[3literpwr]

Well I am trying to decide to get this cell off someone and its kinda small, so I just want to see what you fellas are getting as a average...... Please include injector size and fuel pressure if you know it...... Also Boost pressure too.....

Thanks
Larry Parker
#622

 

[Anders Green]

I crewed for Charles Sherrill at STPR. He runs an Evo, I don't know the boost. We calculated that his mpg was 5 stage, 16 transit.

Anders

 

[Mark Larson]

Keep in mind that the SCCA rally board had approved a rule change to allow up to 90 miles between services starting in 2006. When RA took over, it was stated that all SCCA rules would carry forward to RA events, so I'm assuming that's still the case, though I can't find any mention of it in the 2005 rulebook or Operations Manual.

This would allow events like ours, the Ojibwe Forests Rally, to drop some or all of the roadside fuel stops. In our case, you'd probably need to be able to run 35 or 40 stage miles, plus 40 - 50 miles of transit, depending on the route.

Is anyone else counting on this rule to be implemented in 2006 as scheduled?

 

[Mark Larson]

>I crewed for Charles Sherrill at STPR. He runs an Evo, I
>don't know the boost. We calculated that his mpg was 5 stage,
>16 transit.
>
>Anders

So, for Ojibwe 2006, if the rule change goes through, you'd need about 8 gallons for stages and 3 for transits. A 12-gallon fuel cell would be minimum.

 

[jeff burmeister]

George's Evo gets on Average 4.4 - 4.6 on stage, 14 - 15 on transit.

Being in a car that was forced to retire less then 2 miles from a re-fuel point at Rim this year, this issue has become one of my largest concerns for Organizers in both RA and NASA.

I don't ever want to be involved with a race were we're forced to tune an engines to make distances.

Jeff Burmeister
SpecialStage.com
The North American Rally Resource
[a href="http://www.specialstage.com/blogs/index.php?blog=5" target="new"]My Rally Blog[/a]

[a href="mailto:[email protected]"]Click Here [/a] to request information on advertising

 

[SagSert]

15gal cell, 34mm restrictor, 790cc injectors, 550cfm turbo, 12psi transit boost, 19psi stage boost, 5.5mpg on stage, 13mpg on transits.

Cheers
M.Samli

 

[MDBodnar]

Jeff:

As organizers it's a lot easier to organize an event with longer distances between services.

It is also a lot safer to not ask the service teams to drive around all day.

It is my understanding that the distance between services was artificially lowered to accomadate smaller fuel cells to get lighter cars, which of course are faster cars...

I would not want people to have to tune for fuel economy, but there is nothing unreasonable about a 15 gallon fuel cell, and it would probably not be unreasonable to need a 20 gallon fuel cell.

What are your thoughts?

Mike

 

[Anders Green]

MDBodnar said:
>It is my understanding that the distance between services was
>artificially lowered to accomadate smaller fuel cells to get
>lighter cars, which of course are faster cars...
>
>I would not want people to have to tune for fuel economy, but
>there is nothing unreasonable about a 15 gallon fuel cell

Wow, that makes so much sense that it should have been obvious! (I'm not being sarcastic.) I wonder if this occured when the manufacturers got involved 4-5 years ago? I'm not argumentative here either, I'm actually curious if this rule/suggestion was put in place for them. Given that their presence has vastly withered, maybe 90 miles would make more sense.

Lurch: How big was the fuel cell in that car? How far past the refueling stop did you calculate it should have gone?

Cheers,
Anders

 

[starion887]

Looking at Jeff's numbers for fuel mileage, if one was running 2x stage to transit miles (which should be a representative high ratio), one would be at about 7.8 mpg average. With 12 gallons cell capacity, this would work out to about 94 miles. Since it has not been unusual in the past to have distances like this between fuel stops, a 12 gal cell would be a marginal choice.

FYI, this has been going on for over 20 years. In the 1987 Lac Vieux rally, it was planned to have 105 miles bewteen stops. Several folks spoke up and said it would be marginal or impossible to make this distance, and this was for folks with N/A, 2L, carbed, heavily cammed engines with 12 and 15 gal fuel cells. With good grace, the organizers quickly added a fuel-only stop.

So, the something-like-90 mile max distance has been around for years. Jeff's experience is more than frustrating for any competitor, and should not happen IMO. By the same token, however, competitor's need to realize that if they are going to play the minimum fuel weight thing, then going with a 12 gallon cell in a hot car is going to put them on the margin from time to time.

I think the 90 miles max rule is a good one, for the simple fact that it gives a clear guide for both organizers and competitors to work to.

Mark B.

 

[jandreini]

>>I crewed for Charles Sherrill at STPR. He runs an Evo, I
>>don't know the boost. We calculated that his mpg was 5
>stage,
>>16 transit.
>>
>>Anders
>
>So, for Ojibwe 2006, if the rule change goes through, you'd
>need about 8 gallons for stages and 3 for transits. A
>12-gallon fuel cell would be minimum.

Assuming you do not want to join the Canadian "trap rally" set, you should keep in mind that all existing cars are set up to the current distances. If you attempt to force competitors to install new cells, you'll only wind up with a number of people performing unauthorized service. Many of us have "been there, done that" (you (we) know who we are).

 

[Anders Green]

>you should keep in mind that all existing cars are set up
>to the current distances.

