Jan 2012 FasTrack Posted

There still isn't any valve lift or compression ratio limit listed. How is one to build a motor for such a car? Or does this mean that "Anything Goes"?
 
It's listed as level 2, limited prep, so you can't port the head. Normally limited prep also has a compression and cam limit as well.

Before buying a set of pistons or cam, might be a good idea to ask if there are suppossed to be any limits listed in the spec line NOTES.

Or say nothing and build it and see what happens??
 
I can see the start of the HP runoffs race next year. The Volvo will be blasting up the front straight with all the small HP cars hanging on in the wake of the massive volvo looking like beer cans tide on strings bouncing along behind it. Won't that be a sight. Even in an ITB race the 142 looks huge.
 
TED HEINRITZ":12wrooqr said:
It's listed as level 2, limited prep, so you can't port the head. Normally limited prep also has a compression and cam limit as well.

Before buying a set of pistons or cam, might be a good idea to ask if there are suppossed to be any limits listed in the spec line NOTES.

Or say nothing and build it and see what happens??
Click to expand...

Methinks that would be naively optimistic! :?
 
zChris":78awnwe4 said:
I can see the start of the HP runoffs race next year. The Volvo will be blasting up the front straight with all the small HP cars hanging on in the wake of the massive volvo looking like beer cans tide on strings bouncing along behind it. Won't that be a sight. Even in an ITB race the 142 looks huge.
Click to expand...

It will certainly be interesting! I know from my own data that my Scirocco is bunches faster on a straight behind a Volvo!
 
When you get behind a 142, everything gets really quiet. I still think the 1.56" intake valve will pretty well take care of great potential along with the dinky 1.8 ports. What size valves does the 1.8 OHC VW have ?? Anyone who thinks you can get one of these puppies down to 2150# is stupid or has absolutely no knowledge of this car. Right now Les Chaney's 2 liter 140 is about 5 seconds slower than Dale Collinshaw's record at VIR. If anyone is interested in one of these cars we will be happy to take your money to build it and will furnish all the beer you care to cry in after you try it at the track! To me the practical thing to have done was to make it weigh 2400 # and leave it a 2 liter like it came !! Anybody that has anymore knowledge of this car than I do--PM and I will explain it to you in terms you will understand. I have only been screwing around with 140's since 1989 or so. I did after all win the ARRC FOUR times in a row with my ITB car which isn't that far from Limited Prep Prod. Remember this car CAME with not a bad fuel injection, 10.5 to 1 compression and a 280 degree cam and brakes and overall balance that some race cars don't have. this is not sour grapes--just frustration.
 
If anybody wants to lead that pack down the front straight let me know cause I can certainly hook you up, we will have to build you a 1800 motor but with that much displacement its gotta be fast in the right hands.
 
What's frustrating is trying to make this car fit into the same class as a 948, or any LBC for that matter.

Perfect G car...if only there were enough cars for two classes.

Cam and CR will be specified. Just an omission. I would guess 11:1 CR and .450 lift but don't build your 1800s yet.

Just thought I'd stir the pot.
 
Yes it fits REALLY well at 5 seconds slower than a LBC, but oh I forgot I can't drive nor can I prepare a car.
 
Tom Feller":ka5zucap said:
... but don't build your 1800s yet.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have to worry about that. I guess you guys are trying, but this exercise is unlikely to put a single HP 142 on the track. All that is likely to be accomplished is some old wounds are re-opened.

Consider how a handful of very enthusiastic ITB racers wanted to bring their IT cars into Production, just like the VW and Honda guys that we were racing with have done. Encouraging migration from IT to Prod made so much sense. But, all we got was endless frustration.

From what I see in this classification the CRB still doesn't even know what a Volvo 142 weighs. And to expect anyone to undertake develop of a untested a hybrid engine combination (injected 1800) with a block and head that have been out of production since 1968, that we don't have, just doesn't seem sensible. 1800 blocks and heads just aren't around. I scraped the only one I ever had because even the vintage guys didn't want it. I have a bunch of B20 stuff however.

Tom, it's hard to sell someone what they don't want. And what I wanted was to bring my ITB car into Production with a practical, competitive classification.
 
Having spent many laps behind a 142, I can attest to their drafting help. They should be calssified with the F production cars the way the 2002 was. The 2002 can out handle the 142 on a tight track but the 142 can out handle the 2002 on the straight. Keep the 2 liter with the limited prep motor and adjust with weight. G
 
Gordon Jones":1gsra6sq said:
Having spent many laps behind a 142, I can attest to their drafting help. They should be calssified with the F production cars the way the 2002 was. The 2002 can out handle the 142 on a tight track but the 142 can out handle the 2002 on the straight. Keep the 2 liter with the limited prep motor and adjust with weight. G
Click to expand...

HUH?

If you are saying that it needs to stay in FP in limited prep form and adjust it with weight then you don't understand The 142 can not get down to the weight that it is given now much less a lower 1.
 
Im guessing that if everyone refused to run H unless they could use a
readily available engine, already developed, and of at least 2L displacement, our participation would be pretty low!!
 
Gordon, I've never seen a really competitive FP 2002. I think it's another G/Prod car like the Volvo. There would probably be quite a few if they were more competitively classed.
 
Runoffs fee increases $450 to $500 and Solo Nationals fee increases $94 to $102. Discussion about large line items. BoD expressed their intention for staff to continue to take advantage of low interest rates.
MOTION: to approve 2012 budget as presented. Lewis/Jones. PASSED: 12-1 Opposed Merideth.
MARKETING/REGION SERVICES REPORT
Membership was 40,989 end of October. Discussion on membership and participation decreases and potential solutions: increase value to member, provide value at less cost, provide other membership options, lower cost tiers or premium tiered memberships.

Does anyone else see the irony in these two items?
 
Charlie Broring":1jeipvtq said:
Gordon, I've never seen a really competitive FP 2002. I think it's another G/Prod car like the Volvo. There would probably be quite a few if they were more competitively classed.
Click to expand...


I'm glad you understand what he is trying to say
 
joecam96":18meghv7 said:
Runoffs fee increases $450 to $500 and Solo Nationals fee increases $94 to $102. Discussion about large line items. BoD expressed their intention for staff to continue to take advantage of low interest rates.
MOTION: to approve 2012 budget as presented. Lewis/Jones. PASSED: 12-1 Opposed Merideth.
MARKETING/REGION SERVICES REPORT
Membership was 40,989 end of October. Discussion on membership and participation decreases and potential solutions: increase value to member, provide value at less cost, provide other membership options, lower cost tiers or premium tiered memberships.

Does anyone else see the irony in these two items?
Click to expand...

Yes, if it wasn't so sad it might be funny.

AZ region was asking about marketing help recently. I asked if National had a plan to work off of/with. The responce was . . . "National is working on a marketing plan." SCCA has been around for X decades and they don’t have a Marketing plan.

L
 
Well as Eric Prill is the head of marketing, maybe he can chime in and tell us what that grand marketing plan is.
Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top