what gives ???

[Art Smith]

Frog-

no apology required; it's the nature of spirited debate.

I take from your answer that the club was forced to compensate someone for a very similar rules change that was being used as an economic weapon ?? and if that's the case, what are we doing back here attempting to do the same thing ??? this is surely about new cars and updated older cars and the potential impact on market share of hard tires........................

yes, I believe fans should remain a part of FFord / FF.

Art
artesmith@earthlinnk.net

[Rick Kirchner]

Frog - I don't ever think I've seriously disagreed with you on a topic before, but I do on this one.

I'm trying to reconcile a lot of the twisted logic here and in other threads recently with why we needed the Honda in the first place, the need to spend extra money in Pintos to compete with blueprinted Zetecs rather than restricting them back to the original HP levels via restrictor and mapping - as was originally sold to the membership as an easy means of equalization, etc, etc.

Radical FF aero? Didn't Swift do that? Wasn't there controversy? Vestal? Not exactly the ground breaker folks were scared about? Same with Radon? The lack of a consistent philosophy is glaring.

A vote/letter against this proposal is not a vote FOR fans, it's a vote to leave the GCR as written. Somewhere out there there's a celebrity looking for a publicist, you should apply!

There's a compromise here. The GCR already requires specific dimensions for cockpit openings. Why not a minimum total area for cooling ducts? It's objectively verifiable.

Since I'm not an east coast guy, who is Chip, and what authority did he have to request removing a fan under the current rules?

Batteries? Some of us deal with stuff that operates with a 50% duty cycle of power availability, and when the power is there, has to recharge batteries as well as operate the rest of the system, for years, without maintenance and with minimal human interaction.

I've been working on quad copters lately, and I think I can produce enough airflow with distributed miniature fan technology to produce cooling, thrust, AND downforce while reducing drag, AND minimal weight and no HP loss from the big LiPo I'm going to carry

Rick Kirchner, former National Scruiteneer, and like Art, purveyor of unbelievably expensive and whizzy aerospace technology since 1980-ish.

[scorp997]

OK, open can of worm warning!!

I scanned the rules and I noticed that no rule or restriction are listed regarding moveable/variable ducting that doesn't affect downforce or 'influence the stability of the vehicle'.

What if someone were to develop a radiator duct that opens or closes based on water temp (like the old road cars used to do and is not under driver control) that does not increase downforce or add the 'the stability' of the vehicle', but does reduce vehicle drag (which of course is not aero downforce). The idea could be that the vents open while in a draft and close when airflow is sufficient to cool the engine and reduce drag at the same time. Unless I missed something, if all of this ducted air flows through the heat exchangers, it looks like this could be legal. Another variation on this would be to vary the rear facing openings, since the rules appear to only regulate forward facing openings.

Sorry if I am throwing gas on the fire, I find designs that exploit loopholes very interesting.

[jim morgan]

Down here in the temperate climate zone of So. Fla a stock DB-6 with a fit runs about 190 max another DB-6 former pro/nat car with all the whizzy aero overheats regularly

[EYERACE]

OK.......let's look at this fan thing from a different angle.

If we're concerned that somehow the use of fans will alter the aero/downforce of a car........then.......

[and there's no rule(s) about this I guess, because I've never seen this forum go into hyperbole and minutia on this following thought]

..........then we also and equally need a rule about how we can't tape off inlets on a cold day because it may alter the aero of the car.............

.............and we surely wouldn't want anyone using tape to create downforce now would we?



or maybe instead a rule about how much one may tape 'em off......or what sort of tape may be used if one is allowed to tape 'em off......or that the tape must be applied horizontally only when taped off...........or.....

As a CLUB racer that runs mostly down South where it gets HOT, and even HOTTER sitting on the grid often without crew to lug around a jump battery so I can shut off the Pinto engine that has no alternator to keep the tiny gel cell charged [so I don't really want to keep firing it up over and over again to keep temps down just so it to doesn't overheat on the grid] I would like to have a fan near a rad......

Once I'm on track..............oops need to finish a Patient......more rambling later

[EYERACE]

....She was fine.

Once on track however, especially if I'm some sort of "point of the spear driver" out to win that coveted National Champion title, and I'm tucked tightly up in someone else's draft such that I'm starting to overheat, I guess I would want to have a cooling fan that I could switch on that might buy me a few degrees of less temp such that I gained a whole 0.5 horses.....especially if I didn't want to overheat and wanted to stay in second place for say the last four laps and then pop out at the last second from the draft with only the last corner and/or finish line in view........and if, just if, I could also get that fan to provide me with a little downforce as I approached that last corner as I popped out......well wouldn't that be special..............as a CLUB racer [emphasis added] I really wouldn't care if that "point of the spear" driver did that.........because if that driver....or someone else instead.....wins THE TITLE my life won't change......and frankly most of the rest of us in the SCCA won't have our lives change either.........so it boils [no pun intended] down to > if cooling fans are on cars and maybe give some downforce too I don't give a rat's.

So now the finer line becomes - what? - a rule that allows a 'mounted on car cooling fan' but only in such a way that it provides NO downforce. I can just see the wind tunnel now in the tech shed a RunOffs where they test the FF or FC fan to determine that it provides no downforce.

I am opposed to restricting cooling fans - even though I don't have one

Oh NO! Now the Psychiatrists will start diagnosing drivers who shot their whole family as having it all stem from that dreaded mental health disease 'cooling-fan-envy'

[Steve Bamford]

OBTW, the folks I talked to considering investing in more efficient cooling systems are looking for 3 to 4 more mph at top end... and not because the engine is running cooler.

I think this is the point people are missing in this thread.

If allowed, I will for sure have Greg, Mygale & others, come up with something that will enable us to use fans to help keep the water temps in check while increaseing air flow thus reducing drag giving us the extra MPH that Mike is speaking of above.

I do not wish to spend my money on this but if it is allowed, at the level we want to compete at, then we will have to spend this money to keep up with the Joneses.

[Rick Kean]

Please keep the fan rule as it is. Let designers juggle their energy and mass budgets as they see fit.

Restrict the use of Replaceable Battery Packs; cooling fans must be solely engine powered...

Currently carless, and likely to remain so.

You GO Now,

Rick

[Steve Bamford]

How about ban the fans on the Honda's in FF then? That would solve the majority of issue for the people who be willing to spend the money on it. Let the Kent guys do whatever...I don't think anyone would complain with that compromise. Doesn't solve FC issues but does look after most of FF's issues.

[problemchild]

I think this is the point people are missing in this thread.

If allowed, I will for sure have Greg, Mygale & others, come up with something that will enable us to use fans to help keep the water temps in check while increaseing air flow thus reducing drag giving us the extra MPH that Mike is speaking of above.

I do not wish to spend my money on this but if it is allowed, at the level we want to compete at, then we will have to spend this money to keep up with the Joneses.

Except, that Steve being a 200 lb driver, and running at the limit with no ballast, our system will have to weigh nothing. Our competitors may have 60-70 lbs for their system.

Now that FF has reworked itself into a viable growing class again, why allow open developmental areas? It was that thinking that almost killed the class. People willing to spend buckets of money to have the latest whizzy bits have, for the most part, moved on.

[Daryl DeArman]

Now that FF has reworked itself into a viable growing class again, why allow open developmental areas?

Because it reworked itself into a viable growing class while there was open developmental areas.

People willing to spend buckets of money to have the latest whizzy bits have, for the most part, moved on.

Then there shouldn't be a problem. Water seeks its own level. Not many $250,000 SCCA Formula Ford 1600 efforts out there for a reason.

[problemchild]

Because it reworked itself into a viable growing class while there was open developmental areas.



Then there shouldn't be a problem. Water seeks its own level. Not many $250,000 SCCA Formula Ford 1600 efforts out there for a reason.

No, it faded away to a bunch of people running $12K tractor engines in 25 year old cars. It took fresh thinking to generate car sales and participation, which in the next decade will trickle down to SCCA or whomever is organizing Club Racing at that time.

There are a few people around that still like buying whizzy bits, but most of the current crowd seem to want to spend their money on tracktime. That is the future of the class.

