Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Global Moderator -pru-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    12.02.00
    Location
    Midland, MI
    Posts
    1,538
    Liked: 309

    Default 2009 Aug FastTrack : FF Rule Change Proposals...

    Comments on the FF rules update? FF(it) already has it's own thread, but what about the "other" stuff?

    Beyond the general clean up, a couple things stand out:

    ~ Bodywork "clarifications" in light of the (2007?) RunOffs issues
    ~ Aluminum Calipers?! Whoa. Someone clue me in a on the direct replacement for the LD19...
    Chris Pruett
    Swift DB1

  2. #2
    Administrator dc's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.24.00
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois
    Posts
    5,526
    Liked: 1417

    Default

    for alloy calipers.

    I need more time to digest the body rule changes. My brain can only handle so much content at once.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.31.04
    Location
    Maryland, US
    Posts
    746
    Liked: 77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by -pru- View Post
    Comments on the FF rules update? FF(it) already has it's own thread, but what about the "other" stuff?

    Beyond the general clean up, a couple things stand out:

    ~ Bodywork "clarifications" in light of the (2007?) RunOffs issues
    ~ Aluminum Calipers?! Whoa. Someone clue me in a on the direct replacement for the LD19...
    The brake caliper request (which was turned down) was for FC, not FF. But, LD19s are available. One example: http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/pro...asp?RecId=1138

    Dave

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    04.10.03
    Location
    Medford, NJ
    Posts
    36
    Liked: 1

    Default

    I think -pru- and Doug simply misread the Sports 2000 aluminum caliper request as being part of the revised FF rules. It appears right at the tail end and could easily be seen that way w/a quick skim through the text.

  5. #5
    Administrator dc's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.24.00
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois
    Posts
    5,526
    Liked: 1417

    Default

    Ah yes, poorly formatted and easy to miss. My mistake.


    Bummer.

  6. #6
    Global Moderator -pru-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    12.02.00
    Location
    Midland, MI
    Posts
    1,538
    Liked: 309

    Default Yep...Misread...

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew DiRenzo View Post
    I think -pru- and Doug simply misread the Sports 2000 aluminum caliper request as being part of the revised FF rules. It appears right at the tail end and could easily be seen that way w/a quick skim through the text.
    Indeed:

    Item 4. Effective 1/1/10: Change S2000 section 9.1.9.B.7 as follows:

    B. 7. Brakes
    a. Only the following ferrous calipers are permitted: AP LD19, AP LD20, AP LD65, ICP-20L/R, ICP-65R, ICP-14F, and Girling 14F.


    b. Aluminum alloy calipers of two-piece construction (split into two halves that are fastened together by bolts) having no more than 4 pistons and 2 brake pads are permitted. Spacers placed between caliper halves to adjust for rotor width are permitted.Maximum one caliper per wheel.


    c. Brake rotors must be ferrous. Rotor hats / bells must be ferrous or aluminum alloy.

    d. Brake system otherwise unrestricted.
    Chris Pruett
    Swift DB1

  7. #7
    Senior Member PCalhoun's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.16.04
    Location
    Now in Greenville SC
    Posts
    480
    Liked: 11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Carter View Post
    Ah yes, poorly formatted and easy to miss. My mistake.


    Bummer.
    This is NOT a bummer at all. There is no shortage of calipers, rebuild kits or pads in the market and they are fairly inexpensive in the world of performance braking. All it would do is drive-up the cost of particiaption, as it would be seen as a must have to reduce un-sprung weight.

    As previously stated in other posts, rules stabilization is a key to the overall health of the class and it also protects your investment. If you can you call a modern day, non-vintage racecar an investment
    Peter Calhoun
    Motorsport Manager- Michelin North America, Inc.
    Swift DB1-86 FF1600 (bye-bye 3.12)
    2009-10 SCCA CM National Champions

  8. #8
    Senior Member HazelNut's Avatar
    Join Date
    08.07.02
    Location
    locust valley, ny USA
    Posts
    1,954
    Liked: 142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PCalhoun View Post
    This is NOT a bummer at all. There is no shortage of calipers, rebuild kits or pads in the market and they are fairly inexpensive in the world of performance braking. All it would do is drive-up the cost of particiaption, as it would be seen as a must have to reduce un-sprung weight.

    As previously stated in other posts, rules stabilization is a key to the overall health of the class and it also protects your investment. If you can you call a modern day, non-vintage racecar an investment
    did you notice who submitted the request? "Wright" I'm pretty sure that's Bob Wright aka one of the owners of the F2000 series aka the vibrant pro series that has averaged 25+ cars per weekend.
    Awww, come on guys, it's so simple. Maybe you need a refresher course. Hey! It's all ball bearings nowadays.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,292
    Liked: 1885

    Default

    The caliper request for S2 has been going on and discussed for quite a while on the S2 forum.

    They have a genuine need for expansion of the calipers available to them. For too long I was the only real source for new calipers, but that changed when I finally got the feedback that the caliper assembly became slightly unstable when pushed out to that width ( it would start vibrating) and decided to withdraw it from the market to be safe (though, even after 7 years of use, no one that I know of has ever had any failures). Unfortunately, the S2 market is so small that it just isn't worth it to me to create all new castings for only maybe 50 calipers a year.

    FF and FC are another story all together - there is no need as yet.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,292
    Liked: 1885

    Default Bump

    Just bringing this to the top so that it does not get lost because of the Honda engine thread.

  11. #11
    Contributing Member mblanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.10.02
    Location
    swisstown.com
    Posts
    704
    Liked: 42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PCalhoun View Post
    As previously stated in other posts, rules stabilization is a key to the overall health of the class

    Very well said Peter,
    FFCoalition.com
    Marc Blanc

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,292
    Liked: 1885

    Default

    Bump again.

    Not much activity on this one yet. Aren't there ANY questions?

  13. #13
    Classifieds Super License John Robinson II's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.03.03
    Location
    St Cloud, Fl
    Posts
    1,456
    Liked: 136

    Default

    THe 2cm curvature rule is to much. After looking at most of the top cars ar RA, they are not running the undertray flat but turning the lip up on the back, effectively creating, although an inefficient one, a diffuser. But at least there is now something that says the undertay is now legal, just no sides or strakes. The other thing I find interesting is the undertray may extend past the cl of the rear axle, but only 16" wide (same as gearbox) and there is no limit on the curvature here. I am thinking about reattaching my undertray and building a cover for the bottom of the gearbox that goes to the catch bottle and rain light. It probably wont do anything other then piss more people off, because now they will have to build one.

    Richard, I dont think this effects many people because I was the only one to bitch about this to the comp board. I was told this is a result of my letter after the 07 runoffs. Hope the Honda does not take this long to get approved.

    John

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,292
    Liked: 1885

    Default

    My understanding is that the rule was written that way so as to not make any curent cars with gearbox surrounds illegal - Citations, Reynards, Swifts, etc.

    The 2 cm rule was supposedly originally written as 1 cm - same as the old pro zetec rule that VDs were built to.

    One of the problems with the old rule set is the vagueness as to what constituted a "diffuser". If I read it correctly, the new rules - if the proper pictures are attached - would not allow any turn up at the ends, and would actually give the Stewards something to hang their hats on for once. Under the old rules, the intent was to not allow any turn ups, but without any definition as to what constituted a "diffuser", the point at which any undersides shaping became illegal was anyones guess.

    Mostly, the rules were rewritten so as to better clarify what everyone seemed to think that the rules meant, as well as to verify the direction that the Club seems to think they want.

  15. #15
    Contributing Member RussMcB's Avatar
    Join Date
    03.19.02
    Location
    Palm Coast, FL
    Posts
    6,683
    Liked: 553

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R. Pare View Post
    The caliper request for S2 has been going on and discussed for quite a while on the S2 forum.

    They have a genuine need for expansion of the calipers available to them. For too long I was the only real source for new calipers, but that changed when I finally got the feedback that the caliper assembly became slightly unstable when pushed out to that width ( it would start vibrating) and decided to withdraw it from the market to be safe (though, even after 7 years of use, no one that I know of has ever had any failures). Unfortunately, the S2 market is so small that it just isn't worth it to me to create all new castings for only maybe 50 calipers a year.

    FF and FC are another story all together - there is no need as yet.
    I always assumed S2 calipers were the same as FC. They're not?
    Racer Russ
    Palm Coast, FL

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    04.10.03
    Location
    Medford, NJ
    Posts
    36
    Liked: 1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RussMcB View Post
    I always assumed S2 calipers were the same as FC. They're not?
    The LD19/LD20 series calipers are not as common on S2s. Most modern S2s use the 4-piston LD65 caliper which AP discontinued. Either way, it's got very little to do with FC/FF.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,292
    Liked: 1885

    Default

    S2's originally ran LD20s, but quite a few years ago they all switched to vented rotors, which required wider calipers.

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,292
    Liked: 1885

    Default

    Bump again.

  19. #19
    Contributing Member ric baribeault's Avatar
    Join Date
    07.11.03
    Location
    Santa Ana
    Posts
    1,354
    Liked: 258

    Default IMO

    19/20's cheap in comparison to what?.....gold? the price has skyrocketed over the years and i have to stenuously disagree with availability. i watched my teammate rebuild his zetec after a $20k plus wreck. quess what was the hardest item by far to replace? aluminum caliphers much cheaper, lighter, and available. and i can quareentee you they will be legal in the f2000 series next year.....and if any one is realy paying attention there.....

  20. #20
    Contributing Member mblanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.10.02
    Location
    swisstown.com
    Posts
    704
    Liked: 42

    Default

    D.7.f & h
    Seem very redundant.
    FFCoalition.com
    Marc Blanc

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,292
    Liked: 1885

    Default

    AP's prices may have gone up, but our price for our calipers has risen only $10 since 1990.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.31.04
    Location
    Maryland, US
    Posts
    746
    Liked: 77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mblanc View Post
    D.7.f & h
    Seem very redundant.
    You are correct. There was an editing glitch in the last four paragraphs of D.7. The paragraph between the current e and f should be f; the current f should be removed; the remaining two paragraphs should be g and h.

    Dave

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




About Us
Since 2000, ApexSpeed.com has been the go-to place for amateur road racing enthusiasts, bringing together a friendly community of racers, fans, and industry professionals. We're all about creating a space where people can connect, share knowledge, and exchange parts and vehicles, with a focus on specific race cars, classes, series, and events. Our community includes all major purpose-built road racing classes, like the Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) and various pro series across North America and beyond. At ApexSpeed, we're passionate about amateur motorsports and are dedicated to helping our community have fun and grow while creating lasting memories on and off the track.
Social