Spoilers, SCCA legal Options

[jjackson]

[attachmentid=260
893]
Forgive for pix in trailer.

Missed one.JJackson

Wow thats nice! What class you running?

Thats the "Decent" FP car.JJackson

[Randal]

What motor are you running in the FP car JJ?

[jjackson]

What motor are you running in the FP car JJ?

First overbore on 2.4L-Twin plugged,fuel injected-small motor 1900 lb car-13 to 1-got a real nice crackle.JJackson

[PeeGreen 914]

What motor are you running in the FP car JJ?

First overbore on 2.4L-Twin plugged,fuel injected-small motor 1900 lb car-13 to 1-got a real nice crackle.JJackson

That sounds purty (IMG:style_emoticons/default/drooley.gif) My orange car was on track to be made into something similar. Damn real estate market (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Oh well, GO GREEN (IMG:style_emoticons/default/piratenanner.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/happy11.gif)

[Randal]

What motor are you running in the FP car JJ?

First overbore on 2.4L-Twin plugged,fuel injected-small motor 1900 lb car-13 to 1-got a real nice crackle.JJackson

So a twin plugged 6, right?

I mean 4's don't have a "nice crackle" do they?

[J P Stein]

I mean 4's don't have a "nice crackle" do they?

They do...at least for a while, if you feed some cracklejuice to em'. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[grantsfo]

I wish we had more flexibility with the Boxster motors in FP. They offer the 914 all sorts of options. I cant remeber a 2.5 or a 2.7 ever being offered in a 914 LOL! So you get all the flexibility in the world to build a 2.5? As long as its a 2.5? Thats cool but us Boxster guys have to stick with stock block, bore and stroke configs from the Boxster and Cayman from my understanding. So 914's actually get a nice benefit in FP.

Because if there was a loop hole I would love to destroke a 3.2 Boxster S down to 2.9, lighten up the crank, rods pistons, etc and create a high reving M96 screamer. I guess since they added Cayman to same line we can use newer 2.7 M96 block and maybe get the 3.4 heads from a 987 to make a franken motor. A 2.7 with Cayman heads might be the motor. Unfortunately the 2.5 block is pretty limited - I think I can bolt 2.7 heads on that block which whould give the motor a better cam.

My approach is similar to yours. Try to keep the car as light as possible as I think thats the advantage with current FP crowd. Especially with the AWD turbos. You will never beat them being heavier. Even the BMW and Datsun run a little heavy too.



This post has been edited by grantsfo: May 26 2011, 12:16 PM

[jjackson]

I wish we had more flexibility with the Boxster motors in FP. They offer the 914 all sorts of options. I cant remeber a 2.5 or a 2.7 ever being offered in a 914 LOL! So you get all the flexibility in the world to build a 2.5? As long as its a 2.5? Thats cool but us Boxster guys have to stick with stock block, bore and stroke configs from the Boxster and Cayman from my understanding. So 914's actually get a nice benefit in FP.

Because if there was a loop hole I would love to destroke a 3.2 Boxster S down to 2.9, lighten up the crank, rods pistons, etc and create a high reving M96 screamer. I guess since they added Cayman to same line we can use newer 2.7 M96 block and maybe get the 3.4 heads from a 987 to make a franken motor. A 2.7 with Cayman heads might be the motor. Unfortunately the 2.5 block is pretty limited - I think I can bolt 2.7 heads on that block which whould give the motor a better cam.

My approach is similar to yours. Try to keep the car as light as possible as I think thats the advantage with current FP crowd. Especially with the AWD turbos. You will never beat them being heavier. Even the BMW and Datsun run a little heavy too.

I do not know who wrote all of the letters to get us this flexibility,
but I'm thankful.Were still limited to early case.I am not aware of any true racecar that is not running as light as it can within rules, but we have questioned the idea for autocross based on our need to generate heat in our tires so quickly.We still are a single driver car in a two driver world.Don't know when-but it looks like the AWD turbos are going to be restricted to 36MM soon.That will get HP #s in line.So far JT's talent has been able to overcome all.JJackson

[J P Stein]

All production cars have shortcomings. All production cars do not suit themselves to a given Prepared/Mod class. The Boxster is no exception to that rule, IMO. The motor is shit. That could be overcome with an engine bay transfusion but it couldn't be in FP. It is a decent platform....maybe even very good, but nobody has stepped up with the TM&E to prove it in Prepared or Mod. Strelnieks
Is one of the premier AX drivers in the land. If he can't make a winner out of it......

Putting money into an M96 is worse than putting lipstick on a pig....at least you an eat the bacon from a pig whereas the M96 will eat itself.

[jjackson]

What motor are you running in the FP car JJ?

First overbore on 2.4L-Twin plugged,fuel injected-small motor 1900 lb car-13 to 1-got a real nice crackle.JJackson

So a twin plugged 6, right?

I mean 4's don't have a "nice crackle" do they?

Definitely 6-Different sound.Love stout 4's but we broke lots of stuff trying.We always tried to run too much RPM.That hind sight crap.Used to shift the car a whole lot more than our competition-with light components-increased risk of mistakes and lost traction.JJackson

[jjackson]

All production cars have shortcomings. All production cars do not suit themselves to a given Prepared/Mod class. The Boxster is no exception to that rule, IMO. The motor is shit. That could be overcome with an engine bay transfusion but it couldn't be in FP. It is a decent platform....maybe even very good, but nobody has stepped up with the TM&E to prove it in Prepared or Mod. Strelnieks
Is one of the premier AX drivers in the land. If he can't make a winner out of it......

Putting money into an M96 is worse than putting lipstick on a pig....at least you an eat the bacon from a pig whereas the M96 will eat itself.

So you two aren't tight.Lipstick on a pig?Wow.JJackson

[grantsfo]

All production cars have shortcomings. All production cars do not suit themselves to a given Prepared/Mod class. The Boxster is no exception to that rule, IMO. The motor is shit. That could be overcome with an engine bay transfusion but it couldn't be in FP. It is a decent platform....maybe even very good, but nobody has stepped up with the TM&E to prove it in Prepared or Mod. Strelnieks
Is one of the premier AX drivers in the land. If he can't make a winner out of it......

Putting money into an M96 is worse than putting lipstick on a pig....at least you an eat the bacon from a pig whereas the M96 will eat itself.

So you two aren't tight.Lipstick on a pig?Wow.JJackson

JP is a bit of a butt head and still sore my pig in lipstick boxster beat his "nationally" competitive 914. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/bootyshake.gif)

JP is flat out wrong about the Boxster not being competive in Prepared or Mod classes with M96/97 motors. Just watch this years Nationals. I think he will be surprised at the number of those terrible self eating Porsche water pumper motors in fast cars. Eric is already being challenged in his SSM car by a fast SSM Boxster that just recieved a big 3.8 M97. LOL!

I guess JP has missed the fact a M97 motor can be used in Prepared classes. Granted M96 isnt the easiest motor to work with and it doesnt share the years of development of the older aircooled motors. But we are seeing some much better applications now.

The m96 motor in the FP Boxster right now (bought it for $2K used) has lasted 3 seasons without a hiccup. So much for them being crap. I dont know too many 2480cc aircooled motors that make over 200 HP with over 11 to 1 compression that last three seasons with multiple drivers running at redline every event. And there is clearly a good M97 motor that can be used that will crank out 300 HP in FP trim at 2.9 liters. Thats a competitive weight and allows the car to have some weight over the front end.

Erik has indicated the Boxster as it sits with a stock 2.5 exactly way I sent it to him is competitive for podium level. However Erik is more focused on E Production road racing than making the car a National class FP car. Its going to carry extra radiators and stay with 2.5 so its likely not going to be an all out FP car. And in case you missed it JP my Boxster was and is already a Nationally competive FP car. It has run down the fast podium placing FP cars and drivers in its class 3 times at differnt top level National and Regional events around the US. Get it through your thick skull dude. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/headbang.gif) LOL!

Perhaps when JP builds a car that can compete at a National level in a given class he will gain some credibility being an "expert" but frankly I could care less as I will never see one his cars running against me or one of my cars. As I told JP 7 years ago anyone can cut a top off a 914 throw motor in the car and run near TTOD at a poorly attended local event against street class cars. Thats no fun for me! It takes some real knowledge to build a SCCA prepared class winning car at a national level.

I have nothing against people building fast cars just for fun but when they start spouting trash about the car being nationally competitive like JP has I just have to call BS.

Funniest thing about this is I have never claimed to be an expert. I'm just starting at this building cars for national level SCCA stuff. and I'm not sure how committed I am at this point. I dont have a car currently that I'm targeting for national level build. I am toyin gwith ideal of a 1.7 in FSP if they allow the car in that class. If not I may return to a very serious BSP Boxster build as I know thoses cars just as well as 914's now. You learn a lot about a car when you strip them down to race cars.

[J P Stein]

Grant always needs to have the last word so here it is....His thread from another forum without comment:




http://axpaddock.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=667

He has deleted stuff in the past to cover his tracks so be quick.

5-11-11
"So stock motor blew after a several thousand miles with stock 6500 rpm rev limiter with extra cooling, etc. And from my experience shift point is far below redline on stock 2.5 so shifts are more like 6200 rpm. I'm still not convinced m96 is something I ever want to touch again. mine blew first track event, Andrew blew his, several others have blown with relatively low miles and now Lucille. All stock low revving motors. I just don't see stock motors blowing so often as a great thing. I know stock air cooled 6s that have run much longer with regular track work. Think i have to admit i agree with JP that these motors stink. No worries about me running a spec boaster ever. Even m97 appears to have issues from what I see with racing Caymans.

I just say this as I have chased Larry's nealy 200K mile RSA around tracks, see it show up for tons of AX's and it seems to be still running fine. Tired but no broken pistons, slipped sleaves, fried cam bearings, blown RMS seals etc. We just see tons of issues with Boxster motors. Given their fairly mild tune and low RPMs I'm just suprised they fail so often. Well not really when I see the poor design execution in the motors. I was shocked when I saw my motor torn arpart. Lots of short cuts made on this mass produced powerplant.

