Printable View
It appears from a technical bulletin in the May Fastrack that the 593 engine proposal has been approved in its' original form with the 25mm restrictors at a min weight of 850lbs. Thanks to the total compiled dyno info and multi requests from the F500 contingent this alternative engine was allowed and will be in keeping with the nature of the class as being 2 stroke CVT low buck fast alternative to the other formula classes.:checkered:
With all the F600 (4-stroke MC engine) activity that has been going on, seems like this one (2-stroke 593 cc) sort of flew by, well under the radar.
Think the class name will change to F600 in the future? Guess we'll have to wait and see.
I wouldn't count on that anytime soon and as far as getting in under the radar just take a look at f500.org and f500.us to see what went into all this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Bonow
CE,
Its just an observation on my part. I'm all but too familiar with the SCCA rules process (i.e. pushing rope in a wind storm comes to mind) and I'm certain there was a large effort to get this accomplished. I'm just noting that by comparison to the MC engine effort, the 593 effort was less visable (a compliment to the 593 group). From my perspective, being below the radar is a good thing. I guess a smiley was in order for my first post.
Classy
Wow, I guess he didn't read my second post. ;)
Maybe the name "foamy" has some significance? :D
As a mod, I feel it needs to be said that this is getting dangerously close to personal attacks.
Well, I, for one, am very pleased that I finally have the "facts"! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Foamy
I am helping build one of the new F600's. I have no issues with the 493 or the new 593 cars. For ME the F600 is what I want to work on and run. I like a challange, doing something new, being on the edge. MY point of view is to just have fun. I am glad that the 593 was approved. It will allow current cars more engine choices, parts, and I hope keep them racing. Good luck to all, get out there and have fun.
It is my opinion that approval of the 593 will be good for the long term health of F500 & I also think that approval of the 600cc MC engines will help the class a great deal more.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
For all of this ranting and raving people have against the MC powered cars and how we are directionless, my only response is 24 cars currently publicly known, 9 cars have turned laps on track, and the other 15 have various dates in 2011 listed as their goal for completion. Pretty good for an engine that isn't legal! If that isn't proof enough that people are fed up with dealing with the two strokes and the clutching I don't know what is. At this point we have 6 cars committed for the Rational at Road Atlanta in May and we had 5 at the March regional race at VIR.:ha:
I don't dispute that existing two-stroke F500 drivers would want the 593 approved. How many people from outside the class said they would join the class if the 593 was approved? How many have actually joined the class because of the 593? I bet the answer to both of those questions is zero. MC engine cars have quite a bit of support from people outside the class waiting for it to get approved before they will join as well as some drivers that joined the class before it was approved.
Foamy,
I am glad to see that after your getting banned from another forum for personal attacks on the MC proposal that you are calming down your rhetoric, but just barely under the line.
I, too, am fully in favor of the 593 proposal as it is needed for the continued supply of 2 stroke motors. I believe that almost all of the MC supporters have told me that they also voted the same way. But, this move alone will NOT be enough to increase our class entries high enough to get even close to the top 5 which is where our class should be given that it is the best bang for the buck class. By having both drivetrains ONLY then will our numbers approach the top 5.
See, Foamy, even when you taunt us by saying that we will respond with "anger and bitterness" about the 593 acceptance we have no reason to do so and will continue to discuss these issues factually and avoid personal attacks, can you say the same for yourself?
Jim
ps - and, yes, one day in the future the class name will change to F600 just like it changed from F440 to F500.
????Quote:
Originally Posted by lancer360
It sounds to me like proof that a number of people have an interest in building a motorcycle powered car in the 600cc range - no more, no less. Can that be good for F500 as a class if/when the performance curves can be equalized? Sure. Does it mean that the current F500 drivers as a group are tired of the current package? Not at all.
There was a lot of noise around motorcycle-powered FCs, as well, and we ended up with the FB class. Those are really nice cars, to be sure, and they also have a relatively high performance:cost ratio. The actual numbers haven't grown at the rate expected, however, and it would seem logical that the club take a step back and think things through prior to putting a new bike-engine proposal in place - even if it is a really good idea.
I would ask this series of questions, though: If 3 years from now the predominant engines are the 593 and the 4-stroke bike mill, why would they continue to both carry restrictors? If one or both are eventually allowed to run unrestricted, would they rival or top FF in performance? What would prevent these F600 cars from becoming one more legal package in the FF class? Would that be acceptable in the eyes of most F500 competitors, given that the F600 package would be quite a bit less expensive than current front-running FFs?
In short, what is the vision for F500/F600 3-5 years from now?
I think the restrictors will stay regardless of what happens to help limit HP creep/motor of the year syndrome as well as try to keep the speeds in check from a safety standpoint. It is track dependent, but the F500 lap times are already very close to the FF times (some as close as 0.1sec), but I can't see the class's ever being merged. I just don't see the members agreeing to it.
Personally, I see a slow but gradual move away from the two-strokes to the MC engines over the next 5-10 years assuming the BOD/CRB is able to keep parity. There will always be some drivers, especially from the northern/midwest snowmobile states, that will like the 2-stroke/CVT setup, but I think most will start to see the consistency advantages of the modern fuel injected engines paired with the sequential transmissions. The only advantage F500 has had over other classes in the past when trying to attract new blood, has been the lower costs. The MC engines address's the primary negative views/stereotypes many have of the F500. From the few car shows/presentations I have done plus the numerous paddock sightseers I have talked to I have not had one person say they would prefer the 2-stroke. These are just my personal opinions, and only time is going to tell.
Hmmm... any one have a Delorean? :D:D:D
I will try to asnwer your questions:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshall Mauney
1. Regarding the F1000/FB lack of growth rate - Phil Creighton (BOD member & involved in one or more FB's) told me that the MC's were blowing up right and left due to oiling problems caused by high G loads and that issue has scared off several potential FB entries. Our F600's have not encountered ONE oiling problem due to having only one aero downforce device, thus lower G loads.
2. The current group of F500 drivers are not tired of the 2 stroke - unfortunately most of the drivers in the sunbelt ARE tired of messing with snowmobile/CVT drivetrains AND OUTSIDERS have stayed away in droves as evidenced by our low entry numbers for all these years.
3. 593's and 600's in FF - the top F500 drivers have already been running as fast, if not faster, than the top FF's around the country for years now. There is a BIG difference between the two classes as the FF is a much more sophisticated and COSTLY chassis package (e.g. - transaxle & coil-overs) when compared to the relatively simplicity and lower cost of a F500 chassis package. I would counter that IF a MC drivetrain would be contemplated for FF in the future then use the 750cc MC rather than a 600cc motor so that a differential can be maintained (or re-established). I am not at this time in favor of eventually removing (or enlarging) the restrictors for either motor.
In summary, 3 years from now - F500 (maybe F600) will have two restricted drivetrains, 2 stroke (mostly the north) & MC (mostly the sunbelt), and, hopefully, will start to rise in the number of entries each year. If we play our marketing right we can make it a friendly rivalry (2 stroke vs. MC) that the media can use to talk about our class.
More entries at every race is the ultimate goal as this translates into more fun and more attractiveness to our class.
Jim
Been messing with these cars since 1982
Foamy,
Can you please explain how a broader torque curve does not provide a lap time advantage to the 593 cars?
And also, if you could please point me to any published lap times of a restricted 593 running vs a 493/494 just like the M/C guys have done, that would be really useful.
Thanks in advance.
I have no idea on where you get the idea of planned obsolescence. We want both the 593 and the 600's approved and then let nature take its course. Time will show which is the better solution or it may show that the solution is region based like Jim predicts. If anything, the 593 effectively just obsoleted all the 493 and 494 drive trains for all but the best clutch tuners. For the regional and rear to mid-pack national drivers who are of average ability in clutch tuning converting to the 593 will give them a significant advantage over their competitors effectively forcing them to convert as well if they want to stay competitive. I give it 2-3 years tops before you won't see a 494/493 at the runoffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foamy
I won't get into a cost debate because the drive trains are so different that the $$$ numbers can be so skewed to benefit either party that you will never get an agreement.
We never said everyone hated the CVT. Some do like it, but for those of us who don't the MC option is a good alternative.
I personally do NOT see the 2 stroke drivetrain going away for many years to come.
This is just ONE person's opinion not the majority of the MC supporters. We NEED all the drivers to continue to run to get our numbers up so we are not in favor of running anybody off as that only hurts the number of cars that we can run against in every race.
We are driven by this above all other beliefs:
PRIME DIRECTIVE = The more cars in each race means the more fun for everyone.
Just this plain and simple - Anyone who disputes this is not a REAL racer.
Jim
More cars & more growth of the class is what 99% of us want. I am totally convinced that the most growth will come from the 4 strokes and while I love the 2 stroke combination I do not think it will draw many new competitors to the class.
I simply want F500 to be a top 5 class & I think the bike engines can make that happen within 5 years. Right now there are well over 20 600 MC powered cars being built. If we add 20 cars to the national roster next year that would be an increase from 68 National competitors in 2010 to 88 National competitors in 2012. This cannot be a bad thing for the future of the class.
I also want 2 stroke & 4 stroke competitive parity & I think that is easily possible.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
So if I wanted to start looking around for a 593, can someone point me in the direction of what year/model I should be looking for.
Thanks.
Please stop the bickering! We have two (2) other forum sites for that nonsense. Let's leave ApexSpeed the last bastion of neutrality.
*sigh*
Anyways, nothing wrong with the 593 getting approved, just more motors for the class. Also nothing wrong with MC600s. As long as parity is maintained with restrictors, weight, or a combination of both, everything will be fine. I think the 600s might be a little easier to maintain at the current level (read 493/494) rather than the 593s given that pipe development is in its infancy on that motor.
Can we all shut up and race now? Lots of talk, very little action.
I agree Brian! We have 6 F600's committed already for the Rational at Road Atlanta. See you on the track.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.Novak
Speaking of racing - are you coming to any CenDiv events this year? What about the Grattan double national over Memorial day? What car/class?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.Novak
One restrictor & one weight will not do it for all tracks... ask NASCAR about trying to maintain "parity" between the V6 & V8 engines in Busch North way back when... they gave up trying... they tried weight, restrictors, displacement, you name it. (Tried it years ago with the modifieds too... and failed)Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.Novak
AMA has abandoned trying to equal out the competition between 2 & 4 strokes with displacement.
ISR is still scratching their coconuts over Yamaha's 4-strokes... they've yet to succeed with any tangible result.
& none of them have had to deal with different drivetrains.... just engines.
& you think you can perform some miracle with different engines AND totally different drivetrains?????
Good luck with that... anyone want some ocean-view property in Arkansas... CHEAP? :D
Debate all you want, I'm not here for that. What's done is done. I'm here to race.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshall Mauney
I'll be at some CenDiv/GLDiv events this year. I'll be running the FE and the FB at different events as of now and the 600 will be at some events as well, not sure on driver though! I just moved to a new job so we are still finalizing our schedule and plans after that change up!Quote:
Originally Posted by lancer360
Dix - First, your explaination seems right on for the broader torque curve. Thanks. Seems like a noticably silent MC supporter also offered to reimburse anyone's entry fee that could beat him in a "car swap". You drive the skinny, loud kid's F6 and let him drive your 2-stroke.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dix
At any rate, y'all bring a handful of 593s down to Road ATL next month!! Let's put on a real show for the ATL region folks!! I think there are 6 or 7 F6s planning to be there. Add 5 or 6 F5s with a variety of motors and we'll have the head-to-head comparison <i>everybody's</i> been looking for. Nothining to lose (we won't be running for points) and there are dollars (and braggin rights) to be won!
I've offered before and it still stands - the beer's on me, friend. (Foamy - You're always welcome in my padock, too.):greenflag:
I'm totally speechless.
How do all of us that suffered through the Pinto/Zetec Equality Struggle interpret this new development?
For years we could not get the CRB to accept "dyno numbers" in the equity formula. We bled for years, and IMO it hurt the the FC class.
Now... presto-zippo... they put a new engine in a class with only dyno numbers?
Holy Topeka!
I'm trying to figure out whether to celebrate this new found sensibility, or go outside with my bazillion watt searchlight and look for flat-black helicopters. :rolleyes:
I'm looking for the searchlight...
Thank you very much. You're always welcome to join us out on the wacky left coast. I'll supply the drinks and food. Here's a setup from a few years back (just cell phone pix I took the night it was setup):Quote:
Originally Posted by GBugg
http://www.spikeengineering.com/IRL2008/0.jpg
http://www.spikeengineering.com/IRL2008/1.jpg
Hopefully the next time Dix is in the area, I'll be able to meet up with him.
Correct, we did get it done with a set of dyno graphs. That included about 6 runs with multiple combinations of heads, cylinders, rotary valves etc. The Rave engine was within 1 HP of the 494 Non-Rave engine when the final same rotary valve was used. Same displacement engine, same pistions, torque curves were nearly line on line.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foamy
Why oh why did I do that, I just hate 2 strokes:rolleyes:
Thanks ... Jay Novak
Dix:
Be careful when you post:
"Of course that has many in the MC engine jihad fit to be tied... as they (to quote their dear leader) envisioned "the two stroke is going away, no new engines are being produced"... which was BS the instant it was typed on his keyboard."
