Helium...

I tried that.. It made me talk funny.

Just to let you all know, there is absolutely NO problem servicing GEN II transmissions. Almost all the internals are the same, primary differences: ring and pinion.

Has anyone tried a Gen3 final drive transmission in a Gen2? Might make things simpler to only have one version of the transmission. Seems like it would make 5th much more useful, though it would limit top end to about 124 mph at 5,500 rpm with the .77 5th gear ratio, if my calculations are correct.

Interestingly, using the old .73 5th gear ratio would bring the top end back to nearly the same speed as the current Gen2 final drive, at just over 130mph at 5,500. Changing the 5th gear would be a lot easier to deal with than having to stock two different transmissions...

breton wrote:Has anyone tried a Gen3 final drive transmission in a Gen2? Might make things simpler to only have one version of the transmission. Seems like it would make 5th much more useful, though it would limit top end to about 124 mph at 5,500 rpm with the .77 5th gear ratio, if my calculations are correct.

Interestingly, using the old .73 5th gear ratio would bring the top end back to nearly the same speed as the current Gen2 final drive, at just over 130mph at 5,500. Changing the 5th gear would be a lot easier to deal with than having to stock two different transmissions...

My guess is that it would not work well due to differences in the shape of the torque curve for the two engines. The 1.9 delivers peak torque between 4,000 and 4,300. I think the 1.6 keeps pulling all the way to the artificial 6,700 red line.

Peak HP in the 1.9 is about 5,100, but it will pull to 5,500+ (necessary to stay in the torque band). The 1.6 effectively peaks at the rev limiter (though it will pull on the dyno past 8,000), but it's peak torque curve is much higher than the Gen 2 (really needs to be above 5,000), so the effective width between torque and shift points aren't all that different. Effectively, you would be dropping the shift point in the Gen2 about 3 to 6 mph at 5,500 rpm. The old 5th gear would be nearly identical (130.6 to 131.7), while the new 5th gear would max out at about 124mph. Top end in 4th would be roughly 98 mph vs. 104. Theoretically, this should actually make the Gen 2 quicker, though it would be offset a bit by the increased demand to shift up to 5th.

I drive and will continue to drive a Gen 2 car. I fall into the class of drivers that didn't convert to Gen 3 because I can't afford it. This speaks to the point that I bought my Gen 2 car because I AM a budget racer (those of you who know me, know this). IMHO, a TON of the drivers that converted to Gen 3 did so to get a faster, more balanced car and because they could afford it. Frankly, for an organization like the SCCA that seems to always be struggling for membership and participation, it seems to me to be counterproductive to walk away from a class that could provide the third or fourth best race in the Runoffs and could help support Majors entries for many, many years to come.

If you're one of the racers that converted because you were afraid of not being able to compete in the Runoffs, please speak up. On the other hand, if you're one of the drivers that would love to convert, but can't (for whatever reason) and still want to run Majors and the Runoffs, please speak up.

I am one of a thousand (literally), but it won't stop me from trying. I want to run Majors (in my own class) and I want to shoot for the Runoffs (in my own class) and it may be conceited, but I thing Gen 2 cars have earned the right to have that opportunity.

Again, it is just my opinion, but I feel strongly about it and I think it's worth sharing. I believe that others feel my way. If I'm wrong, I'm sure you'll tell me. I hope I'm not.

Respectfully,
Tristan Welling
SRF331, #32
NEDiv

You are not wrong Tristan. I bought an already converted Gen3 because of what the SCCA originally said was going to happen to Gen two's. It's a little different now.

Why did I buy a Gen 3? Running the 25 Hour with a bullet-proof engine was too good to pass up, and the economics made sense to do it when I did. I also expected that most of the competitors I raced against were going to do the same, so that was an influence as well. The Runoffs didn't play a big factor (though I've gone often, each year I find cost and effort less fulfilling).

The fact that there's even a discussion about potentially having the Runoffs available for the Gen2 should be exciting. I was a "victim" of the first conversion, having bought a Renault in at the end of 1992, just before the conversion was mandated. I had no interest in the Ford given I had just made my first large racing car investment (coming out of karting). In 2007, we were no longer welcome in SCCA, so about a dozen of us went off to NASA, instead (a long story and alcohol required to discuss that!) and eventually was forced to make the transition to the Ford.

Having any home for SRF is a welcome change in attitude. The success of that will be up to the local racers to continue to compete; that will drive the direction of the class more than any one individual. As they say, "show me the money!"

I'm in GEN3 but I can totally agree with keeping SRF as a Majors class as long as the car counts comply with GCR minimums.

I went with GEN3 primarily because of the more reliable engine and superior weight distribution (a big factor). The fact that GEN2 would be eventually decertified for Majors competition had little to do with my decision.

So, if you have a GEN2 and want to continue to play in all Club Racing venues, don't go bitchin' here.

Send your emails to the Comp Board!