FV Runoffs - Disc Brakes
Morning All,
Just wondering how the disc brakes worked at the runoffs? I hear about 1/3 of the field was running the disc brakes and that some swapped back to drums because of drag issues. Just looking for conformation and real information not opinions. Not looking to start the drums versus disc discussion.
Thanks and I hope this does not get out of hand!
R/--
Harry
Some of the disc brake cars seemed to work just fine. Andy Pastore - the guy that posted his 'cheap shot' at building his own disc system was one of those that seemed to work well. There were a couple that had problems .. or thought they did, but I don't think 1/3 of the field was on discs. Maybe more like 1/4? More than I ever expected in the first year for sure. Only 1 car that I know of had issues great enough to make a change back to drums .. and that was a last ditch effort to get SOMETHING going. I'm not sure how clear is was to him that the discs were most of his problem, but he wanted to eliminate it as a possibility I think.
In the end, it would appear that there ARE some 'advantages' to discs that were not anticipated. There are also some DISadvantages. Andy Pastore finished 8th and he was, best to my knowledge, the highest finishing disc brake car. Of course we lost some 6 cars at T1 - not sure how many of those were disc cars .. maybe 2? Laura Hayes held the highest position (4th) with her discs, but fell out with only a couple of laps to go due to an engine failure.
That's all I got
Steve, FV80
Steve, FV80
Racing since '73 - FV since '77
I believe the front row was split between disc and drum. So I would say disc systems do not have a drag issue in all cases.
This also indicates that disc systems are not a must have option and that the people were correct in predicting there would be no performance advantage.
So the class survived another big change.
Brian
Andrew Abbott was supposedly on discs - he was in the lead when he was done in by a head stud pulling out of the case?
Chris.
Originally Posted by Steve Davis
. Andy Pastore finished 8th and he was, best to my knowledge, the highest finishing disc brake car.
That's all I got
Steve, FV80
Steve,
I didn't have the disc setup since the four bolt wheels were not accepted by the CRB and I wasn't willing to test the validity of that "any steel wheel" verbiage in the GCR.
-AP
Andy,
was there more info that came out on this or feedback since your post about what all you had done? I didn't see anything on it.
~Matt Clark| RTJ-02 FV #92 | My YouTube Onboard Videos (helmet cam)
Hi Matt,
It was in the September Fastrack News
"1. #27008 (Andy Pastore) Request Late Style Wheels to Simplify Disc Brake Development
Thank you for your letter. The Club Racing Board does not recommend this change at this time."
-AP
ah, ok... I guess I did miss that one. thanks.
shame about that. I would love to hear their reason, as it would almost instantly relieve all the expense & headaches we are dealing with for discs right now.
~Matt Clark
[QUOTE=Matt Clark;591042... it would almost instantly relieve all the expense & headaches we are dealing with for discs right now.[/QUOTE]
I doubt this is true, if so we would have done disc brakes long ago.
The expense & headaches are of your choosing. The Runoffs demonstrated that disc brake are not a requirement to be competitive.
Brian
Why do you believe that this rule does not allow the use of a 4 lug wheel?
- Wheels shall be standard fifteen (15) inch X 4J as used on the 1200cc and 1300cc VW sedan asdefined herein, or any steel fifteen (15) inch X 4.5J wheel within the track dimensions of C.2.
As to why the CRB doesn't recommend the change in rules, I'll take a stab at it.
Rules were made, parts were engineered, manufactured, sold and installed to meet those rules. Changing the rules to allow a simpler solution negates the work and efforts others put forth. If the goal posts are moved it's hard to entice anybody in the future to expend the energy to create the next desired whizzy-bit.
It would... because the craziness of the $3500 custom brake systems would be removed. we could just use the less expensive kits that already exist, that are too wide.
true... and I feel their pain, but that is part of being an early adopter to a rule that was rushed out. $3500 brakes kits are not good for anyone, except maybe those making them.
~Matt Clark
I disagree.. MY guess is that the CRB decided that no rule CHANGE was required since *ANY* "Steel fifteen inch x 4.5J wheel was already allowed. CRB response to things that don't need to be changed has always been cryptic
1).CRB does not recommend this change at this time
2).Rules are adequate as written.
3). Possibly others that I can't recall at the moment that say basically the same .... "we don't see a need to change the rules as written".
I'm disappointed that Andy elected to NOT "challenge the" 4 bolt wheels. I just cannot see ANY possible way they could be ruled illegal given the "rules as written". Would have been a more clear challenge I guess if he had shown up at the track with just ONE wheel (easier to change back) with a 4 bolt wheel/disc and had someone file a protest (can you protest yourself?? - I THINK there is still a method to submit a "rulings request" to the CRB and get a response (SOME DAY)). A protest would have been heard and decided AT THE TRACK during the Runoffs and we'd KNOW FOR SURE (maybe). The protest could have been filed before the car hit the track. This confirmation would not have 'negated' any efforts put forth by the "forerunners".. it would have just made their market somewhat smaller. There are still MANY out there that would SPEND MONEY in order to NOT have to put in the effort to develop their own 'kit' like Andy did.
Steve, FV80
Steve, FV80
Racing since '73 - FV since '77
"Wheels shall be standard fifteen (15) inch X 4J as used on the 1200cc and 1300cc VW sedan asdefined herein, or any steel fifteen (15) inch X 4.5J wheel within the track dimensions of C.2."
As I wrote at another time- the rule as written was to allow 4.5 " 5 bolt wheels, not to allow 4 bolt wheels, or else we could have had them a long time ago.
The rules do include the line "IF IN DOUBT, DON'T". If you can prove that a 1200 or 1300 as defined herein came with a 4 bolt wheel then you have a case.
Now is the rule poorly written - it predates the disk brake changes - and it should have been updated. Bill Noble believed in the evolution of the class, and when he interpreted the rules and was found to be wrong, he accepted it, made good and moved on.
If you want 4 bolt wheels, get those pens in gear and make your case, or run the 4 bolt and file a protest. Otherwise - move on.
ChrisZ
it must be a 4x15 wheel from the 1200 or 1300 sedan. if not one of those wheels, then any steel 4.5x15 wheel is allowed, if if meets track rules.
in legalese, the way it is written, it DOES allow them... there is zero doubt to that. now, whether that is the intent, that can be argued... but that's not what they say.
~Matt Clark
Ahhh but the cynic in me says that the CRB knew what their intent was so they don't bother reading how the rule can be read. I want to believe that they have no idea that any that meets a certain criteria means any that meets a certain criteria.
The rule is adequate as written response often comes across as flippant. However, it could mean there is no need to change the rule to what is being proposed as whatever is proposed is already allowed. It could also mean we don't even wish to entertain your crazy thoughts.
But the rule wasn't updated so it's the current rule. If you don't want 4 bolt wheels get those pens in gear and make your case, or protest somebody that does run them.
With regard to Andy’s letter and the use of four bolt wheels, the request submitted by Andy and the CRB’s response that he included above indicates that allowing the Late Style Wheels (4-bolt wheels) would require a rule change, and the CRB is not recommending that rule change be made at this time.
With regard to the FV rule stating “Wheels shall be standard fifteen (15) inch X 4J as used on the 1200cc and 1300cc VW sedan as defined herein, or any steel fifteen (15) inch X 4.5J wheel within the track dimensions of C.2.”, when the Formula Vee Ad Hoc Committee discussed this earlier this year, it was generally agreed upon that the rules set (this rule combined with the rest of the rules for FV) did not allow for the 4-bolt wheel.
Perhaps it would be helpful to add a clarification in that particular rule.
John
It currently reads as being allowed... so any clarification that opposes it would be a rule change.
Why not just allow it + keep costs down? $3500 for a brake kit is hardly in the spirit of FV.
What does a 4 bolt setup hurt?
~Matt Clark
Devils' advocate mode: it hurts those who were told the only way a disc package would fly is that if the system met parameters X, Y and Z. They went through the trouble to engineer, manufacturer, test and produce a product that folks within the class seemingly wanted. Now, the 4 bolt setup and the rule allowing ANY 15" x 4.5" steel wheel to be utilized negates all of their efforts.
The GOAL of the disc brake effort was NOT to have someone MAKE LOTS OF MONEY on it (or even ANY money). It was simply to ALLOW drivers to utilize disc brakes instead of drums. The entire concept of vee and the basis for it's origin is CHEAP racing for the 'everyman'. Anything that makes that cheaper should be allowed as long as it doesn't present an advantage. It would appear that even the $4K kits do not present a measurable advantage. The rules are not (SHOULD NOT BE) written to allow only the MOST EXPENSIVE path to the end product. They were not written to entice entrepreneurs to invest for profit.
The rule says ANY steel 4.5J wheel. It does NOT say any wide 5 .. or any except 4 bolt.... The rule is what it is. Hard for me to believe that the FV Committee (before it was quashed) did not recognize that and would ASSUME that it would be enforced as "any steel 4.5j wheel [that LOOKS JUST LIKE ALL PREVIOUS FV WHEELS with 5 mounting bolt holes] would be implied in that rule.
Steve, FV80
Steve, FV80
Racing since '73 - FV since '77
More devils' advocate. If the goal was to make a simple, effective, inexpensive kit legal then the rule should have been written so off the shelf parts could have been implemented immediately.
The rule required an expensive work around.
Now, the wheel rule allows an inexpensive work around. That's good for everybody but the pioneers of the disc brake solution.
Let's take a step back and look at the rules process.
Lets agree that a typo, grammar mistake or printing error should not dictate a change in the rule, if it was not intentional.
Nor can all effects of a rule change be obvious at the time the rule was written.
The wheel rule was written before the disc brake rule. It was written to allow 15 x 4 inch 5 bolt wheels (what else would bolt to a 5 bolt drum?) . If people believed the rule allowed 4 bolt wheels, why did no one try 4 bolt drums to see if they were a performance or safety advantage? The recent change ironically was for consistent grammar - it should have been clarified at that time.
Now the disc brake rule was written, assuming (bad word) that it would maintain the same wheels that were allowed before. The 4 bolt solution WAS discussed and decided against at that time. Those of us who voted for it, knew it would cost more to start but if the performance proved no advantage, then acceptance and mass production would bring the cost down. Remember there are people in the NE running the $500 EMPI package and are quite happy with the performance - they are doing the testing for us on the low end unit.
Now remember how many years and iterations it took to get us the manifold rules we have today. That did cost people time and money. Which is why when there is a rule change it behooves people not to jump to loopholes to try and get an edge. I am a firm believer in the rule of unintended consequences, and that includes how one rule change can affect another, seemingly unrelated rule. The FV rules (and many SCCA classes now) has a warning - if it does not say you can do it, don't (or at least don't be surprised if you get ruled against).
If the Comp Board and the FV committee is of the belief that the rule does not allow 4 bolt wheels, and has ruled so, then they are interpreting that sentence as 5 bolt only. But there are systems to get that clarified, changed, altered, etc.
Or are we going back to Clinton to debate the meaning of "is"?
ChrisZ
Last edited by FVRacer21; 10.20.19 at 9:38 AM. Reason: additional info
It might hurt someone who now has to buy 12 or more wheels in addition to the conversion.
You have to add at least 2 sets of wheels to the initial cost, not just the wheels on the car.
If you are doing fronts only then only 4 extra wheels for rains and spare slicks.
Can someone tell me the price and weight of the 4 bolt wheels?
Thanks
ChrisZ
BINGO!! And this is why my VEE will gain an extra layer of dust for eternity. We jumped the shark with the manifold fiasco, and now we have a brake "upgrade" that is 1/3 the cost of a competitive complete car.
Or you could buy a new set of wheel Cylinders and brake shoes and come back out and race. 8 out of the top 10 cars were on drums at the runoffs.
The manifold situation was mishandled and unfortunate, the disc brakes are another option but by no means necessary to be competitive.
It is clear that disc brakes are not a performance requirement. Not a valid excuse for your lack of racing enthusiasm.
Brian
Because the GCR never allowed 4 bolt drums. While previously the rule did state any wheel that met certain criteria was allowed, it didn't matter because the type of drums that could be utilized was very limited.
The GCR now allows "any" disc to be used that meets certain criteria. That now means the list of any steel wheel that could be utilized is much larger than it was before.
The rules have changed. The definition of "any" has not. You may think it's Clinton-esque to argue the meaning of the word IS, but you seem to be arguing that the word ANY doesn't really mean ANY.
1) The current disc systems, while expensive, provide a conversion that required very little modification to the FV rule set. Same wheels and track for example. This made evaluating the change much easier for the CRB. They did not have to worry about unforeseen consequences even though some did appear.
Changing to 4 hole wheels and possibly a track change might need to be physically demonstrated before the CRB can be confident that unforeseen consequence are not too great. Build and race something at the Regional level (with Regional approval?). If you really want something more affordable some of you guys are going to have to spend some time and money proving the concept. Maybe a crowd fund for Andy is in order.
2) How about a Empi,etc. kit that is specified by the rules. The track could be greater than spec only when this combination is used. Chance are that the extra weight and use of a single piston stock VW caliper would negate the track advantage. Again this is something that is simple to implement at the Regional level.
Just complaining is not going to get anything done.
Brian
I clearly choose to respect my racing community in the way I follow the GCR, but there is a very small portion who have no problem torturing any rule to use to their personal advantage, no matter how short-term that advantage may be. For those who consider Smokey their hero, why can they not argue that fasteners are free, and therefore 4 or 5 (or 3 or 6) hole drums, discs, or wheels are all legal, if all other dimensions fit within the dimensions that are specified? Of course, the "if it does not say you can, you cannot" rule could apply but that is not considered valid by the same portion of the community.
Greg Rice, RICERACEPREP.com
F1600 Arrive-N-Drive for FRP and SCCA, FC SCCA also. Including Runoffs
2020 & 2022 F1600 Champion, 2020 SCCA FF Champion, 2021 SCCA FC Champion,
2016 F2000 Champion, Follow RiceRacePrep on Instagram.
It's not torturing a rule when it says you can use anything that meets X, Y and Z and you choose to, even though most do not.
As to the short-term advantage. That's the risk those pioneers assume. Either everybody else jumps on board with the same widget and you no longer have any legal advantage, or they get the rule changed and your efforts are negated.
Personally, I'd choose to play it a bit safer and be on the right side of the political pressure, just because I'm a tightwad and I don't want to spend money on change just to have to change again. However, if a rule says I can, I bloody well can. Even if you find it disrespectful to the community or Smokey-esque.
Do the 4 bolt 4.5" wide wheels meet the maximum track width rule when bolted to the low cost disc brake 5 package?
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
Question:
When was the wheel spec rule made? Sometime well before the disk brake rule was made, or at the same time?
If well before, then it legitimately is something that can/should be fixed under "oversights and corrections".
Has anyone here, making all this noise, actually contacted the CRB about this yet as regards the possible interpretation being an oversight?
Okay - you got me - I put a formal request in to clarify the rule - not arguing for either side.
Let's see what they come up with
Letter: #27603
Category: Formula/Sports Racing
Class: FV
Did anyone else submit a request?
ChrisZ
Last edited by FVRacer21; 10.20.19 at 4:48 PM. Reason: ask question
I don't believe the readily available wheels do, but I might very well be wrong. Doesn't prevent somebody from having a custom shell and center made that does.
The wheel rule predates the brake change. When the wheel rule was written there was no way to mount a 4 lug wheel. The brake drums had to be similar to the stock wide 5 lug VW system. With the disc brake rule the number of lugs and their location is free because the hub spec says nothing on the subject... or is it assumed to requirer wide 5?
Brian
How is this an error or omission and not a rule change? Part A has been legal for decades, but wasn't used because in order to use it you needed part B, which wasn't legal.
Now, part C comes along, is legal and would allow part A to be used, and folks want to make A illegal.
When asked to change the wording of the rule to specifically allow the commonly available VW 4-bolt wheels, they responded (last month?) with a "we don't recommend the rule change at this time" So, the rule has been left alone.Has anyone here, making all this noise, actually contacted the CRB about this yet as regards the possible interpretation being an oversight?
Now, we are arguing about what that means and why.
Either they left the rule alone because (A) they felt the change would be more limiting (changing from "any that met X, Y and Z criteria" to specifying a wheel.
-or-
(B) they felt it would be a more open rule, and they believe the phrase "any steel wheel that meets the following criteria" somehow excludes certain steel wheels that meet that following criteria.
Those assuming it requires the wide 5 pattern don't know what the word ANY means.
The hub rule specifically says; "Any hub assembly may be usedas long as it can be fitted with part 9.1.1. wheels"
The wheel rule says:. "
- Wheels shall be standard fifteen (15) inch X 4J as used on the 1200cc and 1300cc VW sedan asdefined herein, or any steel fifteen (15) inch X 4.5J wheel within the track dimensions of C.2
Apparently you do not know what "Errors and Omissions" means.
Richard,
Funny, but the SCCA does not seem to fix things on their own - they usually wait for someone to point it out and then act on it. With the Comp Board being responsible for, I don't even want to guess how many cars...you change one word and every Triumph or Fiat enthusiast thinks you are out to get them....
If this was NASCAR or IMSA - well I found this interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfq7-1ePW-M&t=574s
ChrisZ
Which is why I posed the question about someone contacting them - more than likely when the disk brakes issue was passed, no one had looked at or mentioned the possible reinterpretation of the wheel rule, making this a legit "Errors and Omissions" possibility.
Those "someones" sometimes are indeed CRB members, but usually only when it concerns a class they are participating in.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote