2012 Rule Proposal for 348/355 Class

The point I was trying to make was the 4 ways are not a huge advantage even in a professional environment. I am sure grass roots racers derive some benefit from them!

 

Oh, dear. I fear good folks have misunderstood my point(s).

Only a few very low-level series restrict shocks, even historic racing doesn't do that. Most drivers enjoy the setup aspect and many are engineers learning a new depth to their vehicle dynamics. My point was only that the shocks were not going to make somebody a winner and damage irreparably someone else's chances for victory and that the general performance level was not going to go way up with open shocks. I'm FOR open shocks, even though I am not a competitor in the series. I STILL think the greatest variable is the driver's performance.

As an aside, I'm SHOCKED at the misguided, erroneous and falsely supported opinions of the "FC crew chief."

Wings and splitters DEFINITELY affect the rake, angle of attack, aero load on the suspension and, most importantly, HANDLING BALANCE of ANY car above 75 mph. If you allow those, you could benefit from open shocks to correct the varied handling imbalance created by the aero. That cat is out of the bag, I'm afraid. I AGREE with David's last post wholeheartedly!

 

Good post, Rob!

My experience is most of the drivers in FCRA are experienced drivers like you, looking for a personal challenge to develop their own skills and to get better. Data, shocks, aero and alignment all allow this to happen without upsetting the apple cart.

 

Re- reading all of my many posts in this thread, I can summarize my views as follows:

There's no way to have rules that make everyone happy. So, let's have rules that make me happy.

 

"Seems like several on here focusing on the shocks are the ones that have tinkered with their power and say 10-20 HP isn't a big deal."

Rob, as a proponent of open shocks, I agree with you on the hp issue and like the idea of the FCRA managing hp to weight. I haven't heard anyone here argue for engine wars, and I'll gladly take an extra 20hp if people don't think it matters. I think allowing aftermarket exhaust/headers, but not shocks, doesn't make sense. I've had adjustable shocks on most of the race cars I've owned, and love the flexibility they offer. Even Spec Racer Fords have adjustable shocks - just not Ferraris.

 

+1 what he says! And to the extent that Ferrari is worried about us not running "stock" cars, I believe its the motors (t/c in particular) they are concerned about. Were it shocks the retort is easy, give us affordable replacements shocks that a dealer can service and we will run them!

 

+2 to all. The power/weight is the equalizing ticket. That measurement accommodates a variety of cars that have had this or that added over the years and allows a place for most if not all target cars of the series.

Paul Prideaux, Rob Lay and others who've run in NASA have experience with that and that simple measurement and structure is one of the major reasons for NASA's phenomenal growth.

The nit-picking and constant search for competition parity in SCCA (limited prep, 18" wheels and steel brakes, big weight for F430C's in T1) have taken SCCA out of the equation for growth.

Don't want FCRA to follow that model...

 

So I think that 355's should be allowed shocks and aero. It is a relatively low cost for these cars and really do make a difference. I have driven Onofrio's car and can say that the difference is amazing. The costs are much different for the 360 and 430's and there should be a different discussion for each class. I do strongly support testing and policing power/weight regs. This is the biggest issue for these cars.

 

BTW, I am really enjoying the conversation! It is really great that we have a forum to consider all facets and implications of rules. The more it's scrutinized here, the better it will work at the races!

So that's all to say that whatever John and the Board decide, so be it. I get the feeling that all involved here are willing and able to do whatever it takes to continue the support of our great Association.

There is a very high level of respect and consideration for all opinions which is so very rare these days. I think that this is what Gentleman's racing is all about.

 

I will tell you guys this without any doubt. This is fact:

If you allow all the mods you guys want a 430C driver will have to spend $40,000.00 to equalize their car. We will be loosing drivers if we continue down this path. I'm in favor of no modifications and keeping the costs down. I am not in favor of allowing any modifications for performance. I bent on the wing and splitter. (Didnt want to), trying to bend on the exhaust and headers (didnt want to), now its shocks that everyone is arguing doesnt make a big difference. (then WHY!)

And NO ONE wants weight for these mods.

I'm frustrated as hell. This will add $40,000.00 to any new 430 coming into the series. You are not hearing it from people on the fence, I am. Its short sighted.

I promise you you will loose competitors and make politics with Ferrari very difficult. I know three 430s already we will loose and it makes my recruiting much more difficult.

 

now everyone wants a front splitter on the 355? How much is that? very few out there have this.

 

I agree. Thanks for the clarification. The arguments here are being argued by proponents of mods in the 430 class as well. As someone who has direct interaction with everyone, I can tell you that if this is going to be applied to the 430s, as people are pushing for, it is my opinion it is going to severely hurt the entire FCRA. Everyone really needs to be careful for what they are pushing for, and I don't think they are.

 

John: I dont think there is an active movement in this thread to open up all 3 classes. Rob started this at your invitation to address one issue that does have a long lead time both with respect to procurement and set up; shocks for 355s. Because the stock ones are an obsolete road set up with either uncontrolled electronics or imprecise manual adjustment. For the rest the current rule permitting lightening, headers and aero are not expected to change. From there we got into 360 shocks and I guess that while there may be some who want GT-2 (or is it -3) mods for the 430, I think their comments have been directed in public at the 355.

 

WCH
Respectfully, I have been racing Challenge cars in the Ferrari Challenge Series since 1995. I competed in 355's, 360's and 430's for a total of 7 or 8 seasons. I'm a midpack racer with very few accidents who is approaching 62 years old but wasn't far behind the leaders in the FCRA races I ran.

The quote from the Team Principle is from someone with an enormous amount (over 35 years) of profesional and challenge racing experience and has won numerous world class events with cars (prototypes, GTP, Formula Atlantic etc) on his team. And yes, he has plenty of aero and shock experience. He beleives on these heavy cars with the downforce we are making, moving to adjustables would cause more set up problems than benefits for most drivers and teams participating at our level. Having watched his team's serie's spec (no wings, splitters, etc) 430 turn Homestead in the 1:27's I think he understands how to set up these cars. The numerous Challenge Championships also speak loud and clear. Maybe we should take some advice from someone who is not an amateur, even if you think it is the "one of the dumbest things I've read on this site in a long time."

I don't mean to be offensive and hope you take this in the right way. This is an important decision and advice should not be made to sound worthless when coming from a well respected source. I would be happy to spend the 10K-12K on shocks, springs and testing, if it would make the racing more fun, but cost is a serious concern for many and smaller fields won't make it more fun. PM me if you wish to know who I quoted.

 

Neil, I take your source's point to be that the sad little amateurs in the FCRA surely would be unable to exploit something as complex as adjustable shocks, that we'd be lost in the weeds of high and low speed rebound and compression.

In every other series I've driven - except Skippy - adjustable shocks have been part of the playing field. Some people just set and forget them, some fiddle endlessly, but most experiment and learn. Why are Ferrari drivers less competent than, say, Porsche drivers? Years ago when I participated in PCA's race program, in a stock class, shocks were free. The 996 Cup Car I just sold had aftermarket shocks. My D Sports racer has adjustable shocks. My spec racer ford had adjustable shocks.

As for your source's expertise, that's great, but I don't think experience in setting up cars in Challenge series trim carries over directly to the cars as run in FCRA this past year. For one thing, the tires are vastly different. A lot of this is empirical, and unless your source has tested these cars, he's making an informed guess. FA, prototype setup is a different world as you know.

I obviously believe the cost of shocks is minor and well worth the benefit to all, for the reasons I've beaten to death in prior posts. In some ways that position reflects my belief that the 430 Challenge in stock form just doesn't handle very well. I skipped Homestead because I didn't look forward to driving my 430 on an autocross track. Monticello was fun, but still too tight, again IMO. I wish I had made it to Daytona. I'm actually not sure I want to race a stock 430 Challenge car.

I take no offense from your comments and appreciate your civil tone. I find your source's comments uninformed and apparently based on a low estimate of the sophistication of the drivers and teams. I don't think you would see this sort of debate outside of the Ferrari world.

Will

 

I say keep the 355 and 360's open to modify. We are the only series in the world allowing modified Ferrari's. I think it is exciting.

If a 355 0r 360 gets too fast bump them into the class above.

The 430's, Keep them close to stock as possible for cost. I would try to police it the best you can. The winners have won so far because they can drive not because of their modifications.

I think of FCRA as a club not a racing series.

 

If the factory parts were reasonably priced, and readily available, then I could maybe understand requiring that they be used, but the factory stuff is too expensive and difficult to source. (348,355,360,430&458)

My 355 has adjustable Motons. Optimally setting their compression and rebound curves, along with bars, spring rates, brake bias, ride heights, cambers, toes, aero and tire pressures is an enormous challenge for anyone. (even Jaime Melo or Michael Schumacher)

My 430 has a wing and splitter, but stock shocks and springs. The car is not perfect, but it works reasonably well. For the 430, in Challenge there were 2 spring choices (F&R), 2 Bars (F&R) and 2 shocks. The ‘stiffer’ shock curve was simply the old 360 shock.

We did a TON of testing with just those 6 different pairs of components and the other things that could be adjusted, and it was very tedious, looking for tenths.

In the end, it isn’t going to make an enormous difference in FCRA. The factory stuff is decent, so if your car has factory pieces that aren’t worn out, you’ll be fine. If you are going to replace the stuff, you should be allowed to use aftermarket shocks and springs.

Additionally, if FCRA did require only stock pieces, and someone that really wanted to, they could re-curve those shocks.
In Challenge, FNA occasionally confiscates a shock from a front running car to check it on a shock dyno. I really don’t think we want to bring a shock dyno to an FCRA weekend!!

Mark