Only motor Porsche seems to have dialed in is GT3 power plant. I'm waiting for 996 GT3 prices to come down more. Or I may go back to another air cooled P car.

Owner of my Boxster race car is going with LN Engineering block and tons of work to make it more reliable but dang thats expensive! Its a shame as I love the chassis on the Boxster and really understand how to build one now. I just cant stand the motor and lack of resources to go after its inherent weaknesses."

[jjackson]

Sooo.... being from Arkansas and everything-it gets my attention when there are any pig quotes addressing lipstick issues-you know...barefoot and all......Randal
how is the spoiler plan coming along.The 100 sq inch endplates make for an interesting question.Also mesuring at 10" high at midpoint of your trunk-squared off and extending to the width of your flares.Simple design if your trunk was fixed.What if you were three pieces-the outers pieces with endplates permanently attached to car-say with some sort of closer flap when all three pieces aligned?
(our non wing closed off flap is grey duct tape)Just thinking about original thread.JJackson
BTW 1/4 inch lexan is really stout for drilling,countersinking,and attaching appendages. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)



.

.

.

[J P Stein]

Sooo.... being from Arkansas and everything-it gets my attention when there are any pig quotes addressing lipstick issues-you know...barefoot and all......

.

.

.

Jeeze, I didn't mean to get ya'll.....er... aroused or sumthin'. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[jjackson]

2 Piece trunk lid-fiberglass -front pinned-rear fixed -closed off and effective? Just thinking.JJackson

[Randal]

2 Piece trunk lid-fiberglass -front pinned-rear fixed -closed off and effective? Just thinking.JJackson

I have been thinking about getting started on the spoiler this weekend. Been down to TAP plastics in Mountain View and they have some pretty nice equipment to shape anything you want and can glue anything together for which you have the templates.

Oh, I like the duct tape idea for closing off the bottom ends of the spoiler. Was looking at that for sometime yesterday trying to figure out a way to get a shape.

Anyway i don't think I'll be adding anything to the car until after my return from the hill climb and the autoX at Medford.

The car seems to be pretty predictable now, abet the driver being behind, but don't want to inject any high speed aero differences until after the hill climb.

The 1.5 lane road is not forgiving if you go off, as you can see from the video of a 2009 (second day) run when a driver lost it after turn 2 and hit a tree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV_WrCjpiB0

I'm going to run the next AAS autoX in early June so will get a chance to play with the car again. Hell, who knows I might have 6 minutes total under my belt before I start that hill climb; what more could you ask for?

How far out West do you guys come to run SCCA events? It's be fun to hook up.

[Randal]

2 Piece trunk lid-fiberglass -front pinned-rear fixed -closed off and effective? Just thinking.JJackson

Yea, why wait to start the down force. Start it right behind the engine and create some huge down force.

Just lift the back of the trunk lid, like 10 inches minus the thickness of the lid, fill in the gaps and man there is a big airfoil.

Use Gurney flaps for end plates.

I like it.

Sure would look funny, but would probably work.

[jjackson]

[quote name='Randal' date='May 26 2011, 11:27 PM' post='1484190']
[quote name='jjackson' post='1484160' date='May 26 2011, 07:54 PM']
2 Piece trunk lid-fiberglass -front pinned-rear fixed -closed off and effective? Just thinking.JJackson
[/quote]

When I mentioned thsi,I was still thinking of spoiler in traditional spot-Just say last six inches of entire trunk being fixed place-large squared off spoiler with sides (past effective trunk lid)hanging and attaching down sides to a point (width of flares) with rather large 99.9 sq inch endplates fixed to the triangular pieces running down towards ground-similar to area on Kiesel's (rule writer) new design.Closing off to bodywork makes this design awkward with rear trunk portion being operable.Just thinking.JJackson
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/stirthepot.gif)

[Randal]

[quote name='jjackson' date='May 27 2011, 04:49 AM' post='1484279']
[quote name='Randal' date='May 26 2011, 11:27 PM' post='1484190']
[quote name='jjackson' post='1484160' date='May 26 2011, 07:54 PM']
2 Piece trunk lid-fiberglass -front pinned-rear fixed -closed off and effective? Just thinking.JJackson
[/quote]

When I mentioned thsi,I was still thinking of spoiler in traditional spot-Just say last six inches of entire trunk being fixed place-large squared off spoiler with sides (past effective trunk lid)hanging and attaching down sides to a point (width of flares) with rather large 99.9 sq inch endplates fixed to the triangular pieces running down towards ground-similar to area on Kiesel's (rule writer) new design.Closing off to bodywork makes this design awkward with rear trunk portion being operable.Just thinking.JJackson
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/stirthepot.gif)
[/quote]


Oh yea, the trunk still has to work (lift) or come off (like mine with pins). Fastening the bits going down, toward the flares would get interesting. Easy to make permanent, but that doesn't work.

Maybe that is why Britain did his endplates the way he did.