Submitted a request the the SCCA SEB to class the 818 for Solo

[Rasmus]

SEB = Solo Events Board

It read:

Please class Factory Five Racing's new kit car just introduced at the 2012 SEMA show. It's called the 818 and uses a Subaru Impreza for a donor. There are two models proposed: the 818S and 818R

Please look to EM as a suggestion. The 2 liter turbo motor and weight of the kit (818kg) look to make a good fit there. A FFR 818 with a 2.5 STi motor could be classed in DM.

Thanks,
Rasmus

I was issued SEB Letter Tracking Number #9715 for my request.

[RM1SepEx]

Rasmus "A FFR 818 with a 2.5 STi motor could be classed in DM."

According to Autocross rules for DM and EM a turbo 818S would need to be EM

Please read section 18.1 page 140 of the 2012 SCCA rulebook for solo II
According to their rules an 818R would NOT be eligable as it was not designed, constructed and licensable for street use.

Then go to Appendix A
note turbo engines have a 1.4 x displacement ratio for determination of class and all kit cars run with a modified tub weight penalty

so a 2.0 turbo would be a 2.8 liter OHC engine: 1750 lbs with driver including the 50 lb modified tub penalty

a 2.5 turbo would be a 3.5 liter OHC engine: 1850 lbs with driver including the 50 lb modified tub penalty

so only a normally aspirated 2.0 liter could run DM

This discussion has come up before...

[Turboguy]

Are they really going to address this issue before the kit itself is even finalized?


The cars at SEMA were essentially prototypes.

[mrvwcastner]

What about those of us that plan on wearing liscence plates on the 818R? My understanding is the only questionable aspect of it not being a street car is lack of wiper. I'm wanting a NA motor single seat street car with well designed structural cage that will see almost as much cone/track time as street time. I would not expect to find a loop hole for classing advantage, just a fair look at it.

[RM1SepEx]

What about those of us that plan on wearing liscence plates on the 818R? My understanding is the only questionable aspect of it not being a street car is lack of wiper. I'm wanting a NA motor single seat street car with well designed structural cage that will see almost as much cone/track time as street time. I would not expect to find a loop hole for classing advantage, just a fair look at it.

Find it here http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/...ry_reduced.pdf

click to page 140 of this PDF

See my post above, read section 18.1

[Rasmus]

Reread the rules again. Man are the "Modified"Classes rules hard to follow in that book. They skip all over.

You're correct. Doesn't look like the 818 would fit DM:
From page 231 in the 2012 Rulebook:

Modified Class D (DM)
Modified Production and GT cars with engine displacement 2000cc and
under as follows

Which would mean one would have to run NA or destroke and sleeve to 1.428 liters for a turbo.

Regarding EM, from page 231 in the 2012 Rulebook:

Modified Class E (EM)
Modified Production and GT cars as follows:
A. Weight (with driver) vs. Displacement
Piston engines up to & including 3200 cc OHC: 1700 lbs
Piston engines up to & including 4500 cc pushrod/OHV: 1700 lbs
2-rotor rotary engines w/ unrestricted porting: 1700 lbs
Piston engines unlimited displacement: 1800 lbs
3-rotor rotary engines w/ unrestricted porting: 1800 lbs
B. Performance Adjustments
AWD: Add 300 lbs
Modified Tub: Add 50 lbs

The Subaru Flat 4 is a "Piston engine up to & including 3200 cc OHC". We can ignore the "4500 cc pushrod/OHV" because it doesn't' have push-rods, doesn't run the camshaft in the "valley". It's an Over Head Cam motor.

That means we have 2.285 Liters as our maximum displacement for a turbo engine (3200 / 1.4) to get the 1,700 lb weight.

Read section 18.1 page 140 of the 2012 SCCA rulebook, again, like you suggested:

Kit cars, which were originally designed, constructed, and licens-
able for street use, may participate in DM and EM if they are ap-
proved by the SEB.

I do agree that the "licensable for street use" is a hurdle for the 818R. It's really up to the SEB. I'm just glad it doesn't read, "currently licensed, or previously licensed for street use". I take licensable to mean: capable of being licensed. So as long as just one of the 50 states would license it, It's over that hurtle.

