The new World Challenge 2004 regulations allow many changes to the ITR motor that were not allowed at the beginning of the 2003 season. The rules are contained in the VTS sheet http://www.speedvisionwc.com/c...A.pdf and in the Appendix A http://www.speedvisionwc.com/c...A.pdf from Feb 2004.

The engine specs from combining both documents are as follows:

Displacement : 1842 cc (stock is 1797 cc)
Stroke: 87.2 mm (stock ITR) which gives an 82 mm bore
Compression: 12.0:1 (2003 spec was 11.0:1 and stock US ITR is 10.6:1)
Cylinder Head Combustion chamber: 45.5 cc min.
Pistons: free (but getting up to 12:1 will require a large piston dome of 11.6 cc vs stock ITR value of 3.6 cc)
Head: stock with port matching to manifolds for a max of 25 mm into head or manifold.
(No mention of blending in seat a max of 0.75" from seat as in 2003)

And some surprising parts:

Cams: Skunk2 305.05.0150 which is Stage III (2003 was stock ITR cams)
Intake Manifold: Skunk2 307.05.0270 which is Skunk's GSR manifold!!
Rev limit: 9000 RPM

So what do people know about such an engine? Will it make the ITR more competitive than last year?

 

I don't know what kind of numbers that engine configuration would yield but I think it goes without saying that it will make the ITR more competitive in WC next season. The thing is though, that the bar will be significantly raised across the board by the BMW 325, Mazda 6, Mazda Protege, and Acura RSX teams. And of course there are some wildcards out there too.

The thing with the ITR engine spec change is that it will allow some lower budget teams to get into the thick of things. How long they'll be able to hang is a different story.

 

I would suggest that series organizers have a specific policy mission that is being addressed here: Encourage potential entrants of older cars to come play (for large fields) without stacking the deck so that the new models aren't on top. This is common practice in "pro" series in which a core of fulltime entrants travel the country and local people fill up the field.

You do NOT want to be in the ITR that makes it onto the front row someplace. There are several possible outcomes and none of them are particularly positive.

K

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knestis &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I would suggest that series organizers have a specific policy mission that is being addressed here: Encourage potential entrants of older cars to come play (for large fields) without stacking the deck so that the new models aren't on top. This is common practice in "pro" series in which a core of fulltime entrants travel the country and local people fill up the field.

You do NOT want to be in the ITR that makes it onto the front row someplace. There are several possible outcomes and none of them are particularly positive.

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

Outcomes? Like:

1. Next competition adjustment makes the ITR obsolete again
2. Get punted by bigger $ teams
3. ???
4. PROFIT!!!
5a. Become a hero on the ITR forum for beating the DC5
5b. Be hailed as Roger Foo part 2

What outcomes do you speak of for the relatively unlearned students of motorsport ruling juntas?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by descartesfool &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">:
Compression: 12.0:1 (2003 spec was 11.0:1 and stock US ITR is 10.6:1)
Pistons: free
Cams: Skunk2 305.05.0150 which is Stage III</TD></TR></TABLE>




Those little bits should liven the motor up quite a bit.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JMU R1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What outcomes do you speak of for the relatively unlearned students of motorsport ruling juntas?</TD></TR></TABLE>

have your car taken apart for you under protest..?

that's the worst thing I can think of..

 

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




Those little bits should liven the motor up quite a bit.</TD></TR></TABLE>

But what about the Skunk2 GSR intake manifold. I never heard of that being used on an ITR. Did the VTS sheet get the number wrong or is there some secret weapon here?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by descartesfool &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">But what about the Skunk2 GSR intake manifold. </TD></TR></TABLE>I am pretty sure it will not bolt up to the ITR head w/o some modificaion.

The gains over the ITR manifold are a lot less than over the GSR manifold (if any).

 

No, it won't bolt up.

Could they be in-effect requiring the use of a GSR head? I suppose it would give them an additional compression bump.

 

I wonder if this could have some negative side effects. What if a top team gets in an ITR and starts destroying the RSXs and other late model cars? It would be like Toyota Atlantics back in the late 90s when they were trying to phase in the Swift .008s but the Ralt RT-41s were still faster.

 

some people say that is the case, actually.. that if realtime's ITRs weren't carrying so much penalty weight, things would be different for the RSXs..

 

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

have your car taken apart for you under protest..?

that's the worst thing I can think of..</TD></TR></TABLE>

REWARDS weight.

 

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

REWARDS weight. </TD></TR></TABLE>

sorry.. i still have such a hard time saying that's a reward..