MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Race reports and previews from F500 events around the country
Jeff Blumenthal
Posts: 481
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:03 pm
Location: United States, Ohio,

MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Jeff Blumenthal » Tue Sep 22, 2015 5:13 pm

Watching the results of qualifying through Q2...MC powered cars dominating, and quicker than FF. Anyone Surprised??
What can we do to restore competitiveness to our class? Or is it too late?
PS...congrats to Calvin Stewart for setting the bar pretty damn high. Whoever thought we'd see an "F5" going 155.6mph???
- Jeff Blumenthal
FMod #96
F500 #96

David Vincent
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: United States, Kansas, Leavenworth

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby David Vincent » Thu Sep 24, 2015 8:23 am

I think everyone knew that Daytona was a track that favors gears vs CVT where other (most) tracks will be neutral or CVT friendly. Unfortunately, it is hard to look beyond the National Championship race, and there will be a knee-jerk reaction in the off season.

I do think the CRB inappropriately made the last adjustment without any supporting data (that should at least be reversed), and they can make other parity adjustments, that won't be perfect, but very acceptable, that will keep all 4 F500 configurations reasonably competitive at most tracks. At Daytona, they probably should have applied a gear ratio adjustment to keep the top speed constrained to that possible of the benchmark, a 493 (should have been the lowest performance, the 494). I know won't be pleasant to ride around a big oval on the rev-limiter, but that would be required to maintain a balance of performance for that track (more weight and smaller restrictor has less impact on top speed and effects other aspects of the performance envelope). And another issue is the roll bar rules controlling tube size is maximum 875lbs, which means we can't increase weight penalty without making all existing cars illegal.

Maybe the F5 community should have a small sub-committee to the Formula and sports car Committee that only controls the balance of performance adjustments per the GCR (weight, restrictor, gear ratios, and other). I think that is the only way to be accurate and responsive with fewer errors and mistakes. No changes unless properly vetted by that group.

On a related issue, I think 150 mph is probably too fast for our small cars with small crush space and smaller roll bars, etc... Seems unsafe.

Let the flames begin! :D

Dave
Dave

Jay Novak
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:08 pm
Location: United States, Michigan, Dearborn

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Jay Novak » Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:28 pm

The only place we would ever see this kind of top speed is at Daytona. It will be a long time before we have the Runoffs there.

On another note, the roll bars on F500 cars have been the same as ALL OTHER OPEN WHEEL cars for since the change to the 80" wheelbase.
... Jay Novak
SCCA member for 48 years
A special thanks to all SCCA workers

Jim Murphy
Posts: 2650
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: United States, Georgia, Winder

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Jim Murphy » Mon Mar 21, 2016 3:11 pm

Dave,

Just an update since the dust has settled after Daytona. On MC cars, dry sumps and electric water pumps which replace the OEM water pump have been made illegal - both of these were on Cal's F600 and contributed to his high speeds and was the only car with them. My car, driven by Clint McMahan, never got close to the top speed of Cal's car. Although, Clint did end up with the pole, it was not with top speed but everywhere else. A side note from one of the CRB members - the dry sump was added as an optional backup at the time of the MC approval in case the modified oil pans did not work - no one asked for it. With our work on oil pans over the past several years to make them work the dry sump is not needed and an unwanted added expense. However, an inline electric water pump that DOES NOT replace the OEM water pump is a benefit to help with the soaring engine temperatures that occur as soon as the car slows down, say during full course yellow flags and on the cool-down lap (no cool down for these MC engines). If the pump is not enough we may add radiator fans to help the motors live longer.

Now that the MC drivetrain surprisingly received an IIR reduction to 30mm, the 593 will become the dominant motor in the class, except when it loses its crankshaft. With the exception of Daytona, the track records around the country have shown equality in lap times between the two drivetrains so this latest reduction is not justified. The real reason for the speed at Daytona has already been made illegal so now there is no equality until the 593 receives its very FIRST competition adjustment since it was approved with a 493 pipe, not the pipe being used today. I challenge the 2 strokers to an independent dyno test to show the real HP of a 593 with the new pipe which has never been done and published.

mark vollbrecht
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby mark vollbrecht » Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:14 pm

The fast 593 was using a 493 pipe. Do not start this crap again.

