Going FST vs FV Racing

Moderator: Dietmar

Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby csingletary01 » October 31st, 2013, 8:09 am

I try to stay out of all the political bickering concerning current FV vs. FSt. I went back racing in 2010 after a couple of year layoff and decided on Vintage FV with CVAR. Since that point I have ran 14 race weekends including the Birthday Party. I am enjoying racing again so much I wanted to go SCCA racing again. About a year ago I started looking at FV again. Watching this forum and going to and talking to racers I saw that FV costs to be competitive had climbed, parts were scarce and the quality of replacement parts were poor in general and national caliber motor costs were prohibitive. I am already running a moderate national motor in my vintage car to be competitive and the upgrades to this motor would be expensive plus it was needed to run my Vintage Vee. At the Birthday I watched the FST and started investigating. When the latest FV issues showed up, Disc vs. Drums, Chinese Piston Ring Location, spec tire, etc. I made my decision to convert a FV to FST. I think due to the issues I talk about above a FV is very cheap to buy. I found the Last Predator built and did my conversion. I finished the car in a little over 4 months with all of the current best parts and engine for under $10,000 and raced for the first time at Gateway two weeks ago. It was a blast, it was fun to drive with the torque, the precise rack and pinion and the brakes felt amazing. During this conversion process with me being in Oklahoma and being the First FST I had to rely on the FST community through the Internet and telephone, what a helpful and fun group. My background has included, IMSA, SCCA, ASA, and the world of Outlaws. I tech inspect for CVAR and Open Wheel Driver instruct with them. I still love FV, but the group needs to get their head out of the sand and do something's to attract new FV racers including guys like me. Just my two cents worth, and this is not being said to start another war of words just an old racers opinion.
csingletary01
 
Posts: 73
Joined: November 29th, 2009, 2:00 pm
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby FV80 » October 31st, 2013, 8:51 am

Chuck,
Thanks for posting your thoughts. However, IMHO, FV "proper" does NOT have "its head in the sand". We are playing to a MUCH larger base of existing cars and drivers - many of which are not interested in changing ANYTHING. FV is still the largest, most active, open wheel class in SCCA by a significant margin. Our days ARE numbered unless 'some' changes are made ... and maybe even if they are. There is no way to "CHANGE" FV into FST and there is no point - FST is already here for anyone that wants to change. The rest of us are just trying to continue doing what we love for as long as possible WITHOUT having to build a new car (and throw away all existing spares) :mrgreen: .

Congrats on a successful conversion and hope you continue to enjoy it for as long as you want.

Steve, FV80
The Racer's Wedge, FV80
To sign up in the FV Registry for updates about SCCA Formula Vee, please go to http://www.FormulaVee.us/fvregistry_interface2/eEditor.asp?action=insert and enter the appropriate info.
User avatar
FV80
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: June 27th, 2006, 9:07 am
Location: Near Athens, GA

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby csingletary01 » October 31st, 2013, 9:13 am

Thanks for the excellent reply Steve

I neither propose doing away with FV or making all cars FST's. I agree with you they are now both options for people. If somebody wants to convert a FV to a FST without buying a new car it is fairly easy and inexpensive in the grand scheme of racing cost. I started my road racing career in 1971 in a FV and have a great love for it which is why I have a 48 year old Vintage FV to help preserve FV's legacy.
csingletary01
 
Posts: 73
Joined: November 29th, 2009, 2:00 pm
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby fvracer27 » October 31st, 2013, 12:44 pm

How quick are you compared to the 4 fast FSTs? This will determine your cost. I love how everyone keeps talking about how inexpensive FST cars are but everytime I look at a results sheet there is 3 maybe 4 lead cars that are 2 sec a lap faster than the rest that are back with FVs with 30hp less, why? You can run a FV as a mid to tail packer on the cheap as well. Know before anyone flys off the handle make it clear "I think FST is a great class" and If there were more in my region to run with I would really think about building one. I also think FST has problems just like FV just no one wants to talk about it. FV has done a pretty good job as keeping the class going this long. Think about it the class has been around for 50 YEARS more that any other class, Why? The more people in the class the more compition there will be and the more it will cost, it's a fact period. Yes maybe FV needs to do something, maybe not.

