Open Wheel Miata

[BeerBudgetRacing]

I don't think you have to look any further than the Toyo R888 actually. Plenty of data on running it in FF. One set you last you all year.

I have a chart (attached) that groups tires by wear and heat cycles. Can't remember where I got it. Its a few years old.

I didn't believe it until I experienced it. I was running R888 on a corvette. Great tire the first couple of days. Then things got squirrely.. Didn't think it was the tires at first.
Bought some NT01's and they were just as good as the R888's the first day. Have about 10 track days on the NT01's now and they are as good as their first day.

Ton's of tread left on the R888's but they are way past done. NT01's show wear but perform great.

13" wheels are a problem for tire selection for sure.

Attachment 57988

[rcrmike]

I agree with the open diff suggestion. Which means that it is considerably different than the F500/600 concept.

What ideas can we incorporate to keep the shock absorber cost contained? I don't think there is a huge difference between inboard or outboard as far as cost is concerned. Outboard is simple, but inboard is more protected from crash damage. The actual shock itself is the factor. Does it matter to anyone else?

[SEComposites]

I have a chart (attached) that groups tires by wear and heat cycles. Can't remember where I got it. Its a few years old.

I didn't believe it until I experienced it. I was running R888 on a corvette. Great tire the first couple of days. Then things got squirrely.. Didn't think it was the tires at first.
Bought some NT01's and they were just as good as the R888's the first day. Have about 10 track days on the NT01's now and they are as good as their first day.

Ton's of tread left on the R888's but they are way past done. NT01's show wear but perform great.

13" wheels are a problem for tire selection for sure.

Attachment 57988

The advantage we have is there is there is plenty of data on running R888's on 1000lbs open wheel cars. Is it not really a valid comparison to a 3000lbs + Corvette? R888 is available on a 13" rim.

[SEComposites]

I agree with the open diff suggestion. Which means that it is considerably different than the F500/600 concept.

What ideas can we incorporate to keep the shock absorber cost contained? I don't think there is a huge difference between inboard or outboard as far as cost is concerned. Outboard is simple, but inboard is more protected from crash damage. The actual shock itself is the factor. Does it matter to anyone else?

Definitely open to thoughts on controlling a spec damper. That's why this forum is such a valuable resource.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

The advantage we have is there is there is plenty of data on running R888's on 1000lbs open wheel cars. Is it not really a valid comparison to a 3000lbs + Corvette? R888 is available on a 13" rim.

I agree - just think wheel size and other tires should be considered.
A heat cycle is a heat cycle no matter the weight of the car.
I think the weight magnifies that loss of traction - but it's there regardless.

[Jnovak]

Jay,

So are you proposing essentially a FF with 600 or 750 motorcycle power and a live rear axle? I would think this could work with a long lasting spec tire, restrictors to level the power between the engine manufacturers- OR and I like this second idea better- Find a spec crate MC engine (sealed) that can be bought from the manufacturer to prevent "engine of the week" costs and continuous fighting between the different engine camps on IIR sizes for parity. The rev limits on this engine could be brought down a thousand RPMs or so with spec ECU's to promote longevity.

Is there a manufacturer that will offer a new crate motor? From the sounds of it Honda (HRC) sounds the most interested in our sport.

-Eric

My prototype will be with a restricted hp 1000cc bike motor. 150 hp is very easy to achieve with rev limiters or restrictors on these motors and there are thousands crashed every year.

While I am a big fan of the Hayabusa engine the actual numbers of available engines due to low sales volume is limited for the future. Additionally the use of the 1000cc engines will allow the cars to race in 2 other classes while the numbers grow.

My prototype car will have a very simple light weight solid axle. This will save over $2000 on the cost of the car and makes the target price of a kit attainable. For those of you who think that there is a handling deficit with a live axle I suggest that you look at the infield times for qualifying at the Daytona Runoffs when FF and F500 qualified together. And remember this performance was done with a live axle and no springs or shocks. My prototype will have spec adjustable shocks etc.

The target is 1100 lbs minimum weight and 150 hp. This min weight will allow 250 lb drivers to meet min weight. The performance will be spectacular as will the price.

