A good racing seat is like a good suit. It doesn't need to be expensive or flashy. It just needs to fit well and be strong enough to do its job. Annoyingly, the world of FIA-rated racing seats bears other similarities to the ever-changing world of fashion. Just as your favorite suit wears out over time, racing seats age out: The FIA 8859 certification on racing seats expire after just 5 years, after which many sanctioning bodies will no longer allow you to use them. And when you do go to replace them, you'll often find that the styles and features of your favorite seat have changed, leaving you guessing whether they will still fit and work as well as your old one did. This is exactly what happened this winter. The beloved Bride Zeta III that kept our drivers safe reached retirement age. While we couldn't go out and buy a brand-new Zeta III, Bride did release a new series of compact head containment seats called the Xero. So after taking some basic measurements to ensure that it would fit in the car, we ordered up a Bride Xero CS. What is the Bride Xero CS? The Xero is Bride's new line of FIA 8859-homologated head containment racing seats, replacing the bulky winged monster known as the Gardis III. It comes in three variants, the VS, CS, and RS. The CS is the "medium" size amongst the three and is the model that is designed to fit most cars. The RS is slightly wider and has longer head containment bolsters, while the smaller VS is an extra-compact model designed for cars with extremely narrow cockpits, like the Lotus Exige. In keeping with current trends in racing seat design, Bride has made the Xero more compact than its predecessor. The Xero CS's shell is almost an inch narrower than the Gardis III, making it one of the smallest full-size racing seats on the market. Compared to their older seats, the bottom of the Xero's shell is sunk an additional half-inch, and is fitted with pads that are about half the thickness of those on the Zeta III. Bride calls this the "LowMax system" and it allows the driver to sit lower in their seat, further maximizing the space in this compact seat. The most notable changes, however, are in the head containment guards. The enormous elephant-ear head guards from the Gardis are long gone, replaced by a set of small wings that look more like an airplane headrest than a halo. This is a welcome change, as the Gardis' notoriously bulky halo made getting in and out of the seat surprisingly difficult. Finally, the seat shell is covered in Bride's standard fire-retardant fabric and comes fitted with three removable insert pads for your thighs, butt, and lower back. Why not a Sparco, Momo, Racetech, or ____? Despite being coveted by JDM car enthusiasts, Bride seats are a rare sight in American racecars. Part of the reason for this is that many American racing organizations allow the use of aluminum seats, which tend to be cheaper and do not expire like FIA seats do. The other reason is that there is a huge variety of racing seats readily available in the US, including some budget-friendly entries from the likes of RaceQuip that undercuts even the cheapest Bride seats by a significant margin. All that said, there are still good reasons to invest in a Bride seat for your racecar. You should look at Bride Xero if you: Are shorter and/or narrower than the average driver Drive a car with limited interior headroom Drive a car with narrow seat tunnels Are concerned about having the lightest seats possible Want a full containment seat but are concerned about visibility Want to sit as low as possible How does it measure up? Bride racing seats have always been designed for smaller, shorter drivers. The Xero CS is no exception. We took some detailed measurements of the Xero CS to show you just how compact this seat is: Measurements in US Standard units: Measurements in Metric units: For comparison, here are the measurements from the Sparco Circuit QRT, a popular compact FIA head containment racing seat sold in the US: Source: Sparco USA. Original here. Make no mistake, the Bride Xero CS is a narrow seat. The seat bottom tapers down to a mere 11 inches towards the seat back, while the seat back is just 10 inches wide at its narrowest. And It isn't just the back that's like this. The opening at the front of the seat is just over 13 inches, smaller than any other composite seat on the market. Don't expect to spread your legs very much once you're nestled in this bucket seat. Thankfully, the shoulder bolsters are about as wide as those on larger seats, so those of us with broad shoulders should fit against the back without issue. There shouldn't be any issues with lateral visibility either, as the CS's low-profile head containment wings only extend by about 3.1 inches forward of the headrest. All this interior space-saving means that the exterior of the seat is compact as well. Normally, head containment seats tend to be larger, taller, and heavier than regular road racing seats. Not so with the Xero. A side-by-side comparison with our old Zeta III revealed that the Xero is the same size or smaller in every exterior dimension. This is welcome news for drivers that have trouble fitting a head containment seat into their cars' cockpits. With the Xero, they may finally have a way to do it. The compact dimensions mean that the Xero CS is also extremely light. With all pads installed, the FRP version of the Xero CS weighs only 17.6 lbs. That's a full 2.3 lbs lighter than the Sparco Circuit QRT, which is already one of the lightest seats in Sparco's lineup. Spring for the more expensive Super Aramid shell and it will bring that weight down to a featherweight 15.6 lbs. Most carbon fiber racing seats weigh more than that. How does it fit? Sitting in the Xero CS feels less like sitting in a chair and more like wearing a long coat. Not just because the seat is designed to fit tightly around you, but also because the thigh bolsters feel exceptionally tall. When you lower your bottom into the Xero, the seat completely engulfs your hips and thighs. It's a secure, if slightly odd, feeling. You'll experience a similar sensation when you lean against the seat back. If you sit in a Xero CS with your arms at your sides, you'll find that there's a bit of space between your upper back and the seat. This is because the Xero's shell is contoured to the shape of your back while you are driving. Hold out your arms as if you were holding the steering wheel, and that extra space disappears, making the Xero fit like a glove. While this all seems a bit strange, it makes perfect logical sense. Racing seats are designed to be safe and supportive when you are racing. By forming the seat around you in your driving position, they have been able to make the Xero fit your body more closely, making it more comfortable and safer in the event of a crash. This is the same logic that Italian racing suit manufacturers like Alpinestars use when designing their racing suits. Alpinestars suits are intentionally designed so they fit tightly in the front and loosely in the back. They feel odd to stand in and are frankly uncomfortable to walk around in. But as soon as you sit down, those same suits feel like they disappear around you. The Xero CS works the same way. Once you are nestled in its fire-retardant shell, you barely notice that it's there. Who does it fit? Annoyingly, the manufacturer doesn't really give you any specific information about the size or shape of the driver that the Xero is built for. So we took some measurements off of StudioVRM.Racing's official race and test driver so you have a point of reference on how the seat fits: Driver's Basic Size: Detail Measurements over Alpinestars GP Tech Racing Suit: These measurements mean that our test driver is slightly shorter, slightly smaller, and slightly lighter than the Hybrid III 50th Percentile crash dummy that is usually used to crash test FIA 8859 seats. Despite this fact, he found the Xero CS to be a very snug fitting seat. There was just enough room to route the belts around our driver's hips once he was seated in the Xero. While getting in and out of the seat is no problem, it is a noticeably tighter fit than with the Zeta III. In particular, the super-narrow opening at the front of the Xero CS took some getting used to. Bride has left just enough room for his legs to operate the throttle, brake, clutch, and dead pedal. And that's it. There is about 2.5" of space between the edge of the seat and the inside of the driver's knees, which is slightly more than enough space to press the pedals comfortably. Fortunately, the Xero's split thigh pad has enough give to them so our driver could apply full throttle or full brake without issue. As expected, the driver's shoulders aren't completely contained within the seat's shoulder bolsters while his arms are at his sides. With his arms forward, his shoulders sit exactly where they should be. The HANS-friendly seat belt pass-throughs are at just the right height for our driver, with some room to go up or down. We suspect that the seat could easily accommodate drivers from 5'5" to 5'11", depending on whether you add to or remove the bottom pads. There is, however, one area that is given ample room, and that's around the head. Not only are the head containment wings of the Xero CS extremely compact, but they are also spaced far apart. Our driver could turn his head a full 90 degrees in either direction without hitting the seat. Clearly this head containment system is designed to be used with a head and neck device. With the lateral restraint of a Hybrid Pro, DefNder, or HANS device, the head guards extend out far enough that they can stop a driver's head from snapping sideways in a crash. But because of their compact size, they likely won't be as effective without one. On the flip side, lateral visibility is excellent. During testing, the head guards only came into view when the driver turned his head completely sideways. There aren't many head containment seats out there that allow for such an unobstructed view. Fit and Finish Workmanship and durability have always been Bride's strengths, so it should be no surprise when we say that the fit and finish on the Xero CS are excellent. Every part of the seat, from the stitching to the Bride decal embedded in the back of the shell were flawless. The Xero is covered in the same fuzzy fire-resistant fabric as the Zeta series. We aren't sure what it exactly, but we know from using our other Bride seats that it's quite a durable fabric. Apparently this wasn't good enough for the designers, as they decided to cover the edges of the Xero with an additional leather-like pad to give them additional protection against wear and tear. New in the Xero is this diamond stitched fabric on the inside of the lower bolsters. While this might seem like an exercise in retro seat styling, it's a functional feature meant to provide additional padding for your thighs. The quilt-like stitching gives additional structure to the padding under the fabric and makes it feel thicker than it really is. This lets them use less padding on the seat, allowing them to make the shell tighter and keeping the whole thing compact. It's an elegant solution, and certainly a more attractive one than the skeletonized padding used on seats like the Sabelt X-Pad. The plastic harness hole guards are lined with a carbon fibre-textured matte finish, like on all newer Bride seats. While they are obviously fake looking, the textured finish does give them a more premium feel than the smooth glossy pieces found on most racing seats. One thing we should mention is that, unlike with Bride's older seats, the Xero's seat cover is not removeable. You can still remove the bottom pads and bottom half of the back pads. But the main fabric cover is glued to the shell and held in place with a rubberized strip. While you could theoretically remove, wash, and re-attach the cover, it doesn't look like it would be an easy or practical thing to do. Just try not spill anything on it. Price At $1,033 US for the FRP model, the Bride Xero CS is priced right in the middle of the range of lightweight FIA-homologated head containment seats. For comparison, you can get the slightly larger Sparco Circuit QRT for $950 US, a similarly compact Sabelt X-Pad for $1,025 US, or a comparable RaceTech 4100HR for $1,200 US. The Xero CS definitely isn't what you would call cheap. But we would say that the price is fair considering its compact size, light weight, and high build quality. Conclusion and Recommendations As with all safety equipment, fitment is the most important aspect of choosing a racing seat. If it doesn't fit, you shouldn't sit. Hopefully our measurements and testing will help you figure out whether you would fit in a Bride Xero CS. If you do happen fit in a Xero CS, we would recommend it for your racecar or dedicated track car. The seat has excellent holding power, is extremely comfortable while driving, and provides outstanding visibility compared to other FIA-rated head containment seats. Plus, the small exterior dimensions allow it to fit into cars where the average full containment seat cannot. However, the form-fitting shell that makes this seat comfortable while driving also makes it less than practical on the street. If you are looking for a more supportive seat for your street car or your weekend track car, we recommend that you look elsewhere. Bride says the Xero is a dedicated racing seat. Based on what we have seen, we can tell you that they are not exaggerating. See you at the track. Disclosure section: Neither StudioVRM nor Roger Maeda are supported or affiliated with Bride Corporation. All products tested were purchased at full price out of Roger's own pocket.

