F1000 Rules Proposal

[S Lathrop]

If we were truely interested in the future of SCCA we should be talking about a new entry level class at the performance level of Fomula Ford.

Last week I was the engineer where we tested 10 drivers in a Swift 014a. This was for a fully funded ride in the Mazada Atlantic series. There was not one SCCA driver in the bunch. There was only one American driver to make the grade and he was trained over seas. In years past the SCCA drivers would have have been in the hunt for those seats.

This country needs a reasonably priced program that will bridge the gap between go carts and the advanced open wheel race cars. In the past SCCA was the place. It was fun and satisifying to participate in that type program. You got to race against the masters of your class, the local track masters and the up and coming young talants who were studying under the SCCA masters. That is my fond memories of the early years of FV, FF, and FSV. When you won a race then you really earned bragging rights. The fields were at the maximum allowed and at least a third of the cars had the potential to beat you. In those days if it involved road racing it involved SCCA.

Lee; tell me again why the physics of race car engineering changes when we go from tube to composite frames. As to safety, what are the specific safety characteristcs are you referring to?

[formulasuper]

Forgive me if this has already been brought up, but why not do like the current FA rules and add xx lb. for performance advantages? Maybe you could satisfy both sides of the argument.

xxx lb. for tube frame. Add 50 or 75 lb. for aluminun monocoque and another 50 or 75 lb. for CF tub.

People could convert F2000 and FSV cars, and new builders could build any of those types of frames or tubs. The participants could decide if they want to go the inexpensive route or with the more expensive, safer (but not faster) modern tubs.

This sounds logical to me. Probably means it won't happen.

[carnut169]

Scott/ Russ-

As much as I would like to build a set of rules that would allow us to race in the same class I feel like we need to keep the rules simple. 1000cc, 1000lbs, tube frame, FC floor rules.

That, and you are building your car around a 1300, right? Perhaps you need to be the guy who really satisfies everyone by campaigning for the f1500 class.... in the proposed tier system we have F600, F1000, and F1500- this discussion centers around F1000, but if you want to take the lead, write a set of rules, yada yada.... carbon tubs, tunnels, aluminum monocoque, 1500cc mega engines... all of that goes into your F1500. Sounds fun (and expensive).

Of course, we will both be in FS for some time to come...

[S Lathrop]

In the FA rules there is a subset of rules for watercooled Super Vee. Because the engines and other required parts are probably no longer available from VW, why not adjust the rules to allow bike engines and the appropriate drive line components. Also drop the requirement for the other VW components.

The watercooled Super Vees were just adapted F3 cars. This is exactly the car you guys are arguing for. If you allow 1300cc and 900 lbs or 1000 lbs you get a car that wll perform well against other FAs. You have a really open areo package and no limit on construction type.

Let the F1000 be the mid level car based on the current FC rules. Then we should look at a F600 as a FF or entry level formula.

[Lee Stohr]

A steel tube frame can perform well, it can have adequate torsional stiffness. But I don't think anyone would try and argue that a steel tube frame is as safe as a carbon tub.
The don't allow steel tube frames on Indy cars, do they? Or Lemans prototypes.
My point is that steel tube FF's are racing in vintage now. In my opinion young drivers will go from karts to carbon tub chassis from now on. It's a done deal already, with Formula BMW, Renault and Mazda.
I also believe prices of carbon tubs will come down dramatically in the future.
The old glory days of FF cannot come back. The economics have changed. In 1975 there were no $3000 Ohlins TTX shocks(each), no wind tunnels for race cars in the US, no 7 poster rigs, no gearbox dyno treatment, no data acquisition systems, etc. Even if you had a big budget in 1975, there was nothing to spend it on. Today is totally different. There is no such thing as cheap racing. F1000 ain't it.

[superbikestore]

Heres a thought for rules:

Engine

• Any stock motorcycle engine up to 999cc (all stock internals)
• Dry sump if you can afford it.
• Exhaust free (normal noise regs)
• Powercommander OK any map or flatslides if you have carbs.
• Any air filter or none.

If you follow the bike power outputs they go up about 5% each model change so there will be a limted arms race here no matter what..

Wheels

• Any width wheels and tires (everyone will end up with the same sizes whatever the best compromise is)

Chassis

• Any material deemed safe
• All the converted carbon tub cars will have a weight disadvantage anyway.
• Someone will build a car for this class at some point with a light tub - it is just a matter of time. Let the wieght limit for the car limit their advantage.
• Allow the steel cars / aluminum sheet/honeycomb cars as it makes good fun racing for converted cars
• Minimum wheelbase 78in (stop anyone with a go kart with a GSXR1000 engine in it.) Don't laugh it has been done.