[Xusia]

so a 2.0 turbo would be a 2.8 liter OHC engine: 1750 lbs with driver including the 50 lb modified tub penalty

a 2.5 turbo would be a 3.5 liter OHC engine: 1850 lbs with driver including the 50 lb modified tub penalty

I'm confused by the weight listings here; I don't understand what they mean. Are those minimum weights? (in which case the 818 should be fine)

[Rasmus]

I'm confused by the weight listings here; I don't understand what they mean. Are those minimum weights? (in which case the 818 should be fine)

Those are minimum weights WITH driver AFTER runs (e.g. low fuel). The "with driver" part means we'll be looking for ways to remove mass.

[RM1SepEx]

Rasmus

Yup they do jump all over but bottom line is norm aspirated up to 2 liters, DM @ 1420 lbs (page 231) , turbo 2 liter, EM at 1750 (page 232) , 2.5 liter EM at 1850 (back 232) your calculations are correct

BUT the more questionable area is the 818R being made and clearly marketed as a race car? They are tying to be inclusive while not creating a "dominant" exception. Do they allow both types of Factory 5 Cobras in EM now? Is the Competition version allowed to run in EM? That might tell us though the Cobra i covered by a different set of rules as a "clone" of an allowed car...

They don't do anything without input, so if you want this exception write to the SEB and ask... My request will be going in, though my local club will allow me to run my 818S in EM anyway... This does matter to the community though as this is a big area for exposure of the 818 to car fanatics like us.

Xusia you have to multiply the displacement by 1.4 when turbo is used... so a 2.0 x 1.4 = 2.8 liters as displacement for my 05 WRX 2.0 turbo... meaning the engine is too big for DM and light enough to get the lower minimum weight allowance in EM. The SEB and SOLO rules are just trying to equalize performance capability.

It would take weeks to digest and understand the rule book. I did tech and classing questions for years with our local club. Been autocrossing for 15 years +

The Mod classes depend on Appendix A and the section starting on page 140

What fun, can't wait to see what I can do with mine. I expect to take a year or two to develop setup and driving techniques!

[Rasmus]

BUT the more questionable area is the 818R being made and clearly marketed as a race car?

Well warm poop on a stick, I didn't think of that. It is marketed as a race car, which could totally blow the 818R chances to be legal in SCCA Solo Nationals. I'm sure my local club wouldn't care, but I don't want to be protested out off a trophy in a ProSolo or a National Tour.

I'm almost certain they'll class the 818S in EM. And if the 818R is out, I'll just buy have to order a 818S and weld in extra bars and take the windshield off. Which seems sort of stupid because I could get a 818S and turn it into a "818R" and it'd be legal but the 818R would be illegal right out of the box. But I can totally see the ruling going that way.


Or perhaps they're trying to eliminate things like the Radicals from entering D and E Mod. We'll just have to argue our point and see what the SEB decides.

[Mechie3]

It shouldn't matter if it is a race car or not. If it's not clarified, I'd be 100% positive you could win a protest at nationals, though the next year they might clarify the rules.

The rule says"

Kit cars, which were originally designed, constructed, and licens-
able for street use, may participate in DM and EM if they are ap-
proved by the SEB.

Kit car? check
Designed, constructed, and licensable for street use? check

It doesn't matter it was designed to be a street legal race car. Take away the adjective "race" and at it's lowest level, it's a street legal car.

We do this in FM all the time. Floor must be flat within 1" between the front "axle" and rear axle. Wings are specifically prohibited with the intent that all aero is prohibited to keep costs down for all competitors in FM. That doesn't stop people like Jeff Colegrove from making a massive rear diffuser and a front splitter and winning FM nationals two years ina row and placing 2nd in PAX overall. How is it legal? It's not a splitter or a diffuser. It's just a oddly shaped part of the floor that happens to bend upwards in an area not governed by the 1" rule. He didn't only win nationals, he won by over 2 seconds, two years in a row.

