Ok, this came up on NASAForums in the H1 forum, and apparently someone deleted my post. To me, that says this is a 'sensitive' subject.

I disagree with any rule that disallows remote canisters, for the below reasons... which I lifted directly from my post on NASAForums. There are several series and sanctioning bodies, including NASA and the SCCA that are clinging to this rule because of the 'percieved' cost savings. Let's take a real look.

1. Whether or not a shock has a remote canister has nothing to do with whether or not it has adjustable nitrogen pressure. I'm quite surprised that nitrogen pressure was described as a reason for disallowing canister shocks, as Koni 28-series shocks have adjustable nitrogen pressure as well, yet are completely legal for HC.

2. Whether or not a shock has a remote canister has nothing to do with it's price. A set of alloy-bodied Koni 28-series, double adjustable dampers are over $6000 per set, depending upon what brackets are necessary. They are perfectly legal for ANY HC class, right down to H5. It's a loophole in the rules that many are unaware of. It unfairly disallows ALMOST ALL comparable shocks to the Koni-28's, while doing nothing to control costs.

3. It's a flawed rule... it's flawed in HC and USTCC, it's flawed in SCCA IT and Touring. I don't have the answer on how to keep shock costs down, but most certainly the current rule does nothing. In stock-class Solo2 racing, this debate raged a couple years ago, and it was decided that it's impossible to write a rule to keep shock costs down, so they allow any shock absorber. The concensus is that any person with money can afford the big dollar shocks, but very few can properly tune them - they are not the magic bullet that most would like to believe, and allowing remote canister shocks in NASA racing will only open the fields up to more competitors and more potential sponsors.

4. Especially in H1, where $50k cars can be built in without batting an eyelash, and people spend more than $6k in dynotime, and where you can run a $150k-plus racing NSX - it's silly to not allow remote canister shocks. In my opinion, advanced shocks FIT the class, as it's the pinnacle of Honda sedan racing. I feel they should be allowed in H1 and probably H2, and then the rule should be rewritten in H3-5 to keep people from running the Koni 28's. If nothing is done to control the high-dollar Konis, then remote canister should be allowed in all classes.


Discuss...

 

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

Why? If you have an S2000 you want to run in HC, talk with the NASA powers that be. H-T.com banter will do nothing.

My opinion is remote reservoir shocks do not belong in club level racing. HC is a club level series.

The S2000 is a limited prep H1 car, not a hybrid. The car follows the H2-H5 prep rules.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My opinion is remote reservoir shocks do not belong in club level racing. HC is a club level series.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Did you even read what I wrote? What do you feel about the non-canister shocks that have the same amount of adjustments, inlcudin nitrogen pressure, cost just as much yet are legal? Are they OK SIMPLY because they have no canister hanging off them? I don't understand your logic here.

Banter is also known as discussion, and public debate.... and it's a good thing.

I have submitted my official requests to HC officials in the past, as well as discussed with them in person and I will continue to do so in the future.

It's an open forum, and I'm interested in hearing what others think.

So, discuss...

 

I'd rather move to disallow the Koni-28's than open up the rules completely to any shocks.

You make some good points about other points of possible cost inflation, a major one being the NSX. I have no doubt that this car would need to be slowed down if any decent driver showed up with a decently prepared example.

At any rate, I don't think the answer is to open the rules up even more. It may not be a perfect rule (it can be improved) but doing away with it completely is the short road to hell. Kind of like the aftermarket rods thing.

 

Jason,

All of your points are good ones.

So what though?

Do you watch the news? Don't you see that the whole world works like this?

Get a grip or this stuff is gonna drive you outta your mind - and let me assure you that that's no way to go thru life.

Scott, who giggles at the whole idea of cost containment...it's hilarious...subduing human nature is one of the most hilarious things humans try to do...."Why, if I had that much self control I'd be driving an ITC car!"

 

Are you writing this because you have motons already and want to change the rules to follow your car's setup?

 

The thread in question was brought up by someone who asked if it was ok to run remote reservoir shocks.......

I think I opened a can of worms when I asked "What if someone showed up with OEM Shocks on an S2000 then? Would they be protested? They are remote reservoir in the rear."

Even though there is no adjustment, and are there for additional oil capacity, as the rules are currently written they would be illegal.

Now, if you allow those then that opens the door to things like this:

http://tein.com/rsdamp.html



Again - no pressure adjustments, just additional capacity.

Where is the line drawn?

 

This is just an aside, but while playing with gas pressure is somewhat useful in saving time in testing sometimes, generally you want it at the minimum required to prevent cavitation since more than that increases seal friction.

Scott, who is evaluating titanium flexures for the suspension pivots on his $250K club racing ITR..."There is no substitute for Victory!"

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It may not be a perfect rule (it can be improved) but doing away with it completely is the short road to hell.</TD></TR></TABLE>

It hasn't been the short road to hell in SCCA Solo2 competition. People win on anything from Motons to Koni-28's to Koni Yellows to Tockicos. It's all in how you tune them, and when you consider testing costs that can far outweigh the cost of any shock.

Scott, I don't let it drive me out of my mind... that's why I race a Spec Miata.

Pollo, I am starting this thread to open the debate... I've written my official letter, and that was way earlier this year, and that was because I have Motons on my S2000 and am considering running it in H1. Nothing wrong with a little personal motivation to start a discussion about a rule I feel is unfair across the board, in every series that has adopted it. No offense to CRXLee, but Koni has a stranglehold on several series simply because they don't do canisters. That doesn't mean then don't do advanced racing shocks, and because of that if forces serious competitors to buy Koni 28's to comply with a rule that ostensibly holds costs down. This in turn shuts out many manufacturers who would be more than happy to support these series both technically and with sponsorship dollars.

 

Jason,
I have mentioned this before and basically everyone seems to be afraid to let in remote resivour shocks.
However Alex Ratcliff did run some Motouns and his H3, bumbed to h2, GSR, when he rebuilt the car as ITS/H3 legal he had custom valved shocks and had the vlaved as close as he could to the motons, the car was slower with those shocks.

 

Alex also went down in spring rate and said it was easier to drive.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jason Saini &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> No offense to CRXLee, but Koni has a stranglehold on several series simply because they don't do canisters. That doesn't mean then don't do advanced racing shocks, and because of that if forces serious competitors to buy Koni 28's to comply with a rule that ostensibly holds costs down. This in turn shuts out many manufacturers who would be more than happy to support these series both technically and with sponsorship dollars.

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

Koni has a stranglehold pretty much only in IT because the rules do not allow threaded body shocks. This will change in 05 though. HC doesn't have this rule and you will find a lot of people running JIC, Tein, etc. Koni makes good shocks at a good price that are serviced by lots of race shops, this is also why they are very popular in club level racing.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jason Saini &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Are they OK SIMPLY because they have no canister hanging off them? I don't understand your logic here.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I would tend to agree with you Jason. I would *think* it was an attmept to hold costs down that didn't succeed (you can still spend a small fortune on shocks for an IT car). As I understand, there is very little you cannot do to both types of shocks - is it more expensive when it all has to exist in the same container? I don't know.

It would be interesting to see on various levels how much a 5k shock package affords a competetive advantage over a 2k set of shocks in club racing. I wouldn't be surprised if it became more of an important factor as the car's cost (i.e. power and weight and less tire allowed to use) increase. Might make almost no difference in say an ITB/H5 car, might mean the world in a USTCC/H1 car - might be somewhere in the middle for something like ITS. just supposition, I am not saying this in fact would be the case - guessin'/askin'/wonderin'

As an aside: Doesn't Bilstein have a cornered market on Spec Miata? Seems like a lot of folks run Tokicos in small bore IT as well (with good success) and a set of Carerras did a yeoman's (sp) job in ITA last year (in the SouthEast).

 

It's not only that the nitrogen pressure can be adjusted, but these remote reservoir dampers (Moton, JRZ, Ohlin, ect.) can have triple or quadruple adjustable damping capability. While I don't think 98% of Honda Challenge drivers can utilize a damper of that sophisication since it takes not only the knowledge of how to use a damper to correct handling issues, but also you need to be able to service the damper internally (or send it out a number of times) to tune the damping properly. That said, a good double adjustable damper in the right hands can be tuned to do just about anything a driver would need. Actually, a good personal friend of mine owns so many track records with an old set of five-way single adjustable Tokico Rally shocks that it goes to show that dampers don't have to be incredibly complex to do the job.

On the other hand, a remote reservoir damper generally holds more than 50% more oil than single body dampers. In addition, the remote reservoir dampers have more surface area. These two features serve to reduce oil temperature and therefore, keep damping more consistent over a longer period.

As far as the rule banning remote reservoir dampers is concerned, I would not mind if any damper was allowed.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jason Saini &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It hasn't been the short road to hell in SCCA Solo2 competition. People win on anything from Motons to Koni-28's to Koni Yellows to Tockicos. It's all in how you tune them, and when you consider testing costs that can far outweigh the cost of any shock.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Its called cost creep. Its never one big thing that blows costs out of control but a steady march of rules changes that eventually inflates things out of proportion. First its carbon fibre. Then its aftermarket rods. Then its free ground effects. Then its free shocks. Then its free pistons. Then its forced induction...

