Wheel cover ban

[Hardingfv32]

There is a rumor going around that there is an effort to ban the inside wheel covers found on the Runoffs winning car. Are any insiders willing to make a statement on the status of this effort? Is there going to be any competitor input or is this just going to be a one sided affair?

Brian

[Bill Bonow]

I saw those on MV's car in the pre-race interview (speedcast). I was sort of wondering why they would ever be allowed in the first place. Maybe someone has a photo of said carbon fiber inner wheel covers. If legal, will they be the latest in "whizzy bits" for the pointy end of FV?

If there was an issue, how did MV get through post race tech?

As a general comment, MV drove a great race. He was prepared and executed the task at hand. Wheel covers or not, that was MV's race and should be congratulated for his efforts and accomplishment.

Disclaimer: My dog got out of that fight over a decade ago. Purely curious on my part.

[Hardingfv32]

There were complaints to tech, but tech said they were perfectly legal. The rules say body work can extend to the center of the treads behind the beam. So they are considered body work.

Brian

[problemchild]

Lets hope its a one-sided affair ..... the side of the FV comminity!

Leave the whizzy CF bits for Formula Atlantic.

Good diversion though for those fighting spec tires and other cost-cutting or accessability issues.

[protoform]

A few years ago there was a Caracal with a full plastic bubble over the drivers conpartment. It was banned. then a driver found if he was able to put his feet thru the beam and have the pedals in front of the beam, He could make the car more aero. It was banned. Un- safe. I think this is the same thing . Eather ban the covers now , or everyone will have to have them. This will not make the class any better, it will just add cost , and somthing else to get in the way or fall off. con grats on Mike for finding a loop hole and using it to his advantage. But I think it should be banned asap. Mike deserved the win he did it within the rules. as they are at the time of the race. This is suppose to be a low budget class , Peter E Cheney fv#06

[Steve Davis]

Please see the Sept. Committee Conference call Minutes over on the Interchange.
http://www.formulavee.org/interchang...hp?f=15&t=4882

Steve, FV80

[Bill Bonow]

Quoted from the FV forum:

"Inside wheel covers- described by some as “wheel pants” were used at this year’s Runoffs and discussion ensued. The Committee members discussed the question of legality which revolves around the GCR definition of bodywork and other details. After a considerable amount of time, we realized that legality was not the main issue but rather whether allowing these items was for the good of the class. Whether these covers actually are a performance advantage or not is unclear. On whether they should be specifically outlawed, the committee was divided. However, the majority of the Committee agreed that these might be perceived as being an advantage and therefore necessary to remain competitive and that this would not be good for the class. For this reason the Committee will draft a letter requesting member input on a rule change to specifically NOT allow these items in future events."

Rumored price for said wheel covers is $1,200 per set (source: FV Interchange)

[dc]

And if Mike's last ditch draft-by would have failed, this would not be an issue.

[G.B.]

And if Mike's last ditch draft-by would have failed, this would not be an issue.

No, it was being discussed before the race. There was even a petition going round, I am not sure how many signed it.

I don't think anyone is desputing Michael's win. It's just we don't want to all have to buy these wheel covers for next year.

Guy.

P.S. I didn't know you drink Dos Equis, Bill.

[dc]

I don't think that a wheel cover like this is the difference between winning and losing. After watching the race, most of the field needs to figure out how to not hit each other before worrying about placebo wheel flares that likely had little or no affect on the performance of Michael's car. If the field feels the need to go out and build/buy inner wheel skirts like Mike had on his car, then the whole field is filled with lemmings hell-bent on emptying their pockets for no reason.

Most FV guys (and SCCA guys in general) should realize that a simple diet would gain them more on-track performance than a couple of thin pieces of carbon fiber inside of a 50-year old VW wheel.



I'm just sayin'. Seems like a pointless thing to complain about. He's still gonna kick your collective asses without the fender skirts.

[Charles Warner]

I don't think anyone is desputing Michael's win. It's just we don't want to all have to buy these wheel covers for next year.

But it is OK to negate the effort and cost Michael went to in developing these items?

