Provisional FC rules - Group 3

Richard Broadhead

Flag & Com
For those of you who have FC's but don't follow what's happening closely (and perhaps for those who don't care), be advised the SCCA FC rules are/were/will be formally changed with the next Fast-Track publication.

1.
No changes if you have aluminum head Pinto.. sic, right, only a $4K option.

2.
Iron head Pinto's get a new cam (less then $550 maybe) and 10.5 pound flywheel ($125 machining maybe).

NOTE A:
Cams not available yet. sweet :eek:

NOTE B:
Flywheel weight up from the initial 9.5 due to possible problems if you lighten an original one. Engine builders were against the 9.5 but the 10.5 is okay.

3.
Zetec's (I don't think we have any) get a new ECU map and restrictor plate.

For what it's worth, we aren't jumping on the bus till 2010 probably. No point in going through all that except at an engine rebuild. At this point we'd even have to split the engine/trans for a flywheel machining. Bahh, humbug.

Honesty is the best policy statement:
If some ICSCC FC's do make the changes now, it would be SUPER NICE to know it so we can do our own comparison of the effect.
 
FORGOT:
Regardless of making any of the upgrades, new post race MIN weight with driver is 1,200 pounds for all engine variations. Up from 1,190 on the Pinto (down on the other flavors).

Need to be sure that 1,200 gets put on our new min. weight stickers ;)
 
Last edited:
FC fuel spec

Just a question. I believe the SCCA fuel spec for our Pinto engine is C110.

Will anyone object if I run Chevron 92 pump gas as its about a quarter of the price? We only have around 9.5:1 compression so do not need C110.

Last year, when running FL, I tried several blends between straight 92 and straight C110 and did not notice any difference .

Thanks

James
 
I don't think any of us are running ICSCC sprint races with the hope of qualifying for the SCCA runoffs.

The entire SCCA fuel rules are intended to keep people from using exotic mixtures that will give you an extra 1.3 HP and cost like $60 to $150 a gallon. In addition, some of these additives are carcinogenic. That's not something I (for one) would expect from our fellow ICSCC members. :)

If I understand correctly, what keeps 92 octane pump gas from passing the test is the blend of ethanol used to replace MTBE. This causes the test-o-meter to read a DC of 15 (sometimes) or more which is the SCCA limit and indicates the "possible" use of an exotic mixture (be it there or not). Which is kind of a dumb deal as SCCA is looking for ways to make racing more eco-friendly.

Furthermore, even SCCA admits their test-o-meter is a pee-pee poor tool in that it's quite inaccurate at understanding what it's seeing.

FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE:

I don't care what gas you use. Until your exhaust fumes are melting the paint off the car, orange clouds appear as you pass by, Jeff's eyeballs are bleeding when he comes off the track or, you're lapping 10 seconds faster then he is, we won't file a protest :D

We have used both Sunoco 110 LL track side race (WAY too expensive and we gotta stay off that stuff) and AV gas 100 LL (less then half the price of Sunoco). AV gas does pass the test because they don't use ethenol blends.

ONE THING...
That's kept use from trying 92 NO lead is how our engine is built. We don't have any records of who did it last and how it was built.

It's my understanding that LL versus no lead in the 2.0 Liter engine is a question of the valve seats (soft versus hard). Soft seats you need the LL. Hardened seats you don't. I believe the valves as installed aren't the issue. Do you have any idea on this, James? I haven't talked to Ivey about it.

FWIW:
ALL of the above rules changes are related to the introduction of the aluminum head for the Pinto and 'equalizing' the Zetec to more accurately match the Pinto (now with aluminum head) performance.

1.
Aluminum head which really was NOT needed is producing 4.5 to 5.0 HP more then the iron head. But, it wasn't supposed to have ANY performance advantage.. Duhhh. Sadly it's now in the rules so they can't go back.

2.
The Zetec map/restrictor combo is all messed up. The club map versus the Pro series map was/could cause burned valves due to fuel starvation at high RPM's.

Sadly, to equalize, the aluminum head needs nothing (but they did spend over $4K to get it). The Zetec needs a $75 remap and new restrictor. While the iron head Pinto guys (the VAST majority of FC's) get to spend somewhere between $750 and $1,000 plus and engine tear down.

The reason for the lightened flywheel on the Pinto is, to improve corner exit acceleration where the Zetec had a very noticable advantage.

Really NICE and to top it off, the Pinto's did NOT get the improved piston/rod combo to increase the lower end (rings, cylinder bore) life of the engine :(

ONCE AGAIN:
A sign of how lucky we are in ICSCC. No lunitic rules changes after the season starts and drivers actually making the decisions on rules changes.

But in this case, ICSCC FC rules are as per SCCA (which is good). But we need to recognize them as they are in the moment in case new people come to ICSCC with the updates (or run both).

If you haven't followed this 3 year saga, here's what it means on the dyno. The aluminum head still has an advantage over both (plus a lower CG) and now the iron heads spend the $1,000 to be down 2 HP instead of 5 HP:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top