Printable View
Actually Mike, the common rule in marketing (and quite often pointed out here at Apex) is that competition will keep cost under control (think spec tire posts, Hoosier/Goodyear). If this is true, once Noble, Peak, Chuck and Veetech start building, Autowerks will need to lower his price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Sport Engineering
Or am I off on that one as well? :D
Mike,
I think we need to do both.....bring out the garage queens and bring
new blood to the class. I don't believe we should turn our backs on
those who have stepped away from the sport, but rather address
their concerns.
Mark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Bonow
Awwww, come on Bill. We all know standard laws of economics don't apply to racing!
Alright...back to work.
Bill:
I believe there are two things that make this not a typical marketing example. Each engine builder has a sunken cost of 1200 parts and would have to build an inventory of 1600 parts if we all switched over. That up front investment in parts would not be 100% funded by the reserves of the builders, but would be passed on to the consumer so the builder could recover both the cost of lost 1200 inventory and the scale up of 1600 inventory.
The other, and I believe larger longterm factor is that as the population of 1600 buyers increase there will be naturally a shift to both ends of the exspense spectrum (broadening the curve). Typical business the mean may not move. But in racing as soon as someone comes in and starts paying for more powerful engines the demand for more power from the field will increase. As the engines become more powerful and parts become more specialized and lifespan becomes shorter the costs start to escalate until the consumer reaches a max $:Hp level.
(EDIT: I left out the cost of the builder's time too. As the consumer group grows there will be more and more people who will be willing to pay for more and more development time further pushing the cost curve one direction. I would love to see a study someday on engine cost breakdown time vs. parts)
We have reached close to that level in FV. That level in FST has not been reached.
Craig
Craig,
I think the FST gang has tried to prevent runaway engine costs by requiring
a restrictor plate, but I get your point on intial costs etc.....
Mark
Craig,
Please read my post # 229
http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/show...&postcount=229
I'm not for or against "it" in this area of Apex. I am reasonably aware of the class and how life in the FV world fuctions, more so than you may realize. My goal in posting is purely to attempt to keep things factual.
My main reason for following this thread is to moderate for Doug Carter. This topic tends to be very volatile (has been for a decade).
We've got a new sheriff in town and name is :..........Bill Bonow!:D
Bill:
I appreciate your experienece and your involvement in a class that has allowed me to get into road racing. Moderating a bees nest like this deserves just as much respect.
But I believe it is falicy that costs will stay the same as current FST if or when FV and FST are merged to 1600 engines. Costs will go up because the consumer group will support it and even drive it. Using "common marketing rules" to race engine demand and cost doesn't apply here.
(Damn it I should be working!)
Let's say there is the great merger of 2012 to the 1600 cc engine...The people who do merge from the FV world will be the higher spenders NOT the guys with vees in their garages/barns sitting. It will be the people with the money/time to do the conversion and the money to buy new 1600 cc engines. It won't be the people teetering on the edge of racing. The people who convert will drive an immediate average cost increase in 1600 engines. These same people are probably the ones driving the levels of competition/cost up in FV (you know them - the ones who do all the practice days, have the red shocks, multiple wheel and tire sets, new rains every year, etc...). When they come into FST they are going to do the same thing - pushing the envelope - and engines are where they are going to start.
I do not believe typical market model of more builders means reduced cost in this case. A more accurate statement unfortunately may be more consumers means additional costs.
Craig
They do and that's why it won't happen. They've collectively went out on a limb, secured enough bits and pieces to help ensure that those who race FV will still have something to race over the next several years. Now as the well begins to run dry we want to stick them with what's left? Merge the two classes, the 1600 package will grow in popularity while the 1200 package continues to have a place to race. Don't obsolete the 1200 stuff over night.Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs
Craig,
I'm going to make this one point. Not so much as an "it" promoter, but in the interest of keeping things factual (costs we have monitored over the past decade).
Racing cost money. Every year the cost goes up. 100% agreed. The difference (pointed out a multitude of times) is that the basic cost of the 1600 engine componenets is much less than the basic cost of 1200 engine components. Will cost go up? (have you ever seen them go down?) The point being that at the same time as 1600 cost go up, 1200 continues to climb as well. When a 1600 costs $6000 to build (new mind you), a 1200 (mostly used parts) will cost $10k plus.
As for the pushing of the envelope, read the "it" rules. 100+ years of FV experience wrote those rules to limit that as much as possible.
Over time, the 1600 component parts will always cost less.
1200 stuff will always have value. Vintage FV is a booming class
Enough said, fight this out between yourselves. Just keep it civil
I know much less then most on this topic but I don't believe you cant do anything to match the engines even with restrictor plates as they have different power & torque curves.
Having mixed run groups with FV & FST can only help both classes though IMO. People can then see benifits of both classes & choose the one that makes sense for them.
The way to improve FV is to build strong regional groups as there are a few already. Need people to market what is a good racing option to those around them.
I bought this car because at the time i thought we got a good deal. However that was not the case. I don't want to "drive around in libre" I picked 1200 for the close racing. i would just like to see some gradual updates over a period of some years. i would like to be able to buy "brand new" barrels and pistons, rings, crankshafts, connecting rods. Yes the barrels and pistons we can get from the states but i dont want to order from the states because of the extra cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam Bam
I completly agree with you if we would update everything at once the class would crumble. We do one thing at a time and give people a couple of years to get ready for it. Overall I think we do have a great class in Canada, don't get me wrong. The title of this forum is "what does fv need for the future" so I just throwing some ideas of what we can do.
Im seeing some posts of people saying they are getting sick of hearing about fst and what can we do to improve FV. But I hope we can all agree that the 1200 is dead they haven't made parts for these for I dont even know how long. Isn't our only option a 1600. I surely hope we can all agree on this? If not please tell me how we can make brand new 1200 parts available again. Than I will be all for it!
As far as getting people into our class. We need to lower costs. Alot of people in Ontario that come from karting will choose to go oval racing over road course because of the cost of entry fees. Over the past few years we have been promoting F1200 at the local kart track. As soon as we say it costs over $300 to enter and $250 to practice there mouth drops. They say to us why would I pay that much if I can buy an oval car and get paid to come and race. I know this problem is out of our hands but this is a big problem.
Unfortunately, I don't see lower entry fees for road racing on the horizon. That cost is primarily driven by the tracks themselves and is market-driven by the demand for use of those facilities. Club racing is not the only game in town. Many tracks make more of their overall revenue by renting to car clubs and private testing than they do to the SCCA and other racing groups, and there are people waiting in line to pick up available dates.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhole
Circle track racing is a completely different beast. Those tracks operate on a promoter model. They make their money on gate receipts, and the racers are bringing the entertainment that sells tickets. Amateur road racing has proven to not be a product that promoters can sell to a large spectator audience. so it's unlikely the business model will change.
Matt and Greg, Both right on re: the changes to FV. Obviously some things could be changed (spec tires, etc.) But a slow path conversion to a FST via incremental changes is not really technically or fiancially sound. You end up with all kinds of discrepancies and throw-away expenses. As Greg knows, we considered some of these things in FST. We could just never come up with anything that made sense competitvely and cost wise.
The proper answer for FV is EITHER a conversion similar to FST, or stay as is (with a possible spec tire.) But I don't think any real concensus will be reached in the US to make any change at a National level.
First, after building dozens of FV motors from scratch and hundreds of rebuilds (plus dozens of FST motors) and them winning Nationals and doing very well in the run-offs, I consider us to be "REPUTABLE" engine builders. I have no doubt that some bulders will claim their new Phase 2 heads, or Special Carb, etc. etc will be needed and some suckers will buy them. (We went through this in FV with heads, spark plug wires, etc. etc.) They are making the same HP now that they did 15-20 years ago. (brake HP , inertial HP, torque curves etc.) (with the certain exceptions of when the rules were opened at times. (weights, rocker arms, etc.) Track records are pretty stable with those exceptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Sport Engineering
Obviously in the event of a nationalization of FST, more money will be thrown at it.
That's racing. But the rules currently stipulate a BJ beam, (1/2 the price and available new), cranks and rods, etc. all lasting longer with lower pricing and off the shelf availabilty from many vendors. and I won't even go into all of the other reasons your post is incorrect. If it becomes National and the rules do what happend in FV then yes some degree of escallation will happen. But due to the massive availabilty and vendors of later beetle parts this is a great exageration.
BTW, demand (if FST takes off) will have little effect on most prices. There are tens of thousands of VW's, using the same parts that FST uses. If there were 100 FST's built tomororow there would be no real impact on demand. No one is making FV parts (for all practical purposes). So you would be hard pressed to even build 20 cars without demand pressures.
And actually other than tires, I don't consider costs the MAJOR selling point of FST. Entry fees, travel costs, etc. are the bulk of most expenses. It is much more of availabilty, longevity and ease of maintainance. (and of course potential weight and size advantages.) IMO even if FST reached the prices of FV it would still have those advantages.
Since there are costs to convert to FST,. The ONLY answer for FV is to keep FV as it is.
FST is a separate class and will live or die on it's own.
WE are in Canada:D having racing fun!me at the back,Iamundi at the front every race w/e for the 6 meetings,thin guys,fat guys,Radials,skinny manifolds that dont cost $1000 ...so come on up to Mosport like MR. Spadine Junior does and get a Masters trophy and some decent Beer,heck!if you come for the first race in May you may experience racing in the snow:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Sport Engineering
That certainly seems to be the general opinion on this thread. I wonder though if the title is wrong - too broad. Overall there seems to be concensus that what FV NEEDS is to retain drivers and attract new blood. To that end, I suggest that the topic be rephrased to "What does FV need to retain driver/owners and attract new driver/owners in the future" That may focus the discussion. (and yes, I think that's a different, very narrow question which may then shape the discussion - ie does it need marketing, evolution, "perception management", ??? and how do we go about that)Quote:
Originally Posted by sracing
I'd also point out that (if you haven't seen it) there is a final F600 Rules proposal to make F600 a national GCR "regional class" Assuming the BOD adopts this (I understand it comes up in the next couple months) I think BOTH FV and FST better be looking over their shoulders - 100% speculation, but I think that's a platform that a LOT of young drivers will find tempting - and the ability to convert an existing F500 car will make it doable on budgets similar to FV or FST. Just my opinion.
So - what does FV need to do to keep/attract drivers?
Skip this if you don't like to hear anything about FST.
I am sorry, but I HAVE to add more to this, since some posts have made incorrect claims. :)
We have NEVER broken a rotor in FST, be have never broken a spindle/axle in FST, we have never bent a backing plate. We don't have to grind off 100+gr from a already less than optimum rod. We don't need $85 offset bushings to achieve best camber, we have dry sumped engines running for as long as 3 years (30+ races) that dyno EXACTLY as they did after their first race and the bearings look like new.
In a corner we maintain Camber, we adjust camber (and caster) in 5 minutes. We adjust brakes in 0 seconds, we change brakes in 10 minutes (once a year if that)
And all the above are less expensive and available new.
These are NOT exagerations. I could cover several other items, but I know some of you don't like to hear them. :)
Staying FV is fine, but trying to negate certain FST advantages is not possible.
Yes. Promotion of the Class, (FV or otherwse) is the only thing that is going to grow FV. I don't see many rules changes that will bring in a bunch of drivers that have never heard of us.
I believe this thread has pretty well run its course now. People have made their suggestions & others have countered them with some objections. People have brought merrits of other classes for good or bad depending on your own personal view.
As someone pointed out earlier there are many people missing who are in the community that need to be reached out to.
Hopefully after all this discussion something good will come out of this. It has shown there are many people who care deeply about FV & want it to coninue on for many years.
Maybe FV needs to define itself. To me, FV is supposed to be about average joes. The seriously committed drivers can go race F1, or atleast, F2000.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Sport Engineering
Are there more than ten seriously committed drivers racing FV now. I can think of two. Michael and Stephen ....who else. Roger certainly is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Average Joes stay home and watch racing. Racers go and race. I think I'm a pretty committed driver, Just because I'm not running Nationals or going to the run offs makes me not committed? Michael, Stephen and Roger are the only Committed drivers?
