FormaCars

Visit our community sponsor

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: FFR and Enduro class

  1. #1
    Senior Member johngeorge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Nashua, NH
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like

    FFR and Enduro class

    Hi all,

    Looking into running a 3hr enduro with my FFR at NJMP and found out they moved us to ES (FFR in 2012 trim)

    rules snippet:
    Code:
    Class Organization Class Comments
    FFR NASA ES Under new FFR 2012 rules
    FFR2 NASA E1 This was “FFR” in 2011
    ***SOLD!!! - NASA ST2 FFR#48 Gen3 Type65 Coupe R, Street legal.***
    ***SOLD!!! - NASA ST2 FFR#48 Challenge Car rolling chassis, Street legal.***
    http://johngeorgeracing.com

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,960
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes I had heard that.

    I thouhgt there was still a way for you to run an FFR in the lower class, but you couldn't do the agreed upon updates to the car?

    I know one of the guys out here was pretty pissed that he was either forced to ES by doing the upgrades, or would have his clock cleaned in the FFR class in the sprint races if he didn't upgrade.

    Sounds like some coordination as far as rules go is in order.

    Could be that the agreed upgrades were a bit of a mistake? I know the guy out here said he wouldn't pay the money to do them, so he will just run endurance races with the old setup, and that way, he believes, he will stay in E1.
    www.myraceshop.com

    GTM solution kits
    Corvette and Race parts

  3. #3
    Director of R&D, FFR Jim Schenck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wareham
    Posts
    444
    Post Thanks / Like
    FFR2 is still in E1 so if someone want to run that class it is still an available option. This reclassification was not a surprise and right from the get go the enduro and performance touring series were discussed with NASA to make sure they did not have an inadvertant class killer. ST2 was also moved out of E0 this year showing that they are in the process of trying to even out the competetive balance, but that is a difficult thing to do until cars have a proven track record. (the old FFR class was in E0 for a number of years and then moved to E1 during a rules adjustment). American Iron is still in E0 and we seem to be very similiar to them in terms of lap times for our fastest guys so maybe there is a possibility of being re-classified down the road but there is no way to make a case until we have run enough to have supporting lap time data.

    As far as the upgrades they have been an immediate success, you will never please everyone but so far every driver to have converted has been in love with the new set-up. The old series was gradually losing ground to the newer and faster cars, now all of the sudden our bang for the buck is up there with the best of them.
    Jim Schenck
    Factory Five Racing

  4. #4
    Super Moderator vnmsss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    649
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    13
    Agree with Jim that the bang for the buck that the new spec upgrade has produced is a welcome addition to the Challenge series. Kudos to Jim and the crew at FFR for investing the time and R&D effort, as well as creating the manufacturers realtionships to bring these upgrades at amazingly affordable prices to competitors in the series.

    As Tom Coon proved so well last year, the Challenge Series car in original trim is still highly competitive in E1 for enduros, and it remains in that class (in that trim) for 2012. To a large degree, winning enduros is as much about consistency and preparation, as it is about speed, however, you still have to be within a range to be even remotely competitive.

    In regards to the NASA car classing system, over the last six years, I have been competing in our Challenge cars and in my Coupe in FFR/FFC, time trial (TTA), super touring (ST-2) and in the endurance racing series (E1 and EO). For years, we pleaded our case with NASA that the Challenge cars (in the original trim) were not appropriately placed in TTA/PTA. We finally received some reprieve (five years later) when they were re-classed to E1 last year.

    In running enduros with the Coupe, we felt we finally had found a great spot for the car in the ST-2/EO class. We won the WERC endurance series last year with the Coupe running in EO class under ST-2 trim (with a de-tuned motor pumping out a butt-kicking 286 HP to meet the ST-2 8.7:1 ratio). We won the championship not because we were the fastest car in every race, but because we competed and finished well in nearly every race during the year-long competition. By December, we were in a virtual dead heat with our main competitor for the season championship. The last race of the year, the 6 Hours at the 25, was a "must run" event for both of our teams, and the winner would secure the championship. When calamity struck at the 25, and it appeared our season was over, our amazing team pressed on, pulling off an overnight miracle repair, which enabled us to run (and win) the 6 Hours and secure the championshiop....We won due to the will to win, however, within 24 hours of the race concluding, and before the season points were even posted, our competitors had already appealed to NASA to move ST-2 cars, such as our tube framed Coupes, out of EO to ES. When the Challenge Series motor upgrade took the Challenge car somewhere below an 8.7:1 ratio, that sealed the deal for them as well.

    As the enduro series leader here on the west coast, I field lots of questions and feedback regarding the different classes, and have heard a wide range of arguments for why a certain car or "spec" should be in one class or another....When it comes to the FFR chassis in enduros, appeal if you like, but I don't believe our cars in the new trim will be returning to anything less than ES for enduros......For those that think it's "unfair", here's the rationale from our production car competitors....You (FFR) drivers have a tube frame chassis (which in their view is basically a "race car"), and the option to put anything in/on your car that you like..We (production car) drivers, are turning a production chassis into a race car...If you've underbuilt your "race car" car to compete in ES, well, that's your problem.....As one more nail in the classing coffin...I compete against Greg Greebaum, national time trial director, who drives a Z06 in ST-2/TTS...In his words....Gee Karen, if you don't like the classing system, perhaps you should drive a different car....With forces such as these at the helm, I'm thinking we'll be in ES for the foreseeable future.
    Last edited by vnmsss; 05-09-2012 at 01:27 AM.
    #28 FFR Challenge Series
    #28 FFR Type-65 Coupe
    2011 Western Endurance Racing Championship
    2010 West Coast Champion
    Drive it.....Like you stole it!

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,960
    Post Thanks / Like
    You all are missing the real point I was getting at. I have seen this time and time again. People get into a "spec" class because it is affordable and the competition is good. Then there comes the inevitable push to increase the performance of the cars. Sometimes this is due to parts availability and sometimes it is just the will of some of the participants to go faster. Whatever the reason, when the decision to allow "upgrades" is made, it, many times, leads to the demise of the class/series.

    The advice given you, Karen, I would relate to those that wanted these "improvements"...if you want something faster, MAYBE YOU SHOULD STEP UP AND BUY A DIFFERENT CAR.

    I have no dog in this fight as I don't run any of the "spec" FFR classes, but I do hope that FFR remains a driving force in the racing community, and I see the tension and how it upsets classes, in general, when these types of "upgrades" are allowed.

    My opinion, either buy another car if you want to go faster, or create another class that uses the "upgraded version" of the spec car. This allows people to choose which way to go, and the evolutionary forces will dictate which class survives and which class doesn't. Trying to FORCE people to upgrade, and then endure the unintended consequences in other sanctioning bodies rules, to me anyway, does not make a whole lot of sense. IMHO it turns people off that originally got into the original class because of the low costs and high competition levels.

    Maybe that's the way it is now. I don't know, as, like I said, I have no dog in this fight. I am basing my opinions on what I heard from a competitor that wasn't very happy about the changes. That's all. If there is still a lower class to race the car in the original trim, then the guy I talked with probably doesn't have much to complain about and I am with you on the upgrades being a possible good thing.
    Last edited by crash; 05-09-2012 at 10:04 AM.
    www.myraceshop.com

    GTM solution kits
    Corvette and Race parts

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Joliet, IL
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks for the heads up John. I'll have to give the Enduro rules for ES another look with a fine tooth comb to see what opportunities there are to exploit to remain competitive.
    FFR Spec Racer

  7. #7
    Director of R&D, FFR Jim Schenck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wareham
    Posts
    444
    Post Thanks / Like
    Crash,

    I fully understand what you are getting at but I don't think you have all the background info. So much went into this decision as far as discussions, testing, talks with NASA, mulling of options. This wasn't a knee jerk reaction to a couple people wanting to go faster, it was a concentrated effort to revive the series. I knew we would lose a few people along the way, but they would be in the same situation if the series had just be left to fold.

    Some background:

    The old series rules are still in place as FFR2, the new rules were added as an additional series.

    The old series used the same engine configuration, tire and wheel sizes, brakes, min weight, and chassis for 11 years. 11 years!

    What used to be slower and less expensive series were now becoming faster and less expensive series than us, not good for attracting new racers. (CMC2 is the best example)

    Participation nationally had been slowly and steadily declining to the point where if nothing was changed we would have not had much of a series left in just a few years.

    Development of the street cars had progressed to the point where using upgrades from them make the new challenge cars easier to drive and more predictable.

    The cost of building a new car with the donor based parts was rising because of the age of the parts, and the finding the quality of parts needed (like front rotors) was getting to be impossible.

    All of this was discussed with the current racers to come up with the best solution, and while no one idea would ever fit best with everyone we were able to get the majority to agree to this configuration.

    In order to help guys with the conversion Factory Five sold the suspension conversion parts to racers at their cost.
    Jim Schenck
    Factory Five Racing

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,960
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes, you are right. I only had heard one side of the story.

    If you still have the other rules in place for the original class, then I really don't see what the issue is.

    Sorry to make something out of nothing, but maybe it has educated someone besides me. Thanks for the replies.
    www.myraceshop.com

    GTM solution kits
    Corvette and Race parts

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Brown County Customs

Visit our community sponsor