A solution.....

[Doc Austin]

i posted this on another thread, but I think it is worth considering. the racing has suffered a little because of the engine disparity. There has also been too much grumbling about the Gen IV, so this is my plan to stop all the engine nonsense cold....



The solution is pretty obvious.



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spending money on engine development = spending money on war.

Spending money on team and driver marketing = spending money on post-war reconstruction.

Let's start building instead of destroying.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



All utterly excellent points, so rather than argue them, I will expand on why I agree with them.

First, I see the only solution as a spec, sealed unit. Certify four or five outfits to rebuild the things to a certain spec and make them all as equal as possible.

Does that preclude manufacturer involvement? Not necessarily. You could have ther manufacturers pay a flat fee, agree to a promotional budget, and then they will have to bribe the teams to run their version of the badged engine. Instead of throwing the money down the toilet on going faster (which we will just have to legislate away anyway), the manufactures will be pumping the money into the teams in stupid amounts. I don't see that hurting anything.

the manufacturers are going to spend the money to win, and you can take that money to the bank. All you can do is require them to direct it where it will do the most good for the series. It is utterly worthless to blow all that money on making the engines faster (and less reliable in the process) when we don't have enough cars.

So we come up with a good, reliable powerplant (hey, the cosworth looks pretty good), seal the thing and enjoy some good racing. Since the units are all the same, every manufacturer involved will have an equal chance to win without blowing millions in development costs.

Where are they going to spend the money instead? Well, they are going to have to make sure their teams have everything they need if they want success. Buy them some wind tunnel time, throw in some free engines, or just plain insult them with enough cash to buy whatever parts, spares and cars they need. It isn't much different than what Honda is already doing with AGR except it probably won't cost as much.

This will also end the ugly squacking over the rules and what can and can't be updated. You can bet we haven't seen the last of the updates now that the door has been opened, so a spec motor would stop that cold.

Oh, so what if we aren't developing technology? It's a really different world than when Carl Fisher cut the deal for the bricks.
Technology cost money and makes speeds unacceptably high. As long as someone is willing to pay for it all, it's all good and well if you want to use the place as a test bed, to improve the breed, but that concept really ground to a hault with Parnelli's gearbox.

We have to think about the sport instead.

If the manufacturers bail? tough, so long. The sport survived for years with offys and cosworths. If the engine makers bolt, we will still have a sealed, reliable and available unit for everyone. If the tuners do find an improvement, it can be held back until they have enough updates for everyone. Everyone is running the same motor so who cares? The engine companies will be free to do their own research and contribute to the overall pool of knowledge.

Mostly though, I feel it's a real waste of money to keep escalating the speeds and then turning them back. If we can require the makers to spend it on funding the sport instead, it will be win/win for everyone.

And oh by the way, a spec sealed motor will provide great racing on the level we had last year..

[STAND E]

I'm not an expert on engines, but this seems like a generally good idea. I'd like to understand this better before offering thoughts. Are you proposing a completely spec engine like CART is using this year? Would you change it every year, or keep it frozen for a few years at a time? How would you get multiple engine manufacturers to want to participate if the engine was not their design?

[Jim Wilke]

Times change. F-1 had some of their best racing when it was essentially a one-engine series. Indy had great racing during the days of the Offy and Ford. That won't fly any more. Racing, for better or worse, is now a marketing platform. That means money and that has to come from the engine and auto manufacturers first. Then, the Purexes and the Tides and the other non-motorized sponsors will follow. Heck, its every where. The Rolling Stones have corporate sponsors, James Bond drinks this brand of vodka, Lebron James signs a multi-million dollar shoe deal while in high school.

For better or worse, the engine companies are a very necessary part of racing. In my view, the early IRL, the 'vision,' if you will has to be viewed as evidence of this. Tony tried to put a low-budget series on the track and the fans and sponsors - and their money - stayed away. Sprint car owners didn't step up, IRL team owners couldn't find sponsors or, if they did, they couldn't keep them.

