F1K Series Open Engine Rule

[George Dean]

Whos going to tech Georges motors? Oh and isn't he a sponsor of the series to?

I wish someone would step forward and want to assist me in this task, Maybe you allof6! Since the beginning of this class I have done everything I could to make this class of cars grow, I helped with the initial engine rules, I have stepped up to the plate when Mike Beauchamp started his series and paid money to sponsor and get his series off of the ground, As well as for the west coast series to get off of the ground. I have worked with every major car builder helping them with getting their engine program working so their cars can be as competitive as possible. I have spent countless hours on the phone with the competitors of this class, I have spent hours on the phone with the SCCA talking to them. I have spent countless dollars of my own money and weeks away from my shop going to races all over the country just so I could be there to add my support, I did not volunteer for these tech positions! I was asked to do it and I did it to the best of my ability. Because I thought it was for the betterment of the class! And never once was my honesty and integrity questioned that I know of until now. If I have done the wrong thing, Excuse the f==k out of me!! Do you have any suggestions who can do this better?? Let me know. It is kind of a thankless job. I am done with my rant because I find it pretty stupid to try to defend myself against against someone who hides behind a screen name on a public forum

what if I have GD do a standard rebuild and turn around and send it to another engine builder to build a cheater motor out of it? Is no one going to inspect that engine because it is thought to be a GD motor?

These are not sealed engines all engines are subject to inspection, So go ahead and build a cheater engine, If I find it shame on you, If you get away with it shame on me.


George

[RussMcB]

... And never once was my honesty and integrity questioned that I know of until now.

George, we have been saying bad things about you for years. You never any of it?

Just kidding, obviously.

[ghickman]

Do you have any suggestions who can do this better?? Let me know. It is kind of a thankless job. I am done with my rant because I find it pretty stupid to try to defend myself against against someone who hides behind a screen name on a public forum

George

I'm one of those competitors that has spent zero dollars using George's services yet he has many times shared valuable information with me that saved me hours of time.

Start questioning George's integrity and you certainly have crossed the line. I trust this man like my own father.

[Wren]

I'm one of those competitors that has spent zero dollars using George's services yet he has many times shared valuable information with me that saved me hours of time.

Start questioning George's integrity and you certainly have crossed the line. I trust this man like my own father.

Exactly.

George is the man and has been supporting this class out of his own pocket for as long as it has been around.

[stonebridge20]

Short story: back in 05 we were developing a ZX12 for CSR. George built the engine and I had a problem with it. The man got on a plane and flew to my shop in Connecticut and fixed the problem. He got back on a plane and went home. Total bill,....$0

BTW: I didn't ask him to come. He insisted!

Question George's integrity and your asking for problems!

Oh,....I hope all the FB and DSR guys pony up a golf cart rental for George at this years Runoffs. It's sad to watch him running up and down those RA hills on foot, helping everybody out for free!

[ghickman]

I feel the East & West Coast Series should each have a Whistler CR tester. I propose that we start collecting money to purchase one and George can be the castodian of it. I propose we should start a volentary collection to purchase one now. I'd be more than happy to donate $100 right now.

We can end all this monkey business simply by testing compression ratio.

[Wren]

I feel the East & West Coast Series should each have a Whistler CR tester. I propose that we start collecting money to purchase one and George can be the castodian of it. I propose we should start a volentary collection to purchase one now. I'd be more than happy to donate $100 right now.

We can end all this monkey business simply by testing compression ratio.

Here are the problems I understand with that:

1. No 10mm spark plug adapter. Making an adapter is simple, which I know you understand, but does the Whistler give the right CR with an adpater? I assume that the AMA would have just made up the adapter if it was that simple.

2. I understand that 07-08 GSXR engines are coming from the factory with less than 12.5:1, which is the spec published in the FSM. If the engine measures 12.5:1, there is a pretty good chance that it has had the head machined down and the engine is no longer stock and not legal.

[F1000champ]

Here are the problems I understand with that:

1. No 10mm spark plug adapter. Making an adapter is simple, which I know you understand, but does the Whistler give the right CR with an adpater? I assume that the AMA would have just made up the adapter if it was that simple.

2. I understand that 07-08 GSXR engines are coming from the factory with less than 12.5:1, which is the spec published in the FSM. If the engine measures 12.5:1, there is a pretty good chance that it has had the head machined down and the engine is no longer stock and not legal.

Wren is correct. I've had numerous talks with Katech regarding the addapter. 1. They cannot recalibrate it to the increased volume of an adapter. The whistler tube is just under 10mm itself which makes a 10mm plug impossible, they have tried. Which is why the AMA does not use one on 10mm plug bikes. Once we can find a whistler that uses a 10mm plug, the F1K Series will purchase it. Until then, we might have to go by compression pressures. This something George will have to determine.

2. Remember, we are allowing .20mm of machining on the head for clean up (warpage). If the engine specs are 12.5:1 and the compression ratio reads out at 12.5:1 and there has been no more than .20mm machined off the head, it is legal by our rules. If the compression ratio reads 12.6:1 or if the head has been machined more than .20MM then it is illegal. Simple as that.

[ghickman]

Here are the problems I understand with that:

1. No 10mm spark plug adapter. Making an adapter is simple, which I know you understand, but does the Whistler give the right CR with an adpater? I assume that the AMA would have just made up the adapter if it was that simple.

2. I understand that 07-08 GSXR engines are coming from the factory with less than 12.5:1, which is the spec published in the FSM. If the engine measures 12.5:1, there is a pretty good chance that it has had the head machined down and the engine is no longer stock and not legal.

Wren
1) I've already spoken with a manufacturer of these and they tell me it's no problem for them to supply a 10mm adapter and can calibrate for it.

2) So point is that if it blows over the published CR it's not legal. The competitor isn't able to race until the meet spec.

[billwald]

1000% agree! Well put.

[quote=ghickman

Start questioning George's integrity and you certainly have crossed the line. I trust this man like my own father.[/quote]

[F1000champ]

Gary,

Can you provide me with that manufacturer's contact info. I would like to get one for our Series. Thank you.

Jon

[glenn cooper]

a whistler was for determining cylinder volume?

I remember stories from NASCAR's past where they did this type testing and the teams knew it was the same cylinder each time and Petty had an engine one year oversize on 7 cylinders!

[Jnovak]

a whistler was for determining cylinder volume?

I remember stories from NASCAR's past where they did this type testing and the teams knew it was the same cylinder each time and Petty had an engine one year oversize on 7 cylinders!

It can do both displacement and compression ratio Glenn.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Wren]

2) So point is that if it blows over the published CR it's not legal. The competitor isn't able to race until the meet spec

I agree that it could be a good first check, but George's calipers on the outside of the head is probably just as easy

[Rick Kean]

Here is some Whistler info

[JohnPaul]

This is all crazy talk. Just do a sealed spec engine instead or hp limit. I think the rules are crazy when you call someone's 185 hp gsxr "worked" engine illegal but the guy next to him with a stock 195 hp zx10 legal? I know no one is running a zx10 yet and I know technically by the rules that's correct but it just does sit right with me. Something needs to be fixed with the rules and I think this is the best time to do it.

[Hardingfv32]

If the compression ratio reads 12.6:1 BUT the head has been machined ...only... .20MM then it is: legal or illegal?

Brian

[F1000champ]

If the compression ratio reads 12.6:1 BUT the head has been machined ...only... .20MM then it is: legal or illegal?

Brian

If the manufacturers listed compression ratio is 12.5:1 it is Illegal.

[glenn cooper]

This is all crazy talk. Just do a sealed spec engine instead or hp limit. I think the rules are crazy when you call someone's 185 hp gsxr "worked" engine illegal but the guy next to him with a stock 195 hp zx10 legal? I know no one is running a zx10 yet and I know technically by the rules that's correct but it just does sit right with me. Something needs to be fixed with the rules and I think this is the best time to do it.

Yep

[JerryH]

This problem can be easily fixed with single inlet restrictors or a rev limiter (or both). That should keep engines as close as is possible.

Don't know why anyone would oppose that. Rev limiter might have to be issued at each event to keep a check on that.

Thanks,

Jerry

[Brett Lane]

I'm opposed to it, for one. This is the second time you've chimed in about SIR's, the first time you specifically mentioned it in club racing on another F1K thread.

Do you own or drive an FB? If you do, you shouild know the SIR issue in club racing was beaten to death. As a reminder, this is another F!K thread.

