Josh, if I'm correct (and I could very well be wrong) I believe Jeremy Hill is running a fully mechanical shifter.Originally Posted by starkejt
Josh, if I'm correct (and I could very well be wrong) I believe Jeremy Hill is running a fully mechanical shifter.
Impossible.
Exactly my point Russ. The advantage comes from the driver's ability. Not by mechanical advantage (ie: lower weight, more HP, lighter brakes, etc.). It's a driver's aid and there are drivers whom are good enough that don't need one. All this does is make it easier for those who can't and what's wrong with having more drivers running at the pointy end of the grid? Like I said, right now its a free choice and the choice is trying to be taken away.
At the very most he may have a no-lift shift, but does not have a full closed loop system, and he qualified 2nd.
The Piper also has at the most a no-lift shift and no closed loop system and they qualified 3rd.
Pretty sure Hill has just a mechanical shifter.
I believe so as well, but I'm checking on it.
thats a compliment, I'm not talk about looks, he's the #1 rockstar business man marketing guru in the industry. He's got KISS underwear....don't get any ideas for F1000 championship offical underwear!
Well, thank you John. But, you mean I have to tell Hanes and Michael Jordan the deal is off?....LOL
Jeremy has a Novak Paddle Shift with a Dan Robinson (DR) Blipper.
The first two rows of the grid looks like this (to my knowledge):
Geartronics
No wire
Flat Shifta
Geartronics
Oh yeah - FTCRB!
Agree 100%. Free the CRB from their oppression here on Apexspeed!
Agreed, but you have to admit that they have done a pretty reasonable job already of freeing themselves from the oppression of member input. It sure doesn't seem to have any bearing on the decisions they make.
Mr. Lewis
The fact is that strapping another 40 lbs to a 1,000 lb car with only 170 hp is like tying an anchor to it.
Please quantify in (time/seconds) what you think this weight or "anchor" will do to an average lap time compared to no anchor. What is your educated guess on let's say a two mile track?
http://autopedia.com/stuttgart-west/...Physics06.html
don't ask me what any of it means.......what I do know is in Motorcycle racing you are giving up alot being 40lbs heavier, these little F'ers go by you like you standing still.
Mr. Robinson,
I cannot quantify (nor would I attempt to GUESS) in time/seconds exactly what an extra 40 lbs would do without actually testing it back to back. But, what I can say with relative certainty that 40 lbs will slow a car down significantly to one that is 40 lbs less.
Just look at what 40 lbs does to a car in World Challenge and were talking 3,000 lb cars with a lot more horsepower.
My point is that 40 extra lbs does a lot more to the performance of a car than an assisted shifter system. Just look at the winner of the Runoffs. A mechanical shifter with a flatshift. So where's the performance advantage of a shifter system?
Can you quantify or have an educated guess of what the difference in time/seconds would be for a car with and without an assisted shifter system? Of course not. Again, my point. The 40 lb penalty has been recommended by the CRB without any basis or fact. The only way you should impose a penalty is only after adequate testing.
1. use the same car and driver on the same track and same day
2. Have a second car as a baseline for changing track conditions, tires, etc. (the configuration of this car stays the same throughout the day)
3. use a driver that is very good with a mechanical shifter
4. run the car with full mechanical
5. run the car with a shifter system
6. Determine the lap time difference (if any)
7. IF the car is faster with a shifter system, slowly add weight till the times equal out.
8. This would be the weight imposed for all cars using a shifter system
This is the only way you can justify a weight assessment. Any other way would be simply guessing without any basis.
Of course this would mean that they would have to spend time and money to determine what the real outcome should be. And, you have to take into consideration what systems are being used. Is it a simple system like flatshift or a more elaborate system like Pro-Shift or Geartronics and are there different weight assessments for different systems?
Right now, it is the option of the driver/team as to whether they want to use an assisted shifter system or not. It's not a MUST HAVE situation. Leave it alone until you have quantifiable proof of any performance value.
F1000 was formed on the basis of innovation. That's one reason why it is not spec. It was also based on a low cost formula. Low cost is a relative term. Even with a shifter system, the class is still low cost. Low cost doesn't mean the cheapest. Costs are kept down by having tube frame chassis, no carbon fiber, stock engines, no carbon brakes, etc.
Shifter systems like the Pro-Shift and Geartonics (although the initial cost is just under $5G) can help save money in the long run in engine and gearbox maintenance, etc.
Last edited by ASRF1000; 09.26.11 at 8:36 AM.
Accelleration
A simple 1/4 mile acceleration calculation ( with the only difference being the extra weight) will give you a .13 second difference just for that one acceleration run.
Thank you Richard.
Jon,
Your statement is exactly why I originally started this thread. It was to bring out some substance and how the 40 lbs would affect these cars. It was also meant to bring to dicussion just how detrimental this level of weight penalty would be to these cars. We now have an example of how the weights affects the linear acceleration of a car and I would bet that cornering performance would be greatly affected also.
The Geartronics systems carries it's own weight penalty as it it is significantly heavier than the mechanical system it replaced.
No pat answer is possible.
Weight differences will impose varying time difference results depending on the track, so it is impossible to give a one-size-fits-all answer. If someone out there has one of the better simulation programs, it would be interesting to see what the difference would be between, say, Gratten, Mid Ohio, and RA.
To put the weight penalty in a real world context: In a back to back test (one VD FC car using fuel as the weight change) 25lbs was approx .4 sec/lap at Summit Pt a few years ago. Kevin F can verify and fill in details.
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
Bob,
So using your calculations, a 40 lb weight difference would cause over a half second per lap. Times that by let's say 18 laps and you come up with over 9 seconds. I would say that is a pretty significant penalty.
Richard, you are correct that each track presents its own challenges and parameters on how weight can affect the performance of a car. There is no one size fits all situation you can come up with here.
I just wish the CRB would leave this class alone and let it grow. At least we don't have to worry about all this in the new Series. It would just be nice if the club also saw it the same way.
Brandon and I discussed trying to do back-to-back testing on what 40 pounds would mean for lap times at the ARRC, but we have no idea where we would be able to put the 40 pounds on his car. We are already using tungsten for ballast.
Bob is very close with his numbers. We tested 25lbs (25.6 to be exact) at Summit Point which is a 2 mile track with high and low speed turns and straights.( best test track I have ever used) The difference was .3 seconds per lap. Now mind you we were using fuel and not ideally placed ballast but it made the point for what we were trying to accomplish. The CRB then chose to use a heavier untested weight but thats another story and I really am trying to keep my blood pressure down these days. The test was done with a FC car that at the time was making apx 144 hp in the spec we did the weight test at.
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
Runoffs 1 Gold 3 Silver 3 bronze, 8 Divisional , 6 Regional Champs , 3x Drivers of the year awards
Wren,
Considering using lead shot from an ammunition store and package it in small cloth bags wire tied to the various nooks and crannys available in the car. The bags of shot are formable and will contour for fitment.
One ballast method I saw was making a bead seat and using lead shot in place of some of the beads in the lower portions.
I think Wren's point is, adding another 40 lbs to their car to compensate for a shifter system would be very difficult, at best.
I'd hate to have little beads of shot sliding around in the cockpit if any came loose. Also wouldn't like the thought of 40 lbs of lead strapped to my ass.
40 pounds is a lot of lead shot or bags, which is already less dense than the tungsten we have now. I had to put 25 pounds in my DB-6 to make weight and that car has more nooks and cranny's than Brandon's car and it was still a challenge. Brandon's bodywork is tight to the frame, unlike the DB-6. No way he is cutting up his new bead seat to perform a test to verify that the CRB is FOS, which everyone already knows.
We were mostly interested in taking some data and sharing it with the CRB, although they were not interested in the original data Brandon offered them. I guess decisions are easier in a vacuum.
I didn't think you should cut apart the bead seat. I just thought it was a clever way to find one more spot to cram a few pounds of lead for someone who was scratching his head to find where to fit all the necessary ballast.
A modern simulation program such as ChassisSim, Aerolap, etc. should be able to provide some pretty accurate numbers regarding the effects of 40 lbs. upon lap times. The problem is that I am not aware of any current FB race team that has the time and resources to do this properly. The software is very expensive, and it of course takes time to learn and master. You also need to have the information at hand to completely model your car in the software......for example: geometry, weights, cg, damping, aero map, hp curves, tire model, etc.
Or you could just use Steve Matchett's rule of thumb that 10 lbs is worth a tenth of a second per lap.
How much faster does that leave Brandon?
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
A lot. And it doesn't mean **** if it keeps raining.How much faster does that leave Brandon?
^^^Word^^^
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Stan the problem with Steves estimate is he has been around F1 fpr too long. F1 also says it takes a Million $ to get a second a lap. Then again think of all the $$$$ that means Lee has to spend with you to drop that .9 from his 2:00 lap
Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
Shhh...don't tell him!
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
as a matter of fact i built my car for less than $20k (not including labour) my shifter is fully mechanical, perhaps with a geartronics shifter i would have been on the pole...regards, jeremy hill
Good job on the car.
I was just googling you name, did you run Can-Am back in the day?
yes, i ran under 2L can-am 83 through 86, jeremy
When does the BOD meet for this?
Jeremy, do you mind sharing how much you weighed at the end of the race? The geartronics might have put you in third too. You never know.
The BOD will vote on this at the October meeting. This is in about 3 weeks.
Thanks ... Jay
i am happy to share, my car was 1004 lbs after q4, lets be serious if geartronics was not an advantage no one would be using it, perhaps all you guys running the geartronics can tell us honestly how much of an advantage it is, my quess is that at road america with a good driver it is worth at least .6 sec and i believe that a 40 lb penalty would be a .4 sec disadvantage, jeremy
I think that is an extremely reasonable statement Jeremy.
My major concern with the entire issue is that I think it is extremely important that both the Pro series and the National series have exactly the same rules. If not then neither series will survive over the long haul.
I made my position known at the CRB town meeting at the Runoffs that I supported assisted shifting systems. However I will abide by what ever decision the BOD makes on this issue.
There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote