088

iTrader: (9)

+1 for Bob Maybell @ Thunderhill. Nice guy and an excellent rotary information resource, especially for high performance / track purposes. Not sure if he still builds engines though.

+1 for Mike Haag. Rebuilds engines, transmissions, diffs. Good guy to talk to for race-oriented stuff. He also does tuning / troubleshooting on the dyno for a flat fee. Also, for you ITS people, his shop has a setup to extend the 5.12 pinion for use in FC diff. Mike used to travel the country to support rotary racing teams running with the SCCA.

PR Motorsports doesn't rebuild engines (but will remove/install / ship to desired engine builder). I've seen customer race cars at their shop, but most racing and expertise left with the departure of Rick Weldon. That said, if you need something specific done on your racecar, it's a good place to go. As for troubleshooting / repair, I have generally good experience. Recently, they helped me out with a much improved exhaust setup. For racing-specific issues, they directed me to Jose.

Jose's contact info: 510 289 2438
(I have not personally dealt with him, but he seemed knowledgeable over the phone).

+0 for Rick's Rotary. Charged a lot of money, didn't fix my problem (-1). Performed some diagnostic work which eventually led me down the right path (+1), which was to contact Ben.

+2 for Karack. Not really local any longer, but he was the most methodical mechanic I dealt with to solve a phantom power issue, even when I supplied him with incorrect info.

+1 for Rotorsport. Has done good work on my Mazdaspeed Protege (I think he still has 4 or 5 of these). He was upfront and honest when I was taking my rx-7 there.

088

iTrader: (9)

I think you meant ITS?

Balancing of the engine assembly is permitted, but any lightening beyond that is not (Rule 9.1.3.D.1.k). Porting and polishing are specifically prohibited (Rule 9.1.3.D.2.a.)

And now, enter the morass of arcane SCCA IT rules.

Rule 9.1.3.D.1.p. (excerpt)
All engine components not otherwise listed in these rules shall meet factory specifications for stock parts. Where factory specifications are absent or unclear, the Club may establish an acceptable dimension and/or allowable tolerance from stock.

Whether specifications means "dimensions, mass, density, or materials" is unclear. I'm guessing the intent here is to disallow the use of components that could measurably increase the power output and contain costs to some extent. But substituting the OEM part with 1 piece seals or ceramic materials might not be technically legal. I haven't heard of the SCCA stewards tearing down engines to that level of detail, but, at the annual tech, I have heard them threatening to dyno top finishers within a class. That said, if they ever gave me a hard time for replacing an apex seal or any other such minute detail, I would tell them to f' off and take my racing elsewhere.

More to the point, I have heard experienced ITS engine builders say things like "there are things you can do" or "I can build you a top running ITS engine", but no one has revealed what those "secret" IT-legal modifications are. To comply with the rules without getting into any gray areas, it seems like only stock engines are allowed. Certain control systems (6PI VDI) can be disabled (e.g. forced into the optimal state for high RPM power output) or removed (e.g. deleting aux port sleeves is ok, but modifying them is not). If anyone knows a definitive recipe of legally-allowed engine "modifications" for ITS, I would be interested in learning it.

It seems that even SCCA officials don't know the answers. I recently spoke to someone who served on the GCR committee for several years and asked him if an aluminum driveshaft would be considered ITS legal. He said he couldn't give me a definitive answer, but if I pained it flat black and rolled it around in some grease and dirt there wouldn't be any cause for concern. He recently quit the rules committee, frustrated with the ambiguities, and the inconsistencies and randomness in their enforcement.

RotaryEvolution

iTrader: (30)

i'm curious also, because there is some easy tricks that can make a big difference in the long run. does the porting only refer to intake runners or port openings? because a simple auxiliary bridge port can bring in a few more HP without really touching the runners. also exhaust port sleeves, can they be replaced with turbo port sleeves? that should also free up a few more HP.

of course some of this requires a bit more fuel, probably more than a stock carb can provide but with fuel injection and say an Rtek or standalone it can be manageable.

with racing there always seems to be a grey area where people try to take the unfair advantage. to be competetive you also have to utilize that grey area.

