Merge of F600 and F500

[clint]

i believe if we stick with the current rules that are being run right now, things will be slightly unequal to the two strokes advantage especially when someone has the 593. Most of us running mc motors have seen this first hand this year.

[GT1Vette]

And some the two-stroke owners are equally adamant the four-strokes will make their current cars immediately obsolete, so the real answer falls somewhere in between.

This is not unlike the introduction of the Honda into FF or the Zetec into FC - somebody somewhere will feel their opinions are not being listened to.

[Phil Creighton]

I think that the M/C engines being controlled by individual spec lines in the rules is the difference that came out of the feedback on the proposal. Now its unlikely to be the engine of the year. My biggest heartburn with the original proposal was controlling the M/C horsepower arms race and this seems like a tidy way to do it. These controls certainly overcame my reluctance to merge the two classes this year
If it works out equitably amongst the F600 runners maybe it will be a template for future F1000 engine rules.
Phil Creighton
Area 12 Director

[jim murphy]

I think that the M/C engines being controlled by individual spec lines in the rules is the difference that came out of the feedback on the proposal. Now its unlikely to be the engine of the year. My biggest heartburn with the original proposal was controlling the M/C horsepower arms race and this seems like a tidy way to do it. These controls certainly overcame my reluctance to merge the two classes this year
If it works out equitably amongst the F600 runners maybe it will be a template for future F1000 engine rules.
Phil Creighton
Area 12 Director

As long as we don't end up with ONE specified engine like the Two stroke folks have suffered with for all these many years. Allowing only MC's 2 years or older on a rolling basis will allow all to find out if anything sneaky has shown up in one bike maker's 600. So far over the years all four makers are pretty equal and the IIR's will make them equal. One MC engine builder says that the only technology not employed by the bike makers is direct injection and he does not think that will happen because there is no room in the cylinder head of a 600 to fit it in.
AND the older the bike motors age the cheaper they get - this is a good thing.

Jim

[steffen707]

Do the motorcycle manufacturers sell 2011 spec engines? Or is the only way to get one from the used market?

One nice thing about allowing new engines, is that you know the complete history of the engine and don't have to worry about some idiot riding it at 120mph doing a wheelie and starving the engine of oil, ect. (in some cases)

[lancer360]

None of the MC makers that I know of sell a crate engine. Your only option is to buy used or the occasional parted out new bike. As long as you get the engine from a reputable supplier, a used engine isn't an issue.

[SEComposites]

Find a brand new bike thats a good price and part out everything else. I did that with a GSXR 1000 and if l had sold the motor i would have made money as crazy as that sounds.

[steffen707]

None of the MC makers that I know of sell a crate engine. Your only option is to buy used or the occasional parted out new bike. As long as you get the engine from a reputable supplier, a used engine isn't an issue.

I did not know that. I just did some searching and it appears you are right. I read you can get them from Europe possibly, but shipping probably costs a ton.

[cory mcleod]

As long as we don't end up with ONE specified engine like the Two stroke folks have suffered with for all these many years.
Jim

I've never suffered with the specific engine rules in F500, just enjoyed the low cost and rules stability. Never had any problems sourcing used engines. Even bought several 494s and 493s new. Conversions from 494 to 493 to 593 were cheap and simple - they even share the same mounting pattern. Maybe you are referring to something that happened before I joined the class in 1995.

Cory

[Phil Creighton]

The thing I like about the inclusion of an engine on a spec line rather than a rolling two years old addition is that it will lead to a greater degree of stability and make it easier for the committee to ensure parity. It was my greatest concern with the criticisms brought up by the feedback. This way they can delay or not allow an overdog - if you think they can't get that much improvement ask the F1000 guys about the 14000 rpm BMW engines. Its amazing the constant HP advances in M/C engines
Phil

[jim murphy]

I've never suffered with the specific engine rules in F500, just enjoyed the low cost and rules stability. Never had any problems sourcing used engines. Even bought several 494s and 493s new. Conversions from 494 to 493 to 593 were cheap and simple - they even share the same mounting pattern. Maybe you are referring to something that happened before I joined the class in 1995.

Cory

Refering to them going out of production too soon over the years since 1982.
Every engine change required T'n'T'ing all over again to get the correct pipe, gearing and clutching. Time and money consuming too often. Many mandays were spent at my "secret test site" running the car over and over making changes to see what happens. I still remember two of us spending hours under a 10x10 portacover with a lap top connected to the data logger in the car on a hot day. It paid off with my car winning two solo national championships and Clint running up front when he was in F500 (several podiums at the runoffs). This is nothing new as this is what Q told us to do back in the 1980's if you want to run up front.

