What's Next for 1/2-1600's???

C. Bucher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2005
Posts
787
Reaction
40
Location
El Centro/La Quinta, CA
So, what do you think the next major advancement in technology will be to come to the lowly 1/2-1600 car?

Official word is and has been that nothing will change.

There was talk about allowing a stronger transaxle like a Mendeola or something along those lines to alleviate the issue of the weaker Ring and Pinion gear sets, and the addition of a rear coilover in lieu of the torsion bar set-up, but in that case, you might as well go race a class 12 car.

What changes did you have in mind?
 

MO'B MOTORSPORTS

Active Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2007
Posts
38
Reaction
1
Location
OC
they have been talking about changing to coilovers like Bucher said due to the lack of production numbers of the tortion bars and they tried to make them out of cheaper materials but they ended up with stress cracks
 

hammer down racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Posts
1,253
Reaction
150
Location
Lake Havasu City, AZ
They should just leave the class alone. Changing to micro stubs and dual ports was enough. I am a fan of the dual port motors because obviously faster is better. The micro stubs isn't really a big deal to me. Changing to coil overs and Mendeolas is just stupid. Like Bucher said, it may as well be a class 12 car.

Torsion bars shouldn't be a problem. Our car has 300m torsion bars and axles from The Converter Shop. We have a season on them and they are fine. Kartek makes torsion bars and axles also.

The only thing with the 1600 class is the difference between 1 and 2 seaters. They are not equally matched. I know that two seaters have won some races lately but the single seaters seem to have an advantage whether it's driver or restrictor plate or whatever. There was some talk a few months back about splitting them and making two classes but that would be stupid.
 

AZ1000

2009 DRIVE CHAMP
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Posts
3,204
Reaction
144
Location
Fargo, ND
Coil Overs front and rear.
There was a period of about 6 months this year where you could not get front or rear torsions from anyone, we needed both, no one had them.
I disagree with the 12 car comparison. Width of arms front and rear would keep travel the same as todays cars, but for the cost of a new set of torsions you could convert to coil overs, and then you would be set.
I would stay with VW transaxle.
 

C. Bucher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2005
Posts
787
Reaction
40
Location
El Centro/La Quinta, CA
Coil Overs front and rear.
There was a period of about 6 months this year where you could not get front or rear torsions from anyone, we needed both, no one had them.
I disagree with the 12 car comparison. Width of arms front and rear would keep travel the same as todays cars, but for the cost of a new set of torsions you could convert to coil overs, and then you would be set.
I would stay with VW transaxle.

I think its not so much a comparison to the class 12 as much as it is that we'll be quickly headed that way once this or that rule change is instituted. Where will it end....?

If the argument is that the class is going to die out because of a lack of parts and or materials, then I say let it die. I'll go race a 12 car.

Case in point, the class will not die, we are not going to run out of parts or materials anytime soon. These last two years have seen record number 1600 racers coming out to race and parts like torsion bars, springs, axles and so on made out of 300m are slowly being built back up into stock after being ravaged by these racers.

Kartek had a boat-load of torsion bars in stock from Sway-Away as does McKenzies from TCS and Folts who is now making their own brand. With Kartek making their own axles as well as Sway-Away, we shouldn't have any issues with availability anytime soon in that department either.

By converting to a coilover, you are changing a major facet of this class. No stock VW ever came with a coilover. The whole idea behind this class is the stock widths and torsion based suspension. I agree that microstubs changed the face of the class, but then again stock brake drums were never meant to go as fast and pound as hard as they were in these applications.

However, stock ring and pinions may be a whole other story from what I hear....
 

DailyPedal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2001
Posts
1,795
Reaction
107
Location
So Cal-where else?
Website
www.flickr.com
C.Butcher said: "By converting to a coilover, you are changing a major facet of this class. No stock VW ever came with a coilover. The whole idea behind this class is the stock widths and torsion based suspension. I agree that microstubs changed the face of the class, but then again stock brake drums were never meant to go as fast and pound as hard as they were in these applications."

And the torsion bars were? This has been bounced around since before the micro stub deal. When the class originated, it was designed to use stock parts on an economical open wheel platform. That was 30 years ago! Change happens and the class should evolve but only in an effort to maintain the original intent of the class-as an economical race class. Coil-overs will make the class cheaper to maintain in the long run. And in my opinion, to slow the cars and again, make them cheaper to build, get rid of the bypass shocks too. Keeping the bus trans and getting rid of the bypass shocks will create a wider gap in speed and cost between 1600 and 12.
But that is just my opinion...
 

hammer down racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Posts
1,253
Reaction
150
Location
Lake Havasu City, AZ
Coilovers may be cheaper to run but it goes against the idea of the class. A crate LS1 motor is cheaper than a full race 1600 motor should we start running V8s? The way the class is now should be the limit. The class already went to dual port because of availability of single port heads. Torsion bars do run a little low from time to time but the companies that make them catch up. A lot of people have already left the class because of new rules and if things keep changing, our beam and rear arms are getting taken out and we will just race class 12. If changes keep happening to 1600 it won't be a class anymore.
 

DailyPedal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2001
Posts
1,795
Reaction
107
Location
So Cal-where else?
Website
www.flickr.com
So exactly what was the "idea" for the class? There are 4 "limited VW" classes (9, 11, 1-2/1600, 5/1600) and they have all evolved considerably over the last 30 years because they had to. Using your logic, stock VW link pin front ends, arms and rear trailing arms would need to be used. Type 1 trannys and type 2 cv's would still be used and racers would be lucky to finish a race-ever.
Some of those racers that left the 1600 class were trying to race 20 year old cars and didn't agree with the changes. At the same time, quite a few others built brand new high dollar 1600's and the classes are now faster than ever. My intent is to slow the cars down a little and reign in the cost of the new cars and this should make it an easier class to get into and cheaper to maintain which in turn will make the class grow.
 

David_Girdner

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2001
Posts
97
Reaction
7
Location
Reseda, CA
Website
www.3GRacing.com
SNORE created the Champ class for the outdated 1600 cars, they get around 5 entries per race. Here are their rules for that class http://www.snoreracing.net/post/champcar.htm

I don't want to see any more rule changes to the class! And if there are changes they should be initiated by the racers rather than the tech director or companies looking to sell a product.
 

hammer down racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Posts
1,253
Reaction
150
Location
Lake Havasu City, AZ
So exactly what was the "idea" for the class? There are 4 "limited VW" classes (9, 11, 1-2/1600, 5/1600) and they have all evolved considerably over the last 30 years because they had to. Using your logic, stock VW link pin front ends, arms and rear trailing arms would need to be used. Type 1 trannys and type 2 cv's would still be used and racers would be lucky to finish a race-ever.
Some of those racers that left the 1600 class were trying to race 20 year old cars and didn't agree with the changes. At the same time, quite a few others built brand new high dollar 1600's and the classes are now faster than ever. My intent is to slow the cars down a little and reign in the cost of the new cars and this should make it an easier class to get into and cheaper to maintain which in turn will make the class grow.

The class definately has evolved since the early days and welcome it. I'm glad we can use better trannys and stronger suspension but I don't like the idea of coilovers. Torsion bars work just fine so why change?

I agree with with David, the rule changes should be initiated by racers. We drive the cars, we should decide what we can run.
 

DailyPedal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2001
Posts
1,795
Reaction
107
Location
So Cal-where else?
Website
www.flickr.com
You both are right, it is your class and you should have a say and with that say you will never get everybody to agree on everything. My input here is only to answer the original post with my opinion of what the future will bring after racing in and witnessing 25 years of competition. What will the 1600 car evolve into next...and I fully support SNORE but at the same time hate to see the class get pulled in different directions to keep 5 cars racing. But whatever happens, good luck to both of you and keep on racing.
 
Top