Guys, I know there is passion when it comes to FV and the history/future of the class, but can we keep the cheap shots and digs off of ApexSpeed? I'd rather not have to moderate this thread.
Guys, I know there is passion when it comes to FV and the history/future of the class, but can we keep the cheap shots and digs off of ApexSpeed? I'd rather not have to moderate this thread.
Brian:Originally Posted by budawe
I ask again, why relegate the radial racers to regional status only? Or are you stating if a region/division wanted to place in their majors/national supplemental regulations allowing the use of an optional tire/wheel package the supps. would be accepted by the national office? Both Steve's (on the exchange) and Greg's proposals would allow radial racers to run at the national level. Where is the harm? The pointy end of the grid is still going to be at the front. The rest of the pack will still be fighting it out in the middle and back. The serious radial racers will find a setup that will make them fast.
An OPTIONAL tire/wheel package if properly defined can only help grow the participation at every level in our class. I don't see where this would harm the class as a whole. All I want is to have an option not to spend my whole race budget on tires and race once a year.
JMHO
G.
G. Brian Metcalf
72 AutoD MK4
1991 Mysterian M2
2014 ALR73 FV/FST
American Racer will be sent a FV RFP from SCCA... all tire manufactures will get one. It will be up to them to submit a proposal.
The radial tire manufactures can still bid even if the FV rim specification remains the same. They just need a product that works with the existing rims sizes.
Now you could allow larger wheels as a wheel option and increase the possibility of a successful radial tire bid... but I am pretty certain that a FV survey will indicate the requirement to also make a slick part of the RFP option. Now if both a radial and slick answer the RFP the SCCA Board would have to choose between them based on what they see from the survey and written comments.
So no manufacture is technically or administratively locked out by the RFP process.
Brian
1) For whatever reasons there is very few examples of dual wheel/tire specifications in SCCA rule history. Certainly a manufacture bidding on a spec tire contract would expect a one tire restriction. That is part of the financial benefit of making the spec tire.
Take the case of Hoosier... They will be asked to provide a tire that is 2-3X more durable which means a probable loss in net revenue from FV tire sales. Are they not justified to expect to be the exclusive supplier?
Make no mistake... FV participants have written the CRB requesting a spec tire. There will be a FV RFP for a spec tire issued.
2) You have the issue of bifurcating the class at the local level where it could be very harmful to small entry groups. With 3-5 entries it is not always easy to matchup with someone to actually race with on track. You add a dual tire option and it becomes more difficult. It is not like everyone is going to go for the cheapest option. So a participant might find less competition and not motivated to enter events. If it is not fun what is the point?
Brian
Very good points Brian.
Your #1) This makes sense if a spec tire comes within the next couple of years. Not drawn out for 5 to 10 years.
What happens if ABC tire Co. gets the spec tire contract and then decides that making a more durable tire that lasts lets say 3/4 of a season is not cost effective and boosts the cost? We are back where we started at the mercy of a single business who wants to make maximum profit. Don't get me wrong I love Hoosier as they have stuck with us this long. I also know putting your eggs in one basket is not smart business. You know racing no matter how small the budget is a "business"
Your #2) The class is already bifurcated, you have the super fast group who can afford or have a tire agreement and then there is the rest of us. I see your point of a 3 car run group not needing any more problems. Honestly if you have a 3 car run group you are going to be put into the "wings and things" run group and you have more to worry about than what tires you chose to run. That to me sounds like less fun than trying to run down a driver on slicks when I'm on radials. Giving the drivers an option to run a different tire/wheel package might bring out the garage queens and then you wouldn't have to worry about being put in a wings and things group.
once again very good points.
G.
G. Brian Metcalf
72 AutoD MK4
1991 Mysterian M2
2014 ALR73 FV/FST
... can afford any number of things well beyond tires. There really is no way to eliminate that in FV as it is not a spec class. SRF is a much better class if that type of issue disturbs you. Politically it is not possible to change FV into a spec class.
Brian
Seriously Brian?
I try to be cordial and see things from your point of view and what do you do? Insult me by saying that I might be more suited for SRF, because FV isn't a "SPEC" class. You are corect FV is a "restricted" class. I have made an investment in FV and want to grow with FV. Once again you are not giving new drivers like myself or potential drivers a reason to join the class.
G.
G. Brian Metcalf
72 AutoD MK4
1991 Mysterian M2
2014 ALR73 FV/FST
The Majors program is designed to be the highest level of racing and attract the best of the best. Subdividing performance within classes does not meet with this philosophy and would only add to the difficulties of combining classes of different performance levels. There are no local options regarding Majors rules and any changes to the rules must go through the formal GCR rule change process. I read Steve's letter and we'll just have to wait and see if the FSRAC finds it actionable. In view of the fact that there is a spec tire proposal before them, I doubt there will be consideration of alternative tire until that is resolved. I see the FV spec tire process going through 2016 with a tire choice made for 2017 rules. In the past, the CRB has relied on regional racing to test out ideas and classes and I think that inclination will be likely in this case.
