Why are we here?

[Quickmag]

The initial intent of this forum is two fold:

1) To answer the question " Do we want a separate (from F/L) F2000 Class?

2) and secondly, if yes to the above - "Who's rules do we use?"

Let's keep all discussions civil or there will be a 2 second lap penalty applied to your first quality run in 2008.

QM (aka Brian Smetaniuk)

[openwheeler]

Being the resident statistical guru,with the cars you know of in the region,how many cars are f2000 legal
or very close (few minor changes)?

[gary_t]

That will depend on which f2000 rules you compare the cars to. Anything that requires a fuel cell (FT3) will knock most (all? 5 yr life on them) out. If the fuel cell isn't included the list grows pretty quickly. Gord should be legal, Dan F., Jason A., and myself are close (I ran on 8's and 10's, otherwise legal). I don't know enough about the alberta cars to say anything on them.

Gary

[lotiguy]

with the cars you know of in the region,how many cars are f2000 legal
or very close (few minor changes)?

my thought is how many more can we attract as a legitimate class v.s a catch all.

myself i may chose to run libre too if there are no rules as it stands (mmmm turbo) ,but i see alot of possibility's if we have a ruleset in place same as FV and FF1600.

[Quickmag]

Wade:

   As Gary said, if you disregard the fuel cell rule, then I think that 8 of the 9 F2000s in Calgary would be legal.

Bri.

[Blair Robertshaw]

Blair Robertshaw here, my car is SCCA legal as it sits now. May 07 certification. Car was raced 2 times since with no modification. I will support an F2000 class. Casc or SCCA rules with slight variation / exception' such as fuel cells, fuel delivery.