2012 and Beyond

[Mid-Atlantic Coupe 4792]

Brian - I really like that concept of a "Super Challenge Cobra."

I'm a little torn about upgrading our existing FFC to a faster
format. I do like the idea of simple - perhaps more power/better brakes.

What do we want to see? What's the goal for 2011?

I'd say 25 cars at Nationals should be the goal.
Everyone who knows someone with an FFC should push for that.
How can we get that? - Peer pressure or money is my only answer.

[tcmcnett]

I will make this short and sweet. I think if we go to ST-2 we will loose spec racers. The rules are TOO open. WE will always have a problem with no aero, IRS or ABS.

I would love to see us go to the top end of PTA. WE are listed as a PTA car now and are not competitive. Up the HP and brakes and we will be competitive. That way we can fur multi classes with out doing a lot of work.

Brake change. I am all for the Brake changes as this will help in the long run as it is harder to get good front rotors. It will also mean I do not have to change bearing with a rotor change. Much cleaner on weekends. I do not see any reason to go with bigger brakes as we will be at the edge of the tire stopping grip.

Gear Change. The gear change is a must. It will help keep the trans together as we will not be in 3rd gear as much. More fun out of the turns. AI watch out.

Horse power!!!!! I am all for a little more power and as I am told this would help us rebuild the engines easier as we can not get the stock heads. I just wish we could keep the intake we have now just for the cost savings. IF you have a 2500 LB car and 300HP with the rules we would be at 7.93 HP/Wt. That is at the top of PTA and would make a fun and fast car. If we can get NASA to agree with the HP great. We could drop it a little to let say 290 and still have a great fast car.

Sway bar. The sway bar will make this an easier car to drive than OK. I can go either way with this one. But I have not driven a cobra with a sway bar so I might change my mind later.

If we have to decide if we can not do everything and stay in PTA than the brakes, and gears to me is the most important change. Next would be the sway bar than the engine HP.

Adding the coupe. I think that would be great. More cars to pass. The only thing is it would have to be a spec. 3 link and same trans and engine and brakes. I know we could figure out the weight difference. If they are still faster just add a little more weight.

Lets give a hand to FFR for looking at ways to keep our series alive and well.

[Ed Gaven]

I think the basic problem is car count. With the current economy/unemployment/doubt about the next few years/are we having an insurrection in Madison next week? etc etc.I don't see car counts improving this year...with or without bigger engines and brakes.
However, assuming we went to bigger engines and brakes, would the racing change? Aside from braking points, I don't think so.

One theme that makes sense to me, if we are going to change, is make changes optional. Allow a carb option, allow the coupe. let's explore big displacement. Speedway has forged stroker cranks for $400. and rotating assemblies(crank,rods,bearings,pistons) for $800.Add a plug in chip from Summit and a mild cam and get around 350 hp,according to several people I have talked with. And you would have a base to build on if you wanted more. Just an Idea.
Thanks to Jim for opening the topic. A lot of intriguing ideas have been expressed.

[mhoward1]

One thing that I would personally not like to see is this series becoming a $$/HP was like some of the other "Spec" Series have become. If there is a bump in HP then make the whole thing a proven package deal with specified parts, standard suppliers, etc.

The fact that this was a true Spec series was one of the biggest appeals for me when I decided to take the plunge. The buy in was higher, but the operating costs were constant and mostly known.

[Jim@FactoryFive]

I agree that keeping our series to a very specific set of rules is important to keeping costs down. I am a proponent of sticking to our same basic spec forumla only making the cars go and sound as fast as they look. Also making our speed more in line with our initial buy in costs should help sell the series to new guys looking for a place to race. The more specific the rules combination is the less there is a need to buy and test parts, switch out parts at different tracks, be confused about which parts are making the faster guys faster, etc. Having guys laying in hammocks and BBQ'ing between sessions is a great part of our series and I don't think we want to lose that by making it necessary to be swapping parts out all the time or by using parts that need constant replacement. Whatever it is we decide to do I think it is important we recognize what are the good things about what we have now and make sure we don't lose them. Safety, Reliability, Low operating costs, Close racing, Fun to Drive, and Easy to get parts for all have to remain part of the package.

[RWalter]

Well I guess it's time for me to throw my 2 cents into the mix.
Personally I'm in favor of upping the performance of our cars.
The proposed package of reaching around 300/325 sounds good.
My personal preference would be a carburator rather than a fuel management
system. A trip to the dyno and one trip to each track would get the jetting
right......and it's easier to troubleshoot at the track.
Sway bar.....yes
Changing diff ratio.....yes
Bigger brakes....yes.
Adding the coupe....you bet. ....But keeping us as one group not two by finding an equalizer...weight?
What ever way we go I feel we do need to make a change.

