The FV Ad Hoc Committee met October 26
Members attending: Steve Oseth, Stevan Davis, Stephen Saslow, Phillip Holcomb, Alex Bertolucci, Barret Hendricks, Dietmar Bauerle
Guest: Fred Clark
The "old" welcomed in the "new". The new members represent not only various age groups and interests but also various geographic regions which should give the Committee a bigger sounding board to address any issues with regards to FV.
Stephen Saslow, Pac Northwest; Phillip Holcomb, Rocky Mountain; Barret Hendricks, Southwest; and Alex Bertolucci, Central- Great Lakes may be contacted as the need arises as well as the other members of the Ad Hoc Committee. We look forward to addressing any questions or issues that might be of interest to the FV community.
November Fastrack has published the clarification of the term "bushing" and its application to the spindle/carrier . The new rules specify that LINK PIN BUSHINGS may be modified, the carrier and torsion arms may be clearanced, but no other modifications may be made to these components other than those specified in other sections of the GCR.
A proposal has been submitted to the CRB requesting the mandatory use of bolt on valve covers. No decision has been reached by the CRB, but it is our understanding that the rules as they are currently written which allow the use of bolt on valve covers should be sufficient and there is no need to mandate their use at this time. The Ad Hoc Committee was not asked for input by the CRB.
Short discussion regarding the Summit Point memorial race dedicated to Bill Noble ensued. The Committee was informed that 26 cars participated- the largest field other than the Runoffs.
To revisit an old topic, a short discussion was held regarding spec tires. It is still the opinion of most of the Committee that there are both pro's and con's to a spec tire and this subject may be a topic for future meetings.
No other topics were presented or discussed.
Next meeting November 23
October minutes
Re: October minutes
At least one of the offshore manufacures has stopped producing link pin beams. There are still some in the pipe line, but it will be an issue.
Any discussion on legalizing the Chinese P&C sets? (Although on my last order they were almost out with no estimates on getting more.)
(A few of these also exist in the pipeline and there is at least one company in the US that is claiming they make them. However they were EXACT copies of the Chinese ones and I suspect from China) So this should be considered.
Any discussion on legalizing the Chinese P&C sets? (Although on my last order they were almost out with no estimates on getting more.)
(A few of these also exist in the pipeline and there is at least one company in the US that is claiming they make them. However they were EXACT copies of the Chinese ones and I suspect from China) So this should be considered.
Re: October minutes
Jim,SR Racing wrote:...Any discussion on legalizing the Chinese P&C sets?.
See http://www.formulavee.org/interchange/v ... ese#p26230 where that issue was discussed in the Committee Minutes. It has not come up again in our meetings.
Steve
The Racer's Wedge and now a Vortech, FV80
Re: October minutes
Steve,
Yes I saw that, but figured there would be more discussion since it is going to be a problem soon. Considering the prices of the specially made KS's it is already a problem (IMO)
Yes I saw that, but figured there would be more discussion since it is going to be a problem soon. Considering the prices of the specially made KS's it is already a problem (IMO)
-
sharplikestump
- Posts: 183
- Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm
Re: October minutes
Jim,
I suspect that we use the same supplier, but I will check and let you know what I find.
I have been meaning to order some.......figures.
Mike P.
I suspect that we use the same supplier, but I will check and let you know what I find.
I have been meaning to order some.......figures.
Mike P.
-
sharplikestump
- Posts: 183
- Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm
Re: October minutes
One phone call, and I have (4) sets of the Chinese coming to me. I have mixed feelings on these sets. In a way, I like the pistons better than any others because of their light weight. You actually NEED the long-wearing heavier stock pins. The disadvantage is the lower ring groove. If we could get the groove up as high as the K/S, I would consider these perfect.
The cylinders are also a mixed bag. The shelf that mates to the case is WAY too narrow, and because of the way they are cast, you can't shorten them much without reducing the diameter at that shelf to the point that you will create a leak on a case that has bores for the larger cylinders. There is a real weak point just up from that shelf. The top is also weak. A good point is that I find the metalurgy to be more compatible with the rings, and as hard as it is to believe, mine have arrived rounder and straighter, out of the box, than the K/S. The K/S jugs that I last bought were as hard as glass, out of round, and were an absolute time-cosuming nightmare to hone. I had to order 5 gal. of special honing oil, along with different stones from Sunnen, and still spent hours honing each set.
Then there is the availability and cost. I can readily buy a complete set of the Chinese pistons, cylinders, pins, and clips for slightly more than a set of the C&A chromemoly pins that were undersize, wore fast, and are not even available anymore. In other word(s).......DUH!
As to the "legality" of the ring location: A recent conversation inspired me to measure and compare that location on German, Brazilian, and Chinese pistons. I measured from the centerline of the pin bore to the roof of the top ring groove. What I found was actually somewhat surprising. The K/S piston measured the longest, that measurement on the Brazilian (Cofap, Mahle) measured approx. .025 less! I guess I never measured this before. Of course, the Chinese piston dim. is shorter than this. Does this make all of those pistons illegal? If for some reason that I cannot even comprehend, it is determined that surface must be that high on the piston, the fix is obvious....remachine all non-K/S pistons, moving that surface up. The fact that we have a minimum wt. rule allows us to lighten that piston where and in any fashion we choose. If I so choose, it allows me to make one wide groove from the roof of the top ring to the floor of the oil ring. (That would be crazy...I think).
Is this making any sense to anyone?
Mike Palermo Jr.
The cylinders are also a mixed bag. The shelf that mates to the case is WAY too narrow, and because of the way they are cast, you can't shorten them much without reducing the diameter at that shelf to the point that you will create a leak on a case that has bores for the larger cylinders. There is a real weak point just up from that shelf. The top is also weak. A good point is that I find the metalurgy to be more compatible with the rings, and as hard as it is to believe, mine have arrived rounder and straighter, out of the box, than the K/S. The K/S jugs that I last bought were as hard as glass, out of round, and were an absolute time-cosuming nightmare to hone. I had to order 5 gal. of special honing oil, along with different stones from Sunnen, and still spent hours honing each set.
Then there is the availability and cost. I can readily buy a complete set of the Chinese pistons, cylinders, pins, and clips for slightly more than a set of the C&A chromemoly pins that were undersize, wore fast, and are not even available anymore. In other word(s).......DUH!
As to the "legality" of the ring location: A recent conversation inspired me to measure and compare that location on German, Brazilian, and Chinese pistons. I measured from the centerline of the pin bore to the roof of the top ring groove. What I found was actually somewhat surprising. The K/S piston measured the longest, that measurement on the Brazilian (Cofap, Mahle) measured approx. .025 less! I guess I never measured this before. Of course, the Chinese piston dim. is shorter than this. Does this make all of those pistons illegal? If for some reason that I cannot even comprehend, it is determined that surface must be that high on the piston, the fix is obvious....remachine all non-K/S pistons, moving that surface up. The fact that we have a minimum wt. rule allows us to lighten that piston where and in any fashion we choose. If I so choose, it allows me to make one wide groove from the roof of the top ring to the floor of the oil ring. (That would be crazy...I think).
Is this making any sense to anyone?
Mike Palermo Jr.
Re: October minutes
Mike, I think you missed the point regarding the legality of the ring lands. The Chinese piston lands are 2.0mm and the original VW, Mahle, CoFab, etc are 2.5mm. I once asked for the lands to be open to avoid the cost of spacers and the CRB said no. Fred Clark told me that in order for the Chinese pistons to be legal, the lands must be machined out to 2.5MM. Frankly, it's a tough call since making the rules on ring lands more liberal, opens a real bag of worms. Maybe the location of the land, relative to the top of the piston, should be regulated but the width could be made open. There are folks spending hundreds of dollars on spacers alone. You could buy a nice set of cast custom pistons for that price.
The above post is for reference only and your results may vary. This post is not intended to reflect the views or opinions of SCCA and should not be considered an analysis or opinion of the rules written in the GCR.
-
sharplikestump
- Posts: 183
- Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm
Re: October minutes
Brian,
I seem to be missing several points.
Are you sure you don't mean GROOVE when you say LAND? The LAND is the material BETWEEN the GROOVES.
How would WIDENING the grooves eliminate the need for spacers? Seems like you would either need more spacers or wider ones.
I showed Fred the Chinese pistons at tech at the Runoffs, and he told me he had no problems with them.
I Don't understand how we could have a set dimension from the top of the piston to the top ring groove since we need to deck the pistons individually to establish legal minimum deck clearance. Don't you think it would serve better to set a maximum dimension from the centerline of the piston pin to the ceiling of the top groove?
Unless you are referring to and including the purchase of the special backers for the oil rings, which are only an option, I don't know how anyone would "spend hundreds of dollars on spacers alone". The special spacers for the dykes rings were the very expensive ones and they are not even available now. There are readily available superior spacers now at very reasonable prices.
Personally, I feel that allowing "custom" pistons is what can open a "real bag of worms", as that has the potential of making every piston that we currently have obsolete, and that is about the last thing this class needs in these tight times.
Additionally, having custom pistons made ignores our needing cylinders and pins. More money.
I simply see the Chinese as a viable and very reasonably priced option with absolutely no advantage and posing no threat to our existing pistons.
Bottom line on cost, I figure them to save 75 to 80% of the cost of K/S and the necc. lt. wt. pins, neither of which are even available.
Sure would like to hear some other builders opine.
I seem to be missing several points.
Are you sure you don't mean GROOVE when you say LAND? The LAND is the material BETWEEN the GROOVES.
How would WIDENING the grooves eliminate the need for spacers? Seems like you would either need more spacers or wider ones.
I showed Fred the Chinese pistons at tech at the Runoffs, and he told me he had no problems with them.
I Don't understand how we could have a set dimension from the top of the piston to the top ring groove since we need to deck the pistons individually to establish legal minimum deck clearance. Don't you think it would serve better to set a maximum dimension from the centerline of the piston pin to the ceiling of the top groove?
Unless you are referring to and including the purchase of the special backers for the oil rings, which are only an option, I don't know how anyone would "spend hundreds of dollars on spacers alone". The special spacers for the dykes rings were the very expensive ones and they are not even available now. There are readily available superior spacers now at very reasonable prices.
Personally, I feel that allowing "custom" pistons is what can open a "real bag of worms", as that has the potential of making every piston that we currently have obsolete, and that is about the last thing this class needs in these tight times.
Additionally, having custom pistons made ignores our needing cylinders and pins. More money.
I simply see the Chinese as a viable and very reasonably priced option with absolutely no advantage and posing no threat to our existing pistons.
Bottom line on cost, I figure them to save 75 to 80% of the cost of K/S and the necc. lt. wt. pins, neither of which are even available.
Sure would like to hear some other builders opine.
-
hardingfv32-1
- Posts: 1014
- Joined: December 1st, 2006, 8:01 pm
Re: October minutes
1) I have not found any pistons available in a cast configuration. The goal is to find a core that can be machined to the required FV dimensions. You are not going to find such a casting. The only firms that are going to machine such pistons at very low volumes are performance piston suppliers. They only work with forged cores. We would have to hope they have a forged core, say for a Honda, that works for us. At a minimum, you are talking $400-500 a set.
2) This issue will not be resolved until the main FV engine suppliers run out of P&C sets.
Brian
2) This issue will not be resolved until the main FV engine suppliers run out of P&C sets.
Brian
Re: October minutes
Mike:
Since you have used/are using the Chinese parts, what is the RING LAND width of the top and second compression ring?
My limited experience with the Chinese parts( which I sent back) indicated that the ring lands were 2.0 mm, not the 2.5mm that is required by the rules. So that we are all on the same page- Ring lands are the two parallel surfaces of the ring groove which function as the sealing surface for the piston ring. Think that is what Brian M was referring to.
Dietmar
http://www.quixoteracing.com
Since you have used/are using the Chinese parts, what is the RING LAND width of the top and second compression ring?
My limited experience with the Chinese parts( which I sent back) indicated that the ring lands were 2.0 mm, not the 2.5mm that is required by the rules. So that we are all on the same page- Ring lands are the two parallel surfaces of the ring groove which function as the sealing surface for the piston ring. Think that is what Brian M was referring to.
Dietmar
http://www.quixoteracing.com
-
sharplikestump
- Posts: 183
- Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm
Re: October minutes
Brian Harding,
Thanks for the imput. That is pretty much what I had heard. Years back, I asked around about the possibility of having pistons cast, and the common reply was "how many thousand are you needing?"
I also think you are in the ballpark on your estimate for a set of blanks worked up to given specs.
What would you guess it would run for someone to make up cylinders for us? Throw in a nice set of lightweight pins, and we are probably talking close to a grand per set. Does that make sense?
Then if we are going to have someone rework existing blanks, can you tell me how that is different from someone like you or me taking one of these "Chinese Blanks" and remachining the 2.0mm grooves out to 2.5mm?
