FA Parity

[Bob Wright]

There are some (of us) who have tried to become involved in the process more than once and have been basically rejected by parties unknown. Maybe we're considered toxic?

[reidhazelton]

There are some (of us) who have tried to become involved in the process more than once and have been basically rejected by parties unknown. Maybe we're considered toxic?

Where did i say that? And no, because then by that standard I would be considering myself toxic.

Key word being "positive change" in my statement. Clearly, the success you have achieved with FRP shows you have chops and should have been an appreciated resource in that process. Perhaps if SCCA has listened they wouldn't have lost nearly every entry on FF, FC, FB, and mostly FA to you. (That sentence should sound alarms at SCCA, but I doubt it will.)

Like any big org or corp, one person isn't going to change flow of the river. It's a slow process to gradually nudge the flow to the right path, sometimes you get the FF spec tire implemented, sometimes you get shown the door.

[Daryl DeArman]

The good thing about restrictors or rev limiters is, people can spend tons of money on their "stock" engines but they wont get more that a handful of HP for how ever many thousands of dollars they spend

Yes, it does cost exponentially more to get a bit more, but is that a good thing? It could act to prevent people from doing so, but it could also make it a whole bunch more expensive to run up front.

I think it was "established" earlier in this thread, a few HP (like, up to 15) won't help anyone win races.

Yes, that was the opinion of a few, doesn't make it fact. It may not change the running order at many events, but when you have two pretty equal drivers and prepared/developed/tuned cars you aren't overcoming that kind of HP difference. There's also the ability for somebody else to make the same HP but twist it another 1000 rpms.

[RobLav]

I've been outspoken for a long time here and offered to join the FSRAC, and was turned down.
If I was there now, I'd be looking at ways to get one class of flat bottom semi-Atlantic cars all in one class. F3, PFM, FB, and other cats and dogs.
The other thing is all this whining about the FB engine of the month. I've heard this since 2006. Utter fake news nonsense.

[bill gillespie]

I've been outspoken for a long time here and offered to join the FSRAC, and was turned down.
If I was there now, I'd be looking at ways to get one class of flat bottom semi-Atlantic cars all in one class. F3, PFM, FB, and other cats and dogs.
The other thing is all this whining about the FB engine of the month. I've heard this since 2006. Utter fake news nonsense.

hey Rob
FA1... Swift 016
FA2.,,,all others

kiinda like P1 / P2.,,

whstcha’ think ??!

[reidhazelton]

hey Rob
FA1... Swift 016
FA2.,,,all others

kiinda like P1 / P2.,,

whstcha’ think ??!

I like the concept (and a lot more than the FX idea), but I don't think it will fly in SCCA for two reasons. One, it's not reducing the number of classes. This just moves cars around. There was FA/FB, and now proposed FA1 and FA2 - still two classes. One of the main interests of the BoD was in reducing classes. Second, I doubt there are enough 016s to warrant their own class. If FB couldn't manage to survive (for whatever reason one chooses to point to), then I doubt a group of 016s will be able to either - especially considering they already have a great place to race in FRP.

To fit the P1/P2 model, there would need to be other classes folded in as they did with S2000/DSR/CSR. We all know how well that worked out. It might be possible if it was more based on a speed potential. Tattus PFM/016/MZR Atlantics in one group, and 13-inch wheel/1.8 liter/FB/Star Pro Mazda/ etc. It would be a nightmare to try to get parity, which is why I think the FX argument won out. No parity headache, no 200-post apexspeed threads. And, again, this scenario is still two classes. So no gain there.

Or, to RobLav's scenario and yours, I suspect there would need to be more than just the 016 in the class. I don't think there are enough 016s to survive on their own.

IF - the only options for FB were to merge with FA or to merge with FC, what would have people preferred? Just a hypo for my own curiosity.

[bill gillespie]

I like the concept (and a lot more than the FX idea), but I don't think it will fly in SCCA for two reasons. One, it's not reducing the number of classes. This just moves cars around. There was FA/FB, and now proposed FA1 and FA2 - still two classes. One of the main interests of the BoD was in reducing classes. Second, I doubt there are enough 016s to warrant their own class. If FB couldn't manage to survive (for whatever reason one chooses to point to), then I doubt a group of 016s will be able to either - especially considering they already have a great place to race in FRP.

