Dyno procedure

[michaelmosty]

What is the official rule and thoughts about dyno compliance checks at the event? If a random dyno happens (and the competitor pops over), is the competitor held accountable for the dyno numbers at the track or does he have the ability to have his hood sealed and then return to the shop that originally did the dyno?

My concern is over variations in different dyno's throughout TX. I personally thought the numbers at the Dallas dyno day seemed a little low and then Dave mentioned he thought the Houston dyno numbers were a little low. In no way do I feel there is anything shady going on but I want everyone to be on the same page.

On the flip side it would be pretty low for someone to be able to research and find a dyno that historically reads low to use as their annual dyno.

The rules don't address this issue:
3.9 Dynamometer Certification
All participants who wish to compile season points must have a dynamometer certification report prior to the start of the race or make arrangements to have a dyno test performed immediately after the race. The dynamometer certification report will consist of two parts: a completed CMC Dyno Spec Sheet and Dyno Sheet Readout Graphs. These forms must be kept with the vehicle's logbook and be ready to present to any official. The CMC Dyno Spec Sheet includes instructions for performing the official dynamometer inspection, which must be followed in order for the dyno report to be valid. The Dyno Spec Sheet is available on the CMC website.
3.10 Inspection and Testing
NASA tech inspectors and CMC Officials have the right to inspect anything in sight at any time the vehicle is at the track. NASA tech inspectors and CMC Officials have the right to request disassembly or any other procedure required to verify vehicle compliance with these rules including a dynamometer re-certification. The CMC Official may require that a CMC Official or designee be present for any dynamometer re-certification.

[GlennCMC70]

Before handing out a DQ at a regional event as a result of a compliance check on a dyno that was not the dyno the car was certified on for the season, I'll allow them to re-test on the dyno they did certify on...... with a few exceptions.
The dyno must be one open for use by any paying customer.
The amount of HP/TQ over the limit will determin if a re-test is warrented. If the car is... say... 15hp over - forget it. If its 5, then likely.

None of this is set in stone and at anytime the "the tool at the track is the one that counts" default rule can kick in. If you feel unsure of the dyno your certified on, go to another dyno. I tested 7 times in 2006. All this as a result of a crap dyno.

It is up to you to push it to the edge. We are at the mercy of the scales, rulers, and stopwatches at the track, that includes the dyno as well.

[mitchntx]

Wow ... it's like you are reading my mind. I was just thinking about this ...

Here are my thoughts ...

If there is a dyno at the track and NASA decides to check, then NASA should foot the bill.

If the cars goes over the limit as it's outlined in the chart ... that is the power to weight ratio ... then the hood, port, whatever is sealed.

The car then goes back to the dyno where the car certified. The visit has to happen in a reasonable amount of time ... say 10 days.

If the car dynos legal, NASA picks up the tab.

If the car busts out, then the owner/driver picks up the tab for the 2nd pull and reimburses NASA for the first one.

[michaelmosty]

Excellent feedback, thanks.
I see the dyno similar to the scales as you can push the limit as close as you want. Difference being the scales are free and the dyno isn't.

I completely agree in that if you are 10-15 hp over, thats the end. I was concerned in readings that were 1-3 hp off that could be a difference in 1% change of the total number.

I was also comparing this to Nationals. Not degrading regional events but thinking if you attend Nationals you need to budget an additional $100 to certify on their dyno to keep numbers 110% legit wrt altitude, humidity, etc.

[GlennCMC70]

Excellent feedback, thanks.
I see the dyno similar to the scales as you can push the limit as close as you want. Difference being the scales are free and the dyno isn't.

I completely agree in that if you are 10-15 hp over, thats the end. I was concerned in readings that were 1-3 hp off that could be a difference in 1% change of the total number.

I was also comparing this to Nationals. Not degrading regional events but thinking if you attend Nationals you need to budget an additional $100 to certify on their dyno to keep numbers 110% legit wrt altitude, humidity, etc.

Problem is, there is never enough time at Nats from the time the dyno shows up till cars start getting checked for everyone who needs to get on it to do so.

[David Love AI27]

Wow ... it's like you are reading my mind. I was just thinking about this ...

Here are my thoughts ...

If there is a dyno at the track and NASA decides to check, then NASA should foot the bill.

