Nov Fastrack - Intake Rule Change

You may get as angry as you want at me and attempt to insult me by implying that I am somehow someone who wouldn't race within the rules or would seek an unfair advantage, but it is not my fault that your group did not write the rule to mean what you wanted it to. (Is this the same group that won't let me use a bronze distributor gear identical to OEM except it won't break in the middle of race?)

Step back and look at it from the view of the 90% of us who are outsiders to the process and discussions. I do not think I am at all one to seek the edge of rules at all - look at it without your inside knowledge and I think if you were to be reasonable instead of outraged I think you could see the potential for someone to reach the conclusion I have whether you like the result or not.

BTW - the MAF is the little black part on top attached by screws and the remainder is the MAF housing - the MAF will not be modified.

Since I bought this car, I have unmodified more things that I have been told would never have been found, protested or posed any risk of problems. You don't know me so take your drive me straight up bravado and smoke it. Then when you have calmed down - think about why you bothered to take the time to participate in assisting with rule making and don't attack and bite of the users head because the group failed to communicate the intent in their language.
 
(Is this the same group that won't let me use a bronze distributor gear identical to OEM except it won't break in the middle of race?)
Click to expand...

These wouldn't fail if you were running an unmodified oil pump. As soon as you shim the spring or try to run a High pressure pump you will start loosing drive gears.

I am still looking for the wording in the rule that says you can modify the housing that contains the MAF?
 
Ed,

I do appreciate how you clearly stated earlier the reason for this rule change.

However, I have to side with Darin on this. To me, it is pretty clear what this new rule is and its as clear as it needs to be. If competitiors want to force the issue thats exactly what they are doing. The A/F Meter is what you get when you buy one, the whole thing. I do disagree with the folks in topeka on things, especially as of late :( , but to manipulate the interpretation from the Air flow meter to the actual wire inside the meter is rediculous. Its pretty clear that no modifications may be done to the air flow meter itself. You can move it, you can rotate it, run big ass pipes to and away from it, as long as it remains stock and works as part of the FI as it is stock. I really do not understand what all the confusion is. It just makes the playing field a little more even for those of us that run cars that use Air Flow meters.

Derek Ketchie
 
That was solely my impression of the purpose of the rule change, but apparently based on information not available to me the purpose was something else and failed to reach the language. I have tried to read the language again and again in such a way to conclude that it prevents modification of the housing when it explicitly states that intake housings may be removed or substituted. All measurement is done by the sensor. The signal sent by the sensor is not impacted by the housing it is in, it will operate exactly as designed either way.

I am not sure how it made the playing field a little more even - aren't the existing classes, weights and line specifics based on the potential within the rules when the car was classed? If so, then someone is picking up an advantage freeing up their intake's air flow while others are not. If there was a true desire to bring commonality to potential than the most common aspect of a FI system is the throttle body and that is where the potential should be defined.

Were VW's unfairly classed prior to the rule change? Or were they already fairly classed? If they were already fairly classed then I guess the rule change as it was meant to be (and should have been worded) was meant to bring up their potential. If the rule doesn't alter anyone's potential then isn't it just rules creep?
 
Originally posted by turboICE@Nov 7 2005, 03:59 PM
Oil pump is bone stock.
[snapback]64814[/snapback]​
Click to expand...
funny never had a stock one fail in 6 seasons until we used a High pressure pump on a enduro engine.
 
Someone else has mentioned that the pump may have been sticking or providing some other out of spec resistance that caused the failures. I don't know, I am pretty new to these engines and have had two gears go on me already. I asked the prior owner and he said the pumps were not modified and I didn't see any difference from the replacement I bought for next year's car.

On to this topic:

On cars so equipped, the air metering/measuring device (i.e. air flow meter, air mass meter, MAF) including any related housing to which it is attached must be operational and shall not be modified.
Click to expand...

Include the italic phrase and I agree that it would coincide with the intent that has been communicated here. I know of cars where the sensor is available as a seperate part. And trust me those remanfactured Nissan units are just replacing the sensor after cleaning the housing and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the sensors being used are not the same part used in manufacturing in 1989 and I am sure I can track down that sensor.
 