As the IRL going to be CART 2.0? No but it isn't going to be the IRL of '97 and '98, either. Something in the middle, I guess. And that ain't all bad. Races like yesterday and the last few will go a long ways towards softening the blow.

[Doc Austin]

Originally posted by STAND E Are you proposing a completely spec engine like CART is using this year?

Exactly. That's essentially what we had last year and look how good the racing was. This year we have three engines and
it hasn't been quite so good. A standard motor would assure a pretty good race. I don't care about the specs. I just want a good race.

Would you change it every year, or keep it frozen for a few years at a time?

The whole idea is to keep things so stable that costs are absorbed over a number of years. So, yes. I'de say stick with the same basic motor for five years. Or ten. Or thirty if it's a good motor.

If the manufacturers want to do some reasearch on their own (keeping their engineers involved), the league can take anything that improves reliability, drivability, fuel consumption, or especially anything that reduces costs, under advisement. If it is cheap enough to do, incorporate any improvements into the motors when there are enough part for everyone to have them.

Like I say, spec motor with the cam covers for sale. The best way to do this is to have the engines be leased. That way there is no squabbling over what goes on inside. Just seal them up and choose the cam cover depending on which team it goes to.

How would you get multiple engine manufacturers to want to participate if the engine was not their design?

That could be a little sticky, but Tony and Barnhart have just shown us they can work with their engine partners. The engine companies are going to have to spend the money to win no matter how it shakes out. Developing motors that will just be restricted in the future is pretty futile, so I say let the engine companies spend the money by bribing the best teams to use their version of the identical engines.

You would be putting the money into the teams, the health of the series, and the future of the sport rather than wasting it trying to beat the rules.

The manufacturers have agreed to what is essentially the same sort of plan in nascar. The bodies are all the same and if they blow money getting an advantage in the engine department nascar will just restrict them. They are going to level out the competition no matter what the manufacturers do and the manufacturers just put up with it. In fact, the manufacturers surely see the benefit of a managed, cost controlled formula that lets everyone win their share over a full blown financial Jihad where they could still get thumped as bad as chevy was getting it earlier in the year.

It makes sense to me to level the competition right from the very beginning and make everyone run the same exact motor. The engine companies are still free to pay driver's retainers, buy chassis for their teams or pay off their engine leases. They are also free to throw money at the teams.

Now some will say that people won't buy it that the spec engine is a Chevy AND a Ford AND a Toyota, but plenty of people aren't buying it that the new chevy is anything but a Cosworth Ford either. Plenty of nascar fans don't even talk about the spec bodies anymore because it doesn't matter. The racing matters.

One thing is absolutely for sure......the engine makers will bail on us. They have bailed on every series ever known to man except Nascar, and they even bailed on that in the '60's. The fact that they so steadfastly compete in Nascar shows that they like the cost and competition controlled aspect of that series.

If Toyota and Honda get their snoots out of joint over the engines not being technically advanced enough or if the don't feel they want to compete without technical challenge, I don't see anything wrong with the series being contested by Ford, Chevy and Dodge. Wasn't part of the vision the all American thing?

And if no manufactures come on board at least we have a good engine that everyone can get. But I think they would.

See, the beauty of my plan is that we have a great series with engines being a non-issue. They will be fast, reliable and worry free. They will also be plenty cheap. But even that isn't the best part. The best part is all we do is juggle cam covers and let the auto companies pay for it all.

Wheeeeeeee!

[mattndallas]

The reason I'm not debating is because I agree (not that I'm a master-debator or anything).

I'm just interested in good on track product, with everyone having a chance. From there, team setup, team prep, driver skill, pitwork, and luck will decide the fate.

[jmart]

Well, the IPS is using a spec sealed engine and there is some carping going on over there about power disparity. I realize that they aren't getting rebuilds as often as necessary, and as I understand it they are going to get one or two more next year. It could work for the IRL but I don't think it's the best course of action.