Richard Schmidt
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:36 pm
Location: United States, Minnesota, Plymouth

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Richard Schmidt » Tue Mar 22, 2016 2:40 pm

Not this shit again.jpg
Not this shit again.jpg (7.19 KiB) Viewed 7291 times

Chuck McAbee
Posts: 1206
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:02 pm
Location: United States, Maryland, Sykesville

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Chuck McAbee » Wed Mar 23, 2016 7:23 pm

Jim has never found a dead horse he couldn't beat some more.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!

Jim Murphy
Posts: 2650
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: United States, Georgia, Winder

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Jim Murphy » Sun Mar 27, 2016 7:24 pm

The following is my fear for the future of this class:

My sources tell me that this 593 adjustment is being evaluated as we speak so it is a current topic. BTW, I know of several 2 stroke drivers (not the top drivers) who have installed 593's, bought a pipe (not a 493 pipe by the looks of them) and clutching from a well known supplier. They all have significantly gone faster at every track they have run since the change-over during these past few years. These are the facts. This horse is still very much alive in spite of your strident denials. Everyone apparently has forgotten, or did not know, that the 494 non-Rave, when it replaced the AMW problem child, that it was supposed to be the engine to be compared against all new motors being considered for this class. All new motors were to be brought down to be equivalent to the 494 non-Rave. Unfortunately, this has not happened, thus the disparity among the motors and the costly need to "upgrade" whenever a new motor was approved. IF these new motors (especially the 593, a 100cc larger motor) had been made truly equivalent to the 494 non-Rave then there would have been no rush to change over to the newer motors until the parts dried up. This inequality has served to drive up costs which is against the class principle/philosophy of being a budget (low cost) formula car class. Let's see some independent dyno tests using the state of the art pipe for each motor to verify that they all are really equivalent to the 494 non-Rave. IF it is found that any are not so, then the appropriate performance adjustment must be made to the IIR's to make them equivalent. IF you truly want this class to be a budget class then you should be in favor of this INDEPENDENT dyno tests to publicly confirm that all the motors are really equivalent. Let the facts/results speak - not somebody's claim.

This is my sincere hope that this will help the class.

Jim

mark vollbrecht
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby mark vollbrecht » Mon Mar 28, 2016 10:22 am

The adhoc committee is not suppose to be talking to individuals if that is so then they should not be on the committee. If these people are talking to you then they should not be on the committee. The class was fine until your mouth gets involved. Maybe there should be more work involved and let them do their job and wait an see. You know who is on the committee and we all do. If you are getting info then it should be announced to all or those that are giving it to you should not be involved in the committee.

brad smith
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 9:03 am
Location: United States, Kansas, kansas city

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby brad smith » Mon Mar 28, 2016 5:51 pm

Jim Murphy wrote:My sources tell me....


Just that phrase alone make it sound conspiratorial. Any time you have to hide who is giving you information doesn't look good to an outside visitor thinking about joining the ranks as a F5 driver.

All of this in-fighting and pointing fingers and name calling has done more to hurt the class than any of the actual actions. Finding a way to get the different drive trains as close as possible regarding performance is the ad hoc committee's job. It probably can't be done overnight. Hopefully they find a way to get some good data and make some small decision and over time transition into as much parity as can be had between the different engine / drive train types. I would encourage the committee to make as many public posts about meetings and discussions as possible. They don't have to give specifics, just a quick "we all talked today - the topic was XYZ" so the class kinda knows what's going on.

Then again, i'm just a dumb autocrosser - what do I know ;)
Last edited by brad smith on Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

Richard Schmidt
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:36 pm
Location: United States, Minnesota, Plymouth

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Richard Schmidt » Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:09 pm

Jim Murphy wrote:The following is my fear for the future of this class:

My sources tell me that this 593 adjustment is being evaluated as we speak so it is a current topic. BTW, I know of several 2 stroke drivers (not the top drivers) who have installed 593's, bought a pipe (not a 493 pipe by the looks of them) and clutching from a well known supplier.

Jim



As long as the exhaust is a single pipe, the type is unrestricted.

What part of UNRESTRICTED don't you understand?

Richard

Jim Murphy
Posts: 2650
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: United States, Georgia, Winder

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Jim Murphy » Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:14 pm

brad smith wrote:
Jim Murphy wrote:My sources tell me....


Just that phrase alone make it sound conspiratorial. Any time you have to hide who is giving you information doesn't look good to an outside visitor thinking about joining the ranks as a F5 driver.

All of this in-fighting and pointing fingers and name calling has done more to hurt the class than any of the actual actions. Finding a way to get the different drive trains as close as possible regarding performance is the ad hoc committee's job. It probably can't be done overnight. Hopefully they find a way to get some good data and make some small decision and over time transition into as much parity as can be had between the different engine / drive train types. I would encourage the committee to make as many public posts about meetings and discussions as possible. They don't have to give specifics, just a quick "we all talked today - the topic was XYZ" so the class kinda knows what's going on.

Then again, i'm just a dumb autocrosser - what do I know ;)


My sources are not part of the ad hoc committee or the Formula advisory committee or even the CRB. I know that they will not talk.

I understand that this will take time. All I am asking is to have dyno tests done for the Rotax motors WITH their optimized racing pipe to see what HP differences they are now, then make IIR adjustments (or add an IIR if none exist) to get all as equal as possible to the first Rotax motor - the 494 non-Rave. Thus, the weight adjustments can be reduced or even done away with.

Chuck McAbee
Posts: 1206
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:02 pm
Location: United States, Maryland, Sykesville

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Chuck McAbee » Fri Apr 01, 2016 9:45 pm

Sources - Horse feces
Never too old to have a happy childhood!

mark vollbrecht
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby mark vollbrecht » Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:22 pm

Then who pipe do you use on the 494s to make that eval. with and who going to do the dyno work on the mc motor to get them down to the 593s and the non rave valve 494s. who going to make dyno runs with the mc motors with air boxes that are pressurized that create more then 8 to 10 hp when running them at race pressurized speed? Who is going to put carbs on the mc motors and take away the custom ecus and the custom factory ecu. This has caused a big mess in the class Jim. You know as everyone else in the class that the mc motors have a large advantage and need to be brought back down. They have four more intake tracks. Look at the total intake volume to start out with. You have larger restrictor volume we have 25mm for two intake tracts. you have four intake tracks and what 30 mm intake restrictors. The 593 started out at 104hp with out restrictors. The mc motors Started out at 124 plus who needs looking into I would say the mc powered cars. The only reason the mc car did not win at Cal. runoffs was the exhaust had to be modified to make sound requirements how many feet of tubing did clints dad have to put on the exhaust to make the sound requirement out there, and Clint drove half of the race basically on three wheels because of the shock breaking. That was on the smaller restricter i think the 30mm was a gift and you know it.The mc at least the susuki should probably be at least at 26 to start with. But i not asking for it and i will not. That is up to the ADhoc committee to look into. The Honda are probably good at 30mm from what we have seen so far. I am not going to listen to you trying to wreck the class more. There are alot of f500 2stroke and mc f500 people that would want this to work, but you piss off even the guys that have mc power. Maybe you need to be banded from another website or maybe find another class you can BS in. You are truly one of the people that cause unrest in this class. It would be nice if you truly believe what you are dishing out is true that maybe you should let the silent majority have some piece and keep your thoughts to yourself. That is why people do not want to get involved in the class is because you and some others just try to stir the pot just for the sake of getting their agenda through. Not what is good for the whole class.

Jim Murphy
Posts: 2650
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: United States, Georgia, Winder

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby Jim Murphy » Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:20 pm

Civil discussion without emotion is what is called for here. There is a problem in our class - motor inequality and what logically, not emotionally, to do about it. I have not spoken emotionally or flamed anyone in my posts yet many of you cannot discuss this issue without negative emotions or flaming. You are the very ones who run people away from this forum and class, they are reacting to you flamers, not me. I have watched this happen again and again over these many years . . . . so sad. I will not respond to this thread any more.

mark vollbrecht
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: MC powered cars dominating Runoffs @ Daytona...???

Postby mark vollbrecht » Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:49 am

No one is emotional you just need to get the facts straight. The problem is you are looking in the mirror every one knows your agenda. Let the adhoc committee do their work wait and see. Then if you do not like what they have done start your campaign. We are in this spot with the mc cars because they moved to fast and did not have creditable info and look what happened. The mc cars were brought in to fast with out proper limits on them and that is how we got here. The 593 have not dominated like you predicted. But when ever the mc cars have gone to majors they have dominated. Most of the 2 stroke wins have been with 494 with rave valves. Please look up the results at major races. But you can not include the majors that do not have top drivers and the only guys that are running are Jack and friends. Because when Jemery runs with them he is running a 493 and is handling them.


Return to “F500 - Event News & Reports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests