Question for F-1000

[Larry]

I've been working on re-energizing Formula Ford. Others in FF have stated a number of reasons that they think the class is declining. I would appreciate any comments that you may have regarding why you want to go F-1000 instead of FC or FF.

Is it cost to buy an engine? Cost to overhaul/operate the engine? Desire for more speed? Desire to design and produce your own major modifications?

I'm not looking to be critical or to try to dissuade anyone. I would just like to understand why FF has lost its appeal and why F-1000 now appeals to so many.

Thanks,
Larry Oliver

[Rennie Clayton]

Larry,

I have a nostalgic love for FF, but the answer is simple: because a formula car shouldn't be powered by a 40 year old tractor engine.


Cheers,
Rennie

[formulasuper]

Larry,
You named most of the reasons I would chose F1000 over both FF & FC. The fact that you can buy a very low mileage motorcycle engine/6 spd tranny with much more reliable stock horsepower for the price of the FF tranny alone plays a big part in this low budget racer's ability to participate. I wouldn't bother overhauling one when it needed it, I'd just buy another low mileage eng/tranny for about the cost of an overhaul. The ability to design & modify my own car also plays a very big part in it since I have always thought that the car is as important as the driver. Of course SPEED goes without saying!

[Charles Warner]

Larry,

I have a nostalgic love for FF, but the answer is simple: because a formula car shouldn't be powered by a 40 year old tractor engine.


Cheers,
Rennie

Rennie,

I gotta ask "why not?" If the engine still does exactly what it was designed to do what's the difference whether it is 40 years old or not? Look at the DFV. Still hummin' along after all these years. You makes a fiat that an old engine shouldn't power the car? I just don't understand the concept that a formula car has to have a newer engine. The class and cars were designed around the engine and it worked/works well. I do follow that some want the neatness of the sequential shift (although IMO that removes a skill set that is important in racing) and I'll accept that (hopefully) the stock motorcycle engine may prove to be a bit less costly. However, to simply state that something is not applicable because it is 40 years old is (unless it isn't performing as it was) IMO, OTT.

You can tell I've got very little to do while enroute from Frankfort to Detroit, no?

[Purple Frog]

It is the new millenium. When was it in the 60's that they started puttung wings on race cars? Something like 70% of F1 design budgets are spent on aero. When walking my grandsons through the paddock they ask if the pristine FF under the canopy has been in an accident.

so... my #1 assumption is: WINGS.

OBTW, I do appreciate the skill sets needed to really master FF and FV and F500.

I have noticed most the serious Runoffs guys run only a 6 to 7 of times per year. Then they do the Runoffs with a fresh motor. So, they have at least one refresh per year, doing maybe 8 races. Up and coming youngsters (maybe out of karting) are used to doing a lot more events per year, and a lot more test time. By 1999-2000 strong pro 2 liter motors were costing 9K to 10K, with $3,500 refreshes. To run these engines a lot, costs a whole lot. (thus the advent of zetec and duratec)

so... my #2 assumption is: Annual engine costs

FF, FC, F500, and Fv are momentum classes. The key to fast laps is not scrubbing off speed, maximizing cornering speeds. Work like hell in a regional race only to have a FM cruise by on the long SEDIV straights. Bummer. Right or wrong, lot of folks would like to feel a bit more 'kick' down the straights. Just look at the performance numbers on a lot of street cars these kids get to drive to high school.

so... my #3 assumption is: More grunt on the straights.

Numbers 4 through 10 are less universal. Things like sequential shifters, the joy of designing your own beast, the screaming sound, etc. etc.

[Rennie Clayton]

Charles,

I would just like to understand why FF has lost its appeal and why F-1000 now appeals to so many.

To the contrary; since the question is appeal, my assertion is neither inappropriate, nor over the top. But you've keyed into the inconsequential aspect of my statement: I could care less whether it's 40 years old, I just don't like the tractor aspect. The DFV is a cool engine, and I like it. I would race with a DFV. The Kent engine, on the other hand, has an exhaust note like a sick milk truck, it's fragile and expensive, and it's just kind of a lump. People want new, because new is shiny and appealing. They want new because it's not old, dirty and from a junk yard. New technology will also get you double the mileage at half the price.

Just because an engine is serviceable and still performing at its expected levels doesn't mean it's not time for a change. Popularity is a fickle business, and that's really what we're talking about isn't it?


Cheers,
Rennie

[preform resources]

Cmon Rennie,it's an oversquare tight little design,5 mains works well in modified or stock form reminds me of another one you could call an antiquated design,,,,,,,,,,the Small block Chevy,you know what I mean?
Dave Craddock

[Rennie Clayton]

Dave,

And oddly enough, we don't use that engine in formula cars...

Honestly, this whole line of reasoning is a generation gap issue. Namely, early generations will look at the Kent and see a fine, serviceable engine with plenty of time left on the clock. Mine will look at the Kent and wonder why on earth you'd want to use it when you have all kinds of off-the-shelf replacements for it that are cheaper, longer lived and easier to work on. We just don't understand why it's such a sacred cow.


Cheers,
Rennie

[RobLav]

Agree with all the above - re - generation gap, more grunt, better sound, cheaper, lighter, faster, and we get to do some engineering as well.

It's a throw-away society today. With F1000, dump the old engine and get a new one (with the transmission).

There is also the thrill of exploring something new.

I am 48 years old. When my father was 48, I was 21. When I was 21, my father used to talk about those great engines from the 1930's - and everything he said went in one ear out the other. Those old engines were just not interesting to me at the time. I suspect the same issue applies to younger people today wrt the Pinto or Kent.

And today, even though I run the Pinto, I find the head and valvetrain to be a very antiquated design.

[preform resources]

Ren,your point is well taken,and it's true there have'nt been any chevvies in a formula car since the F-5000 days,Robs point is well taken also particularly in view of looking at the popularity of F-F,I think that newbies and veteran competitors are attracted to the wings and the high revving sequential shift bike motors.Personally I am all for the F-1000 concept,and have been from the get go,I just hope it does'nt turn into a huge fiasco because of rules interpretations.
Dave

[Modo]

My read on this is that the classes that normally everyone historically went into, are being thinned by others bright ideas. At the glen last month we would have been in the teens in Formula Continental, the class the front two Indy drivers in 2005 had passed thru, if it were not for two FM's and two SCCA's.....legitimate cars but the same money could have been FF or FC or Firlin FA effort (only Kev could pull that off).....r u going to tell me the FM gold medal guy didn't refresh his tagged Wankle for the runoffs..maybe not

all the Skippy schools and every brainstorm class and the like have thinned our typical classes..........don't really believe its money......so what I see happening, if no one comes up with the big plan is, we will all go in different directions and complain about turnout's in our own classes and the days of 25-30 formula fords with occasional factory efforts to toss in some excitement may well be, bye bye

obviously missed comment on refreshing the old classes, it seems as though that is a big GOOD LUCK

[Marshall Mauney]

My read on this is that the classes that normally everyone historically went into, are being thinned by others bright ideas.
[...]
...so what I see happening, if no one comes up with the big plan is, we will all go in different directions and complain about turnout's in our own classes and the days of 25-30 formula fords with occasional factory efforts to toss in some excitement may well be, bye bye

obviously missed comment on refreshing the old classes, it seems as though that is a big GOOD LUCK

Can you name any class, anywhere in racing history, that has experienced a resurgence without updating the hardware to be more current? Even NASCAR (luddites extraordinaire)have continually changed their rules package, and the new chassis design is about to obsolete a bunch of really good cars.

Also, I keep seeing it said that the new classes are the same cost, and that there is no reason to change. A new FM is $39, a new FSCCA is $36. What FC can be bought NEW for that price? Anyone who is dropping the $$$ to buy/build a NEW car wants to know that it is capable of winning, so buying an old technology car is not a direct comparison.

