Apology

[F1000champ]

My bad!

I provided incorrect information regarding our fuel for 2012. Originally we looked at Sunoco 260 GT as the spec fuel, but changed that after conversations with Sunoco to Sunoco 260 GTX, which is a 98 octane (non-oxygenated) fuel. This fuel is light green in appearance.

It is used as spec fuel in World Challenge, Grand-Am, AMA and other series and is very easy to police and test at the track.

In addition, although we or Sunoco cannot set a price on fuel sold by suppliers, we can set a maximum price to our competitors and we are working with Sunoco to do so. Sunoco is very conscience of the cost to competitors and are working with us closely.

Our official rules will be listed in the 2012 SCCA Pro Racing Rule Book. In the meantime, our rules in progress are available on our website, on the "competitors" page at: www.F1000champ.com

[Will Velkoff]

As Coop mentioned, If you stuck to the fuel sold at the track, that should keep you out of trouble. Your choice of octane, but stick to the leaded stuff. Or you could go to the airport, buy avgas, and burn your engine up if you want.

Care to explain about burning your engine up on Avgas?

[Brett Lane]

Your the second person to ask me that, maybe "burn up" was a poor choice of words. Avgas is 100LL, and LL stands for low lead. The more Tetra Ethel Lead in the fuel, the cooler it burns. Avgas burns hotter than the same octane leaded fuel you'd buy at the track. As far as I know aircraft engines are designed to run with a hotter combustion.

You can run Avgas, but I don't think it's very good for a bike engine.

Regards......Brett

[Richard Dziak]

The cost of fuel should NOT be an issue, considering those drivers that will participate in the F1000 Pro Series events will be spending thousands if not 10's of thousands of dollars to compete in the 2012 series.

The fuel costs are so low & minimal compared to the overall cost to maintain the car, travel, entry fees, food, truck gas, cost of crew, lodging and you might spend more on beer or Vodka, then the price of fuel.

For the serious F1000 driver to quibble over a few extra bucks for fuel, is quite unreasonable compared to the costs overall of racing.

I asked many in a past post what they thought their costs of racing on an annual basis is, but no one was willing to confess to what they spend to race in an amatuer venue.

Let the organizers select the fuel source and everyone can abide by the choice and rules set forward. Then every driver is on the same page with each other. No complaints, no protests, no suspensions if you choose to follow the rules.

[a. pettipas]

Your the second person to ask me that, maybe "burn up" was a poor choice of words. Avgas is 100LL, and LL stands for low lead. The more Tetra Ethel Lead in the fuel, the cooler it burns. Avgas burns hotter than the same octane leaded fuel you'd buy at the track. As far as I know aircraft engines are designed to run with a hotter combustion.

You can run Avgas, but I don't think it's very good for a bike engine.

This lead thing doesn't make any sense to me. Bike engines, like every other modern ICE, run on unleaded, no? Sunoco 260GTX is unleaded

Aaron

[carnut169]

The cost of fuel should NOT be an issue, considering those drivers that will participate in the F1000 Pro Series events will be spending thousands if not 10's of thousands of dollars to compete in the 2012 series.

The fuel costs are so low & minimal compared to the overall cost to maintain the car, travel, entry fees, food, truck gas, cost of crew, lodging and you might spend more on beer or Vodka, then the price of fuel.

For the serious F1000 driver to quibble over a few extra bucks for fuel, is quite unreasonable compared to the costs overall of racing.

I asked many in a past post what they thought their costs of racing on an annual basis is, but no one was willing to confess to what they spend to race in an amatuer venue.

Let the organizers select the fuel source and everyone can abide by the choice and rules set forward. Then every driver is on the same page with each other. No complaints, no protests, no suspensions if you choose to follow the rules.

Yes, racing is expensive but fuel is one of those things that does not have to be. A stock 1l bike motor is happy to run on premium unleaded- currently $3.69 in Ga. To run $10.00/g fuel does not make much sense. The super expensive exotic fuels that can actually make more HP (and make people sick) are not even legal so no point talking about them.
When talking about 1g it's not a huge deal- over the season it adds up.

[K.Sampson]

Your the second person to ask me that, maybe "burn up" was a poor choice of words. Avgas is 100LL, and LL stands for low lead. The more Tetra Ethel Lead in the fuel, the cooler it burns. Avgas burns hotter than the same octane leaded fuel you'd buy at the track. As far as I know aircraft engines are designed to run with a hotter combustion.

100LL is low lead by aviation standards not automative standards. There is still plenty of lead in it. Aircraft engines using 100LL run hot because they are (mostly) air cooled. The 100LL deals with the high combustion temps rather than being the cause of them.

You can run Avgas, but I don't think it's very good for a bike engine.

Regards......Brett

Indeed, fuel designed for slow turning, long stroke, air cooled, carbed engines is less than ideal for high RPM, short stroke, liquid cooled, EFI engines.

[JohnPaul]

Yes, racing is expensive but fuel is one of those things that does not have to be. A stock 1l bike motor is happy to run on premium unleaded- currently $3.69 in Ga. To run $10.00/g fuel does not make much sense. The super expensive exotic fuels that can actually make more HP (and make people sick) are not even legal so no point talking about them.
When talking about 1g it's not a huge deal- over the season it adds up.

I agree, even if I spend a ton every year in racing and I have a zillion dollars in the bank doesn't mean I going to spend double what it would cost for the same fuel out on the street. BTW: how did this go from an Apology thread to a fuel debate?

[F1000champ]

Believe me, after running teams for the past 24 years, I fully understand the costs of racing. Nothing cheap about this sport, but we as a series are looking at every avenue where we can help limit the costs of racing in the Formula 1000 Championship Series.

For example, we have established a tow fund for competitors and have limited our Series events to the eastern half of North America, we have limited the number of tires available at events that can be run on various rim widths currently in use and our tire supplier Goodyear has added a significant addition to our per race prize purse, we have established a spec fuel which we are working with Sunoco to limit the cost to competitors and have established our Pole Position cash award, we are working with a large hotel chain to offer special discount rates for our teams, we have kept the 'Stock' engine rule (which will be strictly enforced), we have not made this a 'spec' series so that teams can purchase their parts from whatever supplier they can get the best deal and possibly get parts support sponsorship, we have kept our entry fees way below other professional series that run at high-profile spectator events, and so on.

We are trying to keep costs down to where teams won't have to spend much more at one of our events than what they would at a double national club event. Afterall, the cars are the same, track time is around the same, you're just now racing in front of 90,000 spectators and have on-demand webcasts to fans all around the world. Oh yeah....and have the opportunity to win some big bucks.

Having a 'spec' fuel that everyone has to run keeps the costs of fuel the same for all competitors and makes testing and enforcing quick and easy. Keeps everyone on an even playing field, fuel wise.

As far a 'pump' gas goes, there are so many different additives in different brands of pump gas that testing and enforcing the rules becomes a nightmare and therefore easier to cheat, if someone really wanted to. I don't think any of us want that scenario. Certainly when there is money to be won at stake.

A controlled spec race fuel is going to cost more than what you can buy at the pump because its produced in much smaller quanities, but it shouldn't be $10/gal. I'll totally agree that that is rediculous.

Yes a few dollars more per gallon is not much when you consider a couple gallons, but when you look at buying 200 gallons or so, over a season it does add up. As do all the other little expenses. So, we as a Series have our competitors best interests at heart and we will search for every avenue possible to keep the cost of admission down.

After all, we look at the BIG picture. Lower costs mean more competitors, more competitors means better racing, better racing means a better show for our fans. It's really a simple equation to grasp, yet one that has seemed to slip by many other series out there.

