|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
17 Jan 2006, 20:30 (Ref:1503356) | #26 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 90
|
I've used both, in hillclimbs, rallies and latterly on my FVL where I moved from the original crossply Bridgestone to cheapy second hand radials. The radials were 1.5 seconds faster at Donington but I hate to say it - I have never really noticed a significant handling difference which is far more a comment on my competence than the tyre performance!!!!
Back on topic - any one else got any comments on the new series in general? I still like the looks of it. |
||
|
17 Jan 2006, 22:28 (Ref:1503420) | #27 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,446
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
17 Jan 2006, 23:13 (Ref:1503446) | #28 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,069
|
They suggested the chassis is not stiff enough by a long way for the tyre.
|
||
|
19 Jan 2006, 18:12 (Ref:1504589) | #29 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 727
|
i know where there is a lovely lovely F3 car for sale!!! would go well in this new championship... pm me if you want to know more.
must say tho, arp was ****!! and i agree with everything that was said above. least now it might be fairer towards the poorer people!! |
||
|
19 Jan 2006, 21:51 (Ref:1504750) | #30 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 19
|
I had a look at the Club F3 regs today. I couldn't find any mention of a minimum ride height or waiver from the general MSA technical regs so have to assume that the cars in this series will have to run with a 40mm ground clearance. Is that correct?
|
|
|
20 Jan 2006, 08:36 (Ref:1505011) | #31 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 90
|
What a good question ??!! Agree I can't see it either. the ARP series ran at F3 heights and of course it is a point of routine debate in Mono. If 40mm does apply I can hear the sound of toys flying out of cots as we speak.
|
||
|
20 Jan 2006, 10:01 (Ref:1505060) | #32 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,069
|
The drawing in the regs does not show the 40mm bit that is included in FF / Mono etc.
There's quite a few errors in the regs mind at this stage, like the cut-off between Classes A and B is wrong. |
||
|
20 Jan 2006, 23:11 (Ref:1505621) | #33 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 19
|
All race cars in races run under MSA rules are required to run with a minimum clearance of 40mm UNLESS the MSA has issued a specific rule waiver. To my knowledge the only waivers granted to date have been for National F3, Formula Renault and ARP.
|
|
|
21 Jan 2006, 08:19 (Ref:1505760) | #34 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 121
|
Could be the kiss of death unless they get one!
|
||
|
21 Jan 2006, 09:52 (Ref:1505798) | #35 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 107
|
40mm
I do not understand all the hysteria about ride height. We have now run four carbon tubbed F3 cars in Mono and if set up correctly they are quite driveable. For sure running at 40mm at the front will not produce a car that is as quick as one running at 15mm but they are not 'dangerous', 'undriveable' or 'impossible' as I have seen them desribed and they are a lot easier to move around the paddock!
Neil. |
||
|
21 Jan 2006, 19:54 (Ref:1506223) | #36 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 804
|
Well I certainly agree with you Neil1982 about making cars work at 40mm, as I have a Formula Renault that handles very well at 40mm, although I fully accept that it is not as quick as it was at 10mm.
But surely if they ran Club F3 at 40mm, the cars probably wouldn't be as quick as a decent Mono 2000 car, because I imagine that a good mono engine should produce a bit more power than a restricted F3 engine. Hence I am virtually certain that Club F3 will get an exemption, after all why shouldn't they. |
||
|
22 Jan 2006, 08:18 (Ref:1506470) | #37 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,069
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
22 Jan 2006, 08:36 (Ref:1506471) | #38 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 19
|
I'm intending to run a carbon monocoque Reynard 903 in Mono this year. This is the ex-Steve Wilkinson, ex-European Aviation car that was previously used in Mono some years back by Paul StoddartIt currently rides at 25mm at the front and 30mm at the rear.
Whilst I don't expect anyone to give away any set up secrets it would be excellent if someone would give some pointers as to the way to go to make this car handle as best as possible at 40mm. As less downforce will be generated from the floor I assume that we need to try and get more downforce (at the expenses of drag) from the wings? Assuming that we can't match the designed levels of downforce I also assume that softer (than F3) springs should be used. Ideally the suspension mounting points should be moved down on the monocoque and gearbox to keep the suspension geometry correct but on a carbon car I can't see that this would be easy/safe to achieved. The 903 wasn't considered to be a good car in its day as there were handling problems, which were variously attributed to aerodynamic pitch instability (by Adrian Reynard), gearbox casing flex and/or engine mounting flex. I'm kind of hoping that these issues will be reduced when running at a higher ride height with less grip. |
|
|
22 Jan 2006, 09:49 (Ref:1506499) | #39 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 121
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
25 Jan 2006, 20:40 (Ref:1509065) | #40 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 66
|
The Ex Stoddard 903 Reynard
So you .. Andy Woolley bought the 903 Reynard .. A nice car, I agreed to buy it from Steve but had to call off the trip from South of London to Llverpool. Perfect for Mono. Stiff chassis .. good engine .. just need a good set up.
et it right and it will be a dark horse in Mono for 2006. Nice one Andy Rgds Raltracer |
||
|
4 Feb 2006, 10:02 (Ref:1515313) | #41 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 88
|
If anybody is interested in racing in club F3 and wants to know any details about the series or regulations then please feel free to contact me.
I raced in the ARP Championship and will be competing in Club F3 with a Dallara304. jon@graysmotorsport.co.uk |
||
|
7 Feb 2006, 09:50 (Ref:1517090) | #42 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 66
|
radials, space frame VD, crossplys for Clubf3
Quote:
then the crossplys were the same pace. The VD chassis I now have (a formula Ireland) is very stiff as a space frame chassis and ran radials as F.Ireland (Dunlops). I will try 2nd hand f3 radials but likely that the Dunlop radical tyre would be a cost effective choice if I cannot go to carbon radials. Whether the VD chassis is as stiff as a carbon f3 chassis is another matter; but many ex national f3 cars get a bit floppy at the back end .. I have looked at a few. The problem is with Club f3, as I see it, you need 20 to 30k to buy a good non floppy original car .. not a bitsa ,then 20k plus to compete .. not run in the series. A self sponsored business driver can run to about 20k but over that it can cause all sorts of issues for them ... tyres are just not an issue as I see it. If you cant afford it don't do it ... I would do it. that is club f3 ... but I am committed elsewhere after a lot of hard work over the winter. Rgds Raltracer |
|||
|
7 Feb 2006, 10:13 (Ref:1517104) | #43 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,448
|
i must say raltracer that in today's climate of more formulas than needed, no formula, if it intends staying the course can afford to take the attitude of "if you can't afford it don't do it" I have always worked on the theory that any club grid contains about 50%
of drivers who only just afforded to be there. That being true, that bunch of racers need to be catered for as much as practical without damaging the fabric of the formula |
|
|
7 Feb 2006, 10:15 (Ref:1517105) | #44 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 730
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"Centipede: An ant built to government specifications" |
7 Feb 2006, 10:17 (Ref:1517107) | #45 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,069
|
Quote:
To compare the F Ireland radials to current Avon BF3s is like comparing cheddar with camembert - they might be the same contruction principal but hardness is a different parameter althogether. |
|||
|
7 Feb 2006, 14:15 (Ref:1517299) | #46 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 90
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
7 Feb 2006, 17:42 (Ref:1517398) | #47 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
7 Feb 2006, 17:47 (Ref:1517401) | #48 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
ie 47's Brand for mono and 55/56's for bulk of the arpf3 grid. raltracer |
|||
|
7 Feb 2006, 21:53 (Ref:1517554) | #49 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 804
|
Hi Alan,
Your are quite right that Club F3 cars are only a bit quicker than a front running mono car, but as in all motor racing that extra bit of performance costs. I imagine that a very quick Club F3 is only a bit slower than say an average Masters Euroboss car (old F3000) and yet the cost differential will be fairly hefty. As the old saying goes you spends your money and makes takes your choices. I was surprised to hear that you sold your Ralt RT3, as it was going very well with the new Zetec engine. What made you swap to a Formula Ireland car ? |
||
|
8 Feb 2006, 12:36 (Ref:1518023) | #50 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
I was always looking to fiddle between races which meant I went backwards down the grid rather than forward some times .. like ... trying to run on bupstops at Oulton Park .. the car shagged to death tyres ... so while we ran some great lap times .. we did some sub 47 secs at Brands .. I decided to go for a more modern stiffer chassis that could be easy to work on, with parts off the shelf, and easy to run at the track on my own, and run the zetec engine I like so much. Thank you for taking an interest ! |
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club 100 | racingdick | Kart Racing | 53 | 19 Jan 2006 17:55 |