Spill Kits

For 2010 the MSA have included a recommendation in the Blue Book, Section J, Common Regulations for Competitors: Vehicles for all competitors to carry a spill kit. This is section 2.20.13 and is worded as follows:

It is strongly recommended for all competitors participating in single venue competitions to have available at their paddock base, and for multi venue competitions to carry within their vehicle a self contained spill kit capable of efficiently absorbing minor spillages of up to 1.5 litres of all vehicle fluids – oils, fuels, coolants, battery acid. Used spill kits are to be disposed of in accordance with local or National guidelines.

For MROC events this will mean carrying a spill kit within competition vehicles.

As a responsible Club the MROC will be supporting this recommendation. One of our Club members has kindly researched this issue and the Club can supply suitable spill kits. Please call me with your requirements.

It is also important that all MROC members understand that individual ALRC Clubs may require conformance to their own interpretation of the MSA recommendation. The Committee have been made aware that the Staffs & Shrops Club now requires competitors to carry a kit capable of absorbing a 7.5 litre spill. If you are a visitor at another Clubs event please call beforehand in order to obtain a list of their Supplementary Regulations (SR’s).

Noise Regulations (results from vehicle testing)

MSA Common Regulations for Competitors: Vehicles [C(b)] section 22-24

In short this regulation provides mandatory limits for the noise that is acceptable for vehicles used in motor sport.

For Cross Country Vehicles, (for our purposes RTV, CCV, TYRO vehicles) the maximum noise limits are:

100 decibels dB(A) at 0.5 meters and at an angle of 45 degrees from the exhaust.
88 decibels dB(A) at 2.0 meters from the vehicle.

This rule is going to be enforced at the 2010 National run by Cornwall and Devon LRC. It is a rule that should be enforced by all Clubs.

As MROC Scrutineer I have the equipment required to carry out this test. Although it is unlikely that any of our current vehicles will fail this test I would urge all competitors to get their motor tested, especially if you intend to go to the C&D National.
Results from Vehicle testing at Newman’s Quarry –

RTV Class – All of the Diesel Vehicles tested recorded a level below 65dB. One V8 recorded 97 dB and the Series petrol vehicles 73-76 dB.

CCVT Class – One Diesel, 97 dB, V8’s either below 75 dB or above 94 dB. Four cylinder petrol 75 dB.

On the whole most vehicles were well within the test limits. All of the competitors involved at the event were informed of their individual result. It was interesting that in the CCVT Class both MROC and visiting competitors achieved the 90+ dB results. Due to environmental concerns from pressure groups and the requirements of land owners, noise is likely to become an increasing issue for our sport. For this reason I think it would be advisable for anyone with a vehicle producing over 80dB to look at silencing options for your vehicle.

Turbo Diesel Issues

The letter and following text shown below has been taken from the last S&ORC Committee meeting minutes. You will see that the fitting of aftermarket larger inter coolers to Turbo Diesels is causing debate. The result of discussing this issue at the S&ORC meeting was a potential recommendation for a rule change. If anyone has any comment to make concerning this issue please contact me so that I can pass the feelings of MROC members on to the S&ORC Committee. Please also be aware that if your vehicle is modified, your competition class may be affected when entering the ALRC National of Inter-Club Events.

