Thanks - but there is more to this than writing a few posts and sticking at it for years. I am still learning every time we go out.
Your point on buy-back is valid and the regulations for buy-back could have been introduced easily when the T2 motor became available for use. There would not have been the incentive to spend massive amounts for a Special one given that it could have been purchased for £400 or whatever. Prior to that it would have been very difficult to gain universal acceptance given that you would have teams that had spent significant time and money on their equipment for it to be devalued over night. As it is, the fact that there is such disparity between the T1 and T2 performance (which the MSA have in their regs that they can take steps to close but haven't - and this can be easily achieved) has already devalued this kit is a travesty as teams have had to go out and buy expensive T2s anyway. Had buyback been introduced at the outset (or the motors built to a specific output) then a ton of cash would have been saved.
As regards seals when i saw the initial batch at PF before Christmas it was simply the crankcase that was sealed with the usual wire and tamper-proof locking thing (don't remember what they are really called!). RPM suggested that the heads may also be sealed but I can't confirm that for now.
Who knows what the performance gain/drop off will be. The barometer will either be RPM's dyno or series organisers providing control engines. At the moment the engines have been drawn on the morning of the race - isn't that what has been introduced in Super 1?
I agree with your concern over the dilution of grids. We saw this before with the failed introduction of World Formula. Thankfully prokarting came back stronger for this (in my view). Today, however, we only have pockets of grids in mainly non-MSA events. Doing nothing is one option, granted, but by trying something different we already know of teams that were retiring returning for another year. One of the leading EPEC teams reckon this will at least half their engine costs for this season.
There are probably numerous other ways to try to invigorate the class (tyres for example). This is just one attempt at a solution and I think we have to applaud RPM for investing in the kit to provide us with the opportunity to try before we buy (all at his own cost). For the wider Honda class the problem of engine cost and performance disparity will, unfortunately, continue. Kelvin's timing tool may solve one problem but it will not equalise performance as there are numerous other areas that provide the variables of a great engine. A fiche to which all motors could be built to would close the gap more but I would put money on there still being differences!
So low cost motors and equalised output? makes a lot of sense to me and we will be racing the 200s at EPEC this year.
Graeme
|
|