+1. This idea that we are going to make FV racing as simple as picking up a set of golf clubs or going fishing is ridiculous. It is a sport that requires a huge level of commitment, if for no other reason than every time you enter a hot race track, you are literally putting your own life and the lives of others at risk. That is not something any of us should lose sight of in an attempt to make the class more accessible.Quote:
Originally Posted by fvracer27
I can't speak for everyone but I know there is not a day that goes by and I do not think about Racing, how to make myself faster how to make the car faster. I check craigslist and other sites for parts I bet twice a day. I can't sleep at night sometimes because my brain is still thinking about how I can make my car lighter because I like food to much and you have never heard me say anything ever about you guys should raise the weight to help me out and hopefully that will motivate me to loose some weight. I think most of us are pretty committed.
Guys, no matter how you wish to look at it in some sense we are all average Joe's. No one said to make the sport as simple as picking up a set of golf clubs or a fishing rod & off you go. You need a hell of a lot more then just a car to enter a race.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt King
Everyone's interpretation of the word commitment is different as well. Michaels & a few others level of commitment are at the highest level, I can only guess people that are as committed as him make up less then 5% of the class & I would bet more like 1%. If my numbers are even close to accurate that leaves a huge amount of drivers 'less committed' & perhaps looking for ways to improve things for the class & their own track experience.
I also don't believe any of the suggestions will jeopardize safety, most will only help to improve it.
Yes, it does depend on how you define commitment. If you want to talk about commitment, I think a lot of us who are in our 40s and 50s, married, with young children, jobs and mortages can talk about what it means to be committed to racing. Spending a lot of time and money prepping your race car does not even come close to that level of commitment when you consider some of the consequences of racing, IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam Bam
Just to fill everyone in - Club Vee was tried in the NE in the early late 1990's.Quote:
Originally Posted by gbmetcalf
It was a regional class and we tried tire, shock and other restrictions in order to keep the cost down. The fields started out good (6+) but stopped growing immediatley and the class was abandoned 2 years later.
It is not the age of the cars that keeps people off the track. It is the economy and economics.
By that I mean it is mostly working class people who run FV. If they are out of a job, or working 60 hours+ per week (and many FV people own their own business) they do not have the time to race.
Constant safety updates and the increased cost in entry fees and consumables (gas tires, travel) also hurt the pocketbook.
Throw in the general SCCA hassles and mixed classes and you can see why many people are going spec Maita.
The way to bring back people to FV is to make it fun again. That is easier done on a track by track basis. See how succesful NER is with FV at Nre Hampshire. Look at the F1200 series in Canada and the FST series in the Midwest. These are the models for Regional Racing. National Racing is another kettle of fish.
ChrisZ
I think Chris has really identified one of the major issues we're facing. FV has always been known as the inexpensive road to racing (yes we all know racing isn't cheap). But a person with a limited budget could buy a car and race with a huge payoff in having a good time at the track. That same person is hit hardest by a down economy. That's why the car sits in the garage. I know of at least 5 people who would have been racing this past season if it weren't for the economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by FVRacer21
The second issue we aren't really talking about is age. Look at the number of people who say they have 20+ years of experience in FV. The class as a whole is getting older. As you get older you realize you don't bounce back like you used to when you were younger. I would say that some of the drivers who have parked their cars are doing it in part because of age. Coupled with a weak economy, that's less of a drive to get back on the track.
We need to promote racing and racing in FV. We all can agree that FV can be a great stepping stone in terms of learning racing. So lets promote that. An increased web presence is mandatory. That is where people now do all their searching. Just as Mike mentioned, have some cars that are rentable. Perhaps talk to the guys who have cars parked in the garage, see if they will prep them enough that they could be rented. We could build an arrive and drive program.
