I first converted an FC to motorcycle power (Hayabusa) back in 2001, and I guess I ended up helping with the original rule-writing because of that. Then I built a new Citation FB and ran that for almost 2 years. However, I decided to go back to FC with a Zetec (engine purchased already).
After some thought, I have a few recommendations for the future rules of the class:
- FB is the only formula class that has great realistic potential for technological growth and development. The rest of the formula classes are pretty much stagnant. This is a great opportunity to bring a lot more of the younger generations into purpose built racecars. Since the engines are technologically driven to gain more performance every year, the car development ought to be driven in the same way. Geartronix is a perfect example.
- I recommend no major rule changes. However, the ECU wording and application needs fixed. Rennie's and Nathan's post about allowing the option of one particular ECU - I think they said Motec, but I think one of these is better: [FONT="]http://www.dtafast.co.uk/compare_ECUs.htm[/FONT]
This is a good idea. In any case, the wording concerning inputs to / from the ECU needs fixed.
- Leave the bodywork width rule as is. There is much room here for development and possible fairing in of some of the airflow around the tires.
- Do not institute a three year freeze rule. Let the engines develop. Do not end up with a one make engine.
- Do put a homologation of 500 or so motorcycle production to allow the engine.
- Do not institute inlet restrictors, at least not yet. The argument that speeds of a tubeframe car are more dangerous than in a tub car is hogwash. The RFR passed FIA tests.
- Leave the gearshifting rule as is.
Overall, we have built a successful formula. Don't be changing it too much.
Good luck to all FB competitors.
Regards,
R
[FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="]
[/FONT]