40 LBS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple Frog

Looking at FB participation numbers in 2011, if a segment choses not to attend, however small, then the class will no longer be Runoffs eligible.

---

This is the crux of the matter. The CRB is dominated by production types who mistakenly bring their fixation with equivalency to a class that doesn't need or want it. And the problem is that in their rush to fix a problem that doesn't exist they will throw the baby out with the bath water.

Just 5 years ago the BoD and CRB both were very keen on FB, rightfully considering it the bright future of small-bore formula racing in SCCA. Yet here we are where everyone even remotely involved with the class can see it collapsing before our very eyes because the CRB won't leave it the f*ck alone!

This year FB qualified as a National Class with just ONE SINGLE entry to spare, so if JUST ONE person who entered Nations this year doesn't run just as many next year the class is dead. Not Runoffs ineligible...DEAD!

Look CRB, HALF THE EFFING FB FIELD has Geartronics installed (and nearly all the rest some sort of shifting aid that will incure the 40 lbs penalty). Take the Formula Committee's recommendation to allow open shifting so we can get some growth going again. All you are doing is killing off the class...why?

For Christ's sake, wake up and smell the coffee, will you?

Did Stan and I just agree on something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R. Pare

Further, if what Thomas and starkjet jusrt pointed out is correct - that the geartronics does not even have that function available in it in the US version - then this disagreement is over.

---

If the hardware is identical in both versions, how are we ensuring the correct software is being utilized? Obviously nobody in the US would ever buy a version intended for another market.

We are trusting that they won't sell it to you. And if you somehow got one secondhand from the UK, they wouldn't configure it for you anyways. And you can't configure it yourself since you don't get the software.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wren

There is absolutely no loophole and absolutely no grey area. If there was grey area, then a rule change would not be needed to get rid of the expensive systems. What loophole could you possibly be referencing?

---

You mean that you fail to see a loophole or any grey area...obviously, 5000 posts related to this topic means people don't all see things the same way.

The rule change isn't getting rid of expensive systems. You can still use one that cost $400 or $40000 with the same penalty; 40#.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starkejt

We are trusting that they won't sell it to you. And if you somehow got one secondhand from the UK, they wouldn't configure it for you anyways. And you can't configure it yourself since you don't get the software.

---

Buying one second hand from the UK that was previously installed on the same motor (already configured) was the scenario I am concerned about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wren

There is absolutely no loophole and absolutely no grey area. If there was grey area, then a rule change would not be needed to get rid of the expensive systems. What loophole could you possibly be referencing?

---

You can wave your arms, engage in smoke and mirrors and build straw-man arguments all you wish, Wren, and it still doesn't address the real issue: the Club cannot independently confirm that the non-permitted functionality is not working. This is the same dilemma that Formula One faced when each team was allowed to build and program their own ECUs, where in spite of all their technical and financial resources they could not independently verify the units were compliant.

You say you weigh 1000 lbs? Fine, roll it across our scales and we'll confirm it.

You say your displacement does not exceed 1000cc? Fine, we'll drop a snap-gauge down the spark plug hole and measure it.

You say your rear wing's span is within limits? Fine, we'll throw a tape measure on it.

You say your computer screen shows the pre-selected gear shift feature is not active? Fine, we'll just...oh, wait. Sorry, we can't independently verify that.

In recognition of that basic reality, and the fact that half the FB field has Geartronics installed, the F/SRAC recommended open shifting, and have voted unanimously to that effect at least 3 or 4 times. I am no longer on the CRB and for the life of me cannot understand why they insist on slamming the barn door after the horses have fled, but I wish they'd come to their collective senses.

In the meantime, Wren, you are not helping with your bullshiat about personal vendettas, black helicopters and assorted nonsense.

As far as I'm concerned, shifting should be open....and I mean open! That way there would not be any concern over what anyone's using and anything would be available to all. It's part of the innovation aspect of this class. We're not talking open engines, carbon brakes, etc. The class already allows open shock systems, various brake systems, etc., all that carry a higher price tag than a shift system. So cost is not the real issue here. Just my opinion.

But, to keep our Series in line with club, we've chosen to keep the rules as they are currently in the GCR. Geartronics, Pro-Shift, Flatshifter, etc. are all legal items, as none of them enable pre-selected gear changes. Period.

