Printable View
Stan,
Much like FB, you can get a "new" car two ways. The above is constructed as an FST, but you can also convert an exsisting FV. Again, just like FB, conversion is less money, but the purpose built cars tend to have more cockpit room and great looks.
Conversion FST approx $10k (buying a Vee and converting)
Purpose built FST approx $20k (get in and drive)
Good stuff, Bill...thanks! :thumbsup:
Those FST's are very nice. I know I could find this elsewhere but you're using the 1,600cc engine in those right? And cockpits built for todays sized Hewmans :thumbsup:
Rick & Stan:
I was one of those who converted my FV to a FST. After selling my 1200 engine, shortbox
tranny and front link-pin beam (drum to drum), the cost was around $2k-$3k for the
conversion. Of course, I did the work along with a friend (thanks Dion), but the end result
is a car that's faster, looks better, has less maintenance and plentiful parts etc.....There's
a converted FST on the Formulavee.org website for $8500.00 ready to race! Thanks!
Mark
95' Citation FST
Rick,Quote:
Originally Posted by rickb99
1584 cc to be specific :D and yes, when we laid out the rules, the min weight and cockpit sizes refect todays larger humanoids.
As long as we're rolling along in a promotional mode in a hijacked anti-new class thread :D
FST is also a class that a person with the desire to "tinker" can construct their own car and be very competitive. This car is our FST series champion two years running. The constructor/driver is 6' 2" and 220 lbs.
I'll now go back into obscurity
While this thread is already hi-jacked, the black and pink car above is for sale.
More info at http://first.formulavee.org/exchange....php?p=212#212
Thanks!
you'd think it's the middle of winter with a wandering half-hypothetical thread like this one
As was pointed out above,
It is not that there are too many formula classes ..... there are not enough formula drivers.
My last two events were Regionals at Nelson Ledges and BeaveRun. The F500/FST/FV race group was well-subscribed but the Formula Alphabet race group was virtually empty. Probably one car per class at Nelson and less at BeaveRun. The despised SM/SMM field was weak at BeaveRun but put on the best shows of each day at Nelson.
It would seem to me, while the new Formula classes seem to be attracting most of the new blood, it is still not enough. The problems/reasons are numerous. Blaming people that chose a formula class different than yours .... is not doing anything constructive. As I have said before, you can not force people to race classes they do not want to race.
The traditional and new formula classes need to do a better job. Period!
I see 2 reasons (of many) as being responsable for what you are seeing. First-Formula car and Sports Racers -Not SRF- require more knowledge and finesse to prep and drive than something like a Spec Miata. You don't meed much of either to to race what is mostly a safety preped road car. Rent a racer and arrive and drive rides are common. Second-Percieved "Safety" of said driver in a full body race car is much easier to "sell" to a prospective racer or (if applicable) to his or her Spouse!;)
In short it takes more Commiment and more $$ to race a purpose built race car and fewer people are willing and/or able to step up to that level.:(
Darrell is right on the mark.
The disparity of interest in non-formula versus formula race cars in SCCA is definitely related to the barriers of entry posed by the various classes. The cost, time, complexity, setup sophistication, etc. is much less in a Spec Miata than any formula class including F-First.
I also believe to some degree there is a lesser factor in that there has been a shift away from interest in formula car racing as a spectator sport (at least here in the US). A Nascar race draws a sea of motorhomes all painted up in that fans favorite team/drivers colors (nutty if you ask me), where as of the audience that might attend an IRL or Champ Car race, over half came out because the guy on the radio said it would be a good time, doesn't know who any of the drivers are and leaves when the kids get bored.
There is a downside to the success the Miatas are enjoying these days. In the upcoming race at Sears Point next weekend, the Spec Miata's currently have 82 cars entered (something like a quarter mile of starting grid rows). SCCA has a waiver to allow up to 69 cars for the race, so 13 guys will end up getting cut and get to run in the IT group. I guess the good news for the Spec Miata guys is you always have somebody to run with... :blueflag:
Finally, as far people complaining about too many formula classes, the answer is not to start cutting formula or sports racer classes and their drivers. The answer is to recruit more race car drivers into the classes. You know, when a Spec Miata guy wanders into your pit, take the time to explain what is going on, offer to let them sit in the car. Many times it only take actually getting into one of these cars to get a person who likes racing cars hooked (I know it sure worked for me 25 years ago). :greenflag:
There are 9 formula classes and 23 tin-top classes.
What were you saying...? :cool:
Bingo, we have a winner here! Like 'em or not, those good ole boys have a fan base second to none. If you've never been in the infield during the Southern 500 at Darlington, you really can't fully appreciate why these guys are doing as well as they are. One of my neighbors was the first guy to put any NASCAR driver on QVC to sell stuff - die cast cars, etc. The driver was Dale Earnhardt - senior. This was maybe 15 years ago. They sold over $1.5 million of stuff in an hour. QVC had never seen anything like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Steele
Love or hate 'em. They're doing something right - most of the time.
jg
" No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the american public" I think that was before NASCAR but sure fits.:rolleyes:
I guess we might be able to do more to get people out to the track on SCCA weekends (that are currently not involved in racing).
I do believe progress has been made though. I was surpirsed recently when I started to look at coming back to SCCA racing after a ten year absence. When I asked someone still racing for a crew voucher to get in the gate, he said, "No need, just sign the waiver at the gate, come to the paddock and we will hook up".
When I was racing last you got a fixed number of crew passes and that was it, anyone wanting to get in without a crew pass (i.e. you had to know a racer personally to get in) was out of luck. That Catch 22 seems to have been addressed. It is definitely better than it was in the past. How often do you hear an old geezer like me say something like that?
Finally, from my perspective, I really am not sure it is that important to grow the ultimate number of competitors (at least here in the SF Region, if my math is right, there are 386 registered for next weekend at Sears) as just getting a few more of the "tin-top" guys Stan referred to earlier interested in Formula or SR cars. :checkered:
Not in Cendiv... :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Steele
Cendiv folks should be able to use the 'temporary membership' (90 days free) process to get into any race as a member.
I believe it was set up to facilitate just this situation- newbie trying to get info about the club and the sport. Show up, get the temp membership and you are in the event(s). I'm sure that part of the temp membership is to cover for insurance protection for the attendee.
I know a couple of folks who have used this to get in to races at Rd Atl for the first time, and not eat up an entrant's quota of passes.
edit re Dave's post: Still, $15 is cheap for a weekend's entertainment at the races, though. The problem of how to get non-members in for the first time is what is being resolved by the weekend membership. Hopefully, we will get some new members out of this method.
Rick:Quote:
Originally Posted by rickjohnson356
There is no longer a "temporary membership". There are now "weekend" memberships. They are good for a single weekend only. The weekend membership is $15. If the person joins SCCA, the $15 will be deducted from the cost of the membership fee. The weekend membership can be purchased multiple times, but clearly that isn't an economically sound way to go.
Dave
Dave,it that the case for all SCCA regions?
Yes, the weekend membership replaced the previous temporary membership as of August 1. Even if registrars have some of the old forms around, they are no longer valid.Quote:
Originally Posted by D.T. Benner
Dave
SHouldn't FST run with FF, they look like the same car w/ the same engine, and everything, what's the difference? besides the FV body?
FST is not the same car or engine or suspension. They are just a bit faster than the FV, but do not corner sideways all of the time.
Say, at Nelson:
FF 1:06.485
FE 1:07.154
F5 1:07.702
FST 1:14.341
FV 1:14.848
And MidOhio:
FE 01:30.226
F500 01:30.873
FF 01:31.025
FV 01:40.347
FST 01:41.938
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/8...artmentmb6.jpg
This is the rear suspension of the black FST car above. Swing axle (FV longbox) transaxle with mono-shock suspension. I still have rear drum brakes but most have production VW disk brakes. The engine produces peak HP numbers in the low 80s.
The front suspension is a ball-joint front beam assembly as found on a late 60s Karmen Ghia or 80s-90s Mexican VW Beetle. It has disk brakes and is much more robust than the FV beam assembly. FST cars have open shock mounting while FV must use the original mounts.
The engines have more power than FV but the spec tires Hoosier 60s are much harder and produce much less grip than the FV tires. It balances out to similiar lap times.
A well driven FF will be much faster than the FST car.
MY PERSONAL OPINION FOLLOWS:
FST is an intersting update of an FV but is just one part of the problem of too many classes. I cannot understand why we have gone to all of the trouble to make a new class that is VERY close to an existing class (FV). They only go a little faster (see iamuwere post above) but takes drivers from FV primariy. This kind of class is so similar to FV that I have a hard time thinking it will be so attractive that new people will join the club just for FST.
There are several previous posts noting that there is not a problem with too many formula car classes, we just need more formula car drivers. I suspect that potential drivers looking in from the outside would have a difficult time trying to understand what we are doing when we have three different classes that are lapping within 1 second of each other (FE/FF/F500) or two classes in the case of FV/FST.
If I were looking in from the outside I would look for classes that are well subscribed so that I can get assistance from the large competitor base and have lots of competition no matter what my skill level is. Spec Miata is a perfect example of this. If I were new to the sport and had a choice between FE/FF/F500/FV/FST (pick one) or SM, I would choose SM primarily because of the large number of entries at most races.
If we trim down the number a formula classes I believe it would increase the number of entries for the remaining classes and as a result the remaining classes would be more attractive, particularly from the ouside looking in. I would personally rather finish 10th in a tough, well subscribed field than finish first in a class that only has 5 competitors (even if the competitors are in fast, well prepared, well driven cars).
Summary: All of the newer classes have their interesting technical points (cheaper / faster / better / looks cooler / less filling / tastes great) but they divide the driver pool and as a result makes all of the formula classes less desirable. Want to increase the number of formula car drivers? Fewer classes.......
YMMV
Tim Dunn, FF19
That's all fine and good, but let me pose this question to you:
Let's say you determine that Formula Ford needs to be eliminated. What are the steps you'd recommend for getting rid of it?
Correct me if I'm wrong here. But I thought (believe) the goal of FST was/is to reduce the running cost (engine change, say more available) and make an improvement in the handling of the FV's with slightly newer (say more available) suspension and disc brakes? If that goal is met, it is the 'goal' to see all FV's undergo a relatively inexpensive change over to FST in the future. A good objective in modernizing an existing class IMO. Sorta like the Euro guys putting the Zetec/Duratec in FF's. But that's another can of worms.
I am mildly surprised that with new engine, discs and updated suspension that there hasn't been a larger improvement in laps times. But that's okay too. What's causing the near equal performance? The tires?
"Let's say you determine that Formula Ford needs to be eliminated. What are the steps you'd recommend for getting rid of it?"
Russ,
I would start by eliminating it from National status and then eventualy from regional status. If I still wanted to run FF I could go to Canada (great FF series still going there) or go vintage. If my DB-6 is not eligible for Vintage now it will be soon (it does have a 50+ year old engine).
That answer dodges your real question I think which is really: Hey, we have all this money tied up in a car in the garage. You (SCCA) can't delete MY class!
My answer to that is that some classes are going to fade away as their participation numbers decrease. SCCA does not have an obligation to provide classes in perpetuity. Plenty of classes have been eliminated in the past. If it is FF, so be it. As incredible as FF has been to Formula car racing around the world, eventually it will eliminated.
Tim
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.T. Benner
Actually, I race both a FE and an SRF and you need to be more prepared and on your game for a SRF or say a SM. You need more finesse because every tenth counts. Top 10 are usually seperated by a second. These classes are tight racing all the time and some of my hardest battled and physically demanding races have been in SRF. You cant leave these guys out, trust me!!!
Matthew (Not trying to be rude) Inge
I would argue that the proliferation of formula car classes is good and healthy. I see it as a process of tyring to find the classes that will find strong support in the future.
Our current selection of cars date from the '80s at best. FF and FV go back to the late '60s and early '70s. They are still the 2 strongest formula car classes but they have no future. Lack of sex appeal to the younger generations and/or high cost to value recieved. They are still the only true entry level formula car classes we have.
To me it is the lack of a worthy replacement for the existing entry level formula car classes that is the real problem. We need more drivers but we do not have a good place for them to start.
In the '80s we moved to spec cars as the answer the future. This would save the new racer from the jaws of the greedy capitalists who were making millions providing cars to unsuspecting newby drivers. Instead SCCA has lost millions on spec cars of their own.
Spec cars have a place as a recreational vehicle for those who want a low hassel form of racing. And maybe that is the future. But I will continue to argue that only thing spec about a spec car is the price of entry. I will also argue that if you bought a Swift DB1 in 1986 and raced it 10 races per year since, that you would have spent way less than if you had done the same thing with a Sports Renault/SRF.
FM and FE appear to have stalled. I don't think that either class is growing significantly. Here we have 2 classes that are at the same performance level and rules concept. One dates from the '70s and the other is more current. I would say that market is saturated. Again the cost of entry is high because the value of the cars is pegged by the rules not changing. This is good if you own a car but bad if you want a car. You can get an older model FC, in equal condition for way less the a FM/FE. And you can get on with the learning process that is really a part of racing. No instant gratification.
Over the last decade, it has been the motor cycle powered race cars that have done the best. I can remember 10 to 15 years back when DSR was on the chopping block for elimination because the participation rate had fallen below minimums. Now it is among the strongest classes.
But formula cars are way less expensive and way easier to handle for the driver/owner and chief mechanic. That is why I think that in the future the F1000 will be the hot intermediate formula car class. This class uses a restricted engine which will keep the engine costs down, it does not have all the body work ( body work = money) of a DSR, and it is faster than all the other cars in its groupings except FA.
If F1000 is a success then maybe we can look at say F600 (FF chassis with MC power). Until then lets keep trying to see what will catch on in the market for purpose built race cars.
Time,Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim FF19;148201
That answer dodges your real question I think which is really: Hey, we have all this money tied up in a car in the garage. You (SCCA) can't delete [U
You are correct, and for every NEW type of formula car, like FST/FE/FB ad nauseum, we create a greater number of guys that can say this. It's a very large can of worms and there probably isn't a club-based viable solution. (FS was to be that solution, giving these bastard cars a place to play, but that wasn't enough.) Too many guys out there that create their own version of an existing car for some personal or perceived reason, run them in outlaw club events and then want a place for them to play in the SCCA at the national level.
This is no longer an industry/market with limited resources or input. There are way too many options these days and if we do not volulntarily limit them no class will be safe. The FB guys probably feel safe now but all it will take is for some Lee Stohr-like character to come up with a better mousetrap using some new technology or powerplant/tranmission and the "wave of the future" will crash down on FB. There ain't no loyalty in this world - and more's the pity.
Its been argued that there only need to be 4 Formula car classes (or maybe 5)- FV, FF, FC, FA. Each satisfies a particular level of racing and each is distictively different. I think one of the reasons for the proliferation of open wheel classes is those 4 core formulas did not keep up with technology so somebody invented a better or more modern platform. SCCA's mistake in my opinion is they allowed them all in, instead of updating the existing, proven classes.
A couple of examples: New motor in FC (ofcourse I mention it..) took years approve when in Europe the whole formula (F2000) evolved to something else years before. FV should have evolved to FST for all the reasons mentioned above a decade ago. FF should have changed both motor and wheels to mirror European specs. Instead, the formulas were effectively frozen openning the door for new designs and classes, which is the point of this thread.
There are many ways to pursue this whole issue, but having 8 or more formula classes does no one any good in the long run.
I think Bob is Wright. --sorry too weak to resist--
The problem is that the huge majority of us are too selfish as racers to take a few lumps now for a better future.
I think FST is a good thing...the FV cars are easy to convert. The conversions make more of the 1200 parts available to the vintage crowd. There won't be a shortage of 1600VW parts for a LONG time.
Not much difference in lap times because you are closer to FV power than FF power. You are still stuck with crappy gear choices with essentially two gears and a 27+% gear split.
I'm not going to get into specific dollars and cents, but I have spent considerable amounts of time, in both FF/CF and Spec Racer. Despite my love for formula cars, Spec Racer costs less, in time and money, than FF/CF. The only factor where FF/CF clearly beats SRF from a maintenance standpoint is in body repair, which can be a pain with a Spec Racer (acres of 'glass).
I did enjoy my years in FF/CF. Great cars. Great people. Great racing. But I just bought a new Spec Racer and am quite content to stay here. No matter where I am in the field, there's always somebody to race with. The SRF car count for the upcoming Double Regional at The Glen is 28 (including my mailed-in entry) and counting, with three weeks to go. We're the largest class entered, including combined SM and SSM. (By the way, there are 12 FFs entered -- a nice turnout for you guys.)
Want proof of Spec Racer customer satisfaction? Just go over to www.specracer.com and check out the General Discussions thread. Hear the crickets? Well, it's not that sleepy. There is a lively thread on Mick Robinson's concussion at the Pocono Nationals. But what you don't see are many threads on rules controversies, vexing technical issues or chronically sagging car counts.
I can tell you from the inside that the Spec Racer guys are a happy bunch of racers.
It's been discussed time and time again on this forum and others -- what formula car racing needs is a true, non-wing, bike-motored spec car. Cost for kit: $23,000 to $27,000. But few have stepped up to build a car like that. One did, and failed. Why? Beats me. That's for others to determine.
Bob:
Look at what I said. I was comparing the cost of racing over the peroid 1986 to today. If you bought a Sports Renault and then converted it to SRF and raced 10 races per year, I think my statement is true. The DB1 has increased in value over that peroid. Over any shorter peroid that cost comparison may not be true.
It sounds to me like you are totally satisified with spec racing at the level you want race. That is great. Maybe you represent the future of SCCA racing. Maybe racing that demands that you maximize your performance within a relatively simple set of rules (formula) and the limit to performance is your inginuety, skills and experience is no longer what racing is about. I started racing when the rules were fairly stable and the cars changed.
I happen to think that over the years, FV has been one of the very best SCCA classes, ever! It has the highest performance to cost ratios. The skill set learned in FV is exactly the same skill set necessary to drive any other formula car well.
Now every one wants the cars to never change and every one race the same thing. I probably would never have gotten involved if that was all there was to racing.
The reason we don't have a new exciting entry level formula class is that there is no constituancy to fight for such a class. No one is saying I will race if you have this class. For the most part entry level racers are not SCCA members until they start racing. Or entry level racers have already chosen the entry level class they want.
RickB99:
The formula FST class was created due to the current and upcoming shortage in VW parts
that the FV used. If I remember correctly, pistons, backing plates and GOOD rear drums
were getting harder to source, and as expected the cost was increasing due to good old
supply and demand. The FST on average are 2-4 second's per lap faster than FV's except
perhaps RA where the long straights help the FV's. The CF tires have 2-3 times the useful
life expectancy as FV tires and thus further reduction in costs. As many of you know, the
disc brakes are basically maintenance free as compared to the drums etc....My 2 cents!
Mark
Steve:
I raced several Club Fords, including a Zink Z-10, prior to going to Spec Racer Renault in 1995. If you want to extrapolate the numbers back that far, then my experience fits into that time span, too. In my case, I'd say the costs are roughly the same between the Club Fords and the Spec Racer when factoring in the Ford conversion costs for the Spec Boat. Nowadays, it's no contest -- Spec Racer comes out cheaper on a ten-race per season basis.
That said, I do miss seeing the wheels out there and the technical aspects of FF/CF (so much so that I ran a Swift DB-1 the last two seasons). But I don't miss the expense and am really pleased to be back in SRF.
i believe the average FF/CF driver and car will beat the same average SRF driver/car every time.....
.....................so why would i want to get out of my Crossle 32F? .....so i can be slower?
Not so you can be slower, so you can learn how to repair large areas of fiberglass, often.
And also pay fixed prices for stuff that could be produced at a more cost effective value if it was an open market.
Hot rodder slang word play in that title, maybe somebody will get it.
EYERACE: I concur. No argument there. But to me, trying to drive on the edge is the thing. The edge comes later in an FF/CF, no doubt about that.
Rick: There's very little griping in Spec Racer community about the high prices on some parts. Those prices support the 14 Spec Racer CSRs nationwide and allow to Enterprises to make a modest profit. Nobody's making a killiing here. Having those CSRs at the races makes a big difference. Even so, how much does a complete FF engine rebuild cost these days? $3,800 like an SRF engine? I don't think so.