Car Costs - 1984 to 2015

[Dennis McCarthy]

A brand new top shelf FF wouldn't cost $90K if nobody bought them at that price.

Nobody would bother building them if they can't make a profit selling them either....

[Steve Bamford]

Nope. A 2015 Corvette stingray starts at $55K MSRP. 4.23x what it cost 35 years ago and about 873x more car.

A brand new top shelf FF wouldn't cost $90K if nobody bought them at that price.

Here is what I looked up, maybe it's a Canadian price & maybe top of line being Z06, however you are comparing it to a Spectrum, top of the line, being sold by a Canadian company.

http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette-z06-supercar.html

I can give you many other examples of Ferrari, Lambo's, etc with an even bigger price increase.

Yes these car are much better. The FF's are much better as well, not to the same level I will admit. There are other options for a lot less then 90 K then Spectrum's for new vehicles out there. Let's not convince everyone a new car has to cost 90 K.

My point is & was that many vehicles have increased in price beyond inflation.

[Steve Bamford]

Also I think a 90 K FF is just silly so don't disagree with this thread but it seems most prices have gone up. There are other options then a 90 k car as many are still available for much, much less then that.

[Matt King]

My point is & was that many vehicles have increased in price beyond inflation.

A better question is, how many people with $80K to spend on a new toy would buy the Corvette rather than the new FF?

[Steve Bamford]

A better question is, how many people with $80K to spend on a new toy would buy the Corvette rather than the new FF?

Thousands would by the Corvette vs the FF, but I am not understanding your point as the street cars have always out sold FF's. They build thousands of Corvette's per year & I bet there is probably less then 100 FF's build worldwide per year.

[Purple Frog]

Going off track...

There is a video on Youtube with one of the factory Corvette drivers driving a new street legal Corvette around Road Atlanta at 1:30 lap... while talking to the camera the whole lap.

That model probably cost more than $79K.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmrPPBrZZ7c

[Matt King]

Thousands would by the Corvette vs the FF, but I am not understanding your point as the street cars have always out sold FF's. They build thousands of Corvette's per year & I bet there is probably less then 100 FF's build worldwide per year.

The point is that when I'm in the paddock at an SCCA race, or most amateur race events for that matter, the majority of the participants look a whole lot like most of the guys I see driving late-model Corvettes. So it's not a big stretch to think that a guy buying an $80K performance car could potentially be a candidate to go amateur road racing if they were marketed to properly. And despite the idea that FF is/was/should be a driver development class, I think it's more likely to attract well-heeled middle aged drivers than teenagers: edit: Just like Corvettes!

[SpacemanSpiff]

Wow, break down in reading comprehension there, sorry. Yes, it would be a good market, but you have to convince them that racing beats taking the wife for ice cream in the Corvette with the top down.

[dsmithwc04]

Wow, break down in reading comprehension there, sorry. Yes, it would be a good market, but you have to convince them that racing beats taking the wife for ice cream in the Corvette with the top down.

Right, like they would allow icecream in their vette. More than likely that demographic polishes the car with a baby diaper after looking at it too long in the garage.

[Daryl DeArman]

The point is that when I'm in the paddock at an SCCA race, or most amateur race events for that matter, the majority of the participants look a whole lot like most of the guys I see driving late-model Corvettes. So it's not a big stretch to think that a guy buying an $80K performance car could potentially be a candidate to go amateur road racing if they were marketed to properly. And despite the idea that FF is/was/should be a driver development class, I think it's more likely to attract well-heeled middle aged drivers than teenagers: edit: Just like Corvettes!

Hey! I resemble that remark. It comes down to what we feel like we are getting for the money. Let's say that I have enough disposable income, and don't have to obtain approval from my wife; I could purchase the top of the line car for any SCCA class out there, but what am I getting for that?

Most of the classes have abysmal participation numbers because not enough people find it worth it. Get rid of MOST of the classes. People who must race will find a class, out of the remaining handful, that will meet their needs. Get the cost of consumables down and people will justify spending decent money on slow cars to compete. Once the cost per weekend is down and the fields are large, people will decide that the $60-90K race car makes more sense then that $100K+ RV or truck and trailer that most people in the paddock have somehow justified.

[Steve Bamford]

A better question is, how many people with $80K to spend on a new toy would buy the Corvette rather than the new FF?

The point is that when I'm in the paddock at an SCCA race, or most amateur race events for that matter, the majority of the participants look a whole lot like most of the guys I see driving late-model Corvettes. So it's not a big stretch to think that a guy buying an $80K performance car could potentially be a candidate to go amateur road racing if they were marketed to properly. And despite the idea that FF is/was/should be a driver development class, I think it's more likely to attract well-heeled middle aged drivers than teenagers: edit: Just like Corvettes!

Sorry I don't mean to be a pain but you first said how many people would rather spend 80k on a vette rather then a FF. My answer to that was thousands would rather spend 80k on a vette, proven year after year by the manufactured number of cars.

As for potential new drivers I am not disagreeing there is opportunities with the individuals who buy the Corvette but the percentage numbers are still much less then 1% no matter what way you want to break out the numbers. There still is opportunity however numbers are extremely low.

[Matt King]

Sorry I don't mean to be a pain but you first said how many people would rather spend 80k on a vette rather then a FF. My answer to that was thousands would rather spend 80k on a vette, proven year after year by the manufactured number of cars.

As for potential new drivers I am not disagreeing there is opportunities with the individuals who buy the Corvette but the percentage numbers are still much less then 1% no matter what way you want to break out the numbers. There still is opportunity however numbers are extremely low.

I don't think anyone disagrees that you can't compare the production cost of a new Corvette to a new FF, but I was talking about customer demographics and how performance car buyers choose to spend their disposable income.


Here are the Corvette annual sales volumes for the past 10 years. If you could convert one tenth of one percent of those buyers to FF, even in the lowest volume year that would equate to 12 new drivers. I would bet that many more than 12 people who buy a Corvette in any given year also gave consideration to buying a trackday or race car of some kind.

Corvette Sales Monthly Archive:

Archived Monthly Corvette Delivery Statistics
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total
2015 2,127 2,605 3,785 3,469 3,514 2,807 18,307
2014 2,261 2,438 3,480 3,514 3,328 2,723 3,060 2,679 2,467 2,959 2,378 3,552 34,839
2013 908 980 1,053 974 905 853 671 655 831 3,929 2,527 3,005 17,291
2012 629 927 1,376 1,396 1,219 1,475 987 1,210 1,351 1,167 1,104 1,291 14,132
2011 721 955 1,163 1,454 1,304 1,299 1,291 936 1,147 946 910 1,038 13,164
2010 854 624 955 1,089 1,428 1,405 1,199 1,135 1,109 1,011 836 979 12,624
2009 842 1,027 1,183 1,407 1,643 1,396 966 746 1,585 1,154 952 1,033 13,934
2008 2,015 2,071 2,692 3,190 2,904 2,082 1,870 4,242 2,318 1,170 1,093 1,324 26,971
2007 2,234 2,784 3,158 3,227 3,300 2,377 2,377 2,877 2,837 2,484 2,438 2,914 33,685
2006 2,579 3,058 3,655 3,516 3,317 2,938 2,794 2,990 3,056 2,761 2,773 3,081 36,518

[S Lathrop]

I remember only one FF driver who also owned a Corvette. The cost of that combination was he had to use the Corvette as his tow vehicle.

[Rennie Clayton]

Wow, break down in reading comprehension there, sorry. Yes, it would be a good market, but you have to convince them that racing beats taking the wife for ice cream in the Corvette with the top down.

The car or the wife?

In all seriousness, the cost of many, many things has rapidly outpaced standard CPI calculation by orders of magnitude. That starts with things that have direct knock-on impact on a person's ability to fund racing activities, especially early on in life: real estate (nee housing) and education in particular. Real estate is a big impact on business costs, as is insurance and a whole smattering of things that nobody even thought about, let alone was expected to pay for in the 80's.

Since this is a subject that's near and dear to my heart these days, the broader subject of the cost of race cars comes down largely to this: in order to be a sustainable business, there has to be the ability for the business to generate adequate profits for continued growth and development, otherwise the business goes away. So the desire for cheap race cars directly conflicts with the desire for race car companies to stick around and support the cars they've sold into the market. Catch-22.


Cheers,
Rennie

[Steve Bamford]

I think we wandered way off topic a long time ago & I am sure I added to that.

I could be wrong but I believe why Reid had started this thread out was to try to make it so FF had some type of cost controls in place so prices don't continue to escalate past where they are now & go higher along with trying to bring them down.

John Larue had stated something to the point of one of your posts Reid a few weeks back made the most sense, which I believe he was referring to you mentioning to let all the older cars go to CFF & be accepted there instead of trying to beat a dead horse with new FF cars. I could be wrong but that is what I believe he was referencing.

If anything different is done it seems there will be a loss of cars for one group or another. Creating a FF class with a new type of GCR that restricts shocks, blue printed gear boxes, etc is a good way to control costs but will limit who can race where.

I don't have the answer for what will or will not work, I believe I hear what you are trying to say & think it makes sense from a higher level, I just don't think anyone invested will go for it. The invested people in our sport usually also make up the larger percentage of the individuals who turn up at the race tracks.

[reidhazelton]

Correct, Steve. Here is my post:

Throwing it out there....

After talking with a few people at the Sprints, it seems to me it's time we all just bit the bullet here and move on.

Here is how I see it. There are a lot of older cars that are not worth converting to a Honda. There and also a fair amount of older cars that cannot be cheaply, or easily converted to run the radial tire (3* neg camber, front roll centers/ride height) that seems to be coming. I own a car that falls in both the categories.

With that, perhaps we are just at a point in time where we need to make the hard call and just move forward and let the older cars go to vintage. The older cars are already parked, and they are not coming back. Adopt the radial, and uncork the Hondas and let them be the new wave of the class. That would end all this parity crap that we knew would happen.

Personally, with the Fit at 140hp or so it would make the cars a whole lot of fun and offset the weight of the radial. To me, 140hp would make it a lot more attractive to potential racers. That would also give us a distinct speed difference between F500/F600.

We can only hold on to the older cars so long, and at some point they will go away.

-RH
(Guy with and older car that needs to go away)

[reidhazelton]

I was hoping this thread would be more of a reaction similar to the support the spec tire idea received and there would be some ideas to cut the costs of FF and bring them back to reality.

I'm surprised and confused that the demand for a spec tire was so high but other costs, especially costs involved with new car purchases, seems to be totally acceptable. I'm not thinking or suggesting this is to be a spec class, just put some regs on it as to curtail some of the crazy costs. If there was to be a 'new evolution of the class', I was hoping to see some cost containment in that evolution rather than a lot of the open checkbook stuff there is now.

Here is what we learned from this thread:

1. Costs to run the car are more of a deterrent than entry costs (new car purchases), for most people.
2. Corvettes are expensive, for old guys with gray hair, who may or may not like ice cream.
3. You can get a Honda for under $9k if you don't run the ECU, harnesses, or upper intakes and throttle bodies.
4. You can spend $2,000-$5,000 on Honda blueprinting.
5. You can spend $20k on a Honda after three companies add their mark up. In that case, I'll sell it to you for $22k.
6. Mike Sauce gets special pricing. (Just teasing Mike - )
7. Karts can cost from $10k-$200k, and maybe a $1,000,000.
8. None of us are very good at math beyond a 2nd grade level.

[Max Power]

Maybe we're all hopeful that the spec tire will be successful beyond our wildest dreams that it will matter even less whether you have a new car or not. It seems to work in Canada and Arizona.

Do I get a bonus point for not turning this into a Honda or Corvette comment?

[2BWise]

Here is what we learned from this thread:

1. Costs to run the car are more of a deterrent than entry costs (new car purchases), for most people.

Honestly, I feel this is probably the biggest reason. The market has become so saturated with trackday and racing options over the last 20 years that unless you're really jonesing to run a formula car there's no logical reason to do so. We swim in the deeper end of the pool when it comes to cost to compete, and for most people looking into racing are going to shy away from it. You could take some awesome vacations with the budgets we blow in a summer.

[Steve Demeter]

Racing is expensive. How fast do you want to go.

There is no such thing as cheap racing these days. It is all relative.

I bought my first Royale for $3500 with spares out the ying yang. But back then $3500 was 3 months salary for me.

The cost to race most definitely has risen at a rate much faster than most people's income and there is really nothing to do unless EVERYONE stops.

Heck it costs as much to run a kart today as it did to run a Super Vee in 1978.

[reidhazelton]

Racing is expensive. How fast do you want to go.

There is no such thing as cheap racing these days. It is all relative.

I bought my first Royale for $3500 with spares out the ying yang. But back then $3500 was 3 months salary for me.

