I think we should compare the results so we can see what's really attainable for a minimum weight, and so we can see the weight differences within CCC. I will go first: my CRX weighed in at 2137 pounds with me in it and 1/4 tank of gas. I weigh 225 lbs. My car was probably the lightest in CCC.

I have no objection to a spec tire for 2018. Let's just make sure we choose something that is cheap and available. I used the Westlake for half of race four and all of race 5 and I liked them. I wouldn't recommend the Hankook RS4 because I had chunking issues with them and the RS4s were not as good as the Weslakes in the rain. Azenis are good too and they are available in 14" sizes. If we can agree on a spec tire it might automatically limit the width as well. 

FYI - Just to be clear the rules for CCC do not allow non-oem camshafts.

I think we should also discuss some permitted parts substitutions for CCC. For example, engines that are equivalent to the D16A6, but are more available and cheaper. The point is to allow more access to cheaper parts without giving anyone a competitive advantage.

In regards to spec tire. 

I will personally be vouching for the Westlake. Even after investing in many sets of 14” rims I think that these West Lake tires are hard to beat at $100ish each. They are not available in 14”. When and if we do choose a spec tire I’m hoping not to have a variance in aspect ratio/sizing. 

Car number 5 - 2230LB* - 250LB - 1/4 tank

edited...Steve slapped me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2017 at 9:38 PM, Mat said:

Here’s a few things that I’d like to see for 2018

 

Here’s my thoughts belowI feel where we are heading with CCC, is Gimli Spec Honda.

Quote

As I mentioned before a minimum race weight of 2286 for a few reasons (my fat ass) also so that all the cars that were built to IT3 specs can remain competitive as well as people new to the class can easily attain the min weight. 

Improved Touring rules favored 88-91 Honda Civics. The minimum weights made no sense (88-91 Civic = 2286#, 88-91 CRX 2630#, 96-00 Civic 2430#).

What I found as I removed weight from my car, it became much more enjoyable to drive.  It accelerated better, stopped better, cornered better, there was less brake and tire wear.  I’m at 2180#, and don’t want to put weight back into my car.   Everything on my EK Civic is bigger and heavier than the EF, including the 1.75” cage tubing.   I’ve spent virtually nothing on lightweight parts.  My only weight reduction expense was $60 of lexan for the rear hatch, a motorcycle battery, and whole bunch of my time dissecting. 

Quote

In MY opinion given the research showing that historically CRX’s were penalized we need to address this fairly. (weight)

NASA rules say add +7 points just for showin up with a CRX (bring a Miata = +14), so the penalty is there, it’s just different.

Quote

Ideally follow a spec tire rule as do the formula v group. Azenis, Westlake or otherwise. I don’t feel that a TW spec is the best way to achieve linearity.

Spec Honda

Quote

Regardless of us agreeing on a spec tire we need to definitely set max tire sizes. How can a 195 compete against a 225?

Maybe it works, maybe not, might depend on the car HP and track configuration, 225 tire and wheel is heavier x4.   Ask AL, he claims to be faster on 195-14, than 205-15.

Quote

Weighing cars / Tech I understand that workers are at a premium and it’s a hassle...but it is so crucial to us tightening up our group and making every driver feel like they have a chance. Fingers get pointed. Here’s one level that we can tighten up.

I don’t think it’s a secret between the GMP family, scales are at the track every weekend, we can weight ourselves on Friday or after racing, Don can bring his beer.  It is a hassle for workers – yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a thought on how to make this easy, and still keep costs down, without creating a spec class where we pick at bits which favor certain models, and exclude everything none Honda.   NASA rules classing, allows 19 modification points before you get bumped up one class.   What if we created a Club Class that simply reduced the point allotment to perhaps 10.   The base class for my car is PTE, so I would get 10 modification points.  Some of you have a base class of PTF, but run in PTE, this currently allows 39 modification points, 0-19 for PTF, then 20-39 for PTE.  Reducing this to 10 per class would allow you a total of 20 points.  This would force you to use your points allowance in a manner that you feel to be the most effective.   You could not spend large $$ on modifications because you don’t have the points to spend.  You could buy a cam and intake if you want, but then you can’t buy suspension bits, so pick one but not both.  Want 245 R-Comps?  Sure, but good luck with your OEM shocks and springs because you no longer have any points left. Take 400lbs out of your car, ok you’re done.  Etc.   I haven’t completely thought this through yet, but perhaps we can discuss.

 

With the NASA class rules, you could build a car that you like, make it competitive and have someone to race with.  My hope was that the class would grow with a variety of new cars, where Hondas could race with non-Honda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello guys, 

I shouldn't really post on this as I did not race last year although I plan on racing next year. 

My 2 cents and just my personal opinion as I have the honour of standing on the sidelines watching you guys and here is my input: It was boring and damn boring... And thank you for that so I didn't feel left out. You guys have 1.7 laps then things are spaced and sorted and that is it and I walk away from the barricades because nothing happens (rarely).

The only real good door to door OR lap after lap racing that I saw was EOD on the first Saturday with Al and Don. Do you remember last year when we were a train bumper-to-bumper going around the course with 5 cars because nobody had anything for the one in front? I couldn't see daylight under Steve in front of me for 6 laps. How about 4 then 3 wide in corner one 3 laps in a row during the last day with crap tires? Nothing like that this year. 

Yes I know I am a forced-spectator, like I said this is just my personal opinion. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chkdsk said:

 

I think this ^^^^ is definitely worthy of more discussion.  

I started working on a points vs weight formula, but got side tracked. I'll try and put it together and post here. I don't want to undo what Don has built, it's just an idea, a way to not re-write the nasa rules, and keep it simple.

I was attempting to set a realistic minimum weight that worked out to 2174. I think everyone could get there, even Mat.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds interesting, Steve. Keep going!

Let's not forget about tire restrictions. Probably the most important factor for keeping costs under control. I didn't mind racing on the westlakes (hint, hint).

From where I was sitting there were a few more close races than just one. But Jordan is right - with Steve and Clint missing some events and Jordan out altogether there was not as much traffic for me in 2017 as there was in 2016. Jordan, we hope to have you back racing for 2018!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts on this. Rather than trying to rewrite the NASA classes, allow say 8  or 10 points into the PTE class, so cars that start in PTF can get on par with PTE base class cars. Restrict power to weight, say 21lbs/Hpish and we can set a base weight for each vehicle based on that.  Set a spec tire to whatever we choose. Just an opinion if we want to open it up a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Can we get an opinion from the CCC registrants. 

Do we just go back to PTE?

Limit performance points as Schteeve suggested?

Try to reconfigure the 2017 CCC?

Can we agree on a spec tire?

What do you guys want to do for 2018?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...