New SPEC Motor Rules

[Acadia]

The SPEC engine needs more rules to make sure parity is conserved.


Everyone has been watching/discussing horsepower, and that is far from the real story. Even if the SPEC engine were to be tuned in to be identical to the builts, the car with a SPEC engine has a HUGE advantage.


The SPEC engine is about 100# lighter than a built. That weight is restored with additional lead. But that lead can now be installed several inches lower than where the weight would be in the built engine. Lowering 100# by a few inches is a HUGE advantage. Just having the latitude to move 100# around is a huge advantage, as long as one knows what they are doing.


That is a huge advantage, exclusive of horsepower.


The engines can be run all day on dynos, but no restrictor plate is going to compensate for the lowering of the front end CG. The CG will not affect the dyno results.


So what needs to happen, preferably before a SPEC engine ever runs another race, is appropriate rules are needed to level the playing field so the SPEC engines do not have the CG advantage.


One option is that the added weight that is used to compensate for the lighter SPEC engine, let’s say 100#, has to be attached to the upper engine bay chassis tubes, which is right about the built engine CG height. About 50# per side.


Another option is to have the maximum left side weight percentage reduced for a SPEC engined car to restore the effective CG to that of a built engined car. The maximum left side weight percentage for a SPEC engine needs to be less than the present 55% max left side weight. That is a simple calculation.


For a drag car, weight and horsepower can be interchanged rather successfully to restore parity. But for cars that have to turn under race conditions where horsepower is not a factor, weight and horsepower cannot be simply interchanged.


As is now, the SPEC engined cars have a huge CG advantage, and that advantage has to be taken away.


NWMT PR, please get Bodine and Co. working on this immediately to come up with new rules on the SPEC engine that restore parity.

[uticamike]

A HUGE advantage that few are running out to buy. Silky felt sorry for the rest of the Tour so they canned it after the second NH race. Buzz Chew is chewing up the field
also with his HUGE advantage. Rowan is fast now he just doesn't know it yet. Maybe you should call Bret Bodine and offer your expertise at the tech center? NASCAR
needs all the help they can get....right?

[RGeeProductions]

Good one Mike... Seems Acadia hasn't mentioned the disadvantages of the SPEC motor yet....
Which may be the reason the rest of the field hasn't rushed out to get one...

Only one race left... enjoy it while you can....
I will be enjoying next year myself...

[holleratme]

Where did this guy come from? He is so far off base WOW

[Acadia]

A HUGE advantage that few are running out to buy. Silky felt sorry for the rest of the Tour so they canned it after the second NH race. Buzz Chew is chewing up the field
also with his HUGE advantage. Rowan is fast now he just doesn't know it yet. Maybe you should call Bret Bodine and offer your expertise at the tech center? NASCAR
needs all the help they can get....right?


Silk blew away from the field in July at Loudon with SPEC. If not for the bad tire, he would have walked away with it. Yeah, I'm sure he felt sorry for the rest of the Tour. Oh yeah, Partridge with his altruistic pursuits to have engine parity across the Tour with the SPEC engine, and underfunded teams can now have the same power as the better funded teams, how could I forget that? Silk ran a built at the Sept Loudon race. So why didn't he run the SPEC engine at Loudon in Sept? Oh yeah, it had too much horsepower in July, an advantage, and that advantage was dialed back. So much for that altruistic pursuit for a low cost engine that would be affordable to the underfunded teams and everyone would then have the same power. I guess that turned into a problem for Partridge, everyone would have the same power and he wouldn't have an advantage.

Chew has said he is definitely not going to run the SPEC at Loudon again to keep from getting run over.

Pennink had a great run at Loudon with his first time using the SPEC. He had to start from the back a couple times and still made it up to finish P5. Had he not had to use up his car to drive out of the back, he would have finished much better.

Interesting how Chew and Pennink had completely divergent experience and comments with the SPEC engine at the same event.

Given how sporadically they use the SPEC engine, it will take several events, maybe an entire season, to get the set up right with moving that 100# around. Moving 100# down a few inches is a HUGE advantage, but it has to be done correctly. If parity is that important, the SPEC engine has an advantage due to the weight disparity, and the rules need to be revised to restore parity.

Good point about how few are buying the SPEC engine.

I'm only here to help!

[RGeeProductions]

First off, it is less then 100 lbs and you still have not mentioned the difference in rotating mass within the engine.
If your '100lbs' was such an advantage, don't you think more would have saved some 25-30 thousand dollars already this year???
Sorry, there really is so much more you are missing on this SPEC motor stuff acadia.

[Acadia]

Sorry, there really is so much more you are missing on this SPEC motor stuff acadia.

I only addressed one specific advantage that the SPEC motor has over builts. Indeed, there could very well be others, but they are not the subject of this thread. I just want parity restored due to the overall weight advantage, I didn't mention anything else. Therefore, I'm not missing anything else.

I have no intention to discuss the difference in rotating mass of the engines. Rotating mass has nothing to do with the cause-and-effect that I described. That is a completely different issue, and cause-and-effect. What don't you understand? The rotating mass has nothing to do with my point of the overall weight advantage of the SPEC engine over the built engine, and how that leads to chassis set up. 100# is close enough.

I'm not missing anything, I just addressed one specific issue, the overall weight advantage of the SPEC motor over the builts. That's all.

Stay on subject, don't cause a diversion or distraction.

If you want me to explain something else to you, ask.

[RGeeProductions]

TOPIC: New SPEC Motor Rules
"Stay on subject, don't cause a diversion or distraction."???
And where did I stray from your topic???
Now telling me what I can/can't do?
1 left there buddy... 1 left....

[uticamike]

TOPIC: New SPEC Motor Rules
"Stay on subject, don't cause a diversion or distraction."???
And where did I stray from your topic???
Now telling me what I can/can't do?
1 left there buddy... 1 left....

Richie, Don't K him please. He's too much fun and where else can you get this much wisdom for free?

Back to the game. We're asked to believe the Tour crew chiefs don't yet have down how to move weight in a car?

Who's buying that? Theoretical advantage and actual are very different. It's a total package that makes a difference in performance

and some guys are better at it than others. Nothing against the Chew guys believe me but they are just not the upper echelon on the Tour.

They raced on the ROC a couple of years back and did nothing noteworthy there but made the move to the "bigs" and are still not a serious

threat to win a race. Their HUGE Spec advantage just isn't there. The jury is still out on what advantage this engine brings and with NASCAR

messing ( experimenting) with the package by the race it's still too early to make the call. We haven't talked rebuild cost yet either but that's

for another day. NASCAR was selling "cheaper" not better handling when pushing this engine. My bet would be if they mandated the engine the same

smart guys on the Tour would be the ones that figured them out first. ( that would be true if you put 20 Honda's in them too). Maybe it's time to rethink

HUGE.

[Acadia]

Richie, Don't K him please. He's too much fun and where else can you get this much wisdom for free?

Back to the game. We're asked to believe the Tour crew chiefs don't yet have down how to move weight in a car?

Who's buying that? Theoretical advantage and actual are very different. It's a total package that makes a difference in performance

and some guys are better at it than others. Nothing against the Chew guys believe me but they are just not the upper echelon on the Tour.

They raced on the ROC a couple of years back and did nothing noteworthy there but made the move to the "bigs" and are still not a serious

threat to win a race. Their HUGE Spec advantage just isn't there. The jury is still out on what advantage this engine brings and with NASCAR

messing ( experimenting) with the package by the race it's still too early to make the call. We haven't talked rebuild cost yet either but that's

for another day. NASCAR was selling "cheaper" not better handling when pushing this engine. My bet would be if they mandated the engine the same

smart guys on the Tour would be the ones that figured them out first. ( that would be true if you put 20 Honda's in them too). Maybe it's time to rethink

HUGE.


If theory and actual are very different, you are using the wrong theory or your measurements suck.

[uticamike]

"Silk blew away from the field in July at Loudon with SPEC. If not for the bad tire, he would have walked away with it. Yeah, I'm sure he felt sorry for the rest of the Tour. Oh yeah, Partridge with his altruistic pursuits to have engine parity across the Tour with the SPEC engine, and underfunded teams can now have the same power as the better funded teams, how could I forget that? Silk ran a built at the Sept Loudon race. So why didn't he run the SPEC engine at Loudon in Sept? Oh yeah, it had too much horsepower in July, an advantage, and that advantage was dialed back. So much for that altruistic pursuit for a low cost engine that would be affordable to the underfunded teams and everyone would then have the same power."

Apparently you didn't get my tongue in cheek comment. Why did you mention horsepower is this response when (according to you) it's Huge advantage is in the corners

where handling takes place? NASCAR "sat" on the engine with a restricter plate change as I understand it and the gear. The July race is where it's HP showed it's stuff as

Silk was catching Stefanik coming to the flag even though he couldn't get off the corners because of the tire deal.

"Pennink had a great run at Loudon with his first time using the SPEC. He had to start from the back a couple times and still made it up to finish P5. Had he not had to use up his car to drive out of the back, he would have finished much better."

Rowan is one of the best on the Tour (and the MRS). He would be a factor Spec engine or otherwise.

"Interesting how Chew and Pennink had completely divergent experience and comments with the SPEC engine at the same event."

Interesting yeah maybe, like I said some teams are better than others. Not surprising at all.

Don't preach about staying on topic when your the one diverging.

Your only trying to help? Help whom?

[Robbyracer]

I think there is a place for a low budget yet competitive engine for underfunded or self funded programs (like myself). Fans don't come to see engines driving in circles they come to see racing. Modified series or any other series.

More competitive cars = better race for the fans.

Merely my opinion.

[jaFor]

"I'm only here to help!"

Acadia... the only way you can help is if you were to disappear. Rich... can't you set up an election or something so we can vote this guy off?

[Axel]

well... you could create a new thread, make it a poll and see what happens... But I wouldnt wanna do that.

I think Acadia is a bunch of bluster, but i share some of his opinions , dont share some of his opinions and cant even comment on some of his opinions. Everyone's entitled to 'em, but it's the self righteous way they are delviered on this board where respect for others was/is always first and foremost.

[nofenders]

Silk didnt scrap the spec motor as stated, they ran it last weekend at stafford. The spec is ok , few things ive heard form them is good top end and a little sluggish off but changes the setup of the car with increased corner entry speed. Built is a little more forgiving with balance of top and bottom end power.