Dunlops
So you don't think a 50% increase in HP has anything to do with the speed of the car.You did not add 50% more weight. Do the math.I am sure that the chassis builders have improved the cars and the drivers have improved as well.Why was F500 community in an uproar over one certain chassis year before last?Why have they gone from no suspension with limited adjustability to some suspension and adjustability.I call that rules creap but maybe that is not the proper term.
since day one in f500 the suspension rules havent changed at all, yes the builders have changed suspension but the rules have been the same from day one, thats all im saying the rules have nothing to do with the F500 speed increases over the last few years.
we have had 90-95 hp since 92 take look at the lap times from there and compare them to
current there is a significant difference and all the while there has been no rule changes
and the change from 65 hp to 90-95hp took place in the 1990and 94 that was how many years ago???? there have been no changes to give us more power since.
I just dont agree with your opinion that rules beeing changed is making lap times faster.
the SCCA does not want this class going any faster and i would have to say i agree with them as there is not much for suspension under there and the cars start to get pretty unstable at 130. since the introduction of the bigger engines the SCCA has not done anything to increase the speed. and all in all if you look at a picture of a 1984 red devil and look at a current one the suspension designs arent that different.
The SCCA is not to blame for the faster speeds as you would like to make out to be.
The speed is coming from the field of f500 people, what are we supposed to do?
Purposely de-tune our cars? We didnt make the rules and actually the f500 group as a whole have been asking for multiple changes to rules aver the last 15 years 95% of them have been denied, the only thing that has changed is the thermostat i mentioned earlier
and some clarification on what exhaust pipes you can use thats it in 15 years. what other class in the scca can count the number of changes on one hand in 15 years???
Thats the only point im tryin to stress here, its not the rules.
On another note, if you "do the math" on the 600cc motorcyle engine and gear box you mentioned earlier, we will actually lose hp and speed, yes we currently have a cvt with an efficiency rating of a 30%loss , but a 4 stroke 600 with gearbox, rpms not beeing controlled and shifting errors will significantly slow us down, allthought the cars would sound a hell of a lot better i belive a lot of the f500 group knows this and is shying away the notion was started by a small percentage of the group.
If you feel inclined check out this link
http://cvt.com.sapo.pt/performances/performances.htm
go all the way to the bottom and look at the chart the cvt vs mt on page 2 is nice too
heres some info the current 2 stroke engines we are using is giving us 95-98 hp stock
as the following below shows , we would lose hp
just trying to clear up another misconception that the cars would be faster
[SIZE=2]600, Honda, cbr600 f4, 99-00,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]mod[/SIZE][SIZE=2]unrestricted version,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]w/ pipe, 1.7-RK jet, advance[/SIZE][SIZE=2]stock, unmodified engine->[/SIZE]~87-92 True HP[SIZE=2]600, Hon, cbr600 f4, 99-00, stock[/SIZE][SIZE=2]CA version / restricted[/SIZE][SIZE=2]Excellent midrange, not so good topend, install 49 state / unrestricted cams AND Igniter unit to convert to unrestricted[/SIZE]~72-75 True HP[SIZE=2]600, Hon, cbr600 f4, 99-00, stock[/SIZE][SIZE=2]unrestricted version[/SIZE][SIZE=2]Excellent midrange, OK topend.[/SIZE]~78-83 True HP
the kawsaki bike engines are even less
This would be the best solution to even out the two classes between the hp loss and the drive change i think things would be a bit more in parity, sound better etc.
im done taking over your post here, but i supply the facts when i post something not just assumptions and opinions.
Dan
Dunlops
I mentioned nothing about motorcycle engines for either class.I am against it for FF.Since I do not own or race a F500 I have no opinion for the F500 and motorcylce engines.I do agree that FF or F500 would sound better with motorcycle engines.See we can agree on something.One other issue is that FF has not had any HP increases since it inception in 1968.If I had all the HP increases that the motor builders claimed over the years we would have about 150HP now.
150HP in FF
'Mmmm ... 150HP' - Homer Simpson
Sorry, couldn't resist.
John Nesbitt
ex-Swift DB-1
hp
someone else made the comment about the motorcycle engine that was proposed, my mistake, but that info is there him as well
yeah i hear ya about the claimed hp, you know if ya bolt some chrome valve covers on ya might gain a hp or 2, lol, the claims rank right up there with the engine rebuild in a bottle
a dyno sheet is close to beeing proof. but you have to have the before and after to really tell.
Good luck to all this year!!!
dan
Aaaawwww man! No more fireworks? Let's hug it out guys. good job!
Kumbahyah, my friends.... as the light from the campfire glistens off the beads of sweat streaming down the beer bottle, kumbah whatever
John
P.S. if you look at the current participation levels, FF might have to absorb them F500 to keep them (F500) in a national championship race.
stand back, he just spit alcohol in that campfire.
Originally Posted by dantheman
One of the reasons I don't visualize much of a crossover between the two classes. The performance of a F500 is too close to a FF to justify the extra costs IMO. FC offers an additional performance advantage for the cost that would be more appealing.
Too many things unattractive about the other package from either side. Wasn't meant as a slam towards a F500 driver at all.
this is my take.....FF1600 is a dying class...the numbers have been falling for a decade and if something is not done in 10 years there wil be no class.
Adopting a cheaper tire or tire rules is one thing but the approach to attract new drivers is imparative. The class needs to be made more appealing to people on tighter budgets karters and such that will race and have the money to do so....NEW BLOOD
Like F1000 there will come an alternative that is cutting edge that will attract new drivers.
If the class were to look outside the box, addopting a new engine Zetec Duratec or something will help lower costs. Using a spec tire either national or region again will lower the cost. That driver that only runs one weekend will run more if it is in his or her budget.
All I'm saying is it is time to take a serious look at this class and make changes that are possitive for the class as a whole.
Well that's my 2 cents
dunlops
I appreciate the spirited discussion and absolutely meant nothing negative.Thanks for everone's input .John II thanks for the humor.
So far this year FF numbers have been up from the last few years.Maybe it is just a temporary growth spurt but maybe it is more than that.Time will tell.
Hey - how are these F500 guys carrying 150lb of ballast in an 800lb car - that's nearly the driver's weight!
Maybe they have 6" unobtainium frame rails to be safe.....
class size
you arent the only class seeing drops in participation, i dont belive the fall in numbers is beeing caused by lack of interest, i think the main thing here is simply the state of the economy over the last 7 years, since 2000 the classes that seem to cost more have been falling , the peple that are getting into it are racing neons and things, and if you guys have been paying attention to the fasttracks, most of the attention of the scca does not go towards ANY of the formula classes, this is something i realized a long time back
look through the fastracks and youll see what i mean, the minute a part becomes scarce for any of the doorbanger classes it is immediately remedied by a substitue part or a re-write of the rules to allow substitutes , if you try that in any of the formula classes you know where that gets you , no where, i think a lot of the drop in numbers is from the lack of support towards the formula classes.
all you have to do is look ever5y month and see the 2 pages of changes for everyone else then look at the forumla section your lucky to see 2 lines of print, and that usually some kind of denial
A while back i addressed the500 community to rally some of the formula classes together and ask for some attention as an entire group. we all are always last on the list and the last priority over the other classes.
There are some people who go to bat for the forula groups and they do a good job but its always the same old print, look at the fatstrack from last month
anyone even mentions forumula this is what you get quoted
"The board has no interest in this matter" now you take the same anouncement that prompted this resonse and attach it to a gt class and i bet they would be all over it
go take a look.
I think somewhere along the line there will need to be some coming together of the formula groups to get some updates, equilization for technology, and some support for ALL of the formula groups.
That just my opinion. The classes need help and no ones is going to even look at it until people start screaming
Dan
dunlops
Dan the man- You are not correct about the attention to Formula cars.We have a very engaged CRB and advisory board when it comes to Formula cars.We have two drivers of Formula cars on the BOD.We as a group(formula car group) don't have as many issues as the other Prod and Sedan cars and we are not near as vocal about the problems we do have.I work as Liaison to CRB for the BOD and I can tell you first hand your statement is just not true.I would like to see more Formula car owners engage the CRB and the Formula car Advisory Committee with their ideas about the future and ways to control costs.
As chairman of the Formula and Sports Racer advisory committee, let me add this to what Mike wrote. It is not the case the CRB or the advisory committee has no interest in helping these classes. Our biggest problem is that the owners/drivers of the cars in most of the classes that have problems do not agree on what should be done about major issues. The letters we get on issues in these classes make individuals with multiple personality disorders look quite normal.
Now, there are those who think the CRB should just take the bull by the horns and dictate to those classes what should happen. Can you imagine what the result would be? Choosing one of several suggested "fixes" to the exclusion of the others (which are often polar opposites) would cause the same kind of uproar. Unless and until the owners/drivers can come to some sort of agreement on what should be done, very little will change. (Note: agreement doesn't mean unanimity, but it does require a substantial majority. When we get five different totally incompatible "solutions" for a single problem, that is a sure sign that there is no such agreement.)
Dave
For the most part that is true. I know there are issues in fendered car classes where there isn't overwhelming agreement, yet things still seem to happen.
Maybe some wouldn't have the impression that we don't matter as much if Fastracks didn't state things something like "14 letters in favor of a spec tire, 1 opposed...rule fine as written"
Dan, we haven't met and I don't know what class you run in, but I can assure you as one of two formula/sports racer guys on the CRB that we are not ignoring the open wheel community. If anything, my feedback from the BoD is that I might be just a touch TOO proactive...
But on to your point about ignoring the formula classes. One thing neither Mike nor Dave mentioned is that with a couple of exceptions the formula classes are either spec classes or are decades old, and so have had most of their issues addressed years ago. It may therefore seem that they are getting ignored somewhat. However, I can assure you that is not the case. To illustrate my point, please consider these initiatives brought forward in recent years:
F500 - new engine and lots of detail changes, resulting in cars just as fast as FFs. There is also a lively ongoing discussion on their forum about whether they might wish to completely revamp the class to widen its appear. Their big challenge is to reverse recent declines in National participation. The loss of some very active National competitors in recent years and the movement of others to Regional and Solo racing has ithe class' members highly concerned about their future as a National class.
FV - Lots of detail updates, and new parts approved, plus an ongoing discussion about disc brakes, wheel and tire changes, etc. A very lively and active class with strong participation and involvement. Even though the technology is decades old, the class has readily embraced aftermarket parts to keep prices low, and the cost of racing within reason. New cars are affordable and selling, and new drivers are entering the class.
FF - Lots of new parts...sleeves, crankshafts, pistons, aftermarket heads, etc. In just the past year that community has seriously considered adding alternate engine options for a long-term future, as well as control tires and other cost containment factors. I don't see any immediate big changes for the class, but they are actively engaged in consciously considering their own future.
FC - New parts again...rods, pistons, heads, cams, etc., to keep the parts bin full. We've successfully integrated the Zetec into the class alongside the Pinto in a now 3-year long program that completes this coming July 1st. In fact, the program has been so successful that guys are complaining of a shortage of 6" and 8" wheels!
FB - New class with about 20 cars coming active this year and a TON of interest. Lots of privateer as well as mainline constructor interest.
FE - Newly elevated former Regional class (F-SCCA) that has earned its way in with more than 400 race entries last year and so far is in the top ten classes this year. Oh, and speaking of 2 pages in Fastrack, aren't there two pages devoted to detail changes to their rules in last month's Fastrack?
FM - Umm, uh...oh yeah! We approved painting the cars BRG!
FA - Sixty-plus new Pro Mazda cars, plus Swift are homologating their pro-Atlantic (the 016a) for club racing, along with new engines. Strong participation in a long-established class that has always embraced new cars and technologies.
Did I leave anybody out?
Stan
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
rules
"rule fine as written"
yeah i agree with this statement, i also agree with dave when he says that the requests that come in should be more organized or little will happen but we have has an overwhelming amount of drivers in our class all agreeing on a specific change, one which was pushed to lower costs down and actually fix a safety issue also, i am reffering to the thickness of the rubber puck beeing changed from 1" to 2" thick the weight of our cars has increased 150 lbs and the current specs causes damage and suspension parts to break, how is this keeping costs down?
the reply we got was "the requested change is not consistent with the rules or intent of the class"
well duhhhh the whole idea was to change the rule, keep costs down, and among all the reason to fix a safety related issue. This change would not have benefitted anyone in the area of performance so why the denial?????