If the cars goes over the limit as it's outlined in the chart ... that is the power to weight ratio ... then the hood, port, whatever is sealed.

The car then goes back to the dyno where the car certified. The visit has to happen in a reasonable amount of time ... say 10 days.

If the car dynos legal, NASA picks up the tab.

If the car busts out, then the owner/driver picks up the tab for the 2nd pull and reimburses NASA for the first one.

That makes way too much sense :wink: :wink:

[Al Fernandez]

Counter point (to keep discussion going):
If there is a dyno at the track then that may be used as the official measurement instrument, same as scales. The rules already give the driver a 7hp comfort zone. If the driver chooses to soak some of that up to gain advantage, then they also must be held responsible for the increased risk of breaking out.

[mitchntx]

If the dyno at the track was as simple as and as inexpensive as rolling across the scales, then I don't think this would be an issue.

And if there is a potential 15hp difference between dynos, as the article refenced elsewhere says and as suspicions indicate on local dynos, then your loagic says that CMC1 cars should not certify at anything above 222/292 if your car is right at the weight limit and CMC2 at no more than 252/302.

So the bigger question now becomes ... what's the point of a dyno cert at all?

We're being held to a moving standard that is far from standardized. It appears physics just won't allow it.


Just thinking outloud ....

How about each racer be charged a $30 "parity fee" that is attached to their comp license and the dyno cert requirement is abolished.

That money is ear-marked for those magic pucks NASA has been experiemnting with and use the data they log as the measuring stick.

If some one's acceleration rate is higher than the group, then he/she gets a closer look ... maybe send them to the track's dyno right then and there.

I would gladly pay an extra $30 ... or even $50 a year to keep from spending hundreds in transport and dyno fees once a year.

And I don't see how that data logger can be any less reliable than a dyno's data.

[michaelmosty]

Al, if the dyno is available for free (like the scales) then I would dyno at the track at every event. This just isn't the case.

On the flip side, what if the dyno at the track is the "official" dyno for the weekend and it happens to read higher than every other dyno in TX. Would it still be a DQ?

There needs to be a clear understanding of the rules expectations and so far we have two different opinions.

[AllZWay]

I kind of like Mitch's idea.

A $50 yearly dyno cost me a heck of lot more than $50, because of fuel and time to haul 100+ miles to get it done.

It seems those magic pucks are as close to being real as a dyno might be.

[Fbody383]

The rules already give the driver a 7hp comfort zone. Only if you run heavy.


If the driver chooses to soak some of that up to gain advantage, then they also must be held responsible for the increased risk of breaking out. Or, a driver chooses to particpate in a class with stable rules designed around low cost.

It doesn't matter what the HP/TQ number is as long as it's repeatable and that's where the rub seems to be now.

What if I paid $XX on a weekend to have a black box run during warm-up or qual for my "weekend dyno." If I get randomed for a race and break out, I'm DQ'd ~ prevents sandbagging, is cheap and (hopefully) repeatable.

[cobra132]

I hate these dynos. I'll bet money that the variation between like dynos is greater than we think. I also do not like the 9.5 lb/Hp and 9.0 lb/tq rule because it really puts the mod motors behind the 8-ball: high reving (and thus Hp) with crappy torque. I love the GPS puck idea. We could buy a few, determine each cars Hp at the begining of the season and then do random checks, Oh yea, for no cost. Hell, I'll buy the pucks. Lets do it. FMR

[Fbody383]

I love the GPS puck idea. Man we've come a long way from "I'll give up the dyno and go to CMC2 over my dead body."

Sounds like we need a round or two of KL or PBR.

[GlennCMC70]

2 things:
1- The dyno deal has worked w/ very few issues over the last 10+ years. I understand and agree w/ all that has been said regarding them, but you can't argue that the current process is totally useless.

2- The MaxQ Data logger (or a device like it) is the future. It will take time to be sure we don't move to it prematurely and cause a bigger problem.

[AllZWay]

It has worked pretty well for the past few years, but I think the apprehension is new because we haven't seen random pulls since 2006.

After Al/Rob's issue at Nationals, I think it makes most pretty nervous to know we are tied to relying on a potentially unreliable tool.

[ShadowBolt]

It has worked pretty well for the past few years, but I think the apprehension is new because we haven't seen random pulls since 2006.

