Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
Squizz wrote:Great to see you all there!
Apart from the post-race shennanigans, due to someone's remarkable lack of a grasp on reality, it was a great day.
.. and to quote Jim Morrison - "I sit on the fence... and my balls hurt" 
| 99 528i SE Touring | 01 Mandarin VX220- I might have to review my opinion.may have been at least a place better, but for the fact she didn't trust a certain racer to fight her without contact and thus let him past after a while, and another one rejoined the track and she should have got past but once again was not confident that he would not have caused an incident. 
.. 
Squizz wrote:Oh yeah, our in-car camera shows a certain car producing some lovely flames.
MartG wrote:No way can that be standard then
(Unless someone knows different? 
). I've spotted it before on this particular car from exterior video... - running rich, which would also give a little more power. The old '5p resistor' on the water temp sensor would do this by giving a false temp reading and fooling the ECU into thinking the engine is still cold, hence the ECU running it rich.(possibly) performance enhancing modifications? 
MartG wrote:Squizz wrote:
I hope that when the car is tested the organisers bear in mind that for legal reasons the 122/123bhp quoted by Toyota for the MR2 is the
allowed for air filter and exhaust gain. , but these said cars have been well maintained and loved, most of the challenge cars have only seen a service if they were lucky before been hurled around a circuit at 6.5 -7.5ooo revs, hence the unreliability of most, that said when we had mine dyno graphed after the rebuild with all original but new parts the car was able to reach the magical 122bhp allowed in the regs, so most on the grid knowing that most are not mechanically checked regularly and serviced, plus being over weight would be hard pressed to be this or above.? ......... 
- Glad you had a decent race with no further damage to fix in the winter period! 
racing23mr2 wrote:SQUIZZ! get Karen in a MK2 next year.
.. possibly... But we've been made a good offer which will hopefully see us in the Nippon Challenge next year. 
(from briskly reading JWR_AW11 comments) run slightly rich at the top end limiting gains anyhow, i can understand the idea behind increasing fueling into the cylinder, but surley its a step backswards unless the VE is changed alowing for the fuel to be burnt efficently ? gueniunly intrested(sorry no spellcheck 
)jonp02 wrote:would a rich car not be down on hp? as i understand the std fuel map's
jon
, in my case we had rebuilt the engine and had the mixture a tad wrong, this was due to running late on the rebuild and not having the time to check things before the first race or two. i really should have left this to Stu to answer as he is the mechanic but i just wanted to close the grey area of this car being or possibly having tuning issues(it did but the wrong and non beneficial kind).
Running intentionaly rich is not going to do any good whatsoever. Just going to foul the plugs, promote bore wash, etc."chippery". Move along, nothing to see here. Roll on next year! .....come on Tim can you see it? can anyone else?, though not in malice just making a point.racing23mr2 wrote:just look at some photos of the said car(front view) its not mechanical but is in the blue book as a definite reg.
? MartG wrote:racing23mr2 wrote:just look at some photos of the said car(front view) its not mechanical but is in the blue book as a definite reg.
Can we have a clue Sarah
.....(click pic to enlarge a bit)
.....
It will be obvious when I post up the race video. 
