A&Q about 350Z
Q:
Some exellent ideas all round regarding some of the "finer" details.
Another idea on the camshaft front... As cams will need to be removed to fit "control" items, why not just send originals to the governing body to be "marked" before re-fitting. The "checkers" could have a simple v-block jig set up to check basic lift and duration to ensure nobody has sent an aftermarket profile ground on an original cam.
Plus, apart from being LHD, is there any other key differences with G60 shell's (just curious).
A:
floor tunnel is slightly different to take a cable change shifter. Not sure about anything else.
A:
The only G60 difference I once heard was that the bolts for the rear wishbone mount have bigger shanks. They may have had bonded screens, though not shell.
Tub? Anyone?
A:
arrgh yes chris they did have a bonded front screen. Although i'm pretty sure you can fit a standard one if needed.
A:
Main point I guess was are the shells stiffer, since that's what would make it a cheat? (assuming G60 arch spats are also banned)
A:
Cheers chaps... No real advantage in anyone using one then...
Would be better to insist upon RHD, uk only supplied GTi's to be used then as suggested.
Easy to confirm via chassis numbers ?
A:
Agreed totally. A total swizz otherwise. Edit: chassis nos should be easily deciperable.
A:
Thanks for further comments, not had chance to post any earlier today as been busy working on my 8V.
foggyvolki - No cannot convert RHD to LHD, the car must be raced as manufactured model. Cage must be six point, will have to discuss limits on construction with the TO.
Tubthumped - No G60 shells with 16V/ 8V motors fitted, car must be raced as originally manufactured. No change of final drives, gearboxes must remain standard.
Dex - Yes policing will need to be tight if we are to prevent cheating, although that is no different from all other forms of motorsport!!
Golden - Yes camshafts need to be discussed in more detail by the committee, we will take all comments onboard. Tubthumped made an interesting point regarding the cut away base of the lobe.
Pascal77uk - ARB's to remmain standard, yes driving standards will be policed.
Chris - You make some very interesting points, will take those back to the TO/ committee. Agree regarding the brakes, we may decide to allow all 16V's to run 256mmm disks. Cams are currently being discussed, not sure best direction currently. The issue of fueling/ metering head adjustments are not there to allow some scope for a little enginuity, as is the suspesion being free, although do agreee that remote resevoir should be outlawed.
steve r - If the car was fitted with brake ducting as standard then must remain, if not then should not be allowed to be added. Will discuss with our TO.
Deako - Thanks very much for your support!!
jamesa2 - Thanks for your support, yes you are right we need to ensure regs are watertight!!
pol - Would expect majority to run 15" x 7" anyway as cheap enought to buy either new or secondhand.
mr hillclimber - Yes cams still being discussed, hope to have further information later this week following our next meeting.
Chris - Will take away your point regarding RHD shells only.
A:
I'd say with the level of basic mods allowed, even some of the "grey" area's arn't going to make much of a performance advantage on track. I like the standard type VW wheel idea though, only problem is some people already have aftermarket alloy's so would have to source original type's, though should be easy and cheap enough.
A:
The issue of fueling/ metering head adjustments are not there to allow some scope for a little enginuity, as is the suspesion being free.
The issue here is that there are some special metering heads available, originally supplied by VW Motorsport, and also rumoured to be present on some Volvos. Prices are high/will hit the stratosphere if you allow these, resulting in the 'haves' and 'have nots'.
I can't quite tell if you are saying metering head adjustments are/aren't there to allow ingenuity, but a standard OE starting point should be the base item to start with, thus cheap.
Out of curiousity, does the Technical person have a VW background?
A:
Thanks for taking on board all the comments... I could be interested in this myself, I'd have plenty of time on my hands after the divorce if I tell my wife im buying yet another car !
A:
!
A:
I'm running out of people to buy cars for so I can have them back when they've finished with them ! (you'd know what i mean if you saw my members motors "project long term")
A:
i think its time to offer Mr eyre a job as i said worth his weight in gold
A:
The G60 is slightly wider at the front and the suspension mounting points are much thicker, shell is generally stiffer too. But as it's not allowed it's fine.
The metering head WUR thing seems a bit open to £££ still.
A:
I can think of few people who would be better suited to being a tech scrutineer than that Eyre fellow. Even if he does drive a citroen.
A:
Even if he does drive a citroen.
I know that it's French rubbish - does that count?
A:
Just a thought - should car weights include driver?
A:
Usually they are without but it should state
A:
No there should be a minimum weight with driver that is how most single make stuff works or you could be dissadvantaged by being shall we say 'more ample'
A:
That's what I was thinking. True competition then (though C of G is tough!)
A:
I've never done anything on long circuits before but all the other stuff I've done has been without driver.
I agree it is a fairer way of doing it though
A:
the CTCRC are now bringing in min weights with driver - it definitely evens things up a bit
A:
Reverse the rule about being able to modify after the airbox filter element and change to before, that way you can only drill the lower section of the airbox and no need to have to start spending money on adjusting airflow meters and gasflowing throttle bodies etc.
A:
No there should be a minimum weight with driver that is how most single make stuff works or you could be dissadvantaged by being shall we say 'more ample'
That's why we don't see fat people in F1 cars .