After Al/Rob's issue at Nationals, I think it makes most pretty nervous to know we are tied to relying on a potentially unreliable tool.


I would not be all that worried if each one of us used the same dyno for every pull but going from dyno to dyno in different parts of the country and the possibility of a dyno or two that are not in tip top condition is a mess. I doubt my car would make too much power on any of them assuming my numbers are the same as the last motor.

Did we not learn enough from using the pucks last year to go to them in place of the dyno? You can leave a puck on my car all the time for all I care.

JJ

[GlennCMC70]

It has worked pretty well for the past few years, but I think the apprehension is new because we haven't seen random pulls since 2006.

After Al/Rob's issue at Nationals, I think it makes most pretty nervous to know we are tied to relying on a potentially unreliable tool.

Me too.

[mitchntx]

2 things:
1- The dyno deal has worked w/ very few issues over the last 10+ years. I understand and agree w/ all that has been said regarding them, but you can't argue that the current process is totally useless.


The only reason it's "worked" is because its been the only tool and standard.

Those pucks might come with their own "drama", but at least its repeatable and standardized drama.

For me ... that's what I want to see. A standardized way to measure ALL cars at the same place and point in time.

Nationals can do it with a dyno ... it's there and its repeatble. Regionally, it's just not possible.

To ensure parity, we all need to use the same measuring stick, not just the same type measuring stick.

[RichardP]

Those pucks might come with their own "drama", but at least its repeatable and standardized drama.


Who's got good data that says the pucks are repeatable, standardized, or closely related to how much power (or torque) the car is putting down???

I think they have their own issues that are bigger than the dyno stuff. My belief is that they can be used as an indicator to determine who might need to be sent to the dyno for a closer look...


Richard P.

[RichardP]

I would not be all that worried if each one of us used the same dyno for every pull


I think the dyno is a slightly flawed but overall good tool for the series to use.

More specifically on your statement, most (all?) of the cars that had issues with the dyno at Nationals had been on those exact rollers a couple of days before...


Richard P.

[mitchntx]

Who's got good data that says the pucks are repeatable, standardized, or closely related to how much power (or torque) the car is putting down???

Richard P.

Who says the unit of measure is HP or TQ? Why not use rate of acceleration measured in Gs?

If a guy is over power and is walking away from every one, then he gets nailed. If a guy is over powered and sand bags who cares?

[ShadowBolt]

I would not be all that worried if each one of us used the same dyno for every pull


I think the dyno is a slightly flawed but overall good tool for the series to use.

More specifically on your statement, most (all?) of the cars that had issues with the dyno at Nationals had been on those exact rollers a couple of days before...
Richard P.

Well we know in that case they were cheatin bastards (LOL).

If nothing wrong was done and nothing at all was changed on Al's car between pulls then how can you use the dyno at all?
Or were most of the other cars putting down the exact numbers they had put down earlier?
I don't have the answer but I understand the problem.

JJ

[marshall_mosty]

Who's got good data that says the pucks are repeatable, standardized, or closely related to how much power (or torque) the car is putting down???

Richard P.

Who says the unit of measure is HP or TQ? Why not use rate of acceleration measured in Gs?

If a guy is over power and is walking away from every one, then he gets nailed. If a guy is over powered and sand bags who cares?

The guys will only sandbag when he's around others. Give him clear track, leading the race or chasing others, and it's a different story all together. Just my .02.

Because of a weak motor, I now can't get to weight even without fuel, so I could magically gain 5 HP and still be okay...

[mitchntx]

Who's got good data that says the pucks are repeatable, standardized, or closely related to how much power (or torque) the car is putting down???

Richard P.

Who says the unit of measure is HP or TQ? Why not use rate of acceleration measured in Gs?

If a guy is over power and is walking away from every one, then he gets nailed. If a guy is over powered and sand bags who cares?

The guys will only sandbag when he's around others. Give him clear track, leading the race or chasing others, and it's a different story all together. Just my .02.


And his rate of acceleration will show on the graph that maps the data logged. If the driver dogs around the track and runs in the pack ... who cares?

And how is this "sand-bagging" any different than hunting down a dyno that reads skewed numbers?

With teh pucks, at least we are all being measured with the same device. Variables have been eliminated.