I'm so tired of reading post of people bashing 1 class or the other. New people get on these sites and read nothing but negitive things. The 2 class are by far the most cost effective open wheel cars to run.
Mark Filip
NER #27
Womer EV-3
fvracer27
 
Posts: 247
Joined: October 25th, 2009, 8:40 pm
Location: Manchester, NH

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby BLS » October 31st, 2013, 1:41 pm

I also think FST has problems just like FV...


Mark, not picking on you, but I've seen this thought before. I think you are mostly wrong. FV has an issue simply because we use the 1200 and "stock" link pin beam. Mostly the problem is the 1200. There are certainly no new parts available for much of the engine. 1600 parts are all available new, and many improved parts are available. The wide use of the ACVW in may venues keeps the parts available. Those "nuts" in California just keep on rebuilding old bugs for the street, keeping the demand for parts up there. The only problem restoring an old bug is when it is the 1200/1300 engine and you want it historically correct. Most of the bugs in Cali go for the larger engine and other mods, so the 1200 gets left out of the demand. Some parts for a link pin beam are available, inner bushings, outer needle bearings/bushings, spindles, link pin carriers, bearings, drums, shoes. The torsion arms seem to be all "reconditioned" when available. The off road guys still prefer the link pin beam for the strength, but they use custom torsion arms often with spindles and link pin carriers with larger link pins.

I don't know of a single part that is in danger with the FST cars. Maybe I missed something.

Keeping a V with the link pin would not be an issue if we wanted to use custom made parts when the supply runs out, but why bother when their are other choices.

I'll have my FV on the track in 2014. I like the FV as it is and I certainly understand someone that has worked hard to build up a supply of spare parts being reluctant to change the rules. It is a matter of economics mostly. It is not politics or protectionism. It is simply a desire to continue racing what they know and have the parts for.

I like the FST cars. If they were not so regionally confined I would consider building one. As far as I'm concerned the FST cars are FV1600. I like the idea of there being two groups of FV, 1200 and 1600.

I don't particularly like the attitude of any change - build a FST. But everybody gets an opinion. I see no reason not to allow updates to FV where needed or desired, even if it brings FV closer to the FST parts group. I can easily see a situation where FV has the BJ beam with discs and rear discs. At that point we would be a few pounds, tires and wheels, and 400cc from being a FST. But it would still be a FV, just a slight bit more modern.

The real question I have is would all the possible changes actually bring in new drivers. Are drum brakes and link pins really holding back a flood of new drivers? I doubt it. Maybe a few, but then there is FST and I don't see a flood of new cars there either. I think the economy hurts the low cost classes more that the upper end. If not, then the only real need to change FV is to address the parts issues.

Making FST a national level class would improve the new car count in my opinion. As a regional class, mostly confined to one general area, there just isn't a desire to build.

As far as the "bickering" goes, read through other classes postings. It's there as well whenever changes are proposed and at least as hotly contested as the FV updates issue. As Steve mentioned, FV is a geographically widespread class with a large base. FST is a geographically confined class with a small base. It is much easier to manage/change the smaller group with a shorter history. There is nothing abnormal about FV and the reluctance to make changes or the difficulty in implementing them. It is true of any group of similar scope.

Regards,
Barry
Barry
Old Zink FV,
'87 Citation
BLS
 
Posts: 384
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 7:52 pm
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby SR Racing » October 31st, 2013, 3:08 pm

fvracer27 wrote:How quick are you compared to the 4 fast FSTs? This will determine your cost. I love how everyone keeps talking about how inexpensive FST cars are but everytime I look at a results sheet there is 3 maybe 4 lead cars that are 2 sec a lap faster than the rest that are back with FVs with 30hp less, why?