IIRC, the SEB has updated the rules to allow diffusers specifically because pretty much everyone has them now.

Cool side note, my friend bought that car this fall and I'm co driving it at nationals in 2013.

[Rasmus]

It shouldn't matter if it is a race car or not. If it's not clarified, I'd be 100% positive you could win a protest at nationals, though the next year they might clarify the rules.
Kit car? check
Designed, constructed, and licensable for street use? check

It doesn't matter it was designed to be a street legal race car. Take away the adjective "race" and at it's lowest level, it's a street legal car.

Excellent points.

[Xusia]

I think Mechie3 is prob right. Also, we don't know if the 818R will technically be a different model (i.e. different serial number designation), or just an equipment package for "an 818" (think Civic EX vs. SI). If they will all have the same serial number series, there is really no way to tell them apart, so there is effectively only the 818 - with different equipment (fitted from the factory in this case).

[RM1SepEx]

A crap shoot, frame is different and it is marketed as a different car... best to play it safe and specifically ask up front.

Yes they are specifically trying to avoid cars like a Radical etc... purpose built race cars philosphically shouldn't be classed with production street cars that are heavily modified... they run in faster classes where vs. production based cars...

I've worked questions with Howard Duncan many times... simple items like a ground effects kit can cause a car to go into a different class!

While Meche3 IDs that making a change beyond the 1 inch defined areo area was allowed in FM, the 818R is clearly described as a track car and is NOT intended to be street driven. It doesn't matter that in Modified you can do all the mods, what matters is how they interpret that sentance and it would be very easy to disallow the 818R based on the differences from the street focused 818S

Ask and keep your fingers crossed. ;-)

[Rasmus]

If the 818R is approved for EMod it will be welcomed by everyone competing in EMod, until it trophies. Then it'll be labeled a Class Killer and they'll all want it bumped to BMod.

[Mechie3]

I've worked questions with Howard Duncan many times... simple items like a ground effects kit can cause a car to go into a different class!

818R is clearly described as a track car and is NOT intended to be street driven.

The bodykit is an altogether different thing. That's adding parts to a production car.

Where was te 818R not intended to be street driven? It's somewhat a moot point since the SEB has to specifically approve kit cars to run DM/EM anyways. The real question is, if I buy an 818S, then modify to 818R specs by either swapping frames or adding the additional frame members, but it's still an 818S (though heavily modified) is it still legal? Should be. That alone, to me, means that you should allow the 818R from the beginning. The argument being that it's a cost saving measure where disallowing the 818R serves no purpose if you can build one from an 818S. In that case, disallowing the 818R only means the guy with the most money wins because he can afford to buy an 818S and modify it to the 818R status.

Yes, in FM the 1" rule implicitly allowed the diffuser, but other verbage indicated the class intent was to have zero aero: no splitters, channels, tunnels, diffusers, wings, etc. It's just that, technically, they couldn't argue against it saying "well, the intent was...." because intent is open to interpretation.

[Rasmus]

For any SCCA member that wants to submit a letter to the SEB regarding the 818 and it's classing in Solo I urge to to take 5 - 10 minutes of your time and submit a letter to the Solo Events Board. They even have a website with a web form. Just fill in the blanks. Request that they class the 818 for Solo. Be sure to have your member number handy.

It only takes 5 minutes. The SEB will do nothing unless the members of the SCCA ask them to.

[Rasmus]

Wow, my wife, who also happens to have a SCCA Membership, wrote the SEB.

SEB:

Please class Factory Five Racing's new kit car the 818. E Modified would seem to be a good fit. They're coming out with two submodels based on the same chassis: 818S and 818R. Please consider classing both submodels in EMod.

Website with info: https://www.factoryfive.com/kits/project-818/

Thank you.

What a woman.

SEB Letter Tracking Number #9718

[RM1SepEx]

very nice wife... I'll get a 1/2 dozen letters in too...

[mrvwcastner]

My membership lapsed in June. Guess I should renew & write letter at same time. I'll run T.O. If need be. I do want to drive in NE eventually. Local events won't be a problem of course. Too bad my 4x100 wheels won't fit since I finally have rain tires, dry tires & street tires all on matching wheels.

