FORMULAVEE.ORG

Vote - 130

Since we are going to add a HANs type device soon, I think going up 5 lbs would be acceptable.

For those who say it is too hard to add weight, most people are running light on fuel for Regionals, they could add 5 lbs easy with another gallon of fuel.

For Nationals that might be another story - I understand that at some tracks fuel capacity is a problem - can anyone confirm?

ChrisZ

smsazzy wrote: For those that have never tried to take 25 pounds off a car, don't sit back and tell me how easy it is either.

I agree with that. My point wasn't so much to be an anti-weight gain post, but to suggest that people should ask someone how easy or hard something might be to do instead of telling them that it's easy for them to do. I think we're on the same page.

I just spent the last 3 Saturdays working on a weight-reduction program on my car.
I drilled/cut 37 holes in the floor/chassis. I covered some holes with aluminum. The rails will get covered with foil tape. Twenty-two hours plus material. 3.7 lbs lighter!
I appreciate those of you who are willing to make a sacrifice of adding some ballast to improve the accessability of this class to bigger folks.

[ external image ]
The rear frame rails.

[ external image ]
The steel pieces that were removed.

[ external image ]
Aluminum panels installed.

[ external image ]
Here is a really cool part I developed. Cockpit adjustable external anti-roll bar.
It is hanging on the wall. It would be on my car if I was looking to add weight.
I cannot afford these 6 lbs.

[ external image ]
Here is a really cool part I developed. Cockpit adjustable rear droop limiter.
It is hanging on the wall. It would be on my car if I was looking to add weight.
I cannot afford this 8 lbs.

Discussions like this and the FV manifold were the kind of BS that had me leaving this class two years ago. Having now bought another FV I am very disappointed that there is a continuing undertone that believes change is needed in the FV class. Having raced in this class for 31 years my opinion remains that the class isn't broken, the EXISTING rules still work and NO CHANGES are needed. My vote remains to drop the dramatics and deal with the cards in hand.

Jim Regan

I have worked in racing for much of my adult life. I have prepped my cars and other cars for many light drivers and have installed hundreds of pounds of ballast in that time. Removing weight is absolutely more time-consuming and costly. I have 80 lbs of ballast in my shop. I could put the first 50 lbs safely in my FV in less than an hour. Obviously it gets more challenging after that .... but it would be a factor of hours .... not days. I am sorry if that comes across as "telling". If you could try walking in the other person's shoes .... you would choose to be a 150 lb FV driver over a 250 lb FV driver. If I weighed 150 lbs .... my car would have NASCAR style side-protection, massive rear and nose protection and every gadget I could imagine. Instead I weigh and select every single fastener, bracket, and panel .... looking to find as many 1/10ths of a pound as I can accumulate, all larger components having been "selected" long ago. I have a bare bones car with cool stuff hanging on the wall. If I were that 150 lb driver, I hope that I would want to sacrifice some of my advantage to make the racing better for more people. Thankyou to those that do.

JimR

It sounds like you left because you did not want to incur the expense or work of keeping your car competitive. The rule philosophy for FV have not changed when it comes to controlling the cost/labor of being competitive. This is the way the class has operated from day one. Competitors requesting a weight change is just their way of making their package more competitive. Their are other SCCA classes that do a much better job of controlling the competitiveness of the car.

Brian

Brian,
With all due respect, you don't know me and your assumptions are dead wrong. My cars have always been plenty competitive and I am more than capable of incurring the expense to be competitive! Maybe next time you should do some background discovery before you impart such an uninformed viewpoint.

Jim Regan

No need for a back ground check. I'm basing my opinion on your post. Did I draw the wrong conclusion from the post? Should I have interrupted it as meaning your are happy with the current flux surrounding the manifold subject development?

Brian

This issue has gotten way off track.

I allow many people to get in my Caracal "C" as I try to get people to consider FV. We can talk about minimum weight until hell freezes over and have avoided other consideration that prevent people getting in the class.

Most cars are sized for people less than 200 pounds. Frequently 200 pounders are too wide for a Vee. There is also the problem of taller drivers to get the roll bar clearance required.

I know that a Womer is geared for the larger driver but most Vees are not.

I have had the pleasure to race with Brad Stout many times. Brad is not the smallest person out there yet he has been at the front for a long time.

Matt

Thanks Jim from another "old timer" that knows you and your cars and driving!!!
Tom

At 6'3" 220, I would love 1050. I am 36 years old now and was 205 and in great shape when I started racing FV 18 years ago. In the last 18 years I don't hink I have EVER come off less than 1050. 6 weeks ago I was 230lbs, but have dropped 10. I will still hit the scales at 250-255 in a protofrm P3. I'm a bigger guy and understand that. My motives are purely selfish as I will never be close to minium weight even with the suggested weight loss techniques. Sure, I could knock off another 5-10, but then I am almost to my high school weight!

They do have Vintage racing for you "old timers" who can't tolerate change.

Matt... Stout is in a Vortech which is one of the easier cars to make weight in, but at $14K+ for a kit hardly the answer for our heavier drivers.

Brian

This board used to have productive information and topics that were useful to everyone from the seasoned veterens to the rawest newbie. A couple of years ago it became the private playground of a few folks who insist on flaming anyone who doesn't agree with their opinions. I find this to be a real shame as it does nothing but detract from a great class and, more likely than not, serves to scare away anyone who may be thinking of joining our ranks. In the years that I have raced Formula Vee I have found the gang in the paddock to be the most helpful and am proud to call them my friends, although reading some of the sarcasm expressed, I'd be hard put to find any friendship or help offered by these individuals. Should this offend feel free to flame away. I'm getting my car ready to go race with my best pals and probably won't be reading much if anything here anymore.