[Stan Clayton]

Larry, reading the discussion here reminds me of something I once heard about good cooking...that the sizzle is as important as the steak.

And it is a principle with a long history in SCCA. Back in the 60's Formula Vee was firmly established as the entry level formula class, right? It was cheap, fast and fun to drive, and highly popular. Yet, even as FV was attracting National race fields of 30 to 40 cars, the Club embraced Formula Ford, which was only slightly faster, yet cost far more. Why? I submit that the transition to a water cooled "modern" engine and dedicated "real race car" suspensions, 4-corner disc brakes and other dedicated components was just the sizzle that racers were looking for in a new car. Sex sells, and the new class was just sexy enough to ignite a storm of interest and passion.

Same thing today with FF. The class is doing okay, no question about that, just as FV was nearly 40 years ago. But it also struggles to attract new blood, and sales of new cars have ground to a stop in recent years. If there was strong interest in the class, that interest would be reflected in new cars and drivers entering the class. Yet we don't see them.

Yet look at the passion and interest that the F-1000 concept is generating. Several manufacturers have jumped into the fray, people are building their own cars, and the excitement is palpable -- even before the BoD approves the class, just like someone describes (in another thread) their memories of seeing their first FF some 40 years ago.

This process has happened over and over again in the Club. Years ago it was FF coming in on FV. Nowadays it is the sudden success of Spec Miata. Sure, there are Showroom Stock and Production classes, but those classes are mainly on a no-growth program, as potential competitors pass on them in favor of SM. Over the past few years Mazda have sold 2000 SM kits, and some 1500 of the cars have been registered with the Club (based on logbooks). Forty-percent of SM drivers are in their first race car, with another 20% coming from karts and Solo II. That's a thousand new road racers who could have chosen another car, but did not. It's the sizzle, Larry.

So where does that leave us with FF? Can the class reignite the passion that led to huge numbers of them a few decades ago? I honestly don't know, but even though I am not of Rennie's generation (I'm his Dad), I certainly understand his points about the class, which is why I encouraged your community to examine engine options.

So far the overwhelming majority of feedback we've received is against any change, so maybe the answer is to leave FF as it is, and look to creating a new class that fits the "formula", but offers more choices -- more sizzle, if you will.

Regards, Stan

[Sean Maisey]

Larry,

To answer your original question. I am looking to go F1000 racing next year. I sold the Zetec and my money is in the bank waiting to see what the constructors come up with.

I just can't deal with the Pinto motors anymore. As you know I ran FF/FC from 1987 through 2000. I have since tried motorcycle power (Stohr DSR) and sealed modern motors (Zetec). There is no going back for me.

I loved the Stohr DSR, but felt that I couldn't compete with the engine, aero, shock/shaker rig arms race in an ongoing fashion. I tried Zetec for the last couple of seasons. I REALLY liked that car, and if I had known that the "East Coast" series was going to be so good, I probably would have kept the car.

But now as I sit on the sidelines, I see F1000 as the best combination of all: 12,000 rpm motors, big brakes, sequential shift, and no full bodywork. Keep the engine mods from getting out of hand and this should be a lot of fun.

Sean

P.S. I think Rob and Ren are right about the generational thing too. Young people aren't going to get excited about racing something with "Pinto power". A GSXR or R1 is another matter. It reminds me of a time a couple of years ago that several of us were hanging aroung Thor Barbru's shop. I was talking about the project Porsche 928 I had just acquired. We all discussed the fact that we all still liked the classic "phone dial" wheels. Thor's teenaged son Karl looked at me kinda sideways. My buddy Mark said, "you know Karl like the old rotary phone dials". His reply, "I don't know what you guys are talking about". He had never seen one. Probably never seen a Pinto on the street either...

P.P.S. Of course the irony of this statement is that Karl now owns and runs the Zink Z10 CF that I ran my first SCCA season...

[thunderracing91]

Larry,

To answer your original question. I am looking to go F1000 racing next year. I sold the Zetec and my money is in the bank waiting to see what the constructors come up with.

