2008 TSO Top Gun Point Series Race Rules

[Turbobuick]

2008 Race Rules

INTENT: This a heads up class for 81-87 Buick regal bodied cars running single turbo Buick V6 engines and stock style rear suspension with a 10.5" tire. The class is to be run on a .400 pro-tree and on a pro-ladder and with a 9.99 minimum qualifying time. All cars must have all applicable safety equipment for speeds obtained and must be able to pass host track safety tech. Host track safety tech will make all decisions concerning safety tech of vehicles competing in the TSO top Gun Point Series and it is the drivers responsibility to make sure their car meets ALL host track requirements.

Class minimum weight is 3200#

1. BODY: 1981-1987 Regal body required with stock firewall location and full stock frame with stock wheelbase required (108.0" measured). Frame modifications for roll cages, safety, tire size and cross member clearance are allowed. Frame notching for tire clearance is allowed but the inner frame rail can not be modified or moved from its stock location. Four functioning headlights and taillights required. Light weight aftermarket body panels allowed. No pin on doors or front ends allowed. Doors must have door panels and be functional with functional windows allowed.

2. EXHAUST: No part of turbo exhaust may exit forward of engine flywheel area and a muffler is required.

3. FRONT SUSPENSION: Must have stock mounting locations. Any aftermarket bolt on part is allowed. Rack and pinion conversions are allowed

4. REAR SUSPENSION: must maintain factory mounting locations on the frame. Coil over conversion allowed, sway bar and panhard bar modifications are allowed. Must maintain factory 4-link arrangement. Any automotive type solid axle housing allowed.

5. TIRES: Rear tires may either be DOT-approved and labeled or labeled for racing slicks. DOT tires must have labels facing the outside of the body and are limited to a maximum new tread width of 12.1 inches and can never exceed 12.25 inches in width. Slicks are limited to a maximum sidewall designation of 10.5 inches width and may never exceed 11.1 inches in width. No drive tire may have sidewall designation height greater than 29.5 inches. The front tires are limited to 4.5- inch minimum tread width. The tread of tires must not protrude outside of the exterior of bodyline at top of tires.
** Measurement will be taken with tape measure from end of tread to end of tread.

6. TURBO: Maximum compressor wheel size is 88.0 mm /3.464” - inducer wheel diameter and exducer diameter of 127mm/5.000". A maximum tubine exducer diameter of 93mm/3.66". Inlet housing is permitted a maximum inlet diameter of 3.544”where the leading edge of the compressor wheel meets the housing. Turbos with compressor wheel inducer diameters of 82mm and smaller will have no limit on compressor exducer size and turbine size. Large frame thumper series turbos are not allowed in any configuration. Turbine and compressor housings must carry a manufacturer part number that is readily available to the general public prior to Jan1 of the current race season.

Compressor wheel to housing clearance must maintain a maximum of 0.080” clearance beginning from a) where the leading edge of the compressor wheel meets the inlet of the compressor housing to b) the transition point where the trailing edge of the compressor wheel meets the volute. All air entering the turbocharger must pass through the turbocharger inlet. Injection of any liquid, gas, or any other substance into the inlet or exhaust housing prohibited. Turbocharger compressor wheel must be constructed of cast or billet aluminum. Exotic material wheels prohibited. The tips of the impeller wheel may not be stepped, cut down, or notched to meet impeller tip-to-tip dimension. (.500-inch will define the tip of the impeller wheel).

Any competitor is subject to inspection and removal of compressor housing. If protested by another competitor, the protesting competitor is required to put up $100 which will be given up if the turbo is found to be legal. Anyone found to be illegal or unwilling to remove the compressor cover for inspection will be automatically dis-qualified and removed from the point series.

7. TRANSMISSION: Any GM automatic transmission w/ any torque converter allowed. No Lenco, Liberty or manual transmissions with or without clutch allowed.

8. FUEL: Gasoline fuel only, no additives, alcohol, or nitrous oxide injection allowed. No additional injection/spray of any sort in or on the motor, turbo, IC, drive train etc. NOS bottle(s) shall not be on vehicle during competition or qualifying.

9. Interior: Stock appearing dashboard and passenger seat required, door panels required, interior must be carpeted and as close to factory appearing as possible. Rear seat may be removed, but area shall be carpeted.

WEIGHTS:
3200# for any turbo up to an 82mm
3300# for a 83mm to an 88mm turbo
** All weights will have a five pound error factor for scale inconsistency

ADDITIONS:
-50# for any non-production block
-50# for any 4.1 block or aftermarket block
-50# for any non-conforming turbo location (turbo mounted forward the core support)
-100# for any turbine housing flange larger than a T4 on turbos larger than 82mm
-100# for a liquid IC


Points:

To enter the series you must fill out an application:

www.t6p.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17389

You can enter as a driver or a team. If you enter as a driver the points follow the driver if you enter as a team the points follow the car. If you are entered as a driver you can only compete in an event with the vehicle you qualified with.

