New RFR F2000?

[Reddog]

The floorpan may be constructed in more than one section. For its entire length, the floorpan shall consist of substantially flat panel(s) in plane(s) approximately parallel to the ground plane (not counting chassis “rake”). In
addition, “stepped” or sloped floorpans ahead of the dash hoop are permitted, however, the maximum vertical distance from the point of attachment to the base of the main hoop to the point of attachment at the front bulkhead shall be 25.4mm (1 inch).

This is more then 25.4 mm...prob built before the new rule?

[Purple Frog]

Ah So Grasshopper, you appear confused.

Did not you see the two steel posts at the front that are part of the steel tubing front bulkhead?

You are mistaking the bottom of the car with something the driver might rest his heals upon. Not always so.

[Reddog]

did anybody notice the 90 degree streering rack?

[Reddog]

no fooling you...your right to hell with "intent" lol

[provamo]

"obviously" legal...and sick

[asw]

Has it raced yet? Any opinions on how fast it is compared to the Van Diemens and Citations?

[Ron B.]

It seems the starter is on the correct side of the engine as well.....

[R. Pare]

In specific reply on the RFR :

In the FF/FC rules, the issue at hand is not a "raised nose" per se, but the position of the floor pan, how it is attached, and what it is attached to. The RFR, while maybe a bit near the "fringe" of the rules, obeys the floorpan rules word for word and history - vertical height variation, attached to the frame rails and the bottom of the front bulkhead on 6" centers. It also has 3 predecessors - the SE3 EuroSwift, the BDR, and the Stohr FF , with the only " real" difference in execution being the these older cars used the "scoop" under the nose to feed the radiators. The RFR does "feed" the radiator inlet openings, but by indirect means.

[Bob Coury]

Great looking car. Is it and illusion, or is the rear wing above the 90cm max height above the ground?

[Purple Frog]

Bob,

the rear wing is taller than current de rigor. But no way to measure it up on stands, and Niki's was jacked up in the rear, so I didn't pull out my handy dandy metric tape measure.

Raised noses aren't new...

I couldn't find a picture of the Sauce in my files that wasn't upside down with the rollbar in the sod.

The Stohr: (maybe not quite the look that kids coming out of karts will gravitate towards. )

[Purple Frog]

I was told by esteemed members of the "Flat Bottom Society" that the new RFR is legal in FC.

In my words, the explanation:

The 'bottom', that piece closest to the track, is made up of a steel tube frame, so it is part of the chassis. On the bottom of that frame is a panel whose attaching method is open. On top of that bottom's frame is some black bodywork. Think of it as the same as body work outside any other part of the frame. That 'bottom' is considered part of the chassis because of those two vertical steel tubing struts at the front. Those two struts are considered part of the GCR defined front bulkhead. So the bottom is flat between the front bulkhead and the rollhoop bulkhead. got it?

Under the driver's feet is another sort of bottom, but not 'the' bottom, for the sake of discussion we will call it the driver compartment floor (DCF). The metal sheet connected to the chassis making up the DCF is only connected every 6 inches, per the side panel rules. Under the DCF is another piece of red bodywork.

I was told the airspace between the bodywork under the DCF and above the bottom is legal because it is not an opening in the bodywork, nor air passing between two pieces of bodywork, because that passage is not closed on all sides. And, it was jokingly stated that air going through there is going to the rads.

Some thought that the air passing through the two struts would be considered illegal. Not so grasshoppers. Those two struts are chassis, not bodywork. No rule saying air can't travel through two chassis members. e.g. Think of the gap in the middle of an exposed roll hoop.

Now if i was building the "son of RFR", I would build those two struts out of long cross-section symmetric steel aero tubing. Then, I'd turn them a bit toed-in. And I'd have legal barge boards. Watch for that on the 2011 model.

It is funny that for 40 years we tried to cover every chassis tube with slippery bodywork. So there are no rules governing the creation of slippery chassis tubes.

Anyway, look for one at a race track near you. With zetec... and maybe a Fit.

My apologies to Queen...

Flat bottomed girls,
they make the racin' world go round...

[Mike B]

I couldn't find a picture of the Sauce in my files that wasn't upside down with the rollbar in the sod.

That's funny, right there.

[Purple Frog]

It wasn't funny at the time at M-O. I was scared for Sauce. The sod was scary soft. i guess it's safe to laugh about it now.

I really wanted a picture of the Sauce. A historically neat interpretation of the rules. My pictures are probably on film negatives in the attic of the race shop.

[allof6]

[Zebra]

Yawn, about new car

FatBoy

[autoerrante]

We will get 3 cars coming to Florida, the 1st one in 2 weeks. we may have it on the race track for the turkey track at Sebring And if anybody wants to see the car at the shop is more than welcome.

if you want to see the car, e-mail me to autoerrante@gmail.com.

[tjcezar]

Where can I see more of this car? The Stohr FF

Bob,

the rear wing is taller than current de rigor. But no way to measure it up on stands, and Niki's was jacked up in the rear, so I didn't pull out my handy dandy metric tape measure.

Raised noses aren't new...

I couldn't find a picture of the Sauce in my files that wasn't upside down with the rollbar in the sod.

The Stohr: (maybe not quite the look that kids coming out of karts will gravitate towards. )

[dc]

I have a few more from the 40th last year...

[a. pettipas]

Ugly. This car is devoid of the elegance that characterizes (for the most part) FC cars.
Form follows function, I guess. We'll see if the old adage holds true in relation to the RFR's performance.

[PCalhoun]

Gordon Kirby article on Ralph Firman. Kirby's Monday on-line column is always an entertaining read:

http://gordonkirby.com/categories/co..._is_no255.html

[Matt King]

Who was driving the Stohr at the 40th?

[VehDyn]

I believe the owner is Jon Jeffords. Hope I spelled that correctly. Always loved the look of that car.

[Stan Clayton]

I believe the owner is Jon Jeffords. Hope I spelled that correctly. Always loved the look of that car.

That IS a beautifully prepared and painted example of the marque...that IMO didn't always present as well in other paint schemes.

Did I say that delicately enough?

[provamo]

the terms unusual, unique, provocative, polarizing,puzzling do come to mind when i view that Stohr FF

thank GOD there are some non-spec racing classes

[tjcezar]

awesome car. I like it.

[dc]

AFAIK, there are only two Stohr FF chassis in existence. IIRC, they were both painted similarly.

Still a beautiful FF chassis IMHO.