What Does FV need for the future?"

[Amon]

Steve,


Touche'!!

Mark

[nbrigido]

Just because you are upset about FV slowly dying, does not mean there is a thing you can do about it.

Nothing you have suggested has been PROVEN to increase class participation in SCCA. That is where you fail in this discussion.

Brian

I don't feel that many people think that FV is dying? I would say that most everyone here is saying numbers are declining and what ideas do people have to increase and rejuvinate the series.

Nothing is PROVEN, if it was, we would not all be here debating the situation. No this is not house soccer league, where $300 a year get you a season of fun. We all participate in a sport/hobby that is expensive, dangerous and time consuming.

I don't feel this discussion has failed, if anything there has been some great ideas. You can't prove something works if you are not willing to try. Most of the ideas here require little or no investment ($$$), if anything they are designed to save money.

So if a spec tire is agreed upon, and no one new joins the series, but everyone saves $$$, where is the lose?

[Amon]

Nbrigido,

Stop, you're making too much sense!


Mark


92' Protoform P-2/05'

[gbmetcalf]

Very well put.

G.

I don't feel that many people think that FV is dying? I would say that most everyone here is saying numbers are declining and what ideas do people have to increase and rejuvinate the series.

Nothing is PROVEN, if it was, we would not all be here debating the situation. No this is not house soccer league, where $300 a year get you a season of fun. We all participate in a sport/hobby that is expensive, dangerous and time consuming.

I don't feel this discussion has failed, if anything there has been some great ideas. You can't prove something works if you are not willing to try. Most of the ideas here require little or no investment ($$$), if anything they are designed to save money.

So if a spec tire is agreed upon, and no one new joins the series, but everyone saves $$$, where is the lose?

[Hardingfv32]

Mark might be better we don't get ideas from some. I guess if I was one of the ones who pushed for thousand dollar intakes I wouldn't be offering any new suggestions either.

Those kind of responses sound like 'tapping out' to me.

I work on my FV program about 60 hrs a week. I am having great fun and not worrying about the future of FV or SCCA.

Statistically speaking, you guys will be long gone, as competitors, before the FV comes to an end.

Brian

[Amon]

Brian,

It's amazing how you can predict the future!

Mark

[Hardingfv32]

I don't feel this discussion has failed, if anything there has been some great ideas. You can't prove something works if you are not willing to try. Most of the ideas here require little or no investment ($$$), if anything they are designed to save money.

1) None of your ideas are new, and they certainly are not great.

2) SCCA has much experience with spec tires, and the results do NOT support your thesis. SFR has a spec FV tire and their results do not support your thesis.

You guys have nothing, so why should the rest of us be bothered.

This is how the majority feel on the subject, so you need to frame your presentation to counter the apathy. This is all about politics at this point.
You guys are miserable at it.

Brian

[lawyerbob]

1) None of your ideas are new, and they certainly are not great.

2) SCCA has much experience with spec tires, and the results do NOT support your thesis. SFR has a spec FV tire and their results do not support your thesis.

You guys have nothing, so why should the rest of us be bothered.

This is how the majority feel on the subject, so you need to frame your presentation to counter the apathy. This is all about politics at this point.
You guys are miserable at it.

Brian

Not really much of a "how to win friends and influence people" kind of guy are you Brian?

I'm not sure how "this is how the majority feel" and "counter the apathy" fit in the same sentence. If the majority feel there is no need for change, that's one thing, fine, then we should all stop talking and move on. If the majority are "apathetic" then by definition they don't care one way or another, in which case, those that do care should make some decisions.

More and More I think FV needs some kind of "leadership" such as a national association or something. I found this on FormulaVee.org http://www.formulaveeracing.org/Association.html but have no idea if it's functioning. I don't mean that to be a slam of any kind on the Ad Hoc Committee, but it's just that - ad hoc - so there's little incentive for FV drivers to really express an opinion. If there was a "governing body" which had the mandate and power to promulgate and propose rules changes (or NO rules changes) on behalf of the membership, based on voting, we might not see the "apathy" that Brian refers to.

(I've been waiting for the mods to pull the plug on this one - I suspect we're close)

[nbrigido]

1) None of your ideas are new, and they certainly are not great.

