Printable View
Joe, actually No, It was rumored at Mid-O that the suspension (A-arms etc) would have some sort of magnetic strip that would be scanned for authenticity (you have to buy your parts from ENT no Knock-offs) to ID them as Spec parts on the car.
I don't think there will be a lot flexibilty here on buying from outside sources with this deal.
Dave
[size="1"][ September 24, 2002, 07:16 PM: Message edited by: Dave Hopple ][/size]
Dave, that may be true. But we did it in SRF and besides, when I was running my VD...we bought the A-arms from VD anyway. They were cheaper and better than most others I tried.
On a side note, it has been to my attention that the personal coments between Dave Harris and I may be upsetting some people. I am sorry if that is true. Dave is a good family friend and I am having a little fun.
Mike,
Let me ask you this and answer honestly. When SCCA approched you about this project, how did you feel then? Would you be backing it if they had you as the car builder? Enterprises would still force you to build the cars and parts with minimal profit? You did not come forward when they asked you about it, only when the decided to go with VD. This makes me think that you kept it under wraps in hope of getting a piece.
This is the same way I conduct business. When someone needs a quote for a big project, I keep it under wraps. If you let out info, you are hurting you chances of getting the job.
Would you be behind this car if it was built by Suace/Stohr/Prince? Or if parts were built by the parties mentioned?
I may be cynical (I'm at the right age) but I can't imagine this spec car will ultimately be classed in FA. The buyers won't want to get their doors blown off by a 10 year old Atlantic. They will demand that their new spec car be at least competitive in its class. If the decision hasn't already been made, there will surely be a new class coming down the pike, since SCCA/Enterprises wouldn't be able to sell cars that weren't at least as fast as the other cars in the class. So there will definitely will be dilution of everyone's racing. When I bring guests to the track I always have to explain why there are so many classes. So SCCA addresses one of their biggest PR/perception problems by adding another to the mix?
I am sure that we have many other people on this site with more knowledge about track time and regulations that me.
If a car is run with FA, that is not a bad plan. The FA class is normally very small. When the bigger numbers do show up in Cendiv, it is for bigger tracks.
I also think that the FA guys are, in theory, more heads up drivers that SOME of the guys in FF/FC/FM. I need to stress some. Because each of these classes, FF/FC/FM has excellent and professional drivers. But it is easier to get into these classes because they are cheaper and easier to maintain than a FA.
So by having fewer drivers and more aware drivers in the mix it should make for a safe grouping.
I don't want to discuss grouping indepth, because you can find pages and pages of what I want to say, spoken by others at the FF Underground site.
In a nut shell, it makes a good grouping.
Runoffs.
When the SR becamse the SRF, the SCCA invited all of the Ford guys to the Runoffs. I was not around for this, but I think if you had a Ford, you were invited. I am sure that this will be the same for the Runoffs again. Why? Some people don't normally get the chance to go. It might be because of points, time, who knows. But this is a selling point too. I am surprises that they have not brought this up yet. Maybe to soon in the sales process.
Joe -What Enterprises asked me about was not a car like this it was a spes racer with no fenders and no competition for any Formula class.They wanted a 1300 Lb. car that a 250 lb driver could get in with 120 hp.Now does that sound like what they are selling now?I was not interested anyway.I am not your typical car builder.All I wanted was for the builders who could mass produce a spec car like this to get a chance to bid on building the car.SCCA did this all wrong because they knew that there would be major opposition.By the way I would not have even bid on this type of project.I have no interest in mass producing cars.Joe -They want to control everything in this class.You will not be able to buy anything but your oil from someone other than Enterprises.Believe it.
Mike, you may be correct on the parts. We will have to see how that pans out. If it is handled in the same way as the SRF, then we will have the oportunity to buy parts from other sources. They cannot and will not try and capture all of the parts sales. That would not be a money maker. For that to happen, SCCA will have to either make or get rodends and all parts from VD. That is not going to happen. You will always have that option. Look at your car. If I was to buy one, what parts would I HAVE to get from you. Well, the suspension pieces and chassis pieces. All else can be bought from any place that will accept the money.