I'm not saying it's fool-proof or hands down better. I am saying I'm being measured against the same standard as Jerry, Sam, Gary and Randy and none of us have to travel all over the state in order to get it done.

[RichardP]

Who says the unit of measure is HP or TQ? Why not use rate of acceleration measured in Gs?


Because unlike the dyno, all the relevant effects can't be factored out.

Weather (temperature, humidity, pressure) will effect the numbers.

The track configuration can also have an effect. Uphill, down hill, head wind, tail wind, aerodynamic drag. Does the guy with a high downforce/high drag setup get to have more power because his numbers would be lower?

Not to mention that it's really hard to account for bump drafting. :-)

If you set a maximum G, honest people are going get busted when it's cold and cheaters are going to dial up the horsepower when it's hot out.

If everyone has pucks, people with extra stuff will stand out. They can be singled out to be sent to the dyno for a controlled environment test.


Richard P.

[mitchntx]

But Richard, everyone has the exact same temp, humidity and wind to contend with and on the very same day on the very same track with all uphill, downhill and turns. It's parity at it's finest ... an even playing field.

And bump drafting will show up as a huge spike and can be accounted for.

Your concern about aero ... OK ... I have an aero friendly car and you have a barn door and we both have identical dyno curves at max HP and TQ.

Who wins? How is it different?

[Rob Liebbe]

I don't believe the dyno at nationals was the issue in and of itself. Jeremiah ran right before me and repeated his numbers from earlier in the week as did a Miata that went on the dyno immediately after I did.

I still blame the car owner. 8)

[mitchntx]

I still blame the car owner. 8)

Many of us do for a multitude of things.

[Alien]

My question on the little magic boxes is how does a competitor test their setup prior to a race?

Say I show up, race, go too fast, get DQ'd? What is the acceptable G or acceleration? Say thru testing, top men come up with a number. So to avoid a possible DQ, wouldn't this mean I would have to buy a magic box too to test my setup prior to race weekend and tune the car to get up/down to that hard number? But doesn't that hard number vary for the reasons pointed out? Then were back to a similar issue with the dyno's.

[GlennCMC70]

If you dont check your set-up on a dyno every now and then, your a fool. The requirement to be at or below a set HP number will never go away. Rather we could change the requirement to hand in an Annual Dyno Cert. The box will tell us who needs to be checked on a dyno.
In the past, radar guys have been used to spot "issues". This is no different. If a CMC cars rate of acceleration is different than all other cars, there is a problem. A car at X weight w/ X power will only accelerate at X rate. It is a work in process to see if this will work. SO we can all stop w/ the "sky is falling" drama.

I agree that if my car is legal for a given year, why would it not be legal for the following year given no changes were made. Even then I would still put my car on a dyno every couple of years at a minimum to ensure I am compliant as well as to check motor health.


So, thereis no "limit of rate of acceleration". It is more along the lines of "one of these does not look like the other".

[Al Fernandez]

Excellent discussion, I'm glad to read that GPS devices are growing on you guys. We (NASA) have every desire to keep learning and developing the software we use with these. It isnt going to happen overnight, and it may be that they can never replace the dyno. Maybe, we'll see. Right now we are not at a point where we can use them "instead of", rather as an indication of who should be looked at closer.

Dont take my post earlier in this thread as being an official position, I meant (and stated) that it was a counter point to further discussion. I dont know what the best answer is regarding verifying someone that breaks out at a regional event. I know at Nationals the dyno is the dyno because everyone has the opportunity to baseline ahead of time.

I do know this: if someone breaks out on a dyno the officials must make every effort to ensure the readings are good. Unstrap the car, roll off, realign, and strap it down again. Follow the procedure step by step to make sure all variables (tire pressure, SAE correction, smoothing, weather readings) are all where they should be.

As far as the concept that dynos are not to be relied upon that seems to be stemming from that article...take a closer look at it. None of the runs made would be valid per our rules: only two shops used a dynojet and neither of those had the correct correction factor and smoothing, pressures werent verified, water temps werent verified, etc. In spite of that the average of three runs at each of the dynojet shops (including the run that was high due to a visible spike) were 657 and 652. Thats a difference of less than 1%. Forget the readings from other machines, its not apples to apples.

