[F500] 493 availability

[Jay Novak]

Don Clar has done just that with a production NovaKar last year.  SCCA
attended the test.  They did not do a back to back as that would have
required another track day rental.  The test produced lap time that were
within .5 seconds from the 494 engine.  Check with SCCA on this, it
happened.

What you propose is an interesting idea Curtis, however there are
several serious problems. Cost & logistics are the biggest.  When you
suggest that we absorb the cost so that we can make money on future
cars.  I have some bad news for you, no one who builds F500 cars is
making any money at all.  We have built & sold over 20 NovaKars  (12
years to do that) & I guarantee you that I have not made a nickel & Don
Clar has just about recouped his tooling costs.  Remember that total new
F500 sales are around 4-6 new cars/year for all builders (NOT EACH
BUILDER).
I am not complaining but people need to realize that this is not big
industry.  I will not really get into the profit issue. But the reality
is that you need to sell about 40 to 50 cars over the life of a car to
amortize the tooling costs & then make a profit.  The problem is that
entry level racers generally do not have the $$$ needed to make F500 a
profit making venture.  Still, it is the best class for the buck & you
can't go faster for less money.  I design & build because I love it.
(Don Clar now builds the cars now & I do the design work)

Now to the projected costs for doing what you propose.

1. engines would cost Tony at least $2000 each.  Even if he loaned them
to us he still has to purchase them & then we probably really do not
want them now as the 493 would not be legal till 2005.  So Tony is out
the cost of engines for the test.
2.  Engine installation:
design & machine engine mount.  4 to 6 man hours for design & $150
machine work.
3. Pipe & manifold.  The one Don Clar purchased cost over $400 because
it was a 1 off from Aaen
4.  labor to install engine, at least 20 to 25 man hours for something
we can't use for a year.
5.  Track rental.  This is anywhere from a low of $500/day to as much as
$2500/day.  Yes you can do a track day on the Friday before a race for
$150 but that is down the road & then you have to switch back to go
National racing.
6.  Travel, track fuel, food expenses, at least $200 for a one day test.
If you stay overnight then it is about $400 with 2 motel rooms for all
involved
7.  Tires.  Who knows? I have plenty of used tires but if I use up 2
sets for a 2 day test I then have to replace them.  Let's estimate about
$250 worth of tires.
8.  Total labor involved to do this has got to be at least 100 man hours
including work on car, travel, track time, etc. Remember that Don Clar
makes his living doing work on all kinds of race cars, so he can't stop
paid work for fun.

Let's total up the costs:
Engine 			$2000 Tony Murphy
Mounts			$150
Pipe etc			$400 	new Aaen
Tires				$250 	used tires
Track rental		$1000 (Gingerman @ $500/day)
Travel, food, fuel etc.	$400
Labor @ $50/hour		$5000  real honest hard work

Total investement		$9200 including labor
			Or 	$4200 if labor is free (& it is not)

These are real numbers for someone who is trying to make a profit on
selling F500 cars.  When a new complete NovaKar roller chassis sells for
$12K you would have to add $1000 to price of the next 9 cars to break
even.

Ask yourselves this question:  Was the approval & use of the Rotax 494
engine a good decision for F500?  
I seriously doubt that anyone would say that is was bad for the class.
F500 is alive & well BECAUSE of Rotax engines.  

Let's just get on with it guys.  We need an engine & we need approval
NOW.  If you want F500 to be around in 10 years we need a PRODUCTION
ENGINE.  If you do not care, then so be it, F500 will be gone.

Thanks ... Jay Novak
NovaRace Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Curtis [mailto:cteague at chartertn.net] 
Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2004 3:01 PM
To: f500 at f500.org
Subject: Re: [F500] 493 availability

Thanks Art for the continual updates on the engines.  I have been
reading
the postings with great interest.

I believe addition of the 493 "might" be in the best interest of the
class,
but primarily from the standpoint of the car builders.  I fully
understand
their desire to have a new engine available for sale in a new car.
Makes
sense.  I, for one, do not believe there is an immediate need for any
type
of replacement for those of us desiring to continue running the 494
non-rave.  Maybe I am being naively optimistic, but I have not had
problems
getting parts.  Let me qualify that by saying that I am only considering
the
two engines I have and a once a year "freshening."   I realize the time
will
come when the parts will be harder/impossible to obtain, but I wonder if
that will happen before the issue of replacing the 493 with another
engine
rolls around again (ie. people are still running Kaw engines after we
have
been through the change twice with AMW and Rotax).  Granted, if the 493
is
truly equal (or not significantly different) to the 494 non-rave, then
adding it to the approved list poses no problem.  So, I would pose the
following.

I believe the class deserves some hard data to show the comparability of
the
493 with the 494 non-rave (never mind the rave and the mixing issues
which
I'll address below).  It is my belief that the only fair way to do this
is
to run cars equipped with both engines at the same track, at the same
time,
with the same driver (I notice Jeremy has already volunteered
Jonathan!!),
setup equivalently.  Cheap?  Probably not.  Therefore, I would suggest
that
the car builders interested in having a new engine available get
together
and split the cost, oversee the testing, and publish the results.  Tony
should be all too willing to provide a stock 493 for use, and possibly a
494
non-rave if the stock configuration is questionable.  I like Tony and
agree
he has been a great benefit to the class.  He is also running a business
and
making money on the sale of engines (assumably, or he wouldn't stay in
business!), so it would be an investment for his business future.  This
data
would be factual, and would not be under the control of Rotax
(Bombardier)
so it could be published.  Maybe that is asking too much of the car
builders.  I realize they are not making a living building these cars,
but
with a half dozen or more sharing costs I would not expect that they
could
not recover the investment with future sales, etc.  It seems to be in
their
best interests.

Assuming we could accomplish this in 2004, it would go a long way toward
getting a consensus on the use Nationally for 2005.  However, the major
issue still exists of mixing of parts to make a "hot" engine.  Listing
the
"approved" parts is a great start, but it will depend on the level of
tech
inspection as to whether the mixed parts issue is policed.
Unfortunately,
short of formal protest, we cannot control this.  I for one do not want
to
see a situation where someone is protested at every event because they
are
faster.  If the above testing could be arranged, maybe a "hot"
configuration
494 non-rave and a 494 rave could be included for comparison.  At the
end of
the day however, I think it is going to be impossible to eliminate
infringement of the rules.  Look at NASCAR for example!  Maybe the real
answer would be to specify the max displacement and open it up to any
production parts arrangement.  I know, I know, expensive......but some
are
already spending the money it would appear from the posts.  For what
it's
worth, a few more HP, although always welcome, would not have helped me
significantly toward the end of this season, as I was struggling with
setup/suspension woes and likely could not have taken advantage of it.
Which brings me to my final point, fast lap times are always about more
than
just HP!!  I think the 493 definitely has a place in F500 future, but
lets
get some hard data.

Let's finish the engine debates and start talking about adding shocks
again!!!  : )  Talk about improving lap times (and ruffling feathers).
I,
for one, would welcome the challenge of tuning these cars with a spec
shock!!

Curtis Teague