Sneak Look at Jay Novak's 600cc F500

[RussMcB]

F600 is a great concept. I'm not sure why the FF guys didn't embrace it. I'd think a move from either FF of F500 technology to F600 would be very attractive.

Jay's F600 frame looked great. Judging by his F500 and F1000 success, I'd guess this F600 chassis is going to have a lot of happy, proud owners.

[formulasuper]

This seems like a very cool concept to me, in particular IF the F500 comunity can/will embrace it and have these cars JOIN the existing class. If so, then I suspect that it will attract people to the class. The cost looks to be much lower than most other classes while providing "driver pleasing" attributes like shifting gears and the sound....

I hope that this is successful!

Some of us F440 racers wanted to switch to motorcycle power way back in the early to mid 90's as the Kawasaki 440 was no longer being produced, however the club would not even consider it. It is good to see times are a changin'!

[Ananth K]

This is really good work, and very clever rear axle location. Are we going to see this type of car run at Waterford next season? I hope so, it looks like a perfect class for someone like me to start my open-wheel career with.

Jay, is there room for an m/c engine in a normal F500 chassis?

[scorp997]

I think (someone will correct me if I'm mistaken) that the RC would be at the intersection of the 2 transverse arms - which from the photos looks like it is at or below the ground plane. It also looks like it will move from side to side as the car rolls, but pretty constant in bump...

Where is the rear roll center?

Brian

[teamfour]

Jay, is there room for an m/c engine in a normal F500 chassis?

I'm not Jay but I can answer this question. I am one of a handful of F500 owners who are converting their cars to 600cc power. I have successfully installed the motor in my 1984 Zink F440 chassis and, with the guidance of Jay, have adapted his Nova-bar rear suspension. My car is primarily for autocross since the cage is no longer legal for road racing, but it will serve as a test mule none the less. The motors actually fit very easily in an existing F500 car.

[Purple Frog]

I have two grandsons coming up and when I saw Jay's new car sitting in the paddock at Road Atlanta you can guess what I was thinking. It is such a neat little package, and like posted earlier; I wouldn't have to become a slipping clutch expert. Besides there's a ton more 600cc bikes out there than 1000cc.

I probably won't put them in karts, just based on the safety issue. I see a car like Jay's as an easier sell to their mother.

I see so much good about it. Lead on Jay!

[Ananth K]

I'm not Jay but I can answer this question. I am one of a handful of F500 owners who are converting their cars to 600cc power. I have successfully installed the motor in my 1984 Zink F440 chassis and, with the guidance of Jay, have adapted his Nova-bar rear suspension. My car is primarily for autocross since the cage is no longer legal for road racing, but it will serve as a test mule none the less. The motors actually fit very easily in an existing F500 car.

Well, I meant without that much cutting involved. It looks like you had to fabricate a whole new rear section a la the F1000 guys.

[Jnovak]

Thanks Froggie. We will be testing down south sometime before the 1st of the year. My goal is to get as many different guys in the car as possible over a 2 day test. I am totally convinced that this will work & that F500/600 will become one of the most popular open wheel classes around. Fast & inexpensive.

Today I machined the coolest wet sump oil pan that will allow us to have really good oil control at 1/4th the cost of a dry sump.

Thanks for all the interest guys. ... Jay Novak

[teamfour]

Well, I meant without that much cutting involved. It looks like you had to fabricate a whole new rear section a la the F1000 guys.

I knew you would say that. Actually the rear clip was cut off because I hated the old Zink engine setup. The fabrication you see was made for the snowmobile motor and 4-link conversion. All I added was the additional rear tower for the m/c engine mounting points.

[teamfour]

Today I machined the coolest wet sump oil pan that will allow us to have really good oil control at 1/4th the cost of a dry sump.

Jay, put me down for one of your first customers when this item goes into general production. I had received a quote from Dean Gaerte for one of his custom pans. $430 without baffles!

[Brian.Novak]

This is really good work, and very clever rear axle location. Are we going to see this type of car run at Waterford next season? I hope so, it looks like a perfect class for someone like me to start my open-wheel career with.

Since we are about 45 minutes away I would say a stop at Waterford with the car would be required. The NovaKar wheel polisher would be VERY upset if we didn't come by!!! ........ Well that is if we can meet the dB level, which shouldn't be a problem. How I long for the day when I can buy a house next to a track and NOT complain about the sound!!!

.....Anyone know of any houses next to Waterford for sale??

Jay, is there room for an m/c engine in a normal F500 chassis?

The motors are close to the size of a 2-stroke with the clutch, but just about every chassis will require some modification.

[Lee Stohr]

Great idea ! Just put some real shocks on it and get rid of the baby buggy wheels - you'd have a real race car for adults

[Jnovak]

"Real shocks" & getting rid of the "baby buggy wheels" would be great Lee. Except for 1 thing, RULES.

Thanks ... Jay

[tedsimmons2]

the suspension works exactly like any race car with a conventional spring. For instance, if the car has a 200 lb wheel rate & the corner weighs 200 lbs then the suspension will move 1" when you set the car on the ground & thus it will then have about 1" of rebound. The elastomer spring is not captured. It is just compressed between 2 flat aluminum plates. The stud that goes through the elastomer is used to align the elastomer so that it does not squeeze out to one side.

Most cars have a spring (rubber or steel) and a shock. Typically, the shock or some other method limits wheel travel or you run the risk of having the spring rattling around on the perch. Or for other reasons you want to droop limit the suspension movement. So, when the F500 suspension runs out of the 1” rebound it is effectively droop limited at that point – right? Because I can’t visualize, with the rubber spring locating through bolt, how you would have any further droop in the suspension.

Contrary to most peoples understanding of the F500 suspension it’s more sophisticated then it at first appears. Don’t mean to belabor the point – just trying to understand the suspension better. Thanks. Ted Simmons.

[scorp997]

Contrary to most peoples understanding of the F500 suspension it’s more sophisticated then it at first appears.

Understatement...... The more I try to get my head around this design the more I see... I would love to see the design studies and evolution of this suspension design.

[Jnovak]

I misunderstood your original question Ted. The system is limited in droop in that there is a stop, just like a conventional shock has a maximum length. My system also has a maximum length or the front & rear suspension would just continue to go into rebound as you jacked the car off the ground. Then the rubber would come off of it's perch & jam the next time you went into compression.

I hope this answers your question.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Jnovak]

John, the car actually has a very sophisticated springing medium. I have years of research into testing many different materials. The spring geometry is very critical when using an elastomer as a spring. The motion ratios need to be properly controlled to get the proper wheel rates and adjustability you need. I have written a simple computer analysis that allows me to explore various rocker geometries & immediately look at the resultant wheel rates on a graph. Best of all is that the car works much like a conventional race car in the way it adjusts and responds to changes. It also gets over 2 G's in nearly all turns & doesn't bounce around at all.

Last year Brian won every race in our division & the Runoffs. He also led every lap of every race last year & he beat the F-Fords in every race where they raced in the same group. Of course we were able to develope the car to that level because Brian could help me with chassis tuning and adjustments & drive the car to the limits every lap.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[iamuwere]

^^^^^^^^^ I always like it when the designer remembers the driver has to be part of the equation as well!!!

For some reason people see a rubber spring instead of a wound steel spring and magically it doesn't seem "right" anymore, yet there are many other vehicles on the road/rail/trail that work without a wound steel spring. Torsion bars come to mind.

jim

[scorp997]

John, the car actually has a very sophisticated springing medium. I have years of research into testing many different materials. The spring geometry is very critical when using an elastomer as a spring. The motion ratios need to be properly controlled to get the proper wheel rates and adjustability you need. I have written a simple computer analysis that allows me to explore various rocker geometries & immediately look at the resultant wheel rates on a graph... Jay Novak

I was referring more to the suspension geometry than the springing/rocker layout. I bet that the motion ratios are very critical with your springing medium, but that part of the suspension is pretty straght forward math. I'm actually pretty familar with elastomer springing mediums, one of my first full suspension mountain bikes was a ProFlex which used them. I think it is a simple, light and elegant method of springing and damping.

My comment was more about trying to calculate (in my head) how the roll center would work on your suspension (suspension designing is one of my technical interests). It has a lot of characteristics of a live axle, DeDion and fully independent suspension. It also has some interesting load paths that transfer the axle torque/windup to the chassis. The hinged rear section of your frame is an interesting twist to the more typical a-frame.