Weight

• Need a weight that purpose built cars can safely ballast up to and the converted cars have something to aim at. If the converted norm seems to be 850lbs and the purpose builts are in the 650lbs range split the difference and go with 750lbs no driver, 900lbs all up. Gives all of us something to aim at.
• At 1000lbs my OMS would need a aluminum plate 1/2 in (maybe 3/4 in haven't worked it out) thick the full length of the car to meet it. Not very safe. Make a good skid plate though...

Cost

• There is such a thing as cheap racing, unless you want to win the championship. You can go racing in one of these cars for very little money and that should be the attraction. Engines are bomb proof, you cannot break the quaife diff (I am told) all the other parts are race proven already and plenty up to the job. Except crashing you should have entry fees and fuel and not much else. When the engine is worn out (2 - 3 years) throw it away and put in the newest model you can afford.
• All this talk of $30k is making me loose the plot. Look how nice sean's car is for the money he has in it. You need an cost that is affordable to get in the door $15k opener for used cars. There is an Rf84 with a GSXR motor in it for sale on this site for $8500. Someone buy it (it is not mine). Look in the FC section.
• If you want to win there is nothing you can do to stop people with big money spending it.

Open rules will make it fun and people will be excited to join in. Most classes are so poorly supported here there is a real need for a fun one full of cars of all types, shapes and sizes and for it to be FUN! and fast.
All this race talk is making me think again about racing the OMS!

Cheers
David

[S Lathrop]

Lee:

From what I see demonstrated on this forum, we are talking about two separate classes. One, an FC based class and other an F3 based class. I think there is a strong consensis on the form of either approach. Maybe we should prepare both options for the BOD to choose between or impliment both and see what takes hold.

[kbee00]

I have been reading along and have seen the so called rules discussion turn into a psuedo-political debate - it is very obvious to see those with an agenda for personal gain, those who are willing to make a buck, even at the expense of the racing class. The fool that stated that steel tube cars are only in vintage has obviously been living in a basement somewhere. Waaaay back when this whole F1000 thing started - the rules were put out as a mixture of FC chassis rules and DSR/CSR drive train rules (please correct me if I'm wrong - but that was MY interpretation) with the inclusion of bike motors. The idea was to bring CFC's with bike motors into a class - chassis' are plentiful, motors are plentiful, and there are still things to buy for those that insist on spending money. Period. End of story.

Can someone tell me why this simple concept is so hard to grasp?? Oh, that's right, I forgot. We need mono-tubs, carbon this and that, blah, blah, blah. All for our own safety...because, according to some, we are too stupid to know better and you better just chuck that old death trap of a tube frame car or without a doubt the first crack in the road will kill you....geesh. So let's wake up and see what's going on here. Of course manufacturers will want to sell you the latest and greatest - that is their job. Hell, I am a manufacturer (not of cars) and if I could write the rules you better believe I would do whatever I could to make them as favorable to me as possible. Obvious answer? The manufacturers DON'T write the rules - those that spend the money to race the cars DO write the rules. Let the manufacturers build to those rules. If they can't make money building a car to those rules - tough ***t. You let manufacturers hijack a class - well, history tells the story. Besides, if MC powered formula cars become a hit, the manufacturers will have their day - trust me.

I truly hope that those individuals that started this F1000 idea take a hard look at the basics of the underlying philosophy and let those ideas guide them through the rules process. I got out of FF with the intent of joining the F1000 ranks. I DO believe that the plan - in it's original form - was good for me, good for the SCCA, and good for many other racers. However, until I see some indication that the F1000 rules are going to follow the intent of the original plan, my plans and seemingly many others, will be on hold. Let's formalize the original rules plan, petition the CRB, and get this class moving before it dies on the vine. I am ready to go!

Loren J. Tieman
former Killer Beez Racer
former Reynard FF racer
future F1000 racer

[carnut169]

Loren-

Build that car.


The before mentioned rules committee is made up of us "little people"... we are working on a plan that will maintain the original philosophy of the class, I assure you.

We believe that if others want to work on developing (building/ selling/ rules, etc) a more advanced class (F1500?) they should go for it, then we can all learn who really got it right.

Until anyone actually builds a car, its all just talk.

I'll be on the track in mine next weekend.

[S Lathrop]

I see the business potential in the F1000 will be for parts to convert existing cars. ICP is just starting to ship our Variloc chain drive differential. This is a unit that will compete with the similar product offered by Taylor.

Step two in the business plan is to expand beyond the differential and offer a rear drive assembly -- similar to Lee Stohr's -- that will allow people do a bolt up conversion in their garages. I see HiTech doing exhaust systems, Pat Prince doing suspension parts, and other people providing all the necessary parts that the average racer can not do himself.

Any reasonable volume of new cars will not materialize for several years. Then I see the typical customer for a new car will be some one who is buying his second car in the class. By then the manufacturers will see what is needed for the class.

Given the SCCA environment in which this class will race, I think we want the rules be FC with motor cycle engines. This will result in a car that performs a little better than a Pinto FC in the corners and is not bothered by the FM on the streights.

Remember, for there to be a class, someone will have to supply cars. If we use FC based cars, there are plenty of reasonably priced chassis to convert. Engines are very reasonably priced, even if you have to buy the bike. And the supply of specialized products to complete the conversions is increasing.

If the rules are FC based, VD can be in the market almost immediately and others will follow when the demand materializes. It might be possible to have several "demonstration" cars ready for testing next fall in preparation for the 2007 season.

[formulasuper]

Loren-

Build that car.


The before mentioned rules committee is made up of us "little people"... we are working on a plan that will maintain the original philosophy of the class, I assure you.

We believe that if others want to work on developing (building/ selling/ rules, etc) a more advanced class (F1500?) they should go for it, then we can all learn who really got it right.

Until anyone actually builds a car, its all just talk.

I'll be on the track in mine next weekend.

The F1500 concept is good but after seeing the can of worms that F1000 has turned into I don't think I'm the one to attempt to develope the class. I think my time is better spent just building my RT5/Hayabusa to run in Formula S & enjoy racing with whoever I can keep up with. When I decided to put the Busa in the Ralt I figured it was the very best bang-for-the-buck that could be accomplished using a motorcycle engine/tranny in a formula car & now that my project is nearing completion I still feel I made the correct decision. After selling off all the VW engine & Hewland parts & purchasing the 4000 mile Busa & drysump system & accessories I'll have less than the original $7500 purchase price invested.
If someone wants to persue the development of this class I would be happy to throw in my 2 cents worth.

[RobLav]

Scott,

Given that I'm helping make my Van Diemen Hayabusa non-compliant with the F1000 rules, I'll probably put a 1000cc motorcycle engine in that Van Diemen. Then I'll have a nicely built Hayabusa engine left over for a Swift DB4 conversion. I'd be willing to assist too with proposed F1500 (or whatever) rulesets.

[Lee Stohr]

Let me make my agenda clear - as a manufacturer we must build what the public wants. We go broke if we don't understand what the buyer wants. We don't write the rules for a class. I think that a bike engined FC car would be a great addition to FC. I think a brand new class should have as open rules as possible. Right now, I don't see any business in open wheel racing. Spec series have taken it all over.

[preform resources]

Lee, I think you've made your agenda abundantly clear,but somehow I don't see customers stepping up to $50000 + cars at this time and you're scaring off the very people who will end up building this class to where a business model could be made for a number of fabricators including your self. You are not the only guy with an oven to do composites,in the indy area there must be 5 or 6 fabricators with ovens AND autoclaves,not to mention the Algie bros among others. Perhaps in the land of Boeing carbon fibre prepreg is more available but at what price ,what availability? The suppliers I've talked to are not flush with materials and the the WORLDWIDE supply of carbon/kevlar is being used up by the military and aerospace giants at premium prices leaving the industrial/sports market wanting for stable prices and availability,MAYBE this year sometime when capacity is ramped up there will be an increased supply as many mfgrs are trying to increase supply.BTW this is'nt just my take on this situation it is well documented in magazines and journals as well as views of suppliers and fabricators.

WE are composite fabricators,but I still don't see in the near term how com posite tub cars are going completely mainstream as of yet,perhaps down the road a piece carbon tubs will be fully accepted/demanded/neccescary in the lower classes of racing ,but not with the number of tube chassis cars available at this time.The way this conversation has been going one would think that deaths and injuries from tube chassis cars rival sprint and midget racing of the 30's and 40's...............B.S.
Dave Craddock

[Lee Stohr]

Customers did step up to buy the new pro Mazdas. Somehow they found enough carbon to build them But I agree that the SCCA club racer would not buy that kind of car for club racing only. I just feel we chase away many potential new racers with too many rules.

