IPRA Poll

A place to chat about the state of the IPRA nation, ask (non-technical) questions about IPRA, etc.
Public Read and Write

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10744
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by TwinTurbo » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:46 pm

Electro wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 1:01 pm
TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:46 am
I thought I should emphasise that this is a POLL it is NOT A VOTE in that it has no implications in regards to regulations changes. For the IP regulations to be changed the actually wording of the suggested revised regulation has to be provided and discussed before a vote can be taken. Which is subsequently communicated via the Delegates
It is basically a 'vote'. The members must get what the majority of members want. No 1, 2, or 3 people are god. The revised regulation's, if any, is just a matter of process and formality after the poll has been decided.
I don't see it that way Dave, plus it's a survey that hasn't gone to every member and doesn't align with the constitution (interesting :? ). How do we know what we are voting for or against? Aftermarket blocks are already not allowed so it can't be that. Are we going to have a reg that bans some genuine original equipment manufacturer blocks? How does that work? I'd like to see the wording that achieves that without affecting a huge number of IP competitors. We are after all allowed to swap to an engine from the same manufacturer provide it has the same number of cylinders and configuration.

What is the wording that stops some same manufacturer/cylinders/configuration and yet allows others? That's going to be very tricky to write. Then there is the enforcement question, are we (Technical Officers) supposed to test the metallurgy, measure the cylinder wall thickness, cut the block up to see if it has different oil galleries? It's going to be impossible to police at a race meeting.

Oh, I know it's up to the competitor to prove compliance. Let's say we (TO's) seal a BOSS302 engine at a meeting for it to be inspected later. A CAMS (sorry MA) scrutineer comes along later to check the engine. He measures it and compares it to the 1980's Fox Body Mustang Group A Homologation papers and finds that it complies (because it does). How does that work to stop the current competitors (I know of 4) running the Boss302? The fact is it doesn't.

To have any sort of decent vote we need to see the proposed regulations before hand.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
82911
forum freak
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Gold Coast QLD
Location: Gold Coast QLD

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by 82911 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:06 pm

This is a huge can of worms as Gary has rightly said.

An example of the unintended consequences of a change to the engine regs is below.
Think carefully.
I hope no one is running a Nasco 202 (NL or NP prefix) in their Torana.....
I hope everyone running a Holden 5 litre that has been decked and now has no numbers on the deck is prepared to try and prove it isn’t a Nasco or GMP & A replacement block...
These are just 2 examples, there are more....

Seriously, mucking around with IPRA engine regs is fraught with danger.

Cheers Greg..
"Conversely some people lack self awareness / emotional intelligence, and just have to be right all the time... "

Electro
old timer
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 10:12 am
Location:

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Electro » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:37 pm

TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:46 pm

I don't see it that way Dave, plus it's a survey that hasn't gone to every member and doesn't align with the constitution (interesting :? ).

Cheers
Gary
If IP is running a poll, then it is inexcusable if the poll does not go to every paid up member - no matter what medium.

Therefore, every paid member would get to choose, then the state results should go to the respective delegate. Then constitution rule 12 will come into play, because each delegate has followed 6.4.

Then the delegate will give the members 30 days notice of impending rule change - then 90 days for compliance.

JOB DONE. CONSTITUTION ALIGNED =D>

Born Again Racer
one foot in the grave
Posts: 682
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:01 pm
Location: Wimmera Vic
Location: Wimmera Vic

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Born Again Racer » Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:51 pm

TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:34 am
It's irrelevant Bruce, there are particular regs that relate to rotary engines that limit their external components, with the result that housings and end/intermediate plates are treated equally;

1.9 ROTARY ENGINE
Engines with rotary (rather than reciprocating) motion of the compressing medium (Wankel-type). A rotary engine is defined as the rotor housings, intermediate and end plates.
4.3 ROTARY ENGINES
(b) The rotor housings, intermediate and end plates shall be identifiable as mass produced Mazda items. Only engines identified as 10A, 12A or 13B are permitted. Such engines must not be exclusively from evolution/racing models.


