Sequential in FC

August has a light racing schedule in the South. Need to stir something up. ;)

In another post today:

I will depart with one story (most of what happens in Canada stays in Canada)....... As we sat on the grid Friday- some kids (15-19) came along... They loved the car - asked all kinds of questions.... The kid said - Does it have a paddle shift? Nah............ Does it have a sequential stick like Atlantic did? Nah............. What does it have?? An H pattern.......... A what? H pattern......... You know 1-2-3-4 in the shape of an H.......... Oh, thats old, said the kid ~ I think it's time for the next big debate to get started........

Matt McDonough

This was talked about at the FC round table discussion at last year's Runoffs.

If we destroy enough LD200 cases... :( we will be forced to go sequential. Hewland wants us to replace them with sequential boxes. They have even already changed their price structure to disadvantage the LD200. In their catalogs it is now sold in the vintage section.

Back when i was serious racing, "real drivers" were only able to race and change their spark advance by moving the lever on the center of the steering wheel.

Technology marchs forward.

Purple Frog

For what it is worth ...... I have a Hewland JFR in a VD already !! all the parts to use OEM wishbones all that is needed is to take out 2 gears and put in 2 spools instead .. 4 speed squantional in a 2003-2011 VD car DONE .... fits very nice ... lots of details are really nice about that BOX and install is pretty clean and it was pretty cheap as well!!!
easy UPGRADE !

stay tuned for more .........

Greg Pizzo

I find many rules in our class were written a while back to contain costs based on the economy at that time. Since then many pieces that were banned for cost have dropped in price to be competitive with older legal part, or the legal parts have gone up in price.

Thoughts?

OBTW... remember that troublemaker Matt started it.

Can I use my Geartronics?

I think sequential is inevitable, but the question is when?

The JFR is still somewhat (~$2k?) more expensive than the LD200, even now that Hewland has increased the price of the LD200 and moved it into the vintage line. It is also quite a bit stronger than the LD200, both case and drivetrain. It is essentially an FTR in a different case, and uses FTR gears (which are about 50% more expensive than LD200 gears). In standard configuration it is a five speed 'box but is also available as a six speed.

A reputable US gearbox manufacturer is currently building a new gearbox that will have exactly the same mounting and suspension mounting configuration as the LD200 and should be a bolt-in replacement. It will be available in a H-pattern, four speed sequential, and five speed sequential versions. Presumably it will be price competitive with the LD200, but we'll see.

A sequential gearbox with the same number of gears and a conventional (not paddle) shift mechanism doesn't provide much, if any, competitive advantage over an H-pattern box. An electronic shifting version (a la Geartronics) that has smart features is more of an advantage but has a much higher "whiz" factor.

I'd vote for allowing mechanical sequential shift 'boxes immediately, and electronic-shifting 'boxes with a substantial (40 to 50 lb) weight penalty, and then see how it plays out on the race track. I suspect this will be much like the rules change allowing aluminum calipers: a few reactionary folks will object strenuously arguing that it will "ruin the class" but in fact it won't change the competitive landscape at all.

Nathan

I don't like the 'more expensive' part of the story. :(

Nathan I absolutly agree with you !! it will be a change but not likely to creat an competitive advantage at all ....... a good shifter (driver) will not really see a laptime difference between a mechanically shifted sequential VS a mechancially shifted H pattern... One thing that MIGHT be better is the pile of broken gears at the end of the year would be smaller !! :)

It might even help save some MOTORS as well ... its hard to select the WRONG gear ie 4th to 1st shifts ... not a common thing but it does happen..
I can tell you its not a hard thing to bolt in a JFR to a OEM VD car :)

I agree, more expensive is bad. The gearbox is already a substantial portion of the price of a new car. Maybe Lee Williams can tell us the exact price difference, I may have it wrong.

I assume the JFR is more expensive because it is designed to handle 50% more torque, not because it's sequential.

I'm told the new LD200 compatible gearbox under development will be the same price whether H-pattern or sequential. Also, I haven't looked into it in detail, but there is no reason the LD200 couldn't be made sequential. (Lee, tell me if I'm missing something!)

Nathan

The more expensive part may be just really how you add everything up. say at the end of the year you bought 1/2 as many gears and NEVER had DNF due to a broken gear. is it MORE expensive then ? and if it were $2000.00 or even $3000.00 MORE but yuo saved $5000.00 at the end of the year then maybe it is more cost effective and the second year maybe even MORE ? I think a person has to look at the long term effect not just I got to spend $3K more to buy a new gearbox how often do you do that compared to the consumables ?
just sayin' add it all up not just the initial purchase

Nathan,
Having had BOTH of these now for some time I really doubt the LD 200 could be made into a SEQUENTIAL. At the VERY least it would require a NEW case and at that point all you are saving is the GEARS themselves ... which granted is in MOST cases a substantial investment. The way the shifting mechanism works is COMPLETLY different and I cant see how it could be UPGRADEABLE.

That said after just ONE gear change I was pleasently surprized how easy it was to accomplish. VERY straight forward.... quite literally ! :)

I had a conversation with Indy from RFR at the sprints about this. He confirmed that LD-200s are easily available from Hewland, they just have a lead time. I don't remember exactly what the time was, but it was pretty short.

I also would be surprised if they were some huge advantage over an H-pattern.

But, I'm not sure that the class needs to do anything based on comments from a few teenage boys. It's not like they were ready to jump in a car if it had only had a sequential gearbox.

Mike, I think you guys must be doing something right. You seem to have the biggest fields and best racing out of any series in North America right now. It's hard to imagine sequential boxes really adding to that.

My opinion is that if it isn't broken don't fix it. But, I think I have a clue what people are actually spending on gearbox maintenance/prep to run up front and it makes the purchase price of a geartronics look small so maybe something is broken. Would sequential boxes lower gearbox costs over time?

We ran Hewland FTR sequential boxes in our Formula BMW's and still went through gears and dog rings. A lot has to do with how the driver shifts.

It's a pretty beefy box, as it was designed for Formula 3, but it can still eat up gears.

Having a shifting system such as the Pro-Shift or Geartonics would have reduced the wear significantly.

Those kids in Canada will probably never drive a "stick-shift" car in their lifetime anyway.
I agree, if it's not broken, don't mess with it until it is. Leave it as a four speed, h pattern shifter.

To convert an LD to sequential would be costly. It would start with a new bearing carrier , shift barrel and pawl selector. Not to mention forks and a shift rack. The JFR is a nice compact box for a very good price.
LD are still being made....there is just a waiting list...

scotty

The H pattern is fine.... But I'd like to see the box modernized for the future popularity and longevity of the class.... When I was that age - F2k was the place I wanted to be - it attracted the right talent, the budget was cheap (if that could be called cheap)..... and the cars seemed like mini F1 cars...... Kids - who grow up to be adults (like me) - someday may realize the dream of owning a race car (like me - at one time), and today - they would probably want to take a Mazda, F1k or FE car and take it club racing....

If there is an option - consider it and add 25 pounds to minimum.....Certainly not saying lets outdate everything - everybody thinks there is enough of that as it is......... I'd hate to see everyone have to change over to be up front (behind me anyway)...... Make it an option with none or less than a competative advantage....

BTW - I've broken one tooth off in my career.... and I think that one was defective.... You treat your box right - it will treat you right down the road.......

I'm on board with Matt, Keith, and Wren. I've never broken a gear and only changed out to new dog rings once. After running the hand operated sequential shift lever in the B-Car, I prefer the H-pattern because I can pick and choose any gear I want when I want it, including neutral, with minimal movements. And I can choose whether to row or not. Old school...

I agree with you 100% Matt..and Rob....well put guys.

Matt agreed Im not NEAR as talanted as you ...and Ive broke 5 gears in... well A LOT of years !! 2 of which were in the early days when I just fliped 2nd and 3d (split ratios mixed up) and the other 3 were well something went wrong, ONE was a long-in-the-tooth first gear and not on a shift... so YOU dont HAVE to break gears ... just some folks do :)

Updating the class with a squential box isnt going to instantly make all the LD200's obsolete... compared to the JFR they are still a bit lighter
I still maintain that in these lower formula cars once you get past the SUPER talented guys (top5) the next bunch will be determined by preparation and more importantly LAPS in the CAR is KING !! the whizzy bit of the month is NOT going to make near the difference as HOW MANY sets of tires the driver has truely WORN OUT!!! (as a measure of number of laps) Throwing a JFR in the car isnt going to make you quicker...I really dont believe that. What it may do is like Matt says is make the CLASS more attractive to younger kids and OLDER kids that grew up on SHIFTER karts and seeing all the cars they wanted to drive but cant (F1,GP2,F3, PFM..etc) Those guys (or girls) are going to be looking to get as close to that experience as they can. BOTH boxes can co-exist 20-25 lbs would most certainly make up for ANY performance advantage. Ill bet that a driver like Matt or others could click off laps at the 2nd or 3d decimal place "gearbox blind" well maybe not 3d but certainly with in a part of a tenth.

MATT??

You don't need a whizzy sequential gearbox as already proven by the F2000 series
to attract youngsters.
People are going to race where the car counts are, wannabe F1 or Indy hopefuls included.

Matt,

Adult?

Frog,
Between side pods and sequential it may be time to take THE SWIFT to vintage. Old school, without the automatic trannys in FB and for years F1 h pattern is much more raceable than having to go through gears you don't want.

To use a recent military term I hate - BLUF - bottom line up front

1) it's a significant performance advantage or else they wouldn't be at the top end of the sport, where a couple of guys got them and then everybody else had to have one

2) they will make the motors last longer because you can't miss gears and blow things up as easy. Pretty sure that's why the big cossie in the 016s lasts despite a piston speed that's marginal for engine life - miss a gear in one of those and kerblammo!

3) they eliminate a source of driver error, and thus eliminate a passing opportunity. Frank Dernie claims the dearth of passing in F1 is not related to aero, it's the insanely short braking distances that prevent you from outbraking another driver and the gearboxes that prevent error. Passing will be reduced.

4) the vast majority of investment in amateur motorsport has grey hair on top - whether it is a driver/owner or daddy's checkbook. Kids don't have enough money to race these cars and it will take a significant change in class philosophy to make what kids think matter (where they decide to invest in a car, without dad's help, at say, 24-25 years of age). Where's FBMW these days anyway - gone! Kids that don't have a lot of money are racing bomber stocks on 1/4 mile dirt - not FF and FC.

On the other hand - resistance to gradual technological creep is what kills classes when club politics and economics create "step inputs" to the class or create alternative classes when obsolescence becomes an issue. Thats pretty much how FF, FC, and FA got where they are today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner

1) it's a significant performance advantage or else they wouldn't be at the top end of the sport, where a couple of guys got them and then everybody else had to have one

2) they will make the motors last longer because you can't miss gears and blow things up as easy.

---

1- Not factual. There is a performance advantage ONLY when a swol system is allowed, which is not in this class. Having to row through every gear to go from 4th to 1st is demonstrably slower than being able to skip in-between gears.

2 - This is the primary reason for their adoption way back when in the first place ( besides the shift itself being quicker).

That was my experience driving an FE.

to have the ability to skip gears in downshifting the sequential FB.
OK, maybe not kill, but maim?

I have looked at the newer gearboxes as an alternative to the LD200. From a car builders point of view, the new boxes may actually be significantly less expensive than the LD200 because they are much better suited to being used as a structural member in the car. They also allow a considerable savings in the engine adapter.

I was engineering Atlantic when we first went to sequential boxes. They absolutely were not a competitive advantage over the H pattern boxes. What time you might have saved on the up shifts, the driver lost way more on the down shifts. The fact that FB has gone to the Geartronics because the down shifts are not possible in the time available at some corners, makes my point.

If you do not allow any shifting aids I think the sequential boxes are a non-issue. If anything they may be slightly disadvantaged to the H pattern boxes in the hands of top level drivers. The sequential boxes can be way more expensive to operate in the hands of unskilled drivers. Replacing shift drums and forks because a driver misses a shift makes broken gears look cheap.

If the LD200 is becoming a supply problem, I think we should allow sequential boxes but stay with 4 speeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner

To use a recent military term I hate - BLUF - bottom line up front

1) it's a significant performance advantage or else they wouldn't be at the top end of the sport, where a couple of guys got them and then everybody else had to have one

2) they will make the motors last longer because you can't miss gears and blow things up as easy. Pretty sure that's why the big cossie in the 016s lasts despite a piston speed that's marginal for engine life - miss a gear in one of those and kerblammo!

3) they eliminate a source of driver error, and thus eliminate a passing opportunity. Frank Dernie claims the dearth of passing in F1 is not related to aero, it's the insanely short braking distances that prevent you from outbraking another driver and the gearboxes that prevent error. Passing will be reduced.

4) the vast majority of investment in amateur motorsport has grey hair on top - whether it is a driver/owner or daddy's checkbook. Kids don't have enough money to race these cars and it will take a significant change in class philosophy to make what kids think matter (where they decide to invest in a car, without dad's help, at say, 24-25 years of age). Where's FBMW these days anyway - gone! Kids that don't have a lot of money are racing bomber stocks on 1/4 mile dirt - not FF and FC.

On the other hand - resistance to gradual technological creep is what kills classes when club politics and economics create "step inputs" to the class or create alternative classes when obsolescence becomes an issue. Thats pretty much how FF, FC, and FA got where they are today.

---

My experience in Atlantic and Indy Lights over 20 years does not make me inclined to support your observations. I have had more dirvers parked with transmission failures driving sequential boxes than H pattern. My most recient was this year at Long Beach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glenn cooper

to have the ability to skip gears in downshifting the sequential FB.
OK, maybe not kill, but maim?

---

Working with a company on a top secret system that allows you to skip gears on downshifting, you can go from 6th to 1st gear in one shift. I'll PM you the details but you can't say anything to anyone.

Which observations Steve? I'll admit to no personal experience. My anecdotal data came from an Atlantic team at long beach a couple of years back, when they first started running the bigger engine and sequential.

Several years back Racecar Engineering had an article on Cosworth's development of the 2.3 engine and their problems with piston breakage, and I was discussing those issues with a friend of mine who was a mechanic on that atlantic team. His experience was that they had a lot less in the way of engine problems because of the sequential. The article expressed concerns by cosworth that the high piston speeds created stresses on the ragged edge of what technology was capable of in the day - of course that was 5-6 years ago.

So your point is that because the sequentials as currently implemented for lesser formulae are fragile, and because you cannot skip gears on the downshift, that any other advantages (cost (money applied elsewhere)/stiffness, etc) would be negated?

Are they experiencing these failures in F3, and do you believe the fragility can not and would not be engineered out of the currently available products?

With the lower HP/Torque of FC render the concerns of fragility of current sequentials moot?

Just trying to figure out where you're going....saying it's Ok because it's potentially cheaper and wouldn't matter?

The Staffs box you guys use in the citations could be operated sequentially, correct? I heard of one FC guy that was running it that way and got pinched for doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner

Which observations Steve? I'll admit to no personal experience. My anecdotal data came from an Atlantic team at long beach a couple of years back, when they first started running the bigger engine and sequential.

The Staffs box you guys use in the citations could be operated sequentially, correct? I heard of one FC guy that was running it that way and got pinched for doing so.

---

My first experience with sequential boxes was in FA with the introduction of the Swift 08. We had both a Swift and a Ralt on the team. In general the drivers who had been in FA for a few years did not think the sequential box was any advantage. This was the pro series and my driver was a top ten runner.

After that I started working in Indy Lights and IPS with the Lola and Dallara chassis. One was sequential and one not.

My main point is that I don't think allowing sequential in to FC is a big deal. Do it or don't, I don't think it is worth getting in a lather over.

I have not used a Staffs box since the 1994 cars. We converted one 1994 Citation to LD200 because it was cheaper than rebuilding the Staffs box. All my new cars use LD200. I think the best box for FC would be the Staffs that was last built for the RT41 and modify the differential along the lines that Richard Pare worked out years ago.

The idea that sequential boxes will be a game changer in FC is not indicated in anything I have seen. But you have experience that indicates otherwise.

A lot of the advantages attributed to the sequential boxes are most likely due to the things you can do once you have a sequential box. I did IPS the year we had "shift without lift". That was an advantage. But we still broke gearboxes. The drivers can stick the car into a gear that over revs the engine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner

So your point is that because the sequentials as currently implemented for lesser formulae are fragile, and because you cannot skip gears on the downshift, that any other advantages (cost (money applied elsewhere)/stiffness, etc) would be negated?

---

Not so sure that the 'box is really more fragile, BUT, missing a shift usually has worse consequences than with an h-pattern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner

The Staffs box you guys use in the citations could be operated sequentially, correct? I heard of one FC guy that was running it that way and got pinched for doing so.

---

Only if you replaced the whole bearing carrier with the sequential setup - and I understand that it wasn't cheap. The sequential setup would be easy to spot because of the canister that stuck out the back.

Belong in FB, FA, CSR, DSR....Not FF FC that said, many would not go that way until new cars came out with one and it becomes a used car and works it's way into the lineup........ I like Steve's words on this also!! A biker kid with money might be inclined to go for it right away Buuuut.......