600cc engine proposal

Ladies & gentlemen, as you may be aware our 600cc MC engine committee has sent our final proposal to the CRB for the use of 600cc MC engines as alternative engines for use in F500.

While the request for input has not yet been posted in Fastrack, letters of support for our proposal can be sent to the CRB & the BOD at any time. If anyone wants a copy of the actual proposal document just send me an e-mail at jnovak at novaracecars dot com & I will send it to you. It is also posted on several forums for viewing both here on Apex & on Eformulacarnews.

It is our fervent hope that our MC engine proposal will be approved by the BOD when it actually comes up for a vote. We are totally convinced that this change will rejuvenate F500 & take the class into the future where we can get more new competitors into the class. Right now there are 6 cars being built with 600cc bike engines for use in F500. This is more new cars in 1 year than F500s that have been built in several years. There is a lot of interest in the potential of this class with the MC engines.

I ask all SCCA member who have any interest in the future of this class to write your letters to the CRB & the BOD supporting our proposal. EVERY LETTER COUNTS!

Letters can be addressed to:
crb@scca.com
bod@scca.com

Thanks ... Jay Novak

I might be mistaken but I thought only F500 class members could send the CRB letters for or against any change affecting the class.

Any SCCA member can send letters in support of or against the proposal. The goal here is to get new racers into the class & to make the class grow.

SEND YOUR LETTERS.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

Perhaps you are right Jay but it doesn't seem right that an important change to the class could be influenced by a bunch of letters from people not already in the class and havenothing to lose(or gain) financially if such a change is effected. I would hope that the CRB members would give more weight to current F500 owners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by captaineddie1975

Perhaps you are right Jay but it doesn't seem right that an important change to the class could be influenced by a bunch of letters from people not already in the class and havenothing to lose(or gain) financially if such a change is effected. I would hope that the CRB members would give more weight to current F500 owners.

---

Ah, but some of us non-F500 racers are watching these developements with interest since we may want to buy, build or convert a car for this class with a 600cc bike engine.;)

I just sent in my letter voting FOR the 600 engines. Lets keep the momentum building! :greenflag:

Letter sent earlier today. Here is a copy if what I sent:

To whom it may concern,

Please accept this letter in the form of an email as my vote FOR allowing 600cc motorcycle engines to be used as an ALTERNATIVE power source in the F500 class.

As an owner of a F500 car, I am concerned with the diminishing source and increased cost for snowmobile engines. In fact, I have already converted my car to use a 2007 Suzuki GSX-R 600cc engine and am the first to do so under the direction of the alternative engine rules proposed to the board. Testing is currently underway, and preliminary results show the car's performance to be comparable with the performance when I had a Kawasaki 440 engine in the car. I do realize that parity is of utmost importance to insure that all cars are on equal footing and competitive. To this end, I also support the need for a systematic approach to gather test data and modify the engine rules as necessary.

I feel the alternative power source is more reliable, less expensive, and creates a much tidier package as far as the engine bay is concerned. The engine upgrade was performed on a car much older than most, and fabrication of a new rear structure to specifically accommodate the engine was minimal.

If this proposed alternative engine is approved, I will be building two new chassis to compete at the Regional level. I expect this change will bring new members on board boosting the class participation numbers, and ultimately benefiting the SCCA as an organization.

Sincerely,

Since the momentum is building those who are opposed to this change had better start getting their letters in too. It is like an election. If you dont "vote" you can't complain later.

In an earlier post I stated that letters should be addressed to both the CRB & the BOD. This was an error on my part.

At this time letters should only be sent to the CRB. All letters wiil be eventually forwarded to the BOD at the proper time.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

This was posted on the F500 forum on Friday the 13th

Those individuals for or against the proposal, to include 600cc MC engines in the F500 class, have two questions to ask themselves:
1. Will including the 600cc motor be good or bad for the class? (Philosophical question).
2. In what form will the motor be accepted? (Technical question).
If your answer to question #1 is BAD end of story. Let the CRB know your feelings and if possible your reasons why. But in any case WRITE and voice your opinion. Same thing is true for those who think it would GOOD.
If your answer is GOOD, then we move onto question #2. In my opinion, this is a technical issue and can be addressed effectively by the Advisory Committee and the CRB with input from F500 members. We may not always agree with their analysis/recommendations but I believe everyone involved has the best interest of this class at heart.
As I’m undecided at this point I’d like for people who are for or against the 600cc motor to layout your reasons why it would be good or bad for the class as a whole. My understanding of the original intent of the F500 class was to provide a relatively inexpensive entry level form of racing. So, how would allowing or not allowing 600cc motors into the class change or modify the class philosophy?
The technical aspects of implementing the proposal, if it’s adopted, is a different subject. If we can get a good explanation of the pros and cons it may help some of us to get a better understanding and help us make up our mind.
Ted Simmons

This was posted on the F500 forum on Saturday the 14th.
Let me try to put into context my post above.
I spoke with a member of the CRB on the same day (13th) I posted the above comment. The CRB member shall remain anonymous at this time just in case I’ve totally screwed up the information he tried to convey. He did not request anonymity, but I feel he deserves it since I didn’t get his permission to quote him.
As I understand it, this is how a proposal is handled:
1. A proposal is sent requesting a GCR change or modification to the CRB. This has been done by Jay Novak.
2. The CRB is tasked by the BOD to review and make a recommendation for or against, with or without changes, and/or modifications to the original proposal.
3. The CRB will refer the proposal to the respective Advisory Committee for input. In this case I believe that to be the Formula Car/Sports Racer Committee.
4. The Advisory Committee will decide if the proposal is a GOOD or a BAD idea. I asked if there were specific criteria used by Advisory Committee members to make this judgment call. Guess what? It’s a subjective call made by each individual Committee member based on his or hers own evaluation of the facts as they see them.
5. The Advisory Committee submits their evaluation of the proposal to the CRB. It is either recommended as is or with changes, or not at all.
6. The CRB will meet and evaluate the Advisory Committee’s recommendation and either submit it to the membership at large for comments over a 30 or 60 day time period or kill it without comment.
7. At the end of the comment period the CRB will recommend to the BOD to either accept or reject the proposal. This step has a deadline of mid to late June 2009 for any proposal for the 2010 competition year.
8. The BOD will then make a decision.
In my opinion it is time for people to lobby for their position by writing to the CRB and voicing them here on the (F500) forum. I don’t know how many Advisory Committee members read this (F500) forum but it may be more then we suspect. By voicing your opinion here you may be able to sway a Committee member’s recommendation or at least convince some of us who are on the fence. If the arguments can be found in one thread it’s easier for someone (Committee member) to maximize their time in getting the information they need to form an opinion. Think of it as lobbying for your position without having to pay a lobbyist.
Although I’m undecided, I’m leaning towards voting NO on the proposal. However, it’s for entirely selfish reasons. Since I already have a really nice F500 with more invested than I like, I’m reluctant to add more dollars to make the conversion. I estimate it will take $8500 to make a competitive conversion using my existing chassis. That includes a 600cc motor, the things necessary to make it run e.g. exhaust, fuel pump etc., and chassis modifications to accept the new motor. Somebody tell me why I should vote YES.
Ted Simmons

'09 600cc GSX-R $2400
Used motor + rebuild $900 + 1200 = $2100
Wire harness $350
Exhaust kit + welding $600
Power Commander $350
Fuel Pump $90
Fuel filter (10 micron) $100
Remote oil filter adapter $25
Braided lines (oil and fuel) $75
AN adapters $100
Custom oil cooler $300
Custom air box $350
Custom oil pan $400
Sub-total $5130 new motor
$4830 used motor
Chassis modification $4000
Total $8730 new
$8430 used
The chassis modification may be less, not sure how much would need to be changed. I don’t think anyone has a clue yet what it will take. Maybe after Jay modifies Chris Ross’ KBS we’ll have a better idea. I don’t want to start a chassis modification and run out of funds, so I always estimate high on chassis structural changes. And I don’t want to miss any of the racing season if it can be helped.
The motor costs are based on actual receipts I have from a previous install of a Yamaha R1 in a DSR chassis. I paid more for the motor but will use the cost quoted by Chris Ross. There are miscellaneous costs for small items I didn’t feel like adding up.

Ted, it sounds like if the 600cc rules are adopted, you'd feel compelled to convert. Is that true, and if so, why?

I don't know for sure, but I think I've heard that it is the intention to have the 600cc cars introduced at a disadvantage initially, with plans to bring the 600cc cars up to speed later.

I know, based on Pinto Iron/alum head/Zetec, that's not a very assuring assumption.

Hey Russ,
This was posted on the F500 forum today 6:50 PM.

... in my discussion with the CRB member he stated emphatically the 600cc motor, if approved, would have a handicap of weight and IIR. The handicap would ensure the 600cc powered car would be slower. He would not commit to how much slower – but SLOWER than the Rotax. He referenced the testing done for the inclusion of the Zetec motor into FC. Some digging around on the Apexspeed forum showed this to be in the neighborhood of 1.5 – 2.0 seconds. This would be adjusted over a period of time after much testing and analysis. The testing and analysis timeframe quoted was not months either but maybe over two racing seasons.
I may have this totally messed up but that's what I took away from the discussion.

Edit: To answer your question about being compelled to convert to 600cc motor.
No, not at all. In fact I believe a well tuned Rotax and properly adjusted CVT will out perform the 600cc motor. When approaching the start of a race in a mixed run group (FV, FF, and F5) it still surprises me how fast a CVT will accelerate. Typically, except for the top National FF cars, we can move past most them with ease.

I will admit to really liking the sound of a motor turning 16,000 rpm.:D

I will be sending in a letter in the next few days for the inclusion of the 600. From my standpoint in which I am actually currently shopping for a car I will not consider F500 unless the 600 is included. At the moment I am in talks to purchase a FV for at least the upcoming season and upon its end will consider a move to F500 only if the 600 is included, otherwise I will stick with the Vee. I will be bluntly honest in saying that I have no desire to learn how to tune a 2stroke or CVT.

