No...not a byline from the 90's...it is a preview of an upcoming event at High Plains Raceway! The Enterprises Sports Racers (FE's with the full body) are gathering to start running selected events and build a base (they currently are CSR's due to engine size). The effort to make this happen was put out by Jay Messenger, THANKS JAY!

Why post this now....because the side subject of new HP for the SRF points towards the ESR as being the logical car it you want to go THAT fast. With some likely reorg of the SR classes, the ESR should find a home.

Even for 170 HP, it takes these kind of cars to handle the power. The Spec Racer is NOT up to more than the 120 HP range without (as Tray noted) significant changes.

Eric why move the discussion here? The "SRF's future" thread seems like a better fit

Steve F, can you add some history on how the Spec Racer Toyota's worked out? Did they spontaneously burst into flame because they had a massive 140hp?

We may be stuck with the new engine for another 20 years (if we are lucky), and cars have been getting better pretty steadily over the last 20. I am just questioning if a 120hp SRFit (?) is going to excite big participation when introduced and 10 or 20 years into the future. I understand that physical fit, cost, and not over stressing the chassis are important. But we also have some really old Renault bits that maybe we should consider updating as well with something with better supply & cost (i.e. brakes, bearings, and hubs).

BFun wrote:Eric why move the discussion here? The "SRF's future" thread seems like a better fit

Steve F, can you add some history on how the Spec Racer Toyota's worked out? Did they spontaneously burst into flame because they had a massive 140hp?

We may be stuck with the new engine for another 20 years (if we are lucky), and cars have been getting better pretty steadily over the last 20. I am just questioning if a 120hp SRFit (?) is going to excite big participation when introduced and 10 or 20 years into the future. I understand that physical fit, cost, and not over stressing the chassis are important. But we also have some really old Renault bits that maybe we should consider updating as well with something with better supply & cost (i.e. brakes, bearings, and hubs).

I believe the SR Toyota had upgraded hubs and brakes.

Engine, transmission, hubs, brakes, ECU, harness ... you're probably looking at a $15,000+ upgrade. That price creates bigger transition problems.

I don’t think anyone said it would burst into flames with more power. However, its current track record of reliability and safety as well as Enterprises Liability would become an issue if you try and push the power too far north in this current 1984 design. Steve's Toyota was done as a track day car. I wonder what its history would look like if we put it through a full national season in fields of 30 to 40? Hard to say since we have no data on that car in those operating condition. The SRF does very well and has for 28 years. Be careful not to mess with something that has been working for 28 years.

One of the appeals of this class is the cost for level of performance. Typically one would have to spend way more on a street car to get the same level of performance. While comparing the performance of new ZR1 to that of an SRF is silly, (The ZR1 starts over $100K) I did pull together some actual numbers to the topic of HP/Lbs. If we you’re going to throw out numbers we should at least offer all the data. (cost as well as HP)
Car/Cost/FWHP/Weight with driver/Lbs_HP Ratio (lower is better)
1984 SRF................ $10K, 100 HP, 1550 Lbs, 15.5
1984 C4 Corvette... $28K, 240 HP, 3400 Lbs, 14.2
2012 C6 Corvette... $57K, 430 HP, 3450 Lbs, 8.0
2012 ZR1................ $112K, 638 HP, 3550 Lbs, 5.6
2012 SRF................ $18K, 118 HP, 1670 Lbs, 14.2
2015 SRF................ $26K, 133 HP, 1630 Lbs, 12.3
SCCA FE..................$40K, 170 HP, 1250 Lbs, 7.4
DSR.........................$65K, 170 HP, 900 Lbs, 5.3

Some comments on that info:
- The current SRF has a power to weight ratio almost identical to that of a 84 Corvette (meaningless but it was a point of comparison)
- The original SRF had a ratio that was not as good as the same year corvette but was better performing on the track and cost 18K less. (Not to mention is easier on brakes, easier to fix, bla bla bla)
- The proposed update has a ratio that is ~20% better than the original SRF and will have better balance
- HP and track performance COST
- The ZR1 is overpriced!

One of the main goals of this conversion is cost. If you shoot for higher HP increases you will see a kit cost double and triple in a hurry. That seems to go against entry level performance and value per $ spent.

GregCirillo wrote:

BFun wrote:Eric why move the discussion here? The "SRF's future" thread seems like a better fit

Steve F, can you add some history on how the Spec Racer Toyota's worked out? Did they spontaneously burst into flame because they had a massive 140hp?

We may be stuck with the new engine for another 20 years (if we are lucky), and cars have been getting better pretty steadily over the last 20. I am just questioning if a 120hp SRFit (?) is going to excite big participation when introduced and 10 or 20 years into the future. I understand that physical fit, cost, and not over stressing the chassis are important. But we also have some really old Renault bits that maybe we should consider updating as well with something with better supply & cost (i.e. brakes, bearings, and hubs).

I believe the SR Toyota had upgraded hubs and brakes.

Engine, transmission, hubs, brakes, ECU, harness ... you're probably looking at a $15,000+ upgrade. That price creates bigger transition problems.

The SRT I did exclusively for Aspen Motorsports Park has 30+ units happily making laps with the only upgrade found to be needed was while going elsewhere with high sustained g loads was a dry sump system. The package did include all 4 corners upgraded with uprights and brakes. The complete wiring harness and ECU were also replaced. The price was a little north of 15K but not by much. This was a 2 year development project for one race track initially with at first only one customer to satisfy. Then they all wanted it. Fortunately I hit it just right but I can not imagine the effort that Enterprises faces to satisfy the needs of a car universal enough to survive all track conditions and driver requests from 500 different directions.

I am fully in support of this project and wish Erik, Mike and staff the best.

Steve is 100% right! No conversion is easy, 5 of something is not that big of a deal? Not so! We need to R&D a conversion to satisfy 650 customers over 3 to 5 years. Develop or prove it in 18 to 24 month period... small details can change the outcome in a huge way.

A lot of people that visit the forum didn’t go through the ford conversion or take part in the first 2 or 3 years of the Renault drive train. The SRF of today is so bullet proof in its current form that people tend to take it for granted, it wasn’t always that way.

I’m doing my very best to update the engine management, fuel delivery and drive train in a logical cost effective manner. Our customers will continue to take part in the most reliable, equal, cost effective and competitive SPEC class in the SCCA. Maybe the world for that matter!

So the plan is simple, operate the engine in a more reliable, competitive state by updating the inconsistent EFI system. Increase the power and feel of our brakes and finally lose some weight and gain some Horse Power!

The SRF of the future will remain reliable and competitively equal coast to coast! Plus have a livelier feel and be better sounding!

For the too much HP is just right crowd…The engine bay or box of the SRF is only so big. The Renault engine R&R was easy 90 minute routine. Shoot @ Runs Offs impound 1992 Dewayne and I pulled my engine and sat it on the ground in 11 minutes. The unofficial all-time record in front of a crowd of people. Fitting the Ford 1.9 was a bit of an ordeal…the engine R&R jumped to a 240 + minute more complicated routine.

The new power plant will be more like the Renault and a little less complicated. It’s all part of the experience of owning and operating the SRF…let’s face it 95 % of us are never going to be rock star racers, so it should be as pleasant as possible!

As for wanting the MZR2.0/2.3/2.5 or K20/24 I wish…but a simple check with good old tape
measure throws those candidates right out the window.
Cost, availability, reliably, weight and power are the criteria for the update candidate. Time will tell…?

Over the coming year as we pin down details of the updates, Enterprises will release “Facts” as they become available. Time to time you may see me with new parts doing some R&D at events, this is a necessary evil as the budget to do 100% standalone testing is just not possible. I will be building knowledge and tuning base so when officially approved by the SCCA, the release of updates will be as trouble free as possible.

This is a very complex and difficult project! Rest assured I’m 100% both hands and feet in…I embrace it!!!

Mike D

Well said Mike!

So, with this new powerplant ... would our class still be SRF ... or would it become SRH ... or SRM?

Tray wrote:I don’t think anyone said it would burst into flames with more power. However, its current track record of reliability and safety as well as Enterprises Liability would become an issue if you try and push the power too far north in this current 1984 design. Steve's Toyota was done as a track day car. I wonder what its history would look like if we put it through a full national season in fields of 30 to 40? Hard to say since we have no data on that car in those operating condition. The SRF does very well and has for 28 years. Be careful not to mess with something that has been working for 28 years.

One of the appeals of this class is the cost for level of performance. Typically one would have to spend way more on a street car to get the same level of performance. While comparing the performance of new ZR1 to that of an SRF is silly, (The ZR1 starts over $100K) I did pull together some actual numbers to the topic of HP/Lbs. If we you’re going to throw out numbers we should at least offer all the data. (cost as well as HP)
Car/Cost/FWHP/Weight with driver/Lbs_HP Ratio (lower is better)
1984 SRF................ $10K, 100 HP, 1550 Lbs, 15.5
1984 C4 Corvette... $28K, 240 HP, 3400 Lbs, 14.2
2012 C6 Corvette... $57K, 430 HP, 3450 Lbs, 8.0
2012 ZR1................ $112K, 638 HP, 3550 Lbs, 5.6
2012 SRF................ $18K, 118 HP, 1670 Lbs, 14.2
2015 SRF................ $26K, 133 HP, 1630 Lbs, 12.3
SCCA FE..................$40K, 170 HP, 1250 Lbs, 7.4
DSR.........................$65K, 170 HP, 900 Lbs, 5.3

Some comments on that info:
- The current SRF has a power to weight ratio almost identical to that of a 84 Corvette (meaningless but it was a point of comparison)
- The original SRF had a ratio that was not as good as the same year corvette but was better performing on the track and cost 18K less. (Not to mention is easier on brakes, easier to fix, bla bla bla)
- The proposed update has a ratio that is ~20% better than the original SRF and will have better balance
- HP and track performance COST
- The ZR1 is overpriced!

One of the main goals of this conversion is cost. If you shoot for higher HP increases you will see a kit cost double and triple in a hurry. That seems to go against entry level performance and value per $ spent.

Well after some discussion this weekend, it seems the call has already been made. But a few comments on the numbers above.

My data had the 1984 C4 at 205hp (I was surprised it was that low for the first year of the C4), with '85 at 220 and '86 at 240. Where can I buy a new 2012 SRF for $18K (Enterprise's web page says $33,100 assembled with tires [like a Corvette comes - and to grow the class you need to sell NEW cars])? The FE price is also about $10K too low, and a good DSR has more like 200hp (although a new Stohr with a good engine may cost a bit more like $70K).

And part of the point was that back when we had the same power to weight as a new Corvette, cost 1/3 as much and were much faster around the track, the Spec Racer was selling like hotcakes. Now we have ~ 1/2 the power to weight, we cost a little more than half as much, and we are slower. How many NEW SRFs were sold in the last year? I bet under 1/10 of what was sold in '84 or '85. And it's not because Eric & Company are not doing a good job now. It's because the car is comparatively less exiting.

P.S. thanks for the tips this weekend and for letting me steal some shade from your Easy Up.

I know it's premature, but....

is there any thought going into what will become of the Ford engines once the conversion starts? Even with a 3-year window, we'll be orphaning hundreds of viable Ford engines. It would be nice to know they're going to a good home, and not a smelter.