2) SCCA has much experience with spec tires, and the results do NOT support your thesis. SFR has a spec FV tire and their results do not support your thesis.

You guys have nothing, so why should the rest of us be bothered.

This is how the majority feel on the subject, so you need to frame your presentation to counter the apathy. This is all about politics at this point.
You guys are miserable at it.

Brian

I would like to know how anyone can say an idea is not "great" if it has not be implemented or tried in a specific situation.

To say the points brought up here are "nothing", to you probably, that is your opinion and you are free to express your opinion.

But to say "this is how the majority feel", I think is a little far fetched, where's the Proof?

How anyone can say this is about politics is beyond me. First off I am Canadian, racing in the Ontario series. At the end of the day I personally have no vested interst in the SCCA, But I do have an interest in the people and companies that support the series. Autowerks, SRacing, Diamond Formula Cars, Nobel, Silver Bullet, Roxanne are all companies that I supported this year. So yes, I do have an interest in them and all those who support these companies that support us. If the numbers keep dropping, will they all be around 5 years from now? Who knows, but I don't want to sit back and do nothing.

In Ontario, we have a spec tire on our FV(1200), we do not have factory representation, money, funding, sponsorship. Heck they are not even a sponsor of our region, But they had a product that served our needs and goals.

So where politics comes into this, I will never know.

But to bash a whole group of "fellow" racers for expressing opinions and offering solutions....

What is the worst that can happen, if a group promoted the series, or a rule is changed...

[nbrigido]

(I've been waiting for the mods to pull the plug on this one - I suspect we're close)

The Sad part is you might be right! This thread is about "what does FV need for the future" and it seems like members are getting bashed for voicing opinons or ideas. At the end of the day this will force people to keep ideas to themselves and nothing will ever happen.

I am starting to think that some actually want the series to fade away or become something else all together. Again, fine, it is their opinion and vision, start a thread about it.

[Tiago Santos]

2) SCCA has much experience with spec tires, and the results do NOT support your thesis. SFR has a spec FV tire and their results do not support your thesis.

Why are you bringing opinion into an argument of facts? Doesn't seem like you.

Or does it..

[Steve Bamford]

Those kind of responses sound like 'tapping out' to me.

I work on my FV program about 60 hrs a week. I am having great fun and not worrying about the future of FV or SCCA.

Statistically speaking, you guys will be long gone, as competitors, before the FV comes to an end.

Brian

Another shinning example of someone only interested in themselves & not the community as a whole.

Sad to hear someone has 2.5 full days a week to devote to a program & not worry enough to contribute to the future of it.

[Bill Bonow]

I found this on FormulaVee.org http://www.formulaveeracing.org/Association.html but have no idea if it's functioning.

Idea started in 2009. Results are self evident. My .02 Just like many other things in FV. Lots of great ideas, but the trigger never gets pulled. I see there is a new Midwest version on the drawing board, best wishes and hope it gets going.

(I've been waiting for the mods to pull the plug on this one - I suspect we're close)

Trying/hopeful this thread will die out. I figured out about post # 26 that this was this thread was going to be the Hatfields and McCoys of FV. For the most part, everyone has been very civil, no personal attacks. It seems to be inching closer in that direction, but a warning now and then seems to keep things cool (this being that warning).

Apex is a great place to communicate about our passion. However, it seems that it is evident that the idea of changing the other guys views simply ain't gonna happen.

As long as the thread stays away from personal attacks, you all are welcome to beat this dead horse until there is nothing more than a grease spot

[Rolling Stone]

God I love Chatrooms !! and Im on my way to pick up my $250 manifold too!!!plus I will soon be racing again,at the back!!I dont bloody care..its the spirit of it all..and damn good fun....sod the tires/manifolds/blah bloody blah..im gonna race soon

[grapefarmeral]

Brian,

There are not many FV/F1200 competitors that are as fortunate or as well off as you, to be able to spend 60 hours a week on FV. Formula Vee was conceived to let the average guy race and I don't mean 5'10" x 165 lbs. The "average" wage earner that has a family, mortgage but a strong desire to compete on track. It's fine if those that are well heeled want to race FV, that's great, but if they want to belong to an elite group , they need to go to FA, GT1,Etc. ... Tony Ave's owner spent $20,000 (10 sets x $2000) on TIRES the week of the Runoffs in 2007.

