Hey guys, just had to start a new thread to bump the previous one, it was getting old...
GC
FB Rules(!)
Hey guys, just had to start a new thread to bump the previous one, it was getting old...
GC
WHat rules are we going to argue about next?
Remotely adjustable (radio) wings?
How about rear wing widths of 95.5 cm from 95cm?
haha
Kyle
LOL Kyle. Now where in the world did you come up with that idea?
Are we going to see you at Pacific this weekend.. Just so it's in keeping with the tread...
FB RULES !
But we don't have one
CREW for Jeff 89 Reynard or Flag & Comm.
Kyle, don't even open that can of worms. That rule change has been requested many times and shot down because the speed increase would ruin the class and make thousands of cars obsolete.Originally Posted by 996kyle
FB Rules!
Racer Russ
Palm Coast, FL
OK, ok
I see you guys have caught onto my not-so-subliminal message.
Good on ya'll.
GC
Similar circumstances
have forced me to bring this thread back.
And what is it now Coop?
I can't wait to enter an argument! Am I in the wrong room - Like Monty Python?
I don't think we should be able to run black colored tires, it makes them look too skinny.
How about a front wing 145cm
The CRB released a message in the last fastrack pointing out that a lot of engines running in the class are illegal (they have always been illegal) and no one is even discussing it. But, Copeland calls a heavily modded stohr another manufacturer and people care about that.
If it's true...
One of the great appeals of the catagory is the use of stock -- truly STOCK -- engines. If people have really started screwing around with their engines, it should be every straight-up competitor's duty to nip the practice in the bud by protesting suspects.
If honest competitors don't police the F1000 catagory by way of lodging protests, all can be lost. If there are cheaters doing their thing with impunity, the practice will only grow untilit becomes Common Practice for the class.
PROTEST the suspected cheaters! If they're playing it clean, no harm, no foul -- your protest was just a thing of due-diligence in the service of the entire F1000 community. If they're NOT playing clean... then they get their DQ, a dose of public humiliation, maybe even a suspension -- and they've been forced to serve the class well by becoming an example to others.
I hope the cheating isn't as widespread as Wren suspects it is. In any case, OMO, a simple protest can be a healthy thing.
Chris Crowe
Last edited by Christopher Crowe; 08.03.11 at 2:41 PM. Reason: SP and clean-up
There is no way to police the stock engine rule, it's way too difficult. The tech guys at the west coast pro series called a GD engine illegal and couldnt say for sure if JR's engine was or wasn't . Plus I know a ton engine builders can build cheaters that no one would ever know and I don't care what anyone says they can't tell for sure. I agree with Wren this is the class' biggest problem we don't talk about enough, the class will fail if it isn't taken care of. The reason (I feel) the engine rules suck is because a "stock" non spec engine is unfair and moves the target too often and this will promote cheaters to build up engines to be competitive, think about it:is some really cheating if they build up a gsxr to 185hp when the guy next to him is running a new BMW or zx10 that is already at 190 hp ( they will be running them next season) or better yet an 06 gsxr with 150hp compared to a '10 gsxr at 170hp? I personally believe that Jon Lewis was 100% on point when he intially opened up the engine rules, why he folded like a cheap suit is beyond me, bad move. Open them or spec, there is nothing in between. As everyone says here: just saying!
George Dean has no control over what happens to one of "his" engines after it leaves his shop. George can only guarantee that the engine was legal when it went out the door.
I think Jon did the right thing to stay with the stock engine rule. My argument to Jon was that the stock engine rule allows the FBs to demonstrate the quality of the products the engine manufacturers put on the market. It allows the manufacturers to say that their recreational vehicle engines are strong enough to serve in our extreme application as delivered.
No one is going to enforce the rules for us, especially SCCA volunteers. If we want good rules enforcement then we, the competitors, have to initiate it ourselves. I think that the stock engine rule is the best of all options for everyone in FB. And "spec" is the worst of all options.
Years ago when we were having issues with FF engines, I carried the equipment to check compliance. You have to do your homework and know what to look for and make sure that when you go looking you have what is necessary to do the check. We even went so far as to pay to have the experts at the track to do the checking. This is all a part of the growth of the class.
The experience of some of my customers is that stock, as delivered, engines are the most reliable. Open them up and you risk blowing them up.
I have had multiple top level FB competitors tell me to my face or over the phone that they have had their heads milled down to max compression. I know of other engine builders that are offering to do it for their customers. I believe that someone running a legal motor with no material removed is running about 10HP down to a reasonably sized portion of the field. It is very frustrating for those running legal engines.
It can be done. I understand that the CRB is putting specs out soon to make it even easier.
I was there for the only real tear down that has ever been done to an FB engine (Brandon's engine after the runoffs) and I got to hear George going through all of the simple things that can be done to check compliance. It was very enlightening.
As Rick pointed out, George has no control over what happens to his engines after they leave the shop.The tech guys at the west coast pro series called a GD engine illegal and couldnt say for sure if JR's engine was or wasn't .
I was told by a top DSR guy that they spent $50k on engine rebuilds in one season. Those engines do not last anywhere near as long as stock engines do.I personally believe that Jon Lewis was 100% on point when he intially opened up the engine rules, why he folded like a cheap suit is beyond me, bad move. Open them or spec, there is nothing in between. As everyone says here: just saying!
I think Jon was absolutely right to go to a stock engine rule. Running built motors was going to be a $25k cost right off the bat before anyone even turned a wheel at a race and probably $50k to run the season and a lot of frustration with all of the blown up motors. There was no question we could not afford to run the series if it was open engines.
I think it would be great to pull in the top 5 after one of the qualifying sessions at the runoffs and pull their heads and check them for cam degree and thickness.
After the June Sprints the FF guys got their cams checked.
Taking the head off before the race at the runoffs?
Not a good idea, after the race fine. If they know that it IS going to happening after the race either they take their chances at getting caught. Or they will withdraw if they know they are running a cheater and don't want to get caught.
There is a way to police the stock engine rule. Maybe club is not prepared for it, but the Formula 1000 Championship Series is. We have specs and diagrams on each engine in use and they will be heavily policed. The reason why I "folded like a cheap suit" over the open engine rule was cost and competitor's input. The majority wanted to keep the stock engine rule, so we had to find a way to adequately police it. Yes, we listen to our competitors and make sound decisions on what is best for the Series.
Does it open up the option of teams changing from one engine manufacturer to another, if it is determined that one stock engine is better than another? Yes, of course, but its still cheaper than building an open engine and having spares. Just as if one car constructor comes up with the best car, that would sometimes make someone change to that make. Can't stop technology.
I personally like the open engine rule, but I'm not a team owner that has to pay out the money to run in the series. So, to keep our rules in relation to club racing, so that teams and drivers can run both if they choose, we have kept the engine rule stock. Screw with your motor in our series and suffer the consequences.
Stock Engines!
I have A LOT of experience with motorcycle engine race cars. I raced micro/mini sprints from '87 until a few years ago. They had the same issues with stock engines. For those that have never ran a stock motor from a good engine builder have no idea how much power those guys can extract over a motor straight out of the bike. Also, the notion that you kill the life of a motor just by opening it up is pure crap! Good builders can put those things together as well as any assembly line worker. Now, the only rules that made sense when I was racing is to institute a rev limiter and a maximum on cranking cylinder pressure based on a chart of differing RPMs. Mandate stock cranks and rods and who cares about the rest of the motor.
Absolutely. Do it after the Monday qualifier, that's plenty of time to identify any problems.
There are Ford guys pulling their heads after every session. I had the head off of my pinto at my last race (admittedly not by choice). It is not a big deal and worst case is that someone needs a new head gasket. It's better than letting people get away with it.
I don't believe that at all. What are they doing to make the horsepower? If it requires moving any metal or doing anything that isn't in the factory service manual, it is not legal.
Well, a Suzuki engine is not a Kent engine. I really wouldn't want my runoffs engine to be disassembled to any level from the time it left the factory until the race was over. With apologies to those with more experience than I, what I have observed personally is that engines that haven't been apart since they left the factory don't give any problems for many, many races unless abused, and ones that have been apart are a reliability crapshoot, even when built by expert engine shops. I am speaking only of 2007 Suzuki GSXR1000 engines.
Stock is Stock
[FONT=Calibri]F1K Series engine rules:[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]Engines – F1000[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]A. Motorcycle-based 4-cycle up to 1000cc.[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]B[FONT=Calibri].[/FONT]The internal parts and surfaces of the engine must remain as originally produced (OEM) by the manufacturer without modification. No metal can be removed from the head or block. Only OEM head gaskets of standard thickness may be used. Intake and Exhaust ports may not be altered in any way. Valve Jobs are permitted but the valve seat diameter may not be altered. Cam shaft timing cannot be altered from its original settings. The maximum compression ratio allowed will be that published by the manufacturer for that particular engine model. Compression pressure will not exceed the maximum pressure published in the manufactures service manual at the time of inspection. In the event that the manufacturer’s service manual does not have a maximum compression pressure published, the published standard pressure + 10% will be the maximum pressure allowed. At no time may the compression ratio or compression pressure exceed these amounts.[FONT=Calibri] The compression testing tools will be the property of the Formula 1000 Championship Series and will be the official testing tools at events.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri][/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]Internals will be checked by boroscope and if the engine produces more compression than allowed or if there appears to be machining done to any part of the engine, heads will be removed and checked as we determine to be required. This could be at any time and teams need to be equipped to do so.[/FONT]
Jon, Those are pretty good engine rules. It appears that full radius valve jobs are allowed. Suzuki cam sprockets are pressed on, how is one to determine the stock timing? Wren, there is a few examples where horsepower can be had.
I like stock motor rules that can be enforced. My experience is that rules that are difficult to enforce, e.i. motor tear downs at each event, cause problems. SCCA does not have the staff to do this at each event.
Darryl,
George Dean (our Technical Director) has ways of checking. Valve jobs that are stock per the service manual are allowed, as long as they do not increase the seat diameter.
no horse in the race but there is a way to police the engines at the runoffs anyways. Impound all cars after 1st session and have tech put SCCA seals on the cylinder heads. This is how its done in other classes when there is a protest and they dont want to tear something done pre race. If the compeititor has to change an engine thats fine, the new engine is also sealed and the original is torn down. If at any time the engine is not legal ........goodbye. And yes I mean tear everyone down.
Get caught once , out for the year, get caught twice out of the class for good.
FB will never grow to its full potential if the people running it now think pretty much everyone else is running bogus. Why would anyone want to get involved ?
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
Runoffs 1 Gold 3 Silver 3 bronze, 8 Divisional , 6 Regional Champs , 3x Drivers of the year awards
Yes I understand that and I'm not saying he would ever build a cheater motor, my point is that his engine was obviously legal and the techs at a "Pro" event didn't have the ability to differentiate between legal and not legal. This is a big problem because as Wren states many people are currently running cheaters.
Jon, I didn't mean to sound like I was attacking your decision. Fold like a cheap suit was not a good choice of words. I just was very happy to see you set it up as an open engine and disappointed when you decided to change that.
What if GD did some testing on restrictors for each type of engine to get everyone to the same HP +/- a few HP. IMO for this class to really take off everyone needs to be pretty close in HP, victory and needs to be decided on aero, setup and drives ability.
I still don't think a series that has multiple engines making way different HP even if completely stock makes sense or is good in anyway, can someone address this point?
People have a whole series of choices to make when entering this class and/or building a car:
Which chassis?
Which differential?
Which shocks?
Which aero package?
Which type of shift system?
Which tire and wheel package?
Which CPU?
Having to chose an engine is just part of the decision-making package that come with the class. It isn't the Club's place to make that decision for them or to make sure that the engine they choose is the best one.
I'm curious. If we took a poll I wonder what people think are the numbers of people cheating. For instance, if there are 40 active f1000 racers, how many have illegal engines? My WAG (based on no facts at all) is < 5. It sounds like some people think a majority of racers are cheating, but I just don't see that many people risking their reputations. I could be naive, but most of the people I know in the class are (or seem to be) honest competitors.
This is one of the few times I've agreed with one of your posts. :-).
I think an ideal situation would be IIR's and/or rev limiters that would cap all engines to around 190 HP. Allow people to use stock or modified engines. It's true that the racers willing to spend lots of money will have an advantage, BUT the advantage would be small.
The thing I like most about that idea is that a competitor could keep his current inventory of engines and parts for several years without falling behind in the power dept. There would be no real disadvantage to keep your current engine mounts, headers, spares, etc. The budget racers could be closer to the high dollar racers. The result is bigger fields, more people in the class and closer competition. Emphasis would be on things other than HP.
In 2002, we had three engine manufacturers in Trans-Am, Chevy, Ford and Dodge. Some with carburator, some with fuel injection. There wasn't a spec engine and there weren't restrictors. bodies were aerodynamically different, Each engine builder built their engines within the rules and we had some of the closest battles in the Series.
It all comes down to the overall package. This class enables EVERYONE to make the best package they can. Enough of the boring "Spec" series concept.
We have a K6 Suzuki in the Series promotional car. We raced against two other cars with K7's. We raced against drivers that had oodles of time at Sebring with their cars and set track records. We're down on power to the K7, but with aero changes we were only off by 2/10ths of a second and actually won the race. Oh and by the way, that was with a mechanical shifter and a baseline setup.
So, with ingenuity you can overcome weaknesses. That is what this class is all about. Being innovative!
It's not just about power. It's about aero, handling, braking and more so, driver ability. It's always easy to try and overcome inability with more power. But, a good driver will always come out ahead.
It isn't the Series responsibility to make winning easy. Concentrate on driving ability along with ALL the aspects of car performance and you'll be in the game.
Some people are just cheating.
Some people are getting illegal stuff from their builder/prep shop and don't know it.
Some people don't understand the rules and think what they have is legal.
Some engine builders think they can build engines to AMA "stock" class rules and that is legal.
I'm not saying that everyone is out there knowingly breaking the rules, but I think that there are several illegal engines out there right now.
At least we aren't arguing over what constitutes a manufacturer anymore. You are all welcome.
I have to agree with Wren's post...and some people are completely legal.Some people are just cheating.
Some people are getting illegal stuff from their builder/prep shop and don't know it.
Some people don't understand the rules and think what they have is legal.
Some engine builders think they can build engines to AMA "stock" class rules and that is legal.
I'm not saying that everyone is out there knowingly breaking the rules, but I think that there are several illegal engines out there right now.
At least we aren't arguing over what constitutes a manufacturer anymore. You are all welcome.
Just make sure you have it all legal for next year!
Last edited by ASRF1000; 08.03.11 at 2:53 PM.
JP,
Why do you assume that the engine in question was "obviously legal"? It could have been modified after it left George's shop.
You guys
kill me!
Post #8 (bringing this thread back) had NOTHING to do with ANYTHING except changing what had been up on the main FB page for months, and which I had become tired of seeing: Shifter Rules.
Now, having said that, we now have another, albeit mistitled thread, goin' "Nuke-u-ler!
THAT my FBros is why I hang here. It's good solid entertainment!
What I'm hearing is that Coop wants more arguing about shifters.
actually you are very correct. I found out some very alarming news about that engine via PM right after I posted that comment.
Groaaaaaaaaan
Make it stop, make it stop, I'll do anything, just MAKE IT STOP! Arrrrggggghhhh...
Okay, I'll stop, but only if you do the truffle shuffle.
things have degraded down to Goonie references
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote