Current future status of F1000

[reidhazelton]

This thread reminds me of a Monty Python skit. FB is the bird....

And, I take no joy in that. I was strongly against the FA/FB merger. Now that the class is fractured between open FA SCCA rules, and FB rules with FRP, I see no logical way it's coming back from the dead when it could not do that when it was an SCCA class under one rule book. I'd love to see it happen, but I don't see how it can. It has ceased to be.

Enjoy!
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hwqnp

[Jnovak]

This thread reminds me of a Monty Python skit. FB is the bird....

And, I take no joy in that. I was strongly against the FA/FB merger. Now that the class is fractured between open FA SCCA rules, and FB rules with FRP, I see no logical way it's coming back from the dead when it could not do that when it was an SCCA class under one rule book. I'd love to see it happen, but I don't see how it can. It has ceased to be.

Enjoy!
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hwqnp

It could be a regional class!

[Jnovak]

Jake L and others - How many of the existing FB cars do you think would convert to built engines and modified body/tunnels? Will this further hurt the class given some will be competing with FRP under the existing FB rule set?

The issue is still under consideration - a final decision was not made at the FTF meeting.

John

Imo built engines will destroy an already damage class.

[Daryl DeArman]

Imo built engines will destroy an already damage class.

Agreed. The only folks that migrate to the built engine/FB chassis are those that have FA-level budgets that might enjoy saving a few bucks. I don't see many FB folks making the leap when they have other options. Those FB folks that do make the leap to FA level performance will just have restrictors thrown at them to make sure they are kept in check.



No restrictors. Stock engines. Open ECU. No engine newer than 2019MY until 2025. In 2025 specify 2024MY limit until 2030. Easy peasy. I'm guessing it's too late for that approach, even if the class participants saw the value in such approach.

[Jnovak]

The NorthAm series follows the old GCR for F1000 (can't remember which month they use).

Can you be more specific about the ruel set Tom?

[Jnovak]

Agreed. A spec aftermarket ECU could be had for around $500 that would do the job just fine. Ain't gunna happen...too much negativity in this class now....sad.

Joel, can you be more specific about the ecu please?

[S Lathrop]

No restrictors. Stock engines. Open ECU. No engine newer than 2019MY until 2025. In 2025 specify 2024MY limit until 2030. Easy peasy. I'm guessing it's too late for that approach, even if the class participants saw the value in such approach.

I don't 5/6 years is a good idea. What the class, FB, thrived on was current engines, engines that were in production so the supply of new or very low millage engines was plentiful. I can see a delay of a year or so with a new model but waiting until it goes out of production does not make sense to me. When FB was in its hay days, you could get a low mileage engine and even new engines for way less than the cost to rebuild an engine. It was our experience that rebuilt engines were not as reliable as low mileage stock engines and for sure less reliable than new engines.

People were buying new bikes and stripping them for parts because the parts were less expensive and they could make a profit selling the bike as parts. The engines were not the profit point in these transactions so the engines were priced very reasonably. That is how I got the engine I used to build the first Citation F1000.

I will absolutely go with open ECUs. And I think that there should be some system to control HP in the 180 hp range so the incentive for new engines is cost driven and not performance driven. I may be dreaming, that this is possible.

I think that FB really has a better future than FA because of the cost of the cars and the cost of racing them.

[david oleary]

If we can use P1 and P2 enignes then are we allow to
do machine work on the heads?
port/polish/shave, because in those classes alot of the power
is in the machine work, and most of the pistons are 13.5 to 14.0
CR ratio.
There was a video in fast track showing head work on a GSXR 1000
where would i find that video? it showed measurements.

[Daryl DeArman]

If we can use P1 and P2 enignes then are we allow to
do machine work on the heads?
port/polish/shave, because in those classes alot of the power
is in the machine work, and most of the pistons are 13.5 to 14.0
CR ratio.
There was a video in fast track showing head work on a GSXR 1000
where would i find that video? it showed measurements.

Read the FA engine rules. You can do more than just some basic machine work on the heads.