Thanks to your 60 hour a week dedication we now have $1000 manifolds... and all that has done has elevated the cost of competition, not the level of competition. What many here are asking, is to retain the "level" of competition not the expense. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Remember the IROC series? What great competition, with drivers from the ranks of sprint cars, speedway cars and even drag racers. The cars were designed to be equal and isn't that the intent of Formula Vee? Equal cars to showcase driving talent.

(Devils avocate here) Maybe we should implement some of the penalties that touring cars had in the past. When someone won they had to add a certain amount of weight for the next race and if they won again more weight, till someone else won. Then the new winner got weight added and so on an so forth... Made a great show for the spectators. I'm not suggesting weight penalties, but FV racing, as in business, you need to change and adapt. If you stand still, you are losing ground. Butch Deer reminded us of the changes over the years and some of those were radical for the time.. losing the fan shorud, generator and belt, etc. etc....

Sorry, just beating a dead horse...

[Amon]

Al, ( add these to yours)

Maybe we should also add weight if:

1.) Your manifold cost more than $500.
2.) Your car is 8 yrs. old or newer.
3.) Your tires have less than 8 heat cycles.
4.) You weigh less than 180 lbs..
5.) You work at least 60 hours per week on your vee.
6.) You believe the SFR is the only region that counts.
7.) You know how the majority feels while being in the minority.
8.) You work 3000 hours per year on your Fv program and haven't won the Runoff's.
9.) You're a genius and everyone else isn't.
10.) Nobody's opinion counts except mine.

I know, I know Bill, I'm getting close to crossing the line!!!

Mark

92' protoform P-2/05'

[Bill Bonow]

Don't push me, I've got a whole bunch of these ready to roll

[starkejt]

grapefarmeral,

You have the best user name I have seen on this site. Every time you post something, I click on it hoping it is the story behind that name.

[grapefarmeral]

Unfortunately there's no interesting story, I have about 400 grape vines in a small vineyard... but perhaps I should make up a good story...

[starkejt]

I still like it. Succinct and gives the reader all the necessary info in a nice, little package.

[Speed Sport Engineering]

Brian,


Thanks to your 60 hour a week dedication we now have $1000 manifolds... and all that has done has elevated the cost of competition, not the level of competition. What many here are asking, is to retain the "level" of competition not the expense. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Just to be clear, $1000 manifolds have been around for A LOT longer then most people realize....10 years at least. Can't figure out why this is always used as an example. I guess because it's a piece of conduit. But in the grand scheme of things, a $1000 part that lasts 10 years (or longer if they don't change the rules ) is actually a pretty good deal.

[Steve Bamford]

Just to be clear, $1000 manifolds have been around for A LOT longer then most people realize....10 years at least. Can't figure out why this is always used as an example. I guess because it's a piece of conduit. But in the grand scheme of things, a $1000 part that lasts 10 years (or longer if they don't change the rules ) is actually a pretty good deal.

I am pretty sure most realize why it was brought up recently & in relation to whom.

[Matt King]

Back when the manifold wars were in full swing, $1000 would have been a bargain. I think Brian was getting close to $1500 for some of his.

[Amon]

Matt,

No wonder the cost of tires doesn't seem to bother him....

Mark

[Steve Bamford]

Back when the manifold wars were in full swing, $1000 would have been a bargain. I think Brian was getting close to $1500 for some of his.

Maybe the real issue is we should give Brian royalties on a spec tire & then he can lobby his majority almighty one vote & make it happen.

[Amon]

Steve,


Sshhhhhhhh, don't give away any idea's!


Mark

[grapefarmeral]

Mike,

You're right the $1000 manifolds were around. But when the "monsters" showed up that was a problem. They clearly were a violation of the letter and the spirit of the GCR. And for some political reason they remained, when they should have been disqualified....

to paraphrase the FV intro in the GCR ..' if it's not here don't do it' all that the "monsters" did was elevate the cost and yes, if you spread the cost over 10 years with no rule changes, but.... what happens if it gets bumped, dropped, twisted or bent when someone drives over the back of your car? We all know things happen... after all this is Formula Vee.

[grapefarmeral]

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Mike,[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]I thought about your $1000 amortized over 10 years and decided to apply it to spec tires. The Canadians can use a set for two (02) years and remain competitive and if you’re leery about that claim ask that good old American Ray Carmody about the Canadian spec tires. But back to the comparison. The Canadians run a six (06) weekend series with one (01)qualifying session and three (03)races per weekend. Four (04) sessions per weekend equals twenty four (24) per year or a total of two hundred forty (240) sessions in the ten year comparison/amortization. Their tires are $300 per set delivered to your door (I’ll dig up my receipt if you’d like to see it). In a ten (10) year period you’d use five (05) sets or a total of $1500 which would get divided by two hundred forty (240) sessions and that equals $6.25 or about the cost of one premium 20 oz glass of beer.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Now if we use the same session comparison for slicks….[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]A National Weekend generally consists of two qualifying/practice sessions plus the race which equals three (03) sessions. To make the comparison apples to apples you would need to run eight (08) races per year to get our comparison twenty four (24) sessions per year. Now if you get two (02) weekends or six sessions (06)out of your tires, which seems to be the recurring standard, you will need four (04) sets per year at $750 per set. Now that will total $3000 for the year x ten (10) years that’s only $30,000 for tires. The $30000 divided by the two hundred forty (240) sessions = $125.00 per session. At that rate the average guy could, given the same National budget, but racing on spec tires, have enough money to buy tires and a new Caracal, Speedsport, Protoform or Vortec… and beer for everyone on the grid. Just on tire savings alone…[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Oh yeah, in that same ten (10) year period the Canadians get one hundred (100) more races during the comparison… not a bad deal[/SIZE][/FONT]

[grapefarmeral]

Apparently If you write someting in Word and copy to the forum it adds all the brackets and crap..

[sracing]

Sorry, I don't see the correlation to manifolds having to do with thread. Someone simply read the rules and made a better performing part. If you haven't seen this done in most EVERY racing series you haven't been racing. When a particular engine builder's engine won the run-offs they started selling engines for 10K. Same thing. No rules were broken. This happens every few years. "Phase 2" heads, and on and on.
Saying someone broke the "spirit" of the rules makes no sense at all and if it did, MANY other parts should be illegal. I don't think $300 carbs and $1000 heads are in the "spirit" of the rules either, but that is where we are.

[Amon]

Al,

I'll drink to that! Bravo my friend!


Mark


92' Protoform P-2/05'

[grapefarmeral]

Jim,

My point is that we're spending needless money to compete. Yes $300 carbs and $1000 heads should be added to that list. The only ones that benefit from $300 carbs and $1000 heads are those that sell them (sorry Jim) , not the class. When everyone has $1000 - 1500 manifolds, $300 carbs and $1000 heads, we're back at our starting point, but now we've all spent more money and what has the class gained? Zip, zero, nada....

I agree that everyone is looking for that edge, but shouldn't that edge be car setup and driver skill? Thank God the SCCA dropped the old Championship points system. The guy that had the most money would win. All he had to do was go to all the races he could, all over the country and the the highest point total at the end of the season wins...

[sracing]

Jim,

My point is that we're spending needless money to compete. Yes $300 carbs and $1000 heads should be added to that list. ....., but shouldn't that edge be car setup and driver skill?

Absolutely! But without a car/engine claimer rule (or IROC type series) I see no way to change that. (And both those ideas are not practical.)

People who have the $ (or the time to build) are going to do exactly that to get the edge. To eliminate all the above you would have to allow only 1 tire type, 1 chassis, 1 body 1 strictly spec'ed sealed engine, one type of wheel bearing, and on and on. This won't happen. And since it is a free market, when someone does go faster and others think it his package, they will offer to buy it at an escallated price. Thats the facts.

[grapefarmeral]

Again I agree there are variables that can't be controlled. The claimer rule doesn't work at the local dirt tracks either. When an "illegal" motor, and most are, is claimed the claimee just loads up and goes home.. most track rules are, that the claimee cannot race at that track for the rest of the season... no big deal, at least in the Pennsylvania dirt, as there's an oval about every 30 - 40 miles in every direction. The claimee just races somewhere else. It's good on paper, but in the real world...