To fit the P1/P2 model, there would need to be other classes folded in as they did with S2000/DSR/CSR. We all know how well that worked out. It might be possible if it was more based on a speed potential. Tattus PFM/016/MZR Atlantics in one group, and 13-inch wheel/1.8 liter/FB/Star Pro Mazda/ etc. It would be a nightmare to try to get parity, which is why I think the FX argument won out. No parity headache, no 200-post apexspeed threads. And, again, this scenario is still two classes. So no gain there.

Or, to RobLav's scenario and yours, I suspect there would need to be more than just the 016 in the class. I don't think there are enough 016s to survive on their own.

IF - the only options for FB were to merge with FA or to merge with FC, what would have people preferred? Just a hypo for my own curiosity.

Reid,
Your pairing of cars is better, I was going for simple just to start a conversation. I have suggested the same premise to FRP.. you are correct, it would not reduce classes, but they would probably run in the same group , but be scored separately.. the current rule disenfranchises FB owners and 016 owners... no bueno imho.

Its important to remember that the CRB never mentions parity, or lap times..their bop edicts are based ONLY on accel data from speed unaffected by aero.. typically 60-100 mph...

FB would not have to spend for built motors to be competitive in FA2, and 016 guys like we wouldn’t have to keep slowing our cars down with heavier weights and smaller SIR’s...

Food for thought ?
Bill

[reidhazelton]

Reid,
Your pairing of cars is better, I was going for simple just to start a conversation. I have suggested the same premise to FRP.. you are correct, it would not reduce classes, but they would probably run in the same group , but be scored separately.. the current rule disenfranchises FB owners and 016 owners... no bueno imho.

Its important to remember that the CRB never mentions parity, or lap times..their bop edicts are based ONLY on accel data from speed unaffected by aero.. typically 60-100 mph...

FB would not have to spend for built motors to be competitive in FA2, and 016 guys like we wouldn’t have to keep slowing our cars down with heavier weights and smaller SIR’s...

Food for thought ?
Bill

I'd eat that meal. Certainly more filling than FX. Good points. That makes sense to me as a fun thought experiment. Sadly, I doubt there is anything to be done now that the FX, FB-into-FA decision has been made.

[bill gillespie]

I'd eat that meal. Certainly more filling than FX. Good points. That makes sense to me as a fun thought experiment. Sadly, I doubt there is anything to be done now that the FX, FB-into-FA decision has been made.

FSRAC...CRB...nothing ? ...crickets ?

let’s see, for starters...
016 guys wouldn’t have to buy a $4000+ air box and a series of smaller SIR’s
FB guys wouldn’t have to pay for built motor/grenades t compete against the 016
Both groups would be happier than with the CRB’s recent decisions
F3/ Pfm18/ Swift 014/Mazda 2.0 would be a pretty good group
Swift 014/1600, FB pretty competitive group....

Mr Copeland ....what are your thoughts along this line, as a defender of the FB loyal ???

[Thomas Copeland]

FSRAC...CRB...nothing ? ...crickets ?

let’s see, for starters...
016 guys wouldn’t have to buy a $4000+ air box and a series of smaller SIR’s
FB guys wouldn’t have to pay for built motor/grenades t compete against the 016
Both groups would be happier than with the CRB’s recent decisions
F3/ Pfm18/ Swift 014/Mazda 2.0 would be a pretty good group
Swift 014/1600, FB pretty competitive group....

Mr Copeland ....what are your thoughts along this line, as a defender of the FB loyal ???

I'd like to respond in more depth later but I'm off to the BVIs and Soggy Dollar Bar. Will mill it over a couple of Painkillers.

[jose gerardo]

FSRAC...CRB...nothing ? ...crickets ?

let’s see, for starters...
016 guys wouldn’t have to buy a $4000+ air box and a series of smaller SIR’s
FB guys wouldn’t have to pay for built motor/grenades t compete against the 016
Both groups would be happier than with the CRB’s recent decisions
F3/ Pfm18/ Swift 014/Mazda 2.0 would be a pretty good group
Swift 014/1600, FB pretty competitive group....

Mr Copeland ....what are your thoughts along this line, as a defender of the FB loyal ???

anything to enhance the racing and drive down the racing cost, the late mr.kaiser once mentioned that it cost something like $37 dollars per mile ( or lap ?) to run an atlantic and the mayers and i calculated around $15-18 for a competitive fb, if we reduce the engine bill to an engine every 2-3 years and go back to pump gas and a spec compound our lap times would slightly affected
and competition enhanced.

i like your grouping ideas, let’s see what thomas thinks .

[bill gillespie]

[QUOTE=jose gerardo;595627]anything to enhance the racing and drive down the racing cost, the late mr.kaiser once mentioned that it cost something like $37 dollars per mile ( or lap ?) to run an atlantic and the mayers and i calculated around $15-18 for a competitive fb, if we reduce the engine bill to an engine every 2-3 years and go back to pump gas and a spec compound our lap times would slightly affected
and competition enhanced.

i like your grouping ideas, let’s see what thomas thinks .[/QUOTE

Jose,
Thanks for your input. I’d be interested in thoughts from other former FB, now FA guys...We don’t see many 016 guys on here, but the ones I talk to are against airboxes, SIR’s, and lead weight. We would like to run the car as designed, but not to disadvantage any other group thrown into FA..
Regards,
Bill

[jose gerardo]

[QUOTE=bill gillespie;595632]

anything to enhance the racing and drive down the racing cost, the late mr.kaiser once mentioned that it cost something like $37 dollars per mile ( or lap ?) to run an atlantic and the mayers and i calculated around $15-18 for a competitive fb, if we reduce the engine bill to an engine every 2-3 years and go back to pump gas and a spec compound our lap times would slightly affected
and competition enhanced.

i like your grouping ideas, let’s see what thomas thinks .[/QUOTE

Jose,
Thanks for your input. I’d be interested in thoughts from other former FB, now FA guys...We don’t see many 016 guys on here, but the ones I talk to are against airboxes, SIR’s, and lead weight. We would like to run the car as designed, but not to disadvantage any other group thrown into FA..
Regards,
Bill

bill, forgot to add: we can increase min weight to that of fc and choke our power a bit to be competitive with a zetec engine car , instead of trying to choke 4-6 seconds out of FA’s (014-016,etc) and i don’t need to mention the safety aspect of running in a class where the competitors have 400lbs of mass over us, this was a core factor why none of us decided on conversion to FA.

i will ask other f1000 guys to contribute.

thanks for listening !!!!

[Stan Clayton]

[QUOTE=jose gerardo;595642]

bill, forgot to add: we can increase min weight to that of fc and choke our power a bit to be competitive with a zetec engine car , instead of trying to choke 4-6 seconds out of FA’s (014-016,etc) and i don’t need to mention the safety aspect of running in a class where the competitors have 400lbs of mass over us, this was a core factor why none of us decided on conversion to FA.

i will ask other f1000 guys to contribute.

thanks for listening !!!!

Jose, is there anywhere in SCCA that FB and FA do not already run together in the same race group?

If folks want to advocate moving FB to FX or FC instead of FA, go for it, but let's not pretend that FB and FA have not run together for years with no more than normal risk...and will probably continue to do so irrespective of their class of assignment since these classes frequently, if not nearly always, run together in the same race group.

[RobLav]

I was thinking the split being between "flat bottom" cars (we know not exactly flat) and tunnel cars.
FA2 = FB, PFM, USF3, and whatever else is close in power to weight with flat bottom aero.

FA1 = 016 and other higher end tunnel cars.

This would leave RT40/41 and Swift DB4, 008, and 014 (and others) somewhere in between. Let these owners pick either sub class. Moving down to FA2 would require new floors / sidepod bottoms, cheaper than moving up in power and cheaper than that 016 $4000 airbox to go down in power.

The easiest thing to more or less equalize flat bottom aero amongst the FA2 cars is a spec diffuser. But that's a separate future topic.

FA2 could be really cool. Similar lap times but executed differently.

[jose gerardo]

[QUOTE=Stan Clayton;595643]

Jose, is there anywhere in SCCA that FB and FA do not already run together in the same race group?

If folks want to advocate moving FB to FX or FC instead of FA, go for it, but let's not pretend that FB and FA have not run together for years with no more than normal risk...and will probably continue to do so irrespective of their class of assignment since these classes frequently, if not nearly always, run together in the same race group.