You "could" use a Big Bore ZX14 or Big Bore Hayabusa and de-stroke it to arrive at 1000cc if you wanted to. 600cc-like stroke = 600cc like RPMS.

No need to even ensure it's a 4stroke engine if you wanted to go a different route. . or maybe a YZR1000, that's a naturally aspirated 1000cc bike with 245HP at the wheel. Just get out the checkbook.

[Daryl DeArman]

I don't 5/6 years is a good idea. What the class, FB, thrived on was current engines, engines that were in production so the supply of new or very low millage engines was plentiful. I can see a delay of a year or so with a new model but waiting until it goes out of production does not make sense to me. When FB was in its hay days, you could get a low mileage engine and even new engines for way less than the cost to rebuild an engine. It was our experience that rebuilt engines were not as reliable as low mileage stock engines and for sure less reliable than new engines.

People were buying new bikes and stripping them for parts because the parts were less expensive and they could make a profit selling the bike as parts. The engines were not the profit point in these transactions so the engines were priced very reasonably. That is how I got the engine I used to build the first Citation F1000.

I will absolutely go with open ECUs. And I think that there should be some system to control HP in the 180 hp range so the incentive for new engines is cost driven and not performance driven. I may be dreaming, that this is possible.

I think that FB really has a better future than FA because of the cost of the cars and the cost of racing them.

You make plenty of valid observations. I don't believe the "5/6 year rule" causes any of the concerns you have.

#1: The number of folks racing FB/FA/F1000 (whatever you want to refer to it as) is so low relative to the number of these bikes sold that those folks racing them will never impact the market in any meaningful way.

#2: Even in fair-weather states, the number of miles put on a sport bike per year is low. A 4-5 year old bike is still low-mileage.

#3: Parts off a 4-5 year old bike have a large market.

#4: When you install your latest round in the chamber, you don't have to worry about somebody coming up with a newer/better choice until such time that your motor likely needed replacement anyway.

#5: It eliminates the engine of the year, or even the perception of the engine of the year.

#6: It eliminates the need for restrictors and the politicking and complaining that comes along with it.

I tossed this idea out there a decade ago. It was dismissed then as not being necessary or desired. We'll never know if it would have led to a different result. My experience in another class powered by MC engines showed that it worked very well.



**** Just looked on Cycle Trader (ignoring all the other popular places to sell used bikes). Fifty-one (51) 1000cc USED Sport Bikes 2015-2019 for sale: 31 have less than 5K miles, 43 less than 10K miles, and none over 25K miles.

[Jnovak]

It is my opinion that F1000 does not need 220 to 250 hp to be popular. To be popular it needs lower costs. The only way to reduce cost imo is to restrict hp to some medium production range. Pick a number somewhere between 180 and 190 hp then you restrict newer engines to that level!

Imo the cars were would cost significantly less than an f2000 or FC cars and be much faster!

[Daryl DeArman]

It is my opinion that F1000 does not need 220 to 250 hp to be popular. To be popular it needs lower costs.

True. However, once F1000 was shoe-horned into FA the option of putzing around with 180HP, no matter the cost, isn't going to prove popular.

As to lower costs striking a balance of rules stability and package performance stability is paramount.

Constantly evolving performance despite stable rules isn't cheap over the long run.
Constantly changing rules to keep performance stable isn't cheap either.

[ghickman]

My total budget less tires, entry fees, travel from 2014 thru 2018 (4 Runoffs Podiums) would barely get you 1 engine rebuild and maybe 1 gearbox rebuild in an Swift 016 / 014. That would be routine yearly expense in the Swift.

From 2014 through 2018 I had 2 engines which I flogged the **** out of. Rotated them one engine every season back to the engine builder. Had zero engine failures in that time span.

You absolutely can not go faster around a track and spend less money doing it than F1000...period.

[S Lathrop]

Daryl,

I think there are 2 possible paths forward for F1000.

One is to make the best of life in FA and try to increase performance to something closer to FA.

