A new engine for F1000??

[Mike Devins]

Jon,

I have no stake in your series other than the customers and friends I have who will be running in it but I believe that your commitment to a stable rules set could be extended to controlling HP.

I do not have a lot of time to type right now so I will keep this short. I have been involved in DSR for a number of years and I believe the HP war there has been detrimental to participation in the class, in fact your series or at least FB has benefited from those who chose not to stay in what is a very expensive game. In DSR the majority of the participants want an open rules set and have let the CRB know, it will remain a class that is on the cutting edge of technology and cost.

In the case of FB, both your series and the club racers have a choice now to cap the HP at a chosen number and keep the racing close and to keep the technology creep in the engine department under some level of control.

From a spectator standpoint close racing is good racing, from a racers point of view close racing is fun racing. If everyone is with in a narrow band of HP the racing has the potential to be close.

This is only my opinion but I would not perceive IIR's as making FB a spec class.

[F1000champ]

Mike,

I can appreciate your opinion and I see your point of view. So, let me state mine. Technology is going to evolve and so will this class. In the case of DSR, the engine rules are open. It was one area where we also wanted to be open, but after significant input from all the current drivers in FB and some of those looking to come in, we decided to stay with a pure stock engine rule. In hindsight, this decision was the correct one. However, the one thing we have to be aware of is that the current engine (Suzuki 07/08) used by most competitors is becoming harder to come by as they don't make them anymore and eventually the supply will dry up and they will become more expensive to buy. We have to look towards new alternatives. for the future of this class.

Right now the best potential alternative is the new Kawasaki engine and here's why. Instead of having to get an engine from a salvage yard, you can buy the Kawasaki engine as a crate motor (something the other manufacturers don't offer). This engine produces 197 hp bone stock and I think you will find that most of the other manufacturer's new engines are going to be in the same ballpark (as that is their competition playground). I don't think restricting HP is the best way (just my opinion). I'm all for more HP. I believe that we need to level the playing field by weight assessments until such time that the majority of the field is using the new engines. It's part of the evolution process.

Now maybe restrictors might work for club racing, as the purpose of club racing is to keep cars competitive over a long period of time without having to do extensive updates. Club racing is different from pro racing. It's just a fact.

Our goal is to keep the cost of racing relatively low. DSR expenses are high due to the engines being open and expensive to build. They are also more prone to damage due to pushing the envelope. Here we are talking about a bone stock engine with more reliability. Yes, there is an additional cost for a team to step up to a new different engine. But when you take into consideration the cost of buying a salvage yard engine and having it rebuilt or freshened, you're not talking a huge difference from buying a new crate motor. More expensive, yes, but not out of the ballpark when talking professional racing and definately cheaper than a DSR engine and more reliable. There is additional cost in changing over engine mounting points, etc., but that's a one time cost.

In a couple years you will see fields of cars with 200hp bone stock engines. It's evolution. I agree that close racing is exciting to fans and fun to drivers. But, I don't think restricting the hp is the right way. We have to level the field to keep the racing close until such time that the vast majority have evolved to a new engine. The best way is by weight assessment. We have to look towards the future, not stay in the present. The future of FB is newer engines with more stock HP.

As I stated before, keeping HP at a steady rate might work for club racing. That's an arena where they are trying to keep cars competitive over many years without change. It's an arena where you want your weekend warriors to be competitive with equipment they've had for years. I understand that. We're talking gentleman racers who do this for fun and spend their hard earned money just to enjoy the competition. I get it.

But, when it comes to pro racing, we're talking about a different parameter. We're talking about drivers both young and old. Those looking to make a jump into a career and those looking to beat the young guns and come out on top. We're not racing for a $5.00 trophy, we're racing for cash. Sure, the costs are going to be slightly higher, but so are the rewards. Pro racing is not for everyone and that is why there is club racing. It's the difference between whether you race for the fun of it or further benefits.

Jerry, I agree that weight changes other performance characters, which is why you cannot simply do a power / weight ratio comparison. You have to take into consideration additional weight in braking, cornering, etc. when placing an assessment on a car with an engine of greater hp. By placing a weight assessment you are not making the current engines obsolete, as they will remain competitive.

My point is, that you can't stop the advancement in modern technology. You have to embrace it, not restrict it. Therefore, we have to welcome the new engines with their increased hp, but at the same time we have to keep the playing field level until everyone has the chance to catch up. In my opinion, weight assessment is the answer.

[JRMarchand]

How much $$$$ are these 2011-12 Kawasaki ZX-10R engines new ?

I called a few dealerships this morning and 4 out of five said the same, "no crate engines at this time". So how can one purchase these "crate engines".

Jon I have a question, is the weight penalty added to the "minimum weight allowed" or is it added to the weight (car and driver) across the scales? So if driver comes through the scales at 1012 after the race where he/she distanced from the field. Do you add the xxlbs penalty to the 1012 or to the 1000lbs minimum.
Also, can the amount of weight have a cap?, say that once X entry has so much weight penalty, then the entry can no longer be scrutinized for distancing from the field for the rest of the series.


I also don't think that FB being faster than FA makes sense but we'll see.



Juan Marchand

[RobLav]

With the possibility of FB being merged into FA in club, all this quibbling might be for naught. I calculated the HP/weight metric for FB HP to be around 212-215 HP to match the HP/weight in FA. Not that that is the sole important metric!

[F1000champ]

Juan,

George Dean can get these engines as crate motors, but there aren't any currently in the states. He would be a better source. I think you're looking at around $10,000 with wiring harness and everything needed. George would know better.

The weight would be added to the minimum weight allowed for the class. If another car running a lesser HP engine is let's say 15 lbs overweight, it's their responsibility to see how they can get down to minimum weight. It's the formula to which the class is held. It's not the series responsibility to ensure parity for someone being overweight.

Once parity with a higher HP engine is found, there would be no additional weight added, but that said, finding parity make take a few times adding weight till we get it right. We won't start with some stupidly high number that going to make them uncompetitive. It may be that we need to add some additional weight to the initial amount. We'll have to see.

[F1000champ]

With the possibility of FB being merged into FA in club, all this quibbling might be for naught. I calculated the HP/weight metric for FB HP to be around 212-215 HP to match the HP/weight in FA. Not that that is the sole important metric!

You're right Rob, and the tires (grip) of an FA car are significantly more than an FB.

[JRMarchand]

Jon

Not bad for a new engine. Thanks for answering my other two questions.

[F1000champ]

I was wrong in the conversion cost area. It's going to be more in the $10,000 range with oil system, wiring harness, etc. And there aren't any crate motors available in the states at this time.

[RobLav]

When I first talked to my Kawi dealer, he told me two engines existed in the states. Last week, he said there's a long lead time to order from Japan. $5800 for the bare engine. Add exhaust, oil system, etc. So at least $9-10K. That's still a lot cheaper than an FA engine and the FC Zetec.

[carnut169]

I purchased a new Zetec in a crate for $750....

You'd be better off buying the whole bike, and parting out everything but the engine. $10k sounds high.

[Jnovak]

Sorry guys....but have to get this back on subject.

Mr Lewis (Jon)......I want your series to go over big......so please consider this carefully. When I suggested IIR's, It was for ALL ENGINES......so they would all be limited to a difined air flow limit.....and therefore HP limit. That would keep them all very close......so any and all new engines could be used.....but those with older engines wouldn't be forced to change immediately to remain competitive. The forced changeover includes cost which seem unneccessary.....and would probably lower the turnout in your series.

IIR's.....and the resultant similar engine output.....seems a better solution than the extra weight you proposed......which affects lots of other performance factors. Unlike SIR's, IIR's are easy to verify in tech, inexpensive, and hard to defeat. Please read some of Jay Novaks post about this. He has done quite a lot of IIR developement for F600.

Collectively, we have to look at what's best for the class.....and obsoleting all the current engines seems like a bad way to go. If nothing else, some cars would have to sit on the sidelines for a bit.....unless one wants to have a good excuse for going slow.

Thanks for listening (er....reading).

Jerry

We have completed extensive testing of IIRs on 600cc MC engines both on an engine dyno and a chassis dyno. We have also completed a lot of track testing with various different IIR combinations.

We have tested a 2007 and a 2009 GSXR 600 on an engine dyno. We have also tested 2009 GSXR 600 and a Honda CBR 600 on a chassis dyno with multiple restrictors. There is simply no doubt that IIRs work at equalizing the HP of stock MC engines.

• As a comparison a 2009 GSXR 600 made about 6 hp more than a 2007 GSXR 600 on an engine dyno without any restrictors on either engine. This was using stock ecu on both engines.
• With restrictors 30mm and 32mm IIR restrictors on both engines they were less than 2 HP apart and the 2007 had a flatter torque curve.
• A comparison of a 2005 Honda CBR 600 and a 2009 GSXR 600 on a chassis dyno on the same day with the same operator showed that these 2 engines had about 6 hp between them without restrictors and were 1 HP different with 30mm restrictors.

While this is not a TON of data it is certainly indicative that IIRs work quite well at equalizing HP between 2 engines of the same displacement even though there was an additional 4 years of developement between them.

BTW: The Honda was a junkyard motor and the GSXR was brand new.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[F1000champ]

I have no doubt that IIR's can work to restrict HP. It's just not the way we are going to level the playing field. Eventually, over the years, more and more cars may switch to a newer, higher HP engine as supply of current engines dry up. I'm not interested in keeping F1000 in 2011. It's a class for innovation. It's going to evolve and new HP engines is part of that. We'll level the overall performance by weight until such time as the majority of participants have a new engine. This could be years down the road. No one can even say for sure if the new Kawasaki or BMW will even run properly in a car. Only time will tell.

Our job is to create a level playing field, not restrict the development of new equipment. It is also our job also to make sure the current Suzuki 07/08 engines are not obsolete and remain competitive, until such time (if it ever happens) that the vast majority have all switched to new power.

[Dave Gomberg]

I have no doubt that IIR's can work to restrict HP. It's just not the way we are going to level the playing field. Eventually, over the years, more and more cars may switch to a newer, higher HP engine as supply of current engines dry up. I'm not interested in keeping F1000 in 2011. ....

Jon:

Essentially you are proposing to use weight to temporarily equalize performance of newer and older engines. There is no reason you can't do the same thing using IIRs. When there are "enough" of the newer engines, just pull the restrictors and you are good to go. It is much simpler to install and remove the IIRs than it is for competitors to find a safe way to place ballast in these cars. The restrictors are easy to fabricate so changing size if the first size isn't what you want is simple as well.

Dave

[R. Pare]

Again, IRR's are the only way to handicap an engine that more HP than you want. Adding weight handicaps the chassis, NOT THE EXCESS HP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Geez... the concept is sooooooooooooooo simple - you got too much HP, get rid of it directly with a restrictor.

Further, it is also way too easy for the competitor to sandbag when going through the weight evaluation, which is impossible to do with an engine where the HP is set and measured on the dyno.


Good god........

[F1000champ]

Dave,

And who do you propose is going to make these restrictors? Who is going to do the dyno work on the Kawasaki and BMW to make sure they are the same in HP? Who's going to pay for this?

It's easy to say use restrictors, but in the end, someone's got to pay for it.

I don't think bolting 25 lbs or so of lead to one of these cars is going to create a safety issue. The safest way is to bolt lead bars or plates to the chassis. And I'm sure there will be other creative ways as well.

After all, the CRB didn't think an additional 40 lbs of weight for a shifter system was out of the question.

The only ones having to add weight are the ones who choose to go the new engine route.

[Marty Nygard]

I think Jon is fundamentally wrong about the way an internal combustion engine works. They are basically nothing but air pumps and it is the pumping efficiency that allows one engine to outperform another. A restrictor orifice(s) in the engine's inlet tract will restrict the amount of air into the engine. Without more air, the engine cannot make more HP If you want to beat a restrictor the only good way is increasing RPM or compression ratio. Neither option is available to a series with a stock internals rule. Dyno work should not be required to equalize HP, just pick an orifice diameter and thow it on everybody's engine. If you want eveybody to go faster, give them all a slightly larger orifice.
There are also many successful race series that utilize restrictors; NASCAR has IIR and F3 has SIR. There are also many series that add handicap weight to winners but no series that handicaps cars based on the manufacturer of their motor.
Of course, it is his series so he can do what he wants.
Marty

[R. Pare]

After all, the CRB didn't think an additional 40 lbs of weight for a shifter system was out of the question.

The CRB, while misguided, at least recognized that this was a chassis issue and didn't try to handicap something totally unrelated like the engine!

Which is what you are trying to do - handicap everything BUT the offending component.

The only ones having to add weight are the ones who choose to go the new engine route.

Same goes for the need and use of a restrictor - if you run XYZ engine that has XXX Hp in stock form as shown on the dyno and the manufacturers claims, you run XX dia restrictor.

[Dave Gomberg]

Dave,

And who do you propose is going to make these restrictors?

Any decent machine shop (or someone with the appropriate tools in their shop). They don't have to be made by a single source; just meet the specs: all air through the specified orifice size, .060" thick; sharp edges, no radiusing. These are cheap.

Who is going to do the dyno work on the Kawasaki and BMW to make sure they are the same in HP? Who's going to pay for this?

There are several engine builders who can do this (and are trustworthy enough to do it correctly). Its even possible a motivated builder would do it for sponsorship consideration or at a severely reduced rate. Once the engine is on the dyno, it doesn't take long to test several different sizes.

...

The only ones having to add weight are the ones who choose to go the new engine route.

The only ones having to use a restrictor are the ones who choose to go the new engine route.

Dave

P.S. Yes, I didn't give an answer about the 40lbs for the shifters, but I'm not on the CRB any longer, so I don't have to defend it now.

[Rick Kean]

Dave,
And who do you propose is going to make these restrictors?

The F1000 competitors; all the Series needs to do is pick a maximum Dynojet HP level plus/minus Dynojet's tolerance.

Who is going to do the dyno work on the Kawasaki and BMW to make sure they are the same in HP? Who's going to pay for this?

The F1000 competitors; all you need to do is schedule the Series certified, portable Dynojet trailer to be at early season events, and threaten track day HP pulls. Doesn't NASA do this too?

It's easy to say use restrictors, but in the end, someone's got to pay for it.

ditto above.

I don't think bolting 25 lbs or so of lead to one of these cars is going to create a safety issue. The safest way is to bolt lead bars or plates to the chassis. And I'm sure there will be other creative ways as well.

Don't forget to bolt the lead at the car's center of gravity height, so as to not lower same...

After all, the CRB didn't think an additional 40 lbs of weight for a shifter system was out of the question.

And after much effort, Club members managed to get that misguided CRB f..kup taken off the table.

The only ones having to add weight are the ones who choose to go the new engine route.

Forget the weight, just make everyone run at or below your Series' Maximum HP. Make your pre-seasonally adjusted Declaration now: 170 hp at the Dynojet wheels. There, that was easy.

Rick Kean

[RobLav]

The only ones having to use a restrictor are the ones who choose to go the new engine route.

But Dave. If you add the restrictor now, you've taken my choice away. If the restrictor was already in place, I would not at all have gone this route.

Frankly, if we play restirctor games, I'm off to FS to run around in circles at Regionals and take my money elsewhere.

[starkejt]

I hope I'm wrong, but I almost feel like this argument is analogous to debating what color uniforms to buy for my minotaur army.

[Mike B]

I hope I'm wrong, but I almost feel like this argument is analogous to debating what color uniforms to buy for my minotaur army.

I don't think your wrong.

[Dave Gomberg]

But Dave. If you add the restrictor now, you've taken my choice away. If the restrictor was already in place, I would not at all have gone this route.

Frankly, if we play restirctor games, I'm off to FS to run around in circles at Regionals and take my money elsewhere.

That's clearly your choice to make - if the Club or the Pro Series chooses to try to equalize engines (short or long term).

If they don't do anything, you get an advantage until everyone catches up with you. But, what you are seeing in this thread is that some among those who have to catch up are saying they won't be able to (at least for a long time) due to cost. By grabbing that advantage now, you (and some others) risk losing competitors at a time when the class is just finding its feet. A temporary (anywhere from 1 to 3 years, for example) restriction will keep everyone in the game until most can make the switch.

Dave

[RobLav]

What's a minotaur army? What color do you use in your army? And what color should I paint my car? Josh knows - kind of like Bo knows eh?

[JRMarchand]

sorry i had to show Rob

[starkejt]

Josh knows avascular necrosis.

[RobLav]

Ha Ha Ha Ha JR!!!

Josh - you don't have that do you? Or anyone you know? If you're referring to Bo Jackson, I though he had a hip injury??

On edit: Also, Dave: if we are going to get merged into FA, I may as well buy the Kawi race cams and race ECU/harness now before they get too hard to find. Then run FS in club until FB merges with FA and FB in Pro. I can see it now - running as FS in the NHMS Rational in April as warmup for pro Mosport.

[F1000champ]

OK, I'll explain my position one last time. You all talk about restricting power. I'm not for restricting power as long as it is stock power. Eventually, over time, everything becomes outdated. And one day down the road, so too will the Suzuki GSXR. I don't see that happening in the next few years, but it will happen.

I think you will all agree that if you have two cars alike (same tires, etc.) a car that is lighter should go through corners faster. By going through corners faster, they should have faster exit speeds.

What I am proposing is a weight assessment on cars that have engines of increased HP. Thereby theoretically making them slower through the corners, yet probably faster terminal velocity. It's a trade off.

This is an assessment that one will have to deal with should they go the more powerful engine route. But, it's a choice everyone shall have.

Remember, there are more corners on a road course than straights.

If you want more power, you're going to have to give up some handling. BUT, IT"S YOUR CHOICE.

This is how we will level the playing field and keep those cars with the current engines competitive.

Again, I'm not a proponent of restricting power. What is the incentive for developing new engine options if after all your time and money is spent, all you have is an engine that produces what you could have had all along.

You might as well just make the Suzuki 07/08 the spec motor of the series, and that's just not going to happen. We are eventually going to need a new engine source, once the supply of GSXR's drys up, which are already getting harder to come by.

[starkejt]

Ha Ha Ha Ha JR!!!

Josh - you don't have that do you? Or anyone you know? If you're referring to Bo Jackson, I though he had a hip injury??

I googled what was wrong with Bo Jackson's hip, and that's what wiki said caused him to need a hip transplant.

[Rick Ross]

Jon,

By "weight assessment", I assume that you are referring to an increase in the current 1000 lb. minimum weight? If this is correct, then this might be great news for the car/driver combinations that are currently unable to meet the minimum weight. They may be able to add significant HP without adding any ballast to their cars.

A weight penalty is only a penalty if you have to actually increase the weight of the car.

[Northwind]

I hope I'm wrong, but I almost feel like this argument is analogous to debating what color uniforms to buy for my minotaur army.

Or looking for penguins on the Northpole

[starkejt]

Or looking for penguins on the Northpole

I like turtles.

[RobLav]

And what did the polar bear say to the penguin?

[Jnovak]

And what did the polar bear say to the penguin?

Nothing unless the polar bear's voice will carry 10,000 or 12,000 miles.

Jay

[bill gillespie]

Jon:

Essentially you are proposing to use weight to temporarily equalize performance of newer and older engines. There is no reason you can't do the same thing using IIRs. When there are "enough" of the newer engines, just pull the restrictors and you are good to go. It is much simpler to install and remove the IIRs than it is for competitors to find a safe way to place ballast in these cars. The restrictors are easy to fabricate so changing size if the first size isn't what you want is simple as well.

Dave

Dave,
Can you share the reasons the CRB mandated SIR's instead of IIR's for the FA engine table. Just curious.

Thanks,
Bill

[Daryl DeArman]

Our job is to create a level playing field, not restrict the development of new equipment. It is also our job also to make sure the current Suzuki 07/08 engines are not obsolete and remain competitive, until such time (if it ever happens) that the vast majority have all switched to new power.

I am hoping you'll take time to explain the logic that somebody would follow when choosing to "develop" new equipment if they are only going to penalized for doing so? Not just penalized but penalized with the intent to level the playing field. Where is the incentive?

If you are going to determine how much weight is enough by utilizing on track results while starting light and creeping towards the right number there is great potential for folks penalized to go "just fast enough". Penalize them with too much weight and they aren't collecting wins in the process....of course they could just stay home and the series suffers.

Personally, I don't think SIR/IIR's are the answer either....but atleast there is some science to it.

[R. Pare]

What is the incentive for developing new engine options if after all your time and money is spent, all you have is an engine that produces what you could have had all along.

What's the incentive of developing a new engine if you have to carry more weight?

What is the incentive for a competitor to actually drive the car to it's potential when you are sorting through the weight penalty?

[JohnPaul]

But Dave. If you add the restrictor now, you've taken my choice away. If the restrictor was already in place, I would not at all have gone this route.

Frankly, if we play restirctor games, I'm off to FS to run around in circles at Regionals and take my money elsewhere.

I completely agree, total BS. How come this is the first time penalties are even being talked about? everyone knew the Kawi was going to be in a car this year. FB is a great class but completely out of control.

OK, I'll explain my position one last time. You all talk about restricting power. I'm not for restricting power as long as it is stock power.

Long live the King! lol, although I don't agree with the decision I think that one person making the final decisions are best for the series.

So basically the only people that are going to be penalized are the people that have busted their butts to get down to minimum weight and spent good money to develop a new motor (for the advancement of the class)...... doesn't sound very fair to me. I certainly wouldn't be happy to be that guy.

[jerry freeman]

Jon,

By "weight assessment", I assume that you are referring to an increase in the current 1000 lb. minimum weight? If this is correct, then this might be great news for the car/driver combinations that are currently unable to meet the minimum weight. They may be able to add significant HP without adding any ballast to their cars.

A weight penalty is only a penalty if you have to actually increase the weight of the car.

Rick is exactly right. This would help most of the cars and only hurt a very few.

I don't care either way. I'm just racing for the fun of it. That doesn't mean I'm not serious, just realistic about my Alabama based F1 team.

Jerry

[glenn cooper]

any worse than the North Carolina based F1 team!