RGB Sports 1000 Committee Meeting &th August 2018

RGB Sports 1000 Committee Meeting &th August 2018

Postby ColinChapman » Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:32 pm

RGB Sports 1000 Committee meeting via Skype – 8.00 pm 7th August 2018

On Call: James, Tim, Charlie, Colin, Olly (Apologies Adrian)

1. Managing costs – as summarised in the last meeting notes, we are looking at possible measures we could incorporate in the regs that would help keep the long term cost of competition down and help protect our position in terms of offering the best performance per pound of any UK racing championship. We had a productive meeting with Ian & Scott Mittell, Tim Gray and Paul Nightingale at Cadwell, aimed at exploring some ideas and principles with the Manufacturers involved in RGB Sports 1000. See meeting note at the foot of these minutes.

Having considered the options, we believe some changes are worth making for 2019 as they have no impact on existing competitors and they protect against future potential cost escalation. Our recommendation to the club, subject to driver support, will be:
i. Tyres – ensure sensible tyre costs by limiting the number of sets of new tyres used in a racing season to 3 full sets, subject to the club demonstrating we have a sound process for administering and controlling. Note this may involve a third set of wheels for those that test regularly and do not want to use race tyres for all their testing miles: 1) racing AO48s (controlled); 2) wets (not controlled) and 3) testing tyres (not controlled).
ii. Brake Callipers: restriction to existing suppliers (Willwood and Hi Spec?) to avoid anyone spending silly money to gain a very marginal advantage. We would “grandfather in” older cars (pre 2011?) with other callipers (Sierra etc.) if still in use.
iii. Differentials: we would remove the risk of anyone investing in a much more expensive diff for marginal gains, by limiting diffs to existing Quaiffe (inc. radical reversing Diff) box.
The above would be proposed to the club for inclusion in 2019 regs - if supported by registered drivers.
Action: 1) Charlie to liaise with club to confirm a robust process is available for controlling tyres. 2) Drivers to comment on above 3 specific proposals for 2019. 3) Drivers to comment on other potential long term cost saving changes – see “future” changes in meeting note below so we can assess if they are worth further consideration for the future (i.e. not 2019).

2. 2019 regs – Ride height: An important distinction between RGB Sports 1000 (standard engines, road tyres, no wings) and Bikesports (slicks, wings, tuned engines) is the very limited aero in RGB. This means that wings are forbidden and floors are flat with no diffuser …… to quote the regs: “The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that RGB Sports 1000 cars have simple floors and do not rely upon the underside of the car to provide an aerodynamic advantage”. Complementing this intent is that our ride height is 75mm minimum (versus 40 mm in Bikesports), which is intended to minimise any underfloor aero benefit. The only test we currently use to check ride height is a static test in parc ferme. Some recent car development has used the limitations of this static test to create ride heights on track that are consistently below 75mm, but that pass the 75 mm test in static conditions. This has effectively created an aerodynamic benefit, contrary to the intent of these regulations. Consequently we propose to clarify the regulations in 2019 to help ensure cars comply with the intent of the regs. This is under discussion and may take the form of:
i. Clarifying the wording of the regs
ii. Introducing a new test to ensure compliance
iii. Restricting some complex (and expensive) forms of suspension that enable the static ride height test to be passed even though a car runs lower on circuit. For example: banning gas struts or anything else that lifts ride height for the purpose of passing the static test, limiting dampers to one in each corner, limiting dampers to single or double adjustable only. Some elements of this might need a degree of “grandfathering” of current cars.

Actions: 1) Drivers to comment on principles please; then 2) Tim/to draft potential regs changes

Note – work on the 2019 regs is just getting moving and the items discussed above are the main issues under consideration at the moment. That does not preclude others coming up before they are finally submitted. As usual, our intent is to minimise changes. We will share any potential changes before submission.

3. RGB Sports 1000 marketing – Colin to ask James Winstanly for an updated report and plan on marketing the formula.

4. On everyone’s behalf, we thanked Olly, Charlie and Adrian for the live broadcasting and race 1 compilation videos that they have created this year. These will continue whenever possible.