Now, experience has shown that variance from one shop to another even when everything is right is not always that small, but its certainly nowhere near 15hp on a 260hp car (which would be almost 6%).

Oh, and Liebbe IS a cheating bastard and deserved to get caught! :lol: :wink:

[ShadowBolt]

Oh, and Liebbe IS a cheating bastard and deserved to get caught! :lol: :wink:
And he will fit in well as a director.


JJ

[David Love AI27]

Oh, and Liebbe IS a cheating bastard and deserved to get caught! :lol: :wink:
And he will fit in well as a director.


JJ

DUDE!!!!!! 8) :lol: 8) :lol:

[ShadowBolt]

Oh, and Liebbe IS a cheating bastard and deserved to get caught! :lol: :wink:
And he will fit in well as a director.


JJ

DUDE!!!!!! 8) :lol: 8) :lol:


Just kidding and Rob knows it.


JJ

[mitchntx]

Al, that article brought to the surface what we've all known or suspected for years.

As an engineer, if you measure multiple "somethings" to an exacting tolerence, you need to ensure the measuring device itself is within that tolerence, correct?

If you are torquing head bolts on your race car, do you think it's OK to use two or three different uncalibrated torque wrnches? Or torque one bolt on Saturday when its 70 and sunny and the next one on Sunday when its 30 and sleeting?

I'm not saying the tool used is wrong, I'm saying the metodology is wrong.

If we are held to an exact standard, then we all need to use the same measuring device, not just the same type.

Is that practical? Not at all. So what's the alternative?

As it stands today, we all have been a part of the "he pulled me like a freight train" conversation, which leads to the conclusion that something isn't right. None of us will admit we ran out of talent before the other guy, so it must be "something wrong". Bottom line, that hurts the series when allegations of "something wrong" pops up.

If we all use the very same measuring device, that removes the variable (the other guy's dyno cert was on a dyno that reads low numbers).

Then we can move onto blaming the tires, or bad gas or some other reason. ;)

Now, having said all that and everything else in this thread, do I think 15HP makes a difference on track at our level ... our level save for Glenn?

Of course not. But I didn't believe it 4 years ago and I can see others who are relatively new don;t either because they are seeking out every last HP number.

Consequently, the hate and discontent that is spread because of it hurts the series. I did it and I'm to blame for it as are many others who have "matured" in this series.

So lets fix it and make it less painful.

[RichardP]

As an engineer, if you measure multiple "somethings" to an exacting tolerence, you need to ensure the measuring device itself is within that tolerence, correct?

Did you read the article? The big take away from the article was supposed to be that you can't just show up to any random dyno to run your car and the magic number that pops out is how much power your car makes, period, the end.

Not only are there variations between different types of dynos but the car can vary a bunch too. The car they chose highlighted the variability. A big, powerful, supercharged engine is going to have numbers all over the map if you don't control the conditions. Ambient conditions, heat soak, air flow, hood up or down, and in this case tire slip all have a big effect on a car like that.

A CMC car is also subject to variability but on a much smaller scale. A cold car doesn't make as much power as a warmed up car because of fluid viscosity in the engine, transmission, and differential. A heat soaked car warms up the intake air and lowers the power a bit. Coolant temp getting too high can really have an effect if the computer pulls timing to protect the engine.

The dyno procedures are set up to minimize these effects and make them consistent for all competitors. It's certainly not a perfect system but it's not a broken system. It's also better than the other alternatives out there.


Richard P.

[mitchntx]

Did you read the article? The big take away from the article was supposed to be that you can't just show up to any random dyno to run your car and the magic number that pops out is how much power your car makes, period, the end.


Exactly. Thats why I posted this.



If we are held to an exact standard, then we all need to use the same measuring device, not just the same type.

Is that practical? Not at all.

[RichardP]

Exactly. Thats why I posted this.


Then apparently you didn't actually read (and understand) either the article or my reply.

It doesn't matter how good your measurement tool is, you can't accurately or repeatedly measure the dimensions of a blob of Silly Putty sitting out in the hot sun...


Richard P.

[marshall_mosty]

If we are held to an exact standard, then we all need to use the same measuring device, not just the same type.
The problem is the same measurement device (dynos) are not calibrated and verified on a routine basis back to the baseline to ensure they are measuring the same.