[Wayne Presley]

The 818R has the same frame and is 4 bolts on the S windshield from being a street version with door that do not open. The R version only has 6 extra 1.5" bars per side over the S.

[Samiam1017]

The 818R has the same frame and is 4 bolts on the S windshield from being a street version with door that do not open. The R version only has 6 extra 1.5" bars per side over the S.

The R has a round tube chassis and the S is built with square tubing.

[Wayne Presley]

The R has a round tube chassis and the S is built with square tubing.

Not the 818R I sat in at SEMA, same square tube chassis as the S with the extra 6 round tubes per side.

[Wayne Presley]

Notice the square tubing at the side at the dead pedal, square tubing which makes the rear of the door opening.

[Samiam1017]

I don't know how to post a pic but there's a pic of the R chassis with the S test mule in the background. Looks like the size of the sq is different and a lot more round tube then just the door and petty bars. I'm sure all the suspension mounting points and Geometry is the same. I could be wrong.

[Olli]

I think that some of you need to understand that officially FFR does not build their kits for street use. They are all "race car kits" and it is up to the individual builder to make that "race kit" street legal. Every State has its' own requirements. Research your States' requirements. I'm sure that the 818R will be easy to get a title for in a few States, not many though. Impossible in others. Remember FFR does not issue a title with your kit, just an MCO. Essentially the 818S is a "race car kit" just as an 818R is. It will be up to the individual builder to ensure that the 818S meets their own States' titling requirements thus making the car legal for street use.

The following is taking from the FFR HR build manual. The same is printed in the MkIV Roadster manual.

This kit is only a collection of parts designed for use primarily as a race car. Factory Five Racing does not
build completed or partially completed vehicles. You are responsible for ensuring that the vehicle you build
complies with all Federal, State and local laws regarding its use. Except as may be specified in writing,
Factory Five makes no warranties, expressed or implied, on the products (parts, or kits) offered for sale. All
implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose are expressly disclaimed by
Factory Five.

...also

Appendix E: Registration and Titling
You are building a race car. It was designed with closed course competition as its focus. If you choose to
use this vehicle on a public road, you are responsible for complying with all State and Federal regulations
governing Home-built vehicles.
Regulations vary from state-to-state. Your best source of information about titling and registration is from
your State Department of Motor Vehicles. Most of these agencies have specific regulations and steps for
you to complete when seeking registration of your vehicle.
Provided with your Factory Five Racing Coupe kit is a Manufacturer’s Certificate of Origin. This document
records the origin of the vehicle and is not a vehicle title. The component kit that we manufacture has no
VIN number. The number stamped on the frame matches the Certificate of Origin and is the kit serial
number.
In most States, upon completion of your kit, you need to bring this certificate along with receipts for any
parts used on your car and a copy of our invoice to your State DMV. Some states like Massachusetts have a
separate vehicle inspection division for specialty cars and custom built cars. Often times this division
handles “salvage” vehicles as well

Olli

[Rasmus]

I think that some of you need to understand that officially FFR does not build their kits for street use. They are all "race car kits" and it is up to the individual builder to make that "race kit" street legal. Every State has...

Thanks for the quote Olli. If everything FFR makes is a "race car" we need to remind the SEB about this when they get back to us on our request for classification.


And get your letters written to the SEB fellas.

[pwnoz]

I don't see why it couldn't be in DM/EM. The Panoz Roadster is eligible for DM/EM as a "modifed production-based car" and in concept, it's very similar to the 818.

[Samiam1017]

Didn't panoz sell complete cars, not kits? They just used ford drive trains. I don't know how many cars need to be produced before the scca considers it a production car but panoz must have met that. Plus they built a series around one of there models too.

[Mechie3]

I take that statement from FFR as more of a blanket legal release than saying they don't intend for most people to title them. It's like any aftermarket component mfg that says their exhaust, lights, horn, suspension part, or what have you is for off road use only. It's just to absolve them of legal liability and to further state that out of the box it might need additional parts. In reality, we know and they know they are intended to be street legal race cars.