Mike Rand has grasped this concept and has done a tremendous job with the F2000 and F1600 series. You can see this by the number of competitors in his fields. We simply take this same concept to a larger spectator audience.

[F1000champ]

JP,

This thread started as an apology for illegal fuel, which is why it has slowly turned into a fuel debate.

The apology was acknowledged. Now we're all just talking about fuel itself.

I guess my last post got a bit off the subject as to costs rather than fuel itself. Sorry, just a shameless plug I guess....LOL

[Randy Cook]

The answer to this question would shed a lot of light on the topic.

I can't quite come to grips with how someone (especially someone with an expectation of winning), could go to the effort to obtain a high cost fuel and not find out first if it could be used at an SCCA event. That's much more relevent than what was or wasn't said before a protest.

In most cases, competitors should welcome protests and be flattered.

The typical outcomes of protests are:
1. Innocent verdict.
2. Guilty verdict (caught knowingly cheating).
3. Guilty verdict (unaware they were cheating - should have known the rules)
4. Guilty verdict (pushing the envelope - accepting the risk that it might be ruled illegal)

RussMcB,

Let me add to your list one other outcome of a fuel test which happened to me and cost me the NP Divisional FA Title in 2004: From a sealed VP C12 drum I fueled my car and post race was DQed for illegal fuel. C12 was a legal fuel (and still is I think) but someone in the process didn't purge a hose of an illegal fuel before filling my drum, contaminating it and causing my disqualification. (Another test performed on fuel directly from that drum also failed.) Thereafter I always submitted a sample of fuel from a new drum to SCCA tech at the track before I put any of it in my car.

With new fuel testing rules that are so complicated that this pre-use test procedure is not possible, I've chosen to use only AVGas. I feel AVgas is probably more likely to be legal than any low volume produced racing fuel because of what I trust is a more stringent quality control system guarding its production.

It causes me great consternation that we don't have a way to be sure the fuel we individually use is provable to be compliant before we use it, only after the fact when it's too late.

If there is a way for us all to us AVgas I think it's a great way to solve the problem. PS to those that think it will burn up your engine: set the mixture correctly and that won't happen. Ask Carrol Smith if you don't believe me.

Randy

[LLoshak]

Just saw this. Wanted to share my opinion.

Suspending JR out of the runoffs is way too extreme IMHO.

If you fail a fuel test, you get DQ'd. Thats were it should end. If you do it again, different story.

If you run a stroker kit in your 1000, that should equal a suspension.

Regardless, a suspension should take you out of regular season competition, not the Runoffs. Again, IMHO.

To take out a top flight driver with a top flight program is not good for many reasons.

JR, if theres anything I can do, please let me know. This is blown way out of proportion. Especially when you have a others that have confirmed VP also told them that the fuel was legal.

Also, if fuel is stinky, it doesnt automatically mean its illegal or its going to harm someone. There are a lot of fuels out there.

And before anyone jumps to conclusions, I use 100% legal, Sunoco fuel and have past several tests this season and the 2010 runoffs.

[LLoshak]

Heres my letter I just emailed to the COA:


[FONT=Calibri]Hello all,[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]Thank you for taking your time to read my letter.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]I am not protesting the legality of the fuel used or the fuel rules.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]I would like to share my opinion on the severity of the penalty JR Osborne had received for running an illegal fuel.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]I believe a 3 month suspension for failing a fuel test is far too extreme. [/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]You must keep in mind VP had told him and sold him, what he believed was a legal fuel. There are many others who were also told, by VP, that U4.4 was a legal fuel.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]I do agree, it is the responsibility of the driver that his car is compliant. The above named driver did try to confirm its legality by contacting the manufacturer directly.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]But again, I am not protesting the legality of the fuel used or the rules, but the above must be taken into consideration.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]I have seen many drivers fail a fuel test over the years. I have never seen anyone receive a 3 month penalty.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]PLEASE consider rescinding the 3 month suspension and replace with probation IF deemed necessary.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]Excluding a top flight driver with a top flight program is not good for the class, or the club, for many reasons. We must remember, JR is a customer of the SCCA, paying many entry fees, membership and licensing fees for many years with no previous record of being non-compliant. He is also a 3 time champion and a role model for many aspiring drivers, including myself.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]Please let JR Osborne race in the runoffs. This is not only a painful penalty for the driver, but for the manufacturer as well (Stohr) which has many years of supporting FB and DSR.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]I hope my opinion is to some value with my 15 years of membership and 2 national championships. Resume is available upon request.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri]Thanks again,[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]Lawrence Loshak[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]#241355[/FONT]

[JakeL]

Didn't even know there was such group to contact. Searching the Web turns up information on the COA to send them e-mail, but does not list an e-mail address. Is it coa@scca.com?

-Jake

[RussMcB]

I read a post recently (thought it was in this thread but couldn't find it) that SCCA competitors are no longer able to determine if their fuel is legal at the beginning of a Club Racing event, something about the tests can't be performed at the track. Is that really true?

[JakeL]

I believe so - my understanding is that fuel samples are now sent out to a lab for analysis.

This is coming from a guy who's never been through a fuel test before, though, so take that information for what it's worth.

-J

[formulasuper]

Our club can be unreasonable at times. Several years ago I received a 3 month suspension & a years probation for forgetting to change my car number before qualifying when another driver that registered earlier than I had the same number. I guess it was wrong to asked why they were making me start at the back of the second group of a split start race when I had qualified on the front row of the faster group. Evidently the lady in charge of timing & scoring was having a bad day. I decided to take the rest of the season off.

[Brian]

No dog in this hunt in any possible way, but reading this makes one wonder why anyone would ever in a million years race with SCCA. I'm just sayin...

Brian

[RussMcB]

No dog in this hunt in any possible way, but reading this makes one wonder why anyone would ever in a million years race with SCCA. I'm just sayin...

Brian

There are a million reasons to race with SCCA. I don't have time to type them all now, tho. :-)

[Richard Dziak]

There are many other venues and racing organizations other than SCCA to enjoy the thrill of racing these beautiful racing machines that we own. The costs are lower, the rules set for fun and enjoyment. Safety remains a major issue, and many orgainizations are modeled after the SCCA. The SCCA is not the only game in town. I find here in the deep southwest these other racing venues and organizations are attracting more car counts than seen in the SCCA regions. That perhaps tells something. And yes, they also have rules.

SCCA however is highly recoginized.

[LLoshak]

Couldnt agree more. I love the SCCA! And I've been known to get into my fair share of trouble in my rookie days!

Dont let one bad situation or a person, bad security guard, whatever... Change your perception of otherwise a fantastic club to race with.

Jake, you have to log in on scca.com

go here:

https://ams.scca.com/netforum/eweb/D...=yes&Site=scca

Log in, the go to far right and go over "resource" tab. Click on "directory" and then click on "boards and committees". The COA will be under club racing.

Please guys, send in a letter. I do hate cheaters but this is not cheating. This was a mistake and Im sure even a DQ for that weekend is painful. To suspend for the rest of the season is way over the top. Its not like they found his fire extingisher full of NO2!!!

HELP SAVE JR OSBORNE!!!!

I'd do this for anyone and I feel many would do this for me if I were in this situation. This is our club, every letter matters.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!

[LLoshak]

Totally agree Richard.

But with all due respect Richard, you'll find more of the fastest drivers with top flight programs race in the SCCA Club Racing. I know many people who struggled in the SCCA and then go dominate in other clubs. So if you want to race the best of the best like me, SCCA is where its at.

[Richard Dziak]

LLoshak:

I also agree with you.

Most of the drivers in the other racing organizations I race with would be considered Regional drivers, who are out for fun and good times, and safety with their cars. I am sure that drivers like Dixon, Cooper, Hill, Osborne, Belling Bros, etc. F1000 driver/owners would be bored in these groups and dominate the organziations respective classes. For the fast ultimate competitive drivers the SCCA is still the bill, but there are so many other drivers that don't fill in where the guys above do.

The SCCA is a class organization and I have belonged for many years carrying the National SCCA Competition license. I am just saying that for so many more drivers that don't want to be scrutinized over every little detail, there are alternatives.

[formulasuper]

There are many other venues and racing organizations other than SCCA to enjoy the thrill of racing these beautiful racing machines that we own. The costs are lower, the rules set for fun and enjoyment. Safety remains a major issue, and many orgainizations are modeled after the SCCA. The SCCA is not the only game in town. I find here in the deep southwest these other racing venues and organizations are attracting more car counts than seen in the SCCA regions. That perhaps tells something. And yes, they also have rules.

SCCA however is highly recoginized.

It's the only game in town in the South East for formula cars.

[Daryl DeArman]

you'll find more of the fastest drivers with top flight programs race in the SCCA Club Racing. I know many people who struggled in the SCCA and then go dominate in other clubs. So if you want to race the best of the best like me, SCCA is where its at.

I'd argue that most of the fastest drivers who also have top flight programs don't even bother with SCCA Club level racing. There are wankers everywhere and SCCA is no exception.

Back to the issue at hand...

There are moving infractions, misdemeanors and felonies. They don't all carry the same penalties. Obviously, neither should cheating. Being 1# under weight isn't the same as having 100cc too large displacement, but neither one is legal. SCCA has been looking at the fuel situation for awhile. Suspending somebody with illegal fuel for 3mos is probably enough to ensure folks are using legal fuel next time right?

What do you think the minimum penalty neccessary to send a message that illegal fuel will not be tolerated?

[Mike Devins]

What do you think the minimum penalty neccessary to send a message that illegal fuel will not be tolerated?

For me the real issue here is "intent", since fuel is tested all the time why would JR run something that he knew would not pass. The answer is that he did not believe that the fuel was illegal. JRO is a very competitive driver and good one at that. Like anyone else at the top of the class he is always looking for a competitive advantage. He purchased what he believed was the best legal fuel that he could find.

If JRO had a separate fuel port with legal fuel and a main tank for the good stuff - that would be cheating. Running fuel that he thought was legal - that is a mistake.

3 months and losing your shot at the runoffs for a mistake is wrong.

[formulasuper]

"If JRO had a separate fuel port with legal fuel and a main tank for the good stuff - that would be cheating. Running fuel that he thought was legal - that is a mistake."

Now that's thinking outside the box!!!

[starkejt]

Anybody remember the small tank within the fuel cell that held just enough legal fuel to give a clean sample?

ETA: years ago, not in FB...

[Mike Devins]

I think that is the way most of my press operators used to pass their annual physical and drug test.

I was always waiting for one of them to come up clean but find out he was pregnant.

[drdestructo]

Seems everyone here is under the assumption that he thought it was legal. Not sure where they get that.

quote: Had I known the possibility of such a severe penalty was there, I would never have chanced the VP fuel.

SCCA probably will back it's stewards on this, as it is banned as a health risk. I don't want to be near the stuff or its toxic exhaust.

[glenn cooper]

from a very reliable soure that JR was kicking all sorts of ass at Laguna this past weekend in a 250 Superkart, maybe possibly on pole over a few guys by the name of Eddie Lawson and Wayne Rainey - maybe y'all have heard of them?

Looks like he's got a way to get his kicks while "serving out his sentence".

JR, you comin' back here to add anything to the discussion?

[Daryl DeArman]

For me the real issue here is "intent", since fuel is tested all the time why would JR run something that he knew would not pass. The answer is that he did not believe that the fuel was illegal. JRO is a very competitive driver and good one at that. Like anyone else at the top of the class he is always looking for a competitive advantage. He purchased what he believed was the best legal fuel that he could find.

If JRO had a separate fuel port with legal fuel and a main tank for the good stuff - that would be cheating. Running fuel that he thought was legal - that is a mistake.

3 months and losing your shot at the runoffs for a mistake is wrong.

Of course he didn't run it knowing that it would be tested and that it wouldn't pass. Maybe he is uncertain so he runs it at a local race, if it passes he's good to use it at the runoffs. If it doesn't, well, what's a little DQ from a local event?

Again, 3months and losing your shot seems too severe...so what's just severe enough in your mind?

[Alex Pate]

Dont forget the engine swap the officials requested. If my motor was stock and they told me to Change it I would kindly tell them to blow me instead of pulling an all nighter

[RussMcB]

... I would kindly tell them to blow me

Good one. :-).

[JohnPaul]

Dont forget the engine swap the officials requested. If my motor was stock and they told me to Change it I would kindly tell them to blow me instead of pulling an all nighter

Didn't they also say one of GD's engines was illegal? I wouldn't read too much into the request, if they knew for sure JR'S engine was illegal he would have been tossed

[Alex Pate]

Then if my motor was stock I would be more than happy to remove the cylinder head for the
Right there as it's less work for me than an entire engine swap.

[marshall9]

from a very reliable soure that JR was kicking all sorts of ass at Laguna this past weekend in a 250 Superkart, maybe possibly on pole over a few guys by the name of Eddie Lawson and Wayne Rainey - maybe y'all have heard of them?

Looks like he's got a way to get his kicks while "serving out his sentence".

JR, you comin' back here to add anything to the discussion?

Lawson came to one of our events and ran with the karts, that guy is FAST. If karts were equal, and JR "kicked all sorts of ass" on him, then it certainly wasn't just the fuel in the protested FB race....just saying.....

[LLoshak]

For me the real issue here is "intent", since fuel is tested all the time why would JR run something that he knew would not pass. The answer is that he did not believe that the fuel was illegal. JRO is a very competitive driver and good one at that. Like anyone else at the top of the class he is always looking for a competitive advantage. He purchased what he believed was the best legal fuel that he could find.

If JRO had a separate fuel port with legal fuel and a main tank for the good stuff - that would be cheating. Running fuel that he thought was legal - that is a mistake.

3 months and losing your shot at the runoffs for a mistake is wrong.

Bingo, thats exactly my point. Again, its not like NO2 was found in his car.

Seems everyone here is under the assumption that he thought it was legal. Not sure where they get that.

Dr., he called the manufacturer and asked. What really more could be done? The need to actually send out to a lab is pointless. Because if he did and lab said it passed and SCCA's lab still found it didn't, wouldn't JR still be in the same boat? Also, if you read all the posts, others have confirmed they also received the same information form VP.

And no one, including JR, is trying to get his finish or points back for that weekend. All thats being argued is the 3 month suspension.

If a DQ is not severe enough of a penalty, then I suggest probation and points be put on ones competition license.

[LLoshak]

BTW, I was at Laguna that weekend racing for AM Performance in thier GS 370Z.

I ran into JR and even welded up a shifter lever for him. His kart is sweet!!! In race 1 he was running 2nd, leaving Lawson behind .5 per lap. The leader (Euro champ/guest) was leaving JR by .6 per lap. But the kicker here is, JR was in a single cyl kart and both the euro champ and Lawson were in doubles!!! Unfortunately, JR broke his shifter lever and DNF'd. Especially because the euro champ broke a lap later and Lawson won. JR was a bit upset knowing he could have won overall, beating Lawson, in a single.

For race 2, JR had to start form the back of the pack. He riffled through the pack and got up to 4th and then a coolant leak ended his day. He told me Laguna has always treated him that way and beating Lawson/winning at Laguna has always been his goal.

JR is a heck of a driver and no way a cheater.

[starkejt]

It takes 2 minutes of googling to find out that U4.4 has too much MTBE to be legal. Just saying.