Oh, I forgot. It's for the greater good. What rubbish. No good deed goes unpunished.

[Wren]

No, it was being discussed before the race. There was even a petition going round, I am not sure how many signed it.

What a terrible move. Did people think there was going to be an emergency BOD meeting to ban the wheel covers? That is as stupid as the petition at the runoffs to prevent the Honda. There is no provision in the rules making process for a petition.

I'm always amazed that people are willing to run around and do something as meaningless as a petition but not willing to sack up and throw paper at them. You need to understand that complaining to the tech people is meaningless. The COA were the only people there with the authority to get rid of them.

[G.B.]

They are very clever.

MV must have mould and this they could be made available at a nominal price to the greater FV commumity.

However, Chris Jennerjahn broke the lap record without wheel fairings, so you are correct they are unnecessary and the money would be better spent elsewhere.

But you know how it works.

Is this the direction we want this formula to go?

[dc]

Is this the direction we want this formula to go?

Isn't FV one of the few formula classes to allow carbon fiber already? Aren't there cars in the RunOffs field that have ridiculously small cockpit openings? How many guys are even close to the weight minimum of the class?

The rules are already written as such, why try to ban something that is within the written rules? Because no one else thought if it first, that's why.

There were 39 FVs starting the RunOffs this year—more (WAY more) than any other formula car class. More than FE, FC and FF combined. I seriously don't think that inner wheel skirts are the death knell of the class. There are plenty of other issues that FV needs to deal with first before fretting over a few thin pieces of CF inside of a wheel.

[Charles Warner]

MV must have mould and this they could be made available at a nominal price to the greater FV commumity.

You act as if the "greater FV community" has some right to these items.

However, Chris Jennerjahn broke the lap record without wheel fairings, so you are correct they are unnecessary and the money would be better spent elsewhere.

Then this discussion and the attendant hand-wringing is actually moot.

Is this the direction we want this formula to go?

You mean reward those who are sharper and more innovative than the rest? Or do you want anarchy? What's next, the concept that everyone should win at least once so the results will be adjusted to provide that outcome? Should we all sing Kumbaya now?

[Bill Bonow]

Interesting in that both sides have valid points.

A) FV boasts of "rules stability" yet at the first sign of something "trick" (but apparently within the rules), the call for a rule change rings out. If I'm not mistaken, that particular bodywork rules is 49 years old? (please correct if wrong)

B) FV is meant to be "cheap racing". Allowing $1,200 items that make $35k FV's creep higher in cost certainly don't help the cause. The guys at the pointy end will get them and it will be perceived as a must have item. I understand that point.

I think some would call a situation like this a conundrum.

[Charles Warner]

FV is meant to be "cheap racing".

No such thing!

Allowing $1,200 items that make $35k FV's creep higher in cost certainly don't help the cause.

That implies there is a valdity in restricting how much money a competitor spends. What's next? Restricting a driver from attending a driving school because not all drivers can afford it?

[sracing]

I haven't seen them, but I have little doubt that anything that encloses the inner wheel would be helpful. Mike has spent some time in the wind tunnel, so he may even KNOW the amount of gain. Kudo's to Mike and his dad for coming up with the idea (that they apparently checked on and found to be legal.) EVERYONE anywhere near the front of the pack does the exact same thing. It is not cheating, That is how all racing works.

I certainly understand the concern of potential cost increases. If a mass feels this is not good for the class the board should be petitioned and ask for input. If the rules are changed then that is also how racing works. Congrats Mike and Al. We all wish we would have thought of it first. That is the only reason the issue is at hand.

BTW, this is not really new. Rich Richardson and his dad came up with a similar concept 15 years ago. They asked us to file a protest on their car at the run-offs in 1997 or 1998. (they of course paid for it.) They were ruled legal then (with a fastening caveat). However since Rich only finished in the front 10, no one complained.

[Bill Bonow]

No such thing!

Will you accept FV as a "lower cost" racing (as compaired to other SCCA classes) ?

Besides, our self proclaimed King of Cheap (Mike Eakin aka Puple Frog) would argue that "cheap racing" is alive and well

[Charles Warner]

Will you accept FV as a "lower cost" racing (as compaired to other SCCA classes) ?

It may take less investment to buy and campaign an FV than an Atlantic. However, I would surmise that the amount of money spent by those at the pointy end of the grid takes them out of the cheap(er) category. In any event, the amount of money a competitor, any competitor, wants to spend is his decision and no one should presume otherwise. This simply raises the age-old argument about those who have more money to spend on racing have some sort of unfair advantage over those who do not. Even with totally spec classes there are opportunities of spending more on preparation, support, training and coaching, etc. And, more often than not, these expenditures will lead to greater success.

The instant call to make something illegal just because someone was cleverer than others in following the rules smacks of poor sportsmanship and anarchy. I call it the "Steve Johnson Effect." More's the pity.

[dc]

There are classes with cost controls—they are called spec classes. Try FE or SRF. Then again, some of those at the pointy end spend an awful lot, too. Even those show the guys who have the deepest pockets.

Racing is expensive, and so are Formula Vees. You can race a lot of classes on the cheap, but you won't ever be at the front of a National field. Guys at the RunOffs in any class complaining about the cost of racing (or potential cost creep) is downright comical. Complaining about a smart item that may or may not be a performance gain because you don't have it is childish.

These fairings are perfectly legal, and the odds on seeing them on every car at the RunOffs next year is slim to remote. How many cars did you see at the RunOffs this year in FF using those Aerotek wheels that Jongbloed made that were on the Bill Kephart Vestal from a fee years ago at Heartland Park? One? Anyone remember the stink those things caused? "Everyone will HAVE to have them, they should be illegal."

[Bill Bonow]

"Steve Johnson Effect."

100% agree with your assessment and yes, Steve Johnson is/was a tool.

[budawe]

The real only salient portion of this discussion relates to the SCCA process. While several folks were going ballistic about this issue, no one wrote a protest. If you don't want wheel covers write a letter. Does anyone remember how far the last petition went? I may sound like a shill for SCCA but there is a process available to everyone.

[flat tappet]

A few years ago there was a Caracal with a full plastic bubble over the drivers conpartment. It was banned. then a driver found if he was able to put his feet thru the beam and have the pedals in front of the beam, He could make the car more aero. It was banned. Un- safe. I think this is the same thing . Eather ban the covers now , or everyone will have to have them. This will not make the class any better, it will just add cost , and somthing else to get in the way or fall off. con grats on Mike for finding a loop hole and using it to his advantage. But I think it should be banned asap. Mike deserved the win he did it within the rules. as they are at the time of the race. This is suppose to be a low budget class , Peter E Cheney fv#06

Some folks thought that the legal sports car type nose on recent F500's would give a big competitive gain but if I recall correctly the winner of the runoffs for the past 2 years, Mike Mueller used a stock,nonaero nose on his car!

[Mark Filip]

Race season ending and I can see most are bored!

[FVRacer21]

Does anyone have a picture so those of us who did not make it to the runoffs can form an opinion?

Chris Z

[flat tappet]

Does anyone have a picture so those of us who did not make it to the runoffs can form an opinion?

Chris Z

Chris...If you go to speedcasttv.com and look at the sunday morning races, you may be able to see them.

[Bill Bonow]

Chris,

Here is a little more detail:

http://www.speedcasttv.com/scca/#/races/296

Go to about the 170 minute mark. The wheels, suspension and CF wheel cover are all black. Hard to see them clearly.

[smsazzy]

Jonathan Weisheit and Dennis Andrade had the fastest trap speeds in Q1.

Bob Neumeister had the fastest trap speed in Q2. We should ban that Z-bar car of his. :-)

Point is, these are not the reason Michael won. The reason Michael won is because there likely is not anytone working harder on their FV program than Mike and his dad.

It's the total package of car development, engine development, car prep and driver talent.

[Amon]

SMsazzy: Amen to that!!!!


Mark

[dc]

Stop talking sense, Steve. That's completely uncalled for.

[FVRacer21]

BTW - unless you can document that the trap speeds and lap records were set with only one car on the track, then the results may not mean anything.

The FF lap record at Lime Rock was held for a long time by a PRS that had triple tow - once on the straight, once up no name and again on the straight.....

"I'm just sayin.."

ChrisZ

[Bruce Livermore]

As far as the legality of anything, the ONLY way to establish it is to protest it. Tech, even at the Runoffs is not the final arbiter.

The petition (if there really was one) to disallow the covers at the Runoffs was off the mark. If someone racing there in FV thought they were illegal, they should have protested them. If they thought they were legal but didn't like them, they needed to suck it up for the week and then work to get the rules changed.

Do I think the covers are legal? Yes, as I read the rules today. Should they have been allowed to run? Of course. Were they a new idea? No. I saw basically the same things on the Richardson's cars sometime in late 90's or early 2000's (estimating). Mike's are MUCH nicer. Very nicely made.

As far as whether wheel covers are good for the class, consider the following as the basis for rulesmaking for the class:

From the CGR:

"Formula Vee was recognized by SCCA in 1963. The class is highly
restricted, originally requiring the use of genuine VW parts “from the
standard Volkswagen 1200 Sedan Series type 1, US model sedan as
imported by VW” in the engine, drivetrain and suspension. Over the
years, the rules have changed slowly to maintain parts availability and
allow a gradual evolution of the class. However, the focus remains
the same: to provide a cost effective, highly competitive class that,
through consistent and tightly controlled component and preparation
rules, emphasizes driver ability rather than technological development
of the car. Today, as throughout its long history, FV is one of the most
highly subscribed classes in SCCA. The goal of these rules is to maintain
both the competitiveness and cost effectiveness of the class."

And as far as never changing the rules as a way to save money for the competitors, that's a red herring.

Almost all real racing classes do it all the time. F1 is doing all kinds of stuff today to save money in order to keep the racing competitive and thus popular. They banned the Alfa fan cars after one or two races back in the 70's. They banned movable skirts that dragged on the ground. They just banned blown diffusers.

In the essentially unrestricted CanAm they banned the Chaparral's movable high wings back in the 60's. They also banned the Chaparral fan cars.

The idea that banning things that are currently legal but are determined to be detrimental to the future of the class has plenty of precedent. Insulting those who suggest doing things to keep FV racing "cost effective" is disrespectful.

Name calling and obfuscation doesn't help. Can we for once discuss something like grown-ups?

[jpetillo]

Bruce, well said on all counts!

[Mark Filip]

+2 Bruce

[G.B.]

Well said, Bruce.

As I understood it, the purpose of the petition was not to ban the wheel covers at the 2012 Run-Offs and I don't think anybody is disputing their legality. It was more looking towards the future of FV and do we want the formula go down the road of $1200 aerodynamic gizmos.

[Matt King]

Since Bruce mentioned F1, this issue should be resolved the same way F1 handles technical questions of this nature: the governing body needs to decide if the technology meets the spirit or intent of its own rules. In other words, the SCCA needs to step up and make a decision, either through reviewing a formal protest or asking the CRB to examine the issue. Until either of those things happen, Varacins car is legal and deserving of a well-earned Championship.

[Mark Filip]

If MV was not on pole and did not win, this would not be a big deal. Anyone in there right mind knows these covers were not the winning ticket. It could have been the car with whizzy bits or a 20 year old M2 without whizzy bits. But I do understand keeping these type of things from going to far.

[Amon]

Matt:

Stop it, you're making too much sense!

Mark

[Steve Davis]

... Until either of those things happen, Varacins car is legal and deserving of a well-earned Championship.

I don't believe anyone is questioning the legality of Mike's mod .. and THAT is the reason no one protested it. Mike *IS* deserving of a well-earned championship - regardless of the outcome of this issue.

The question is ... as GB said .. do we WANT to go down that road in FV?
Personally, I think NOT. It is not within the philosophy of the class. This class is not supposed to be about "innovation", nor was it intended to be about "creative interpretation" of the rules. Let's do what we can to maintain the class and leave the innovation to the classes created for that purpose.

Steve, FV80