5. Marshals BBQ at Cadwell: Thanks to TGM for allowing us to use their awning given the weather and to everyone who contributed food, drink and helped run the BBQ. We had an excellent turnout and raised £175 for the Marshals fund.

6. Long Service Badges – Olly taking on admin from Adrian.

7. New RGB Sports 1000 branded shirts etc. James working with Duncan to provide mock ups.

8. Anglesey – no drinks and snacks planned for Anglesey presentation as most of us will be heading home immediately afterwards given it is a single day meeting.

9. Committee members: Adrian is standing down as he will not be racing with RGB next year. Thanks to Adrian for his support and to those who have volunteered their services. If you want to help out by joining the committee, please let one of us know.

10. 750MC Race Committee: The club and MSA processes in dealing with the incident in the assembly area at Pembrey (that resulted in a car change for an RGB competitor) was discussed at some length with the clerks and scrutineers in Race Committee and may result in a review at board level.

11. Fuel Splash Guards: There has been some recent discussion with the scrutineers on this subject involving one of our cars. Action Charlie to follow up and clarify with Scrutineers.

End of meeting

RGB Sports 1000
Ongoing Cost management - Discussion with manufacturers

27/7/18 Cadwell Park

Attendees: Paul Nightingale, Tim Gray, Ian and Scott Mittell, Charlie Thomas and Colin Chapman.
Objective: To explore possible measures we could incorporate in the regs that would help keep the long term cost of competition down and help protect our position in terms of offering the best performance per pound of any UK racing championship. The list below summarises the main points discussed at the meeting.
• General discussion explored the merits and possible issues with being more restrictive to help manage costs without affecting the development aspect of the championship.

• Two categories of potential changes were discussed:
o Now: Those we could make now that would not affect any competitors. Examples: limit number of sets of tyres that could be used in a season or require all cars to use Willwood or Hi Spec brake callipers, as every car uses these now (tbc) ..
o Future: Those we would want to introduce with a notice period (e.g. 3 years) because they would impact existing cars. Example: banning split rims or limiting choice of dampers as this would necessarily force changes to existing cars.

• Tyres – no major issues with the idea of limiting tyres to possibly 3 sets per year. Main issue was testing the practicality of control and management by the club. Could be a “now” change.

• Brake callipers – restriction to existing suppliers (Willwood and Hi Spec?) to avoid anyone spending silly money to gain a very marginal advantage. Could be a “now “ change.

• Dampers – is there a way of constraining damper selection to avoid a race to the most expensive? This would be a “future” change as there are a wide variety in use today and on some cars it may be difficult to change.

• Number of dampers – do we restrict the number per car (e.g. max 4) and ban mono shocks? This would be a “future” change.

• Dry sumps – potential “future” change. Banning may reduce costs up front though some would argue a cost benefit in the long run.

• Differentials – possibly limit to the Quaiffe standard and (Radical) reversing diffs to avoid more expensive options for marginal performance benefit. This could be a “now” change.

• Use of carbon fibre bodywork – again a potential ”future” change. But does this remove a technique that is now becoming more accessible to club racers?

• Split Rims. Another potential “future” change as we have them in use now and in some cases a change would require major changes to existing cars.

Meeting ended by torrential rain storm and wildly bucking awnings! All above were briefly discussed but with recognition that any major decisions would only be after consulting drivers.
User avatar
Posts: 697
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:07 am
Location: Worcestershire

Re: RGB Sports 1000 Committee Meeting &th August 2018

Postby dlarner » Mon Aug 20, 2018 12:48 pm

Please see my comments/feedback on the notes above:

1. Managing Cost
All for it, as long as it's about ensuring wealthier teams/individuals can't gain unfair advantages vs non-team/self funded drivers via "pouring money into it" rather than being about restricting or limiting the formula.

i. Tyres
Potential grey area for people wanting to do additional testing/track days but needing a 3rd set of wheels to run for rather than using up their race tyres.
- Assuming that the 3 sets are for use in qualifying and races? Who is going to check?
- What about tyre damage?
- What about pre-race test sessions?

ii. Brake Calipers
Didn't realise anyone was spending big money here... Willwood are cheap and I don't see any performance advances elsewhere?
- Possibly just requires futuring of the regulations to ensure braking innovations stay within current basic principles, rather than specifying brands.

iii. Differentials
Indifferent.. Again, maybe just requires regulation futuring to protect against more expensive technologies being used and current ATB, viscous and other types currently in use as allowed.