The second option would be to concentrate on making F1000 more attractive as a class by keeping the engine costs under control. I agree with Jay that 180 is a good target. I think that at this power level the costs go way down. The trick is to make it easier to use current day engines. The idea of not allowing engines in the class for 5 or more years is something I don't agree with. Having such a rule would be a huge disincentive for any manufacturer to ever make crate motors available. I think it would be good for there to be crate motors available and run those motors stock except for the electronics.

F2000 was first dumped into FSV when the performance differences are the same or worse against the dominant water cooled FSVs. But the class grew to the point where it could stand on its own. F1000 needs to follow that model but keep going forward after it stands on its own. I think going forward with built, high powered motors is a prescription to maintain the status quo of being a second class citizen in your class.

As part of FA, F1000 has been given a second chance at being a standalone class. Built motors take that chance away. But that is only my opinion. I like the idea of being the fastest car in my class.

[RussMcB]

Steve, funny you should mention that. I was just thinking about when FF2000 ("Super Fords") joined FC. After a while, the cars that previously made up that class faded away, leaving FF2000 in FC because it had strong support.

Maybe that could happen to F1000, but I'm puzzled that something so exciting and promising as F1000 hasn't grown like I expected. My guess (like others), is engines gaining power every year (differently than any other SCCA class - and not sustainable IMO).

[S Lathrop]

Steve, funny you should mention that. I was just thinking about when FF2000 ("Super Fords") joined FC. After a while, the cars that previously made up that class faded away, leaving FF2000 in FC because it had strong support.

Maybe that could happen to F1000, but I'm puzzled that something so exciting and promising as F1000 hasn't grown like I expected. My guess (like others), is engines gaining power every year (differently than any other SCCA class - and not sustainable IMO).

I think you are right. The class grew when everyone was running 07/08 Suzuki engines. When we started updating the engines and that became more and more difficult, the class stalled.

[lmpdesigner]

Where Sonic restrictors ever used or discussed as a way to cut power on these cars.? (Or the awful but simple flat plate restrictor?)

Would that not be a way (not always the best-I admit) to keep parity between older/newer engines?

[Jnovak]

Where Sonic restrictors ever used or discussed as a way to cut power on these cars.? (Or the awful but simple flat plate restrictor?)

Would that not be a way (not always the best-I admit) to keep parity between older/newer engines?

We did multiple dyno tests on the 2 most popular engines using the brutally simple flat plate restrictors between the throttle bodies and the cylinder head and it worked like a charm i still have the data. The committee simply voted no on implementation in the class.

[jchracer]

We did multiple dyno tests on the 2 most popular engines using the brutally simple flat plate restrictors between the throttle bodies and the cylinder head and it worked like a charm i still have the data. The committee simply voted no on implementation in the class.

Yes, that whole effort and it’s clumsy, on again/off again attempted implementation is what drove many out of the class and led to the ultimate demise of FB. Jay, you helped kill the horse and now you refuse to stop beating it…..it’s dead, just step away…...

[RussMcB]

Jay, you helped kill the horse and now you refuse to stop beating it…..it’s dead, just step away…...

Geez. No thanks for contributing personal time and sweat to try to help a class survive. Do you think the class was going great, had no problems and then Jay decided to step in and ruin it for everybody?

From my POV, the class was losing its draw fast and several people were trying to save it.

Another opinion I have is the people with plenty of money to spend on racing weren't too concerned about people not running at the front and/or without many thousands of dollars to spend on engine management hacks or whatever it would take to make the latest engine run in a car so you can have another 10-15 HP next year. There are a lot of mid-field runners happy to run 1-2 seconds off the pace, but not 5-6 seconds back.

I like Carrol Smith's opinion that an engine was a lump that should be more or less the same for most competitors'. Just install it and go. The most successful classes have very little to do with engines and more about driving and tuning.

[Daryl DeArman]

The second option would be to concentrate on making F1000 more attractive as a class by keeping the engine costs under control.

Is it your understanding that if the MC powered cars in FA reach some magic participation number that the SCCA would allow FB to become a stand-alone class again? If not, what's the point?

Having such a rule would be a huge disincentive for any manufacturer to ever make crate motors available. I think it would be good for there to be crate motors available and run those motors stock except for the electronics.

Absolutely agree. Keep in mind having a potential market of 10-15 engines a year is also a huge disincentive for any manufacturer to make crate motors available. If those crate engines last 3 to 5 years, you need 30-75 active participants in the class just to get to 10-15 engines a year. The US Legends folks are building and average of over 200 new cars per year for the last 28 years.

If you want crate engines available you best find the engine rules of another series where crate engines are already available and emulate their engine rules. Keep in mind those crate engines available for Legend cars are the FZ09 or XJ1250, both anemic things around 120-130HP. And the complete FZ09 engine package is $7199.

Mini-sprint rules are fragmented across the states. There are series that run a spec-built GSXR-600 with the engine being supplied as a crate engine from Suzuki and further prepped by Yoshimura, those engines are $10K plus after prep.

I have known the technical sales guy at Yosh since junior high school. Yosh is 20 minutes from my house. If you don't follow MC-related racing Yosh has been closely aligned with Suzuki for decades. If you want me to reach out to him and see what kind of volume Suzuki/Yoshimura would require before they even entertain the idea of supplying a spec engine, let me know. I'd be glad to help.

[S Lathrop]

Is it your understanding that if the MC powered cars in FA reach some magic participation number that the SCCA would allow FB to become a stand-alone class again? If not, what's the point?

I have known the technical sales guy at Yosh since junior high school. Yosh is 20 minutes from my house. If you don't follow MC-related racing Yosh has been closely aligned with Suzuki for decades. If you want me to reach out to him and see what kind of volume Suzuki/Yoshimura would require before they even entertain the idea of supplying a spec engine, let me know. I'd be glad to help.

F2000 reached the numbers and the original in FC dwindled to the point where they could not make numbers to remain a class. SCCA just changed the rules so F2000 was the performance standard in the class. I don't see traditional FA cars increasing their numbers going forward. It could get to the point that without F1000, FA would drop out of the picture. So why would the F1000 guys want to keep cars in a class that they can not possibly out perform. And F1000 is a bit too fast for FX.

From what I have heard from customers and other competitors, the Suzuki engine/transmission package was the easiest to adapt to F1000 and the best performer. I think that if crate Suzuki engines were available that would be a big plus for the class. That by itself might get F1000 out of the doldrums.

[Daryl DeArman]

I don't see traditional FA cars increasing their numbers going forward. It could get to the point that without F1000, FA would drop out of the picture. So why would the F1000 guys want to keep cars in a class that they can not possibly out perform

Agreed. I happen to subscribe to the theory that the F1000 cars were added to FA to save FA.

F1000 guys won't want to stay in FA if they can't perform with the traditional FA cars, it's the reason the engine rules are now what they are.

There's zero reason for the F1000 traditionalists to campaign in FA at the former F1000/FB spec if SCCA won't allow them to go back to their own class.

From what I have heard from customers and other competitors, the Suzuki engine/transmission package was the easiest to adapt to F1000 and the best performer. I think that if crate Suzuki engines were available that would be a big plus for the class. That by itself might get F1000 out of the doldrums.

Yes, IF it's a possibility that F1000 could be a stand alone majors class then it would be worth pursuing. Also another big IF, is that the participants in the class want the Suzuki crate engine to be the performance standard. If it's not, it won't be sold in any volume whatsoever.

[Jnovak]

Yes, that whole effort and it’s clumsy, on again/off again attempted implementation is what drove many out of the class and led to the ultimate demise of FB. Jay, you helped kill the horse and now you refuse to stop beating it…..it’s dead, just step away…...

It was never ever on again off again at all it was proposed one time to the committee. we dynoed 3 dufferent engines and we were easily ablt to match the power curves. You are imo, mad at me personally because i did not completely fullfill our business agreement and i apologize for my failure. But the teality iis that my setup data would not have made you as fast as Brian or Coop. Just a fact.