The only reason to allow fans is for the financial benefit of those selling the hardware and designing/building systems. Fans do nothing for the driver or to improve the quality of racing.

[Joefisherff]

From the Kent perspective there was to be an ongoing equalization that was to occur to ensure that the Kent and the Honda remained as close to equal on the track as possible when Honda was voted into FF. Where does that stand? I've not heard of any ontrack or dyno testing that has occurred driving ECU adjustments or weight penalties for disparities in power levels? My stance is if I can use a fan to maintain the optimum power levels from my Kent so it at least has some chance of competing with a Fit then I should be able to or keep it from melting down while running at Moroso or Buttonwillow. The FITs already enjoy the benefit of fuel injection, ECU controlled ignition spark timing, advance, alternator, 40 years of design improvements, etc.. If you are going to regulate out innovation then let's just outlaw any cars designed and built since 78 so we don't have aero friendly inboard suspension, Swift-like aero bodywork, running skinnies at Road America, the Vestal, the new bodywork on the Van Diemens, the new bodywork on the Citations, etc.. I submitted my letter I highly recommend others do the same.

[Steve Bamford]

From the Kent perspective there was to be an ongoing equalization that was to occur to ensure that the Kent and the Honda remained as close to equal on the track as possible when Honda was voted into FF. Where does that stand? I've not heard of any ontrack or dyno testing that has occurred driving ECU adjustments or weight penalties for disparities in power levels? My stance is if I can use a fan to maintain the optimum power levels from my Kent so it at least has some chance of competing with a Fit then I should be able to or keep it from melting down while running at Moroso or Buttonwillow. The FITs already enjoy the benefit of fuel injection, ECU controlled ignition spark timing, advance, alternator, 40 years of design improvements, etc.. If you are going to regulate out innovation then let's just outlaw any cars designed and built since 78 so we don't have aero friendly inboard suspension, Swift-like aero bodywork, running skinnies at Road America, the Vestal, the new bodywork on the Van Diemens, the new bodywork on the Citations, etc.. I submitted my letter I highly recommend others do the same.

Um...maybe I am missing something but by allowing the fans I believe you give the Honda an unfair advantage do you not? As I posted earlier why not simply rule fans out on the Honda's & then that appeases most people.

[Daryl DeArman]

It faded away to a bunch of people running $12K tractor engines in 25 year old cars. It took fresh thinking to generate car sales and participation, which in the next decade will trickle down to SCCA or whomever is organizing Club Racing at that time.

There are a few people around that still like buying whizzy bits, but most of the current crowd seem to want to spend their money on tracktime. That is the future of the class.

Agree with everything here. Your statement and mine above are not mutually exclusive.

The only reason to allow fans is for the financial benefit of those selling the hardware and designing/building systems. Fans do nothing for the driver or to improve the quality of racing.

Here we disagree. While your "only" reason certainly might be a reason some may support it. The fact is there are those who already have them and why should they be penalized for something that's been legal for decades? As to improving the quality of the racing---I'd suggest that being allowed to remain in a draft without fear of overheating certainly could improve the quality of the racing. Perspective dependent on whether you are the drafter or the draftee.

Um...maybe I am missing something but by allowing the fans I believe you give the Honda an increased unfair advantage do you not?

Again perspective. You are not giving them an increased advantage unless they were dyno'd with their a/f and timing maps utilized when ECT is 200+ to begin with. Lastly, nothing says that Kents can't also take advantage of the increased aero available with optimized cooling/ducting systems utilizing fans.

[fitfan]

I think this is the point people are missing in this thread.

If allowed, I will for sure have Greg, Mygale & others, come up with something that will enable us to use fans to help keep the water temps in check while increaseing air flow thus reducing drag giving us the extra MPH that Mike is speaking of above.

I do not wish to spend my money on this but if it is allowed, at the level we want to compete at, then we will have to spend this money to keep up with the Joneses.

This was my point. If explicitly allowed. Then all the brilliant and clever engineers and designers will figure out how to package a faster car using cooling fans instead of free air.

If wanting that is good or bad... I don't know?! But as a bit of an outsider looking in. If they can't figure out the Honda thing yet, adding another rule/technology evolution right now might not be good timing?