Even in the 2020s, the 2nd generation Honda CRX remains a wildly popular chassis for track and race cars. And it's easy to see why: The CRX is one of the few easily attainable cars with a ~2000lb curb weight, an engine bay that can accommodate a myriad of engine swaps, and a still-strong aftermarket that is still producing new parts. As popular as it is, the CRX chassis isn't without its quirks. The tail-happy nature of this short wheelbase car can make it intimidating for newer drivers, and some of the usual Honda suspension tricks don't seem to work on these chassis. Fortunately, we at StudioVRM have developed a fairly deep understanding of these cars through years of testing with our sister team, ProjectCRX. So we thought we would share the exact suspension and specs that we use on our SCCA Improved Touring A-prepared Honda CRX Si, in the hopes that it helps those of you out there who are planning to run your car on the track: Springs and Anti-Roll Bars Despite what you might expect from its featherweight chassis, the 2nd gen CRX chassis works best on stiff springs. After testing a variety of different spring and roll bar combinations, we settled on 600 lbs-ft springs in the front and 800 lb-f/in springs in the rear. While this might sound extreme, the high motion ratios of the stock CRX suspension mean that these translate to only 400 to 500 lb-f/in at the wheels. This is very mild for a dedicated track car. On the flip side, we found that stiff anti-roll bars make the car snappy and unforgiving over tall kerbing, even with near-stock spring rates. In the end, we found that the best balance between speed and drivability involved using no front anti-roll bar and a stock Honda CRX Si rear anti-roll bar. As far as ride height, our car sits approximately 5" (127mm) from the ground to the bottom of the front jacking points, and approximately 5.5" (140mm) from the ground to the bottom of the rear jacking points. Dampers On most cars, you can get away with using sub-optimal dampers and still punch out fast lap times. Not so much with the CRX. A set of good race-valved shocks with plenty of midrange compression damping is paramount for a fast and forgiving CRX. Fortunately, there are plenty of options out there for this chassis, as coilover kits from other small Hondas all the way up to the EG Civic fit on these cars with very little modification. We use double-adjustable DMS 50mm rally dampers, as used on the ReidSpeed Civic prior to their Fortune Auto partnership. We had to shave some bushing material from the rear lower control arm in order to make them fit, but otherwise, they are a bolt-on application. Unfortunately, DMS Australia is no longer making racing dampers, so these kits are difficult to come by. If we were to build a new CRX racecar in 2020, we would look towards one of the following kits as an alternative: Redshift-valved BC Racing Coilovers Fortune Auto 510s (not the 500s) MCS Motorsports 2-way dampers A used set of Tein Super Racings A used set of Penske 7500 series If the budget isn't there for a good set of race dampers, we would recommend sourcing a used set of Tein Basics (the old rebuildable version) or Tein Street Advanceds (again, the rebuildable version), get them revalved for the rates that we need, and look for some used Hyperco, Swift, or Eibach race springs to put in them. Alignment Aligning a CRX for the track is one of the most counter-intuitive processes on the planet. Many drivers copy alignment specs for a later model Honda and find their cars twitchy and difficult to handle. This is partly due to the short wheelbase and short overall length of the car, and partly due to the exaggerated bump steer in the front and rear suspension. A fast CRX alignment is one that makes these quirks manageable, and that usually leads to some unusual looking results. For example, we recommend skipping the usual front toe-out that you find in most FWD racecars and opting for a very small amount of front toe-in. This counteracts the tendency for the CRX front suspension to bump out under braking, making the car much more stable during hard braking and turn-in. We also recommend running significantly more camber in the rear instead of the front. This is the opposite of what most racers (including yours truly) recommend for FWD track cars, as it can give the rear end too much grip and make it difficult to rotate the car mid-corner. Because the CRX is naturally so eager to rotate mid-corner, we recommend adding the extra camber to the rear to stabilize the car instead. Finally, we recommend adding a small amount of toe-out to the rear wheels. Like the front end, the rear end of the stock CRX suspension exhibits a significant amount of bump steer, this time in the form of toe-in under braking. While a small amount of toe-in can help with stability, too much rear toe-in can cause the rear end to snap around during corner entry. A small amount of static toe-out helps keep this in check. Ironically, this small bit of toe-out also keeps the car from wandering on long straights as well. So what does this mish-mosh of seemingly backwards alignment settings give you? Here's the full set of alignment specs for our ProjectCRX: The aggressive camber settings are specifically for DOT R-Compound tyres, which work best with 2 to 5 degrees of negative camber, depending on brand. For street tyres, we recommend running reducing the front camber to -2 degrees and the rear to -3 degrees. Tyres And lastly, the most important piece of the puzzle, tyres. The gold standard tyre for track-driven Honda CRX's is still the Hoosier A7. The soft "A" compound makes the car less tail-happy through the first cold laps of the day, and they bring out the best of the CRX's razor sharp handling once they come up to temp. These cars are light enough that you can race on them for a 30+ minute sprint race without overheating or stripping away the tread. Running equal tyre sizes front and rear offer the best balance and the lowest cost. In Improved Touring A trim, we run 205/50R15s on 15x7 wheels. When running a less grippy compound (e.g. Nitto NT01) or a street tyre (e.g. Bridgestone RE-71R), we opt for one size wider and run 225/45R15s. How does it handle? So how does a car with this setup handle in the real world? Take a look at this in-car camera footage from ProjectCRX's last test day, where we used the exact setup described above: As you can see, the car is very mild and easy to handle. Despite ice-cold track temperatures in the 36-to-40-degree (F) range, there is none of the tail-happy oversteer that people expect from a typical Honda CRX. The car doesn't wander on the straights like some fast CRX track cars, and it still maintains that sharp, responsive cornering that makes it one of the fastest cars on track through the Lightning circuit's twisty turn 2-5 complex. Special Thanks Thank you to the many friendly CRX racers of the SCCA who shared their setup tips with us, as well the drivers of ProjectCRX.Racing, who patiently tested some truly abominable handling setups as we trialed and errored our way to these settings. Also, shout out to Josh Hughes, Danny Stark, and the enthusiasts of the Honda CRX Community FB Group, who took the time to read, share, and contribute suggestions to this article. Thank you! See you at the track.

Well, it finally happened. Despite careful handling, we managed to bend (and ruin) the delicate aluminum frame of our Tenhulzen 4-wheel alignment rack. It's such a shame too, as it was such a cleverly engineered piece of kit. But in truth, the flimsy construction of the Tenhulzen frame and camber gauge were making the alignment process more annoying than it should be. Plus the whole setup was so fragile that I couldn't take it to the track without risking it getting damaged. Time to try something else then. So during the winter, I shelled out $425 and ordered the B-G Racing String Alignment Kit. How Does it Work? The concept behind using the B-G Racing String Alignment Kit is simple. Assemble the the two racks according to the instructions, open the hood and trunk of your car, and hang each rack off of the front and rear bumper. The two racks act as frames that help you line up the two high-visibility strings so that they are parallel to the centerline of your car. Once it's set up, you use the strings a reference point and measure the toe at each wheel. Just take an ordinary straightedge and measure the distance between the string and the leading edge of one of your wheels. Then compare it to the distance between the string and the trailing edge of one of your wheels. The difference between the two measurements is your toe. If you get a larger measurement at the front, you have toe in. If the measurement in the back is larger, you have toe out. The advantage to using a string-based alignment kit like this is that you can get toe measurements on each of your wheels independently, so you won't have to worry about the steering wheel ending up crooked, or the car crabbing because the rear wheels aren't perfectly aligned with the car's centerline. The advantage to use a car-mounted kit like the B-G Racing kit is that you can jack and roll the car with the rack still attached, which makes the whole alignment process of measuring, adjusting, and re-measuring go much faster. First Impressions: It's Smarter than it Looks At first glance, the B-G String Alignment Kit looks almost identical to the Smartstrings string alignment rack, a popular DIY alignment kit amongst club racers in the US. But look closely and you will find some noteworthy advantages in B-G Racing's design: The three-way junctions that hold the frame together have metal shims inside. These shims provide a little bit of added resistance that you can make fine adjustments to the rack while the adjustment knobs are tightened halfway. The 3-way junctions have a knob that lets you adjust the angle of the vertical bars. This is helpful for older cars where the hood extends out further than the front bumper, as it allows you to rest rest the rack against the relatively sturdy bumper instead of the delicate leading edge of the hood. The strings are wound in a convenient reel instead of just being wrapped around a spool. You can even lock the handle and use it as a weight to help keep the strings taut. The other end of the string has a small spring that keeps tension on the string, again to make sure that you get the most accurate measurement possible. The round alignment bars(where you hook the strings) are held in place with a set screw with a plastic knob. This makes it easier to keep the bar where it needs to be, and reduces the risk that you'll accidentally knock it out of place. There is a rubber-coated flat protrusion on the other side of the hook that goes on your car. This is great for cars that do not have a lip on the radiator support or trunk that you can hook on to. They include three different lengths of square tubing so you can make the rack as big, tall, or wide as you need to. There are even extra junctions included in this kit so you can combine bars together, just in case your car is particularly large. It's also worth noting that the widest part of the rack (the round alignment bar) is narrow enough that it will fit through a standard residential garage door. This is very important for those of us who do most of their work at home. While these little design features are seemingly insignificant, they are actually a big deal. 4-wheel alignments involve a tedious process of setting up the rack, measuring, adjusting, re-setting the rack, and re-measuring. This can go on for hours, depending on your experience level and how many mistakes you make along the way. Having these features will make the whole process easier and reduce the number of errors, in turn making the whole effort much, much faster. Appropriately Heavy-Duty Whoever designed the B-G Racing Kit understands that car enthusiasts are rough on their equipment. This thing is heavy duty. With an emphasis on heavy. The box containing this alignment kit weighed almost 40 lbs (18kg) - Literally twice the weight of the Tenhulzen 4-wheel alignment kit and several pounds heavier than the last Smartstrings set I worked with. Once you have it open it's easy to see why. The racks are made out of zinc-plated steel square tubing that feels incredibly dense for what it is. The junctions are of a similar construction and weigh several pounds each, while the round crossbars are made of solid steel. All of the knobs are made of a durable plastic, and the screws within them appear to be Class 8.8 or better. In spite of the fact that they are precision instruments, it feels like you could throw the racks down a flight of stairs without putting a scratch on them. Let's be clear - I do not recommend that you actually do this. It just FEELS like you could. While weight is normally a bad thing in the world of motorsports, the confidence-inspiring durability more than makes up for the few extra pounds. I would happily load this up into the back of my tow rig without worrying about it getting bent or damaged on the way to the track. BYO Straightedge I should mention that you do need to provide your own straightedge to use this kit. You can use pretty much any metal straightedge where the zero marker goes right up to the edge of the tool. I taped a small line level to mine to make sure that I'm holding it level when I'm taking my measurements. Some Assembly Required. Some Instructions Provided. Like most alignment kits, the B-G Racing Alignment Kit comes tightly packed in a small box, and the buyer is responsible for the assembly process. This revealed the one weak point in the entire kit: The manual. The author of the manual seems to have prioritized brevity over comprehension, and it really shows during the assembly process. The assembly instructions are just a series of caption-less photos sandwiched between a few tips on using the kit and an abstract diagram on the theory behind string alignments. And the sole diagram of the fully assembled rack looks like this: Yes, I understand that you can technically use tubes C, D, or E in any of these places. But this doesn't give you clues as to where you should start or which bars work best for which location. It took a fair bit of trial and error to get the racks assembled the first time. Then I found out I had it assembled incorrectly so had to do it again. Then two more times after that. The whole process was so intense that I learned enough to write my own assembly manual for this kit. Here it is, by the way, in case you buy one of these and get stuck like I did: ▶ StudioVRM's Unofficial Instructions for the B-G Racing String Alignment Kit All of that said, credit where credit is due - B-G Racing's customer service is excellent. Upon assembling the kit incorrectly for the third time in one night, yours truly posted this frustrated post on Instagram. To my surprise, B-G Racing responded (within hours, no less), acknowledging the feedback and promising to publish a video that shows the details of the assembly process in the near future. It's great to see that level of customer service for a product like this. Awesome Once Assembled The good news is that all of that hard work is worth it. Once assembled, the B-G Racing kit becomes the most user-friendly 4-wheel alignment setup that you can buy for under $1000 US. Like with all string alignment kits, there is some setup to do before you can start taking measurements. You do need to adjust the height of the alignment bars so they line up with your wheel centers, hang the strings off of the reel, and make sure the strings are spaced evenly on both sides of the car. The clever yellow string reels and their sprung twine makes this a cinch. There's no untangling string, no tying knots, and no worrying about string tension. Just slip the loop in one of the grooves of the alignment bars, unlock the reel, walk over to the other end of the car, and wrap the remaining string around the other bar. Lock the reel back in place and it becomes a weight that keeps the string taut. One of the annoying attributes of most string alignment kits is that they are super delicate: Snag a string on your shoe or bump into a rack, and it will throw the strings so far out of alignment that you need to set them up again. Not so with this kit. The little metal shims in the junctions hold all of the bars exactly where you put them, so the occasional light knock won't interrupt your work. You could even roll the car with the racks still attached and expect the strings to stay exactly where you put them. This is a huge time saver, especially when you are working on a car that requires multiple rounds of adjustments to get a good alignment. I took this kit out for a test alignment earlier, and it took less than half the time to set up compared to when I was using my old Tenhulzen kit. This says something as the Tenhulzen setup is already one of the more user-friendly 4-wheel alignment kits available on the market. The B-G Racing kit is very impressive indeed. Overall Impressions & Verdict In theory, you don't need a $425 alignment kit to do a string alignment. But in practice, the time-saving features in the B-G Racing String Alignment Kit make it worth every penny. The team at B-G seems to have figured out how to make the annoying, repetitive process that is a 4-wheel alignment as fast and easy as possible. Sure, if you have all the time in the world, you can run some fishing line across four jack stands and get similar results. But this kit will let you achieve the same results in a tiny fraction of the time. If you are an avid track day driver, an active autocrosser, a club racer, or are an enthusiast that likes doing your own alignments, I recommend this kit as a long-term investment. It's small and easy enough that you can set it up and use it in a one-car garage, and it's durable enough that you can take it to the track. The $425 price tag may seem like a lot, but realistically, it'll pay for itself after your 2nd alignment (remember, race alignments are EXPENSIVE). Because of its convenience and durability, I would rate this above both the Smartstrings or the Tenhulzen 4-wheel alignment kit. Yes, the Tenhulzen set comes with a camber/caster gauge and has more functions. But B-G Racing's kit is so much sturdier that it's worth spending the extra money to get a separate camber gauge to go with it. The only things that let this kit down are the confusing manual and the fact that it doesn't come with any measurement tools. If B-G improves their instruction manual and starts including a set of cheap metal straightedges, I would give this kit a 10/10. Disclosure section: StudioVRM and Roger Maeda are not affiliated with any of the products or manufacturers mentioned here. All products were bought out of Roger's pocket at full price. He also recommends that you park your car on a flat, level surface, not on a cracked concrete driveway like he did in some of these pictures.

