2012 Rule Proposal for 348/355 Class

I agree with Option 3 with two additional points:

1) Whether we like it or not we are investing in 15 year old technology and to a large extent are dependent on Ferrari to obtain parts at prices fully reflective of such an investment value. I rebuilt my shocks 2 years ago and they are due for another rebuild this winter. The cost is about half that of installing a lower price point remote reservoir set such as Penske or Mouton. However the parts for these rebuilds are only available from one source AFAIK and that is the guy in NH who used to do this for FNA back in the day when these cars were part of the series. I will contact him this week to see what the status of his supply has become.

2) There is also the issue of other suspension parts such as sway bars at springs. While changing the set up has speed considerations (obviously) there is also the safety issues especially when running with faster cars. Set ups for each track do vary and rain conditions place completely different demands on the suspension. Given that these cars do not have adjustable sway bars but do have an alternative sway bar spec, surely that poses the same question: if adjustable shocks were part of the original spec and alternative springs and bars were too, why not make springs, shocks and bars free? That gets away from needing a set of tech police and yet allows for the spirit of the original regs that facilitated adjustment except that we would user newer (but by no means leading edge) technology.

As it is I have no idea which set of bars or springs are installed on my car and in my discussions with Risi Competition it seems the spec on the part numbers has disappeared.

 

I would say for now. Let everyone do what they want to do. I have the original shocks. I don't care. Everyone knows who is running what because it's a small class. Frankly, these mods are not creating a unfair advantage. All the 355's are within a 3 sec window. What wins races in the 355 class is consistently showing up to race. If you can make all the races, you will win the class.

What I find comical is, the guys who have all the modifications calling out "foul" when someone else out qualifies them with a less modified car.
It doesn't even matter if you out qualify someone anyway. The race times are always slower.

 

This is a good forum and we are listening. Let's get the other 355/348 drivers to chime in.

My preference is to keep all of the cars as stock as is reasonable. The overall guidelines for modifications are allowances for things that make the cars safer, more cost effective to run.

As for Greg's comment about the guys who show up will win, the 355 class will be much bigger next year and is going to get a lot more competitive, so we need to keep an eye on the cars being equal. It's a slippery slope if we do not reign it in now. People who may not care now, will in two years.

 

You are probably right, John. It might get out of hand, but for now it is ok with me. The driving speaks for itself in the 355 class. The guys who won deserve it.

 

I agree with you but here is the issue if you extrapolate your perspective: a belt job with some head work and new rings costs about 50% of the cost of an exchange 360 engine. Someone (and that is not me) may choose to do a "cool" 355 Q-Car and race it. Are you OK with that? What about a turbo 355 - they are out there?

If we do not stick with John's perspective we either have to have our own tech police/protest methodology or choose limited changes that are modern replacements rather than enhancements. I think air filters, exhaust headers and pipes, shocks, springs and bars (given bushing issues) are easily freed-up as replacements. Wider/larger/lighter wheels would not be a replacement but an enhancement.

If this is not to be the case, then John rules! But that brings up a host of mods that have been done to all the cars as raced this year in some form or another that need to be either waived or reinstated. I have the original Challenge parts list and saw these mods at Homestead and Daytona. Personally I don't care wanting a reliable affordable steed but the changes need to address affordability much as they do at other discrete single class Vintage events.

 

The only 355 which meets the super 355 criteria is Jeff's 500hp car and John did the right thing. He put him in the 360 class. So, we will have to see how it goes. I don't worry about these things. I just drive.

 

What we need to do is further define the existing set of rules. I'd like to hear the perspectives. Right now the driving rules, but as the series progresses, and competition and participation gets more serious (like I said we will have a big jump next year), these things will count. For next year we may have a major sanctioning body organizing and running the races, (the FCRA members and board will retain control).

As a series we will make exceptions (and add a weight penalty) to cars that were purchased in a certain condition prior to the owner entering the series. But I do not want cars modified beyond our goals. Otherwise we defeat the purpose of a cost controlled series.

My judgment is that Engines should remain stock. Period. For those already modifided we will provide a weight penalty for next year.

As for shocks, we need to decide. Id like to see cars remain stock put we need to see what is the most cost effective way to deal with this.

The stock ideal needs to balanced with not causing an expense to guys with existing mods (hence the exceptions and weight on a case by case basis)

But I'd like the 355/348 drivers to ultimately decide.

First big issue: Shocks.

 

John - shocks are symptomatic of the problem with "old" cars but in this case its not as bad as I thought. Delta Vee in MI are still advertising that they can do rebuilds for 355s at $400 each and seem to still be offering exchange units too but I suspect that for the moment is on the stock shocks vs. the Challenge models which were a firmer valved spec.

http://www.deltavee.net/parts.htm

They participate and advertise on F'Chat so perhaps we can get them to comment. They offer Dealer Discounts so it may be possible to negotiate for the FCRA if someone was so empowered.

So a lot less expensive than modified for Penske etc. I think this clinches it?

 

I agree with John with trying to keep the 348/355Ch's as close to original as possible with regards to the power train. But with wear items such as shocks, it would seem reasonable to use what is currentley available and priced reasonably. Again such replacement items should remain in the spirit of the series.

 

What about headers? Most of us have modified headers because the stock ones do not last a weekend in racing environments?

What's the feeling about this arena? They can make a marginal improvement in output but generally its about longevity. However if the stock Challenge silencers are removed the resulting system is noisier (Limerock issues) which is good marketing as they sound like F-cars should!

 

Shocks....then we need to ban Onofrio,lol. He is running a full Penske system. Rob Lay wins the 355 class for 2011!!!

 

Its a point - but the issue is we need to resolve this soon as Onofrio will have to procure a set of stock shocks, install and set up if this is the way we are going. similarly if we decide to allow remote shocks, some of us are poised to overhaul our stock ones which money would be better spent on a Penske set up. These things always take longer than you expect.

 

Then theres the question of where the "358" Plugzit has fits !

 

Shocks are an issue for the 430s as well. I have adjustable Penskes because the stock shocks aren't very good IMO - especially as we're using tires the car wasn't designed for. I'd make shocks free.

If you don't make shocks free, people will just revalve the stock bits anyway. You have to be realistic, unless you want to undertake SCCA level scrutiny.

 

On the engines, you need to allow upgrades of weak street internal parts. Nothing wrong with upgrades to help reliability.

FYI, I bought my car new and the engine is as from the factory.

Urge you to take a hard look at the Pirelli Cup Ferrari specs.

http://www.competentmotorsport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/PDC-Technical-Specification-Matrix-2011-revised-09-Mar-2011.pdf

 

I think we need to concentrate on getting as many (355) cars to these events as possible. We are NOT professional drivers. We run in this series because we enjoy driving Ferrari's and having fun with our cars. You guys start slapping rules on everything. I guarentee cars will stop showing up. If you want rules and regulations to keep the racing fair, go join SCCA.

I think FCRA's priority should be in the area of SAFETY. It's starts with the cars and ends with the drivers.
The cars should meet or exceed all current safety standards of SCCA. They should be running fire systems, new belts, new seats, nets, hans, full helmets, inspected roll cages and full Nomex.
Next should be the driver education. All drivers need to be certified within the Club not by rubber stamp. The rules of NO touching should be enforced and gentleman driving should be DEMANDED.
My fear is this series will end up in the hands of IMSA or Grand AM. Then it will become too serious. It needs to remain a gentlemans series in order to survive.
Just keep it simple, keep it fun, encourage as many cars to show up as possible and most importantly make it safe.

 

Greg:

I can promise you that the FCRA will remain controlled by the drivers. I started this as a non profit and I am not turning it over to a sanctioning body to run away with it.

I also agree with you that the object is 1) to make it safe, 2) to make it cost effective, and 3) to get as many cars as possible to participate.

This year we accomplished a lot. 1) We ran one of the most incident free series I've ever heard of, with everyone being extremely safe. We proved you can race your Ferrari without fear of getting it banged up. 98% of the cars did not so much have a single off or scratch in 14 races. 2) we proved we could run a Ferrari challenge arrive and drive program for 1/5-1/10 the cost of the factory challenge, 3) we exceeded the grid counts beyond anyone's expectations. (FYI we have 35 cars pre-registered for the first race 5 months out and over 90 Ferrari challenge owners have joined the FCRA)

However we do need rules. Mainly to promote the three goals, safety, cost effectiveness, and participation. Only rules that respect these three will be adopted. The series needs to be fun, and safe, profit is not a motive.

We will never exclude new cars entering the series. We will always encourage them. We may make exceptions and put weight on cars to even them out, but I want the cars to eventually graduate into as stock as reasonable. Many people this year got frustrated about the various performance level of the cars. (I am one of these). And if the series is going to continue to attract new members, then the cars need to be relatively even. If there are no rules the guys that spend the most will always win and that will hurt the series.

However, there will be no rules that increase costs or prevent new cars. We will make exceptions and put weight on cars that people buy in good faith that are already modified. I realize that there is a competing expense of returning cars to stock and we need to respect that.

 

I think that Rob may be on to something. I do think that shocks should be an open item. They are really not too expensive in the whole scheme of things and will make an easier time of maintenance. Aero is also another consideration. I would like to see the spirit of the series to be as equitable as possible, and that means that there should be honesty about what's going on. I fully support the idea of weight penalties for overly modified engines as well as removal of all non-original aero add-ons. I think that there needs to be a minimum weight set, and if that is the original racing weight, so be it.

Ego is an inevitable by-product of racing, and I am certainly guilty of one particular offense of taking myself too seriously this season. To that end, I can assure you that I will be much less interested to carry on if I am not even in the ballpark with HP against other cars. I do not claim to be as talented as most drivers in my class, but it is nice to have a shot at a competitive race with ALL the cars in the class. I definitely had some really fun times at NJMP and Homestead with equally matched cars. That is what makes a great race series that is as entertaining to drive as it is to watch.
Let's keep fun and fair!

 

An interesting approach that was used to equalize cars was the rule set from the Calclub sponcered Corvette Challenge which is a time trial series in so cal. Relative performance 430/360/355/348 could be seen just like vettes, C6Z06, C6base, C5Z06, C5base. Class names could change to A,B,C,D or whatever. Then points are added or subtracted for modifications like big brake +25 or +10 for swaybars. Too many points bump you in the next class. So a base 355C with more power, big brakes, and a giant wing might be in the 360 class. You could compete in the 355 class in your 360 if you run street tires. What this allows is people are free to spend money if they want or not and move around in class. The formula can get complex but it works and reduces the complaining. If a couple of guys want to start running methanol you let them and assign points that might effect their class position. If you find mid season those points are not enough or too much you change the points assigned for next season.

 

IMHO the group should appoint a technical Czar to make such decisions based on engineering science and with safety considerations. Perhaps there could also be a board that is made up of representatives from the various teams.
The Czar should have complete autonomy and produce a written set of rules and oversea their implementation and inspection. Everyone has made some very good points here and the spirit of the thread seems to be one of cooperation...Bravo

 

"The vast majority of what is done to a car to make it lighter is free."


Rob, you could have people using lightweight body components. I personally would set the minimum weight a little below below the stock weight. By the time people add cool suits, data & cameras, aero, cupholders, etc, they'll likely have pumped it back up anyway. Hey, maybe we'll end up with an FCRA diet as drivers try to improve hp to weight the "easy" way.

Weight is simple to check at the track.

I think John has done a superb job of trying to steer things to fairness and equality without excessive scrutineering. The series is at a crossroads, and John seems to be trying to steer it on a course away from legalism - not bad for a lawyer. Rules are a mixed blessing: they can bring disputes. It may be that an honor system on most issues is best the way to go. Realistically, I don't think John wants to do teardowns. And, let's be honest, there's so much money and expertise out there that a driver who wants to cheat probably can do so without easily being caught.

My formula is, at least, without any penalty: conversion to steel brakes; front and rear aero; shocks and springs; headers. If there are model specific improvements generally recognized to add reliability or safety, then the class can ask for them.

Good discussion.