You are very near the line. AND you are using statements that are no longer true as we MC supporters have already recognize AND POSTED that the 593 will be around for awhile. This hurts your reasoning so stick to the facts. The wildcard in the future of the 2 stroke is the willingness of the 2 stroke makers to meet future demands of the EPA on emissions. I suspect that this dark cloud on the future of 2 strokes is what leads many to believe that the 2 stroke may cease to exist in the future given that dirt bike racing has gone over to 4 strokes for one example.
Stick to the facts and leave out emotional words (jihad, dear leader, BS, etc) that you are starting to use yet once again.
My capitalization is for emphasis not emotion.
Jim
Certain members of this swirling debate seem to view their own actions and statements through rose colored glasses. The anti-MC crowd has spent the better part of the last year attacking MC proponents. Don't believe me? Read for yourself page after page after page of personal attacks on Murphy, Clint, and Jay on Dixon's forum.
I've yet to see a single vocal opponent of the 593, let alone anyone from the MC camp decry the engine's approval. There have, however, been people who have raised very legitimate questions and concerns throughout the process. These people were immediately dismissed as jihadists, and their concerns marginalized. There are also a large number of people who were very surprised with the way the motor was approved.Quote:
Now it appears that the ones who didn't want to be involved with improving F500, as opposed to promoting F600, have become vocal opponents to the 593.
As a stakeholder and class member, I've got my own concerns.
I don't want my current motors rendered obsolete. I think ANY new engine should be introduced to the class beneath the performance standard set by the front-running 494's and 493's, then worked to parity.
I'm happy to see the 593 was introduced at 850# min, in spite of the fact that it's being brought in at a meager .2HP deficit to the 493(in the absence of its own purpose built pipe). I really hope that this is enough ballast to combat the HP bump a pipe is likely to bring.
If this makes me a vocal opponent, it might surprise the likes of wayne and mugge to learn that there are MANY vocal opponents of the 593.
Having a new pool of engines available as replacements is great, provided it doesn't fundamentally alter the competitive landscape, or render the current crop of engines in cars and trailers worthless.
This still doesn't address our problem with class growth. F500 is cheap and fast. It's hard to understand given the cost to speed ratio why F500 isn't the spec miata of the open wheel world.
I think a lot of that lies in the rest of the SCCA driver pool's aversion to our current drivetrain. The two stroke CVT can be intimidating to people who haven't spent time messing around with snowmobiles, and it can take years to perfect your setup.
Amen to that - a Big +1!!
Jim
I believe many are surprised by the method/speed at which the 593 was introduced while the MC proprosal has had to go through many hoops and hurdles.
IMO because of the similarity 2stroke v. 2stroke and CVT v. CVT it was an easier process than evaluating the MC powertrain package. However, if everybody was operating in good faith I'd imagine the MC would have been approved, albeit conservatively restricted (such as the initial FFit) by now. I also believe the 593 issue would have not been started had it not been for the threat of the MC proposal.
I've been on record before: I love 2 strokes. Started with karting and later a RD400 street bike. I'm also okay with the tinkering/tuning of the CVT because I feel I can use it my advantage. However, I want to shift. I will not be entering the F5 class until the MC powerplant is a viable (competitive) option....not holding my breath.
You want to be banned? I can oblige... be careful what you ask for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foamy
Foamy:
Jim,
You're the the moderator here too? Go ahead, make phone calls, send emails. Get us banned.
Please.
Nope I am not the moderator on this or any other forum; I am just trying, yet again, for you and Dixon to stay away from emotional words and and antagonistic labeling that you use against anyone who does not agree with you. This is a PRIME directive for all internet forums around the world and it is NOT my rule.
BTW, the moderator, without my saying one word to him, has already warned you in an earlier post in this thread. Heed him by doing what I have tried to tell you repeatedly and you will remain on this forum.
Jim
Foamy (George Muggee) is done here on ApexSpeed after a short and remarkably annoying first 11 posts. In the three days since this thread was started, I am already sick of the Post Warnings and complaints about a select few relatively new users here. If Wayne Dixon and the rest of the f500.us guys would like to continue to enjoy ApexSpeed, then the flame baiting and personal side-swipes will stop right here, right now.
I exploded my right kneecap into a few pieces on Sunday, so I now have plenty of time to focus my full attention to this topic. I won't hesitate to show any other malcontents to the door swiftly and without any warning.
No more fight-picking. I'm jacked up on Vicodin and I don't have any patience right now. :mad:
Full contact graphic design?Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Carter
...you're done...:blackflag:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dix