In theory, the different dynos should produce equivalent numbers (+/- mfg rolerance). In practice, maintenance, or lack of, more often than not will dictate the variance from the benchmark.

This may be where NASA has "approved" dyno centers who actively validate the numbers their dyno is showing, compared to the manufactures baseline...

For stuff at work, it's either a 3-month, 6-month, or 12-month certification on our measurement tools...

[GlennCMC70]

Marshall touched on a point I want to make.
If we use a GM car odometer to measure out a set mile and then do it again w/ a Ford car, we will likely get the same result w/in a reasonable margin of error. If we hold that error factor to w/in 1/8", they will not be the same. A foot? possibly not. A car length? Possibly so. Dyno Jet advertises a % of accuracy. I'm fairly sure our CMC cars (as Richard said - when the procedure is consistant) are w/in that error factor.
Also, 1% error factor w/ 550hp is larger than a 1% error factor w/ 230hp. Richard also pointed out the car was boosted. That in of itself is a major variable.

So knowing the error factor, do you fault the car for missing the measured mile by 1/8"? 1 foot? Or in excess of 1 car length?
Same w/ a dyno. We all know there is an error factor. If you don't, you will soon learn. I set my car at 229HP/299TQ knowing good and well I'm on the edge. I follow the procedure pretty close. I also know I have a 50lb safety net to cover me to 235hp or 305 tq. It isn't much, but my car always makes pretty much the same numbers. At Nationals I know the local fuel is crap compaired to what we see here. 91 is the best we see at Miller and Mid O. I always dyno way low at those events. Point is, I know my car.

I see this as nothing more than the "sky is falling". It is a good article. But it was not written to disprove the usefullness of a dyno. It seems that is the way it was taken.

[GlennCMC70]

This may be where NASA has "approved" dyno centers who actively validate the numbers their dyno is showing, compared to the manufactures baseline...

That is not the case. I know of no "standard" that can be placed on the dyno to check how accurate it is.

[mitchntx]

Exactly. Thats why I posted this.


Then apparently you didn't actually read (and understand) either the article or my reply.

It doesn't matter how good your measurement tool is, you can't accurately or repeatedly measure the dimensions of a blob of Silly Putty sitting out in the hot sun...


Richard P.

Agreed Richard ... you can't accurately measure the exact HP/TQ of a car on ANY dyno ... calibrated or not.

But if we all use the SAME dyno (or measuring device) at least we are all subject to the same variance.

[Crumpacker]

I have a solution...

http://www.racingjunk.com/category/44/Shop_equipment/post/2042638/Brand-New-Mobile-2000hp-Dynojet-.html

I'm in for $100, who's with me?!

[Rob Liebbe]

Oh, and Liebbe IS a cheating bastard and deserved to get caught! :lol: :wink:
And he will fit in well as a director.


JJ

DUDE!!!!!! 8) :lol: 8) :lol:


Just kidding and Rob knows it.


JJ

I can't be a cheatin' bastard if I don't have a freakin' car. :oops:

[Papa Kellam]

Unbelievable!
First race of 2011 has not been run and you already have the same people making a big deal about dyno. Heard it all last year. You guys are wasting your time and talking out your ass. I am not going to debate anyone on this topic so you can tell me I don't know what I am talking about. It is true that I really would not be able to hold an intelligent discussion about dynos but neither can any of you in my opinion. How many times have peopole said "horsepower does not matter". My advice is to prepare your car according to the rules, prepare yourself, and go race. Most of you are only making excuses for your lack of preparation, both technically and mentally. Some people will never have the skills or the balls to run flat out. May the best man/woman win. Good luck this year 'winers'.

[marshall_mosty]

This may be where NASA has "approved" dyno centers who actively validate the numbers their dyno is showing, compared to the manufactures baseline...

That is not the case. I know of no "standard" that can be placed on the dyno to check how accurate it is.
My point exactly... If the dyno's aren't regularly "certified" as being within the DynoJet mfg tolerance, it could lead us down the wrong path (think along the lines of the Plano Kwik Kar dyno... :roll: )

[GlennCMC70]

That was a poorly maintained dyno - and was addressed earlier. There issue was a dragging brake.

And trust me, I know the story behind that dyno.

[Fbody383]

Most of you are only making excuses for your lack of preparation, both technically and mentally. Some people will never have the skills or the balls to run flat out. Papa K. in da house!

When you comin' racing with us?

[mitchntx]

Unbelievable!
First race of 2011 has not been run and you already have the same people making a big deal about dyno. Heard it all last year. You guys are wasting your time and talking out your ass. I am not going to debate anyone on this topic so you can tell me I don't know what I am talking about. It is true that I really would not be able to hold an intelligent discussion about dynos but neither can any of you in my opinion. How many times have peopole said "horsepower does not matter". My advice is to prepare your car according to the rules, prepare yourself, and go race. Most of you are only making excuses for your lack of preparation, both technically and mentally. Some people will never have the skills or the balls to run flat out. May the best man/woman win. Good luck this year 'winers'.

You and yours should be all for a standardized process.

Last year, the 18 car was a target of such discussion about the validity of posted HP/TQ numbers. I recall a conversation with your driver who was more than a little ticked at the rumor mill.

Having a methodology that removed question about that validity would make the racing more enjoyable, don't you think?

[Papa Kellam]

Not really. What we're really talking about are very small percentage differnces from one car to the other. What really ticks us off is people questioning your honesty rather than recognizing that you have prepared your car and yourself and giving you the respect you deserve.
Try using something like Trag Mate and you can see very clearly where and why one person is really faster than the others. We used that a lot the last two years to find where we could improve. Looks like maybe it worked. What you can not measure are the intangibles which are where the real differnces are. You'll are barking up the wrong tree.
I'm surprised no one has not mentioned the fact that Michael and Jeremy did not dyno with the other guys but together at another place. I'm sure they will be questioned when they start beating everyone. And then maybe not. I would not because I believe they are skilled drivers and that is why they will dominate.
I've had my say. I'm done.

[mitchntx]

And you and I know the that to be true.

I didn't use to ... I've pointed my finger before and I've had my car fingered.

However, those that are new or "don't get it" find a reason to excuse on track performance and drag honest, talented racers through the mud, dragging the series with it.

[donovan]

Hi Mitch!

[BryanL]

Well I agree with Fruitcake that this is an excellent discussion. There is no perfect solution as there are always too many variables. But the dyno has been the best option available and I think it has worked pretty well. Now I'm interested in seeing the data from all the pucks and how that can be used in conjuction with dyno's. I can't wait to go to the track and get pucked :lol:

How about the ability to protest someones car? Since there are dyno's now at a few tracks here is my suggestion. If I think someone is making too much power I can put up the dyno charge (whatever their fee is) to put someone on the dyno. If they are compliant then I lose my money. If the person fails the dyno then I get my money back. The non compliant person has to pay for the dyno and then would be DQ'd. Of course this wouldn't be easy to put into the rules.

When I chose CMC racing I was under the impression that it was routine for the winners to go to impound and hit the dyno. Now I realize that we are just racing for a little medal that I throw away and that is a little bit overboard. I would still like to see a random event where the top 3 are pulled to impound for a dyno.

[GlennCMC70]

Bryan, that is already in the rules.... it's called a protest form.

[GlennCMC70]

17.5 Protests, Request for Action, and Appeals
17.5.1 Protests
Any entered driver may lodge a protest against another driver disputing the mechanical
compliance of their competition vehicle. To lodge a protest, the protestor shall obtain a “Protest Form” from Registration, fill it out, and file it, along with the appropriate fee, with
the Race Director. The Race Director may accept the protest, may extend the time
allowed, or may reject the protest. For the protest to be valid, it must meet the following
conditions:
1. Be filed within thirty (30) minutes of the completion of the race.
2. Each part that is being protested must be named specifically.
3. Each part may be considered a separate protest, in terms of fees.
4. Each part listed shall be accompanied by the rule(s) number that it violates.
5. The title of the rulebook must be cited with each rule number.
6. Accepted by the Race Director.

[Wirtz]

Well I agree with Fruitcake...

...I would still like to see a random event where the top 3 are pulled to impound for a dyno.

You do not need to be in the top 3 to be cheating. I don't think random dynos should be limited to finish position. Everyones numbers into a hat and one lucky winner.

One thing I liked from back in the autocross days was after a run group was finished, they put all cars in impound for some set amount of time and the rule was all cars had to have hoods and trunks open. Everyone could look around if they wanted, no touching.

