Entry Level Formula Car

[S Lathrop]

Jay;
You aren't doing something like Bob Riley and separating the springing from the damping functions?

[LJennings]

The real question: aussuming that you can come up with a concept for a very low cost entry level race car, where do you race it?

The SCCA will not allow additional classes to be created. So how can you create a new class of cars that will gain enough momentum without the total co-operation of the SCCA? IMO, this will only happen if a car is built that can race within another existing class and then grow to be the favorite car in that class.

What class can and will accept a new concept knowing that it might eventually supplant existing cars? This has already started with F600 merging with F500. Who knows what the next 5 or more years will bring. There may eventually be rules changes that will make the class more mainstream in the future.

Here is an interesting picture. Make of it what you will. I also suggest that you take a good look at the current ApexSpeed header picture.

BTW, under the right circumstances we might be interested in co-operation with other builders on common components that are very low cost.

I believe the answer is you do not use SCCA. Use a series like Rand's.

Let me start-off saying that anyone that knows me, will agree that I do not hide the fact that I despise spec racing car series. You name it, Indy car, Indy Lights, F2000, NASCAR, SRF, SM, FE, and etc….. Look at Indycar just a name of a once great series full of innovation.

SRF, SM, and FE have done more to ruin the SCCA than anything else has. You can argue based on this weekend’s entries at Sebring that SRF and SM is the savior, with 41% of total entries, but these bottom feeders are not what drive an organization to greatness.

What drives an organization to greatness is its ability to nurture raw talent and turn it into a marketable commodity that in turns promote your organization.


I know, SCCA is club racing, but look back during SCCA’s most prosperous time the 80’s and 90’s. Look at how many drivers progressed thru SCCA onto Pro Racing careers. That is what the new young warriors are looking for. Not racing with bunch of “old fat rich people” just out to have “fun.”

SCCA is an outdated business model for the young up and coming drivers. What does SCCA have to offer anyone that wants to pursue a career in racing?

You can blame the economy but people find a way to always purchase want they want before what they need if it is within reach.

If you could design a kit that contained a front and rear clip that anyone could configured into a complete car in the $25,000 range and market it thru a series like Rands, where the young driver could showcase his skills in front of FF1660, FF2000, and other pro teams you would have a winner.

In addition, I think it would help to bring back manufacturers and maybe a few wannabe Penske's would come out and start small teams to compete.

[Jnovak]

Jay;
You aren't doing something like Bob Riley and separating the springing from the damping functions?

No Steve, just no springs on the shocks when this picture was taken.

[Stan Clayton]

No Steve, just no springs on the shocks when this picture was taken.

So...I was correct?

[Jnovak]

So...I was correct?

There is a slim chance that you are correct Stan.

[dc]

There is a slim chance that you are correct Stan.

I'm in. Driver carries no cash, but I'm in.

[Jnovak]

I believe the answer is you do not use SCCA. Use a series like Rand's.

Please note that 3 of the 6 F600 Challenge Pro weekends are with Mike Rand's organization. Remember this is still sanctioned by the SCCA, just SCCA Pro.

See here: http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61639

[Stan Clayton]

A FV works really well in the original configuration. Increasing the tire size and horse power exasperates the short comings of the VW Beetle suspension. But that is the challenge of doing a FST. Parts are available today but down the road, where are they going to come from? We are now making more modifications to the front beam setup. At some point in time, a simplified FF front end will be cost effective with modifying old VW parts. You don't bend front beams at the rate you do front control arms but you do bend them and they cost more and more to replace.

Old FVs have remained competitive, more so than old FFs. But I think that by taking lessons from the past, that problem can be addressed in the formulation a new car.

Actually, ball-joint front ends are very cheap; were made by VW until recently and are made by a wide variety of aftermarket suppliers now, so there is no fear of these parts becoming scarce in the foreseeable future. Same with gear cases. Aluminum aftermarket ones cost the same as OE cases, and are stronger, if slightly heavier. Brake components, engine cases, jugs, cranks, pistons, heads...everything critical is already supported by the aftermarket, so as far I I know there is no fear of parts shortages.

Other issues may render a VW-based affordable entry level car not the ideal choice, but as far as I know parts won't be it.

[Bill Bonow]

Actually, ball-joint front ends are very cheap; were made by VW until recently

Hate to be corrective, but they still do. Agree 100%, parts availability will not be an issue

[tlandon]

Interesting. The car builders always use words like, big$$$, rich, lots of money, etc. That is what killed karting and that is what is killing racing in general. Just like skiing. Sports for the haves not the have nots.

[Stan Clayton]

Hate to be corrective, but they still do. Agree 100%, parts availability will not be an issue

Thanks Bill...maybe I was thinking of gearbox cases that VW recently discontinued.

[Jnovak]

Interesting. The car builders always use words like, big$$$, rich, lots of money, etc. That is what killed karting and that is what is killing racing in general. Just like skiing. Sports for the haves not the have nots.

I have always been a low bucks racer. My goal for quite some time has been to design and build cars that I and others like me can afford to race. For some crazy reason I have no interest in million $$ race cars. Probably a mental illness.

[problemchild]

Here is an interesting picture. Make of it what you will.

With quality shocks and spring inventory, you just moved your price point from under $25K to over $30K. Does the 20+ per cent cost increase translate into 20+ per cent more speed?

[provamo]

is anybody, other than the manufacturers and suppliers, clamouring for an "Entry Level Formula Car"?

i would settle for racing beat up (used) cars at lower entry fees (you know, like in the sixties and seventies LOL)

[Jnovak]

With quality shocks and spring inventory, you just moved your price point from under $25K to over $30K. Does the 20+ per cent cost increase translate into 20+ per cent more speed?

You are right and I agree. However our long term plan is to build cars with a well developed spec shock package. This car is using a high $$ set of shocks because they were available and highly adjustable.

We will use this package to develop the low cost package. Our shock guy says that he can build us a spec adjustable set of shocks for $1k.

Take a look at what is available in the circle track marketplace. It can be done.

[Jnovak]

is anybody, other than the manufacturers and suppliers, clamouring for an "Entry Level Formula Car"?

i would settle for racing beat up (used) cars at lower entry fees (you know, like in the sixties and seventies LOL)

Lower entry fees? I would love that too. Any ideas out there?

[Matt King]

IMO entry level is the wrong term. Calling SM an entry level class is also a misnomer. Most of the people I know who race SM had years of experience in other classes before they starting racing in SM. They came to SM because of the perceived simplicity and parity of the rules. Sure it's been a stepping stone for some people, but the vast majority racing in SM are going to stay there for a long time. This is basically what classes like SRF and FV have become, and lately even FF. They are now destination classes. An affordable, stable, sustainable, and easy to enter open wheel class is a better way to think about it.

[problemchild]

We will use this package to develop the low cost package. Our shock guy says that he can build us a spec adjustable set of shocks for $1k.

Take a look at what is available in the circle track marketplace. It can be done.

I hear that alot from people that cannot afford to buy real shocks I do believe there is some truth to it. Unfortunately, when I go to the race track, I don't see very many cars running at the front on shocks that don't cost $1000+ each.

Good luck Jay .... but I really think you are sabotaging your master plan by introducing the spring/shock option. The people that will be attracted by eliminating the rubber springs won't understand the fundamentals of the class ..... next, they will want more track, more wheelbase, bigger wheels, better brakes, more and more whizzy bits, etc

[Jnovak]

Greg, I am building a race car for another class. Even though it uses our F6 chassis it is a much different car and is not intended to change the F600 class. In fact it will not be racing with or near F600s at all.

I am not introducing a shock to F600 and we continue to developed our very effective rubber suspension system.

My post was just intended as a teaser. We will announce this new car later in the year and it will be a very fast and a low cost car.

[Offcamber1]

I wonder what the rear suspension looks like?

De Dion, right Jay?

[Rick Kirchner]

So just what problem are we trying to solve here? And it the right problem to be solved? I bet I go to at least two meetings a month where folks are discussing the pros and cons of some widget, without actually looking at the problem to be solved and doing some simple analysis of alternatives - and the AOA usually finds an underlying simple problem with the use of the widget.

Is this about attracting more to the sport, or about preserving the chassis builders guild?

With no new classes and no significant growth in any existing class what's the point? Is this just an interesting intellectual exercise?

Standard parts and drivetrain with whatever the owner wants to stick in-between. FV, FSV, and Daytona prototypes did that. With disruptive technologies such as 3-d printing to produce ready-to-cast molds, CNC costs dropping like a stone, do the economics of the past still apply (outside of gearbox and engine)?

Trying to figure out what the potential market might be? I'd propose the APEXSPEED collective, which for the most part (ZETEC, Fit, FST, and F1000 tribes excepted) is change-averse, is the wrong group to answer that question.

One thing that we never discuss here on Apexspeed is lifecycle cost. We talk a lot about build and component technologies, and various aspects of running costs (tires, etc). But as interesting as this cheap-car thread is, there are probably some interesting statistics buried in the various sanctioning bodies troves of data, that would show how long people remain in the sport, how many races they run, how many cars they own over that time, and where those cars go - and the analysis of that data might explain how we got where we are and indicate where things are going.

Comparisons with Legends are interesting, but the saturday night oval racing business model is so significantly different from the weekend-long, longer tow road racer model that differentiating and separating the "attractiveness" of one model from the costs of another might be difficult.

[problemchild]

Greg, I am building a race car for another class. Even though it uses our F6 chassis it is a much different car and is not intended to change the F600 class. In fact it will not be racing with or near F600s at all.

I am not introducing a shock to F600 and we continue to developed our very effective rubber suspension system.

My post was just intended as a teaser. We will announce this new car later in the year and it will be a very fast and a low cost car.

Sorry. I thought I recalled some discussion where you would introduce shocks/springs to F600 with a weight penalty.

[Ed Womer]

I like the Subaru engine but some of us FV racers in the east have been running in ChumpCar racing and the Subaru has issues with blowing head gaskets so I would stay away from that. I think MC engines are great as long as you don't start modifying them. I have heard that the DSR and CSR guys are spending way to much on engines that also don't have any longevitity after they are modified so much.
Ed

[Jnovak]

Sorry. I thought I recalled some discussion where you would introduce shocks/springs to F600 with a weight penalty.

Not to my knowledge.

[racerdad2]

Jay. Your new project is very intriguing ! Can't wait to see it.

Entry level open wheel engines. The Legends cars have a great engine program. Perhaps, something similar makes sense ? A single make, sealed 600 cc motorcycle engine/tranny. A common ECU with soft touch rev limiter or restrictor. Common suspension pieces, front & rear. A cockpit large enough so most anyone can come out to play. Spec wheels & tires. I realize that many despise Spec Racers. However, they are the most popular classes. SM, SRF, Legends, etc.

[fvkartguy]

Wow, this thread took off pretty quickly... Wasn't this the original premise for Formula SAE (until teams started putting ridiculous amounts into the car)?
Though I would argue none of the cars that show up at the FSAE competition would make good racecars (especially for longer tracks), I think the basic idea is pretty good. Take a cheap, readily-available motorcycle engine, drop it in a light chassis, and go racing!
However, it would be nicer if we could modify one of the classes already out there...
But, just for fun, have you seen these things:
http://www.hyperracer.com/

[S Lathrop]

So just what problem are we trying to solve here?

Is this about attracting more to the sport, or about preserving the chassis builders guild?
With no new classes and no significant growth in any existing class what's the point? Is this just an interesting intellectual exercise?

When I started this thread, I did not do it with any idea of trying to solve a problem. That doesn't mean that there aren't problems. I just don't think this exercise will do anything to solve the problem that might be.

I have the sad thought that formula car racing as I have known it may just be dying and nothing will stop the funeral march. I look around the paddocks and I see very few young people.

And yes this is an intellectual exercise. If anything grows from this discussion, it will be years down the road.

The pro F2000 series shared the track with the drifting cars at Road Atlanta. What struck me about the drifting crowd was how they resembled the crowd that I was racing with in the late '60's and '70's. They were young, a lot of people, cars on open trailers and guys and gals working on their cars. That crowd has a future. That demographic is not in our paddocks. Why?

When the chassis builders are all gone, your race cars may be too expensive for you to race. You might entertain the thought that the people who built your cars and provide parts and services to keep you on the tracks really are trying to do the best job for you because their well being is dependent on your satisfaction.

Here is a little secret that most will not believe, building cars is a money loosing proposition. Having customers race those cars is the only profitable aspect of the business. Again it seems to me that you as a driver and me as a supporter of your hobby should be on the same page.

[S Lathrop]

Looks to me like there are a few consensus points so far:

1. 600 cc bike engines, along the line of Legand cars, single engine, no modifications;

2. chassis that resembles FF or built to FF type rules with very restricted parts sourcing.

What other items would people like to see in the dream car?


If I were to start a design from here, the first thing I would look at is the rear drive line. That is every thing from the chain sprocket to the wheels. I got tired of tube axels in the days when I worked on dirt champ cars. But what I am using on the Citation F1000 is way out of the price range for this project. Any ideas?

[jim murphy]

600 cc bike engines, along the line of Legand cars, single engine, no modifications;

We learned over the years in F440/500 that a single engine spec does not work -
What do you do when that engine is discontinued? Just look at the engines that have had to be added to the F500 class and the weight changes and now an IIR on the latest Rotax 593 that went with each engine change. What we did in F600 was to allow maximum displacement size from any MC maker and made an allowed stock MC list. Then we dynoed to figure out what size IIR to use. Last - we added some durability options like upgrading rod bolts, a dry sump and a power commander to help with fuel/air adjustments required by the IIR's. There is one item that we are looking for and that is a modification to the starter that keeps it from exploding when the car goes backwards (Hypercars has one possibility). Over time we can add more to the list BUT there will be no need to make any other adjustments - why, you say - the answer is the IIR. Remember there are millions of MC's built every year worldwide.

Anything more sophisticated than a F500 chassis will just cost more.

Jim
Been messing with these cars since 1982.

[S Lathrop]

600 cc bike engines, along the line of Legand cars, single engine, no modifications;

We learned over the years in F440/500 that a single engine spec does not work -
What do you do when that engine is discontinued? Just look at the engines that have had to be added to the F500 class and the weight changes and now an IIR on the latest Rotax 593 that went with each engine change. What we did in F600 was to allow maximum displacement size from any MC maker and made an allowed stock MC list. Then we dynoed to figure out what size IIR to use. Last - we added some durability options like upgrading rod bolts, a dry sump and a power commander to help with fuel/air adjustments required by the IIR's. There is one item that we are looking for and that is a modification to the starter that keeps it from exploding when the car goes backwards (Hypercars has one possibility). Over time we can add more to the list BUT there will be no need to make any other adjustments - why, you say - the answer is the IIR. Remember there are millions of MC's built every year worldwide.

Anything more sophisticated than a F500 chassis will just cost more.

Jim
Been messing with these cars since 1982.

I have followed the engine evolution in F500.

FF has had three major engine changes over the history of the class.

I think one thing that favors the bike engine is the ease of changing engines over time. The first bike engine car I did was in the late '70's. It would not be a big issue to put a current engine in that car. In doing the Citation F1000, I have worked out the installation for 4 different engines. Again this is not a big deal.

I personally like the idea of multiple engines but it may not be the least cost option.

[Jnovak]

Looks to me like there are a few consensus points so far:

1. 600 cc bike engines, along the line of Legand cars, single engine, no modifications;

2. chassis that resembles FF or built to FF type rules with very restricted parts sourcing.

What other items would people like to see in the dream car?


If I were to start a design from here, the first thing I would look at is the rear drive line. That is every thing from the chain sprocket to the wheels. I got tired of tube axels in the days when I worked on dirt champ cars. But what I am using on the Citation F1000 is way out of the price range for this project. Any ideas?

Steve, I have researched the costs for rear drive trains extensively. I agree that an independent FF style suspension is technically superior however a simple chain drive live axle costs less than 1/3 the cost of an independent suspension. I can guarantee you that if properly done the live axle similar to that in F500/F600 can do the job. Our 2007 Runoffs winning F500 car still holds the lap records at Mid-Ohio on both the club course and the Pro course and and at Grattan too. Those lap records, to this day, are still faster than the FF records.

This is not intended to be a plug for our cars but it is intended to show that a very low cost, properly executed, live axle suspension can work just well as an independent suspension at less than 1/3 the total system costs. I am not just talking about the axles, hubs etc but the much lower costs of the frame etc.

I am also not saying that I think that F600 is the answer as the current rules create big compromises in the design that makes the class less mainstream than it should be. However the CONCEPT of a low cost open wheel class with a speed MC powertrain with similar rules to F600 with the appropriate rules changes will be the best bang for the buck.

Here are my rules thoughts and I mean just thoughts:
1. Tube frame steel chassis
2. Large cockpit opening
3. A max wheelbase, say 90"
4. A max width, say 60"
5. Define max overhangs
6. Defined low cost wheel sizes. I like the 10" wheels for cost and weight but I understand that 13" wheels have more appeal. Knock off wheels not allowed.
7. Minimum weight 850 lbs. not hard to do IMO.
8. A spec 600cc motorcycle engine with manufacturer support. No mods, spec ECU, spec rev limit etc. and engine like this will live for a couple of seasons.
9. Body rules to limit Df, make the cars look like normal open wheel cars, no sports cars noses, smaller side pods etc.
10. Elastomer springing and damping system at 850 lbs. this system is extremly functional and very low cost of less than $100 per corner. This would NOT be the current F500/F600 rule.
11. A spec spring and shock unit from a single supplier, min weight 900 lbs. this would add just over $1500 to the purchase price of the car.
12. Live axle rear suspension.
13. No carbon bodies or other high cost materials in the car.
14. Common parts mandated wherever possible. Perhaps a single supplier.

I am sure there is much more needed but perhaps this is a place to start.

I guarantee that these cars would cost way less than 1/2 a new FF and would turn faster lap times.

[racerdad2]

Ya got me thinking about those drifters. They put a ton of money into those cars. And talk about tire expense ! Perhaps the real issue is not the costs of open wheel, but the desire, or lack thereof, to race ? My memories of the SCCA are from the late Sixties thru the Seventies. Those memories are what prompted me to finally try my hand at open wheel racing ( & my MD's words, "There's nothing I can do & there's nothing you can do.") Whatever the reasons, there just isn't a large number of young guys & gals that want to go open wheel racing. It's a major cultural shift. It just may be the real question is, "How do we (or can we) restore the passion for open wheel racing in the next generation ?" Are the potential young drivers intimidated by the million dollar toters & haulers ? Are we enthusiastically welcoming the racer who barely has enough money left for gas to get home after a race weekend ? Is the current perception that open wheel racing is only for the top 1% ? Is there an attitude of, " If I can't race up front, I ain't racing at all. " ??? With fields of 40 + cars, the majority of racers have got to be there for the joy of being on track and racing with someone to finish 30th, as well as 1st.

I have noticed a lack of determination & a "I can do it on my own" spirit in the majority of young racers. Maybe it's just me, but I see a whole lot of this attitude - "My dad doesn't have the money, so I can't race." The thought never occured to most of us to ask daddy to fund our hobbies. We went to work all week. Cashed our paychecks. Played on weekends with our own money.

Enough ramblings. The grim reaper is knocking at the door. I've got much to do before I let him in.

[aims20]

Ya got me thinking about those drifters. They put a ton of money into those cars. And talk about tire expense ! Perhaps the real issue is not the costs of open wheel, but the desire, or lack thereof, to race ? My memories of the SCCA are from the late Sixties thru the Seventies. Those memories are what prompted me to finally try my hand at open wheel racing ( & my MD's words, "There's nothing I can do & there's nothing you can do.") Whatever the reasons, there just isn't a large number of young guys & gals that want to go open wheel racing. It's a major cultural shift. It just may be the real question is, "How do we (or can we) restore the passion for open wheel racing in the next generation ?" Are the potential young drivers intimidated by the million dollar toters & haulers ? Are we enthusiastically welcoming the racer who barely has enough money left for gas to get home after a race weekend ? Is the current perception that open wheel racing is only for the top 1% ? Is there an attitude of, " If I can't race up front, I ain't racing at all. " ??? With fields of 40 + cars, the majority of racers have got to be there for the joy of being on track and racing with someone to finish 30th, as well as 1st.

I have noticed a lack of determination & a "I can do it on my own" spirit in the majority of young racers. Maybe it's just me, but I see a whole lot of this attitude - "My dad doesn't have the money, so I can't race." The thought never occured to most of us to ask daddy to fund our hobbies. We went to work all week. Cashed our paychecks. Played on weekends with our own money.

Enough ramblings. The grim reaper is knocking at the door. I've got much to do before I let him in.

When I get home from work today, I'll try to share my views on this discussion. It's very interesting and relevant to me as a recent Mechanical Engineering graduate and FSAE student/racing addict who just brought a 1990 Red Devil back from the dead and hopes to club race/autoX it a few times this year. Hopefully I can add some perspective to this. A lot of good discussion so far.

[Neil_Roberts]

But, just for fun, have you seen these things:
http://www.hyperracer.com/

Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a winner.

There is a lot that I like about that car.

[Mark Filip]

Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a winner.

There is a lot that I like about that car.

It's not a car it's a kart

[TimH]

It's not a car it's a kart

Kart tires, but it has a suspension. And full roll cage.

[Matt King]

Kart tires, but it has a suspension. And full roll cage.

And a four-stroke MC engine with a gearbox. Kind of like an F600 with smaller wheels and less bodywork.

[dc]

And I'd bet that it's crazy fast. Needs better bodywork for spectator identification, but it's a really cool concept. Bet it's fun to drive, too.

[fvkartguy]

...I kind of threw that in as a joke. But in all seriousness, there are several things about it that I do actually like. And I'd bet that car would do well in the FSAE dynamic events.
I think something like this but made a bit more into a "car" instead of kart would be a really great option for racing on a budget and create some really awesome competition!

[racerdad2]

Several looked into the HyperRacer when it first appeared. A little too much kart for our local track's liking & and insurance. What a blast on small road circuits !!!