Mark Sirota wrote:
>jac73@daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
>> Shift light: The idiot-light version of a tachometer. It simply
>> lights up at a pre-selected RPM, indicating the selected RPM has
>> been reached.
>Agreed, provided engine RPM is the *only* input. One could
>envision a much more complex circuit that took other things into
>account. One could even envision a device that reminds a driver
>not only of when to shift, but what to be looking ahead for, etc.
>Where's the line?
Navigational aids, sort of an electronic version of Nicky Grist reading
Colin McRae his pace notes while going around the autocross course
("Off-camber left 4 tightens slippy feeding flat right 5 past drainage
grate..." in a nicely-clipped Welsh accent)? Sure, someone *could* take
the time and money to develop such a beastie (I walked around the South
Course at Topeka this year with my hand-held Garvin GPS just to see if it
could resolve different lines that finely, but it didn't go in the car and
wouldn't have been any use anyway as it's strictly visual), but why? You'd
spend so much time trying to program the damn thing accurately that you
wouldn't have a chance to actually learn the course. That said, I suspect
that *if* someone were to do such a thing (or try to adapt the factory GPS
nav system for that purpose), we'd have a protest, a ruling, and a
clarification in the following year's book. Cross-reference Jean Kinser's
bustle-back (seat bolster strapped to her body) in '94 for an example of
how such a driver-aid issue should be handled.
I'm not a big fan of the pre-emptive strike method of rule-making in this
sort of case. ie, something that generally falls into the hair-splitting
category versus, say, allowing bolt-on superchargers in Stock or SP, which
most reasonable people will agree is a major performance change.
Did you know there are cars available now with variable rev limiters?
They'll allow different rev limits depending on gear selection, for
example. Some cars actually produce horsepower and torque numbers (through
fuel, spark, and/or turbo boost manipulation) that are gear-selection
dependent. All factory stuff here. Most electronic stability and traction
control programs right now are more of a hindrance on an autocross course
than an aid, but what happens when someone comes up with one that is indeed
a driver aid (the C5 Corvette's "Competition" mode for its stability
program apparently comes closer to this than anyone else has done to date)?
Do we require these systems to be switched off or disabled? How do we
enforce that? Can you imagine a bunch of people in these enhanced cars
running basically identical times by just mashing the gas, turning the
wheel at the right time, and letting the computer do the rest? The tech is
very nearly there to do that, it just hasn't gone into production yet.
There's this huge furball of possibilities here. A simple shift light that
merely looks at RPM, compares it with the value plugged into it, and lights
when that number is reached is no big deal -- and it's legal per the SIIR
as currently written.
>> Taking this additional-input-to-driver restriction to extremes,
>> how 'bout "Tommy Stock" - driver must be blindfolded and use
>> active noise cancellation earphones to prevent any visual and
>> aural feedback...
>As in, "Tommy Saunders has to drive blindfolded"? Okay!
Actually, take "Rock Operas of the Psychedelic Era for $100, Alex" for the
source of my reference. But yeah, you CModders would take any opportunity
to make Mr. Saunders drive in a sensory-deprivation field, I'm sure. :)
>Taking your jest slightly more seriously than it was intended,
>that's a bit different than the shift light issue. People aren't
>modifying their cars so that they can hear them better, but they
>might be modifying them so that they can know when to shift.
Umm, Mark? I must beg to differ. You know all those obnoxious
open-exhaust Neons we autocrossers have been plagued with for the past
several years? Do you know how much power was to be gained by lopping the
muffler off? According to at least 3 different dyno tests various
autocrossers did at different times, it was essentially zero to very very
little, with any top-end gains offset by corresponding losses in low- and
mid-range torque. So why take the muffler off? So the driver can hear the
engine better was the reason I most often heard. I had a professional
interest in having quiet Neons for a while there as the ProSolo starter for
D Stock and E Stock for a couple years. Imagine being between two of them
as they launched... and then two more... and then two more... and then two
more... ad nauseum.
While I know Mark is against the addition of tachs/shift lights as
performance enhancements, there is another school of thought that says said
devices are not so much performance devices as longevity-improvers, much
like a temperature gauge or an oil pressure gauge -- they help the operator
detect a problem before it becomes an expensive and messy problem. You
could make the same argument -- temp gauges are a performance enhancement
as getting the engine into its optimum temperature range will help it make
more power (an actual bit of fact) -- but realistically, it's really an
"Aw, crap!" preventer, so the "performance enhancement" argument is a bit
of a reach.
Jim Crider
|