April 2012 Preliminary Minutes and Tech Bulletin

SUGGESTED RULES FOR 2013
PRODUCTION
ALL
1. #7154 (Chuck Mathis) Allow CIS fuel injection to be replaced with Digifant
Thank you for your request. Change 9.1.5.E.1.b.4, Car’s permitted to utilize fuel injection, must use the stock manifold and
throttle body. The throttle body bore size must remain stock. The throttle body can be ported and polished. The number of
injection nozzles must remain the same as stock. The mounting position and injection point of the injection nozzle must be
stock. Electronic fuel injection may be substituted for the stock type of fuel injection. The fuel injection system is otherwise unrestricted.

Also, change 9.1.5.E.2.b.4, Fuel Injection: All inducted air must pass through the throttle body and be subject to control by the
throttle butterfly. The stock throttle body casting/housing must be retained. The inside dimensions of the throttle body
casting/housing and all dimensions of the throttle butterfly must remain stock. The throttle butterfly shaft must not
be relocated. The outside diameter of the portion of the throttle butterfly shaft located in the throttle body bore must be no
smaller than stock. The contour of the interface between the throttle butterfly shaft and the butterfly must remain stock. The
throttle butterfly and any throttle butterfly to shaft screws/bolts can be attached to the throttle butterfly shaft by any means
including welding or brazing. Holes or slots can be created in the throttle butterfly for purposes of idle adjustment only. The
number of injectors must remain stock. The mounting position and injection point must be stock. Electronic fuel injection may be substituted for the
stock type of fuel injection. In all other respects the fuel injection system is unrestricted.
Click to expand...
 
The VW guys will be rejoicing! No more fiddling with CIS, now they can use a real fuel injection system.

Thank you , Chuck. :applause:

Mark
 
I would wager that the spec line for the VW's will STILL say that the 1471 cc engine cannot use FI, since it never came with it.
Any takers??
BC
 
dryenko":2bf2tgpv said:
I would wager that the spec line for the VW's will STILL say that the 1471 cc engine cannot use FI, since it never came with it.
Any takers??
BC
Click to expand...

It will now
 
dryenko":raj15tlz said:
I would wager that the spec line for the VW's will STILL say that the 1471 cc engine cannot use FI, since it never came with it.
Any takers??
BC
Click to expand...

True but no one in their right mind would ever build a 1.5 VW for FP in the first place. :lol: 8) :wink:

Now make it an HProd car with the proper weight adjustment ( and get rid of that ridiculous and unjust restriction) and you might get a few takers. :applause:

MC
 
What HP weight adjustment do you want? What is the "ridiculous and unjust restriction" ?
The 1471 that didn't come with FI from the factory still does't have FI.
Chuck Mathis
 
c mathis":3lt01ifd said:
What HP weight adjustment do you want? What is the "ridiculous and unjust restriction" ?
The 1471 that didn't come with FI from the factory still does't have FI.
Chuck Mathis
Click to expand...

Chuck,

I'm retired and done with club racing myself, so I'll defer that weight adjustment question to someone else who might be interested. He/she can write that letter.

The unjust restriction? Before I ticked off the former CRB member, the 1457/1471 spec line did NOT have the exception for the 1471cc engine, therefore the update/backdate rule would have allowed FI on the 1471. Simply remove that restriction and put it back the way it was. It was simply a hissy fit by that CRB member.

Thank you for spearheading the fuel injection change. I think you'll see more VWs in prod now, for the simple fact racers now have a FI choice that is easier to work with. :jump:

Mark
 
Level 1 and 2 are included and not just VWs. The stock or ported throttle body (depending on your prep level) is still the airflow restiction. This allows the older FI cars the same level of prep the newer FI cars have. Hopefully giving all the same tuning options to all FI cars.
I don't know what to say about the 1471 engine other than write another letter and we will look at it again.
Chuck Mathis
 
Chuck,
A letter WAS WRITTEN again only a few months ago and the CRB responce [ IIRC ] was STILL "lack of interest".
Our sitting on a fresh $3+ K 1471 cc race engine that was ruled out of use by a former CRB member / control freak just doesn't sit well.
What possible difference could it have made, 1457 vs 1471 cc , to some who was running a BMC car ????
None except for being spiteful.
Must still hate the Germans for WWII ??
Glad to see that you being involved with the CRB has made a difference on items that you have proposed.
BC
 
Production
1. #7663 (Club Racing Board) Errors and Omissions, Change to 9.1.5.E.6.h.1
In section 9.1.5.E.6.h.1, change paragraph as follows: "Screens, block-off plates or tape that serve only to protect or
restrict air flow to the radiator(s) and/or oil cooler(s) are unrestricted, but must be located a minimum of 2” behind the
stock radiator/cooler opening or behind the stock grill."

:applause:
 
Tom Feller":1knwl1pb said:
Why would a car that never came with FI be allowed FI?
Click to expand...

Hi Tom: In the mid to late 70s as VW was dealing with meeting emissions standards they switched between various engine configurations (1457, 1471, 1588 cc) and from a carb to FI then back to carb then back to FI again (I think I have that in the right chronological order). All this in the same basic car (rabbit, scirocco) with essentially everything else about the car staying the same. And the 1457/1471 engines are on the same spec line in the PCS. Hence, it seems like the perfect application of the update/backdate rule that any year car from that era should be able to mix and match assemblies, and to single out a single engine to disallow that process seems to be against the spirit of the rules. IMHO...

Evan
 
Tom Feller":15qsczmh said:
Why would a car that never came with FI be allowed FI?
Click to expand...


Ah, but the car on the spec line DID come with fuel injection. (1457cc). It's one of the engines being specified that is being singled out. Originally, it was not.

I think the SCCA should focus on being MORE inclusive. What would it hurt in this case? The car on the spec line can already run FI, and the alternate engine is 14cc different in displacement. It's not like the Spitfire 1296/1500 specifications difference. Or should we talk about the frankenmidgets that were running in HP in body configurations that NEVER, EVER existed in the real world? :hand: :lol: But those were allowed under the update/backdate rule. :whistle:

But like I said, unless this car is moved to HP, NO ONE WILL EVER BUILD ONE FOR FP. So it's a moot point right now.

MC
 
Mark Coffin":27t42bxf said:
Tom Feller":27t42bxf said:
Why would a car that never came with FI be allowed FI?
Click to expand...


Ah, but the car on the spec line DID come with fuel injection. (1457cc). It's one of the engines being specified that is being singled out. Originally, it was not.

I think the SCCA should focus on being MORE inclusive. What would it hurt in this case? The car on the spec line can already run FI, and the alternate engine is 14cc different in displacement. It's not like the Spitfire 1296/1500 specifications difference. Or should we talk about the frankenmidgets that were running in HP in body configurations that NEVER, EVER existed in the real world? :hand: :lol: But those were allowed under the update/backdate rule. :whistle:

But like I said, unless this car is moved to HP, NO ONE WILL EVER BUILD ONE FOR FP. So it's a moot point right now.

MC
Click to expand...

OK so I wasn't going to bring up the hybrid spridget, but that is of course the most tortured interpretation of the rules that I'm aware of, and pretty much establishes a precedent that basically says, if you can come up with a combination of assemblies from the same manufacturer that fits in the
right ballpark of performance, then that should be acceptable even though it is fairly far removed from any particular year of car. And basically, I think that's an OK direction to go for flexibility in building a car.
 
To be fair, we're mixing some rather different things here. I think Mark is referring to Bugeye noses on Mk2 (??) back ends, and Evan is referring to the L1/L2 hybrid Spridget. IIRC, the former was indeed an update/backdate thing, the latter was done as a known outside-the-norm classification to help out the then-948 L1 guys as new cars were coming into HP. So much so that it was put to a competitor vote in a tent meeting at Mid-Ohio and passed unopposed - again IIRC.

Having said that, it seems very reasonable - and with lots of precedent - that the 1457 and 1471cc VW A1 cars, which are already on the same spec line and have been so for years, be lumped together in all ways including induction. It's the same chassis, same body, same everything, just a minor year-year tweak as Evan alluded to. It simplifies the rulebook and breaks no new precedent grounds, so why not?

And if it's a moot point in F, someone should write a letter asking for it to be moved to H with some weight added, the more there the merrier....

For that matter, while we're at it, why not lump all the A1-chassis VWs into one F spec line and one H spec line and just list different weights for different ccs? A note could be added to prohibit FrankenVWs combining Rabbit and Scirocco or Scirocco I and Scirocco II body parts.... If the <1500cc cars are brought to H as L1 then they ought to have their own line of course.
 
Curious. Did every single one of these VWs have the same throttle body (s)? How big is it (they)? It's relavent because the carb options look pretty restrictive. That little intake valve may make it irrelevant but still I am curious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top