Chuck would have been near the top, but without a co driver I don't think he could win. The game has changed ..
GaryK wrote: > In my car with new tires, or the same tires I ran, maybe. If we put > old tires on it, I don't think so. New tires make a BIG difference, > especially on asphalt or slippery surfaces. > > IMHO, an F440 is still competitive. If Chuck would have been at this > years Nationals, he would have been way up at the top. > > Gary > > > At 11:54 AM 10/3/2006, you wrote: > >> It ain't me building a 440, but I can guarantee that you'll be quite >> surprised .. perhaps even shocked. And it will be fast. As for myself I >> have better things to do than start an engine program with some old worn >> out parts from 1970. Just be patient and you'll see who it is. >> >> BTW, you cannot even tune a car with dead tires, as Jim has attested to. >> Your reference to you trophying Blumenthal's and Kramer's cars are not >> at all fair. It's the best combo of drivers and their cars that win. If >> you show up for Nats without having the the best setup you can you >> cannot expect to trophy. >> >> Jan Schmidt wrote: >> >> >John, >> >I am sure I will be flamed for this, but here it goes..... >> >If I had brand spanking new tires to run Nats with, I might have >> >improved 5, or 6 places in the final results. Not bad for plunking down >> >$600. However, If say, I had Blumenthals car or Kramars car to drive at >> >Nationals (assuming I had a chance to run it in the warmup event), I >> bet >> >I could have nipped the last trophy spot, or at least real close to it. >> >My point is...440s have a distinct disadvantage against the >> competition. >> >If I am wrong, then why dont you see a dozen or more 440's running at >> >Nats. It certainly wouldnt be parts availability, or costs. I bought a >> >Kawasaki engine off ebay that runs for $150. Try doing that with a 494, >> >let alone a 493. So, who is the brave soul that is building this killer >> >Kawi car, anyways? >> >Bill Schmidt ...tired of being the underdog. >> > >> > >> > >> >>>>John Whitling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/03/06 10:32 AM >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >YOU GUYS ARE CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No >> >way I'm putting 100 lbs of lead in my car for a bunch of lazy Vee >> >drivers. Our cars are the GCR legal cars. Go bastardize the the Vees >> >some more. >> > >> >BTW, at least all one new solo car is being built for FMod that uases a >> >440 with a weight break so don't give me the story that a 440 isn't >> >competitive either. And Bill, you cannot expect to compete with old >> >tires. >> > >> >Jan Schmidt wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> >>I agree 100% with Jim on this one. It would cost about $50 for lead >> and >> >>a couple of bolts. Make the 494's and 493's both weigh 900lbs and >> leave >> >>everyone else alone (vees and f440s). There was only 1 F440 in the >> >>trophies this year and that driver weighs about 130 lbs (lots of >> >> >> >> >> >ballast >> > >> > >> >>in that car). That f440 was the cleanest, most well built F440 I have >> >>seen in 3 years of playing with these cars. >> >>Bill Schmidt 88 Red Devil Kawi >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/03/06 7:26 AM >>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>Bobby, >> >>As one of the writers of the rules that established F Mod as a budget >> >>class, we based this class on BOTH the F440/500's AND the SV's while >> >> >> >> >> >the >> > >> > >> >>FV's were the actual afterthought as they were deemed noncompetitive. >> >>Most of our time was spent writing the SV part of the rules as we just >> >>said that the F440/500's had to be GCR legal. Later, we found out >> that >> >>there was a loophole in that the lighter Solo legal roll bar and >> >> >> >> >> >chassis >> > >> > >> >>stucture could also be used - examples of this are the Dave Phaneuf >> and >> >>Art Trier cars. Our prime directive was and is the equity in >> HP/weight >> >>ratio of 10 lbs per HP between the F440/500's and the SV. This >> >> >> >> >> >resulted >> > >> > >> >>in the SV engine allowances that would provide an output of roughly >> 100 >> >>HP for their 1,000 lb minimum weight. The AMW was the 500cc motor >> back >> >>then and produced with a good pipe about 80 hp, so 800 lbs was a good >> >>minimum weight. >> >>Now the 494 with a good pipe produces around 90 hp so do we raise the >> >>F500 weight up to 900 lbs to be true to the prime directive of 10 lbs >> >>per HP? I propose that weight changes be used to bring equity back >> >>between the SV's and the F440/500's because it is the cheapest method >> >> >> >> >> >of >> > >> > >> >>doing this and F Mod IS a budget class. >> >> >> >>Jim >> >>Been messing with these cars since 1982 >> >> >> >> >> > >> >[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type text/x-vcard which had a >> >name of jwhit.vcf] >> >> [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type text/x-vcard which had a >> name of jwhit.vcf] [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type text/x-vcard which had a name of jwhit.vcf] ________________________________ FormulaCar Magazine - A Proud Supporter of Formula 500 The Official Publication of Junior Formula Car Racing Subscribe Today! www.formulacarmag.com or 519-624-2003 _________________________________ _______________________________________________ F500 mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change options please visit: http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500 *** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
