Looking at 2020

[gordon]

On a more general point. Based on pre-Christmas email exchanges between Steve, O'Brie and I, there will be no tech-inspection before competition begins except for the Rally class. Instead, just the winning car in each class will be checked and if the winner fails (and is therefore disqualified), we'll check the second-place, etc. This will be a big time-saver.

[steveaca]

Hi Gordon,
with only your and my agreed responses on the topic, I'd like to suggest that we put these changes into the rule book so that adjustments to the cars, if necessary, can be started.
Steve

[gordon]

Steve I was thinking the same thing. Anyone else wants to contribute? Maybe we can vote.

[obrie]

Sorry guys i have been fighting the flu for the last couple of days and the brain is just not functioning!!!! I seriously have to do most things twice to make sure I will look at the 2020 suggestions and give my $0.02

[gordon]

Concerning our Modified Production class regulations for 2020, we currently have reasonable arguments for:

1. Leaving the regulations as per 2019.
2. Limiting all cars to 20,000 RPM motors and having magnets ahead of the rear wheels.

The first argument refers to the fact that there are a significant number of cars already set up and which can potentially be easily set up to comply with the 2019 regulation option where magnets may be located anywhere as long as motors do not exceed 20,000 RPM.

The second argument is primarily in the interest of slowing down the cars, since some of them are actually quicker than the fastest of our Restricted GT cars, which is not a very realistic scenario. We have also found that reducing the speed of the cars can often make for more interesting racing.

Well here's my proposal which I believe will address both points:

• We allow magnets to be located anywhere, however all cars must run FC-130 motors that do not exceed 18,000 RPM. I also recommend that we apply the 45º USD rule so that the cars require more than just holding the throttle flat out for the whole lap.

This will not only increase the potential car pool, but it will also slow the cars down to a more reasonable speed.

[steveaca]

Re Gordon's proposals for the Mod Prod class for 2020, these are my thoughts:
I think that magnet position, not only magnet strength, plays a huge role in a car's handling and the existing rules let the <20k rpm motor cars take full advantage by having free magnet location. This handling benefit is further increased in those cars that accomodate magnet mounting directly under the rear axle. It seemed in practice that the performance benefit gained by running >20k rpm motors was not sufficient on track to overcome the handling advantage of the free magnet location of the <20k motor cars. My suggestion of having all cars have magnets located in front of the rear wheels would have in a way levelled the handling playing field for all cars. My feeling is that Gordon's proposal , with free magnet location for all cars would still give a very significant handling benefit to those cars which can accomodate under-axle magnet location. Some cars just cannot facilitate this and I think that if some cars can run under-axle magnets, the ones that can't should enjoy a benefit elsewhere. My suggestion therefore is as to have, as we've had since the inception of this class, a rule which allows two different configurations. These would be as follows:
A) As per Gordon's suggestion, with up to 18k rpm motors (but not limited to FC130 type) and free magnet location.
B) 20k rpm motor limit with magnet located in front of rear wheels.

[gordon]

Steve, rather than retain two magnet locations, what about requiring that all magnets be minimum of a certain distance ahead of the rear axle (e.g. the location of the rear magnet in Slot.It inline pods or other inline chassis where the magnet is basically below the motor shaft and pinion gear)? By using this option, it will be much easier to set up the magnets. At the same time, the 45º USD rule will limit the amount of downforce possible. As you correctly said, trying to overcome a handling advantage with a motor RPM variation is not really the best solution. I would like to simplify this whole thing of having two different magnet configurations and motor requirements.

Concerning my suggestion of only allowing FC-130 motors up to 18,000 RPM, this is being proposed to prevent everyone having to go out and get long-can, high-torque motors to be competitive as is now the case for F1 and VSGT. Keeping it below 20,000 RPM is primarily to exclude the very quick ScaleAuto 20K FC-130 that several cars now run in the class, including my Zakspeed Capri. Perhaps we can allow any motor up to an RPM to be determined, provided it can be proven that the torque does not exceed 200 gm/cm.

I would like to have rules that will make it as simple as possible to allow a wide selection of cars from different manufacturers that can all be made to be competitive, at the same time slowing down the cars somewhat.

[steveaca]

Hi Gordon,
If we agree to limit magnet mounting position to be a minimum distance (eg.per Slot.it inline pod, I'd be fine and also be okay with the 45 Degree Rule. As far as motors go, I agree with your points and would be okay with the 18k rpm FC130 motors.
Anxious to start work as soon as these new regs.are finalized.

[gordon]

Okay. Here are the new Modified Production proposed 2020 regulations:

• Body: Must be based on a non-GT production car. Windows may be tinted so as not to reveal the cockpit.
• Motor: 18,000 RPM or lower and torque must be under 200 gm/cm, based on manufacturer's specifications. The RPM and torque figures must be verifiable.
• Magnets: Modified (45º) USD rule (see diagram under BTCC above). All magnets must be positioned at least 5.5mm ahead of rear axle (rear magnet position of inline Slot.It pod).

Let's hear your thoughts below.

[gordon]

I've changed the above maximum RPM from 20,000 to 18,000.