• Forum membership has its advantages....

Class 5 only

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
No Ben, it's a serious question. I tried to defend the VW heritage when this all started. Now what I said would happen has. Hell, the Subaru isn't even a Baja Bug body, so why even call it Baja Bug anymore? I ditched all my plans and parts for a VW 5 car. I can't afford sequential 6 speeds, 6-10k dollar computers and building a built 2.5 liter tin cam motor from not VW. I love Volkswagens. It's why I am now assembling a 5-1600 in the garage. Class 5 Unlimited VW Baja Bug has been killed.
 

Baja Belk

Well-Known Member
No Ben, it's a serious question. I tried to defend the VW heritage when this all started. Now what I said would happen has. Hell, the Subaru isn't even a Baja Bug body, so why even call it Baja Bug anymore? I ditched all my plans and parts for a VW 5 car. I can't afford sequential 6 speeds, 6-10k dollar computers and building a built 2.5 liter tin cam motor from not VW. I love Volkswagens. It's why I am now assembling a 5-1600 in the garage. Class 5 Unlimited VW Baja Bug has been killed.
Class 5 would have been dead for sure by now without the rule changes to allow water-cooled motors. You cannot find parts for Type IV's anymore, and the costs are astronomical. I would have loved to maintain the heritage, but unless Volkswagen wants to make an naturally aspirated 2.5L Ecotech-type motor, there is no other choice.

I'm not sure how transmissions became the focus of this discussion. You can spend $30k on a trans, or $4k, but with moderated HP, your advantage is still limited, and the class will stay competitive, and budget teams can still compete. The entire point of this conversation is to prevent a world-beater, class-killing, 400 hp motor package from being developed, which is entirely possible, and currently, entirely legal. Most of us agree the motor rule should have been capped when the water-cooled engines were first allowed. Let's follow through with what was brought up by SNORE/MORE, now, before it is too late and you have 3 cars next year with 50-100 hp more than the rest of the field. Then we can discuss what we want to do about 2020 and beyond.
 

steve0we

Well-Known Member
Is this racing or car shows... last time I checked racing meant keeping up with the Jones. If you don’t like the cost of racing go to a lower class.

The limiting factor in this class is the front end.
 

turbodon

Well-Known Member
Don, nobody said that the 2.4 built motor can't compete with the stock 2.5. I for one don't have a problem racing against a stock 2.5. I think the power is about the same but the torque curve is different. I dont know who "they" is either but I assure you that nobody has ever complained about being beat by a stock 2.5 that was running a built 2.4 or I've never heard of it.
My 2.4 with mephi computer makes my H pattern more competitive. If I have to give up the built 2.4 motor at a cost of about 10k then we would need to run the sequential to even the playing field. Its the same money or more to go with the stock 2.4 tagged motor in my opinion. It means you will have to run a big money trans and big money ECU like class 10. Doesn't that just negate the whole argument that we need to keep costs down? If the rule says that 2.5 remains stock and 2.4 can be built then I think that's fair, I see them as pretty equal. Any air cooled is also good with me.


Guy's,
I didn't mean to start an argument, but I'd like to point a few things out.

No one really knows much about the 2.5 as there are only (2) cars that I know of running one currently. Schweers and Dillon. It sounds like Redline, Danzio, and similar have already been toying with them and doing R&D, not surprising as the engine has been on the market for 6 years now.

The information I received from the tuning shop that is doing the work on mine, informed me that they had recently tested one (which was not running on Gasoline pump fuel) that made mid 190's to the hub. If we correct that for a 15 or 20% drive line loss, that'd be between 232hp to 246hp at the crank (theoretically) hub dyno's are usually more forgiving than a wheel dyno but at the end of the day, they're just numbers.

A stock Danzio 2.4 DI is rated at 220hp at the crank. But since it's a 2.4, it would be left open to any modifications as long as the stock head and block is retained.

My opinion is that it's lopsided to leave an already 220hp platform open to any modifications when it's only 10 or 12 hp away from the 2.5. (Unless the 2.5 is really 246hp than that's be a more modest inclrease.)

I'm fine with keeping the 2.5 stock for the purpose of the new rules.

When i say "they" I mean the panel of 12 that voted on it who likely all own 2.4's in there cars currently. How convenient that they elect to keep the package that "they" run unlimited, but want to put limitations on the newer engine that "they" are not running.

I'd also like to say that I really don't think the 50-100 extra hp numbers that are being thrown around are even close to accurate.

A full tilt 434 trophy truck engine with huge billet heads and an individual runner intake is like 760hp.... 434CI = 7.1 liters.... 760 / 7.1 = 107hp per liter.
107hp per liter X 2.4 = 256hp.

I don't see the maximum full potential of a 2.4 with as cast factory head being anywhere near some of the numbers that have been claimed and thrown around.

I'm OK with stock 2.5..... but just know that there's a stock 220hp platform that you are leaving wide open for people to spend millions on and make all 256 of those horsepowers.
 

Zac Reish

Well-Known Member
I believe the intent for 2019 is to keep a 2.5 stock as delivered, and 2.4 open to mods, and then in 2020 reign the rules into stock 2.4 and 2.5 as delivered. I may be interpreting that wrong though.
 

PRECEPTS

Well-Known Member
Guy's,
I didn't mean to start an argument, but I'd like to point a few things out.

No one really knows much about the 2.5 as there are only (2) cars that I know of running one currently. Schweers and Dillon. It sounds like Redline, Danzio, and similar have already been toying with them and doing R&D, not surprising as the engine has been on the market for 6 years now.

The information I received from the tuning shop that is doing the work on mine, informed me that they had recently tested one (which was not running on Gasoline pump fuel) that made mid 190's to the hub. If we correct that for a 15 or 20% drive line loss, that'd be between 232hp to 246hp at the crank (theoretically) hub dyno's are usually more forgiving than a wheel dyno but at the end of the day, they're just numbers.

A stock Danzio 2.4 DI is rated at 220hp at the crank. But since it's a 2.4, it would be left open to any modifications as long as the stock head and block is retained.

My opinion is that it's lopsided to leave an already 220hp platform open to any modifications when it's only 10 or 12 hp away from the 2.5. (Unless the 2.5 is really 246hp than that's be a more modest inclrease.)

I'm fine with keeping the 2.5 stock for the purpose of the new rules.

When i say "they" I mean the panel of 12 that voted on it who likely all own 2.4's in there cars currently. How convenient that they elect to keep the package that "they" run unlimited, but want to put limitations on the newer engine that "they" are not running.

I'd also like to say that I really don't think the 50-100 extra hp numbers that are being thrown around are even close to accurate.

A full tilt 434 trophy truck engine with huge billet heads and an individual runner intake is like 760hp.... 434CI = 7.1 liters.... 760 / 7.1 = 107hp per liter.
107hp per liter X 2.4 = 256hp.

I don't see the maximum full potential of a 2.4 with as cast factory head being anywhere near some of the numbers that have been claimed and thrown around.

I'm OK with stock 2.5..... but just know that there's a stock 220hp platform that you are leaving wide open for people to spend millions on and make all 256 of those horsepowers.
Look I agree the end goal here is to make the water cooled engines in this class as stock as possible. I have an engine builder for a partner and he tells me it’s entirely possible to build a reliable 2.4 that would easily out perform a stock 2.5. The rule set forth by SNORE is meant to stop development of expensive 2.5’s and give the current modified 2.4 owners a year to use up their equipment. What we are trying to do is set the stage for a rule change in 2020 for stock only water cooled motors.
 

PRECEPTS

Well-Known Member
Is this racing or car shows... last time I checked racing meant keeping up with the Jones. If you don’t like the cost of racing go to a lower class.

The limiting factor in this class is the front end.
We all know that racing is expensive no matter what. Those of us that are working to limit the motor rules are doing it to grow the class. If you need an example look at class ten. It’s not a cheap class but it is growing because the engines rules are fixed.
Some people have referred to old class 5 as “unlimited”. That’s nonsense the only viable option before was a type IV and only thing unlimited about that motor was the amount of money it took to keep it running. The class was headed for extinction and now it has future. That future will be even better if we fix the engine rules so anyone can buy a junk yard motor from a Chevy Malibu and race it. It’s still not cheap but better than an open arms race.
 