I believe you've been working on this setup for a while, but I've never seen good, closeup photos of your cars until now. Nicely done, can't wait to hear how it works out for you.

[Brian]

I would seriously love to put that rear suspension location setup under a Lotus 7 and see what happened. Is it patented? Getting the rear roll center into a lower and more controllable position opens up things so much.

A guy I knew with a MG Midget put on a A-frame axle location device with the center of the A-frame at the top of the rear differential (it was easier that way, apparently). It did an excellent job of side to side location of the rear axle, but with the roll center so high the inside rear wheel was about 6" off the ground as soon as he tried to go around a corner... Extremely funny to watch.

Brian

[Jnovak]

John & Brian, the front suspension is your typical SLA setup, just carefully designed to work without anti-roll bars. Obviously the rear suspension is different than your typical live axle suspension geometry. The fore & aft trailing links are nothing new but the lateral location linkage is something new. I invented (I think) this method, which I call a "NovaLink" in the early 90s & the design has migrated to what you see on the pics shown. The main effort was directed at having a simple adjustable rear roll center height due to the fact that F500 cannot have anti-roll bars (rules). That said, I immediately discovered that there were other interesting things going on with the system that could help the car if properly managed. This is about the 3rd or 4th version of the design. The system is a bit too complex for my liking but it does have some real advantages or I would not be using it.

The roll center is NOT below ground as some have speculated & the lateral migration of the roll center is VERY small.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[kmt63]

i am thinking about building a f600 car and would like to know what engine rules to follow.is it safe to use a stock gsxr600 with baffled pan?cable shift?what year range of engine?any help with this would be great.

kevin

[tombu-mi]

There are no rules at this time. This is just a demonstration of a concept - putting a 600cc motorcycle engine in a F500 - as an alternative engine choice for the class.

[Jnovak]

There are no real rules yet. There are some guidelines that are very similar to the F1000 engine rules which are as follows. Please note my comments in RED

Also see this link to another forum discussion here. There are several discussion threads on the forum.

http://www.eformulacarnews.com/viewforum.php?f=8


F1000 rules with comments in RED
H.4. Engines
A. Motorcycle-based 4-cycle up to 1000cc.
B. Engine internals and compression ratio must remain stock. The competitor must present, on demand, an original factory manual for the engine to allow compliance verification.
C. The stock ECU shall be used. The ECU fuel map may be changed. Devices that modify inputs to the ECU (e.g., Power Commander) may be used. Stand-alone after market ECUs are not permitted.
D. Turbochargers and superchargers are prohibited.
E. Carburetion and fuel injection are unrestricted as long as they are stock to the engine.
F. The exhaust system and exhaust manifold are unrestricted, within SCCA safety regulations.
G. The lubrication system is unrestricted. A dry sump system is permitted; any oil pan and/or baffling is permitted. No dry sump allowed in my opinion
H. Oil coolers are unrestricted.
I. The cooling system is unrestricted. Radiators, if housed in or incorporating a cowl air-scoop deflector, shall comply with bodywork rules.
J. The stock chain tensioner may be replaced with any mechanical chain tensioner

With regard to item C, I do not believe that anyone is actually reflashing ECUs to change the fuel map nor are Power Commanders being used - the stock stuff is plenty good. With regard to item G, finding room for a dry sump tank in an F500 might be difficult, so this might be limited to pan replacement only. I think we should do oil pans only, no dry sumps

To your point about air boxes: the stock air boxes work fine, if you have room for them. If not, creating a new air box isn't very difficult - there are many that have been done for the 1000cc engines in DSR and F1000. (You are correct that you do need one or things will be a mess.)

As for wiring harnesses, there are several shops that will modify a harness for use in a car (throwing away the unnecessary stuff and modifying the kick stand, tip over and other circuits that get in the way). These guys charge about $200 (give or take a bit) to do all this. It may be necessary to lengthen some parts of the harness after these modifications to get to the cockpit items (dash, etc.).

The last item I will mention is that there is a cheap, simple means to restrict the motorcycle engines that does not cause the ECU to go into "limp mode". If the current 600cc engines deliver more power than a 500cc two stroke, that fixes the problem. If future 600cc motorcycle engines produce more power, the fix is the same. So, it is not necessary to try to balance performance through weight adjustments.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[kmt63]

thanks jay,

thats what i ment to say.safe guidlines to follow.i would like to start building and keep things as would be legal when the time comes.also what is the race weight for f600?

[Jnovak]

We are starting out with our car at 825 lbs with the driver. This may change as needed.

Thanks ... Jay

[iamuwere]

thanks jay,

thats what i ment to say.safe guidlines to follow.i would like to start building and keep things as would be legal when the time comes.also what is the race weight for f600?

but do note, you may be building to something that NEVER comes.

This is a purely builder beware demonstration yet.

[RussMcB]

The last item I will mention is that there is a cheap, simple means to restrict the motorcycle engines that does not cause the ECU to go into "limp mode".

Something besides an SIR?

[Dave Gomberg]

Something besides an SIR?

Yes. And, before you ask: it will work for F1000 if and when it is needed. And, before you ask: details if and when needed.

Dave

[RussMcB]

Yes. And, before you ask: it will work for F1000 if and when it is needed. And, before you ask: details if and when needed.

Dave

Thanks, Dave.

[formulasuper]

but do note, you may be building to something that NEVER comes.

This is a purely builder beware demonstration yet.

However, one of these cars can run in FS no matter if it is ever approved for F500 class or not.

[Jnovak]

Check out this forum for my build blog on the car.

http://www.eformulacarnews.com/viewtopic.php?t=2148


Thanks ... Jay Novak

[iamuwere]

However, one of these cars can run in FS no matter if it is ever approved for F500 class or not.

As long as the minimum weight waiver is continued since the cars would need 150-200 pounds of ballast to get to FS minimum weight.

[Jnovak]

The weight is not a problem Jim.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[kmt63]

thanks for the info jay.i do understand that building the car before it is legal could have problems down the road but it fits my bank roll and if i can only run it in fs or test days thats fine by me.

kevin

[formulasuper]

thanks for the info jay.i do understand that building the car before it is legal could have problems down the road but it fits my bank roll and if i can only run it in fs or test days thats fine by me.

kevin

My guess is that it could run in FS as a temperary allowance for testing & developement only since the official FS minimum weight is 750lbs without driver. Why else would any class rule have been written with a minimum weight if it really doesn't mean "Minimum Weight"?

[RussMcB]

My guess is that it could run in FS as a temperary allowance for testing & developement only since the official FS minimum weight is 750lbs without driver. Why else would any class rule have been written with a minimum weight if it really doesn't mean "Minimum Weight"?

I got the impression from Stan's post that when a car is submitted for homologation to run in FS, you can request a waiver from certain aspects of the FS rules, such as min weight. Then, I guess it is up to the "homologation giver" to determine if the waiver should be granted. So, I assume that F600 guys will submit their homologation requests and include a request for a waiver from the FS min wt. rule.

We can only guess what criteria they use to determine if a waiver should be granted. I assume that safety is at the top of the list.

[jim murphy]

New member here.
For the people talking about which race group to run in -- When I asked SEDIV Division officials a year ago about this they stated that it had to have a FS waiver and be designated F600 so that it would run in the FF/F5/FV race group because it would be unsafe to run in the faster wings 'n things group. By having the car designated as a F6, it keeps everything straight for registration and timing/scoring.
BTW, Clint and Dan McMahan are converting Clint's black KBS Mk.5 and an old Dolphin chassis with a goal of having them ready to run in February.

Jim

[GT1Vette]

We will also recognize F6 as a regional-only class for Atlanta Region and will put them in with the small open-wheel group for all our races (including the 2009 ARRC by GRM). This should provide test data for their eventual inclusion in F500 yet still not clutter up any existing classes.

Jim Murphy (the previous poster) is a newly-elected member of our Board and will provide guidance as we review and approve the rules.

BK

[teamfour]

New member here.

Darn! He found us! Just kidding Jim. Glad you are on the board; you have a wealth of knowledge to help this F6 thing get off the ground. Sorry I missed meeting you at this year's ARRC. I probably stood next to you near Jay's car at some time since I spent hours drooling over it.