Does anybody have any solid data or idea of what 40 lbs of additional weight will do potentially to a Formula 1000 car? (Lap times)
Does the 4% equation actually work directly in comparative lap time also?
Printable View
Does anybody have any solid data or idea of what 40 lbs of additional weight will do potentially to a Formula 1000 car? (Lap times)
Does the 4% equation actually work directly in comparative lap time also?
I thought this was a "5 years into the marriage" thread, my bad...
You're not far off. I added 40 lbs. to the car, and to tell the truth, I wasn't really as interested in racing it as I used to be, and the times I tried to race it, the car either had a headache or was too tired, so I just would roll over and watch videos on the internet of younger, lighter race cars with giant, fake shifters until I fell asleep.
I thought it was some sort of magic equilvalency like: 5lb = 1HP. :confused:
In that case it would be like being 8hp down. That may only work for acceleration. Not sure of the formula for effect on cornering, braking.
that I shoulda taken a pic of my keyboard and screen covered in atomized peach tea.
I've not figured it out yet, but I will get you back, maybe at the R/O's, maybe not.
It'll be a suprise, just like what just happened.
BTW - Awesome, def "Best of A/S" material from Josh!
Starke....you get post of the year! Beer through nostrils!
Russ
Pure comedy gold... :p
But on a more serious note, the Club has received only three emails on the weight/shifter topic since it came out in Fastrack. Are you guys happy with 40 lbs? Is it too much...too little? Leave it the f*** alone or I'm converting my car to FX? Active FB competitors especially should write in: CRB Letter Submission Form.
C"mon, guys, get your votes submitted!
PLEASE LEAVE THIS CLASS ALONE AND GO GET A LIFE !!!!!!!! Find another class to screw up and harrass.
Please cut-n-paste this into the CRB link I provide above. Ranting here is like peeing upwind. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by DonArm
So much energy has been wasted in the rants printed here. Thanks for publishing an easy link to the powers that be.
Here's what I sent:
Sirs,
I was an SCCA racer in the 1970s (FB/AS/DSR; CenDiv). After many years away from the SCCA, the new Formula B catagory provoked me to come back. I am now constructing a one-off Formula B/1000 car to provide for some as-yet-unamed young asperant driver.
But the "target" is changing. The catagory is being repeatedly peppered with potential rules changes that have profound ramifications. Participants are confused and upset. The catagory might even lose it's National Champion to a non-SCCA series (in protest of these changing rules).
I ask that FB be left as it is at this time; ALLOWING the Geartronics-type shifters without the punative 40 lb. weight penalty. The weight pentalty would be a defacto ban on these shifters -- a ban you recently (and wisely) decided against.
I ask the Board to leave Formula B alone at this critical, formative time -- to allow it to solidify and mature; allow it to find itself. Even the proposal of profound rules changes at this time is having an extremely deletory effect. The confusion is driving potential participants away.
Formula B is not broken. Let the catagory mature with the current rules left in place, unaltered.
Respectfully,
Christopher Crowe
La Crescenta, CA
Well said Chris.
all this banter and complaining over a measley shifting system... if you're too weak to use a push/pull cable, it really doesn't bother me what you use, just one more thing to go wrong in the middle of a race.
but if a shifter system can cause this much discussion, i can't wait to see what happens when someone can actually get a BMW to work. the internet might just blow up :D
Fixed it for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by archuzzi
Shift system camps:
Which camp is the one that is still stuck on the Bohr model?
To put it into perspective I guess the cave man with the stick lever should be wearing a nomex driversuit as well.;)
Dang it Josh, with an eye for detail like that you should be prepping my car too.
Just saying, the lever is still state of the art.
Utah Russ and BC Taylor - Somea these guys are gonna think you guys are hurling insults at folks not using a pure mechanical linkage.
I however know better - you guys are all jacked up (rightfully so) about winning some National races, it's cool, we feel ya.;)
I was once on a flight to Tel Aviv, and with the clarity of hindsight I know now that the pilot was one R Werner - "This is your Captain speaking. Thanks for choosing ________ Airlines today. We realise you have many options in regard to choosing an air carrier, and will do our utmost to make your flight safe, smooth, and hassle free!
However, before we can push back from the gate, I have been told there's some twit in 36G who refuses to turn off his electronic device! There is an option if you choose to keep your iPod powered up while in flight, but it's kind of unpleasant for roughly 95% of the general population, and involves a rather invasive, purely non-surgical, outpatient friendly installation procedure!"
Friendly Skies, Indeed!:ha:;);)
What's the weight penalty for an iPod on board the FB?Quote:
Originally Posted by glenn cooper
I'll be doing just that at the RO's.
I got the 13 yr old kid down the street to hack the thing, which will now see fully automatic, up and down shifts, all while I go all "Iron Eagle" slippin' under the wire!
Tech THAT!!
Tired of listening to all of the awesome advice I give over the radio?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Dixon
I love all this humor but seriously guys lets get those letters in... LIKE RIGHT NOW...might take a whole 10 minutes of your time to put your thoughts in writing.
We can't roll over on this one
:)
I just did send mine to the link provided by Stan.
Thanks Stan!
Just sent mine in. I kept it simple, basically telling them the class will lose it's national status due to lack of participation.
And as we all know, that would be a crying shame for such a young, innovative class.
Letter sent in favor of leaving the class alone. Short and sweet.
Jerry
Letter sent to require a stick and two boulders. Anything else requires 2 stones penalty weight. :mad:
Actually I've decided I don't care how you all shift.
Sorry, but I think having the second boulder as a fulcrum means it is no longer direct acting.
Letter sent. No penalty, leave it alone. Shifter's Choice!
Letter sent to leave rule as is. I enjoy these threads too much to change anything now!
i'm not insulting anyone, i really don't care what anyone uses to shift, and i don't think it makes much difference, personal preference only
c'mon coop, you know us canadians are too nice for that kind of stuff. EH?
Letter sent
Rick
I just sent in my letter asking to ban drivers that are in favor of banning shifters. I'm sure these drivers are too old to be driving on the streets let alone racing on a track! hope I don't get in trouble with AARP!
There will not be a weight penalty in the Formula 1000 Championship Series.
Results speak for themselves. Of the 10 races that made up the F1000 Pro Series in 2011 only one race was won by a air shifter car. Not only that but you are already penalitized with weight just installing the shifter.
All this I stated in the letter to the CRB.
The F1000 Pro Series does not intend to run with any kind of weight penalty for air shifter cars in 2012.
Russ we'll see ya in 2012 I just know we will. You're gonna to get bored flying that plane around cross country.....damn, that sounds like work!
Thomas,
Did any of the cars have a "Flat Shifter"? if they did the 40 LB penalty would apply.
Does this mean that if the BoD approves the rule you'll be running your races at non-SCCA events? Just asking...as I couldn't find anything about the 2012 schedule on your website. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland
You aren't already penalized by installing the system as long as you can still make minimum weight and the series/class doesn't have any restrictions on the amount of ballast one may utilize or where it must be located. However, I understand your point; someone who installs the system must spend more effort/money elsewhere to otherwise arrive at the same weight as the next guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland
Way too many variables to look at results. Besides we can make the statistics mean anything we want. Clearly your results suggest that the non-air shifter cars should have a 40# weight penalty. ;)
Congrats on the series early success!
Stan:
Why would that matter? The series rules are the series rules, regardless of the sanctioning body and what it's rules might be for a similar class, aren't they?
Okay, I wrote my letter stating that I am against the weight penalty. This is on behalf of the entire F1000 class, as I am one of the few who would actually benefit from the proposal.
I will explain...
Currently I am significantly above the 1000 pound limit - and yes, I have a Geartronics. So, for me, the 40 pound penalty means nothing as I am already well beyond the minimum.
So, if I were really selfish (instead of just marginally selfish) I would not have voiced any opinion and let it run its course, and if they instituted the penalty it would merely bring the field closer to me in terms of weight.
However, because in my view "moving the goalposts" in this class is horse manure, I wrote my letter indicating as much. So I am just another person who voiced to the CRB to 'leave FB alone'.
Anyone who agrees can buy me a cold beer when they see me. :)
Cheers,
John
I only asked the question because that series made a very big deal of waiting to publish the official Seattle race results pending SCCA enforcement action against the on-track winner, JR Osbourne. When SCCA DQ'd JR from the race for a fuel violation, the series took away his points, as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Pare
That implies to me that the series has been insisting on compliance to SCCA rules. Hence my question to Thomas...if the BoD enacts the new rule, will the series go along with it, leave, or by implication, award points irrespective of whether SCCA DQ's a driver?
Gets messy in a hurry, eh?
Pretty amazing, our letters had much the same content and implication...Quote:
Originally Posted by jaltaman
I would just like to mention that the rule as proposed would impose the 40# addition to anyone who has a wire in the system. It is not limited to air shifters, if you have a strain gauge in order to sense when the auto blipper actuates then you would get 40#'s added as well. This is the way the Flat Shifter works
Now you can have an air shifter so long as it is not actuated by a solenoid, if your shift lever was attached to a shuttle valve that would not result in a 40+.
A wire is worth 40+ no matter where it is in the system.
how did the Quote funtion turn cold beer into a cold Grape Nehi
I made a beverage change (sue me).;)
The Grape Nehi now comes without HFCS, and as I'm doing everything I can to get a few pounds off, the beer was definitely out of the question.
We are looking at that possibility, yes. We do have SCCA Pro Race sanctioning for next year so we can organize our own events. I am in conversation with several tracks and with at least two other series about running at venues where we would split costs. I've also talked to an SCCA region about running as a separate "pro" race group during a national weekend. I'm exploring all possibilities right now. What I'm trying to achieve here for 2012 is that for the same cost or for alittle more than the cost of an SCCA weekend we can run as our own run group at our own race event and get nearly twice the track time while doing it. No more alphabet soup racing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan Clayton
I've examined the possibility of running as a support race with IndyCars and GrandAm (talked to several tracks about this) and also the possibility of running as top bill at our race event rather than as some 5th billed race at an major event where our track time would be greatly limited. I think if we have most of our events as our own with maybe 1-2 events runned as a support race with Indy/GrandAm that could be a good balance.
We are also looking at some very interesting venues for our events next year. Things that are out of the ordinary and break the mold a bit and provide a bit of buzz factor, but at the same time also providing the traditonal road course venues everyone wants to compete at.
I have mentioned all this at the series driver's meetings over the course of the last 2-3 weekends. I will be sending out a survey to the series registered competitors in the next week or so and get their feedback on the direction they want the series to go in and whether these venues are acceptable. But from a driving standpoint, I find them exciting.
In the interest of keeping costs down we may end up with a mix of what we did this year along with our own events. Maybe half-half, 60-40, whatever. Don't know yet. Way too early to get a schedule up. Most tracks don't even have the major events plugged in yet. But I really hope not. The series needs to move in its own direction, but to do that it needs the support of the drivers that are going to compete in it. What we do in 2012 is primarily going to be up to them.
If we do have a situation like that where we split between national and our own events then the events we run as our own we will run without the weight penalty (I'm really hoping that is going to be true at all our events next year).
To really grow this class any further I believe that growth has to come from outside the SCCA. Primarily from go-karters. I believe to get them interested and involved we need a real pro series that is similar or less in cost that what they would spend racing in a shifter kart season. But having said that, I also don't want to overreach for too much too soon. I'm not sure of at what kind of pro series level that we can really support right now. We need more cars. I prefer to take a cautious approach.
But a lot of this will probably get shaken out within the next 2 months or so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan Clayton
My apologies - I was actually thinking of the other pro series when I typed that question ( waaaaaay to little sleep lately!), but I guess it would just as equally apply to Copeland's series, depending on just how he has structured it and his agreement with the Club.
Basically, his series could also ignore a weight penalty if it wanted to, IF his structure is that the series runs it's own rules (and the Club agrees to it, of course). I would expect, however, that if his rules varied from the Clubs, the races would no longer qualify participants for National points.
John,
This is the same scenario for me. The original post on this thread was to get some idea of how the additional weight effects our cars. I am much heavier then just forty lbs over and am currently putting the car on a diet and hope to get it to the 40 lb heavy weight class.
Yes, and my concern is that having both pro series stepping out of SCCA's National structure might endanger FB's status as a National Class. FB is not like FC or FA, where there were hundreds of cars to support Club racing and the pro series posed no threat to their status with the Club.Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Pare
Thomas, thank you for the comprehensive answer. I wish your series all the best, but I also hope you'll stay in National racing until the class is on more solid footing.
Thomas,
The one very positive thing your series did this year was support the national participation for Formula 1000. The boys running on the west coast did a great job this year in helping secure the future of FB. Thank you to all that participated! Strategic thinking tells me that if you were to follow with a majority of events formated like this year the FB classes future would be brighter.