[Rasmus]

Just got an Email back from the SEB

Rasmus,
Your letter has been reviewed by the Modified committee, and a recommendation has been made to the SEB. The SEB will review your letter and the Modified committee's recommendation on their next conference call. Your letter details are below:

Letter #9715
<my letter>blah blah</my letter>

Thank you,

SEB

[Rasmus]

Ms. Rasmus just got a letter from the SEB:

Dear Rasmus' Wife who is also a SCCA member due to Family Membership,
Your letter has been reviewed by the Modified committee, and a recommendation has been made to the SEB. The SEB will review your letter and the Modified committee's recommendation on their next conference call. Your letter details are below:

Letter #9718
Title: Factory Five Racing 818 Classing Proposal
Request: SEB:Please class Factory Five Racing's new kit car the 818. E Modified would seem to be a good fit. They're coming out with two submodels based on the same chassis: 818S and 818R. Please consider classing both submodels in EMod.Website with info: https://www.factoryfive.com/kits/project-818/Thank you.


Thank you,

SEB

[Slatt]

Thx, Rasmus. I'm keenly interested in what you are doing here, but I'm also a bit lazy. Where should I send a "+1" email to?

[Rasmus]

Submit a letter to the Solo Events Board

[Rasmus]

The Solo Events Board made a decision:

2012-12-03
Rasmus,
Your letter has been reviewed by the Solo Events Board. The response will be in an upcoming Fastrack. Your letter details are below:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Letter #9715
<myletter>blah blah blah</myletter>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you,

Solo Events Board

Looks like I'll have to wait for the Fastrack to publish.

[Rasmus]

Just looked in the December 2012 Fastrack. Nothing in the Solo section. Looks like we'll have to wait 'til January's comes out.

[Jeff Kleiner]

With the SCCA's history of making decisions at glacial speed I'm putting my money on Fastrack reporting that the request is being "taken under advisement". Hope I'm wrong but when they still cant come to a concensus on whether to allow a Fiat 500 to compete in H Stock 2 years after it has gone into production I just don't see them making a decision on a car that doesn't exist beyond prototype stage. It took them 10 years of them bouncing the roadster around various Modified, Prepared and Street Prepared classes before they finally slotted it into XP.

Jeff

[Grintch]

Well warm poop on a stick, I didn't think of that. It is marketed as a race car, which could totally blow the 818R chances to be legal in SCCA Solo Nationals. I'm sure my local club wouldn't care, but I don't want to be protested out off a trophy in a ProSolo or a National Tour.

I'm almost certain they'll class the 818S in EM. And if the 818R is out, I'll just buy have to order a 818S and weld in extra bars and take the windshield off. Which seems sort of stupid because I could get a 818S and turn it into a "818R" and it'd be legal but the 818R would be illegal right out of the box. But I can totally see the ruling going that way.


Or perhaps they're trying to eliminate things like the Radicals from entering D and E Mod. We'll just have to argue our point and see what the SEB decides.

Keeping the Radicals out is exacly my understanding of the intent of the current Kit Car allowance. I view the 818R as the equivalent of a Porsche Cup car, while built as a race car, derived from a street car and legal in the GT classes. I think the Cobra and Noble are allowed in XP, which is a bit more restirictive than DM/EM and have higher minimum weights. That might be another, probably more competitive option.

The Cobra kits were pretty much always legal for EM, but a rather standard kit car just wasn't competitive (at nearly 1000lbs over the old EM minimum weight of 1500). That is when the negotiations started for allowing them in Prepared.

[Rasmus]

New Email:

Rasmus,
This automated response has been sent to let you know that your letter has been reviewed by the SEB and the response will be in the January FasTrack. The FasTrack will be posted on the SCCA website on the 20th of this month.

Here is the link to the Fastrack:

http://www.scca.com/about/?cid=44415

Solo Events Board
http://www.scca.com/

[RM1SepEx]

Ididn't see any response in the solo section... did I miss something?