FV Disc Brakes

[fv9]

This weekend, NER event, 2nd largest class is FV ...
and if the 4 novices pass class, we will be the largest.



John

Thats great. But as Brian Harding said earlier, try looking west of Appalachia. The west coast consistently has almost NO regional entries on a while. Our Majors/Nationals are typically 8 or so cars. Numbers are up a bit this year, but thats only because the Runoffs are out here. Things will be back to normal next year...or worse.

Point is, we are talking about FV on a national scale, not just your particular region.

[budawe]

Statistically, the West leads all areas of the country in entry level decline in all classes. Bringing the Runoffs to the West has really boosted participation, especially in the Majors but that may not transfer to 2015. There are many reasons for why the west's decline is greater than the rest of the country most appear to be cultural. If you look at the spectator levels at pro events like Indy car at Sonoma or NASCAR at California Speedway, you'll see they are very low compared to the rest of the country as well.

[craigs]

Thats great. But as Brian Harding said earlier, try looking west of Appalachia. The west coast consistently has almost NO regional entries on a while. Our Majors/Nationals are typically 8 or so cars. Numbers are up a bit this year, but thats only because the Runoffs are out here. Things will be back to normal next year...or worse.

Point is, we are talking about FV on a national scale, not just your particular region.

Changing the brakes, beams, and wheels will get those west coast cars out of the garages!

[Daryl DeArman]

Changing the brakes, beams, and wheels will get those west coast cars out of the garages!

I'm sensing sarcasm.

It may not get a single car out of the garage, however, it might keep a few out.

[gbmetcalf]

I'm sensing sarcasm.

It may not get a single car out of the garage, however, it might keep a few out.

G.

[smsazzy]

I feel the need to point this out, since many of the posters do not seem to remember this:

Nobody WANTS to ruin the class. Everyone has their own reasons for supporting or opposing a disk brake option. They are not an idiot for opposing the idea; they are not an idiot for supporting the idea.

In the end, we all want the same thing, we just have different opinions on how to get there. Sounds like we should all be in politics. The mud slinging has reach election year heights and it needs to stop. It does no good, except to divide the class.

If there is a disk brake option, that has a penalty associated that makes it so it is not an advantage, that is (in my opinion) a great thing for the class. Those that want to change will. Those who do not, won't.

I would love to see the discussion shift more around how to create parity between the two solutions. That WOULD be constructive. The 25 pound penalty, I believe, does just that. Any gain in braking performance (if there is any) would be lost in acceleration and cornering maximums. That is about the weight of the conversion anyhow, so it works out well.

[problemchild]

I feel the need to point this out, since many of the posters do not seem to remember this:

Nobody WANTS to ruin the class. Everyone has their own reasons for supporting or opposing a disk brake option. They are not an idiot for opposing the idea; they are not an idiot for supporting the idea.

In the end, we all want the same thing, we just have different opinions on how to get there. Sounds like we should all be in politics. The mud slinging has reach election year heights and it needs to stop. It does no good, except to divide the class.

If there is a disk brake option, that has a penalty associated that makes it so it is not an advantage, that is (in my opinion) a great thing for the class. Those that want to change will. Those who do not, won't.

I would love to see the discussion shift more around how to create parity between the two solutions. That WOULD be constructive. The 25 pound penalty, I believe, does just that. Any gain in braking performance (if there is any) would be lost in acceleration and cornering maximums. That is about the weight of the conversion anyhow, so it works out well.

What has the testing shown to be a fair weight penalty? When SCCA institutes major rule changes, they require years of testing and development. Honda FFs and F600 would be examples of how the process normally works. In this case, we have the FV committee making it up on the fly, and the CRB is voting for change before the committee can even finish writing the rules. Who knows what wording of what rules the BOD is preparing to vote on. When changing rules that will disenfranchise a significant portion of the class, it would be good to make sure you get the rule package right!

[Matt King]

I agree that the process so far has been pretty murky, but how does an optional modification "disenfranchise" anyone in the class?

[problemchild]

I agree that the process so far has been pretty murky, but how does an optional modification "disenfranchise" anyone in the class?

Have you not been reading the posts on this thread?


Has anybody ever run a FV with FV race tires on those 15 X 4 4-bolt wheels? Maybe somebody should before they become the basis for this major rule change. While much of the technical info is being ripped off from the FST developers, there are portions of this "murky" plan that are pure speculation.

[Matt King]

Have you not been reading the posts on this thread?

Yes I have. "Disenfrancise" in this context to me means it will make someone's car irreversibly obsolete, and I can't see how allowing disc brakes would do that.

[Tiago Santos]

What has the testing shown to be a fair weight penalty? When SCCA institutes major rule changes, they require years of testing and development!

Which you have complained about before. You've asked for these processes to be swift and effective. Just because it's not the rule change you had hoped for, it doesn't mean we should have to drag this out for years. Also don't think running different brakes and wheels is quite at the same level of major change as the Honda motor in FF and bike motors in F500. But even those worked out well enough despite the doom and gloom.

I don't think the weight penalty was chosen to be fair. 25lbs is a lot of weight in a Vee and I think it was picked to be well on the safe side of negating any on track advantage.

By the way, we're discussing all of this based on the fastrack prelims.. Is there any chance the actual June Fastrack might have the actual rule proposal rather than the weird blurb from the prelims?

[problemchild]

When people get rule changes forced on them, they feel dis-empowered, disconnected, and marginalized. When making such changes, we need to make sure that the benefits override the size of the group that will leave.

That means any parity formula needs to be tested, developed, and introduced in its finished form. Otherwise, it will just become an ongoing battle based on anecdotal input.

I expect the BJ beam/brake guys will get the short end of this in the end. After spending thousands to convert, they will find they cannot generate the front grip of a tweeked out LP beam, have hopelessly overweight cars, and are saddled with a parity penalty. Good luck trying to get the hard-core FV guys to make them equal at that point.

These proposed rule changes need to be tested. A parity plan needs to be developed and tested. At that point, it should be introduced as a proper proposal.

Yes, as a FV racer who has raced FV and FST, I believe that the LP beam with all the stupid mods we have allowed, will be a superior performance item compared to a BJ beam as the rules are written. I expect my two buddies to immediately contradict me, but that is my opinion. BJ beams for everybody or nobody.

[problemchild]

Which you have complained about before. You've asked for these processes to be swift and effective. Just because it's not the rule change you had hoped for, it doesn't mean we should have to drag this out for years. Also don't think running different brakes and wheels is quite at the same level of major change as the Honda motor in FF and bike motors in F500. But even those worked out well enough despite the doom and gloom.

I don't think the weight penalty was chosen to be fair. 25lbs is a lot of weight in a Vee and I think it was picked to be well on the safe side of negating any on track advantage.

By the way, we're discussing all of this based on the fastrack prelims.. Is there any chance the actual June Fastrack might have the actual rule proposal rather than the weird blurb from the prelims?

Yes Tiago, I believe the process is hopelessly broken. That we are even considering ramming through these major changes without a single lap of testing and a parity plan without any technical data, just shows how messed up this is. The CRB has voted on something that the committee has not finished writing. Who knows what the BOD is voting on.
That is why the status quo is the only way to proceed!

[Tiago Santos]

I'm confused (doesn't take much, I admit) - no one is forcing changes on anyone. You're saying you expect the ball joint folks will be at a disadvantage - I do believe that was the entire point. No one NEEDS to change their car, but some people will want to. This just isn't the major game changer that people are making it to be. The runoffs, sprints and most majors will be won by the same handful of folks, probably on drums. No one needs to leave unless they were only looking for a reason to quit.

Numbers and prices keep getting thrown around including folks talking about a 5 grand conversion. I didn't know BMW dealerships were working on vees if I get a chance today, I'll try to add up and list the prices for what I think I'd need. I'm sure there will be things I'm missing, but we can all figure it out and put a real number out there.

When people get rule changes forced on them, they feel dis-empowered, disconnected, and marginalized. When making such changes, we need to make sure that the benefits override the size of the group that will leave.

That means any parity formula needs to be tested, developed, and introduced in its finished form. Otherwise, it will just become an ongoing battle based on anecdotal input.

I expect the BJ beam/brake guys will get the short end of this in the end. After spending thousands to convert, they will find they cannot generate the front grip of a tweeked out LP beam, have hopelessly overweight cars, and are saddled with a parity penalty. Good luck trying to get the hard-core FV guys to make them equal at that point.

These proposed rule changes need to be tested. A parity plan needs to be developed and tested. At that point, it should be introduced as a proper proposal.

Yes, as a FV racer who has raced FV and FST, I believe that the LP beam with all the stupid mods we have allowed, will be an inferior performance item compared to a BJ beam as the rules are written. I expect my two buddies to immediately contradict me, but that is my opinion. BJ beams for everybody or nobody.

[Tiago Santos]

Yes Tiago, I believe the process is hopelessly broken. That we are even considering ramming through these major changes without a single lap of testing and a parity plan without any technical data, just shows how messed up this is. The CRB has voted on something that the committee has not finished writing. Who knows what the BOD is voting on.
That is why the status quo is the only way to proceed!

You're right, something didn't quite work in this process. Still, from what Brian said (and re-reading the prelims, he's most likely right, despite my first impression..) The CRB still needs to put the proper rule out to a vote. Turns out we've had two "what do you think" rounds, but no vote - we didn't have a rule to vote on anyway. My hope is that the CRB trusts the committee enough that they are willing to put up for a vote whatever the committee recommends. And since they didn't have a proper proposal in time for the meeting and the prelims, they posted the weird first draft. That's my hope, at least, but maybe I'm far too trusting

[problemchild]

This just isn't the major game changer that people are making it to be.

How do you know?

There is absolutely no data or proof of how competitive any part of this package will be. While your "gentlemen racer" approach is very nice, it is not realistic for serious National racing.

What happens when some unknown puts it on the Runoffs pole by several seconds with a BJ beam and the next 14 cars are the regulars with their LP beam cars? What happens when someone goes to a big race with their BJ beam car and discovers they're 5 seconds off the pace and have no chance? Until the competitive levels have been established (testing, racing FS, etc), then you cannot start allowing parts that change the basic dynamics of performance.

Why not introduce the concept as an experimental 2 year class that runs at Regionals within the FV race group? In several years, you will have the data to evaluate the competition factors and show competitors/consumers proof of concept.

[Hardingfv32]

The idea of testing this change is ridiculous. Just a simple delaying of the changes that are required for the future of the class. Parts availability and operating cost reduction dictate what must be done. The weight penalty is adequate for those who fear the performance of this change. With out doubt, it will be found unnecessary in the near future.

Brian

[problemchild]

The idea of testing this change is ridiculous. Just a simple delaying of the changes that are required for the future of the class. Parts availability and operating cost reduction dictate what must be done. The weight penalty is adequate for those who fear the performance of this change. With out doubt, it will be found unnecessary in the near future.

Brian

You're always the one demanding engineering papers or other documentation to prove other people's obvious conclusions. Seems like a double standard.

If this is a logical necessary change after 50+ years, then why not adopt full FST specs for FV?

Not a single car has moved a single inch with the proposed specification package, or even a conceptual package (as the proposed package has not been finalized). No other class would consider or accept such a power play on their rule package. That is what is ridiculous.

[Bill Bonow]

I come up with lots of ideas for lots of things. A very good friend of mine always asks me, "yes, great idea.... But the real question is who is gonna buy it?"

Based on the current "general" proposal, that being front disc brakes, BJ beam and min weight at 1050 lbs.:

*How many current FV racers are ready to jump on this option (convert)?

*How many garage queens will get back on the track by converting to disc brakes?

*How many new drivers will be brought into the fold specifically because of this option?
(Seems like the NE FV guys are doing a great job recruiting without)

Everyone needs to ask themselves, is this for the good/future of the class? or is it for me?

[Matt King]

*How many garage queens will get back on the track by converting to disc brakes?

As the owner of a garage queen, I would say the answer is probably Zero. I really dislike the drum brakes on Vees for many reasons and would far prefer to drive a car with discs, but it's not enough to bring me back on its own. There are just too many other hurdles to overcome to get back on track after a few years off. Adding the cost and hassle of a conversion on top of all that doesn't make it any easier.

[grapefarmeral]

I first joined SCCA in 1967 and have always been amazed at the confusion and inner workings of upper management.

Didn't we vote on spec tires , with he result being 75% for and the CRB responding with something like, we didn't test or didn't use the proper format for voting?

I thought Stevan Davis did some testing with BJ and discs a few years ago.

If the BJ and discs are an option and offer no advantage no harm no foul. Other than the front runners I'd suspect that most cars on the grid are overweight anyhow. So eliminate a few donuts during the week and your disc brake/BJ car will weigh the same as your car does now.

[Bill Bonow]

I thought Stevan Davis did some testing with BJ and discs a few years ago.

Please correct if wrong, but the Steve Davis tests were with a LP bolt on kit that used 4 x 130 wheels.

That being said, I doubt there is significant difference in the braking potential (LP with disc to BJ with disc). Handing characteristics (LP to BJ) may be a completely different story as I believe that is untested on an FV.

[gbmetcalf]

Honestly I would volunteer to be a guinea pig to see if this is a viable option. The 25 pound added weight wouldn't affect me anytime soon, seeing there is no way I'll make min weight.
I think as an option lets try it! Lets develop the B/J beam so it performs as good as the L/P beam. I think with a few tweaks it can be a great option.

Just my humble opinion.

G.

[DaveB]

The problem for our class is there is no place within the rules to test any proposed rule changes. I have asked for many years to modify the FS rules to allow FV with mods to run there. We could get real race info form said runs, not just someone pounding around on a test day. Personally I would like to see 100lbs. added for cars with disc brakes. I would be easy for the CRB to make a competion adjustment to lower the weight, but like pulling teeth to get them to raise it.

Dave

[sracing]

The problem for our class is there is no place within the rules to test any proposed rule changes. I have asked for many years to modify the FS rules to allow FV with mods to run there. We could get real race info form said runs, not just someone pounding around on a test day.

?? Dave, you can do that now. That is exactly what we in Formula First did. We made our rules and enforced them within the FFDA and raced in FS until there was a FST class. (We also tested our initial rules in that class at regional races.) FS IS a catch all for Formula cars that don't fit elsewhere. Seldom do you see anyone even using the class, it made great sense for us (FST). In our first few years racing there, I think we only saw one other car in the class.

[Bill Bonow]

Dave,

Jim is correct. FST ran in CenDiv as FS from 2002 until 2008 (2009 became FST). There is no reason at all that an "FV test car" can't run in FS. Hell, in most divisions at this point run anything without doors in one group, so you can't even complain about having to be racing with faster cars.

[DaveB]

Sorry Bill and Jim, we don't have wide enough wheels, our mirrors may be too small and we are not required to use the Kohler B-52 bathtube cut out for the cockpit. Other than that we could run.

Dave

[Bill Bonow]

Dave,

I stand corrected, you are right on everything other than I couldn't find anything on mirror size?

I guess it doesn't matter as basically FV is screwed on a test car in FS, that's a shame.

[gbmetcalf]

USED TO BE........
If you knew your car didn't meet the GCR for "non safety" reasons you could sign a waver to run and not be scored. Is that still an option?

G.

[gbmetcalf]

Correct me if I am wrong.
Didn't these wheels come stock or couldn't you get these as an option on 70 - 79 supers beetle?

http://www.thesamba.com/vw/classifie...php?id=1540037

[budawe]

You can run anything you can convince your region to accept. As long as a car meets the minimum safety requirements, the region can make provisions. There are several alternative SM classes like sealed engine SM and we have two FV classes in SF region, FV & FVT which is a class that runs the spec tire.

[nhJohn]

I'm sensing sarcasm.

It may not get a single car out of the garage, however, it might keep a few out.

Okay, and this is where i fail to see you "logic"

1. How can adding $3000 worth of changes - keep someone "in"
2. You have had 10 year for FST ... why is that NOT working in your region.
3. FV "IS" one of the bigger "National" classes... maybe not in your region ...

??

John

[Tiago Santos]

Wait, wasn't it $5000?

I bet if we wait a week, it'll be $1000!

edit: as pointed out by someone smarter than me (or just nicer), sorry for the slightly inflamatory dig I said sometime last week that I'd add up the costs so we can all stop guessing and throwing out random numbers depending on what point you're trying to make. I'll TRY to do that this weekend.

[nhJohn]

Wait, wasn't it $5000?

I bet if we wait a week, it'll be $1000!

edit: as pointed out by someone smarter than me (or just nicer), sorry for the slightly inflamatory dig I said sometime last week that I'd add up the costs so we can all stop guessing and throwing out random numbers depending on what point you're trying to make. I'll TRY to do that this weekend.

NO ... It was not a dig ... but like before, you ARE being rude. I checked with THREE!!! fabricators, and all 3 said $3K was a MINIUM ...
They also said, "and for some cars you can't do it because the cars would not meet specs ..
And for other cars, it could not be done ...

[Stan Clayton]

Can we dial the hyperbole and overreaction back just a notch? The objective is not to force anybody TO DO anything, but rather to address very real supply issues. If link pins and drums are getting hard to find and long out of serial production, approving alternatives now PROLONGS the lives of cars that are difficult/impossible/expensive to convert. It's a win-win.

Engine issues (pistons and barrels) are more problematic, and will have to be addressed too, but can be saved for another day.

[nhJohn]

Can we dial the hyperbole and overreaction back just a notch? The objective is not to force anybody TO DO anything, but rather to address very real supply issues. If link pins and drums are getting hard to find and long out of serial production, approving alternatives now PROLONGS the lives of cars that are difficult/impossible/expensive to convert. It's a win-win.

Engine issues (pistons and barrels) are more problematic, and will have to be addressed too, but can be saved for another day.

Okay:
Fact - There IS no shortage of LP beams. How many do you want? Stock or prepped?
Fact - There is NO shortage of Drums. How many do you need? I have 3 German ones and 2 new aftermarket ones. You can even purchase them on Apex Speed
Fact - the Advisory board has reported that the jugs/pistons are available.

Overreaction??? No - I am just a bit tired of people NOT dealing with "facts".

John

[Tiago Santos]

Like Stan said - the proposed rule change is to allow the OPTION of changing to ball joint beams and disc brakes. It is not mandatory and to most folks, it won't even be advantageous.

Sorry if you feel I'm being rude - that's not the intention, yet I do see how it can come off that way. But when I calculate the prices for things, I'm not gonna take into account how much it would cost to have them done for me. The parts cost what they cost - my time, when I'm working on the race car, is free. If I had to calculate my hourly rate into the time I spend working on the race car, I sure as hell couldn't afford to even prep for a normal weekend.

A full set of drums, porterfield shoes, wheel cylinders and backing plates is what.. $600? $700? Now if I add $50/hr for the time to order all of these from different places, a trip to the junkyard for the backing plates, 30 minutes grinding and sandblasting the backing plates, a bit of paint, machining the drums, and a couple hours reassembling, what does that add up to? That's not how we normally calculate the costs of fixing our race cars, so why would you calculate optional changes that way?

[tgaluardi]

I usually try not to voice my opinion here because it will come in for plenty of criticism.
I have been driving my FV for 40 years with over 250 races. Yes, the same car! So I have seen plenty of change over the years. Some of the comparisons however need a comment.
Yes you are allowed to run a fan, but that is a huge performance disadvantage. The Honda engine was going to revive FF. I don't think so. How many FFs at an SCCA event. And it appears there is a performance advantage. Same for FC. How many competitive Pinto engines run? So it is claimed the 25 pounds will make it all good and equal. It did not work in FF or FC!
Just old and cranky.
Tom Galuardi
member #34126
FV #20

[Daryl DeArman]

Okay, and this is where i fail to see you "logic"

1. How can adding $3000 worth of changes - keep someone "in"
2. You have had 10 year for FST ... why is that NOT working in your region.
3. FV "IS" one of the bigger "National" classes... maybe not in your region ...

??

John

1) Ample supply of quality parts keep cars racing. Look how many people found the change to a FFit worth it despite that upgrade cost. Look how many people left FF because of the Kent before the Fit was an option.

2) Two cars in the region to race against. It's a catch 22.

3) What does that have to do with anything? SRF and SM are bigger and both have had more drastic changes in their shorter lifetime than FV.

[Daryl DeArman]

Okay:
Fact - There IS no shortage of LP beams. How many do you want? Stock or prepped?
Fact - There is NO shortage of Drums. How many do you need? I have 3 German ones and 2 new aftermarket ones. You can even purchase them on Apex Speed
Fact - the Advisory board has reported that the jugs/pistons are available.

Overreaction??? No - I am just a bit tired of people NOT dealing with "facts".

John

65 different FV racers in Majors this year so far.

You want FV to be around another 10 years without a change to the brake package?

Can you source me 300 rear german drums? 65 LP beams and 200 sets of barrels and pistons?

What do you think is going to happen when only 30 FV racers across the entire country are the only ones with good parts? When you have 3FV's show up to a Major on a good day, how quickly will the class decline?