[F500] 493 engine decision

Sun Feb 1 21:28:54 MST 2004

Jay -

You forgot the part where the clerk at Step 3 round files all the
information and the committee/VP spend 8 months not realizing they had
requested information in the first place, and then re-request the
information.

Seriously - The differences between the 493 & 494 are about a close as we
are ever going to get two engines.  I have sent my recommendations to both
the Comp Board and the BOD.

I agree we need the 493 legal for the 2005 National season.  We don't need
to give Topeka and reason to think we, as a class, are not planning for the
future.

Chuck McAbee
SEDIV #16

-----Original Message-----
From: Jay Novak [mailto:jnovak6 at wideopenwest.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 21:57
To: f500 at f500.org
Subject: [F500] 493 engine decision

Seriously guys, this dyno data is as realistic as you can get unless you
want to dyno 20 or 30 different configurations & combinations of these 2
engines.  Lets get real, we NEED a new engine NOW.  Let me tell you what
this whole thing looks like to me:  

Sometimes it works like this at a BIG company that I know very well.  
1. Management needs information to make a decision.  
2. More information is better than a little information.
3. You can never have too much information.
4. Let's get more information before we make a decision so that we make
the right decision the 1st time.
5. Now that we have all the information (???), set up a study group to
make conclusions about what the information means.
6. Management reads the report & recommendation of the committee.
7. Send the report back to committee to clarify section C, paragraph 17.
8. Management review of final report, try for consensus agreement.
9. Report consensus management agreement to VP level.
10. VP makes the decision that should have been made 8 months ago.

Anything seem familiar.

Thanks ... Jay Novak
NovaRace Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: McAbee, Chuck [mailto:Chuck_McAbee at csx.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 2:51 AM
To: 'f500 at f500.org'
Subject: RE: [F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves

Dave - 

I believe if you dynoed all the participants at the Runoff's you would
find
more than 5.8% between the best and the worst engines in the field.
Progress moves forward, not backward.  No one in their right mind is
going
to offer an engine that is inferior to what we already have.  What would
be
the point, who would buy it?

I believe the 40mm carbs probably account for the peak between the 7750
max
for the 494 and the 8000 max for the 493.  Hopefully, Mike Moench
(Sidewinder Mike) or someone else when the dyno the engines will compare
apples and apples and test both engines with 38mm carbs.  The
differences
between the 494 and 493 are probably as near equal as we will ever get
any
two engines.    

No one has any dyno figures for any of the 494 RAVE configurations, and
they
have the recommendation for Board approval....For all we know, some 494
RAVE
configuration might have a 10% improvement over the stock 494....Let's
get
the 493 legalized and get on with the fun of racing instead of the agony
of
bitching about engines.

Chuck McAbee
SEDIV #16

-----Original Message-----
From: dogill80 at charter.net [mailto:dogill80 at charter.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 10:56
To: f500 at f500.org
Subject: Re: [F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves

Chuck,

I cannot agree that a 5.8% difference in horsepower on the top end is
"remarkably similar" and I predicate my judgment on the "remarkably
similar"
horsepower figures of the AMW and Rotax, Kawasaki and AMW, and Chapparal
and
Kawasaki.  If Helio (Castro Neves), Mark (Martin), Ron (Fellows), or
Kimi
(Raikonnen) believed they had that much horsepower advantage over their
competitors, they'd soil their knickers every time they strapped in.

I realize the caliber of competition at our levels is quite simplified,
several orders of magnitude lower in economic input, and less pivotal in
our
daily lives.  However, if we are going to compete, we need to try to do
this
one ( as opposed to the AMW vs. Kawasaki and Rotax vs. AMW) a bit
better.
If applying 38mm Mikuni's to the 493 effectively evens the power output,
I
will get on the 493 bandwagon but, first, I need some assurance that
this
new motor will not instantly obsolesce the existing engine
configuration.

dg

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "McAbee, Chuck" <Chuck_McAbee at csx.com>
To: <f500 at f500.org>
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 9:57 PM
Subject: RE: [F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves

> Jay -
>
> One question....Was the 493 run with it's stock 40mm Mikuni's or with
38's?
>
> The 494 is stock with the 38mm Mikuni's.
>
>
> I agree the data shows the engines to be remarkably similar.
>
>
> Chuck McAbee
> SEDIV #16
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay Novak [mailto:jnovak6 at wideopenwest.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 22:49
> To: f500 at f500.org
> Subject: [F500] 493 - 494 dyno curves
>
>
> OK guys, I have been trying to get dyno data from Rotax for a couple
of
> weeks.  I just got it last Monday by fax.  I finished putting together
a
> graph comparing the data of the torque & hp of PRODUCTION STOCK 493 &
> non Rave 494.  The data that I received was in metric units, Nm torque
> (Newton-meters) & engine rpm (also had Kw, fuel flow etc).  The faxes
> were Rotax data sheets.  I copied the data to Excel, converted the
> metric torque data to ft-lbs & then calculated the SAE hp.  Take a
look
> at graph at the link below & I think you will see that we have two
very
> similar engines.  I put lots of notes on the graph defining some of
the
> variations in the 2 engines.  I think that they are amazingly close
> above 6000 RPM for being totally different designs. (Reed vs. rotary
> valve).  It is pretty clear to me that the performance will be VERY
> similar in the cars.  Remember these 2 curves represent the engine's
> performance with production exhaust systems & not your typical Aaen
pipe
> setup.  It seems to me that with our Aaen pipe setup we have been
right
> at 8000 rpm in any case, so the HP on the race track might even be
> closer.
>
> I hope that this helps to clear up some issues for many of us.
>
>
> http://www.f500.org/rotax/
>
>
> Thanks ... Jay Novak
> NovaRace Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> F500 mailing list - F500 at f500.org
> To unsubscribe or change options please visit:
> http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500
> *** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
>
>
_______________________________________________
F500 mailing list - F500 at f500.org
To unsubscribe or change options please visit:
http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500
*** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
_______________________________________________
F500 mailing list - F500 at f500.org
To unsubscribe or change options please visit:
http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500
*** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***