Per Event:
• To Show Up 25 points (Must sign in and attempt one qualifying pass)You can enter as a driver or a team. If you enter as a driver the points follow the driver if you enter as a team the points follow the car. If you are entered as a driver you can only compete in an event with the vehicle you qualified with.
•To Qualify 50 points you make the field
•Round Loss 40 points (car must run down full 1/4 mile under its own Power)
•Round Win 50 points
•Final Round winner 25 point (In addition to the 50 points for Round Win)
•Top MPH 10 points
•Low E.T. 10 points
• #1 Qualifier 5 points

Season conclusion Bonus points:
• Top MPH 15 points
• Low E.T. 15 points
The winner is the person who accumulates the most points from three of the events. Points are awarded to the name on the application. In the event of a tie at the end of the season, then we look to qualifying ladder points #1 earns 16 points, #2 earns 15 points and so on. Tie breaker "Ladder" points will be a summation of points earned at the three TSO point series events.

[Otto J]

Turbine and compressor housings must carry a manufacturer part number that is readily available to the general public prior to Jan1 of the current race season

So this means that if any manufacturers release new wheel technology after this past tuesday,The turbo will be deemed illegal?

Just making sure I read this right.

Nice job with the rules.:rock:

[Turbobuick]

It applies to available turbine and compressor housings. That was in the rules last year also so it is nothing new. As long as a compressor wheel or turbine wheel fits the dimensions above and is in a housing that was available by the beginning of this year you won't have a problem.

[Ted A.]

So this means that if any manufacturers release new wheel technology after this past tuesday,The turbo will be deemed illegal?

Just making sure I read this right.

Nice job with the rules.:rock:


Are you planning on running with us next year? :thinking:

[Turbobuick]

I put changes in red. Of the four rules we voted on the Turbo, tire, and weight rules passed. The only rule that didn't pass was the fuel testing rule. Thanks for all the racer input.

[Otto J]

Are you planning on running with us next year? :thinking:
No,Why would I race with guys that take wins while....
Oh nevermind.
Ill just drive around in my slow ass stock block hybrid car and try
not to blow it up,Fat chance at that.

Sorry for the hijack Chris

[Baadgn]

2008 Race Rules

Compressor wheel to housing clearance must maintain a maximum of 0.080” clearance beginning from a) where the leading edge of the compressor wheel meets the inlet of the compressor housing to b) the transition point where the trailing edge of the compressor wheel meets the volute. All air entering the turbocharger must pass through the turbocharger inlet. Injection of any liquid, gas, or any other substance into the inlet or exhaust housing prohibited. Turbocharger compressor wheel must be constructed of cast or billet aluminum. Exotic material wheels prohibited. The tips of the impeller wheel may not be stepped, cut down, or notched to meet impeller tip-to-tip dimension. (.500-inch will define the tip of the impeller wheel).



Chris,

My Compressor wheel is not cast or billet aluminum it is a machined wheel made out of 4340 steel so not (exotic material) I assume this is ok, and also to clarifie its 3600 with a l/c intercooler

[Joe Lubrant]

Frame notching for tire clearance is allowed but the inner frame rail can not be modified or moved from its stock location.

Chris,

My car, as most know, has the back side of the inner frame rail re-enforced.

Stock front facing side of box frame rail was cut out to the inner face of back side.

Original back side of box frame rail is in stock location, but was re-enforced by stiffening the back side.

The original front facing piece that was cut/removed, was ground flat and re-attached to the front exposed stock location inner rail.

The car has always met all previous TSO rules regarding this matter.

Need your ruling, so we know if we are gong to be racing this season ?

[Joe Lubrant]

Chris,

My Compressor wheel is not cast or billet aluminum it is a machined wheel made out of 4340 steel so not (exotic material) I assume this is ok, and also to clarifie its 3600 with a l/c intercooler

Tony,

Turbocharger compressor wheel must be constructed of cast or billet aluminum. Exotic material wheels prohibited.

I believe rule is implies Cast or Billet Aluminum Only ?

4340 as we all know is not Aluminum.

As far as exotic, I believe rule implies materials like carbon fiber, titanium etc. etc.

I guess Chris will clarify

[EightSecV6]

Frame notching for tire clearance is allowed but the inner frame rail can not be modified or moved from its stock location.

Chris,

My car, as most know, has the back side of the inner frame rail re-enforced.

Stock front facing side of box frame rail was cut out to the inner face of back side.

Original back side of box frame rail is in stock location, but was re-enforced by stiffening the back side.

The original front facing piece that was cut/removed, was ground flat and re-attached to the front exposed stock location inner rail.

The car has always met all previous TSO rules regarding this matter.

Need your ruling, so we know if we are gong to be racing this season ?

I think that would be ok Joe, that is the way we just did Jeffs car, it's the only way to really get it low.

[Turbobuick]

Chris,

My Compressor wheel is not cast or billet aluminum it is a machined wheel made out of 4340 steel so not (exotic material) I assume this is ok, and also to clarifie its 3600 with a l/c intercooler

Are you sure the compressor wheel is going to be 4340 Steel and it isn't a billet turbine wheel made from 4340? I can't imagine a comp wheel being made from steel but I wouldn't have a problem with it. The intent of the rule would be more for light weight exotic materials and I wouldn't consider 4340 steel to be that. If you are with in the listed spec I wouldn't see a problem with a 4340 compressor wheel. The new billet turbine wheels will also be fine with a max exducer diameter of 93mm.