Robert

[mhoward1]

While I will never claim to know nearly as much about these cars than most here I will say I have sampled some non-spec cars with minimal changes and I don’t think this had to be drastic at all.

I think the power upgrade can be as simple as a stock Sportsman/OEM 302 with AFR heads (165?) or GT40, Cam (Comp Cam number XE264HR or Crane 2031) and headers. These are just some packages that Google returned back but it seems to popular. Maybe even the Edelbrock packages for the EFI 5.0. Either way I think a 90+ HP bump can be made with minimal cost. As long as we specify exactly what the new package is it will keep everything “in Spec”. With the additional HP I think a few of us would also start using the front spoiler. It’s impact would be less on high speed tracks and would help both higher speed cornering and general braking.

Brake wise I think we are actually pretty good except for the rotor change problems and availability. Going to the SN95 would fix that. I have never had an issue with not having enough braking force. Brake balance is another item but it is something we can already fix. I really haven't had much trouble with heat dissipation either with the cooling hoses.

[Jim@FactoryFive]

I think this has been a fantastic discussion, very positive and with some really quality thinking. Reading over the many posts and sorting through the details it seems that most of us agree that some changes are needed to energize the series and without them we run the risk of losing it altogether. One thing that is not yet clear is how many people prefer the idea of adding a class vs how many would just modify the rules and remain as one group. So this thread doesn't become to difficult to follow I am going to start a second topic for this specific discussion.

[gwellinghoff]

After giving a little more thought over the past week or so, I do have some additional observations.

I agree that our cars are infinitely cooler than a miata or a mustang, but we will never be as cheap.

Factory Five has done a great job of protecting the value of our cars, not only the racers, but the street cars as well. If you go shopping for a factory five today you will not find many for sale, and the ones you do find for sale are priced well in excess of the cost you could procure the kit and all parts for if you built the car yourself. Unfortunately Mazda and Ford don't have that luxury as a result of their mass production of cars and the values of their cars depreciate as they age. A savy shopper can find a Miata for around $2500 and a mustang that could be turned into a CMC car for not much more. By the time the racer refreshes the car and puts all of the required racing equipment on board, the racer can have a race car for under $10,000. Mazda or Ford cannot build even the most stripped down basic car for that kind of money. The reason these series are so much cheaper is becasue some sucker bought the car new at the dealers lot, drove it around for 10 years or so while the value depreciated, and is now trying to sell it. Thus someone took a kick in the butt. I don't expect Factory Five to build kits and sell them at a loss so we can grow our race fields. Unfortunately the nature of the beast is such that racing in our class will never be as cheap as some of the classes that are benefiting from large fields. Its not a fair cost comparison as the two types of cars are different vehicles, we drive a purpose built racer, while these other fields drive modified street cars.

Perhaps one of Factory Five's promotional tools should be how much the value of the initial investment is protected over the life of the car. In other words buy a challenge (or street) kit now and go racing with it and in 5 years your completed car is still going to be worth more than what you paid for the initial kit.

Granted the economy sucks and the thoughts of $5 race fuel this summer are not helping to attract new racers / kit owners. Perhaps one of the best ways to market the higher initial entry cost to potential racers is to emphasize that their $14,000 kit ($20,000 finished) can be sold down the road for around $25,000, while a Miata will cost them $10,000 finished and they'll be able to sell it for the same or less. Basically, selling the idea that historically you can make money on a Factory Five or lose/break even on a Miata.

Food for thought!

Greg Wellinghoff #77

[mhoward1]

So thinking about how this conversation started and who FFR would want to attract to the series I went to who I though the target audience might be, this being a large group of current racers in different starter series (spec E30, ITx, ST2, etc) and those who want to get into racing in general. While not giving any specifics about what has been discussed here and nothing relayed about any possible plans I just asked what do you think about the FFRC series and what could make it better. The points they made showed one thing pretty clear, there are a lot of misconceptions about the way things are right now. Here are some items that stand out and some very good point made by the group, and some of the general quotes just to get the feel of things overall. I will warn you this will be a long post. I am also going to post links to the other two threads since many posted in them and may not be aware of this thread too.

• Most thought the true entry price was $30K - $35K
• Many thought it was an open Engine/Trans Series which means that competitive engine builds would be very expensive
• Maintenance and racing expenses are very high
• Because the cars are open they are safe/ Don’t’ look safe
• It’s just a flimsy kit car
• Slow times for a V8 Class (But 99% of them had never seen a FFRC race, only standard FFR cars at HPDE’s and AutoX)
• Slower than ITA and HC1 so why spend the extra money
• Only 60+ year olds race them
Here are a few good quotes so far:

“A) FFC/FFR series is not spec engine/trans, etc all open.
B) Cars aren't safe- (perception issue, not reality)
C) toyo's
D) Dr. K. nailed it... economy.
E) for the sound and aura, the speed ain't there. Speed the cars up, or drop the price.”


