David, what you just described is a formula for success!!!
You have new suppliers stepping in, new chassis' out there, some
"competition", imagine that???
There isn't any back door deals on engines. Try and call up American
Honda and order 100 CBR600rr engines, they'll give you the phone number of
one of their dealers and maybe the dealer will kick in a couple of bucks.
Cranks??? I have never seen a crank come out of one these engines, unless
it was a defect from the factory.
If the motors are kept stock, I don't see how these could be any more
expensive then what you have, and I know they require tons less fiddling.
The statement I enjoyed the most was "how can we increase participation,
without changing anything". I think that echo's the dilema of the class.
CR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with Ed and believe that neither of us "missed the point."
I, too, wish for F500 to remain essentially with the same formulae as we
now
have. I can see how this (adding a 4-cycle bike motor to a class that
currently uses 2-cycle snowmobile motors) COULD unfold. Just suppose:
SCCA approves the "Yamagatcha XYZ600" for use in F500.
In the first season, the legacy F500's (the snowmobile folks) run off and
leave the bikers. Near the end of the season, f500.org and the comp board
emails light up whining about the significant performance delta. The Comp
Board responds with a 50# weight penalty for both 494 and 493 Rotax
powered
cars. "Quinton Gotrocks" of "Rock On" racing decides to make a few bucks
and buys 36 (that's 3 dozen) XYZ600's and an appropriate set of "spare
parts" (truck loads of cranks, pistons, rods, cams, valves, heads, etc.)
and
begins to build engines that sell considerably higher (he has a right to
make a fair profit) than the crate motors (motors directly from
Yamagatcha).
The crate motor sells for (let's say) $3800 (machining of the PTO taper
extra) and the "motor" sells for (again, let's speculate) $5200. (NOTE:
Quinton got a volume discount on his bulk purchase.)
With the new weight penalty, the crate motor cars are on a par with the
legacy F5's, one class having an advantage at some tracks and the other
the
rest of the tracks. Disparity is setting in. The legacy guys have a
disadvantage on long tracks and the bikers have a disadvantage on short
tracks (or visa versa, I don't care but, suffice to say, the performance
will be different and controversy will creep in causing more whining by
some
of us). Meanwhile, back at the races, the bike "motors" (those high-dollar
blue-print pieces) are cleaning clocks everywhere. It is becoming clear
that, if one wants to win at every track, one best contact QG and make
plans
to sink some dough into one of his motors.
For the next season, "Micro Go-Fast" is building a car specifically for
the
XYZ600. Although not built specifically for the legacy motors, MGF will
provide a kit (at extra cost) to accommodate any legacy motor. All you
have
to do to the new chassis' engine bay is (followed by a short list of
welding
and cutting). A good question here would be "why?" but, hey, we're trying
to open the class up to people who like bike motors in cars (F1000 is not
suitable for them but, the reason escapes me). The new chassis and engine
combination goes like stink and sells for just under $22,000 (of course,
fire system, gauges, wheels, tires, and prep are extra and your job). The
first season goes well. There are 4 Go-Fasts in the top ten qualifying at
this season's Runoffs(r) and 8 in the entire race group of which six
finish
the race, the best finish of the marque being 5th (remember, I'm making
this
up but, it is based upon factors and issues that have been with this class
since the 80's). Not bad for a marque in its first year of involvement in
the class.
The following years are cluttered with issues on how to tech the motor,
options on adaptors for the 38mm Mikuni's on the XYZ600, how to check
valve
lash in post race, policing the cam profile, how come rear tires wear out
so
much faster on the bike-motored cars, and the usual "thermostat"-type
issues.
I won't bore you with the rest of the story (it IS a story). Can you see
where this could possibly take us? Do we want our class to risk these
types
of possibilities? You won't do it with me.
There was some discussion a few years back (I believe) and, if memory
serves) the consensus of f500.org was that there was too much performance
disparity and conversion complexity in opening the class up to ANY 500cc
(+/- 10cc) snowmobile powerplant. In my opinion, THIS approach would
introduce the potential for FAR MORE performance disparity, complications,
re-written rules, and unwarranted cost than our previous discussion.
Sure, I am having fun here by making up stuff but, reread this little
piece
and change some of the facts. Switch the initial performance advantage,
for
example. The whining doesn't end but, the whiners are different. This is
NOT FACT-BASED but, it is based upon what could BECOME fact and also upon
what we all know IS fact.
Again, I am opposed to bike motors in THIS class. I am not opposed to
motorcycle powered cars. I just cannot afford them. I will NOT remain in
this class if bike motors are adopted. Personally I believe the SCCA would
oppose it on grounds that it is contrary to the intent of the class.
David Gill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Reinhardt"
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: [F500] Editorial: How did F1000 go wrong?
Ed, I think you missed the point....
Eric I agree, "if" there was to be a bike motored F500 type chassis, I
think it should be added to the F500's, and not replaced by it.
It seems odd how one particular manufacturer was talking up building a
new chassis F1000 car, while the rest of the planet was dead against it,
and then it went through.... Who's hands are in who's pockets!!!
CR
edward capullo wrote:
Eric - Excellent post!!! We must remain focused on how to make F500 "as
it
is" more popular or we might stand a chance of losing our "most bang for
the
buck" status. I too am a regular reader of Apex Speed.com and followed
the
F1000 right from its' original concept. When I saw Lee Stohr first say he
wasnt interested in building a F1000 car only to change his mind and to
make
preparations to build and sell one my first thought was there goes the
low
buck concept.
Ed Capullo
