Minimum Weight Survey

[SR Racing]

While I won't take a position on whether the weight in FV should be changed, I will disagree with some of the points seamingly made here. Most would die for 2 additional HP. Well, given that a Vee currently has a 1:17 HP/Weight ratio with (60HP @ 1025) If you weigh 1056 you are effectively down 2 HP!
That of course is not everything that makes one fast or slow, but weight is every bit as important as HP. The formula to accelerate a mass from X to X+ is easy to compute and clearly points out the difference in who gets to the passing zone first. (and we aren't even discussing things like the CG and possible cornering losses.)

Certainly car prep and driver skill is important but 2 HP is every bit as important.

We have teams buying pro HANs units from us for $300 extra dollars to save 14 oz off of 1:6 HP/Weight ratio cars ! (and since the Hans is strapped down to the shoulders, the weight difference means nothing to the drivers comfort, only to his acceleration and cornering.

[jpetillo]

I agree with most of those points, but the effect is probably much less exaggerated than suggested. The 25 lbs worth of mass difference is about 2.4%, and equates to under 1.5 HP if it worked like that - but I'd suggest that it mostly doesn't. If there were no such thing as wind resistance, spinning up the tires, and other frictional losses, then it would appear like a 1.5 HP loss. But, weight only slows down the mass acceleration, it doesn't affect the push against wind resistance. With a long enough straight the top speeds would be the same, neglecting any effects from things like bearing friction, etc. We are rarely accelerating down at speeds where the wind resistance is low. I think it would equate to much less than a 1.5 HP difference - I'd guess under 0.5 HP. It should be a straightforward calculation to determine the effect for a given track and a car's dyno curve.

Actually, if the day ever were to come where we get manifolds that flow within 1% of a norm, and assuming that the percent flow is directly related to HP (probably close), I think we can show that this would give a bigger difference in HP between the best and worst manifolds than that of the 25 extra lbs. This would be easy to determine from data.

I'd suggest that if we all had the same aero package the racing would be closer, too. I'm sure were can find at least a 1.5 HP equivalent difference between FV aero packages. Aero is probably more important than the other effects. Should we consider suggesting aero equality, too? The calculation to show that effect should be straightforward, too.

I don't mean to water down the discussion - I think these issues are important - but if we really want to suggest these changes, I think we need to better quantify their effects first. John

[smsazzy]

If it is going to have zero effect, then let's just go ahead and change it then. That will shut me and the other fat guys up.

[jpetillo]

Stephen, that was funny. My intention with what I write is to always try to be informative - although it may not come across that way and perhaps the delivery is in an annoying way. If people take it to support increasing the minimum weight or not, that's fine by me, as long as a more informed decision can be made. That was my intent. What I wrote was not quantified and just my guess, as stated – don’t go changing anything based on it.

What I worry about most is us making changes in the class based on hunches and non-validated claims. We really should know the effect if we can. The effect of the weight increase on lap time should not be that difficult to estimate for a particular track. Also, the HP difference from manifold flow variances should be easy to determine as well – not that anyone has asked about that (don’t know why). That should be pretty easy with some amount of standard data collection. I'm sure that's been done, though. John

[cendiv37]

If it is going to have zero effect, then let's just go ahead and change it then.

Talk about calling a bluff!

[smsazzy]

Lap times aside, how about the increase in safety for a car built to the new weight. No more need for an aluminum floor and thin walled tubing to make it to 1025. Now you can drive a car that is a little safer and still make weight. Plus, you open up the class to growth. How many people look at another class because they know they can't make 1025 in one of our cars. Reality or not, the perception is that being over the weight means you won't be competitive. Thus new drivers, and existing ones, move to different classes as a result. I am well aware of Bill Noble, etc. who have been successful being over the weight limit. But the entire manifold discussion has been about "leveling" the field. Why would that not be the case with weight too. With all the positives of raising weight, it should be a no brainer. Increased participation, safer cars, more competition vs. a few people who say they are unable to find a way to add ballast..... Seems like a no-brainer to me.

[FVartist]

I am against. I see no need for all these rule changes.

[Mystique Racing]

I used to be in the "weight doesn't make that big of a difference camp" until I recently had my son, who is about 25lbs lighter then me, drive my car on the same test day in the same conditions. WOW is all I can say after reviewing the data. I am currently about 200lbs and 6'-1" I wouldn't say that I am over weight, but I could stand to loose a few lbs. Currently I am about 30 lbs over the 1025min weight with what I would classify as a marginally safe Mysterian M2 with virtually no side impact protection. This weight issue is #1 on of my list of reasons why I am heading to FST. I can build a much safer stronger car and still have to add weight.

My .02

[loris]

Raise it to 1050. That levels the playing field for more people than argueing about manifolds.

[FVartist]

It seems F1 has issues. http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/20/rena ... -petrov%2F

[problemchild]

Are oval racers smarter than FV drivers?

There must be several hundred oval tracks in the US that run weekly shows, probably with 100 entries per. So, we have 20,000 of these guys who seem to be able to bolt weight in their cars safely. Some are adding hundreds of pounds.

I see that the committee has decided that we are not intelligent enough to secure ballast. Why would we not apply the same standards which we use to secure batteries, fire bottles, starters, wheels, drums, or other heavy items that we secure on our cars? Of course we will need more than tie-wraps .....

We have had many F1200 drivers come from karting who are young and small. Most have them have been bolting weight into their karts so they could compete in higher classes. They think putting weight in a Vee is a breeze compared to a kart.

[wroché29]

Greg;
You're correct. When my son Geoff was racing his 100cc Yamaha kart we had 60 pounds of steel bolted to it...

[fvracer27]

I am a driver who is 250lbs now and I was 275lbs when I purchase my Vee in 8/09. Being way over weight does 2 positive things for me. 1st I have the motivation now to loose some lbs and get in better shape to live longer. 2nd it will force me to drive that much better. I realize some drivers that are just big guys 6' tall stuff like that you may not have to get in better shape they are just big but it will still make you drive a little bit better and find those better lines. At first I was like ya raise the limit to 1050 but to be honest it really does not matter to me and I will give it all, all the time.

[brian]

Greg, unless I'm mistaken, my vee would fit in the trunk of a typical oval car. They often use tons of lead shot in pockets located in the gigantic square frame rails but it would be tough to put panels inside our frames and I don't think having the lead loose would be very nice either. I could add weight to my car but anything over 25# would be very difficult. One sq. ft of lead at 3/16" thick is about 6#. It would take an entire floor of lead to get close to 25#.

[smsazzy]

How many square feet of steel do i need to replace with aluminum to take 25 pounds off my car?

[problemchild]

Trunks? 1/4 midgets, 1/2 midgets, 3/4 midgets, midgets, mini-sprints, micro sprints, slingshots, legends, dwarfs, are just some of the oval cars that run around here. I am sure there are many other classes that are similiar. They don't have trunks. Even modifieds and super-mods do not have trunks. Some of these classes are smaller and/or lighter than FVs. Ballast is a fact of life for them where twelve year olds often race with grown men.

Brian, I am confident that someone who can build cars, engines, and trannies .... is more than capable of safely adding 100 lbs of ballast to their FV if they chose to try. It is not rocket scientistry. 25 lbs should be a 5 minute job for someone as creative and capable as yourself. Why are you so opposed to making FV more accessable?

[Mystique Racing]

Brian,

I installed a 14ga steel belly pan in my M5 that weighed 22 lbs. It was welded to the frame rails, virtually impenetrable, way stronger then a .030 riveted aluminum sheet, and the weight was in the best place possible, the bottom of the car. I have been bolting weight on my go kart for years with no failures. A little safety wire can do wonders.

This whole argument that adding weight is too difficult is weak.

[Speedsport]

I would like to point out again that just forcing people to add more weight to their car does not create as equal of a situation as people hope it will. If a 180# driver has to add 25# more ballast in their car, thats a greater % of the weight they get to keep as low as possible in the car, creating an advantage. While it may help to reduce the disadvantage someone 25# over minimum has, it adds to the advantage someone who gets to pick the location of the ballast has. Larger drivers like myself are already disadvantaged because of our body mass being high in the car. A 205# driver can make minimum with some effort. Why add to the advantage of the little guys?

[Lynn]

Greg, unless I'm mistaken, my vee would fit in the trunk of a typical oval car. They often use tons of lead shot in pockets located in the gigantic square frame rails but it would be tough to put panels inside our frames and I don't think having the lead loose would be very nice either. I could add weight to my car but anything over 25# would be very difficult. One sq. ft of lead at 3/16" thick is about 6#. It would take an entire floor of lead to get close to 25#.

The internet tells me that on cubic foot of lead weighs 709 pounds. My calculator says that a one square foot plate 3/16" weighs just over 11 pounds. A 3/8" plate would weigh 22 pounds.

For the ultimate in ballast, I would recommend platinum. It weighs a hefty 1750 pounds per cubic foot.

I don't know of any circle track that will allow lead shot any more. If it gets loose, the track becomes a hazardous waste site.

[smsazzy]

I would like to point out again that just forcing people to add more weight to their car does not create as equal of a situation as people hope it will. If a 180# driver has to add 25# more ballast in their car, thats a greater % of the weight they get to keep as low as possible in the car, creating an advantage. While it may help to reduce the disadvantage someone 25# over minimum has, it adds to the advantage someone who gets to pick the location of the ballast has. Larger drivers like myself are already disadvantaged because of our body mass being high in the car. A 205# driver can make minimum with some effort. Why add to the advantage of the little guys?

Mike, you make an excellent point. However, this would only be true for cornering. Acceleration (in our cars) does not care where the weight is. Decelleration only minimally cares. So, the argument is lessened. Since you are (presumably) at minimum weight, you too would be able to add the weight wherever you want it.

All this is just hypothetical at this point however, as it appears the idea will not get any further than this thread. It would have been interesting to see what the member input would have said, but unfortunately, the committee did not make that recommendation.

[brian]

I really amazed by how everyone gets so fired up on this issue My car has a steel belly pan already. I won't run an aluminum pan since many of the tracks I run are in the desert and have a lot of huge rocks trackside. I can add a 1/4" thick pan weighing maybe 50#, but it wouldn't be easy since it would require moving all the hydraulics seat and fuel tank. I can't weld it to the bottom of the car since it's really low now. I sure don't want to start bolting weight on the upper frame rails because that would be dangerous.

Just last weekend at Portland I saw a car carrying a lot of ballast due to a small driver. The owner bolted in what appeared to be at least 15 pound block with one 1/4 bolt! Bruce, if you're reading this correct me if I'm wrong, but with any substantial g forces generated by an accident that bolt is going to shear and the ballast is going to impact the driver. The car received an annual with the weight in place.

Guys, I'm truely sorry if you think this is what is keeping you from the front. My legs are so short, I had to give up my dream of being in the NBA I wrote the CRB and supported the 25# increase so I'm not fighting this at all. Let's move on.

[dd46637]

Per the June fastrac: Thank you for your input. The rule is adequate as written.

I have no dog in this fight but I find it interesting that there was no request for input from membership.

[smsazzy]

Input from membership is above this thread. 35 in favor of an increase, 32 against. Not enough support I guess.

On a brighter note, I spent two hours in the garage last night refabricating an exhaust support and saved 4 oz of weight after two hours of work. I wonder how much ballast I could have added in that amount of time?

[jpetillo]

Probably couldn't add much weight in 2 hours if done safely. For me, it took much planning and then several days to add 50 lbs to the 25 lbs of ballast that was already there. I don't have the materials and tools to do that job as well as others - probably not the ingenuity and experience, either. By the way, I was surprised how expensive it was to buy steel and lead. Anyway, some of it's bolted down, some's riveted down. But, I'd like to do some calculations about what it would take to have it tear/shear off, especially that 25 lb chunk of steel. I'm not that happy with that aspect of it right now. I wish some of you guys lived closer! John

[brian]

In the absence of facts from someone like Bruce Livemore, I always over build. Make sure that the weight is shouldered up against a frame rails or cross member. Use biggger bolts than a 1/4" and remember the washers.