Having come back into racing after 18 years some things have improved and some have not.
Something that does interest me and I suggest a few other and it does not seem to be discussed.
1. With the hugh growth in historic racing should we be pushing so much to all go Duratec.
2. With pinto grid still usually bigger than Duractec is it fair to complain about lower Pinto grids.
3. Should we not be looking to encourage pinto cars rather than suggest it is failing. Like the press on the economy, that does nothing but fuel recession.
4. There have been hugh numbers of classes eg BMW, FF Zetec, etc that get all the attention but still fail. FF Kent still being far better supported than Zetec
which has been a failure really.
Sorry if this does not appeal to everybody, but are there many of you out there that agree or maybe you disagree. Very interested to hear everyones opinion.
Next year its Pinto for me. Our champion this year told me so is he. Hope you mean it Paul.
Regards to you all and I hope you have a great dinner, sorry I have got to work. Charles
Pinto or Duratec or do they live together
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Charles Fogg |
Pinto or Duratec or do they live together |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 25 (11/12/08 13:50:04) |
|
||
|
PaulStreat |
|||
|
Posts: 49 (11/13/08 02:49:02) |
It is all in interpretation: the club is going well given the current climate and we should be promoting it ourselves and bringing new people in to all the
championships (point 3 above?!?).
Duratec: There have been 24 cars out this year and there are a further 7 that have not been out for one reason or another. With a few new Rays and Lolas next year (and moves afoot in the US) that means a big grid but this has only been possible through continuously promoting it and this has been the right way to go. Just look at the numbers in VdeV if you want a comparison (less than 20) and the failure of many other spec series - it really is a good news story! Pinto: 48 cars have been out this year. A further 20 haven't been out for one reason or another but were seen last year and there are 10 or so that are sitting in garages. The point being there are 70+ cars out there which are racing when they can - very few cars for sale and no one is heading off to other series. The reality is that not everyone can do all the races at the moment but they are doing whatever they can and should be supported to do that. We have great circuits, hospitality, the D&D, trophies, DVDs, magazines etc. nearly 100 active cars and some incredibly close racing. Keep spreading the word and more people will come in to the series when they realise that in the current climate it is as good value for money as you are going to get. Make sure you fill in the questionnaire as that is the best way to find out what people want for next season. Yep - I'll be in the swift again - I need to learn how to go a bit faster rather than picking up points - I'm fed up of staring at the back of Shrikes, Tigas and Carbirs! And Colin: Do I get a reduced entrance fee next season for this blatant piece of propaganda? |
||
|
Colin Feyerabend |
|||
|
Posts: 814 (11/13/08 05:10:49) |
Paul of course you don't! BUT you can do all the talking and I'll just open and close my mouth!
What you say is so true we need all 3 championships and in the future you will find each one will be providing a supporting role
for one or more of the others at various times. Then for special events such as European races, endurance races, festivals etc we can all race
together.
You can't dispute the fact that the economy is preventing many of our Pinto drivers from coming out to play. That fact does
not mean the Pinto formula is on a road to destruction, as Paul points out the cars are still there and they will be out when times are better.
The Duratec championship has remained unaffected which is I think mainly due to the fact that many of the owners are in a better
position to weather the climate and most have only recently bought their car and so are understandably keen to race it. Where as many of the Pinto guys have
had their car cars for centuries!!
We will never fail while we offer value for money, race on great tracks and enjoy the company of our fellow racers.
Duratec is growing, Historic will grow and Pinto will be back.
Now if we had a sponsor then we could run instead of crawling forward!!
|
||
|
Paul Jenkins |
The future of Duratec | ||
|
Posts: 10 (11/14/08 13:20:30) |
I hear rumours that the weight limit for Duratecs is to be raised to as much as 520kg to attract potential professional volume constuctors who cannot build a
car to the current 500kg weight limit despite fancy carbon bodywork Dymag wheels, alloy callipers and all the other goodies. This I think is totally wrong. Has
it not always been the aim of a race car constructor to build as light as possible. I am sure people will say that we now have to comply with FIA regulations
but my understanding is that the only modification that we would have to do to the class B Lola that we run for Jonas to run in class A is to fit a deformable
crashbox structure. As the car weighs 490 kg, and we already run 5kg of ballast and brim the fuel tank to make the 500kg limit this could be done with ease. We
also run iron brake callipers as well.
One of the main reasons that we have not taken delivery of the new Lola is that the factory could not make the 475kg advertised limit(later changed to 500kg). To rectify this Lola have instigated a weight saving programme that involves thinner skins on the honeycombe panels, removal of chassis bracing bars, lightweight engine frames, carbon bodywork and a host of other weight saving measures. After all this if the weight limit is increased we are going to be faced with carrying up to 30kg of lead in the cars. This is crazy and a safety hazard. We have been discussing the future of all the classes. If this new weight limit is introduced anybody with a converted Pinto car is going to be on a hidding to nothing. The weight limit for converted Pinto cars/class B cars should stay the same at 500 kg. If not, for every new car that is built we will loose one of the existing cars that have supported the class so well during the painfull early seasons. With regard to the Pinto class, to my mind it has produced the most exiting and entertaining close racing of all the classes with grids at least as big as the Duratecs and agree with other comments made on this subject that we should not deride the efforts of all those who have supported the class so well this season and imply that it is a dying class. I am sure there will be much to discuss at the AGM |
||
|
CG Developments |
|||
|
Posts: 124 (11/15/08 04:38:02) |
I think Paul makes some interesting and very valid points. It must be extremely frustrating to build a car at 490kg, and then find you have to carry a spare
(Pinto) engine block in the passenger seat to make the weight limit!!! However, raising the minimum weight limit should eliminate the need to use exotic
(expensive) solutions such as carbon bodies, therefore keeping the overall costs in check. As for buying a current Lola that has been "lightened" to
make the weight limit !!? Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. No, I got that wrong. It's already a disaster, so no change there then!
The other thought of giving the class B cars a weight advantage is also potentially counter-productive. If a modded Pinto car starts to out-perform a new car, who's ever going to buy new? Mind you, I keep looking at the Swift and thinking it would be an interesting exercise.... Hurry up, David, and get yours out there, so I can assess the situation more easily!! If finances allow, I'll be back out in Pinto next year. The category is brilliant, and any car from any era can win, as proved by Patrick, Jim, Paul, Andy and Chris this year. Consolidating the classes into one race might have to be considered for 2009, but the Pinto category is fundamentally sound, and I hope to be running in it for as long as I can, or until I can afford to go Duratec. Rollo.
|
||
|
teampjm |
|||
|
Posts: 49 (11/15/08 05:13:40) |
You are right Rollo - it`s going to be difficult to strap the pinto block down somewhere !! However I disagree that allowing the B class duratecs to remain at
500Kgms would be counter-productive. Let`s face it if a new car with a sequential box and all the advantages of modern design and technology cannot overcome a
20 kgm weight penalty something is fundamentally wrong. Having helped Paul run Jonas all year as mainly the only B class car, it would be healthy to get a few
more in the class. The benefit of gaining 20 kgms over a "new" duratec would hopefully encourage a few more conversions.
Cheers, Martin, |
||
|
Ecurie Dudley |
WEIGHT | ||
|
Posts: 190 (11/16/08 05:37:04) |
Why is it that we used to have a 480kg limit and the cars all had iron Pinto motors, Iron calipers, fibreglass bodies, Compomotive (heavy) split-rims, Steel
extinguishers, heavier Varleys, and yet the cars were still produced underweight? The move to 500kg for Pinto's already killed performance and a further
20kg on a Duratec chassis will be like carrying a co-pilot, compared to the original spec.
By all means encourage the new constructors, but don't give them a waiver on weight. If they want a competitive car, all they have to do is use a lighter materials construction. It is not too much more expensive to produce - it is just that they are building 'puddings' for the heavier VdeV regs. Whilst on weight, isn't it about time to level the playing field for the stouter gentlemen (a class to which i am subscribed) and have an overall weight limit and to avoid giving the advantage to the flyweights? Cans of Worms - i've got plenty that i can open!!!! Glenn |
||
|
Paul Stevenson |
|||
|
Posts: 32 (11/16/08 07:18:28) |
Glenn
Firstly I have to say that I am unaware of the Duratec weight issue so I can't comment on that. However.......... You know how Colin looks forward to being teased with this one every year and you know what the answer is every year. Its no good asking Paul Tickner (no offence Paul, putting you in the fuller figure club) to contact you and go for a two pronged attack!! As long as gentlemen of a certain weight continue to run at the front of the pack there is no need to change a succesful formula. As always, creating a false situation with the weight issue is no substitute for the variation in talent that exists amongst us. Which is why we have close racing throught the grid. I know David Whitham will be able to summerise the situation in far fewer words than I have done - you have been warned. As for your cans of worms...............what you eat for breakfast in France is your own affair!! All the best Glenn. |
||
|
CG Developments |
|||
|
Posts: 125 (11/17/08 04:16:05) |
Ecurie Dudley wrote: Aha! The old driver weight issue raises its head once more. It is true to say that driver weight has not, on the face of it, had a major influence on the outcome of this year's races. However, that masks the reality of the situation. The difference between someone of Andy Matthew's stature and Paul Tickner/Glenn Dudley could amount to 30kg. That is significant. In a drag race to the line at Oulton Park (uphill from a slow second-gear corner), it could make the difference between winning and finishing 0.00008sec behind! Having said that, there has to be some incentive for us "larger" drivers to get close(r) to the weight limit. Perhaps some consideration could be given to establishing a median weight for car and driver? This might still give the lightweights an edge, but only @ 10 - 15kg? You would, of course, need to introduce more post-race weight checks. After all, the words "old" and "fat" tend to go together, so that's most of us then......! Coming back to the Duratec weight limit for a moment. It's inevitable that any constructor would have an eye on other categories, such as VdeV, in order
to make economic sense from building a car. In that respect, I would rather see a higher minimum weight, so as not to discourage manufactureres from building
Duratec cars. The cars will also be fundamentally more robust, thus keeping the running costs down, and the second-hand values up. Anyone who's been
involved with (for example) Shrikes will know how fragile a truly lightweight car can be, especially after a number of years.
|
||
|
nimmo |
|||
|
Posts: 12 (11/17/08 09:39:34) |
Going back to the original theme, I'd have one of each if I could but 'Er Indoors would never sign off on it, so I'll just have to carry on with
what I've got. But there's room for us all so I don't think we should be promoting any one class at the expense of another - we just have to find
a way of encouraging people with cars to use them.
|
||
|
David Whitham |
Weight | ||
|
Posts: 213 (11/17/08 13:23:31) |
Glenn, On all up weight for the stouter gent, which part of NO don't you understand the N or the O?
On the Duratec front I understand that Mike Jenvey has got his Gunn right on the weight limit so what is the problem? Charles, as for giving FF Zetec as an example against FF Kent, the reason was the Zetec engine is/was garbage. The Kent engine was and still is simple and low and behold Duratec has revived the top class in FF (even though I gather a season is about £110,000 ouch!) There is room for both No one I know was pushing to go all Duratec? Just a warm up for the AGM, sorry Paul too many words. David W |
||
|
Ecurie Dudley |
|||
|
Posts: 192 (11/18/08 01:35:22) |
I suppose that's why all you flyweights race UK S2. You wouldn't have a chance in F1 or IMSA - or even the US S2 where all up weights have been the
norm forever. I'm not fighting for me on the weight issue, my time is over. I do know however, how much weight does make a difference and it's not just
looking for an advantage, it is so that the skill element is not promoted in a runt who goes quicker just because of his frame and the larger guy has to drive
considerably better just to keep even. Level the playing field by all means, but don't go adding even more weight to a category that get's it's
edge from a good power to weight ratio.
Cars can be lightened easily by using less paint and filler and taking out the unnecessary toys. If a manufacturer can't shave weight off to get into a category - then they shouldn't be in that category. Otherwise you could ask Bentley or Maybach to join in and run two-ton tanks! And for all of you who think that i eat worms on a regular basis - that was in the '90s when i was at the top of my form! Happy Xmas, Glenn |
||
|
Charles Fogg |
|||
|
Posts: 26 (11/18/08 01:56:49) |
Well we certainly got a bit of debate going on here. Good for spicing up those wet winter evenings.
Now what about adding 30kgs to the last winner, 20 to second and 10 to third. |
||
|
lewwright |
Weight Reduction??? | ||
|
Posts: 32 (11/18/08 02:59:29) |
On that basis I should be able to run 100kgs lighter next season! That might even get me into the top half of the grid! With Christmas fast approaching talk of
weight reduction may be "pies in the sky" Hans devices may be required wear for the AGM!
|
||
|
Raceydaveygravey |
Weight | ||
|
Posts: 38 (11/18/08 06:13:15) |
What Glenn`s talking about is an even playing field which is supposed to be what Sports 2 is about. I thought the whole Sports 2 philosophy is to create even
parity so that you cannot buy your way to the front. Surely there is no simpler or cheaper way to help create / sustain this even "playing field"
than by having a "realistic" all up weight.
No, there is no point in just having an all-up weight that allows the heaviest people a free ticket, thats not what its about but if we had a realistic all-up weight how can anyone argue that this would not be fairer than the current system ??? the answer is you cant. Its like saying you small people over there can have more powerful engines but you larger people can`t , you`ll just have to try harder....because thats what actually happens |
||
|
JBarryD |
|||
|
Posts: 41 (11/18/08 07:20:06) |
Charles you are such a wind-up merchant !
"Success" weight penalties may just wonderful for touring cars on the Telly to keep them crashing into each other, but not for S2 thank you very much. It smacks of dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator, and that is not what motor racing should be about. Now have a second race with a reversed grid and it would get very interesting. Barry D. |
||
|
Duke |
|||
|
Posts: 1 (11/18/08 07:40:32) |
Glenn,David you both know there is no chance of an all up weight limit while the powers that be have an average weight of a healthy whippet.
|
||
|
PaulStreat |
|||
|
Posts: 50 (11/18/08 07:42:37) |
Ah the joy of having the results - means I can pull out random statistics in my coffee break.
Question is how much time difference 20kgs weight difference makes to a car on the average 1m30sec lap. Over the last two years the average difference between Pole and 10th is about 4% - or about 4 seconds a lap on the average 1m30 lap. Top 5 have been within 2% - c.2 secs. I can't see 20kg making more than 0.5secs difference on a car being driven somewhere near its maximum so I don't think you would see any difference across the field - put 20kg on Jim/Andy/Oli/Paul T/Patrick's cars and they will still be at the front. It would however increase the difficulty of competitors setting their car up and particularly on scruteneering / making sure people start/finish the race with the correct all up weight etc. I propose that we enforce a time penalty on the fastest drivers - that being a forced amount of time to be spent in the hospitality tent at the courtesy of Mr Doble's finest - that should have the double effect of increasing weight and decreasing physical ability to concentrate on anything other than digestion/an afternoon nap! |
||
|
JBarryD |
|||
|
Posts: 42 (11/18/08 11:10:30) |
I had an even better idea.
Make it compulsory for drivers to carry their sponsor in the passanger seat. Can't fail. Sponsors get more for their money too. The hunt for tiny sponsors with big budgets is on ! Barry D |
||
|
Ecurie Dudley |
|||
|
Posts: 193 (11/19/08 01:15:40) |
I've given up on worms - i'll just continue pissing in the wind!
It appears that you flyweights need all the help that you can get - now where did i leave my pie! Happy dieting, Glenn |
||
|
CG Developments |
|||
|
Posts: 126 (11/19/08 03:27:54) |
David Whitham wrote:Rollo 
|
||
Quick Reply
U.S. Sports 2000 Racing Forum