Terrible logic. In EVERY class there is always several grouping of cars. Some 2+ seconds back. It is usually driver experience, skills, desire, etc. It is seldom a $ issue. I have had most all of the FST's running out there in this area on the dyno. The difference in HP is VERY little. (or the money invested in the engine/car.)

BTW, I have literally had 100's of FV's and FST's on the chassis and/or engine dyno. The final finishing position for these cars has VERY LITTLE to do with the HP (except at the extremes). It is almost ALWAYS car setup, driver skill, etc. Certainly another HP or two helps. But it won't put you on the podium.

You can run a FV as a mid to tail packer on the cheap as well.
,

but not applicable whatsoever to the FST class at this time.


I also think FST has problems just like FV just no one wants to talk about it.


I love a conspiracy. :shock: What are the hidden problems that no one wants to talk about? I think we talk about them all the time. (cost to convert, non National, Geographics, etc. Are those are the secret things? Unlike FV we in FST do use some non-"VW" components from the aftermarket. We sometimes find a parts that doesn't seem to be of the best quality. We note it, publish it on our web site and let everyone know.. WE LOVE to talk about it. So what are the things that " no one like to talk about" ?

I'm so tired of reading post of people bashing 1 class or the other. New people get on these sites and read nothing but negitive things. The 2 class are by far the most cost effective open wheel cars to run.


The comparisons are going to be made and will continue. Both have pros and cons. (as pointed out by Barry.. above)
User avatar
SR Racing
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 1:58 pm
Location: Lexington, KY

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby fvracer27 » October 31st, 2013, 4:57 pm

Barry I understand exactly what your saying and for the most part I agree with you. Just the FST has no problems part I'm having trouble with. Maybe I'm misinformed and have received incorrect information.
Mark Filip
NER #27
Womer EV-3
fvracer27
 
Posts: 247
Joined: October 25th, 2009, 8:40 pm
Location: Manchester, NH

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby BLS » October 31st, 2013, 5:38 pm

Mark,

I'm just not aware of any parts the FST uses that are not readily available. I don't have a FST but have looked closely at the class. I may have missed something.

Barry
Barry
Old Zink FV,
'87 Citation
BLS
 
Posts: 384
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 7:52 pm
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby Bill_Bonow » October 31st, 2013, 8:36 pm

Hey, been away from the board for a while. My black helicopter was in the shop getting serviced. Did I miss anything?
Bill Bonow
" I love Formula Vees, they're delicious!"
User avatar
Bill_Bonow
 
Posts: 301
Joined: June 26th, 2006, 12:53 pm

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby SR Racing » November 1st, 2013, 9:44 am

fvracer27 wrote: Maybe I'm misinformed and have received incorrect information.


I think so. But here is the place to tell us. The pros of cons ARE being discussed here to determine what are the best options. If you have some info about FST problems, please share them.
As we find issues with new parts, etc. we post them. You have something new for us?
Jim
User avatar
SR Racing
 
Posts: 1213
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 1:58 pm
Location: Lexington, KY

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby Mystique Racing » November 29th, 2013, 10:34 am

Bill, maybe if you would upgrade the 1200 engine and the link pins your black helicopter it would not have to be in the shop so often.....
Scott

Diamond Formula Cars

http://www.diamondformulacars.com
User avatar
Mystique Racing
 
Posts: 210
Joined: June 26th, 2006, 12:40 am
Location: Northern CA

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby smsazzy » December 2nd, 2013, 3:04 pm

The universal case is nearly impossible to get for both classes.
Stephen Saslow
FV 09 NWR
User avatar
smsazzy
 
Posts: 701
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 5:56 pm
Location: Seattle, Wa

Re: Going FST vs FV Racing

Postby Bill_Bonow » December 2nd, 2013, 4:10 pm

Yes, but not impossible, just expensive to buy new.

I've been using the AS 21 (vs. the much more common AS 41). It's a much better/stronger case.

Here is a great resource http://www.thesamba.com
Bill Bonow
" I love Formula Vees, they're delicious!"
User avatar
Bill_Bonow
 
Posts: 301
Joined: June 26th, 2006, 12:53 pm


Return to Formula First

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron