Knestis

We're on the same page I think, Ryan. I don't know what kind of documentation the ITAC will accept but a technical manual, bulletin, or something is necessary I think.

It strikes me that this all might be a case of the Type R mystique working against it - that it's not as magical as rulesmakers have come to believe. As much as some people poo-poo the possibility, I think it might have some bearing. Like VTEC. We laugh at ricers who think it makes power like a turbo but a lot of actual racer-types buy into the mythology at some level.

K

EDIT - I'm no Honda guru but it seems like the Type R would indeed be a competitive ITS car, at a reasonable weight - brakes being the main complaint of the GSR, right?

Catch 22

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knestis &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The problem is that evidence of any machining beyond typical flashing clean-up, more than 1" from the port, is going to be considered sufficient proof that illegal whittling has happened. EQUALLY, if it is understood that all Type R's are going to show evidence of machining, it becomes effectively impossible to determine that no ADDITIONAL machining has taken place. Neither option is palatable to the rules makers. I"m not saying it is right - that's just how it is, and it doesn't take a ton of imagination to understand why it could reasonably be a concern for people who have to apply the same rules to a lot of different cars.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yaaaayyyyy... At least one person gets it.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Scott, pull your head out of your *** </TD></TR></TABLE>

**** off RJ. Seriously.
This...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DonF &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Catch22,I did not watch the video. Makes sense, but ignoranceof the rules does not make you any smarter, the earlier one shows hand porting, this one machine porting. How can you make ANY kind of judgement when you are not smart enough to look at the Honda released vdios.
The obvious question is, if the bowl can be ported, who did it? The factory, or a head porter, now add in the 1 inch rule and I can have close to a RLZ, Portflow head.</TD></TR></TABLE>

is unintelligible nonsense.
I have no idea what he is saying, and if you do then maybe you need to spend a little less time on the interweb and read a few friggin books, Because I read daily, and I'm pretty damned smart, but I have no idea what that post says.
If you do, please try to translate it into something my apparently stupid *** can read and understand.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

and you cant go printing out a bunch of threads from an internet forum and submit them to the ITAC as evidence. They'll probably send it back to you with a note "i hope you printed these on 2-ply"</TD></TR></TABLE>

Same thing you'd likely get with a video, regardless of who is in it.
Thats just not the type of "document" they are looking for.
But I'm going to submit that video anyway. What the expletive, right?

Scott, who says "**** on it."

.RJ

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Catch 22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
This...


is unintelligible nonsense.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

I've read alot of DonF's posts on the rest of H-T in the past, and I think he's a pretty smart guy, especially with engines. Maybe you could ask for clarification rather than dismissing what he posted.

Catch 22

Or maybe you could quit assuming I'm dismissing what he posted?
I'm not.

I'll say it one more time...
The only thing in that post that makes sense in terms of this discussion is the part about the video showing the hand porting going to machine porting.
Yeah... GREAT!
But how many times do I have to say that the video is not "documentation?"

Dammit.

I have worked all night on parameters and cars for the "new" IT class that just might happen and just might have the ITR in it at under 2600lbs, and I'm fuggin tired of people spouting crap and calling it gold.

IF YOU CAN HELP... HELP GODAMMIT!
But please, don't keep telling me "Its right 'here,' in this video." Thats not help and I've already told you why.
I'm going to TRY to use the video and convince folks that this is workable, but it'd be a HELL of alot easier if someone, somebody, amongst all you Type R worshipping masses just had an official document. Just one thing. A Manual. A bulletin. A brochure...
This has got to be one of the most worshipped and documented cars that ever existed, and nobody can produce an official document that states the hand porting stopped in 1998? Nobody?

Scott, who doesn't understand what it is that most of you guys can't seem to understand.

.RJ

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Catch 22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Scott, who doesn't understand what it is that most of you guys can't seem to understand.</TD></TR></TABLE>

We get it - we all understand what the problem is, but I dont think anyone really cared enough in the past to obtain some sort official documentation about how the heads were modified, if at all.

I'll dig around the ITR forum archives and google tomorrow to see if I can dig anything up.

RJ - who had an ITR and thought it was a slow, torque-less, heavy, undersprung pos.

Track rat

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">whats the big deal at getting it classed? it would not be competitive, as shown by the classing of the GSR and b16a powered cars.</TD></TR></TABLE>

No, I think it would be a pretty solid ITS car, as demonstrated with AMB timed laps at Road Atlanta. My car is at 2,610lbs on K 710s and the only item not IT legal is an 8 lb flywheel and it goes 1:41.9... which would be a 10th place qualifying time at the 2005 ARRC. Put on a 12lb OEM flywheel, Hoosiers, tweak the car a little more, give the driver some nads and it's doing mid 1:40s which is good for 3rd place in 2005 ARRC qualifying. With the BMWs carrying more pork in 2006, it could be real solid depending on minimum weight.

It's all 'word salad' however, 'cause it'll never be classed in ITS due to the porting issue and 180+ whp. It looks like another BMW class dominator on paper, but its lack of torque would make it a dog at anything over 2,650 IMO.

Track rat

[QUOTE=Catch 22]
I have worked all night on parameters and cars for the "new" IT class that just might happen and just might have the ITR in it at under 2600lbs, and I'm fuggin tired of people spouting crap and calling it gold.[QUOTE]

Sweet! If you can get it in ITX at 2,600 I'm buying YOU a 12 pack of Coronas

[QUOTE=Catch 22]
This has got to be one of the most worshipped and documented cars that ever existed, and nobody can produce an official document that states the hand porting stopped in 1998? Nobody?[QUOTE]

Well, I'm looking right at my coveted 1998 and 2000 sales brochures and they both boast "hand polished intake ports".

Shrug?

tnord

are there any aftermarket heads being produced?

isn't the actual cast of the ITR head and GSR head the same? if that is the case it wouldn't have to be hand/machine ported, and it might be legal falling under the umbrella of

"Stock replacement parts may be obtained from sources other than the manufacturer provided they are the exact equivilent of the original parts"

now....it gets a bit sticky because it says it must meet all dimensional and material specifications. you could argue that an un-ported head (even though a performance DISadvantage) does not meet this requirement. i'm guessing this could be worked around though.


so....does anyone produce bare castings of a GSR/ITR head?

Track rat

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
RJ - who had an ITR and thought it was a slow, torque-less, heavy, undersprung pos.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Great. Now why don't you just say something bad about my mother .

Rat, who thinks RJ had a great car that was under driven .

slammed_93_hatch

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Track rat &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

No, I think it would be a pretty solid ITS car, as demonstrated with AMB timed laps at Road Atlanta. My car is at 2,610lbs on K 710s and the only item not IT legal is an 8 lb flywheel and it goes 1:41.9... which would be a 10th place qualifying time at the 2005 ARRC. Put on a 12lb OEM flywheel, Hoosiers, tweak the car a little more, give the driver some nads and it's doing mid 1:40s which is good for 3rd place in 2005 ARRC qualifying. With the BMWs carrying more pork in 2006, it could be real solid depending on minimum weight.

It's all 'word salad' however, 'cause it'll never be classed in ITS due to the porting issue and 180+ whp. It looks like another BMW class dominator on paper, but its lack of torque would make it a dog at anything over 2,650 IMO.</TD></TR></TABLE>

you just proved my point, it Could be a very good car, but Scott has said that the ITAC has a formula, and they are sticking to it. Looking at the GSR, and B16 civic's, you can only imagine what ungodly weight an ITR would come in at.

so again whats the point?


This doesn't seem like a "walk in the park" to get cars classified, so why work on cars that will be nothing more then test vehicals that destroy tires and brakes.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">isn't the actual cast of the ITR head and GSR head the same? if that is the case it wouldn't have to be hand/machine ported, and it might be legal falling under the umbrella of

"?</TD></TR></TABLE>

no they are different. The B16a heads, and B18c5 heads are from the same casting. If you search around im sure some one has posted flow charts of the heads.

Track rat

So, we take a b16a head, install the ITR cams, springs, intake valves, pimpy red valve cover, match the ports 1" in and you've got yourself an un-factory ported ITX legal ITR.

Hmmm. Scotty, you there?

tnord

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">


no they are different. The B16a heads, and B18c5 heads are from the same casting. If you search around im sure some one has posted flow charts of the heads.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

ok....so use those castings then. if they really are exactly the same minus the head porting....then it's an angle that might work. it's a long shot....but it might work.

Track rat

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
ok....so use those castings then. if they really are exactly the same minus the head porting....then it's an angle that might work. it's a long shot....but it might work.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The rules makers would have to take exception to the "no interchanging of assemblies...thus creating a new model" rule.

drewbie

isnt bone stock what COMES from the factory? Seems kinda wierd to me. just like a wrx...its turbo from the factory. so its stock. if you add a bigger turbo, then its not stock

i guess they are trying to say that the head is hand ported and can be further ported by the owner of the car??

wierd

88 rex

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 88 rex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Just out of curiosity, what if you had a pr3 head from a B16 that didn't have any machining done with ITR valve train. Would that be an acceptable alternative? Same thing minus the machining in question. Seems legit to me.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Dang you people. I asked this question on the last page.

George Knighton

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tnord &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
... not just a couple days ago many were surprised and strongly against any sort of tear down after a podium finish....</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's just a matter of grassroots maturity. The series is full of people for whom this is, was and will be their only racing experience.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knestis &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">EDIT - that was not intended to be a reply to RJ but this is: The problem is that evidence of any machining beyond typical flashing clean-up, more than 1" from the port, is going to be considered sufficient proof that illegal whittling has happened. EQUALLY, if it is understood that all Type R's are going to show evidence of machining, it becomes effectively impossible to determine that no ADDITIONAL machining has taken place.</TD></TR></TABLE>
And that's why it's being projected as a maddening waste of time. We can put together all the facts and figures, and we can get Torrance to put those facts on their letterhead, but it's still going to be a waste of time. In the early labour-intensive years of the B18C-B18C5's build, there were surprising differences between the motors and how individuals implemented the templates that Honda gave them.

Back then, there could be a 10 HP difference between two stock ITR put on the same dyno on the same day.

If half a dozen Honda-Tech ITR owners say that they want to race in ITS, then that's a different story. When I ask people who own ITR about this, however, the reaction I get is that people should race ITS with a car that's classed in ITS and stands a chance of winning an occasional race.

The ITR's heyday is gone. It was a charming proposition in those couple of borderline years when Realtime and Spoon were still dominating with them <u>and</u> they were affordable in Honda Challenge.

Now Honda has just gone on to other things. Realtime and Spoon are winning with their CL9 and CL7, and we're going to see these cars in Honda Challenge next year.

It just doesn't seem to matter to Honda or Honda-Tech that the ITR won't be classed in ITS, and that's just peachy.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 88 rex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Dang you people. I asked this question on the last page.</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's Honda-Tech. Everybody expresses, just a few read.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
so again whats the point?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Exactly.

Back in Black

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's just a matter of grassroots maturity.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Perhaps, but for me, it's more the fact that I just spent the last seven months of my life and an assload of capital putting what I believe to be one of the nicest H1 cars in the country together. I can't say that I'm happy about the policy of pulling the head just to cleanse other people of their paranoia and add credibility to the National HC Championship.

It might not be a big deal to some, but for somebody that actually chose their setup for the sole reason of being competitive while remaining stock and not having to open the motor, this isn't a good thing.

That said, I will and have always played by the rules. I'll do whatever is decided, but I won't be happy about it.

George Knighton

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Back in Black &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Perhaps, but for me, it's more the fact that I just spent the last five months of my life and an assload of capital....</TD></TR></TABLE>
And you still have 12 HP less than me!!

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">... I can't say that I'm happy about the policy of pulling the head just to cleanse other people of their paranoia and add credibility to the National HC Championship.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I know. When I referred to grassroots maturity I was referring to the SCCA acceptance of just having to spend sums of money that you do not have to spend in NASA.

As a series matures and as the racers "mature" maybe it'll be more expensive...I dunno. It seems to me that you guys carry a lot more weight in Honda Challenge and in NASA than you would carry in other organisations.

Back in Black

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And you still have 12 HP less than me!!</TD></TR></TABLE>

Not true. I have bronze paint. You only obtain that power adder when you're actually on the track.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">As a series matures and as the racers "mature" maybe it'll be more expensive...I dunno. It seems to me that you guys carry a lot more weight in Honda Challenge and in NASA than you would carry in other organisations.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Believe me, I definitely understand that. That's a big reason why I haven't went anywhere.

.RJ

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by drewbie &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i guess they are trying to say that the head is hand ported and can be further ported by the owner of the car??
</TD></TR></TABLE>

The problem is, that if the head is hand ported from the factory then there is no way to distinguish what was factory porting, and if the competitor had done any additional (illegal) porting. With a stock casting thats not factory-finished by hand, you can tell "hey this has been ported, its illegal" but if its already factory ported then there is no way to tell if the porting was factory, or if the competitor did additional port work.

Honda318dx

What is the difference between a hand port, and different tolarances between machines?

I have seen B18B cams, same year engine, completely stock with very measurable and even obvious by the naked eye, to have completely different profiles. Yet, they are made by a machine.

Knestis

The IT (and SS, Touring, etc.) rules implicitly accept the inevitable variation in manufacturing processes. But that's not the issue here. The question isn't whether a part is or isn't stock - it's whether anyone can enforce the rule requiring it to be (in this instance at least more than 1" from the port, that is).

K

Honda318dx

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knestis &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The IT (and SS, Touring, etc.) rules implicitly accept the inevitable variation in manufacturing processes. But that's not the issue here. The question isn't whether a part is or isn't stock - it's whether anyone can enforce the rule requiring it to be (in this instance at least more than 1" from the port, that is).

K</TD></TR></TABLE>

Understand, can they enforce the rule on various profiles of the cams? How can one prove its OEM, or is a custom grind that looks exactly the same as OEM but at the absolute furthest factory spec?

Just playing the Devil's Advocate role, and probably annoying the **** out of Scott.

.RJ

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Honda318dx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but at the absolute furthest factory spec? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Isnt that how you build a good IT engine?

Honda318dx

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Honda318dx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> custom grind that looks exactly the same as OEM but at the absolute furthest factory spec? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Why spend thousands trying to find that spec, when you can make it is what I was getting at. No one would ever know if it was OEM or not.