Vorshlag 468x60 Banner
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 19 Jun 2013 10:10 PM by  Robert Puertas
factory five 818
 30 Replies
Sort:
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 212 > >>
Author Messages
t walgamuth
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:680


--
30 May 2013 07:08 PM
    Has this car been classified yet?  Can it simply run in the appropriate mod class?
    47CP
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:2742


    --
    30 May 2013 08:23 PM
    A request has been sent to class it in EM, but as of a few months ago, there wasn't stable production data to allow it (yet).

    Are they actually in production yet?

    Until they get approved in D-E Mod, they can run in AM.

    DaveW
    t walgamuth
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:680


    --
    30 May 2013 10:33 PM
    The new Road and Track has a road test of one and makes it appear as if you can order one for about ten grand or so. I went to the factory five website and found it to be less than suggested in the article. It will accept a $99 deposit but you have to say that you will accept changes in the specification and no list price or date of delivery is offered. That's pretty discouraging. the car looks to have real promise.
    Robert Puertas
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:761


    --
    30 May 2013 11:44 PM
    I hear GRM is also building one.
    I would think this will be a slam dunk for EM under the kit car allowance... once it's been in production for a few months and all the info stabilizes.

    Sounds like a good project to slip under the Christmas tree.
    t walgamuth
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:680


    --
    31 May 2013 06:05 AM
    That does sound like a good fit.
    Grintch
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:259


    --
    05 Jun 2013 11:31 AM
    I suspect it may be a bit heavy for EM. There are some kit cars recognized for XP, that might be a more competitive place for them.
    t walgamuth
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:680


    --
    15 Jun 2013 05:26 PM
    IIRC it is 2000# (818 kilos) and has whatever the subie makes...270 hp?

    If one put in a non turbo mill they could run a certain poundage less, right? 300? or 200?

    I am a little intimitdated by maintaining the turbo mill (thought the popping and buzzing on over run would be good clean fun!)
    47CP
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:2742


    --
    15 Jun 2013 06:20 PM
    Posted By t walgamuth on 15 Jun 2013 05:26 PM
    IIRC it is 2000# (818 kilos) and has whatever the subie makes...270 hp?

    If one put in a non turbo mill they could run a certain poundage less, right? 300? or 200?

    I am a little intimitdated by maintaining the turbo mill (thought the popping and buzzing on over run would be good clean fun!)

    For EM?  How much displacement is the subie motor?   Should be 1850# with or without Turbo in EM, including driver.

    DaveW


    t walgamuth
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:680


    --
    17 Jun 2013 07:19 AM
    Seems like the motor is around 3.6 liters. No consideration of a turbo vs aspirated, heh? I had a lively discussion with a couple of other fellows yesterday. We are all hot for an 818. Both of them have built 7 kits. It would be my first.
    47CP
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:2742


    --
    17 Jun 2013 08:06 AM

    Here are the EM weights.   No difference on Turbo.    Is it possible to get a 818  down to ~1600# without driver?  That seems pretty light for anything bigger than a 7 or Sprite.

     

    E Modified (EM)
    Modified Production and GT cars as follows:
    A. Weight (with driver) vs. Displacement
    Piston engines up to & including 3200 cc OHC: 1700 lbs
    Piston engines up to & including 4500 cc pushrod/OHV: 1700 lbs
    2-rotor rotary engines w/ unrestricted porting: 1700 lbs
    Piston engines unlimited displacement: 1800 lbs
    3-rotor rotary engines w/ unrestricted porting: 1800 lbs
    Electric powerplants (non-hybrid) 1800 lbs
    B. Performance Adjustments
    AWD: Add 300 lbs
    Modified Tub: Add 50 lbs
    C. Weight Bias Adjustment - with driver sitting in the driver’s seat
    RWD w/ less than 51% weight on drive wheels: Deduct 50 lbs
    FWD: Deduct 50 lbs

     

    DaveW

    Scootin159
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:183


    --
    17 Jun 2013 09:35 AM
    Posted By t walgamuth on 17 Jun 2013 07:19 AM
    Seems like the motor is around 3.6 liters. No consideration of a turbo vs aspirated, heh? I had a lively discussion with a couple of other fellows yesterday. We are all hot for an 818. Both of them have built 7 kits. It would be my first.

    Doubt many people would be putting the 6cyl 3.6l engine (the 6cyl that came in the Legacy) in there.  I'm pretty sure the 818 is being designed around a 4cyl WRX drivetrain, which means either a 2.0l turbo or a 2.5l turbo.  The non-turbo versions of these engines would be a direct swap as well, but would take a big horsepower hit.  The 2.5l would be the ideal option for autocross though - even though raw power output isn't *that* much more than the 2.0l, you end up with much less boost lag and more mid-range torque.  A stock 2.5l will have ~300hp, but ~400hp takes little more than an aggressive tune and a more open exhaust.  500-600hp isn't out of the relm of reason with a turbo swap, but you'll pretty quickly get diminishing returns from turbo lag & traction issues.

    Dropping the weight of an 818 for EM trim should be pretty doable.  From the "factory" they're using as many stock WRX components as possible - which while it is easier and cheaper, those components end up being much heavier (and stronger) than really needed.

    Grintch
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:259


    --
    17 Jun 2013 09:57 AM
    That's 1600 lbs WITH driver. It will be interesting to see where the R model comes in, weight wise. But I suspect it will be 200-400+ the EM minimum. And given that most of the heavy stuff has been ditched, hard to make up the difference.



