RunOffs 2010 FB Rules Meeting

[JohnPaul]

I guess by trying the engine freeze, we are attempting to make things easier for everyone, so that they would not have to go through the trials and tribulations that we have gone through already.
Folks could still run other engines in testing, get stuff bullet proof or as close to it as possible, then could even benefit from selling the bits to others, or just keep it all to themselves, whatever.

I have to respectfully disagree. By putting a freeze on the engines you be discouraging people, that otherwise would, develop new powerplants. What would be the point. The time it takes to develop a new engine will allow people to get plenty of use out of there current setup. The new powerhouse engines are coming out 2011-12 and 13, add a year or two to get them competitive and that's basically the 3 years you want to freeze. Otherwise the class will be stagnant. I believe this is a move to make the engine freeze permanent and have a spec engine. I'd bet anyone $1000 that after a 3 year freeze is over it would be extended or made permanent which would be total horse sh*t.

This is the most exciting time in Liter bike engines, don't stop progression now. FB needs a few more years before they pull the plug on the engines.

Don: don't jump the fence buddy!

[Dennis Valet]

I have to respectfully disagree. By putting a freeze on the engines you be discouraging people, that otherwise would, develop new powerplants. What would be the point. The time it takes to develop a new engine will allow people to get plenty of use out of there current setup. The new powerhouse engines are coming out 2011-12 and 13, add a year or two to get them competitive and that's basically the 3 years you want to freeze. Otherwise the class will be stagnant. I believe this is a move to make the engine freeze permanent and have a spec engine. I'd bet anyone $1000 that after a 3 year freeze is over it would be extended or made permanent which would be total horse sh*t.

This is the most exciting time in Liter bike engines, don't stop progression now. FB needs a few more years before they pull the plug on the engines.

Don: don't jump the fence buddy!

Perhaps I'm incorrect, but I thought the entire point of choosing Motorcycle engines for this class was that you could pull an engine off the shelf or junkyard, throw it in the car and have a very powerful and reliable engine for a reasonable price. I.e. it discouraged "engine development" and instead chose to use stock readily available cheap engines that would last a competitor a long time, reducing the high cost of engines...rebuilds, upgrading, etc.

It seems more and more that the direction of this class is DSR, where people are throwing down enormous sums of money to see minute gains. When I initially saw this class proposal and what it was offering, I was excited. Cheap cars (tube frame) with cheap readily available bike engines to make a class faster than all the available options except formula atlantic. I thought the class was supposed to learn from the mistakes of DSR to make a genuinely fun, fast and cheap class.



I guess those with bottomless pockets don't see the point of all that, but then again it seems more and more that SCCA racing is moving away from the individual pulling a 22 foot behind his pickup truck....and yet everyone on here will wonder why spec miata is so popular and why the SCCA is throwing nearly all its chips behind that class.

[Daryl DeArman]

I have to respectfully disagree. By putting a freeze on the engines you be discouraging people, that otherwise would, develop new powerplants. What would be the point. The time it takes to develop a new engine will allow people to get plenty of use out of there current setup. The new powerhouse engines are coming out 2011-12 and 13, add a year or two to get them competitive and that's basically the 3 years you want to freeze. Otherwise the class will be stagnant.

In the series I raced in, there is a 2 year freeze. 16 years later they still have the same freeze intact.

In their world the way it has worked is:

A new HP king is introduced today. Nobody gets to utilize that motor in competition until 2012 season. No matter what is introduced in 2011 or 2012, their 2010 motor will be the motor to have in 2012. They have time to get that 2010 motor package fine tuned before it is needed.

The class is not stagnant because there is still a new group of motors eligible every season. They are just 2 year old motors.

It isn't a spec motor class. 2011 the best motor might be a '09 GSXR, '12 might be the 2010 BMW, 2013 might be the 2011 CBR, etc.

[Daryl DeArman]

Perhaps I'm incorrect, but I thought the entire point of choosing Motorcycle engines for this class was that you could pull an engine off the shelf or junkyard, throw it in the car and have a very powerful and reliable engine for a reasonable price. I.e. it discouraged "engine development" and instead chose to use stock readily available cheap engines that would last a competitor a long time, reducing the high cost of engines...rebuilds, upgrading, etc.

Dennis,

I believe that scenario is still very much a possibility. The difference is what it may take to be competitive. In my opinion, if you are more than 1 second off the pole, you aren't competitive.

You could run a couple of junkyard 2008 GSXR motors in a VD conversion for the next 10 years and probably still be faster than a FC for a fraction of the cost. You just aren't likely to be keeping up with the 2018 whatever.

[JohnPaul]

Perhaps I'm incorrect, but I thought the entire point of choosing Motorcycle engines for this class was that you could pull an engine off the shelf or junkyard, throw it in the car and have a very powerful and reliable engine for a reasonable price. I.e. it discouraged "engine development" and instead chose to use stock readily available cheap engines that would last a competitor a long time, reducing the high cost of engines...rebuilds, upgrading, etc.

It seems more and more that the direction of this class is DSR, where people are throwing down enormous sums of money to see minute gains. When I initially saw this class proposal and what it was offering, I was excited. Cheap cars (tube frame) with cheap readily available bike engines to make a class faster than all the available options except formula atlantic. I thought the class was supposed to learn from the mistakes of DSR to make a genuinely fun, fast and cheap class.



I guess those with bottomless pockets don't see the point of all that, but then again it seems more and more that SCCA racing is moving away from the individual pulling a 22 foot behind his pickup truck....and yet everyone on here will wonder why spec miata is so popular and why the SCCA is throwing nearly all its chips behind that class.

I respect and understand your point but let me start by saying I'm not one of the "bottomless pockets" you are talking about. Your comment about FB going in the direction of DSR is way off on many accounts.
I'm not saying anything about using expensive non stock engines. Why would using anything other GSXR engines cause you or I higher costs and rebuilds, upgrading? what are you talking about? People have already spent time and money on the Kawis, Hondas, BMWs and Yamahas and I don't see it cost anyone any extra $$ (besides the people that wanted to try and use them) and neither have they made the playing field lopsided, the GSXR's still work best. The rules state that I'm able to develop and use any stock liter engine if I want. If someone wants to get a new kawi or BMW to work it wouldn't cost you (or anyone) anything, and once the kinks are worked out it probably wouldn't cost more than a GSXR, maybe less who knows, and maybe a better more realiable engine also. I wouldn't discourage what has worked so far.

[JohnPaul]

In the series I raced in, there is a 2 year freeze. 16 years later they still have the same freeze intact.

In their world the way it has worked is:

A new HP king is introduced today. Nobody gets to utilize that motor in competition until 2012 season. No matter what is introduced in 2011 or 2012, their 2010 motor will be the motor to have in 2012. They have time to get that 2010 motor package fine tuned before it is needed.

The class is not stagnant because there is still a new group of motors eligible every season. They are just 2 year old motors.

It isn't a spec motor class. 2011 the best motor might be a '09 GSXR, '12 might be the 2010 BMW, 2013 might be the 2011 CBR, etc.

That would be fair and would work. Is this what is being proposed for FB. Is so I didn't understand that way and I'd be in favor of that. I just don't think that the engines should be restricted to current HP or engines.

[Daryl DeArman]

That would be fair and would work. Is this what is being proposed for FB. Is so I didn't understand that way and I'd be in favor of that. I just don't think that the engines should be restricted to current HP or engines.

I don't know what exactly was/is being proposed. Above is what I suggested a couple of years ago here on this forum as a solution other organizations have found. Whether it is wanted or not, by the SCCA FB members or not is up to them/you.

I also agree that engines should NOT be restricted to current HP levels or engines currently in use. If in practical terms the 08 GSXR is still the engine to have in 2015, fine. As long as it isn't the only permitted engine.

I am against the restrictor plate idea only because of the politics and subjective data used to make such decisions.

[Dennis Valet]

I respect and understand your point but let me start by saying I'm not one of the "bottomless pockets" you are talking about. Your comment about FB going in the direction of DSR is way off on many accounts.

Can you elaborate on this and explain how the current rules are keeping FB from becoming DSR?

[Stan Clayton]

Can you elaborate on this and explain how the current rules are keeping FB from becoming DSR?

Dennis, can you elaborate on where the FB rules are becoming more DSR-like?

[JohnPaul]

Can you elaborate on this and explain how the current rules are keeping FB from becoming DSR?

Pick up the rules and read through them.

[Dennis Valet]

Dennis, can you elaborate on where the FB rules are becoming more DSR-like?

Shifters, body work vs "floor", arguments over carbon fiber, discussion over minimum production number on eligible engines, ecu discussion, etc - I would say that this is the first "legitimate" year of very real competitive FB racing and development...and these are the things that have already come up....with what seems to be great resistance to throttling back development.

That's just what I've noticed as an outsider looking in. If it's the wrong perception, that's fine - I am asking him to clarify so I can contrast his view to mine.

[Stan Clayton]

Shifters, body work vs "floor", arguments over carbon fiber, discussion over minimum production number on eligible engines, ecu discussion, etc - I would say that this is the first "legitimate" year of very real competitive FB racing and development...and these are the things that have already come up....with what seems to be great resistance to throttling back development.

That's just what I've noticed as an outsider looking in. If it's the wrong perception, that's fine - I am asking him to clarify so I can contrast his view to mine.

I think it's normal for a new class in its early years of 'real competition' to see some jostling about just what the written rules mean, but IIRC there have been NO substantive changes to the FB rules. Idle chatter here on Apex is just that.

[Dennis Valet]

I think it's normal for a new class in its early years of 'real competition' to see some jostling about just what the written rules mean, but IIRC there have been NO substantive changes to the FB rules. Idle chatter here on Apex is just that.

I agree with what you are saying, and I also agree that sometimes (most of the time?) it is a bit misleading to take the discussion that occurs on this site as the reality for the class...but, this class is new and I have nothing else to go by, so I take what is said on here as information important enough to seriously consider.

I would say that my perception of the way the class is currently trending doesn't come from the way the rules are structured or the jostling/interpretation that is a result of all the relevant factors, but more so from the way the leading members of this class are responding (on this site) to the jostling and the way the interpretations of the rules are developing.

That being said, because this is an internet message board, the loudest mouths get the most attention, but don't necessarily have the most influence....so maybe my perception is skewed because of my observations on this site. A lot of the time you will read a discussion thread on here and think that the popular opinion is "A", and then a polling will reveal that it's actually "B". It's just the proponents for B don't speak as loudly or as often as A's.

I have no stake in this class at the moment other than the fact that I enjoy watching and listening to these cars blast around the track. I think it's a very cool class that doesn't need to be expensive to maintain the features that make it interesting and unique.

[JohnPaul]

I would say that my perception of the way the class is currently trending doesn't come from the way the rules are structured or the jostling/interpretation that is a result of all the relevant factors, but more so from the way the leading members of this class are responding (on this site) to the jostling and the way the interpretations of the rules are developing.

Ok sorry, i thought you meant from a "rules" stand point. I guess you meant FB is become like the DSR class because of all the bickering about rules? I think, I guess??

[Dennis Valet]

Ok sorry, i thought you meant from a "rules" stand point. I guess you meant FB is become like the DSR class because of all the bickering about rules? I think, I guess??

No, but for instance if you determine that the electronic gear change assist kits comply with the rules as written, then they become part of the rules in the class. So it's not what is actually written, but the interpretations of the rules that seem to be getting a favorable reception.

[Alex Pate]

ok it seems the message has been skewed.
the proposals were an open ecu, avoid all the demons associated with setting up a new bike engine, i e limp mode. the other proposal was an engine freeze be it two year or 3 year. the engines will be frozen for said period of time to allow stabillity with your engine package. for example no one can come bring a 20xx motor that brings 30 more horse power to the table untill said freeze has come to an end. you will now have had more development time on your next power plant of choice hopefully providing you with more reliability than you would encounter having the next best thing every year. that being said it is also an instrument to control costs and a chance to breath as you know that this motor you have is good for another three years.
it also may happen that the 08 gsxr motor will proove the best choice for the class but that only time will tell.

now this is also a discussion so if you want to propose a horse power freeze then thats fine too.
just thought i would clarify the intent of the freeze that was proposed at the meeting as i saw it.