hrd-hr30

that was Coates Rally Queensland. Some nice pics there Col. for those who want to go and spectate at a rally, here's what's coming up: * Aug 12, Round 3 KCF Short Course Series, Jimna. * Sept 9, Goodyear Auto Service Centre Classic Rally, Gallangowan * Nov 4, BioGanics Cooloola Rally, Gympie Rumour has it that a few top Classic rally cars from NZ might be coming over for Gallangowan. John Spencer has been running his awesome Datsun 1600 over in NZ all year and a few of them are keen to come and do an event over here. That would be worth seeing. difficult event for spectating though. Stages start at Beerburrum, then go through Woodford, Jimna, and out to Gallangowan. Have to see what their spectator instructions are closer to the event. here's a couple of pics of my rather unglorious foray into rallying a couple of years ago... http://www.dairally.net/media/hrd_17-04-04.jpg http://members.westnet.com.au/debandtim/images/stanza1.jpg I stick to service crewing now! lol

bump

no worries. I didn't compare 0-100kph to 0-400m times after you pointed that out before. I simply said you're misinterpreting what they are each about. and again, real world cars don't behave like that. so they are very closely matched, as the figures suggest. How many real life drag races have you seen where a 2 cars that run the same times, pull 3 carlengths to 200ft and then cross the line together? it just doesn't happen in the real world. that's my point. The lead only keeps changing in drag races in bad car movies!

I though tth epoint of your post was that 0-100kph times are useless. I mean that's what you said. sorry if I misinterpreted that. All you argument revolved around the difference between cars that get off the line faster and those that don't launch but come on strong in the top end. So again, if i misunderstood what your problem with 0-100kph was, its only because of your explanation. i can only go on what you're saying, not what you're thinking. I think its you who's missed the point. 0-100kph times are not designed to show who covers distance quicker. 0-400m times do that. 0-100kph times are designed to show which car accellerates to 100kph the quickest. you're right, it's not rocket science. what you're saying here is like saying 0-400m times are useless, because a car might loose a race but be faster (in trap speed). so the slower car won. their both moot points.

don't buy secondhand shocks. unless they are a very good quality rebuildable shock, and you are planning to rebuild them. otherwise it will probably be a waste of money. I don't think you'll get adjustable upper arms for the front for $159! I certainly haven't seen anything even close to that cheap. offset camber adjusting bushes are more expensive than that! Arms are normally around $5-600 depending on brand, and even then the quality varies dramatically from what I've seen. I'd suggest the Whiteline stuff too. everyone seems very happy with that gear, and you know what you are getting is quality, and the springs/shocks are setup to work together.

I can't agree with you Big Rizza. Too much theory poorly applied that doesn't even come close to modelling the real world. one quick example of how poorly applied you estimations are from your last example... the V8 wasn't doing 20kph for one second - that was its instantaneous velocity at the end of that second. A much more reasonable estimation (though still terribly innacurate) would be to average the speed for that second. ie the diffference between the speed at the beginning of that time period and the end of it. in this case 10kph. So the V8 would have travelled much closer to 2.7m instead of 5.5m as you state. And the innacuracies just keep on compounding from there with each subsequent time period. I'll Leave aside the completely unrealistic modelling of the cars' accellerations and complete disregard for gearing, as that would be far too complicated to get into here. anyway, the fact of the matter is, in the real world, 0-100kph times are a useful comparison of accelleration performance. a car that has a better 0-100kph time will always be in front of a car with a slower 0-100kph time in the real world. For what you're saying to actually hold true in the real world instead of just on badly modelled physics and poorly applied mathematics, you would have to find a statistically significant sample of dissimilar cars, where one has a clear launch advantage over the other, but do the same 0-100 time, and where the one with the start line advantage does a much faster 0-400m time. because according to your theory, it will have covered many more metres by the time it reached 100kph than the other car. In your above example the V8 is already 0.48 seconds ahead by the time they have both hit 100kph. it will have to be more than just one comparison though because if what you're saying is true it will happen wherever a car has a launch advantage and similar 0-100kph time. If you just find one out of all the awd performance cars out there, the result is much more likely to have been skewed by gearing which will be a much more significant factor in the real world. ie if one car had to pull another gear just before 100kph and the other pulls 3rd just after 100kph. That is a much more likely scenario to skew 0-100kph results inthe real world. Anyway, the issue you raised really doesn't happen in the real world. go and find an old PCOTY or BFYB test. I'm sure they will show that an AWD turbo car with a very similar 0-100kph time as a front engine rwd taxi will not have a substantially better 0-400m time. I see your point, but its a theoretical problem not a real world issue. 0-100kph is a good indicator of performance 99% of the time in the real world.

sorry about confusing the issue. I agre if all the lights are on, its a charging problem. That was happening when my fanbelt was slipping when i first got the car. aha - I did have a stop light out! all fixed now! why does it look like a headlight if its a stop light??? now if it looked like a stovetop hotplate I would've got it...

price drop to $4000 ono.

bump price drop to $4000 ono starts first time everytime. runs well. drives A1. I can deliver as far as Sydney for cost of fuel to tow it there and get back home - eg $500 to Sydney.

thanks. all the lights were working. It's only on intermittently when the lights are on, half the time its not lit up at all, and it flickers at times too. Maybe I should check for a loose wiring at one of the lights...

yep sounds like a charging problem. could be as simple as the fan belt loose/slipping, or wire fallen off the back of the alternator. Or it could be the alternator itself, but it pays to chack the basics first. Normally in the Bosch type alternators, its just worn brushes. These are replaceable without removing the alternator, and will cost alot less than a reco/exchange alt. If it turns out you need a replacement alt, I'd get one from a auto sparky. They're normally cheaper than repco in my experience. can anyone tell me what the 2 warning lights on the R30 dash that look like headlights mean? There are 2 of them, one faces left, and right next to it the other faces right. I intermittently get the one on the right lighting up when the headlights are on. What the hell are they?

the radiator in my HR30 was a 280C radiator. I replaced it yesterday with a radiator out of a manual MR30, which fits the full width of the radiator support opening unlike the one in the pic above. I also had to use the manual R30 top rad hose. the overflow connector faces the wrong side of the car, but that's no biggie. I also replaced the worn alt/waterpump belt and replaced the bearing in the idler puller for the power steer. Its so quiet now! I also have a stupid question - the amber 'headlight-looking' light in the dash is on sometimes when the lights are on. Sometimes its out, and occassionally it flickers. Is this supposed to be a charge warning light??? if so, why does it look like a damn headlight?

yep, that's one of the many dumb things about Improved Production. It was a good set of rules for its day, but that was 20 years ago. It need to be modernised IMHO. tyre/wheel width - I'd favour limiting cars to whatever fits inside the standard bodywork. No Flares (or widebody kits) allowed. Lipping is OK. on the power issue, I've seen R32 GTR track cars in Japan claiming 800ps, and they certainly didn't have lag problems even on a tight track like Tsukuba. Allow that much power and the only things that will be capable of winning are the awd vehicles. No rwd is going to be able to get that kind of power to the ground on semi's that fit inside the standard bodywork, let alone for a whole race. I think outright power should be limited to around 600bhp by some means. injector size limits for particular cars, pop-off valve, or restrictors.

stuff that - I don't think anyone's talking about a parity class of racing. just some checks/controls to limit outright power and rules that don't unnecesarily disadvantage any group of cars (such as late model turbos). control ECU for every different car that ends up racing???

forged internals? not sure what yoor are doing, but factory (prepped) rods should be fine for 95% of applications. forged pistons are normally made to order from blanks from places like Specialised Pistons. Call SWR (stewart Wilkins Racing) in Sydney - he'll be able to help you out.

yes, that's the ongoing tender process refered to in the link I posted previously. Council have stated they are hoping to have an arrangement in place by September. So if all goes well there may be actual events or track days there before the end of the year. The Total Driver daya at Lakeside are not a 'track day'. It is strictly driver training being conducted only with instructors in the car, and no speeds in excess of 100kph on the straights. I got this straight from people who attended. NDSCC (Northern Districts Sporting Car Club) have also been talking to PRSC about the use of Lakeside as a venue for events. NDSCC used to have their clubrooms at Lakeside many years ago, and Council has been receptive to their enquiries, even offering some financial support for events in the community. But they have advised it will need to be conducted and arranged through whoever wins this tender process. So we are waiting to hear more about this whole process.

well come on then mountainrunner and rb20inside, don't hold out on us, tell us when the next track day at Lakeside is on!

good points, but without some measures to limit power (other than tyre width) nothing apart from awd turbos would be in the running. The reason I am against a rim or tyre width limit as IPRA currently has, is that the heaviest cars (which need the most power) would be hardest hit, and it hurts their cornering performance too much - which is already their weakness. And also hurts more the longer the races go for, or in warmer climates - and I live in Brisbane... boost limits are harder to enforce, and encourage expensive engine development to get more power from the same boost level. But I was thinking of free engine internals/porting anyway... So you might be right - it might be a better way than restrictors. The more i think about it, the more I'm starting to come around on that one.

I'm with GTRgeoff. that would be very expensive racing and has some controls that are very difficult to police. I'd vote for all panels to be of original material, all glass must remain. No flares or wide bodies. no metal removal except unused brackets. If you want a silhouette series with spaceframe chassis, free suspension, composite widebodies, wings and perspex there is already a category for you - 3D Sport Sedans. here's the IPRA regs. a couple of years old, but you get the general idea http://www.ipravic.com.au/other_content/IP...203J%202004.pdf

I think I speak for most of us elitists when i say we prefer roads with corners (and sometimes cows ) rather than a drive up the highway.

fairness to all cars was the purpose of the restrictor based on factory weight, and applied to all cars, turboed or not. actually, i think that was the purpose of starting this thread... Lambo wouldn't be able to run in a Production car category anyway. as for 3E, I don't want my race car to have a standard exhaust or be slower than my road car... If you want to create a race category for the younger generation as an alternative to drifting, or for those who want to race something made in the last 20 years on a level playing feild, it has to allow freedoms to tune the cars to a reasonable level. as for the "family of vehicles" thing, that problem is created by the wording of the IPRA regs. this theoretical modern racing series could simply do away with that wording and the problem dissapears. Just reword the eligibility rules to also include used/imported cars available to the public under the DOTARS import scheme (or whatever it is) where at least 200 are registered in Aus - same as what they have for new cars.

no, the HR30 is stock apart from springs, wheels & tyres, and is not registered. That might all change soon. I'm missing my old Datto 1200 coupe race car. The GTR is fast on the track, but just doesn't have the raw edge that the caged, RWD stripped out race car had. And I can't bring myself to do that to the GTR. The HR30 on the other hand is looking likely to go under the knife...

agree with most of what SK said, except the sperical bearings. I've been involved with rallying for years, and almost all cars are using sperical bearins in lower control arms and the like. This isn't a load bearing joint and wear rates are almost non-existant. They last years of pounding around in the forest, and I have never seen one fail in competition here in QLD. Sport sedans on their massive slicks with free suspension systems, good aero, and low centre of gravity probably generate alot mor lateral loads than a new production based class with no/very limited areo, factory suspension pickup points and semi slicks can ever hope to. They are also relatively cheap (if you kniow where to get them). I wouldn't say you have to use them - if you prefer poly, go for it. And I would also impose some restrictions to limit a total redesign of the suspension, such as having to retain factory lower arms for double wishbone systems (without rose joints or adjustability), and factory pivot points. Just looking for a way to include the wealth of affordable adjustable aftermarket equipment available today for modern cars, and allowing a useful increase in geometry settings for modern vehicles without macpherson struts. Cusco front upper arms can be had for about $600 and good quality rear upper arms for about $200 for Skylines/Silvias and presumably alot of other modern Japanese things. I cannot see this costing $5000/yr on a production based car with limited places where they can be used. On this note, make bushing materials for rear cradles free. there are arguments for/against control tyres: -the big budget teams will still have advantages with control tyres - ie they will come out with a brand new (scrubbed in) buffed set for each race if they feel that is a competitive advantage, and have full depth sets for wet conditions. Alot of semi slicks are now also available in wet compounds - as hillclimbers are finding out... -IPRA's new control tyre doesn't seem at all popular, and the larger sizes are only available in harder compounds, which is a disadvantage for many of the short races run at state level. It exaggerates the handling advantages of the smaller, ligther EM vehicles by giving them softer rubber. -It can also end up costing the competitors more by removing the chance of securing tyre sponsorship. maybe a limit on the number of tyres available per race meeting is the answer to the cost problem there? I'm against aero - the group A and C cars were much better to watch because they had no real aero. cars moved around and had to be driven. areo also gets in the way of racing IMHO. I'm also against electronic aids. no aftermarket traction control, launch control, or ABS. factory systems can be retained unmodified or removed. those are my thoughts...

I'm not about to speculate directly about the legality of anyone's car on the internet. All I will say is I don't even know what year models they are, or when they were log booked, but the bimmer looks to be a LM car to me, judging by tyre profile.

some spoiler designs cover (or partially cover) the standard steel bars, but they do have to be there. some escorts are allowed bumperettes on the front. becasue they are the standard front bar... other than that, I can't think of anything else that would make it look confusing to those who aren't familiar with the rules.