Originally Posted by Stan Clayton
Most of the wet lay parts that I see in Glass are about 1/2 the cost of Carbon parts.
(M/C, not car parts)
If the price of the material has gone down and stays down, the delta between the two should drop.
Most of the wet lay parts that I see in Glass are about 1/2 the cost of Carbon parts.
(M/C, not car parts)
If the price of the material has gone down and stays down, the delta between the two should drop.
I think you're right Nicholas, but I think this is where the confusion comes in to many. Instead of just saying its a restricted class, I think there are those who would like it more clearly spelled out what is allowed and what is not, just to make things more clear and precise and eliminate any questions.
well if we are spelling things out to eliminate questions.. then we will have a 500 page rule book ! jokingly aside.. if we put apexspeed poster "Daryl" on the committe that is !!
and then wren and josh starke could work with daryl for feedback !
And I had almost forgotten how much I dislike you.
Actually, If I were on the rules committee the FA/FB/FC/FF/FV/F5 rulebook would be about 12 (2 pages each) pages long total and you'd all be belly-aching about technology creep instead of rules' creep.
In my opinion classes should be either very open in nature, or much more spec....trying to have parity and play the middle ground is how you come up with 500 page rulebooks and the constant bickering.
Rule book engine section below
Looking at the bold areas, you could make the argument that a Nitrous could be legal.
I did not see an area anywhere else that said it could not be used.
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.
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.
H.5. Inlet Restrictors
The air inlet system is unrestricted at this time. However, the CRB may
require the use of an inlet restrictor at any time by publishing the requirements
in FasTrack.
H.6. Fuel system
The fuel system is unrestricted within the following limitations:
A. Fuel Cell Vents: Fuel tank air vents shall be located at least 25cm
to the rear of the cockpit.
B. Fuel capacity: maximum 10.83 gallons.
That sentence is unfortunately unenforceable, since it is only for guidance purposes (a different word than "intent", but basically in this case meaning the same thing).
There are all sorts of things being done that are not specifically allowed in all of these classes, so in reality, the rule has no meaning other than to show that the "intent" of the class structure is to not allow the designers to go hog wild. In reality, it ought to be dropped and replaced by something more meaningful (but I have no clue as to what else you could use that would have any teeth).
And in light of recent rulings, even the BoA doesn't seem to think it has any meaning that can be used for enforcement purposes.
Times change, personel change, and the meanings of the rules change. Guess we'll just have to live with it....... or write better rules.
Wood - use often to create a hard point for mounting purposes, and as a core for stiffening purposes (as well as complete sidepod bottoms sometimes - especially as fast trackside repairs)
N2O - Again, in light of the philosophy established officially by recent rulings, if it doesn't say that it is illegal to use, then it must be legal - If it ain't in the GCR, it ain't a rule.
N2O is an oxygenator. At one point the rules stated that oxygenated fuel was not legal, but that went away when fuel testing, dielectric constants and all that other chemistry stuff we don't understand was introduced and the fuel rule was rewritten. Possibly the N2O could be prohibited by stretching the intent of the .05% or less Nitrogen compounds allowed in fuel, but the N2O isn't part of the fuel. Or is it? It originates from a different tank and delivery system, but it is still a component of combustion in the combustion chamber. We seem to have opened a potential loophole by trying to close another one with regards to our fuel standards.
If you can't outlaw fancy shifters because half of the field already has them, then you can't outlaw N2O because many of us would have to remove our systems.
Part of the problem stems from how the GCR defines "fuel":
From the GCR:
9.3.26. FUEL
All cars shall use fuel, as defined below, unless a specific exemption is made in the provisions for a specific category/class.
A. Permitted Fuel
Permitted fuel is herein defined as gasoline or meeting specified dielectric constant standards and not containing any prohibited substance in excess of stated limits. Gasoline is a mixture of refined hydrocarbons.
From the Glossary:
Fuel – The chemical mixture which, when mixed with air, is burned in an
engine to produce power.
It pretty much looks like "fuel" is being described in one case as as gasoline (a pretty specific description), and in the other as (getting interpretive here) a liquid chemical mixture. Not sure which one takes precedence, but for sure neither seem to be specific enough (or maybe general enough) to allow them to be interpreted as outlawing N2O.
An argument could be made that when referring to "air" it is assumed that it is referring to what is all around us at all times. However, N2O since it is naturally produced by bacteria in both soils and the ocean, it too is a natural component of "air".
Ain't this fun??
an extremely easy solution to all this business about NO2 or other additives that may not be delivered in a usual manner is to simply add an item to the General Competition Rules that these items are not allowed. They simply do not need to be in every class rule set. Let's get real.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
Agreed - but logic seems to be in short supply these days on the CRB.
