New FV Minimum Weight

[problemchild]

There are plenty of cars TODAY that can make minimum weight with a 200 pound driver. I have one--a Citation--which I don't think anyone would consider to be a particularly lightweight design. I think 200 pounds is a reasonable target weight for the average driver. Plenty of guys are heavier and lighter, but that is a reasonable average to shoot for. If the average car weighs 825-850 you can see a sweet spot forming in the range of 1040-1050, which I think the results of the poll I started in the other thread would verify, although I would still like to see at least twice as many respondents to that question to gather a better data set.

I would consider a Citation a light car. Before Vortechs became the rage, it would have been one of the lighter production cars, if not the lightest. Mysterians, Caracals, Lynxs, Adams, Lazers, BRDs, and many more, have ladder frames with 2X4 rails.

[Matt King]

I would consider a Citation a light car. Before Vortechs became the rage, it would have been one of the lighter production cars, if not the lightest. Mysterians, Caracals, Lynxs, Adams, and many more have ladder frames with 2X4 rails.

Maybe the frames are lighter, but those other cars don't have 15 pounds of sidepods and extra steering linkage either.

[FVRacer21]

Its interesting that through all your research and statistical analysis, you always come back to whats best for you.

I did the research before I posted this thread - I was traveling an unable to post it until I got home.

I can use your numbers and conclude; that if 189 lb drivers could once make minimum weight, and the average weight of American males has risen 24.7 lbs during the life of FV, that the proper minimum weight for FV would be 1064.7 lbs. Since we are actually trying to increase accessability, rather than maintain it, we should just round up to 1075 and be done with it. I'm sure that number would be perfect for some.

I have stated that I was not looking to do a competition adjustment except for the fact that the rules might have inadvertently gone in a reverse-competitive direction. I thought we should level the playing field first - my opinion.

Since you think 1040 is the appropriate weight to maintain the ideals of our "forefathers", why don't you just round that up to 1050 to help your fellow racers. Why are those 10 lbs so important to you?

I would have no problem supporting 1050 if at the end of this discussion there is enough member support for this. I am well aware of the politics of the SCCA and feel the Comp Board will support a technical reason for a change rather than an "inclusive" adjustment. I also recognize the concerns about tire wear and other performance changes - that is why I asked for hard data for performance with different weights. Before I would think about a change to 1075 I would want to talk to the tire manufacturers first. Ironically, this might have the effect of them producing a harder tire.

BTW - I have raced on the Canadian/EMRA tires, but that was years ago but I don't remember the weight coming off the track. I tested at Bridgehampton and raced them at Lime Rock. I really liked the tires and how the car felt on the track. Because of the mixed classes in the SCCA, I believe there would be objections to this on a National level, but Regionally, might be doable.

ChrisZ

[FVRacer21]

Just a thought,

Everyone's voice should be heard, but don't bombard the Comp Board with letters asking them to keep the weight at 1025 until there is a proposal on the table.

Nor should everyone send a letter with their own specific weight.

In the heat of this discussion (sometimes reminding me a the Republican debates, rather than the FV community I know.........we must all have cabin fever) remember nothing has been proposed, and the process would take a year whichever way we go.

Thanks

ChrisZ

[Rolling Stone]

Im going to work on my car,add weight...save weight....drill holes...lighter belly-pans...Ummm....kevlar body..YE!!its worth the trouble.




Im gonna ride a bike...eat well....diet....excercise...go to a gym...Nah...its not worth the trouble.





As my boxing coach used to say"There are guys Big naturally,and there are guys who make excuses"


It would be fascinating to make the weight 1100lbs for two seasons and see the overall results re:front runners,how many entries etc,etc.

[Amon]

Matt,

I am at 200lbs. as I've mentioned to you in the past and yet I'm still 28 lbs.
overweight. I exercise 3x a week Min. but I think that my Protoform P-2 is
just a heavy car. It's an early version that's been modded before my purchase
so I tip the scales heavy. I did have a 95' Citation and I always made the min.
weight in that car once I replaced the 36 lb. steel floor with a lighter one. Not
all cars are designed the same and weigh differently, unfortunately heavy in
my case.

Mark

P.S.: Actually I've been told that my car started out as a P-1 before it was
converted to a P-2, so that also may explain the weight issue?

[FVRacer21]

and the average weight of American males has risen 24.7 lbs during the life of FV, that the proper minimum weight for FV would be 1064.7 lbs.

Your right - we are behind (pun intended) the times:

http://news.yahoo.com/brazilian-biki...160432580.html

ChrisZ

[racecarguy1968]

Well if we raise the min weight I could get off this silly diet

[Amon]

Not so if you're Gilligan but the Skipper is another story!

[ProbeInc.]

Short story to make a point:
For a couple years I was really into competitive power-lifting. My competition weight was ~260lbs. It didn't help my racing and I knew it. For a year or two, I sacrificed potential in the race car because I didn't want to give up my competitive lifting. However, I didn't care about racing any less than than I did lifting. I loved both and so the situation really was hard on me mentally. I didn't want to give up what I worked so hard for in the gym (MUSCLE/BULK). Likewise, I didn't want to sacrifice any racing potential in the name of lifting. Eventually, I could no longer handle the mental stress of knowing I could be faster if I wasn't so bulky. I chose racing.
In ~6-8 months, I dropped from 260lbs to 200lbs. I accomplished this by changing my diet to one single meal per day, consisting of one tablespoon of rice. In all seriousness, I lost the weight by easing up on the carbs/red meat, focusing less on heavy weights and more on strength training and cardio. Today, I'm down to a healthy, lean and strong 175lbs.
Weight is not the difference between a runnoffs podium finish and being a back marker. It's merely a one variable among many which may or may not add up to going faster.
To me, asking to raise the minimum weight is akin to petitioning that there be some sort of time limit set on car prep and innovation.
Personally, I have neither the fund, space or time to commit to my race car as some of the front runners do. But that's not their problem...that's mine and moreover, the nature of racing. Investment yields return. Buffalo Wings, beer and burgers are great; as is doing well on the race track - But attempting to reshape the whole congressional district because beer is good and treadmill's suck? That's lazy.

[smsazzy]

So our answer to someone being over minimum weight is that they should eat a single spoon of rice each day?

First of all, not only is that an unhealthy and potentially dangerous diet for some, but it is also completely unrealistic.

As someone who is actually underweight, I don't have a vested interest in lowering the weight except for this: I want larger fields. It has been demonstrated that people are leaving the class who are unable to make the weight. I want the weight increased to make the class mo accessible to the average racer.

I think it takes dedication and determination to win the Runoffs. It should not take someone eating one spoon of rice per day in order to feel they can be competitive.

If you had the time to put the time into the gym, you have time to prep the car. Maybe not enough to win the Runoffs, but I'm not buying your point there.

Lastly, everyone has a different body. The I did it, so you can too does not always apply. Everyone has a different work commitment. If someone is working 80 hour weeks to afford to race, that means they are just as committed to racing as the guy who works 40 hours and spends an hour a day in the gym. Don't mix up dedication with going to the gym. We all do what we can to get on the track.

[Matt King]

Nick, I think we've combined to lose about 150 pounds in the last couple of years. We'll hardly recognize each other the next time we meet!

BTW, Smazzy, I think the spoonful of rice diet was a joke.

But as far as the "If I can do it,you can to attitude," that can be applied to everything in life. Everyone has a different situation and faces different challenges. We all overcome them the best we can and deal with the results.

This minimum weight thing is a hot button issue because it seems like an easy thing to address with a rules change, but IMO all that does is expose the fact that the majority of things that really separate the winners from the also-rans cannot be "fixed" with a rules change.

[BLS]

but IMO all that does is expose the fact that the majority of things that really separate the winners from the also-rans cannot be "fixed" with a rules change.

I'm not sure I understand your statement. The physical reality is that raising the weight limit will make those that are overweight more competitive. Will they be the winners? Maybe, maybe not. But, weight inequality can certainly be fixed by a rule change. Not everyone that has an overweight car is an overweight person. I'm 6'4 and weigh 220. I'm neither fat nor overweight. I can also get a car to the minimum weight, but it would be a safer car if the weight was a bit higher. We're not going to fix the situation for someone that weighs 250-260 pounds, it's too far away. If people leave the sport because they perceive the weight is a penalty then that is a fixable problem unless others leave because they will not add weight to their car. That is a possibility but I don't think it is much of one.

I can understand being opposed to the weight change, but I don't understand your statement.

[Tiago Santos]

I really don't mind either way.. But I think it's somewhat justifiable to increase the weight similarly to what the average weight has increased over the years. Kind of a sad reality, but reality nonetheless.

I guess the problem is, you're right, drivers who are 260lbs, for whatever reason, are too far beyond what we can fix with a rule change. So we raise the limit to help the guys who are 200-220lbs. Then the 220-240lbs guys will complain that we're only a rule change away from helping them, and two rule changes away from the now-not-so-out-of-reach 260lb drivers

I'm here to race, and don't care for having any artificial advantages. I firmly believe I'll have an advantage over any 260lb driver even if our cars are 2000lbs. There's something to be said for agility and endurance, which I don't think many 260lb men have much of. As for keeping the weight down just because I worked hard to get there? I couldn't care less. This is a driving game for me, I want to be the best driver I can be and don't care if I lose to a better driver.

If you're confused about the point I'm trying to make, don't worry, I'm not sure either I guess I am against setting a precedent for further increases, but FOR allowing more people to believe they can be competitive

[Daryl DeArman]

I'm 6'4 and weigh 220. I'm neither fat nor overweight.

Yes you are overweight according to these experts

http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

Of course at 6'1" and 190 so am I and most anyone who looks at me wouldn't categorize me as "overweight".

At 190 I shouldn't expect to be able to be a horse jockey. At 220 I don't believe we should really expect somebody to be a competitive driver in a 850# car, 60HP car.

FWIW, when I was racing competitively in FV I weighed 160-165 and it was work to stay there....as it should be. If it were easy to be competitive everybody would be doing it. It's not like the current rules mean you have to be Danica sized to win.

Just my opinion, flame away.

[Matt King]

I can understand being opposed to the weight change, but I don't understand your statement.

Simply put, I think a 10-25 pound weight disparity is one of the least decisive factors that separates the front runners from the backmarkers. I could recite a laundry list of things that are more critical to performance but I think most of us know it's the sum of a lot of things that makes a complete racing package.

For the very best drivers who are a few pounds over the minimum weight and doing all the other required things to be competitive, plus have the basic driving skill to be at the front, increasing the minimum may be the one small missing piece that gets them onto the podium. For most of the rest of us, I think it will make very little difference. It may eliminate one potential excuse, but then what does one do to address the others?

[Halifax]

So why don't we all commit to logging car weights, driver weights, and finishing positions across our races this year, and post the information here? One or two first-person testimonies and conjecture about building the class through a rule change does not cut it for me.

BTW, my car routinely weighs in at 1070.

[craigs]

So why don't we all commit to logging car weights, driver weights, and finishing positions across our races this year, and post the information here? One or two first-person testimonies and conjecture about building the class through a rule change does not cut it for me.

BTW, my car routinely weighs in at 1070.

With or without the beard?

[Halifax]

Heh heh heh. It's pretty long right now, but not to the ZZ Top length I would prefer ;-)

[Amon]

I'm nearly 6'2" and 195-200lbs depending on the time of day, and yet I'm still
28 lbs. overweight, well actually 24 lbs. now that I purchased a gear reduction
starter. Getting down to my weight at 18 yrs. of age (180) isn't going to happen
at my age (51), but If I go to a light weight battery I can save another 10 lbs.
and all it costs is money $$$$$......correct!


Mark

92' Protoform P-1

[BLS]

Yes you are overweight according to these experts

Experts. Dime a dozen. Nothing to calculate for bone structure. Just height and weight. Baloney.

I have a friend that I backpack with. He's 6'4 and weighs 290 pounds. No fat. 15 miles a day for a week on trails rated as difficult, carrying a 75 pound pack. His shoulder width is almost 10" wider than mine. Nobody would want to call him fat... Big guy, yes.

I weighed 215 in college. Better shape then than now. I'm also 59 and, as I have discovered, our hip bones widen as we age. This is part of the weight increase that occurs. Wider hips have to have a bit more mass. But, it's beside the point. Some people are heavier without being fatso's. Some are just too heavy to ever make a decent FV weight. I'm not arguing for a weight increase. I just get tired of the comments that anyone that cannot make weight must be fat and it's their own fault. Not everyone heavier than 170 is fat. I started racing FV when the minimum was car weight only, 850 pounds I think. No way to keep up with a small stature person that weighed around 130-150. I was giving away 70-90 pounds. SCCA changed the rule, 1976 I think, to min weight car and driver. Suddenly, I can run with the front group for the first time. Nothing but weight. Weight matters. No, it's not the only thing that matters.

Simply put, I think a 10-25 pound weight disparity is one of the least decisive factors that separates the front runners from the backmarkers.

I agree. 25 pounds is essentially 2.5%. 2.5% slower to accel and decel. Something in the turns. It is not the only thing but it is something. I'm quite sure no one wants to be 25 pounds or more overweight. Since I would think most cars are 10 pounds or so at the finish line as a safety factor, being 25 is not a big deal. 50 is, in my opinion.

As I said, I'm not making the case for a weight increase, but I think it should be considered.

[Daryl DeArman]

Experts. Dime a dozen. Nothing to calculate for bone structure. Just height and weight. Baloney.

Ha! That's it, you're "big boned". I never said the "experts" claimed you were fat, I said "overweight"; big difference.

If you want to race a small hp, lightweight, open wheel car you shouldn't expect to have rules in place where you can be built like a tight end and be competitive any more than a linebacker should expect rules to allow him to a competitive jockey.

If we have to draw a line in the sand, lets make it where somebody that weighs 150-180 range (most racers who pay some attention to their fitness) can be competitive without having to use titanium fasteners everywhere and a CF body. While somebody that weighs 120# doesn't have to add 120# of lead to make weight.

It's fine where it's at. The coming from someone who's a bit overweight at 190.

[Amon]

Based on the so called "experts", if we don't have six-pack abs, we're ALL fat!

[BLS]

I never said the "experts" claimed you were fat, I said "overweight"; big difference.

The difference being?

Do a search on the BMI index for problems. Tall results in high measurements. Being athletically fit results in high measurements. BMI is a joke.

This results in taller people having a reported BMI that is uncharacteristically high compared to their actual body fat levels.

From wikipedia. Like I said, I don't really care if the min weight is changed. However, trying to pretend that weight is not an issue in performance is silly. Overweight cars will not perform as well. Every driver that falls above your range is not fat/overweight/unserious about racing. It might, and I say might, reduce the number of people racing. I have no idea how to validate this.

[Amon]

If weight doesn't factor into performance, why did all of the Indy Car drivers
complain about Danica's weight advantage several years ago before a change
occurred to even things up?

Mark

[Daryl DeArman]

The difference being?

Fat vs. overweight

The word "Fat" indicates that the term corresponds to the amount of body fat one is carrying regardless of said persons weight.

The other has the root word weight, which indicates that the term is dependent on the actual weight of the person regardless of body fat percentage.

Yes, I am aware of the shortcomings of BMI. However, as far as being athletically "fit"...I guess that depends on if you consider a NFL Lineman more athletically fit than Lance Armstrong. NCAA DI wrestlers; how many fat or overweight ones there?Outside of the occassional heavyweight I don't think you'll find many of either. Look at a NFL roster and you will see many fat or overweight athletes.

However, trying to pretend that weight is not an issue in performance is silly. Overweight cars will not perform as well.

Wasn't pretending it wasn't an issue affecting performance. In fact I believe it is a huge factor, that doesn't mean I have to believe that the min weight needs to be changed.

If weight doesn't factor into performance...

Again, it most certainly affects performance. That doesn't mean the current minimum weight needs to be changed. HP affects performance, should it all be cut to a max of 55 just because there are people out there racing with 55?

[Tiago Santos]

Daryl, I agree with what you're saying to a degree. Your horse jockey example is the best, should all the jockeys be carrying lead to make it possible for a 200lb guy to race horses?

The problem is there's no shortage of jockeys as far as I can tell, but the supply of willing FV drivers is drying up So yeah, there is a point to relaxing the "requirements". If we had 30 140lb drivers at every race, I'd say tough luck, but as it is, we may need the "fatties" (sorry, meant overweight!) more than they need us

[BLS]

I guess that depends on if you consider a NFL Lineman more athletically fit than Lance Armstrong.

This is getting way off topic, but what the heck. I'm not trying to put NFL linemen in a FV anymore than I think Lance Armstong can cut it in the NFL.

Calling someone fat or overweight is the same in common usage. Whatt I am saying is that not everyone that is over 180 pounds is either fat or overweight. Many are however. But the question is will more people pick FV if the weight is increased? I don't know the answer but I suspect it will increase the number of participants, having known a couple that quit as a result.

[Amon]

5'5" & 180 lbs. = overweight, fat, big boned or what ever you call it.

5'10" & 180 lbs.= normal American status

6'2" & 180 lbs. = thin, skinny, marathoner, (I wish), etc...etc...


There's already enough outside pressures (job, family, health) that we don't need
to supply additional reasons for drivers not to race.

[budawe]

In response to an earlier question, while working tech and weighing many vees, I recall the average weight to be around the high 1030's. Not a national survey or a reflection of the minimum the particular car could achieve, just an average of what I saw. My car typically finishes a race in the mid to high 1030's and I generally don't worry about hitting the minimum since I believe the penalty for missing far outweighs the opportunities for cutting it closer. Qualifying at the Runoffs will motivate me to push the window a bit more.

[DaveB]

Mark you should have purchased a permanent magnet starter, you would have saved a few pounds more.

Dave

[Speed Sport Engineering]

Two things not mentioned:

1) Those that are complaining about being overweight - how much attention do you give your fuel calculations? Miss it by a gallon and that's 6 lbs right there. If you're not filling to a specific amount and targeting a remaining amount you're not trying hard enough.

2) While 1025 is the minimum, it's un-realistic to make that the target. 1030-1035 is a much better number to shoot for. That gives everyone complaining about the 1025 target 5-10 more pounds right there.

[problemchild]

Probably not mentioned because they have no relevence. Weight of unused fuel and comfort margin left to the minimum weight are the same for any car, any class, any form of racing, regardless of specified minimum weight.

[smsazzy]

5'5" & 180 lbs. = overweight, fat, big boned or what ever you call it.

5'10" & 180 lbs.= normal American status

6'2" & 180 lbs. = thin, skinny, marathoner, (I wish), etc...etc...


There's already enough outside pressures (job, family, health) that we don't need
to supply additional reasons for drivers not to race.

Actually the average American weighs 192.

[Daryl DeArman]

Probably not mentioned because they have no relevence. Weight of unused fuel and comfort margin left to the minimum weight are the same for any car, any class, any form of racing, regardless of specified minimum weight.

Really think so? I'd bet that the F1 teams tend to cut the minimum weight a bit closer, and monitor their fuel consumption a bit closer than your average local hobby stock racer.

Actually the average American weighs 192.

....and almost 38% of Americans are obese, not just overweight, that tends to skew the average just a bit.

[smsazzy]

Irrelevant. We are talking about making the class accessible to the average Joe. The average joe is between 175 and 209 pounds.

Since the current minimum weight was based on a 175 pound driver, not including front roll hoops, additional safety gear, etc., we could see a logical reason to move it up 20-25 pounds just to keep up.

[problemchild]

Really think so? I'd bet that the F1 teams tend to cut the minimum weight a bit closer, and monitor their fuel consumption a bit closer than your average local hobby stock racer.



....and almost 38% of Americans are obese, not just overweight, that tends to skew the average just a bit.

An average is an average by definition. How do you skew an average?

Do you really want to compare F1 to FV? Has FV not become elitist enough?

Whether the minimum weight of FV is 1025 or 1075, a gallon of unused fuel will still weigh the same. Whether the minimum weight is 1025 or 1075, racers, who care, will still finish with a comfort margin of atleast 5 lbs more than minimum. A few will actually strive for 2 or 3 lbs over minimum.

Now, back to slamming average American males that are not built like Lance Armstrong ....

[smsazzy]

Lance Armstrong is 5'9" and weighs 165 according to Wikipedia.

Add 3 more inches of height and he would likely weigh 183. (US Army assumes 1 inch of height is worth 6 pounds of weight)

He would likely only need 10 or so pounds of weight max in most cars out there today if he were 6 feet tall. Many cars he would be over weight.

So, all you whiners that have 40 pounds of weight in your cars need to understand that we cannot have you fit in our class anymore. If you can't be in the shape that Lance Armstrong is you're not welcomed!

I kid of course.

[Matt King]

lance armstrong is 5'9" and weighs 165 according to wikipedia.

Add 3 more inches of height and he would likely weigh 193. (us army assumes 1 inch of height is worth 6 pounds of weight)

165 + 18 = 183.

[smsazzy]

183. Sorry.

Corrected post.