Dennis
NER FV 53

Thanks Dennis!!!

Tom

Dito Dennis,
Perhaps Mr Harding should come race against us old timers rather than run his mouth. I would very happy to test my "old" skills against his.
Had I posted what I wanted say, I likely would have been banned from this board,
From now on my commentary will occur visor down.
Jim R

Can we get back to the topic at hand. Will the committee consider this issue since slightly more than 50% want to raise the minimum weight?

Being one of the 3 who voted for 1035 I really don't care because I have ballast in my car. Unfortunely the amount keeps getting smaller as the years pass by. Like Greg mentions a higher weight allows a stronger/safer chassis and possibly more toys on the car. Being at minumum weight is just a fantasy some people want because they think it matters. Reality check! it really doesn't matter. I have won races at 1045-1050 because I added to much gas or was to lazy to take out weight. For those who know Bill Noble he was always over weight but it didn't stop him from winning either.

In theory it should, but just because Steve Matchet always says it matters in F1 I think it is just engineering BS becuase like I said I have won considerably over weight as well as others. Yes you can do the numbers and it looks great on paper but for some reason it just never shows up on the track.

Although I haven't bought lead since my dad had a plumbing business and I have 170lbs in around 20lb peices that I use when I align the car as well as what I have for ballast, it can't be to expensive and it is a one time purchase. You can also buy steel in 1", 2" 4" etc. from thicknesses 1/8" up thorough 1" or more and you can bolt it to the sides of the frame inside or out and with enough bolts it won't go anywhere. Or you could get rid of that aluminum belly pan and weld on a steel one that will make your car much more ridgid and you will never have to replace the rivits.

Ed Womer

Where do you fill out the survey?

I would vote for 1050 at least.

My son and I take turns with the car at hill climbs and I road race and neither of us can make minimum.

I'm 6'1 and he's 6'2 or more and thin, was a recent HS athlete, etc. and he can't make minimum in the car at about 180lbs. I'm out of the question making it at 220. Not too long ago I was doing cross country running with the kids, in the best shape of my life, and would have still been 35lbs over at that point.

Hughie Maloney is also a bigger driver. He needs to put weight in for Jack and John on some cars but I don't think he's close with him in the car. John Pitman is also over quite a bit (he's like 6'4 or so and not really overweight). We end up carrying more weight with the larger cage and roll hoops as well.

I agree with others, the rule was proabably written with small drivers in the 150 lb range in mind. Most amateur drivers aren't Lewis Hamilton's size.

Right now as it sits, if the rule were 1050 my son and I would still be over and there isn't much I can do to the car.

Ed...

If weight is not important why does tech check it so often? They must have some knowledge of its importance that we don't. It would seem that it is the most important thing to check if frequency is a guide. More important than compression ratio or fuel.

Brian

hardingfv32-1 wrote:Ed...

If weight is not important why does tech check it so often? They must have some knowledge of its importance that we don't. It would seem that it is the most important thing to check if frequency is a guide. More important than compression ratio or fuel.

Brian

The REASON that tech checks it so often is that it's
1). REALLY easy to do.
2). It's something that's ( in most classes) VERY CLEAR/BLACK/WHITE - no arguments.
3). It gives tech and the competitors something to do in impound while we wait to see if anyone files a protest <VBG>.
Steve

Brian,

Basically Stevan repliy is it. Many years ago when I weighted less, it was tempted to take out the ballast just to see if it would make a difference but again that lazy factor came up.

I still think that weight is not as important as a good motor or new tires since we are a momentum car where the draft can be important, it is easy to keep up with other cars that you normally can't because of the draft. When I first started national racing I did just that with the leaders but if I lost the draft I was done.

At the runoffs after my short flight when I resumed racing back around 22nd, as I caught up to other cars some were very hard to shake lose because of the draft. Although I caught them quite quickly after passing them they were able to keep up with me due to the draft. That is a big problem with Road America since there really isn't enough turns close together that the faster cars can use to get a gap on the other cars to keep the draft from playing a roll in allowing them to keep up.

Ed

I would think that if we struggle over gaining 1 hp ( good motor) or that extra bit of traction (good tires) that 25 or 50 pounds, give or take, would also be significant for the people that are actually wringing that 1 hp worth of speed out of their car. Maybe on a flat track with no elevation changes it's less obvious. On a track where you need to climb a hill it hurts. I understand momentum but weight really hurts acceleration.

-Andy Passthesalad

Ed is correct, their are more important things than weight, assuming you are not too far off. A good computer model would show us where the curves cross.

I'm in that small group that says everything matters. I know for sure one other member of this group, Michael Varicins. The 2009 Runoffs was a perfect example where someone showed up with EVERY i dotted and t crossed. It was clear to see that was not the case for the rest of the field. Sure you can get away with not being perfect most of the time, but there are going to be rare occasions when its going to bite you. If you can live with losing on these rare occasion, then that is fine. But for some of us winning that rare occasion is what it is all about. You pick your level of competitiveness and live with it.

Brian

I'll add that the 2009 DSR national championship winner or someone associated with his team posted that they used PLASTIC screws where possible to save weight. THEY were very serious about winning. I agree with Brian that you want everything going in your favor as often as you can.

-Jim