Is the new car going to bring in NEW racers, or will it feed off existing racers and detract from existing classes? The truth is probably a little of both. The price is attractive enough to appeal to some new racers, and it has already attracted 20 or more experienced racers from different classes (as witnessed by sales at the Runoffs).
Joe, I can guarantee you that, had I been contacted, International Racing Products would have submitted a bid to produce and support the class. It would have been a business decision. As a member and supporter of SCCA, I am very unhappy with the way this entire thing was carried out. It still calls to question whether SCCA exists to serve its members...or whether a segment is dedicated to the preservation of SCCA Enterprises.
...however, all the reports that I have heard on the car sound very positive. Perhaps it will be the boost the formula car racing needs. We've already endured Formula 3, Formula Renault, the "new" Formula 2000, old FM and now new FM. FF and FC persevere in spite of these other entrants, but they don't appeal to many new drivers.
Personally, I'm hoping for the best out of this new class...
Larry Oliver
International Racing Products
Joe, while I don't agree with high dollar shocks or new tires every weekend, I also have a problem with another "spec" class that allows no suspension tuning. How can you have a "drivers" class when the only way to tune the chassis is with the wings and a-roll bars?
Having driven many different VD chassis, I can tell you that the chassis needs tuning. The cars are so rake sensitive its incredible. You will have to have a good setup on the ride hight, camber, caster and wings. These factors are still open. The shocks have been removed. That is a blessing. Not everyone wants to study dyno sheets and pay someone for the latest updates. It takes alot of testing to know what shock changes effect. If I were to remove 2 turns of rebound from your car, would you know? How many people would? Now non adjustable bilsteins are a little more stock than I would like...but what the hell, why not.
Trust me, you will never find a pushrod car that has a setup that will go fast each weekend at different tracks. You will always be chasing a good setup and the wings will just confuse you even more.
There's this incredible feeling you get as a driver when you hit upon the sweet spot in setup that a spec car driver will possibly never experience. One or two clicks on a damper is the difference between sweet or not so sweet. It's a pity that someone embarking on the path to a pro ride, or even a hobbyist, won't get to experience that. That feeling is what I (we?) do this madness for, getting the whole package of car and driver working together. Seems kind of a perverted concept, no external damper adjustments. Assuming rebuildable dampers, how much wasted time will be spent changing shim stacks at the track or getting pissed off at an ill handling mush-monster? Time = lots of money. I guess I'm not the target audience.
Dane,
You are right about that feeling when you get the car just right, although I think I get more enjoyment out of the actual wheel to wheel competition in a race, when you don't have time to think about what change to make to your shocks. Luckily, this year I've had some intense wheel to wheel racing, probably some of the best of my career (16+ years). Kind of like that race you and I had a couple of years ago at RA. This year I had three or four races like that - passing two to five times a lap, etc. To me that is what racing is about, and if this spec class (car) can offer that, it will be worth being in. I know I can get that in FF, so that is where you'll probably see me. However, if these spec cars provide similar entertainment, I think you'll see a lot of them, maybe with me in one!
Thoughts:
New car= new members? Maybe, but few I bet. More likely many other cars will be for sale soon.
New car= buy all the parts from Ent? You bet, and if they can get the oil spec too you can count on it.
Ent to take over= control of the classes? That's the plan from the info I've come to get. They want it all, not some of it. The plan may include taking a run at FM again next year too. Lost round one, but wait until after elections.
New FM= A threat? (sorry had to mention the car) No way. This is a Pro (read IMSA) car only and not about to have an SCCA decal on it, save for those who choose to run it in FS.
New car= A bad idea? Not really, the people will speak with their wallets. I'm interested in what it has, but I doubt we'll see high numbers anytime soon.
Few adjustments= A bad design (and NOT a drivers class??) I don't see that. If anything it's much more of a drivers class than what many have now. Few changes place the emphasis on the driver rather than the engineer. Yea, I know, don't start with the training engineers stuff. The SCCA is not about training engineers.
I'm toying with telling you all a short story about the new Ent tech director. Suffice it to say the SCCA has few scruples.....
[size="1"][ September 25, 2002, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: Todd TCE ][/size]
Todd- You are dead on about the lack of scruples.I talked with MS.Jensen and it is like talking to a recorder with a tape loop.Same exchange back and forth with little understanding that SCCA is for the members not just the Board of Directors.The dilution of classes started along time ago when many of the current members were not around.Remember the Shelby Can Am.It was pushd through by a small special interest group(the Board of Directors).It died but in the process almost killed S2000.Too many people have used the strength of club racing for there own personal and financial gains usually screwing things in the process.It just makes me sick.Racing costs money.We have classes for people who don't care how much they have to spend to be competitive and we have classes where a reasonable budget can keep you competitive and everything in between.We don't need any more Spec classes or any other classes period.The quality of SCCA's product is diluted and compromised every
time the BOD's think they know what is best for us the members.
All of this about this new car/class turns my insides. If they are trying to create a training/drivers class, a driver must be allowed to at least turn the knobs on a damper if he/her is going to learn anything. The big formula cars are all about the drivers feel. If you take away the abilities of a driver to shine because he/she has that 'gift', it is like slowing down the education of a 'gifted' child so all the others can keep up. This mentality of the SCCA is why F1 cannot and will not find an American driver, at least one from our soil.
Let Dominic Cape test the car, the package has never even turned a wheel. He is the best I know, and I know a lot of them, then let the scca seal the shim stacks specs, BUT LEAVE THEM ADJUSTABLE. Then dump a produstion car class. There are only 6 of the 24 classes that are for formula cars. Then they need to bind the regions to hold sanctioned SCCA races with those race groupings. LET THE MEMBERSHIP WITH COMPETITION LICENSES DECIDE. We are the ones racing in these groups, let us decide. FA/FC, FF/F500, FM/FS, FV.
As Joe says, if it's worth having, work for it!
Jon
And Todd says: "Suffice it to say the SCCA has few scruples....."
Methinks taking over the whole formula car classification is in the works OR we too can be a "Skippy" using the Trans Am as a base. If you get enough players to dilute the National entries, then everything else becomes a Regional Class anyway.
Plus
Just where did the idea of Enterprises, Sports Racer Renoo (and the Le Car Pro Series), Pro Trucks, etc. come from anyway?
John is right on the money in his statement about driver training. If you put a new driver into a car that is developed to only 70% of it's potential, then you get a driver that can only drive a 70% car. Put him/her into a car that needs to be tweeked to 90%, and MAYBE a few naturally gifted drivers will learn how to do it, but only with the help of an experienced (read: expensive) engineer/coach. Put them into a car that needs to be tweeked to 100% to be competitive, and that 70% driver will be useless, and probably useless forever if they spent too much of their formative training time in that 70% car.
Spec classes DO have their place in club racing (gads, how I hate to admit that!) because of the number of people who look at race driving as just another form of entertaining themselves - like buying a wave runner - but to think of them as being a savior of the Club is a big mistake.
Richard-Dead on Richard,You can see the downfall of American drivers linked to 2 happenings,when Spec race cars were introduced in the early 80's and the downturn for Formula Ford.The two happened together.Now how many Americans are successful in Europe.Very few.In Europe they start in Formula Ford.But even now thats changing because too many Spec cars have been introduced.The people who don't know where to start have many choices and money is the first consideration.I don't think that we will ever be able to create the caliber of driver necessary for F1 without a stationary ladder system.There are too many spec cars and spec series, not because it creates great drivers but it makes money for the car and series providers.It all comes down to money.
Trackman.
If you want to post anything on this forum, that is fine. Your opinions are welcome. If you want to criticize someone personally or there post, give us a name or an email...something.
I will not allow for people to slam others and not stand up to there own words.
* 3M *
[size="1"][ September 26, 2002, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: JoeTovo ][/size]
Steve S.,
I'm glad the new car may be right for you, an important fact is you'll still be RACING! For some of us the shoe doesn't fit, but don't let our opinions take away from anyone's enjoyment of their new ride.
See ya at Indy.
Dane, if the spec car was a 2001 williams, you would still want something more advanced! [img]smile.gif[/img]
Joe -Have you put your order in yet for the new Spec car?What if it is a really cool looking car and it handles like crap?How much will it cost to have an engineer figure out what is wrong with it?
Good luck and have fun.Maybe someday I'll even want a Spec car.I hope they at least make them use an American tire manufacturer.
Mike, I am not spending a dime until after next season pans out.
If it handles like crap, that would suprise me. It is a VD chassis with a few changed. It is a proven car, I am confident it will work.
But yet, I am waiting a bit to order one!
I don't think I agree with what is being said here. I believe that when cars are more equal and money isn't playing all the cards then it is more of a drivers competition. Sure maybe the car can only become 70% of it's potential with the tuning available but that's not a disadvantage. If everyone has to deal with 70% maximum then you factor it out and everyone is on the same playing field.
A Formula Ford is not a 100% car, and an F1 car is much closer to the 100% mark. Does that mean that the drivers in FF aren't as good or that competition won't be as good? Actually it's totally opposite then that. Not everyone has the money for an engineer, not everyone has the money for the best equipment so what it should come down to is the driver. A good driver can balance a car on the edge of it's theoretical limit and there's where the skill comes into play. When you push the envelope of technology and money cars go beyond the capabilities of human abilities. Therefore technologies like traction control and launch control are used to do something a driver can't. So what it comes down to is the person with the best car and money will win the race UNLESS there is some big problem but on the average that is what happens.
Sure racing isn't cheap but if you open your eyes and look at the way racing is going... it's down the tubes for the people that think money, engineering and 100% tunable cars are the way to go. Without fans, sponsors and close racing the fields will get smaller each year. As much as I like technology I can't deny that racing is also for the fans and the people giving the teams money to play. CART is nearly dead and where did all their technology and superb engineers and lousy marketing? No where..... people want to see close racing and drivers that they can relate too. They could care less about what is under the hood or what types of shocks we would be running. Sure it may matter to us gurus but unless you want to be sitting in your garage making engine noises because the series are dead then change is the answer.
A spec car with limited adjustability will level the playing field because the expensive engineers, expensive data logging, and massive amount of track time to "approach" 100% tuned will not be as big of a deal. Go-karts don't have shocks or suspensions and there races are close and have good competition.
Sex appeal is also another big point... sure our FFs still look decent but they don't compare to the looks of the spec car in this article. Looks make the world go round and it can be found is almost any avenue of our existence. We can explain to people all day that some of the looks of the spec car don't do much for it but in the end they will still look at the better looking car as superior. Would you buy fruit in the store that had a label saying it was high in some vitamins that other fruits didn't have but it was ugly looking fruit? Probably not…
Remember that thing called computers… remember when it came around and everyone said that they can do things fine without it and that there needed to be no change? Remember fighting with people about the advantages of it but just watching your thoughts go right out the other ear? It’s interesting………
Chris More
Chris-I think the point trying to be made here is this:SCCA is a club (non-profit).It is supposed to be controlled by it's members for the good of it's members.Spec cars will come and go because it is only profit that is important.You think FF is expensive,try owning a FM or even a FV.If you want to be competitive in any class it costs money.Tires are the single biggest costs besides entry fee and travel.If you want a top notch Nationally competitive engine in FV you have to pay around $3000.00 for a good rebuild.FF costs are only marginally higher.If you want to buy a car to run in any class usually the acquisition costs are the biggest chunk of change you spend.A spec car is a more expensive acquisition but the motor costs are cheaper.But even with the spec car you still have the constants,ie Travel,entry fees,tires etc.I run my FF for about $750.00 weekend.Thats based on 1/2 set a tires and motor costs and chassis parts.The rest of my cost of racing is travel,motels amd food.I figure 1 set of tires every other weekend except at the Sprints,double Nat. or Runoffs. If we had a tire rule it would help bring down the costs of tires on a season.Ask any guy who has a Spec car,he will tell you it is not much cheaper than what I spend on a FF.In fact I bet most of them spend more.The problem with FF is not the costs of it but the way many of the people think that own them.Racing is expensive and it is not for everyone.Why should it be.There are other alternatives,Go karts autocrossing etc.FF is not expensive in comparison to almost any other open wheel class.I get really tired of listening to people complain about things they don't try to change.If you want a Spec car go and buy one, for some it may be the answer but I have watched Spec cars come and go over the years and the only two classes that I have seen little or no change since 1974 is FV and FF.FF has had downturns in participation and we need to address those issues.
Alternative motor parts are in the works which will help the reliability and longevity and other issues will be addressed as well.I hope we can all do our parts to help FF prosper in the future.
Spec cars serve a purpose in this case to make money for Enterprises but they are not cheaper to race.
Mike,
I will rent your car for $750 for every weekend in Cendiv. I will even do your region.
If you can run the car for $750 per weekend, I will pick you and the car up and go to the track.
Gibby charges $200-$300 per day for assistance. I will give you the same. You don't even have to do anything. Just hang out and have fun.
So, $750 per weekend and I take the car to the track.
Sign me up. When is the next race?
JoeTovo,
You wouldn't happen to have Gibby's email would ya?
Mike,I've been in CFF and FF in Central Div.for a few years and have always found a way to race for
$750. or even less.Sure I will get used tires and camp out also track showers.
As far as the expence of owning a Formula Ford I've reacently converted a 2 liter car to a 1600
for under $10,000. If one has the drive and determination one can do this sport on a limited
budget. John Vlasis
Joe -The deal is I own my own car.I take the depreciation costs and my labor costs out of the equation.I race for about $750.00 a weekend plus traveling expenses and that spec car is not gonna be much cheaper because the traveling,motel entry fee and food expense is basically the same for everyone.I figure $3-4k engine costs annually about $400.oo per weekend and $300.. or so for tires remember 1 set every 2 weekends and remember I build all my own parts and repair my own car and do all the labor.I went to the Runoffs this by myself and cared for my car and my brothers car basically alone.I don't fly in friends and family,I drive the truck myself and cut costs wherever I can.I bet you dinner at the Runoffs next year that the Spec car tires are more expensive than FF-FC tires and you have to have a new set every race to be competitive.Ask the Mazda guys.The only thing you will possibly save money on is the motor and that remains to be seen.Joe I hope you realize I not against the Spec car I against the the way SCCA is doing it and I am against the misinformation that flys around at the site of a new pretty face.
Joe I forgot one thing.Why would I want to rent my car to you for what it costs.That wouldn't be very smart for me .But nice try.I will rent you a car if you take it to the track and hire Gibby to work on it.It rents for $1400.00.You have to pay entry fees and travel costs,motel and I'll supply 2 cycle old tires for the weekend.I'll rent you a FC for $2000.00.Come on down to Texas we got some out a sight bargains on cars!
Joe I forgot one thing.Why would I want to rent my car to you for what it costs.That wouldn't be very smart for me .But nice try.I will rent you a car if you take it to the track and hire Gibby to work on it.It rents for $1400.00.You have to pay entry fees and travel costs,motel and I'll supply 2 cycle old tires for the weekend.I'll rent you a FC for $2000.00.Come on down to Texas we got some out a sight bargains on cars!
Mike,
I think you're pretty close on the numbers. I have been figuring about $300/hr for the engine. Of course that includes doing the head a couple of times during the life of the engine before rebuild. I would like to hear numbers on the engine. I may have pulled this out of thin air, or maybe from the Zetec's, but I've heard something like 200 hours between rebuilds. If that's the case, the cost per hour would drop to about $25, compared to $300. Pretty significant for someone that wants to so a lot of testing, lapping, renting, etc. Also, according to the site put up on this thread (what were you thinking, Dave...LOL), the tires would last 12 sessions without a drop in performance. Even at $800 a set, you would be at $200 a typical weekend. Of course you would also have expensive wings and wheels to bend, and the gearbox sounds like a total unknown. Just food for thought, and from the pictures they are a pretty face! Dave says they are big, though (like, really big, he said).
PS - I think you would make a great contribution on the BOD. For an important position like that, you'd probably have to let your hair grow, though!! LMAO!
Ok here's my 2 cents. FF is not cheap to race if you want to be up front in a National. It can be relatively cheap in Regionals or if you just want to be in the race and not very competitive. Formula Ford cannot be raced as cheaply as a spec car if you want to run up front.I know this new car is FA at the moment but it's only a matter of time before it has it's own class in my opinion. How much does a Runoffs winning caliber FF chassis and motor cost? I expect that it's well over the price of the spec car. How much testng will it take to get the Runoff's caliber car into that sweetspot it will need to compete? Add that price in as well. The Spec car is attractive because everyone is close to equal and things won't change. I know no 2 cars are equal but they should be close. At least you have a chance.
Some of you act like FF is static. I say the price of running up front and the equiptment needed just keeps escalating. In 1984 we pretty much had a spec FF series, at least at the Runoffs, lots of DB-1s with the odd Reynard, Citation and Van Diemen. Is a 1984 spec DB-1 competetive today? No. I'm going to list some of the things that are needed now to run up front that were rare if they even existed back in 1984. Gun drilled half shafts, lightened CVs, Aluminum diff carriers, droop limiters, 3 way adjustable shocks, data acquisition, radios, Aluminum heads, 5 1/2 inch clutches, and drilled rotors all come to mind. My 1985 Van Diemen has none of those items. Even with those improvements it doesn't appear that a DB-1 could keep up with the current front running chassis. My point is our rules may be static but there is always a new item needed to run up front. Then you have to go testing with that new item. You might say we reached the end of the development of the class. I bet some people said the same thing when they saw the DB-1 in 1983. FF just keeps getting more expensive to run up front because the motors require a lot of maintenance, the tire costs are high, the testing needed to run up front and the continually new parts available. Also There may be a new chassis next year that will make your current one obsolete.
I don't know how the Spec car was put through and if it wasn't done right that bothers me. But I think this club needed it. The FF contingent doesn't seem to be able to agree on rule changes, our cars are getting long in the tooth and new FFs are expensive. I've always thought it was funny to see the cars in production classes, MG Midgets, Turners, 356 and 914 Porsches and then hear how the SCCA is graying and can't get new young members. None of the kids have probably ever seen one of those cars on the street, they can't relate. Well folks, the DB-1 is 19 years old. Formula Ford had a great run but maybe we should go vintage racing.
I'm with you, Mark. Your argument is realistic, and I think will prove right in the long run. I'm just not sure enough to write the big check right now - maybe in about a year or so if the dust begins to settle.....
You guys have strayed from the comments Chris made earlier. And he's venturing into deep water at that with some of you guys!!
His comments run couter to many of you that it doesn't make you a poor driver because you can't tinker and engineer away. In fact if I read right he supports the notion that this less tinkering may in fact make you a better driver as you have to work harder with what you have, rather than relying on the tweek-of-the-week part. I tend to side with him on it as you all know, but I also see the value in letting people learn to max what they can with 'open shock' for example. I don't however see how this open policy can be stated that it makes you a better driver any more than the opposite can be true. You can become a smarter driver perhaps, but then again so too do the others you race against if they are allowed the same latitude.
As for costs, I think people can do regional races for less than a grand a weekend if they really put some effort into it. Sure more is nice, but how big are the paychecks?
Ok, I have to ask. Why don’t you embrace the Duratec engine in FF? I know it would save a lot of money for the racers but I know racers are all very rich so money is no object!
Blast away but remember to be nice!
I think we've nearly all agreed that the retro fit idea to a current car is simply NOT the way to go. Yes, there are a few hold outs on this one too, but most of us are realistic in teh cost vs return of such a project.
Yes there is a way to breathe life into FF with the Kent engine.There are many aftermarket parts being worked on that will lower the cost and increase the reliability.I am going to suggest to the Comp. Board they bring back the Tire Rule.We don't have to have a new engine to bring motor costs down.I personally have much invested in the Kent but if I thought there was no way to decrease the cost of running the Kent engine I would opt for a new motor.If you have suggestions or ideas about the Kent go to the technical page.Back to topic the Spec car will not bring the costs of racing competitively down to less than a FF.FM is not cheaper than FF and it's engine lasts for 3 years or more.But to be competitive you have to have new tires every race.FM tires are more expensive than FF tires.The costs of getting there (travel,etc.)is the same.The Mazda is going to loose value as SCCA has targeted it's new car to compete for FM customers.The FM is $40k and the Spec car is $26.9k.The FM looks dated and SCCA new car looks like a spec F1 car.What do you think FM customers are going to do.This new car is going to dilute FM,FC and FF.I am glad I don't own a FM because I think that the class has been targeted because SCCA Enterprises was not allowed to rebuild the motors.Just a thought.
Reinstating the FF tire rule is a good idea. I never understood who supported it going away. When I wrote my area director about the rule change and complained about the cost increase I was basically told that racing is expensive, if you can't afford it go away. I went away.
There was no benefit in doing away with that rule except to the tire companies. I know in the Northeast we had a gentleman's agreement to run only one set a weekend. I don't know if that still stands. Of course the Runoffs were a different matter.
Here's an idea, why not specify a hard compound tire like in CF in addition to one set per weekend? That may entice more CFs to show up at Nationals, they would be on a more level playing field without having to buy another set of tires. There would be no harm to FF since everyone would have the same tire. They would last longer and perhaps tire expenses would go down. The lap records currently standing would probably never be broken again but does that matter?
Just a thought but at the least I do support reinstating the tire rule.
$300 per hour for a Kent motor. Not only that, but a motor that puts out only 120hp.
Folks, that sums up the current FF problem.
[size="1"][ October 01, 2002, 05:04 PM: Message edited by: Purple Frog ][/size]
I hear that the HP number is looking to be 175HP.
Now, this is going to be fun!
I guess the reason for the different views is that we all probably have conflict of interests. We are all probably in different points of our life, we have different experiences and neither opinion is better or worse.... but we should all be open to others ways of thinking.
Here are my interests:
I would like to race professionally but I find out that 95% of the time (in this age) you have to be rich or have someone that is rich put you through it. I like open wheel races and Formula Ford is about the only class I can get into on a minimal budget and get onto the track. Maybe buying a project car isn't the most economic decision but I didn't have the initial money nor did I want to wait around till I could afford a new car. I like Formula Ford, and the people in the class are great but I don't want to stay here forever. I want to gain driving experience, get better and move on. I never want to get rid of my Formula Ford but if I don't move on at some point I will always be a club racer. Since I don't have a lot of money to throw around in Formula Ford I just want to get out on the track and get experience. Therefore I hate throwing money into areas that seem to go into a black hole. Now if I was going to do Formula Ford for the rest of my life I would probably have a different outlook.
When I went to ICP's engineering class this summer they talked about how you can just make almost one full season on a set of tires. They say you need 3 or 4 sets of tires to start with and then continue to rotate them. They said that most of the time people have to buy tires every race or two is because of incorrect setup on the chassis or they just have the money to blow. If you are running for a national championship or you have plenty of money getting a full set of tires each race or two is the way to go as every little bit counts.
A spec treaded will probably equalize the field more and lower costs (depending on price) but racing on a slick is more fun..... they run treaded tires over seas and there are old cars still competing at the top. I see rocker arms cars running with pushrod cars all the time.
I do support the idea that letting people tinker with the chassis can help them understand the engineering side more and thus help them get closer to the car's limit. I'm just saying if you put rules into place to limit the amount of "adjustments" the focus moves away from engineering and more toward the driver. Now there still will be tweaks that will make the cars faster and I think that is fine but as we know the more and more engineering and technology we put into the cars the less we get away from competitive racing. Top drivers in the world are of the same order of driving ability but that seldom makes close racing. Since technology keeps increasing and prices are not going down the fields get smaller and the races get more predictable... aka F1. Sure our cars are a drop in a bucket compared to F1 but so are our budgets.
So yes I a spec car may be more expensive in some aspects but at least the technology is equal among all drivers. Sure we all may not like FM as it is older chassis technology but their fields are tight and they are on TV... and we are not…. At least in the US.
I guess it just comes back to the same notion I started out as... if you are weekend warrior without aspirations to becoming a professional racer then the current "formula" works for you and that's cool. But we shouldn't discount the idea that a spec car could still survive for sometime and may benefit some drivers.
It doesn't have to last forever to still be a success. If it works for those who drive it and they get what they want out of it then that's fine. Still as a weekend warrior there are changes to FF that can save us all money in the long run no matter what your future holds.
Chris
mike,
actually the cost of a set of FF tires is exactly the same as a set of FM tires, for hoosiers anyway. for goodyears, the FF tires can run from $6 less, to $10 more, depending on which fronts you run. md
[size="1"][ October 02, 2002, 08:20 AM: Message edited by: mark defer ][/size]
Hey Mark- Since you are a FC guy, how do you feel about the devaluation of your chassis and the SCCA
selling this Spec car?Baytos is responsible for both or least partially responsible anyway.Do you think that FC numbers will be hurt by this new car?I think it will hurt FF,FC and FM.
mike,
actually, i think the only class that's really gonna get stomped on is FM. if you're a spec car type guy, which would you rather have, a FM, or the new car. in that respect, it's better for everybody cause the tanks will be gone. in the future, when you tangle with a spec car, the MAD doctrine will apply.
i don't think it's going to have much affect on FF. in my mind, FF guys are class lifers, kind of like sports racer guys. you see the same guys in the class every year. you don't see many young guys coming into the class. what that says for FF as you guys get older, i don't know. but i don't think the spec car is going to affect FF much.
as for FC, it probably will affect us a bit more for two reasons. the FC guys don't seem to be as wedded to the class as FF guys. secondly, we do see a few young guys coming into the class every year, and we'll probably lose them. but with the zetec pro series, and the probablility of integrating zetecs into FC in the next couple of years, i see a bright future for FC.
personally, i think the whole concept of the new spec car is a great idea on the part of the SCCA. i only question the part about enterprise controlling it. md
I agree with Mark. Teaching drivers schools the last 3 years and hanging around the paddock at 15 events per year, I would say the new guys had already been entering straight into FC and skipping over the FF rung. So the spec car may skim off much more from FC than FF, and the most from FM.
If they hold the performance down on the spec car to below a FC, the young kids will skip over the spec car and jump straight into FC as they have been for years.
I think the target for the spec car is the average profile of a FM beginner. They have to have enough clank to be looking above some old CFC or CF, and at the same time like the "safety net" that a spec class offers... e.g. arrive and drive programs, parts network, resale values, etc.
I agree with Mike that we need to take steps to make the class more economical and maintain the competitiveness. By addressing the consumables first - tires, gas(spec gas or no $15 a gallon super fuel), cranks (they seem to be consumable with the current flywheel configuration) and other un-reliable parts (lifters, timing chains/gears). These items would go a long way in reducing the cost of operating a FF. Next I think we need to segment the FF's nationally, maybe a national CF class to include all of the FF chassis's and fill out the fields at national and regional races. I share the concern that my RF84 is not competitive in FF ranks but would be competitive in CF ranks with a weight penalty or other means to even the playing field. We all drive to compete and the lack of participation and interest is do to the costs and the disparity in competition. Lastly, I think we should formalize a Mentor program for those getting started in FF racing. One that would have a veteran paddock with a novice for the first few events to make sure they get off on the right foot. I'm sure Chris would have welcomed this as he rolled his "new" Citation out to overcome any teething problems he encountered. This board is great but where the new guys need help is at the track.
Personally I don't have any connection with FM except that they are members of SCCA as well and deserve a fair shake.It is wrong for SCCA to introduce a car that disenfranchises any member.When a private entity does that it is the free
enterprise system in full swing.If SCCA introduces a car to compete against any class
for participation and market share it is wrong.Why are there so many people who appear not to care if other members are hurt by this.This is not a club run by it's members like it is supposed to be.This appears to be an out of control BOD that wants to punish the FM manufacturer because they did not want Enterprises handling their motor rebuilding.It sure appears to be this kind of situation.Just because you don't like racing with FM's doesn't mean their class should be threatened.Am I wrong?The members input and the GCR should dictate whether a class should live or die.Right?
FM won't die unless their owners/drivers let it die. (haven't we heard thay before?) There is enough of them out there to keep it a national class for a long time to come.
They (FM) may see some realistic depreciation in value. But, what 5 year old car doesn't depreciate? I must be old school, but I don't buy racecars as investment vehicles. I read many posts where that seems to be the concept. I buy them to race, accepting that they may be a complete writeoff in the blink of an eye. Whatever I get for them when I sell them is sort of frosting on the cake. I don't buy into a racecar thinking it will have X amount of resale value next year.
With that said, current FM owners will still have a fairly high performance car to race in a national class. So it's hard to say the current owners are getting hurt. But it may be easy to say the sellers of new FMs may see a drop in sales.