[Marshall Mauney]

I just feel we chase away many potential new racers with too many rules.

Great point, but......

The classes that have the most actual entrants tend to be those with the tightest rules - the spec classes. Mid- and low-buck racers are very afraid of buying guaranteed obsolescence in a class that allows continuous development. These guys who can't afford to trade cars every other year want to buy something they can run successfully for 5+ years.

I think you're 100% right, though, in that most people who haven't yet made the decision to compete don't understand how our rules get so complex, and think it is unnecessary. Somehow, they all seem to have a view that they should be able to assemble any old collection of parts and put it out on the track - and we know where this leads.

However, a simple ban on the use of carbon fiber in structural and suspension components is not hard to interpret or understand. Same is true for titanium. This might actually be easier and simpler than having staggered weight penalties for differing designs....

....thoughts?

[superbikestore]

Seeing everyones opinions and cares is great.

Good committee review is being done here.

To the man in charge - lets have a list of rules based on a happy medium here including anyone who already has a car bought or built or wants to build one and issue them. Make it so everyone can race.

Life is good - weather will be warm soon (in the mid west anyway) and I can smell race gas everytime I go in the garage. Just need the smell of hot rubber to go with it.

David

[Stan Clayton]

The way this conversation has been going one would think that deaths and injuries from tube chassis cars rival sprint and midget racing of the 30's and 40's...............B.S.
Dave Craddock

Dave, how do you draw such an extreme conclusion? No one has suggested any such thing in this thread. On the contrary, I and others have repeatedly pointed out that the safety record of FC and DSR is quite good. It has also been pointed out that adding 40 HP and losing 200 lbs is going to up the speeds considerably in these cars, and that opening the class to composite chassis on safety grounds is worth consideration.

I have also offered a way forward that is inclusive of cars that don't conform to FC specs (with the exception of alloy calipers), and that is to reinstate the old 930 lbs weight standard for cars that do, with all other cars weighing 1000 lbs. That protects the converted FC while permitting newer, wider designs and offsets the perceived composite advantage.

Stan

[preform resources]

"Also, I personally feel that driving a tube frame car in this day and age, is about like driving without a helmet" Quote by none other than Lee Stohr

Stan,with all do respect SAFETY has been mentioned a lot in these precedings what is meant by safety is obviously different in different folks eyes and I don't recall the number of times the safety of tube chassis has been touted,however the number of times safety has been mentioned compared to carbon tubs is numerous and more than likely true,I'm saying there is no serious problem involving tube chassis safety,if you suffer a serious crash you may get hurt.no matter what,god forbid. So most humble apologies to those who thought my point a bit radical.
Dave Craddock

[S Lathrop]

Stan:

Seventy pounds will not balance the performance advantages of a carbon composite tub, unless the seventy pounds is a required mass mounted above the center of gravity (say 20 inches above the bottom of the car ).

Give me a carbon tub and seventy pounds located any where I choose and I will choose the carbon tub in a heart beat. You're offering the sleeves off your vest to the tube frame guys.

If F1000 is for 175 plus hp fromula cars then make the rules simple forget any allowances for tube frames. Be consistant on the safety issue. Cars with this performance potential should be monocoque construction only. This class should be the resurrection of water cooled Super Vees with bike engines.

I would forget restrictors to limit engine performance. Require that the engines be from street legal 1000cc bikes with limited modifications. Again keep it simple.

[Stan Clayton]

I stand corrected, Dave, as somehow I missed that in the 220-odd posts...

That said, I stand by my position that the demonstrated superior safety of composite chassis make them worthy of consideration as an option.

Regards, Stan

[carnut169]

I truly hope no one takes offense by this, but...
I am finding this thread more boring and redundant every day. Being that I own a F1000 it should be of utmost interest to me. Can't imagine how bad it would be if I didn't own a car!

[kbee00]

S Lathrop,

I believe what you say to be true - to a point. 175hp at 1000lbs is real performance. However, I disagree that we will get that much out of a STOCK bike motor - and that is the $64,000 question - how much can we do to these motors. According to very reliable sources, power will be in the 140 to 150 range - and that is on well tuned engines. My take on it is that we allow nothing to enhance power output - and I mean nothing. Any mods should be directed at the actual conversion from bikes to cars - such as the issue of fuel delievery with lateral g-loads, etc. Such things as strengthening the gearbox or things of this nature under the arguement of "reliability" enhancement is nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing. We all use stock motors, we all have the same inherent weaknesses. Simple and easy to understand - better yet, less open to interpretation.

I look forward to this class getting on it's feet because I believe we are on the brink of a new wave of formula cars in the SCCA. Optomistic? Maybe so...

Loren

[S Lathrop]

Hang in there carnut169. I hope the rules are exactly what you are racing.

[S Lathrop]

Loren: I think the engines ought to be limited to 150 hp. However, Honda advertises 175 hp for their 1000 cc sport bike. I think that is the hp on the newer bikes.


Restricting the engines to 150 hp will only reduce costs by improving engine life.

[Dave Gomberg]

S Lathrop,

I believe what you say to be true - to a point. 175hp at 1000lbs is real performance. However, I disagree that we will get that much out of a STOCK bike motor ...
Loren

Loren:

I'm afraid you are out of touch with current 1000cc motorcycle technology. Unless you mean 140-150bhp at the wheel, you are way off. And, even at the wheel, you aren't really close. The current Yamaha R1, Suzuki GSXR-1000 and Kawasaki ZX-10R are all (stock) in the 170-180bhp range on dynos. Yes, really. That's why I suggested an SIR to cap the power at what today's engines make because next year will be up a few bhp and the year after that a few more. There has been a horsepower war for the last 5 years and it isn't over. It doesn't matter exactly what the cap is as long as it insures that a guy with an 03 GSXR doesn't have to replace it tomorrow to be competitive.

Dave

[LJennings]

[size=2]In 1988 we were able to get 220 hp from a GSXR1100 running on alcohol.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2][/size]

[superbikestore]

Sean is right - this thread has gone dull.

Do all the people arguing have cars?

[Bob Wright]

Ummm....if you use a FC chassis and a (bike) motor restricted to 150 hp, don't you have the same thing as a restricted Zetec FC, but with a little more hp and a little less torque?

[Lee Stohr]

I'm not sure of the purpose of this thread When someone writes the F1000 rules, then what are you going to do with them? Are you hoping everyone in America, and England and South Africa and Italy I guess, (Jedi, OMS, Speads, Gloria) will voluntarily adopt them and maybe someday there will be enough cars to get F1000 separated from FS?

[jerry freeman]

Sean,

Your right about this thread going south.
I was hoping we could get some rules laid out
so other people and myself could get on with building
new cars. Oh well. Formula Super will work. I don't see why
FC chassis rules with wider sidepods for bigger radiators
wouldn't work fine. Mount your 1000 in it and go race.
It can be done for $20,000 or less even if you can't fabricate
or do the work yourself. I don't understand why you have to spend
$50,000-$100,000 to win a trophy.

[carnut169]

You don't Jerry.

Current FC owners can build this for $5- $15,000 depending on how much work you do yourself and what 'extras' you want.

Low cost, high performance.
Go build one!!

[Purple Frog]

To answer Bob Wright's question: The difference is that with a bike motor one can easily be 200 pounds lighter. The performance kick, following Sean's philosophy, comes not so much from a hp gain as a WEIGHT loss.

Over this long thread I have read many folks that seem to think if it was based around FC rules that it would maintain FC weight rules. Not so. We have always proposed a min weight of 1000 pounds, or even lighter.

In my non-engineer brain, 200 pounds less also means a chassis designed for 1190 would be proportionally stronger at 990.

Meanwhile, it looks like Sean is loading up to go play in Atlanta.

[kbee00]

Dave,

I should have stated at the rear wheel. This information was given to me by the service manager at a local bike speed shop/Honda dealership (as well as a couple other bike builders). Yes, with aftermarket sport exhausts and a few other "required" mods that are so common I can see the HP bumped up. But I specifically stated a totally stock motor - but if SIR's are needed to control the HP wars amongst manufacturers - is there anything really wrong with that? Again, easy to understand, easy to check, and not open to interpretation.

Jerry - I agree wholeheartedly - I also was hoping for a clean set of rules so I can begin building. However, it does seem that things are happening behind the scenes to bring this to a completion sooner rather than later.

Lee - I understand this whole F1000 concept to give competitors an opportunity to build a formula car with a bike motor - partly driving this is the whole "old technology car engine" issue and partly I think the individuals interested in this have their own reasons, i.e. they like the open wheel look, they like bike engines, higher permormance, 10,000rpm exhaust note, etc. But mostly I think we all just want to be able to race as many weekends as possible and the cost to build/buy and maintain the car directly impacts the race schedule. It's as simple as that.

carnut - the car is beautiful. I hope you don't mind the barage of questions I'll be throwing at you this summer during the build. While you are out screaming around the track, I'll be poking along in a lowly ITA car - but if it takes care of the "speed" fix - oh well! (Or maybe NOT so speedy....)

Perhaps we can turn our attention to helping those interested in building F1000 cars. Sources, do's and don't's, etc. Mike?

Wishing you all a wonderful day.

Loren

[carnut169]

HAPPY to help, however I can.

my cell # is 404-456-3707, feel free to call or email.

[Matt Conrad]

I just wanted to clarify some of the talk on engine costs because I think the theory of keeping the costs down is a good one, but the reality is that there's not a huge disparity in costs from a base "race prepped" motor to a fully built one.

Our current George Dean-built GSX-R1000 motors range in HP from 155-180, depending on the package the customer wants. First, we never install a core motor in a car without having George go through them completely. That way we know exactly what we have from the beginning. I believe the HP numbers are calculated on a motorcycle dyno at the rear WHEEL....as in only one wheel. George has the capability to put a complete car on the dyno, but we haven't done it yet with one of our cars.

Now for some realistic engine costs....You will be able to secure cores from several sources and those can range from $1,500 - $2,500 for a complete car kit. You will also need to choose an oiling system. We offer a very reliable wet-sump pan for $500 and you can also spend several thousand for a dry-sump if it makes you feel better. Again, either way, I do not recommend that the engine go in the car "as is"....you never know where its been and how its been treated. Here's our prices for the different engine packages (without core and oil system).

All engines get the following:

1. Complete Tear-Down and Re-Build
2. New Bearings
3. New Gaskets
4. Manual Cam Chain Tensioner (the stock one's break)
5. New Billet Clutch Basket and HD Clutch Springs
6. Customized Wire Harness
7. Hydraulic Clutch Conversion Mechanism
8. Dyno Tested

This is what we consider our "base" engine and is essentially stock with some very minor changes for reliability. This engine runs $3,295. HP is usually between 155-160. The upgraded engines are as follows:

Stage One...add JE Pistons and Carillo "A" beam rods...$4,995 (~170HP)
Stage Two...same as S1 except upgrade to Carillo "H" beam rods...$5,395 (~170HP)
Stage Three...same as S2 and add Hi-perf Cams and "head work"...$6,595(~180HP)

So the reality is that the difference from a base "race prepped" motor and the fully built engine is really only $3,300.

Hope this helps....

Matt Conrad
Phoenix Race Cars, Inc.

[Matt Conrad]

I understand some of you are "bored and tired" of how the thread has evolved, but I do think it is (in the long run) healthy to get all sides and to think about others points of view....Having said that, I have one more point regarding the tube frame vs. carbon tub discussion.

My fear is that by allowing carbon-tubbed cars into this class will kill it before it gets started. My reasoning is fairly simple....

1. How many people are going to plunk down $75K-$80K to buy a carbon-tubbed car to go run in a new Regional class with no guarantee it will ever make it as a National Class? Probably only a few. And don't poo-poo my numbers unless you can find me an FIA certified carbon-tubbed race-ready car for less.
2. How many people are going to spend the time and effort to convert their old VD FC to run F1000 if they know the class allows $75K-$80K carbon-tubbed cars? Again, maybe a few.

So now you have a few carbon-tubbed cars out kicking the crap out of the few old FC converts in Regional races. How long will it take before the tube frame guys put their toys away and quit playing? And you won't have the FC conversion market in the class that was devised for FC conversions.

My opinion is that this thing needs to be BUILT before it gets a makeover. Let's let the guys that started this class....start this class....the way they intended from the start.

Matt Conrad
Phoenix Race Cars, Inc.

[Lee Stohr]

No worries Matt, I have no plans to build a F1000.

[Purple Frog]

...yet.

[Scott Gesford]

No worries Matt, I have no plans to build a F1000.

I would love to see what it would turn out like if you did! I love the DSR's you built in the past and always try to check them out at the tracks. The new one looks amazing in pictures. Can't wait to see it in person this year(hopefully). I understand the guys wanting to keep the rules simple but I would love to see an all out car done just to see how quick it would be.