The Future of FB/F1000

[JerryH]

Most of us who are involved in FB/F1000 really love the class. It is exciting to see and hear the cars run.....to say nothing about the thrill of driving one. The class is still relatively new, and it is growing. Several drivers have moved over from other classes, and perhaps more importantly, it seems to be attracting new members to the club.

So.....how do we build on that success? Decisions made at this point can make or break the future of the class. We must think carefully about what is really best for the class in the long term. Every dicision should be guided by the disire to encourage partictipation by those who currently have cars....and attract more drivers to the class.

To that end, here are some of my thoughts:

1. The rules for FB and USF1000 need to be the same. To do otherwise will reduce participation in both. Smaller fields could kill the class in scca, and small fields in USF1000 will not be attractive to series sponsors (which are sorely needed....unless we want all the cost and prizes to come from increased entry fees).

2. USF1000 races need to be run on Majors weekends. That way competitors can compete for both championships.....which will incourage participation in both series. Running on regional weekends will not attract series sponsors. Running on other "pro" weekends will increase entry fees and relegate us to the worst paddock spaces.

3. Newer engines will be needed in the class as the supply of older engines becomes scarce in the used marketplace. HOWEVER, the horsepower wars between motorcycle manufacturers results in big gains in power every few years...with different brands being the choice in different years. This could result in an "engine of the year (or 2)" battle and the cost of that could drive people out of the class and scare new drivers away. Some way to bring some parity between the various engines seems like a good idea to me. The proposed restrictor rule will achieve that better than any other method anyone has come up with. It will bring the engines closer together...never equal.....but close.

4. USF1000 prize money should be combined into a year end purse spread over the top 10 cars. That will be an incentive to run more races.......which will be good for participaton numbers (Both Majors and USf1000....if ran together).

5. USF1000 series needs to remain at least 5 or 6 weekends to attract sponsors. Drop to 2 or 3 weekends as some suggest.....and the series will die. Sponsors will not be interested. REMEMBER, IF PRIZE MONEY DOESN'T COME FROM SPONSORS, IT WILL HAVE TO COME FROM HIGHER ENTRY FEES......and that will hurt participation.

6. Everyone would like to have our own run group at each race.....but until our numbers increase, it is difficult......so lets do what we can to increase the participation numbers!

7. Some have suggested a dedicated tech person. We would have to pay that person.....and it is unlikely anyone could get to all the races. As much as we don't like it....SCCA tech can handle the usual wing measurents, etc..... and a protest is the method for enforceing compliance.

8. For this year, with the runoffs at Daytona, the USF1000 final east vs west national championship race should NOT be at the runoffs. Let's face it, west coasters will not be at Daytona in large numbers.

Let's here your thoughts.

Thanks,

Jerry Hodges

[Steve Davis]

Jerry,
I think this thread is a great idea and I hope you get some really good input from it. However, IIRC, one of the primary goals of the MAJORS weekends was that there would be NO "supporting series" races. No local IT guys running, no Enterprises "Pro" races, no Trans Am, etc. Before pursuing this, you should check with SCCA HQ to see if that has changed. I know they are making "a few" changes to the program - this might be one of them.

Good luck.

[sprocketmensch]

3. Newer engines will be needed in the class as the supply of older engines becomes scarce in the used marketplace. HOWEVER, the horsepower wars between motorcycle manufacturers results in big gains in power every few years...with different brands being the choice in different years. This could result in an "engine of the year (or 2)" battle and the cost of that could drive people out of the class and scare new drivers away. Some way to bring some parity between the various engines seems like a good idea to me. The proposed restrictor rule will achieve that better than any other method anyone has come up with. It will bring the engines closer together...never equal.....but close.

Jerry, well said and very timely. Thanks for starting this thread particularly as the CRB will be voting shortly. My only comment to add to this about ECUs and there is another thread open which has started on this.

There is no good reason, in my opinion, to require a stock or factory racing ECU. All this really does is increase the cost to all of us as the time and engineering knowledge required to disable the many sophisticated features of a modern bike ECU that don't apply to a car are huge. An aftermarket ECU that could easily be checked in tech, that would only control car related features would allow more engines to be available and in a faster timeframe. This will ultimately keep costs down. If I could just buy a new Suzuki or Honda or Kawi or BMW 2015 crate engine, throw in a restricter plate and go racing, my running costs would drop dramatically and it would keep the field competitive. If the concern is that competitors would add hard to detect features, I'm sure we could come with a specific aftermarket ECU that would prevent this ability or at least allow it to be easily monitored by tech.

As for the CRBs concern that we are going too fast, I don't see this as an issue. FC's are within a few mph of us, weigh a lot more and don't have any more protection. I don't see anyone yelling there. We are simply more nimble because of our lighter weight. Restricting all engines down to a Honda or Suzuki will have the effect of not allowing speed gains by adding horsepower but I don't see any advantage to slowing us down further. Too bad that we're as fast as an FA. I, for one, don't want to drive and maintain a car that expensive.

Thoughts?

[Nick77]

Doug actually the stock ECU or factory race ECU are far less expensive then some aftermarket ECUs which could easily go into the thousands of dollars also the factory race ECUs will allow for new engines to be used in car applications
Nick#77

[JerryH]

Steve,

Most of last years USF1000 races were on majors weekends (at least the eastern half). It worked well.....especially since most of the majors were double race weekends anyway. The combo seemed to help participation.

Jerry

Jerry,
I think this thread is a great idea and I hope you get some really good input from it. However, IIRC, one of the primary goals of the MAJORS weekends was that there would be NO "supporting series" races. No local IT guys running, no Enterprises "Pro" races, no Trans Am, etc. Before pursuing this, you should check with SCCA HQ to see if that has changed. I know they are making "a few" changes to the program - this might be one of them.

Good luck.

[Steve Davis]

Steve,

Most of last years USF1000 races were on majors weekends (at least the eastern half). It worked well.....especially since most of the majors were double race weekends anyway. The combo seemed to help participation.

Jerry

OK.. I can see how that would work. I was thinking that you were speaking of FB *ONLY* races. I do recall now, that there were some FB races in with the usual WINGS groupings - usually even with a split start.

[Thomas Copeland]

I actually think the future of F1000 (if it really has one) exists entirely outside the realm and reach of the SCCA. All you need to understand are the demographics. It says it all.

[Jnovak]

I actually think the future of F1000 (if it really has one) exists entirely outside the realm and reach of the SCCA. All you need to understand are the demographics. It says it all.

Please expand.

[Northwind]

I actually think the future of F1000 (if it really has one) exists entirely outside the realm and reach of the SCCA. All you need to understand are the demographics. It says it all.

I must not understand the demographics. Please enlighten me.

[Tiago Santos]

I must not understand the demographics. Please enlighten me.

I'll throw in my guess - F1000 racers have money, usually lots of it. They value the experience more than the budget. Give them enough value, and they'll pay whatever it costs.. So working within the constraints of normal SCCA weekends is more of a hassle than they need. If there was a well organized pro series that ran on big profile weekends, with F1000 only run groups, decent track time, treated drivers and teams well, people would show up - as proven by the ill fated screw up of a couple years ago

Hopefully no one takes offense to the "well organized pro series" comment. It's not that the current F1000 series aren't well run and organized (they seem great and I enjoy reading the reports and following the events from home!) but I think F1000 is sort of meant to run on much higher profile events. Again, sort of what would have happened if "the-one-we-shall-not-name" wasn't a scam artist.

[sprocketmensch]

Not sure I agree with this. I went from FM to FB. I was looking for a class that had growth potential, allowed the most modern designs, and had paddle shifting. I personally think FC is a little long in the tooth, FE doesn't have the car counts I wanted, and FA is too expensive so FB it is. This class allows me to do some tinkering, have relatively cheap engines that have the potential to last a season, have nice car counts that seem to be growing, and one can enter the class at a relatively low cost (lots of cars in the $30K to $40K range). I do not see this class as a rich man's class. There are plenty of F2000 drivers who spend way more to run the pro series then we seem to do.

As this class matures, and the rules morph a bit, I think we all need to keep in mind that keeping the class easy to enter for new drivers will be key to having a healthy class with good car counts.

[Northwind]

I'll throw in my guess - F1000 racers have money, usually lots of it. They value the experience more than the budget. Give them enough value, and they'll pay whatever it costs.. So working within the constraints of normal SCCA weekends is more of a hassle than they need. If there was a well organized pro series that ran on big profile weekends, with F1000 only run groups, decent track time, treated drivers and teams well, people would show up - as proven by the ill fated screw up of a couple years ago

Hopefully no one takes offense to the "well organized pro series" comment. It's not that the current F1000 series aren't well run and organized (they seem great and I enjoy reading the reports and following the events from home!) but I think F1000 is sort of meant to run on much higher profile events. Again, sort of what would have happened if "the-one-we-shall-not-name" wasn't a scam artist.

I think we need to take a closer look at the class demographics to say that F1000 racers have money. Those that got involved early were the people that believed in the class philosophy of near FA performance for a considerable amount less money. If you look at how many FC conversion cars that are out there running this will give you a snapshot of the budget minded population within the class. I am sure there are others that bought purpose built cars that got in because they could recognize the value of the rule set for the given performance dollar wise. I am the anomaly of the class and doubt no one has qualified and finished the runoffs for less money. My 2010 expenses were under $3400. This happened because I was running other peoples take off tires and do all the work on the car my self. My runoffs finish position was 7th that year. In 2012 season qualifying
to get to the runoffs and finish 4th was just under $5800. Again I do all my own work and fabrication but I did buy two sets of tires. I was also taking advantage of the runoffs being only 250 miles from home. I know several other conversion guys (Beauchamp, Crowe, Hill, and would take a guess that they are within three times what my expenses are. These drivers all manage their motors and are not blowing engines up for various reasons like a number of others do. All these guys are capable and have had proven success. If we take out these types of entrants, are there enough guys to support the class and keep it viable? I don't think so at this time. Running outside the SCCA? where has it happened with any form of success? My thoughts are that JerryH is pretty much spot on with his thoughts about the class and that there are not enough cars running at this time to leave some form of SCCA sanctioning. Is F1000 capable of running higher profile events? Yes, I believe it is a great class that would fit in well with a big pro event, but I can't see the class at this time being sustainable without club racing involvement.

[Jnovak]

i think we need to take a closer look at the class demographics to say that f1000 racers have money. Those that got involved early were the people that believed in the class philosophy of near fa performance for a considerable amount less money. If you look at how many fc conversion cars that are out there running this will give you a snapshot of the budget minded population within the class. I am sure there are others that bought purpose built cars that got in because they could recognize the value of the rule set for the given performance dollar wise. I am the anomaly of the class and doubt no one has qualified and finished the runoffs for less money. My 2010 expenses were under $3400. This happened because i was running other peoples take off tires and do all the work on the car my self. My runoffs finish position was 7th that year. In 2012 season qualifying
to get to the runoffs and finish 4th was just under $5800. Again i do all my own work and fabrication but i did buy two sets of tires. I was also taking advantage of the runoffs being only 250 miles from home. I know several other conversion guys (beauchamp, crowe, hill, and would take a guess that they are within three times what my expenses are. These drivers all manage their motors and are not blowing engines up for various reasons like a number of others do. All these guys are capable and have had proven success. If we take out these types of entrants, are there enough guys to support the class and keep it viable? I don't think so at this time. Running outside the scca? Where has it happened with any form of success? My thoughts are that jerryh is pretty much spot on with his thoughts about the class and that there are not enough cars running at this time to leave some form of scca sanctioning. Is f1000 capable of running higher profile events? Yes, i believe it is a great class that would fit in well with a big pro event, but i can't see the class at this time being sustainable without club racing involvement.

totally correct.

[Brett Lane]

Just to add to what Dan says, my budget(s) have been close to his doing the same thing. A couple years ago at a regional, I beat two Atlantics and would have beaten the third had I not f##&ed up a shift on the restart. In impound, this Atlantic driver was bewildered how a homebuilt conversion car ran with his $70k Atlantic. I didn't have the heart to tell him I paid $2k for the engine on ebay.

It's moments like that that makes the whole thing worth it.

[RussMcB]

Dan, that's pretty impressive.

I was one of the early F1000 competitors and it was a huge draw because the cost of a conversion car was WAY lower than anything else offering the same performance.

One of the (smaller) reasons I left was because of the engine-of-the-year possibility. That hasn't been a problem yet, and from what I hear, the class is taking steps to limit HP at a certain level. I think that is fantastic and will help low budget racers be closer to the front runners. That will help fill fields.

It's worth noting that the most popular SCCA classes are those that help keep cars close in performance, and that lets the best drivers and teams show they deserve to win. It's no good for a class if it's too easy for the wealthiest to win.