Dietmar
If we are going to be on the same page, we might as well use the correct terms. I suggest you google "Piston Terminology", and pick a site such as JE Pistons. You will see that the area above the top ring is called the "top land", and the areas BETWEEN each of the ring GROOVES are called LANDS. And the areas that I call
"GROOVES"?....they're called "GROOVES".
Thanks for the imput. That is pretty much what I had heard. Years back, I asked around about the possibility of having pistons cast, and the common reply was "how many thousand are you needing?"
I also think you are in the ballpark on your estimate for a set of blanks worked up to given specs.
What would you guess it would run for someone to make up cylinders for us? Throw in a nice set of lightweight pins, and we are probably talking close to a grand per set. Does that make sense?
Then if we are going to have someone rework existing blanks, can you tell me how that is different from someone like you or me taking one of these "Chinese Blanks" and remachining the 2.0mm grooves out to 2.5mm?
Dietmar
If we are going to be on the same page, we might as well use the correct terms. I suggest you google "Piston Terminology", and pick a site such as JE Pistons. You will see that the area above the top ring is called the "top land", and the areas BETWEEN each of the ring GROOVES are called LANDS. And the areas that I call
"GROOVES"?....they're called "GROOVES".
Re: October minutes
Mike:
Very interesting that you should direct me to ring terminology but seem to avoid the question.
When I measure RING Land clearance, I measure the gap between the ring and the piston with a feeler gauge. I stand by my definition of RING LAND as : Ring lands are the two parallel surfaces of the ring GROOVE which function as the sealing surface for the piston ring. By the way, this defintion WAS taken from a piston terminology site.
So back to the question stated differently. What is the GROOVE width on the Chinese pistons? Think you might have already provided the answer with your reply to Brian H @ 2.0mm but I wanted to know for sure.
Dietmar
http://www.quixoteracing.com
Very interesting that you should direct me to ring terminology but seem to avoid the question.
When I measure RING Land clearance, I measure the gap between the ring and the piston with a feeler gauge. I stand by my definition of RING LAND as : Ring lands are the two parallel surfaces of the ring GROOVE which function as the sealing surface for the piston ring. By the way, this defintion WAS taken from a piston terminology site.
So back to the question stated differently. What is the GROOVE width on the Chinese pistons? Think you might have already provided the answer with your reply to Brian H @ 2.0mm but I wanted to know for sure.
Dietmar
http://www.quixoteracing.com
-
sharplikestump
- Posts: 183
- Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm
Re: October minutes
Not sure how you can say I avoided the question when I placed the answer immediatly above your name.
Besides, you stated you had those pistons in your hands. Did you not measure them yourself?
The only "ring land clearance" that I know of is that which is between that land and the cylinder wall.
Additionally, compression piston ring grooves only have one sealing surface....the bottom, but think what you want.
What you are now referring to is "lateral ring groove clearance".
You seem to have your own glossary of terms.
More importantly to me is that, as I see it, the Chinese pistons offer us a viable, available, and very reasonably priced option to continue building FV engines, whereas I don't see you or anyone else coming up with solutions.
Have a nice day.
Besides, you stated you had those pistons in your hands. Did you not measure them yourself?
The only "ring land clearance" that I know of is that which is between that land and the cylinder wall.
Additionally, compression piston ring grooves only have one sealing surface....the bottom, but think what you want.
What you are now referring to is "lateral ring groove clearance".
You seem to have your own glossary of terms.
More importantly to me is that, as I see it, the Chinese pistons offer us a viable, available, and very reasonably priced option to continue building FV engines, whereas I don't see you or anyone else coming up with solutions.
Have a nice day.
Last edited by sharplikestump on November 8th, 2011, 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: October minutes
i seem to have lost my reply from this weekend so i will offer an abbreviated version. I did research on pistons at the PRI show and while I am now confused as to whether the vendors said cast or forged, pistons could be made. They had blanks from which we could have pistons made and they would cost somewhere short of $100 apiece.
Basically, the rules state that we can use alternative, non OEM parts, if they are "dimensionally identical". I have measured both the Chinese and other pistons and the "grooves in which the rings sit in the pistons", are not the same on the Chinese pistons as they are on all the other pistons I have measured. While I don't think it really makes a performance difference, the Chinese pistons are not in compliance as produced. Maybe I'm suffering from sour grapes since my request to the CRB to make ring grooves open was denied. But it is still an issue to be resolved. Since we have apparently received different answers from Fred Clark, maybe the committee should chime in.
