2015 Tech forum - Classes 2 & 3

[Cookie Monster]

Thx Oli - me too as I felt a lot closer in power ( not skill/experience!) to class 3 than class 4 esp as cars similiar to mine would be even more outclassed with a move up in power limits to 210 for 2015

Selfish mode on: It would certainly significantly dampen my enthusiasm for the championship if I'm so far off the pace I have no close contender. Last year with Phil (Matchwick), James & to a much lesser extent Oli & Richard - only because they were so much better - made it really enjoyable even though I was in a different class.We three were close with Oli & Richard's times to aspire to & use as a benchmark which made for really enjoyable events which is what it's all about isn't it? Selfish mode off.

[Simon.Rogers]

What we must not forget is that it is a competition and that those who do take it more seriously should not be penalised either.

I do think the R300 K's should be in Class 3.

However someone is always going to be at the bottom of the power stakes in a class - unfortunately thats life.

 

[Mark Durrant]

Classes 2 & 3 are very succesful as the regs have remained stable and the costs kept to a minimum. I suggest the power limit remains unchanged and R300 K's are allowed to compete in these classes this year and it is reviewed at the end of the 2015 season. This will stop any current class 2 or 3 driver going to additional expense and give the club the opportunity to assess if any changes to the regs are required.

I see not point in having different power limits for the two classes and it will make it difficult for competitors to switch between class 3 and 2 like Andrew Willoughby.

[Stuart Miller 7]

I agree with Mark and if it ain't broke......

Allow the R300 K's in too - despite the TB's I doubt they'll be over the power limit anyway.

[punch]

I wholeheartedly agree that the fun of competing with similar skilled competitors drives us to progress in our times up hills or round circuits  and weather  Cookie Monster has TBs/emerald has no bearing on the fun, but later next season when I am struggling to keep him in sight might be slightly peeving and end up with expenditure I was hoping to not expend!!! So my vote would be keep 150/155 next year and consider splitting power from class 2 /3 by 150 and 160 and allowing K throttle bodies/ermeralds in.

BUT can I ask clarification on hp measurement as manufacturers quote flywheel horse power but rolling roads are rear wheel hp and 10/20/30% difference between so 160 hp on rolling could be 190 flywheel against 140 flywheel which could be 120 at wheels or am I wrong???  I also wish I could select and put smiley in my text!!

Philip

[mikecocker]

We're certainly getting some mixed messages here. If it ain't broke....., but allow R300k in!  

I can't think of anything more likely to break it. 

[Richard Price]

Whilst it starts to get muddy, maybe, cars that were originally supplied with TB's should be allowed in (as we already do with sigma 150), but otherwise, the rules should stay roughly as they have been this year?

This would allow in standard R300's, but not allow an existing competitor to build a special with 155bhp AND shed loads of torqure?

An 1800 K, with a ported head, and TB's could make very good torque in the mid range, but then be mapped to tail off the torque and thus power at the top end. Potentially, it could make 155bhp from around 4500rpm all the way to  8000rpm. (but it would feel a bit like a turbo diesel to drive....)

 

For the record, I'm in favour of allowing stock K R300's with TB's into class 3.

 

[Richard Price]

Punch,

Rolling roads normally calculate the transmission losses wit a run down test, so do measure power (or more accurately torque, from which BHP is calculated) at the wheels, but then apply the losses to quote power at the crank.

[Stuart Miller 7]

Mike

In my experience a (standard) R300k is lucky to make 155 which I think puts it roughly in class 3.  I also don't know who has an R300 currently competing.  If there is one then if we compare times to the rest of class 3 then we'll know the answer.  If we look at the results this year then the standard K's (and the occasional historic) are a clear margin ahead. 

 

[mikecocker]

Stuart,

I don't think it's about how one particular car performs or how one particular driver drives. This model of car has the potential to be a clear class leader in my opinion and therefore rewrites the class rules as far as performance is concerned. That said, if it's what the majority want then we have to accept that it will put financial pressure on the other competitors to aim for a similar level of power and the only winners in this will be those supplying expensive tuning parts.

[David Horne]

I'd support the 155bhp limit, allowing standard R300s in, and reviewing at the end of the season.

We were down on numbers in class 3 this year compared to previous years which is one of the reasons why I think it is right to find a better way to accommodate R300s in the championship.

However it is important to maintain close competition so we should review at the end of the year if the rest of us become so uncompetitive compared to newbie R300s that the element of competition is diminished.

Of course it is quite possible to find competition lower down in the class, and enjoy yourself, as I have found in the past 5 seasons with my underpowered 5spd 1.6...

 

[Cookie Monster]

I may be wrong here but I think my R300k was the only one this season? However my times were mostly rubbish so not sure that will help?

It is completely stock, obviously 1.8 with TBs & runs a MBE (not Emerald as mentioned by Punch, above). When on the Two Steve's rolling road in June it was measuring 154.9 bhp so might fall into class 3 for the 2015 season as I understand it?

[Blue_SV]

As a (very nearly) newbie here, I am still getting to grips with the various engine variants etc. I have a standard Roadsport SV with 1.8 K series that has had a 'R300 upgrade' during its life (not by me); the 'R300 upgrade' comment came from Caterham when I bought the car. It was done by Minster Power. The car has a standard Caterham MBE ECU that is locked (at least to most...). It do not think it has any other modifications.

I competed in one event last year (providing a foundation to the results sheet.. ) and keen to continue into the championship this year. From the discussion it seems that I might squeeze into 3 but.. Northampton Motorsport did a power run in March and the max power came out at 161.9 - for those that understand these things, a scan copy of the output is available here:https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/77159797/140314%20Caterham%20Power%20run.pdf

Does this mean I would end up in Class 4 and probably not even make it onto the score sheet or would I squeeze into class 3 on the 'R300 rule'. For the forseeable future, I aim to keep the car for predominantly road use but the L7 competition is very pleasant side line.

I would appreciate some thoughts, including any explanations of the Power run in terms of how 'typical' it looks for this spec.

Jon

[OliW]

Hi Jon,

I would think that would put you in class 4, but don't worry about that.  I spent the first season learning what the hell I was doing rather than worrying about scores and am still learning now.  No need to worry about whether you might keep up with the front runners.  You'll have fun whatever.

Although you might be permitted to enter class 3, depending on what happens with these rules.

Oli

[CaterBram]

Jon,

I would think if you talk to Northampton motor sport they might be able to advise on if you can get down to 155 BHP or whatever is finally agreed.

But before you get anything changed have a chat with Matthew to confirm you will be acceptable in Class 2/3 , which might not be confirmed until after the conclusion of the Tech Forum.

 

 

 

[Notsohotcams140]

Novice and a SV, current statistics equal harmless. Right?

[CaterBram]

SV = Widetrack......

25 kg ish difference, less than the difference between some drivers....

[Notsohotcams140]

Mandatory full tank of petrol and must keep windscreen in place?

[Notsohotcams140]

But seriously, looking at the 2 Curborough results on the club website neither Phil's R300 or the 161bhp R300 upgraded engined car looked out of place through the speed traps. If this is the preferred method of identifying an overpowered car it would suggest they are both acceptable???

[Blue_SV]

Hi

Thanks for the views, I have no aspirations for success next year other than learn lots. I am hoping my wife will also enter so there will be some competition to be the foundation of the score sheet . 

I had a very helpful chat with Simon R the other day who also thought we might be able to squeeze down into class 3 but either way, Oli's comment is well made - it will be a learning experience... 

On a broader note, I am interested in the focus on total power output with little discussion around weight, be that the car or the driver. In my case with an SV, the extra weight (probably an extra 10+% over a standard model) will bring down the power to weight ratio, reducing acceleration and top speed. I do not know the relationship between power/weight ratio and 'effort' (in terms of acceleration or speed), but if it were broadly linear, my extra 10+% weight of the car would bring down the 'effort' to match standard cars with around 150bhp. I imagine driver weight will also be a factor although it seems that most folk I have met are broadly similar size/shape and so it may have less effect that the different types of car. 

Of course, I fully appreciate that driver skill is the ultimate defining factor in a class and it will be a while before that factor offsets my car differences... 

Jon

 

 

[Notsohotcams140]

Having run the only SV last season in Class 3, people don't see it as a disadvantage, and as Chris points out its width is an advantage on circuits, such as Llandow. I wouldn't say I possess that much driver skill as I had only been karting on a couple of stag do's before doing sprinting this year but I wouldn't think the power/weight would make as much as 10bhp difference. Ask Phil Matchwick who ran the same engine in a S3. It was very close, and he had the elusive aeroscreen. 

[rob spencer]

I’m with Mike on this.  Class 2 has been contested recently by a number of driver/car combinations that have been very evenly matched at the events we enter (maybe not me this year though).  From the Northampton Motorsport dyno results earlier this year, ported 1600K Supersport cammed engines produce c. 146 bhp and Graham’s X-power 1800 was there or thereabouts.  A 155bhp 1800cc R300 car entering Class 2 will have a very clear advantage over other cars which competed in the class this year, which were very evenly matched through the final speed trap at Curborough.  You can bang on about driver skill being more important than power all you like but, all other things being equal, including driver skill, the R300 will beat the other cars most of the time. . . which as Mike points out, will cause current Class 2 competitors who want to stay competitive to get their cheque books out to get the extra power. 

I like the sound of Alan’s 150bhp for Class 2 (sorry Andrew :(  ).

But if there is to be a power output specification for the engine, there has to be a method of enforcing it (wherever it is set) such as a specified rolling road .  I know its Clubman’s motorsport and I know its just a bit of fun, (No, it's a lot of fun) but that shouldn’t mean we don’t have effective rules to “encourage” all competitors to play fairly.  Everybody can then get on with enjoying fair competition, which is what it’s all about isn’t it?

Rob

[Graham Howard]

I agree about having a specified rolling road. But I think  excluding R300k's is being a bit protective of current competitors and discouraging others who may want to join but be hopelessly uncompetitive in class 4.

I like Richard's proposal that only cars origanally supplied  with TB's will be eligible in classes 2 and 3. This would allow in Sigma 150's and R300k. Could we also ban any adjustment of the ECU on these cars? I am afraid I don't know what ecu an R300k has and whether it is easily programmable.

Some of us may have also already  embarked on modifications to reach the 155BHP limit proposed last year.

[Grahame W]

I agree with Graham that if we are going to stick with standard plenums then it makes general sense to control the ECU as well

Had we had power only regs as suggested my interest  in developing the car was much more driven by an ECU that would allow me  a 'pass the MOT' setting, and if really developing the engine to have a setting to compete in the sub 1700 HSA/SBD class with a bit more chance of being a bit nearer the quick guys  

[Notsohotcams140]

I don't agree with saying cars that came with TB's are allowed but cars that have them added after manufacture aren't. How are we going to know? And what do we say to people who have bought a 2nd hand 1.8 k which someone has added TB's to? Having these sub rules makes competing very complicated and we could still end up with people competing in Class 4 with 155bhp just because its non standard?

i thought the point of the rule was to even K's and Sigmas, not stopping people building the optimum car for the rules? If we do that are we not saying you cant modify your car towards the power limit?