Talk with your engine builder about the specifics, but be prepared to sacrifice some power and to shift at slightly lower RPMs. The parts that are in them now and the engines' internal clearances will determine how much can be done and how much it will cost. Good luck! StanOriginally Posted by Dennis McCarthy
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Capo, yer killin' me...!Yo, Stan, you talkin' ta me?
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Greg - Your post made me laugh and think about how I started. Maybe someone ought to start a seperate thread on how we all got started and our first year or two of racing. Some of the things we did starting out I'm not sure I'd recommend to others, but man did we have fun.
Steve - I just want a chair next to one of those little white wooden boats hanging off the side. As far as Spec Racer, I'm only saying the reason it took off was that it was cheap to get into in the first several years, just the same as Miata. No way do I think the club should be in the middle of that process.
Stan - It was good to see you at the national convention. Overall I thought there was a more positive attitude this year than the past couple years. You could actually joke around about some of our issues without someone taking offense.
I know I've seen the individual class participation charts but I don't remember seeing any total numbers. What is the total number of entries in all fromula and sports racer classes combined now, compared to what it was in whatever we consider the glory days?
As far as ford goes, an updated engine package may be the way to go a few years down the road but I also believe the multiple engine/gearbox package deal would be a huge mistake. I don't think our club has the resources to create absolute parity out of a multitude of combinations and I don't think FF is the class to do it in. That's part of the appeal of all the Skip Barber type series, they don't have to worry about the rules changing all the time and those cars could hardly be called sexy.
I'm not really in tune with the F500 community but if we're really talking about entry level, why isn't the conversation about updating that class. They're already inexpensive and surely the motorcycle engine and gearbox would be a better deal than the CVT. Slow 'em down just a little and that would be something that I would put my boys in.
Stan, Thanks for the reply!
I know I can build a less competitive motor right now but I won't. that is pretty much an exercise in futility unless you only want to time trial against yourself.
I'm more curious as to whether or not there are any long term plans on the table right now with SCCA to try and cut rebuild costs and make these motors last longer.
[quote=Don Denomme;130827]
If I knew a young person who wanted to improve their driving skills and had a lot of money to through around, I would suggest Formula BMW or the Skip Barber Series. If they wanted to spend some money and play with the cars as well, I would suggest FV, FF/CF or Zetec FC. These are all classes that presently exist.
When I put my race engineer's hat on and try to evaluate drivers, the products of Barber and the other spec car classes can no way compete with drivers who have come up in FF, FC, FV type classes. The "development classes" -- FV, FF, FC, etc.-- give drivers better training when it comes to getting a car setup. In the high end pro series, setups are all important.
The dirver who gets the setup right first is usually the winner.
For entry level, SCCA club racing is still the best place to go. If you ask me, I would send a kid and a mechanic down the road in either a FV, FF, or FC and run as many races at different tracks as they could do in a year. I would choose the class that you can best afford to win in. There is nothing like running against the old track masters where ever you go to teach you race craft and setups. Make the new kid driver do it all. Race, repair and maintain the car, do his own setups and get his car to the next race. If he doesn't have the stomach for that kind of racing then why waste the money in the high dollar series?
In addition to a new Zetec FC for 2007, there will also be a new Citation FV on the track.
so I have a question about motorcycle engines and their capabilities in a car. I have been told by several DSR drivers and read on the sportsracer site that the driver has to use the clutch when downshifting a bike motor. Apparently not using it results in a broken clutch basket. If this is the case it sure takes the warm and fuzzies out of racing anything with a bike motor. Racing an open wheel car, or anycar imo, that requires use of the clutch is pointless. Certainly not what guys comming from karts have in mind.
My question is , is this true ? I am not talking about ham handing shifts and breaking transmissions, that will happen in anything. I am also not looking for a debate about everyones favorite shifting method just whether or not there is some truth to this.
