Main differences between Fst and FV

[Ackmann]

I've looked through a few threads and didn't seem to find the answer.

I've seen the FV running around Portland PIR but don't know much about FST

[sracing]

1. Wheel base can be up to 2" longer
2. Body length can be 10" longer
3. 1600 engine. Mostly stock , but with allowed aftermarket parts and a FFDA provided restrictor plate and W-110 Cam. Develops about 85HP
4. Mandatory stock VW transaxle with long box and 1.26 third gear.
5. 4 Wheel Disc brakes
6. Ball Joint beam with certain allowed mods.
7. Aftermarket wheels with the Formula Ford Spec tires. (Hoosier)
8. Weight 1125 (with driver)
9. Rack and Pinion Steering allowed.

Those are the major differences. See the GCR for details though.

More info on the history and rationale can be found here : http://www.formula-first.org/ See links on the bottom of the page.

[Ackmann]

Perfect, thank you. Sound like I may that way vs a FV

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

What all those differences add up to is lower cost racing:

20+ heat cycles on the FST tires compared to 6 on my FV.

At 210 lbs no problem making minimum weight in FST. 50 lbs over weight in FV.

Disc brake pads for the FST $10.00 per wheel and last all season. Drum brake shoes for my FV $80-$100 per wheel and last 3-5 races. Did I mention that disc brakes need no adjustment after every session and the pedal is rock solid every time you push it?

Dry sump oil system in FST = no oil leaking and no pressure losses in corners. Wet sump in FV pressure losses if oil level isn't high enough which = oil everywhere......

Only one 3rd gear ratio and one final drive ratio allowed in FST which means only one transaxle needed. FV has three 3rd gear ratios and 2 final drive ratios allowed which means 3-5 transaxles.

Engine restrictor keeps RPM's lower in FST which equals longer engine life.

50% more torque equals really fun to drive!

All FST parts are available "new" at your local bug shop or online. No junk yard visits necessary.

[Bob Posner]

Be aware that there are no FST cars in Oregon,Wa or B.C. You'll find plenty of good fv cars for sale under $10k in the northwest also. A chance for you to be the FIRST FIRST and have no one to race with.

[jpetillo]

Whatever class you choose, of those that are affordable, I think what ends up being most important is having a sufficiently large group that you will have someone to race and dice with in your class. That will keep it fun year after year, as you get better and faster, where you will continue have racers to dice with. You will also have more paddock support racing in a larger class, and a better chance to get the car fixed and raceable in case you need parts/help.

I didn't think about this aspect of it as a new racer getting into the sport - just hadn't thought of it - but realized later that it is one of the most important things to consider. John

[FVRacer21]

What all those differences add up to is lower cost racing:

20+ heat cycles on the FST tires compared to 6 on my FV.

At 210 lbs no problem making minimum weight in FST. 50 lbs over weight in FV.

Disc brake pads for the FST $10.00 per wheel and last all season. Drum brake shoes for my FV $80-$100 per wheel and last 3-5 races. Did I mention that disc brakes need no adjustment after every session and the pedal is rock solid every time you push it?

Dry sump oil system in FST = no oil leaking and no pressure losses in corners. Wet sump in FV pressure losses if oil level isn't high enough which = oil everywhere......

Only one 3rd gear ratio and one final drive ratio allowed in FST which means only one transaxle needed. FV has three 3rd gear ratios and 2 final drive ratios allowed which means 3-5 transaxles.

Engine restrictor keeps RPM's lower in FST which equals longer engine life.

50% more torque equals really fun to drive!

All FST parts are available "new" at your local bug shop or online. No junk yard visits necessary.

Scott, Lets not go overboard here - if we are talking about a regional racer,

1. Tires can last for 8 - 10 heat cycles and there is a good supply of 2 - 5 heat cycle tires that appear through the season. Or you can run the AR tires - less grip but 12 heat cycles or more and cheaper than the Hoosiers,

2. Minimum weight - yes FV could use a little but if you are not 225+ not a big advantage to FST. (210 should be 10 - 20 over, not 50)

3. Drum brakes - I have the same shoes on for 20+ races and they cost $50 for a set F & R. I adjust them once a weekend. (I do like discs)

4. Dry sump - I was hoping the FST guys would find a solution without going to a dry sump, but it is a better system. OTOH - once you are shown how to check the level in your FV, not much of an issue.

5. Transmissions - I like the idea of a standard transmission, just wish we had a usable 2nd gear. That said, depending on the track(s) you run, most people get a way with one transmission, maybe 2.

6. Lower RPM - no one makes you shift at 7000, most FV engines will go 25 hours on a full rebuild - again slight advantage to FST

7. More torque - no argument there.

8. Parts availability - you are right about "new" parts, but there are so many cars and parts out there for FV (used) - that right now it is not as big a deal as people think.

I think John hit it right on the head. In the NE it is FV. In the Midwest FST is a reasonable alternative. Up in the NW I assume FV is still stronger. (sometimes you show up at a race that everyone stays away from, you have to look at the entire season)

Competition is what you are looking for.

Good luck Ackmann in whichever you choose.

ChrisZ

[Amon]

Chris,

In regards to weight, I weigh around 205 lbs. and at the Atlanta ARRC, I was exactly
at 1025 on the scales with a 5 lb. weight bolted down on the floor, so 50 lbs. over is complete B.S. for most FV's.

Mark

88' Citation 002'

P.S.: I purchase used tires and get over 10+ heat cycles on my tires, so another myth
with the 6 heat cycles...

[Bill Bonow]

Guys,

I don't think Ackmann was asking for the purpose of buying/choosing a class. If you read his other posts, he recently bought an older F440 and is fixing it up to race/solo in the NW.

I could be way wrong, but I really just think his purpose was to ask/understand the technical differences in the two classes. They really are quite similar to the outside observer.

I think the OP's questions have been answered based on his reply in post # 3

[Ackmann]

Be aware that there are no FST cars in Oregon,Wa or B.C. You'll find plenty of good fv cars for sale under $10k in the northwest also. A chance for you to be the FIRST FIRST and have no one to race with.

This is my suspicion that there may not be other FST in the Nw to compete with.

I may have to default to the FV to have a competetiv class to play.

[Ackmann]

Guys,

I don't think Ackmann was asking for the purpose of buying/choosing a class. If you read his other posts, he recently bought an older F440 and is fixing it up to race/solo in the NW.

I could be way wrong, but I really just think his purpose was to ask/understand the technical differences in the two classes. They really are quite similar to the outside observer.

I think the questions have been answered based on his reply in post # 3

I did recently buy a two stroke car that I plan to autox, but I don't think it will work well or may not even be able to run at PIR. I'm thinking I may want a FV or FST to play a few times at NW tracks and I also have a desire to try a hillclimb or two and I think a car with a manual transmission would work better for this.

I'm still trying to figure out my plans, but I'm thinking that a dedicated affordable race car is a better way to go than beating up on my Porsche.

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

Chris,

In regards to weight, I weigh around 205 lbs. and at the Atlanta ARRC, I was exactly
at 1025 on the scales with a 5 lb. weight bolted down on the floor, so 50 lbs. over is complete B.S. for most FV's.

Mark

88' Citation 002'

P.S.: I purchase used tires and get over 10+ heat cycles on my tires, so another myth
with the 6 heat cycles...

Chris,

There is no myth here. I own a 1999 Protoform P2 along with an FST. My son ran the runoffs this year and crossed the scales at 1075-1080. He is 6-3 and 225 lbs. I actually weigh a bit less then him at 210 lbs and come over the scales around 1050-1055 My Protoform has a lighted sub frame and other mods to save weight. So no BS here. In fact I just cut off the rear sub frame last weekend to try and take more weight off the car. I never said that it wasn't possible to make minimum weight in FV, however, it is a struggle for us bigger guys.

I ran my FST a couple of weeks ago and came across the scales at 1125, right at minimum weight.

Additionally, we ran four majors this year, and the runoffs, and I can tell you that the Hoosier FV tires definitely fall off 1-2 seconds a lap after 6-7 heat cycles, again no B.S here, this is real life experience.


SR Racing posted the rule differences between FV and FST. I just wanted to give more detail as to why the rules are different and some of what I feel are the advantages of FST. If I was in the Pacific North West, where there are not any FST's to race with, I would probably not buy one either.

I have been running FV for 33 years and just came off a 7 place finish at the runoffs. I have a pretty good idea what it cost to be competitive in FV at a national level. All of the information that I shared is based on my results, I'm not making up bogus facts just to try and make a case for FST. I obviously think there are advantages to FST over FV and hope that FST continues to grow.

I don't hate FV, I just think there is a better version of FV now available that happens to have what I consider to be many advantages.

[Amon]

Diamond,

I also owned a Protoform P-1 that was converted to P-2 specs prior to my ownership. Again,
I weigh around 205 pounds and came across the scales at 1033 in the P-2, so i don't know
where you're getting weighed, but there way off from scales at The Glen, Nelson Ledges and Road Atlanta. In addition, if you're coming in 1050 to 1055, you're only 25 - 30 pounds over the min. and not the 50 lbs. you mentioned. My car also had a detachable rear subframe and was
lightened as well so it's possible to get close.
In regards to tires, we're not talking about Nationals since FST's aren't eligible so comparing the old regional format, many drivers run tires with over 10+ heat cycles and are competitive
with those tires. You aren't going to win many Nationals with 10+ heat cycles, but that's not the true comparison and I don't think the original poster would be running Nationals any time soon?

Mark

88' Citation 002'

[Bill Bonow]

I'm thinking I may want a FV or FST to play a few times at NW tracks and I also have a desire to try a hillclimb or two and I think a car with a manual transmission would work better for this.

I'm still trying to figure out my plans, but I'm thinking that a dedicated affordable race car is a better way to go than beating up on my Porsche.

If this really is your thought (try out Race/AutoX/Hill Climb/ect.), then I honestly think an FST is a much better way to go, even if the competition level is extemely light. Good flexability, lots of torque and most events are run (1) car at a time.

Here is an excellent car that is a real steal:
http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/show...37&postcount=1
Get a set of Hoosier CFF tires and your on your way.

[problemchild]

It is quite refreshing to read the FV guys commenting in the FST section.
Payback is a bytch

I have driven both FVs and FST cars and would recommend choosing one or the other based on location. Scott is telling it like it is in my opinion. He is as straight a shooter as I have met in racing. He is not a liar. He is an experienced and accomplished builder and driver.

Yes Mark, there is a hugh variation in the weights of FVs, particularly Protoforms, and you should be thankful that you have a lightweight one. If you are over 200 lbs, you cannot just buy a "ladder" frame common FV (Lynx, Caracal, Mysterian, BRD, Adams, etc) and go racing competitively. I personally would not feel safe in many of the FVs that I have seen that let 225 lb drivers make weight in FV. That is not the case in FST at all. That is before allowing for the ability of ladder frame cars to be crashed and race again without chassis repairs.
I am sure that any FV racer, and most FST racers, would advise someone in Oregon to race FV. Challenging obvious conclusions is not necessary and just discredits the challenger.

[Bill Bonow]

Greg,

If the OP is truely looking to go SCCA racing and only SCCA racing, then you are 100% spot on, no question, go get an FV. Plenty around, in fact here is likely the best FV deal in NA at this time:

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65443

I'd highly recommend this car for anyone looking to go FV

However, I read into his post that he is looking for a wide range of application to "test the waters" of autoX, hill climb and racing. An FV is certainly functional for all, but I'm doubtful that anyone would recommend an SCCA FV for autoX applications. At least an FST has a fighting chance.

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

Diamond,


In regards to tires, we're not talking about Nationals since FST's aren't eligible so comparing the old regional format, many drivers run tires with over 10+ heat cycles and are competitive
with those tires. You aren't going to win many Nationals with 10+ heat cycles, but that's not the true comparison and I don't think the original poster would be running Nationals any time soon?

Mark

88' Citation 002'

Mark,

Doesn't matter to me if it is a regional or a national or a major, Call it whatever you like. I always want to run in the front and will not accept a two second penalty for my tires having heat cycled out after 6 sessions. Maybe you, or others, are happy running take offs from the fast guys with 6-12 heat cycles on them and running mid pack, I'm not. I can buy new tires for my FST that will be competitive (capable of winning) for 12-16 heat cycles. These tires cost almost exactly the same amount as the FV tires, so I'm getting, at the very minimum, twice the life out of the FST tire, or said another way, half the cost.

American racer makes an awesome FV tire that will go 20+ heat cycles but no one wants to use them because there 2 seconds a lap slower compared to the Hoosiers and won't hold air over night. Big %$&* deal........ This is just one of the the problems with FV that has been resolved in FST. This is why FST will continue to grow and FV will continue to decline.....

[Amon]

Scott,

You might be correct and FST will continue to grow, but how fast and will it grow
in sufficient area's throughout the U.S. ? I'll love people such as yourself who continue
to predict the end of FV's and saying this won't make your class grow any faster.

Time will tell who has the staying power in the entry level of formula cars.

Mark

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

Scott,

I'll love people such as yourself who continue
to predict the end of FV's and saying this won't make your class grow any faster.


Mark

Mark,

Those are your words, not mine. I used the word decline, not die.

Maybe you didn't read my earlier post regarding my Protoform FV. If I though FV was dying I wouldn't still have a FV. Although It would make a great FST conversion......