Still a very nice car you have put together and! my suggestion is to put Brian, a 3 time national champion in the car!

[jchracer]

It was never ever on again off again at all it was proposed one time to the committee. we dynoed 3 dufferent engines and we were easily ablt to match the power curves. You are imo, mad at me personally because i did not completely fullfill our business agreement and i apologize for my failure. But the teality iis that my setup data would not have made you as fast as Brian or Coop. Just a fact.

Still a very nice car you have put together and! my suggestion is to put Brian, a 3 time national champion in the car!

I'm am just fine with my pace ( I've gone faster than Brian ever went in the car) and I don't really care about you not fulfilling your obligations....

The engine restrictor rule was jammed into the GCR one month prior to the start of the season only to be recinded shortly thereafter....two years in a row.

I'm a racer. I will race to whatever rules are in effect. My beef is that the rules should have some buy-in from the affected racers and some stability so that proper planning and engineering can be accomplished prior to a rule change taking effect. None of that happened with the engine restrictor implementation. Without rules stability, FB racers went elsewhere and the class went further into decline.

Not sure there is much to save at this point.

[Thomas Copeland]

Can you be more specific about the rule set Tom?

On the NorthAm website says June 2018. https://northamf1000.com/rules-package/

Even though I haven't been involved in organizing the series for a while I don't see us changing any of those rules anytime soon. Of course we have some additional rules that are specific for the series. Tire usage and stuff like that.

I find it interesting that some people in this thread consider F1000 in decline or even dead. I just see it as having moved on. It just doesn't need the SCCA and all that heartache that went with it anymore. It has a place to race. Constructors that build cars. A rule book that guarantees stability. A championship to compete for and a great bunch of guys to race with. Works for me!!

If I ever did go back and do any SCCA club event it would probably be like for some kind of semi-demo type drive on this or that certain track like COTA or Indy, or maybe one more time around Laguna Seca for old times sake, To enjoy the moment that comes from driving a superb car on the limit (my limit!--I'm old!) on a circuit that I always wanted to experience.

[Daryl DeArman]

I find it interesting that some people in this thread consider F1000 in decline or even dead. I just see it as having moved on. It just doesn't need the SCCA and all that heartache that went with it anymore. It has a place to race. Constructors that build cars. A rule book that guarantees stability. A championship to compete for and a great bunch of guys to race with. Works for me!!

More power to you if you can help build that series.

If you don't wish to race in FA with SCCA, nor race anywhere East of the Mississippi River what option do you have?

That's a huge decline in options and participation from the class heyday.

[reidhazelton]

Agreed. I happen to subscribe to the theory that the F1000 cars were added to FA to save FA.

Just to correct the record, the above is not accurate. FB was merged into FA because FB had insufficient numbers. The choice was between merging into FA, slowing them down and merging it into FC, or leaving it along and let it die off in Regionals. SCCA chose option 1. It had nothing to do with FA numbers. I don't recall that ever coming up on any of the conference calls.

FA has been the dumping ground of misfits for years. F3, PFM, F4, SCCA Lites, etc.

[Jnovak]

I'm am just fine with my pace ( I've gone faster than Brian ever went in the car) and I don't really care about you not fulfilling your obligations....

The engine restrictor rule was jammed into the GCR one month prior to the start of the season only to be recinded shortly thereafter....two years in a row.

I'm a racer. I will race to whatever rules are in effect. My beef is that the rules should have some buy-in from the affected racers and some stability so that proper planning and engineering can be accomplished prior to a rule change taking effect. None of that happened with the engine restrictor implementation. Without rules stability, FB racers went elsewhere and the class went further into decline.

Not sure there is much to save at this point.

Now i remember that time when the crb put the restrictors in place with essentially no notice but i had zero influence on those decisions. I am simply a technical fan of the flat plate restrictors and they have been used for quite some time in F5-F6. A set of cnc machined restrictors cost $65 per ser of 4 and all that is really needed to use them is a lambda sensor and a fuel pressure regulator. The most additional power we have ever seen on a remaped ecu is 3 hp on a dyno! They have the best chance for work and are very low cost.

Again it was the CRBs decision to implement the restrictors with essentially zero notice. I had zero influence on that decision. In fact i agree with your position that it was a bad decision!

[Daryl DeArman]

Just to correct the record, the above is not accurate.

Just to correct the record, Reid and I have different theories as to the why. I said it was my theory, no record to correct. Whether or not they "spoke" about it on any conference calls is irrelevant. They all know they can't kill that class.

FA being a dumping ground for years doesn't dismiss my theory, it actually supports the fact that they keep dumping all types of high-performance cars in that class to ensure their premier-level class never dies.

In 2019 they had 20 Majors where FA couldn't fill a podium.

They had 8 Majors where one guy shows up with a FA.

They had 7 Majors without a single FA entry.

If this was only about participation, they would have killed FA and FB both.

[JEREMY HILL]

I'm am just fine with my pace ( I've gone faster than Brian ever went in the car) and I don't really care about you not fulfilling your obligations....

The engine restrictor rule was jammed into the GCR one month prior to the start of the season only to be recinded shortly thereafter....two years in a row.

I'm a racer. I will race to whatever rules are in effect. My beef is that the rules should have some buy-in from the affected racers and some stability so that proper planning and engineering can be accomplished prior to a rule change taking effect. None of that happened with the engine restrictor implementation. Without rules stability, FB racers went elsewhere and the class went further into decline.

Not sure there is much to save at this point.

Joel,

There was 8 of us including Jay who spent a ton of time and our own money to dyno different engines and we came up with a plan that would help grow the class. We voted unanimously to submit our proposal to the CRB who decided not to adopt it. The 8 of us were all directly involved in the class and we had only the best of intentions.

Best Regards, Jeremy

[jchracer]

Joel,

There was 8 of us including Jay who spent a ton of time and our own money to dyno different engines and we came up with a plan that would help grow the class. We voted unanimously to submit our proposal to the CRB who decided not to adopt it. The 8 of us were all directly involved in the class and we had only the best of intentions.

Best Regards, Jeremy

I'm sure that everyone involved had good intentions. Like I said, I had a problem with the clumsy implementation. My guess is that was due to the internal politics and archaic processes within SCCA.

Fortunately or unfortunately, most actions in life are judged by results not intentions....

[Thomas Copeland]

More power to you if you can help build that series.

If you don't wish to race in FA with SCCA, nor race anywhere East of the Mississippi River what option do you have?

That's a huge decline in options and participation from the class heyday.

The first real series started on the West Coast with the F1000 ProSeries in 2010. We ran that series piggyback on SCCA events. We had our own podium and gave out our own trophies. Just the same way the NorthAm F1000 got started. That was put together by Nicholas Belling and I after we became Firman Dealers for the West Coast market. We also had local constructors Stohr and Phoenix and Rilltech with their Speads that helped us put up some respectable numbers for the first couple of years which eventually allowed us take the series national with the USF1000 Championship.

Many of the guys that made all that possible have also moved on. Retired, worn down by SCCA politics or just plain getting old or getting other interests. I don't really know if there are enough numbers now on the West Coast to put something like that together, and would they come out and race?

That's not say it can't happen. You can run it piggyback on the SCCA like we did. Run with the FA group and do you own thing and just ignore FA. Run your own F1000 championship within the group and give out your own trophies separate of the SCCA podium. That's how we did it. All they have to do is get organised. I might be down for that if there was any interest at all.

How many cars are there on the West now? Is there any desire among them to run in their own championship within the SCCA? That's how you get it all started. I'll be great to see the F1000 Pro Series make a comeback. Jose and I have already talked about it. But we are only 2. We need others.

[reidhazelton]

Just to correct the record, Reid and I have different theories as to the why. I said it was my theory, no record to correct. Whether or not they "spoke" about it on any conference calls is irrelevant. They all know they can't kill that class.

FA being a dumping ground for years doesn't dismiss my theory, it actually supports the fact that they keep dumping all types of high-performance cars in that class to ensure their premier-level class never dies.

In 2019 they had 20 Majors where FA couldn't fill a podium.

They had 8 Majors where one guy shows up with a FA.

They had 7 Majors without a single FA entry.

If this was only about participation, they would have killed FA and FB both.

Well, except I was there. I was on every conference call. My version of events are not theory, they are fact. SCCA/FSRAC does not care any more about FA than it does FB, or any other class. Again, I was there. You, were not.

If they killed FA and FB, where would SCCA place those cars? I'm sure you see why that was not an option. There was discussion of slowing FA down since the 016s are overdogs, but it was concluded that had about a good a chance at happening as turbos being allowed in FV. No one wants to go slower. The same logic was applied to FB merging into FC - the FB community did not want to go slower.

Be well my man -

[Daryl DeArman]

Well, except I was there. I was on every conference call. My version of events are not theory, they are fact.

Your version of events can be true and I can still have my theory that the SCCA will never allow FA to be killed. It's irrelevant whether you all spoke about it or not

SCCA/FSRAC does not care any more about FA than it does FB, or any other class.

Perhaps the FSRAC does not. I'd suggest that SCCA cares more about SM and SRF than they do about a myriad of other classes, as they should.

If they killed FA and FB, where would SCCA place those cars?

The same place they put the Shelby Can-Am, F440 and SpecRacer Renault's. . . out to pasture

Be well my man -

You as well!

[eboucher]

Really interesting to read all the opinions and views here. Unfortunately it’s pretty much cemented my thoughts that investing in an F1000 at this point in time would basically be flushing money down the toilet. Too many missteps over the last several years have apparently all but killed the class, and the move into FA is the final step. Had the CRB taken steps to limit the power in the class as Jay and others suggest it would be in a much different position today and I’d be potentially making an offer on the two Phoenix cars and trailer package sitting in Pahrump. Run one myself and rent the other out to help cover costs.

Forgive me if I’m mis-stating something here, but doesn’t P2 run 1000cc bike engines? If that’s the case why has that class been relatively successful while F1000 died on the vine? Is it simply a matter of guys wanting the extra protection and safety of fenders or something else? Just curious.

Thanks all
Eric

[Farrout48]

Forgive me if I’m mis-stating something here, but doesn’t P2 run 1000cc bike engines? If that’s the case why has that class been relatively successful while F1000 died on the vine?

P2 does run 1000cc bike engines. Can be stock or modified and the weight/restrictors change accordingly. But P2 also allows Busa and many other engine combinations with weight/restrictors to normalize each car's performance to a standard that equates to less performance than P1. Take a look at the P2 engine tables and the spec line cars to see the total scope. IMHO the P2 scope is large enough to negate direct comparison to the F1000 engine discussion.

[JakeL]

Jose and I have already talked about it. But we are only 2. We need others.

Get your cars to Colorado! You, Jose x2, me, Jeff Keacher with Gary's old Phoenix, Arax, a few Speads, Mike Holland at Hallett, there's critical mass to have some cars to zoom around and play with one of these days

-Jake

[johndl]

P2 does run 1000cc bike engines. Can be stock or modified and the weight/restrictors change accordingly. But P2 also allows Busa and many other engine combinations with weight/restrictors to normalize each car's performance to a standard that equates to less performance than P1. Take a look at the P2 engine tables and the spec line cars to see the total scope. IMHO the P2 scope is large enough to negate direct comparison to the F1000 engine discussion.

If the engine rules are working for P2, would this not work for F1000? Seems a simple solution. Just a thought.

[Daryl DeArman]

P2 does run 1000cc bike engines. Can be stock or modified and the weight/restrictors change accordingly. But P2 also allows Busa and many other engine combinations. . .

Given the current FA spec line rules for the former FB cars you could run a de-stroked 'Busa if you wished. No weight or restrictor adjustments currently required.