Did anyone happen to notice:
SCCA Fastrack News July 2007 Page 23 In Appendix “A”, Modified Class F, A.4., change second sentence: “Add 50 pounds for AMW and Rotax 494 (Rave or non-Rave) and 493 engines.” o Add new paragraph to Appendix “A”, Modified Class F, A.5: “Competitors using the Rotax 494 Rave engine are required to use the 494 non-Rave rotary valve: Rotax part #924509 or 924508, SkiDoo prefix 420, 147 degree designation that opens @135 degrees BTDC and closes @ 64 degrees ATDC in their engine. Rave valves shall be blocked in the “full open” position or left as delivered. No other alterations are permitted. 494 Rave and non-Rave parts may not be interchanged between the two engines unless specifically noted.” It looks like the SCCA is wanting to allow the 493, 494 non-RAVE, or 494 RAVE motor all at the same weight. I think the 494 non-RAVE is right in line with the 493 RAVE motor, but the 494 RAVE...hoo-whee! The SCCA plans to restrict the RAVE motor to the milder non-RAVE rotary valve, but that's not going to cut the power all that much. I would take an extra 20 degrees of exhaust port duration and RAVE valves any day, even if I had to give up 12 degrees of rotary valve timing. I know we are searching for more available motors, but the 494 RAVE as proposed (without the dreaded weight penalty) will most likely become the only motor to have - that puts us back to one. Perhaps the first try would be to add 50 lbs to the 494 RAVE The SEB is soliciting comments. I have sent mine. ________________________________ FormulaCar Magazine - A Proud Supporter of Formula 500 The Official Publication of Junior Formula Car Racing Subscribe Today! www.formulacarmag.com or 519-624-2003 _________________________________ _______________________________________________ F500 mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change options please visit: http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500 *** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
