2007 IFMAR 1/8 On-Road World Championships: Oct 4-14
10-16-2007, 10:09 AM
#751
10-16-2007, 11:20 AM
#752
Tech Master
WOW!!! What a race!!!!!!
10-16-2007, 11:29 AM
#753
10-16-2007, 12:33 PM
#755
Controlled fuel,
I see that this being a HOT topic...
First off, the WORLDS is not only a test of the drivers' ability but the motor tunner and mechanics' as well.
Manufactures come to debut their products, ultimately proving their dominance and supremicy!!!
The idea behind controlled fuel is that IT'S THE SAME FOR EVERYONE. I'd go as far as saying this ..if you can't tune a motor
you shouldn't be at the WORLDS. Lets be honest this worlds did present the motor tuners with an array of tuning conditions with the constantly changing weather.
If the fuel as it were to be contaminated with "used" fuel then why is it that the same fuel produced better performace in the FINAL (this is when it should be most contaminated) than any other time during the event?
These rules were put in place to make the competition FAIR. The bottom line is simply this at the end of each qualifying round and FINAL the fuel is once again tested using the nirtomax 25% device, and even with "Contaminated fuel" is still 25%. I really can't see this being that BIG of an issue.
Just my 2 cents!
I see that this being a HOT topic...
First off, the WORLDS is not only a test of the drivers' ability but the motor tunner and mechanics' as well.
Manufactures come to debut their products, ultimately proving their dominance and supremicy!!!
The idea behind controlled fuel is that IT'S THE SAME FOR EVERYONE. I'd go as far as saying this ..if you can't tune a motor
you shouldn't be at the WORLDS. Lets be honest this worlds did present the motor tuners with an array of tuning conditions with the constantly changing weather.
If the fuel as it were to be contaminated with "used" fuel then why is it that the same fuel produced better performace in the FINAL (this is when it should be most contaminated) than any other time during the event?
These rules were put in place to make the competition FAIR. The bottom line is simply this at the end of each qualifying round and FINAL the fuel is once again tested using the nirtomax 25% device, and even with "Contaminated fuel" is still 25%. I really can't see this being that BIG of an issue.
Just my 2 cents!
Since Tornado was one of the main sponsors it was very, very wrong to re-use fuel! They should simple open a fresh can of 2,5 liters (10 x 250cc) during the qualifications and open a fresh 5 liter can before each of the finals...
This has been the wrong way to save some money for the sponsor!! I hope it will happen never again!
10-16-2007, 02:24 PM
#756
Tech Apprentice
Yes, Ray Wood was there. Serpent sent him to Argentina to cover the race. Its great to see serpent take the initiative to help people like Ray Woods that support the hobby.
From the ray wood video website:
LATEST NEWS Sept 5, Thanks too the generous support of Michael Salven & the SERPENT TEAM, we are off to cover the IFMAR 8th On Road World Champs in Cordoba, Argentina next month. I was finiancially unable to go with out their help. Serpent - supporting our sport . The DVD will have both English AND Spanish narration!!
Paul D.
From the ray wood video website:
LATEST NEWS Sept 5, Thanks too the generous support of Michael Salven & the SERPENT TEAM, we are off to cover the IFMAR 8th On Road World Champs in Cordoba, Argentina next month. I was finiancially unable to go with out their help. Serpent - supporting our sport . The DVD will have both English AND Spanish narration!!
Paul D.
10-16-2007, 02:58 PM
#757
10-16-2007, 02:58 PM
#758
10-16-2007, 04:02 PM
#759
interesting
Hmmmmm How about Spec tires( like formula-1, 2 compounds hard and soft), body and fuel? now that's an idea it would be very interesting to see how the mechanics cope.
10-16-2007, 04:56 PM
#760
Tech Master
I am confused as to what you guys are talking about. Are you saying they were handing bad fuel out??? Because I was the one filling my own bottle and almost always it was from a new can. It was always fresh out of the can. If you had some left over from the previous run than as anyone would do you pour it out and fill a new bottle up... Each can only lasted for about 2 to 3 heats... My opinion was that it is an O.K idea to run controlled fuel but to do that can be more admistrative than having a spectrum analyzer and tech the fuel. Either way works well... I have not seen anyone destroy an engine becuase of the fuel....
