El Mirage

[RichFox]

Without going into the gas powered cars without throttle plates, what about the Diesel entry's? If your looking for throttle return springs on the butterfly I don't think you will find them.

[JackD]

Throttles are not just butterflies but include slides and barrels also.
The rule should read "Throttle return spring" and work in concert
with the fuel regulation requirements.

[fastesthonda_jim]

Hey JackD,

As long as we're asking what if's here, here's one I sent to another forum a little bit ago.

Let's say I entered a true dual engined liner (2 fire systems, throttle springs, etc.) with both motors hooked up end to end through their crankshafts and then out through a tranny and differential.  Then let's say I left off the cylinder head(s) off of the front motor.  Could I still use it to "upgrade" to the next class?  What if I left off the intake manifold?  What if I left off just the carburetor?  Or maybe only the fuel line?  What if I put a clutch between the motors so I could disengage the front one after the start?  Ain't no specific rule about none of  that.  But at some point wouldn't you say "Bulls..t!  That violates the SPIRIT of the rules!" and toss me out of the meet for being just too darn "cute" (or merely disrespectful of what we all are trying to produce here)?  And yet as we all know, there is/are no specific rule(s) prohibiting that behavior.  It merely falls to a preponderance of evidence argument or how insulted you might feel, rather than black and white fact.  

Motors are composed of hundreds of parts.  Miss a bit of key stock between the crankshaft and the cam drive gear and your motor don't go just as much as it don't go if you left off a cylinder head.  It seems to me that a certain portion of the argument here is based upon the physical size of the "infraction" when, in reality as to whether your motor runs or not, size does not matter.

Okay, gotta duck back behind the sandbags.  

(And FWIW I do NOT "sandbag")

[Sumner]

If a gas powered "PONY MOTOR" was used to drive various accessories
such as cooling, oiling, or electrical  devices and remove that load from
the drive motor, should it be counted in the size of the engine package if
it met all the various required safety criteria ?

From me the short answer would be no.

Granted another motor driving these type of accessories would take a load off of the primary motor and potentially make the car faster, but I believe the intent of the rule (probably needs to be clarified or we wouldn't be talking about this now) is that the second motor be used to "drive" the wheels and not drive accessories.

To take it too extremes someone with a really fast small motor streamliner could stuff a second motor in there that has substantial displacement to move up a couple classes and just power say an alternator.  The motor could be added to the car in such a way to not hurt aero, yet they wouldn't have to figure out a way to power even one wheel.  Not what I think we are trying to say to someone building a 2 motor streamliner.

Just my opinion,

Sum

[JackD]

In the 50+ years of the SCTA, the problem has not often surfaced but can.
All the situations that were described have occurred over the years and as
if by magic they were handled within the rules we have.
If the motor makes a contribution to the forward motion of the vehicle it is
part of the package.
A number of double engined packages have had 1 engine disabled and
sealed at tech to establish that it made no contribution.
The presumption is that tech is smart enough to establish the condition of the disabled part and seal it appropriately for the protection of everybody.
That same condition exists in motors with not all of the cylinders operational and tech figures it out.
The tech people have to earn the respect of the entrant or as in many
species they will be dominated.
They have to decide is it cheating, or taking minimum advantage of the
allowed rules.
All of that should never compromise safety.
My thoughts turn to the jet turbine with a minimum link to drive the wheels than would not hold the power but is a connection none the less.
With a rear facing exhaust, is it a wheel driven turbine or a thrust vehicle?
Sometime you have to stand up with the courage of your convictions,
employ the "UNWRITTEN RULE" and suggest the entrant "TRY AGATN"
In addition you have to decide was the intent to cheat or slide between the cracks.
If you think they are sliding, you might consider addressing that point completly in the rules.
If you think it was cheating, it is also you obligation to step on his neck and make an example for others.
Without seeing the application myself, at a minimum it appears it did not
meet the safety rules and beyond that proably never actually ran.
What rule was it that allowed part of the vehicle to be removed when it was presented at tech to certify a record ?
Did I miss that one ?

[dwarner]

Jack,

"What rule was it that allowed part of the vehicle to be removed when it was presented at tech to certify a record ?"

I think that not having the unit attached at safety inspection is the question.

The car did not fit on the trailer with the unit attached. I was at the finish line area when Rick stopped. That is when I discovered that the engine was cold to the touch, etc. We put the engine and framework in my truck and back to certification. The unit remained in my truck during certification so I don't think it was compromised in terms of checking for record purposes.

DW

[dwarner]

Does this apply?

2006 rulebook, page 1, 2nd paragraph, last two sentences:

"Any interpretation or deviation of these rules is left to the discretion of the officials. Their decision is final."

DW

[Leon]

If a second legal motor really deloads the drive motor, it does contribute to getting the vehicle down the road and should be considered part of the total.

Just throwing this into the air, then does electric fans, water pump, fuel pump, etc get figured into the size of the engine? No, but where do you draw the line?

[JackD]

That is a little more detail than I had but the cold motor would indicated it was not used in any fashion.
It seems clear enough to me.
That should do it.

In this case, permission should have been sought rather than forgiveness.

[1212FBGS]

Leon
a line was drawn earlier this year when electric turbos or an electric blower was not allowed for the blown class
kent

[JackD]

What happened to the protest about the prosthetic trailer on the liner ?

[1212FBGS]

protest denied... record stands.

[JackD]

Lots of great accomplishments that were ultimately soiled by this act.
I think it won't be soon forgotten.

[LittleLiner]

Imagine a world after the Neb II is stretched and a second engine (exactly like the first one) is added . . . . . . . . Same frontal area and a bit more weight to aid traction.  Hummmm. . . .

[John Noonan]

Imagine a world after the Neb II is stretched and a second engine (exactly like the first one) is added . . . . . . . . Same frontal area and a bit more weight to aid traction.  Hummmm. . . .

Might as well add 100 weed wacker engines and go for a reacord in another class...100 engines, 100 tires where will it end?

Congrats to the "new record holder"