My alternative: Allow mfg's, at least in the first year of a new engine cycle, to submit closed area redesigns by Apr 30th. Run the TiTW according to league spec. Make everyone pass tech -- same wing/whickers/rev limits. Allow mfg's to correct fundamental design flaws early. After 30 Apr, it's back to open areas only for development for the remainder of that year. If mfg's want to submit revised closed area parts over the winter, maybe that would be OK but teams that have old spec motors should be able to send them back and get the update kits free of charge. Alternatively, manage your engine pool so you don't have a bunch of obsolete parts at the end of the year.

This plan would force mafg's to be ramped up to burn the midnight oil and commit some more budget if needed, but they're big boys, with a bunch of tools at their disposal. They ought to be able to handle it. If needed, run the TiTW in Jan instead of Feb.

I personally like the ides that there is some deisgn work and innovation in the engine area, it's just a matter of degree as to what I think is appropriate. It's a balancing act, I'll grant you but the idea of going to a spec motor just doesn't sit rigght with me. Conversely, we don't want F1 style development or even tailored heads for short ovals, speedways and dare I say it, road or street courses. That would be a step in the wrong direction IMHO.

jmart

[Racewriter]

I don't really mind Doc's plan, but the key is accessibility. If you have a spec engine with a million-dollar lease, you haven't really gained much. To me, it would be a spec engine on a purchase plan, and designed in such a way that you could have lots of reliable HP with a piece that didn't have to be torn down every race - let's say at least a 1500-mile expectancy.

Since everyone is so married to DOHC engines, let's keep 'em. Make 'em a 5-liter DOHC V8 on methanol, with at least 750HP on tap. The displacement should allow for some nifty torque, which would challenge the drivers on shorter tracks like Richmond.

And the cost per unit should be no more than, say, $75K.

The problems with the IPS engine is that it's too little HP for too little dollars, and the quality control is pretty suspect. Do it right and you don't have that problem.

Incidentally, I still think a 6-liter stockblock pushrod V-8 formula is the way to go, but this isn't that bad of a solution.

[Jim Wilke]

Exactly. That's essentially what we had last year and look how good the racing was.

I disagree. Last year Penske had one engine, Panther another, others had something else, Infiniti was on a different page. Over the years, you've had Ilmor with the 'soft-limiter,' NAC or Comptech with an edge, Jones cams providing power. We've NEVER had equal engines; another falacy that came with the spec-issue that won't die.

[Doc Austin]

Originally posted by Racewriter
If you have a spec engine with a million-dollar lease, you haven't really gained much.

I think if you keep the engine over a long period of time the costs will go down. If the engine manufacturers get involved financially that will help too.

To me, it would be a spec engine on a purchase plan, and designed in such a way that you could have lots of reliable HP with a piece that didn't have to be torn down every race - let's say at least a 1500-mile expectancy.

The only problem with a purchase plan is then the motors aren't necessarily rebuilt by the approved builders. You'de have guys grinding on cams and rods and, well, it won't be a spec motor anymore.

Now if the motors are tightly controlled, you can turn back the revs and they will last forever. That's part of the plan too. If you control everything about the engine, you can take a huge motor, detune it and it will loaf along all day without straining.

Since everyone is so married to DOHC engines, let's keep 'em. Make 'em a 5-liter DOHC V8 on methanol, with at least 750HP on tap.

Look how fast they are going with 3.5 litres. We don't want them going any faster, but if you detuned a 5 litre it would work effortlessly and be virtually bullet proof.

But if you turned them loose and had no rules with 5 litres of DOHC to play with....Wheeeeeeeeeee!!!! We would see the records fall in a big way.

And the cost per unit should be no more than, say, $75K.

Can it really be done that cheap?

Incidentally, I still think a 6-liter stockblock pushrod V-8 formula is the way to go, but this isn't that bad of a solution.

that would be a good motor, but we really need to get into the 21st century and do away with the pushrods. we are already being accused of being OW nascar.

[Doc Austin]

Originally posted by Racewriter
[B]I don't really mind Doc's plan, but the key is accessibility.

I'm sorry. I missed this part before.

Yes, with a spec, sealed unit, you would have an engine that is randomly supplied to 100% of the field. The quality would have to be superb because they have to be 100% equal, but I'm sure with all the manufacturers involved it would be doable. It would even be an excercise that could help them learn about controlling their own production tolerances.

I remember in R/C cars we would pay a $15 entry fee and they would hand you a stock, sealed motor. The quality wasn't too bad and the motors were mostly equal, so we had great races. It was sure cheaper than burning up a Reedy Modified at $50 a whack per race. It wasn't quite as fast, but no one cared because we all had an equal shot.

And something else: The guys we suspected of cheating before never did well in those races. Go figure.

[Racewriter]

Doc - you can have a sealed spec purchase plan. It's worked extremely well for the ASA for the last few years. You have to buy the engines through Lingenfelter, and they're sealed. The ASA engine is a no-rebuild program (they only cost 12K, and run a full season), but you could do a rebuild program with one licensed builder who could then re-seal the engines.

I think 75K is completely reasonable - as long as you didn't design a brand new engine, but used an existing design (perhaps tweaked a bit in terms of displacement, head ports, etc). Maybe 5 liters is too big, but like you, I was thinking of detuning it for reliability.

In the ASA, they run 460HP, all aluminum, 380lb V-8's that run a full 25-race season without popping for $12K. Most of them then get sold to a street rodder for around $4K. Not a bad deal, huh?

I agree with you totally on the principle that we have to get away from technology for technology's sake. However, a lease is extremely limiting in terms of one-offs or a few offs that can participate. I don't think we really need to rehash Indy this year, right? A system that allows engines to be PURCHASED for reasonable cost will have more participation. More participation is good. And anyone who's thinking of launching the CARTisan "Quality, not quantity" argument can save it. You only really ensure quality when there are more cars than starting positions.

[manson]

Just put 327's in all of them.

[Doc Austin]

Originally posted by Racewriter The ASA engine is a no-rebuild program (they only cost 12K, and run a full season), but you could do a rebuild program with one licensed builder who could then re-seal the engines.

Sounds completely workable to me. The whole idea is a cheap, durable piece that is equal to everyone else's. Sounds like ASA has got it's program figured out.

I think 75K is completely reasonable - as long as you didn't design a brand new engine, but used an existing design

I think the old Aurora would work pretty good. Even tweaked out they were still pretty reliable. And I don't see where they would be very expensive as the tooling is already in place and paid for. It would just be gravy for whomever GM sold it to. The aurora might not be the best example, but it is an example of a motor that already exists and wouldd work pretty good.

Heck, how many engines did we have go away yesterday? I think the metalurgy is so good that attrition isn't the problem it used to be. In a way, that is sort of unfortunate because you lose a little of that element of suspense. Will he blow up? Won't he? Of course, I'm not footing the re-build for the blowups either.

Maybe 5 liters is too big, but like you, I was thinking of detuning it for reliability.

I'm ok with 5 litres as long s they don't let the speeds get out of hand. I rememkber the old F-5000 series was pretty good racing, but nowdays with the DOHC engines they would be firebreathing monsters. If they were spec and sealed, the wick could always be turned down at the tuner's shop. Maybe run a spec ecu or something.

However, a lease is extremely limiting in terms of one-offs or a few offs that can participate.

I never considered that, but perhaps if there are enough motors in rotation you could lease one for, say three races. I would be ok with selling engines as long as they were sealed and had to go back to an IRL approved tuner for rebuilds.

I don't really have much of a problem with the current system because the three engines are pretty deadlocked. The Gen IV led the most laps, the Toyota won and the Honda had the fastest lap. I think that's a pretty interesting tidbit.