Of course someone smart could find a way to probably enable it, but that would be cheating and its up to the Series organizers to properly tech and catch such illegality. It seems to me that the club just wants an easy route so its easier to tech, or maybe they just don't have the resources to do it properly. So, the response was to just ban them or if you can't ban them place a penalty so large that they become useless.

I've said it time and again...the Formula 1000 Championship Series will NOT put a weight penalty on these systems, and we will tech them and insure that there is no cheating. If we find it, there will be heavy penalties for the one cheating, but not to all those using the systems correctly.

If this hurts the national numbers (and I really hope it doesn't) then it would be unfortunate. It's certainly not our decision. We've brought our rules in line with the current GCR to make our series viable to both club and pro only teams. We went away from the initial Open Engine rule because that's what the majority wanted. We listened. But, we can't change our rules just because someone or some entity makes a rules change that we feel is inappropriate. Our rules are in place and steady. Everyone knows exactly what they are and they won't change for 2012. If there is a question as to legality of a part or system, its an easy call and an answer will be provided. If it provokes a clarification of a rule, it will be posted in our sup regs. Simple and easy.

I truly hope that the BOD has the clear foresight to see that this weight penalty is absurd and is NOT in the best interest of the overall survival of this class as a whole. I guess we will just have to wait and see in October.

May clear heads prevail!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starkejt

We are trusting that they won't sell it to you. And if you somehow got one secondhand from the UK, they wouldn't configure it for you anyways. And you can't configure it yourself since you don't get the software.

---

Would they not sell you an unblocked one if you were using it in your Suzuki GSXR 1000 powered "Desert Racer" or Formula S car?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman

Buying one second hand from the UK that was previously installed on the same motor (already configured) was the scenario I am concerned about.

---

any race car driver will admit preselected semi automated gearshifting is rubbish and not something they want enabled. it provides no control and balance on timing of racecraft. if you preselect by the time its a braking zone or accleration zone so many factors could simply change within seconds making the driver change the desired timing for optimal.

I dont think any front running professional drivers in open wheel road racing use this or for god sakes want this function

It is more for the school environment.

but if we are worried of someone getting a second hand unit from the uk, then we should be worried about people having special stock looking engine ecus as well.

with the budgets the local scca regions have to properly tech at a high level. ITS simply not going to be feasible. I dont see it ever happening. at a pro series level.. YES i see it possible as there can be alot more centralized focus and thought put into specifically how to tech one class and within the rules the class runs by. and with a dedicated tech official as well.

I think scca knows they can simply not tech these sophisticated electronic systems.. so with that in mind they either have to ban anything with a wire,, (kill inovation) or impose a penalty (weight, make the complainers happy, and the people who have systems not lose their investment) or realize they ***** up and the genie is out of the bottle and to not upset the stability of the class leave it wide open.. no policing needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ASRF1000

But, to keep our Series in line with club, we've chosen to keep the rules as they are currently in the GCR.

I've said it time and again...the Formula 1000 Championship Series will NOT put a weight penalty on these systems, and we will tech them and insure that there is no cheating.

---

It seems apparent to me that you will be keeping your series rules in line with the club rules as long as the club chooses to follow your rules, not the other way around.

How do you plan to tech these systems to ensure that there is no cheating?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman

It seems apparent to me that you will be keeping your series rules in line with the club rules as long as the club chooses to follow your rules, not the other way around.

How do you plan to tech these systems to ensure that there is no cheating?

---

Geartronics will provide all the necessary tech tools to the official techs in both the east coast and west coast series.

I believe every competitor will be disclosing their shift system in order for the series to properly understand and work on tech solutions for such systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman

You mean that you fail to see a loophole or any grey area...obviously, 5000 posts related to this topic means people don't all see things the same way.

The rule change isn't getting rid of expensive systems. You can still use one that cost $400 or $40000 with the same penalty; 40#.

---

Most of those 5000 posts challenging the legality of the system is from people who don't understand the system, made up their own lies about it or were proposing absurd scenarios for using the downshift rejection function.

The first attempted rule change was to ban the systems.

The 40# weight penalty is just a terrible idea. Open formula racing is not about equivalency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan Clayton

You can wave your arms, engage in smoke and mirrors and build straw-man arguments all you wish, Wren, and it still doesn't address the real issue: the Club cannot independently confirm that the non-permitted functionality is not working. This is the same dilemma that Formula One faced when each team was allowed to build and program their own ECUs, where in spite of all their technical and financial resources they could not independently verify the units were compliant.

---

You quoted a post from me where I talk about the legality of the systems as currently used then went on to talk about enforcement of the rule. Enforceablity doesn't reflect on legality. It reflects on the rules writers.

Are we just saying random things now?

Quote:

---

In the meantime, Wren, you are not helping with your bullshiat about personal vendettas, black helicopters and assorted nonsense.

---

It may not be helping, but the personal vendettas are actively hurting the class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman

Buying one second hand from the UK that was previously installed on the same motor (already configured) was the scenario I am concerned about.

---

There is absolutely no way in hell having a fully automatic transmission is an advantage anyway. There is no way a system that is fully automatic will get you around the track faster than someone with a manual transmission. So if someone wants to use one let them.

This is the last year of FB being a National class. I'd bet my life on it.

We will have the necessary programs from Geartronics and both Series will have the necessary programs from Pro-Shift to tech that they are properly configured. Both Pro Series will have all the required equipment to properly enforce the rules. We have already been in contact with each other to make sure. It is up to us (the Series) to make sure we have the proper tools to enforce the rules. It's our job and responsibility. If we don't, shame on us.

We run separate Series, our's in the east and their's in the west, but we work together to ensure the stability of the class as a whole.

Daryl,

You are correct. We will stay in line with the club rules, as long as the rules make sense. The 40lb rules does not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wren

The 40# weight penalty is just a terrible idea. Open formula racing is not about equivalency.

---

I agree on both counts.

Quote:

---

You quoted a post from me where I talk about the legality of the systems as currently used then went on to talk about enforcement of the rule. Enforceablity doesn't reflect on legality. It reflects on the rules writers.

---

That section of the rules dates from the early 80's in DSR, a time when the Geartronics was no more than a glimmer on the science fiction horizon. But hey, if you could just see your way to sharing your 20/20 hindsight as a member of the F/SRAC, I'm sure we would all benefit.

Quote:

---

It may not be helping, but the personal vendettas are actively hurting the class.

---

This is why I don't take you seriously, Wren.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan Clayton

That section of the rules dates from the early 80's in DSR, a time when the Geartronics was no more than a glimmer on the science fiction horizon. But hey, if you could just see your way to sharing your 20/20 hindsight as a member of the F/SRAC, I'm sure we would all benefit.


This is why nobody takes you seriously, Wren.

---

this is why I propose a ban on future robot drivers. I think the rules should say that only humans can drive the cars. I'm not taking any chances in the future of FB

John Paul,

Life is all about taking chances. I firmly believe in this class. I see it as the perfect scenario of performance and cost effectiveness. The club has issues right now, but hopefully they will all be sorted out. Is the class perfect? Of course not, none are, but this class has the ability to put on a show such has never been seen in junior motorsports.

I am putting 100% of everything I have into making this new series a great success. I've been successful in running teams in just about every road racing series in North America (ALMS, Trans-Am, Indy Lights, Formula BMW, etc.). Trans-Am was going through a change in the early 2000's and the teams pulled together to make it a success. We could have bailed, but we didn't.

I help the North American Touring Car Championship get off the ground in 1995. It was a gamble but it came to fruition in 1996.

I see this class as the next biggest thing to happen to junior league open-wheel racing in North America. That is why I have looked at every detail to make the new series first-class in every way...right down to the champagne bottles we use on the podium.

FB in club racing has an extremely bright future, if the powers that be just let it grow. It has already sprouted and is ready to bloom. It just needs nurturing and sunlight, not clouds.

I firmly believe that those who are vested in its success will rally to make it the best show possible and not abandon it for greener pastures. We as a Series will do everything in our power to support the drivers and teams that make F1000 their home.

Jon, I know I bitch or make stupid jokes alot but I agree with you, I love this class and hope it is successful. I think you are working you ass off and doing a great job. But I can't stand all this BS and fighting and that's why I decided to go into FC for time being. I just like the stability and big numbers. Plus I still have a lot of learning to do and would like to get back into FB when I can be competitive in such a great field of drivers.

