Poll results & how to control power in FB engines

[Northwind]

But at the same time we really do need to open up the electronics on these motors. It's stifing engine development.

With engines being restricted there is absolutely NO reason anymore to restrict ECU's.

Thomas brings up a good point. If we show that restrictors of the same size can effectivley manage equal peak HP for all engines the role that the electronics plays will have less impact on peak performance. Sure there may be some mid range electronics advantages but we will also see differences with mid range performance between different engine, header and air box configurations also. The bottom line is regulating peak HP. Freeing up the electronics rules will allow more engine brands to come online and allow for those that like to tinker with engine development to do so which might draw more interest to the class.

I think we should seriously start exploring the equal IIR program. If we publish (here on Apexspeed) the testing results from the dyno runs to mitigate false accusations or claims the group could collectively make a sound popular decision. Until then we are just speculating what we think might be best for the class. Let's get a program manager and a number of people together for stewardship and develop a clean engine regulation for the class.

[John Mosteller]

It will probably take a few things to find a solution.

1 Someone unbiased like George Dean to do the testing

2 A new generation Kawasaki to use for the tests

3 Some restrictor plates of various sizes ? 38mm to ? 40mm in .5mm steps

4 Money to finance the testing


Maybe someone that knows George could see if he would be willing to do the testing

New Kawasaki engine anybody?

There are a few machinist in the class that might be able to help with making of the restrictor plates or know someone that could.

As for money I would be willing to put a few hundred towards the cost of the program and hopefully there will be others that will donate as well to come up a solution for long term engine stability.

[Brett Lane]

So make your choices. Restrict ALL engines to a lower than current level or restrict newer engines only to the level of current engines. Good luck on making this happen and making everyone happy.

I'll take the latter. Anything else, I'm running FS.

BTW. Where did the 175hp number come from?

Maybe instead of coming up with some random number(HP), the proposal should be more specific by naming certain newer generation engine(s) to be restricted, IF it becomes necessary. And up to now, that is still a big if. Anything else opens up every engine that can and is running in this class subject to scrutiny, making this whole thing one big f***ing mess.

[Jnovak]

I understand that the 175 hp was an estimate that is not backed up by data.

George Dean is quoteing 180+ for his FB Suzuki engines (I think).

I definately do not want to see any reduction in HP for FB. In fact I still want more but I appear to be part of a minority on this.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Wren]

I understand that the 175 hp was an estimate that is not backed up by data.

My understanding is that the 175hp number was chosen specifically because it is slightly less than the 180+ number from George's dyno.

Taking a few hp off of the current cars will make them fit well in between FC and FA. It will also make the engines last longer.

Jay- do you guys have a different engine going in your car for this year?

[Jnovak]

Jay- do you guys have a different engine going in your car for this year?

No we are staying with our 2007-8 Suzuki engines for now.

Thanks ... Jay

[RussMcB]

I'm confused. Over the past few years I posted many times that engine HP should be capped, and it seemed the majority of responses were no, advancing the engine technology was something to keep the class exciting and interesting (or something to that effect).

Now some people are suggesting that a restrictor be used that will lower even the current HP levels (from 180 down to 175). I don't understand that at all, primarily because RobLav would likely be screwed, and I think that's unacceptable.

I'd like to see everyone run a restrictor that keeps HP from growing past the current best. That way no one is adversely affected.

[JohnPaul]

I agree with Russ, Jay and Brett. 175hp seems a little too light. restrict it at 190-195hp. Let the people with 2005-2010 suzukis build motors and use restrictors this way they can compete that that level. That's not a big dollar ticket. Once they become obsolete in a few years everyone will use the newer more powerful engines.

[F1000champ]

Well, you all know my point of view. In a perfect world where money didn't matter I'd want to see an open engine rule with a one engine per event limit. Change an engine at anytime during an event and you start from the back of the grid...period.

But, unfortunately money is an object and the drivers have stated to me that a stock engine rule is best so I've listened and we've aligned our engine rules with club racing.

Not sure how the SCCA is going to establish a correct IIR rule. In my talks with several engine builders, the general consensus is that it won't work. Each brand of engine is going to perform differently to a restrictor.

I don't have a dog in the hunt in club racing, so my view doesn't really matter there, but it is my view to try and keep the cars in club and in our series similar, so that there is an easy crossover.

That being said, there will NOT be a restrictor rule in the Formula 1000 Championship Series. Only once it has been established that a new engine can run effectively and dependably, AND that said engine relegates all others uncompetitive, will there be any decision made as to equality. It certainly will not be to reduce the power of current engines in the field.

I see the use of restrictors in this class being a big mess waiting to happen. Just my point of view.

Right now, the Suzuki GSXR is the engine of choice. It's not always going to be, but it is right now. Sure, the BMW & Kawasaki seem to have more stock horsepower. But, it has yet to be proven to run in a car effectively. Restricting HP of current engines just because of a maybe down the road doesn't make sense to me.

Things are going to evolve over time. That's one thing that's exciting about this class. It's not FV or FF where old technology is kept at a stand still. F1000 is the one class that rewards innovation and doesn't restrict those thinking outside the box. There's nothing that says you can't run an F-duct in this class (well maybe the forward facing gap in club might), but then again we don't have that rule either.

I say don't stiffle those trying new engines by restricting them. Let the development continue. Sure there might come a day when there is a new engine of choice. 07/08 Suzuki GSXR's aren't always going to be available. If you restrict engines, there is no reason for anyone to spend $$$ developing a new one. And, isn't development part of what this class is all about?

[JerryH]

Jay,

Regarding your dyno work on the 600's......It was my understanding that you were trying to equalize the engines to the F500 engine, and that was why the 600's were restricted down to 103-104 HP. I didn't think you did any effort to restrict the output to the lower of the two 600's......which is what we would be doing with the 1000's. Do you have any data from larger restrictors on the 600's that would back up your conclusion that we would need to restrict below current gsxr levels to obtain parity?

You have more knowledge about this than anyone (I think). You were very instrumental in getting the F600 class going using IIR's.......and I believe early on, you supported IIR's in F1000.

In any case.....getting the 600's to within 1 HP of each other is amazing.....and if we can do that with the 1000's, the class will benefit tremendously.....even if a sllight reduction is HP is required (yes, I too would like to find the killer engine that no one else has....but that is not in the best long term interest of the class).

Thanks,

Jerry Hodges

[Christopher Crowe]

"Yes, I too would like to find the killer engine that no one else has....but that is not in the best long term interest of the class... "

So true. And I guess with everything figured in... we have to figure out how best to implement restricting all powerplants to the current GSXR level.

Pain in the butt, but not doing it is probably going to be a nightmare of expense for all.

[Jnovak]

Jay,

Regarding your dyno work on the 600's......It was my understanding that you were trying to equalize the engines to the F500 engine, and that was why the 600's were restricted down to 103-104 HP. I didn't think you did any effort to restrict the output to the lower of the two 600's......which is what we would be doing with the 1000's. Do you have any data from larger restrictors on the 600's that would back up your conclusion that we would need to restrict below current gsxr levels to obtain parity?

You have more knowledge about this than anyone (I think). You were very instrumental in getting the F600 class going using IIR's.......and I believe early on, you supported IIR's in F1000.

In any case.....getting the 600's to within 1 HP of each other is amazing.....and if we can do that with the 1000's, the class will benefit tremendously.....even if a sllight reduction is HP is required (yes, I too would like to find the killer engine that no one else has....but that is not in the best long term interest of the class).

Thanks,

Jerry Hodges

I knew that this would cause some confusion. What I tried to state was that IF ALL ENGINES WERE RESTRICTED WITH THE SAME RESTRICTOR SIZE then the GSXR would have to loose some power to make this happen. However if you only restrict the newer engines you could then restrict them down to the level of the Suzuki and not restrict the Suzuki.

For instance we tested the Suzuki 600 with 5 different sizes of restrictors )of 2 different types) and we could have easily matched the Honda at 112hp (and did). However to get down to the target level both engines had to loose power. What was very interesting was that the same sized restrictors produced the same HP in both the Suzuki and the Honda. I am sure this is a result of simply limiting the amount of air that can get in the engine. We tested the Honda with 30mm and 32mm restrictors and we all felt the best equality would come with the 32 as the 30 put us way under 100 hp and that was too low.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Mike B]

So make your choices. Restrict ALL engines to a lower than current level or restrict newer engines only to the level of current engines. Good luck on making this happen and making everyone happy.

I'll take the latter. Anything else, I'm running FS.

Brett, can you clarify this statement? Are you saying that if everyone is restricted to the same HP level, you'd rather "race" against whatever shows up at a regional?

I knew that this would cause some confusion. What I tried to state was that IF ALL ENGINES WERE RESTRICTED WITH THE SAME RESTRICTOR SIZE then the GSXR would have to loose some power to make this happen. However if you only restrict the newer engines you could then restrict them down to the level of the Suzuki and not restrict the Suzuki.

Jay,
If we wanted to restrict all engines to the current GSX-R HP level, would it be possible to simply implement a restrictor that matches the size of the actual GSX-R intake? Would this have the net effect of not restricting the Suzuki? Am I oversimplifying it by assuming that an engine that makes more HP would have a larger intake?

[glenn cooper]

I have heard nothing of the power/torque curves, only HP "equalization" or whatever is more appropriate.
So let's say the Kaw or BMW get a restrictor to take HP off, what happens to the HP and torque?
Anybody have any actual data, even from 600's Jay?

[Northwind]

Coop,

In my previous post, we already see variation in the torque curves with all the different configuration airboxes and header systems in the class. Its a good thought to think about but probably impossible to equalize torque curves in this class. Too many brands and car packages to try to tame. With a Max HP limit, bodywork areo and chassis set up will be the new development play ground for the class. Still very open and room to play.

[Rick Ross]

Seems to me that the FB owners have some tough choices to make about the future of the class. I have done some limited developmental work with one of the current FB chassis. I think it is a very interesting class, and I would love to see it prosper. In my opinion, you have two viable options at this point:

Option 1:
Keep the current rules which allow the freedom to fully develop any stock motor package. For those that enjoy engine development, this will provide the opportunity to find and optimize the best available engine package. HP will continue to increase, and serious competitors will likely need to perform a new motor installation every few years. Lap times will continue to decrease, and eventually you will be tripping all over the FA/CSR/DSR cars. At that point the class will likely be merged with FA, which will probably require some rule changes in order to "equalize" the classes. Assuming class consolidation does occur, and if FB cars start to outrun the top Swift 014/016 cars, then I would expect the club to consider restricting the FB motors.

Option 2:
Find some way to "freeze" engine HP at about the current level. This will be very tough to do in the SCCA system. Probably the only way this would work is a single IIR size for all engine types....something very easy to inspect and enforce. I have no idea how the Club would determine the correct IIR size, or who would pay for the testing and development. But if it could be done well, you would not need to worry about what the next best engine would be, or possibly seeing the FB class combined with 1300+ pound FA cars.

I can see the merits to both arguments. If you do nothing, IMO you will probably by default end up with Option 1 above. If that is what you all want.....great. If not, you should start the process now of trying to come up with an effective way to cap the HP levels.

[JohnPaul]

wide open engine rules with restrictors at 190-195hp! everyone is happy:

2008 GSXR 1000 for sale
Supersport build
Degreed cams (Yosh)
Milled Head
Thin Gasket
Full titanium Leo Vince exhaust
Aftermarket race air/oil filters
Power Commander with custom tune – 192hp pump gas – 200hp with race fuel

this setup would be very reliable and cost maybe, maybe $1500-2000, a little more than a standard rebuild.

[Jnovak]

Jay,
If we wanted to restrict all engines to the current GSX-R HP level, would it be possible to simply implement a restrictor that matches the size of the actual GSX-R intake? Would this have the net effect of not restricting the Suzuki? Am I oversimplifying it by assuming that an engine that makes more HP would have a larger intake?

It might be possible but I doubt it. I suspect that a restrictor that knocks 20hp off of a kawi will also restrict a suzuki. The only thing to do is to start flow bench work. Flow work is lower cost than dyno and it will get you in the ball park

Thanks ... jay novak

[Wren]

With a Max HP limit, bodywork areo and chassis set up will be the new development play ground for the class. Still very open and room to play.

Those are the development grounds now and will be if the new breed of engines come in.

Letting in the new engines isn't going to create some unfair advantage for any longer than it takes the front runners to finish their conversion. We just have to hope that they do their conversion to the new engines instead of FC. It is not going to be some kind of super secret or something that someone else cannot replicate.

The best case scenario for this is that everyone ends up with one of the new engines in their cars and the status quo remains. Everyone just has a less money and has their car down for a while so participation and quality of racing will suffer even more. No one is going to be attracted to the class by this but people could definitely be turned off.

There is exactly zero chance of this turning into some kind of interesting engine development race. It is just going to be expensive and ****ing obnoxious.

[Wren]

wide open engine rules with restrictors at 190-195hp! everyone is happy:

2008 GSXR 1000 for sale
Supersport build
Degreed cams (Yosh)
Milled Head
Thin Gasket
Full titanium Leo Vince exhaust
Aftermarket race air/oil filters
Power Commander with custom tune – 192hp pump gas – 200hp with race fuel

this setup would be very reliable and cost maybe, maybe $1500-2000, a little more than a standard rebuild.

It really won't be. Even the stock engines aren't that reliable.

I would expect that setup to last two race weekends if you are lucky.

No one is getting 195-200hp reliably in DSR. Period.

I have heard multiple DSR guys quote yearly engine budgets over $50k.

[RussMcB]

I like the idea of a restrictor at say 190 HP and letting people with older engines do whatever they want to get their engines up to that level. That will let people get more out of their investments (dry sump, engine mounts, header, harness).

Granted, there will be some people who might obtain slight advantages by super tuning and having more HP/torque in mid range, but their advantage will be small, especially compared to the advantages people can get with the current rules.

[Brett Lane]

Mike,

To clarify, I am not putting a restrictor plate on my GSXR. Period. I will run regionals in FS before I do.

[JohnPaul]

It really won't be. Even the stock engines aren't that reliable.

I would expect that setup to last two race weekends if you are lucky.

No one is getting 195-200hp reliably in DSR. Period.

I have heard multiple DSR guys quote yearly engine budgets over $50k.

This setup is not nearly as radical as what the DSR guys are doing. This is a Super Stock setup. degree cams/gasket/light mill, nothing crazy. In reality I see this setup more in the 185-190 range. MC guys runs these engines for multiple seasons no problem (ok it's a bike).

[Brett Lane]

And, If I make it to the ARRC at Road Atlanta, I'm pretty sure I won't be the only one there with the same setup.

[RobLav]

I'm on board with Brett. A restrictor will never go on my car as long as I own it. And the Factory Race ECU goes on too.

Y'all seem to think ya can decide what I do with ma toy!

[Mike B]

I'm on board with Brett. A restrictor will never go on my car as long as I own it. And the Factory Race ECU goes on too.

Y'all seem to think ya can decide what I do with ma toy!

Would you convert back to Zetec?

[RobLav]

No Mike. This is the third time I've essentially built this car. Not again!!!

[Mike B]

Quit racing?

[formulasuper]

Enough of you FB guys decide not to go with new restrictions then maybe FS will become a pretty cool class.

[reidhazelton]

"Attracting new people to the class and allowing it to grow" is the common theme here. After all, that's the whole point right?

So, being someone who really, really wants to drive one of these things and wants to come to the class, here is what I see. If the perception is that this class is DSR money, people will be turned away and go to the other winged car options- FC, FE, FM, FA...and the number one thing that will cause that perception to develop is engine expenses.

That said, I see some great bang for the buck in FB. And to maintain that I would not want to be cutting the back of the car up (paying someone to do that) every 3 years or so because Japan put out a more powerful engine. Then spending the time to develop another engine program over and over. I'd rather drive than build a car over and over. Also, I see the added 10-15hp that some people want as costing way to much to achieve. Like the old saying, you spend 90% of the money on the last 10%. Just be happy with the 90% and save a ton of coin.

I like to go stupid fast as much as the next guy, but do you really want 200+hp in a tube frame car that is based off the same construction rules as a turd slow FF?? I don't think I would be interested in racing a car like that on a regular basis.

I say keep the engine rules conservative, cap the power and that will:
-increase engine longevity
-reduce expense in having to keep up with the motor of the month club
-not push the safety limits of a chassis that was not designed to have 200+hp in it.
-solidify RULES STABILITY - and this is the time to cap it before the cat is to far out of the bag.

I hate to be a "if-you-do-this-i'm-taking-my-ball-and-going-home" guy, but if the engine rules are opened up and it gets into a tweak of the week thing, my opinion and perception would be that it is too expensive.

[F1000champ]

"Attracting new people to the class and allowing it to grow" is the common theme here. After all, that's the whole point right?

So, being someone who really, really wants to drive one of these things and wants to come to the class, here is what I see. If the perception is that this class is DSR money, people will be turned away and go to the other winged car options- FC, FE, FM, FA...and the number one thing that will cause that perception to develop is engine expenses.

That said, I see some great bang for the buck in FB. And to maintain that I would not want to be cutting the back of the car up (paying someone to do that) every 3 years or so because Japan put out a more powerful engine. Then spending the time to develop another engine program over and over. I'd rather drive than build a car over and over. Also, I see the added 10-15hp that some people want as costing way to much to achieve. Like the old saying, you spend 90% of the money on the last 10%. Just be happy with the 90% and save a ton of coin.

I like to go stupid fast as much as the next guy, but do you really want 200+hp in a tube frame car that is based off the same construction rules as a turd slow FF?? I don't think I would be interested in racing a car like that on a regular basis.

I say keep the engine rules conservative, cap the power and that will:
-increase engine longevity
-reduce expense in having to keep up with the motor of the month club
-not push the safety limits of a chassis that was not designed to have 200hp in it.
-solidify RULES STABILITY - and this is the time to cap it before the cat is to far out of the bag.

I hate to be a "if-you-do-this-i'm-taking-my-ball-and-going-home" guy, but if the engine rules are opened up and it gets into a tweak of the week thing, my opinion and perception would be that it is too expensive.

You may be very correct when it comes to club racing. Expense needs to be kept in check as we are talking weekend warriors for who this is a hobby. It's a little different in pro racing where you win $$$ not just a trophy. Here are some of the quoted operational prices for different classes that I have received in pro racing (these are arrive and drive programs):

FE (USF2000) $180,000
USF2000 $250,000
Pro FM $450,000
F2KCS $150,000
F6000CS $100,000
F1KCS 75,000
FA $???

F1000 is still a great bang for the buck in pro racing.

Maybe the easiest thing in club racing to do is to limit what engines are eligible, that way restrictors aren't even an issue. Let the development of new engines take place in pro racing. They can always run in FS in club. Let's face it, there is only a couple guys who are not running the Suzuki or older Yamahas or Hondas in club racing. But that still might not be fair to those who are currently working on new power plants, but those guys aren't going to go the restrictor route anyway. This will effect only a very few instead of everyone. Just a thought.

[reidhazelton]

You may be very correct when it comes to club racing. Expense needs to be kept in check as we are talking weekend warriors for who this is a hobby. It's a little different in pro racing where you win $$$ not just a trophy. Here are some of the quoted operational prices for different classes that I have received in pro racing (these are arrive and drive programs):

FE (USF2000) $180,000
USF2000 $250,000
Pro FM $450,000
F2KCS $150,000
F6000CS $100,000
F1KCS 75,000
FA $???

F1000 is still a great bang for the buck in pro racing.

Maybe the easiest thing in club racing to do is to limit what engines are eligible, that way restrictors aren't even an issue. Let the development of new engines take place in pro racing. They can always run in FS in club. Let's face it, there is only a couple guys who are not running the Suzuki or older Yamahas or Hondas in club racing. But that still might not be fair to those who are currently working on new power plants, but those guys aren't going to go the restrictor route anyway. This will effect only a very few instead of everyone. Just a thought.

I very much agree. But, just because the other guys cost a lot does not mean it's ok to let costs escalate just because there is room between budgets.

Not trying to bust your balls, really - I am very interested in what you have built in such sort time and wish I could afford to take part, but how do you figure F1kCS is cheaper to run that the F1600CS per weekend?

[billwald]

Good posts Reid and Jon! You summed up my thoughts and expressed them better than I would have. Still a great class, hardware, drivers, and people.

PS: My last two motors were $1,500 used bike only motors. They served us pretty well for almost two seasons. I love to brag about that. One was from Coop and the other from Voloracer. But George has one of mine now and can't wait for a little GDRE boost!

[F1000champ]

I very much agree. But, just because the other guys cost a lot does not mean it's ok to let costs escalate just because there is room between budgets.

Not trying to bust your balls, really - I am very interested in what you have built in such sort time and wish I could afford to take part, but how do you figure F1kCS is cheaper to run that the F1600CS per weekend? No way does a bike engine go as long as a Ford or the Honda. Am I missing something?

I'm not talking about excalating costs. But there is room to do so at a limit. You have to also way in what the rewards are in each series. F1600CS prize fund vs F1KCS prize fund and tow fund. I'm not knocking the other series. They are great for what they are. But you have to take in the overall potential winnings vs costs to evaluate each program effectively. The F2KCS and F1600CS are great venues. Lot's of cars, single run groups, lots' of track time, good competition, etc. It's a great place for the club racer and aspiring young professional to run for more than just a trophy and the events are run very well. But, the monetary rewards are not very high.

These are just prices I was quoted for arrive and drive programs in each series. Remember, F16000CS has more venues, which is why the overall cost is greater. Also remember, you can get a full season out of a bike engine if you treat it right, and rebuilds and engines in general are far less costly. You don't have gears to contend with, etc. It's just an economy of scale. Remember, these are arrive and drive quotes. You can certainly do each series cheaper if you do it yourself, but that's the same across the board.

[reidhazelton]

These are just prices I was quoted for arrive and drive programs in each series. Remember, F16000CS has more venues, which is why the overall cost is greater. Also remember, you can get a full season out of a bike engine if you treat it right, but rebuilds and engines in general are far less costly. You don't have gears to contend with, etc. It's just an economy of scale. Remember, these are arrive and drive quotes. You can certainly do each series cheaper if you do it yourself, but that's the same across the board.

Gotcha. All those prices seem very accurate to me.

Again, I am very impressed with what you have created in such a short time. Someday when I grow up I hope to join you.

[reidhazelton]

Good posts Reid and Jon! You summed up my thoughts and expressed them better than I would have. Still a great class, hardware, drivers, and people.

PS: My last two motors were $1,500 used bike only motors. They served us pretty well for almost two seasons. I love to brag about that. One was from Coop and the other from Voloracer. But George has one of mine now and can't wait for a little GDRE boost!

That is pretty cool. Brag away, I am the same way with my 40-hour Ford rebuilds.

[Jnovak]

Guys, I think we are way overthinking this entire engine parity deal. If there is a big performance difference between engines on the track, and that has not even been shown yet, why are we looking at the most complex solution to the problem?

Instead of forceing everyone to spend a ton of $$$ on engine restrictor and tuning development consider the simple and easy low cost solution.

It's called weight. Use it if needed or leave it alone if it's not.

The minimum weight is 1000lbs right now. Let's say that the best Suzuki engines are making 184hp and the Kawasaki or the BMW is making 197hp. (see George Dean's dyno chart) http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/atta...9&d=1326508750



Try this on for size:
Suzuki GSXR1000 cars with engines up to 2011 weight 1000lbs/184hp = 5.4 lbs/hp

Kawasaki or other 197hp engine cars = 5.4lb/hp = 1070lbs.


However you do not add weight until it is clearly identified that the new engine is a game changer.

Weight is the SIMPLE LOW COST SOLUTION. Give it some thought.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[F1000champ]

Jay,

Thank you. This has been my position on equalizing performance between the potential higher power engines. Again, only once they have been proven to be reliable and competitive.....and dominant.

Weight can be added in different areas depending on the likes of each team....innovation.

Of course you can't just take a pure power to weight ratio as the basis on weight, as a car with more weight will handle differently in the corners (braking, g-forces, accelerations, etc.)

But I am in complete agreement that weight should be the answer.

Screw all the restrictor nonsense, as it inhibits development of new engines, adds additional costs, etc. Let those who want to develop have the opportunity to do so, freely.

Innovation is what this class is all about. This isn't FV or FF. THIS IS NOT A SPEC CLASS!!!

[Rick Ross]

Jon,

Restrictor use is not the sign of a spec class. F3, probably the best open-wheel developmental class in the world, uses inlet restrictors. This means that every car on the grid makes essentially the same power, and the teams win via better engineering, planning, driving, data analyis, simulation, etc.

Also, I believe that the discussion in this particular thread is centered upon the Club rules. You are obviously free to do anything you want in your new series.

[Jnovak]

Jon,

Restrictor use is not the sign of a spec class. F3, probably the best open-wheel developmental class in the world, uses inlet restrictors. This means that every car on the grid makes essentially the same power, and the teams win via better engineering, planning, driving, data analyis, simulation, etc.

Also, I believe that the discussion in this particular thread is centered upon the Club rules. You are obviously free to do anything you want in your new series.

Rick, your are correct in the F3 engines are very close in power. 3 things are very different:
1. They use an SIR (single inlet restrictor)
2. The internals of the engine are not restricted much at all, cams are free, valves are free, pistons are free etc. These are among the most highly developed engines in the world. They use very small diameter SIR restirctors and because the air velocity in the SIR is approaching the speed of sound the engine RPM is kept relatively low.
3. These are VERY EXPENSIVE ENGINES.

Thanks ... Jay Novak