[TDI PILOT]

With all due respect I believe the differential adds to the cost and maintenance of the build significantly and improves performance marginally. Maybe I am mistaken, please explain.

A rev limited, stock internals Busa engine would be a great idea except they are quite expensive compared to a 600 or 750, almost double in fact. However, with reduced revs the bigger motor may be necessary in order to achieve the performance to make the platform attractive to the masses.

Bigger guys, 6' 2'+ 220 lbs+ need to be able to fit and easily make min weight. So the min weight must be attainable for everyone. This is what I believe makes the spec classes so attractive. In spec classes nobody has a huge performance advantage over anyone else. Also the guy with the biggest wallet (see Level 5 Motorsports thread) doesn't always win.

Also spec bodies are 100% necessary. Wind tunnels and budget racers are not from the same planet. This should bring the costs of replacement body parts down as well if everyone uses the same body.

-Eric

[Earley Motorsports]

Call me crazy, but how about bike rear shocks for all corners. That would keep the cost down. I have seen them work well on Lotus 7 clones. Just a thought.

[Spengo]

I agree with the open diff suggestion. Which means that it is considerably different than the F500/600 concept.

What ideas can we incorporate to keep the shock absorber cost contained? I don't think there is a huge difference between inboard or outboard as far as cost is concerned. Outboard is simple, but inboard is more protected from crash damage. The actual shock itself is the factor. Does it matter to anyone else?

I definitely prefer an inboard shock. A marginal increase in upfront cost is well worth it for the crash protection for your expensive whizzy bits. Plus, pushrods just look better.

[Jnovak]

I definitely prefer an inboard shock. A marginal increase in upfront cost is well worth it for the crash protection for your expensive whizzy bits. Plus, pushrods just look better.

Here is a picture of our inboard rocker system on our F600. Simple enough to replace the upper rod/rubber assembly with a shock and spring. Obviously the rocker would be different to get the geometry correct for a spring and shock.

[Spengo]

If you are going with a solid rear axle another idea to save some cash is single rear brake.

[Jnovak]

If you are going with a solid rear axle another idea to save some cash is single rear brake.

That is exactly what we have always used on our cars.

[SpacemanSpiff]

Honest question, what is the actual lap time difference if properly valved between a $8000 set of double adjustable Penskes and their $2000 single adjustable siblings? Especially on maybe less than ideal tires and setup by non-shop run race teams? I'd leave them non-spec but restricted to single adjustable (linked compression and rebound). Otherwise you penalize people that like a different setup (see SM) and there's no opportunity to learn valuable skills. Push rods are a really good idea. They protect corners, allow easier adjustment and make spring/shock changes simpler.

I'd personally prefer an IRS on the car. To me there are things that define a race car. Seriously compromised suspension to save a little cash isn't one of those things. Even if all the cars in the class are burdened with it.

I don't think cutting every penny out of a car is the best strategy. If everything's compromised you end up with another FV or F500 where the trade offs will outweigh the value for a lot of people.

Honestly, I was pretty excited at some of the Formula Ford ideas that didn't come to fruition over the summer. I'd had some hopes of building a R888 tire, single adjustable shock car and trying to get an engine line for the (uncompetitive) wet sumped, actually stock Fit engine. Life changes wiped out the racing budget, but it'd be a fun, cost effective car that doesn't need a brand new class.

[Daryl DeArman]

Definitely open to thoughts on controlling a spec damper. That's why this forum is such a valuable resource.

$300 claim per corner on damper(s) will keep folks in check.

[yellowesty]

DeDion?

[S Lathrop]

Honest question, what is the actual lap time difference if properly valved between a $8000 set of double adjustable Penskes and their $2000 single adjustable siblings? Especially on maybe less than ideal tires and setup by non-shop run race teams? I'd leave them non-spec but restricted to single adjustable (linked compression and rebound). Otherwise you penalize people that like a different setup (see SM) and there's no opportunity to learn valuable skills. Push rods are a really good idea. They protect corners, allow easier adjustment and make spring/shock changes simpler.

