Counting on Sal to do the right thing...

ScottWisdom

Well-Known Member
Posts
283
Reaction
35
SAL – THE RACERS ARE COUNTING ON YOU TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION. DON’T CHANGE CLASS 1600 RULES. DON’T ALLOW DISC BRAKES.

As many of you know, SCORE has been planning to make changes to the Class 1600 brake rules to allow disc brakes. When the 1600 racers learned about the potential rule change, a survey was conducted and the overwhelming majority (84%) of 1600 car owners/DORs do not want the rules to be changed. Sal Fish has the survey results and is aware that 1600 racers don’t want disc brakes, but Sal relies on Bill Savage to make the right technical decisions for the racers. Regardless of the fact that 1600 racers do not want disc brakes allowed, Bill Savage remains convinced that 1600 brake rules should be unrestricted/open (i.e. disc brakes).

SAL FISH IS DECIDING WHETHER TO DO WHAT THE RACERS WANT OR TO DO WHAT BILL SAVAGE WANTS.

75% of SCORE 1600 racers do not want to change the brake rules (9 out of 12 surveyed).
Overall, 84% of all 1600 racers do not want to change the brake rules (57 out of 68 surveyed).

SAL – DO THE RIGHT THING. THE SCORE 1600 RACERS DON’T WANT DISC BRAKES. THE REST OF THE 1600 RACERS DON’T WANT DISC BRAKES. DON’T CHANGE THE RULES.
 

deleted

----
Posts
1
Reaction
96
I am not a mechanic but disc brakes are much more efficient. As the saying goes we should Progress in Technology not Regress.

Matt Scaroni
SMD Motorsports/ Protruck 27 / Excursion 4111
 

Rodney

Well-Known Member
Posts
132
Reaction
0
I spent a season in 1600 and the worst part about driving a 1600 car is the brakes. We spent a ton of money on different drums, big wheel cyls. tractor linings etc. , the brakes still sucked. Do the math...discs are waaaay cheaper to maintain and work 100000% better.

Winning IS everything
 

martininsocal

Well-Known Member
Posts
22,828
Reaction
5
I am curious why everyone is against disk brakes, butthey were pretty much for the micro stubs? When that thread was running, I brought up the disk brake issue and pointed out that costs then would be about the same as upgrading to all of karteks wahzoo parts for the drums. Heres an idea, how about disks on the rear only? you don't really want the fronts to lock up anyway, so it helps the front to rear brake bias problem.
I just don't understand why folks don't want disks with good german drums getting harder to find...

If your gonna go, go BIG
 

MikeLeung

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,066
Reaction
226
The problem with disc brakes in my opinion and many other 1600 racers, is the rule change was too vague. It did not address the issue of trackwidth, type of disc brakes and a host of many other issues. SCORE proceeded with this rule change with out talking to the people that race 1600. If Sal had presented the idea to the 1600 racers and allowed discussion of the change, rather then just annouce it, then I think the idea of the rule change would have gained greater acceptance.
 

ScottWisdom

Well-Known Member
Posts
283
Reaction
35
The 1600 racers are trying to maintain the integrity of the class. Class 1600 is a limited spec class, a true drivers class. The 1600 cars are basically equal, but if disk brakes are allowed, some can upgrade and others cannot, which will divide the class. Racers with drums will feel they have a disadvantage.

Bill Savage wants to allow disc brakes because he feels it will be more economical in the long run. If economics is the new guideline, then think about the future. Coilover suspension is more economical in the long run than torsion bar suspension. Mendeola transmissions are more economical in the long run than bus boxes. Class 1600 would evolve into Class 12 lite.

I addressed this issue with Bill Savage. His response...."We're not considering coilovers at this time." Not at this time....so I take that to mean that they will be considered in the future.

1600 racers don't want any changes so it makes one wonder why Savage pushing this.
 

vman

Well-Known Member
Posts
47
Reaction
0
as it is now if you have a 1600 car that is ten or 12 years old it is still completive. things really haven't changed that much. most any one can buy a good car for $10,000 to $15,000 dollars and get into racing. that's why there are 70 cars at parker and 65 at the buffalo bills race. for you guys who can't get your brakes to work try getting the smallest master cylinder that there is and get your drums turned and they work good. this class started over 25 years ago and in all that time this is the 1st time anyone has even talked about disk brakes, why because you don't need them. lets stop this rule now or next it's 2000 cc motors and a arms

racing
 

Jerry Zaiden

Well-Known Member
Posts
9,843
Reaction
1,167
I feel there are two types of 1600 cars the good ones $25k plus; and the older ones $10-15k. When I raced in 1600 one of the questions I had was why not disk brakes? They are safer, less money in the long run, and will help the car perform better. If you want the class to be competitive why allow 3" bypass shocks? just one shock will cost the price of the disk brakes. I feel 1600 is way above and beyond what it started out as. Do they need disk brakes? (NO). should they for safety? (YES). Kartek will by far be able to build a really nice disk brake system for 1600, and it will be afordable.
 

Rory

Crayola Killer
Posts
6,596
Reaction
3,881
Wasn't there an issue with FINDING brake drums for a while? This class has been going through brake drums (front and rear) for 25 years, maybe they are becoming harder to find. Nobody likes change but it's better for the sport.

Racers Only
 

martininsocal

Well-Known Member
Posts
22,828
Reaction
5
Jerry- your right about the evolution thing. This class started out with a bunch of folks beefing up stock vw parts(trailing arms, spindles, etc..) running a stock 1600 motor, adding a couple shocks to theback of the car, and having fun. anyone anywhere could go down to the local offroad store, purchase a 100" wheelbase frame, beef it up a little, add some aluminum, and have a race car. These cars were great because they worked well shortcourse as well as long course, wer simple to maintain, easy to get parts for, and didn't set you back too much money. It was a good recipe for fun and competition.
Then folks wanted to go faster, and rather than stepping up a class, they went to longer wheelbases, the cars got faster, and then front arms and spindles started breaking. We need bigger spindles and after market front arms! so they got combos and tubular front arms. The rear arm being 1" longer is kind of a fluke because it came about when they still had a drivers rep for each class and a guy in Az. had a reduction box car that he wanted to switch over irs. He aske dthat he be able to reduce the length of his arm 1" because it would fit the existing shock geometry, etc...and the drivers said ok...so we got the + or- 1" rule. Soon Superboot was selling the latest and greatest in 930's with gobs of articulation andnow you needed to run a +1 arm to clear the now needed long torsion bar so you could twist it to 16"s without breaking the short bars, and the new 33" tires wouldn't clear the long bars without the +1 arm. Then power steering, then after market rear arms, then Triple bypass shocks, then micro stubs, now disc brakes... costs for a truely state of the art 1600 car are not that far off a 12 car. And how would it work in a short course situation? not as well as the 100" car would. Everyone talks about the class rules being stable for so long, but they really haven't.whenwas the last time a head was checked for extrude hone boring?
what ever happened to the whole boost bottle thing? I don't know why people will complain about disk brakes when every other "improvement" this class has seen over the last 2 decades was always done in the name of long term cost and longevity.

If your gonna go, go BIG
 

ScottWisdom

Well-Known Member
Posts
283
Reaction
35
There is alot of history and alot of different opinions from non-1600 racers. But when it comes to the bottomline, shouldn't it be up to the 1600 racers?

84% of 1600 car owners/DORs do not want to change the brake rules.

Have you ever seen that much agreement in off-road racing? This is not just one or two racers. 57 out of 68 racers don't want any changes. That speaks for itself.
 

MNotary

Well-Known Member
Posts
929
Reaction
16
"I am curious why everyone is against disk brakes, butthey were pretty much for the micro stubs? "

If you want to waste your money on micro stubs.... I don't see a performance advantage. And really no advantage in disk brakes. At 1600 speeds, brakes lock up fine.

Shock body no larger than 2.5 in.
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
"At 1600 speeds, brakes lock up fine."

That really isn't the goal of brakes. That's easy to do, making brakes that stop quickly is a lot harder. It a very rare situation when a skidding tire will stop a car faster than a rolling tire.

I would say allow discs. Call out maximum rotor thickness (solid rotor, limit heat rejection advantage), maximum effective rotor diameter (limit leverage), and maximum caliper piston area & maximum operating pressure (limit clamping force) in the rules.
If you work those out correctly you should be able get a formula that will have the same effective braking HP as the stock drums. Then those that want to go to discs will not have a significant performance advantage over those who don't. Done right this should help contain costs.

TS

"It only seems kinky the first time"
-- Bumpersticker seen in Lost Wages
 

IDRA_CRB

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,015
Reaction
2
How do you tech a vehicle's brake system for "Maximum Operating Pressure"?

Reese
 

martininsocal

Well-Known Member
Posts
22,828
Reaction
5
not only that, but who is gonna spend the money to R&D and produce these brakes? If the whole theory for the switch is better braking, why make a brake that is only as efficient as what they have now?

If your gonna go, go BIG
 

Clifford

Well-Known Member
Posts
326
Reaction
14
History would tell us that there have been advancements with each and every class.