“I saw something about the factory five challenge cars on Speed just a day or two ago. My first thought was "Cool!" Followed by "I bet I couldn't afford the consumables to race one of those..."
If the 2nd one of those wasn't true, that's how I'd market the class I think. Something like "Race a real v8 rwd car on the same weekend costs as that fwd POS"




“High turnover is very natural in racing. It is actually rare for someone to race for many years.
One of the problems your series has is a pretty limited schedule, buy a SM for the same money and you can race almost any weekend with a short tow and find good competition.
As has been stated SM and FFC are really similar cars not spec cars. Really the only successful truly spec series is SRF and comes with downsides as well as upsides. To be truly spec adds some costs that you hope will be offset by lower development and upkeep costs”


“Going back to an earlier point though, I think that the least of your worries is performance. Making them faster won't in and of itself fix anything. And you DO risk pissing off current racers who don't want to spend the coin to change things playing the creep game.

I confess that I'm a little surprised at how affordable they seem to be. That's contrary to my preconceived notions, and what ***** touches on above, so you have indeed got a perception problem of SOME kind. SM got popular really quickly partially because people bought into the "competitive for $7000" thing. There was a ladder, too, in that case though...

If you could get Ford to give the winner at Nationals a ride in a Conti Challenge Mustang and convince everyone that they can buy one of these things for $15K - even if you can't, really - you'd be on to something.”



“Being a kit car is probably the appeal for some of the owners, but a huge drawback to many others.

I know I will never (at least not in the next few decades) have the time, space, and motivation to build a kit car. So, that $20,000 kit car (kit + the mustang bits) becomes a $30,000+ car by the time I have a shop build one.”





“Mostly stock Mustang bits leads to the low cost of running them. Most of the bits can be had a NAPA. The stock 5.0 doesn't make all that much power, not without building it. And the stock rear end, IIRC, is quite tall for the car, further limiting wear.

But, $7000 is a LOT cheaper than $15-$20k. Not that a competitive SM can be had for that, but it sure sounded good in print. You can run a whole season, including car acquisition, in a FWD shotbox for the cost of the car in FFC.”




“If you're going after the "V8 guys", you need to be able to articulate the differences (pros and cons) between FFR and American Sedan (SCCA), American Iron (NASA), T1 (SCCA), ITR (SCCA) and ST1/ST2 (NASA).

Pluses:
- close to spec series
- cheap consumables and replacement parts, due to near stock Mustang drivetrain. This is huge when comparing to AS and AI cars, or new Corvettes. List prices for a generic reman transmission for FFC vs a built transmission for AS/AI, or a 6-speed Vette. List brake rotor life and costs.
- faster than ITB (is it faster than ITA?)
- cool looking car
- in line with looks, they can be tagged in most states with the right paperwork (shouldn't matter to hardcore racers, but for the recreational racer, this can make a difference)

Cons:
- slower than T1, AS, and AI

Dunnos:
- How hard are they to drive? Can a new racer get in one and turn reasonably consistent laps? This is a huge plus for Spec Miata - the cars are easy to drive - much more so than many of the FWD IT cars.
- in the same vein, are the fun to drive? Are they tossable, or overweight pigs? If they're tossable, you need to get out the word.

For the parts that aren't spec, possibly publish a list of parts that are known to work well. Brake pads, spark plugs, whatever. Take out all the unknowns.”



“Already been mentioned, but I think a spec style class really needs to list out the things that might be obvious to existing racers, such as what is really "spec" and what that means.

For example, what components are spec on the FFR? Shocks? Mustang rear end? Wheel/tire size? If so, give the typical Marketing BS to promote those features, with a clearly listed benefit:

-Spec Koni XXXX Model shocks: No custom revalving required, readily available, adjustable for changing track conditions.

-Spec 17x9 Mustang Cobra wheels: Perfect fit, no custom lightweight wheels required, plentiful in the aftermarket.

Stuff like that.

Also, I think a realistic "running cost" breakdown is a huge point for a spec class. I look at the FFR guys and assume they spend twice as much in consumables as an ITA car, yet go slower. The allure of the big V8 may be attractive enough, but that big V8 also means big tires, brakes etc. If that isn't the case, show us. Give us a "mid-pack running costs" and a "front runner running costs."





“I think the "slower than ITA" perception might come from two places (one, both, or either):
- NASA HPDE. There were always a few running laps during HPDE sessions at VIR. Whether they were new owners, testing changes, whatever, they were usually not as fast as one might expect. Even if they were turning quick laps, there were always Corvettes and built pony cars that were faster (which they should be, but the perception was FFC were slow for a V8).

- hugely variable talent within the class. The slow guys are MUCH, MUCH slower than the fast guys. Yeah, this is true with all classes, but in a one-make series, it stands out a bit more.