The last thing will be the hardest, that is keep the costs down as much as possible. Perhaps have central stockpiles of gear that people can resource. For all those who are hoarding parts, stop hoarding and make parts available. If the class were abandoned next year (hypothetically speaking), or better yet if the apocolypse comes later this year, do you really want to have all that wasted stock sitting on a shelf?
In reading the posts, I don't believe anyone is discussing the eventual slow transformation to FST. Could that eventually happen? Maybe but I doubt it in the next 5 years. Our problem is not the cars, it's the people. Bring back the people and all this squabble disappears.
Might sould like a silly question... but were are all the race fans??? Go to a regional race at Limerock, NHMS, etc ... no ones watching! That would be a prime source of NEW people intrested in going racing!
SCCA should be promoting regional and national races... Fans = more new drivers = lower costs... and maybe lower entry fees??? silly idea.
Not a silly idea at all - I think that's exactly what should be happening. probably a topic for another thread though :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by veefan
Well said!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam Bam
Not a silly idea, but a few problems. Normally the track gets the gate receipts. In return they provide security and take the risks, provide seating, sell hotdogs , etc. They also participate with the sanctioning body in promoting the event to get people to come.Quote:
Originally Posted by veefan
If the tracks thought they could cover all their expenses and make money they would love to entertain spectator events. If SCCA racing got popular enough (like F1 :D ), the SCCA could even ask the track to pay THEM to put the event on. But I think we are a long way from that. :)
That is why the roundy tracks have much lower entry fees. The fees are usually only to cover the purse. The gate receipts pay for the track.
Ovals are cheaper to rent and maintain and spectators prefer an oval. So road course racing has a big set of problems.
Even with getting TV coverage. 3 to 4 cameras and a couple announcers and you can do a small oval. Probably 4- 5 times that with a road course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fvracer27
That is NOT what Greg implied,Im at the back and just as commited as you or anyone else,Im just slow at the moment.And if I wanted to be anything else ie:"Dead serious" I would be in Formula Ford but I chose the Club Racing/cameraderie/cheaper/ class of FV/F1200 because thats what the class was developed for..EXACTLY that.
I guess someone has to define commitment. Commitment to win? or just to race? In FST we are Regional , we wanted to race competitively and have fun. (half of our fun is between sessions at the track.) Most of us have families, make house payments, and a lot of other "commitments." Racing is 3rd or 4th etc. on our commitment lists. "
I would be "committed" if I wanted to make it to F1. I don't, I ain't. :)
Guys, while there is a little Walter Mitty in all of us.. this is nothing but an expensive bowling league.
You get some trophies and maybe a mention in SportsCar. Great fun, and I think overall worth it.. But "committed :confused: If you looked at what we put into racing even at the "un-commited" levels, we probably should be committed. (to mental wards) :D
FV racers that want to go FST racing should go FST racing. Jason did. Doug did. etc. Some like the class but are not ready to wait around for it.
The time has passed to evolve FV into FST. One of the reasons, among many, is that the FST is a complete package that combines solutions to virtually all of the negatives of FV. What it does NOT do, is provide a way around the front-loaded cost or obsoletion of over-priced FV-specific components. This of course, is the biggest obstacle, of which there is no solution.
Partial conversion just is not feasible. Going to disc brakes without changing beams and wheels costs too much. Changing beams without changing brakes costs too much. In both cases, you end up with a more expensive way, to get less of a solution. The sum of the parts is what makes the FST package.
Those, that love the FST, should find like-minded people in their area and buy/convert cars. Exactly like Scott is doing!
The FV community has committed to the status quo. Those that want it to grow into FST, should just go FST, because pushing for evolution of FV will just speed up the demise of the FV class.
Lets concentrate on making FV cheaper and more accessable.
Greg,
Well said....... and in only 283 posts
I do have an actual idea for FV that might help. I have been told by a long time VW mechanic that the 1600 piston, cylinders, and rods can be used in conjunction with the 1200 crank, 1200 heads, and 1200 manifold. 1600 pistons are cheap. 1600 "H" beam rods, like FST uses are cheap, and with a little machine work to the cylinders and heads everything will fit. Of course you will have around a 1580cc engine now but everyone can still use their same heads, manifolds, and cranks that they have put a lot of money and time into. Seems like a good idea to me.
