I have heard and appreciate all of the comments above and all will be considered by the board in determining the best overall solution. That said, here are some preliminary thoughts on these matters which are certainly open for further comments and discussion. Firstly, all drivers should be required to provide to the FCRA a list of all performance enhancing work or items installed on their cars prior to the first event. Horse power to weight is the biggest issue and clearly there are significant differences among cars in each class. As mentioned, we don't want to start ripping things off of our cars and don't want alienate others from entering the series because of modifications, but DO want to level the playing field as much as possible. Therefore I recommend setting a minimum weight, including driver and equipment, for each class as the 95 lb. guy should not have an advantage over the 225 lb guy. The minimum weight should be determined by the weight of a fully stock challenge car with a calculated adjustment for the allowed wing, splitter, steel brakes, and exhaust system, as well as an average driver weight of approximately 180 lbs. A threaded stud should be installed in the passenger area floor to receive ballast as necessary. Cars should be tech'd at the events as required throughout the weekend and the top finishers should be required to run across the scales immediately upon exiting the track after the race to insure the minimum weight has been met. I recommend having approx 2 gallons of fuel in the car during pre-tech so you don't wind up under the weight immediately after the race. At the first event, a portable dyno should be brought in to measure the horsepower/torque figures of each car and the appropriate weight penalty assigned to each car. Note: It is important to test all the cars on the same dyno as dynos vary from one to other. The motors will then be sealed with an FCRA stamped seal. At any time during the season, the FCRA can elect to retest any car, at its discretion, to ensure that the power figures have not changed for a particular car due to any new modifications outside the motor such as ECUs, throttle body modifications and other possible non-motor related upgrades that may be performed after the initial assessment. All participants should come prepared with the stud pre-mounted in there cars and enough ballast to accomplish the possible added weight assigned to them. Shocks, springs and bars should be free as there are too many problems with controlling this issue. Tires should be a series spec tire. We need to have the support and feedback from the series tire manufacturer for consistent SAFETY and performance baseline data at each event. Among other safety check requirements, driver equipment should be presented to the officials as required to insure it meets current standards. A driver test should be performed, in full race gear, to insure that the driver can exit the vehicle on his own in the required 15 second time frame. Window nets should be required for all driver side doors. These are just some of my thoughts. There are obviously a multitude of other rule items that need determination and/or clarification in order to provide a complete and simple 2012 rule package and they are currently being developed simultaneously with the ones mentioned here. Keep your comments coming as we hope to have the final rules written and distributed sometime shortly after the new year. That will leave 2 months before the first event which should be a reasonable amount of time to plan and implement your needs. I realize that everyone wants all the answers now, but its important that we get this right. Regards to all and looking forward to an exciting season for 2012 !!!
I agree with 100% of what you've said (your entire post), I'm just not clear on how big an advantage the light weight panels are. The front and rear deck lids are aluminum in stock form, carbon may be more bling than functional. Fenders and doors could be significant, but a gutted stock door is also very light. My car has a few light weight panels on it and I will be scaling the car tomorrow. I will report back my findings and maybe even change my opinion after I see the result. Colin will also be scaling his this weekend (on the same scales) so we can begin to close in on how big a difference this is. If others know the weights of their cars, please chime in! The more we share with each other the better we will be able to get the rules right and facilitate growth in the series. If a minimum weight is set, I would hope that it would be a healthy amount lower than the original stock weight. Remember, the original stock 355 Challenge cars still had their electric glass door windows in place! They left a lot of street car remnants in place and were not as true to the race car concept like the 360 and 430 Challenge cars evolved into. At a minimum we need room to toss that stuff out, account for lexan over glass, floating rotors over solid, etc. This will all be more clear with data so I look forward to sharing the weights with everyone after we hit the scales this weekend. Stay tuned ...
I spent last season competing in the SCCA Pro World Challenge GTS series and it looks like you did too or at least were observing how things are handled there, in general. I would like to see the ballast location open. BTW, I have been talking to Carol Hollfelder about running her #10 "hand controlled" 355 Challenge car in the FCRA series next season..... The car was dropped off at my shop today for a full tear down and prep. Now if I can get some of the other drivers I use to crew chief for back in the day this could be fun! When will the 2012 schedule be announced? Adam
Another rules package worth a look: the UK FOC rules for their Ferrari Open series. http://www.ferrariownersclub.co.uk/events/pfo_11/regs%202011%20final.pdf
I only read the 355 section but the rules here seem very close to capturing many of the comments here and the spirit of the FCRA. At first glance the only thing I didn't like was the restrictions on the exhaust (must keep cats?, no center outlet?) and perhaps the minimum weight being a bit high (I am a big proponent of lighter is better). Thanks for posting!!