Cheers
Gary
So if aftermarket blocks are allowed does that mean after market rotary engine components are also allowed

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10744
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by TwinTurbo » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:44 pm

Born Again Racer wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:51 pm
TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:34 am
It's irrelevant Bruce, there are particular regs that relate to rotary engines that limit their external components, with the result that housings and end/intermediate plates are treated equally;

1.9 ROTARY ENGINE
Engines with rotary (rather than reciprocating) motion of the compressing medium (Wankel-type). A rotary engine is defined as the rotor housings, intermediate and end plates.
4.3 ROTARY ENGINES
(b) The rotor housings, intermediate and end plates shall be identifiable as mass produced Mazda items. Only engines identified as 10A, 12A or 13B are permitted. Such engines must not be exclusively from evolution/racing models.
So if aftermarket blocks are allowed does that mean after market rotary engine components are also allowed
Not unless the change also included changes to reg 4.3 (b). Which I seriously doubt as the target is plainly one car, except there’s actually 4 ](*,)

Cheers
Gary

Born Again Racer
one foot in the grave
Posts: 682
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:01 pm
Location: Wimmera Vic
Location: Wimmera Vic

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Born Again Racer » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:10 pm

TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:44 pm
Born Again Racer wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:51 pm
TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:34 am
It's irrelevant Bruce, there are particular regs that relate to rotary engines that limit their external components, with the result that housings and end/intermediate plates are treated equally;

1.9 ROTARY ENGINE
Engines with rotary (rather than reciprocating) motion of the compressing medium (Wankel-type). A rotary engine is defined as the rotor housings, intermediate and end plates.
4.3 ROTARY ENGINES
(b) The rotor housings, intermediate and end plates shall be identifiable as mass produced Mazda items. Only engines identified as 10A, 12A or 13B are permitted. Such engines must not be exclusively from evolution/racing models.
So if aftermarket blocks are allowed does that mean after market rotary engine components are also allowed
Not unless the change also included changes to reg 4.3 (b). Which I seriously doubt as the target is plainly one car, except there’s actually 4 ](*,)

Cheers
Gary
So what you’re saying is that if aftermarket blocks are allowed then piston engine cars don’t actually have to have any original manufacturer parts in the engine whereas rotaries must have all original parts or major components in the engine and then we are limited by a porting and we are not allowed to increase capacity seems fair to me

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10744
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by TwinTurbo » Sun Mar 08, 2020 4:50 am

Born Again Racer wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:10 pm
TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:44 pm
Born Again Racer wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:51 pm
TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:34 am
It's irrelevant Bruce, there are particular regs that relate to rotary engines that limit their external components, with the result that housings and end/intermediate plates are treated equally;

1.9 ROTARY ENGINE
Engines with rotary (rather than reciprocating) motion of the compressing medium (Wankel-type). A rotary engine is defined as the rotor housings, intermediate and end plates.
4.3 ROTARY ENGINES
(b) The rotor housings, intermediate and end plates shall be identifiable as mass produced Mazda items. Only engines identified as 10A, 12A or 13B are permitted. Such engines must not be exclusively from evolution/racing models.
So if aftermarket blocks are allowed does that mean after market rotary engine components are also allowed
Not unless the change also included changes to reg 4.3 (b). Which I seriously doubt as the target is plainly one car, except there’s actually 4 ](*,)
So what you’re saying is that if aftermarket blocks are allowed then piston engine cars don’t actually have to have any original manufacturer parts in the engine whereas rotaries must have all original parts or major components in the engine and then we are limited by a porting and we are not allowed to increase capacity seems fair to me
Personally I don’t think aftermarket (as in true aftermarket) blocks should be allowed as the ready availability is pretty much limited to US V8’s and a couple of popular Japanese 4 cylinders. Of course we could always get a billet block made but I don’t see that as being IP budget friendly.