For weight:
3300 base wt for turbo larger than 82mm
50 for non production block
50 for aftermarket block
100 for larger than T4 flange?? (BTW this is going to also include the new V-band clamp from PTE)
100 Liquid IC
3600 Total for what I guess you are going to run

[Turbobuick]

Frame notching for tire clearance is allowed but the inner frame rail can not be modified or moved from its stock location.

Chris,

My car, as most know, has the back side of the inner frame rail re-enforced.

Stock front facing side of box frame rail was cut out to the inner face of back side.

Original back side of box frame rail is in stock location, but was re-enforced by stiffening the back side.

The original front facing piece that was cut/removed, was ground flat and re-attached to the front exposed stock location inner rail.

The car has always met all previous TSO rules regarding this matter.

Need your ruling, so we know if we are gong to be racing this season ?

Yes that is perfectly fine. I just don't want the inner rail moved from the stock location and yours isn't & I looked at it in Columbus last year. Any type of additional support, bracing etc is fine.

[Baadgn]

Are you sure the compressor wheel is going to be 4340 Steel and it isn't a billet turbine wheel made from 4340? I can't imagine a comp wheel being made from steel but I wouldn't have a problem with it. The intent of the rule would be more for light weight exotic materials and I wouldn't consider 4340 steel to be that. If you are with in the listed spec I wouldn't see a problem with a 4340 compressor wheel. The new billet turbine wheels will also be fine with a max exducer diameter of 93mm.

For weight:
3300 base wt for turbo larger than 82mm
50 for non production block
50 for aftermarket block
100 for larger than T4 flange?? (BTW this is going to also include the new V-band clamp from PTE)
100 Liquid IC
3600 Total for what I guess you are going to run

Chris,

Thanks for the clarification on the compressor wheel, the turbine wheel can 93 mm!! at the exducer(down pipe side) thats cool.

P.S sorry I never got back to ya on my wheel size but i talked to fiscus and based on his turbo mine is fine and now that you posted the sizes i am ok

[Baadgn]

Frame notching for tire clearance is allowed but the inner frame rail can not be modified or moved from its stock location.

Chris,

My car, as most know, has the back side of the inner frame rail re-enforced.

Stock front facing side of box frame rail was cut out to the inner face of back side.

Original back side of box frame rail is in stock location, but was re-enforced by stiffening the back side.

The original front facing piece that was cut/removed, was ground flat and re-attached to the front exposed stock location inner rail.

The car has always met all previous TSO rules regarding this matter.

Need your ruling, so we know if we are gong to be racing this season ?

Joe,

I made up a tool to measure from outside frame to outside frame in the backfor our cars what i did was took the inside dimension between frame rails of a stock frame added the frame thickness (.185 times 2) and that is the min distance that the outside dimension can be. Obviously if a frame was not notched the number would be bigger but if a frame was notched past the inner rail it would be smaller hope all this makes sense this was made up for a local race I run I keep this in my trailer so it will be avaliable if someone is unshure

[Joe Lubrant]

Joe,

I made up a tool to measure from outside frame to outside frame in the backfor our cars what i did was took the inside dimension between frame rails of a stock frame added the frame thickness (.185 times 2) and that is the min distance that the outside dimension can be. Obviously if a frame was not notched the number would be bigger but if a frame was notched past the inner rail it would be smaller hope all this makes sense this was made up for a local race I run I keep this in my trailer so it will be avaliable if someone is unshure
Tony,

Makes sense.

OK we're good to go.

[Joe Lubrant]

Tony,

For clarification is it .185 or 1.85 x 2 ?

Joe

[Baadgn]

Tony,

For clarification is it .185 or 1.85 x 2 ?

Joe

Joe,

the .185 is the thickness of the metal used on our frames give or take 10% for variance so yes it would be .185 for each side

[Joe Lubrant]

Joe,

the .185 is the thickness of the metal used on our frames give or take 10% for variance so yes it would be .185 for each side

Tony,

OK excuse me, so the dimensioning tool you made, will be measuring the outside to outside dimension of the frame rail ?

If so then any re-enforcement or boxing on the original backside is not an issue or relevant.

BTW...What is the dimensions you came up with?

Joe

[Buicksx2]

Chris,

Rules look good, looking forward to racing this year.

Thanks for your efforts.

[TurboDiverArt]

Chris,

My Compressor wheel is not cast or billet aluminum it is a machined wheel made out of 4340 steel so not (exotic material) I assume this is ok, and also to clarifie its 3600 with a l/c intercooler

Since the turbo needs to be readily available just list the manufacturer and part number and Chris should be able to determine if it's within the rules. I think the exotic material rule is for lighter materials like ceramic, etc.

Art.

[Baadgn]

Since the turbo needs to be readily available just list the manufacturer and part number and Chris should be able to determine if it's within the rules. I think the exotic material rule is for lighter materials like ceramic, etc.

Art.

Art,

Chris stated the sizes for the wheels so i am all set and he has stated that 4340 is not exotic so all is ok.

[Baadgn]

Tony,

OK excuse me, so the dimensioning tool you made, will be measuring the outside to outside dimension of the frame rail ?

If so then any re-enforcement or boxing on the original backside is not an issue or relevant.

BTW...What is the dimensions you came up with?

Joe

Thats right Joe it measures od to od my frame is reinforced on the inside also that would not be an issue.I will have to go in my trailer with a tape measure to measure the distance of the tool give me a day or so

[Joe Lubrant]

.............I will have to go in my trailer with a tape measure to measure the distance of the tool give me a day or so

Tony,

I was just curious.......no need to go thru the trouble. Nice that you have a tool available if needed.

Thanks,

Joe

[Joe Lubrant]

Chris.

All air entering the turbocharger must pass through the turbocharger inlet.



Does this infer No Ported Shroud Copressor Covers that allow added air in thru the separate machined outer ring section?

I am assuming all air entering the turbo, would be limited to the compressor cover inlet wheel inducer area allowed.

Clarification ?


Joe

[Turbobuick]

My understanding of a ported shroud is that it relieves pressure when the throttle closes and helps minimize compressor surge at part throttle and lower boost levels? I was under the impression that a ported shroud does not affect incoming air and that all the air going into the turbo will still have to pass through the inducer side of the compressor wheel? If this is the case then a ported shroud compressor cover shouldn't be a problem.

Am I correct in my thinking Joe? I wish we could've had this discussion in December?

[Joe Lubrant]

My understanding of a ported shroud is that it relieves pressure when the throttle closes and helps minimize compressor surge at part throttle and lower boost levels? I was under the impression that a ported shroud does not affect incoming air and that all the air going into the turbo will still have to pass through the inducer side of the compressor wheel? If this is the case then a ported shroud compressor cover shouldn't be a problem.

Am I correct in my thinking Joe? I wish we could've had this discussion in December?

Didn't know the topic was or wasn't discussed, due to not receiving any e-mails in Nov or Dec. as they were sent to old business addy that was cancelled last year.

Your understanding of releiving pressure quick-off throttle etc... is true, but the added air statement is also true.

Not sure as of today, but some sanctioning bodys do not allow this modification, and if it was done they made competitor plug or weld the openings closed.

Looking thru these additional openings, the compressor side of wheel in housing is evident.
These openings do allow additional air in, if they didn't there would be leakeage of air compressing & would be a detrimental to the cover effeciency.
This of course would mean less power.

Turbo charger air inlet is always considered thru the Compressor Cover Inlet (inducer size of the wheel + machining tolerence).

If not why not just use a 91mm or other wheel cutback .500 & get the extra air needed thru the ported shroud openings??

If someone wants to use a cut back wheel to meet rules fine, but I would strongly suggest no ported shroud as that would be a major advantage. A 4788 with P.S. in my opinion is also advantagous over non-P.S.

Just trying to keep a level playing field, your the one to make the rules & clarifications.... its your call.

[EightSecV6]

Didn't know the topic was or wasn't discussed, due to not receiving any e-mails in Nov or Dec. as they were sent to old business addy that was cancelled last year.

Your understanding of releiving pressure quick-off throttle etc... is true, but the added air statement is also true.

Not sure as of today, but some sanctioning bodys do not allow this modification, and if it was done they made competitor plug or weld the openings closed.

Looking thru these additional openings, the compressor side of wheel in housing is evident.
These openings do allow additional air in, if they didn't there would be leakeage of air compressing & would be a detrimental to the cover effeciency.
This of course would mean less power.

Turbo charger air inlet is always considered thru the Compressor Cover Inlet (inducer size of the wheel + machining tolerence).

If not why not just use a 91mm or other wheel cutback .500 & get the extra air needed thru the ported shroud openings??

If someone wants to use a cut back wheel to meet rules fine, but I would strongly suggest no ported shroud as that would be a major advantage. A 4788 with P.S. in my opinion is also advantagous over non-P.S.

Just trying to keep a level playing field, your the one to make the rules & clarifications.... its your call.

Just as a "friendly" reminder to all, the T5 47-88 uses a ported shroud, it was permitted last season but with a substantial weight penalty. Avon and Fiscus both ran that turbo and I presume they intend to run it this year (I know Avon does). I am confident with the penalty given to each, it leveled out the playing field. I think it may be a little late in the game to change this around now but that is just me, maybe next year????

[Joe Lubrant]

Just as a "friendly" reminder to all, the T5 47-88 uses a ported shroud, it was permitted last season but with a substantial weight penalty. Avon and Fiscus both ran that turbo and I presume they intend to run it this year (I know Avon does). I am confident with the penalty given to each, it leveled out the playing field. I think it may be a little late in the game to change this around now but that is just me, maybe next year????

Hmm......maybe I made a mistake. Didn't think they came standard with the P.S.

Thought that was an option or modification

In any event.... lots of words in the rules about compressor wheel size & other dimensions, & tolerances don't really mean squat now.

I remember when Harry put all the wording for a santioning body(that Chris is quoting in our rules), with PS Covers.



Now he could work his majic with larger wheels machined back to meet rule. He was laughing his A_S off that they open the Barn Door and no one would be the wiser. Later on they had to be plugged or welded closed !!

Well if anything I at least bought some light on the subject. :nixweiss:

If 4788 T5 PS is OK .....what about cut back .500 larger wheels with PS??????????????????????????

BTW...thought Avon was going to use the 4788 T4 and save 100# ????


Joe

[Otto J]

Is there gonna be standard removal of downpipes to check ex wheel size?

[Baadgn]

Now he could work his majic with larger wheels machined back to meet rule. He was laughing his A_S off that they open the Barn Door and no one would be the wiser. Later on they had to be plugged or welded closed !!

Well if anything I at least bought some light on the subject. :nixweiss:

If 4788 T5 PS is OK .....what about cut back .500 larger wheels with PS??????????????????????????

BTW...thought Avon was going to use the 4788 T4 and save 100# ????


Joe

Joe,

Now that the wheel sizes are in black and white its time to get creative :rock:. I also heard Avon dropped to a T4, You and Ted have made that turbo "work"

[EightSecV6]

I took this from Garrett's website in the tech section:

http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/tech_center/turbo_tech103.html

A Ported Shroud compressor (see Fig. 2) is a feature that is incorporated into the compressor housing. It functions to move the surge line further to the left (see Fig. 3) by allowing some airflow to exit the wheel through the port to keep surge from occurring. This provides additional useable range and allows a larger compressor to be used for higher flow requirements without risking running the compressor into a dangerous surge condition. The presence of the ported shroud usually has a minor negative impact on compressor efficiency.

There is a lot of interesting info on that site. I am no turbo expert by any stretch but it appears as if the ported shroud is an exit for airflow even under load???
It doesnt really make a big difference to me, we can make the same power with or without it. I am looking out for my customer as I am sure he wont be happy if I tell him he has to buy another turbo after running this one last year.
Avon is still going to run the T5, he has a 47-88 and a 47-76.

[Joe Lubrant]

I took this from Garrett's website in the tech section:

http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/tech_center/turbo_tech103.html

A Ported Shroud compressor (see Fig. 2) is a feature that is incorporated into the compressor housing. It functions to move the surge line further to the left (see Fig. 3) by allowing some airflow to exit the wheel through the port to keep surge from occurring. This provides additional useable range and allows a larger compressor to be used for higher flow requirements without risking running the compressor into a dangerous surge condition. The presence of the ported shroud usually has a minor negative impact on compressor efficiency.

There is a lot of interesting info on that site. I am no turbo expert by any stretch but it appears as if the ported shroud is an exit for airflow even under load???
It doesnt really make a big difference to me, we can make the same power with or without it. I am looking out for my customer as I am sure he wont be happy if I tell him he has to buy another turbo after running this one last year.
Avon is still going to run the T5, he has a 47-88 and a 47-76.


Bill,

I don't disagree with the statements above, but it relates specifically to the Surge Line to the Left on a Compressor Map. wheel speeds, engine air demands etc. etc. That is where the compressor efficiency has a Minor loss.

It does not have any negative effect on the upper air flows to the Right side of map (higher boost evels, speeds, air demands etc) If any thing it will add air at higher wheel speeds.


This provides additional useable range and allows a larger compressor to be used for higher flow requirements without risking running the compressor into a dangerous surge condition. The presence of the ported shroud usually has a minor negative impact on compressor efficiency.


The minor negative effect as I stated before & by garret only relates to the Surge line....not the Choke Line on a Compressor Map.

I'm also not a Turbo Expert, but have been around one for years, and hence not a novice.

If a very well known racing organization, based on rules as stated, had those additional air entries plugged or welded closed......what do you think the concensus was as to the positive effect it contributed?

The rules as written to me, means the air is to come in thru the compressor inlet,as it relates to the inducer wheel size & tolerance as specified. If its construed any other way for PS than the air entry area has been increased.

I don't think any turbo experts would deny the advantage of a PS as an enhancement of air flow, unless a rule had an impact on their wallet!!!

Joe

[Otto J]

So on this discussion
All air entering the turbocharger must pass through the turbocharger inlet.

Where does the actual "Turbocharger inlet" start.

Is it the leading edge of the where the wheel starts?
OR the leading edge of where a pipe would be connected?
Either one could be considered the turbocharger inlet right?
Example.You can put a 5 inch pipe onto your turbo that has a 5" INLET
But hey Im no expert either.

IMO for this arguement to go on the rule would need to state
"All air entereing the turbocharger must pass only through the compressor wheel opening"

[Joe Lubrant]

So on this discussion


Where does the actual "Turbocharger inlet" start.

Is it the leading edge of the where the wheel starts?
OR the leading edge of where a pipe would be connected?
Either one could be considered the turbocharger inlet right?
Example.You can put a 5 inch pipe onto your turbo that has a 5" INLET
But hey Im no expert either.

IMO for this arguement to go on the rule would need to state
"All air entereing the turbocharger must pass only through the compressor wheel opening"

Otto,

Just for clarification....I didn't think we were having an argument here??

I agree that rule as written is flawed. Why make all the statements about wheel sizes, tolerances etc. for air entry etc. if you don't intend for the air only to pass thru that area?

Joe

[EightSecV6]

Otto,

Just for clarification....I didn't think we were having an argument here??

I agree that rule as written and accepted is flawed. Why make all the statements about wheel sizes, tolerances etc. for air entry etc. if you don't intend for the air only to pass thru that area?

Joe

Joe,
I still personally think it is too late in the game for this type of discussion this year as to whether the PS or non PS is permitted or not. We will work with whatever is required but I suspect if the PS is not going to be allowed this season, there will be more than one competitor pissed off!
I really have not seen anyone run off with the class yet, a few guys were getting things straightened out at the end of the season. I think the weight penalty covering the T5 is more than enough to cover the PS on the turbo in question as evident by the ET and MPH Fiscus,Ted,Avon and yourself were running.

[Joe Lubrant]

Joe,
I still personally think it is too late in the game for this type of discussion this year as to whether the PS or non PS is permitted or not. We will work with whatever is required but I suspect if the PS is not going to be allowed this season, there will be more than one competitor pissed off!
I really have not seen anyone run off with the class yet, a few guys were getting things straightened out at the end of the season. I think the weight penalty covering the T5 is more than enough to cover the PS on the turbo in question as evident by the ET and MPH Fiscus,Ted,Avon and yourself were running.

Bill,

A number of years back I posted what a full Stage II TSO car would be capable of. As you also know I have always defended the smaller head configurations to try and keep things somewhat fair. I have always taken flack for that effort.

If I had not been relentless in that effort, there probably would not have been any penalty's imposed. Which as we all know now were definetly warranted.

I understand your thinking that no one has run away with the class.

However rules are formulated so the potential as much as possible is not there.

I personally don't think the weight deal is still totally fair, but that will be an issue for next year I guess....think the small head T4 set-up should get a 50# reduction.

Don't think my car can run an 8.30 @ 167+ that has been accomplished by a Full stage II???

Joe

[Otto J]

I should have used discussion not arguement.

Now this is a question that has been hashed out I believe.
But the horsepower potential of any of these motors properly built is still regulated by the Turbo,Am I correct here?
If so than the stage heads would only make it easier to get the max potential.
Using Teds car as an example,Would his car make more power with stage heads?

[Joe Lubrant]

I should have used discussion not arguement.

Now this is a question that has been hashed out I believe.
But the horsepower potential of any of these motors properly built is still regulated by the Turbo,Am I correct here?
If so than the stage heads would only make it easier to get the max potential.
Using Teds car as an example,Would his car make more power with stage heads?

There's alot more to it than just changing heads & keeping the T4. With the other components properly added......Answer is Yes.

Of course with Stage II Heads etc ,4788 T5 PS or non PS, Liquid Intercooler etc, that answer is obviously.....Yes

The questions you pose and details as to why would probably be better served in a separate post area. It would also be long winded.

[Turbobuick]

I looked into the ported shroud issue and I used the info Bill cited above as my source also.

On the compressor wheel we have an inducer and exducer dimension listed as max so a PS cover isn't going to make a difference IMO. Max is max? I don't believe it is worth much to begin with and since we've defined the limit on inducer and exducer size I really don't see it being that much of an "issue".

We bastadized the NMRA rule for the Drag radial class that requires a max turbo size of 88mm. That class does not have a max compressor exducer size listed so I can see something like this being a problem. I left that part of the rule in just to keep people using stock housing and to not try something "creative". It can be dropped or modified for next season if need be.

We are rolling for this year and I really don't plan to make any changes especially since the PS large housing 47/88 is already been in the class and for 3+ seasons in BG. What I would consider for 2009 is on the weight penalty for anything larger than a T4 flange adding and/or a ported shroud. SO in essence it wouldn't add any weight to those running it but would discourage those without one to upgrade. I still don't think it is necessary.

[Turbobuick]

Bill,

A number of years back I posted what a full Stage II TSO car would be capable of. As you also know I have always defended the smaller head configurations to try and keep things somewhat fair. I have always taken flack for that effort.

If I had not been relentless in that effort, there probably would not have been any penalty's imposed. Which as we all know now were definetly warranted.

I understand your thinking that no one has run away with the class.

However rules are formulated so the potential as much as possible is not there.

I personally don't think the weight deal is still totally fair, but that will be an issue for next year I guess....think the small head T4 set-up should get a 50# reduction.

Don't think my car can run an 8.30 @ 167+ that has been accomplished by a Full stage II???

Joe

Joe,
I agree but no one has done anything like this in competition. As a matter of fact the fastest cars in competition last year were production style head cars and the point series record is held by a production head T4 turbo car. I agree that someday it will be an issue I do have plans to deal with it.

[Turbobuick]

I should have used discussion not arguement.

Now this is a question that has been hashed out I believe.
But the horsepower potential of any of these motors properly built is still regulated by the Turbo,Am I correct here?
If so than the stage heads would only make it easier to get the max potential.
Using Teds car as an example,Would his car make more power with stage heads?

This is the Point Series discussion no arguing here:icon16: I would rather deal with this stuff now in January anyway:tantrum2:

The problem with S2 heads is they are more efficient especially at higher rpm than stock style heads. The larger a turbo becomes in size or potential the harder it will be for the production head cars to keep up due to mechanical limitations. For example, a S2 head might be able to move 140 #/min of air at 7500 rpm while a production style head might need 9000 rpm at the same pressure ratio to move the same amount of air. If you increase the pressure ratio on the production head motor to lower the engine rpm you will lose efficiency in the compressor map and that turbo may only be able to move 130 #/min of air at the higher pressure ratios.

So you can see how a "better" air pump can maximize the turbo more efficiently and at a lower engine rpm and how a stock style head with a larger turbo may never be able to get all the airflow from a give turbo. Also, why a class like TSM would never be any faster with a S2 head than it already is.

If we can keep the turbo in check heads shouldn't matter. If the turbo gets any bigger it will be a problem, hence the new turbo rule for this year. With the original turbo rule I always felt the 4788 was capable of 165mph at 3500 and we maybe seeing that next year. What surprises me is that the production head cars are right there still so it will be interesting to see where it goes.

And Joe, I certainly think your car is capable of 8.30's.

[Joe Lubrant]

This is the Point Series discussion no arguing here:icon16: I would rather deal with this stuff now in January anyway:tantrum2:

The problem with S2 heads is they are more efficient especially at higher rpm than stock style heads. The larger a turbo becomes in size or potential the harder it will be for the production head cars to keep up due to mechanical limitations. For example, a S2 head might be able to move 140 #/min of air at 7500 rpm while a production style head might need 9000 rpm at the same pressure ratio to move the same amount of air. If you increase the pressure ratio on the production head motor to lower the engine rpm you will lose efficiency in the compressor map and that turbo may only be able to move 130 #/min of air at the higher pressure ratios.

So you can see how a "better" air pump can maximize the turbo more efficiently and at a lower engine rpm and how a stock style head with a larger turbo may never be able to get all the airflow from a give turbo. Also, why a class like TSM would never be any faster with a S2 head than it already is.

If we can keep the turbo in check heads shouldn't matter. If the turbo gets any bigger it will be a problem, hence the new turbo rule for this year. With the original turbo rule I always felt the 4788 was capable of 165mph at 3500 and we maybe seeing that next year. What surprises me is that the production head cars are right there still so it will be interesting to see where it goes.

And Joe, I certainly think your car is capable of 8.30's.

Chris,

Appreciate your input.

If anything I wanted to point in the other posts the issues of fairness we were dealing with.

Although we have not raced or had as many passes with my car as others, our team effort was pretty succesfull. (Thanks to Dan, Diana, Daisy & Jim )

The smaller type heads are definetly performing well, but most of us are close to the edge. We also recognize the carnage of the smaler head designs at our current power level trying to stay with the big head boys.

I will stay with the small stuff, but if $$ were no issue for me, no doubt we would show up with the full blown Stage II stuff.

No doubt in my mind where the current advantage still lies. Guess I have to wait to see if another prediction comes to pass.

Didn't expect to see any changes, and we will do the best we can with what we got.

Thanks for thinking we can go 8.30's........Hope your right !

[Joe Lubrant]

Just for info for those that may still be confused on turbo wheel dimensions:

The 4788 turbo has an compressor wheel Inducer of 88mm per rule.

The Compressor Exducer of 4788 is 117.6 and is smaller than rule which allows 127mm

This of course would allow, as I stated before, a larger compressor wheel (91, 94 etc) to be custom machined to meet the 88 requirement at the true inlet.

It than would make up some or most of the air loss differance by using the openings of the Ported Shroud Cover.......Hence more power than the regular 4788mm !!!

Per the rules No Part # is required for the Compressor Wheel.

So its a free for all on custom or exotic wheel designs. .... Have Fun:rock:

[Otto J]

Don't think my car can run an 8.30 @ 167+ that has been accomplished by a Full stage II???

Joe
I dont see why not,It has been posted that Ted A. has run over 170MPH in testing.
Now unless he made a head change to stage II stuff,It has been done on a
T4 with small heads,So it we should see those numbers again this year.

[Joe Lubrant]

I dont see why not,It has been posted that Ted A. has run over 170MPH in testing.
Now unless he made a head change to stage II stuff,It has been done on a
T4 with small heads,So it we should see those numbers again this year.


Never saw it posted by TED, or heard directly from him about that.

Please read my previous on topic post if you missed it, as we posted at the same time.

Thanks,

Joe

[Brad T]

Can we run 10.5 w's ? I was looking at a 29x10.5-15w Hoosier.Supposed to come in under the allowed 11.1" allowed. Has anyone tried the stiff sidewall? What are the pros and cons?

[Turbobuick]

Can we run 10.5 w's ? I was looking at a 29x10.5-15w Hoosier.Supposed to come in under the allowed 11.1" allowed. Has anyone tried the stiff sidewall? What are the pros and cons?

I would measure it first with a tape measure end of tread to end of tread. Sometimes advertised sizes vary.

I like the stiff sidewall and plan to try a set of MT's this year. Putting tubes in my Pheonix made a BIG difference and that will typically tighten up the sidewalls.

[Otto J]

Never saw it posted by TED, or heard directly from him about that.

Please read my previous on topic post if you missed it, as we posted at the same time.

Thanks,

Joe
Ive never heard it from Ted either,But it was posted that he went that fast,
And Ive never seen him deny it.
I would expect if it did not happen that he would clarify it on one of the boards.

As far as the previous post,That 127 may be a bit large then.
Does anyone know of any current production 88 turbo that has an exducer bigger than 117.6?

[Joe Lubrant]

As far as the previous post,That 127 may be a bit large then.
Does anyone know of any current production 88 turbo that has an exducer bigger than 117.6?


Not sure ?........ I guess Chris does because he put it in the rules:nixweiss:

Don't think anyone was running anything bigger in the past year or so, but maybe someone new to class wants to.

Might be the size on the Y2K ???

Joe

[Baadgn]

Can we run 10.5 w's ? I was looking at a 29x10.5-15w Hoosier.Supposed to come in under the allowed 11.1" allowed. Has anyone tried the stiff sidewall? What are the pros and cons?

I don't know about the hoosier 10.5w's but you can't run the M/T 10.5 w's its bigger than 11.1 I went 1.24s on the 28-10.5 stiffwall so i would say they work, also they are more stable at high speed in my car anyhow

[Baadgn]

Just for info for those that may still be confused on turbo wheel dimensions:

The 4788 turbo has an compressor wheel Inducer of 88mm per rule.

The Compressor Exducer of 4788 is 117.6 and is smaller than rule which allows 127mm

This of course would allow, as I stated before, a larger compressor wheel (91, 94 etc) to be custom machined to meet the 88 requirement at the true inlet.

It than would make up some or most of the air loss differance by using the openings of the Ported Shroud Cover.......Hence more power than the regular 4788mm !!!

Per the rules No Part # is required for the Compressor Wheel.

So its a free for all on custom or exotic wheel designs. .... Have Fun:rock:

Joe,

I belive the 127mm exducer rule does come from the Y2K turbo and that turbo makes less power than the 47/88 but we all know the difference is in the exhaust wheel.

[Joe Lubrant]

Joe,

I belive the 127mm exducer rule does come from the Y2K turbo and that turbo makes less power than the 47/88 but we all know the difference is in the exhaust wheel.


Yep....... thought that was where it might have come from.

With that said and PS allowance, the turbo rule could have been 1 or 2 sentences.

No need for alot of the other stated restrictions, because now anyone can do just about anything they want,....... or should I say do stuff not available to everyone.

Combining 2 different dimensions from 2 different type turbo"s should have been avoided in any case.

If anything specific type of turbo's, brands etc. available to everyone would have been a better approach since dates, & part #were imposed ?.

Joe

[Buicksx2]

Speaking of exhaust wheels, my exhaust wheel has a number of fin ends chipped off, can I just get a new exhaust side of the wheel or am I looking at a whole new wheel?

Thanks

[Otto J]

Speaking of exhaust wheels, my exhaust wheel has a number of fin ends chipped off, can I just get a new exhaust side of the wheel or am I looking at a whole new wheel?

Thanks
You can buy just the ex wheel if pte will sell it to you,The wheel and shaft are one peice,the compr wheel is seperate.

[Buicksx2]

You can buy just the ex wheel if pte will sell it to you,The wheel and shaft are one peice,the compr wheel is seperate.

>>> Thanks...........any idea what I am looking at price wise? Never bought just an exhaust wheel.

[Otto J]

>>> Thanks...........any idea what I am looking at price wise? Never bought just an exhaust wheel.
No idea,Having Billy call them would be your best bet.
Maybe there is an upgraded wheel you can put in since its apart:rock:

[Turbobuick]

Joe,

I belive the 127mm exducer rule does come from the Y2K turbo and that turbo makes less power than the 47/88 but we all know the difference is in the exhaust wheel.

Correct, I should also mention the Y2K has three different turbine wheel choices a 101mm, 89mm, and 84mm. The 101mm turbine wheel is not legal.

[Turbobuick]

Yep....... thought that was where it might have come from.

With that said and PS allowance, the turbo rule could have been 1 or 2 sentences.

No need for alot of the other stated restrictions, because now anyone can do just about anything they want,....... or should I say do stuff not available to everyone.

Combining 2 different dimensions from 2 different type turbo"s should have been avoided in any case.

If anything specific type of turbo's, brands etc. available to everyone would have been a better approach since dates, & part #were imposed ?.

Joe

It's not that simple. If we go that route then we should just make it a spec turbo class. I spent a lot of time researching how to come up with a rule that fits the turbos we have in the class now and it wasn't easy. I spent countless hours reading, calling manufacturers, measuring the turbos I have available, comparing specs, and looking at what other sanctioning bodies are doing and this is what I came up with and I presented to all of the racers for discussion.

You still have to run commercially available housings, no thumper housings are allowed and you have to run wheels that fall within these specs. What wasn't covered? Do you really think a 4788 with a PS and a 127mm exducer is going to make that much difference over a standard one or even the T4 style one? I don't and IMO the turbo would be a pig to spool and no real advantage.

We'll see how this year goes. You can always write a "new" turbo rule and submit it for 2009.