Originally posted by turboICE@Nov 7 2005, 10:02 PM
You may get as angry as you want at me and attempt to insult me by implying that I am somehow someone who wouldn't race within the rules or would seek an unfair advantage, but it is not my fault that your group did not write the rule to mean what you wanted it to. (Is this the same group that won't let me use a bronze distributor gear identical to OEM except it won't break in the middle of race?)
Click to expand...

No insults were intended, and I'm not angry... I do tire of the twisting you guys want to do to otherwise clear language...

If you had known me prior to me being on the ITAC, you'll find that I've always read the rules the same way as I do now, so I CAN see what 90% of the others out there see... You are making a HUGE assumption by suggesting that there are that many people out there taking the same meanings from this that YOU do...

BTW - the MAF is the little black part on top attached by screws and the remainder is the MAF housing - the MAF will not be modified.
Click to expand...

This is a completely unqualified statement... BACK it up! I provided you with a link and a pic of EXACTLY what is considered a MAF by the automotive industry, as well as the layman on the street... I didn't search for an "MAF Housing", or "little black part on top", I searched on MAF and this is what comes up...

Upgrading the MAF is one of the first performance mods just about every tuner out there performs (well, maybe a close second after the 5" tailpipe...) and it always includes replacing what is shown at that link... If you go to ANY parts outlet, the dealer, where-ever, and order a MAF, you are NOT going to get the "little back part on top"... THAT would be a special order item, as it is only one part of the MAF...

I don't smoke, so I'll disregard that comment... As for this topic, you can just take your chances... I've presented you with my case. The wording is clear and concise and says what it means... As I said before, if you guys need clearer definitions of what these components are, we can arrange to have that language added... If it would help, then I'm all for it... We aren't writing this stuff to try to confuse anyone. Our intentions are to make things as clear and easy to read as possible... However, it's clear that some require more language than others, so we will work harder to remove the possibility of ambiguity in the future... (I feel that's what we've been doing to this point, but ...)

Finally, Bill is correct... The purpose of this rule change was to allow people to use air tubes in place of their stock air-tubes between the stock MAF and the throttle plates... Many cars, the 240SX included, have tubes that have production restrictions in them to accomodate installation, clearance, etc..... Many Hondas, etc., or any car that doesn't utilize an MAF, had the advantage of being able to replace everything ahead of the throttle plates...

The point was to smooth the airflow going from the MAF to the throttle plates... This in itself should be enough of a performance benefit for most... We tried to write language to restrict the location of the MAF to the factory location, but there was no way to verify in tech exactly where that was on many cars, so we decided it wasn't important to strictly restrict it, the wiring limits would take care of that to the degree necessary. The rest of the language was choosen so as to assure that the stock, unmodified MAF was retained, and was included in the system. The simple logic is that, in-order for it to be "unmodified", and "operational", as well as retained... It must have the air entering the motor passing through it...

So, from where I sit, I can rip your entire argument appart by showing you that the MAF is NOT just the "little black part on top", but rather the whole unit, as delivered on the car, and as sold in every parts store in the world...

All you have to do to prove me wrong is to show me that the MAF is really just the little black part...

Either way, we can get some more language in place to further define the intent, if that's necessary...
 
Darin,

How can you rail against someone for trying to get as much out of the rules as possible? That's really the nature of racing.

I don't really know anything about these cars, or even this technology (VW CIS is pretty much mechanical injection), but what do they call the sensor, if you just want to buy that? Or, can you buy it seperate from the housing?
 
Originally posted by turboICE@Nov 7 2005, 11:41 PM
Include the italic phrase and I agree that it would coincide with the intent that has been communicated here.
[snapback]64819[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

First of all... all ITCS language asside, I can ASSURE you of what the intent is... I think you can believe me when I tell you what the intent is... ;)

Second, if that phrase is all it takes, then I will make sure it gets included... However, how much are you willing to be me that someone is going to come up with a problem with THAT one too!

What we will be doing is telling everyone what is considered to be a MAF by SCCA standards...

If getting that line or a simliar phrase added makes this rule more clear, then this was a productive thread and I'll work to see that it gets done...


As for the oil pump... if anyone will have broken one, it's Joe, and he hasn't had any trouble in any of the 240SX's he's been associated with to my knowledge...
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller@Nov 7 2005, 11:55 PM
Darin,

How can you rail against someone for trying to get as much out of the rules as possible?  That's really the nature of racing.

