Race Engine Challenge II

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by Walter R. Malik » Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:23 pm

Rick360 wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:14 pm
One problem with header rules is the headers have to fit the dyno, so some headers that fit a chassis won't fit some dynos.

Rick
Exactly ... in my opinion, that is why requiring a "catalog" down-swept header but, with simple modifications allowed, like different flanges or flange adapter plates, would make a lot of sense here; keeping the playing field somewhat level.
Last edited by Walter R. Malik on Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4622
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by GARY C » Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:24 pm

CamKing wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:50 pm
GARY C wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:38 pm
I think if you kept the header rule to a mild steel (no stainless) then custom header cost would not add a big dollar amount to the headers and could open up ideas to the market on header design, not to mention the adventurous builder could buy a mild steel header kit and build his own and might save a few dollars.
Would there be any advantage to running expensive stainless, over mild steel, for dyno testing?
If not, then let the builder decide.
If the only advantage to stainless, is that it'll last longer, then let the engine builder decide if it's worth the extra money. Maybe he will have an easier time selingl the stainless exhaust to a customer. Maybe he can get a company like Burns Stainless to sponsor his project.
True!

User avatar
MadBill
Guru
Guru
Posts: 13445
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:41 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by MadBill » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:12 pm

I think limiting the choice to catalog headers creates problems across the availability spectrum: At the "ubiquitous xxx engine" end are an embarrassment of riches, where you need to test many $et$ to find the least-compromised for your combination. Even with the same general specs, the pipe contortions to fit a design into a specific chassis could affect the power and likely none will be ideal for the EM challenge. At the "orphan" extreme are few or zero choices and the need for a custom set regardless, with possibly no subsequent designated chassis recipient to recapture the cost.

Specifying just a general location and orientation of collector exits for ease of dyno installation (and encompassing typical chassis design locations for those going the 'catalog' route) would make the job of custom fabbing much easier, with no convoluted and restrictive routing required for a specific chassis.

An optimum header design is a significant contributor to a winning combination and the builder shouldn't be handcuffed by commercial availability.
Felix, qui potuit rerum cognscere causas.

Happy is he who can discover the cause of things.

User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 8567
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:23 pm

Walter R. Malik wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:23 pm
but, with simple modifications allowed,
One man's definition of simple, may not be the same as another's.
If you get into too many "gray area" rules, you end up pissing off a lot of people. It's hard to explain to someone why their idea of a simple modification wasn't allowed, while another person's idea of a simple modification was.
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs
Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
(704)489-2449

User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 8567
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:25 pm

MadBill wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:12 pm
An optimum header design is a significant contributor to a winning combination and the builder shouldn't be handcuffed by commercial availability.
And MadBill drops the Mic, and walks off stage. :lol:
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs
Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
(704)489-2449

User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 8567
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:30 pm

RevTheory wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:19 pm
I hear ya, Mike, and I don't have a solution :-k
Me either, but I always take the side of "Less Rules".

Remember, the long term plans of the "Race Engine Challenge" is to have multiple classes to compete in.
Maybe one that is a lot less restrictive, and one that is more restrictive.
That's something, down the road. Right now, we've got a class that needs to represent the top of the line street/strip engines, that allows the engine builders to showcase their talents and ingenuity.
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs
Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
(704)489-2449

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by Walter R. Malik » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:43 pm

That being the case ... I could definitely run some 180 degree headers as long as tubes cross under the oil pan or across the engine rear and don't physically interfere with the dyno. Those types are everywhere in the street/strip car crowd, right ...? I know some FE Ford vehicles and Panterra's which are custom like that way right now.

I guess I could work that out. :-k

There has to be some kind of sensible header rule ... not anything goes.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

Rick360
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1038
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2004 9:55 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by Rick360 » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:53 pm

The cylinder head rules will be the hardest to get right between all the different engine families.

Also the most important.

Rick

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by Walter R. Malik » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:55 pm

CamKing wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:23 pm
Walter R. Malik wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:23 pm
but, with simple modifications allowed,
One man's definition of simple, may not be the same as another's.
If you get into too many "gray area" rules, you end up pissing off a lot of people. It's hard to explain to someone why their idea of a simple modification wasn't allowed, while another person's idea of a simple modification was.
Whatever those simple modifications are to be, would need to be defined in the rules package ... not just the word "simple".

Of course ... cylinder heads will most always be the most important.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 8567
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing » Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:00 pm

Walter R. Malik wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:43 pm
That being the case ... I could definitely run some 180 degree headers as long as tubes cross under the oil pan or across the engine rear and don't physically interfere with the dyno. Those types are everywhere in the street/strip car crowd, right ...? I know some FE Ford vehicles and Panterra's which are custom like that way right now.

I guess I could work that out. :-k

There has to be some kind of sensible header rule ... not anything goes.
Luckily, I'm not making the rules. I'd allow 180 degree headers.
That way, the 90 degree crank V8's wouldn't be at a disadvantage to the 180 degree crank V8's. :wink:
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs
Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
(704)489-2449

User avatar
CamKing
Guru
Guru
Posts: 8567
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:05 pm
Location: Denver, NC
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by CamKing » Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:05 pm

Rick360 wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:53 pm
The cylinder head rules will be the hardest to get right between all the different engine families.
I think you'll be surprised.
the average "assembler" won't like the head rules, but the good engine builders will.
Mike Jones
Jones Cam Designs
Denver, NC
jonescams@bellsouth.net
http://www.jonescams.com
(704)489-2449

SchmidtMotorWorks
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9683
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:30 am
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by SchmidtMotorWorks » Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:17 pm

CamKing wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:05 pm
Rick360 wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:53 pm
The cylinder head rules will be the hardest to get right between all the different engine families.
I think you'll be surprised.
the average "assembler" won't like the head rules, but the good engine builders will.
Keep up the good work, it is obvious that you are putting a lot of care into this. =D>
http://www.schmidtmotorworks.com Aerospace Machine Work: Prototypes, Tooling, Molds.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4622
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by GARY C » Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:36 am

CamKing wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:30 pm
RevTheory wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:19 pm
I hear ya, Mike, and I don't have a solution :-k
Me either, but I always take the side of "Less Rules".

Remember, the long term plans of the "Race Engine Challenge" is to have multiple classes to compete in.
Maybe one that is a lot less restrictive, and one that is more restrictive.
That's something, down the road. Right now, we've got a class that needs to represent the top of the line street/strip engines, that allows the engine builders to showcase their talents and ingenuity.
Yes, as much as I don't like the cost of custom headers I think there is a lot of unexplored potential on the exhaust side of an engine so I can see where you would want that less restrictive.
The next question would be if someone finds something new should it be required that they share it?
That was one thing I liked about the earlier EMC was the follow up articles gave some good tech info about the engine.

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Race Engine Challenge II

Post by Walter R. Malik » Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:20 pm

I think the oil pan rules will be interesting to know; will one need to have a dragster in order to use the "contest" oil pan after the contest ...?
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

Post Reply