If someone is unclear as to what happen please make a post and I will answer if I can. Let me lay all the rumors to sleep.. The fuel was good... No one had a chance to run illegal fuel... When you walked into the pre-race area with your car, fuel bottle and fuel gun had to be empty... Than you fill your own bottle and warm up the car at that point. The cars worked excellent on the Tornado fuel.... It would have been good for the fuel sponsors of the drivers to have had there drivers win with their fuel but it has been known that there are some cheater fuels so this system eliminates that.
If someone is unclear as to what happen please make a post and I will answer if I can. Let me lay all the rumors to sleep.. The fuel was good... No one had a chance to run illegal fuel... When you walked into the pre-race area with your car, fuel bottle and fuel gun had to be empty... Than you fill your own bottle and warm up the car at that point. The cars worked excellent on the Tornado fuel.... It would have been good for the fuel sponsors of the drivers to have had there drivers win with their fuel but it has been known that there are some cheater fuels so this system eliminates that.
10-16-2007, 04:57 PM
#761
Spec fuel is there for a reason and it is not just to control nitro content. Racing at this level people push their equipment to the max and some times unfortunately push the rules a bit also. There are only so many ways that you can easily try to make a level playing field for people in this class and that is what EFRA & IFMAR is looking at. Vehicle dimensions and weight (min/max's) are controlled theoretically making the field equal while still giving manufacturers room to be unique. Engine displacement, intake and stinger dimensions are controlled while still leaving it up to the manufacturers to be unique in their internal design i.e. port count, timing etc. etc.
So you have controlled chassis weight & aerodynamics (bodies must be approved), controlled engine displacement & controlled amount of air entering & exiting the engine + controlled fuel tank size which theoretically limits power and by default run time. Tire widths are regulated so everyone is on equal footings from a grip stand point.
Reality of the matter when it comes down to engine design is that producing a lot of power is easy, producing a lot of power and still making 5 minutes of run time is really, really hard lol! As we all know in this class if a single driver has a big hp advantage over the competition it can be over very quickly indeed!
So how do you limit the engines simply by controlling the amount of fuel and the Nitro content that you can put into that fuel. Great you say we already have a rule for that dummy, now everyone should theoretically all be on an even playing field! Right? If you said this you would actually be wrong! Why? Because there are huge performance advantages to be had from fuels and specific fuel formulations. Even though the rules say that your fuel can only be comprised on methanol, nitromethane and lubricant how can you tell that is all that's in your competitors tank? Better yet how can the officials tell without having to pull samples from everyone to send to a lab for analysis? It's easy to check for Nitro content but the rest of the chemicals, forget about it! This can be a really big factor when some of the additives can add as much as 20% to the power of an engine without resulting in a fail on the Nitromax or any of the float type teching devices. As an additional negative a lot of these additives are either highly explosive and/or highly carcinogenic. Basically you do not want to be next to a running motor.
So ultimately what IFMAR decided was.... why mess with the hassle of having to tech this to make sure no one is cheating? Just require that everyone uses the same fuel that we give out right before they go on the track and you guarantee that they are all on an even playing field, which they were! The fact that there were performance differences between cans and/or batches speaks to me more of consistency issues from a fuel manufacturing standpoint of the specific brand that was chosen rather than the rules being wrong, which I do not think they are. Just my $.02
So you have controlled chassis weight & aerodynamics (bodies must be approved), controlled engine displacement & controlled amount of air entering & exiting the engine + controlled fuel tank size which theoretically limits power and by default run time. Tire widths are regulated so everyone is on equal footings from a grip stand point.
Reality of the matter when it comes down to engine design is that producing a lot of power is easy, producing a lot of power and still making 5 minutes of run time is really, really hard lol! As we all know in this class if a single driver has a big hp advantage over the competition it can be over very quickly indeed!
So how do you limit the engines simply by controlling the amount of fuel and the Nitro content that you can put into that fuel. Great you say we already have a rule for that dummy, now everyone should theoretically all be on an even playing field! Right? If you said this you would actually be wrong! Why? Because there are huge performance advantages to be had from fuels and specific fuel formulations. Even though the rules say that your fuel can only be comprised on methanol, nitromethane and lubricant how can you tell that is all that's in your competitors tank? Better yet how can the officials tell without having to pull samples from everyone to send to a lab for analysis? It's easy to check for Nitro content but the rest of the chemicals, forget about it! This can be a really big factor when some of the additives can add as much as 20% to the power of an engine without resulting in a fail on the Nitromax or any of the float type teching devices. As an additional negative a lot of these additives are either highly explosive and/or highly carcinogenic. Basically you do not want to be next to a running motor.
So ultimately what IFMAR decided was.... why mess with the hassle of having to tech this to make sure no one is cheating? Just require that everyone uses the same fuel that we give out right before they go on the track and you guarantee that they are all on an even playing field, which they were! The fact that there were performance differences between cans and/or batches speaks to me more of consistency issues from a fuel manufacturing standpoint of the specific brand that was chosen rather than the rules being wrong, which I do not think they are. Just my $.02
10-16-2007, 06:08 PM
#762
I'm no scientitst, so bare with me. I just Goggled fuel additives. Found: dinitropropane, acetone, methanol, nitrobenzene, propylene oxide and our all-time favorite, nitromethane. All of these change the way internal ccombustion engines perform...mostly, make them go faster. With the system IFMAR put in place, what would stop someone from putting a teaspoon of, say propylene oxide in the tank prior to tech? It's colorless and basically smells the same as nitro fuel. And it's not enough to be seen. It could change the power curve by 10-20%.
Now imagine if I really knew what I was doing. Or had lots of $ invested. I think this demonstrates a little of what someone could do...without anyone knowing. But, I wasn't there so I'm just sayin'.
It just seems, without chemical analysis of fuel tanks, the playing field will never be truly even. We need Grisham from CSI in tech. Or at least the gas chromatograph his lab uses.
I'm not saying anyone cheated, just keeping the discussion live...geek-style.
Now imagine if I really knew what I was doing. Or had lots of $ invested. I think this demonstrates a little of what someone could do...without anyone knowing. But, I wasn't there so I'm just sayin'.
It just seems, without chemical analysis of fuel tanks, the playing field will never be truly even. We need Grisham from CSI in tech. Or at least the gas chromatograph his lab uses.
I'm not saying anyone cheated, just keeping the discussion live...geek-style.
10-16-2007, 06:20 PM
#763
I'm no scientitst, so bare with me. I just Goggled fuel additives. Found: dinitropropane, acetone, methanol, nitrobenzene, propylene oxide and our all-time favorite, nitromethane. All of these change the way internal ccombustion engines perform...mostly, make them go faster. With the system IFMAR put in place, what would stop someone from putting a teaspoon of, say propylene oxide in the tank prior to tech? It's colorless and basically smells the same as nitro fuel. And it's not enough to be seen. It could change the power curve by 10-20%.
Now imagine if I really knew what I was doing. Or had lots of $ invested. I think this demonstrates a little of what someone could do...without anyone knowing. But, I wasn't there so I'm just sayin'.
It just seems, without chemical analysis of fuel tanks, the playing field will never be truly even. We need Grisham from CSI in tech. Or at least the gas chromatograph his lab uses.
I'm not saying anyone cheated, just keeping the discussion live...geek-style.
Now imagine if I really knew what I was doing. Or had lots of $ invested. I think this demonstrates a little of what someone could do...without anyone knowing. But, I wasn't there so I'm just sayin'.
It just seems, without chemical analysis of fuel tanks, the playing field will never be truly even. We need Grisham from CSI in tech. Or at least the gas chromatograph his lab uses.
I'm not saying anyone cheated, just keeping the discussion live...geek-style.
Who knows....
10-16-2007, 06:25 PM
#764
I'm no scientitst, so bare with me. I just Goggled fuel additives. Found: dinitropropane, acetone, methanol, nitrobenzene, propylene oxide and our all-time favorite, nitromethane. All of these change the way internal ccombustion engines perform...mostly, make them go faster. With the system IFMAR put in place, what would stop someone from putting a teaspoon of, say propylene oxide in the tank prior to tech? It's colorless and basically smells the same as nitro fuel. And it's not enough to be seen. It could change the power curve by 10-20%.
Now imagine if I really knew what I was doing. Or had lots of $ invested. I think this demonstrates a little of what someone could do...without anyone knowing. But, I wasn't there so I'm just sayin'.
It just seems, without chemical analysis of fuel tanks, the playing field will never be truly even. We need Grisham from CSI in tech. Or at least the gas chromatograph his lab uses.
I'm not saying anyone cheated, just keeping the discussion live...geek-style.
Now imagine if I really knew what I was doing. Or had lots of $ invested. I think this demonstrates a little of what someone could do...without anyone knowing. But, I wasn't there so I'm just sayin'.
It just seems, without chemical analysis of fuel tanks, the playing field will never be truly even. We need Grisham from CSI in tech. Or at least the gas chromatograph his lab uses.
I'm not saying anyone cheated, just keeping the discussion live...geek-style.
10-16-2007, 06:32 PM
#765