dhjeepgeek

Well-Known Member
I don't like to add or change rules. change sucks. But if it keeps my cost down, then well Ok. More rules usually just make stuff more of a pain than is needed and more expensive.
It would be like living in California.
Single source motors, in my opinion, would suck. The source can basically name the price. And no more junk yard motors. I think a 2.4 built or a stock 2.5. But you know that someone will try to slip it by.
It too bad people cheat.
Oh well. I still have to get the car back going with the junk yard 2.4 DI.
 

promer

Well-Known Member
Stock motors are the best option to keep the class growing. Now does somebody want to loan me a few bucks for a few extra gears :D
 

Bajawillie

Well-Known Member
Jumping topics for a moment... Who is planning to run Parker?? Please chime in for those that don't visit RDC much.
So far confirmed is,
Me
Adam
Ray
L J
Mike B
 
Last edited:

SpyRacing

Well-Known Member
Jumping topics for a moment... Who is planning to run Parker?? Please chime in for those that don't visit RDC much.
So far confirmed is,
Me
Adam
Ray
L J
Mike B
In addition who is planning on running the mint with the increased entry fee this year? I know my dad is running it and a few people are thinking and arnt sure.


Sent from my iPhone using race-deZert mobile app
 

Big Whitey

Well-Known Member
I just spent time catching up on the last 5 pages and at one point someone stated that the other car that raced the 1000 against Swift’s newish JFW car was not even on the same level was more than accurate. I own that car and raced it down there. The car is 12 years old, 4 sp H pattern with a used 2.4 non DI bought out of a ten car. If we took out our down time and there’s I think they would still have won but we kept a pretty close pace for a under built car. 2.4 or 2.5 is not going to kill this class I like the stock idea with a tune, my wallet is a long way lighter than lot of the guys in the class and I pay for pretty much everything so easy acces to reliable cheaper engines works for me. I think Zac should be limited to a 2.2 with stock tune to make it fair for the rest of us
 

TMorford

Well-Known Member
If we took out our down time and there’s I think they would still have won but we kept a pretty close pace for a under built car.
You guys passed me while I was carrying the spare PS pump, fluid and allen set a half mile or so before Ben's car was parked and I had the exact opposite thought... Even after spending over 12 hours in the car, hiking, digging, digging, digging, digging, digging and picking out cactus spines from everywhere on my body the first thing I did was check to see if you had pulled on us or not. Nice meeting you guys in tech!
 

Zac Reish

Well-Known Member
You gave us a run sir. I have a lot of respect for you and your team. And your hand shake grip damn near broke my hand.
 

Zac Reish

Well-Known Member
Yes, it was. Saw Zac briefly in San Felipe and he said he was running until mile 285 so we represented.
Holy SHI T I can’t believe that was for me. I told my wife about that sign. Actually told a lot of people about that sign. She’s like yeah no, there’s another guy named Zac on a motor cycle it was most likely for him. I agreed thinking yeah why would anyone do that for me. Anyways We honked as we passed thinking haaa cool some other Zac with the same spelling is running through at the same time as me. Sweet, I’ll take it! I thought there’s no way that was for me. A 30’ long sign with 3’ tall x4” wide blue letters. Biggest sign I’ve ever seen in desert/ or racing history!!!!!! Dude that is one of the coolest things i’ve Ever seen at a race and for me!!!! I owe you!! We’ll be at Parker let me buy you dinner!
 
Last edited:

Radiobirdman32

Well-Known Member
Holy SHI T I can’t believe that was for me. I told my wife about that sign. Actually told a lot of people about that sign. She’s like yeah no, there’s another guy named Zac on a motor cycle it was most likely for him. I agreed thinking yeah why would anyone do that for me. Anyways We honked as we passed thinking haaa cool some other Zac with the same spelling is running through at the same time as me. Sweet, I’ll take it! I thought there’s no way that was for me. A 30’ long sign with 3’ tall x4” wide blue letters. Biggest sign I’ve ever seen in desert/ or racing history!!!!!! Dude that is one of the coolest things i’ve Ever seen at a race and for me!!!! I owe you!! We’ll be at Parker let me buy you dinner!
I'm so glad it fired you up. That was the idea. If I'm not at Parker, we'll see catch up soon, somewhere in 5 land.
 
Top