Although all this has got me to thinking of using less lead. More battery. Less opening in the swift and a cooling fan at Fontana . It's a net net on weight an aero advantage, so why not??

[Steve Bamford]

Again perspective. You are not giving them an increased advantage unless they were dyno'd with their a/f and timing maps utilized when ECT is 200+ to begin with. Lastly, nothing says that Kents can't also take advantage of the increased aero available with optimized cooling/ducting systems utilizing fans.

Daryl,

Honda will have an advantage in creating extra battery power compared to the Kent.

I am trying to come up with a middle ground for most people. Most Honda's don't have them so simply don't allow it to happen. Leave them on your Kent's. What's the issue with that? Maybe there are more Honda's out there using them other then Steve R but I am not aware...so stop it before the big dollars start to get spent.

[Wren]

Art,

While I think you have a point about not outlawing something that is currently compliant and in use on cars, you do yourself an enormous disservice when you make up conspiracy theories about the situation instead of just dealing with the proposed rule change. I don't understand the obsession on this board with seeing a conspiracy theory behind every rule change. I don't mean that to single you out, it seems pretty common on here.
I think Mike has been pretty generous with his time to respond and explain the reasoning behind it.

examples have nothing to do with abusive arbitrary unilateral and capricious rule changes or the circumvention of rationale change process! fans have been unrestricted for approaching 50 years......................... can you whisper Radon ???

This is not abusive, arbitrary, unilateral, capricious, or even a rule change. It is a proposed rule change that is following the rule change process, that is all. You are free to write a letter to the CRB and BOD outlining your concerns and opposition. I suspect that they are more likely to listen if you leave out the ranting.

I love a good Radon discussion, but I can't see how it applies here.

Frog-

skipping the serious process problem with how this was sprung on the community when a lot of competitors are preoccupied with this year's RunOffs, I don't agree the sky is falling.

Last year we had the bright idea to frame up a car over a few weeks for the runoffs. That sucked. Even with that, there was stilll time to read and digest fastrack. There is not a process problem when members write a letter proposing a rule change. You did the same thing this month about FC rods. This wasn't sprung on the competitors and neither was your proposed rule. I agree with you about the sky.

end to all of these smoke filled room attempts to use the rules for economic benefit.

It is statements like this that bother me. No matter how much you deny it, you are accusing the authors of the letter of something inappropriate. Unless you can outline what is being done and to whose economic benefit, you should not make these kind of accusations.


On to discussion of fans:

I can't really imagine a cooling set up that completely replaces forward facing openings for the radiators with something that picks up air from a lower pressure area of the car. It seems really difficult to select and package a radiator/fan combination that is going to effectively cool an engine making rated ~115hp for 30 minutes at a time. 130+ mph air is capable of transferring a lot of energy.
The use of fans for supplemental cooling in the draft makes perfect sense, but ultimately picking up 4mph through the fans seems like a lot. Steve and Greg make a reasonable argument for banning the fans, but it is not pleasant to ban something currently in use.

[Purple Frog]

Rick Kirchner,
I've got you down as "yes for fans".

But.... interestingly your statement seems to support my point:

I've been working on quad copters lately, and I think I can produce enough airflow with distributed miniature fan technology to produce cooling, thrust, AND downforce while reducing drag, AND minimal weight and no HP loss from the big LiPo I'm going to carry

Rick Kean,
I have you down as a yes vote also. In your email to the CRB make sure you mention that you don't have a race car and don't expect to get one.

You wrote:

Restrict the use of Replaceable Battery Packs; cooling fans must be solely engine powered...

The battery packs do not need to be replaceable.
And think about this... an engine powered fan that is controlled by an electric clutch, only engaging at certain parts of the track. I could see it in a DB-1 or DB-6. Just saying.

Bam Bam, I can't see it as a Honda only rule. Put an alternator on Cooper's special Kent and you are back to square one.

Actually some of the talk around town is that a Kent/DB6 and a Pinto/DB6 might be the best cars for Daytona. With an engine like Cooper's Kent, and Niki's Pinto wrapped up in a body with wizzy aero might just be the car that can outrun the draft in FF and FC. or... maybe your VD/Kent with new almost invisible sidepods.

Fitfan has it figured out: (even has the right avotar )

This was my point. If explicitly allowed. Then all the brilliant and clever engineers and designers will figure out how to package a faster car using cooling fans instead of free air.

Joe Fisher, I've got you down in favor of fans.

Actually, in a warped sort of way I'm starting to think you all need to keep your fans. That way next year this time I can read about how much it costs to keep up now that modern fans are a must have. Like I say, vote yes for spec tires, so the money you save can go into bodywork and fans.

[Steve Bamford]

Mike,

Not really worried about the one off LC3 car compared to the mass of teams with Honda's willing to spend the big $'s which will cause me to have to pony up as well. I can live with a one of Kent, can't compete against a grid full of Honda's with them.

If the one Kent causes issues then I can always spend money on my Kent car but not near as worried about it as I am with the Honda's.

[Purple Frog]

So.... Steve,

I read that as meaning you are building trick fans/sidepods for your Kent aimed at the 2015 season run to Daytona. I have you down for that.
I'm calling Monty.

[andyllc]

[color=purple]



Bam Bam, I can't see it as a Honda only rule. Put an alternator on Cooper's special Kent and you are back to square one.

Actually some of the talk around town is that a Kent/DB6 and a Pinto/DB6 might be the best cars for Daytona. With an engine like Cooper's Kent, and Niki's Pinto wrapped up in a body with wizzy aero might just be the car that can outrun the draft in FF and FC. or... maybe your VD/Kent with new almost invisible sidepods.

Woo Hoo...Frog my VD has some skinny sidepods and some slick bodywork with a FoMoCo engine...let's hope that is what it takes at Daytona!
Fans, no fans, don't really care....let's just go race. The fast guys will still be the fast guys, the mid pack guys will still be the mid pack guys, and so on.

[Steve Bamford]

So.... Steve,

I read that as meaning you are building trick fans/sidepods for your Kent aimed at the 2015 season run to Daytona. I have you down for that.
I'm calling Monty.

You didn't see me at RA last year, you won't see me at Laguna this year & it would be a good bet you won't see me at Daytona next year. Things like this, open tire rules, alphabet soup class groupings, along with other better offerings keep me running other schedules. Rule 20 comes in handy & when used properly is very effective.

[Steve Bamford]

Has anyone even thought of what this may cost? I am guessing 10 - 15 grand by the time you figure it out with the body work, labor & testing. Maybe I am on the low side, I don't know but I would rather spend this money on track time.

[Rick Kean]

Mike,

I just don't want to see dedicated battery packs, replaceable or not, powering cooling fan(s).

[Jnovak]

I guess I will chime in again. I do think that a decent drag reduction could be achieved with fan assisted cooling with an alternator and solid batteries and some software to manage the deal.

I do not think that much Df could be done with the cooling fans as the only way to effectively get the air would be from the underside of the car and this would be very difficult given the floor rules and the amount of air flow required to get significant Df.

That said, I have decided that, IMO, this development would be counter productive for the class. JUST my opinion though as I do not have an FF and doubt that we would unless someone wants to help in a very big way.

[problemchild]

OK. So I get me one of those 130 lb drivers ..... spend $7K with SBS and buy 40 of the Shonai 18AH 1.1lb Lithium Iron batteries ..... How much velcro and wire will I need to install the batteries? I'm wonderiing what my weight window will be for the fan hardware?

[Purple Frog]

Steve,
One thing that will be investigated is radiator core design. One team said they would test three different types. So, yes, it could get costly. It sort of depends on how much you do yourself. If it is a team effort where as the composite guy donates some time and labor, maybe with the thought of future sales and/or his own car, and others pay for other pieces... Who knows... might be south of $10,000 with track testing for proof of concept. The payback is if it works multiple cars with the same chassis. Spread the costs over 6 cars and it is not too expensive. Sort of like a version upgrade.

I know there are side pods that have rolled to grid the past few years that cost more than that.

OBTW, I know why you race where you do.

[problemchild]

Steve,
One thing that will be investigated is radiator core design. One team said they would test three different types. So, yes, it could get costly. It sort of depends on how much you do yourself. If it is a team effort where as the composite guy donates some time and labor, maybe with the thought of future sales and/or his own car, and others pay for other pieces... Who knows... might be south of $10,000 with track testing for proof of concept. The payback is if it works multiple cars with the same chassis. Spread the costs over 6 cars and it is not too expensive. Sort of like a version upgrade.

But if everybody does it, then everybody is back where they started, but $XK lighter in the wallet. If you spend 3X as much,and keep it to yourself, then you may have an advantage for a few events.

[Steve Bamford]

But if everybody does it, then everybody is back where they started, but $XK lighter in the wallet. If you spend 3X as much,and keep it to yourself, then you may have an advantage for a few events.

Not only that Greg but those that don't have the money to spend or don't want to spend it will be at a disadvantage. Once that starts to happen we will start to lose more entries. This will happen across the board, mid back guys, further back drivers & those who are currently at the pointy end of the grid.

Enough people have said they don't run anymore because their older car or older engine wont be competitive with the newer cars out there. Don't make it even more of an expensive class then it currently is. We are asking for trouble.

I have only heard fans are needed for California if what I read is correct...so allow them in that region & have the rest us of us go without.

I am simply asking to save me from having to spend more unneeded $'s for my racing program. Those who know me also know I am not a budget racer by any means.

Also if the CRB, or however the process works, approves it then a year from now realizes it was a mistake & changes the GCR I would imagine there will be many pissed off car owners.

Think of what my cost will be if I convert 2 FF cars & 1 or 2 FC cars??? Then a rule change a year or two from now?

[marshall9]

Not only that Greg but those that don't have the money to spend or don't want to spend it will be at a disadvantage. Once that starts to happen we will start to lose more entries. This will happen across the board, mid back guys, further back drivers & those who are currently at the pointy end of the grid.

Enough people have said they don't run anymore because their older car or older engine wont be competitive with the newer cars out there. Don't make it more even more of an expensive class then it currently is. We are asking for trouble.

I have only heard fans are needed for California if what I read is correct...so allow them in that region & have the rest us of us go without.

I am simply asking to save me from having to spend more unneeded $'s for my racing program. Those who know me also know I am not a budget racer by any means.

Also if the CRB, or however the process works, approves it then a year from now realizes it was a mistake & changes the GCR I would imagine there will be many pissed off car owners.

Think of what my cost will be if I convert 2 FF cars & 1 or 2 FC cars??? Then a rule change a year or two from now?

I guess some don't have anything else to do with the money saved if the spec tire rule passes......others still won't come out to increase fields, because even though the tire expense problem is solved, they won't be able to afford the body mods and fans......Jeesh

I'm about ready to go FM or some other spec class forever, FF is just not sounding fun anymore.

[reidhazelton]

Not only that Greg but those that don't have the money to spend or don't want to spend it will be at a disadvantage. Once that starts to happen we will start to lose more entries. This will happen across the board, mid back guys, further back drivers & those who are currently at the pointy end of the grid.

Bingo.

Spending more, just to have everyone go the same amount of speed faster is why we have $75k FFs now. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

[Roux]

If the rules ban fans on the top running pro cars. (It could be a rule prohibiting cars with alternators from running fans, or Honda engined cars or all FF's.) The original problem still remains. The cars in P3 onwards are all going to be down a few ponies and at a disadvantage due to engine temps above 194F. So if I am team X and I have 3 cars running top programs with young guns would it not be a big advantage to spend buckets of money on new sidepods. Those new designs would benefit from clever CFD, and wind tunnel testing with multiple cars in the tunnel to create the requisite turbulence signature. Then if my young gun gets mired in traffic he or she could still pull off passes on everything including P1. Now if P1 has 2014 sidepods, he or she cruises backward in the pack with little or no chance of moving back to the front. This solution is likely to be even more cash intensive than adding fans and closing down the intakes since the flow problem is much more complicated. If only Team X gets in there and works the problem their drivers get to race for the championship while everyone else is apologizing to angry 'sponsors' because their cars are not as trick as those across the paddock.

Now back to Frog's s score sheet. Score me as "really don't care". I am working on getting my ducting to work without the aid of the fan. If the fan stays legal I will keep it, if it is outlawed I will take it out and put it up for sale on Ebay. Fan or no Fan, I am still in cooling hell and have to keep generating and testing ideas.

Steve

[Daryl DeArman]

Bingo.

Spending more, just to have everyone go the same amount of speed faster is why we have $75k FFs now. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

Exactly the same situation with sticker tires, exotic fuel, turd-on-the-hood, etc. people spending money to go the same amount faster. It's not an advantage if you are doing it just to keep up with the Jones' so to speak.

People will spend whatever it is worth to them to remain competitive or in pursuit of a competitive advantage. The rest of us will just try to do more with less and learn to take pride in doing so even if we don't find ourselves on top of the podium.

[Steve Bamford]

If the rules ban fans on the top running pro cars. (It could be a rule prohibiting cars with alternators from running fans, or Honda engined cars or all FF's.) The original problem still remains. The cars in P3 onwards are all going to be down a few ponies and at a disadvantage due to engine temps above 194F. So if I am team X and I have 3 cars running top programs with young guns would it not be a big advantage to spend buckets of money on new sidepods. Those new designs would benefit from clever CFD, and wind tunnel testing with multiple cars in the tunnel to create the requisite turbulence signature. Then if my young gun gets mired in traffic he or she could still pull off passes on everything including P1. Now if P1 has 2014 sidepods, he or she cruises backward in the pack with little or no chance of moving back to the front. This solution is likely to be even more cash intensive than adding fans and closing down the intakes since the flow problem is much more complicated. If only Team X gets in there and works the problem their drivers get to race for the championship while everyone else is apologizing to angry 'sponsors' because their cars are not as trick as those across the paddock.

Now back to Frog's s score sheet. Score me as "really don't care". I am working on getting my ducting to work without the aid of the fan. If the fan stays legal I will keep it, if it is outlawed I will take it out and put it up for sale on Ebay. Fan or no Fan, I am still in cooling hell and have to keep generating and testing ideas.

Steve

Steve,

Money has been spent on sidepods over the years developing the cars by manufactures & by individual racers. Sure there is room for improvements however ever so slightly most likely. There will always be development like that which has existed forever.

Someone has identified that fans, used to aid on track cooling, could be benifical however at possibly a very expensive cost. Not sure how this will benifit the entire class of FF cars or FC cars.

[racerdad2]

It's club racing. The more expensive it gets, the smaller the club.

[Roux]

Steve Bamford, if I interpret your last post correctly, the optimization without fans is complete, the design space has essentially been depleted and cars in turbulent air will run a bit hotter unless they are running bigger cooling capacity in which case they were going to be slower no matter where they run in the pack. If that is the case, we clearly have to ban the fan, so that people spend their money on entry fees and other more useful things.

Is there a consensus that if you ban the fan the wizzy aero bits race is essentially closed?

[Steve Bamford]

Steve Bamford, if I interpret your last post correctly, the optimization without fans is complete, the design space has essentially been depleted and cars in turbulent air will run a bit hotter unless they are running bigger cooling capacity in which case they were going to be slower no matter where they run in the pack. If that is the case, we clearly have to ban the fan, so that people spend their money on entry fees and other more useful things.

Is there a consensus that if you ban the fan the wizzy aero bits race is essentially closed?

Cars running in the pack need to figure out how to cool their engines which should come down to the driver figuring out how to do that. At Thompson as an example down the front straight I was running with the two blue cars however I was not in line with them there...I was able to knock of 7-10 degrees on my temps from start of the straight to the end yet still say with them as we were a 3 car run away train. The rest of the track, based on the design of the track, I was pretty much in line with them to not lose them.

Wizzy aero bits cost big $'s...we don't need them in FF Club Racing & someone identified this as an issue in the future.

[Rick Kean]

Mmmmm, gravity defying Oreos
Have to pitstop & join the DQ Blizzard Fan Club

[Steve Bamford]

Mmmmm, gravity defying Oreos
Have to pitstop & join the DQ Blizzard Fan Club

That's a good one!