I don't really know anything about these cars, or even this technology (VW CIS is pretty much mechanical injection), but what do they call the sensor, if you just want to buy that?  Or, can you buy it seperate from the housing?
[snapback]64823[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Bill... I understand where you guys are coming from, but at some point, people have to stop redefining things... When someone defines a rule using common terms, those terms shouldn't have to be defined EVERY time...

resistor vs. wire is the first that comes to mind... RESISTOR is a thing, AND a function... the rule clearly is written in terms of the THING...

A MAF is a thing as well... It may be composed of many pieces, but it doesn't function, or operate, as an MAF unless all the pieces are there... If you take the sensor out and put it in a different housing, you've created a new type of MAF, but you've altered the original one to do it...

I'll do some looking, but I've NEVER heard of an MAF, or air mass meter, or air metering device, defined as the little sensor in the housing... it's always been the whole deal...

I'm not alone in this... the entire ITAC was in on writing the rule, and most of them are smarter than I am...

What's next? When we add "and housing" or whatever to the rule, is THAT suddenly going to mean just the sensor cover, or is it finally going to mean the whole package?

If I'm wrong, so be it... I'd like to know the same thing... What IS just the "little black part" called? If you can order an "MAF" and that is all you get, then perhaps I'm wrong... However, I've already shown what happens when you attempt to order an MAF for this particular car...
 
Someone else has mentioned that the pump may have been sticking or providing some other out of spec resistance that caused the failures. I don't know, I am pretty new to these engines and have had two gears go on me already. I asked the prior owner and he said the pumps were not modified and I didn't see any difference from the replacement I bought for next year's car.
Click to expand...


Pull the bypass spring cap of the pump and see if there is a washer in there. Also look at the front of the thrust bearing on the crank because when those gears fail they will normally take the thrust bearing with them. aAIf the thrust is bad then a replacemant spindle will just fail again.

I have searched my nissan parts CD and I don't find that sensor as a seperate unit. I had to purchase a new for our T2 350 last season cause the housing was cracked and you could only get it complete. I agree that if possible defining the MAF and housing a unit would be good but I believe the wording is device which does cover the housing at that point. At least in west coast lingo.
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 8 2005, 12:10 AM
I agree that if possible defining the MAF and housing a  unit would be good but I believe the wording is device which does cover the housing at that point. At least in west coast lingo.
[snapback]64827[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


OK, I've done a quick search and I would have to conclude that this is a car-specific deal... In other words, the definition of what an MAF is may be tied to what car it came on...

Here is a sample of what you find if you search for Mass Airflow Sensor:
http://www.realtruck.com/products/gmsmassair.php

http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/tech/0402mm_focus/

http://corvettefever.com/tipstricks/153_04...nuction_repair/

http://www.gecdsb.on.ca/sub/projects/psl/n...plates/wind.htm

http://www.1motormart.com/mass_air_flow_sensor_part.html

http://www.fordscorpio.co.uk/cleanmaf.htm

http://www.kemparts.com/TechTalk/tt06.asp


However, I also came up with this one...:

http://www.visteon.com/products/automotive...ow_sensor.shtml


This last one, if you'll notice, has it's own small little opening to pass the air over the wire elements... It's function is seperate of the housing it's installed in...

So, I will see about getting the wording revised if the ITAC decides that's necessary, but it seems that, in industry terms anyhow, it's pretty clear what comprises a "stock, unmodified MAF"...
 
Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 7 2005, 07:49 PM
I do tire of the twisting you guys want to do to otherwise clear language...
Click to expand...
I have no desire to twist any language - I have been told to use that expensive paper weight (bronze gear) anyway. I found no place in the rules where I could and requested that it be allowed and was denied - so now I have an expensive paper weight. I will live with that (and complain since I see no reason not to permit it) but I am not putting it in the car, because I wouldn't twist the rules to say that I could and instead made the mistake of thinking the CRB would be reasonable about my request.

This is a completely unqualified statement... BACK it up! I provided you with a link and a pic of EXACTLY what is considered a MAF by the automotive industry, as well as the layman on the street... I didn't search for an "MAF Housing", or "little black part on top", I searched on MAF and this is what comes up...

Upgrading the MAF is one of the first performance mods just about every tuner out there performs (well, maybe a close second after the 5" tailpipe...) and it always includes replacing what is shown at that link... If you go to ANY parts outlet, the dealer, where-ever, and order a MAF, you are NOT going to get the "little back part on top"... THAT would be a special order item, as it is only one part of the MAF...
Click to expand...

As is this statement also unqualified (as well as that the KA24E would have ITS potential if not for the MAF housing on the SOHC) - the statement above is made as an absolute, while it isn't the case. Yes there are many examples where a nonOEM sensor is used with a fabricated housing. There are also examples in the tuning world where only the housing is replaced and the OEM sensor is in fact maintained - so it is not an absolute universal understanding of what makes up a MAF. Trust me - I have tuned cars where the MAF is understood to be the sensor and the modification requested by the customer is to replace the housing which has a mount for the OEM sensor and no request to replace the sensor and the resulting output can be easily twice OEM - there is not the universal understanding you claim. And there are examples where the sensor is available stand alone.

If the part by part availability is the standard that you want to apply you are going to have someone come up to you with the manufacturer's part number of their MAF sensor and say "there". But I assume based on your responses that it was not your intent even when the sensor was available seperately.

I don't smoke, so I'll disregard that comment...
Click to expand...
Had nothing to do with smoking, it was a phrase that I thought had universal meaning. ;)

As for this topic, you can just take your chances...  I've presented you with my case.  The wording is clear and concise and says what it means...  As I said before, if you guys need clearer definitions of what these components are, we can arrange to have that language added...  If it would help, then I'm all for it...  We aren't writing this stuff to try to confuse anyone.  Our intentions are to make things as clear and easy to read as possible...  However, it's clear that some require more language than others, so we will work harder to remove the possibility of ambiguity in the future... (I feel that's what we've been doing to this point, but ...)
Click to expand...
If I was the type that was going to do anything at all close to the edge I wouldn't bother discussing it here. Someone legitimately asked if it meant the housing could be replaced. I responded that I believed it pretty clearly did. There was nothing untoward or sinister or intended to twist the rules in my response - it was legitimately and remains truly believed that the language as it stands permits it. I don't believe it is as clear and concise as you believe or intended. I am sure that there was no desire to confuse and don't believe I am confused by the language as it is written. But there needs to be some acceptance that terms are not as univeral as some would like to claim in the rules.

I made a recommondation for a change in the wording that I believe would clearly and concisely capture the intent as you have communicated it.


Finally, Bill is correct... The purpose of this rule change was to allow people to use air tubes in place of their stock air-tubes between the stock MAF and the throttle plates...  Many cars, the 240SX included, have tubes that have production restrictions in them to accomodate installation, clearance, etc.....  Many Hondas, etc., or any car that doesn't utilize an MAF, had the advantage of being able to replace everything ahead of the throttle plates...
Click to expand...
But when I read it, it does not say what you have been saying on this board. MAF is not a universal term that means the same thing to everyone - there are a lot of different makes, models and generations and tuning techniques. Trust me there assuming that anything is universal between them is the first thing that will result in confusion.

The point was to smooth the airflow going from the MAF to the throttle plates...  This in itself should be enough of a performance benefit for most...  We tried to write language to restrict the location of the MAF to the factory location, but there was no way to verify in tech exactly where that was on many cars, so we decided it wasn't important to strictly restrict it, the wiring limits would take care of that to the degree necessary.  The rest of the language was choosen so as to assure that the stock, unmodified MAF was retained, and was included in the system.  The simple logic is that, in-order for it to be "unmodified", and "operational", as well as retained...  It must have the air entering the motor passing through it...
Click to expand...
It can pass through the sensor and result in the same exact signal when it is installed in a different housing - again the meaining is not universal. I think about it being done - because using the OEM MAF and changing the housing is a technique I have used in tuning and have been requested to do.

So, from where I sit, I can rip your entire argument appart by showing you that the MAF is NOT just the "little black part on top", but rather the whole unit, as delivered on the car, and as sold in every parts store in the world...

All you have to do to prove me wrong is to show me that the MAF is really just the little black part...

Either way, we can get some more language in place to further define the intent, if that's necessary...
Click to expand...
But again as so frequently happens within the SCCA the ability to rip my entire argument apart presumes everyone has the same miscopic experiences and understandings as everyone else. There is great diversity in the world of automobiles and performance much of it outside the SCCA's realm of appreciation. Your assumption that from where you sit defines everyone else's world is a large part of the criticism others place on the SCCA and why I am continually asked why I would want to bother. This subject has caused me to ask it as well - not because whether or not I am allowed to change MAF housings - but because the entire thing is based on the assumption that my own experiences and knowledge are irrelevant to the SCCA because they do not line up with their own assumptions.
 
My frustration comes from voicing with all honesty exactly what I took the language to mean from my own experiences and knowledge, without the knowledge of the basis for the conclusions reached in the rule language. The responses have alternately implied either that I am trying to get away with something or am just ignorant. Neither of which is the case, but either of which offends me deeply.

What good is an organization that would respond to a member's honest expression in such a manner all over the possibility that there may be more than one accepted definition of the term MAF?
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 7 2005, 08:10 PM
Pull the bypass spring cap of the pump and see if there is a washer in there. Also look at the front of the thrust bearing on the crank because when those gears fail they will normally take the thrust bearing with them. If the thrust is bad then a replacemant spindle will just fail again.
[snapback]64827[/snapback]​
Click to expand...
There was no washer and the spring "looks" (for as much as that is worth) the same. Thank you for the warning on the thrust bearing. Your input will be well used in the off season.
 
I did not ask the question to distort the rules, nor to push the envelope. I asked because, after looking through information on the internet, I was confused.

I initially thought the MAF included the housing, but then I found listings for the sensor separately, and I found references to removing "the MAF" and installing just the sensor into a different housing (i.e. Typhoon, but there are other examples). I also found tuner shops selling different housings that use the original sensor. All this left me totally confused. Maybe I'm not the brightest bulb when it comes to this type of thing, but after more than 20 years of racing, I am absolutely sure that if I'm confused, others will be too.....and some will make modifications based on how they read the rules, not the intent, unless this is stated. The COA, right or wrong, typically only takes wording into consideration, not unstated intent. Does all this matter in the final analysis - i.e. power to the wheels on the race track? I don't know, but suspect in most cars it wouldn't matter much. Reading most literature for my type of motor indicates the entire changed intake would make up to 3.7 horsepower. It doesn't seem to matter if the type os system includes the MAF and housing, or if it includes just moving the sensor. However I'm just looking at one type of motor. So while I very much doubt that just a different housing (including the air intake tube itself) would make more than 1 horsepower difference, I have no data to back this up, and no real incentive to do further research. So....if the ITAC thinks it makes a difference, or they do not want to worry about anyone else being confused by the current wording, I would respectfully suggest a change to include verbage stipulating the housing containing the sensor is considered part of the restricted assembly.
 
Originally posted by mowog@Nov 7 2005, 09:11 PM
The COA, right or wrong, typically only takes wording into consideration, not unstated intent.
[snapback]64835[/snapback]​
Click to expand...
I have no reason not to believe this to be the case, and if it is the case even when an ITAC member is protesting you, by having the discussion where it seems at least at some point in time no less than 3 posters in this thread could have appreciated the existence of confusion even while agreeing with the intent, then pushing the issue now will have been beneficial as the ITAC now has the opportunity to bring the language up to the intent. Because I believed (in all my ignorant bliss as to how decisions are reached in the SCCA) that the COA operating under the standard above would agree with me, however wrong that belief would be. I would rather know now that I was wrong via the clarification discussed and knowing that I wouldn't be racing against someone else that I could understand reaching the conclusion I had that doesn't participate in this forum.
 
PS, as to most manufacturers claims of added horsepower for after market intake systems, engine modelling programs very much disagree on the amount of gain (again, using just one motor as my example). I think the real gain, for most, is much more like about 2 horsepower, and most of that is in the lower to mid RPM range. Breaking down dyno and flow bench results on the Focus motor shows that over half the gain is from the type of filter used. Again this leads me to think changing things like the MAF housing nets very little, if any, true gain at the wheel, on the track, where it really matters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top