Would you, in theory, be opposed to new rallies using the "old" 90 mile limit? That is, let's assume that current rallies stayed the same but a new rally used larger intervals, and that there wasn't a good place to service on these new roads?

I don't have a fuel cell, but it would seem like getting a 12 or 15 gallon cell, and only CHOOSING to put 9 gallons in it would give one a lot more options than saving the extra pound or two and installing a 9 gallon cell. Or is there a large cost difference? Or fit difficulty? Any small fuel cell owners care to speak up as to their choice making process in this regard?

Cheers,
Anders

 

[tcc]

None of you are considering people that aren't using fuel cells in their cars, lots of stock cells are only around 15gallons or smaller even, and in an Open/G5/and maybe even G2 car its not so big.

I'm on the stock tank in my G5 car, and I haven't really been too close, but its biggish as far as stock tanks go. (I'm on 720cc injectors, 18-21psi boost, 47psi, b16g turbo).

 

[Flyboy]

>
>I don't have a fuel cell, but it would seem like getting a 12
>or 15 gallon cell, and only CHOOSING to put 9 gallons in it
>would give one a lot more options than saving the extra pound
>or two and installing a 9 gallon cell.

FYI, gas weighs 6 lbs. per gallon, for any of you out there who'd like to make the calculations. Hence, five gallons of extra fuel would be 30lbs, which would be slightly noticable to the driver.

Dennis Martin
[email protected]
920-432-4845

 

[Doug Woods]

>Assuming you do not want to join the Canadian "trap rally"
>set

Joe:

Please explain.

Doug Woods

 

[Lurch]

>None of you are considering people that aren't using fuel
>cells in their cars, lots of stock cells are only around
>15gallons or smaller even, and in an Open/G5/and maybe even G2
>car its not so big.

Right. My Protege has a 13 gal. tank. It gets about 6 mpg on stages. And it is a normally aspirated 2.0.

I would think the absolute limit would be decided by a heavy Production class RSX. 200+ hp...and no fuel cell allowed in P class.

Don't make the guys go to bigger cells. What a pain.

From rule 5.7.B.2 of the 2005 RA rules:

The fuel capacity of the vehicle shall be sufficient that the vehicle
be able to traverse a total of ninety (90) miles with a maximum of
45 stage miles within that number without fuel replenishment. If
other fluids limit the range of the vehicle, the capacity of those
fluids shall also be sufficient to traverse that same distance.

It used to be sixty miles period with no distinction between stage and transit miles. It was changed for 2005.

A 15 gal. cell SHOULD take care of most cars.

PS...Joe, is that an admission of guilt?
Anders, Jeff Burmeister is not Lurch.

 

[Morgan]

I have one word for you guys " Hybrid and alternative fuels!" }(

 

[Jens]

>I have one word for you guys " Hybrid and alternative fuels!"
>}(

Or...

Compliance with federal and state emission control laws.

 

[derek]

My 2.0L carbed Golf makes 6 MPG on stage and about 20mpg on transit. There are no injectors and no boost.

Since gas has a fixed about of HP per unit these numbers would indicate that we all use about the same amount of power on a stage...

Derek

 

[jeff burmeister]

>Jeff:
>
>As organizers it's a lot easier to organize an event with
>longer distances between services.
>
>It is also a lot safer to not ask the service teams to drive
>around all day.

Mike

I absolutely agree. Please don't take my prior statements as a push against organizers or their efforts. I KNOW and understand the difficulties of organizing and structuring an event is. And believe me, I love events that are compact, light service events.

But I just don't want people to dismiss this as a team issue when a well thought out structure (IE no turn arounds without a fuel offer no matter how far you've gone) could have prevented someone from being towed off a stage because a remote fuel drop wasn't allowed.

>I would not want people to have to tune for fuel economy, but
>there is nothing unreasonable about a 15 gallon fuel cell, and
>it would probably not be unreasonable to need a 20 gallon fuel
>cell.
>
>What are your thoughts?

Absolutely, if a team wants to roll the dice and 'light load' their cars in hopes that this will help with their times better, by all means I wish them all the luck in the world. Running stock tannk here. I just want to make sure that the organizers have some type of direct input from Teams with ranges etc so that we can all go there and have fun.

But we all need to remember that there is a lot of "starting up, sitting around, queued up, shut down, start up, move over for official cars, shut down, start up, get ready, no shut down, okay lets go" that is never figured into those miles. Again, I'm just a bit sensitive as we DNF because of range.

So, if I was a guy with the power to create rules for Organizers, I would like to see a couple simple things added.

-Turn around stages are forbidden unless an independant remote refuel is offered to the teams. (no point in sittind there doing nothing)

-All refueling areas must be on ground that is level.

-The range until a refuel is offered shall be defined as "(stage miles*3) + (transit miles)" and will be equal to less then 90.

But again, that is just my thought. I could be completely wrong on this.

Jeff Burmeister
SpecialStage.com
The North American Rally Resource
[a href="http://www.specialstage.com/blogs/index.php?blog=5" target="new"]My Rally Blog[/a]

[a href="mailto:[email protected]"]Click Here [/a] to request information on advertising

 

[mattjohnston]

Geeez,

I get 34mpg transit, ~16mpg stage.

I totally need more power.