D Walker

iTrader: (1)

There are always "things" IT and showroom stock guys do to get ahead, and a lot of it is grey or beyond in regards to the rules. Things like acid flowing/porting heads, runners, etc to give optimum flow while leaving no machine or tool marks, lightening rotating components, then media blasting etc. to give the appearance of an "untouched" factory part. Adding material then re-machining to change port timing etc while keeping "stock" dimensions. The list goes on and on. Racing rotary engine builders spend lots and lots of time on clearances, because as we all know a wee bit here or there means power. There has also been some creative machining done to rotors to lighten them up with the idea that if the engine was ever torn down they would take the hit the, but win races until proven out.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

RotaryEvolution

iTrader: (30)

Rick actually recommended me? lol. i assume probably because he assumed it had an internal engine issue and was just trying to unload it on the builder because he didn't want to figure it out. i know most of the shops you went to could have figured it out, if they cared enough.

088

iTrader: (9)

Yes, that was it. Everyone knows Ben cares!

Rule 9.1.3.B
.....competition adjustments, other than as outlined in section 9.1.3.C, are not allowed. Other than those specifically allowed by these rules, no component or part normally found on a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, altered, or removed [for the purpose of obtaining any competitive advantage.]

The part in brackets was removed, starting with the 2009 GCR. Presumably, this was to eliminate the ambiguity of what constitutes a "competitive advantage." In reality, I think people have continued doing what they've been doing. For example, you can consider 6PI/VDI actuation to be part of the emissions system, so you can delete the solenoids and plumbing under rule 9.1.3.D.1.d, which (essentially) states that emissions control devices may be removed but not modified. These systems are not specifically mentioned in the rules. But, since they can only hurt high rpm power output when functioning improperly, they are typically left wired open.

RX-7's classified under ITS are 1984-1991 models, with non-turbo 13B engine, meaning that you probably can't take pieces from a turbo car and place them in a non-turbo engine assembly.

Rule 9.1.3.C seems to support this.

Any updated/backdated components shall be substituted as a complete assembly..... No interchange of parts between assemblies is permitted, and all parts of an assembly shall be as originally produced for that assembly..... Additionally, it is not permitted to “create” a model or type of car by updating or backdating assemblies.

There are a couple of rules specific to rotary engines, the most significant being:

9.1.3.D.2.a: Any porting or polishing is prohibited.
9.1.3.D.2.d: Alternate rotor seals and springs are permitted.

As far as engine internals are concerned, I guess you're supposed to figure out how to make power with fancy apex seals.

SCCAITS

iTrader: (3)

Page 407 of the GCR on the spec line:
"5th and 6th intake port - actuators and valves may be removed or disabled"

To see how just how limiting the IT rules can be, I recently found out that my use of "S4 housings, S5 rotors, S5 intake, S4 TB and AFM" during my ITS days on my S4 was not even legal because of this rule:

"Any updated/backdated components shall be substituted as a complete assembly (engine long block, transmission/transaxle, induction system, differential/axle housing). No interchange of parts between assemblies is permitted, and all parts of an assembly shall be as originally produced for that assembly (such parts may, however, be coated, painted or plated)."

Good thing I did not race ITS very long, less than a year.

aoc007

iTrader: (5)

Daryl Drummond now builds Grand Am Rolex motors for 20B RX8s, they make 25 more hp at the crank than David Haskell of Speed Source's motors.

That being said you should go with Jose, his cost is only $500 I think and he's in Hayward.

088

iTrader: (9)

Resurrecting this because I'm finally getting around to simplifying a few things in the engine bay. I said earlier that VDI can be wired open, but there isn't a specific rule I could find to support this, so I must have been selling the "emissions removal" justification in my mind.

Just want to make sure I'm legal in both NASA and SCCA if I remove / disable the VDI actuator (i.e. "hard-wired" to optimize top-end power).

NASA: Modification of the Variable Dynamic Intake (VDI) by removal of the actuator mechanism, and permanently wiring the VDI open will be a No-Points Modification.

I couldn't find a similar statement in the SCCA GCR, but I've talked to some people / researched and it seems like this debate was settled in the past:

http://www.improvedtouring.com/forum...p?t-23538.html

(esp. the last post suggesting NASA and SCCA are in agreement on this)

Can anyone confirm?