I think a sealed program would just eliminate all the carping we've heard in the past weeks about the Chevy Gen IV. If it reduces costs, drives up participation and improves the racing, what more could we ask?

Anyway, thanks for the info on the ASA program. That gives me a little more to formulate my plan with. As with any plan, any new information might cause me to change course a little. Being flexable will just make it easier to get done, but the main goal of cost control and parity can't be compromised.

[PIGSKINPETE]

Doc,
I think your idea is good, but isn't the Indy 500 too big and important to be a spec race. Manufacturers battling it out is intriguing to me. All the big events are like that: Le Mans, Formula 1, Moto GP, CART Pre 1995, etc. Nascar's low tech approach and tight controls on tech is the main reason I was turned on to OWR and sports cars.

[Doc Austin]

Originally posted by PIGSKINPETE
[B]Doc, I think your idea is good, but isn't the Indy 500 too big and important to be a spec race.

Well, yes, it is. But you can bet the manufactures will bail and we have to be ready for that. Look at the bind cart got themselves into by not being prepared for that. Of course, they sure landed on their feet with the Ford deal. I like the idea of what they are doing there.

Manufacturers battling it out is intriguing to me.

Oh, no doubt that is thrilling, but there just isn't enough money going around right now. Every series that has gone down the tubes as long as I been watching has been about cost controls getting out of hand. In some series, the manufacturers battle it out, raise the ante stupidly high, and then bail out leaving the series with a bunch of privateers trying to run factory equipment on a pauper's budget.

Yes, Indy has always been the proving ground, but personally, and it's just my personal opinion, I've really gotten spoiled by the IRL's ball busting action and I don't want to see that change. We've already seen what kind of disparity can happen with the Gen III. If that hadn't been corrected, it would have really hurt the series big time.

So it's really the choice of whether we want great racing or manufacturer involvement with all the glitter. Personally, it's all about racing for me, at least in the IRL. If I want to see tech, everything always has and always will take a back seat to F-1.

Now sportscars is a whole different deal for me. None of the manufacturers hide behind the teams or chassis. When audi gets beat by MG, that's exactly what you get. So when the manufacturers go after each other there, at least it's honest and they rise and fall on their own name. I say let them run magnetic pulse engines, burn unobtainium, go 400mph and knock each other's socks off.

But then, we see how much companies like Mercedes can afford to get trounced by toyota on world wide TV while spending millions: they can't. And both of us are pretty sad with the state of sportscar racing right now as a result. It got so expensive that everyone bailed and the cars cost too much for all but a few of the privateers. Yesterday at sonona they had 7 whopping prototypes. Heck, I remember when Ford would enter 7 year old GT40s just to back up the new models. It sure is a different sport today.

Nascar's low tech approach and tight controls on tech is the main reason I was turned on to OWR and sports cars.

Yeah, but I am just being selfish. I got spoiled on the IRL's racing and the chevy deal showed me how fragile the balance is.

And Yo, PIGSKINPETE, welcome to Track Forum. Go bucs!!!!

[STAND E]

This idea is at least good because it helps break down the issues, between technical and business, racing based on technology and racing based on driver skills, and so on.

I'm intrigued by the idea of getting the manufacturers to stay, but spend the money more wisely to grow the series. Then once more sponsorship comes in, the manufacturers can go play by making the individual distinctive high tech engines again. That idea would mean the manufacturers sign up for the long-term, not just the short term.

[Lucky161]

Lots of engine choices. In no particular order

1. GenIV
2. Toyota
3. Honda
4 Gen 111
5. Gen 11 (Olds)
6. Infiniti
7. MB pushrod turbo
8. Offy Turbo
9. Small blocks
10. Big Blocks

All of those engines plus the CART Cosworth COULD be built in that price range and the last two for MUCH MUCH less and who cares if it makes us Open Wheeled nascar?
But Doc and Racewriter both have the key. Single supplier, sealed engines with random distribution.

How could you get the car companies to sponsor a car with an engine not designed by them? Easy. What was actually under the engine cover would only matter to us. Casual fans would just see bow ties, blue ovals etc. Catepiller builds engines, but I don't think Ward Burton's car has one of their engines in it. On a local short track a Toyota dealer was a HUGE Chevy fan, but he couldn't get a Chevy franchise. It didn't stop him from sponsoring one of the best late models in the area and you can bet that those Baker engines in his Camaro weren't Toyotas.

[autoracingfan2]

If everyone gets the same upgrade, what is the reason the manufacturer/rebuilder looks for more power? Why spend the money when your team/customers won't get an advantage?

Last year may have had the majority of the same engines, but there were a lot of rebuilders out there looking to gain an advantage to get their customers/team out front. If the engines were sealed, this development would go away.

[Belanger99]

Tis not often that I would find common ground with Doc, so maybe he's not such a bad guy after all

I am reminded that a man brought what was essentially a marine engine 70 years ago to Indy, and it proceeded to outlast just about everything thrown in it's path.

It was essentially a spec engine, not that expensive, most mechanics of the day could work on them or perhaps even build one.

And the racing suffered not one iota.

In fact, if you take it one step further, most of the cars from 1959-1964 were pretty similar in configuration and engines. And the racing, for the most part was terrific. Legends were made, and most of the throngs that followed championship racing didn't care if Ford, or GM, or Chrysler was involved.

From what I've seen, the inclusion of Toyota and Honda in the IRL can only lead to a spending war of biblical proportions. Don't agree? Same thing happened in the 60's and 70's between Goodyear and Firestone. While some of the tire war stories are fun, it also led to one company bailing out for 20 years, and the second war led to the other company taking a hike.

Even in the 1970's and 80's, Indy car had essentially a spec engine-they were all cosworths, some of course were better than others, but most guys could afford the thing and had access to one. I didn't see that the racing suffered.


CART may have the right idea with the turbo Ford they are using (I think the gas V-10 is a stupid idea). I am certain that a spec V-8, or even a spec V-6 normally aspirated could be built for a reasonable price for the IRL.

But I also wonder if the rules or specs couldn't be written so that the essential components (block, heads, crank) could be spec in nature and sold to the teams, and allow the teams to build them themselves.

Another concern of mine Doc, is that if a spec engine is put into place, how much will teams then spend on aero testing looking for that extra edge? Seems that is what is going on down south with the restrictor plate cars.

[Lucky161]

"Another concern of mine Doc, is that if a spec engine is put into place, how much will teams then spend on aero testing looking for that extra edge? Seems that is what is going on down south with the restrictor plate cars."

That bothers me some too, but maybe if we get the engines under control, then we can concentrate on the cars. I am with Doc on this area too in that last years cars were great and personally I don't see any great safety improvements to this year's cars, although I could be very wrong.

I actually have an idea of some VERY inexpensive cars and engines that would keep the MUCH of the same speeds and competitiveness, but in my VISION the series would own all the cars and hire teams and drivers. Sponsorships would be available, but if a sponsor wanted to spend double, then they would sponsor two cars, triple would get them three cars etc. But this is a busy week at work and I don't have the time to post it, much less defend it.

[Racewriter]

Originally posted by Belanger99
But I also wonder if the rules or specs couldn't be written so that the essential components (block, heads, crank) could be spec in nature and sold to the teams, and allow the teams to build them themselves.

Of course they could. Happens in short track racing quite a bit. IMCA, Southern All Stars, SUPR, and ASCS all have spec-head rules, where they mandate a certain head be used for their engines. Typically, the series logo is cast into the runners, which tamper-proofs them. IMCA also requires a spec intake and carb. You could take it one step further, and spec a block and crank. That'd leave enough room for the small builders (another part of the original "vision") but control the key costs.

