F600 Proposal

The F600 proposal for allowing 600cc sport bike engines into the F500 class for SCCA road racing (and Solo) is being voted on soon.

"Please tell eveyone who is a SCCA member to send in their email of support for this proposal to www.crbscca.com ASAP. We need all the votes right now as they are about to decide our fate."

My letter -

Dear SEB / CRB,

I support any and all efforts to allow the current F500 / FM cars to convert to 600cc motorcycle engines. The cars become much more attractive from both a user and a spectator point of view. Given the knowledge base that has been developed through Formula SAE, and the declining availability of 2 stroke CVT drivetrains used in modern powersports vehicles, the F600 concept represents the future of this type of car. For that reason, I hope that not only are these cars allowed, but they are configured in such a way that they are competitive with the current 2-stroke cars.

In reply to Per Schroeder:

Why? What is the real issue here. The few guys I know that own and compete in their F500's don't like the idea. Of course they are not quite so desperate for engines and parts as the FF guys. At least not yet.

TheWake wrote: In reply to Per Schroeder: Why? What is the real issue here. The few guys I know that own and compete in their F500's don't like the idea. Of course they are not quite so desperate for engines and parts as the FF guys. At least not yet.

The F500 guys around here love it.

I think I illustrated the "Why" in my letter. 2 strokes and CVT's are old technology that is in reduced supply, is annoying to listen to, is finicky and unreliable, etc. Bike engines OTOH are at the forefront of technology, have a 20 year precedent of performing well in very similar cars, have an infrastructure to support the conversion, etc.

The MacMohans (sp?) have been running a conversion for 2 years. Whereas their old drivetrain required a rebuild every 1-2 races, constant berkeleying around with the carb, belt drive, etc., Their CBR 600 has not even gotten it's first oil change since the conversion was completed.

What was the donor for a 500cc 2 stroke CVT setup? 4-wheeler?

600cc's of 4-stroke are going to burn a lot cleaner than your average 500cc 2-stroke, I would think. That alone seems like a reason to consider a change.

TheWake wrote: In reply to Per Schroeder: Why? What is the real issue here. The few guys I know that own and compete in their F500's don't like the idea. Of course they are not quite so desperate for engines and parts as the FF guys. At least not yet.

Seems like the FF guys got some help with the retro-Fit package, didn't they?

Now, the F500 competitors have a similar offer on the table.

I understand this is what the sidecar people use now in Europe. The performance is simply unbelievable.

pres589 wrote: What was the donor for a 500cc 2 stroke CVT setup? 4-wheeler? 600cc's of 4-stroke are going to burn a lot cleaner than your average 500cc 2-stroke, I would think. That alone seems like a reason to consider a change.

Snowmobiles.

I have a friend who races an F500 and I talked to him about this subject at the auto-x this past Sunday.

His suggestion makes more sense to me: Simply make it a new class.

My guess is that popularity would then be a regional thing. In the Northeast and midwest, where snowmobiles are popular and parts/service is easy to find, F500 will stay 2-stroke. In the south, where few have ever seen a snowmobile in person, F600 would be more popular.

Keeping them seperate will also eliminate the need to 'equalize' the two engines, thus negating the MC user having to keep track of the restrictor plate of the week.

Don't knock the 2-stroke set-up until you've tried it. It's amazingly quick. The engines are really simple. My friend says maintenance is crazy-simple and rebuilds are stupid-cheap (like about $300 every other season).

As a prospective wannabe/newcomer to F500 I've been watching this subject for the past year or so with great interest. I do see some merit to the MC set-up. For one, the sound will make you wet yourself. It's incredible. Search for it on youtube. That said, the utter simplicity of the 2-stroke/CVT set-up is hard to ignore.

Ian F wrote: That said, the utter simplicity of the 2-stroke/CVT set-up is hard to ignore.

And so is the noise.

It's as appealing as feral cats mating outside your bedroom window. You know it's just "part of the deal", but you want it to happen as far away as possible.

$.02, coming from one who likes cats.

Ian F wrote: I have a friend who races an F500 and I talked to him about this subject at the auto-x this past Sunday. His suggestion makes more sense to me: Simply make it a new class. My guess is that popularity would then be a regional thing. In the Northeast and midwest, where snowmobiles are popular and parts/service is easy to find, F500 will stay 2-stroke. In the south, where few have ever seen a snowmobile in person, F600 would be more popular. Keeping them seperate will also eliminate the need to 'equalize' the two engines, thus negating the MC user having to keep track of the restrictor plate of the week.

There's your answer.

pres589 wrote: His suggestion makes more sense to me: Simply make it a new class.

NO- The last thing SCCA Club Racing is more classes. (especially ones with the SAME chassis SAME everything, only a different engine, that will perform the SAME as the 2 stroke)

SCCA needs to take a look at the big picture, and learn how to combine classes and use weight and engine restrictions to make cars equal. This will make it easier for fans because they'll be more cars in each class, and watching will be easier there'll be less classes to keep up with. Drivers would have a easier time picking a class to race in because they wont have 12 different classes their car can fit in.

on the F600 thing- I'm tottally against it, if the drivers want to go race go-karts, join WKA and get a shifter kart, they're faster than F500/600. All F500 is a go Kart-small tires, a very limited suspension, no shifting (sequential if they go to F600) engines are not really represented in the car market, and no engine manufacturer has interest. They also get in the way of the FV group because most of them can't drive and end up slowing everybody up and causing a clusterberkeley until the straightaway, which they rocket away, until the exit of T2.

Steven

StevenFV19 wrote: SCCA needs to take a look at the big picture, and learn how to combine classes and use weight and engine restrictions to make cars equal. This will make it easier for fans because they'll be more cars in each class, and watching will be easier there'll be less classes to keep up with. Drivers would have a easier time picking a class to race in because they wont have 12 different classes their car can fit in. Steven

Gee... aren't you just a barrel full of happiness...

Regardless of your pissiness, I had the same comment and his retort was that historically when the SCCA has tried this, it kills a class... but since that is apparently what you want, I can imagine you would approve...

The really funny part is listening to him complain about FV drivers who can't drive...

I have been following it pretty closely on this forum http://eformulacarnews.com/forum.php (F500 section)

I support it

F500 has been seeing declining numbers and declining interest. Most people respond to the class by observing that they dont want to mess with a 2-stroke OR tuning a CVT. The 600cc motor addresses that, making the class more attractive. The motors used in the class are no longer produced. Period. They are going through used supplies.

SCCA will NOT make a new class, they would rather cancel classes. Even the die hard F500 guys have to admit that their class is drying up (on a regional level especially, if the driver is serious they go directly to nats level competition) The class needs to evolve, not die. That said, balancing new and old is the best way forward for them. This is a win-win for the 2-stroke die hards as increased car counts provides them with more competitive venues.

You can say what you want about comparing the cars to karts, but they are FF speed for a fraction of the price. They have a lot of speed for a small amount of money. F500 is the best entry level formula car class in the SCCA, FV is another option, but is also more expensive (at least according to comparos I have seen)

As I said, I support the change and would be interested in competing in an F600 in the future (you know, when I graduate and get a good job)

I think it would be great if GRM did an article covering entry level formula car racing. I know the primary market is for production based and street legal, but I think it would be a good issue and draw interest to a struggling class (in F500's case) as well as interesting to cover FF, FV, and other classes and what it actually takes to get into them (at both the fun level and the competitive level).

Ian_F wrote:

StevenFV19 wrote: SCCA needs to take a look at the big picture, and learn how to combine classes and use weight and engine restrictions to make cars equal. This will make it easier for fans because they'll be more cars in each class, and watching will be easier there'll be less classes to keep up with. Drivers would have a easier time picking a class to race in because they wont have 12 different classes their car can fit in. Steven

Gee... aren't you just a barrel full of happiness... Regardless of your pissiness, I had the same comment and his retort was that historically when the SCCA has tried this, it kills a class... but since that is apparently what you want, I can imagine you would approve... The really funny part is listening to him complain about FV drivers who can't drive...

C'mon, Ian, you're talking common sense to a kid who knows everything. He's a prodigy who instructs at HPDE events!

Then again, Ian, the SCCA has to deal with entrenched member biases and the encroachment of reality. Doom and gloom was predicted when tube-frame cars were first allowed in the GT classes and (then) when those classes were "adjusted" in recognition of lower participation numbers. BUT, the GT classes still exist and are relatively healthy.

It hasn't been that long since the club finally recognized the dwindling numbers in the Prod classes and decided to introduce fwd tin-tops. Guess what? The entries have increased and we still have great competition.

The end result is that both your friend and StevenFV19 have some valid points. I just think both guys don't know enough to realize they don't know everything.

DILYSI Dave wrote:

TheWake wrote: In reply to Per Schroeder: Why? What is the real issue here. The few guys I know that own and compete in their F500's don't like the idea. Of course they are not quite so desperate for engines and parts as the FF guys. At least not yet.

The F500 guys around here love it. I think I illustrated the "Why" in my letter. 2 strokes and CVT's are old technology that is in reduced supply, is annoying to listen to, is finicky and unreliable, etc. Bike engines OTOH are at the forefront of technology, have a 20 year precedent of performing well in very similar cars, have an infrastructure to support the conversion, etc. The MacMohans (sp?) have been running a conversion for 2 years. Whereas their old drivetrain required a rebuild every 1-2 races, constant berkeleying around with the carb, belt drive, etc., Their CBR 600 has not even gotten it's first oil change since the conversion was completed.

Your post did not appear while I was writing, so I missed it. Anyway your points are valid, and the guys I know acknowledge at least the availability part. They are just not happy about the change. The bike engine with sequential gearbox will make the cars a whole new beast. They agree that eventually it will need to be done. They also see that it is essentially replacing F500 with the new 600cc class as the rules and new cars sort themselves out. I hope it works out for everyone.

I still have a couple of questions, have they looked into the big scooter engines and CVT's? Would that be a better match to the existing snowmobile engines and CVT's? I know everyone wants to go as fast as possible, so they want sport bike engines, but have they looked into it? I'm fairly sure that at least Honda/Yamaha/Suzuki each make a scooter in the 500-650 range with CVT's. Also what will need to be changed in the chassis designs to accommodate the new drive trains? Will the current set of cars need extensive rework/replacing to go to the 600cc bike motors?

Some have been converted with brackets and such. There is someone making a kit to do the conversion on one of the more popular chassis. I know that the MacMahans cut off their frame behind the roll hoop and played connect the dots with the remainder of the frame, the wheels, and the engine all sitting in their new respective homes. So the "right" approach is not yet defined.

My biggest issue with the scooter is that it retains the CVT. I know that some people swear by them, but from an outsider perspective they are unreliable, finicky, and are at least part of what makes the cars so annoying to listen to.

I fully support the addition of the 600cc engines. I've been planning to purchase an entry level open-wheel track toy to use mostly for auto-x. With the news of the F600 proposal, I'm even more excited about it.

oldsaw wrote: The end result is that both your friend and StevenFV19 have some valid points. I just think both guys don't know enough to realize they don't know everything

Yeah, I don't necessarily buy into the doomsday scenario either and would like to think the 2 engines could live together. I also believe that adding an F600 would increase the class numbers since the engine really does sound like sex on wheels vs. the dieing leaf-blower sound of an F500. I still believe there will be more of a regional difference in numbers with the F500 remaining popular in areas where the knowledge is better.

When discussing the new Honda engine for FF, he told an interesting story of one 3-car operation and how they are approaching that engine. Of course, their strategy will likely only work for one year and they are probably not the only one doing so. The results will be known at the run-offs.

My friend is obviously on the 2-stroke side of the fence. Personally, I admit to not knowing enough to really have a worthwhile opinion, but right now I also lean towards the 2-stroke since if (and hopefully when) I get a car I would be heavily relying on him for guidance. He jokes that the area F500 guys are the "poor class" and they all paddock together at races and help each other out. This is the sort of commaraderie I would enjoy vs. just showing up and racing (which I've done before in other situations and find rather boring).

My current experience is limited to a single (and somewhat hurried) auto-x run last w/e in a QRE car that didn't fit me at all. It was fun, though. From an auto-x point of view, we are unlikely to see many F600 cars since the CVT has a bit of an advantage in that situation.

Ian F wrote: From an auto-x point of view, we are unlikely to see many F600 cars since the CVT has a bit of an advantage in that situation.

I disagree. Even if the CVT has a theoretical advantage, reliability has to go to the bike drivetrain. I've been around this stuff for over a decade, and I'd guess that the finishes-to-starts ration of these cars is in the 80-90% range. They are constantly breaking something. And not just the low-buck POS cars. We have last years Nationals winning car in Atlanta Region. At SEDIV, it got one run each day. Then it broke. Both days. Different failures. The current drivetrains are time bombs. The bike motors, once past the teething pains, should be a "set it and forget it" solution.

I am for the proposal as well. It makes this class actually appealing to me. With the current setup I have no interest.

Coming from FSAE, I know the potential of the 600cc, and will strongly consider buying a car if this gets passed.

DILYSI Dave wrote: I disagree. Even if the CVT has a theoretical advantage, reliability has to go to the bike drivetrain. I've been around this stuff for over a decade, and I'd guess that the finishes-to-starts ration of these cars is in the 80-90% range. They are constantly breaking something. And not just the low-buck POS cars. We have last years Nationals winning car in Atlanta Region. At SEDIV, it got one run each day. Then it broke. Both days. Different failures. The current drivetrains are time bombs. The bike motors, once past the teething pains, should be a "set it and forget it" solution.

I haven't seen that here. One of our region directors runs a FMod and it rarely has problems. He's been running the car for almost 10 years and just recently blew the motor... although apparently it was due to user-error (leaning it out in search of more power). The other car running this year (the one I drove) is a relatively new build from QRE and hasn't had any issues this year so far. My friend brought his car on Sunday as well, but it's set up (geared) for road racing and it was mainly a test session for him as he investigated a wierd oiling issue that he couldn't duplicate while idling in his driveway

The MC engined BMod LeGrand, on the other hand, hasn't finished an event this season, IIRC. However, the owner - while disappointed - somewhat expected some teething issues with the car and assumes 2010 will be a developement year.

Oddly enough, you have the FM champion car in your region... we have the driver in ours... He co-drove the previously mentioned director's car last year and is running F125 this year (although the F125 is currently for sale).

I bought my E30 so it would basically be a "set-and-forget" auto-x car... and what happened on Sunday? It broke (how badly, I don't know yet). There are no guarantees when it comes to race cars. So I seriously doubt the MC drivetrain will really be any more reliable than the CVT set-up - it'll just find different ways to break. For one, there are many, many, many more parts to fail. If there is one area where the MC will have the advantage, it would be in heat management, since a MC engine is obviously designed to run in much higher ambient conditions than a snowmobile. That said, there are fixes to help that (my friend runs a pair of VW radiators to cool his car).

DILYSI Dave wrote: My biggest issue with the scooter is that it retains the CVT. I know that some people swear by them, but from an outsider perspective they are unreliable, finicky, and are at least part of what makes the cars so annoying to listen to.

In our regions races, I can't think of a single failure that has been due to the CVT. From my outsiders position they seem really reliable and adjustable. That may make them more work than the sequential transmissions from the motorcycle, but I don't see them being less reliable. Going to 4 stroke from 2 should fix the sound issue.

Ian_F wrote: Regardless of your pissiness, I had the same comment and his retort was that historically when the SCCA has tried this, it kills a class... but since that is apparently what you want, I can imagine you would approve...

Deleting a class is OK, because they can mesh 2 classes into 1 pretty easily (although the die-hard guys in the faster class will bitch about the new restricitons). I was looking at ITS vs ITA times the other day from the last MARRS race. More than half the ITA field is faster than the half the ITS guys. Solution? Combine classes, the weight of the ITS cars dwindle their performance so much that they do not have much advantage over the ITA cars. (I am assuming Prod classes can combine the same way pretty easily too)

Also, the Formula Enterpreise run the same times as FC. FC handles better, but FE has more power. Solution? combine the class and make FE a fast-out-of-the-box FC, and NO development can be done to the FE. This will raise entries in FC and SCCA will still make money with the sale of the FE.

Just .02 worth from a PDX instructor who knows everything.

Steven

Sounds like a situation similar to the motorcycle club racing back in the 70's and 80's transitioning from RD two strokes to the 600cc four strokes. As economical and sensible as it was to have a WERA class "Formula RD" it doesn't sound (and I admittedly have been on the WAY outside of this for years) like it ever really took off the way I thought it would or should. 600 Production racing, however, seems quite strong. Given the situation I don't see how you can argue against the adoption of F600.

Ian F wrote: I haven't seen that here. One of our region directors runs a FMod and it rarely has problems. He's been running the car for almost 10 years and just recently blew the motor... although apparently it was due to user-error (leaning it out in search of more power).

Hence the biggest attraction to the MC engine proposal. Most of them, Jay Novak of Novakar included, are running the GSXR 600 with the injection and engine management. So, no more jetting to try and make an engine designed for operation in a sub-freezing environment run right on a 90 degree day. Not to mention the variable of guys that premix fuel instead of using oil injection (more oil = leaner mixture).

As a past F-mod competitor I support the proposal to permit these engines AND other 500cc 2strokes. It seems the snowmobile industry thrives on building an engine for a couple years and then moving on. They have also been uninterested in supporting non-snowmobile uses of their engines. If the proposal would read "any 600cc 4stroke with gearbox (and needed restrictors) or any 500cc 2stroke CVT engine in totally stock configuration allowing stock style replacement parts but no modifications to the engine.