But it still makes for a fun discussion now that the season is over!
but fuel injection is open, n2o is just part of my injection right. so why are we specifying what you can and can not do in all these other areas? no shaving heads, or moving cams etc. i guess the only rule that covers it is from the first paragraph which says if in doubt dont, but what if i do not doubt it? i guess i do not understand what you mean by its a restricted class? are not all classes restricted in some fashion? by the way, just playing devils advocate, i think we all know n20 is not intended to be legal. oh, and sail cloth?? who is using that? the outer floors and rear wing endplates on taylors modded stohr are solid ply wood wrapped in glass, as it is easier for testing, takes a beating, and the car is under weight otherwise.
Richard......as you pointed out, fuel is defined as a chemical mixture which combines with air to burn in the engine to produce power. A mixture doesn't have to be liquid...it can be a gas as well.. N20 is a gas but still would be a fuel.....and doesn't meet the specs the gcr spells out for fuel.....so it is not legal.
Wood has been used for end plates and even wings. Aircraft wings are commonly built with thin plywood skins. Have any of you seen the DSR with the large plywood skinned wing?
Jerry Hodges
I know, I was only kidding about wood. Our rear end fences have a wood core. I was just imagining a Woody car. You know like the old Woody's of the 40's....LOL
Wood
The DSR with the most use of wood is Jon Staudacher's. He learned his wood skills from his father, a builder of unlimited hydroplanes. Carried it through during his building of other hydroplanes and many aircraft including championship aerobatic planes. And finally has used wood to build his own trailers; the latest teardrop design can carry his DSR along with all tools and spares and still be towed by a Mazda 3.
Cool guy!
Marty
True that it could be considered part of a chemical mixture, however....
One part of the GCR defines "fuel" very explicitly as gasoline, another section uses the phrase "chemical mixed with air".
If the N20 is introduced as a component of the incoming air, before mixing with the gasoline, which section of the GCR takes precedence? Keep in mind the recent "exactly what the words say" rulings we now have as precedence on how to look at a specific rule.
I know, I was only kidding about wood. Our rear end fences have a wood core. I was just imagining a Woody car. You know like the old Woody's of the 40's....LOL
Does using wood give you a Woody?
Ah, but nitrous is not a fuel, it is an oxidant. Semantics maybe, but an important distinction for our convoluted GCR. Combustion requires fuel and oxygen; N2O just makes additional oxygen available to the combustion process, which allows additional fuel to also be added, increasing power output if done properly. The GCR doesn't have any specs for oxidants, and unfortunately doesn't seem to have any prohibition for oxidant delivery systems.N20 is a gas but still would be a fuel.....and doesn't meet the specs the gcr spells out for fuel.....so it is not legal.
Jay is right, a general competition rule prohibiting N2O and nitrous delivery systems is sufficient.
On the other hand, a "push to pass" nitrous button could be fun, and just think of all the excitement when those motors running at full tilt explode at 140mph!
So who's going to build a DSR using an Oriented Strand Board monocoque?
Just to make it clear, N2O is not legal in the F1KCS. No debate here.
Nice thing about our rules is if it doesn't say you can use it, all it takes is a phone call to ask if you can. An answer will be given and it will be posted in the sup regs for all to see. Use it without asking and you risk a penalty and/or removal of the system. Easy enough...
Both N2O and Bodywork materials have been addressed in our Sup Regs. Anything else?
Since it takes an act of congress to change or clarify anything in the GCR, we can at least clarify it in our rules. It's a start.
Last edited by F1000champ; 10.03.11 at 2:32 PM.
The former (a GCR rule passage) actually defines "Permitted Fuel", while the latter (a glossary) defines the more generic "Fuel". But have fun playing Devil's Advocate.
Cheers,
Rennie
All of our fiberglass body parts and wings would be cheaper in carbon fiber. We use RTM and VARTM, so the cost of the dry material is a small percentage of the total cost. Kevlar is (by far) the most expensive and labor-intensive material we use, carbon fiber is the cheapest and easiest to work with.
Nathan
So, if carbon Fiber costs have come down in price....how many are for the use of Carbon Fiber and how many are against it....and why?
Is the potential of carbon fiber on the race track (due to accident) and cutting tires, etc. more of a potential problem than fiberglass?
Other than weight, what are the advantages of CF in bodywork?
Due to the brittleness of CF, isn't most CF bodywork combined with kevlar?
Does using wood give you a Woody?
I use plywood for my sidepod floors. It's cheap and gives me a woody!
Jerry
<threadjack>I know, I was only kidding about wood. Our rear end fences have a wood core. I was just imagining a Woody car. You know like the old Woody's of the 40's....LOL
For those of you wondering what a Woody DSR might look like:
http://dsrforum.yuku.com/topic/7938/...011-car?page=1
</threadjack>
Cheers,
Rennie
No, they don't.
They don't? thought it looked like thin plywood when we drilled the holes larger. My mistake.
Well then, I guess the only wood we have on the car is the Blockhead running it....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote