90 Van Dieman

[BrooksHall]

I just recieved a call from some interested in CFC and he asked if a 90 VD was CFC legal. What's the verdict?

[Tom Johnson]

Don't think so. That's a F/R pushrod car, and other than some minor differences pretty much the same as the 95.

[Purple Frog]

What year was it homologated in?
There was a 90 floating around about a year ago that didn't get homologated until 95.

I guess we really need a CFC.a class for 90-95 VDs. And current CFC could become CFC.b.

[Skunk Butt]

Hey Purple Frog or other FC Member...
This is a rookie question...
What does homoligated mean???
Hope it is not too dumb a question..
If it is a 90 VD but did not get homoligated till 95 ...What does that mean???????

[Tom Johnson]

Skunk:

Homologated is just a fancy word for "approved".

TJ

[Steve Demeter]

gentlemen,
it depends on where you are.
in cendiv, the rules read anything 90 or older and no updates later than 90

[BrooksHall]

Here are the rules that we will be running in Cal Club these rules are basically lifted from the SEDiv. We added the line "rocker arm suspended" for the very reason discussed here. I really should have worded my original post this way "is a 90 VD rocker arm suspended?".


Club Formula Continental (CFC)

This class was initiated for all (rocker arm suspended) Formula Continentals homoligated in 1990 and before. Class must comply with SCCA — GCR and Category Specifications for Formula Continental. Updating is allowed to 1990 specifications (i.e., 1984 Reynard would be allowed to update to 1990 specifications.). Cars will be required to run a spec tire:

Goodyear D 2106 20 X 6.5 X 13 Front R 600

Goodyear D 2107 22 X 9 X 13 Rear R 600

[Tom Johnson]

Steve:

No kidding? Huh. Well a 90 VD in CenDiv would be a killer car to have. But I believe there were literally only a handfull of them introduced.

[BrooksHall]

To my thinking allowing a push rod style car is contrary to the spirit of the rules, which is why we added the line. I asked a lot of FC guys out west and they all agreed that the push-rod suspension was a sea change in the developement of the class. I am surprised that any region allows them in. Pesonally I see no reason to own Reynard or a DB-3 if you can own a '90 VD. The cost of buying in is not that much more and the car is far better.

[Purple Frog]

When the SE wrote their rules they said '90 and earlier. Period.

It was later discovered that the 90 Swift was half rocker/half pushrod. There were not any in the South, so they left the rule.

Every once in a while Marty will bring her pretty Swift over from Missouri and stomp our butts with our own rule.

[Matt Conrad]

I'm a bit confused by the different CFC regulations. Why not just state 1990 and older and move on. I understand that the pushrod suspension is an improvement over the rocker-style, but let's look at the big picture here. I have one of those handfull of 1990 VD's and was looking forward to racing CFC with CalClub. If there are only a "handfull" of 1990 Van Diemans out there, then what is everyone worried about. And what about cars that have pushrod and rocker suspensions? Are they excluded too? I'm just looking to go have some fun with guys who also can't afford to spend $50,000 on a new VD and try to compete with the sponsored teams, etc. My 1990 is far closer in performance to the CFC cars than it is to the new FC cars.

[BrooksHall]

Matt I think PF's post says it all when the rules were in in SEDiv the intention was to seperate the push rod and rocker cars. The CalClub rules state that. A 90 VD can be updated 95 specs and be competitive with later model cars while an 89 Reynard or Swift DB-3 cannot. It was our intention to creat the class for the cars that cannot be updated to compete with later model cars. I understand your frustration I am sure that the owners of rocker style cars where CFC is not available feel the same way.

If you have any questions please e-mail me with your phone number and I will be happy to call you.

[ January 12, 2002: Message edited by: BrooksHall ]

[Purple Frog]

We have a true dilemma in the "clubby" racing ranks due to the evolving technology over the last 20 years. About every 5 years enough progress occurs to to create a new step in the FC progression. '84s dont often outrun '89s, 89's don't often outrun '94s, and '94s don't often outrun '99s, etc. etc.

Yet administratively it is not readily feasible to run four FC categories. And now, the advent of the Zetec could create another step. These older cars are not accepted readily in many vintage events, and I don't think it is good for SCCA to have a outbound migration. If you have ever checked into vintage racing, I think you will agree most owners of these older cars cannot afford the vintage racing fees. I think we are going to see more acceptance of some sort of Formula S, much like the creation of GTO and GTU.

I feel for owners of '90 VDs, for example. But I would encourage them to come out and play. I have found that somewhere on the grid there is a race you can play in, even if it does not play into a regional championship structure. I know a lot of GTU and GTO guys that know their ride can never win the championship, but come out and have a real blast racing whoever is in their performance category.

OBTW, in the SEDIV a '90 VD (homolagated in 1990 or before) would be a CFC car, and probably would be a class killer like the '90 Swift.

[John Green]

I AGREE WITH PURPLE FROG! WHEN I FINALLY REALIZED THERE WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE SOMEONE WITH A BIGGER CHECK BOOK AND A NEWER CAR, I FIGURED THAT I WOULD DEFINE MY VERSION OF RACING AS SIMPLY STAYING AHEAD OF THE GUY BEHIND ME AND GETTING AROUND THE GUY IN FRONT, WHERE WE ARE IN THE FIELD IS MOSTLY A FUNCTION OF THE "CHECK BOOK"

95 VD

[Tom Johnson]

...well, mostly the checkbook. But there are other things that count. Like driving talent, sweat equity, and innovation.

There isn't a reason in the world that a pushrod car with an adequately stiff chassis can't be made competitive on a National level. And if the chassis isn't stiff, that can be rectified, too!

But it does take the desire to learn what makes a car go fast, the patience and expertise to make the appropriate structural and geometric changes, and the willingness to experiment and not be devastated if every idea you have isn't heaven-sent. Oh, yeah. And it doesn't hurt to be a pretty good plagiarist. You know what they say about imitation being the sincerest form...

[Adair]

Well said Mr Frog, Mr Green, and Mr Johnson. As a new member of the FC communtiy, there are times when I read the posts and think.... "I am way out of my league in an 88 Reynard!", but then I recall why I am here... I love this stuff!


If I go out and get spanked by a '90 VD, it will just make me work harder. If I go out and get spanked by an '01 VD, it will just make me work harder. Will my '88 Reynard and I ever spank a late-model VD? Probably not, but it sure will be fun trying, and definitely more fun than watching from the stands!

[Bill Hayter]

Adair,
Have heart I drove a '89 reynard from '97 thru '99, I was always up front in the rain, and actually won my last race in that car in '99 against a field that included '97s, '98s, and a'99 VDs (in the dry). You won't run with the fastest guys but you can run with the less experienced VD drivers. Learn the car and drive it hard.
BH

[GR]

With all of this talk on Homologation, Pushrods/Rocker Arms, etc... It made me think again about my car, an SF88 Reynard and a question I asked a while ago about being accepted in CFC vs FC when I begin racing in earnest this year.

The initial information I shared about my car was enough to have positive posts about my participating in CFC. It does have a late model VD rear wing (guessing 94-95) and I think everything else is "normal".

I have pulled out the first log book on the car and now see the Homologation certificate issued in 1998. Don't know why it was issued then and not before. Does this now "disqualify" my CFC participation since it is WAY beyond 1990?

Also, if I remember correctly, It seemed as long as no changes were made to the motor, chassis or suspension , other improvements were pretty much accepted by CFC racers.

I, like Adair, want to enjoy racing, but I also do not want to earn the ire of the people I want to have fun racing with because I do something that is unfair. I think my car is pretty capable of challenging a lot of the FC guys, but would like to consider other "improvements".

Where is the line really drawn?

Peace

[BrooksHall]

Tom Johnson has a point. If you are inclined to be an Adrian Newey type you could probably make anything fast. I love Sports Racers but D/CSR's really lend themselves to the driver/owner who is also a race engineer type. I am not one of those guys; I am also not one of those guys that have really deep pockets. When I sold my I/CE 250 kart I was going to buy a Lola T340, because I liked the car and they are reasonably cheap to purchase. Then I stumbled upon this website and found CFC. At that point, with the help of another driver, I got CFC off the ground in Cal Club. I found a good 89 Reynard for about the same price a CF of SF. I personally don't want to try to make a pig fly although I am sure with enough time, thought and money I could at least get it off the ground for about 20 feet. Then after all that I could have bought a 95 VD to begin with.

Ever since this class was approved in Cal Club I have been receiving e-mails from guys with cars or guys looking for them (I personally think this is because of the spec-tire deal). The only way for us to grow this class is to keep a level playing field and that means no push rod cars. If I were to go out and buy a DB-3 or an RF88 and have to drive against 90 VD's I might as well just race in FC. Just my opinion and I guess by seasons end we will see just how successful our CFC rules are.

[Purple Frog]

Hard Rock,

If you have been following these posts, you will already know that in SARRC it is pretty loose. One look at David Sava's 88 will tell you that nobody is enforcing any rule on aero changes! Hoffman won in 99 with a VD rear wing. Dowis took the championship in 2000 with an 87 with newer VD wings and tray. Aiken took it in 2001 with a tray. So the real precedent has been just whether the chassis/suspension design was built in 90 or before.

We have been trying to grow the class so the drivers have been loose also, and not protesting all these aero changes. I have never seen any inspection of homolagation papers in the SE, but the rule is there if someone wanted to be a butt. The current crop of CFC drivers in the SE are real racers, they know a 88 Reynard, even if homologated in 95, is still a 88 Reynard and should be able to play in CFC.

We don't think anybody is going to spend tens of thousands of dollars to design and tool a new rocker car just to win a SAARC jacket. If they did, you would see 50 dollar bills flying at tech.

The only loophole, as mentioned earlier, was that they didn't cut it off at the end of 89. Thus technically allowing the '90 Swift, and possibly the '90 VD. The only '90 Swift we have seen in the SE has been when Marty brings her's over from Missouri to spank us at the ARRC. We have never seen a '90 VD. I think there would be some grumbling if one showed, and maybe somebody would post $50 at that point to enforce the homologation date rule.

But your car from Davie should have no problem this season.

I may have to mention this at the SE annual meeting this Saturday....

[GR]

Frog,

Thanks for all your words of encouragement. All I want to do is play fair, have fun, be safe and race hard. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Looking again at the "certificate" I have for this car, it does not even appear to be an "Homologation" certificate (not that I have any clue what one looks like :confused [img]smile.gif[/img]. At least there is no title on it that states that it is one. It does have "Statement of Approval" on
the back of it and an x in the box that it meets GCR Section 18. Wooo Hooo!!

I just sent an e-mail to an SCCA SEDIV "Top Dog" with a request for help on this. Let's see what comes of it. I did include a comment that I would like to help keep CFC alive.

You mention aero "changes" that have already been put into place by others. I do plan on a different nose and maybe a new diffuser for this season. I guess I will have to do what everyone else is doing, meeting and talking w/drivers to see whats going on.

Like many in this group, I am in this for fun and won't be backing up the trucks filled with cash, but I want to be competitive too.

Thanks again guys for the info and help

Peace

[Team Lorenz]

I have read some of the post and now wonder if my car would be legal since it is half roker (rear) and pull rod (front). it is a crossle built in 1986. is there a clear rule that says rockers must be at both ends in any division?
thanks
Chris

[GR]

Well, I've heard back from the SEDIV Director who suggested I contact Denver on the Homologation certificate item, and I have found that what I have is my Homologation Certificate, Whew! Except that it's date in 1998!!

Next, Denver stated that the rules/definitions of what is acceptable to divisions is really the divisions decision. The main item that Denver stood behind is the 1990 or older issue, as far as construction of the car goes.

So, I'm back w/my Div. Director asking what my next step is to make sure I'm ok in CFC.

Geeze. I really hope I'm not screwing things up for everyone, and I'm hoping that if a change in language is helpful, maybe it will start here. It appears that with each division setting their own rules, cross division competition could be really screwy. It already appears there are differences from what has been posted here.

That's it for now. (enough damage done for one day). I think I'll go clean my roll cage or something.

Peace

[butchcfc01]

To all concerned! REF:88,89,and 90 reynard's
are all the same.FF chassis and FC chassis
are the same construction,because of this any FF chassis,can be HOMOLAGATED to FC standards,even after 1990!THE DATE of the CHASSIS/build is what's relevant!AS,long as no up-dates other than those used for conversion to stock FC of those years.Body
work,or wing's,or trays or noses do NOT apply! How do I know? I HOMOLAGATED my purchased from new ff1600/1988 to fc2000/1988
in 1995 with DENVERS guidance.ANY REGION that doesn't under stand, can be referred to contact DENVER,and reminding them of theses years of construction. This happens to be the easiest conversion built from new.IF it passed HOMOLOGATION 1st time for TECH,their shouldn't be any problems.The date of HOMOLOGATION just reflects,conversion's date/year.Therefor,your (new)LOGBOOK should be issued with ORIGINAL CHASSIS YEAR! NOT HOMOLOGATION YR. B.T.W.,REYNARDS are FAST, and can compete with any chassis thru 98,providing driver/chassis/motor/tires are
right!!!! IT takes time to develope driver/chassis to be fast. HOPE this answers
most questions.
butchcfc01

[Purple Frog]

I spoke with Hyler Craft at Buccaneer Region today. He supports what Butchcfc01 has said. 88s were homologated in 88 by the manufacturer. 89s in 89, etc. etc. You may have papers with newer dates, but in effect they are just re-issues of the original. The plate on the chassis being an important factor.

Just to make sure, I have placed a call in to Phil Mellor (Head Tech in the SE). Also, I will research it further at the annual meeting this weekend.

Now... to answer the original question. Was a 90 VD homologated in 1990, or did they wait until early 91? If Van Dieman applied for and got homologated in 1990, then the 90 VD would be SARRC CFC legal.

[GR]

Good day!

I just received an e-mail from Phil Mellor indicating that "the critical date is Jan 6 89 when the car was raced with a log book. Therefore the Pre 90 date is verified."

So it appears all is ok for "me in CFC".

Hope to see some of you at the track this year. If all goes as planned, I will be able to attend SARRC events in RR and RA as well as those in Florida.

Peace

[Mark H]

Are the rocker cars realy slower because of the areo-drag of the rockers over hang or the shortcomings of the geomerty with the coilovers being mounted in the position they are ? Meanwhile I say [run what you brung} and good luck.
Maek H

[Purple Frog]

A lot of it is the aero drag of the hardware sticking out of the chassis to hold the rocker pivot points.

The rest of it is the challenge of building a rocker strong enough to take the newer heavy spring rates.

A little bit of it is the drag created by the thickness of the rocker itself.

[chuck cecil]

FYI GENTLEMEN WHEN CFC WAS FIRST THOUGHT OF IN THE SOUTHEAST.I WAS ASKED TO WRITE THE RULES.THE ONLY RULE FOR SEDIV IS ALL 1990 AND EARLIER HOMOGLATED FC. ARE LEGAL.

CHUCK CECIL