But, at the end of the day, the FFC offers a quick lap (a bit faster than ITA or SM, but not as fast as other V8 classes) for money that is in the same ballpark as a full-blown IT effort (slightly more up front, similar week-to-week).

Not a bad deal, IMO.

Are there race shops that build them? Or, just street-car shops that sometimes build the race kits?”




“I think I've met 3 guys that raced them. One came autocrossed for a full season and probably DNF'd 60 of 70 runs. One guy said he hadn't raced since his stroke. The other guy walked out of an attorney's office with a bunch of file folders, put his stuff in the passenger seat, then sent hundreds of sheets of paper flying when he pulled onto the interstate. I had to use my wipers to get his bank statement off my windshield.

I think I'd rather be bitten by a pitbull than race on a track with those guys.”





I’ll post more as we here back but it seems that most of the items have nothing to do with the cars in their current configurations or the series itself. If we want the series to grow again we will need to bring in new and younger drivers. The misconceptions need to be addresses and some promotion about how affordable and how well these cars can really do.

[mhoward1]

Added a few more quotes

[wideofapex]

Originally Posted by Jim@FactoryFive

Some options that we have come up along with the reasoning:

1) Leave the series alone. Yes, leave the series alone, and enforce your current rules. Nascar has been fairly successful at this. 358 CI engine, carbs, solid axle, etc. Their base foundation has just improved, but not changed until next year, where with fuel injection, will be more cheating than ever...


2) Promote the heck out of what we have now. This class needs to be a high horsepower Spec Miata in my opinion. What I mean by that is that you buy junkyard parts/donor pieces for the expensive stuff. I think if you start allowing racing cranks, heads, etc, the cost goes up and the availability for garage teams to compete goes down. Nobody seems to know about this great concept.

3) Change the Value equation to make the cars more appealing-This was designed as an entry level car/class for the bang it gives. I believe that the instant you open the door for aftermarket stuff, etc. you will lose drivers. If you want to compete against the AI series, buy an AI car. Otherwise I think you end up with AI Cobra. The series has been around for 10 years, I would not stray too far from the roots, that kills classes. Look at Trans-Am, Formula Ford, etc. They just kept allowing wilder combinations until the class died(with SCCA's help of course). England kept their Formula Ford series close to the Kent Engine and it thrives there. They have 20 year old Van Diemen cars winning todays events. Buy an AI car if you want to compete with them.


4) Add a second class to give drivers somewhere to move up to.-You had what, 6 cars in FFC at Mid Ohio? I don't think people like racing against fewer people. I believe it would end up like USF 2000. I hate using open wheel cars as a comparison, but you would have Pinto engines, Z Tec engines, and the new Mazda 2.0 engine. There were I think 11 cars at Sebring. You had 3 classes in 11 cars. Lets say for example, you did have FFC and FFC Modified, at Mid Ohio, and 1/2 the field converted, you would have 3 cars in class. Keep it simple, 1 car, 1 class. If you want to go faster, buy a faster car in it's class. I'm still not sure why there is AI and AIE, 2 people raced in Extreme. That to me is pretty lame.



5) Add more cars to the series- Take a look at Grand Am's Continental Tire series. It has a bunch of different cars and they are ALWAYS changing the rules, weight breaks, adding weight, taking boost away, adding boost, taking spring packages away. I think you should keep it the same class and mandate a spring/shock package currently.



6) Something we haven't thought of-Let's look at Spec Miata. I am not a pro Miata fan or anything. However, you have to look at their series and see what they are doing. My thoughts above about guys who want to go faster... These Spec guys are slug slow, but they have 50 cars ALL the time. Everybody has somebody to race/play with on track. The cars use junkyard parts/pieces. I think the biggest thing about the success of SM is that it's cheap racing, easy to fix the cars, they mandate springs, aero,etc. Also, they actually tear engines down. They have cheating, as racing in any car does, but they do a great job of enforcing the rules they have. When is the last time a camshaft was profiled or a rod/piston was weighed, Flywheel weighed, etc in FFC? I don't think there is a huge amount of cheating in FFC, but I think it'd be funny to do a full engine tear down after the last 3 years of Championship races.



As both a driver in the series and part of FFR I am leaning towards numbers 3 or 4, I think the best value proposition out there is this:

OEM Cobra R (Brembo) front brakes (use stock cobra rotors)
New front spindles (required for newer brakes)
OEM Cobra 11.65 rear brakes
Add a front sway bar (basic inexpensive bar)
Engine top end pack (heads cam intake) for around 300 hp
3.27 rear gears
Everything else stays the same. Cars will be 3-4 seconds quicker per lap on most tracks.



My opinions for thinking this:
In order to get big fields we need to make our cars the best bang for the buck going in the Big Bore group.
Our current Fox part are getting old and are not as easy to find or cheap as they once were.
By using newer stock components and the same tires our operating costs can remain low
The cars with newer spindles and front bar are easier to drive
Faster cars and bigger fields give more chances for contingency
Cars closer to ST2 spec will allow people in regions with low car count to run against other cars
CMC2 cars are getting very close to our lap times
People see our body design and expect the cars to have more power
The risk has become just as big to do nothing and let the series fade away as it has to make a major change.
People are moving on from our series that we might be keep interested
I don't think promotion is the answer, the Mustang challenge had tons of promo but still didn't last. Same for TDI cup.
Testing that has been done with these parts on cars for other classes has shown very positive results

So the question I am asking is what do the guys who know the series best think? Which option from above is best, and if its none of the above what are your ideas?

All in all, it's a great series. I think if you want bigger fields, it's got to be cheaper, not 3-4 seconds a lap faster. Again, look at SM, they have HUGE fields of slow cars. It sounds like you want to grow the series, not make it faster. As for the above mention about Brembo's.... If you can do a whole race, on a hot day, using 100% threshold braking, and have 0 fade, whats the advantage of $2000 Brembo's? My thoughts, as a racer of 25 years in many failed classes and classes that made it... Thanks!

[Jim@FactoryFive]

The reason for these proposed options is we are just gradually losing car count year by year, not because there is anything wrong with the racing or the cars. The problem with doing nothing is that there is no reason to expect that this downward trend will change, many of the other NASA classes are growing so it cannot all be due to economy. One of the reasons I think we are losing ground to some of these other classes is we no longer represent as good a value as we once did. After a couple years of getting the cars sorted out we were fielding cars with lap times competetive to AI and GTS3 levels but without the unlimited spending potential of those classes. Now 7-8 years later we have lost a few seconds to those cars and been passed up by the HC1 cars and now run very similiar times to the much less expensive CMC2 cars. We still have advantages for sure, operating costs, lower maintenance, better looking (IMO at least) but its a much harder sell. If there was a way we could significantly decrease our cost of entry then I would be all for it, but I cannot think of it and no one has been able to suggest one yet. What I am proposing we do is switch to a package that maintains our low operating costs and keeps the cars evenly matched for close racing but makes our lap times and car image desireable to more people. As far as cost of entry we would not be making much of a difference, perhaps raising the cost to build a new car from $24k to $26K. Thats a whole lot less difference in money than there is between a CMC2 car and a full out AI. I agree that we have too few cars to be dividing up into multiple classes however I would rather see us do that than have guys who don't want to change pack it up and go home.

In no way do I think we should leave the "spec" part of the series like AI, ST2, GTS, that is where the budgets will run out of control, I just think cars in general have gotten faster and for ours to still be considered by guys getting into racing or moving up from other classes we have to upgrade or be prepared to fade away.

[wideofapex]

I know this is time consuming, but it might be worth it to call everybody that is not racing with us anymore and just ask them. "We are curious as to where our customers went and what you are doing now"? "Are you still racing, yes? Why did you sell/trade/park your FFC car". Might be best to hear it right from the racers...

[Jim@FactoryFive]

We have remained in contact with many past series racers as well as many of the guys who built cars above and beyond the specs to begin with. Many of these guys have posted already in this and the other 2 posts. There is not one defining reason people have left, some have wanted to go faster, others more car count, and some the budget just wasn't gonna be there forever. People moving on is going to happen no matter what we do, we just need to get new racers in faster than we lose the ones we have.

[BigKeyserSoze]

Regarding performance:

Someone in one of these comments mentioned that these cars are only a few seconds a lap faster than a Spec Miata. Respectfully, anyone that is just a few seconds a lap faster than a Spec Miata really aren't driving these cars right.

Dollar for dollar, driven right, these cars are still competitive with most of the AI field (particularly on shorter tracks), and should be able to readily outrun the CMC2 cars. The rub for me is where I live, the AI fields are small and the FFR fields essentially non-existent, so I have to play in the PTA and ST2 sandbox - on really long tracks. It gets frustrating to come off a turn 5 mph faster than a ST2 Corvette on Hoosiers, pull up to his door about the time he finds the gas and rockets away, only to repeat this story over and over. In sum, I want to play with some of the faster cars since I can't get a good race as it sits. If I could, I'd happily run in spec configuration forever.

Sadly, however, through three different posts, I'm not really seeing or hearing a uniform answer. It seems everyone wants something different.

[mhoward1]

Originally Posted by BigKeyserSoze

Regarding performance:

Someone in one of these comments mentioned that these cars are only a few seconds a lap faster than a Spec Miata. Respectfully, anyone that is just a few seconds a lap faster than a Spec Miata really aren't driving these cars right.

That comment came from someone's perception about the series and not actual facts.

[CooperD]

I'm not an experienced racer, but I've been doing track days in my partially prepared Miata, and want to take the next step into full racing - so I think that makes me an example of the kind of guy you need to recruit to the FFRC series. Perhaps my point-of-view of the series may be helpful as you decide where to take it.

FWIW, I'm 38 years old - I wasn't born when the Roadster was original, but that era of car design still appeals to me. I'm old enough to afford it, but not old enough to be in the "I haven't raced since my last stroke" category either.

I've been doing lots of research on different racing classes to decide where to go. A SpecMiata is an obvious choice for me, given that I'm already familiar with those cars, but I've also been seriously considering the FFRC series, which appeals to me for a few reasons:

• Community
• Specialness / Uniqueness - the idea of "classic styling with modern tech"
• Spec Series to control cost, and minimize "testing" overhead
• Build it myself (that's a plus for me)

Community -

From what I've seen on the forums, and the few people I've talked to who are a part of the series, it's a strong, supportive community.

One guy told me a story of another racing team loaning him spare parts at a race when his car broke down - that sense of camaraderie is a big plus for me. I'm out to have fun in competition, not claw my way to an opportunity in pro racing, so knowing that the guys I'm racing against would help me out if I need it is a huge plus.

As part of promoting the car, you should put a big emphasis on the community as well - it's one of your biggest strengths.

Uniqueness / Appeal -

I think the marque value of the design is one of the biggest selling points you have for the series, and you need to capitalize on it. The car looks like a $100k car, and will turn heads and make introductions wherever you go.

Modern Tech -

To me, the idea of an FFR Roadster has always been Classic Design / Modern Performance. But given what I've been reading, these cars are showing their age in terms of handling and power.

Given that the performance of the cars is slipping in relation to other classes, this is a big perception to overcome.

Whether the perception is right or wrong, a guy like me will look at it and say "no sway bar? no IRS? only 225 hp out of a V8?". I think you have to address those perceptions - by changing those configurations to make the car be the performance beast it appears to be - both on the track, and frankly when bench racing as well.

As for being a "handful", while it may be challenging for some, the perception that the car is difficult to drive will discourage newcomers who may be still building their skills (like me). I know my Miata won't punish me severely for a few mistakes.

Safety -

Honestly, I would feel more comfortable with some forward bars on the cage. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but I've got two kids, and I don't want them to grow up without their dad. Just sayin'

Classing -

From a classing perspective, I'd rather run with the FFRC in a spec series, but I also want to know that if I invest $25k+ into a car, that I won't find myself with no-one to run with and a significant investment required to be able to compete in some other regional class.

I know you want to promote the FFRC, as opposed to having Challenge Roadsters join other classes, but what you need is numbers of cars - make the cars competitive in other regional / national classes, and guys on the fence will be more likely to invest in one knowing they can compete anywhere, in addition to the sanctioned FFRC series.

This is really the biggest issue for me right now - I love the design and the community. The performance / handling aspects of the car are a detractor (perception only perhaps), but I'd be totally willing to take on that learning challenge if I felt there was a long term future in the series. I'm worried about buying into a car and being left at the starting grid with no-one to play with.

Price -

Face it, the Roadster can't compete with the "cheap" perception of entry-level Spec classes like the Miata, E30, or 944. The fact that it will cost almost as much as an FFRC to have a truly race winning car in those classes will be lost on most people who will see that they can enter those classes for much less and build over time.

For me, I'm willing to look at it as a long term invested - $25k now over 5 years is amortized once I've built up my skill and been able to compete over a longer period of time. But that investment needs to have a promised future in it where I believe there will be life in the car or series.

Spec Series -

I definitely say keep it spec - it's hard enough for me to get time to build the car (though I want to do it, and will make it work). I'll be hard pressed to get it to the track as often as I'd like, so I want to make sure that when I'm there, I'm competitive. I don't have the time to go out every weekend to test new parts and configurations out of a list of candidates - I'd much rather build it to the spec and know I'm at least capable of being in the middle of the pack (talent willing).

Oh - and I think it should be kept one series - if there are few cars now, splitting the classes won't help you, it will just confuse and frustrate newcomers. I think Spec Miata can afford to have Showroom Stock Miata because there are 100's of them playing, and it gives newcomers a way to enter cheaply - but you're not competing with that cheapness. I'd let older cars run in their original configurations of course, but leave it up to the owners to upgrade if they want to be competitive.


In my opinion -

The car needs to be competitive in at least one other racing class with a large field. That will avoid the concern that the investment won't pay off if the series fades, leading candidates to choose a 'boring but practical' production based car instead.

Promote the cost only by comparing performance to much higher value cars - you can't compete with "cheap".

A little more on the total cost of the car is something I'm willing to spend if I see a long term use and enjoyment of it with a larger community.

Unfortunately, if it appears that the car's tech is aging, and the class is waning, I'm likely to feel that I'm better off with a Spec Miata on the track, and building a Mk4 Roadster for the street.

Thanks for listening to the ginormous post

[johngeorge]

CooperD, thanks for sharing.

[UrQ]

Some recent observations;

Last week I installed a new engine, built fresh to spec. Was at the track with another challenge car (my weight was 2580 and his was 2450), this car had I believe had more than a E303 cam (was a Comp cam), aluminum heads, Cobra intake and MAF/throttle body/injectors to match. So I would guess 300+ HP, I got walked on, while he was able to keep up with the American Sedan class cars I was left 7-8 seconds behind. In our league our class grouping consists of GT1-2-3, AS, ITE, RS, ST, where we have to run in ITE. It would be nice to agree upon a top end package soon so we can start planning the winter project. I would like to see only 2 changes;

1. Top end package (cam, heads, intake), still maintain EFI
2. New Spindles/calipers/rotors

[Jim@FactoryFive]

We are still in the process of finding out who is interested in working with us on a top end package and what is the best reliable bang for the buck available. Still I am hoping whatever direction we end up going we have it mostly ironed out by mid-summer so it can be tested prior to becoming a firm rule in the fall.

The only other things we need to consider besides your two changes I think are gearing, mostly becasue we will have moved the operating range of the engine further up in rpms, and possibly a front sway bar. Both of these things can be tested individually to give an idea of the differences they might make and if they aren't worth the extra money then they can easily be left on the table.

[UrQ]

I think that the gearing change should be optioanl as there are some tracks where the 2.x gears have an advantage over the 3.x gears and also the other way around.

Looking forward to details on the top end package, I assume no chnages required to spec short block (so no big valves).

[D+10]

A word of advice. Better get you orders in now for all those new kits that FF will be building this winter. I am sure the 50 or 60 new orders that will be coming from the rule changes alone. It will take some time for FF to manufacture them and you have to take into account the time it will take to build for next season. I would not count on other companies being able to build your car for you...I am sure they will be swamped. Oh by the way, mine will probably be for sale if things keep to their current course. Silly me...I have allowed the economy to effect my earnings and buying power. Oh by the way, has anyone solved the gearbox problems at our current HP rating? I heard by changing gear ratios that should do the trick. So now we will be running fourth at higher HP instead of third. I don't know much about these things but doesen't that just change the target gear for destruction or is fourth much stronger. Here is an idea. Let's go to a sequential gear box. It would be much stronger and I am sure it would not add to the cost by much. Then we could use paddle shifters. Cool shifters like that are sure to draw 20 or 30 new racers. And how about that up in HP? Right now the 5.0 is solid as a rock with many people able to get two or three seasons between rebuilds. We have to change that. Let's see more power + more heat+ more strain on the internals + higher RMPs = a larger much more satisfying bang at the end of the streight. I don't know about you but I am just giddy for that prospect. Oh also there is that little problem with aerodynamics. The answer is carbon fiber Corvette bodys. Wow how cool. Yes I know...not helpful. But true. Jim I love ya brother and I know you have good intentions but forcing us to throw money at the problem will not save the class. In fact it will kill it sooner. It is the economy... It is the lack of incentives. We already have one of the coolest racers out there. All you have to do is watch the faces of the folks that come buy when our cars are out. Promote that. What incentive is there other than cool cars? None now. At one time FF offered things that could motivate racers to keep at it. Not any more. They will say they can't spend a lot because of the economy...Wow isn't that what some of us are saying? Stability is what was promised when I started this gig and that is exactly what has not been delivered. Fuel Cell, Shocks Tire changes at the whim of who ever. OK I have bitched enough. Back to work for the Aug. Mid Ohio. I hope to see you all there and I will have plenty of cold beer. Let's sit down get drunk and solve this problem.
Mike

[mhoward1]

Mike,
I can understand your frustration, especially coming from someone who has had to go through all the changes over the years. At the same time though one thing Jim, and even myself has heard that even if the economy gets better the stand alone fields of the FFRC series won’t be enough since there are only 1 or 2 cars in certain regions. If the FFRC cars can run somewhat competitively in other classes (not national winners, but at least at the regional level), then their appeal is a lot greater.

You are right that the promotion of the series we were hoping for didn’t happen. We here on the East Coast have been promoting it by word of mouth as much as possible but with little results. I am sure Jim and FFR are still listening to ideas.

BTW, will you be at any East Coast Events before Mid-Ohio?

[D+10]

You are right Marty. It is pure frustration takling. I have been chasing the rules since we started. That is not fun. The only thing that keeps me in is the great people in the series. It still puts a smile on my face. I do hope FF realizes that you must spend money to make money and it isn't fair to force us racers to bare the brunt.

[M DOUGHERTY]

Hi guys

Well it is really great to see so many people chime in here with their ideas.

this series is awsome the way it is, but I do feel it can be better.

these are the things I would like to see.

1) One series ---Do not fracture a already small group. If people want to run the car they have now let them Just grandfather it in. Racing is not about winning for some they just want to be there.

2) Add the coupe This is the answer for the people who want a full cage. Its easy to make coupe and roadster run the same.

3) More power I dont want to run with the slow guys while I am driving a cobra. stick with the 302 short block and add a spec cam head intake inj package. then add the approriot throttle body and mass air meter.

4) I love the idea of the cobra brakes but I also want the cobra rears. also allow cross drilled and or slotted. so we can purchase e-bay rotors ( thay are less exspensive in some cases )
5) 327 gears and dont look back. they work with this package.

6) front sway bar is a great idea it can only help and Jim has found
a good one for cheap

later for now

[mhoward1]

do we really want to bring in slotted or drilled rottors with all the cracking issues they have?

[cobra728]

In TTA.

Too bad he was in HIS NEW SPEC E30 car!
So it doesn't really count. His FFR...gone, much like the entire series out west. Reminds me of my days in Texas when I was the sole FFR.

So I've been mulling over this thread for months now, reading, thinking, and wondering wtf. Many a PBR gone down on this one...very concerning.

My Mom always said, "if you don't have anything nice to say...."

So I'll do my best Mom.

So some months ago, the whole idea of rule changes comes up yet again (the basis of "wtf")...I'm told FFR is very concerned about the series, they want to get involved.

Really?

That's interesting, because since getting into FFR all I've seen on the public front from FFR is a super car, a hot rod, and now an Impreza kit where some shmoe from the DeVry Institute with 6 units in Solidworks can win $$.
the past two nationals, apparently, has been full of discussions about what to do with the semi (take dudes racing or go to another non-racing function)

this year, West coast drivers are s.o.l., which I had predicted anyway

Grassroots motors sports, the grass roots RACING magazine, the magazine that LOVES the challenge car:
in the last three issues (that's about 7 months worth, and remember, their concerned and want to get involved)...not a single FFR ad showing or mentioning a challenge car (but plenty of the hot rod and the aforementioned designer wanna-be FULL PAGE ads)

the RACE CAR, not in the RACE magazine...hmmm

not a word or new effort to bring new intestest to the kit that ties the Company to the true history of the replica they produce

Nationals coming up...we have a driver attempting his 4th straight championship (you son from an unwed mother), we have a driver (Mr. George) who has bested his finish every year and this year he only has one better finishing position to go, and many other hard working drivers and teams getting ready with exciting stories, from all over the nation

In the same amount of advertising budget could FFR create a really cool ad capitalizing on the passion of these drivers, and, could they throw in mention and pictures of all the other kits (including the aforemetioned "I think I'm the next Jesse James" Impreza kit).

To bring new interest to the series, could it make 2-bits of common sense to "go fish where there are fish" and work with Grassroots for a spread on the challenge car and series and the colorful people that will be appropriately touching and driving wheel to wheel for the National Championship (cuz sheez, I'm sick of the poop-can stuff already...and reading about a bunch of snobby Cup-Car-Flat-Out and Vyper hob-knob dudes just gets old)?

How many ideas can we come up with to promote the challenge series, with no additional funding? Let's here 'em locals...

C'mon FFR, where did you go? What happened to my FFR? Pull it out already!
You're a bunch of engineers (like me), and what are we taught in engineering school...to THINK creatively.
So let's get back to F=mA, and entropy always rises, and "we're doing this because we love racing"...othewise drop the word "racing" from your name.

Alright...shoot the messenger boys and girls, and bring it to the man saying what needs to be said.

(over 60 cases in, been all over Europe, first case in Great Britain last week, pounding forward to get our less-than-perfect FDA to figure it out, boy could I attach some gnarly photos)

[BigKeyserSoze]

I don't have the magic answer, but I will say this.

I actually like the car the way it is. That said, I can't get a spec race anywhere around here, so I wind up racing with PTA and ST2 cars, which is a bad race for me. With more power, at least out of class I can get a better race, and that would be more fun. I'd love nothing more than to see 15 spec cars on grid in Florida or anywhere, but it just isn't happening.

I will say this. If we go to a spec top end package, it needs to have a power to weight table with it, just like right now. I currently own a BMW Spec E30 and a Spec Miata, and I'm learning quickly that, while fun, it sucks to have to have a $7000 pro motor built to run at the front, because there isn't a simple power to weight table to run on. In my opinion, thats the single smartest thing we have in our class is that power to weight table.

Just my thoughts.

[UrQ]

Originally Posted by Jim@FactoryFive

We are still in the process of finding out who is interested in working with us on a top end package and what is the best reliable bang for the buck available. Still I am hoping whatever direction we end up going we have it mostly ironed out by mid-summer so it can be tested prior to becoming a firm rule in the fall.

Any closer to working out a top end package?