2. Ride Height
- Secondary systems to enable cars to pass ride height during static tests should be banned.
- Tuning the primary suspension system to operate in a particular way dynamically but maintain static ride height req is fine... Suspension moves, if it "stays down" at speed, that is because we're averaging 90 mph and the bodywork is going to create downforce and affect the ride height. This is too grey an area to define a minimum ride height recovery time and too difficult to police.

3 way should be banned - too expensive for the average Joe as well as requiring additional testing (more money) to set up well.

Number of dampers
- I'm in two minds about this. 1 or 2 more dampers for pitch/heave control isn't that much more expensive unless you don't ban 3 way dampers.
- Rarely do bikesports run this however (only really single seaters) so maybe we shouldn't either?

Dry Sumps
Not aware of many people running this or it adding performance, just reliability... indifferent.

Carbon Fibre
- No real gain to performance by using carbon due to weight restrictions
- Unlikely that manufacturers will use it to make full cars due to cost
- Not that expensive if an individual wants to make their own parts
- Possibly just needs future rule to ensure manufacturers don't increase vehicle prices by using large quantities of carbon fibre (individual parts that require stiffness are okay?)
- eg. 'Main body panels/clamshells cannot be made wholly from carbon fibre, however use in small items such as spoiler end plates, wing mirrors, straps can use composite materials.'

Split Rims
- Difficult rule as selling already owned wheels isn't an option due to fitment but there is an obvious performance advantage.
- Expensive to repair/replace also.
- Future rule change to restrict new purchases? (assuming old cars/wheels will fade out as time goes on)
- What if a new supplier offers split rims at equal costs to 1 piece rims? Grey area?!

Kind regards
Twitter/Instagram: @danieljlarner
User avatar
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:03 pm
Location: Warwickshire

Re: RGB Sports 1000 Committee Meeting &th August 2018

Postby Hutchie » Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:30 pm

Just my thoughts ......
Whilst I’m all in favour of trying to curtail costs, this is fraught with difficulties in what is essentially a developmental formula and we need to be careful when applying grandfather rights that we are not just differing a significant cost to make older cars compliant - this would typically hit people with smaller budgets so could be a double whammy.
Maybe when the items need to be replaced they could only be replaced with what the current regs state - but I guess this would require the introduction of log books and all the admin may become too onerous.
On the point regarding tyres, will there be some allowance for replacing damaged tyres (e,g. cut or punctured & unrepairable)- and would this allow the replacement of a pair on the same axle? If so I guess the next question is how do we avoid this being abused?
Many thanks for all the efforts involved in trying to manage these challenges though - I know it is not an easy task !!
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:20 am
Location: York

Re: RGB Sports 1000 Committee Meeting &th August 2018

Postby smurfmoto » Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:58 pm

Cost control is a good idea as long as the control measures can be applied fairly and policed.

limiting the number of tyres is a good idea as long as there is a way identify the individual tyres and monitor thier use.

We could specify type and material rather than a make. Ie, steel or aluminium maximum four pistons per caliper

There are a wide rangeof dampers being used at the moment. We could limit the dampers to steel or aluminium double adjustable no remote resevoirs, but there are several cars already using a more advanced and expensive dampers Who would be forced to buy new dampers, a transition period could help the people with existing higher spec dampers.
We could limit the cars to a single damper, spring and bumpstop on each corner plus front & rear anti roll bar.
This would control cost and also help with the ride height control.

Mandating the quaffe diffs makes life difficult for front engine cars and anybody wanting to be creative with production parts. I think it would be better to limit by type ie, torsen, plate and vc only.
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:53 am
Location: Sittingbourne Kent

Return to RGB Formula Committee and Race Committee

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests