I believe that there is a big misconception to the Pro built motor.

As far as I know all the "Pro Built" motors are using used pistons and untouched bores.

It is important to do the oiling mods (what ever that is) and to have the late oil pan.

The performance gain is in the head. A must is to install new valve seats, guides, seals and shave to maximum compression to meet the 10.5 to 1 compression ratio.

This cost anywhere from $800 to $2,500 depending on who does it.

You want to start with the 85.5 and later head. An 88 engine with the 10.2 to 1 pistons is a help but not required.

The so-call "PRO BUILT" motors should cost aywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 depending on who builds it.

The engine in my car was $3,500 and was built by Steve Rusikof (sp). He has built many of the motors in So-Cal.

I don't see this as an unreasonable cost to go racing. Especially when you consider what it costs to run a Miata at the front of the pack.

Not sure you can find a more reasonable way to go racing that has more that a couple of cars in class.

I agree with ol' Buzzetti. The only way to truly do this if it is even necessary would be to use the World Challenge reward weight ballast system.
There will never be true parity in racing, probably never has, and probably never will. Even in the Skip Barber Series, we all had “equal cars” from front to rear, but if you could still tell who was faster and who was slower; the cream always rises. I don’t want to come off as erogant or egotistical, but it is true. The only way a person gets better is through track time, and instruction with others to work at it. This series is based as (Spec), which means the series tries to take as much of the car and wallet out of the equation as possible (all racing is expensive), and place a majority in the drivers hands.

Look at pro-spec series examples ( Ganassi and Penske in Indycar) and Ganassi in Rolex (9 out of 11 wins) Damn, Ganassi.

Anyway, I still think this is an issue of socio-economic’s and driver ability. It sounds like from my point of view, that some want to penalize the guys who don't have the knowledge nor the time to build their own engines, for the sake of guys who do their own rebuilds.

A PRO Build is totally different than an engine refreshing.

To me a "Pro Build" is what I would do to my engine to run in GTS or Performance Touring, blueprinting and the whole deal.

Freshening my motor for Spec 944 with new rings, etc. but keeping it tollerances in Spec with normal parts, is a rebuild to make the engine last 2-3 seasons, before i have to rebuild it.

Once you have done other types of racing in other series, you will find this out in a much larger way.

Also with what Eric stated, if you really want even engines, than you will have to get one sole engine builder, supplier, and even at that, you are not guaranteed to get a normal “Spec” motor. When I raced in USAC Focus Midgets we had spec sealed engines. However some did not get the same engine I received, even though all were “locked, wink:wink:” from our sole supplier. Some teams were getting the engines, and breaking the seal and doing some modifications. Then they went to USAC and stated, well the seal broke when we cleaned the engine from dirt track races, by using brake clean, can we get our engine resealed. So, bam they got their engine re-sealed.

So, if we were to go that route, look out, if people think racing is political and expensive now, wait till you get involved in a deal like that one.

cbuzzetti wrote:


YES 100% Dave Dirks is a "pro" at "building" 944-spec engines ! He has done so many at this point he knows where he can make more power and where every limit and grey area is. He left plenty of room on the table for his Nationals engine but he could have gotten more from it.

Yes his engines are "probuilt"

NO NO NO .... I am not asking to not allow "pro built" engines. not in any way shape or form. ! Dad GUM , over half of the rmr cars have pro built engines. The other half have "probuilt" heads.

What I am not happy with is the arms race. "If you don't make over 140HP (144HP, 147HP) you can't win" ... I have 2 racers who have good running engines that feel they need new engines to keep up. One of these was brand new "pro built" by the wrong pro ... this year.

944-Cup has a limit on power. I (just one racer talking) feel we need a limit on power.

Really? Dave's a stickler for being legal, but is he really just choosing to leave things on the table for Nationals? Seems odd



While I have much less of an objection to power limits, than power equalization, a we have always held that a rule change requires the "burdon of proof" before enforce the pain that any rule change makes. Needs to be a clear, and compelling reason to make the change.

There will always be racers that feel they just need one more part (or horsepower) to be able to compete. That doesn't make it so... Put Dirks in their car for a session, or them in Dirk's car. Maybe it's not the motor.



Is this reality, or perception? Who is making 144-147 HP? Are their motors legal? Where were they at Nationals? No dynos showed that sort of power on Spec cars at Nationals (nor elseware that I have seen). If they exist, and are legal, they need a close look to see how they are making such exceptional power (what gray areas are they exploiting). If these gray areas can't be made black and white via refining the existing rules, then a dyno limit makes some sense.

The TM data that seems to have fuelled this speculation is not reliable. The SCCA & NASA have been looking at this with the TM & Max-Q data systems for 5+ years. No one uses them to enforce rules yet, because of the variability seen. Maybe it will be good enough one day, and that would be awesome, but it not there yet. There were big dyno/TM discrepancies in GTS, but no action based n this at Nationals. Dirk's data shows 135- to 148 HP max, depending on the lap you look at. What lap would you like? [Before I get Dirks in trouble, his dyno was 138, and his motor painstaking legal, I just use this to show the variability in TM data].

As stated above the dyno and Traq Mate data is no good. Even the dyno at Nats showed big discrepencies. Over 6 hp on my car in 4 sessions in 3 days.

It is quite possible that the upset drivers are not as good as they think they are.

How many actual drivers who are upset about HP are we talking about here?

Are these drivers that win races in their region consistently?

You can't just buy a motor and expect to win Nationals.

Crap I got 15 years into racing cars and I did not win even though I have great equiptment. I missed the set up and struggled to stay in 3rd. I have no issue with that it was my fault.

Let's get real guys, only one car is going to win on any one day. The other 28 have to accept their position and try again tomorrow.

I hate these debates. Too many good racers fall victim to this sort of thing and it sours the experience.

Charlie hits the nail on the head with the problem with HP limits:

1. Dynos are inconsistent. You would have to dyno everyone on the same day, back to back, to have any really good comparison numbers.

2. Dynos are expensive. Who will pay?

3. You can still cheat. Throttle blocks, timing switches,etc. Even if proven on the dyno, the "other guys" will still claim you have too much HP.

It is hard to accept that you just aren't as fast as the fast guys but I've seen a great driver jump into someone else's back up car that wasn't previously competive and spank the whole field in 944 Cup.

Coming from the Cup series, you guys can trust me when I say that you have it right. Spec has a great rule set and is a ton of fun for a reasonable cost.

I just don't see the rampant cheating (or more equal than others) alledged here.