It takes work but you don't need all the adjusters on shocks that you can buy. I have worked with a set of shocks that only have 2 adjusters, low speed bump and rebound. Now that I am close with the valving, I could get buy with rebound only.

If you want to go with a simple shock, you need a good quality product in order to get the shocks to match side to side. I tested a set of the early FE shocks. 2 matched well enough. But the other 2 were not a good match. The irony was that if I could have found a mate to one of the miss-matched shocks, I could have had a significant advantage over someone running a well matched set. Not to mentioned some one running just what they got. In the end FE went to Penske shocks.

[SpacemanSpiff]

Maybe not a popular thought, but what about borrowing IT's restriction against ever being a major's class. Does that kill the class before it even gets started, or does it get rid of the big money spenders, and allow a great starter class?

[TDI PILOT]

Honest question, what is the actual lap time difference if properly valved between a $8000 set of double adjustable Penskes and their $2000 single adjustable siblings? Especially on maybe less than ideal tires and setup by non-shop run race teams? I'd leave them non-spec but restricted to single adjustable (linked compression and rebound). Otherwise you penalize people that like a different setup (see SM) and there's no opportunity to learn valuable skills. Push rods are a really good idea. They protect corners, allow easier adjustment and make spring/shock changes simpler.

I'd personally prefer an IRS on the car. To me there are things that define a race car. Seriously compromised suspension to save a little cash isn't one of those things. Even if all the cars in the class are burdened with it.

I don't think cutting every penny out of a car is the best strategy. If everything's compromised you end up with another FV or F500 where the trade offs will outweigh the value for a lot of people.

Honestly, I was pretty excited at some of the Formula Ford ideas that didn't come to fruition over the summer. I'd had some hopes of building a R888 tire, single adjustable shock car and trying to get an engine line for the (uncompetitive) wet sumped, actually stock Fit engine. Life changes wiped out the racing budget, but it'd be a fun, cost effective car that doesn't need a brand new class.

To figure out what the "deal breaker" items that the majority of people interested in this class/car cannot live without will require a poll.

To me a perfect car would be a converted or copied FF/FC/FB chassis with 600cc MC power, no wings, no shift assistance, no dry sumps, no restrictors, and a cheap(ish) spec tire.

The reality is, I don't think you could do that for 30K complete with engine unless you had a production shop build 100 of them.

[Purple Frog]

Following this thread with interest...

But, I have to ask, are you guys dreaming up another "spec" car?

I know Steve Lathrop has railed against spec cars for years. So how spec is this going to be?

Can I build my own upright if I think I can do a better job on my CNC?
Can I send my shocks off to Steve to tune?
Are the shocks going to be sealed?
Do I only buy one manufacturer's wheels? or any wheel over a set weight?
If I like Performance Friction brakes over Wilwood can I change?
Can I change suspension pickup points if my testing points that direction?
Can I change track by building my own A arms?
If I want a faster steering rack, can I change?
Can I sand down my spec bodywork to make it lighter?
Can I change manufacturer of diffs?
Can I upgrade the CVs? Drill the axles?

Is this going to be a spec car like FE, FM ?

Without tight specs, I can see two cars on grid that look alike, one costing $25K and one costing $37K ; and both look almost the same.

With tight specs, you have a spec class....

[SStadel]

C'mon race season

[SpacemanSpiff]

Pretty sure it'll never actually exist, so whether it's spec or not is pretty irrelevant. The asks are all over the place. My opinions are based on what I'd like to see, and that I think you might be able to get people interested in based on my friends. Product specs put together this way are always a disaster.

If the goal is to increase racing head counts, and specifically open wheel counts, the poll can't be to a bunch of racers. It's a starting point to determine what might matter, but outside work would have to be done, otherwise you're just exchanging between classes.

I'd look at:
-Track day and time trial drivers
-Left turn only drivers
-The serious sim racers
-High level autocross racers
-High level kart racers
-Production racecar drivers
-The ChumpCar/LeMons/etc racers.

You don't cannibalize existing F/SR classes if you attract these drivers. The needs of all of these markets will be different, but there might just be enough overlap to develop a market.

You have to convince all of these groups (except maybe the production drivers) to spend a lot more money, and that it's worth it. You also have to be willing to listen to this input I've been told what I want is wrong in a bunch of these threads now. For instance I'll never run a spec car, I'm just not interested. And when a substantial portion of my income and time off is going towards this, yes I want a good looking car.

If this is a serious effort to really make structural changes you'll likely need leadership willing to make hard decisions.

To figure out what the "deal breaker" items that the majority of people interested in this class/car cannot live without will require a poll.

To me a perfect car would be a converted or copied FF/FC/FB chassis with 600cc MC power, no wings, no shift assistance, no dry sumps, no restrictors, and a cheap(ish) spec tire.

The reality is, I don't think you could do that for 30K complete with engine unless you had a production shop build 100 of them.

I'm shocked that you can build anything for less than $30K. A track day sport racer build that I put together a rough BOM for came out to almost that writing down all labor, using pretty basic parts and borrowing heavily from my existing track car. And that was done over a lunch break and probably missed a lot.

[S Lathrop]

[QUOTE=Purple Frog;495345]Following this thread with interest...


Can I build my own upright if I think I can do a better job on my CNC?
Yes but the basic upright must be built to a spec design. Like a VD. I see an upright with a stud out the bottom and a flat surface and 2 bolt holes on the top. What you bolt to the top and the spacing on the bottom is free.

Can I send my shocks off to Steve to tune?
I like the old Indy lights shock rule, a spec shock but any standard piston and valve stack. And I would like the business.

Are the shocks going to be sealed?
No. If the factory makes it, you can use it.

Do I only buy one manufacturer's wheels? or any wheel over a set weight?
I drew up a wheel made up of a steel rim, bolted to an aluminum center section. Think wide 5 wheels. The wheel centers can be either a spec item or free. But that center section will bolt to a spec hub, so the wheel center will fit anyone's car.

If I like Performance Friction brakes over Wilwood can I change?
I would favor a spec caliper but pads are free.

Can I change suspension pickup points if my testing points that direction?
Absolutely.

Can I change track by building my own A arms?
Track would be free within the max width limit.

If I want a faster steering rack, can I change?
You might have to change the steering arms.

Can I sand down my spec bodywork to make it lighter?
I would like to see the body work free subject to some restrictions, think FV.

Can I change manufacturer of diffs?
I would favor allowing live axels or IRS. If IRS, the parts would be restricted to the donor car, maybe Honda Fit or Civic.

Can I upgrade the CVs? Drill the axles?
Got to use what Honda sells or standard replacements.

Is this going to be a spec car like FE, FM ?
I wont be involved if is. Answer is no, NO!!!!!

Without tight specs, I can see two cars on grid that look alike, one costing $25K and one costing $37K ; and both look almost the same.
I don't see an issue if there is no performance advantage to gold platting you car.

With tight specs, you have a spec class....
Think FV. Is that a spec class? This is the class model I have in mind.

All this is my thinking, as addled as it might be.

[Daryl DeArman]

Maybe not a popular thought, but what about borrowing IT's restriction against ever being a major's class. Does that kill the class before it even gets started, or does it get rid of the big money spenders, and allow a great starter class?

It has had both large participation numbers and big money spenders. So, while it may "kill the class" for some. It doesn't for many,

Speedsource and I believe Turner Motorsports at one time had IT programs that weren't cheap.

[Purple Frog]

Folks,
I was going to write a PM to Steve with my concerns. Decided to make it public for all to see. Turned out to be a good idea because then all can see the thinking.

Thanks Steve for prompt response.

[problemchild]

Rather than argue about the specifics, the key to this magic formula, is to find an enthusiast investor with 2 million dollars who can commission 100 cars. He can hire a dictator to confirm the specs and get cars built with that $20K sales price.

Keep it completely independent and separated from SCCA, so that SCCA, NASA, FRP, USF, Indycar, FIA, CASC, or whomever ..... can be involved with no exclusivity.

Finally, with all due respect to the people who have developed Formula car racing in North America, create a 21st century business model that is unlike the models developed in the 60s and 70s to market our early race cars. I know FV and FF racers who have missed seasons of racing waiting for bodywork, frames, or just suspension components. I know those were the "glory days" but we live in a different world today.

I don't care if it has steel or aluminum wheels, 13" or 15", diff or live axle, or any of the 50 other variants being discussed. It needs to take big-sized common men, run on long-lasting all-weather tires, be built by the dozens, with inventories on hand, and cost <$20K.

I will put my money down to order one today if someone will build cars in quantity at that price. People's energy and focus should be in finding the financing to make it happen. The technical matters would take care of themselves.

Cheers!

[Jnovak]

I am in agreement with what Steve's comment to the Purple One. Steve and I have discussed this,concept at length and neither of us want another spec class. Way to many now. What we are trying to create is a new class that has important components speced in order to control costs.

Here is a list of critical components to start with.
1. Must use a production car wheel hub and bearing housing and axles if IRS. The upright itself would be free but must be made out of flat aluminum plate. No complex castings or welded uprights to hold the bearings. See the picture at the bottom of the page.

2. A spec low cost brake caliper, pads will be free.
3. A spec low cost shock absorber from a single manufacturer that is adjustable and rebuildable. Possibly have a claiming cost.
3. Frame controlled so that there is no opportunity to create under body Df. Perhaps a true flat bottom.
4. A minimum frontal area for the body. How to do this is TBD.
5. A spec minimum wheel weight
6. A spec wheels size as in 13 x 6 or 13 x 7. Same wheel on all corners spec min weight.
7. A production motorcycle engine that is restricted to 150 hp either by restrictors or a supplied aftermarket rev limiter. Hopefully we can get a single source engine. Estimated 150 hp
8. Wet sump only. Not certain about this.
9. A maximum of 2 different final drive ratios allowed using a single sized front sprocket and any 2 rear wheel sprockets. Of course this detail is tbd
10. No wings
11. No Difussers.
12. Minimum weight, I estimate 1100 lbs.
13. Define rear drive system to be either a live axle or an IRS. My prototype will have a live axle.
14. A single size spec tire.

There may be others not discovered yet. It is all about controlling costs not adjustability or creativity.

Target price is $20K for a roller kit

See production aftermarket Honda wheel hubs with a bolt on bearing carrier. Less than $60 per corner.

[38bfast]

Run the plan up to Jon Staduacher. The man can turn very little money into a work of art. I am sure he could have one track ready in 2 months from concept to completion more than likely under budget.

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

I do like the basic ideas being presented here. However, I agree with what Brian McCarthy mentioned a few pages ago about how racers do perceive open wheel cars as being more dangerous. I have talked to many drivers over the years that drive non-open wheel cars and virtually all of them mention this.

I would like to see the same concept that is being discussed here but in a sports racer configuration. I think it would be attractive to a much larger customer base thus making it stronger from a marketing and sales perspective. I guess you could use the same basic concept and do both open, and closed, wheel versions with minor changes.

Thoughts?

[Jnovak]

I do like the basic ideas being presented here. However, I agree with what Brian McCarthy mentioned a few pages ago about how racers do perceive open wheel cars as being more dangerous. I have talked to many drivers over the years that drive non-open wheel cars and virtually all of them mention this.

I would like to see the same concept that is being discussed here but in a sports racer configuration. I think it would be attractive to a much larger customer base thus making it stronger from a marketing and sales perspective. I guess you could use the same basic concept and do both open, and closed, wheel versions with minor changes.

Thoughts?

actually not a problem at all if there is $$ available for body tooling. My chassis with a Sports racer body would fit right in the P2 class.

[formulasuper]

I do like the basic ideas being presented here. However, I agree with what Brian McCarthy mentioned a few pages ago about how racers do perceive open wheel cars as being more dangerous. I have talked to many drivers over the years that drive non-open wheel cars and virtually all of them mention this.

I would like to see the same concept that is being discussed here but in a sports racer configuration. I think it would be attractive to a much larger customer base thus making it stronger from a marketing and sales perspective. I guess you could use the same basic concept and do both open, and closed, wheel versions with minor changes.

Thoughts?

