|
|
Post by avidsupporter on Dec 28, 2011 16:00:48 GMT 12
Have heard Douglas Stanaway out with illegal engine.
Chevron Taniwha into finals.
|
|
|
|
Post by PantherFan87 on Dec 28, 2011 16:01:09 GMT 12
OMG What?!
|
|
|
|
Post by worldno1 on Dec 28, 2011 16:37:45 GMT 12
over 10-1 compression
|
|
|
|
Post by artnmotion on Dec 29, 2011 16:34:04 GMT 12
3 different tests on his engine... 3 different readings!.....
not sure of the full story but .2 over i heard then under .1 then over .1
not very consistent tester by the sounds? they going to have to strip his engine back and get it done properly! wasn't even allowed to get a second tester in to get his engine tested from what I've heard.....
is that thing even got a calibration cert?
everything i have mentioned may not be 100% accurate also... just saying
|
|
|
|
Post by Spiker on Dec 29, 2011 16:36:52 GMT 12
was the engine sealed or is the rule no more than 10-1
|
|
|
|
Post by artnmotion on Dec 29, 2011 17:02:52 GMT 12
the rule is 10:1 , his car is impounded and the will be testing the engine i believe  engine builder is confident it will be fine |
|
|
|
Post by mrmadtaylor on Dec 29, 2011 17:17:15 GMT 12
All cars should be checked before qualifying (by a qualified compression tester with a good quality tester).. 2 reasons I think this:
1. So a driver is not side lined on the second night (and then maybe found to be ok which could happen in this case).
2. Could have a car on the track (with illegal engine) taking other cars out in qualifying that never gets checked but kills the hopes of other drivers of making it to the finals.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spiker on Dec 29, 2011 17:23:31 GMT 12
how flexible is the rule, are the snz checkers strict on 10-1 or can it be ok if its 10.3 - 1??
|
|
|
|
Post by Rusty on Dec 29, 2011 20:25:31 GMT 12
how flexible is the rule, are the snz checkers strict on 10-1 or can it be ok if its 10.3 - 1?? has to be 10:1 10.1:1 is over |
|
|
|
Post by aggressive7 on Dec 30, 2011 10:46:41 GMT 12
another way to accurately test is to do all cylinders, maybe not jus number #1 cylinder? just maybe
|
|
|
|
Post by Devilracer on Dec 30, 2011 11:26:18 GMT 12
All cars should be checked before qualifying (by a qualified compression tester with a good quality tester).. 2 reasons I think this: 1. So a driver is not side lined on the second night (and then maybe found to be ok which could happen in this case). 2. Could have a car on the track (with illegal engine) taking other cars out in qualifying that never gets checked but kills the hopes of other drivers of making it to the finals. Engine checks should ALWAYS be done before any car hits the track, this should be done at green sheeting as well. Who wants to travel away to find then that there engine isnt right. Same problem as all the cars who didnt pass vehicle checking on qualifying day, Why werent these manifold issues picked up at green sheeting? Are the checkers all reading off the same page?? I think NOT. The rulebook is way to open to interpretation. I feel for the guys who traveled a long way just to have there cars sit on/in trailers. Are we ever going to get ALL the vehicle checkers reading off the same page?  ? |
|
|
|
Post by animal13 on Dec 30, 2011 16:08:51 GMT 12
here´s how i see it. when your right on the limit of something that gets measured like the compression ratio you risk being inaccurately measured somewhere along the line. weather its in the engine shop when its being built or at the track, if the engine shops tools arent calibrated the same as the snz tools you risk being over compression. best bet is to be slightly under and you will never have an issue. and i am very well aware that different machines read differently, at the last huntly meeting my stockcar weighed in at 1490 and at rotorua with nothing changed and the same amount of fuel i weighed in at 1498. so my theory on the situation is to not push the limits because one different reading could leave your car in the shed which is not what anyone wants, not you, not snz, not sponsors and especially not the paying crowd.
anywho just my thoughts on the matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by MadMarty13B on Dec 31, 2011 12:16:47 GMT 12
sp very true^^^
|
|
|
|
Post by Pazza on Dec 31, 2011 18:09:17 GMT 12
Our car waz on a certified weigh bridge 2 days b4 xmas & went 7kg heavier at Rotavegas..
Would hate 2 have a car close 2 the limit a.
They snz scales very everywhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheter rees on Dec 31, 2011 20:04:42 GMT 12
I hope Chevron Taniwha sends a thank you card to Douglas Stanaway
|
|
|
|
Post by PantherFan87 on Jan 2, 2012 9:36:58 GMT 12
hbfan..... stop stirring.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Observer on Jan 4, 2012 13:58:29 GMT 12
I think they only use the whistler to test the compression on the final 30, as it takes some time to complete, when you add that on to the list of the other tasks the scrutineers have to do. Its a thankless task at the start of a meeting, especially with a day of it in the sun.
Were there any other cars that didn't pass the whistler?
Only ask as if 170 cars passed and one failed it would be a little hard to blame the machine.
And whats the process from I here - I suppose there is a guidline in the rule book that must be followed since they have been testing engines since "adam was a cowboy".
|
|
|
|
Post by TheFanVan.co.nz on Jan 5, 2012 7:45:15 GMT 12
Only ask as if 170 cars passed and one failed it would be a little hard to blame the machine. Given that the engine has subsequently been found to be legal when accurately tested its a little hard not to blame the way engines are tested. If one competitor is excluded from his chance to compete in the finals due to inaccurate testing, is that acceptable or one too many - I would suggest one to many. |
|
|
|
Post by The Observer on Jan 5, 2012 8:18:47 GMT 12
Given that the engine has subsequently been found to be legal when accurately tested its a little hard not to blame the way engines are tested. Hi Bump - thanks for this. I must have missed the subsequent test earlier in the thread. *ammeded post - don't think there is any comment about a further test and found to be legal?*DId they do it at the track again, or use a different whistler "Given that the engine has subsequently been found to be legal " |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 5, 2012 12:23:28 GMT 12
I've spoken with SNZ President David Jones late this morning, and he has committed to supplying me with some official details of this situation once a few more things have been sorted out.
I can say that all 170 cars were not tested, in fact I think only six before the Stanaway car showed the irregularity (I'm not sure of the total number tested, but it's not like 169 tested legal and one didn't. There's also a curve ball thrown in there which is yet to be explained).
To avoid rampant speculation maybe we could wait until that official statement is made before getting too carried away? Just a thought - but I realize that macgorian's aren't well known for their restraint ;D
|
|
engine builder is confident it will be fine