Jim

[clint]

I need to be sure I understand this, are there plans to have only one engine manufacture in the rules or will the rules allow for different manufactures and year models? On a seperate comment, I wouldnt mind seeing motors limited to a five year hold meaning the newest motor allowed for the 2014 season would be the 2009 models. The newest motor in the class to my knowledge is a 2009 gsxr .I currently have a 06-07 gsxr in two of the cars and a 03 cbr in the other. All three are dead equal in a straight line.

[allof6]

I need to be sure I understand this, are there plans to have only one engine manufacture in the rules or will the rules allow for different manufactures and year models? On a seperate comment, I wouldnt mind seeing motors limited to a five year hold meaning the newest motor allowed for the 2014 season would be the 2009 models. The newest motor in the class to my knowledge is a 2009 gsxr .I currently have a 06-07 gsxr in two of the cars and a 03 cbr in the other. All three are dead equal in a straight line.

I know of a KAW and Yammi car being built in the midwest as well. This will suck if they go down that road and have to change. Wait till the 20th to find out I guess as no one wants to say anything.

[Phil Creighton]

I believe all the current engines will be accounted for on an individual spec line for each one. It was not the intent to exclude any current engine but to put in place the ability to keep the latest and greatest under control for the future. If you have an engine that is a little off mainstream it would probably be good to let the committee know in case it gets missed. An 03 CBR would be just such an engine!!!
The actual engine spec lines may not be done by the 20th Fastrack as there was only just an agreement in principle at the weekend - that's why I'm answering as many questions on this as I can.
Phil

[clint]

I would like a kawi run. It would be fun to see how they compare.

[clint]

I believe all the current engines will be accounted for on an individual spec line for each one. It was not the intent to exclude any current engine but to put in place the ability to keep the latest and greatest under control for the future. If you have an engine that is a little off mainstream it would probably be good to let the committee know in case it gets missed. An 03 CBR would be just such an engine!!!
Phil

It was the first F600 on the track, I dont know how it was over looked as most of the comparisons was done with it and a 06-07 gsxr. The 03 cbr is the same as the 04 and 05 cbr. What needs to be done to insure that someone currently running a motor is not left out?

[allof6]

To be quite honest with you the rules are pretty limited as it keeps you on the 4 jap makers. limit it to the -4 and older and it will cover items that the F1000 didn't plan for.

You wont have the exotics like the aprilia or ducs as most of them are over 600cc anyways.

No reason this has to get complicated.

[Phil Creighton]

Clint
Contact the Formula/Sportsracer committee.
phil

[clint]

To be quite honest with you the rules are pretty limited as it keeps you on the 4 jap makers. limit it to the -4 and older and it will cover items that the F1000 didn't plan for.

You wont have the exotics like the aprilia or ducs as most of them are over 600cc anyways.

No reason this has to get complicated.

I agree as this was the origional intent to have the class as affordable as possible and to keep it as simple as possible. I also strongly agree to having the flexibility of being able to adjust motors on a case by case basis. I believe if a new "hot" motor comes into play that it will be obvious as everyone knows how close cars are currently in a straight line. Theres always going to be differences between the areo of the cars but thats true in any class. I like having a 03 honda thats comptetive with a 09 gsxr It makes for good racing and it seperates people that can drive the turns rather than just being fast in a straight line.

[cory mcleod]

Refering to them going out of production too soon over the years since 1982.
Every engine change required T'n'T'ing all over again to get the correct pipe, gearing and clutching. Time and money consuming too often. Many mandays were spent at my "secret test site" running the car over and over making changes to see what happens. I still remember two of us spending hours under a 10x10 portacover with a lap top connected to the data logger in the car on a hot day. It paid off with my car winning two solo national championships and Clint running up front when he was in F500 (several podiums at the runoffs). This is nothing new as this is what Q told us to do back in the 1980's if you want to run up front.

Jim

Yes - lots of testing, data analysis, dyno work (and the associated $$) are required to win the Runoffs or Solo Nationals. How is that a result of having a short list of legal engines?

[clint]

Yes - lots of testing, data analysis, dyno work (and the associated $$) are required to win the Runoffs or Solo Nationals. How is that a result of having a short list of legal engines?

Not referring to a short list or for that matter any list of legal engines, just saying the frequency is too often for our taste lately.

[Jnovak]

Guys, relax, the CRB really does have a handle on this. It will be ok.

On another note, the latest Kawasaki engines are 636cc and thus are NOT LEGAL or allowed at all. If someone wants to use a sub 600cc Kawasaki I am sure that the CRB can do it in the spec line.

Right now, to my knowledge based on MANY EMAILS, no one has told me that they are building a car with a Kawasaki engine.

My understanding is that the new rules will be posted in the next Fastrack.

Calmness is the order of the day.

My suggestion is that we set a goal of adding 20 competitors to the class in 2014.

[allof6]

Thanks Jay,

The Kaw spoken about is a pre 2012 so its a 599cc.

[Jnovak]

Thanks Jay,

The Kaw spoken about is a pre 2012 so its a 599cc.

Kawasaki produced the 636cc engine from model years 2002 to 2006. It is also now available in a new 636cc bike.

These engines are not legal for the class.

[lancer360]

Jay is correct. Up to '06 you need to find a Kawasaki 600RR which is the 599cc version, but they were made in limited numbers for racing classes requiring 599cc displacement. In '07 to '12 they dropped the 636 and only made 599cc bikes. Starting in '13 the 636cc engine has been reintroduced.

[Jnovak]

Jay is correct. Up to '06 you need to find a Kawasaki 600RR which is the 599cc version, but they were made in limited numbers for racing classes requiring 599cc displacement. In '07 to '12 they dropped the 636 and only made 599cc bikes. Starting in '13 the 636cc engine has been reintroduced.

Chris is also correct. The 600cc Kawasaki was a homologated race bike. It is not suitable for the new class.

[allof6]

Thank you Guys! I appreciate the input but I am not going to use this thread or forum to debate the legality of an engine for this class. (don't want another FB situation). There is a ton of misinformation out.

Looking forward to 2014

[lancer360]

No problem. Under the original regional rules the 599cc Kawi was legal as long as it was a road going version of the bike which it was from '07 to '12. We will have to wait for the November Fasttrack to see what the initial ruleset will say. Looking at the published dyno numbers from the various engines (Honda, Kawi, Yamaha, Suzuki) from '05 to current shows no real big differences between the various makes. I don't see an issue with getting any of those engines added to the rule set if the BOD decides to do spec line engines in the rules. I guess we will find out in a few weeks.

[allof6]

[jim murphy]

Yes - lots of testing, data analysis, dyno work (and the associated $$) are required to win the Runoffs or Solo Nationals. How is that a result of having a short list of legal engines?

Having to do it all over again - (1st)Kawi then (2nd)AMW then (3rd)494 non-Rave then (4th)493 . . . . .
I was getting ready to do it all over again for the (5th)593 when I traded the DareDevil for the EMod Jeep.

[Daryl DeArman]

Anybody been in contact with Yamaha? They sell KT100S crate motors to the kart shops as well as the FJ motors that the legend car guys are using.

I imagine it's probably a minimum number sold requirement before they'll do that and clearly those two engines have many, many more users than all SCCA classes combined. Just thinking out loud.

[lancer360]

Not sure if anyone has contacted Yamaha. The Yamaha packing makes it tougher to fit in a F600 chassis, especially since the transmission output shaft is a fair bit higher than the Suzuki. This can give trouble trying to get the geometry correct with the rear axle if you are doing direct drive. Would be interested in seeing some solutions if/when someone decides to tackle the project of building one into a car.

[jim murphy]

Not sure if anyone has contacted Yamaha. The Yamaha packing makes it tougher to fit in a F600 chassis, especially since the transmission output shaft is a fair bit higher than the Suzuki. This can give trouble trying to get the geometry correct with the rear axle if you are doing direct drive. Would be interested in seeing some solutions if/when someone decides to tackle the project of building one into a car.

George Bugg tried it but he replaced it.

[lancer360]

George replaced his mainly due to geometry issues trying to package it in a Novakar chassis with direct drive. It is a good engine, but it might take a car designed from scratch around it's geometry to get it to work.

[jim murphy]

George replaced his mainly due to geometry issues trying to package it in a Novakar chassis with direct drive. It is a good engine, but it might take a car designed from scratch around it's geometry to get it to work.

After all of George's rotten luck I will be rooting for him to do well at the series finale at the ARRC.

Jim

[cory mcleod]

Not referring to a short list or for that matter any list of legal engines, just saying the frequency is too often for our taste lately.

Clint,

That makes sense. For me, 3 engine upgrades in 18 years just seems like the cost of racing, not "suffering", but the FV guys would probably think that's waaaay too often.

Now that we're one big happy family again, I hope the final MC rules provide the stability you are looking for. I'm concerned that the currently written rules, or the same rules with a 2-year delay on new engines, would create the need to upgrade much more often. We'll see how it's addressed when the new rules are published.

Cory