In many ways, the FB cars are the most exciting in SCCA. Please do whatever you can to keep it within reach of as many people as possible. By that I mean, keep the rules so that someone who only spends the bare minimum but does everything else well (like Dan) can be close to the front.

[JEREMY HILL]

I think we need to take a closer look at the class demographics to say that F1000 racers have money. Those that got involved early were the people that believed in the class philosophy of near FA performance for a considerable amount less money. If you look at how many FC conversion cars that are out there running this will give you a snapshot of the budget minded population within the class. I am sure there are others that bought purpose built cars that got in because they could recognize the value of the rule set for the given performance dollar wise. I am the anomaly of the class and doubt no one has qualified and finished the runoffs for less money. My 2010 expenses were under $3400. This happened because I was running other peoples take off tires and do all the work on the car my self. My runoffs finish position was 7th that year. In 2012 season qualifying
to get to the runoffs and finish 4th was just under $5800. Again I do all my own work and fabrication but I did buy two sets of tires. I was also taking advantage of the runoffs being only 250 miles from home. I know several other conversion guys (Beauchamp, Crowe, Hill, and would take a guess that they are within three times what my expenses are. These drivers all manage their motors and are not blowing engines up for various reasons like a number of others do. All these guys are capable and have had proven success. If we take out these types of entrants, are there enough guys to support the class and keep it viable? I don't think so at this time. Running outside the SCCA? where has it happened with any form of success? My thoughts are that JerryH is pretty much spot on with his thoughts about the class and that there are not enough cars running at this time to leave some form of SCCA sanctioning. Is F1000 capable of running higher profile events? Yes, I believe it is a great class that would fit in well with a big pro event, but I can't see the class at this time being sustainable without club racing involvement.

I agree and would like to add that i have only lost one motor in the last 5 years and i could have saved that one but i chose to go for the sprints win instead....Jeremy

[S Lathrop]

The one discouraging fact I see is the relative lack of interest in new cars. The class has a healthy core of competitors but it is not growing. I did a run of 9 Citation chassis starting in 2007. 4 were FB, 3 FC and 2 FF. We have started a new run of 10 cars. So far, 2 are FCs and 1 FF. No new FBs in the works. There are not even any tire kickers.

I think that FB could be the best training ground for young drivers in this country. I think this is because the cars are very fast, they are demanding to drive, they require good setup skills to make them fast and the driver has to take care of the equipment or he won't finish many races. I know a lot of people who really proud to have raced against the young drivers who went on to have professional careers. FC is that class now but FB can raise the training to a higher level.

Maybe we will see growing numbers if the economy ever starts to really expand again and people see an increase in disposable income. I see at least 2 years before that is likely to happen. My experience over 40 years in the business is that not many government workers drive race cars and that is the only segment of the economy that has grown recently.

[crowe motorsports]

My 2014 season went off track due to some unplanned events after the March Road Atlanta Majors/F1000 Championship Series event. We will dust off the car and me and will be at the Homestead and Sebring Winter Nationals to start our season and will be at Runoffs at Daytona. Hopefully we will have good car count at the Florida Winter events.

My thoughts:
1) Restrictors are good as it will not dis-enfranchise any car/motor combination, or current competitor, or future competitor thinking of getting into F1000.
2) I have raced DSR with bike motors since 2008 and moved to FB in 2013 because I like the stock motor rule in FB over the built motor rule in DSR. Furthermore I like the performance, reliability and cost of running bike motors. I don't know why some say bike motors are unreliable. I typically run the same motor a season or more and have only blown up one motor since 2008 (a DSR built motor). If you don't use excessive revs, don't over heat, or shift incorrectly these motors last a season minimum and rebuilds are more reasonable than most classes I have run.
3) FB may be the most economical high level performance class you can run other than go carts. I know from experience as I have raced EP, Go Carts, GP, FF, GT1, FC, FM, SRF, Grand Am, Shifter Carts, DSR, FE & F1000.
4) I am not a fan of sealed motors because of added cost. The cheaters will be flushed out and I have seen reputations ruined in racing when they are caught.
5) The speed of our cars is not a concern. I have no problems if we go faster or slower. 150 and 170 does not feel any different to me. If it all went wrong yes I would prefer to be in a carbon tubbed car. It is a risk we manage as drivers and accept.
6) Demographics? I am a value racer and do not have an unlimited bank account. I race on tires much older than many. I am very sensitive to costs including entry fees, lodging, tires, etc.
The latest and greatest go fast items like Geartronics etc. is not necessary to win. It may help but there are many drivers in F1000 that are capable of out driving a car or motor deficiency.
7) The F1000 Championship Series overlaid on SCCA Majors is smart because you can compete both for F1000 and SCCA Championships. If we can assure a high car counts (Say 15 cars minimum) it may be fun to participate at a Pro Venue. Split starts or F1000 only race groups are always a plus if it can happen.
8) I do not like standing starts because it is hard on the clutch, motor, drive train etc. They have the potential to increase my cost of racing and therefore prefer rolling starts.
9) ECU rule as proposed is fine. Chasing a open ECU is costly and full of headaches. I know a top level DSR competitor at the 2013 RUNOFFS that spent a week at Halteck in his motorhome to build a custom map for his one built and two stock BMW 1000 engines. He blew up or injured all three motors and converted to a GSXR for the race. ECU maps are like selling snake oil and everyone will be on the Dyno working to build a better program. I run a stock GSXR ECU and don't even run a Power Commander although I have one. The "Keep It Simple principle" tends to keep my costs down.
10) Cars are selling. Look at the cars that have been sold on APEX including many new JDR's last year. And JRO breathed new life into the RFR with a RUNOFFS win. Any F1000 car has the ability to win if well driven and well prepared. Look at Jermey Hill in old Van Diemen. There is no dominant car.

In summary F1000 should naturally attract those that want to race at a high level in a very quick car/engine combination that shifts at 12k plus with a 6 speed no lift paddle shifting while developing abilities with set up and aero components changes. It is a desirable combination and I think perfect for young guns coming out of go carts.

Thanks to the Comp Boards effort to analyze and offer a path to manage the power plant platform. This will assist in containing future cost and the competitiveness/value of current cars.

[Jnovak]

Extremely well stated Michael.

[Nick77]

Bravo Michael you're right on I couldn't agree more
nick77

[JRO183]

I think one element is missing in your thoughts, where is the motivation for someone to do all the development work/expense to make a new type of engine car ready when it is slapped with a restrictor before it even hits the track???

We have benefited from DSR guys spending the development money it took to go from the old R1 to the current Suzuki. Nicholas Belling/RFR spent a bunch of money to figure out that the 2009+ GSXR ended up NOT being the next best thing, even though it dynoed out better than the 07-08.

I personally spent a ton a dough and time trying to get a BMW going because there was motivation for me to hopefully find an advantage. It did not pan out. In fact, people are still spending money trying to get a BMW going because they are looking for an advantage.

Rod Rice spent the money to get the ball rolling with the new Kawi because he was hoping there may be an advantage.

The new R1 looks to be a nice engine, but who is going do all the legwork on getting it car ready when it's 45mm throttle bodies are going to be restricted to 38mm?

The so called problem "engine of the month club" is unfounded to date. Contrary to dyno results and theoretical worry, the Kawi has not destroyed the Suzuki on track and has hardly obsoleted the guys running Suzukis.

The expensive part of putting a new engine in a car is all the development costs: oil system, header system, wiring harness, on track sorting thru, etc. Once someone pays for all that stuff and gets the package proven, it is not big money in the scope of things.

This is not a spec class, SCCA has plenty of those. I think there is a fine balance between giving racers the opportunity to develop an advantage (which than allows the rest access to developed technologies) and to regulate out any motivation do future development.

JRO

[KodaBear]

People we be motivated to develop new engine packages for FB for,the same reason people spend a ton of money in FF on Fit conversions, and FC on zetecs. Except they won't have to wait decades and decades to be able to do it.

I think one element is missing in your thoughts, where is the motivation for someone to do all the development work/expense to make a new type of engine car ready when it is slapped with a restrictor before it even hits the track???

We have benefited from DSR guys spending the development money it took to go from the old R1 to the current Suzuki. Nicholas Belling/RFR spent a bunch of money to figure out that the 2009+ GSXR ended up NOT being the next best thing, even though it dynoed out better than the 07-08.

I personally spent a ton a dough and time trying to get a BMW going because there was motivation for me to hopefully find an advantage. It did not pan out. In fact, people are still spending money trying to get a BMW going because they are looking for an advantage.

Rod Rice spent the money to get the ball rolling with the new Kawi because he was hoping there may be an advantage.