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
Runoffs 1 Gold 3 Silver 3 bronze, 8 Divisional , 6 Regional Champs , 3x Drivers of the year awards
clutchless downshift with MC transmission
QED, without drama or broken / bent parts.
Cheers,
Rennie
Apparently if done right and with matched rpms the gearbox can be moved up or down w/o the clutch. Forced, baskets and forks can go south in a hurry. I up w/o and down with- often you go down a couple gears (or more) go clutch in- down, down- down, clutch out works reasonably well and will make my non-billet basket last.
Sean O'Connell
1996 RF96 FC
1996 RF96 FB
2004 Mygale SJ04 Zetec
Let's not put a granade in the engine bay
Selecting a power-plant that needs to be highly stressed (Or is difficult to obtain long term) is something we want to steer away from. That's why I'm leaning towards a restricted 1000 MC Power-plant or an automotive alternative. I just see additional economies in FD & FB sharing power-plants. Some ebay searching shows the difference in price of a 600 and 1000 being less then $1,000. In the scheme of things, that is a small difference, especially since the 1000 won't have to be tuned to the edge and should last longer before needing to be rebuilt/replaced.
AMBROSE BULDO - Abuldo at AOL.com
CURRENT: Mid Life Crisis Racing Chump/Lemons Sometime Driver (Dodge Neon)
CURRENT: iKart Evo Rotax 125 Kart
GONE: CITATION 87/93 FC - Loved that car
GONE: VD RF-85FF , 1981 FIAT Spider Turbo
All the new bikes have "slipper clutches" This allows you to downshift 1 gear or as many as you want without wheel slip and matching revs. So in a way it would be like driving a shifterkart. I am really surprised the DSR/CSR guys dont have these installed???? I have never rode a race bike with one but that was the hot setup when I was getting out of bikes. I would definitly have one if I were building a F1000 or building a new racebike.
Andrew
we designed a paddle shifter that has the clutch integrated into it. No clutch for upshift and just grabbing the downshift paddle automatically gave you as much clutch as you had tuned in. People were very happy with it. No pics on this computer though.
Make the new kid driver do it all. Race, repair and maintain the car, do his own setups and get his car to the next race. If he doesn't have the stomach for that kind of racing then why waste the money in the high dollar series?
Very well said, it would also prove he/she has the deternination to do it and understand why the mechanics are always bitchin about the "arrive and drive" types with their shiney new suits.
John
I'm not really in tune with the F500 community but if we're really talking about entry level, why isn't the conversation about updating that class. They're already inexpensive and surely the motorcycle engine and gearbox would be a better deal than the CVT. Slow 'em down just a little and that would be something that I would put my boys in.
Well, some of have tried, but there is resistance. As to the CVT, the big problem with them is that not enough people have driven them...really, there is a reason that so many new cars are using them and F1 banned them. It really is nice to drive. It takes a while to get past that "I'm not a man if I am not shiftin'" thought process, but it happens.
What needs an update? Dampers. Springs don't matter--a rubber spring and a metal spring are still just springs. ARB's. My last three engines were less then $600 each shipped.
Actually...
If we are looking the way of MC power, why not look at the 600racing.com cars? Very stable series with lots of competitors (few in the SCCA though). They have complete cars for $15000-19000 depeding on legend or thunder roadster style.
Sealed motors. 122hp or so. Too heavy at 1300-1500lbs with driver, but remember--these are built to circle track durability with lots of bumpers and whatnot.
Replacement parts are common and cheap.
Recent conversion of the series to Bilstein monotube shocks to replace Carreras because they were easier to tech as "stock". They seem confident in this. The shocks are swapped at random between drivers and cars. Fines/DQ for a non-compliant shock (excluding failures).
Not to say I like the design, but why is it that a series can come up with an actually cheap, complete solution. Multiple builders, multiple sources of parts. Costs are contained. Parts are regulated but reasonable.
Why not a regulated design with regulated parts for under $20K. It wouldn't take much to alter the design to a competitive formula series. We don't need another $40-50k series in the SCCA formula series.
This is the big difference between club racing and other forms racing. SCCA racing is very expensive. Maybe people want exclusivity.
I just want to race someone. Other series can be cheap and entry fees at my local dirt tracks aren't $320 a weekend and they will have 40 people in a class...
http://www.600racing.com
http://www.600racing.com/thunderroadster.asp
http://www.600racing.com/legends.asp
http://www.legendscars.com/ <----in left column see "new Road Racer" and center column see "latest rule changes"
"Why not a regulated design with regulated parts for under $20K"
It's already there.
Three Classes
Formula S
Formula 500
Formula Vee
We don't need any more classes.............
Please don't take this wrongly: Then go there. SCCA is not meant to be all things to all people. Yes, there are other series. Yes there are other series that may provide what you want for less than you can get it for with the SCCA. Open Market forces decide these things. Too many people want to morph the Club into their own personal bailliwick. There are other sandboxes out there. We have too much of an impetus to change what we have with little or no concern for the current members and racers. I think it was very instructive that someone pointed out it took an inordinate amount of time to get a substitute crank in FF yet the establishment of a new class (FB) that threatens an existing class was accomplished at (comparatively) warp speed.
I think we should all look to where we see the CLUB going and stop concentrating on our own personal desires to race a certain spec and change the existing system to allow this. This type of movement is splintering the Club in more ways than you can see and pretty soon we'll see a lot of racers get totally frustrated with the penchant for chasing a fast moving target. Then they will vote with their feet. As I said, there are other sandboxes, some of which are becoming more and more attractive to the traditional SCCA racer.
Charlie Warner
fatto gatto racing
'Cause there's bugger-all down here on earth!
The thing is-you did. I have absolutely no interest in running anything other than road racing. I am not interested in anything other than formula classes. Even as a physician, a new FF is way out of my price range. I will 40 or older by the time I have that much money laying around. I like driving in the SCCA. The point is that this discussion has been how to combine classes. Several people tried to suggest ways to make this happen by combining classes. I was mere providing a model which has been successful. If one were to try to devise a potentially successful structure.
I really am tired of driving around by myself or with two or three other cars on national weekends which are busier than regional weekends.
jim
"Why not a regulated design with regulated parts for under $20K"
It's already there.
Three Classes
Formula S
Formula 500
Formula Vee
We don't need any more classes.............
nor am I suggesting another...
F1000/F600 FSAE Links
I may or may not be the "FSAE Alum" RobLav has referenced in one of his previous posts, but we have discussed the F1000 class/rules for nearly a year at NHIS on weekends.
To fill in the history, FSAE uses engines that max out at 600CC's, bases many of the rules on safety, but promote innovation by allowing turbo's, blowers, dry sumps, custom manifolds, and exotic fuels as long as they use the correct intake restrictor for the fuel class.
To me that was fun, and as an engineer, a lot of the fun of a "spec" and "stock" would end after the car was built. That said, the only way that the classes could be economical for recent FSAE alum (think 10+ yrs of college loans, chasing dream jobs with poor pay, driving early 90's Toyota Corolla's from grandma, and small apts in urban areas) is to keep costs down somehow - either allowing older engines or limiting new engine advantages with some kind of restrictor.
I have not started writing checks for an F1000 because it is not yet the class for me. $20k+ for a chassis with wings is not my cup of tea at the moment. A roller FF chassis with a swapped in MC engine is on my short list of build projects right now and a lot of that is based on cost to build and cost of ownership. As labor is free (just let that ride) starting with a chassis, building a rear bay (possibly retaining stock rear suspension parts to keep the spares), and dropping in a boneyard 600-1000CC MC engine could be a $10k or less car. It probably wouldn't present a significant performance advantage over a nicely dialed FF w/a fresh 1600 but it does depend on what kind of boneyard parts I can get a hold of.
Much of the cost of ownership depends on brakes, tires, wheels, and such - but toasting a few $1k junkyard engines does not scare me. Top end rebuilds (if the valves are still good) are a few hundred dollars, bottom ends a few more, with transmission parts often quite expensive. Once you do it a few times and have a few engines sitting around it does get easier. My personal preference is to have as little bodywork as possible included in the cost of ownership. Wings are nice, but expensive - so if the goal is to bring in drivers with less experience, the "stupid tax" of an off-track or contact is less - as in it might not end the season due to $$$.
I'll be following the thread, just wanted to toss in my $.02.
Charles, I actually agree with this if I can add in a sentence or two...
I think we should all look to where we see the CLUB going and stop concentrating on our own personal desires to race a certain spec and change the existing system to allow this. Or to refuse to accept the fact that times and people are changing, and that the club may have to change also. This type of movement is splintering the Club in more ways than you can see and pretty soon we'll see a lot of racers get totally frustrated with the penchant for chasing a fast, or non, moving target. Then they will vote with their feet. As I said, there are other sandboxes, some of which are becoming more and more attractive to the traditional SCCA racer. Lets figure out how we can continue to provide the premier club racing experience in America.
Some are concerned about car values. No, I don't want to see anyone get hurt but isn't this a natural progression anyway? The 98 VD hurt the value of my 96...
Obviously don't have a dog in the hunt as far as F600 is concerned (if anything I should be against it as it make take potential FB buyers). I just see a decline in participation that started occuring before FB, FE, or F6. If these classes, or the version suggested above, will turn this trend around we all win.
Sean O'Connell
1996 RF96 FC
1996 RF96 FB
2004 Mygale SJ04 Zetec
Yes, the 98 VD hurt the value of the 96 VD. But it didn't render it valueless.
If a F600 class is created, and if Kent engined cars will not be allowed to run in that class, then I predict one of two things will happen. Either the F600 class will eliminate the FF class causing incredible heartburn for a great deal of SCCA members. Or the two classes will split the dwindling numbers FF now has and both will be unsucessful.
Jim
Last edited by Jim Garry; 02.24.07 at 9:27 PM.
Jim
I wish I understood everything I know.
Jim,
Sorry, but, as a physician, being in the upper echelon of the income earners in this country, if you can't pony up the bucks then who can? You make my point. There are a myriad of older FFs out there that are perrfect for entry level cars. If you are looking for a follow-on car, one that will be a national competitor, and, as a physician, you can not afford this, then this hobby should be considered out of the range of many individuals. As I said, the SCCA is not to be all things to all people.
No, sir! The discussion has been about creating a class that will threaten an existing class and relegate many extant racers to a dying class. You speak as if this new class exists. We do not have that secondary class which is to be combined with another class. We are talking about creating that class. I happen to feel this is not in the best interests of the Club or FF.The point is that this discussion has been how to combine classes.
Understood. There are other sandboxes.I really am tired of driving around b myself or with two or three other cars on national weekends which are busier than regional weekends.
Charlie Warner
fatto gatto racing
'Cause there's bugger-all down here on earth!
Sean,
The natural progession is that cars, as they get older, will naturally become less competitive due to technology advances/creep. However, the system should still allow the older cars that qualify for the class to compete, albeit at a reduced competitive level. The system should not, by regulatory change, render the older cars obsolete or ineligible.
Charlie Warner
fatto gatto racing
'Cause there's bugger-all down here on earth!
Charles, I think you are forgetting just how many people find this hobby out of range. Besides, who says how much of my income I must spend on my hobby other than me?
Just because I can afford something doesn't mean I should.
Yes, there are other sandboxes. That is something SCCA has become, and needs to continue to be, very aware of. If we aren't attracting new members, who is and why?