Understood. I don't particularly enjoy all this fighting over the rules either. Remember though...numbers come from those participating. You are one of those numbers. If everybody waited until the numbers got bigger, they never would. People participating make the numbers larger, not the ones sitting on the sidelines.

this thread had a gun, it would shoot itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnPaul

There is absolutely no way in hell having a fully automatic transmission is an advantage anyway. There is no way a system that is fully automatic will get you around the track faster than someone with a manual transmission.

---

You are taking a leap by suggesting fully automatic transmissions is what would happen/be desired.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicholas Belling

any race car driver will admit preselected semi automated gearshifting is rubbish and not something they want enabled. it provides no control and balance on timing of racecraft.

---

Really? I disagree. Right paddle split for up/down shifts for queue. Left paddle for immediate--I want it now unless it will result in an over-rev shifts. No traffic/no racecraft required use the right paddle...computer will shift up and down at optimum rpm. Any situation where you know you need something different use the left. I'm certain that this method would be faster than 99.99% of the racers out there.

I'm sorry Daryl, but your relationship to FB is what? Are you running a car in FB, building a car, working with someone who runs an FB, do you have a vested interest in the class? I'm just curious. I apologize that I'm not currently aware.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman

Buying one second hand from the UK that was previously installed on the same motor (already configured) was the scenario I am concerned about.

---

If:

One of the handful of UK systems with preselect enabled happened to be on the same motor as yours,

AND

That person sold you his system,

AND

The config was close enough for your car (unlikely),

THEN

Yes, you would have circumvented the rules. But, since the systems are tweaked to each car, that is highly unlikely. For instance, for FB, they ship to you with a canned Suzuki config, but it doesn't work very well or reliably until they tweak the config based on your data logs at the track the first time you run it. Which they'd refuse to do on your gray market GCU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ASRF1000

I'm sorry Daryl, but your relationship to FB is what? Are you running a car in FB, building a car, working with someone who runs an FB, do you have a vested interest in the class? I'm just curious. I apologize that I'm not currently aware.

---

Nope, he must be bored with his class, CFC, so he's over here stirring things up. :rolleyes:

I've not followed this thread in great detail, which perhaps I should so forgive me if this has been mentioned before or is irrelevant. If I had the fancy paddle shifter (which I regard as perfectly legal) I would NOT want it to change gear for me anyway!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman

You are taking a leap by suggesting fully automatic transmissions is what would happen/be desired.




Really? I disagree. Right paddle split for up/down shifts for queue. Left paddle for immediate--I want it now unless it will result in an over-rev shifts. No traffic/no racecraft required use the right paddle...computer will shift up and down at optimum rpm. Any situation where you know you need something different use the left. I'm certain that this method would be faster than 99.99% of the racers out there.

---

Could you please go out and provide data to substantiate your claims. Most interested and curious to see. If the data is in your favor then I have a huge new market of pro drivers with existing shifters in place currently running closed loop systems and I can tell them there is improvements to still be had !! and when they argue they have tried it and there engineers have reviewed data I can then validate with your data they are wrong. well that would just be dandy..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman

It seems apparent to me that you will be keeping your series rules in line with the club rules as long as the club chooses to follow your rules, not the other way around.

How do you plan to tech these systems to ensure that there is no cheating?

---

In Jon's defense, I think he does a good job of following the club rules and being SANE about them. He has been more than reasonable working with the competitors. I cannot say that for the CRB.

The expense of it all.......

We don't even have paddles on our car. Instead, we have a chipmunk operating the gear lever in the engine bay. We had to bulk him up a bit and teach him to learn and obey verbal commands, but the expense was in producing his little headset so the driver could tell him what gear, which cost $4,000 but still less than a Geartronics. The little nomex suit wasn't much as Simpson sponsored it and actually has all the Series logos on it. The real cost is that it wasn't a one time expense as we have to keep feeding the little guy. Well, at least it doesn't have a wire!!!

Oh, and the little bastard pre-selects the gears sometimes by himself, so maybe its illegal.

Sorry, just had to lighten up here a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ASRF1000

The expense of it all.......

We don't even have paddles on our car. Instead, we have a chipmunk operating the gear lever in the engine bay. We had to bulk him up a bit and teach him to learn and obey verbal commands, but the expense was in producing his little headset so the driver could tell him what gear, which cost $4,000 but still less than a Geartronics. The little nomex suit wasn't much as Simpson sponsored it and actually has all the Series logos on it. The real cost is that it wasn't a one time expense as we have to keep feeding the little guy. Well, at least it doesn't have a wire!!!

Oh, and the little bastard pre-selects the gears sometimes by himself, so maybe its illegal.

Sorry, just had to lighten up here a bit.

---

If you have an engine blow up and resulting fire, I'm not eating from the hospitality tent that day :)



I wish that I understood why this topic is such a "hotbutton" for so many...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandon Dixon

I wish that I understood why this topic is such a "hotbutton" for so many...

---

I really believe the people against the shifter systems fancy themselves as real racers and everyone else not as talented therefore need these shifter systems to be as good..... Keep practicing Brandon and one day you may be a good as them......

Yeah and Formula 1 should have H-pattern shifters.....and only 4 gears....that would make them REAL drivers....

Oh, and we should go back to analog gauges and no data systems....that's what made REAL racers....

Brandon, what's the matter, you never had a little Munk on toast? It's actually pretty good. Tastes like chicken...LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ASRF1000

Brandon, what's the matter, you never had a little Munk on toast? It's actually pretty good. Tastes like chicken...LOL

---

I'm just not sure about the flaming Joe Gibbs sauce :D

Internet Forum 101. There must always be some ferociously contested issue at all times. Right now, it's shifters. At some point, one of us will compare another one of us to Hitler, then the thread will devolve into chaos and become locked. From there, the cycle begins anew with some other topic.

Why hasn't an Apexspeed poll been taken, and the published results sent to all the members of the Advisory Committee, CRB, and BOD?

Rick Kean

The only problem with that is that ALL of the FB owners may not be on here and it's only pertainent to those who have a vested interest in the class, which there are some on here that do not.

Unpopular opinions ahead

I know I am breaking the 20th rule of the Internet here, but inasmuch as we all love to bitch, where is the grownup accountability for the survival of the class? Where is the solidarity of purpose and pulling together for the good of the class? I mean, in this very thread we have people throwing their toys out of the pram and saying they won't play with the SCCA next year, and people openly predicting the death of the class.

Over what? A 40 lbs change in minimum weight. Seriously?!?! Really, your threshold for throwing a temper tantrum is 40 effing lbs of weight? Sorry to be so blunt, this kind of reactivity is just ridiculous, not to mention counter-productive. Are you going to turn things up to 11 when shiat really starts to go bad, or how does that work?

Now - do I think the direction of the CRB is right? Hell no! This should have been settled a long time ago with the acknowledgement that shifting system are expensive, but ultimately are probably cheaper in the long run, drastically simplify the lives of the drivers, and make the whole experience much more enjoyable at the visceral level. Get rid of the restriction and be done with it, there are other more important issues to deal with at the club level. Perhaps even a 25lbs weight penalty, to put it inline with other penalties of a similar nature. In FA, we have 25 lbs apiece for fuel injection and sequential shifters. No big deal.

The CRB is making crap decisions - but the only reason the sky will fall is if people decide to abandon the class over what is truly a small issue in the grand scheme of things.


Cheers,
Rennie

Rule 20 is "It is delicious cake. You must eat it."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starkejt

Rule 20 is "It is delicious cake. You must eat it."

---

Shows what you know, I've already skipped to Rule 49: Profit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rennie Clayton

Unpopular opinions ahead

II mean, in this very thread we have people throwing their toys out of the pram and saying they won't play with the SCCA next year, and people openly predicting the death of the class.

Over what? A 40 lbs change in minimum weight. Seriously?!?!

---

Rennie the problem is really that the Pro series will allow it and club racing will not. I agree that this a great class but the drivers that have installed the systems will not take it on and off to switch back and if they are using club events to test then they will not want to run the ballast. Maybe they will but I hear what they are saying, I would hope that the club does to.

BTW I gooooooooooogled rule number 20 and it definitely has something to do with cake.