I'll attempt to clarify some things before heading to Lime Rock later today. If I'm wrong on these, then the rest of the F1000 gang can set me straight. Perhaps some perspective is due.
1) There were five relatively consistent members of the F1000 committee. Mike, Sean O, Ben, Sean M, and myself. All of us are at (at least) mechanical tinkerers. Mike is currently building a conversion, Sean O obviously pretty much completed his, I converted a RF96 to Hayabusa, Ben is currently building one (he also ran a Gloria F1000 type Blackbird Honda in the UK), and Sean M has experience running both FC and DSR. The point here is that we would typically not hesitate to manufacture pieces / alter our cars if the rules permitted.
2) The first and original discussions focused on the basics - philosophy of the class - and to leave the more difficult SIR proposal off the table for a bit. The goal all along was to eventually make it a National Class, but that we needed to go through the normal SCCA path to attain that - which means Regional First. We initially discussed a possible path for the class to join the FC cars in F2000 (especially if there is some consolidation with the FA, FB, FC, FD etc thing), but we were told by Dave Gomberg that there would be a lot of conflict with the FC people if that was the intent.
3) We then discussed the possibility that, given the HP to weight ratio of these cars, their performance would probably be somewhere between FA and FC. Frankly, I was, and still am, excited at the possibility of a car performing near an FA at significantly less cost than an FA and probably less cost than an FC. Given the higher possible level of performance, I pushed to allow stressed sheet metal on a tube frame chassis and even aluminum monocoque tubs. Rightly or wrongly, carbon tubs were always out of the picture because of the envisioned cost. So the original written proposals included allowing monocoque tubs. This was later removed. The proposal that we sent to the F/SR committee had an allowance for stressed sheet metal on the tube frame chassis, but there has been some kickback to this idea.
4) We always recognized that, for a new class to grow, that there must be new cars manufactured. We never discussed the cost to purchase these. That's up to the economics of the market, but we always kept "lower cost" as one of the goals. The lack of a carbon tub and the stock engines with transmissions were major keys to keeping the class relatively lower cost. Our envisioned build up of the class consisted of converted cars initially while the new car market would hopefully grow.
5) Our written proposal to the F/SR committee contained an allowance for the SIR, but that size was not determined. Our agreement on the F1000 committee was to provide a size that did not restrict the HP of a stock 2005 GSX-R1000 with Power Commander and race exhaust. We did not agree to what that HP amount was at the crankshaft.
In a nutshell, this is what was sent:
- Regional Class, (with intent to go National)
- Stressed sheet metal on tube frame chassis
- SIR, with size to not restrict 2005 GSX-R1000 - this was not written, but it was our F1000 committee agreement.
So - about "morphing"? What has come out of the F/SR committee has "morphed" our input! The stressed sheet metal chassis is now gone, and the SIR is set at 23mm, which will considerably restrict the 2005 GSX-R1000 engine.
Lastly, the discussions here with Richard Pare, et al, have helped to solidify the ruleset. Many of his comments have resulted in clarifications and reduced ambiguities. I already sent these recommendations to the CRB.
Now - off to Lime Rock...
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by carnut169