Extract from S&ORC minutes – names of individuals removed.
Dear Mr. Chairman,
Some years ago I fitted a large intercooler to my 200 TDi Defender in order to improve its performance on the road, especially whilst towing. At that time I was able to do this and remain in Standard Class 4 under the prevailing rules. Even under the new rules I felt there was an argument to be made for remaining in the standard class, and indeed did so until a clarification was made by the Scrutineering Committee last year which meant I was now in the Modified Classes. In addition to this, the ALRC has also changed the rules so that a Modified Class vehicle may not be the overall winner at the National RTV. In order to overcome this at this year’s National RTV, I temporarily looped out my intercooler and, due to the consequent reduction in space, fitted a K & N air filter instead of the standard one. I highlighted these changes to the scrutineer prior to the event, explained the reason for them and was allowed to compete in Class 4. My efforts were rewarded by my double driver winning the event.
The purpose of this letter is to try and persuade the Scrutineering Committee to reconsider
their placing of vehicles with large intercoolers into the Modified classes for the following reasons:-
1. At trialling speed there is no performance increase gained by the fitting of a large intercooler. As you are undoubtedly aware, when the larger intercooler is fitted the fuel pump is also 'tweaked' so as to give the correct fuel/air ratio. However, at low speed there is insufficient air flow over the intercooler for it to be effective and the performance increase is solely from the extra fuel brought about by the fuel pump adjustment. This truth of this statement is borne out by the fact that no loss of power was noticed by me during the National RTV or the Club RTV where I tested this arrangement prior to the Nationals. Furthermore, I know of people who adjust their fuel pump on arrival at a trial and adjust it back at the end, with similar improvement in performance.
2. TD5 Defenders are fitted with a large intercooler that is the full width of the grill and very similar in size to what I have fitted. Surely under Rule A5.1 I can retrospectively fit this to my vehicle. It would seem churlish to permit this and not the intercooler that I currently have fitted simply because it is not made by Land Rover.
3. Rule B.2.8 states that 'the forced induction coefficient does not apply to diesel engines'. An
intercooler is a method of forced induction in that it compresses the air above atmospheric pressure
by cooling it and inducing more air into the combustion chamber.
4. I used to compete in Class 4 where I was up against V8 engined vehicles. I have a friend who is considering changing from a 3.5 to 3.9 litre V8 specifically to improve performance for RTVs and this is a legal change that will see him remain in Class 4. I, on the other hand, made a change to improve road performance that does not impact on trialling performance yet am destined to be considered Modified and have to compete against Defenders fitted with 4.6 litre V8s.
In conclusion, if there is no performance gain at trialling speeds, then it would seem that I am being moved into a Modified class purely for cosmetic reasons. Rule A.3 says that changes should be in the spirit of the regulations. I genuinely believe that what I have done fully complies with this important aspect of our rules and ask that the Scrutineering Committee reconsider their Clarification published in the SORC minutes of January 2008 in light of the above points. I look forward to your reply.

This letter was further discussed with initially the following e-mail read out.
Point 1: Intercoolers.
Standard vehicle regs do not allow modified intercoolers; a rule change request would be required to allow their fitments.
Ref A.5.1. You could argue the case of retrospectively fitting a standard Td5 intercooler to an older 90, however I suspect the vehicle had a larger none-standard intercooler fitted.
Ref B.2.8. The intercooler does not increase the pressure of the charge by cooling. If reference is made to the combined Gas Laws (Boyle & Charles Law) then his statement in not correct.
Pressure x Volume = Temperature x k (where k is the gas constant)
In fact as the volume of the intercooler remains the same the reduction in temperature would actually result in a reduction of pressure to maintain the Gas constant k.
The intercooler allows the induction temperature to be reduced therefore allowing the turbo pressure to be increased whilst maintaining safe inlet air temperatures. The additional power is generated by increasing air volume forced into the engine by the turbo and matched with increased supply of diesel.
Point 2: Competing against V8 larger then 3528cc in Standard Class.
Ref B.2.1. V8 petrol (where factory fitted). Accepted replacement “Any V8 aluminium engine up to maximum size listed in the vehicle size chart (page 79 in ALRC 2009 Handbook) from product listed in A2”.
Referring to the vehicle size chart would limit standard class Ninety to 3528P and 2500D. Further the engine would be limited to twin carburettors on a standard inlet manifold under B.2.3. If his friend fits a 3950cc engine then his vehicle would be placed in the modified vehicle class under C.3.1. which would also allow him to fir EFi and more than two carburettors.
This raises the question over which class a standard 50th Edition 90 would come under, however this is covered under L.1.5. which covers standard production vehicles built after 1993 which do not have a standard competition class listed are allowed to compete in the class which nearest fits its specification. A.5.1. would also allow an engine of exactly the same specification to the 50th Edition (4.0GEMS) being retro fitted to a 90 only.
From the above I would consider that the fitment of a large intercooler, unless standard TD5 moves the vehicle into class 20 and would also clarify that any Ninety fitted with a V8 engine larger than 3528cc or other then twin carburettors on a standard manifold, unless a genuine 50th Edition 90 would also be placed within class 10.

It was pointed out that by disconnecting the intercooler a modification had been made to the vehicle and in hind sight should still have remained in class 10. This was agreed by the meeting. It was also said that whilst petrol engines can be changed for more powerful ones there is discrimination against diesel engines in what members are able to change. The rules governing petrol engines seem to have moved with the times as new technology has been developed but the rules for diesel engines have not.
Clarification on engine sizes should be listed for that specific vehicle and not taken across several models. Bigger engines have been in some vehicles for the last 10 years. The chart printed on page 62 of the ALRC Handbook needs to be updated.
To permit the use of larger intercoolers in standard class a rule change proposal is required.