The new R1 looks to be a nice engine, but who is going do all the legwork on getting it car ready when it's 45mm throttle bodies are going to be restricted to 38mm?

The so called problem "engine of the month club" is unfounded to date. Contrary to dyno results and theoretical worry, the Kawi has not destroyed the Suzuki on track and has hardly obsoleted the guys running Suzukis.

The expensive part of putting a new engine in a car is all the development costs: oil system, header system, wiring harness, on track sorting thru, etc. Once someone pays for all that stuff and gets the package proven, it is not big money in the scope of things.

This is not a spec class, SCCA has plenty of those. I think there is a fine balance between giving racers the opportunity to develop an advantage (which than allows the rest access to developed technologies) and to regulate out any motivation do future development.

JRO

[ghickman]

I think one element is missing in your thoughts, where is the motivation for someone to do all the development work/expense to make a new type of engine car ready when it is slapped with a restrictor before it even hits the track???

JRO

This is 100% correct.

I'm glad JRO spoke up about this. The benefit of having guys with the dough to pay guys like me to figure out how to make it all work has a trickle down affect. The knowledge base is passed down to everyone.

I spent a year building a car for Larry Vollum that would be light enough for him to run the Kawasaki. His current Stohr is horribly overweight and with the Kawasaki it's even worse. Larry knew the Suzuki wasn't the engine of the future and has spent thousands of dollars making it work. Now he is faced with putting a restrictor on it after spending all the effort and dollars to make it work to get slapped with a restrictor.

I could have built myself a Kawi powered Phoenix but my instincts told me restrictors were coming. I'm not convinced that the Kawi will even run against the Suzuki with the 40MM restrictor. Any way you slice it the dry sumped Kawi is 43 lbs heavier than the Suzuki. This is a stone cold fact. Add the fact that it needs a Geartronics to shift properly add another 17 lbs.

I've made it known that I'm against the restrictors but it doesn't change my plans. I've already been doing my own dyno testing with them and soon track testing. January is coming up quick and I'll be prepared for whatever gets tossed at me.

[JRO183]

Jon,

Not sure how you compare the Honda Fit and Ford Zetec to FB engine development. Those are 2 well funded manufacturers that saw an opportunity to provide new engine packages for large classes that were spending a ton of money on old Pinto technology.

We the racers are the ones funding the development for a personal benefit in FB. I don't see a big company coming to invest in our engine program anytime soon as there are only about 25 F1000 drivers that consistently race as it is.

JRO

[Nick77]

JR I definitely agree with you we need to bring in new engines
But your reasoning is all wrong we need to have new engines for an alternative to current engines that are becoming less
available on the open market not for a competitive advantage. Look for that in making the car faster
Nick77

[Jnovak]

Seriously guys. Give it a try. I think I can guarantee that the Kawi will be the new engine of choice.

[JRO183]

Alex,

If my reasoning is wrong, who us going to step up to pay for it? What is the incentive to be the pioneer???

[Jnovak]

Alex,

If my reasoning is wrong, who us going to step up to pay for it? What is the incentive to be the pioneer???

You get an engine that will live and it will make plenty of power.

Of course if you want to get merged with FA then just get the unrestricted engines approved for FA. If we do not restrict the engines then we will all be in FA anyway.

[Nick77]

The incentive should be to keep the class growing and strong I don't disagree that someone has to pay for it ultimately that comes down to us
Nick77

[RobLav]

In my professional field, the current proposed restrictor solution with different sizes is called system tampering. Really dumb... especially given the lack of robust data for that decision. When we made the rules, I always envisioned that if restrictors came into play, then one size would fit all. That would then let the players figure out the best direction from there. One size would at least meet the criteria to keep the cars at the current performance level.

[Jnovak]

In my professional field, the current proposed restrictor solution with different sizes is called system tampering. Really dumb... especially given the lack of robust data for that decision. When we made the rules, I always envisioned that if restrictors came into play, then one size would fit all. That would then let the players figure out the best direction from there. One size would at least meet the criteria to keep the cars at the current performance level.

What makes you think the decision was made without data? The FB ad hoc committee collected a LOT of money from the members and George Dean also contributed TONS of hours on the dyno to make sure that we made good decisions based on data. Then we spent 100s of man hours on the analysis to make sure that our decisions were based on data and not opinion.

Send your letters to the CRB. Just remember that the CRB gave the FB ad hoc the task to make sure that the class did not get faster or it would be merged with FA. You choose.

Where is your FB car Rob?

[Nick77]

Thank You, Jay and the rest of the committee for your hard work
Nick77

[JRO183]

Hi Jay,

What does too fast mean? Is there a lap time minimum established that we are not allowed to cross?

If you look at the 2007 AARC results, Pritchard qualified at 1:22.7. That is still a great time today.

Most of the fast Atlantic teams are running in the Pro series. I think it's more of a case that they are slowing down more than we are speeding up.

Can you specifically help us understand their concerns and how they quantified them?

Thanks for your help

[RobLav]

Jay,
First, all my racecars are gone... and I let my SCCA membership lapse. I have nothing of interest other than to see what we created thrive.

If my language earlier discounted all the effort gone into the data collection, it was not intended. I know of the data and the results. I would plead my case that you ought to set one restricter size (to maintain current performance) rather than try to meddle deeply into different sizes for different engines when there is so much variation not only on the dynos but also between each individual engine of the same type (plus many other variables I could mention, and I'm sure you're already aware of). Your current implementation of that data is what I am calling the system tampering. Outcomes are never good.

Please consider using one restricter size first before implementing the current plan.

[crowe motorsports]

I did not know that a Kawasaki may need a Geartronics to shift per Gary's comment. I had heard the Kawasaki had some shifting issues. Geartronics I recall is around $4,600(?).

Even with restrictors I do not see F1000 becoming a spec engine class. Motors will still have different power bands. Some tracks will benefit some motors over others.

We have some great engine builders supporting the bike engine classes. Rebuilds and new engine platforms will allow them to fund and build their businesses. I know George Dean (George Dean Race Engines) is always evaluating motors and their ECU's and will work with car owners looking to update as engines come on the market. There are several of us that will invest in having a wet or dry pan machined for a new potential motor. Then you may get some of your money back when others buy pans you funded to have designed and machined. It is a given that many of us will be wanting to update when our current engine inventory is becoming scarce or used up.

Most F1000 cars are built with modular bolt on aluminum rear and front engine mounts and it's pretty easy to make new mounts for a motor once the pan is on it. I did all the work to convert my Stohr WF1 from a R1 to a GSXR and some conversion parts were available from Stohr that made it easier. The initial Billet oil pans dry or wet is required to fit the motor with attention to sprocket alignment, then headers fabricated, then air box will probably need to be modified and plumbing changes. Sounds easy but I know it is much more involved and takes many hours.

The biggest risk for the first motor is you hope the motor likes road racing in a car. As we all know engine oiling caused by G's loads are different in our cars versus a race bike environment.

So I will take a WAG at an engine conversion and then those that are more knowledgeable can chime in to give others an idea of cost.
1) Motor $2,500
2) Pan $2,000 initial design and machine. Dry sump would be more expensive. You own design and sell more at a lower price with a margin to recoup initial cost.
3) Motor mounts $200
4) Headers $2,000 initial design and fab and sell more for your type car at a lower price with margin to recoup your initial cost.
5) Air box if new total design $1,000 and you own the molds to sell more JV with fabricator.
6) Plumbing $200
7) Labor (free if you do it)
8) Headaches (free)
9) Wiring harness $500

So call it $6,000 in initial entrepreneurial opportunity cost plus engine. Total $8,500.

A FF FIT engine conversion kit (including engine) on the HPD site is $13,000 to $14,000.

If the motor does not work (unlikely) build a pit bike with it. Also our motors sit nicely on the oil pan. Put it in your game room with a glass top and call it your $8,500 coffee table. I recall a story about Interscope Racing where I believe it was Danny Ongais who wrote off a brand new Porsche 935 at Daytona. They had the car crushed into a square block and placed it in their reception area with a note stating it's origin and that it was a $250,000 coffee table.

[Jnovak]

Jay,
First, all my racecars are gone... and I let my SCCA membership lapse. I have nothing of interest other than to see what we created thrive.

If my language earlier discounted all the effort gone into the data collection, it was not intended. I know of the data and the results. I would plead my case that you ought to set one restricter size (to maintain current performance) rather than try to meddle deeply into different sizes for different engines when there is so much variation not only on the dynos but also between each individual engine of the same type (plus many other variables I could mention, and I'm sure you're already aware of). Your current implementation of that data is what I am calling the system tampering. Outcomes are never good.

Please consider using one restricter size first before implementing the current plan.

All testing was done on a single dyno.

[Gearslingr]

What is the FA class weight / power output compared to our FB class 1000 lb / ~185HP ratio?

Doug

[JakeL]

Just remember that the CRB gave the FB ad hoc the task to make sure that the class did not get faster or it would be merged with FA. You choose.

Jay, do you know why/where/who on the CRB has the apparent stated intent of combining FB and FA if FB is too fast? Where is that coming from and why, any idea?

-J

[JerryH]

Addressing the question JRO raised regarding who will spend the time and money to develope new engines for the class:

As our currently popular gsxr engines become scarce, the cost of rebuilds will begin to increase dramatically. When that happens competitors will switch to newer more readily available engines.....but they will not feel the need to switch immediately. As Mike Crowe said, someone will tool up to make the oil pans, etc....as they did for the gsxr......and hopefully make a few bucks for their effiorts. The engine builders will no doubt be involved in that developement too. That developement will not be a result of seeking the the ultimate engine.....but instead result from satisfying a need their customers will have for newer, more readilly engines.

With the restrictor program, there will be several choices of engines to use....because they will be fairly close in performance. With more brands of engines to choose from, the supply of low milage used engines will be larger.....and therefore less expensive in the long run.

As a competitior, I understand the desire to develope an engine package that has an advantage.....but you don't need to do that......I have seen you drive! It is always a short lived advantage anyway. Some of the competition will do the same......and that just keeps driving up cost....causing some to give up on the class. I want to race in larger fields....not smaller ones.

Jerry

[Thomas Copeland]

My take is that the restrictors rule. if it comes to pass, will be a complete bust. But by the time everyone realizes it the damage will have been done, and that damage may be irreparable. At least as far as SCCA FB is concerned.

Nicholas Belling and I spent nearly a year developing the Suzuki 009 engine and countless thousands of bucks. We had talked about doing a development on the Kawi as well. We did it for various reasons. Some which JR mentions. But if there had been a restrictor rule in place at the time we wouldn't have spent a dime on it, or for that matter any other engine. Not one single damn penny. At least I wouldn't have.

This restrictor rule will have the effect of freezing engine development right where it is. If you have now is what you want 5, 10 years from now, then that is what you will have. In doing so it will kill off a lot of the momentum that this class currently has. Kill it dead in it's tracks.

That means you can forget about new blood coming in. For much of the appeal of this class will be gone for them. It's hard enough already to get fresh faces into this class.

Demographics? Do I really need to explain this one? Look around the paddock at any SCCA event. It's mostly made up of grizzled SCCA old guard racers flogging around dinosaur race cars. Me included. It's not really the place for this class at all. All shiny and new like. Anyway, what happens when these old guard racers finally decide to hang it up? This is probably mostly why SCCA membership is down and the paddocks are less full. The SCCA has yet to figure out how to reinvent themselves and appeal to a younger generation of drivers. Does any of that sound like a formula for growth?

Most young drivers don't need the SCCA anyway to pursue a professional driving career, if that is their goal. My first 20 years as a racer I didn't even have an SCCA membership card. And I raced around the world. Europe, Canada, USA.

F1000 has a lot going for it. But it isn't going to grow sustainably any bigger if all we do is poach drivers from other SCCA classes. Also any growth potential it has is going to get stymied whenever you just start throwing edicts down off the mountaintop at the competitors over issues that don't yet even exist. Solution in search of a problem. Perfect analogy.

I've had more than one discussion with F1000 sponsor reps about showcasing the F1000 Series at karting events. Hoping to bring in the new blood. For what they spend on a season of karting they could run F1000. But they really aren't interested. Like the cars. Yeah. Like the paddle shifters. Yeah. Like the SCCA? Noooooooooo.... Let's face it. The appeal of the runoffs and the road to the runoffs wore off years ago. Most of the younger drivers couldn't care less about running a majors race. It's only the older drivers that have been around since whenever that seem unable to wean themselves off of that that still make it (the runoffs) still viable.

Bottom line, F1000 needs to break the shackles that the SCCA has around it's neck. Run as a standalone. You can still run SCCA. Hopefully the rules won't be too out of whack. Just put on your restrictor and training wheels when you run SCCA events. But F1000 will not grow from within that (SCCA) organization. Just way too many peoples hands on the rulebook.