SPS 468x60 Banner
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 17 Apr 2015 03:43 PM by  tomsn16
SMF minimum weights raised by 200lbs for 2013!?
 34 Replies
Sort:
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 2 << < 12
Author Messages
fsparv
New Member
New Member
Posts:45


--
28 Dec 2012 02:54 PM
So all these folks complaining were thinking they were going to run N/A? I don't think that's a good plan. My car is presently 1900lbs, & 200hp N/A, with just a chip tune and when you put an good instructor behind the wheel, they drive about 2-2.5 sec faster than me, which is probably less than a second faster than the little blue CRX that won (given a course that is about 45 sec for our AM drivers, one of whom also is a trophy winner). I race against that car locally, and it dominates our SSM class by an average of 1.5 sec (we have no competitive ssm cars, I'm the 2nd fastest car regularly running SSM with SCCA in our area). And the lotus is mid-engine RWD ~40/60.

For comparison, there are folks who've contemplated doing a serious N/A lotus for ssm, but they tend to talk about things like: cams/valves/springs/coatings/pistons/port/polish stroke to 2.0, Oil Pump Gear, Ti connecting rods, 10k rpm, decat/header, motec, custom tune, race gas, etc... probably to the tune of around $20k in mods. Most folks in the lotus world think that N/A done to win is a lot more costly than blower setups achieving a greater power/weight still on pump gas and without many deep engine mods. I doubt it's much different for CRX's. Note that min weight for a 1.8L N/A lotus in SSM is 1805, and 2120 for the same size lotus with a blower. The 2.0 stroker would need to weigh 1850. This sounds like the CRX weight ranges mentioned earlier...

I think the changes are probably saving folks from impossible N/A builds. If forced induction is the way to go in SMF, that makes it consistent with SSM and SM all of which are FI dominated as well.
Andy Hollis
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts:6197


--
28 Dec 2012 11:49 PM
fsparv wrote:
I think the changes are probably saving folks from impossible N/A builds.

If you say so.

You can get 300hp from an NA K24 build with tons of torque. Doesn't even have to be a grenade to get there. If you don't believe me, I can put you in touch with the people who have done it. Put that in an eg or ef hatch with appropriate aero and suspension. Install A-list driver. Win.

The difference between SSM/SM and SMF is the "F". There is only so much usable power when you have to put it to the ground through the front wheels. Beyond that, you are better off running lighter for the sake of handling. This is autocross, after all. Not road racing.

fsparv
New Member
New Member
Posts:45


--
31 Dec 2012 02:23 PM

Hmm. I wasn't aware that k24's could go N/A that high is that whp or bhp? Interestingly a 1.6L FI only gets a slight penalty (0.2l) vs a 2.4L N/A now with the 1.0L adder... What's the cost of that 300 hp N/A (including swapping the engine), vs getting the same hp/tq from FI on a 1.6L?




TPColgett
New Member
New Member
Posts:49


--
31 Dec 2012 04:28 PM
I have been following all of this closely as I am not sure what the future will be for STF...

If the class goes away, the pile of uninstalled parts I already have sitting around for my Fit would push the car to FSP (where I think I would get slaughtered)

But for SMF, IF I can drop A LOT of weight, and go FI....at only 1.5L and with 4 doors, 2062.2 pounds? There are proven FI builds out there on either SC's or turbo's making 200+whp...

My real question is, is this a pipe dream? Or can a roughly 2000lb gutted car with 225whp and mac strut/torsion rear suspension possibly put up a fight in SMF?
justint5387
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:176


--
31 Dec 2012 04:37 PM
TPColgett wrote:
I have been following all of this closely as I am not sure what the future will be for STF...

If the class goes away, the pile of uninstalled parts I already have sitting around for my Fit would push the car to FSP (where I think I would get slaughtered)

But for SMF, IF I can drop A LOT of weight, and go FI....at only 1.5L and with 4 doors, 2062.2 pounds? There are proven FI builds out there on either SC's or turbo's making 200+whp...

My real question is, is this a pipe dream? Or can a roughly 2000lb gutted car with 225whp and mac strut/torsion rear suspension possibly put up a fight in SMF?

I think the suspension and the overall height of the FIT makes it very difficult to stay with the older civics/crxs

TPColgett
New Member
New Member
Posts:49


--
31 Dec 2012 04:51 PM
Combine the COG killing height with the 200+pound folding rear seat and not double wishbone suspension, and it's no wonder that the EF chassis cars regularily out pace my best by 3-4 seconds in ST level prep....