How many of us remember what changes and or improvements have been made to each class. I can think of one "major" change that has taken place in the course of 30 some odd years. The first one that comes to mind is classes. When the first racers tackled the Baja 500 or the 1000 how many classes were there..................The answer is one. There weren't any 7S trucks or Score lites, or even Score for that matter. It was racers in a buggy that may resemble a 9 car to most.

I don't think this decision should lie solely with the 1600 racers. True, this change would effect 1600 racers as soon as they made a decision on whether to use discs or drums. Anyone and everyone who has an interest in racing, that currently races, or may race in the future could be effected.

My current view is to make the change. If the overwhelming population of 1600 drivers do not want disc brakes, then how much of a change would you have? Granted, in the future you may see more cars staging in front of you and behind you at start/finish with disc brakes but, Is it really going to matter. On our 5/1600 and my 5/1600 preunner we have dual fox shocks. Since the car was built in mid 90's most 5/1600 today are running a single King bypass. You can either accept change as we do on a daily basis or let time pass us by.....
 

JCA

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,772
Reaction
6
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

I don't think this decision should lie solely with the 1600 racers.

<hr></blockquote>


I could not disagree more. I was not going to reply to this because I do not race 1/2-1600 anymore but I did feel the need to say that the decesion should be left to the guys in the class. If you are going to take input from anyone and everyone that "might" be a 1600 racer sometime then you better start by asking every kid what they would want to do. No one should be making decisions for a class except people that own cars right now and when those people that "might" become 1600 racers actually do become 1600 racers then they can bring the rules up that they think should be changed.

This IMO is the best part about the "pro" organizations that are coming out. They should have a rules review board set up and should provide a way for all the teams that frequent any santioning body/promoter to join to have a say in the rules. A lot of teams cant afford to get into a points fund and make races that a majority vote decided on or just cant travel to run the races that a majority voted on. For example, some "pro" organizations might cost $500 to get in and that would make the team eligible for a vote on races to be run and make them elgible for end of year point awards but they should also make it so a team can pay a membership fee of $50 and that would give them a vote about rules include them in any mailers and web site access.

Anyway that is just my thoughts on the subject

J.C. Andrews
Andrews Racing
www.andrewsracing.com
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
From reading the comments in this thread one school seems to feel this is a needed change. Partly a safety issue, partly a parts scarcity issue. The other school seems to feel this is one more place that will drive up the cost and change the nature of the class. I thot to propose a partial compromise that addressed the safety issue, and eliminated the parts scarcity issue while not offering a significant performance advantage.

How do you tech max operating pressure ? Easy, if the the system can be made to exceed 1200 psi (design limit for most aftermarket brakes) by replacing a bleed screw with one of these: http://www.wilwood.com/products/accessories/gauge.asp the car fails tech. The above replaces any 1/4-20 bleedscrew & it wouldn't be hard to make adapters for what ever else might be out there.

There is a formula for figuring out torque of a drum brake. I don't have it here. Operating psi*piston area (1 side only for fixed calipers)*cF of pad (~.4) x disc radius will give you a disc brake's torque. If you calc the drum's torque then you can set the disc torque equal to it and back out the piston area/rotor diameter combo with Excel.



TS

"It only seems kinky the first time"
-- Bumpersticker seen in Lost Wages
 

MNotary

Well-Known Member
Posts
929
Reaction
16
"That really isn't the goal of brakes. That's easy to do, making brakes that stop quickly is a lot harder. It a very rare situation when a skidding tire will stop a car faster than a rolling tire."

Right, you can also make drums not lock. You don't have that "window" that disks have....

Would you say that rear drums are replaced once a year? Desert racing; a mag check before each race. There is not a availability problem. Call Mckenzies... T3 or Thing. Stock stub axles is the availability problem. All the stock size aftermarket ones are questionable.

You have to build arms for this class... just allow 3x3. Same for the front...
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
I think you're missing some of my points.

First, that the ability to lock the brakes is not indicative of anything. A lot of people think that it is. Put a pad material intended for a static holding (holding or parking brake) application in and you will have discs that lock and do damn little else.

Second, I was proposing that a legal disc system that did not offer any significant performance advantage over drums could be reasonably built. This was to appease those who want the lower ultimate costs of a disc system while not making those who wish to stay with drums suffer a huge disadvantage. It is possible to do. With mostly of the shelf parts.

Third, I have no idea of the drum availability, but from reading the posts in this thread there was a time when they were hard to get. It is forseeable that such a time could come again.

If the market is there, I bet one of the stub maker's will step up and make a decent stub axle. The bucks-up teams need to start that ball rolling.

TS

"It only seems kinky the first time"
-- Bumpersticker seen in Lost Wages
 
Top