The fact that the answers and denials come with absolutely no explanation is ridiculous.
As I also said in my post there are some that go to bat for the formula classes and your efforts are appreciated but That rule should have been changed and there isnt one person on the board that come up with a logical reason for denying it. if you can, the entire group would be axiously awaiting for this response.
Someone is going to have a front A-arm break from the abuse and undersized dampeneing material and when that happens I hope no one dies in the process but we are going to blame the bod for not seriously looking at the issue or seemingly not putting much thought to it, and if you say thats not the case well then say it but the short answers and bs responses that come back make it look that way. I am not alone in this opinion I have heard it from many others.
Maybe the entire process for rules changes needs to be looked at , maybe there needs to be one guy from the class to coordinate the official requests from the classes , i dont have the answer but just like the guys in this group are saying the competition numbers are down and have been falling for the last few years, something has to change or we'll all be driving neons.
I am not trying to get anyone stirred up here at all but sometimes you have to sling a little mud to get a response from someone
I do appreciate everyone taking the time to respond, we may not all agree on the same thing or have the same opinions but in the end we are all here for the same thing, The best entertainment there is at a reasonable cost whether your driving a mustang, a continental or a glorified kart.
Dan
formul
well stan,
I commend you for taking the time to point that all out for me, lets take a good look at all those changes and the timing involved, a lot of these changes should have been made a long time ago, Instead of waiting for the class participation numbers to get low then make a change, its a bit late. looks like someone must have found the very last vw cylinder on a shelf somehwere in another country and the board finally realized there werent any more parts. you see where im going here??? Most of these changes are caused by parts totally disappearing.
Maybe it is time to re-vamp some of the classes and make some major changes.
I came from the f500 group and i would be in favor of a re-vamp, anyone familiar with the formula 4 class out of canada???
FF needs a bit more juice under the hood, various classes need a tire solution etc.
Initially changes do cost quite a bit but someone needs to make the decisions to do it.
im sorry if your chassis from 1982 is obsoleted by new rules either updat it or junk it
yeah some cars arent going to make the rules cuts, so be it.
The introduction of the F1000 started off sounding good now look at it, the price tag has drove off a lot of people that would have run with it, it should have been an entirely new class Instead of trying to build the specs around other class cars to fit in obsolete junk
look what happened to the price tag the estimate of 25g's has doubled.
Who's going to ultimately make the decision on the revamping though? according to another person here you cant get any kind of aggreement or concesus from the classes themselves.
The end fact here is racing costs money and changes cost money but sometimes your going to have to spend a bunch to save it in the long run.
I think communication between the scca and the groups of drivers sucks, maybe this needs to be looked at, instead of asking the class community for input maybe the class should all have thier own spokesman and have the majority of a class agreeing on something before submitting a proposal to the CRB/BOD and expand the reponses just a bit from the bod instead of the short denials.
Dan
Dan,
Why do you state that there will be no place to run any of these cars? If they dont make the count they become a REGIONAL only class. There still is a class for them. Hell you might talk most of the vintage organizers into letting you guys bring out the old 440s. I would be even happier running on the regional level if the competition was there, it isnt so we travel to where it is.
Price a new FSCCA recently? Werent they first espoused to be in the mid 20's.
Bottom line, for a class to truly grow there needs to be an active pro series. New cars for the pro teams lead to new cars at the club level. Where would FA be if not for the pro series?
John
so the answer is the CHAMP and IRL need to get back together. This will regain all open wheel support in America, creating the need for the glorious days of SuperVee and the lesser support classes and we could all be happy again.
All of the world's problems result from Indy.
[insert stupid "I am Indy" theme music]
jim
Actually, I would suspsect a Bernie Ecclestone of American Formula Ford would be good for us about now.....yes, there would be disenfranchisement of some currently in the formula, but if the decisions are aligned to a sound master plan or even just a well thought out vision for the class we would all be better off instead of going nowhere in our current semi democratic committee driven governmental muck. It would be painful at first, but if its done well, intelligently and by someone with the backbone & thick skin to play the role we really could recreate a great class. But perhaps thats already been done with F1000...
------------------
'Stay Hungry'
JK 1964-1996 #25
you've got it good, be very careful what you ask for!!
Dan the Man-
I envy your sense of being ignored; be very careful what you ask for...... "helping FFord" for some unknown reason has become fashionable and attracted all kinds of quacks with "remedies" for unknown and non-exisitent malidies. in spite of almost two years of what seems like endless "help" from Chicken Little, the sky hasn't fallen and FFord seems to be getting better. FFord is one of only two formula classes with increasing National partication the last two years. FFord's National participation turn around, the huge 1600 fields in Great Britian, the large fields north of the border, and the apparant FFord growth business most of the other sanctioning organizations here in the US are experiencing somehow goes unreported. make too much noise and you too may attract a helper or two to F500 with new engines, new transmissions, threaded tires, inlet restrictors, equivalency formulas, and a new F312.5 class to ease your pain!!! I'm of the opinion that Mike Sauce has it just right on threaded tires for FFord: anything that slows FFords down is probably not a good idea and he wants to hear from and will disproportionately weight the opionion of current FFord National competitors. both huge improvements again in my opinion from the apparant malidy FFord has been suffering under where one occasional regional competitor with the "right concern" is suddenly turned into a "cause celeb"..........................
be very careful what you ask for or in ten to fifteen years you too could wake up some morning with the pundits shouting your engine is from a motorcycle and not worthy of continuing to power cars in your class; you clearly need something from a personal watercraft because it's "cool and refreshing" and has such a manly muffled roar!
be very care of what you ask for or some early January morning you too may recognize that +0.005" oversize pistons have been approved "to eliminate the cost of sleeving for your engines" while most everyone was focused on family, freinds, and the year end holidays. consider yourself "lucky" that you somehow missed all of the problem reports, the spirited and raucus debate on what if anything to do, and the endless nit-picking of the draft language.................... as an insurance policy, I'd recommend taking one of those "new math" classes at the local university so you're ready for the complex mathematics required to fully appreciate the cost saving you'll accrue as a direct result of the tireless efforts of the folks who worked through the holiday season. people who know tell me bores in your engines are good for 40 to 50 hours and then they need to be replaced (ie: sleeved or buy a new block). racers like yourself will soon discover that you only get to "postpone" for 50 hours the cost to sleeve your block(s) when they're bored out for the larger pistons. the cost trade between buying oversize pistons and oversize rings when/if they become avaiIabe versus sleeving/reusing your current forged pistons is something I'd recommend looking into. it's hard to imagine what you'll be able to do with those new forged pistons you purchased last year to save money; probably not much of a market for used go slower engine parts...... the best I can tell, the only racers avoiding the cost of sleeving their block during FFord's +0.005" oversize piston adventure were the folks leaving competiton in less than or equal to 50 hours............................ go figure???
be very careful of what you ask for and be sure to show appropriate defference to those who will soon be leaving comptetion in F500; their FFord counterparts clearly are a force to be reckoned with!
Art
artesmith@earthlink.net
Last edited by Art Smith; 04.07.07 at 8:49 PM.
be very careful of what you ask for
be very careful of what you ask for you seem to have me confused with someone else
If someone decided to change the engine tomorrow I could care less, I have never stated I personally was concerned about the cost of racing, I myself arent counting the pennies to buy cylinders, pistons and rings, it seems that everything in this whole area is beeing driven by a bunch of people who for some reason think they can go racing on a budget of $300.00 a weekend. I am not one of those people, while you were all working and tiring over the holidays trying to keep the cost down to $1 for the kmart racers I ordered 2 sets of cylinders and pistons to go with em. yep around 1800.00 my math works just fine.
and on another note, I could care less what happens in FF, if you are all happy with the changes or lack of them thats great.
Have fun staring at the F500 in front of ya!
Dan
Dan,
While costs may not matter to you they do to most racers including many of your contemporaries in F500. That is the opinion voiced by several friends who race F500 and a very close friend who is a leading F500 constructor.
Instead of bitching about the process, why not get directly involved in it? You are a SCCA member correct? Have you ever attended an SCCA meeting of any type to voice your concerns directly to the volunteers who make it possible for you to play with cars??
be very careful what you ask for!!, Part II
be very careful what you ask for, cuz until this recent, basically unguided, "dead cat bounce", FF has dropped over 40% in just 6 years, and some crazy number something like 85% in the last 15 or 20 years. Yes, just about all classes have dropped, but even in relation to all others, FF has had the biggest, fastest drop. So an uptick is actually expected, cuz it ain't got no place else to go! But the cat only bounces so high. (And congratulations to the many people trying to stir interest, but that attempt has been ongoing for some time, and the correlation to that effort and this uptick almost impossible to resolve.)
be very careful what you ask for, cuz the many concerned mature adult people who observe trends detrimental to FF must be seeing something.
be very careful what you ask for, cuz if you wait another 5 years or so until the current data is accumulated, then you can sit back and be VERY proud of your great insight, oops, I mean hindsight. Then you truly can count yourself as a member of the eternal FF community which has done just that for the last 20 years.
be very careful what you ask for, cuz I'm sure many people like being a bottom feeder class. If we were to rise up the food chain we might implode from the sudden burst of evolution. All that pressure of being a successful thriving class again is not good for the ol' ticker ya know. And the status quo racers will miss strolling down the pick-your-part aisles looking for junkyard motors. Ah, the memories!
Sorry that Bryan can't even post an enthusiastic report about his outing on the tires. Like the saying goes, "All Roads Lead to Rome".
Who hijacked Bryans Tread
Can we talk about Bryans tires experment please... And some one please kill Cicken Little...Geeeez
John Vlasis
Dunlops
Bryan-Sorry about being a participant in the hijack of your post.I would be willing to do back to back tests with those tires if there is enough support from the National FF group.I have several sets of used tires right now I could try in the fall at a Regional race.I will let you know how that goes.
and now, BACK TO THE TIRES!
Great thread Bryan, (at least the beginning)
I liked reading your very specific comments on the tires,
I couldn't help but read your comments on the tires, and think that it is extremely similar to my experience with the Hoosier R60.
Your comments are copied and repeated below, and I've added my comments comparing the to the R60
They take longer to warm up then a R35 Hoosier (Shocking I know
-yup, need a couple real hard laps to get them fully there, but everybody's in the same boat on lap 1.
The braking distance is slightly longer, but not horribly so.
-similar, and that's not a bad thing, longer braking zones would make for better braking battles
Cornering speeds are very similar, which was surpring to me.
-I agree again, with the "hard slick" very similar, not quite as high, but as long as the game is the same for everybody, the experience is similar, along with the joy of getting it just right.
The added "time" it takes for them to take a set takes getting used too.
-again similar, R60s take a little to get used to, but don't have the 'take a set' issue
They respond well to chassis changes.
-as do R60's, since they ARE a slick
I had confidence in them right away.
-the R60 always gave me confidence it will be the same grip, not super high grip, but consistent grip
The car felt "free" in the oval, a key piece to going fast at GIR.
-similar w/ R60, car likes to move around, predictably, but not glued to track
I could not brake quite as agressively as with slicks.
-again, I agreee w/ a hard slick compared to sticky slick,
Braking distance increased maybe 10 feet on average. I'd say I could brake at a 8.5 compared to a slick tires 10. (10 being maximum braking without lockup). Make sense?
--yes, makes sense, again I think that is an area of 'improvement' in competition, possibly making for better 'wheel2wheel races' vs just lapping faster than the next guy
The car had snap oversteer to start that was tamed by lowering the car 1/4.
--never had that problem with R60's, as they are a real slick,
I also agree with the comments that said they can be faster after a few sessions than brand new, that was my experience w/ R60's anyway.
Also agree with the comments that even a year or so old, they are low grip at first, then can come back to near original grip levels.
I bring up these things, because I still feel that the hard slick is still a good solution for FF, and might not be met with as much resistance as a change to a treaded dunlop.
If the reasonable spectrum of choices is: Arizona Street tires to Dunlops to Hard Slick to the current open tire rule, I think something in the middle could be just the thing that we should 'be careful, and then ask for'.
FFCoalition.com
Marc Blanc
Well this has been interesting!
Look what I started!
One of the important things to look at in the big picture is this:
Making it attractive for a manufacturer to build new FF's. If, as a group we concentrate on how to make the class viable for more people, they guys at the top could/would buy newer, faster cars.
Then you have to vreate the middle market for them to sell theri old cars into. Finally you have the folks at the bottom buying there first car at entry level pricing.
We have the entry level now. I bought my Royale in running condition, with 3 sets of wheels, 9 sets of gears and a trailer for $6025. There are plenty of cars in the under $10k range. That is the true "bottom" of the entry level if you asked me.
So what would it take to get the top to want to buy a new cars? What would make a middle guy want to step up to a faster car? Think older rocker cars to anything with pushrods, or CF guys to rocker cars. It's really a marketing scheme as much as anything.
If the cars overll were more "equall" it would possibly narrow the gaps between the top and bottom. This has the potential of increasing the value of everyones cars and possibly growing the class.
Just thinking about the top National drivers does a diservice to the class as a whole. Why? Casue there are what, maybe 10-15 LEGITIMATE people that fit that mold at any one time. Hey, I love you speedy dudes as much as the next guy so don't take this the wrong way:
Regulating to the margins is never good practice. The CRB or BoD would change a rule for the slowest 15 of us out here would they? Hell no. But they do it for the top 15.
All I'm saying is that both are valuable to the class as a whole.
FYI, I love the idea of making FF's faster. The problem is that the top 30 nationwide will/can do it. It will leave many of us behind creating a further breakdown in the class overall.
Stan, Mike, et, all: Not a single "spec" class that I know of in the history of SCCA has ever worked out as planned. Cost controls never work or implemented right. Parts costs out of control. Car pricing not controlled. This is not news to you.
Why not look for a "formula" that might actually work to control cost in some way? Real cost too, like a deal with a fuel supplier that would allow racers to buy fuel at a fixed price?
Example: There is a fuel/heating oil dealer in Topeka that buys his race fuel for the year (not the actual product, but fixes the price) in January of each year. He then sets his retail price and it is stable for the year. Period. I paid $4.25 last Ocotber for Cam 2 110. It would have cost me $7 trackside at HPT or GIR.
You have a pool of racers that need a product. You have suppliers that want to seel a product.
The drivers get hosed when SCCA makes marketing agreements that are good the Inc but not for the driver. Make it good for me the racer and by my being able to race more I'll make it good for Inc? Understand the logic?
This is just one example of a way that cost could be controlled. I don't really care about al the different brands, or the tracks. That is not SCCA's job.
Tires could be done in much the same way. Now, of course having only one tire will piss off some, but it might very well be good for the whole. Me, at the middle, you at the top and those newbies getting in.
BTW, I'm hopeful that I can run one of the test days at HPT in June for fun. No racing that weekend as I'm crewing for Mark Blythe. Besides, not fair to make all you pass me on my treadies! Course it might be embarassing if I beat someone.....
Bryan
Dunlops
Bryan- Although I agree with many points you make I am sure that no car manufacturers will build new cars because the tires last longer.In fact when I ran in Canada the fastest guy up there was Martin Guimont and he drove an 82 Reynard.My point is the tires equalize the chassis and all the wizy pieces we have put on our cars.If old cars can be made competitive who is going to spend 35k plus to buy a new one.Nobody! I do think that relaxing some the tire costs for many would allow many cars to run more.But I honestly don't think the guy that runs 2-3 times is going to come out a 4th or 5th time because now he buy tires cheaper and they will last longer.Do you buy a new set of tires to run 3 times a year?I bet you find good used ones for your races.The first 10 years I competed in FF I never bought a set of tires,I only got the fast guys take offs.When I became competitive enough to win I thought I needed new tires.Even now after 72 National wins I don't put new tires on my car every race.I try and make my tires go at least 2 weekends.Sometimes 3.I still will use a 3 cycle old set that someone discarded from time to time.I am going to try a set of Dunlops and see what the speed loss is.But no matter what the cost of the tires is or the longevity of them most of the fast guys will put on a new set every race if they think there is any advantage.
Someone will always want the latest and greatest and that same person will put new tires on the car every weekend. Where it gets interesting is the guys that can really drive but doesn't have the wizy pieces on the car due to the lack of budget.
Based on my exclusive use of Dunlops on Formula Fords (including Vintage, CF, and modern), I would put the cumulative Dunlop knowledge of the Ontario Series front runners against any other Dunlop shod grid in North America.
Rich, poor, or otherwise, no one who knows what they are doing puts a new set on the same weekend as a race unless they have punctured one (baring rain of course).
A new set is significant disadvantage in a race over a properly cared for used set.
The best driver for tire management I know of in the series still picks sets from a the used tire pile. It wasn’t for a lack of money either.
Jonathan
P.S. Bryan C. - I am 100% agreement with your comments, but then our situations are very similar.
---------------------------------
Ferret Industries Archival site
Ferret Industries on Facebook
Basement Bookshelf FF/CF Scanned article Archive
Not to offer an opinion but to make sure the facts are right .... Martin drove an 89 Reynard that had previously been his Pro F2000 car in the Export A Series. At the time, the car was less than 10 years old, had quality shocks, and was anything but a "beater". He is a professional race mechanic, was run with help from pro prep shops, and is a world-class talent. To imply that is car was 3rd-rate is not accurate. As certain young and old men in FC keep showing us, not having a new car does not mean the competitiveness is missing. IMO, Martin's program would have been competitive on any tires and other good drivers would have been competitive with Martin's equipment.
Cheers!
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.
The issue at hand is simple cost control. How it's done is up to those running the show.
For me, I believe a change to a different tire than slicks will control the cost enough so that I can afford to race more often (or at all). That's all this is really about.
The benefit of being a member of a club could be collective bargining. We all know (or should know) that the real benefit of membership in any sanctioning body is access. Access to tracks, insurance, event staff, etc.
Just some different thinking applied to old problems.
A few points to add:
Mike, I respect your enthusiasm to try something new/old in fitting Dunlops to your car. Why not try all the "Hard" tires out there? GY600. Hoosier C60 and the Dunlop? There might be more.
Back on point, ok, forget the tires and look at other fixed costs like the fuel idea I mentioned? No good idea is easy or quick to come about.
I guess what I'd ask at this point it for those in charge to look at how some of the fixed costs could be reduced. If the answer is you can't find a way, at least you tried.
PS: I meant no disrespect to the current marketing staff at SCCA. I made a statement in my previous posting about decisions made by marketing that weren't clear enough. I consider the current staff(as a whole) as friends still and we speak more often than most would believe!
Bryan
Dunlops
First of all, Martin is a friend of mine and a very accomplished driver and if he was driving a 89 Reynard then he had 82-84 bodywork.I didn't imply that it was a "beater" if anything very far from it.I have the movies of that series and have looked at them recently.My point was that the controlled tire like we ran on, a BFG not a Dunlop equalized the cars.I drove an 84 Swift DB1 which to my knowledge never had any developement work done on anything but slicks and even my car was very competitive.In fact Brian Graham can tell you a very interesting story about Tagliani and his DB1 running in that series.I was not that far off Martin and I broke the lap record at Montreal.The point is that many other cars would be competitive on that type of tire and would not make manufacturers build new cars.
Dunlops at the ARRC?
How many Club Ford guys would be more interested in doing the ARRC in November if this tire was included along with the Hoosier R60?
In SEDiv, the R60 is the only tire approved for CF currently. Appalachian Tire (Hoosier) does a great job down here for SCCA club racers, but I think we can get more CF participation at the ARRC and all year long if this tire is included in the spec.
CF's to run vintage now are having to use this tire and SVRA and VDCA are seeing more CF's than in previous years. To me, this means that we can maybe get them interested in the ARRC and maybe SARRC if this tire is approved. Too late for SARRC in '07, but I've written to inlcude it in CF for '08.
jg
Open tire rule at the ARRC?
If I read the other posts correctly there is no mandated CF tire for the ARRC. Just a gentlemens agreement. Agree?
Steve, check my reply under the Bryan Cohen Dunlop first run thread.
Not an "open tire" rule as in no stickies like 160's or 35's, but ore than just Hoosier 60's.
I hope.
I think.
I think I hope.
Steve, I meant under the Maxwell thread, this IS the Bryan Cohen started thread.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
