Steel Cranks for FF1600 - Page 43

ff90 · 24 Jun 2008, 15:59 (Ref:2236640)

Another grape vine source says the new cam followers might also have something to do with the new cams failing so keep your old ones

kartingdad · 24 Jun 2008, 16:12 (Ref:2236645)

Trouble is your'e meant to have new followers on a new cam as they wear into each other.

ff90 · 25 Jun 2008, 07:00 (Ref:2236994)

Quote:

Originally Posted by kartingdad

Trouble is your'e meant to have new followers on a new cam as they wear into each other.

Yep! but now they are wearing each other in a few races and in some cases on the dyno, again so the grape vine says

kartingdad · 25 Jun 2008, 07:21 (Ref:2237008)

I've heard that as well.

Flavio Galtieri · 25 Jun 2008, 09:37 (Ref:2237098)

So here we are having read most of this thread for a year or so, fresh engine, first time out at Cadwell and guess what?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHP7ZPaXM34

Something really needs to be done I think, FF1600 engines used to be pretty bulletproof, or is that just me remembering through the misty haze of times past?

MikeM · 25 Jun 2008, 11:21 (Ref:2237141)

Just a comment on (Kent) cams.

Admittedly a few years ago now I had a similar problem with a new cam that turned out to have unhardened cam lobes (not FF) The engine builder didn't replace the followers so the warranty was invalid when he tried to claim a new cam. Kent then expected them to be replaced as a set. I don't know if this will apply with the cams causing a problem now?

kartingdad · 25 Jun 2008, 11:43 (Ref:2237149)

Nope. Its new cams and followers disintegrating in 5 mins on the dyno.

Alan Raine · 25 Jun 2008, 11:57 (Ref:2237159)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

So here we are having read most of this thread for a year or so, fresh engine, first time out at Cadwell and guess what?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHP7ZPaXM34

Something really needs to be done I think, FF1600 engines used to be pretty bulletproof, or is that just me remembering through the misty haze of times past?

Great Video

I wouldn't say they used to be bulletproof, I went through 3 in 14 years. The cranks were always a little suspect - kerbing the flywheel doesn't help.

It just seems the legal replacements just aren't up to the job.

mwg · 15 Dec 2008, 17:06 (Ref:2355310)

I have become confused with this issue.

The major outcome of the 'secret' meeting with Ford last month was that the current Kent regulations will not be changed for 2009. Right?

Since then, the e-mail from Kevin Shortis (BRSCC) would suggest that they are planning to relobby Ford or run supplementry regulations for National FF1600 which *would* allow a different crank. Is this right?

The question is, for somebody who needs to have a fresh engine before the start of the '09 season - what am I to do? Wait for an annoucement from the BRSCC, or go ahead and make the investment and risk *not* having a steel crank were they be permitted?

ff90 · 16 Dec 2008, 08:20 (Ref:2355785)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwg

I have become confused with this issue.

The major outcome of the 'secret' meeting with Ford last month was that the current Kent regulations will not be changed for 2009. Right?

Since then, the e-mail from Kevin Shortis (BRSCC) would suggest that they are planning to relobby Ford or run supplementry regulations for National FF1600 which *would* allow a different crank. Is this right?

News to me?????

Last I heard they were sticking with the FFI crank since they have verified "themselves" that the new batch of cranks where fine, something they never managed to do before. If that’s the case the 40 sold this year will NOT need changing in this winters rebuild, if they are the problem is as great as ever!
It would be nice to think the new batch is that good and therefore this campaign will have been a success but I would have preferred to have the same sensible choice as the rest of the world.

Last note, another bone of contention, was a "Proposed Method of Change" system for the BRSCC to allow changes to be made or discussed sensibly which would have soughed this argument long ago? Again a suggestion on deaf ears

ff90 · 16 Dec 2008, 08:21 (Ref:2355786)

?

diz · 16 Dec 2008, 16:13 (Ref:2356193)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ff90

?

Hi Phil,
OT but my emails to info@ and plant@ both bounce saying you don't like me.

Have you changed email addresses, or is it you really don't like me?

ff90 · 16 Dec 2008, 17:20 (Ref:2356253)

Quote:

Originally Posted by diz

Hi Phil,
OT but my emails to info@ and plant@ both bounce saying you don't like me.

Have you changed email addresses, or is it you really don't like me?

My service provider has/is having a bit of trouble with a mail server but plant@ or phil@ are working ok & I've always liked you. Mike M has now sent me the relevant email which i have passed on the Dave H who had not seen it either.

Phil

sharkie · 13 Jan 2009, 10:16 (Ref:2370478)

Steel cranks are now allowed, I have instructed my builder to fit one as soon as he has them in stock......well done everyone

Mr.Jingles · 13 Jan 2009, 10:22 (Ref:2370480)

Eh? explain (what have I missed).

Triple J Motorsport · 13 Jan 2009, 10:41 (Ref:2370490)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharkie

Steel cranks are now allowed, I have instructed my builder to fit one as soon as he has them in stock......well done everyone

And lighten the flywheel ?

Flavio Galtieri · 13 Jan 2009, 11:31 (Ref:2370514)

Ok I am now totally confused.

My engine is with the builder and he has confirmed that he, and other UK engine builders, have been asked to install (illegal) steel cranks. I have told him to build a legal engine as usual.

I would expect engines to be checked during the season and I have no desire to cheat so where can I find the definitive reference to steel cranks now being allowed in FF1600?

Flavio Galtieri · 13 Jan 2009, 17:06 (Ref:2370735)

Kevin has told me they are drafting a rule giving the option of a SCAT crank and it will be announced on Thursday. This is cast not forged as per the SCCA rules perhaps? We will soon know one way or the other.

Mr.Jingles · 13 Jan 2009, 17:10 (Ref:2370738)

Who's drafting it exactly? Nobody I've spoke to knows anything about this.

Flavio Galtieri · 13 Jan 2009, 22:17 (Ref:2370940)

Well I just called Kevin Shortis at the BRSCC and that's what I was told.

ff90 · 13 Jan 2009, 22:34 (Ref:2370965)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

Kevin has told me they are drafting a rule giving the option of a SCAT crank and it will be announced on Thursday. This is cast not forged as per the SCCA rules perhaps? We will soon know one way or the other.

The SCCA crank is the SCAT crank as commissioned by the SCCA in the first place some six years ago (approx) and has always been a CAST Steel Crank.

StephenRae · 14 Jan 2009, 09:35 (Ref:2371206)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

Kevin has told me they are drafting a rule giving the option of a SCAT crank and it will be announced on Thursday. This is cast not forged as per the SCCA rules perhaps? We will soon know one way or the other.

Did you ask Kevin whether or not a lighter flywheel is also to be allowed?

Mr.Jingles · 14 Jan 2009, 12:31 (Ref:2371283)

OK, spoke to Steve Burns @ CCRC.

This change is something that BRSCC are doing off their own back (it hasn't been changed in the Ford Regs) - obviously CCRC will be keeping an eye on how the change goes down with the drivers etc, and there's always the chance we could adopt it at a later date (providing all the drivers signed up to it).

However it won't be this year, it's safe to say.

Where does this leave BRSCC drivers for events like the WHT? having to field 2 engines or stick with the original crank? Will they get a rule break because it is (if everyone's honest) probably not going to increase performance? Could it be protested if they did?

ff90 · 14 Jan 2009, 13:39 (Ref:2371316)

It has been long acknowledged that the crank offers no performance advantage and has always been about a choice.

Certainly less to think about than the Historic cars having +20' and pattern piston engines.

Mr.Jingles · 14 Jan 2009, 14:01 (Ref:2371333)

Yeah - but there are people who will protest, because they can.

View Poll Results: Should steel crankshafts be used.
Steel crankshafts...yes	117	75.48%
Steel crankshafts...no	9	5.81%
Leave it the way its always been	29	18.71%
Voters: 155. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New Cranks with Flywheels	Walshy	Club Level Single Seaters	19	9 Feb 2009 12:57
FF1600 in the UK	jimbomit	Club Level Single Seaters	4	8 Nov 2005 15:19
Which FF1600	Midgebradley	Club Level Single Seaters	33	29 Jun 2005 17:11
Which came first - the FF1600 or the Vee! :)	Triple J Motorsport	Club Level Single Seaters	75	21 Mar 2005 15:37