Start with the original Aurora design, and optimize the displacement for the bore/stroke/deck height. If that's 4 liters, fine. If it's 4.5, fine. Just create the limit based on the ideal configuration for the block dimensions. You might have more horses than what you have now, but we could remove downforce and make 'em brake for the turns...

[CamKing]

Originally posted by Jim Wilke
Racing, for better or worse, is now a marketing platform. That means money and that has to come from the engine and auto manufacturers first. Then, the Purexes and the Tides and the other non-motorized sponsors will follow.

You are overlooking a multi-billion dollar industry, but don't feel bad so is the IRL.

If you are in the Indy area, go to the "Performance Racing Industy" Trade show this winter. If you look around, you will see tons of businesses that spend billions to have their decals displayed on almost every type of race car. You won't see them on IRL cars, because the IRL has allowed the manufacturers to lock them out.
Next time you're thinking about how the IRL could attract more sponsorship money, take a look at all those decals on any NASCAR car or Truck and know that many of those companies wanted to be in the IRL.

[Belanger99]

If I understand correctly, you really make horses through the heads. NASCAR seems to have limited that aspect, IIRC because I think the rules state they approve the head the manufacturers can use, or soemthing to that effect.

I still think the teams and little engine builders should have the ability to perform a few tricks for a few horses, after all, it would be their money they were spending. I am against manufacturer development unless it would lead to components that were available to everyone.

I'd hate to see a spec motor, then all the teams running for tunnel time trying to lower the drag coeffecient by a hundreth of a percent, and spending zillions in the process.

But the idea of a spec motor has merits-the ASA has a really good idea, and I'm starting to come around to the Ford Focus midget concept as well.

[CamKing]

Originally posted by Racewriter
Typically, the series logo is cast into the runners, which tamper-proofs them.

Sure it does

Most of my costomers spend about 2-3grand having them reworked and then covered up.

[Racewriter]

Originally posted by CamKing
Sure it does

Most of my costomers spend about 2-3grand having them reworked and then covered up.

Frickin' cheater...

[Scott Bennett]

You guys make things way to complicated.

My engine rule book:

1. Specified mounting dimensions, fuel pump location, airbox location, water and oil inlet & outlet, exhaust flanges, and maximum engine volume. You should be able to exchange any two engines with NO modifications to the chassis.

2. Specified displacement, maybe max revs.

3. You must race the engine you qualify, or start in back.

4. An complete engine must sell for $150,000- ready to run, and accompanied by the dyno sheet to prove it. You can still lease if you want to.

5. BUT, any engine in any car can be purchased after any event (by any team entered in that event) for $300,000.

The end.


P.S. There is no way to seal an engine or make it tamper-proof at this level. People will cast new parts with all the appropriate logos or whatever they need to do.

[CamKing]

Originally posted by Racewriter


Frickin' cheater...

Dude, I'm in the south. If ya aint cheatin, ya aint tryin.

[Lucky161]

Scott, I don't know which has a worse conotation, spec or claimer, but I think it's got to come down to that someway, somehow, sometime. And while most people will tell you it can never be cheap enough to suit me, if your figures will build full fields, then I can live with that.

[CamKing]

Originally posted by Scott Bennett

P.S. There is no way to seal an engine or make it tamper-proof at this level. People will cast new parts with all the appropriate logos or whatever they need to do.

Every day of every week.

PS, I'd just make the engine claim price the same as the new engine price($150,000). By letting them get $300k for it, you are letting the guys that bend the rules profit from it. I would also make the engine claim only available to the teams running that brand of engine. If Chevy built a better motor, toyota shouldn't be able to buy it the next week.

[Lucky161]

I misread Scotts post. I thought we were claiming the whole car for $300K. What was I thinking? That being said, I don't think there's snowballs chance that $150K engines will fill the fields. I thought they were only $125K now and we get 3/4 of a field two races in a row and basically that same amount since Indy.