RunOffs 2010 FB Rules Meeting
Their were two main subjects proposed at the FB meeting, the first was a proposed engine freeze, may it be 2 or 3 years from the current year model. the Second is the proposal of Open ECU's and whether or not they would benefit the class as the manufacturer ecu's are becoming more difficult to defeat.
That being said, feel free to chime in on any other items that you feel may have been overlooked in the meeting.
Wow! That's the first concise description of that meeting that I've read, thanks Alex! Now maybe we can have a meaningful discussion. Let me be the first:Originally Posted by Alex Pate
Engine Freeze: depending on the specific wording, I can see that working. My concern is that in 3 years, if I need an engine it will be 3 years old and have 8,000+ miles on it. Good for George Dean, bad for the guys that install them right out of a wrecked bike.
Open ECU: At this point, I'm against it because it's a Pandora's box and I don't want to get burned like I did on the shifters. I'd like to take more time to see if we (and by "we" I mean smart people like G. Dean) can find some more cost-effective way of making future engines run in a car. Possibly permit aftermarket race ECUs from the racing division of a given manufacturer?
Beyond that, the rules that we have now have allowed this class to grow beyond my expectations back in the fall of '06. They're not perfect but they seem to be working fine. If it ain't broke...
p.s. it was nice meeting you last week.
Mike Beauchamp
RF95 Prototype 2
Get your FIA rain lights here:
www.gyrodynamics.net/product/cartek-fia-rain-light/
Same concern as Mike. We need to have some idea what will happen to engine availability for past model engines in the freeze. Would they dry up on ebay, be only high mileage needing rebuilds kind of negating the intent of the freeze. Do we really understand what might happen if this was implemented? I heard at the runoffs that Suzuki did not bring in any 2010 GSXR 1000 due to the poor economy. Not sure if it is true but may effect this type of freeze as well. Just some things to think about.
There is an interesting precedent for the open ECU's in racing right now, as there are a number of 2010 cars whose ECU's persist in going into a limp-home mode when subjected to racing conditions. The latest was the Mazdaspeed 3's in the Continental Tire Challenge, who were just allowed to start using an aftermarket ECU (which would normally be against their rules) because no one could keep them running.
Perhaps some research could turn up a reasonably priced aftermarket ECU that would (1) support a number of different manufacturers engines, and (2) would NOT be sophisticated enough to support traction control or automatic shifts, just ignition and fuel injection maps. That functionality would eliminate all of the problems associated with bypassing sidestand and tipover switches without opening up a whole new realm of exotica.
Marty, with no oar in this water ........
Marty Bose - #1 gopher, GonMad Racing
would horse power freeze solve open ecu and future lack of engine problems?
Look at Alex!
Post #2 and already making sense.
(Kids these days!)
Hey in regard to the 3 yr moratorium, there's nothing that says you have to wait 3 yrs to buy one, they could be purchased brand new if one were to choose, pickle it, and re-annimate that lump as needed in the future.
As George dean specified, a horse power freeze would be next to impossible, as he said his dyno will always give you different numbers than, the other guys. That would mean to freeze horse power every engine would have to go to said engine builder and then sealed, before competition. In the spirit of growing this class and manufacturer competition sealed motors would be no fun. Now if someone wants to pioneer acquiring crate motors from the manufacturers that would be an ideal solution to an engine freeze.
An SIR could be used to limit power. It would not be necessary to dyno and seal engines. The SCCA already requires SIRs in some classes (e.g. Swift 016 Atlantic).
Forgive me for sounding ignorant, but what's an sir
Single Inlet Restrictor (SIR) – A system to limit engine performance that meets the following criteria:
A. The intent of this restriction system is to have a sealed system
from the restrictor to the intake ports of the cylinder head. All of the
air entering the intake ports shall pass through the specified restrictor.
Modification or addition to any part of the intake system that allows the
introduction of air into the intake ports that has not passed through the
specified restrictor is prohibited.
B. The engine air intake system must be fitted with an aluminum air
restrictor. The intake system is defined as an assembly of parts, including
but not restricted to: the restrictor, restrictor housing, ducting, filters, air
box, velocity stacks, throttle body, carburetors, manifold and manifold
gasket up to the intake ports on the cylinder head.
C. The restrictor must be round in shape. The maximum ID of the
restrictor is listed on the vehicle’s spec line. The restrictor’s maximum ID
must be maintained for a minimum length of 3mm. Restrictor mounting/
placement within the intake system is free, but must allow accessibility
for measurement. It is acceptable to have some minor disassembly of
the intake system to provide access to the restrictor for measurement.