Maybe a "prominent" engine builder can verify if this will work.
I am going to have to agree with others, this thread has gotten off topic. It is supposed to be about the future of Vee, not the conversion to FST. ( No knock against FST) Like Greg mentioned, those who want to move, the door is open.
Everyone has an idea on what will work, so is it not time to quantify the ideas and figure out if they are valid and how to implement them?
Many points have been raised, break them down, start a thread on each, and come to a conclusion. Personal opinion plays a big role, but not everyone will agree with it.
Minimum Weight - How Much, Why
Spec Tire - Yes, No, Radial, Slick, Manufacturer
Marketing - Who, Why and When..
Reduce Overall Costs - How
Growing the Series -
A big issue, I don't see anyone ready to take the "bull by the horns" at put this together, present it and implement it. The FST guys seem to have a pretty load voice on the FV forum (their marketing plan is working)
By the number of posts it looks like everyone want change, but no one is agreeing on how.
I guess we are lucky in the Ontario Region, that we can get together table an idea, and reach a descision, based on vote. One person controls the meetings.
I fell the support for Vee is great, Companies like Noble, Autowerks, SR, Vallis Motor Sports, and many others. They are all here to support the group, North America wide (many from our region support these US companies). Crap you can still get a new vee built, albeit from many used parts.
There is a tremendous amount of teams running multiple vees at events, people have a lot invested in cars, parts, developement. (Diamond Formula Cars just came out with a new off set shock mount) So the support is there.
Time to plan for tomorrow and the future....
Just to clarify my post above regarding using 1600 pistons and rods was intended to be a replacement for the 1200 pistons which are in short supply and much more costly, thus, helping to lower the cost and provide future supply for FV, not FST.
It's been 10 years and how many cars are there in how many regions? I'm asking because I don't know before someone snaps at me.Quote:
A big issue, I don't see anyone ready to take the "bull by the horns" at put this together, present it and implement it. The FST guys seem to have a pretty load voice on the FV forum (their marketing plan is working)
Mike,
To answer your question, I think they're strong in the Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois
and Wisconsin area, but sporadic in other area's. They've done a good job with the
rules stability, especially with the tires etc. I sold my FST and went back to FV because many of my friends who were going to convert, either quit racing, moved
or elected to stay with FV. So unless I wanted to travel with the FST traveling
Championship group to various tracks, there was no one to race with and I didn't want to travel that time, since I have three tracks within 90 miles of my home. I do plan to buy a FST in the next several years or vintage vee because both programs are of interest to me, and I'm not going to continue to spend an ever increasing part of my budget on tires!
Thanks!
Mark
92' Protoform P-2/05'
Mark,Quote:
Originally Posted by fvracer27
Here is a list:
http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/show...67&postcount=1
This may be a silly question, but I only ask out of ignorance.
I know SCCA is the "club" but does each region have it's own association, president? IS there a chain of command for Vee's? (Nationally or Regionally):confused:
You have hit on the strength and weakness of the SCCA.Quote:
Originally Posted by nbrigido
There is the National Organization with its rules and regulations, Divisions and then Regions.
To a certain extent, Regions have the power to modify the rules; however they have to watch out for the overlap between Regions and Divisions. New England Region can have its rules for FV, New York Region it's rules and NNJ it's own rules. So when you have a race at Lime Rock you can have 4 or 5 different rules for the same class.
One year we have people running for the following Championships:
NYSSRC
NARRC
NER
NJJ
NYR
Now in theory you could have 15 cars show up with 3 in each class!
On the other hand, if you trailer 3000 miles from Maine to California and show up at a race, you can be pretty sure that there will be no problems in tech with your car.
It is different if you have a group like EMRA or FCCA who set their own rules like is done in Canada. In the SCCA you are always fighting the politics of a National Organization (and Race Directors hate too many classes as trophies become expensive)
Mike Rand's organization may be the model for the future as mini race series open up tapping into the SCCA's cars and drivers.
And to be more specific with your question, there is no head of FV anywhere. We are just a class like the 47 other (or more) classes the are overseen by the SCCA Competition Board.
How we get anything done is amazing:D.
ChrisZ
SPEC TIRES so they are cheaper, Make them grooved so both vintage and non-vintage can run them
On the topic of treaded tires:
If they are vintage tires such as the Dunlop, they are $1028+shipping from Sasco. I typically would get about 3 double weekends out of them before they were DONE (about $85/heat cycle).
If you are talking about allowing a DOT-R type compound the ones that will provide an advantage are more expensive than the current selection of slicks AND aren't as fast for as many heat cycles. Currently the Hankook's seem to be at the fast end of the DOT-R compounds and are comparable in price to slicks (around $600/set) but don't seem to last as long---4 to 6 heat cycles before they lose significant time seems to be the norm. (about $100-$150/heat cycle)
If they are going to be DOT treaded tires they really should be a non-R type compound where they are designed to last MANY heat cycles without a change in performance---realizing folks will shave them if the compound overheats easily and their useful life will be dictated by remaning rubber and not heat cycles.
Daryl,
Yep, the Dunlops are expensive, soft and go away quickly. Hoosier's vintage FV tire is hard as a brick and wear is measured in "seasons".
Within the class. research, test and find the tire that meets the spec (low cost per heat cycle?). Once found, then you can work to get that tire to be the approved spec.
Let someone else (SCCA, tire manufacture(s), ect) choose a tire for the class based on a bid spec and you will get a crappy result.
My .02
Sorry, I know this thread is titled FV needs for the the future but since the tire discussion has come up & speaking of $'s for a spec tire...
The tires we run North of the boarder are in the $4 - $5 hundred per set & will last for 2 plus seasons. I guess I shouldn't be posting that because if there becomes demand for them possibly the price could go up on us.
So for $250.00 per season we end up using them for 18 races, 6 qualifying sessions, 6 practice sessions on race day, 30 plus test sessions on test days. Not a bad deal, $4.17 per session for a set of tires or possibly a "heat cycle" if you want to call it that.
Matt Damon said in Good Will Hunting "How 'bout them apples?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Bonow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam Bam
I certainly agree that there are tires that would fit the bill, I was commenting that I think a rule that says "vintage treaded tires" or one that says "DOT approved tires" wouldn't work.
I raced in a series on spec hoosiers back in '92-93. Hoosier contributed to our point fund and the tires were CHEAP for everybody ($240/set in '92-'93 dollars)
I believe in and worked for the acceptance of the AR in VARA FV1 class. I believe it's a great option. Not because it lasted longer but because it was cheaper.
I really like the idea of DOT tires but the buy in could be severe. I know the guys in Canada have done it but they didn't have hundreds of cars to convert. Just think about the adjustments that will be required to be competitive on drastically new tires. Shocks, springs, roll resistence and testing. The serious guys will do the homework, and what will change about the balance of the class? Not arguing, just thinking. Maybe Craig should chime in and say what it takes to convert. He's done both.
I go back on forth between 14" street radials and slicks without changing very much, sometimes nothing. It's the same basic concept ..... get the front end to work the best you can by messing with stiction, then, balance the car with rear camber and mostly rear droop. Anybody who currently has a good-handling car can put either tire on and go race, probably making fine adjustments in droop limiting.
The radials will not allow the car to be driven very aggressively (like a modern FV with front droop limiters and sticky new slicks) so you just don't even try. I tend to leave the front end higher and limit the front shocks less.
As I've suggested before, the racing tire companies could easily make a one-size tire for the class that would perform just like the Falkens but would fit on the 15" wheel with performance similiar to modern FV tires that are 5-6 sessions old.
If you allow any DOT tire your tire bill will be more expensive and not last as long as sticky Hoosier/Goodyear slicks.Quote:
Originally Posted by budawe
The best DOT spec tire is something like the Toyo RA-1--relatively hard but very long-lasting and amazingly consistent from the first through last heat cycle right down to the cords. Anything else will put you right back into a tire war.