When I first started on my mission to turn a 93 Honda Prelude Si into a racecar, everyone thought I was completely off my rocker. Never mind popularity and racing heritage. For an amateur racer, building a racecar is a formulaic exercise in following the leader. The sane thing to do is to establish a budget, choose a racing organization and class, then either buy an established front-running car or build a new car based on the make, model, modifications, and setup of the existing class-leader. That's why you see so many of the same car at the sharp end of most SCCA and NASA racing classes. Deviating from this formula comes at a huge expense in both time and money. And sometimes, you'll find that after hours and hours of blood, sweat, and tears, the minimum weight values, power restrictions, and regulations defined by the almighty rule makers mean that your car may be at an inherent disadvantage against the other cars in its class. It's a high dollar, high-risk investment. Now that I've gone down the road of the less-than-practical and made that investment, I'd like to share the fruits of that process with all of you. This little series will walk you through all of the major steps that I took in the process of turning a street driven 4th gen Honda Prelude into a racecar. Choosing a Class Decisions, decisions. What class stickers will adorn the sides of your new race car? The look and feel of the 4th gen (92-96) Prelude was what drew me to the car. The fact that I found a competitive racing class for it is what sealed the deal. All successful racecars are built to the rules defined in its class. Class rules determine the allowed level of modification, necessary level of safety equipment, and the approximate cost of what it would take to race a specific racecar. Simply put, those rules are there to make sure that the cars are both competitive and safe. Here's are the series of questions that I asked myself when I figured out what class I wanted to run the car in: What popular SCCA and NASA classes are a 1993 Honda Prelude Si eligible to compete in? As it turns out, there are lots of classes where I could race a 93 Prelude Si. At the time, the list included: SCCA Improved Touring S SCCA Super Touring IMG Performance Index 4 NASA Performance Touring D NASA Honda Challenge 1 NASA Honda Challenge 2 NASA Honda Challenge 3 (now defunct) Which classes allow me to do suspension and chassis modifications, while keeping the cost of engine modifications down? I priced out the parts and major labor costs for theoretical cars in each of the following classes, and found that they fit into my long-term budget: SCCA Improved Touring S IMG Performance Index 4 NASA Performance Touring D NASA Honda Challenge 3 (now defunct) Given the wording of the rules and the car being what it is, what would be the biggest hurdle in making the car work in each class? SCCA Improved Touring S - Take enough weight out of the car so I could achieve the minimum competition weight of 2555 lbs IMG Performance Index 4 - Since the class is so new, spend lots of time and money in figuring out what makes a car competitive in the class. NASA Performance Touring D - Make enough power and do enough chassis modifications to offset the high minimum competition weight of 2888lbs. Or run super sticky tyres and pay the penalty points for a competition weight that is lower than the base weight. NASA Honda Challenge 3 - Do enough work to the engine internals so the car can produce enough power to be competitive in a field of lighter cars. Which car class has the largest race fields in the last few years? Of the choices above, SCCA Improved Touring S had the largest uniform field in this region. NASA Honda Challenge 3 had the smallest. If I built a car to one of these classes, could I run it in any other popular class? This was basically an exercise in figuring out which class had the most restrictive rules, and seeing if it could be readily adapted to fit into the rulesets of another class. Based on the four theoretical cars I priced out in step 2, I made this compatibility chart: Building the car for SCCA Improved Touring S gave me maximum flexibility and options as far as where I could run the car. SCCA Improved Touring S seemed like the clear winner. But what modifications would I need to do to make the car race ready? The rulebook is long and wordy, but the paraphrased mod list comes out quite short: 8 point roll cage Racing Seat Racing Harness Intake Header Exhaust Reprogrammed ECU Some very minor work on the cylinder head Some very minor boring out of the cylinder walls and re-fettling of the bottom end Height-adjustable coilovers without external canisters Racing brake pads Suspension bushings and bearings Stiffer engine mounts Aluminum wheels R compound tyre Take out as much weight as possible That was more than enough to satisfy my appetite for mods, while keeping the overall budget in line with what I was willing to put into the car. So with that, I borrowed $2000, signed the paperwork for a used Honda Prelude Si, and the build process began.

Don't rely on your odometer to tell you when to change your oil or replace your brakes on a track-driven car. That's just asking for something to break when you least expect it. Instead, steal a page from the aeronautics industry and install an hour meter to stay on top of your maintenance schedule: Since I got so many questions about it last time, here's where you can get the parts I used: DTI Tiny Tach TT2AM ($45 from Amazon) Honeywell Hobbs 85094+ Hour Meter ($27 from Aircraft Spruce) Add-A-Circuit Fuse Taps (Full size fuses for older cars) ($8 from Amazon) Add-A-Circuit Fuse Taps (Mini APM fuses for new cars) ($10 from Amazon) And yes, there are cheaper hour meters and inductive tachs out there. I went with these two because they are designed to withstand more moisture, vibration, and dirt than the cheaper ones. And they're calibrated better than the cheapos. Still, if you want to give those a try, there quite a few out there: Cheap alternative meters on Amazon PS: While the 85000 series Hobbs meters are perfect for cars, boats and motorcycles, they are not for certified aircraft. So don't go sticking this into your Cessna 152.

Car enthusiasts often say that that a good engine oil is "cheap insurance" for their performance motors. Unfortunately for those of us with dedicated track or race cars, this has started to become less and less true. A recent surge in marketing activity across the major performance oil manufacturers has caused the price of my go-to track car oil to jump by 30% in just one year. My "cheap insurance" of choice was starting to cause problems for our modest racing budget. So when I was flipping through Grassroots Motorsports Magazine and came across an ad for a new brand of racing oil, my interest level spiked through the roof. I had never heard of PTH Racing Oil, but their ad had the right keywords and it came with a most intriguing tagline: "for racers, by racers." At first glance that might sound like small business cliché, but think about it for a minute. You need hundreds of thousands of dollars of industrial machinery and years of experience to blend your own motor oil. What kind of "racer" has access to the warehouse full of specialized machines required to blend, test, and bottle motor oil? And how did they suddenly pop into existence without anyone noticing? Who are these guys? When a quick search of the usual car forums yielded no useful information, I ended up calling the company directly. It turns out that the company really is run by a SCCA racer and that they aren't as new as I thought. In fact, PTH Racing Oil has been around for the better part of the last decade, quietly producing custom blended racing oils for club racers on the west coast. According to company Principal Rick Lee, he started out with the same objective as all track car owners and drivers - To find the best possible racing engine oil at a reasonable cost for the average enthusiast. Unlike the average car enthusiast, Rick happens to have 20 years of experience working in the big oil industry and the commercial equipment to test and manufacture and package motor oil. So he did what any curious engineer would do: Analyze and test the living daylights out of the big name racing oils and high performance passenger car oils to see what worked best. When he couldn't find a racing oil that satisfied all of his requirements, he used his years of hands-on experience to create his own. After third party lab testing and on-track tests came back with positive results, he decided to start selling it to racers and track day drivers who might be interested in affordable, quality racing oil. The company is established and the technical expertise seemed to be there. So I dug a little deeper into the product itself. Top-Shelf Racing Oil at Club Racer Prices Because their oils are designed solely for high-performance track and racing use, PTH Racing Oil takes a slightly different approach to the majority of the other big players. Most of the money goes towards using the best Group IV base stock that they can get their hands on. According to Rick, their base stock comes from ExxonMobil's line of PAO base stocks. Apparently, these base stocks are so expensive that even Mobil themselves can't afford to use it in Mobil 1 passenger car oil. I asked around, and this does seem to be true. According to one supplier, you have to shell out for their (significantly) more expensive Mobil 1 Racing in order to get the same base stock in a Mobil branded bottle. The additives package is also very different from what you would get from most high performance street oils. When the conversation turned towards additives, Rick talked primarily about friction modifiers, friction reducers, antioxidants, base number boosters, anti-foaming agents, and anti-misting agents. He made it pretty clear that the priority was to make sure that this oil would stand up to long-duration loads in a high-stress, high-temperature environment, even if it meant making compromises on emissions and fuel economy. At the moment, PTH only sells three viscosities: 5w-30, 10w-40, and 20w-50. All three are the same exact price - $140 for a case of twelve 1-quart bottles, which comes out to $11.60 a quart. ***2019 Update: Since this article was written, PTH changed their price to $175 a case, or $14.58 a quart. They also reduced their shipping costs to the lower 48 states to $25. It's still a fair bit cheaper than the competition. While this might seem like a lot compared to your average street car oil, it's actually a bargain for a fully synthetic racing oil. Joe Gibbs Racing Driven XP3 costs at least $17 per quart, while Motul 300V comes in at $16.50 per quart at the cheapest. That difference adds up really quickly when you consider how often you change your oil in a track car. Comparing Technical Specifications Of course, everyone likes seeing cold hard numbers. So here's a quick and dirty chart of key figures that I scraped together from data sheets from the manufacturers (cross checked against third party Virgin Oil Analyses where available): *Mobil1 Extended Performance is an API SN passenger car oil. I added it to show what a typical street car oil looks like. Right off the bat, there are a few numbers that jump out at you. The unusually high HTHS viscosity confirms that PTH prioritized high-stress performance over everything else. A relatively high TBN number suggests that it will do a good job of protecting the internals of the engine against the metal-eating acids that form in the oil during the natural course of engine combustion, and that it could sit in the crankcase for longer periods of time. The relatively low Viscosity Index says that this oil is designed for use in relatively temperate environments (like racetracks during summer), and less for cold start in sub-zero climates. The Zinc and Phosphorus levels should bring smiles to owners of flat tappet cam-equipped cars. PTH Racing Oil contains more of each additive than even the near-ubiquitous flat tappet oil, Brad Penn PennGrade1. In fact, 2000 ppm of Zinc and Phosphorus is comparable to some popular break-in oils. The calcium content is also surprisingly high. I'm guessing it's to counteract the ash production that comes as a side effect of certain additives, like the ones use to boost the Total Base Number. Of course, there are a lot of other additives and agents which I couldn't get reliable numbers for. But based on published data, PTH Racing Oil looks to be an excellent choice for drivers of dedicated track and race cars who run their cars in longer on-track sessions. I can see this stuff being particularly attractive for drivers running long race sessions (e.g. SCCA Majors races), 6+ hour endurance sessions (e.g. AER Endurance races), or open track days where they give you 6-8 hours of time to do whatever you like. I would also imagine that this would be particularly attractive to drivers of modified Honda VTEC, Toyota VVTL-i, and Porsche Variocam Plus equipped cars, which tend to run at high oil temperatures at higher RPM with higher cam lift than other production car motors. Based on the quality of the base stock, I would also expect that motors wouldn't lose as much power as the oil gets older. All good news for me, with my Honda race cars and my personal preference of 40+ minute sprint race sessions. Of course all of these good qualities come with a few drawbacks. Like with most racing oils, the high concentration of Phosphorus means that this would not be good for OEM catalytic converters. So don't put this into your daily driver unless you plan on replacing the cat in the near future. Based on the high HTHS numbers, I would also expect fuel economy to suffer compared to most synthetic passenger car oils. Not that it matters much when you're barely doing 8 miles to the gallon when going full throttle on a racetrack. That said, there are certain street car applications where PTH Racing Oil would probably work well. Classic British cars, vintage Porsches, or high-horsepower, cat-less sports sedans are likely to run very happily with this stuff in its engine. But how do you know that it's actually good? Good question. You can look at oil analysis numbers and compare test results all you want, but until you actually use the oil in a real engine in a real racing situation, you won't know whether it's actually any good. So I went out and bought a case from PTH. And as part of a long-term experiment, I will be running PTH Racing Oil in 5w-30 in the StudioVRM Prelude throughout the first part of the 2018 season. I also have some oil analysis kits coming so I can verify PTH's claims about what their oil contains. Why take the risk? I will admit that cost is a big factor. The reality is that JGR Driven XP3 and Motul 300V are top-shelf oils with top-shelf price tags. It just isn't cost effective for me to use either of them with the change intervals I need to run. PennGrade 1 5w30 was my lower-cost go-to for Regional races, but with the current asking price at $114 per case, it just isn't that cheap any more. Especially so when I have three street cars and a separate endurance racing car that need my attention. The other big factor is stability in the product recipe. D-A Lubricant Group recently completed their acquisition of Brad Penn, which has some enthusiasts concerned about potential formulation changes to Penn Grade 1. Motul, on the other hand, are making no secret of the fact that they have changed the base stock for 300V to a different, Japanese-sourced base. Not to say that the quality of either oil has gone down. But it does make you wonder if the characteristics of the oils are going to quietly change as time goes on. That's where a small volume manufacturer like PTH has an advantage. I can literally call the company and ask the guys who mixed my oil if anything is different in this batch. It's a luxury that high volume oil manufacturers can't afford to give to us privateer club racers. The last factor is the vibe I got from talking to the guys at PTH Racing Oil. Despite the high-dollar commercial machinery and slick marketing presentation, these guys gave me the same feeling that companies like Kingpin Machine and Fortune Auto did. These are examples of companies that were founded on the basis of delivering the best possible product for a very specific market, with a secondary objective of "oh, if we make some money that would be good too." I like companies that give me that vibe. They tend to give a crap about their product, and by extension, their customers. What's Next? Between the winter weather and some ongoing chassis work, it will be a little while before I'll be able to put real track miles on this oil. In the meantime, here's the contact info for PTH in case you want to ask them any questions: PTH Racing Oil P.O. BOX 970754 Orem, UT 84097 831.917.3715 www.pthoil.com Personally, I can't wait for the first test day. See you at the track. Disclosure section: Roger buys, uses, and recommends Joe Gibbs Racing Driven XP3, Brad Penn PennGrade 1, as well as the cheaper JGR Driven XP7. The PTH oil mentioned in this post was purchased at full price out of his own pocket. StudioVRM is not sponsored or supported by any oil companies, which probably explains why we're doing this test on a Prelude instead of a NSX.

Half the fun of having a track car is in building and developing it. Sure, it gives you all the chances in the world to screw up. You can spend a lot of money buying parts that don't work as well as you thought or you make a mistake and blow up something in a very expensive way. I'm not ashamed to admit that I've made my fair share of expensive mistakes in my pursuit for greater speed. So when a fellow car enthusiast asked me what mods I had on my car, it made me wonder: If I was to build a competitive Prelude for SCCA Improved Touring racing, what would that build sheet look like? And what would it cost? Parts List Here's my answer, based on 8 years of blood, sweat, tears, and development work: Professional Help Required In addition to installing the parts shown above, there are some labor-intensive items that are necessary to make the car competitive. You'll want to seek out an experienced race shop to help you with these items: Fabrication and welding of the roll cage Engine head inspection and cleaning Installation of a Limited Slip Differential ECU installation and dyno tune Corner weighting Race Alignment Labor costs vary wildly depending on where you are. It would be a good idea to get on the good graces of someone who has the necessary time, skills, and equipment for some of these things. If you have skills that you can offer them (even if they aren't motorsport related), put them on the table too. It never hurts and you may just get that little extra something for your hard-earned money. Lesson Learned The biggest lesson to be learned from this is that building a race car is not a fiscally responsible thing to do. In addition to all of the dollar amounts you see above, I spent hundreds of thousands of hours went into researching, testing, and setting up the car as it was being built. The upside is that by building a car yourself, you can choose when to spend your time and money. By building the StudioVRM Prelude over the course of 8 years, I was able to split up the cost and time in a way that I could easily afford it. Plus I often chose top shelf parts to eek out as much performance as possible. You could probably get 90% of the performance of this car for a lot less money if you bought used parts or took some slightly cheaper alternatives. Not only did I end up with a competitive car, I gained the knowledge, experience, and skills from some of the best in the business. That's something that I can now carry forward to the small fleet of other racecars I work on to make them faster for less money. And more importantly, I now have a decade worth of fond memories and an address book full of close friends with whom I'll share a lifetime of good times. Would I do it all again? Hell yes. You should too. It's worth every penny. See you at the track.