Thank all of you for the comments and please keep them coming. As Alfred said, it will be very helpful for the board. We are working on the 2012 schedule now. We will have it finalized shortly.
I put my 1998 355C on the scales today and here are the results, all done without driver and subtracting the estimated 20 lbs of fuel in the car to reflect an empty tank. 2,895 lbs without Cool Box 2,916 lbs with small Cool Shirt Cool Box I run with the Cool Box in any weather over 50 degress so as a driver that is the number I would be working with. For perspective the UK rules WCH posted has the minimum weight at 2,904 lbs and the original 355C Spec weight was 2,981 lbs. My car is equipped as follows: Carbon front trunk lid, carbon engine lid, carbon front fenders, carbon bumpers, lexan rear window. Doors have been lightened (no glass or electronics) but not gutted. Adding weight back are the passenger seat with harness and the cool box. I usually run with a radio but it was not in the car today. We will scale Colin's car tomorrow allowing us to better understand the effect of the carbon. While I am lighter than the original spec, I would still be in compliance with the UK rules so I suspect the carbon is more bling than weight savings. In theory I could drop another 20 lbs or so by pulling the carbon passenger seat but I would also expect to end the race with some gas in the car. It sucks to park on the apron I would still vote for no weight limit, but if one is required it should certainly be lower than the original spec. Lightening was allowed in the 2011 rule set and having all the original drivers ballast back up would be silly. If a number must be set, following the UK spec might be interesting just for consistency and perhaps they have been at this longer than us and have a larger data set that led to that figure.
Quite a few of these challenge cars, especially the older ones (mine included) have had significant modifications. I have driven and continually worked on my car for 11 years. To now add weight back in, change my suspension, or make other modifications will incur costs which negate the entire point of the FCRA series to begin with. I like the UK rules. Have two classes with each model. The first class will be for relatively stock challenge cars, the second class will be for cars modified without limitation. The UK rules state: Cars in 1(a) shall be Ferrari F355 in accordance with the 2000 or earlier European ‘Ferrari Challenge’ specification, but with certain specific relaxations as identified in these Regulations. These relaxations are listed under the principal headings which follow. In addition to F355 Challenge cars, F355 road cars may be entered in this Class and may be modified to a specification that is equal to but not beyond Challenge specification. Tipo F355 must be subject to approval of these modifications prior to acceptance. Cars in 1(b) must comply with the detailed requirements listed in these Regulations. These cars will be permitted extensive modifications from standard. It should be noted that if the engine of the original vehicle is replaced by an engine from another Ferrari tipo, that tipo must have been manufactured prior to the cut-off date specified above. With the large fields the FCRA has been seeing, having 6 classes is really not a problem. This will resolve the issues without incurring additional costs for the drivers, or trying to artificially alter a cars performance, weight, class., etc.
Initially i liked the idea of "stock" vs "modified" within each model class. My only reservation is that 3 trophies in 3 classes is already 9 trophies. By adding the subclasses for each, we would be handing out 18 trophies after each race. Seems like a lot. In addition, I am concerned there may not be enough cars in each class with the division within the 3 or 4 model classes for 348, 355, 360 and 430. Perhaps cars that are developed to the extent Jeff's is... according to its weight and horsepower.... may stack up against the 360s better than being in a sub-355 class and running almost alone. Perhaps the subclass could be entertained so long as the hp to weight does not reach the 360 class...OR the 430 class for that matter .
Agree with Alfred here. We cannot have this many classes. We already have three classes. Six classes doesn't work with podiums. The reality is this series is based upon stock ferrari challenge cars. We will find places for our friends, but the concept works well with the cars staying stock. Challenge cars are good enough, modifications for speed or performance are not going to carry much weight (a little pun that the opposite will occur). We will make exceptions for our friends who have cars modified prior to the creation of the series. and we will put weight on them. But this will only be handled on a case by case basis, so don't start modify afterwards expecting a pass. There are a lot of reasons for keeping these cars stock, and I can go on about all the reasons which include, preservation of the cars, politics with the factory, cost and an effort to keep them level. There are two categories of mods that we are looking at for he rules. 1) safety, and 2) cost. Every other modification will be frowned upon. Please consider these ideals in mind with suggestions. As I've said, it's a club and we want it to be inclusive and we will find ways to level and categorize cars that were mod'ed prior to the series.
