FV future #3 Transmission

Post Reply
CitationFV21
Posts: 272
Joined: July 6th, 2006, 10:49 pm

FV future #3 Transmission

Post by CitationFV21 »

3nd of a Series

Okay we have just had a successful event (SCCA Runoffs) where we established our class as the largest formula class there, and attracted new blood from karting, one of whom is the son of a Indy 500 winner.

To keep FV relevant, and yet also a entry level class, I want to propose some changes and discuss the pros and cons. I would like to keep each thread factual and focused. If there is another idea we can break it off into its own thread.

The threads must be self-policing.

If someone writes something that does not belong to the thread - DO NOT RESPOND.

If the person feels their point is valid they can pm me to start a new thread, or they can start their own. Hey, I can dream can't I?

Okay, for idea # 3.

The proposal is that FV adopt a fixed transmission – that is with a fixed series of ratios.

Reasons:

In general, there are 4 combinations of transmissions that could be built easily:

1. Short-Short (1.26 3rd)
2. Short-Long (1.22 3rd)
3. Long-Short (1.26 3rd)
4. Long-Long (1.22 3rd)

Most racers have settled on the Short-Long, while FFirst I believe is using the Long-Short. Most Vintage groups might be using the Long-Short as their engines do not rev as high so they need the extra gearing.

Advantages –
1. Less cost for driver entering FV
2. If we pick the right box, it will lower revs at top end (MAYBE)
3. Less changing of gearboxes means more time to do other things
4. Turnaround time between certain races is now possible.

Disadvantages
1. The gears we pick may not lend themselves to certain tracks
2. The fixed set may not be as “fun” to drive
3. Engines and exhaust may have to be returned for more midrange torque. (I need input from engine and exhaust builders to see if this is a show stopper – most other classes using a fixed transmission use a fixed engine and manifold.

Please let me know your feelings, experience and if you would support a fixed ratio gearbox.

If the results are positive, then they can be submitted to the new ad hock committee or put up for a class vote.

Chris Z
Citation #23
061987
hardingfv32
Posts: 104
Joined: June 9th, 2015, 8:04 pm

Re: FV future #3 Transmission

Post by hardingfv32 »

How many competitors actually change gearboxes for different tracks? Is it up to the rules to dictate where you spend your prep time?

As has been stated many times before.... any restriction to gear ratios is just going to create additional development of engines and exhaust systems to make up for the lose in performance. You only have only so many fingers to put in the holes of the cost dam you are building. You could spec out the motor and exhaust systems like they do in SM and SRF.

Brian
sharplikestump
Posts: 183
Joined: January 12th, 2009, 2:28 pm

Re: FV future #3 Transmission

Post by sharplikestump »

Ahhh....good deal, I finally get to disagree with one. I am all for leaving it as it is. Maybe (or maybe not), having the option of at least attempting to match gearing to the different tracks is more valuable to those that live in the rarified air of a place such as Colorado, (reduced power) but I certainly do consider having that option a big plus.
Now, as an engine builder of well over 1,000 VW engines, I shudder to think that customers could possibly be locked in to the same engine for one of the "goat path" tracks as well as having to use it for somewhere such as Road America, Road Atlanta, Daytona, and now Indy! Holy grenades, Batman! :shock:
Mike P.
Post Reply