I’m surprised too. Goes to show how well developed the x30 is!
OK-N is running at 158kg in the stars. CIK weight in 155kg. really it should be at the 150kg mark. So it’s probably carrying a couple extra KGs. It’s probably track dependent as well as it doesn’t quite pass the smell-test being this slow.
Either way 15,000rpm was far too low a rev limit.
1 Like
At go pro x30 uspks is 365lbs, vs 350 for ok-n. Norberg in qualify at iame finals 47.001.
ok-n qualify Stanfield 46.828.
Only two tenths slower with 15 lbs extra weight,
probably x30 could be faster at same weight than ok-n, even in a mid-range track like mooresville
I think the rev limit and lack of bottom end relative to the X30s hurts it. You’re giving up out of the corner and down the straight, and that really shows at a track like New Castle
Still surprised though. I’ve seen Rotax beat Leopard and X30 at New Castle… so is OK-N slower than Rotax? 
Yes, but IAME Grands was at the end of the year. USPKS last year and Stars were at about the same time of year, so similar(ish) weather conditions. Another thing to consider is this being a class without the superstar names like Norberg, Turney, Garrison, etc. So the numbers look a bit different then too.
Yeah, I definitely expected it to be quicker but for some reason it looks better on track imo even if it is only marginally faster sometimes, if not slower
It’s worth noting that KF Clubman was a similar concept in the UK over a decade ago. Basically take a KF3 and slap a KF2 ECU (15k rev limit up from 14) on it. The extra weight meant it wasn’t particular fast. This wasn’t approved by the FIA nor did the manufacturers homologate engines specifically for it, but the ‘base concept’ was the same as OK-N.
Having said that once we get more data in we’ll know relative performance a lot better.
Quite puzzling indeed, as all tests we have conducted with all variables in check showed a 1 - 1.2 sec delta to the X30, in three different tracks, in Italy. First events in Europe also confirmed this performance gap, with most of the performance difference coming from better mid and top end performance (average of 8km/h faster at end of straight)
I think its quite hard to compare times when you don’t have the same driver, which is the biggest variable…
Norberg in the video is the same driver! LOL
I will reserve judgment a bit until we can see OK-N and X30 or Rok GP on track at the same weekend. Comparing across seasons might skew the results.
Driver quality of each class isn’t an issue, Stanfield and Norberg are both quality.
The weight advantage the OK-N has means that Norberg time is very strange. I know lacking bottom end power is a thing round hat kinda track, but it didn’t seem like it was left wanting for power. Even still, I think that OK-N should at the very very very least have had a 16k rev limit, preferably 18k. (well no rev limit would be the best).
1 Like
The whole point of OK-N was to make it last longer, and 18k rpm dont really help with that.
But other then some races In Italy i have yet to see this taking of In Europe.
If this is the priority for the customer, then they will (and do) pick the MAX FR125 EVO every day of the week. No one at the level OK-N is being sold at right now cares about a few extra minutes on a piston. If I had money the 3k less revs ain’t going to stop me refreshing the engine as often as I could afford.
2 Likes
I agree, but that is the “Selling” point from FIA, but no one In their right mind would turn up to a race with an not having a new top end.
Hol up.
I don’t race nationally and never have but if I did, I’d kind of want to go fast and the idea of Alan’s world wherein the engines are a bit nuttier and wear quicker actually sounds pretty cool.
I’d kind of expect to see Norberg et al going 1s faster on ok-n. Not seeing this makes me wonder what the point is?
Sure, the engines are a touch more open ruleset but that seems to be at odds in reality with the attempts to be more economical and limiting rpm etc.
Where does this fall, as it stands? It seems like the x30 and it are too close.
That’s why I’m waiting to see a more direction comparison, because I still don’t understand how the OK-N would be slower than the X30. It has 5 HP more than the X30 and class weight is lighter. The physics don’t add up.
There’s gotta be track condition differences in the comparisons being drawn here.
1 Like
Also I think the OK-N is to bridge the gap of America & Europe where they run OK. Both contents are on the same package…
That or Norberg wasn’t running at the correct weight
Are you calling my man Ryan fat?