The cost to race most definitely has risen at a rate much faster than most people's income and there is really nothing to do unless EVERYONE stops.

Heck it costs as much to run a kart today as it did to run a Super Vee in 1978.

I never understood accepting the status quo simply because that's how things are. If that was the case, spec tires never would have been brought up.

Actually, it isn't relative and that is the problem. Car costs, and the cost to run a car have escalated well beyond inflation and median/mean income.

I totally disagree there is nothing we can do. It's been done, and can be done more. Simply because we don't, doesn't mean we can't.

It seems it's not that there is nothing we can do, it's that we don't want the negatives that come with it. The pros don't outweigh the cons for many.

[bobmelvin]

Reid:

Seems like a good approach, just feels like giving birth.

.....................
It looks to me like we are heading near-term for a CF, SCF and FF. 'Super Club Formula would be any car before a certain year (you pick that one) running a Kent.

The fact is, the average Kent is no comparison to a three year old run of the mill ECU equipped injected modern plant (which seems to run way below its capacity). Average Kent, guys.

Maybe it would even give the SCCA and HONDA the opportunity to open up the motor just a bit to ensure separation and no more embarrassing moments like getting beaten up the hill at the Sprints say. By a vintage chassis. It takes one talented shoe to do that and the above average guy running a Kent is not in the mix. Accept it and let it go.

The second to last thing we need are more classes/sub-classes. The very last thing we can take however is the CF/FF class floundering in many, many regions of the U.S. The cars that could be enticed to come out and play, the types that are the lifeblood of the club, are 90% Kents. Data collection is fine (one time expense) but some other areas could hold costs down to a level we could all admit to spending in public.

I cite as a successful example Keith Averill's long time support of the Great Lakes CFC series. For a $10k car or less, I could fly and drive a relatively low maintenance effort. Then again, Keith was my original 'crack dealer' back in the Eighties...

Respectfully,

Bob Melvin
'93 VD Kent
'00 VD H
Colorado Region

[Jim Nash]

One point that I feel has not been mentioned in this thread is the general decline in interest in open wheeled racing. Its starting point was 1995 with the CART-IRL debacle. The group of us that were wide-eyed 10 year old kids in the 60’s, 70’s or 80’s were drawn to the allure of Indy and F1 of the day. For reasons too many to mention, it has not been the same for 20 years. It’s no one’s fault( Tony G.!). Just that time marches on.

We seem to be addressing how the small group of former/current racers can come together to grow the class. IMHO..many of the current guys are well into their amateur careers (invested) and many of the aforementioned “parked cars” are owned by longtime former drivers that would like to resume (continue the dream they worked to attain) but are unlikely to ever do so based on a couple small rule changes. The old days are gone. The pool we are working with is shrinking every year.

Suggestions to fix this situation are many. But most would require radical changes. Not very SCCA like.

Jim

PS-Splintering of the FF cars into more classes is not the answer. Spec tires is a good idea!

[Mark Walthew]

I agree with Jim that one big problem is there just aren't enough young drivers entering the class.

We have an aging population of FF drivers. As I got older the wow factor went away some and I am not willing to do the things I did when younger to go racing. I am less inclined to spend as large a percentage of my income and time on racing as I did years ago because it is not new and as exciting anymore. Here are some things that will make me stay home now that did not in the past.

Racing in the rain is great but everything else sucks so I will not go if the whole weekend will be a washout.

If the forecast is for low temperatures and I am an early group forget it. I do not enjoy scraping ice off of my tow vehicle in the morning and trying to put heat into slicks when it is freezing.

On the flip side I did Roebling in July many times and have no desire to do that again.

I will not tow home several hours after being the last race group when I need to be at work Monday morning.

I will not work on the car late into the night in an attempt to make a race. There will be other races.

If the car, trailer and tow vehicle are not 100% ready I won't go. In the past I borrowed trucks and trailers without a second thought.

Been there done that to all of those things and many more. I don't need to do them again. The fun no longer outweighs some of the negatives although it did in the past. I think it is just age, maybe even (gasp) wisdom. I suspect others feel the same way.

[dsmithwc04]

I agree with Jim that one big problem is there just aren't enough young drivers entering the class.

We have an aging population of FF drivers. As I got older the wow factor went away some and I am not willing to do the things I did when younger to go racing. I am less inclined to spend as large a percentage of my income and time on racing as I did years ago because it is not new and as exciting anymore. Here are some things that will make me stay home now that did not in the past.

Racing in the rain is great but everything else sucks so I will not go if the whole weekend will be a washout.

If the forecast is for low temperatures and I am an early group forget it. I do not enjoy scraping ice off of my tow vehicle in the morning and trying to put heat into slicks when it is freezing.

On the flip side I did Roebling in July many times and have no desire to do that again.

I will not tow home several hours after being the last race group when I need to be at work Monday morning.

I will not work on the car late into the night in an attempt to make a race. There will be other races.

If the car, trailer and tow vehicle are not 100% ready I won't go. In the past I borrowed trucks and trailers without a second thought.

Been there done that to all of those things and many more. I don't need to do them again. The fun no longer outweighs some of the negatives although it did in the past. I think it is just age, maybe even (gasp) wisdom. I suspect others feel the same way.

I am still among the young and delusional and could put a check mark next to half of your points. I fear growing up and using reason and logic in my decisions making while attempting to make a race....

[reidhazelton]

I disagree it is a generational thing and that the young guys/girls are not interested. I, and many of my friends, are very interested. Go to an autocross and look at the average age. Under 35. The local ones I go to watch are packed. 100+ every event. The single biggest reason by far as to why they do not go road racing is money. They don't want to spend it, and they know it will suck every dime out of their wallets. I have one friend who i have offered a car to so he can try road racing and he didn't take it. He said it would be like crack - one hit and he's done. That's the issue. Those who would normally want to go racing don't because they know the costs are well beyond that of what they can comfortably afford. For a well paying middle class job, road racing is far beyond what that can support. Steve Lathrop had a great post about the median income and the cost of racing, and how the cost has disproportionally increased well beyond median income. We can't much to raise the income, so if we want anything to change for the better the costs have to come down.

Younger people still love cars. It's not a t-bucket with a Buick in it, now it's a Nissan 240 with a 2JZ in it. Things have changed, but our love of cars is still the same, just different cars. What has changed, is the cost. That is the biggest, single most reason why my autocrossing buddies don't go road racing. Several have cars that are darn close to road race cars as they are. It's not a lack of passion for cars, a desire to race, or a disinterest in motorsports that keeps the younger people out. It's the costs. (Also the same reason you Corvettes are for old grey haired guys...they are the only ones who can afford them.)

Costs have to come down. That is not really a question as I see it. What is the question, is are we (again...looking at you Topeka) willing to do what it takes to reel those costs in? Someone said earlier, that it will take radical change and that is not SCCA's style. I agree. So we will continue to see an aging membership, smaller fields, more and more expensive cars, and eventually less events.

[SEComposites]

When my copy of the SCCA's Sports Car magazine arrives in my letter box it usually goes straight into the recycling bin, unread. This month I thought I'd flick through it. Not one photo of an open wheel car. Into the recycling bin.

Costs of course are the primary reason for poor car count, but it seems to the that the SCCA have more interest in tin tops than open wheel cars?

[Steve Bamford]

Reid,

I think you have good ideas however we aren't going to turn back time with where FF currently is. Possibly create a class for FF drivers that if they meet the criteria you are suggesting they can run in a sub group of FF. So what is the criteria? Cheap shocks, non modified gear boxes, limited data, limited gear sets? This will bring down some of the costs but I don't think you will be bringing many new drivers.

If people want the least expensive open wheel cars then FV is a no brainer but many seem to not choose to run it. F500/F600 seems to be another option which I understand is less expensive then FF.

I also don't see any manufactures offering a cheap version of FF anytime soon.

SCCA needs to kill a bunch of under subscribed classes but that is a topic for another thread.

[BLS]

He said it would be like crack - one hit and he's done.

We all know this is true

[Daryl DeArman]

While we should do what we can to keep costs in line, it's not the dollar amount, it's the perceived value.

Young people are spending money, they just aren't spending it on race cars. They still live at home with Mommy and Daddy at 28 years old, with a $700/mo car payment and no money in the bank.

[andyllc]

I fit the target market that SCCA wants to recruit as new members. I am a bit unique that I have been a member all of my life and raced in other people's equipment as well as my fathers but this year I am doing it on my own. I am 31, good job, married, no kids (yet), and live in a state with an incredibly low cost of living. Here is my financial outlay for racing this year....
$17,800 for a car that is 18 years old with a Ford motor
$8000 used enclosed trailer
$20,000 used tow vehicle
$12,000 in 'other crap' for the racecar (data, spares, gears, consumables, tools, transponder, etc)
$4200 1 Major event (VIR)

I am about to spend:
$7000 (est) to get my engine rebuilt as with a slick car I couldn't keep up with Fords on a track I know very well
$1000 (est) to get my shocks rebuilt
$2000 (est) to have my transmission gone through

Other things I would like to buy but haven't yet:
Spare wheels ($1200-2000)
Ez Ups ($1000+)
Generator ($1000+)
Set up pad ($2000)
Other stuff to outfit the trailer ($1000)

Someone else can add that up if they want, I don't want to. Could I have spent less money? Yes. Could I have spent more? OH YES. That is a lot of money for (so far) one event. The cost to get started is huge and unfortunately I don't really see that changing. This is why my friends don't get involved themselves. Cost to enter is too high. Reid is right, that is keeping people out of the sport. However, having been around the sport my whole life I am not like most people my age and what I am willing to do for racing is different than many that are brand new to it. I want to play in the Majors. Regionals don't interest me as much. I think the idea of what Reid is saying is good but it can already be found. It can be found in Regionals. I would be shocked if anyone running regionals had the super high dollar bits and pieces that have been discussed here. I think those that are running Majors understand the stakes and budgets required. Those that aren't comfortable end up running Regionals and that in itself is a good checks and balances for costs. Overtime the Majors equipment will become Regionals equipment and new Majors equipment will be found from the Pro Series or somewhere else. We don't really need another class, certainly not at the Majors level. I would love for prices to go down but I don't see that happening in any way. If someone wants a low cost, spec, class at the Majors level then there are others out there (FE, FM come to mind).

[reidhazelton]

While we should do what we can to keep costs in line, it's not the dollar amount, it's the perceived value.

Young people are spending money, they just aren't spending it on race cars. They still live at home with Mommy and Daddy at 28 years old, with a $700/mo car payment and no money in the bank.

Totally disagree. My friend's work their ass off, a couple 50+ hours a week, and none have brand new cars. Yes they spend money, but it is at things they can afford - which is not road racing. To them, autocrossing is racing and I have asked, and they reply every single time the reason they don't go road racing is the cost. This line of thinking is nothing different than with every new/old generation and the lack of understanding between the two. I see them working on their cars until 12am, spending money buying speed parts, and smiling like crazy dodging cones. I have asked several, "hey, why don't you go road racing and get above 50mph?!" Every. Single. Time. The number one answer is the cost.

[SpacemanSpiff]

I'd recommend against making generalizations about the young generation. I'm 28 and haven't lived at home in a decade. Same goes for most of my friends, certainly the ones with the cash to consider racing. Student loans, trying to buy a house and starting in a weak economy on the other hand are very real factors for my generation.

So far I'm not racing. I don't have the budget for any of the classes I'd be interested in running. So for now I've got a track car that makes me happy. While it sucks for now, I'd hate to see good classes neutered just so I can join in.

Could I run F500 or FV? Probably. But the car is an important part of motorsports for me, and crippled or vastly outdated cars aren't my cup of tea.

If I were going to design a car, I'd start with a quality single adjustable shock that had the option of being upgraded to a DA or better, an unblueprinted Honda engine, provisions for an FC engine or similar, designed to at least allow for a radial tire, low cost data system and an unmodified transaxle, but most importantly I'd include provisions in the design for sport racer body work.

The goal would be a car that could, without major redesign, run FF, FC, and P2, most importantly closed wheel body work allows for a vehicle that can be used at track days. Now you have a vehicle that a driver can grow into, and a substantially larger market of people to sell to. It wouldn't be cheap, but hopefully you could keep it away from a $90k bill.

I'd then actually market the thing. There aren't a lot of car people out there that don't know about Radical, Caterham, etc. My guess is not many have ever heard of Mygale. It's hard to attract people to your class when they know nothing about it except, "Racing, isn't that really expensive?"

[reidhazelton]

So far, I think there are 3 people on this thread that are under 35. They seem to be saying the same thing.

I never understood SCCA wondering why younger racers don't exist, yet the few that are there are totally ignored, and still ignored when they share their viewpoint.