I just can't deal with the Pinto motors anymore. As you know I ran FF/FC from 1987 through 2000. I have since tried motorcycle power (Stohr DSR) and sealed modern motors (Zetec). There is no going back for me.

I loved the Stohr DSR, but felt that I couldn't compete with the engine, aero, shock/shaker rig arms race in an ongoing fashion. I tried Zetec for the last couple of seasons. I REALLY liked that car, and if I had known that the "East Coast" series was going to be so good, I probably would have kept the car.

But now as I sit on the sidelines, I see F1000 as the best combination of all: 12,000 rpm motors, big brakes, sequential shift, and no full bodywork. Keep the engine mods from getting out of hand and this should be a lot of fun.

Sean

P.S. I think Rob and Ren are right about the generational thing too. Young people aren't going to get excited about racing something with "Pinto power". A GSXR or R1 is another matter. It reminds me of a time a couple of years ago that several of us were hanging aroung Thor Barbru's shop. I was talking about the project Porsche 928 I had just acquired. We all discussed the fact that we all still liked the classic "phone dial" wheels. Thor's teenaged son Karl looked at me kinda sideways. My buddy Mark said, "you know Karl like the old rotary phone dials". His reply, "I don't know what you guys are talking about". He had never seen one. Probably never seen a Pinto on the street either...

P.P.S. Of course the irony of this statement is that Karl now owns and runs the Zink Z10 CF that I ran my first SCCA season...

I must be one of the few and far inbetween young guys that does get excited when you say FF or FC pinto power! I get a lot of history from my dad (age 61) about road racing back in the 60's and 70's. Myself being only 24 I have decent knowledge about racing. Also dad being my major sponsor since I was 10 also helps! I really like the idea of F1000 but for me I feel like I will be a better driver racing a FF for a few seasons before moving up...........

andrew

[emotepix]

F1000? simple.

a) I already come from Solo Vee, with a 105HP 1600 motor, free rims and tires (and so use FC spec rims and tires on my Vee anyway).

b) a decent refresh on the Pinto costs $3500. In one year, that's the cost of an F1000 conversion. (Or even a Zetec conversion, if anybody would care to take me up on my other post).

c) Gas is still, I believe, unregulated in F1000, as it is in Solo Vee. Consequently, I'd go with $3 a gallon to $8 a gallon any day.

Okay, so for the cost (which will run me around $19k when I'm done) I can either end up with a reasonably competitive FF, or a very fast FS/F1000.

For the same money, would you really prefer to run at the "there's a good boy" back of the pack?

Yes, I'm a newbie. No, I'm not a beginner to speed sports, not by a very long shot. There was no way I'd lose to a Kawasaki Quick Anything when I was back in my teens. Why would I accept to do that now?

To paraphrase the words of a champion in another sport (17 times national champion, actually):

A. THE FOUNDATIONS

EQUIPMENT

Learn it the hard way, or, better yet, don't learn it the hard way: get all the equipment you need and get the best equipment you can afford. Understand that any compromise you make initially may not only cost more to upgrade later but may also be an obstacle to your progress now.

Can't say it any better than that.

Tires cost too much money to be fooling with discontinued motors.

[Charles Warner]

Honestly, this whole line of reasoning is a generation gap issue. Namely, early generations will look at the Kent and see a fine, serviceable engine with plenty of time left on the clock. Mine will look at the Kent and wonder why on earth you'd want to use it when you have all kinds of off-the-shelf replacements for it that are cheaper, longer lived and easier to work on. We just don't understand why it's such a sacred cow.

I'm wondering when we'll see the words "geezer" and "whippersnapper" come up!

I don't see the Kent "tractor" motor as such a sacred cow. I think the generational issue can also lend some of us to the attitude of "if it ain't broke, don't piss away a bunch of money trying to fix it." That motor does fullfill the function it was designed for. Plain and simple. That doesn't mean that there are not other lumps that melt your butter more. There are all sorts of neat motors out there. But that does not mean the Kent engine is not a valuable and still functional tool. And those of us on the north side of 50 probably have developed a mindset of not throwing away something that is working quite well just to see things change.

As to the comment of classes that have a resurgence without technical upgrade, I would point out the vintage/historic groups are having a tremendous resurgence, and I'm not talking about the HGP F1 group only. All through the groups we are seeing more and more racers showing up with well prepared period cars and havig a good time. There are some groups (notably the T/A and GT1 types) that try to upgrade the equipment but for the most part these guys want to enjoy the cars as they are and have fun. My guess is that this is where the FFs will go.

BTW, Ren, the "tractor" motor has a fairly good lineage, i.e. Lotus T/C that led to the BD series. Sort of like the firetruck motor that became the BMC stalwart for many years. It's not always safe to look at somthing's initial function to determine it's later use in life.

[Rennie Clayton]

Charles,

I don't see the Kent "tractor" motor as such a sacred cow. I think the generational issue can also lend some of us to the attitude of "if it ain't broke, don't piss away a bunch of money trying to fix it." That motor does fullfill the function it was designed for. Plain and simple. That doesn't mean that there are not other lumps that melt your butter more. There are all sorts of neat motors out there. But that does not mean the Kent engine is not a valuable and still functional tool. And those of us on the north side of 50 probably have developed a mindset of not throwing away something that is working quite well just to see things change.

With due respect, you're hitting well wide of the mark here. Your vehement defense of the Kent belies your assertion that you don't see it as a sacred cow. You said, among other things, "if it ain't broke, don't piss away a bunch of money trying to fix it." To which I reply, "don't piss away a bunch of money in a vain attempt to keep everything the way it is, when there are cheaper, better options available to you." To wit, what are the costs to purchase and maintain a "new" Kent from a reputable builder? What is a reasonable expectation for TBO? Allow me to illustrate why I believe that the Kent is, in fact, broken:


Kent
$12,000 purchase (?)
$4,000 rebuild (?)
900-1200 miles (?)
$4.44-$3.33 per mile, rebuild only

Zetec
$11,000 purchase (includes conversion kit) (?)
$4,500 rebuild (?)
~9,000 miles (?)
$0.50 per mile, rebuild only

Duratec
Similar to Zetec?

Motorcycle (stock blueprint build)
$6,000 purchase (includes transmission)
$1,500 rebuild
4,000 miles (?)
$0.38 per mile, rebuild only


$4.44-$3.33 per mile, rebuild only - in comparison to all of the other options out there, that means "it's broke, so fix it"!

Lineage means precisely squat, unless you are vintage / historic racing, or trying to sell something. If something is properly engineered, it's properly engineered, regardless of where it comes from. I don't espouse lineage arguments with regard to the appropriateness (or otherwise) to racing of a particular piece of kit - they either work on their own merits, or they don't.


Cheers,
Rennie

[emotepix]

Hey, I agree with Charlie too.
If you already have one and it works for you, heck, I say run with it.

It's the people who are getting into this from somewhere else that think about this the most, I believe.
They want to know where to put their buck to make it perform the best.
And as we all know, in 5 years the present crop of superbike engines will be "over the hill" too...

Let's say this, then.

Obviously, if there's a high prize at stake and people's (sports) careers are on the line, then the sponsors are right and the most bucks applied in the most intelligent way rules.

Hoever, if the prize is worth less than the retainer bolt on a wheel, and there aren't any sponsors worth the name, or people who make their living at this, then the least bucks applied in the most intelligent way should rule, right?

And our rules should reflect that idea.

(easy to say, I know, I know...)

[Charles Warner]

"don't piss away a bunch of money in a vain attempt to keep everything the way it is, when there are cheaper, better options available to you." To wit, what are the costs to

Whippersnapper!

[Rennie Clayton]

Whippersnapper!

Geezer!

[Jonathan Hirst]

Kent
$12,000 purchase (?)
$4,000 rebuild (?)
900-1200 miles (?)
$4.44-$3.33 per mile, rebuild only

Motorcycle (stock blueprint build)
$6,000 purchase (includes transmission)
$1,500 rebuild
4,000 miles (?)
$0.38 per mile, rebuild only
Rennie

Is it realistic to assume that you would rebuild the motor to *stock* condition after 4000 miles? How many miles do you do in a season? 1200?

I would think that after 2 years of racing, the new 1L motors will be higher rpm and higher hp forcing you to upgrade (@ $6000) rather than rebuild in order to remain competitive nationally. This would be far short of the required rebuild date and alter your $/mile costs significantly. I would estimate costs calculations would be more applicable to calculate the cost / mile based on buying a new motor for every 2 years of competition.


Don't mistake my scepticism of the costs as being critical of the intent though - I like the bike motor formula a great deal. The 750cc series for winged formula cars has been running in Ontario since the late 60's and my uncle and cousin have been involve with the class since the 70's.

It started very much like what is being discussed here with enthusiastic, mechanically competent racers looking for a more economical alternative to FFord/FVee. The class numbers dwindle today only because it never made the jump to attracting more mainstream suppliers of cars. Not everyone wants to be their own designer/machinist/builder and thus most new racers gravitated towards the classes that had transitioned out of this growth phase and now supplied turn key chassis (FFord/FVee).

The support this group is getting from US manufacturers bodes well for the class making that transition especially now when the growth of the other non spec formula classes has reached a plateau. The period of growth following the transition to a more “mainstream” formula is what FFord was in the 70’s essentially.

I hope F1000 turns out to be a $0.38/mile class but I think that is optimistic once the green flag drops and the search for speed within the class begins in earnest.


Jonathan

[Dave Gomberg]

...Is it realistic to assume that you would rebuild the motor to *stock* condition after 4000 miles? How many miles do you do in a season? 1200?

I would think that after 2 years of racing, the new 1L motors will be higher rpm and higher hp forcing you to upgrade (@ $6000) rather than rebuild in order to remain competitive nationally.

Jonathan

We're getting off the original topic a bit, but let me make two observations about this point. First, it isn't clear just how much longer the bike manufacturers will be pushing the horsepower on the one liter engines - it is getting harder to squeeze them into this size engine and with coming changes to the bike racing formula, their incentive to do so may disappear. Second, in the latest draft of the F1000 rules, the SIR has been removed, but the CRB can impose a restrictor at any time - if newer engines threaten to "obsolete" the current engines, they can be limited.

Dave

[Stan Clayton]

Kent
$12,000 purchase (?)
$4,000 rebuild (?)
900-1200 miles (?)
$4.44-$3.33 per mile, rebuild only

Motorcycle (stock blueprint build)
$6,000 purchase (includes transmission)
$1,500 rebuild
4,000 miles (?)
$0.38 per mile, rebuild only

Jay Ivey tells me that a latest-spec Kent should go 40 hours between overhauls, or about 3000 miles at typical FF lap speeds. That lowers its per mile cost to about $1.35/mile, still more expensive than a motorcycle, but nowhere near what they cost 5 years ago.

And there appears to be a constant supply of late model 1000cc m/c engine kits on ebay and other sources for $2500-$3000, with bare replacement motors cheaper still. Using Jonathan's 2-year, 2400 mile criteria (probably pretty realistic), that's about a dollar per mile for a purely stock m/c engine. Adding a good dry sump might double that, lowering the overall engine operating cost to the 50-cents per mile range. I know that some have gone further than that, but Jonathan's numbers are probably pretty realistic.

Stan

[Charles Warner]

Geezer!

That's Mr. Geezer to you, sonny!

[Art Smith]

it's important to acknowledge that's I'm camped much closer to Larry than those
drooling over 1-liter motorcycle engines and sequential gearboxes in anything
that theatens or further undermines FF. as a consequence, my logic poking is
probably well to the right of center.

what are all these number and arithmatic doing MASQUERADING as data and objective
analysis?? quoting a knowledgeable well liked child who apparantly hasn't done their
homework does NOT constitute data. where I went to school throwing numbers and
guesses on a piece of paper was call "dry labbing" and the good professors could
smell it at a thousand yards! I'm guessing the (?) behind the numbers in the
referenced post means they're guesses pulled from a dark spot the writer sits on.
there was no reference to how many and which of the nationally know engine builders
was called for information or responded to a RFI (request for information). there was
no indication of how many rebuilds were averaged by which engine builders to arrive
at the number shown for rebuilds. there was no indication of how many customers
from which engine builders were surveyed to arrive at the number shown for miles
between rebuild. there's also no indication of the timeframe of the sampling which is
probably material given the falling costs associated with FF engines (steel cranks,
aluminum heads, forged pistons, and new valve train parts appear to be contributing
to lower cost of ownership in FF).

the motorcycle numbers provided have the same odor as the FF numbers above. how
many and which of the motorcycle engine builders were called for information or responded
to a RFI (request for information) for what specification/configuration engine? as best I
can tell there is NO 1-liter stock motorcycle engine installed base approaching 1% of the
FF population (FF, CF, & SF since they all use Kents). there certainly isn't a
published set of SCCA rules for 1-liter stock motorcycle engines to quote to!! I wonder
if a Power Commander, dry sump lubrication, and billet clutch basket were in the
imaginary numbers that were posted. with the large number of people currently running
1-liter motorcycle engines in formula cars, I wonder which of the driver(s) was surveyed
that have had their engine and transmission rebuilt. most DSR engines are not stock;
and besides they're not open wheeled formula cars................. with the long history of
1-liter motorcycle powered formula cars, I also wonder how many have 4000 miles on
their vehicle and of those how many were surveyed.

if someone was interested in publishing objective factual data for FF, the data exists and
could be collected and presented. the large installed base and number of qualified engine
builders building engines to the same rules minimizes the probability of data sampling or
statistical problems. numbers for 1-liter motorcycle engines is pure vaporware best on
best! there is NO common specification for the engines, there is NO installed base
(statisticly insignificant compared to FF), and there's NO experience base in 1000 lbs
open wheeled formula cars with large tires and wings to extrapolate from....................
someone in the business whose opinion I value has told me 1-liter re-builds will cost at
least as much as FF given the high parts count and stresses resulting from almost
continual useage at high rpm (>12,000). even small failures at those speeds is good for
the new engine business!!

it's my feeling numbers pulled from a dark spot and arithmatic masquerading as data and
analysis have no place in this discussion. if the "sizzle" has to be sold, at least do it in
a manner where respected members of the community can't be perceived as doing analysis
when in fact they're "dry labbing" in a very biased manner. if you must, sell generation gap
or sequential transmissions or the wonderful sound of an engine turning in excess of
12,000 rpm or wings or no safety rules or .............................................

Art
artesmith@earthlink.net

[Rennie Clayton]

Hey Art,

In your rush to write War and Peace, did you fail to notice the (?) marks behind each number I posted?

If you want to provide something constructive to the conversation, then update the numbers to the best of your knowledge. Nobody here is asking for waterfall accurate numbers that will take us to the moon to the closest cent or a CMM 5 audit trail, so anecdotal data is juuuuuust fine. Otherwise, you're just inelegantly contributing to the effluvium.


Cheers,
Knowledgeable, Well Liked Child

[Jonathan Hirst]

and there's NO experience base in 1000 lbs
open wheeled formula cars with large tires and wings to extrapolate from....................
Art
artesmith@earthlink.net

Have you had a look here Art?

http://www.formulafour.com/ShortHistory.htm

FWIW - I was working with Rennies numbers based of the 1200 racing miles per season based on the average speed of the track I run 90% of the time (Mosport - 100 mph ave) and the hours I trust the crank before I want to have a look at the bottom end.


Jonathan