Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Bill Strong

      BOD Nominations   10/03/2017

      Emails have been sent to all current CCWS Members with a link to BOD nominations. Please check your email.   You will need to ask the person you're nominating for their current 2017 CCWS Member Number. Keep in mind that we will contact each nominee to make sure they are OK with being a candidate. You can't nominate yourself either (sorry). All nominations are due by November 3, 2017. To keep from having 574 different nominees, a nominee must be named by at least five members to qualify. We will compile all the nominations and put the top ten nominees on the November 10, 2017, ballot. Elections are over on December 10, 2017. We will announce the winners on December 13, 2017, and the two winners will take office January 1, 2018. How to get your current CCWS member number. Log into the CCWS event registration system. Your member number will be next to your name on the welcome screen. https://www.chumpcar.com/register/login.php Mike Chisek
      President
      ChumpCar International, Inc.

Snorman

Members
  • Content count

    319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Snorman last won the day on August 5

Snorman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

308

Recent Profile Visitors

916 profile views
  1. Simple Enforcement for Fuel

    The gains of running race gas on a stock engine regardless of how high you jack up the timing are pretty small. Figure ~2-3 percent. Of course, it'll make much more with cheaty bits. I think that's the thing here. There is really no reason to be running race gas unless you've got cheaty stuff in the engine. So maybe race gas should be points too? S.
  2. Simple Enforcement for Fuel

    First off, anybody with an ear will know that's not a stock engine. Second, over 400 hp is a waste unless you find a way to swap it into something with a big-ass tank. Third, not all engines have the flexibility to make power that the EFI 5.0 SBF does. Nor do they have the parts or the aftermarket support. But I agree that simply checking the stroke would suffice in this one instance. There are other cars (like a Porsche 944) that don't have anywhere near the flexibility to run parts like the 5.0 can. S.
  3. Simple Enforcement for Fuel

    But it does accomplish something. You can't make more power with those cheaty bits when running pump gas. Heavily decked heads are out. Big compression pistons are out. On-the-edge tunes that are saved by race gas are out. Has there ever been a teardown in post-race to check compression? Or valve lift/duration? I truly don't know. But if you eliminate the mechanism needed to run those cheaty parts, then you eliminate the cheaty parts. S.
  4. Simple Enforcement for Fuel

    No, they won't be claimed because they won't be there. You can't run 12:1 (or more) compression on pump gas and make more power than 10:1 compression on pump gas. So the option for those teams will be to build a combo that's within what can be ran on pump gas. Can they still put cheaty poop in the engine? Sure...just not as cheaty. And we'll all be restricted to the same octane limitation. Would it be fair to let a team run on Trofeo R's, or R888's or R1's? So why is it okay to let them run on race gas? S.
  5. Simple Enforcement for Fuel

    In an naturally aspirated combo, I would agree that race fuel is a modest increase over pump gas. But it's an advantage in a series (like others) where everybody looks for an advantage. We can't have a free oil cooler for longevity but running race gas to quell detonation and allow more timing, more compression and (maybe) more boost is okay? S.
  6. Simple Enforcement for Fuel

    Yes, and a race fuel car was on the podium at Sebring as well. S.
  7. Simple Enforcement for Fuel

    I don't agree with letting Chumpcar blow up somebodies engine to prove they are running race gas. I'm sure the threat of testing a fuel sample would be enough to dissuade teams from trying. And it doesn't matter if cars aren't winning with race gas. Turbo cars don't seem to be dominating in Chump and there are pretty restrictive rules for turbos. S.
  8. Rule 7.2.2

    Not sure, maybe some drivers are averse to having to get on the brakes while on the grass in a braking zone. Who knows. Both drivers could have avoided this. S.
  9. Rule 7.2.2

    We had an incident at Road Atlanta this year. I was effecting a pass on the outside of T6, gave the car I was passing lots of room, and after I had nearly cleared him he made a beeline across the track and hit our right rear quarter. We have in-car video and it was clear that I didn't pinch him. The other driver was simply focused on another car trying to get under him. He was wide in T6 and slow through there. We took our lumps and our black flag and went to the tower after our stint to meet talk to Mike C.. After reviewing our video, and seeing that my hand position and car position through the turn did not change, he gave us back 3 laps. Mike commented that Chump was moving towards both the passing car and the car being passed having some accountability for a safe pass. I saw a video from Sebring last year. In it, a driver in a BMW was being passed on the left by a rather fast Miata coming out of T9. It was very clear the BMW driver was not paying attention, and came from far track right to the left to set up for T10, contacting the Miata pretty damn hard in the process. The BMW was being passed, pinched the Miata and IMO they both were at fault. I think the point is, we're all trying to dance out there. And it's nice if you don't get a spinning backhand when you step in for the reverse fleckerl. S.
  10. Very fast V8 RX7 for sale

    So I think the nice thing here is that we've established that this is not an EC car and is not over 500 points based on current swap valuations. It's somewhere between a 310-348 point car (plus whatever else it has). S.
  11. Very fast V8 RX7 for sale

    The GT40 heads are F1ZE, F3ZE or F4ZE castings. The GT40P heads are F77E castings. S.
  12. Very fast V8 RX7 for sale

    I'd put a new log book in the car and use the above info. If he's running a 210 hp Explorer engine it's going to be a 348 point VPI assuming they treat that swap as they would with the other 5.0 variants and there is no reason they shouldn't. S.
  13. Very fast V8 RX7 for sale

    Awesome. So this is a sub-500 point car that is not in EC correct? S.
  14. Very fast V8 RX7 for sale

    Yep, GT40 heads and the bespoke Cobra intake along with aluminum Cranes. The '94-'95 Cobras also had a factory oil cooler. The '86 5.0 had flat top pistons and the smaller valve heads. I also think they had a smaller throttle body. To me, the best 5.0 EFI variant would be the '89-'91 mass air, forged piston cars (from a swap perspective). S.
  15. Very fast V8 RX7 for sale

    The '93 was 205 hp. The '94-'95 cars were 215 hp. Then things got bleak in '96 with the gutless 4.6 SOHC. The only bright spot was the 4.6 DOHC, but I wouldn't consider running one of those in Chump for various reasons. The VPI jump from '95 to '96 is inexplicable unless you consider the Cobra, because it was the same car, but with the crappy 4.6 SOHC and junk T45 trans. S.
×