There are K&S assy's available right now and I understand that they can be ordered again. I expect retail on stock assemblies to be somewhere in the $350 to $400 range. That's higher than the Chinese but the quality is better and they're legal. I know the first shipment came with very hard cylinders but heard subsequent shipments were better.
Basically, the rules state that we can use alternative, non OEM parts, if they are "dimensionally identical". I have measured both the Chinese and other pistons and the "grooves in which the rings sit in the pistons", are not the same on the Chinese pistons as they are on all the other pistons I have measured. While I don't think it really makes a performance difference, the Chinese pistons are not in compliance as produced. Maybe I'm suffering from sour grapes since my request to the CRB to make ring grooves open was denied. But it is still an issue to be resolved. Since we have apparently received different answers from Fred Clark, maybe the committee should chime in.
There are K&S assy's available right now and I understand that they can be ordered again. I expect retail on stock assemblies to be somewhere in the $350 to $400 range. That's higher than the Chinese but the quality is better and they're legal. I know the first shipment came with very hard cylinders but heard subsequent shipments were better.
The above post is for reference only and your results may vary. This post is not intended to reflect the views or opinions of SCCA and should not be considered an analysis or opinion of the rules written in the GCR.
Re: October minutes
Brian:
I gave up trying to hone K/S cylinders from the 1st order with my 4 stone hone and ended up paying a shop to do them. Have not tried it on the batch that came with the second order about a year or so ago so I can't really comment on the hardness of the cylinders. Have not heard anything negative from the shop that does them, so...
Contrary to what some might believe, the Committee is discussing this issue right now and we ARE trying to come up with a solution. I'm sure something will be posted in the November Minutes.
In the mean time, there are still legal P&C sets available.
Dietmar
http://www.quixoteracing.com
I gave up trying to hone K/S cylinders from the 1st order with my 4 stone hone and ended up paying a shop to do them. Have not tried it on the batch that came with the second order about a year or so ago so I can't really comment on the hardness of the cylinders. Have not heard anything negative from the shop that does them, so...
Contrary to what some might believe, the Committee is discussing this issue right now and we ARE trying to come up with a solution. I'm sure something will be posted in the November Minutes.
In the mean time, there are still legal P&C sets available.
Dietmar
http://www.quixoteracing.com
-
sharplikestump
- Posts: 183
- Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm
Re: October minutes
Brian,
This is the first that I have heard that there are K/S sets available now. My understanding was that it was Lybarger that was bringing them in, and when I spoke with his employee Jeff last month, he said there were none, and they were not inclined to order more.
Then I read a few posts up that if they were to become available, they would be in the area of $600/set, not counting the necc. light weight pins.
Do you know something that we don't?
Mike
This is the first that I have heard that there are K/S sets available now. My understanding was that it was Lybarger that was bringing them in, and when I spoke with his employee Jeff last month, he said there were none, and they were not inclined to order more.
Then I read a few posts up that if they were to become available, they would be in the area of $600/set, not counting the necc. light weight pins.
Do you know something that we don't?
Mike
Re: October minutes
Spoke to a couple of shops that still have inventory and the prices I mentioned were quotes. Maybe the price you heard including prep and machining. I was told that future orders are possible but will require co- ordination with all the vee vendors to finance.
The above post is for reference only and your results may vary. This post is not intended to reflect the views or opinions of SCCA and should not be considered an analysis or opinion of the rules written in the GCR.
-
sharplikestump
- Posts: 183
- Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm
Re: October minutes
Brian,
Good news. Are these user/shops like us, or retailers? Any clue as to how many sets in inventory?
Thanks,
Mike
Good news. Are these user/shops like us, or retailers? Any clue as to how many sets in inventory?
Thanks,
Mike
Re: October minutes
There is nothing preventing getting more sets of Kolbenschmidt p & c sets ordered. Although I have not spoken with them since the last order I'm sure they are will be make more. We simply have to organize a group willing to put money up to place an order. Price will be dependant on the dollar to euro value at the time the order is placed and method of shipping. It will be a bit more difficult this time because we got, in the past, a great deal on shipping and importing. While the avenue we used is not available that task is not insurmountable. While opinions vary, my take is that the German P&C sets are vastly superior to the others that I have seen.
SteveO
SteveO