Just a side thought here: In the 28 yrs I've been racing open wheel cars I have not seen any evidence of open wheel cars being more dangerous. I have watched closed wheel classes banging away on each other, I'm guessing because they feel protected in their enclosures, like the snarling dog in a closed up parked car. I've always felt open wheel racers have a little more respect for each other.

[marshall9]

Just a side thought here: In the 28 yrs I've been racing open wheel cars I have not seen any evidence of open wheel cars being more dangerous. I have watched closed wheel classes banging away on each other, I'm guessing because they feel protected in their enclosures, like the snarling dog in a closed up parked car. I've always felt open wheel racers have a little more respect for each other.

For some, it is the wife and family's perception as well......

[petawawarace]

If you want to attract new blood to the sport, you've got to start thinking like this new blood. They have no experience with chassis setup, shock valving, data systems etc. they do not have any of the knowledge you guys here do. Its fine to say you don't want a spec class, but that's what they want. It's not only about hard costs, it's about perceived costs. I've been involved with snowmobile racing for years. We've been through these same problems. To existing racers, data systems save testing time and are relatively cheap. To the new ma and pop team they are daunting. Same with adjustable shocks, multiple pickup points etc. Youve got to start them with simple but essential adjustments like camber,castor,toe, etc.

You guys can $hit on the legends cars all you want, but their model is the one you've got to follow if you want to really boost numbers. They get joe blow off the couch and into a racecar. A lot of the time, after a few years he will move up to a limited late model, then a super late etc.

Imagine a new guy coming to this class and having to compete against one of you guys with years (decades) of experience. You can argue that "they can learn", "I did it with less money" whatever you want, but it won't matter.

IMO the Busa engine is too limited build, but feel free to run the numbers. The litre bikes are great but it's an arms race with them and they change every 2 years so keeping the same spec is difficult. Perhaps there is a touring type bike that may have a 1200-1400 engine that would work better with a longer build period?

I think Greg is 100% right that one person/company has to call the shots. A democracy here won't work.

[SEComposites]

I have to say I agree totally.

[petawawarace]

The legend cars use an XFJ 1250cc sealed motor. They are only 130hp, but have more torque than you'd expect. They have an inhouse rebuild and sealing program. They advertise 2800 for a full rebuild and 1800 for a top end rebuild. They are air/oil cooled but that doesn't seem to be an issue. They also use a modular front upright that's reverse able side to side and is dirt cheap. Like $500 a corner, wheel,brakes included.

[SEComposites]

Personally I don't think the motor is suitable for an open wheel car. They sell for nearly $7k too. There are plenty of other options out there though. Perhaps one of the big touring bike models although I suspect they are not crashed with the regularity of the 600's and 1000's.

[S Lathrop]

[QUOTE=petawawarace;495384]
Imagine a new guy coming to this class and having to compete against one of you guys with years (decades) of experience. You can argue that "they can learn", "I did it with less money" whatever you want, but it won't matter. QUOTE]

The goal of this class is to have a very modestly priced car perform at a very high level and be a real pleasure to drive. The performance and pleasure factor are not likely to be consistent with a spec car.

To advance in racing, and drive a faster car, a driver has to learn certain skills. Spec classes are not good at teaching many of those skills. FV and FF are excellent classes to learn the most basic skills. FV and FF fields are populated with some very skilled drivers who could easily climb into faster cars and be right on pace in a very short time. Even drivers starting in FC struggle with some basic skills that FF and FV drivers know almost instinctively.

Drivers who had come up from FF through FC and jumped into an Indy Lights car were successful very quickly. Not so for drivers from the spec classes only. Driving spec cars frequently forces drivers to work around some short coming in the design or setup of the car. A truly balanced, neutral car, can be scary for a driver who has never experienced that sensation. Rolling maximum speed through a corner is a FV, FF skill that many drivers don't do very well. if they did not learn it early on.

As a driver ages, he needs his car to be better setup and easier to drive. He will absolutely loose an athletic contest with a teen or twenty something driver if it gets into a pitch and catch contest with the cars. But if he gets the car exactly as he wants it, he will be very competitive. If you look at the F2000 series and maybe the F1600 series as well, more than half of the field is master drivers (over 40). In the end, it will be the old guys and gals that put the sustaining number of cars on the track.

One thing about having multiple manufacturers is that they will all be competing to put out the best cars and they will likely work very hard with their customers to get their cars going fast. After all, any driver driving you car is a salesperson for you car. The better he goes, the more cars you are likely to sell.

[John]

I have two minds about this so I will do two posts in one.

First the car already exists, Bob Fox and Art at Amac built the car you are describing in the 90's. I gave Art $12k and he provided a kit for me to assemble. It had a perimeter frame so you could drop what ever Motorcycle engine in you wanted. In those days it was a 140hp zx10 motor, today most are running a GSXR motor. It had a cheap three piece fiberglass body, Koni single adjustable shocks, outboard suspension, it fit big guys, wide guys, could have been run with a formula car body as it was not a wide car, the brakes were fiat bits, I spent an extra 1200 and put coleman rotors and wildwood calipers on mine. We had 15 of them ( I am including the Cheetas as well, they were a bit more, but were the same design with a tub) at most regionals so the formula worked. We ran the motors stock for the most part and had a great time. I would suggest that if you build one of these types of cars talk to Art and Bob about their experiences. So the formula will work if you do this, and I would look at a formula car/ sports car variant. I really would make sure there is a perimeter frame, so the engine can not be used as a stressed member this makes it easy to change motor types, and I would specify shocks / brakes / calipers / wings and perhaps even wheels, or force submission by vendors.

Oh and making the Fuel injection system work properly is not cheap on the bikes, and you have to have a dead reliable wet pan, sort them for a couple of seasons before you go all in. I would be willing to help.

Second, I am not sure the first idea works as I don't know how you get enough engines if the formula works. Several times during this thread folks have mentions that transaxels are very expensive, and that you should look at the Subaru drive line. Factory five has build a car called the 818 it uses the Subaru driveline apparently it is easy to use the 4wd in an impresa as a transaxle and they are cheap. We could go from N/A 130hp the way to 300hp monsters with the same transaxle, and they should be stone reliable. Just a thought and no one here seems to have any interest in this, I believe that the people you want to appeal to will associate better with a Subaru based driveline than a M/C based one. I would ask the Karters and the Spec Miata guys which car would be more appealing given a mock up of both and perhaps a slightly higher price for the car based system. we could talk to the Factory Five guys perhaps about what they think. They might even be interested in being involved.

Anyway my 2 cents, hoping to be running my FB this year in the Seattle area.
I would prefer to try the Subaru version personally

[RussMcB]

A quick, short side comment re: open cars:

In Spec Miata, when I suggested on a forum that running without a top would be more fun, there were several replies about how much more dangerous that would be. I was a bit shocked, but I guess they've seen enough SM roll overs that they'd think the hard top adds a lot of safety.

Like FormulaSuper, in my 30 years I haven't noticed worse crashes or injuries in OW.

[petawawarace]

Steve I agree with you 100% that the drivers will learn better skills faster by learning the setups that you've described. The issue I see, is that kids and young adults want to be competitive almost right away. We can argue this point all day long and weather it's right or wrong, but it's true. The new generation doesn't want to put the time in to get there with open type competition. The guys who are serious about racing will move onto FF or FB,FC etc and learn those skills there.

Currently open wheel doesn't have a class where you can buy a cheap car, run it yourself and be remotely competitive.

I love building my own stuff too. But to generate serious numbers you have to go with what attracts the masses. A Spec car will do that. This website is full of guys that build/maintain their own cars. The majority would rather not see a Spec car I'm sure. But it's not the guys on this site your trying to attract either.

[S Lathrop]

The issue I see, is that kids and young adults want to be competitive almost right away. We can argue this point all day long and weather it's right or wrong, but it's true. The new generation doesn't want to put the time in to get there with open type competition. The guys who are serious about racing will move onto FF or FB,FC etc and learn those skills there.

Doesn't say much for the new generation coming of age to race cars. And there won't be any more great golfers or other highly skilled athletes in this bunch either if this is the standard.