I can assure you from my discussions with members of the BoD that this question is very much on their minds. Stan
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Then I wonder how the BOD would feel about adding an F600 class that would kill FF. If the rules did not allow FF's with Kents to run in the new class, or, if the rules were written so that the current FF chassis rules were not compatible with the new F600 rules (allowing for conversions), then do you think most owners of FFs would sell their cars to autocrossers and go out and buy a brand new F600? More likely, they would find racing organizations that allowed them to run their FFs and they'd abandon SCCA just as SCCA had abandoned them.
Jim
Jim
I wish I understood everything I know.
What are you really telling me here, Jim? That you, a FF owner and driver yourself, see your own class as so overpriced, undervalued and unattractive to newcomers to formula racing that an F6 class would kill it off in short order? Or are you saying that FF needs to be rolled into FD (should it come to pass) so that the value of those cars is retained while our de facto entry level formula class adapts to a viable long-term future?
Because if it is the former, we might as well put a bullet in FF right now. Seriously. If OTOH, you are calling for FF to embrace new cars and engine technologies to ensure its own future, then I think we have grounds for a conversation. Let me know.
Stan
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Just another new class!!!!
I think Charles Warner is right!!! most drivers want to race with other drivers!! In a class they can afford?? I FOR ONE THINK WE HAVE WAY TOO MANY CLASSES AS IT IS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The SCCA is a CLUB and as a club , YOU have to find a place or create your own place in that club!! I have tried to help (by donating my time) the Great Lakes FC/CFC Series get going for the lower income guys so they can have fast cars AND someone to race with!!You can go about as fast as it gets in the SCCA for under $20,000. Right NOW you can buy a car(FF2000) ON THIS WEB SITE FOR UNDER $10,000.and a fresh engine should last 2 seasons.You are NOT going to find ANYONE willing to build a new car at a LOSS !! and that is what it would take to build a road racing formula D(600what ever) for UNDER $20,000.Right now our Regions are dropping formula and sports racers from a lot of weekends because the numbers!! They are really only having to drop one group,maybe 2 groups at best!! As for the new car? A well prepped formula ford or FF2000 can look as new as they come !!Right now on this site you can buy a FF OR FC/CFC for under $12,000!!!THAT IS WELL UNDER $20,000!!!!!
We would ALL love to race new cars!!!!
Lee A. Jordan
http://www.metroevents.com/jordaneng/index.htm
Stan,
I'm not sure we can "either - or" this. Many seem to consider the not-yet-born FD/F600 as a new and cheap entry level car. I don't believe it can be that, any more than the originally-proposed F1000 entry cost target was attained. Competitive cars will be expensive and IMO converted cars will cost at least as much as a well prepared older FF.
If this is an anti-Luddite movement for some who think it's cool to paddle shift (or can't learn to use a Hewland) and need FI (or can't tune a carb) or want to see rev ranges in the 10,000+ range (back to the "cool" factor?) then no amount of discussion will make a whit's bit of difference. One of the spec classes' attraction is the similarity of the cars. Many people do not feel comfortable with a run-what-you-brung attitude as that opens up the class more to the larger pocketbook advantage. How do you achieve parity? Not only do we have to consider different HP and torque numbers, but we now have to think about penalties for sequential shift systems, air shift systems, etc. IMO these two types of cars are so diametrically opposed that there is little hope of ever creating a combined class where all types of eligible cars have the potential of winning (given the same driver.)
We have created F-Zetec and FB to cater to those that want to play with the newer technology. We have XSR as well. I don't see any reason to further weaken FF by introducing more competition. Maybe FF is not growing as much as any of us would like, but I think it has a much better chance of surviving on its own (with some reasonable changes made to allowable parts) than if it has direct competition from F600/FD. I agree with Jim that this would likely push some/many FF drivers to the vintage ranks.
I just don't see a need to introduce another class. I know there is a movement afoot to create the older style FA, FB, FC, FD etc., and this falls right in with that plan. I don't think it's a good idea for the Club as a whole. Maybe the times-they-are-a-changin' and we are seeing a fundamental shift in the prevailing winds. We best be careful about the sea change before it occurs as I don't think we can make a 180 if we screw this up.
Charlie Warner
fatto gatto racing
'Cause there's bugger-all down here on earth!
What did you start racing in?
Who here started racing, kart, motorcycle, boat, whatever..., in a new set up? I started with a used kart. The entry level is not, nor has it been, a new vehicle, unless you were willing to spend major dollars.
john
We need to have new cars produced to have a healthy class
All of the sub $10,000 entry level cars that are refereed to are used. With no mass production of new cars, the supply of used FF's as entry level platforms will dry up further hurting class participation (and driving costs up).
What FD-600 (Or FB-1000) will do is:
-- Allow new cars to be built, with new modern components. These new cars will kick start the currently dormant trickle down new to used car market. Today's New $20-$25knew FD-600, will become tomorrow's $10,000 Starter.
-- Allows new opportunity for new lower cost, longer life technology to be introduced. Allot has been learned in the years was FF manufacturing was at it's peak. Now tools and process have been developed, new parts sources have been established.
-- It allows manufactures to enter the market as they see a profit making opportunity. Just look at the manufactures interest created by FB. Whole cars, Conversion Kits, Whole Car Kits and I bet, eventually Conversion or Kit Assembly contractors.
-- It creates a positive buzz, attracting drivers who for whatever reason don't find FF appealing in its current form (Old tech, Rebuild/longevity, Running Costs, Etc).
Last edited by racer27; 02.25.07 at 2:22 PM.
AMBROSE BULDO - Abuldo at AOL.com
CURRENT: Mid Life Crisis Racing Chump/Lemons Sometime Driver (Dodge Neon)
CURRENT: iKart Evo Rotax 125 Kart
GONE: CITATION 87/93 FC - Loved that car
GONE: VD RF-85FF , 1981 FIAT Spider Turbo
Perspective is every thing
I read Charles Warner's arguments and I am amazed that I can look at the same set of facts and arrive at the oposite conclusion.
F600 is not the real threat to FF. FC is probably the biggest threat. The cars used are about the same price. Operating costs are the same or less (cheeper tires and a slightly better engine life). All the newest FF are derived from FC. Right now it takes the combined market of FF and FC to keep most shops going. What is the attraction of FF over FC?
Arguing for alternative sources for engine parts for both FF and FC does nothing to expand the classes. The existance of thses parts makes it possible for people to continue to race but the cost of new engines continues to rise with every new part introduced. The engines are not in bone yards any more because the value of scrap iron. So over time you are going to be running pure racing engines. If you want FF blocks talk to Cosworth, they already have aluminum blocks that are almost identical to the FF block.
The Zetec engine was the last relative cheep engine conversion available for both FF and FC. But even that engine has a limited future because it is now out of production. FC took the plung and FF didn't.
As to real entry level classes, F500 has had more than a decade to catch on and hasn't. FV is still strong and in my estimation probably the best entry level class SCCA has. The cars cost way less that FF to buy and operate. The quality of the competition is probably the best of any SCCA class. You go to any national any where and you are likely to run against a former national champion, sometimes several. For the most part there is only one FV class racing because the performance of old and relative new cars is not much different. As a group of racers the FV people represent the best of SCCA. In truth, FV has delivered the promises made by the promoters of spec racing.
I see F600 as the savior of FF if it adopts the FF rules. F600 will increase the value of current model FF chassis, and creat a new supply of cars built to a lower cost target than FC and F1000.
To some extent, the future of SCCA club racing needs a new entry level formula class that will attract new drivers. The current formula car mix is not getting the job done.
The race groups are already a dumping ground so one more class is not going to alter anything. But if F600 takes off like SM, then you may see single class racing again with F600 or at least a more homogenous class grouping.