A spec tire would eliminate one costly variable and shouldn't we eliminate all unnecessary variables. I wouldn't want one chassis, body or sealed motors, but if the specifiactions are tight and enforced that will eliminate the real or imagined advantages. Yes someone might design and build a car that could handle better, and he could then sell copies, like Rod Stout or the Varacins .. that's great. Someone will always come up with something that's better or faster, or is it really. If you put Mike or Brad in a Caracal or Protoform, I'd bet they'd be just as effective. I remember someone commenting about HP claims, you know when some one would say ' we found a 1/4 HP here and another 1/8 there' and if you add those 1/4s and 1/8 ths over the years we'd have 120 HP.

I say let those that want to spend thousands and thousands on the latest get fast schemes, but limit the expensive variables..

[Bill Bonow]

In all forms of competition (not just racing), most people will predominantly spend all available funds. In FV, those available funds can widely vary from person to person and in such can give competitive advantage to those that outspend the others.

Limit the effects of spending by the design or the rules and the competitive dominance of the "big spenders" is minimized.

As discussed, the time frame/window for a complete redesign to minimize the effects of spending of the now 49 year old FV class is long since over. The class is not dead, but it is on the back side of the bell curve (slowly shrinking). Change (if possible) at this point should be focused to miminize new costs and attract a few new participants.

From my personal viewpoint (as posted previously) is a hard spec tire and an increase in minimum weight is a best path with minimal cost to everyone that will help to extend the life of the class.

[Steve Bamford]

Save money & have equality...I guess the concept is hard for some to grasp. Even if not another racer is added, everyone who continues to race saves money.

As for those who talk about rules stability, the thousand plus dollar manifolds were something I am sure the originators of the class never envisioned when the rules were written. Someone built a better mouse trap however they did it at a considerable expense/cost to competitors. If you were one without the expensive manifolds then the likelihood of being competitive decreased. Many lobbied against it & in the end consider who really benefited from it? It wasn't the class that benifited, rather the ones Al listed previously.

FV is an entry level class & a great drivers series. No one is going on from here to be the next F1 driver. It has been a great inexpensive class, steps should continually be taken to control costs & give every driver the opportunity to be competitive regardless of budgets.

[Tiago Santos]

No one is going on from here to be the next F1 driver.

Hey, speak for yourself, buddy!

[butch deer]

Remember FV was never ment to be a spec class. If it was a Votrect and SpeedSport would be like a 1963 formcar. Back in the dark ages when FV was celebrating it's 20th birthday a dicussion group that included Bill Duckworth(c0-founder of FV along wit his partner ant Formcar Col. Smith) and Ray Caldwell( at one tome the worlds largest manufacture of race cars-most of them FV's) comented on why they thought FV was successful and they both thought that part of the growth was the fact that it offered the opportunity for competitors to update there cars using new technologies in a slow groth pattern so inovasion was rewarded but groth was slow enough so as not to be so fast that it exclude all but those who have large budgets and in house engineering staffs. In other words somewhere above spec racer and below F1.

[Daryl DeArman]

Brian,

<snip>Thanks to your 60 hour a week dedication we now have $1000 manifolds... and all that has done has elevated the cost of competition, not the level of competition.

Minimize the cost per set and minimize the advantage of a new set of rubber and spend the savings on something not as consumable----like $1000+ manifolds.

Maybe I'm the one that drug the manifolds into the discussion a couple of pages back, however I failed to make my point adequately (no surprise).

The point I was attempting to make is why such an uproar over $1000+/manifolds (not nearly as consumable) yet many seem okay with $3000ish a season on tires for a FV? I'd much rather spend $1500/year on tires and $1500 on a manifold every 3-4 years.

As far as Brian's 60 hour week working on his FV program; if the results of his efforts suggested that everybody else was going to have to dedicate even 1/5th the time just to keep up, then I'd say that his situation may not have a healthy effect on the class. I don't believe that is the case. Perhaps the hours he spends on his FV has been exaggerated, maybe he works really slow and likes many coats of wax...?

I also disagree with the persons' means dictating what class they should have to compete in. As long as the rule book I get to work with is the same one they get to work with then I can make the choice in which sandbox to play.

[problemchild]

Butch, Who is trying to ban Vortechs? I have not read everyone of the 500+ posts but I have seen no one suggesting such. There seems to be alot of people that want to reduce costs and make adjustments for a larger society and increased safety equipment.