A few Formula Ford questions..
I was looking over the 2010 rrule book for FF and I can't find a roll hoop diameter or front/rear wheel track dimensions nor wheelbase constraints. I'm assuming that since they aren't there that there are no rules pertaining these dimensions?
can anyone shed some light? Thanks!
If you are referring to the SCCA General Competition Rules, you will find the roll structure specs in the General Comp section. Since, I haven't downloaded the GCR this year, I can't tell the correct page. As for the track and wheelbase, there hasn't been a specific set of dimensions for the class, but if you look in the Formula Continental rules you should see a diagram that gives limits. These are useful since in the past and even now the two classes are some what inter-changeable.
robin
hmmmmmmmmmmmm interesting
are we thinking of building something? coooooooooooooool
Look in GCR. 9.4.5.E
Up to 1700 lb, hoop must be 1.375 x .080
Seamless, or DOM (Drawn Over Mandrel) mild steel tubingtubing (SAE, 4130)
(SAE 1010, 1020, 1025) or equivalent, or alloy steel
I could not find anything to restrict wheelbase, or track.
Dimensions diagram
Wheelbase and track maximum dimensions are specified in a diagram--not in the text. They are there; you just have to look carefully.
Larry Oliver
International Racing Products
Larry Oliver
Larry, please give us a page number from the current edition of the GCR. The only diagram i can find is the one for FC.
The diagram was originally for both classes, and if i remember correctly, originally was placed at the end of the FF rules, but was somehow moved in the early '90's. Since there never was a rules change that eliminated its use for FF, us Grey Hairs consider it still valid for FF.
Gcr 215 & 216
It is confusing but there is a statement in the FF section that states that the 1986 contruction rules apply to FC as well. In the FC section there is a table in B.12 with all of the pertinent info and the diagrams are below it.
Ray
Still not clear
Stating that the FF rules apply to FC does not mean that FC rules apply to FF.
Ed
FF1600 Regs UK
I don't know if it is any help - but here are the FF1600 Kent regs from the UK
Regardless of what us old-timers think the rules say, or should say... I spent a few hours reading*, and can find no way that as a national scrutineer i could force a FF competitor to abide by the chart at the end of the FC section. There is no wording anywhere i could find that provides that connection.
I believe as they stand track and wheelbase is open for FF.
* the most current on-line version.
Froggie:
True, unfortunately. Lots of stuff has happened in the GCR over the years that effectively instituted rules changes without going through the official means - and with the newcomers not knowing the history behind the rules, meanings change without anyone ever voting on them.
However, if someone decided to take the time to research why the diagram moved, and found that there was no rules change that accompanied the move, he/she could get it reinstated as an "oversight".
And I can imagine the screaming from some quarters then!
FC and FF same
Well, you can hem and haw ( is that how they're spelled? ) about it all ya' want and you can pray to the gods that the GCR be made perfect all the while having a thousand SCCA formula car racers chant "Ommmmmm"......"Ommmmmm" for thirty days straight. When yur done with all that huh-ha, the FC chassis rules will still apply to an FF chassis. Yul just have to get over it!
Sorry, John, but it is visa versa.
The FF rules (certain sections, including the chassis and bodywork) have to be used for FC, but within those FC rule sets [as printed in the FC section[/i] there may be items that pertain ONLY to FC. In this case, since the diagram got moved, the perception is that it pertains only to FC, and that perception is technically correct since (A) - there is no note anywhere stating that it applies to FF also, and (B) - there has never been an "errors and omissions" correction going on 22 or so years.
Yeah, I know!
Richard, I know what you're saying and yes, "technically" the dimensions are not applicable to FF for the reasons you quote. But could we not conclude that those dimensions - regardless of whatever oversight may have occurred - apply to FF1600 by "historical precedent"?
What amazes me about the dimensions listed on page 215 of the GCR is that track and wheelbase dimensions are shown as minimums! How can that be?
Last edited by John Merriman; 07.11.11 at 8:06 PM.
I'm not sure that no rules for track, or wheelbase is really that big of a deal.
Engineering principals (as controlled by all the other rules that are in place) will determine an optimum track and wheelbase, and it probably won't be a whole lot different than current cars. Going too wide with track adds considerable aero drag and some weight. Going too long with wheelbase also adds weight and at some point turning radius. I'm sure the differences would only be in inches. Of course, after learning at the ICP seminars the importance of hundreths of inches in setup procedures, it could be that the door is open to build a world-beater.
In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the real brains like Steve Lathrop, or Don Sievenpiper already know what the numbers would be. They probably worked it out 20 years ago.
A while back I had this discussion with Jay Novak. We agreed that if he could write a new set of rules for F600, wheelbase would be longer. But to not disenfrancish current F500 chassis, it couldn't politically be done.
John:
The problem is that "historical" precedent is not included in the GCR, and as you know, if it isn't in the GCR, it isn't a rule.
And THAT is what the Stewards have to go by when issuing a ruling - what it says in the GCR.
Add to that the fact that the current crop has mostly zero historical knowledge of these open wheel classes - especially any precedents that extend back 15 or more years - and you get the sort of ruling we've seen in the last couple of years.
We grey-hairs may still consider it a rule (especially since there never was an official rules change), and produce our designs accordingly to be on the safe side (because Stewards rulings are as predictable as the weather on Mt Washington), but we are in the minority in the Club now.
However (again), the diagram could be reinstated if the historical timeline that I stated earlier could be proven.
All of this is why I proposed that the Club establish a "rules ruling precedent library" for these classes. Unfortunately, only a minority of the BoD members seem to think it a good idea, so it sits in never-never land at the moment.
Originally Posted by Purple Frog
Actually, track width could be.
Consider first that the wider the track, the less weight transfer that will take place, and the greater the overall grip there will be. Aero drag increase will be minimal (wishbones and driveshafts only), with the potential of cleaning up turbulent air down the sides of the cockpit possibly allowing even less drag.
That's the probable tech side. There is also the devious crazy side to be considered:
Crazy scenario:
You capture pole with the car in normal 72.83" wide trim. You then change the suspension over to a 15' wide track, making it almost impossible for anyone to pass you.
Crazy? Yes, but perfectly legal!
In all formula classes, the rules start off as trying to define a concept, with some (sometimes) strict limitations. Track is one of them in every formula car class ever produced.
How and why the placement of the diagram ever got changed, I'll never know, but until someone gets it reinstated for FF (if ever), we are stuck with the perception that it does not apply to FF - and the subsequent rulings from the Stewards.
1.2.1. Replacing the GCR
Beginning January 1st each calendar year, the newest edition of the GCR
takes effect and supersedes all prior editions. Rule revisions published in
prior calendar year(s) must be included in the new edition of the GCR to
remain effective. Court of Appeals decisions on technical specifications
are effective for the calendar year during which they are rendered, and
are superseded by the following year’s edition of the GCR.
What it said last year, or for the last 30 years means absolutely squat. Of course they could publish a clarification or make an errors and omissions correction tomorrow and it would mean a whole bunch from tomorrow to the end of the year. But, what I raced today was legal.
In FC the maximum overall width (not track width) of the car is defined at 185 cm. That's the same as the British Formula Ford regulations as well as F3. The overall width in F1 went down to 180 cm a few years ago. Has anyone produced an FF recently wider than 185 cm? If not, I doubt anyone would object if the CRB issued a rules clarification for FF applying the dimensions table to FF as well as FC.
We looked at various track widths when developing our FC car, and there are definitely aerodynamic and handling tradeoffs. They aren't always intuitive. You run into issues with wishbone buckling, unsprung weight increasing, pushrod/pullrod angles decreasing, and some other subtleties if you go too wide. There are also potential safety issues.
The wheelbase is a minimum. At 2000 mm, it's so short it's not an issue, at least for a modern formula car.
Nathan
Wow, this thread took off! thanks for the info guys.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