If the Koni-28's are a problem then let us address the problem.

Really what we are talking about is a performance advantage. The RR shocks provide this advantage at about 2 to 3 times the cost and that's why they are outlawed. Said Konis also provide this advantage at 2 to 3 times the cost. Should we do away the rule altogether or should we address one anomaly in an overall theme?

You are correct in that the tuning makes the difference. If that is the case why don't you just use single-bodied shocks? The reason is that you would like to exploit a greater advantage. Nothing is wrong with that except that it would cost everyone else more money to compete.

 

Maybe just allowing them in H1 is the way to go.

 

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JMU R1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Its called cost creep. Its never one big thing that blows costs out of control but a steady march of rules changes that eventually inflates things out of proportion. First its carbon fibre. Then its aftermarket rods. Then its free ground effects. Then its free shocks. Then its free pistons. Then its forced induction...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Every1 read this three times out loud.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JMU R1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Its called cost creep. Its never one big thing that blows costs out of control but a steady march of rules changes that eventually inflates things out of proportion. First its carbon fibre. Then its aftermarket rods. Then its free ground effects. Then its free shocks. Then its free pistons. Then its forced induction...

If the Koni-28's are a problem then let us address the problem.

Really what we are talking about is a performance advantage. The RR shocks provide this advantage at about 2 to 3 times the cost and that's why they are outlawed. Said Konis also provide this advantage at 2 to 3 times the cost. Should we do away the rule altogether or should we address one anomaly in an overall theme?

You are correct in that the tuning makes the difference. If that is the case why don't you just use single-bodied shocks? The reason is that you would like to exploit a greater advantage. Nothing is wrong with that except that it would cost everyone else more money to compete.</TD></TR></TABLE>




I also don't like self-serving discussions that are disguised as "better for the series" posts...Not that I think this one was done in a sneaky manner, but it rubs me the wrong way. Say it the way it is.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JMU R1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Its called cost creep. Its never one big thing that blows costs out of control but a steady march of rules changes that eventually inflates things out of proportion. First its carbon fibre. Then its aftermarket rods. Then its free ground effects. Then its free shocks. Then its free pistons. Then its forced induction...

If the Koni-28's are a problem then let us address the problem.

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

None of the rules that you mentioned in your "cost creep" have been changed. Sure, they been debated or clarified, but not changed. Rules are made so that everyone has the recipe of parts or designs that are allowed so that each racer can build up to and including those specs. Debating rules is healthy since it gives the rulesmakers some feedback they can use to clarify, update, or possibly even change the rules based on this healthy feedback.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Johnny Mac &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
None of the rules that you mentioned in your "cost creep" have been changed. .</TD></TR></TABLE>

Carbon fiber has been allowed in H1...that was a change.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If the Koni-28's are a problem then let us address the problem.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Go back up and re-read my #4 bullet item... I agree that the Koni 28's (again, not sure how you would word it, other than maybe disallowing anything that has adjustable nitrogen pressure) should be limited in other classes beside H1. Being the pinnacle, H1 should be allowed to run canisters.

Again, they are not the magic bullet that people tend to think they are... if so, why would Koni be resisting even designing one for so many years? They firmly believe it's not necessary, and while I don't tend to agree with them they certainly have been able to come up with some kick-*** shocks.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jason Saini &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> In my opinion, advanced shocks FIT the class, as it's the pinnacle of Honda sedan racing</TD></TR></TABLE>

This is just silly, btw, Honda Challenge is club-level racing...not a pinnacle of anything...no apogee...nothing.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Johnny Mac &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">None of the rules that you mentioned in your "cost creep" have been changed. Sure, they been debated or clarified, but not changed. Rules are made so that everyone has the recipe of parts or designs that are allowed so that each racer can build up to and including those specs. Debating rules is healthy since it gives the rulesmakers some feedback they can use to clarify, update, or possibly even change the rules based on this healthy feedback.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Thankfully none of the aforementioned rules changes have been allowed but some of them have been bitterly debated and could have possibly gone through had cooler heads not prevailed.

Discussion is however healthy and I'm glad that this stuff can be out in the open for everyone to see different viewpoints on the issues. I am glad people who wish for change are up front and willing to discuss things in a mature manner

 

...and if you had unlimited $$$, you could use the current HC ruleset and still build a worldbeater car. It's just not very likely anyone will do it. Just like it's not very likely too many folk will show up with the Koni 28XX shocks. But if you open up remote reservoir shocks at 1/2 the price of the 28XXs, everyone will have to have them (or think so) to remain competitive. Racing just got way more expensive.