    47CP
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:2742


    --
    17 Jun 2013 10:02 AM
    With a 2.0 or 2.5l it would be 1700 with driver, 1500-ish without.

    DaveW
    t walgamuth
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:680


    --
    17 Jun 2013 10:32 AM
    Posted By Grintch on 17 Jun 2013 09:57 AM
    That's 1600 lbs WITH driver. It will be interesting to see where the R model comes in, weight wise. But I suspect it will be 200-400+ the EM minimum. And given that most of the heavy stuff has been ditched, hard to make up the difference.


    Thanks for being so polite about the motor....what was I thinking? 


    Grintch
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:259


    --
    17 Jun 2013 10:41 AM
    Well, 2.5 * 1.4 = 3.5, so 3.6 is not that far off with the turbo equivalency factor. And the 1850 number someone suggested sounds abpit right. And much easier to get close too.
    P.s. FFR says the 6 cylinder (and 6 speed) will not fit.
    t walgamuth
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Posts:680


    --
    17 Jun 2013 10:52 AM
    it was my understanding that the name 818 refers to kilos which equals about 2000#. If that includes the standard subie seats, upholstery and so forth then 100# can be cut fairly quickly. Light calipers rotors and wheels probably will cut at least 50# or so. Leave off top and windshield and spare and you are another 50 or so.

    Its pretty interesting.
    47CP
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:2742


    --
    17 Jun 2013 08:36 PM
    Posted By Grintch on 17 Jun 2013 10:41 AM
    Well, 2.5 * 1.4 = 3.5, so 3.6 is not that far off with the turbo equivalency factor. And the 1850 number someone suggested sounds abpit right. And much easier to get close too.
    P.s. FFR says the 6 cylinder (and 6 speed) will not fit.

    Are we talking about EM still?   There is no *1.4 there....

     

    DaveW

    Grintch
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:259


    --
    18 Jun 2013 01:41 PM

    Posted By <span class='af-profile-name'>47CP</span> on 17 Jun 2013 08:36 PM

    Posted By <span class="af-profile-name">Grintch</span> on 17 Jun 2013 10:41 AM


    Well, 2.5 * 1.4 = 3.5, so 3.6 is not that far off with the turbo equivalency factor. And the 1850 number someone suggested sounds abpit right. And much easier to get close too.

    P.s. FFR says the 6 cylinder (and 6 speed) will not fit.


    <p>Are we talking about EM still?   There is no *1.4 there....</p>
    <p> </p>
    <p>DaveW </p>


    Used to be in appendix A. You have to be carefull as I dont care for how the rules are split between the two sections.
    47CP
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Posts:2742


    --
    18 Jun 2013 01:59 PM
    Posted By Grintch on 18 Jun 2013 01:41 PM

    Posted By 47CP on 17 Jun 2013 08:36 PM

    Posted By Grintch on 17 Jun 2013 10:41 AM


    Well, 2.5 * 1.4 = 3.5, so 3.6 is not that far off with the turbo equivalency factor. And the 1850 number someone suggested sounds abpit right. And much easier to get close too.

    P.s. FFR says the 6 cylinder (and 6 speed) will not fit.


    Are we talking about EM still?   There is no *1.4 there....


     


    DaveW




    Used to be in appendix A. You have to be carefull as I dont care for how the rules are split between the two sections.

    I was careful   I even cut/paste the entire EM section from appendix A....

    And the 1850 isn't a suggestion, it is the rule.  If I got to make the suggestion, I think something above 2000 is a better answer for the so called big production car class.

    There is no 1.4 turbo multiplier in EM, only DM.   Never has been one in EM that I can think of, engine size really doesn't matter in E.

     

    DaveW

     

    Grintch
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Posts:259


    --
    18 Jun 2013 05:43 PM
    Posted By 47CP on 18 Jun 2013 01:59 PM


    I was careful   I even cut/paste the entire EM section from appendix A....

    And the 1850 isn't a suggestion, it is the rule.  If I got to make the suggestion, I think something above 2000 is a better answer for the so called big production car class.

    There is no 1.4 turbo multiplier in EM, only DM.   Never has been one in EM that I can think of, engine size really doesn't matter in E.

     DaveW

     

    Not careful enough.

     18.1.B

     4. Internal and external components of the engine, transmission,and rear differential are unrestricted. Any shifting mechanism or pattern is permitted. Driveshafts may be made of any material deemed safe. Supercharging and turbocharging are permitted without restriction but shall require the displacement specifics of Section 18.0.B.3.

     6. Supercharging and turbocharging are permitted for all engines subject to the displacement factor of 18.B.

     18.0.B.3  Turbocharged or supercharged versions of the above engines will be classified on a basis of 1.4 times the computed displacement.

    Oddly enough you got the weight right (both DM & EM got a good bit heavier in a rule shakeup in 2005 or so, which is why I was originally thinking a lower weight).  Even though, if you neglect the 1.4x factor, you should have come up with a 1750lb minimum.

    XP is the highly modified production car class, DM/EM is for orphans and "in excess" GT1-GTL type cars.  I have never understood why XP picks and chooses some kit cars to allow but not others.  As far as I am concerned they should all go in DM/EM or XP depending solely on displacement and weight.  With the possible exception of very race oriented, sports racer type kit cars.

     

    You are not authorized to post a reply.
    Page 1 of 212 > >>


    G-Loc Button Vorshlag 88x31 Button
    Sunoco 88x31 Button
    SPS 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