To be honest, 99% of the time all the drivers stood around bench racing instead, but the idea is that all cars are available for peer inspection. Helped keep the good feelings going.... I realize with our schedule for the weekend, this is not always practical, but to throw it in once and a while might be workable.

I do agree that the dynos are not perfect but it is pretty much what we have to work with for the time being.

Jeff

[BryanL]

17.5 Protests, Request for Action, and Appeals
17.5.1 Protests
Any entered driver may lodge a protest against another driver disputing the mechanical
compliance of their competition vehicle. To lodge a protest, the protestor shall obtain a “Protest Form” from Registration, fill it out, and file it, along with the appropriate fee, with
the Race Director. The Race Director may accept the protest, may extend the time
allowed, or may reject the protest. For the protest to be valid, it must meet the following
conditions:
1. Be filed within thirty (30) minutes of the completion of the race.
2. Each part that is being protested must be named specifically.
3. Each part may be considered a separate protest, in terms of fees.
4. Each part listed shall be accompanied by the rule(s) number that it violates.
5. The title of the rulebook must be cited with each rule number.
6. Accepted by the Race Director.

Rob/Glenn- Did you have these protest forms at the track or do you know if Registration always have them available?
This seems to identify protesting a certain part but doesn't address the ability to send someone to the dyno? What is the appropriate fee for sending someone to the dyno? Does the individual who filed the protest get their fee back if they are found illegal?

[mitchntx]

Brayn ... you are protesting the validity of their dyno cert.

Jeff ... the "name out of a hat" occured a few years ago. And guess what ... the same guy got selected two or three times in a row. It kind of lost juice after that.

[RichardP]

Jeff ... the "name out of a hat" occured a few years ago. And guess what ... the same guy got selected two or three times in a row. It kind of lost juice after that.


That's a bummer. It was a pretty sweet setup. The hat drawing was done Saturday evening giving the selectee all Saturday night and all Sunday to correct any "tweaks" they might have made before their hood was sealed and they were sent to the dyno. :roll:

It was still better than what we are doing now...


Richard P.

[mitchntx]

I think it was SchuVarner, wasn't it?

Still ... he could have busted out using the track's dyno. And then if he went back to his original dyno and rolled within specs, what was just accomplished?

If dyno cert is the way to go(and I don;t have an issue using a dyno as the cert tool) then it needs to be the same dyno for everyone, just like the scales.

You can't claim that you made weight on the scales you have at your shop. To be consistent ...

[rleng1]

17.5 Protests, Request for Action, and Appeals
17.5.1 Protests
Any entered driver may lodge a protest against another driver disputing the mechanical
compliance of their competition vehicle. To lodge a protest, the protestor shall obtain a “Protest Form” from Registration, fill it out, and file it, along with the appropriate fee, with
the Race Director. The Race Director may accept the protest, may extend the time
allowed, or may reject the protest. For the protest to be valid, it must meet the following
conditions:
1. Be filed within thirty (30) minutes of the completion of the race.
2. Each part that is being protested must be named specifically.
3. Each part may be considered a separate protest, in terms of fees.
4. Each part listed shall be accompanied by the rule(s) number that it violates.
5. The title of the rulebook must be cited with each rule number.
6. Accepted by the Race Director.


so now I need to get a lawyer on my race team? :o

[David Love AI27]

Jeff ... the "name out of a hat" occured a few years ago. And guess what ... the same guy got selected two or three times in a row. It kind of lost juice after that.


That's a bummer. It was a pretty sweet setup. The hat drawing was done Saturday evening giving the selectee all Saturday night and all Sunday to correct any "tweaks" they might have made before their hood was sealed and they were sent to the dyno. :roll:

It was still better than what we are doing now...


Richard P.

when you reach tech after r1 or r3 (the money races) you draw a puck out of a "hat"... one out of 4 is marked for dyno, if you draw it your hood is sealed right there

if you did not draw the marked puck or you were not in the top 4 someone would need to file a protest by the book...

[AllZWay]

You do not need to be in the top 3 to be cheating. I don't think random dynos should be limited to finish position. Everyones numbers into a hat and one lucky winner.
.....................
I do agree that the dynos are not perfect but it is pretty much what we have to work with for the time being.

Jeff

I agree with Jeff.