My personal opinion is that there potential growth of the class with the introduction of the 600cc MC engine and I'm one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2BWise

I will be sending in a letter in the next few days for the inclusion of the 600. From my standpoint in which I am actually currently shopping for a car I will not consider F500 unless the 600 is included. At the moment I am in talks to purchase a FV for at least the upcoming season and upon its end will consider a move to F500 only if the 600 is included, otherwise I will stick with the Vee. I will be bluntly honest in saying that I have no desire to learn how to tune a 2stroke or CVT.

My personal opinion is that there potential growth of the class with the introduction of the 600cc MC engine and I'm one of them.

---

You have hit the nail on the head!!! I have been hearing the same thing in the paddocks since 1982 when I first drove a F440. One day the F5 participation numbers will be close to the FF and FV classes like it should be. This is what is driving the whole MC alternative issue.

Jim

Letter sent. I have a vested interest and people interested in joining the class if this succeeds. Would never consider F500 if this didnt happen.

I started out in F440 decades ago. I've since moved to, and built quite a few FVs. I'm planning on building a new car, either a DSR or FV. If the 600cc bike engine is approved, I would most likely go with that. I think that people who like the DSR/CSR classes, but either can't afford or can't justify the expense of being competitive would come to the class in droves.

Tom Kaufman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VDF1

I think that people who like the DSR/CSR classes, but either can't afford or can't justify the expense of being competitive would come to the class in droves.

Tom Kaufman

---

I agree with this 100%

Originally Posted by VDF1 http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/imag...s/viewpost.gif
I think that people who like the DSR/CSR classes, but either can't afford or can't justify the expense of being competitive would come to the class in droves.

Tom Kaufman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Christopera

I agree with this 100%

---

Except for the open-wheel phobic.

The 600cc proposal has made it into the May Fastrack.

http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastra...strack-may.pdf


I suggest that you all read this very carefully. You will see that we have done everthing possible to make certain that the 2 stroke & the 4 stroke MC engines will have parity.

Our goal is to get these engines approved for 2010, this will get at least 10 to 20 new cars out there next year. Right now there are nearly 10 cars being built right now & this is WAY more new cars to the class than F500 has had for about 10 years.

If the proposal is approved F500 will grow into a class that has great levels of participation & we are certain that the 600cc MC engine will make this happen.

MAKE SURE YOU WRITE YOUR LETTER OF SUPPORT TO THE CRB. Also make certain your letter supports inclusion of the 600cc engine option for the 2010 season.

Thanks for the many letters of support ... Jay Novak

I am working on an open-wheel phobic.....trying to convince him that some of the body work I've seen on these F500's look less open wheel than a FV or FF for example.

We will see. I'm supposed to be helping him keep an eye open for a steal on a '89 BMW 325i/is---I'm not looking too hard ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quickshoe

I am working on an open-wheel phobic.....trying to convince him that some of the body work I've seen on these F500's look less open wheel than a FV or FF for example.

We will see. I'm supposed to be helping him keep an eye open for a steal on a '89 BMW 325i/is---I'm not looking too hard ;)

---

When the rules were being written for the F440/500 National class back in 1983, sidepods were included for two reasons:
1. side impact crush area
2. prevents two cars from coming together side-by-side and have the wheels "interlock" sending one or both cars up in the air.
Tell your friend that the open wheel drivers are VERY conscious that the hitter can fare far worse than the recipient of a hit, thus, everyone on the track gives a cushion to every one else. When a driver feels that he is inside a "tank" like a SRF or a fendered car that driver is much more likely not to give a cushion and thus hit his competitors, "accidently", of course.

Jim
Been messing with these cars since 1982

I started in open wheel, went fendered for 4 years, open wheel for the last 6. Been upside down once, third year of racing.

My friend has been racing fendered cars (RR and OVAL) since 1984....it is a tough sell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quickshoe

I started in open wheel, went fendered for 4 years, open wheel for the last 6. Been upside down once, third year of racing.

My friend has been racing fendered cars (RR and OVAL) since 1984....it is a tough sell.

---

To quote the oval track guys: "It ain't racin' if it ain't rubbin'." so your friend's mind set will never change.

Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim murphy

To quote the oval track guys: "It ain't racin' if it ain't rubbin'." so your friend's mind set will never change.

Jim

---

Well....I haven't lost hope. WE both started road racing. Both spent some time on ovals (open wheel for me). Both have been involved in road racing for the last decade.

Neither one of us are of the mind set that rubbin's racing. We don't seem to appreciate the "skill" required in advancing by contact.

It is a matter of the perceived danger of the open wheel car---not the style of racing.

I'll probably need to buy one and make his old tired arse take it for a spin to get hooked---you reading this Tony? :p

Okay, try this, then - the adrenalin and sensation of speed is far and away much greater in an open cockpit formula car than inside an isolated, high temperature cabin fendered car. This may reawaken his adrenalin rush that he is probably wondering what happened to it over these many years. Maybe some on board videos of formula car races will help.

Jim