Thank you for your feedback Stan, you are absolutely correct, we have run together for a few years but the discussion amongst FB Drivers was based on what at the time was the current situation ( Move over and give the corner to the faster FA ) and the future state where we would have to defend/attack the same corner for position in a slower lighter car.

I have tangled three to four times with Atlantics and lost every time, and this was while trying to get out of the way,and this is after conceding and giving a pointer to the FA Driver, fighting for that corner would have been much worse.

https://youtu.be/eWKIgTvwWSs

[bill gillespie]

[QUOTE=Stan Clayton;595643]

Jose, is there anywhere in SCCA that FB and FA do not already run together in the same race group?

If folks want to advocate moving FB to FX or FC instead of FA, go for it, but let's not pretend that FB and FA have not run together for years with no more than normal risk...and will probably continue to do so irrespective of their class of assignment since these classes frequently, if not nearly always, run together in the same race group.

Stan,
I believe the prime concern of FB owners was having to compete with well developed FA cars. Secondarily,I believe the point is valid about the disparate mass....I forgot the exact math algorithm that predicts potential energy of mass x velocity, but it further raises the stakes for a tube frame car to use a built motor for a higher speed.

You may have other fish to fry in this food fight, but you can’t deny the physics....I USED to be able to compute the extra energy involved for every knot above V1 an abort was initiated....the increase in energy and stopping distance was FAR from linear, I apply that thought to increasing an FB speed, then thinking about 1000 vs 1450 lbs....saying it is already that way, doesn’t really add to the discussion.
Cheers,
Bill

[Daryl DeArman]

I have tangled three to four times with Atlantics and lost every time, and this was while trying to get out of the way,and this is after conceding and giving a pointer to the FA Driver, fighting for that corner would have been much worse.

https://youtu.be/eWKIgTvwWSs

I "sure would" hope that an Atlantic owner some 12 seconds a lap off the pace would re-examine his own abilities / attitudes before making a number of "WTF" gestures again. Perhaps he saw some footage and thought maybe that tiny shiny reflective thing on my left has a purpose? Perhaps he saw some footage of the incident and offered an apology for his initial reaction.

[bill gillespie]

I "sure would" hope that an Atlantic owner some 12 seconds a lap off the pace would re-examine his own abilities / attitudes before making a number of "WTF" gestures again. Perhaps he saw some footage and thought maybe that tiny shiny reflective thing on my left has a purpose? Perhaps he saw some footage of the incident and offered an apology for his initial reaction.

Huh ? Sorry, just watched the video...

[bill gillespie]

I was thinking the split being between "flat bottom" cars (we know not exactly flat) and tunnel cars.
FA2 = FB, PFM, USF3, and whatever else is close in power to weight with flat bottom aero.

FA1 = 016 and other higher end tunnel cars.

This would leave RT40/41 and Swift DB4, 008, and 014 (and others) somewhere in between. Let these owners pick either sub class. Moving down to FA2 would require new floors / sidepod bottoms, cheaper than moving up in power and cheaper than that 016 $4000 airbox to go down in power.

The easiest thing to more or less equalize flat bottom aero amongst the FA2 cars is a spec diffuser. But that's a separate future topic.

FA2 could be really cool. Similar lap times but executed differently.

Rob,
The usf3 is 303 tubo hp . It and the Tatuus pfm are both 10 mph faster than the best 016... maybe a better fit in FA1... more at play than flat bottom vs tunnel.... ask the current FB guys what they think ...

[Thomas Copeland]

I'm writing this on the run on a tablet so forgive any typos.

My primary concern with FB racing head to head with FA has been about safety. Its just not safe. Jose has explained it the same way I would have. I wrote that in my letter to the BOD. The aecondary concern is FB just isn't competitive with a properly driven FA, and that makes a joke of the
whole merger.

I would be for F1000 going into FX with certain restrictions. Its not the best situation but it's better than lumping us with
FA. I would prefer Rev limiters over Restrictors. Easier to implement than resctrictors. Thiscwill also better control the horsepower war. That make the ccross over from SCCA to FRP easier as well. Right now i don't think FA, FC don't have to make any changes to compete in either, so why should we make it complicated for F1000.

Try and write more later when I can.

Oh FA2 would also work.

[RobLav]

Bill, I meant the older USF3 cars. Obviously new USF3 would be FA1.

[bill gillespie]

Bill, I meant the older USF3 cars. Obviously new USF3 would be FA1.

agreed...

[jose gerardo]

I'm writing this on the run on a tablet so forgive any typos.

My primary concern with FB racing head to head with FA has been about safety. Its just not safe. Jose has explained it the same way I would have. I wrote that in my letter to the BOD. The aecondary concern is FB just isn't competitive with a properly driven FA, and that makes a joke of the
whole merger.

I would be for F1000 going into FX with certain restrictions. Its not the best situation but it's better than lumping us with
FA. I would prefer Rev limiters over Restrictors. Easier to implement than resctrictors. Thiscwill also better control the horsepower war. That make the ccross over from SCCA to FRP easier as well. Right now i don't think FA, FC don't have to make any changes to compete in either, so why should we make it complicated for F1000.

Try and write more later when I can.

Oh FA2 would also work.

anybody knows if we can get a zetec re mapped to equalize power to weight with f1000 once a rev limiter or restrictor is implemented and the min weight of f1000 increased to 1100 ?.
just an idea and i also like fa2

[Bob Wright]

An unrestricted, 1200 lb Zetec will put out maybe 165 Hp or a little more (QS can confirm). At that level the LD200 gearbox starts to have wear issues, as do the half shafts-although my recollection is the 8/10" wheels may have been the real culprit. An unrestricted 1220 lb USF MZR can be close to 200 Hp (I don't think RTI ever ran them unrestricted). The JL gearbox and the twin plate 7.25 clutch are not an issue, but I wonder about the rest of the drivetrain at that power level.

[jose gerardo]

An unrestricted, 1200 lb Zetec will put out maybe 165 Hp or a little more (QS can confirm). At that level the LD200 gearbox starts to have wear issues, as do the half shafts-although my recollection is the 8/10" wheels may have been the real culprit. An unrestricted 1220 lb USF MZR can be close to 200 Hp (I don't think RTI ever ran them unrestricted). The JL gearbox and the twin plate 7.25 clutch are not an issue, but I wonder about the rest of the drivetrain at that power level.

thanks for your insight Bob, I believe that if we provide competitors with a class they fit in and can run in safely and competitively then this will provide a more sustainable racing environment both for the scca as well as organizations outside the scca, the fact that in f1000 as an example we could perform a minor change to our cars ( plug in-out rev limiter/ecu, add/take out weight ) and be able to compete in multiple organizations that blanket the U.S. then this could bring people back out racing instead of feeling excluded because their class has been eliminated and/or combined with another faster / less competitive environment, and think what this could do to the value of the cars if there are multiple avenues for them to race in competitively.

if folks are in agreement with something along these lines, then can someone shed some light as to the process to get started ?.

[Steve Bamford]

An unrestricted, 1200 lb Zetec will put out maybe 165 Hp or a little more (QS can confirm). At that level the LD200 gearbox starts to have wear issues, as do the half shafts-although my recollection is the 8/10" wheels may have been the real culprit. An unrestricted 1220 lb USF MZR can be close to 200 Hp (I don't think RTI ever ran them unrestricted). The JL gearbox and the twin plate 7.25 clutch are not an issue, but I wonder about the rest of the drivetrain at that power level.

USF used to run the LD200 but got rid of it many years ago due reliability & the cars weren't running a ton more hp then the Zetec. I don't believe the FC Zetec can handle more HP & also if you do this then you have thrown out all the Pinto's.

This is the problem of trying to adjust cars to fit into a space they were never intended. Whatever changes are made in any class usually it seems more people are unhappy then those that embrace the changes.

[bill gillespie]

thanks for your insight Bob, I believe that if we provide competitors with a class they fit in and can run in safely and competitively then this will provide a more sustainable racing environment both for the scca as well as organizations outside the scca, the fact that in f1000 as an example we could perform a minor change to our cars ( plug in-out rev limiter/ecu, add/take out weight ) and be able to compete in multiple organizations that blanket the U.S. then this could bring people back out racing instead of feeling excluded because their class has been eliminated and/or combined with another faster / less competitive environment, and think what this could do to the value of the cars if there are multiple avenues for them to race in competitively.

if folks are in agreement with something along these lines, then can someone shed some light as to the process to get started ?.

Jose, et al :

I think the open wheel community has reached critical mass on the issues highlighted in this thread. It is past time to try to right the ship....I have been in/out of FA for 35 years , but am a very minor player. I am a very interested observer, and I do have a dog in the fight..

I think the affected open wheel racers should consider our version of a PRI/FRP meeting at an agreed upon location..

Bob Corliss has a directory of active/semi active FA owners. I’m sure Bob Wright has similar info forF2000 guys. FB guys have good word of mouth , but not sure who might have names and contact info.

Invite all interested owners/drivers.

Invite these major players as well :
FSRAC
CRB
KHill
Polestar
Swan Motorsports
Élan Powersports
Hasselgren Engineering
Quicksilver
FRP
A nominal registration fee could secure a convenient location for,a,reserved conference room...Indy comes to,mind...
If this could,be,pulled,off in February, it could affect the the 2020 season which begins in earnest in March.

We need a chairman, a meeting agenda, a method to determine and present agreed upon classes/rules moving forward for the guys with actual skin in the game.....maybe a mailed out questionnaire with results presented at the meeting, and a consensus of the group to move forward . The SCCA would have a choice to make, and that might determine the future of racing for these affected groups

Guys, these are just my spitball ideas.....if interested, many really smart, experienced guys are here...who’s gonna step and, take,charge?

I will help....will you ?

Regards to all,
Bill Gillespie, FA faithful

[Thomas Copeland]

thanks for your insight Bob, I believe that if we provide competitors with a class they fit in and can run in safely and competitively then this will provide a more sustainable racing environment both for the scca as well as organizations outside the scca, the fact that in f1000 as an example we could perform a minor change to our cars ( plug in-out rev limiter/ecu, add/take out weight ) and be able to compete in multiple organizations that blanket the U.S. then this could bring people back out racing instead of feeling excluded because their class has been eliminated and/or combined with another faster / less competitive environment, and think what this could do to the value of the cars if there are multiple avenues for them to race in competitively.

if folks are in agreement with something along these lines, then can someone shed some light as to the process to get started ?.

Exactly how I would approach this.

[jose gerardo]

USF used to run the LD200 but got rid of it many years ago due reliability & the cars weren't running a ton more hp then the Zetec. I don't believe the FC Zetec can handle more HP & also if you do this then you have thrown out all the Pinto's.

This is the problem of trying to adjust cars to fit into a space they were never intended. Whatever changes are made in any class usually it seems more people are unhappy then those that embrace the changes.

Thank you for your insight Steve, you are absolutely correct , shame on me as I started with a pinto engine behind me, Are those car mostly now club continentals?, I got out of FC/Pinto to FC/Zetec when it became prohibitive to rebuild those engines back in 2010.

What would be a solution for a pinto engineed car?.

Question for Mr. Bob Wright, are there any pintos running in FRP?, or is it an all Zetec field?, and does anybody know how many pintos are running still in scca?.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Thank you for your insight Steve, you are absolutely correct , shame on me as I started with a pinto engine behind me, Are those car mostly now club continentals?, I got out of FC/Pinto to FC/Zetec when it became prohibitive to rebuild those engines back in 2010.

What would be a solution for a pinto engineed car?.

Question for Mr. Bob Wright, are there any pintos running in FRP?, or is it an all Zetec field?, and does anybody know how many pintos are running still in scca?.

As a Pinto driver on the west coast it looks like we'll have 3 of the 9 cars at Fontana (couple unregistered). 3 is a very high count.
Some cars have gone vintage. I would say it's split. I'm frequently the only Pinto on grid.
I think Brad's Southern series gets decent Pinto grids.

What we need is to let us get creative on the parts we use. There are cheaper ways to rebuild these engines than what the GCR allows without being a killer. My biggest concern is the LD200. Repair gets pricey fast and most Pinto drivers are on a budget.

That said, the older chassis just isn't competitive anyway. Most Pintos are racing other Pintos.

The class (per GCR) left us behind years ago, so I think it's not really an issue. Whatever happens with this effort is not going to 'loose the Pintos'.

[jose gerardo]

As a Pinto driver on the west coast it looks like we'll have 3 of the 9 cars at Fontana (couple unregistered). 3 is a very high count.
Some cars have gone vintage. I would say it's split. I'm frequently the only Pinto on grid.
I think Brad's Southern series gets decent Pinto grids.

What we need is to let us get creative on the parts we use. There are cheaper ways to rebuild these engines than what the GCR allows without being a killer. My biggest concern is the LD200. Repair gets pricey fast and most Pinto drivers are on a budget.

That said, the older chassis just isn't competitive anyway. Most Pintos are racing other Pintos.

The class (per GCR) left us behind years ago, so I think it's not really an issue. Whatever happens with this effort is not going to 'loose the Pintos'.

Thank you for the un biased comments Beer Budget Racing, this is exactly the Middle of the Road insight we need from all race classes in order to visualize and make our efforts more efficient by understanding the realities of our situation.

Is there a way that we can obtain a National or by Division Pinto car count?, would giving all pintos a vintage classification help?, along with freeing up the use of alternate parts to make them more cost effective to run?.

[Bob Wright]

To answer the Pinto question; FRP had one Pinto enter one weekend in 2019. It is my understanding that a Pinto rebuild with the new specs will yield a motor with more power than a Zetec by multiple hp (again, verify this with QS). There have been very few upgraded motors built so far. There are also very few modern (read newer than 1998) FC's with Pintos; most have been converted to Zetec.

FRP has announced a 'FC Classic' class for older cars with the express idea of attracting Pinto powered cars to join us. We have tried various concepts in the past to attract the older cars with virtually zero results, but we can't be accused of continuing to try.

BTW, it is my belief that a well driven modern FC with a fully upgraded Pinto would be a killer in either FRP or FC.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

To answer the Pinto question; FRP had one Pinto enter one weekend in 2019. It is my understanding that a Pinto rebuild with the new specs will yield a motor with more power than a Zetec by multiple hp (again, verify this with QS). There have been very few upgraded motors built so far. There are also very few modern (read newer than 1998) FC's with Pintos; most have been converted to Zetec.

FRP has announced a 'FC Classic' class for older cars with the express idea of attracting Pinto powered cars to join us. We have tried various concepts in the past to attract the older cars with virtually zero results, but we can't be accused of continuing to try.

BTW, it is my belief that a well driven modern FC with a fully upgraded Pinto would be a killer in either FRP or FC.

I've made an effort in the past to get Pintos out. There are quite a few sitting.

This make sense from what I hear from owners. The issue is rebuild cost. Sure, you can get a few more HP with the long rod, but that isn't happening, because....

What they are waiting for is the NEXT FC motor (since the Zetec is already in short supply).
I've heard Honda is working on one. Talked to them to offer a 93 chassis I have in storage for testing but they denied any effort is being made. The FF kit has to be pretty close.

Sure, the long rod makes the motor last, but it's still a carb'd motor with a restricted power band that takes more work to get right. Why spend money on it and be stuck with it longer?

They don't want to spend any more money on these motors, so they are waiting.

[jose gerardo]

To answer the Pinto question; FRP had one Pinto enter one weekend in 2019. It is my understanding that a Pinto rebuild with the new specs will yield a motor with more power than a Zetec by multiple hp (again, verify this with QS). There have been very few upgraded motors built so far. There are also very few modern (read newer than 1998) FC's with Pintos; most have been converted to Zetec.

FRP has announced a 'FC Classic' class for older cars with the express idea of attracting Pinto powered cars to join us. We have tried various concepts in the past to attract the older cars with virtually zero results, but we can't be accused of continuing to try.

BTW, it is my belief that a well driven modern FC with a fully upgraded Pinto would be a killer in either FRP or FC.

thanks Bob, would you be interested in representing frp in this meeting Bill is proposing sometime in February ?, as the premier place to run the troubled scca open wheel clases it would be of paramount importance if you could attend and get your point of view.

thanks to all of you for taking the time to share your thoughts.

[Lotus7]

They don't want to spend any more money on these motors, so they are waiting.

Hang on, what ... waiting for a new engine???

For years the two most common "reasons" for the many hundreds of formula cars sitting unused in garages has been either
"my car's not competitive", or "racing is too expensive"

are you suggesting that people who wont spend a couple of grand to enjoy the car they currently own will suddenly pony up $10k? $15k? $more? to re-engine their existing chassis' ?

I'm happy to be shown to be wrong, but I cannot believe "waiting" is the solution to our current open-wheel participation issue.

Look at Homestead; 22 open wheel entries.... it won't be long before SCCA finds a way to justify putting them all in one run group to make room for the door cars, then even the last few diehards will quit showing up.
The solution HAS to be - get out there now and run what ya brung - maybe it's not ideal, but at least show the scca that you've got skin in the game.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Hang on, what ... waiting for a new engine???

For years the two most common "reasons" for the many hundreds of formula cars sitting unused in garages has been either
"my car's not competitive", or "racing is too expensive"

are you suggesting that people who wont spend a couple of grand to enjoy the car they currently own will suddenly pony up $10k? $15k? $more? to re-engine their existing chassis' ?

I'm happy to be shown to be wrong, but I cannot believe "waiting" is the solution to our current open-wheel participation issue.

The solution HAS to be - get out there now and run what ya brung - maybe it's not ideal, but at least show the scca that you've got skin in the game.

I'm saying that's what they told me. I can also attest to the fact that in the last 4 years I've spent about $6k on engine maintenance and repairs and a friend with a Zetec who races more than me has spent $26 for a spark plug and some throttle linkage fix.

They also want an engine they can stop fiddling with.

It's not the money, they feel it's spending bad money to fix their Pinto.

Talk to people who have Pinto cars and stopped racing them. I did. Whether it makes sense or not it was the common theme.

And yes, they felt push out by the Zetec and a too little too late approach by the CRB to keep them competitive. No one is spending development money on Pintos and the CRB won't change anything without someone spending money.

I made and effort and spent a lot of time trying to get these cars on the grid. Couldn't budge them with their current options.

[Lotus7]

They also want an engine they can stop fiddling with.
It's not the money, they feel it's spending bad money to fix their Pinto.

Understood, but again waiting for a "maybe" could be the death knell for the class. It certainly does nothing to get anyone on track soon.
If what I quoted above is the primary sticking point, then go FE2.
It's available now, it's proven, it's essentially fixed costs with no surprises and no fiddling.... and there's a large (in current context) and growing group showing up each event.

(and perhaps they'll argue 'but no one will buy my FC at this time', and maybe that's true, but if its just parked for the foreseeable future, how's that different?)

[Steve Bamford]

I'm saying that's what they told me. I can also attest to the fact that in the last 4 years I've spent about $6k on engine maintenance and repairs and a friend with a Zetec who races more than me has spent $26 for a spark plug and some throttle linkage fix.

They also want an engine they can stop fiddling with.

It's not the money, they feel it's spending bad money to fix their Pinto.

Talk to people who have Pinto cars and stopped racing them. I did. Whether it makes sense or not it was the common theme.

And yes, they felt push out by the Zetec and a too little too late approach by the CRB to keep them competitive. No one is spending development money on Pintos and the CRB won't change anything without someone spending money.

I made and effort and spent a lot of time trying to get these cars on the grid. Couldn't budge them with their current options.

My personal belief that a manufacture would considering building a replacement engine for FC on a scale of 0-100 is ZERO. For a manufacture it costs them millions to design &
support doing something like what you are talking about. Honda is now invested in F4 & F3, why would they ever consider another route at this point?

I can not believe Pinto owners are sitting around just waiting. MZR engine would have possibly been an option to lobby for if you wanted it many years ago as FRP has proven to be able to match them with Zetec equally.

[LenFC11]

I'm saying that's what they told me. I can also attest to the fact that in the last 4 years I've spent about $6k on engine maintenance and repairs and a friend with a Zetec who races more than me has spent $26 for a spark plug and some throttle linkage fix.

They also want an engine they can stop fiddling with.

It's not the money, they feel it's spending bad money to fix their Pinto.

Talk to people who have Pinto cars and stopped racing them. I did. Whether it makes sense or not it was the common theme.

And yes, they felt push out by the Zetec and a too little too late approach by the CRB to keep them competitive. No one is spending development money on Pintos and the CRB won't change anything without someone spending money.

I made and effort and spent a lot of time trying to get these cars on the grid. Couldn't budge them with their current options.

So the introduction of the Zetec pushed out the pintos. But a new engine would bring them back?? That doesn’t make any sense