To be fair to kezz, duplicating things like stampings and witness marks is possible and has been done over the years. 20 years ago an engineer demonstrated that he could manufacture all the parts for a 'no alterations' class in his workshop, to the level of creating 'balanced' parts rather than relying on finding bits that met the tolerances at a standard that passed all normal scrutineering, including spark eroding casting marks on bits cut from billet.
So would a person spend that much money creating a compliant 'super' engine or even one that was actually non-compliant?
As the MSA said over a Rotax engine that had been 'adjusted', the level and cost of the engineering was substantial, and though it was eventually detected at scrutineering by stripping and measuring every part, it was small satisfaction to all those who had been beaten by the illegal engines over the period they had been in use.
The only question that matters, if one is going to cheat, is that of risk. Will this engine be discovered in the current circumstances? In many club races or even in championship events, it is unlikely that an engine will have its volume measured, especially during the heats. It's a case of having a meeting or championship strategy, rather than planning only for the immediate race.
So, yes, it is a valid fear that someone may be using illegal cylinders and relying on the fact that most scrutineers will not be measuring those part sizes accurately but simply seeing that the parts 'look' right.
As to how many people would do it, well that's the second question. I find it astonishing that people deliberately cheat to win a club event, but then every time we deliberately take the kerb because it is faster than staying between the white lines aren't we , strictly, cheating? Most of us excuse it by saying that we won't get 'caught' and the driver in front is doing it to stay in front of you.
What if you think that the other guy has a non-compliant engine and you won't get caught because he hasn't?
Risk analysis suggests that the number of non-compliant barrels is currently very small, not that they don't or won't exist. The case for extra scrutineering is then a cost/benefit equation.
|
|