SCCA: Why are young people not eating our broccoli (Nationals)?
Young people: Because broccoli (Nationals/Road Racing) sucks, and we want ice cream (NASA, Vintage, AutoX, ect).
SCCA: Maybe we just need to put a different sauce on the broccoli!
Young people: No, then is just broccoli with $#!+ sauce (Majors).
SCCA: No, it's 'prestigious'!
Young People: (crickets)

If you want to know why the under-35 crowd isn't coming to road race, go to an autocross (THE perfect demographic) and ask them. They will all tell you. COST.

I know full well racing is expensive, and we can play all the word games and semantics about it that we want. Fact is, from what I see in my group of friends and those on the fence (literally) the cost is the single most reason why they don't. Personally, the cost to keep up with the current crop is why I run one race a year the last 2-3 years. I see something wrong that someone as passionate about racing as many of my friends are, with a good job, and is willing to put in the work to do it can't because of the entry cost and cost to compete is too high.

That is the barrier to entry for SCCA and it needs to change if they want the demographic to change or membership to increase.

[reidhazelton]

I'd recommend against making generalizations about the young generation. I'm 28 and haven't lived at home in a decade. Same goes for most of my friends, certainly the ones with the cash to consider racing. Student loans, trying to buy a house and starting in a weak economy on the other hand are very real factors for my generation.

So far I'm not racing. I don't have the budget for any of the classes I'd be interested in running. So for now I've got a track car that makes me happy. While it sucks for now, I'd hate to see good classes neutered just so I can join in.

Could I run F500 or FV? Probably. But the car is an important part of motorsports for me, and crippled or vastly outdated cars aren't my cup of tea.

If I were going to design a car, I'd start with a quality single adjustable shock that had the option of being upgraded to a DA or better, an unblueprinted Honda engine, provisions for an FC engine or similar, designed to at least allow for a radial tire, low cost data system and an unmodified transaxle, but most importantly I'd include provisions in the design for sport racer body work.

The goal would be a car that could, without major redesign, run FF, FC, and P2, most importantly closed wheel body work allows for a vehicle that can be used at track days. Now you have a vehicle that a driver can grow into, and a substantially larger market of people to sell to. It wouldn't be cheap, but hopefully you could keep it away from a $90k bill.

I'd then actually market the thing. There aren't a lot of car people out there that don't know about Radical, Caterham, etc. My guess is not many have ever heard of Mygale. It's hard to attract people to your class when they know nothing about it except, "Racing, isn't that really expensive?"

This guy. Listen to this guy. This is who SCCA wants, and desperately needs and what they say should be listened to very carefully.

If not, it will be a long slow spiral downward while SCCA waits for this group to be able to afford road racing in their higher-income years (50+). That will be a 20-year wait with an already aging membership.

[Steve Bamford]

But please explain how you will make racing cheaper? I can see controlling some costs but not much that will make a huge difference you are saying is needed.

As to the aging membership, I started racing about 5 years ago maybe 6. I was and are middle age racer here in Canada while when I did my first SCCA event I was shocked that I was what seemed like a spring chicken compared to all my other competitors. What I am trying to say is that the aging membership is nothing new and has been an issue for many years now in SCCA.

[reidhazelton]

But please explain how you will make racing cheaper? I can see controlling some costs but not much that will make a huge difference you are saying is needed.

As to the aging membership, I started racing about 5 years ago maybe 6. I was and are middle age racer here in Canada while when I did my first SCCA event I was shocked that I was what seemed like a spring chicken compared to all my other competitors. What I am trying to say is that the aging membership is nothing new and has been an issue for many years now in SCCA.

Limit things that don't improve racing, meaning, things that we all have to spend $X to go the same amount of speed faster than before. That does nothing to help the sport, and escalates costs. Spec ratios (limit it to ten) helps upfront costs. Limit gearboxes, that saves upfront costs. Spec Tire, we will have that. The Honda helps the cost to run a car.

As for weekend costs, SCCA and the entry fees don't add up. I ran my first full vintage weekend about a month ago. The cost to tracktime value was 3-1 compared to what you get in SCCA. This is an apples to apples comparison. Both events at Blackhawk Farms and included test days. Here is what you got for the dollar:

Vintage VSCDA Event - 4 hours, 45 minutes for $520.

SCCA Majors Event - 2 hours, 45 minutes for $720.

