Jump to content

Hi_Im_Will

Members
  • Content count

    975
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Hi_Im_Will last won the day on September 12

Hi_Im_Will had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,301

3 Followers

About Hi_Im_Will

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Dearborn, MI

Recent Profile Visitors

2,042 profile views
  1. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01H4KU83W/ Hyperikon 90+CRI T8 tubes. I have 44 of them in my garage, mounted in some old 4x T12 housings I got on craigslist. They are incredible. I gave a bunch of brand new fluorescent tubes and ballasts to the neighbor because the Hyperikons reveal so much more detail. All of a sudden subtle discolorations I never used to notice started showing up. These lights make silver sharpie visible on sheet aluminum. The chintzy marketing photo isn't lying - these lights make everything more colorful.
  2. May be wrong, but I don't think any of the top 4 quickest from last weekend can go 2 hrs balls to the wall on a dry track.
  3. Fire Extinguisher recall

    Again???? They got recalled about a year ago, and I kept 2 of them around as junk extinguishers for when something needed to be put out, but not urgently. I was 0 for 2 on getting them to spray. Starting to think that Kidde should just give up on plastic handles.
  4. Sorry to take so long to respond to this, and I'm truly honored to have been nominated (thanks @Jamie for the push!). However, I doubt I'll be able to devote the time required to serve on the ChumpCar BoD, so I have decided not to run. That said, please consider voting for Jeff Christianson @JDChristianson and Tyler Pedersen @Crank Yankers Racing. Both have demonstrated their dedication to Chumpcar over and over again, and have the experience and enthusiasm to do a fantastic job as directors. -Will
  5. Jesus Christo. Fun fact, the two fastest laps on your chart were driven by 2 different pro drivers. Now that I've added fuel to the "ban the pros" argument, let me give ya'll something else to chew on. Randy agreed to drive our car (the number 2 on the chart above) for ~30 minutes Sunday afternoon so we could collect a little throttle and steering data from somebody famously good. After correcting for his short shifting, Randy's fastest lap would have put him in 2nd or 3rd out of the 5 people to drive our car last weekend, and his fastest lap in the mid-high 1:34s. Having a good driver certainly helps, but @MR2 Biohazard (thanks again for letting us borrow your hot shoe!) built a car that's legitimately 5 seconds faster than ours.
  6. GWR: Guarino-Watson Racing #991

    It doesn't make much power up there. Peak is around 6k, and we're about 35hp below peak by 7k. We only run it that high to give the driver some flexibility with where on-track to shift. Our ideal 3-4 shift point is 6750rpm.
  7. @mcoppola Stop saying such nice things, you're going to make me start tearing up at my desk.
  8. Perhaps many of us have been quietly considering whether or not running for BOD is something we really want to dive into, while simultaneously acquiring the requisite nominations? A lack of early activity on the forum campaign thread does not mean a lack of attention, opinion, or enthusiasm for the club. But since you asked: Speed creep and cost creep go hand-in-hand, and both make the club less accessible. As was said earlier, speed costs money. In my mind, you can break that money into two portions: Consumables - This is fuel, tires, brakes, and maintenance. The faster you go, the more fuel you're going to burn. Corner harder, wear tires faster. Spin the engine faster, rebuild more frequently. The countermeasures to this cost are well known - make the cars lighter and slower, and limit tires. ChumpCar does both of these. However, nobody has optimized their car to the current rule set yet (see point #2), so as speed creeps, this portion of cost will creep. I don't think we have a problem here yet, and I think the way the rules are fundamentally structured will limit how much this cost rises in the future. Investment - Fundamentally, as the club gets more competitive, people will spend more money trying to optimize their cars to the limit of the rule set. It's the traditional "arms race" issue, and it affects every series. The problem is especially bad in spec racing and pro feeder series, where people will do silly things like go to a dyno and spend all day testing a stack of ECUs of the same part number looking for a half horsepower advantage. The basic solution is to make spending a lot of money lead to very little advantage, but people will still spend the money if the incentive is there. The fact that at the end of the day, we're racing for an old brake rotor and $600 really helps keep people from going too crazy. Creative engineering is part of what makes this series so amazing. I absolutely love the engineering-driven nature of ChumpCar racing, and the sheer variety of cars and modifications that end up on the podium as a result. Points-free parts in many cases raise the initial cost of building a car (part of that investment point above), so they should be approached with caution. That said, the creativity involved in designing and building a car to optimize performance while remaining under that magic 500 point limit is part of what makes me love racing in this series. The other thing that makes me love ChumpCar is that I'm racing against everybody. You can engineer to your heart's content in AER or WRL, but the large single class is part of what makes Chump special. I see the displacement based classes as an excuse to spread around the prize money and bragging rights, and as a bogey for teams in the middle of the field. But classes should never be more than that - once you introduce different classes based on performance, you take away what makes ChumpCar different from NASA PT, WRL, or any other multi-class series. Right now, ChumpCar doesn't need change. This is a fantastic series. Sure, you could rationalize the rulebook a little bit, but every major change involves a very large, very real-world cost to the teams as they adapt. I believe in stability in the rule set, with changes coming infrequently, and with lots of thought and prior notice. I have to go, so no bio right now, but here's the basics: Name: William Guarino Member Number: 004449 Team: GWR: Guarino-Watson Racing (co-owner) Education: MSE, Mechanical engineering Occupation: Driveline Research Engineer at A Major Automaker Racing since: 2008
  9. Honda brakes - good suggestions welcome!

    Mushy is generally a maintenance issue. Make sure your fluid is fresh (sounds like it is now!), all the lines are in good condition, and nothing is worn out. ATE type 200 is a great fluid assuming you're not boiling it. If the car has ABS, that system can be especially difficult to bleed, leading to a soft pedal. Not easy to modulate implies something is sticking, either in the MC or a caliper. Once your're confident all the bits are in perfect shape, you can start adding stiffness to the system. Swap to SS lines if you haven't already, and maybe replace the stock combo valve with an adjustable proportioning valve in the rear brake line to get some more control over balance. But make the mushy go away first.
  10. VPI Numbers you just can't get your head around

    Recent results would suggest the second gen RX7 is a comfortably competitive platform right now. GMS and Sahlens have been doing quite nicely with them.
  11. A ton of research seems like a reasonable thing to do before making a $5k+ purchase.
  12. The "visionaries" yes. They tend to be rather full of poop. The engineers actually executing on developing autonomous tech, not so much. The most serious attempts at autonomy are treating it as a taxi service at this point, and fully intend for autonomous and human driven vehicles to coexist on the road in harmony for the mid term future. FWIW, I'm all for autonomous vehicles (I'd love to be able to call a car to come pick me up, but not have to pay somebody to drive it), but that article struck me as rather "visionary".
  13. Aluminum Radiators

    Yeah, you would have to write the rule so that it's very clearly an exception for cars with poor parts support, and publish a clarification with the approved part number. Similar processes work for other parts in other series. In effect that's what we do already, we just let NAPA or Oreilly make the decision - take a minute to look through Rock Auto's E30 radiator selection, and tell me which one most closely matches OEM BMW. The problem is it rapidly turns into an ugly administrative task, which is why I lean towards leaving the rule as written.
  14. Aluminum Radiators

    I'd accept free aluminum radiators under these conditions: Same hose locations/diameters as OE Core thickness same as or up to .25" thinner than OE (no buying weight in radiator capacity) Width and height same as OE or up to 2" smaller (no mini-rads for other nefarious purposes) No smaller than 1/2" tube (none of that micro-channel BS) Pre-approval of part required by tech Basically, allow a non OE aluminum radiator, but it's function (in every way, not just cooling capacity) must match OE. That gets you your low cost alternative to OEM, but makes it very difficult to sneak in a performance gain points-free.
×