I don't care how fast FST grows, or where it grows, as long as it's growing. FST has a sensible rules package that makes it very attractive.

I will say that I think the whole foundational values of FV have been lost. It has become something that it was never intended to be. Maybe all classes end up that way, IDK.

[problemchild]

Greg,

If the OP is truely looking to go SCCA racing and only SCCA racing, then you are 100% spot on, no question, go get an FV. Plenty around, in fact here is likely the best FV deal in NA at this time:

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65443

I'd highly recommend this car for anyone looking to go FV

However, I read into his post that he is looking for a wide range of application to "test the waters" of autoX, hill climb and racing. An FV is certainly functional for all, but I'm doubtful that anyone would recommend an SCCA FV for autoX applications. At least an FST has a fighting chance.

Bill and I were typing at the same time so my comments were not in response to him.
Claiming that FV is not in decline, or being 30-50 lbs overweight is insignificant, or that 10-session FV tires are competitive is just hurting the FV argument. Why would people be selling 2-5 session tires if new ones were not better?

FV is still the best choice for low-cost and competitive racing in most of North America.
Cheers!

[jpetillo]

With regard to tires, wouldn’t comparing Regional FST to Regional FV make more sense for this thread? Comparing what the (top) National guys might be doing in FV compared with regional-level racing in FST doesn’t seem right and is perhaps sending the wrong message. John

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

With regard to tires, wouldn’t comparing Regional FST to Regional FV make more sense for this thread? Comparing what the (top) National guys might be doing in FV compared with regional-level racing in FST doesn’t seem right and is perhaps sending the wrong message. John

John,

To me there is no difference between a regional and a national, I don't put the car on the track with tires that I know are not up to the job. So, if I can use a tire that will stay competitive for twice as many head cycles that is a huge savings for not just me, but everyone in the class. I'm not happy running mid pack on worn out tires, others might be and I respect that. Either way it benefits the entire class if the tires last longer which equals less cost.

The only message I'm trying to send is that IMHO the cost (to run up front) in FV doesn't really match the fundamental values, or spirit, of what FV is suppose to be. And the point that I think most people miss it that these high cost don't effect the guys that have the financial ability to purchase these whizzie bits, it hurts the average guy who struggles just to make it to a couple of races per year. The other point that people miss is that without the average guy coming out to race the class numbers continue to fall and now we are looking at racing in mixed run groups with FA, FC, FF, etc. I think the FV1200 guys in Canada are doing the best job of keeping the cost under control and keeping the numbers up.

[B Farnham]

John,

To me there is no difference between a regional and a national, I don't put the car on the track with tires that I know are not up to the job. So, if I can use a tire that will stay competitive for twice as many head cycles that is a huge savings for not just me, but everyone in the class. I'm not happy running mid pack on worn out tires, others might be and I respect that. Either way it benefits the entire class if the tires last longer which equals less cost.

The only message I'm trying to send is that IMHO the cost (to run up front) in FV doesn't really match the fundamental values, or spirit, of what FV is suppose to be. And the point that I think most people miss it that these high cost don't effect the guys that have the financial ability to purchase these whizzie bits, it hurts the average guy who struggles just to make it to a couple of races per year. The other point that people miss is that without the average guy coming out to race the class numbers continue to fall and now we are looking at racing in mixed run groups with FA, FC, FF, etc. I think the FV1200 guys in Canada are doing the best job of keeping the cost under control and keeping the numbers up.

If FST had anywhere near the numbers of FV then the prices would go up. Competition causes prices to rise, just look at Spec Miata. When they started SM I bet they never intended that car costs would exceed 50k for the front runners. The vast majority of the guys that are new to racing and FV are not looking to run up front nationally (although they do have that option since FV is a national class). If you're not willing to travel all over following the FST series then FV is for you.

[Bill Bonow]

If FST had anywhere near the numbers of FV

Just for my own clarification of your point, are you saying 2014 total FV entries to total FST entries? or since "apples to apples" comparison was pointed out on tires, 2014 Regional FV entries to regional FST entries?

Just want to understand your point better.

[B Farnham]

Just for my own clarification of your point, are you saying 2014 total FV entries to total FST entries? or since "apples to apples" comparison was pointed out on tires, 2014 Regional FV entries to regional FST entries?

Just want to understand your point better.

Total numbers, if FST was actually a national class its regional numbers would be much smaller. FST just doesn't have near the level of competition vs FV which again accounts for some of the difference in the costs. As competition gets tighter the level of development goes up as well as the need for proper preparation.

What is often forgotten is the high costs of travel which FST incurs due to having to run the series vs running your local events which is what luxury FV has. 2015 participation numbers will increase in FV with the runoffs coming back to the east.

[Bill Bonow]

I'll just share a little statistic 10 FVs racing for every FST racing and from what I've seen FST numbers have leveled off.

Based on the 10:1 ratio you quoted, I checked the 2014 numbers both ways as it seemed your calculations were incorrect.

FV/FST Regional to Regional entries: 4.2 to 1 (519 to 125) source, SCCA Club Racing

FV/FST total entries: 5.8 to 1 (732 to 125) source SCCA Club Racing

We'd need a Stan Clayton type to give us a growth/decline rate comparison over the past few years, but from what I have seen, FST is seeing steady slow growth. I truely wish I could say the same for FV.

[B Farnham]

Based on the 10:1 ratio you quoted, I checked the 2014 numbers both ways as it seemed your calculations were incorrect.

FV/FST Regional to Regional entries: 4.2 to 1 (519 to 125) source, SCCA Club Racing

FV/FST total entries: 5.8 to 1 (732 to 125) source SCCA Club Racing

We'd need a Stan Clayton type to give us a growth/decline rate comparison over the past few years, but from what I have seen, FST is seeing steady slow growth. I truely wish I could say the same for FV.

Ohh funny how you go back and quote something from another thread from months ago. I was actually basing my numbers off of the 2013 participation numbers due to the fact that 2014 hadn't concluded. Based on the 2013 numbers there were 10 to 1 FV's to FST's.

FST has growth because it is coming from very little participation, in contrast you have FV that is the 4-5th largest national class. FV has grown over the last few years with the exception of this year which was due to the runoffs moving to the west coast.

Since you would like to speak numbers and growth I've taken the liberty of pulling up the FST series participation.

2014- 21 drivers with 8 only competing in 1 weekend
2013- 18 drivers with 7 only competing in 1 weekend
2012- 17 drivers with 3 only competing in 1 weekend
2011- 16 drivers with 3 only competing in 1 weekend

If we break it down even farther I counted the participation for each weekend.

In 2014 56 race weekend participants over 6 weekends
In 2013 46 race weekend participants over 5 weekends
In 2012 51 race weekend participants over 5 weekends
In 2011 59 race weekend participants over 6 weekends

So if we look at the data it appears as if the FST series really hasn't grown at all over the last 4 years. Its "growth" is just due to the fast that 6 weekends were run this year vs 5 in both 2013 and 2012. 2011 actually had the most participation and had the 2012 and 2013 series run 6 weekends instead of 5 there would have been more participation as well. Now I know this doesn't take into account the 1-2 cars that race in other areas and don't participate in the FST series but I wouldn't call whats going on growth by any means. You might have added some drivers but you're losing drivers almost as fast.

Have a good night

[jhenn4716]

Gentlemen, the man asked a question and as Bill pointed out it was answered early on in the posts. Let's not get into a debate about FV vs FST. Both classes offer certain benefits to the driver. It will really depend on who he wants to race with and what he wants to do with the car. Lets focus on answering any questions he has and not rehashing old debates about which is the better car class.

[Bill Bonow]

Ohh funny how you go back and quote something from another thread from months ago.

The quote was from October 14, 2014.

The participation examples you've given are specifically limited to FST series races. There are other cars around the US that do not run the series (additional numbers). Not really fair to specify "total" entries and then limit the comparison to make a point.

I'm looking at SCCA FV and FST total numbers for 2014 and that your quoted ratio is incorrct for the data specified.

If your 10 to 1 number is based on 2013 data, then that does point to A) significant FST growth, which neither of us have claimed, or B) FV have seen a significant decline

As stated earlier in this thread, the OP's question was asked and answered.

Onto a new topic

[dc]

Instead of this continuing to devolve into an "us vs. them" antagonistic confrontation like it always does, couldn't there be a better way to bolster the entire collection of air-cooled VW formula cars by creating a FV12/FV16 class structure like CF/FF that has a better bridge for one to go to the other (meaning the 1200 Vees need to compromise, and the 1600 FSTs need to compromise), and for them to be ONE class instead of angry, splintered factions of racers?

You know, if you eat your own, your species is destined to die, and that's really bad for everyone.


You all should be more worried about the cost of entry-level pavement and dirt oval cars and the bajillions of 600cc sportbikes feeding the parts supply for the F600 builders than taking pot shots at each other.