[carnut169]

Why not suggest a sealed motor? I'd rather pay for the seal then have to sit around while engines are torn down then pay for it to be reassembled several times over the season. Competitors who choose to run a sealed engine would be exempt from the tear-down (but still inspected).

Allof6- I understand your position but the challenge is finding someone with the required knowledge/ skills, the willingness to devote the time/ travel, AND who posseses the integrity that 99% of the field does not question.
George is the right guy.
Further, George can/ will build an engine for any competitor. If he was only building for one or two teams I could see people having an issue with him being the tech inspector.

[F1000champ]

Ok, everyone wanted the stock engine rule. The fact is you can't have it both ways. Stock means stock. Do a normal rebuild and you'll be fine. Start monkeying with the motor by machining the head, etc. and suffer the consequences.

Single inlet restrictor. Won't work. Not everyone has a properly sealed airbox. Nor are the inlet's the same. Even more testing (airbox pressures, etc). Now you're asking all the teams to come up with another airbox and make a passible restrictor. More cost. Also, there is nothing to say that one engine will perform or be more drivable with a restictor than another.

Restrict HP. Yeah, that's an easy one. Let's put everyone on a chassis dyno at every race. Let's make sure that all tires have the same wear, let's make sure all the engines are the same temperature, etc. Not going to happen.

Seal the motors. Again, do you want to be restricted to only one builder? I don't think so. Testing doesn't mean tearing down per say. It means non-evasive testing to determine if a tear down is neccessary.

Spec engine. Come on. You mean that everyone who doesn't have the "spec" engine has to disgard their current one and buy a whole new motor? Yeah, that's a real cost savings. Again, not going to happen.

The only way to easily police an engine rule was to have it open as originally proposed. But, no one wanted that. So, here we are. Stock engine rule. KEEP IT STOCK AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO WORRY! Screw with it and suffer the consequences. Period.

Leave it alone. The rule is a stock engine and we will have the proper proceedures to make sure everyone is legal.

[JohnPaul]

The only way to easily police an engine rule was to have it open as originally proposed. But, no one wanted that. So, here we are. Stock engine rule. KEEP IT STOCK AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO WORRY! Screw with it and suffer the consequences. Period.

Leave it alone. The rule is a stock engine and we will have the proper proceedures to make sure everyone is legal.

thats not the point, you have suzuki's with one hp range, Honda with another, BMW another, kawi another..........getting the point? so what if you don't do an open engine rule? save money? really? you'll have people spending double to buy the latest greatest engine. You know they will with the type of money on the line. I know if I compete I'm going to try to fit the ZX10, thats $6k just for motor. I can built my gsxr for a few grand and not have to worry. Spec, seal or open thats the only way to make it somewhat affordable and even steven.
I'd go back to the original rules you proposed. As crappy as the SCCA rules are its fine for club racing but no way for a Pro Series. It'll be a joke.

[carnut169]

This would be true if people built the motors for reliability but they won't. They will want every possible once of power, even if it means 3-4 engines a year.

An open engine rule would be very enforceable, fun as heck to watch/ drive, but also
costly and it would keep some guys from participating.

I will say this- when I 1st built my car there was no FB and I ran it as an FS while we were forming a rules committee, etc. It had a Crutchfield 1050cc GSXR which is what they run in a 1/4 mile car of some sort- that motor never gave me an once of trouble and did not cost much more than a prepped stock motor. Swapped to a stock motor and started the fight w/ heat control...

thats not the point, you have suzuki's with one hp range, Honda with another, BMW another, kawi another..........getting the point? so what if you don't do an open engine rule? save money? really? you'll have people spending double to buy the latest greatest engine. You know they will with the type of money on the line. I know if I compete I'm going to try to fit the ZX10, thats $6k just for motor. I can built my gsxr for a few grand and not have to worry. Spec, seal or open thats the only way to make it somewhat affordable and even steven.
I'd go back to the original rules you proposed. As crappy as the SCCA rules are its fine for club racing but no way for a Pro Series. It'll be a joke.

[tonyave]

Jon,

If I may:

The rules are the rules, if you don't like it, don't run. I think it's pretty clear what the series is going to do, so it would appear they are beyond the point of asking any more opinions. If a particular engine seems to have an advantage, either buy it or don't. Or, feel free to start your own series....

How is it possible someone makes an announcement of paying 50K to a championship winner and all we see is people complaining cause it isn't fair??? Are you kidding me?? $6000 for an engine is too much??? I have news for you, at $6000 I would buy three of them and have them dynoed to run the best one. Why do I even get into these things....


Tony

[JohnPaul]

This would be true if people built the motors for reliability but they won't. They will want every possible once of power, even if it means 3-4 engines a year.

An open engine rule would be very enforceable, fun as heck to watch/ drive, but also
costly and it would keep some guys from participating.

I will say this- when I 1st built my car there was no FB and I ran it as an FS while we were forming a rules committee, etc. It had a Crutchfield 1050cc GSXR which is what they run in a 1/4 mile car of some sort- that motor never gave me an once of trouble and did not cost much more than a prepped stock motor. Swapped to a stock motor and started the fight w/ heat control...

You are exactly right, there is no need to spend the money on a hand granade. but what is the alternative? if you want to be competitive you'll need to spend $10k on the baddest new motor out. dam'd if you do dam'd if you don't.

Tony, maybe everyone isn't a big shot like you. I can do the same but it isn't my point its just plain dumb. 100% of FB drivers run gsxr so why not use what is readily available and run it open. it'll cost way less to blow out a competitive motor.

[R. Pare]

Guys:

F1K is setting up a series for you, the Club racer who would like to go play in the "big time" as your budget allows.

To get this series going, he has chosen the smartest path possible - Club legal cars with minimal modifications. This decision allows YOU, the amateur racer, to participate without having cough up a lot of $$$$ to change the car away from the Club configuration.

The Club specs are that any 1000cc or smaller engine is legal in its stock form. You knew this while the rules were being made, and you knew this when you made your decision to go with the engine you chose.

Is the some inequity between different manufacturers?

Hell yes.

Did you know that going in?

Hell yes.

Does this mean that if someone is willing to spend the time and money to get the latest and greatest engine adapted to their car that they might have a HP advantage? Hell yes - IF they can get it to live for the weekend.

Does that mean that they automatically have an insurmountable advantage over you?

Not necessarily. In initial acceleration off of the slowest corners, yes, but once aero drag starts dominating the acceleration rate, all bets are off.

Leave the engine rules as they are. Time will tell if there really is a need to change anything.

You want to race in this series? Do your homework beforehand, make your choices on what equipment you can afford, work your ass of developing it, and go have fun. But don't whine when someone make better choices than you did.

Welcome to the real world of Pro/Semi-Pro racing - and real racing in general.

[Wren]

This would be true if people built the motors for reliability but they won't. They will want every possible once of power, even if it means 3-4 engines a year.

I agree, that is the problem with the open engine rule. But, I think it would be worse than 3-4 engines a year, it would be 3 engines just to start the first weekend. One in the car, one in the trailer, and one at the builder being prepared to replace the one in the car that will wear out soon. That is a $20k-$25k price of entry. There is also a good chance that halfway through the season all three of those motors have big holes in the side of them and you need to go spend another $20k-$25k to finish the season. It's not a coincidence that the DSR guys go through more motors than the FB guys.

I think it would be good for the series to look into anti-tamper seals that could be applied after George inspects a motor so that he doesn't have to re-inspect the same motor the next weekend. George already works so hard he makes me tired so I am in favor of anything that makes his life easier but still maintains the integrity of the racing. I think that sealing the valve cover, head, and maybe the oil pan is a very reasonable thing to do as there is no need to remove any of those things in the course of a normal weekend. It should take about 2 hours to inspect a motor and the series could easily average 15 cars/weekend the first year. Doing 30 hours/weekend of inspection could get cumbersome.

JohnPaul - I think you are worrying about something that hasn't come to pass yet. It is certainly possible that someone could show up with a BMW and have 10-12 HP on the field, but it is equally as likely that those engines will not last a race distance, much less a full weekend. Let the series worry about those motors if they show up and prove to be an advantage.

Richard - well said

[tonyave]

John Paul I am not being a big shot, if I were I wouldn't be at my shop right now prepping my Trans Am car for the next two weeks, someone else would be doing it. I'm just pointing out that these debates are endless, you throw around a number like 6K being too much to tolerate. Have you considered how much money one could spend in a wind tunnel with these rules? Either do it or don't, but don't assume those of us interested in running the series need you to look out for whats good for us. We can handle that on our own.

Tony

[JohnPaul]

John Paul I am not being a big shot, if I were I wouldn't be at my shop right now prepping my Trans Am car for the next two weeks, someone else would be doing it. I'm just pointing out that these debates are endless, you throw around a number like 6K being too much to tolerate. Have you considered how much money one could spend in a wind tunnel with these rules? Either do it or don't, but don't assume those of us interested in running the series need you to look out for whats good for us. We can handle that on our own.

Tony

Tony, beleive me when I say I'm not worried for anyone. I'm not "throwing" $6k around as too much, it is a simple fact that most of the people in this class want to keep things to expenses to a minimum. I'm saying in order to keep a level playing field and not have go through engine enforcement (which seems to be a pain in the butt) maybe an open engine rule would be cheapest (or maybe not). I know for sure that everyone in FB would atleast have an engine to start with (gsxr) and wouldn't have to purchase a $6k motor (which by the way is only the motor not the other expenses needed to get it to work, possibly another $6k)
This is a forum to discuss topics and give your 2 cents. I think that the engines rules are weak and should and can be addressed now. Maybe FB isn't for me.....but at least I'm speaking as an invested driver and owner of one you are acting as a big shot that would buy 10 engines when you aren't even in the class.

BTW: I'd love one of the top DSR guys get on this thread and tell us what a realistic engine budget would be for 5 weekends becuase there is a lot of speculation being thrown around.

[tonyave]

My buddy Jean Luc Liverato quit DSR because of the money he was spending on the open engine deal. While I like that stuff, and would be one of the few to figure out a way to pay for it, it would be WAYYYYY too expensive for the masses to support. It's not just a matter of compression ratios, its playing around with one race pistons, rods, cranks, and on and on. Different engine configs for different tracks, all the stuff I have been there and done before. So, it looks like what Jon is doing makes the most sense, at least to me. Which is why I have moved forward and gotten my hands on a car to measure up in consideration of running for the 50K.

If you think my comments are that of a 'big shot', you are in for a rude awakening as to what people will do to win a series that pays 50K. David Tenney did the 'dyno a bunch of engines and sell off the bad ones' back in the early days of Spec Racer, a supposed control series, which this one is not. I speak out in support of the series here because most people thinking like me just shake their head at the notion of those who think this is supposed to be a foolproof, on the cheap, nobody-has-an-advantage endeavor. Jon has put in way too many hours.

I have a lot of experience at racing for a living, and I'm telling you there is no easy way, just a ton of hard work. Seals? If you don't tear the winning engines down regularly, seals or not, you have no rules. Google "604 Crate Racing seals" if you don't believe me.

So, say what you want, but I say live by these rules:

Get a rulebook, build a car, show up and give it your best effort.

Stop whining.....

Tony


(And yes, you are)

[JohnPaul]

Stop whining.....

Tony


(And yes, you are)

lol, I know doesn't it sound like I am? so lets just run the same crappy engine rules that everyone has been complaining about even though now is a perfect time to figure out something that works. Maybe not an open engine rule but something. The way it looks now is that there isnt a way to enforce the current engine rules (at least one that does'nt mean tearing an engine apart and putting it back together before the next race), that's going to be a tough for anyone entering the series. Maybe you spec it to current gen stock gsxr's and if you see people pulling on people on the straights you tear apart the engine then and do a life time ban if they are running a cheater. change engines every 2-3 years, I don't know but I'm sure there are smarter people than me that can figure something out.

[Brands]

Perhaps a really severe penalty would help if anyone is caught with a dodgy motor. Life time ban from the series perhaps. I like the stock rule, and I'm sure as the F1K series develops teething troubles will get ironed out.

[F1000champ]

I don't know about everyone else but all this is getting tiring. Inspecting an engine doesn't neccessarity mean tearing it down. We will have proceedures in place to check engines to see if they fall within the stock parameters (compression ratios, compression pressures, etc.) that will not require a full teardown. Only if these proceedures determine that an engine falls outside of the stock parameters will a potential teardown be initiated.

Wren, your idea of a seal of some type once the engine has been inspected by the Series that enables us to simply check the seal instead of a full inspection at the following tech inspections is a good one and it is something that George and I have already discussed. We are looking into ways that it can be done easily and effectively. Please let's not go off on another tangent as to how this can be done, we've got that under control.

Now, will there be differences in power of some different engines? Of course. There is a difference between a K6 Suzuki and a K7 Suzuki. Just as there are between a BMW, a Honda and a Kawazaki. That's just the nature of the beast. There is always going to be a better mousetrap. That's evolution. This Series is geared towards innovation, not a spec class. If someone gets a Kawazaki to run properly in a car and it has more power in stock form than a Suzuki, there is no doubt that it will become the engine of choice. It's up to each individual team as to whether or not they want to switch brands. There is no perfect way to make engines of all manufacturers equal. Horsepower can be the same but yet the power band can be different as can the torque curve. Everyone has the same opportunity to purchase whatever engine they choose. It can't be anymore equal than that. We are not banning anyone from their decision making opportunity. All we are stating is that whatever engine you choose, it has to be stock.

I currently have a K6 in our promotional car. Is a K7 more powerful. Probably, but we're working on aerodynamics to overcome its potential short falls. There are more areas beside just horsepower where you can make up ground. The misconception (and Tony stop me if I'm wrong) is that overall top end speed is the key. It's not. I've been racing professionally for 23 years and one thing has never changed. There are more corners on a road course than there are straights. Make a car brake deeper, go through a corner faster and exit a corner at a greater speed and logarythmically (sp) it will be faster overall.

The fact is that even in Trans-Am we had one year when the Chevy engine seemed more dominent than the Ford and visa versa. It's racing folks. Did we complain when we were getting our butt kicked by the Chevy's. No, it was clear that they were better. So, we had to find other ways in which to be competitive. We found it in aerodynamics. the Jaguar was a better body style. We also found more speed in the braking area of the car. Nobody here is backed by a engine manufacturer. Your not locked into one specific power plant. Nor are you locked into one specific wing package, brake package, or even chassis. There are several guys out their trying to figure out how to put engines from different manufacturers in a car. I for one think that's great. More power to them. Being innovative within the rules structure is what motorsport was founded on. We've seen to have gotten away from all that with all these spec series out there, and frankly I find that boring. You don't have to cheat to be innovative and if you want to switch motors its at the price of a stock engine, it's not a built race motor. If you want to run in a spec series, then this probably isn't the place for you. There are plenty of spec series out there you can run in. I want to see innovation within the rules guidelines. I want to see teams compete, not just drivers.

This is "formula" car racing. What that means is that there is a set formula in which you can prepare your car. Within that formula you have areas that you can work within. You can choose different engines, you can choose different aero packages, you have some freedom to experiment. Take your car to the a2 wind tunnel in Mooresville, NC if you want. At $350/hr you can spend two complete days there for $5,000. What you can find there in ways of aero advantages could be huge. Even if this was a spec engine class, there will be guys spending their money in other areas like that. So you can only keep costs down so much. You cannot control how much one team is willing to spend over another.

I think everyone here has to stop worrying about whether someone else is cheating or not and whether they are going to get away with it. I understand that with SCCA club racing, it has gone on without really any checking with maybe the runoffs and june sprints being the exception. But this is not club racing. This is the F1K Series. Our rules will be set and will be enforced. How we decide to check them is our decision. We will do everything in our power to make inspections non evasive for our participants. We don't want to teardown engines anymore than we have to. We don't want teams to incur unneccessary expenses either. If it passes our simple tests, then you don't have to worry. Please get that through your heads. The only time you should be complaining is if your cheating yourself and worried about getting caught. The one thing that I can say is that if you cheat, you will be caught. Simple as that.

[VehDyn]

Jon,

Hang in there brother. Tony has some sage advice.

Now, will there be differences in power of some different engines? Of course. There is a difference between a K6 Suzuki and a K7 Suzuki. Just as there are between a BMW, a Honda and a Kawazaki. That's just the nature of the beast. There is always going to be a better mousetrap. That's evolution. This Series is geared towards innovation, not a spec class. If someone gets a Kawazaki to run properly in a car and it has more power in stock form than a Suzuki, there is no doubt that it will become the engine of choice. It's up to each individual team as to whether or not they want to switch brands. There is no perfect way to make engines of all manufacturers equal. Horsepower can be the same but yet the power band can be different as can the torque curve. Everyone has the same opportunity to purchase whatever engine they choose. It can't be anymore equal than that. We are not banning anyone from their decision making opportunity. All we are stating is that whatever engine you choose, it has to be stock.

I currently have a K6 in our promotional car. Is a K7 more powerful. Probably, but we're working on aerodynamics to overcome its potential short falls. There are more areas beside just horsepower where you can make up ground. The misconception (and Tony stop me if I'm wrong) is that overall top end speed is the key. It's not. I've been racing professionally for 23 years and one thing has never changed. There are more corners on a road course than there are straights. Make a car brake deeper, go through a corner faster and exit a corner at a greater speed and logarythmically (sp) it will be faster overall.

The fact is that even in Trans-Am we had one year when the Chevy engine seemed more dominent than the Ford and visa versa. It's racing folks. Did we complain when we were getting our butt kicked by the Chevy's. No, it was clear that they were better. So, we had to find other ways in which to be competitive. We found it in aerodynamics. the Jaguar was a better body style. We also found more speed in the braking area of the car. Nobody here is backed by a engine manufacturer. Your not locked into one specific power plant. Nor are you locked into one specific wing package, brake package, or even chassis. There are several guys out their trying to figure out how to put engines from different manufacturers in a car. I for one think that's great. More power to them. Being innovative within the rules structure is what motorsport was founded on. We've seen to have gotten away from all that with all these spec series out there, and frankly I find that boring. You don't have to cheat to be innovative and if you want to switch motors its at the price of a stock engine, it's not a built race motor. If you want to run in a spec series, then this probably isn't the place for you. There are plenty of spec series out there you can run in. I want to see innovation within the rules guidelines. I want to see teams compete, not just drivers.

This is "formula" car racing. What that means is that there is a set formula in which you can prepare your car. Within that formula you have areas that you can work within. You can choose different engines, you can choose different aero packages, you have some freedom to experiment. Take your car to the a2 wind tunnel in Mooresville, NC if you want. At $350/hr you can spend two complete days there for $5,000. What you can find there in ways of aero advantages could be huge. Even if this was a spec engine class, there will be guys spending their money in other areas like that. So you can only keep costs down so much. You cannot control how much one team is willing to spend over another.

Think F1. The Renault engine is the same in the Red Bull as the Renault factory cars but there is no comparison in performance. Another example is comparing the McLarens to the Force India. Same powerplant, different results.

I think everyone here has to stop worrying about whether someone else is cheating or not and whether they are going to get away with it. I understand that with SCCA club racing, it has gone on without really any checking with maybe the runoffs and june sprints being the exception. But this is not club racing. This is the F1K Series. Our rules will be set and will be enforced. How we decide to check them is our decision. We will do everything in our power to make inspections non evasive for our participants. We don't want to teardown engines anymore than we have to. We don't want teams to incur unneccessary expenses either. If it passes our simple tests, then you don't have to worry. Please get that through your heads. The only time you should be complaining is if your cheating yourself and worried about getting caught. The one thing that I can say is that if you cheat, you will be caught. Simple as that.

At some point you have to stop worrying about making the rules where it is impossible to cheat. People will cheat. People actually lie too. In my business, I see people lie under oath. It happens. People will do what they think fits within their morals. As rule writers and enforcers, you do the best you can and make the penalties stiff enough that when you have purposeful and obvious cheating, you hold them accountable with severe penalties. Sometimes people make mistakes and there are misunderstandings; but when its obvious, hold them accountable.

Keep up the good work.

[Jnovak]

I suggest that we all give this some time to settle out. F1K has created a very reasonable & workable set of rules that we can live with. Is it perfect in that it makes everyone happy? No but there is no set of rules that will make everyone happy.

Lets go racing. We all will work under the same set of rules & it will work out.

Thanks ... Jay Novak

[Northwind]

Jon,

You have my vote with your current plan. This is a good starting point and adjustments can be made down the road if needed. Let's get the series on the map. We already know there is great competition with the way the cars are formulated now.

And for those that don't know Tony, he craps more about racing then most of us will ever know. For what I remember he and I started racing against each other in 1986, Sports 2000. He had a father that gave him a top notch program and took the reins and made a career out of racing. I would listen to what he has to say. He's been thru the wringer.

[John Mosteller]

Which manufacturer specifications will you be using.I have 07-08 Yamaha engines.The factory service manual lists the designed/claimed compression ratio at 12.7.

In the cylinder head specifications it lists head volume 14 - 14.8 cc warpage limit 0.10 mm (0.0039 in) and says if the warpage is under 0.10 mm reuse the head and if the warpage is over 0.10 mm to resurface the head to spec. They list no maximum amount that can be machined from the head but after resurfacing it still needs to measure 14 - 14.8 cc volume and if it does it is within fractory spec.No other areas may be resurfaced.

In the maintenance section they list a standard cranking compression pressure of 210.5 PSI at 350 r/min. Then they list the minimum/maximum cranking pressure of 183.5 - 236.1 PSI at 350 r/min. One would think the standard pressure would be what they calculate at the designed/claimed 12.7.You wouldn't think they would claim 12.7 and give a standard pressure that equaled 12.2 or 12.9.

The cranking min/max pressure may relate to the cylinder head volume min/max 14 - 14.8 cc. The difference between 14 -14.8 cc head volume would probably be a difference of .5 to .7 on the compression ratio.If the standard cranking pressure does relate to the claimed 12.7 then clearly they consider a compression ratio above 12.7 and below 12.7 to be within factory spec.

With a factory spec with this wide of range it might be possible to have an engine that has never been touched since it left the factory to have a higher compression ratio than the claimed 12.7. Would such an engine be considered legal as it would be within factory spec and if so would someone that had a warped head that was resurfaced and within factory spec with all other engine parts being untouched be legal if it exceeded 12.7?

The only other factory service manual I have is for 04 -05 Kawasaki ZX10R and they don't allow anything to be resurfaced except the head.They list a warpage limit of 0.05 mm (0.002 in).They say to replace the head if it is over the warpage limit and to lap the head on a surface plate with wet sandpaper starting with 200 grit and finishing with 400 to bring the surface back to 0.So as far as the 04 -05 ZX10R the compression ratio for the most part is what it is. Are all their engines right on their claimed 12.7 or could they be 12.71?

If you are going only by the claimed ratio and not the specification range then anyone wanting to run one of your races will have to take their stock engine apart and cc it or somehow determine if their stock engine is a legal stock or illegal stock engine so they don't get caught out.Anyone with an 04 -05 ZX10R better hope theirs is legal stock because there is nothing that can be done except try a different engine.

These factory service manuals weren't intended to be rule books and as such are not very useful as one.

The engine rules we came up with to start the class were for the most part taken from the AMA rules for the stock class.No one could come up with anything better to submit at the time but we wanted a stock engine rule.Is it as good as it can be.No but it was a good starting point and will probably get modified as the class progresses.

The compression issue is one of the areas that may have to be addressed eventually.
AMA ran into some of these same problems with it and changed their rules a year or two after we started F1000.They went to a rule allowing the crankcase,cylinder top or bottom and the cylinder head to be machined for the purpose of increasing the compression ratio. My understanding is that some of the teams running brands with lower factory compression ratios claimed they could not compete with the teams allowed higher ratios.They also wanted to be able to alter cam timing as some brands had cam timing that was more for the street and didn't think it was fair that they couldn't have the same cam timing that some of the others could.

So they allowed all brands to raise compression to the same level and as I recall they set it at 13 or 13.5 and they started allowing the slotting of the cam sprockets or replacement of the press on cam sprockets for the purpose of changing the cam timing.These rules are still included in the latest AMA pro rules for the stock class.They no longer run a 1L stock class only 600cc inline 4s and some larger twins but are still allowing those items.They basically allow only stock internals with no modificalions except to the cam sprocket,the replacement of press on cam sprockets and the replacement of the cam chain tensioner with a manual cam chain adjuster and they allow the machining for increasing the compression ratio.

I think there are pros and cons to that.If F1000 went that way it would stop the complaints from the have and have nots and make checking easier.but would ulitmately cost most some money to develope their engine and it might make it harder to determine if other modifications have been made.It would also be nice if any rule changes could be made at the club level as well so that there would be crossover.

[tedsimmons2]

What about individual inlet restrictors (IIR)? No, I don’t have a horse in this race but potentially may have a pony in the F600 race. It’s been suggested that IIRs can restrict all four brands of MC 600cc engines to a reasonable HP to compete on equal footing with the unrestricted 500cc snowmobile engines in F500. Not a SIR but a restrictor placed downstream from the airbox to limit HP. Would this work on the 1000cc engines? If not, I’m curious how it would work on the 600cc but not the 1000cc. It’s even rumored that George Dean has said this would work on the 600cc engines.