See Charlie, I'm not the only one who sees things differently.
$20.000 starter car?
If someone has the money to invest they could sorce new cars from China and bring them in for that price. With the spares biz it could be profitable.If you want to wait for the F1000 stohr or some other "Hot" F1000 car to get down to $10.000 you could have a long wait!
As someone pointed out before the only way to start to contain cost is a "Spec" tire.
I raced FF1600's in England and was shocked when I found out what it cost to run a FF1600 here when I got back. We are the only country that run's Formula Fords on big sticky slicks and not a spec or road tire. It kind of defeat's the original concept of Formula Ford as a place for new drivers (and those with limited budgets) to learn race-craft in a "real" formula race car.
It's all about cost
Since we are talking about an entry level class, at all boils down to how much a competitive FD can be sold and run for.
-- If a competitive car comes in between $20-$25K
-- and long term costs are 50% lower then FF (This would dictate a long lasting tire)
I believe we have a Formula that can attact new drivers, keep new cars tricking in, keep older cars trickling down, introduce more modern multi sourced components, etc. If both of the above can't be done, then the class is challanged from the onset.
It's really up the the experts with the manafaturing expertise to advise if the $20-$25K car can be built. And if it can't be built/ let them dictate a price. Conversly let them indicate what concesions would have to be made to reach a price point that the market will be comfortable with (Myabe the only way is to manafacture in China). The Banchee for $12,995 is not sexy, or cutting edge, but competes effectively with CF/FF every weekend. With the manafacturing talent currently supporting out sport, can't an upgraded SCCA endorsed equivelent be built for twice the price?
As a consumer, I'd much rather pony up $25K for a new car, same or better performance, lower operating costs, more modern (easier to find) technology then a recently listed/sold 1999 FF for $25K.
The fact that the top cars in each class will hold thier value, like the Swift, goes further towards reducing overall cost of ownership.
Last edited by racer27; 02.25.07 at 2:58 PM.
AMBROSE BULDO - Abuldo at AOL.com
CURRENT: Mid Life Crisis Racing Chump/Lemons Sometime Driver (Dodge Neon)
CURRENT: iKart Evo Rotax 125 Kart
GONE: CITATION 87/93 FC - Loved that car
GONE: VD RF-85FF , 1981 FIAT Spider Turbo
Steve,
What do you estimate the cost of a simple (no data,simple shocks, steel wheels) new rolling formula car chassis less a gearbox and any wings could be built for?
Cost
I guess my long winded dialog goes towards asking the same thing Dennis is... How much for the "Rolling Starter Car" ... Altough i reliaze this may not be a fair question given that the most basic requirements are not even yet defined.
AMBROSE BULDO - Abuldo at AOL.com
CURRENT: Mid Life Crisis Racing Chump/Lemons Sometime Driver (Dodge Neon)
CURRENT: iKart Evo Rotax 125 Kart
GONE: CITATION 87/93 FC - Loved that car
GONE: VD RF-85FF , 1981 FIAT Spider Turbo
Cost is not the only consideration. Review the history of DSR. The introduction of "readily available" engines and "turn key" cars has saved it from becoming extinct. Clearly Lee saw an opportunity and re-created a class which is pretty much his. Kudos. Cost is certainly not an issue there(DSR), nor is it going to be for the front running F1000 cars.
Many factors have led to the decline of FF over the years. Perhaps increasing costs have been a contributing factor, but has the cost of racing FF increased more dramatically than any of the other classes?
One of the factors as I view it is the failure to keep pace. Simply stated the class does not now serve the market it was introduced for. I believe it is best compared to the Model T which in its day was affordable for the purpose it served. Today the Model T is a collectable and has a different value yet other cars have been introduced and now serve the same purpose as it originally did. FF has not changed with the market place.
If something else had been introduced which compared in value, FF would be much worse off than it is. It is doing surprisingly well, but for how long can that be sustained without new cars/engines? 5 years, 10 years more?? The value now in an automotive based formula car is the Zetec, but some day it too will travel this same path.
How to fix it or whether to fix it is the question that needs to be answered and from my view point it does not appear that most FF drivers want change.
Steve, how will F600 increase the value of a FF? Do you think a conversion will be competitve with a purpose built?
John
Maybe $15,000 for all the parts laying on the floor. No vendor items ( bolts, bearings, etc.). 3 or more weeks labor to assemble. $5,000 for all the other parts. You are at $25,000 and you haven't got an engine or transmission. Things like fuel cells, steering racks, drive line components cost the same no matter what you build.
Now if you could produce 30 cars in a year as we did in the early days of FF, then the costs come down somewhat. Assembly labor drops to a week to a week and half. In truth your actual costs will come down some but because of volume, more savings will come from cutting the margins per unit because of the volume.
The year I turned out 30 Z10, Carl sold 150 T340s and John probably sold 40 Chrosle 30s. We need to find the class that generates that kind of sales.
You really don't save much by simple. The amount of labor is about the same. It is more an issue of the number of parts. If I were to build the Z10 again the frame cost would be within a few hundred $$ of my current frame. Rockers cost more than push rods, bell cranks and a-arms.
Outboard suspension is cheeper than inboard. Until you crash and replace the shock along with the a-arms.
Using round tubing for some suspension a-arms is more time consuming than using oval tubing. Making some a-arms non handed costs more because of extra parts or compromised design. I have handed rear uprights because it is lighter, stronger and faster to machine the caliper mounting on one side only.
Shocks are a one time expense. Cheep shocks are not servicable and may have to be replaced several times in the life of a car. Today you can get out dated top end shocks which are cheeper than low end new shocks. There are enough TT44 Ohlins available to equip this years production of F1000s.
Yes steel wheels are cheep but they may not be strong enough.
DOT spec tires may not save any thing. You have to choose a spec tire that will handle the loads it will be subjected to. They are not a lot cheeper than racing tires. If they have to be shaved and treated, then they cost about the same. Shaved they will not last much longer than racing tires. If you talk about regional club racing then spec tires may make sence because the participants can agree to use one tire. If we are deciding a national championship then a racing tire will not be more expensive.
Bottom line: you want FF type cars to race, then you have to pay for FF type cars.
Ambrose,
I think this definition is flawed. An "Entry Level Car", to me, means a car that is relatively inexpensive, well sorted, and a platform to be used to determine whether the prospective driver wants to continue with his racing. Quite often the decision is made not to do so, for whatever reasons - financial, fear-factor, it wasn't what he thought, etc.
IOW, an entry level car does not have to be - in fact, should not be - be competitive. What if the prospective racer decides not to continue yet he has bought a new $25k car? The entry level car will more than likely take a fair amount of abuse from a neophyte driver as he learns the tricks of the trade. He won't be fast enough out of the box to be competitive anyway. Why should he spend a lot of money on a car he will use as a learning tool and very well may want to get rid of or trade up to a faster machine? A used FF/FV/FC/F500 is ideal. These chassis can have many iterations as entry level cars for several drivers.
If you are labeling the entire (F600/FD) class as entry level then I think that is flawed logic as well. You will find many experienced racers that will enter the class (diluting other classes?), spend lots of money and now the class no longer fits the definition of your entry level criteria. We would no longer have a class appropriate for new drivers. Then we are back to the same situation: find a used yet not competitive chassis (of whatever class you want) and learn before committing your resources to a hobby you may not be sure of.
Some seem to make their predictions based on assumptions of new drivers leaping from the woodwork with scads of cash just waiting for this car. I suggest we wait and see what develops with the FB class and the real costs of putting a competitive one of these on the track before we branch out to yet another class.
Charlie Warner
fatto gatto racing
'Cause there's bugger-all down here on earth!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote