What would you say to a bike engine option in both F1600 and F2000? Maybe the engines would be a spec packages, very tightly controlled. The goal would be to increase participation in the 2 classes with a new car package at a much lower cost than new F1600 or F2000. Existing cars could take advantage of the new power plant options if desired.Originally Posted by LenFC11
What I am exploring is if we can enhance what we have but not diminish what exists now. Maybe that is unobtainable.
Mike.
I ride bikes as well. I agree a screaming high rpm engine is glorious!!
I do believe F4 is more a rung in the ladder on the road to no where. I feel FF FC F1000 and the like are more long term homes for us old guys who want a place to play
“Back in the glory days”when there was only a few classes to choose from all found a home. I don’t believe F1000 attracted anyone who had no interest in racing then somehow discovered F1000 and thought hmmm I’m in..
The number of people who are interested in open wheel racing is limited. We all know this. Nothing earth shattering here. Those who are interested will pick am existing class. More classes only dilutes the pool
The key to growth is reducing costs and limited classes.
Asking those that are currently participating how to increase participation is not going to get you much useful information as you are already involved
Find out why long and short term competitors stopped coming. Listen to what they say as they like me probably are the low hanging fruit. I was very involved for just about 20 years. Did everything I could to stay in. Heck I even stored, prepped and brought other cars to the track to help with my own costs. I did this out of my home shop used a pickup with a small stacker trailer. Competed well in the early days of F2000 and F1600. Had a blast and want more then anything to join the circus again
I like many can’t spend 5 days at the track. Race weekends need to be condensed. 2-3 days max including commuting. Costs need to be contained.
That’s the most simple way to grow participation. How that happens is a whole different question
Cheers
Len
Porsche River Oaks. Houston
I have no issue at all with other engines in existing classes. I think there should be many options available. Easy enough to equalize with mapping and restricters. I don’t understand why anyone is against this. Bring in bike engines, Honda’s, Nissan’s.. whatever. So long as they can be equalized I think it would be helpful for both FF and FC
Cheers
Len
Porsche River Oaks. Houston
As I'm sure you remember, the class was proposed as a Regional level class subject to the then existing participation rules to be eligible to move up to National eligible. It got caught up in several other classes being moved to National status prematurely. I think it could have achieved wider acceptance had it remained at the Regional level for several years. Alas, we'll never know.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
I remember quite well and was surprised when the SCCA gave us what I thought at the time was a gift. Yet another example of the moving target of participation requirements. Guaranteed it will change next year.
Too late for a do-over?
Mike Beauchamp
RF95 Prototype 2
Get your FIA rain lights here:
www.gyrodynamics.net/product/cartek-fia-rain-light/
Probably. Too many genies would need to be put back in the bottle.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
It's not different - and that is the point. Move to a new car with the same problems? Thanks, no.
Here's a sold gxr asking $5250 for what appears to be a stock motor. Everyone seems to have a spare.
https://www.apexspeed.com/forums/sho...XR-1000-Engine
I seem to recall reading about many issues with ECUs in newer bike motors so earlier motors and late motors are not interchangeable. You have to choose a manufacturer and stick with it.
The savings just don't seem to add up. And from what I gather, you just need to keep developing the car to keep pace.
This is true of any form of motorsport in the entire world.
Van Diemen RF99 FC
Gentlemen - Focus
Go back to post 311. Print it out and put it on your wall.
Look at it every morning.
Do everything you can to get more people out to race.
If Formula First and Formula 1000 and F600 were the answer, they would have succeeded.
Shoulda, woulda, coulda is not going to put cars on the track in 2025.
Sorry to be so grumpy the day before Thanksgiving.
Start a committee, to look at the long term future for FF and FC, but don't design a new kitchen while the house is on fire.
ChrisZ
bravo.....
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
True, but the extent, cost, etc. seemed to be large rather than just refinements we currently find in FF and FC. Maybe we need to stop and just race.
And that brings up an old issue. Wizzy stuff. This is amateur racing. Some people want to spend lots of time and money developing cars and some people would rather just race. Most of us are on razor thin budgets.
Remember when everyone complained about Pintos being parked? If people can't be competitive they won't show up.
Are we going to do that again? Is the problem here really the engine? Are we going to split the class yet again?
No wonder Spec classes are growing.
In this conversation.... We have some promoting cutting cost and common engine options while others suggesting a change to bike motors and others reviving why FB should have been successful. Geez.
I'm reading this thread and the message seems to be we all need to spend money on our cars (new engines) to improve attendance. BS.
We all need to run Majors/SuperTours, etc. to keep the classes alive. What many of us are hearing is "you need to go to these races so I can go to the runoffs." More BS.
I for one have no intention of going to the runoffs. It's simply not in the budget. That's my reality.
Yes, racing is expensive. And every time you say that you lose someone.
No wonder were not getting anywhere.
FV did start a COMMITTEE.. in 2006 (Thanks, Steve Oseth). And we worked HARD to address issues in the class and come up with solutions. About 8 of us spent untold hours discussing, defining, and trying to find answers to big issues - parts supply, 'Technological BREAKTHROUGHS', etc... and came up with what I think were GOOD SOLUTIONS. SCCA simply BLEW US OFF with virtually EVERY suggestion we offered to help the class. Finally, SCCA just 'fired' "our Committee" and implemented their own. Then got a couple things passed that THEY seemed to want, then fired their OWN COMMITTEE to keep anything else from improving the situation. Now.. they have impaired the entire class to an extent that boggles the mind. I guess we now understand the WHY's of the Committee exits.
Hard to see into the future to come up with a plan to SAVE US under these circumstances -- and creating your own committee has proven to NOT BE THE ANSWER - but don't let that keep you from trying. BSpec apparently did it .. were MAZDA PARTS involved in that class?
Steve, FV80
Steve, FV80
Racing since '73 - FV since '77
Steve when you say SCCA blew you off, was it the CRB, BOD or some other party within SCCA HQ?
Also did they give an explanation of why they didn't want to adopt your proposals? Or did they simply say "We're not doing that".
Steve,
I agree that you guys did a lot of work and I am not sure you did as bad a you think. A lot of what went on is today still burbling around. Some of the stuff done on manifolds slowed things down - kept it from really getting out of hand. Maybe the answer is not to sell it to the SCCA, but sell it to the drivers - and not on a Majors level.
It seems it has to come from the bottom and not from the top. That way we only have ourselves to blame....
ChrisZ
The basic issue was that we were NOT an "official" SCCA "Committee"... so NO RESPONSE was what we got most of the time. ( Commitee input was submitted by several members of the Committee through the Official CRB Channels). The Ad Hoc Committee INTAKE MANIFOLD was the perfect example. We worked for over a YEAR to get the details, mfr capability and specs into place to "fix" the FV manifold issue. It would have provided a BETTER manifold than anything currently available (BY measurable margin - based on Australian experience) for some $500 per copy. EVERY FV driver could have the (a) BEST possible manifold for a mere $500 .. instead of something in excess of $1000 each. All that work was IGNORED by SCCA in favor of a 'new set of specs' that essentially REQUIRED any driver that wanted to be competitive to go out and BUY a manifold built to a new spec. Estimated cost to the FV community was tough to compute, but it was easily twice as much as the proposal submitted by the Ad Hoc Committee.
sd
Steve, FV80
Racing since '73 - FV since '77
Some info:
http://formulavee.org/viewtopic.php?t=5834
Lots of info:
http://formulavee.org/viewforum.php?f=15
I agree that the engine issue needs to be solved for FC. The cost to put a Zetec in is prohibitive (> 20K) and upgrading a Pinto engine gets you an almost competitive engine that requires regular rebuilds. I helped years ago get the Zetec approved and maybe doing something similar will work again.
For the Zetec around 2005 I was on the Formula Sports Racer Advisory Committee. FSRAC. IIRC Dave Gomberg was on the comp board and supported our effort. With the Pinto in short supply and many Zetecs in the pro series, we formed an adhoc committee to write a set of rules to include Zetec in FC. The committee included maybe 5-7 racers and had close advising from QSRE. We had phone calls and jointly wrote a set of rules that strictly limited Zetec development. After a bunch of dyno testing by QSRE we did a track day at Summit Point (courtesy of SP) to do the final dial in of maps and restrictors.
This was very effective and we submitted a detailed rule set that was adopted by the SCCA. The equilibration was not perfect but it was close. In hind sight I think the dyno doesn’t lie and evaluating rotating mass and dyno numbers can get the engines very close.
Each class can form a class specific committee. For FC I would suggest 5-7 experienced racers and 1 or 2 engine builders kept closely in the loop. Maybe 2 Pinto cars, a couple Zetec owners, an MZR, FRP, and a few more. The comp board ala John LaRue needs to be kept in the loop.
I think we need to be less afraid and more proactive to add new engines, but make a real effort for them to be equal, and then re-evaluate the equilibration a year on.
For instance the current Pinto and Zetec engines are close, but the Zetec still has an advantage of a couple horsepower up top and a sizable advantage below 5800 RPM. The 20 lb weight advantage does not make up for this. I am happy to provide dyno sheets of good motors to make this case. An equal Pinto will bring out some of the older cars.
We have to identify a new engine. It should be compatible with the FRP series. Some possibilities were discussed above. A committee as described above in close consultation with Bob and the FRP series, QSRE, etc. should then write a set of rules with a high probability of passage by keeping the comp board informed.
Maybe look at the MZR and making it an equal engine widely available. A few other ideas to think about:
1) Do an engine closely related or based on the FE2. SCCA will always have FE2 engines available, so something closely based might be good.
2) We could consider increasing the overall current FC horsepower levels. Maybe remove the Zetec restrictor and add side drafts Webers to the Pinto. A 5-10 horsepower increase will largely eliminate the entire FE2 FC debacle. (FE2 will always be supported by SCCA. An FC class that is compatible with FE2 would benefit FC regarding class stability. It is like FE2 is spec formula class on 8’s and 10’s and FC is similar open development class a bit lighter and on 6’s and 8’s.)
3) The rules have to be written to contain ongoing operating/rebuild costs and initial installation costs. Minimize the use of expensive electronics and fuel injection. Limit development and blueprinting at least until all crate engines are gone.
If we actually do something like this, then we should have an ongoing thread in the FC section.
NewFormula C Cars
Is anyone building new FC cars?
To Larry:
Yes. Ray race cars can and will build a FC car. There is a complete one on the ground in Pennsylvania and a frame ready to build up in the UK. Raysport US will be happy to work with anyone interested. The current one is fitted with a Zetec but can handle either a MZR or a Sigma. I believe Spectrum will build a car if there is interest, and possibly Piper.
Rick- motors...I think the MZR is the motor of choice, set up like the FE2 rather than the current VD MZR and crate motors are still available. This is a thoroughly known motor that FRP has already equalized to the Zetec. An alternative is the Ford Sigma (used in the SRF Gen 3). FRP and Raysport US are investigating all of these options. There is also a 3 cylinder Ford Dragon motor being looked at; it is a turbo that can easily produce 165 + hp. However, while it is a current production motor, it has some issues for either FF or FC installation and operation.
Last edited by Bob Wright; 11.29.24 at 9:24 PM.
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
'Your' committee was never a formal part of the CRB. While your manufactured manifold was a technically perfect solution, it was not a good political solution. A CRB sub committee made up of FV competitors came up with the current rule solution which the majority of FV competitors favored. FV competitors again controlled their own fate....not SCCA.
Update: Challenge Cup attempted to source the manufactured manifold and it is no longer possible. So a long term source could have been seen as an issue.
Brian
At the risk of clouding the task at hand, it might be worth also looking at the gearbox since the LD200 is difficult to find and expensive if you do find one. It can cost more than the engine.
Mike Beauchamp
RF95 Prototype 2
Get your FIA rain lights here:
www.gyrodynamics.net/product/cartek-fia-rain-light/
Brian - Why wasn't it a good political solution?
I am trying avoid the same pitfalls for F600.
any technical solution has to have a political solution as it disrupts the status quo.
For Formula Vee, think of all the drivers who would loose their investment in existing manifolds.
Why would they vote for it?
When you bring a new engine into a class, you should shoot for performance just below the existing engine, with the ability to adjust up, not the other way around.
ChrisZ
Political in the sense that all the FV competitors did not view the manifold issue in the same way. The top line competitors were happy with their existing manifolds, money already sunk and offering a possible competitive advantage. Competitors working their way up the ladder wanted a less expensive alternative. The average/majority FV competitors had very little interest in the subject.
The fabricated manifold was also represent some administrative issues for the CRB/SCCA.
Brian
Besides the manufactures Bob mentioned it also sounds like Steve is itching to build a Citation with an MZR engine.
This would be a very interesting project
Cheers
Len
Porsche River Oaks. Houston
Aw man so cool I want that.
Mike B- Elite in the UK is supplying LD200s at a reasonable price. They are not quite up to Hewland quality standards (and price!) but quite adequate. I had one blueprinted by Scotty Young and he indicated it would be fine for FF and FC.
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
I cannot stress this enough! This is exactly what happened to our class (F500/F600). It has only been in the last couple years that the performance between the 2 strokes and the 4 strokes has gotten as close as it has been in over a decade. In the meantime we lost scores of obsoleted 494 cars that have never returned.
The cruel irony is that now that we've finally gotten the performance close the SCCA has chosen to this year to drop the hammer on us..of course never admitting their culpability in causing the problem in the first place.
For next year we're pushing a 494 only series to be run concurrently at Majors with its own points and hopefully contingencies - provided internally by the F600 community. We'll see if we can bring out some folks currently sitting on the sidelines.
Last edited by teamfun; 11.29.24 at 10:26 PM.
This sounds familiar
This situation is very close to the story of F2000 when the cars were originally allowed to run in the old FC class with the water cooled FSVs. The F2000 never had a chance of beating those cars but they increased the numbers to the point that the original FC cars were able to continue as a class. Eventually the old FSV were bumped up to FA.
For many years it would have been legal to run an air cooled FSV in FC. Fortunately no one ever did and the option was dropped after several years. My experience with the air-cooled FSV led me to believe that the air-cooled Citation FSV would have smoked my Citation F2000.
At the first test at Phoenix 1 mile oval tract for the then new water cooled FSV we spent a day testing the new cars. I had a car at the test and Lola had cars there as well. I brought my air cooled FAV as well as my water cooled car. After a day of testing, both my car and the Lola cars were done by 3:00 PM. We still hade track time so I unloaded the air cooled Zink Z14 from the trailer. Tom Bagley took the car out and turned a lap that was a full second faster than the my Citation water cooled car had done or the Lola water cooled car had done. We were turning laps that would have put the Lola and the Citation in the top 20 cars for the USAC Indy car race that year.
Sorry for the brief OT, but…
Steve, if never seeing this, you’ll sure want to:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7EqU2o...hhbmdlZA%3D%3D
I saw your black Z14 at the Glen in ‘76 (and elsewhere) with MacInnes driving it, as you did at the Runoffs.
Gigliotti still describes his front-row start at the Glen as his first major breakthrough.
Once we think we’ve mastered something, it’s over
https://ericwunrow.photoshelter.com/index
My testing post was about the test session prior to that race.
Mounting MZR
Wasn't sure where to ask this question and didn't think it was worth starting a thread over. Has an MZR been mated to the Van Diemen late model bell housing? It would require an adapter plate. Is anyone producing an adapter plate? If so, who?
We must be careful about overly positive selective memories. The older powerplants had very short duty cycles. A pinto in year 2000 was probably good for 20 hours. All the front runners qualified for the Runoffs in early summer and then sent their engines off to be refreshed. I remember FF guys changing engines on saturday night or at the least lapping valves. Serious FC teams came to the Runoffs with spare engines and manpower to change them.
The air-cooled SV were not exactly robust, and the water-cooled VWs were not a whole lot better while being expensive. We took it as normal to have what today would be considered short engine duty cycles.
With all the curmudgeon complaining set aside the Honda and the Zetec probably extended the class life 15 years.
The issue of class entry probably will not be repaired by injecting new engines into the equation. I have an inventory of FC cars I did about 10 years ago. There are enough cars out there. If 60 cars would just enter 3 races a year it would not be an issue. If 22 cars would just enter 2 double weekends a year, there would be no issue.
I have photos of 38 zetecs on the grid at WGI. The cars are out there. They just are not racing.
As always YMMV.
I agree with all that, PF!
I think the only thing the Honda did for FF was to kick suppliers in the pants and make sure Kent parts remain available, while also pissing off a lot of FF participants who didn't feel the conversion was within their budget but also felt that their cars became obsolete against the F.I. Honda.
Garey Guzman
FF #4 (Former Cal Club member, current Atlanta Region member)
https://redroadracing.com/ (includes Zink and Citation Registry)
https://www.thekentlives.com/ (includes information on the FF Kent engine, chassis and history)
CGOffRoad- There is a simple adapter plate mating the MZR to a VD bell housing made by Elite Engines. The rest of the kit (pan, oil pump, intake etc) was developed for the USF2000 VD and would have to be sourced through Elite. I think an alternative could be the FE2 MZR version, but there would need to be some adaptation. As I mentioned above- the motor is matched to the Zetec by FRP
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
What would happen if I showed up with a MZR in the back of a Citation?
Well...FRP would treat it the same way we are treating a Sigma motor in the back of a Ray FF. It runs as a ghost until we can evaluate the performance before we write it into the rules. The MZR is illegal in SCCA club FC until the CRB allows it.
In the case of a MZR in any F2000 car other than the club legal USF2000 configuration, we would hope we would have some advance warning it was being done. We already have a very good idea of the HP and torque curves of the MZR and have developed both maps (T2 and PE3) and restrictors that have favorable performance comparisons to the zetec.
As I've said multiple times before, I personally and by extension FRP are very much in favor of more modern, readily available, cost-effective motors for both FF and FC. We are actively pursuing these behind the scene.
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
BeerBudget and team, I'm writing this to clear the air on the "you need to go to these races so I can go to the runoffs." comment.
I just want you to know the following: I'm the one talking about the automatic inclusion of FF in the Runoffs and the one who set up the Thursday Zoom meetings and the Formula F/1600 USA Facebook page. But much more significantly I'm working hard to increase participation in Majors so that FF stays relevant in the eyes of the SCCA. In my opinion, given the way I believe they think, I'm guessing we have to stay automatically invited to the Runoffs to stay relevant to them (the SCCA). Said a different way - it'll be harder for them to kill a healthy class, and having an automatic invite is the most significant sign of healthy. And for those not up on the latest, the class has to average 5.0 entries in each Major plus the Runoffs over a two year average to get the automatic invite.
Just so you know, I'm not doing this because I want to go to the Runoffs. In fact, I might be happier if there was no such thing as the Runoffs since the schedule is silly IMO. However 2024 was our first Runoffs since my son wanted to experience it and it was close to home. And we'll likely go next year since it's a short drive for us. But the previous seven years of FF racing we didn't go since the vacation time to travel plus the time at the event was too much. When it's not at RA in 2026 we won't be there.
In conclusion, I'm pushing this hard so we have somewhere to race in the future, Runoffs bound or not.
Thanks,
Tony Stefanelli
Ld200
I learned last week that what was once Staff's gearbox's makes an exact LD200 copy with Hewland internals for around $6500. So basically they are just casting the cases and installing Hewland parts.
Thanks,
Tony Stefanelli
IIRC that would be Elite in the UK. See my post above....I have 6 of them on order for Ray FFs
----------
In memory of Joe Stimola and Glenn Phillips
There are currently 14 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 14 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