As I posted previously I have no idea what this survey is attempting to achieve. Because, to put it bluntly, I can’t see how it can achieve anything at all.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4675
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Steve thomas » Sun Mar 08, 2020 11:42 am

Born Again Racer wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:10 pm
TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:44 pm
Born Again Racer wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:51 pm
TwinTurbo wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:34 am
It's irrelevant Bruce, there are particular regs that relate to rotary engines that limit their external components, with the result that housings and end/intermediate plates are treated equally;

1.9 ROTARY ENGINE
Engines with rotary (rather than reciprocating) motion of the compressing medium (Wankel-type). A rotary engine is defined as the rotor housings, intermediate and end plates.
4.3 ROTARY ENGINES
(b) The rotor housings, intermediate and end plates shall be identifiable as mass produced Mazda items. Only engines identified as 10A, 12A or 13B are permitted. Such engines must not be exclusively from evolution/racing models.
So if aftermarket blocks are allowed does that mean after market rotary engine components are also allowed
Not unless the change also included changes to reg 4.3 (b). Which I seriously doubt as the target is plainly one car, except there’s actually 4 ](*,)

Cheers
Gary
So what you’re saying is that if aftermarket blocks are allowed then piston engine cars don’t actually have to have any original manufacturer parts in the engine whereas rotaries must have all original parts or major components in the engine and then we are limited by a porting and we are not allowed to increase capacity seems fair to me
Fair has not really been a part of IP for a very long time. The problem is as with anything controlled by volunteer committees/ Delegates etc there is always unavoidable self interest.
Ford, GM, Nissan and likely other manufacturers have long motorsport history and as such built cars with Motorsport in mind inc engine blocks, These engines are rightfully eligible. Non OEM race blocks are great and fair for Sportsedan as they can be used by everyone, IP does not allow this engine freedom to all cars so there is no fair excuse to allow them to maybe 1/3 of the class.
Back to the Past for the Future.

User avatar
cossie55
old timer
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:00 am
Location: Victoria
Location: Victoria

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by cossie55 » Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:59 am

[/quote]

So if aftermarket blocks are allowed does that mean after market rotary engine components are also allowed
[/quote]

We don't know what the final wording would look like if aftermarket blocks are wanted by the majority of members. But if it goes that way, I would expect that aftermarket rotary housings would be permitted at the same time, as they have been in sports sedans.

regards,

Jamie

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10744
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by TwinTurbo » Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:08 pm

cossie55 wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:59 am
We don't know what the final wording would look like if aftermarket blocks are wanted by the majority of members. But if it goes that way, I would expect that aftermarket rotary housings would be permitted at the same time, as they have been in sports sedans.

regards,
Jamie
Isn't that the obvious problem with the survey, we are being asked to complete a survey on something without knowing what it is that we are actually saying yes or no to. The rotary competitors are a prime example of that problem, as far as they know they are completing the survey not knowing if it helps them or puts them further back.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
cossie55
old timer
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:00 am
Location: Victoria
Location: Victoria

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by cossie55 » Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:18 pm

no, not at all.

If people read the supporting documentation, they will find more details about the issue.

It is standard practice for clubs to ask members questions about their preferences for their category, then later spend the time to put those preferences into the detailed words used as the rules.

Once the IPRA category know what the preference of members is for their category, the club can work on some rules to implement the wishes of the members, as they have always done.

regards,

Jamie

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4675
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Steve thomas » Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:38 pm

Big swing in thinking over that last decade. 10 years ago the world was going to stop turning if we went to boost limits and no "R", Now we are talking aftermarket race blocks. I guess open engines up to 6.0l for everyone next.
Back to the Past for the Future.

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10744
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by TwinTurbo » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:27 pm

cossie55 wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:18 pm
no, not at all.

If people read the supporting documentation, they will find more details about the issue.

It is standard practice for clubs to ask members questions about their preferences for their category, then later spend the time to put those preferences into the detailed words used as the rules.

Once the IPRA category know what the preference of members is for their category, the club can work on some rules to implement the wishes of the members, as they have always done.

regards,
Jamie
Jamie the supporting information is full of factual errors, not to mention choosing to use the term "aftermarket blocks" is extremely misleading.

Cheers
Gary

gmontrack
old timer
Posts: 330
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 4:48 pm
Location:

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by gmontrack » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:59 pm

Anyone can log on to the IP National web site....... ipraaus.com.au
You can answer the two question (or not) and have a say.... click the link to read the supporting documents
You have to put in your name and membership number so if your are not financial I don't think you answer will be counted....
Everyone has a chance to voice their views.... go for it!

GM
just another club member now...lol

speaksgeek
pit crew
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 7:13 pm
Location: Melbourne VIC

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by speaksgeek » Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:41 pm

I would agree there is definitely some nuance and inconsistency in the documents as presented that means the term aftermarket block is not quite right in some cases.
That said, I get the impression this is more of a poll to see which way the wind is blowing among those competitors who care enough to vote on it.
I'm sure it will then inform whichever committee to put together a rule change (or not) that attempts to address those issues.

Honestly, if I were to magic wand it, I would get rid of any engine block freedom and only allow the block that came in each particular car from factory. Internals freedom would stay. That way it's an improvement on production, not a buy the best engine your brand ever made type choice.

But we're here now, so I'm interested to see how this plays out.
TwinTurbo wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:27 pm

Jamie the supporting information is full of factual errors, not to mention choosing to use the term "aftermarket blocks" is extremely misleading.

Cheers
Gary

Born Again Racer
one foot in the grave
Posts: 682
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:01 pm
Location: Wimmera Vic
Location: Wimmera Vic

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Born Again Racer » Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:13 pm

cossie55 wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:59 am
So if aftermarket blocks are allowed does that mean after market rotary engine components are also allowed
[/quote]

We don't know what the final wording would look like if aftermarket blocks are wanted by the majority of members. But if it goes that way, I would expect that aftermarket rotary housings would be permitted at the same time, as they have been in sports sedans.

regards,

Jamie
[/quote]

Jamie

You may want to read the SS regulations again

User avatar
cammck
pit crew
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:08 am
Location: Essendon Vic

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by cammck » Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:55 am

speaksgeek wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:41 pm
I would agree there is definitely some nuance and inconsistency in the documents as presented that means the term aftermarket block is not quite right in some cases.
That said, I get the impression this is more of a poll to see which way the wind is blowing among those competitors who care enough to vote on it.
I'm sure it will then inform whichever committee to put together a rule change (or not) that attempts to address those issues.

Honestly, if I were to magic wand it, I would get rid of any engine block freedom and only allow the block that came in each particular car from factory. Internals freedom would stay. That way it's an improvement on production, not a buy the best engine your brand ever made type choice.

But we're here now, so I'm interested to see how this plays out.
TwinTurbo wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:27 pm

Jamie the supporting information is full of factual errors, not to mention choosing to use the term "aftermarket blocks" is extremely misleading.

Cheers
Gary
With you on that speaksgeek
Cam McKinnon
IPRA VIC Member IP0512
Datsun 1600 (EM) - Falcon EB (LM)
Ph 0403 303 633

www.888capital.com.au

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4675
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Steve thomas » Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:56 pm

How can IP allow people in control of the class to use their positions to serve their own self interests? Inc impacting new logbooks etc?
Hard to avoid self interests with volunteers I know but we must try.
Back to the Past for the Future.

User avatar
TwinTurbo
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 10744
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:46 am
Location: Sydney
Location: Sydney, IPRANSW

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by TwinTurbo » Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:21 pm

Steve thomas wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:56 pm
How can IP allow people in control of the class to use their positions to serve their own self interests? Inc impacting new logbooks etc?
Hard to avoid self interests with volunteers I know but we must try.
It’s completely unacceptable for parties with self servicing prejudices to be delaying the issuing of log books based on false manufactured excuses. Just because someone doesn’t like the judge’s verdict doesn’t mean that they can continue with their vendetta. You do no service to yourself or Improved Production.

Cheers
Gary

User avatar
Steve thomas
You've got to be kidding, how many posts?
Posts: 4675
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Perth WA
Location: Perth WA

Re: IPRA Poll

Post by Steve thomas » Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:02 pm

Thanks Gary.
Back to the Past for the Future.

Post Reply