remember there were a lot more 440's produced than the non rave 494's a two year run -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Sent: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:24 PM Subject: RE: [F500] What?! Discontinuing the 493?!
Art, all engine issues aside, the class is down on numbers, all the formula classes are down on numbers, just another nail in the coffin..... I'm not really sure if the "vast majority" is against it, I haven't seen any polls, just a few angry emails.... What bike classes does the SCCA have??? The DSR,CSR and new F1000 class??? CR Art <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Chris, I know your preference for bike engines. You've made that clear many times in the past. But, the vast majority of F500 respondents have rejected that direction. Just because we have temporarily lost the ability of purchasing a complete new engine does not affect the ability of this class to succeed. We will still be able to get the parts to rebuild the engines already out there as we have done with the Kawi and the 494. We've faced this problem before and it's solution is not a bike engine. There are still many engine choices to add to the GCR approved list if the SCCA has learned anything from this experience. The world has not ended. I think SCCA has enough bike engined classes and doesn't need another one. I think you should concentrate on building your car for F1000 as you've planned and leave us to our own devices and solutions. Your amusing(?) comments don't really help things a great deal :-). Art -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Reinhardt Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 5:56 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [F500] What?! Discontinuing the 493?! Art, I think that's problem with Rotax in general, or any purpose built engine. How new cars have been built in the last 10 years? Mike's count is what 50, maybe 75? That times four for all the production in these cars and you still only have 200 to 300 cars. Times that by two for spare motors and you have a possible production run of 600 engines? That's maybe 60 motors a year, that doesn't justify tooling. My argument has always been bike motors. I don't have the numbers in front of me but Honda's for example production run of CBR600 bikes is like in the 100,000 or better world wide each year, plenty of spares around, parts are cheap. CR Art wrote: Jim, You got to be kidding! I can't believe the ridiculous statements in your post. This was purely a business decision by Bombardier, Tony had nothing to do with it nor could he prevent it. As far as SCCA is concerned, they did everything possible to prevent folks from upgrading to this engine by moving slowly to legalize it, adding weight when none was necessary, and moving like a snail on handling other issues with this engine. All this lack of and slow movement caused the manufacturer of this engine to feel there was absolutely no market in SCCA F5 or F Mod. Tony could do nothing to hide this fact. How many engines were purchased by the F500 group, how much support was given, since the engine was legalized? Very, very little. Do you really expect a multinational, billion dollar corporation to be swayed to keep their production line going for a handful of engines sold over the last two years? As far as the promise of production goes, Rotax believed that they would produce this engine until 2008 and maybe longer if the need was there. So they were a year short in their projection. As Tony stated, the market for 500s went away and even we did not purchase the engines in projected numbers to keep the production line running profitably. And Jim, unless you've forgotten, a company makes plans based upon making money. Rotax was sold a few years ago and the new owners(Bombardier) cut back tremendously on everything from personnel to non-profitable engines. They only focused on engines that were in demand. Unfortunately, the 493 was not one of them. You want to rectify this decision? To late Jim. We, as a group, had our chance to buy engines but we didn't for various reasons. Maybe the 494 was just too good :-).We didn't do much in the way of support. Tony made some very generous offers over the last few years to help people buy those engines and nobody responded. Instead of whining about Tony not doing this or that, you should be glad that Tony was involved at all. Had he not been, you'd still be powered by that boat anchor you had in your car. Instead of crying to Stan for help, which he can't give BTW, maybe you and SCCA should be looking at why this happened in the first place and learn for the next time we try to get a engine legalized. We can do without all the BS that occurred concerning this engine in the last three years. Bring Rotax, SCCA, and F500 drivers together to discuss this decision? Won't happen Jim. SCCA has ignored Tony in the past. The F500 driver's have not responded by buying engines. And Rotax needs to make engines that people want. There is no basis for compatibility here. You want Rotax to confer with "....the F500 group BEFORE making their decision." I find that laughable. Get real Jim. Tony has asked Rotax to produce engines for us before the line is shut down for good. They agreed, although they certainly didn't have to do that. Will anyone respond by buying engines before they are gone? Probably not as history tell us, but the jury is still out. And Jim, Tony didn't just "....come out with this announcement". He is giving the list a heads up on what is occurring in the marketplace. I think you owe Tony an apology by trying to imply some negative reason he posted this information, but I won't hold my breath waiting for that and I don't think Tony will either. Art -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 8:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [email protected] Subject: [F500] What?! Discontinuing the 493?! Tony, We finally get to the point after TWO years of work, where the minimum weight is finally closer by 25 lbs, a good pipe is finally here, the clutching for the 493 is about at its optimum and people are beginning to look at a 493 for their car and you come out with this announcement. This is MOST premature to say the very least in a very charitable way. Where is the promise that was made back at the beginning that this would be in production for several more years??!! Did the Rotax executives only listen to you or did they do due diligence and talk with the F500 group BEFORE making their decision. I think the answer is obvious. As word spreads thru SCCA officials (who, I suspect, were not consulted either), Rotax's name will become MUD, something I did NOT want to see happen. This unilateral decision could hurt the F500 class within SCCA. I implore you, Tony, to bring together the Rotax decision maker(s), the SCCA officials and F500 drivers for a discussion on what can be done to rectify this bad situation. Stan, any help here? Jim --------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. --------------------------------- Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. ________________________________________________________________________ Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection. ________________________________ 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! ***