I know those are big hurdles, and since the EF's get all the same allowances for SM, my only hope was that realistically I can be almost SPOT on the above minimum weight...
Andy Hollis
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts:6197


--
03 Jan 2013 02:58 PM
fsparv wrote:

Hmm. I wasn't aware that k24's could go N/A that high is that whp or bhp? Interestingly a 1.6L FI only gets a slight penalty (0.2l) vs a 2.4L N/A now with the 1.0L adder... What's the cost of that 300 hp N/A (including swapping the engine), vs getting the same hp/tq from FI on a 1.6L?




322+ whp Dynojet K24

Check out the second chart...and that's on pump 93. Need to have the right combo of parts to get there. And it isn't a peaky dyno queen, either...plenty of torque across the board.

Lots more 300hp K24 builds out there on that site.

Not cheap, though. About $4k in hard parts, plus the motor and the bolt-ons (I/H/E) and engine management. But you need that stuff for FI, too. Still cheaper than FI overall, but not a lot.

fsparv
New Member
New Member
Posts:45


--
04 Jan 2013 11:26 AM

Ok, I guess you are referring to the second dyno there? and furhter down the page it lists this set of mods for that chart:

Stock k24 crank, shelf carrillo pro H rod, shelf wiseco piston, Pro 156 CNC head, Ferrea 6000 stock size valve, this cam, psi valve spring.

That's a lot of deep engine stuff and the cams alone are $1200. That's going to require $$$$ in labor if you aren't an engine mechanic yourself and a lot of build time even if you are. A little googling seems to say that mild super-charger setups take you to ~300bhp and cost $3k for kit/tune. Bolting on a super charger is quite a bit more DIY friendly than replacing pistons, valves, cams, rods, head etc.

http://www.7thgenhonda.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15998

It does sound like they are trying to make the class a bit more accessible... I suppose those who are expert mechanics want to out-mechanic other folks perhaps (and folks with big wallets want to out-wallet other folks), but I think out racing people is what it should be about. And yes that probably means I'm either stupid or insane for running a lotus in SSM sans big wallet :). Good thing this is for fun :)

Andy Hollis
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts:6197


--
05 Jan 2013 12:19 PM
fsparv wrote:

A little googling seems to say that mild super-charger setups take you to ~300bhp and cost $3k for kit/tune. Bolting on a super charger is quite a bit more DIY friendly than replacing pistons, valves, cams, rods, head etc.

There is a lot more to putting together a proper supercharger setup for comptition use than most of the cheap kits include. I've consulted with Chris Shenefield (Redshiftmotorsports) who is a specialist on K-series superchargers, as it was on of my options in moving forward on my own car. One you start pushing big hp numbers, you need a built forged bottom end regardless of whether it comes from FI or all-motor. So that part is a wash. After that, you are talking about sending a head out to be ported/built and bolting it on, versus figuring out how to plumb all the necessary bits to get the supercharger setup to work. Check out CRXKswap.com to see how the car that won at Nats this past year did it. Lots of custom fab (beautiful work, too).

Look also at the existing turbo D16 SMF car that Dave Hardy built (snot rocket) now in the hands of new owners. Again, tons of custom fab work.

And Jason Tipple's FI car is also full of custom fab, but I am less versed on the details since it did not get campaigned much last season.

On the other end of the spectrum is Jinx Jordan's car, which this past year sported a simple TSX K24A2 engine swap into his FSP-winning Eg chassis. Dirt simple, cheap, and mega fun/competitive. That car will see some engine internals this year (cams/pistons/rods), but not quite as extensive as what I suggested above. Let's see which approach ends up working the best. I know where I'd put my money.

tomsn16
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:144


--
15 Jan 2013 05:05 PM
fsparv wrote:
Hmm, googled and didn't find the 2012 weights, were they published? I was under the impression that the class winner in SMF this year wasn't running very close to minimums anyway... (but maybe I'm confused)

Here's the 2012 results listing name/car/time/stated weight/actual weight for your reading enjoyment.

SMF
Mancuso 91CRX 126.508 2075/2106 + 31
Jordan 93CIVIC 126.734 1850/2081 +231
Kuehl 91CRX 129.226 2075/2106 + 31
White 93CIVIC 129.687 1850/2081 +231
Forsythe 95CIVIC 130.187 1800/2037 +237
Kotzian CIVIC 131.584 2075/2109 + 34
Larson 95CIVIC 133.662 1800/2037 +237
Zacharda CIVIC 135.562 2075/2109 + 34

Andy Hollis
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts:6197


--
15 Jan 2013 06:40 PM
tomsn16 wrote:

Here's the 2012 results listing name/car/time/stated weight/actual weight for your reading enjoyment.