I currently don't see any issues with the 355 class. The cars are evenly matched and it's up to driver to win. If a 355 is highly modified it will be bumped into the 360 class. The real problem is the 430 class. Some guys have really modified there cars and it's getting a little out of control. My two cents, I watched both races at Homestead because my car was not running. I could tell instantly who was running modified cars by their speed and who was running a stock car. It was really excited to see guys driving their butts off against drivers with modified cars. I can honestly tell you the guys that drove well were rewarded and won. It had nothing to do with mods. I did not see anybody with an unfair advantage.
As Rob has said, I also weighed-in today: With my normal Cool Box, 1/4 tank=5.5 gallons +/- 35 lbs - the car was 3011 without driver, or 2976 w/o gas. In any event likely to finish over the Challenge Car minimum weight. Modifications are: Minus: Lexan quarter windows; no passenger seat; gutted doors with Lexan windows; no cats or silencers Plus: Cool Suit; Fire system; GT wing (wings were not allowed in 97/8) and splitter on front bumper. Questions remain: Shocks, bars and springs. So Rob it would seem that your cool set up is worth nearly 100 lbs! That's a lot IMO so what am I missing here? Smaller Cool Box, no helmet fan, - what else? I wonder what Onofrio's car weighs? Greg - any idea on yours? I know Rob Lay's is more or less the same as mine.
I believe that allowing a package, aero, shocks, exhaust and steel brakes gives a bit of flexibility for modifying cars, which a lot of people enjoy, without taking them too far from stock. Aero and shocks give a couple extra tools for dialing a car in, which, at least for me, adds to the challenge. I wasn't at Homestead but I raced at Monticello and didn't feel anyone's car was out of hand. I ran with Jerome and I dont think my car is out of hand - my engine has never been touched, my gearbox has never been touched. You cant underestimate the advantages of a lot of testing. Alfred and John have identified the horsepower issue, and addressing that will help keep costs and performance under control. That should help address engine building and ecu games. The trick is to keep scrutinizing simple and as non intrusive as possible. Seems to me John and Alfred are on the right track.
+1 I think this strikes the right balance. We should want to encourage some tuning as this then makes the 'Team Trophy' more relevant. It adds some car development and data sharing into the mix, allowing the Universal and FoCF to contribute more to the outcome. I continue to like the idea of the UK rules on most issues. Seeing that we are leaning towards setting a weight limit I just ordered my new driver's seat in fiberglass instead of carbon. But I would like to take that cost savings and plug it back into shocks. We really need to decide that soon as it could easily take 30 days to get them put in and then I would need another 45 days to schedule time to dial them in. March will come sooner than we think! BTW, Motons are pretty reasonable for the 355 and cheaper, easier to maintain over time: http://www.hrpworld.com/index.cfm?tpc=Moton-Ferrari-Club-Sport-Damper-Sets&form_prod_id=3478&action=product (For those doing the math, it's a 60 lb difference between my car and Colin's as posted here. But while Colin was here I think I discovered my gas gauge gave me a bad reading and I may have had an additional 40 lbs of gas in the car, getting to the 100 lbs stated.)
I have had a long conversation with a leading company that rebuilds shocks. A complete rebuild cost is around $1600 verses 4-6k for replacements. Therefore in the 355 class we are very likely to require stock shocks. Again, I repeat, we will not cause added expense to cars already modified, on a case by case basis we will weight the cars to keep them in compliance. The request for rules within 30 days is a reasonable request and we will try to comply.
This is my correspondence with Delta Vee Dear John, * Thanks so much for your call today; Im thrilled that after so much talk for so long theres a place to compete with vintage Ferrari Challenge race cars! * Regarding Ferrari F355 Challenge Bilstein OE damper rebuild services to your driver/ owners involved in your series and the question of cost of the OE Bilstein vs. an owner converting to a Penske double-adjustable 8100 series damper I have outlined the following: Penske conversion estimate total is $1,220 per corner, $4,880 per car. In regard to the cost of fitting Penske double adjustable 8100 series dampers to a F355 Challenge, the initial installation cost estimate is approximately $1,000 per shock with some of that cost going to development of the proper shock valving for the car. Adapters are required to mount the dampers, estimated to cost $100 per shock, assuming the conversion will allow a change to a standard 2-1/2 ID motorsport spring system vs. adapting the Ferrari Challenge spring system which is larger in diameter than a typical motorsport spring. Cost for the 2-1/2 springs/ helper spring is $120 per corner. The preceding is in no way a firm quote to provide shock systems to your competitors. Maintaining a Penske shock costs will be similar to the cost of maintaining the Bilstein OE damper. Retaining the Original Equipment Ferrari-Bilstein damper is the most affordable solution for your owner/ competitors. I propose an initial evaluation including comprehensive rebuild at a cost of $400 per damper, $1,600 per car total. This is a one-time per chasis (set of four shocks) rebuild fee. Future maintenance, exclusive of crash damage repair, will be held to $100 per shock for as long at the owner/ driver/ chassis remains in your race series (even if the chassis is sold to another competitor, the damper is a known quantity to us at that point). One option to your owners is conversion of the Ferrari-Bilstein dampers to allow pre-event nitrogen charging as part of regular race car maintenance. Installation of a Schraeder valve for nitrogen charging is a one-time $40 option per shock. * If your member/ drivers approve of our services and are interested in a group discount arrangement we can discuss this possibility for servicing during the winter. * One recommendation I can make based on my years of Challenge competition including campaigning a F355C in SCCA Touring 1 (with Runoffs podium) is to allow your competitors to disable the active damping computer and lock the adjusters into one position. This would significantly decrease the potential cost of maintaining the F355 Challenge. * I am happy to discuss this solution with any of your membership. I would also offer my services as a consultant to your series and/ or perhaps offer a suspension and chassis set up seminar for your teams. * Best regards, Rob * Rob Schermerhorn Delta Vee Motorsports LLC 10590 West KL Ave Kalamazoo, MI 49009 847.380.9508 [email protected] LinkedIn Profile
"BTW, I have been talking to Carol Hollfelder about running her #10 "hand controlled" 355 Challenge car in the FCRA series next season..... The car was dropped off at my shop today for a full tear down and prep. Now if I can get some of the other drivers I use to crew chief for back in the day this could be fun! Adam" I would be THRILLED to see Carol join us. I remember her driving when I was in college, and she is such an inspiration. We will be racing in front of alot of fans at Sebring and another pro support race this year, and the FCRA will be doing a lot of press next year, and I think she would be such a benefit to the FCRA and an inspiration to the fans.
I had my shocks done by deltavee a couple of years ago. Wonderful job. I also have locked my shocks. I also forgot to mention my car is street legal. I have my headlights and turn signals still on the car. Watching the homestead race I have to say mark m, Alfred,John, dick york and Franco drove the wheels off those cars. The race to watch was at the front in the 430s. A fun Moment was when john? In the yellow 355 got wide at t1 and spun off. He put it back in gear and got back in the race.
John, When my 348 became a full winged racecar DeltaVee was responsible for the OE shock conversion, valving and spring package. Rob definately made me faster. I highly recommend his services. Also, notice also that he said "Penske". There are reasons that penske is a good choice that go beyond just the shock itself.
I'll run however the rules get decided and I think its great that you'll make adjustments for previously modded cars, but if you do that you really need to give ALL cars the option to make the same mod with the assumed weight penalty or to stay stock without a penalty. IMO, a well engineered, adjustable shock system that has been properly tuned is EASILY worth 2+ seconds per lap on a normal road course. I have no idea what weight penalty you would associate with a system like the Penske triple/quad adjustable shocks, but I have got to assume I would choose the shocks every day of the week. If one driver is given that option, all driver's should be allowed to make the same decision. Of course an open rule set on shocks/springs/bars solves the problem without trying to calculate the magic weight penalty that keeps things equal.
I have noticed that running stock 430 shocks and springs with the aero package that almost everyone in the 430 and 360s are running is not optimal.. The stock set up is a real compromise with the added downforce from the aero kit and the change to the Hoosiers. I beleive we need to allow shock and spring modifications. Using packers which were legal in the "Original Challenge Series" like we did when running stock shocks and springs, just doesn't work with the difference in downforce created by the spoilers and splitters. Could we possibly find a manufacturer that would give us a group buy on a set up tested for our cars. We could offer a sponsorship oppurtunity to the manufacturer, but the priority should be safety and performance. It would be great to have the expertise of a race shock manufacturer test and provide baseline setup specifications for each class and allow almost a hundred competitors to advertise the product on their race cars if they choose to use the product. It would also keep replacement components even, if and when competitors wanted to upgrade their car's performance. IMHO I beleive we want to keep the cars as close to stock as possible, but most of us don't consider FCRA a vintage series and shocks have come a long way from the single action bilsteins that can't be adjusted for aero.
