Weston,

I have been watching the 88 motor issues since 2002. It has always been a concern. However time and time again winners seem based on driving skill and general car prep vs who has the 88 pistons and who does not.

I am fairly confident we can get some good data at Miller to support/disprove any 88 power differences going into 2010.

As for specific whp limits (peak or curve) there are some issues related to these which make then less than ideal. I will be happy discuss this with you.

A wise man once said (no I don't know who he was).

"If it ain't broke don't fix it"

I don't see a broken system here. Cars in the So-Cal/Nor Cal region seem to be on par with each other. Race wins seem to come down to drivers skill, set up and luck.

Just as an FYI I am having a new windshield installed for Nationals (non factory). I have also ordered a Pro Shield Tear off to see if this helps solve the broken/cracked windshield issues we are seeing in the West.

Here is the link to the tear off.

shop.protint.com/product.sc?categoryId=12&productId=63

Will this be an issue of non compliance at Miller?

joepaluch wrote:


For the most part, I agree and have had similar experiences, but once you get everything else worked out, engine power does matter.

There is a widespread perception that the '88 motor is the only motor you really want in this class, and there is an actual difference to back that up. Pretty much anyone building a motor is building an '88, and some replace good motors just so they can have an '88.

I just don't want to see this class turn into a Spec Miata, where most everyone is blowing money and pushing the limits of the rules, in some attempt to one-up the next guy, then everyone else has to do the same just to keep up. We're already seeing that kind of stuff in our class, and it's only going to get worse. I know we keep saying "low cost, equal racing", but actions speak louder than words. I'm not referring to any one person when I say that, as I've seen this from a number of people. Screw it, I guess I'll just do the same then... I'm tired of being one of the few people who actually wants to compete on a level playing field.




It will definitely be interesting to see how things pan out. It's too bad the dyno at Nationals is overpriced... I'd really like to see some current dyno's of a few of our cars at the same location, where we know things like type of fuel, engine configuration, DME, etc.




Yeah, I think that's something that will be good to discuss at the rules meeting at Nationals. There are a lot of viewpoints that we should consider.

cbuzzetti wrote:


No. I would not be a compliance issue so have at it. If it does reduce glass cracking great.

BTW.. for all those concernd about glass safety. This past weekend at Road America the Porsche GT3 RSR of Patrick Long had large crack in it s glass windshield. Of course they had the $$$ to replace it next race, but they still used glass.

As for hp of the 88. Sure on paper 88 is ideal and building an 88 is nothing new. Most will get their hands on one if they can. However at the same time most that do realize that while "nice" it did not get them any power. I bought an 88 924S parts car years ago for virtually nothing once I sold off 2-3 parts. It came with an 88 motor and short 5th box. I have run the 88 motor compared with my 84/87 motor. The was no power gain to my 88 back 2-3 years ago.

In fact I ran my old low comp motor for 2 season with the 88 build and waiting since there was no power gain. Currently I have the 88 motor in the car and my 84/87 motor is due for a refresh. This is the motor I ran last year at Miller and was down on power. However it also had 15-20% leak down on two cylinder due to leaky valves and I changed it over the winter after I confirmed the leak down numbers.

So while I will have more hp than last year I am just getting back to the HP levels I had on my non-shaved head 84/87 motor back in 2003 when it was fresh.

1st what ever rule changes that are maid we should lean towards making the cars faster not slower, that applies to lexan , increase in min weight or tire size and so on. Second one rule that I would liked discussed is the placement of ballast to allow four and aft of the mounting brackets but more importantly either side of car. If cars had more equal side weight when going to a clockwise or counter clockwise track the racing would also be closer. there are small changes we could make to move us away from being the slowest class! Just my 1cent.

Charlie, you no good, low life cheating *!#%&*

Of course a tear off is a complete, blatent rules violation and even suggesting should be a 10 grid spot penalty for the Big Show, in my humble opinion.

The aero advanage of having a clean, slippery surface on our big windwhields is worth 5 mph at the end of the straight at Miller. If you are getting one, I am getting two, so there.

How much did you pay Joe to give you a "thumbs up"?

Spec Miata here we come.

Big Dog