Maybe SCCA should go ask VSCDA how they do it. There was so much track time available at the VSCDA event that a lot of drivers sat out a few sessions. Almost doubling the track time for $200 less would go a very, very long way to get more people to the track for SCCA.

Also, like I have said before, the Majors program doesn't help the little guy. 8+hour tows and a day of towing each way means that you have to take 2 days off work, that doesn't help. Run five weekends and you just blew your 2 weeks vacation. Good luck telling the wife and kids why they can't go to Disney World. If you live in the Rocky Mountain Div you have a Major at NOLA. What's that? 14 hours? The Majors are not any more prestigious than Nationals were before the semantic switch, despite SCCA telling us they are. Standing on milk crates and spraying skunky sparkling grapefruit juice doesn't make it the Indy 500. Give the the $5 of my entry fee back that went to the 'podium celebration' and I'll go buy some cheese curds and be a lot happier.

I don't know of anyone who really cares about SportsCar. I flip to the classifieds and then toss it in the trash just like Ben Cooper and others. There is this new thing, called email and PDFs. They are a whole lot cheaper than mailing out a magazine maybe 10% of recipients read anyway. Yes, that saves a small percentage but it's a start.

I don't have all the answers just some ideas that seem obvious to me and 'my demographic'. Several times I have asked what people thought and to share their ideas. Mostly it has been reasoning why we have what we have and seemingly accepting of that because 'that's just how it is'.

We organized right here on Apexspeed, and wrote letters to get a spec tire. That took a year. Done. Why can we not do that with other things? All we need are ideas to help the class, or SCCA in general. Then organize and try to do something about it. Again, we did it with the spec tire so it can be done.

[reidhazelton]

What I am trying to say is that the aging membership is nothing new and has been an issue for many years now in SCCA.

I completely agree, and if I were someone higher up in SCCA this would be writing on the wall of a slow death for the club.

How much longer can it be an issue before it becomes a nail in the coffin?

[SpacemanSpiff]

Me? Same thing as everyone else, tires and race fees.

I figure this year I'll get somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 track days in, a bit lower than I'd hoped due to some scheduling issues. Assuming similar in a race season, if I could get through this on 3 sets of tires (4 days-ish out of a set) I'd be game. If that's 10 sets of tires that's a radically different deal. I don't care what they are, R888's, American Racers, Maxxis RC-1s, whatever as long as I'm not out of it just because I can't afford to sticker up every day. If the car development sucks that's on me, but tires are a different matter. Maybe avoid tunes for race gas, not the end of the world, but every bit helps.

I can race with our local group for about $140 - $200 a day, same as their track days. If I had the experience and a car prepped for it I'd be all over that deal. If that was $200/day or less and I could run 1 or two days I'd be on board. Even at $250/day it's a maybe doable (I'm spending that for a track day weekend this fall). Note, SCCA's track day in America is $150 a day, so this isn't insane.

Allow people to withdraw without penalties to avoid engine teardowns. I understand why they do it, but if I'm going to have to pay to rebuild that's probably a race I'm skipping. Also, maybe move all of these new cars to a common 5 or 6 speed and allow it in FF and FC. Putting together a rough budget for a race car build with a stock engine, it's the single largest line item. Volume helps.

Not so much on cost, but work with the track day organizers to make wings and things classes more common. When I bought my track Miata I really wanted a purpose built but the sport racers were out of my budget and you can't run open wheeled cars at track days.

Last, autocross kinda sucks from a value perspective. $50 buys you a couple minutes of time, at least around here you still have a huge drive/haul to get there and back, and you can't kick back under the tent and talk with friends when you're done.

[2BWise]

Entry costs are ridiculous. The Mid Ohio Major was $600 just for the three day event and had 300 entries. A double regional is two days, $350 and has roughly 100 entries. The economics of scale don't make sense here. Even with the extra day the SCCA is making a huge profit on the Major. Add in the same amount of track time and one less day committed to being away from home (day off work, lost income). Why are the "prestige" events so expensive if they want to draw in bigger crowds? The test day is another $400 and the twilight test $200. That's $1200 in entry fees!

The real answer is in roundy round racing. I work with several guys who race at the local circle track. Their weekend out of pocket expense is $200 (running late models). They only have to give up one night too. Starting money, spectators, spec tires, and tire usage limits. One set of circle track tires costs less than two formula car tires and last more than one weekend