When we last left off in the series, the StudioVRM Prelude was back with powertrain wizard Robert Oliver for a top-to-bottom rebuild of its battle-worn H23A1. In addition to giving the block a long-overdue refresh, we also installed high compression pistons to take advantage of the cams we installed during the 2018 season. Why stick with the non-VTEC H23A1? At this point, you might ask why we didn't just do a motor swap and start over with a H22 instead. After all, the higher performance 2.2L engine comes with more power out of the box, a better flowing head, and the awesome power of Honda's coveted VTEC technology. Plus the 2157cc engine would allow us to run with a lower minimum weight by virtue of the SCCA Super Touring Under class' displacement-to-weight rules. As always though, the devil is in the details. Details, such as: The fact that our lightly modified H23A1 is already making more power than a stock US Market H22 We lose the ability to hit SCCA STU's 12:1 compression limit using OEM pistons* The oiling system in a high revving H22 is much more highly stressed than in the milder H23 VTEC isn't useful in a racecar where the gearing can be adjusted to keep the engine in a certain RPM range *Installing Type S pistons in a H22 will get you to 11:1 compression, which is close but not quite the same as you get from installing USDM H22 pistons into an H23A1. That's not to say that the H23A1 is a better engine than the H22. We just happen to be at the point where starting over would cost far too much for what gains we could achieve. Besides, what would be the fun in that? StudioVRM is all about taking the road less traveled. So with our H23 upgrade plan firmly justified in our minds, we set off on the road less traveled and went about improving the Prelude's lesser-loved non-VTEC engine. Building a Better Head The StudioVRM Prelude has come a long way since its days as a near-stock ITS car. As of this build, the following aftermarket parts now occupy the top end of the engine: Racer Brown Custom Grind Racing Camshafts for the H23A1 AEM Tru-Time Adjustable Cam Gears (part #23-802BK) Crower Sprigns and Retainers (part #84177) Lightly ported H23A1 head by Robert Oliver Port matched intake manifold by Robert Oliver Mahle Head Gasket Set (HS5897) Head decked by Robert Oliver Most of these modifications were actually installed early in the 2018 season as part of our stress test of PTH racing oil. The purpose of this round of modifications was to unlock the power that these modifications gave us. Rebuilding the Bottom End It may come as a surprise that the StudioVRM Prelude's block has never been disassembled, much less rebuilt. In fact, even after a decade of racing, our racecar still had the original bearings as it had when the car rolled off the assembly line in Sayama, Japan. This finally changed this winter, after 25 years of faithful service. Over the off-season, the bottom end was rebuilt with: King Main Bearings (Part #MB5168XP) King Connecting Rod Bearings (Part #CR4033XPSTD) King Bearings Thrust Washers (Part #TW152AM) OEM Honda H22A1 Pistons NPR Piston Ring Set Beck / Arnley Engine Seal Kit OEM Honda Oil pan gasket By combining the H22A1 pistons with the H23A1 rods, we were able to bump the compression of our rebuilt motor from 9.8:1 to just shy of 12:1. The theory is that the increased compression would help maximize the power output of our high-overlap custom cams. The brand new King bearings would help keep the motor running safely through sustained high-rpm sessions on the racetrack. Sidebar - Wrist Pin Weirdness During the course of assembly, powertrain wizard Robert Oliver stumbled across a strange problem. When he tried to install the H22 pistons on our H23 rods, he found that they were too big for the pistons. This seemed like an impossibility considering that wrist pin sizes for Honda H series engines are very well published. According to all known literature, both engines should use exactly the same pins. So what was going on? As it turns out, our H23A1 is not the USDM Prelude Si engine that we thought it was. It is actually the Japanese variant of the engine, which came with the larger wrist pins and rods from the VTEC-enabled H23. Wrist Pin Diameters for reference: USDM H22A1 Wrist Pin Diameter Spec = .8649" -.8654" USDM H23A1 Wrist Pin Diameter Spec = .8649" -.8654" JDM H23A1 Wrist Pin Diameter = .8657" This little known fact caused a major headache for the powertrain wizard. The H22 wrist pins were the perfect size for a floating pin application in the H23A1 rods, but that would require precise machine work to bush the rods and modify the pistons to properly retain the pin. We could go out and use aftermarket forged pistons, but that came at a substantial cost. Plus most forged pistons aren't compatible with the H series' FRM cylinder liners. Finally, we could try and get a different set of H23 rods. But Honda hasn't made new H23 rods in years. And there was no guarantee that we wouldn't run into the same issue with someone else's used rods. After pondering the options, Robert came up with a very simple solution. He first drilled a set of small oil passages into the small end of the H23 connecting rods. He then pressed the larger H23 pins into the H22A1 pistons using his pin press. This allowed us to keep the pressed-pin setup of the stock H23 without having to do any machine work at all. Because we effectively forced the wrist pins into a hole that was 0.004" too small, this does mean that we may not be able to disassemble the pistons and rods in the future. But practically speaking, this isn't much of an issue. H22 pistons and H23 rods are cheap and readily available. If we ever needed to replace the pistons or rods, we could just assemble and replace them as a set. In addition to teaching us a fun new fact about the H series engine, the experience taught us a valuable lesson - Never underestimate the power of Occam's razor. Induction, Exhaust, and Electronics Of course, none of this would do any good if we can't get air in and out. As the powertrain wizard keeps reminding me, an internal combustion engine is just a giant air pump. The key is to get as much air flowing through it as efficiently as possible. Here's what we have to make that happen: AEM Cold Air intake (Part #21-405C) Hytech H23A1 header 2.5" ID custom exhaust by Robert Oliver Burns Stainless 17" glass pack muffler Hondata S300 on a Honda P28 ECU Check out the previous installments of the series for details on these items. Dyno Tune After a few weeks of careful assembly, I picked the car up from Robert and brought it back to our go-to Honda tuner, Jeff Evans. Since our last visit to his shop, Jeff had transitioned his highly regarded tuning shop into Evans Performance Academy, an innovative tuning school. Fortunately, he still makes time to tune the odd racecar, as you can see here: Since the motor was totally unproven at this point, we played it safe and tuned the car on Sunoco 260GT, a 100 octane unleaded race fuel. So how much power did it make? Well, see for yourself: Jeff's initial assessment was that we should feel a substantial difference compared to before. While the peak numbers were modest, the car gained 30+hp at 6000 RPM. This will make a huge difference in a racing situation. Better yet, Jeff thinks there's more power to be unlocked from this motor. He thinks our stock intake manifold and mildly ported head are choking out the engine and preventing it from reaching its full potential. While we won't be doing that this time around, it's encouraging to know that there's more to be had out of our lowly non-VTEC powerplant. Conclusions and Next Steps 180hp and 169 lbs-ft of torque might not seem earth-shattering, you have to remember that different dynos read very differently. The only way to get an accurate comparison is to compare with another car on the same dyno. By comparison, a stock H22A1-powered Prelude reportedly makes around 165hp and 135 lbs-ft of torque on the Dynapack at Evans Performance Academy. While a modified H22 would produce more peak power, they would be hard pressed to reproduce the same low-end grunt as our fully worked-over H23A1. Of course, all of this is all theory at this point. The only way to find out how fast the car is to run it on a full size racetrack. As I write this, the StudioVRM Prelude is getting some final suspension adjustments before it goes off for corner weighting and an aggressive race-friendly alignment. As soon as that's done, we will be ready for our first track test of 2019. How much faster will this car be in the 2019 season? Stay tuned. See you at the track. Disclosure Section: Roger has no affiliation with the manufacturers or companies mentioned above and therefore paid full price, out of pocket, for everything mentioned. StudioVRM is now an Amazon Associate, which means that we get a tiny bit of income to support our site if you buy a product using the Amazon links above. We would be tremendously grateful if you did just that. The site gets a lot of traffic nowadays and hosting isn't that cheap.

Those of you who have been following our activities have no doubt witnessed the untimely demise of our 2019-spec H23A1 motor. While it was an immense disappointment to see the Powertrain Wizard's hard work go up in smoke, we had no intentions of letting that stop us. Instead, we brought the car right back to Robert's garage and combined our rebuild plans with our pre-planned upgrade for the 2020 season. What Happened? The short answer is "oil starvation." The long answer is that we overwhelmed the stock oiling system of the H23A1 with the cornering grip of our wide tyres and functional aero. While the Honda OEM oiling system was perfectly adequate for SCCA Improved Touring levels of grip, the mild baffling of the OEM oil pan just isn't enough to prevent oil starvation from the high cornering G's generated by 245mm width Hoosiers, a big rear wing, and a 3" front splitter. With so little oil going to the oil pickup, the rod bearing under cylinder #2 spun, causing the OEM rod bolts to shear apart right below the retaining nut. What ensued was a catastrophic disintegration of the stock H23A1 rods which culminated in the remains of the rod bolt exiting the engine block and landing on the driver's side shock tower. Not even the best racing oil available would have saved our motor from this failure. Here's what was left in the oil pan: Yikes. What Are We Changing? As a result of this hard-learned lesson, we focused on two areas when building our 2020 engine: Upgrading the oiling system to prevent future failures Improving the flow of our intake and head to extract more top-end power While the oil system improvements were an obvious must-have, we also had a desire to get more top-end power from the H23A1. Based on past conversations with top Honda Tuner Jeff Evans, we knew that we that the Improved Touring-legal head and OEM intake manifold were not flowing enough air to take full advantage of our aftermarket cams and 12:1 compression bottom end. After several discussions with Robert, we decided it was the perfect time to make the motor more reliable while building it closer to the limit of SCCA Super Touring Under rules. And so, Robert went digging in his basement full of Honda parts in search of a new H23A1 head, while yours truly went looking for a clean block that we could use to start rebuilding StudioVRM Racing team's 2020-spec race motor. Beefing up the Bottom End If you just looked at the specs on paper, you wouldn't notice much of a difference between the short blocks of our 2019 and 2020-spec engines. The new engine retains the basic concept of our 2019 engine, using a H23 block with different rods to raise the compression to 12:1. But there is much more than meets the eye to our 2020-spec bottom end. An aggressively baffled Moroso Road Racing oil pan now adorns the bottom of our freshly honed block, increasing its oil capacity to 5.5 liters and providing much-needed protection against oil starvation from high cornering G's. A new Honda OEM oil pump will maintain a steady flow of engine oil and a KS Tuned Balance Shaft Eliminator kit will ensure that we get consistent oil pressure across the H23's wide powerband. The Powertrain Wizard replaced the stock connecting rods with aftermarket units that used standard rod bolts instead of the OEM press-in kind. This seemingly insignificant upgrade makes a huge difference in Honda H-series engines. This will let us run the motor at higher revs while without the risk of another rod bolt failure. King bearings are once again the bearings of choice in our new engine. As an added safety measure, we installed a 3 quart Canton Accusump oil accumulator. This device acts as a reserve tank for the engine oil. When oil pressure drops below a certain point, it automatically pushes fresh oil into the motor, acting as a safety net to prevent major issues. At over $650 for a full kit, it was easily the most expensive part on our shopping list. But considering how much time and money it takes to build and install a new engine, we see this as a very worthwhile investment. Improving Top-End Airflow Once we had a bulletproof foundation for our new engine, the Powertrain Wizard turned his attention to boosting our engine's power. During our last visit to Evans Performance Academy, Tuner-Owner Jeff Evans pointed out how much power we were losing from our restrictive stock intake manifold, mildly ported head, and OEM throttle body. SCCA Super Touring rules allow modifications to two out of three of those areas, so Robert went to his grinding station and began freeing up airflow. Photo by Robert Oliver Through weeks of meticulous shaping of both the intake and exhaust ports (punctuated by frequent trips to the flow bench), the Powertrain wizard was able to achieve flow numbers that far surpassed our original H23A1 head. He also bored out the stock H23A1 intake manifold and removed the intake butterflies to ensure that there was enough volume and airflow to feed the free-flowing head. Photo by Robert Oliver Flow bench testing provided very encouraging signs. Our new head and intake showed much improved numbers, similar to what you would see from a ported H22 VTEC head. Considering the difference in port sizes between the stock H23A1 and stock H22 head, this is a huge achievement. While peak flow numbers were a bit short of Robert's best race-ported H22 heads, he was confident that the gains we made here will make a noticeable difference on the dyno as well as at the track. Got Air? Need Fuel. Internal combustion engines need both air and fuel to make power. If you increase the airflow to the cylinders, you need to inject more fuel. Based on the Powertrain Wizard's calculations, the OEM Honda injectors in our Prelude would not flow enough fuel to take advantage of the airflow from our new intake manifold and head. In response, we ordered a set of 410cc Acura RDX injectors and a Rosko Racing fuel rail to allow increased airflow. We also ordered a jumper that will bypass the OEM resistor box to ensure that the injectors operate as they were originally designed. Once installed, this should give us plenty fuel so we can get the maximum out of the 2020-spec motor. Cam Clearance Panic Photo by Robert Oliver One of the consequences of building an experimental engine is that you sometimes run into some unexpected issues at the strangest of times. Within seconds of starting the new engine for the first time, the Powertrain Wizard noticed a loud clatter coming from under the valve cover of the new motor. A closer inspection revealed that our custom-ground Racer Brown cams were hitting the adjuster nuts on the rockers as they turned. This was not good. After some research, we found out that the high rocker ratio of the H23A1 rockers demand an asymmetric cam profile in order to open and close the valves without causing clearance issues. However, the lobes on our Racer Brown cams appeared to have been ground to a symmetrical shape. This would allow the cam lobes to come in contact with the adjusters, causing the rattling noise and causing unwanted friction in the delicate valvetrain. A comparison of cam profiles between the OEM H23A1 intake cam (left) and the Racer Brown intake cam (right). Note the curved ramp on the left hand side of the lobe and the flat slope on the right of the OEM cam. These features are missing on the Racer Brown race cams. In response, Robert recommended that we make a switch to Crower Stage 2 H23A1 race cams, which boasts similar amounts of lift and duration while retaining the critically important asymmetric lobe profile that we needed. Even with these new cams, a test fitting showed that the cam lobes still came uncomfortably close to the rocker adjusters. So after some more number crunching, Robert sunk the valves 0.025" into the head. With this modification, we finally had enough clearance between the lobes and the rocker adjusters. I would be lying if I said I wasn't worried about this late breaking drama. Both the issue and the proposed fix were far beyond the understanding of someone who has admittedly limited experience building high performance engines. Thankfully, Robert has decades of Honda engine experience and has top notch problem solving skills. His calculations proved correct, and his fixes worked exactly as expected. The newly reassembled motor roared back to life with little more than a rhythmic light tapping coming from under its valve cover. How does it run? At this point, we know that the motor runs well in a test environment. Due to prevailing conditions, we have not yet had a chance to fully dyno tune the motor or put it through its paces on a racetrack. In truth, we don't really know how well our new powerplant will perform when it is being put through its paces. That will change in the next few months, as we will be taking the StudioVRM Honda Prelude back to Evans Performance Academy to be re-tuned by one of the best Honda tuners in the world. How much power will this new motor make? Check back soon to find out. ~R Disclosure Section: Neither StudioVRM, Roger Maeda, nor Powertrain Wizard Robert Oliver are affiliated with any of the manufacturers or suppliers mentioned above. All of the products mentioned above were bought at full price using Roger's own money, or salvaged from the deep dark recesses of our garages and basements.

If you have ever purchased a high performance summer tyre or a dedicated race tyre, you have probably seen the warnings: Don't store your tyres below freezing temperatures. But due to the fact that there are so few pictures of freeze-cracked tyres out there, no one seems to know what actually happens when a tyre has been subjected to freezing cold temperatures. The only site which seems to have a picture of a freeze-damaged tyre is TireRack.com, but the photo they show is not exactly representative of the most common form of freeze cracking: Well, due to unforeseen circumstances, the StudioVRM Prelude had spent a few nights out in some sub-zero temperatures. When we came out in the morning, we found that the front tyres had been severely damaged by the low temperatures. Here's what an actual freeze-damaged race tyre looks like: Can't see the damage? Here's a closer look: Those trypophobia-inducing grooves in the tread are actually deep cracks that go all the way to the steel belts. Contrary to popular belief, it's the outer shoulders of the tread, not the sidewalls, that crack in cold weather. While these tyres do still hold air, they are no longer safe to use. If you apply any load to this tyre, the tread will crumble and peel away from the location of the cracks, until you are basically rolling around on a steel belt held up by sidewalls. If you see this on any of your tyres, replace them immediately. How Do You Prevent Freeze Cracking? As boring as it sounds, the best way to prevent freeze cracking is storing them according to the manufacturer's instructions. Dismount them from the car and keep them in a cool, dry indoor location that is climate controlled above freezing (0 degrees C / 32 degrees F). Racing tyres are especially susceptible to degradation from ultraviolet rays, so keep them away from the sun as well. If you store them in your garage, cover them with a moving blanket or put them high on a shelf in the corner where sunlight will not reach them. Take good care of your tyres, and they should serve you well in the warmer summer months. See you at the track.

About a month ago, we conducted a head-to-head comparison between two popular chemical rust removers, with some very surprising results. Then the whole excitement happened around current events, and we kind of forgot about the samples. By the time we got around to cleaning up our workspace, our three rusty brackets had been soaking in their rust remover baths for an entire month. So we thought it would be a good opportunity to turn lemons into lemonade and use these neglected samples to test a claim touted by both manufacturers - That these rust converters won't damage clean metal. While it might seem like a minor point, it is actually something worth testing. After all, both of these solutions are more expensive than some very common rust removal products. For example, muriatic acid and media tumblers can also do a very good job of removing corrosion from ferrous metals at a fraction of the price. The problem is that they need to be watched carefully. Leave your corroded parts in too long and they might end up eroding away some of the precious good metal underneath. The value behind products like Deox-C and Evapo-Rust is that you can literally "set and forget" them. So let's test to see how true those claims are. How is this Even Possible? This does raise the question - What makes products like Evapo-Rust and Deox-C so special that they can even make such a bold claim? The secret to achieving this non-destructive rust removal is a chemical process called chelation. Chelation is a chemical process that involves using an agent which binds to a metallic agent and separates it from the surrounding materials, not unlike the way soap binds to grease and oils. It's the same principle behind how a household water softener works, and is the same technique used by hospitals to treat patients with heavy metal poisoning. There are a wide variety of chelating agents out there, and the art is picking the correct one for the application. Choose the wrong one, and it may end up disintegrating your work pieces instead of cleaning them. What this means is that this experiment is really a test of how whether these manufacturers did their homework in selecting their chelating agents, and how well they did in selecting the right chelating agents to do the job. Visual Inspection By the time we wrote this article, our three work pieces had been soaking in their rust remover baths for a full 30 days. In order to preserve the condition of the work pieces, we only gently wiped the brackets down with a dry paper towel and before bringing them to the workbench for a closer visual analysis. Evapo-Rust The work piece soaked in Evapo-Rust looks quite similar to when it had been in the rust remover bath for 24 hours. There is some noticeable pitting as well as some mild etching in the cleaned area, but the brackets do not seem to be any thinner or more brittle than they were when we filmed our comparison. Thanks to the effects of evaporation, all three samples have a band of de-rusted metal that ended up being exposed to the air for an extended period of time. This band of exposed metal is clean and nearly rust-free on the Evapo-Rust sample. It seems that Evapo-rust has an additive that prevents flash-rusting: A convenient feature for when you aren't able to seal and paint your work pieces right away. 5% Deox-C Solution The 5% Deox-C solution seems to have produced similar results to the Evapo-Rust, with some subtle differences. The pitting on the clean end of the bracket is less pronounced than with the Evapo-Rust solution, and the etching of the metal is very slightly less noticeable. However, the exposed band of metal near the untouched rusted portion had clearly flash rusted and is starting to corrode again. This is an indicator that you should immediately wash, prep, and seal your work pieces immediately after removing them from a Deox-C bath. If you are working on large work pieces, this is also an indicator that you should have enough extra liquid to keep your parts submerged, just in case some of it happens to evaporate out of the top of the container. 20% Deox-C Solution The higher concentration of Deox-C seemed to have zero pitting, in stark contrast to the other two samples. This is an indicator that some of the pitting had happened during the rust removal process, and the higher concentration rust remover had dissolved the larger chunks of rust before they could corrode the clean metal underneath. What is surprising was the extremely even etching on the freshly cleaned surfaces. We expected more pronounced surface etching on this sample compared to the others, as the Deox-C is very slightly acidic. As with the 5% Deox-C solution, the band of exposed metal on this sample also showed signs of surface rust, though not to the extent of the 5% solution. Measuring the Outcome Because none of the samples showed significant amounts of erosion, we broke out the digital calipers and measured the thickness of the brackets to see how material had been dissolved. We took multiple measurements of the freshly cleaned sections, the cleaned portion that was exposed to open air, and the original rusted section to see how the thicknesses of the brackets changed. In order to get the most accurate results possible, we took four different measurements of each section and averaged them together. Here are the results: Conclusions and Recommendations From these results, we can see that Evapo-Rust and Deox-C do live up to their claims of being safe for ferrous metals. While the process removed almost 1 mm of material from the original rusted brackets, we can see from the exposed sections of metal that the majority of this was rust and scale. The extended rust remover bath seems to have done little to affect the thickness or integrity of the clean metal within these rusty brackets. The biggest surprise of this test was the 20% Deox-C solution. We expected that the high concentration of powder would have eaten into the metals significantly more than the others. Our results showed that this was not the case. On top of this, the 20% Deox-C solution gave us the best results in the visual test, producing the least amount of metal pitting and the most even surface of our three samples. The added silver lining for us here is that it does seem to be possible to turn lemons into lemonade... Even if they have been abandoned in the garage for an entire month. ~R Disclosure Section: StudioVRM is not affiliated with Evapo-Rust or Bilt Hamber. All products were bought out of Roger's own pocket at full price so we could do these tests.

Our last video spurred a few questions about what went into making our DIY rear wing. Between picking the right profile, choosing the right materials, and forming the required shapes accurately by hand, there's a lot of work involved in making your own wing. The skills and materials are often so specialized that it isn't possible for your average DIY mechanic to build his or her own rear wing. Fortunately for the budget-constrained of us, there is a big market for cheap, appearance-oriented aero add-ons. And some of those huge ricer wings can be made to work on your track or race car. Here's how: Find the Right Cheap Wing The first thing to do is to find the right wing to work off of. Not all cheap wings produce usable downforce. In fact, some cheap wings have so many problems that it isn't worth trying to modify them. Look for wings that are: Single element Have a simple profile (or bear a strong resemblance to the APR 3D wing profile) Have no holes in the endplates Are as wide as possible Include tall struts that bring your wing up to roof height (or higher) Here are some examples of wings that could be easily modified to produce downforce: Avoid wings that look like this. They have so many fundamental problems that they aren't worth fixing: Add Internal Reinforcement One common attribute among cheap wings is that they are more flexible than their more expensive counterparts. While it is ok for an automotive wing to be flexible, they do need to be rigid in a few key places. Those key places are the areas where the wing connects to the wing supports, and the trailing edge of the wing. Most of the cheaper plastic and aluminum wings out there have no internal ribbing to support these key points. So the first modification you will want to do is to add some reinforcement to these points. The "right" way to do this would be to cut the wing open, add in internal ribs, glue them into position, and glue the wing back together. But there is a much cheaper, much easier way to accomplish this. And that involves using our old friend, 2-part expanding urethane foam. Most of you who subscribed to car tuning magazines through the 90's and early 2000's will recognize this stuff. It's the same foam that enthusiasts used to pour into the side sills of cars to make their chassis stiffer. When mixed together in a 1:1 ratio, this two part foam quickly expands and hardens into a stiff, lightweight structure with properties similar to a light wood. We drilled a few extra holes near the mounting points of our plastic wing, and poured in a small amount of the 16 lb/cu ft density. We first poured in a bit of foam and stood the wing up on its trailing edge to make sure that it would fill the tall gurney flap on our plastic wing. After allowing it to set for 10-15 minutes, we laid the wing down poured a small amount of foam into the holes to reinforce the mounting points for the wing uprights. This will ensure that the wing wouldn't collapse when faced with a 100 mph headwind like you would see on a racetrack. Work slowly and pour the foam in small portions. You don't need much foam to fill the open cavities inside the wing. We used 1 oz shot glasses as measuring cups to make sure that we didn't overfill the wing. Sand off the excess and paint to match the rest of the wing. Why go through the trouble of doing all this? The picture below shows what can happen if you run a hollow wing without the appropriate reinforcements in place. A functional rear wing can generate hundreds of pounds of downforce at high speeds. These forces are easily high enough to crack the skin on these cheap wings. This wing had big cracks around their mounting holes from years of hard racing. If left alone, this could have resulted in the whole wing breaking off of the car mid-corner which, needless to say, would have been an extremely dangerous situation. Fortunately, this is easy to fix if you catch it early enough. If this happens, drill small holes at the ends of the cracks to prevent them from getting worse. Then fill the cracks with a structural epoxy to ensure that no new cracks appear. Choose Endplates that Don't Suck Most budget friendly wings tend to come with very sharp, angular endplates that are trimmed into thin teardrop shapes. While these designs do look good, they actually don't work very well. Why? It's because the main purpose of endplates are to keep the fast moving airflow from spilling over the edges of the wing. The most effective endplate designs tend to be simple squared-off designs that are large enough to cover the full chord of the wing. Very few cheap wings come with great endplates, but you can avoid the worst offenders by knowing what to look for. Try to find a wing that comes with large, flat endplates. The closer they are to a simple rectangle or square, the better they will work. Stay away from endplates with big slots or holes in them. These endplates are basically guaranteed to not do anything for performance: If you want to get the maximum benefit from your rear wing, you will need to make your own endplates. Fortunately this is quite simple. Drill a few holes into a piece of sheet metal or a 1/4" thick flat polycarbonate sheet and bolt them onto your wing in place of the endplates that came with your cheap wing. Bolster your Trunk Mounted Supports In an ideal situation, you would want your wing supports to bolt through your trunk and into your chassis. This ensures that all of the downforce generated by the wing is transmitted to the chassis and wheels. However, all of the cheap wings available on the market are designed to be mounted to the trunk or hatch panel, rather than the chassis. Fortunately, most car trunks and hatches are capable of handling the downforce produced by bolt on rear wings. The key is to spread the load as much as possible, and there are a few tricks you can use to do this. The first is to make sure that the wing is mounted as close to the rearward edge of the trunk (or hatch) as possible. The edges of the trunk panel are significantly stronger than the middle, and it will go a long way towards reducing unwanted flexing and bending. The second is to reinforce the underside of the trunk where the uprights bolt through the chassis. Most of the wing uprights that come with cheap wings tend to extend very far forward and are slanted rearwards at a fairly shallow angle. In most cases, this puts the center of pressure of the wing behind the rear feet of the wing supports. When a wing like this produces downforce, it will actually try to pivot around the rear feet of the wing uprights, pushing the rear feet down while pulling the front feet upwards. If the trunk is not strong enough to resist this motion, the wing will tilt upwards at higher speeds, resulting in a loss of downforce as you go faster. Adding a few fender washers on the underside of the wing uprights will help reduce trunk flexing and will help transmit all of that hard earned downforce to the chassis. Do You Need an Expensive Wing at All? With a few careful modifications, an inexpensive wing will get you very close to the performance of a more expensive aftermarket wing. So why would you spend the extra money for an expensive purpose-built racing wing? There are a few good reasons: Higher efficiency from newer wing profiles The profiles of cheap aftermarket wings are either copies of a popular wing or are modeled after a common NACA airfoil profile. While these profiles do work, they are older designs and tend to generate more drag relative to the amount of downforce they produce. The current generation of aftermarket racing wings are extremely efficient, and even the simplest looking of aftermarket wings boast a much higher downforce to drag ratio than the most elaborate looking "3D" wing profiles of yesteryear. With a cheaper wing, you will always give up a bit of efficiency compared to a well-designed modern racing wing. Better variety in profile and width options Need a dual element wing for your powerful hillclimb car? How about an extra wide wing for your unlimited class time attack car? You'll need to shell out for a proper racing wing. Unfortunately there are almost no workable cheap wing kits that fit the bill for these niche applications. Slightly lower weight As you might expect, purpose-built racing wings do tend to be lighter than these DIY wings. While the wing elements themselves are only fractionally lighter than a foam filled DIY wing, the wing uprights tend to be much lighter than the heavy steel pieces that come with cheap kits. If weight is a big concern for your car, going with a dedicated racing wing can mean saving 5-8 lbs off of the rear end. Conclusion and Recommendations With a bit of time and a few small modifications, you can make an affordable, functional wing that actually produces downforce. It might be a little more draggy and weigh a bit more than a high-dollar carbon fiber racing wing, but it will make your car much more stable through high-speed corners. It's a worthwhile modification for many track cars, as well as on club racing cars in classes which allow add-on aero. If your aero budget is closer to $100 than the $500-$700 that many racing wing kits cost, give this option a serious look. You'll appreciate the added stability as well as the low impact it will have on your wallet. See you at the track.