Measurement device and restrictor shall be similar temperatures when
used.
D. Sealing the restrictor from its supply of air must cause the engine
to stop within 4 seconds. This check is to be made at an engine speed
of approximately 2500 rpm. The sealed airbox must withstand this test.
Pressure sensors present inside the intake system must be disconnected
during this check.
PS - you can see one here.
Last edited by Stan Clayton; 09.30.10 at 10:09 PM. Reason: add image link
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Thank you, Stan. I should have been more specific in my post.
Wouldn't that still require the same engine dyno to be used to seal all motors as to attain an equal power output based on the calculations each dyno uses as well as altitude humidity, etc based on where the dyno operates?
Welcome to racing
Like Mike said "If it ain't broke". The FB just completed its first runoffs, it is getting interests from allover the place, the worst thing you could do is start implementing these changes. Let it go under the the current rules and see how it grows.
[FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Arial][FONT=Verdana]why not restrict the power with 3% or 5% tolerance for example? and of course, talking about stock units using restrictors if needed... set the horse power limit to 180 horses... that rule would probable allow around 5 different engines to be used... some of them will have to use restrictors some of them won't... decision about the restrictor size needed for certain engine could be made in collaboration with Mr Dean or/and some other engine builders[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Arial][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Arial][FONT=Verdana]plz don't pay too much attention to numbers... consider it as a concept[/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
I thought I remember hearing the IIR approach was better than SIR because the computer and sensors were better able to cope with a restriction after the throttles compared to before.
Of course, IIR's could be trickier to implement because different engines might require different parts (no one-size-fits-all).
THANK YOU ALEX for stepping up and starting this post !!! Since I had to leave before this meeting and even though I'm not a manufacturer I do have a significant monetary investment in this class already. As opposed to some people who have been posting their opinions in the FB forums about a class they are not even running in. But being fair, maybe they can see the forest through the trees
Almost all of the motorcycles do have FACTORY racing or aftermarket ECU's and they are NOT overly expensive!!!
In fact, they are much cheaper than the Geartronic paddle shift system. So thanks Mike B for bringing up the suggestion.
Honda's, which is the engine of my choice which I'm putting into a Citation I'm in the process of building is as follows, $450 for the ECU, $400 for the data cable, and $250 for the software to tune, which anyone can use. So we don't have to end up like FC where you have a few engine builders whom dictate price. If you choose to use a tuner for your engine then so be it, and consider that just a cost of the build. The people that I've spoken with that are doing it will cost anywhere from $95/hr for dyno to $600-700 plus travel expenses if you have them come to your testing. Which is more than likely a little cheaper than blowing up a motor.
Kawasaki, and Yamaha also have aftermarket ECU's, and in addition their stock factory ECU's can be reflashed. Although, after much searching on the internet I could not find a specific factory / aftermarket ECU for Suzuki but, they can be reflashed. Which after reading many of the reflashing websites, is about the same as having a standalone. And, if you speak with some of the people doing it, you pretty much have access to ALL of the parameters in the ECU which in essences would make it a standalone.
So I would,
1. Vote against freezing or requiring sealed engines
2. Vote for allowing the FACTORY aftermarket ECU's
3. Vote for allowing the Geartronics paddle shift system or something like it.
4. Vote against air restrictors
And
5. Vote for people to STOP whinning and bit#*^#* and as someone else on another thread suggested, start enjoying the fact that FB had close (in it's first year) to the same number of cars running in it's class as FE and more than some other formula classes. In addition had an unprecedented number of different manufacturers cars running. And all of the manufacturers in the class were not even represented !!!
LET's not ruin a good class after it's first year in the nationals !!!!!!
Last edited by DonArm; 10.01.10 at 2:00 AM.
1. Vote against freezing or requiring sealed engines
2. Vote for allowing the FACTORY aftermarket ECU's
3. Vote for allowing the Geartronics paddle shift system or something like it.
4. Vote against air restrictors
And
5. Vote for people to STOP whinning and bit#*^#* and as someone else on another thread suggested, start enjoying the fact that FB had close (in it's first year) to the same number of cars running in it's class as FE and more than some other formula classes. In addition had an unprecedented number of different manufacturers cars running. And all of the manufacturers in the class were not even represented !!!
LET's not ruin a good class after it's first year in the nationals !!!!!!
Agree with everything DonArm says. As a matter of fact I think we should make him President of The loyal order of QYW&BAJRYFFB of American (quit your whining and bitching and just race your F**king FB)
Don't change what works, everything is inclusive right now and there is no need to start restricting things people have invested in or things that people love about this class. As for the ECU's, if you need to use an aftermarket ECU do what Sal did, apparently it was legal. As far as Shifters, I'm pretty sure that other 11 page (of now) thread established that it isn't a performance aid to the car but a drivers aid, and I think anything that aids the driver to be more in control should automatically be legal. But anyway, the shifter is legal so there shouldn't be a question. This is more a problem for people that don't want to pony up the $$ to get one, just like I don't feel like spending the $2k on 6"-8" wheels that seem to be more competitive but I'm not going to bitch and whine that it isn't fair, either I'll spend the money (if I feel I need them to do well)) or I'll just keep my mouth shut.
Engine restrictors, 3 year freeze??? I think there should be a 3 year freeze on that stupid talk, I'm not interested in being involved with a class where you need to find old junkie engines; maybe if it was an open engine class but not stock. I didn't sign up for this sh*t, and neither did anyone else.
Anyway, I think Don should start an entire new thread and ask registered FB drivers, manufacterers to vote on the record on these topics.
100% agree with you guys...
just one more proposal... call it Formula Libra
Stan: Not to pick too many nits, but shouldn't that read minimum ID ? The "maximum ID" would not be the restricted throat, but the transitions on either side, assuming that transitions are part of the SIR design.
With the desire from everyone to go strictly by the words used, that wording would seem to be incorrect for the the desired intent.
The "transitions" ahead of and behind the restrictor are not the restrictor itself, so "maximum" is the correct word. In practice many SIRs are 3-piece, bolt-together assemblies; a spun or machined inlet upstream (the trumpet shaped part), the minimum 3mm thick restrictor itself, and a spun or machined diffuser downstream.
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
I don't believe there are enough, or likely to ever be enough FB racers to impact the availability of 1000cc motors. Even if you have enough FB racers to move to #1 in participation, the numbers are small relative to the numbers of 1000cc bikes.
I raced in a series that had a 2 year rolling age, and still does 16 years later. Many of their other engine rules have been tweaked in those 16 years but the age requirement remains.
People generally don't wreck brand new bikes. They tend to "respect" them a little more when they first get them. It's when they get a little too comfortable for their abilities that things happen. Pay attention to the ODO on wrecked bikes. Not too many will be brand new. Not too many will be high mileage.
The big benefit isn't the idea that you may only have to buy a motor every 2 or 3 years. It is that you can continue to use the same model and remain competitive. Using the same model prevents the fabrication issues that comes along with changing models. New headers, new mounts, possibly a new air box and modified tail section, new wiring harness, along with the associated R&D.
If you think the engine freeze is a bad idea vote no, but don't let the availability concern issue be the reason.
"It is that you can continue to use the same model and remain competitive. Using the same model prevents the fabrication issues that comes along with changing models. New headers, new mounts, possibly a new air box and modified tail section, new wiring harness, along with the associated R&D."
Exactly, thereby increasing the cost of maintaining the car.
Now please understNd I'm not taking sides, but I feel you should know the intention of the three year freeze as it was discussed.Agree with everything DonArm says. As a matter of fact I think we should make him President of The loyal order of QYW&BAJRYFFB of American (quit your whining and bitching and just race your F**king FB)
Don't change what works, everything is inclusive right now and there is no need to start restricting things people have invested in or things that people love about this class. As for the ECU's, if you need to use an aftermarket ECU do what Sal did, apparently it was legal. As far as Shifters, I'm pretty sure that other 11 page (of now) thread established that it isn't a performance aid to the car but a drivers aid, and I think anything that aids the driver to be more in control should automatically be legal. But anyway, the shifter is legal so there shouldn't be a question. This is more a problem for people that don't want to pony up the $$ to get one, just like I don't feel like spending the $2k on 6"-8" wheels that seem to be more competitive but I'm not going to bitch and whine that it isn't fair, either I'll spend the money (if I feel I need them to do well)) or I'll just keep my mouth shut.
Engine restrictors
Anyway, I think Don should start an entire new thread and ask registered FB drivers, manufacterers to vote on the record on these topics.
The mAin reason is to limit costs and give manufacturers, drivers, engine suppliers a heads up on development time. Also at the same time preventing one car from spending ridiculous amounts of money in purchasing the next big thing and in turn requiring everyone else to follow suit just to be competitive. We are not interested in a spec class how ever we are interested in controlling some costs to help the class grow, no one needs a 30,000$ fa motor.
Just a thought... if we freeze the engines, we don't need to change the ecu rule, because we have existing solutions for all the engines currently being run in the class. That would give us 2 or 3 years to come up with a solution that accommodates future engines.
As an aside, the "Stock Moto" shifter kart classes use a 125cc Honda two-stroke that was last used in a bike around 1995, and parts are still readily available. (I'm not worried about keeping our 08 Suzuki alive.) With regard to the ecu issue - the class mandates a stock ecu and addresses the tech issue by the simple solution of requiring that the ecu be readily removable on the pre-grid. The race director can require competitors to exchange ecu's with another competitor, or with an ecu provided by the race director. Obviously, it's a lot easier with only one model of ecu to contend with, but it does show that sometimes these problems have simple solutions.
Stu Waterman
RMDIV
twitter.com/stuwaterman
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhhahah
[FONT=Verdana]I've been witness to people crashing on the way home from dealerships. I myself have wrecked 2 times in one weekend (once on Saturday and once on Sunday) after buying and finishing the race build on that Friday, and that isn't the one time. Maybe not a Harley or cruiser but a ton of sport bikes get wrecked as soon as they leave the dealership or within a month of purchasing, that a fact. The whole MC racing community lives off that fact![/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana]Also, if you put a freeze on engines would there be a push to open up the rules for installing NON performance enhancing internals that would add to the reliability and longevity of the motor?[/FONT]
Perhaps an Apexspeed poll would be a more visual way of seeing where people are on the various post runoffs issues?
Also this discussion doesn't have to be just about engines, if there are any other ideas for making the class grow, any concerns, etc feel free to voice them.
Agreed, I think since everyone likes you, you should be the one to start it and keep track. Here are some of the things I'd like to see:
multiple choice:
Engine: 1) same rules [FONT=Verdana]2)[/FONT] HP restrictor[FONT=Verdana] 3)[/FONT] 3 year moratorium [FONT=Verdana]4) open engine 5)[/FONT] same rules with spec non performance (HP producing) parts for reliability allowed.
ECU: 1) same rules [FONT=Verdana]2)[/FONT] any aftermarket ECU [FONT=Verdana]3)[/FONT] Stock ECU with NO flashing 4) Spec aftermarket ECU or Stock
Shifter: 1) same rules w/ autoblip [FONT=Verdana]2) [/FONT]no auto blip [FONT=Verdana]3) [/FONT]mechanical autoblip
well it's a start. I think it needs to happen right away!
Rules Proposal
An open ECU will just drive up cost and turn the class into "the person with the most money wins" type situation (like Formula Atlantic) - by the way $5000-10,000 to get an improved electronic shifting system - come on, that's exactly what I'm talking about.
An engine freeze is good in theory but it needs to be administered so in fact it doesn't make it more difficult to get an engine but I think it could work - a 3 year window is probably workable.
James
Everyone gets to have their own opinion of whether or not it is legal, but I can guarantee you that no one can point to a section of the GCR that allows what he did. Since this is a restricted class, my opinion is that it is really quite illegal.
Just because no one protested it does not mean it is legal.
Why would they put a rule in there against stand alone ecu's if they meant for it to be legal for anyone to be able to use their ecu as a switch to turn the stand alone unit on and off.
If the car won't start and idle without the Pectel/Motec you have in there, then it is a stand alone ECU.
I like the engine freeze because it adds stability to the class.
It is very reasonable to assume that every time someone wants to pioneer a new engine they can plan to destroy about 5 engines in the process of figuring out how to make it last.
$6k-$7k is a reasonable number to assume for the costs of putting in the first engine, if you do all of the work yourself. Every engine after that will cost an amount that varies between just the cost of the engine and the cost of the engine+whatever was destroyed in the fire that started after the last engine blew up.
That $6k number is only applicable if it is a well sorted engine package though. If you want to pioneer, then expect your costs to go up dramatically.
Yup, I think I'm with you on that. It worked well when I was racing in the UK, and even at the end of the three years there were plenty of low mileage motors around. I don't see why it should be any different here. For what it's worth I bought a brand spanking new GSXR 1000 at the begining of the year, and by the time I had parted out everything that I didn't need the motor cost me about $1500. Not bad for a motor that I know the complete history of, and way cheaper than buying a new motor.
Last edited by Brands; 10.01.10 at 4:06 PM.
Wren:
"If the car won't start and idle without the Pectel/Motec you have in there, then it is a stand alone ECU".
If that's what you feel would make the standalone piggyback legal, in your opinion, no problem, it can be done.
Well, I did say "generally" and we can't help stupid.
I won't check first, that'd be cheating. Look on ebay and a "cycle-salvage.com" type place. How many wrecked 2010 bikes (it is October now), how many '09 and '08's? I'd be surprised if there weren't more 2008 GSXR's available than 2010 CBR, R1, and ZX's combined.
I'd say nutty mixed into stupidity. You are probably right, between the economy taking a big crap in 08 and the fact that the GSXR's are the most ridden of the sportbikes I'd bet you are on the money.
I am an Ebay junkie always looking for decent 07-08 GSXR engines and I can say claimed mileage is generally between 2000 and 8000 miles. It it rare to find one with fewer than 1000 miles or over 12,000
I have no doubt that the claimed mileage and condition of the product vary from the sellers' claims, Ebay being Ebay.
At the risk of thread drift, I have noticed that the 07-08 GSXR engines seem to be increasing in price. About 9 months ago I bought a brand new one for $3000 and my brother bought one with a claimed 2000 miles that is super clean for $2000. Not many clean ones are going for less than $2500, but there many be a seasonal fluctuation.
Last edited by Ivinsea; 10.01.10 at 10:09 PM.
getting them wont be too bad but wait until you see how much they cost $$$$$, it'll be much more than what we pay now.......without a doubt (for an older junk motor) great strides in progression ! and this 3 years to help in development is total horse sh*t, what does that even mean?? the way it works now and obviously has in the past: new better engine comes out, someone decides they have to take on the challange and spends the time and money to develop it, everyone benefits! not rocket science. I'm starting to feel there are personal agendas at play (i know everyone is goin to say im crazy). why do we need a cap on anything?
There are almost always personal agendas at play. Most of us feel that what we want is best, otherwise we probably wouldn't want it. Of course, there are exceptions.
I beleive the 3 year development point is two fold. If I put a 2010 XYZR in "my car" right now I don't have to worry about what 2011 or 2012 brings. I have time to "recover" my installation and R&D costs.
Further, if I decide to buy the hottest 2011 motor out, I have time to get it all sorted and working in a car chassis long before I'll need it at the big dance.
I also have more time to find the motor of my choice.
I don't really care if the motors are available in a junk yard for $1K....if there is a different motor to have every year to remain competitve which requires chassis fab, body mods, exhaust mods, harness mods, it will get more expensive than it needs to be.
If that is your reasoning you wouldn't need a 3 year freeze, according to you it's going to take a couple years to sort out a new engine so there won't be anyone running one competitively for a while:
So even if the new 2011's come out blazing they won't be competitive until 2012-13
Everyone will still use what works just like JR did when he switched out the BMW. That engine may not be a threat for another year or or 2 or maybe ever.
So you (and anyone else concerned) get your "monies worth" from the engine you're running, at least for the next couple of years. So whats the difference, lets get the newer engine out testing asap, why wait and sh*tty transition period (post freeze)
BTW: when I said personal agenda's, I meant (and should have said) personal Business agenda's.
A little history
Back in the first year of FB, 2008, folks were finding out, quite often the really hard and hot way (Kerblammo/FIRE!) just what the GSXR will handle.
Things like max rpm, oiling, or rather lack of oiling, cooling of oil and water, etc...
I know I had some engines expire due to the above reasons, and as we have gained knowledge of what needed to be done, we got more service life out of the engines.
We found out the GSXR rod bolts were good to about 12,500, but just a few more, and bumping the rev limiter @ 13,3 would soon result in a blowup.
It took time, and often we headed down paths that soon were also found to be wrong.
Many, if not all of the things we learned can and will be applied to future engines.
The BMW at the Runoffs appeared to overheat. If those engines are anything like the BMW car engine, they are a royal pain to bleed the coolant system, perhaps there was an air bubble that lead to the retirement?
Again, we live, we learn, we race...
I guess by trying the engine freeze, we are attempting to make things easier for everyone, so that they would not have to go through the trials and tribulations that we have gone through already.
Folks could still run other engines in testing, get stuff bullet proof or as close to it as possible, then could even benefit from selling the bits to others, or just keep it all to themselves, whatever.
One thing my bro Ben mentioned above was the engine freeze worked well in the UK.
This is huge as I don't know that we have really investigated what has worked in other countries. If not, wow, we are really missing an opportunity to learn from other's mistakes. Hmmm, sounds a little familiar.
Last edited by glenn cooper; 10.02.10 at 12:45 PM. Reason: ..
Very good points about the engine freeze I may have to reconsider my thoughts about that.
Thanks
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