SMF
Mancuso 91CRX 126.508 2075/2106 + 31
Jordan 93CIVIC 126.734 1850/2081 +231
Kuehl 91CRX 129.226 2075/2106 + 31
White 93CIVIC 129.687 1850/2081 +231
Forsythe 95CIVIC 130.187 1800/2037 +237
Kotzian CIVIC 131.584 2075/2109 + 34
Larson 95CIVIC 133.662 1800/2037 +237
Zacharda CIVIC 135.562 2075/2109 + 34

You should show what each has to weigh next year. It is enlightening.

tomsn16
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:144


--
16 Jan 2013 10:07 PM
Andy Hollis wrote:
tomsn16 wrote:

Here's the 2012 results listing name/car/time/stated weight/actual weight for your reading enjoyment.

SMF
Mancuso 91CRX 126.508 2075/2106 + 31
Jordan 93CIVIC 126.734 1850/2081 +231
Kuehl 91CRX 129.226 2075/2106 + 31
White 93CIVIC 129.687 1850/2081 +231
Forsythe 95CIVIC 130.187 1800/2037 +237
Kotzian CIVIC 131.584 2075/2109 + 34
Larson 95CIVIC 133.662 1800/2037 +237
Zacharda CIVIC 135.562 2075/2109 + 34

You should show what each has to weigh next year. It is enlightening.

Yep it might be but would rather wait to see how "enlightening" the 2013 SMF season and Nationals will be....hopefully there will be way more than 9 open SMF entrants at Nationals in 2013, for whatever reasons.

tomsn16
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:144


--
16 Apr 2015 05:32 PM
The 2013 SMF weight change appears to be working.....2014 SMF Nationals participation set a record high:

Nationals SM participation history
2009 SMF 6 / SM 21 / SSM 26 = 53
2010 14 / 20 / 28 = 62
2011 22 / 24 / 26 = 62
2012 14 / 23 / 34 = 71
2013 13 / 23 / 32 = 68
2014 23 / 31 / 33 = 87
Der Wankel
New Member
New Member
Posts:36


--
17 Apr 2015 01:56 PM
I don't see the issue.
It is nice to raise the weight/displacement in SMF to get more participation from the newer common heavy FWD cars.

Remember, SM and SMF are essentially "handicap" classes for SSM.

If you want to build a fast SM car and it gets to light for your power goals you go play in SSM or add weight.

If you want to build a fast FWD car you have even more choices, you can run SMF, SM or SSM each with its specific displacement/weight standards.

SM and SSM have the FWD handicap and AWD advantage already factored into the class by the varied displacement/weight rules!

If you feel handicapped by your FWD in SM or SSM- make the car RWD or AWD and add the weight you need to comply. Drivetrain is unrestricted.

Honda and Suzuki are probably the only ones that can make a 200+hp 1,275lb SSM car and get an air shifted sequential dog engaged 6 speed cheap, but its going to be FWD at that weight or 1,500lbs and RWD. You get to choose your handicap.

Yeah, I'm planning the 1,275lb FWD variety since that is the stock weight of my Honda and I can't see making it RWD and running 225lbs of ballast (although it would make the very narrow car less tippy, hmmmn). I do see the disadvantage of FWD, but I feel it is less than the disadvantage of 18% more weight.

In my opinion the spirit of SMF/SM/SSM is that they are pretty wide open classes with five specific guidlines.

1) Do not violate the unibody
2) Engine manufacturer matching chassis manufacturer
3) Stock suspension to chassis mounting points
4) Full interior
5) Meed your displacement/drivetrain layout minimum weight

Step up to the challenge the class presents?
tomsn16
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:144


--
17 Apr 2015 03:43 PM
Nice SM category summary by Der Wankel and obviously a proponent of the current rule set.
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 2 << < 12


SPS 88x31 Button G-Loc Button
Vorshlag 88x31 Button Leroy Engineering Micro Button
Sunoco 88x31 Button
Woodhouse Motorsports

Advertise on SCCAForums.com and reach thousands of visitors per day!

SafeRacer FREE SHIPPING over $99

Shop for Pirelli tires at Tire Rack. blank



Sunoco Bottom 468x60 Banner