I do not wish to offend anyone and this is not a reflection on the concept of street radials, but let's take an objective look at the Falken camp. There are around 20 to 30 Canadian folks running the tire and the NE sub group is about the same number. If those numbers were to increase and prove the concept, it's much more likely to be considered. Does anyone think it fair that a minority could mandate a rule change for the entire class? The reason why the letter process is in place is for the CRB to measure the breadth of support for change. If the radial fans can muster enough support a change is possible. There were 233 individual vee entries in the Majors program this year. Does anyone believe that 10 or 20% of that number, most of whom did not run Majors, can request a change to the series?
The above post is for reference only and your results may vary. This post is not intended to reflect the views and opinions of SCCA and should not be considered an analysis or opinion of the rules written in the GCR. thanks, Brian McCarthy, BOD area 9.
I don't see a problem on a regional level with different tires and wheels allowed. Right now we have two classes of Spec Racer running, and at least 4 types of Spec Miata.
What do they get for splitting the class? Most times the get THEIR OWN RACE!
Anything that gets more FV's on the track at one time is better. On the other hand, if the same 12 cars breaks into 2 subgroups, with no increase in numbers, then hopefully the fields will be more stable.
On a Majors level, I have mixed feelings. Part of me says, why not let the radials run, but the other says - the purpose of running Majors is to against the best, so borrow a set of slicks.
BTW - can anyone answer this question? If a spec tire is chosen for FV, will this affect a region's ability to allow an alternate tire?
ChrisZ
Thank you Brian for that rational reply. No offence taken. I still think a well defined optional tire/wheel program might help in the long run.
G.
G. Brian Metcalf
72 AutoD MK4
1991 Mysterian M2
2014 ALR73 FV/FST
If and when a nationwide spec tire becomes rule, absolutely nothing happens to the ability of regions and racers to take alternative paths that fit their situations best. The regional race program is an incubator of new cars and classes and the BOD gets that. For those that survive and grow to achieve Majors status, like SM, there is a path. The supplemental rules will assure communication and fair races for all.
The above post is for reference only and your results may vary. This post is not intended to reflect the views and opinions of SCCA and should not be considered an analysis or opinion of the rules written in the GCR. thanks, Brian McCarthy, BOD area 9.
No idea where you are coming from but I will be happy to add more fuel to your fire.
I will state that it is up to you.. the new guy on the block .. to spend the money required to get up to speed and race with the old timers. No way we are going to spend our money to make it easy for you. It is very likely that you will not be around in 4-5 years. You would be a risky investment. As an example last years 'provisional Runoff winner' is selling his car after 3-5 years in the class.
If you only wish to participate then there are plenty of Hoosier takeoffs available.
I have no delusions about the future of this class. It is a restricted class that by definition is not all about cost control. Clearly SM & SRF have a much better handle on cost control and seem to be where the participation numbers are.
Brian
Brian:
Let me help you......
This word must escape you OPTIONAL
synonyms: voluntary, discretionary, not required, elective, noncompulsory, nonmandatory; permissive; rare-discretional. This means this won't cost the DRIVERS that want status quo a dime. They can keep buying the Hoosier slicks and keep doing what they have always done. It won't cost you a thing because from your own admission you do not race anymore. So I'm not sure how you include yourself in this statement "No way we are going to spend our money"? I've been around FV a long time and plan to be around for more than the 4-5 years you predict.
What are you afraid of? Why are you being so hard headed about an OPTION? This won't affect your manifold sales. Quite the opposite if the OPTION got legs radial racers would be looking at other areas to make them go faster. A great manifold would be one option.
I swear discussing the future of FV with you is like talking politics with Archie Bunker. You always have to be right, and the rest of the world is wrong.
Good day to you sir.
G.
Last edited by gbmetcalf; 09.06.15 at 7:13 AM.
G. Brian Metcalf
72 AutoD MK4
1991 Mysterian M2
2014 ALR73 FV/FST
Again, complete denial or understanding of reality. So are the Runoffs ..... yet we invite people based on how many regionals they started ...... even fewer racers required if projected entries are low.
If people want an alternate tire program, that is clearly slower, why would any SCCA politician object and fight it. Completely irresponsible!
Greg Rice, RICERACEPREP.com
F1600 Arrive-N-Drive for FRP and SCCA, FC SCCA also. Including Runoffs
2020 & 2022 F1600 Champion, 2020 SCCA FF Champion, 2021 SCCA FC Champion,
2016 F2000 Champion, Follow RiceRacePrep on Instagram.
Topeka
The Scca, as with our federal government in D.C., as they continue to grow they become more and more detached from those they are suppose to serve!
I'm not sure it's so detached, but perhaps it's more that it's trying to serve an ever-widening variety of interests as the organization works to retain what got it where it is, and evolves with the times. John
This situation is so typical of SCCA. The "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem" premise could not be more applicable.
A group of racers, tired of increasing costs and declining entries ...... finds a great solution that SCCA could not find in 35 years. They organize their own race Series but would like to share their great concept with their FV brothers, and continue to participate in SCCA races. That is met with resistance from the SCCA status quo. Rather than fight a 3-year civil war to get Falkens as the spec tire, they are content to COMPROMISE and settle for recognition for Falkens as a alternate tire. But that is not good enough for Brian, Brian, Michael, Mark, and the other SCCA politicians. They do not want to compromise but want to stomp out the Falken tire movement and send enlightened FV racers to Canada, FRP, or other race Series. They are protecting the "healthy" SCCA Majors from growth or a future.
The Falken guys are open to any compromise that lets them participate and not increase their tire budgets by several thousand percent. Brian, Brian, Michael, Mark and the other SCCA politicians want no compromise.
How sad.
Greg Rice, RICERACEPREP.com
F1600 Arrive-N-Drive for FRP and SCCA, FC SCCA also. Including Runoffs
2020 & 2022 F1600 Champion, 2020 SCCA FF Champion, 2021 SCCA FC Champion,
2016 F2000 Champion, Follow RiceRacePrep on Instagram.
That is not indicative of a problem with the "racer"; that's indicative of a problem with the class.
If I was that successful after less than 5 years in a class, I'd be looking for new challenges myself. "That was a great run, now what?" Setting a goal and then attaining is the reward. Then you set a new goal.
If you don't have a business connected somehow to the class, what fun/reward is there in getting multiple RunOffs championships in the same class?
I am not a competitor in FV or any other racing class in any organization. I am not a rules maker in the SCCA or any other racing organization. I am not an official of any SCCA Region. I am an SCCA Club Racing Steward, charged with applying the GCR and Supplemental Regulations to the conduct of safe, fair and fun events.
It has already been explained that there is a path to effect change within SCCA through Regional Racing. Convince a sufficient number of competitors to run the Falken tires at the Regional level and that will resolve the issue. That means getting geographically broad adoption, not just a few pockets of acceptance.
What's being done in this thread, however, is an attempt to bully SCCA into imposing a top down solution by a handful of people who refuse to work within the structure to effect change.
Maybe it's the national political climate that encourages this kind of thing, but not getting one's way has never been an acceptable excuse to abuse anyone or anything.
" You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
I have to say that we find our Region (NER) very easy to work with and helpful when we want something different than the norm for our class, even on a one-weekend basis. I agree, you'd want to start a few months ahead of time - well before the supps are out would be best. If it affects other groups, then before the year's schedule is decided on is best. We find no barriers - just the region wanting/willing to find a way to make things work for us and others, if it makes sense overall considering the other run groups. We really couldn't expect more in this regard from our region. They have put in a significant effort at times on their own to help us make things happen, like with figuring out how we could run our Open Wheel Driving Experience while satisfying the greater club's requirements, for example. Some things we have wanted to do would not necessarily even be expected to increase entries - just us making an effort to make the experience better - and we still get the same level of support from the Region. John
What being done is an attempt to bully the majority into accepting the status quo. A status quo wanted by a handful of people who refuse to let the majority of the members get the rule change they desire.
Ironic.
Then prove it through the Regional participation route.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
162 FV entries in 110 Regionals.
Not even 1.5 FVs average per Regional. That guy doesn't need to cut tire costs, he's not racing against anybody. He can show up with just about anything that holds air and win. Unless he's in the NE or racing a Regional at Daytona.
Through July the Non-Majors average FV count per Region:
Central .25
Great lakes 2.1
MidWest 0
NorthEast 4.2 (63 entrants this season through August)
Nor Pac .35
RockyMtn 3 (only 3 entrants total in one event)
SE 1.2
SoPac 2 (6 total entrants in 3 events)
SouthWest 1
Throw out Daytona Regional from the SE this year and one Region has TWICE as many FV entrants as every other REGION COMBINED. Hmmm....wonder what tire they run there?
Combine a working proof of concept with the poll responses and the ONLY reason this isn't happening tomorrow is political.
You reject the process, make accusatory statements and then expect to be respected for your opinion. That, sir, is true irony.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
Peter, I don't give half a rats' ass whether you respect my opinion or not. I don't expect anybody to respect me for my opinion. They can read the words I type, look at the facts and let their own logic and experiences form their own beliefs.
My statements represent my beliefs. If they are accusatory, so be it. If I am wrong, prove it.
Per Region or Per Regional?
Just to be clear - out of 10 Regionals in the NE Division (I don't consider Summit the NE but the SCCA does) the average is 7.2 cars per race. If you take out 3 Summit Point races, the average jumps to 8.9.
Also - aside from the race at Pocono (1 out of ten) All other races were run with Hoosiers or American Racers - no Falkens.
At the RAL weekend when 16 FV's showed up, only1 FF and 1 FF2000 showed up. I mention this as people think that a spec tire will save FV. While one piece of the puzzle, it is by no means the one answer and putting ones eggs in one basket will not work. With the exception of SM and SRF all other classes in at SCCA Regionals are in trouble.
The NE and Canadians are successful because they are actively trying to solve the problems, albeit in a slightly different manner.
ChrisZ
I think the above message makes the point that you are using selective, incomplete and distorted data points to support a position that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that SCCA has a process for change which you seem to want to run over roughshod. The membership, through its elected BoD and their appointed CRB, will make the decision.
Accusing that process of being political is like accusing water of being wet and equally pointless. SCCA is not a for profit private or public corporation. It is a club and the process of electing its directors is political. In that sense, in any sense, those elected operate in what they perceive to be the best interest of the club as they understand it.
What you're wrong about is your endless drum beating about something that doesn't seem to be going the way you want it. You've made your point. Brow beating those who disagree with you does nothing to move the needle. The energy spent over the past several years to argue this on ApexSpeed applied to convincing regional racing programs to adopt the Falken tire would have advanced your cause much more than this forum.
One wonders why that wasn't done.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
What we want to know, is are they operating in the best interests of the club as we understand it?In that sense, in any sense, those elected operate in what they perceive to be the best interest of the club as they understand it.
Publish the FF RFP. Do not keep it secret. Then we can all understand the process and if it speaks for the club members.
You get to decide that every time your director is up for election.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
I would say a Racing steward has his interests in racing as a "spectator"and racing rules etc,etc.NOT the interests as a driver who is trying to keep costs down,I will say it again"its like talking to brick walls"Im an old fart who retired from F1200 in 2013 and thank god I was/am open to any ideas to improve costs,who the hell cares if its slicks or Falkens,if its cheaper its OBVIOUS what to do.If you are an ELITE driveror are financially well off and can afford all the wizzy bits and 500 slicks a year,GO RACE A REAL RACECAR!!!!Formula Ford Class and up from that!!!!I would have if I could have afforded too but I went the F1200 route because of the CHEAPER running costs
Just another example of the massive disconnect between SCCA politicians and the racers. Note that I said racers. A SCCA politician explained to me that we are members, not SCCA customers, as I would like to think. Think about that next time you drop a few $K supporting a SCCA event.
The SCCA system is clearly broken. Apexspeed polls of FV and FF racers show a 55% majority want DOT tires as their spec tire choice, but SCCA politicians have created levels of bureaucracy that prevent even consideration of these tires. When these racers ask to be allowed to run at the back, that gets lobbied against.
So, to sum it up ........ dedicated SCCA customers, and wannabe customers, who want to participate at reasonable cost, grow the class, and absorb ALL the compromise, are the trouble-making disrespecting bullies. Wow!
Last edited by problemchild; 09.07.15 at 9:28 AM.
Greg Rice, RICERACEPREP.com
F1600 Arrive-N-Drive for FRP and SCCA, FC SCCA also. Including Runoffs
2020 & 2022 F1600 Champion, 2020 SCCA FF Champion, 2021 SCCA FC Champion,
2016 F2000 Champion, Follow RiceRacePrep on Instagram.
Everyone keeps talking about this "majority"
Majority : a number that is greater than half of a TOTAL.
Does anyone on this forum really believe that the entire FV community has participated in these forums polls?
The majority of the FV community wants nothing to do with the nonsense that is discussed on these forums and I certainly can see why, so the Polls on forums are invalid.
Mark Filip
Is this your best argument?
When a poll, on the only decent formula car forum on our continent, shows that a majority of respondents favor a specific option, it is just common sense to admit that that option has some serious support. To dismiss that poll as nonsense, and choose a 3 year old poll constructed by politicians with an agenda, as relevant, is humorous.
If this forum is irrelevant, why do you read, post, and advertise on it?
Greg Rice, RICERACEPREP.com
F1600 Arrive-N-Drive for FRP and SCCA, FC SCCA also. Including Runoffs
2020 & 2022 F1600 Champion, 2020 SCCA FF Champion, 2021 SCCA FC Champion,
2016 F2000 Champion, Follow RiceRacePrep on Instagram.
maybe you should read it again slower
Mark Filip
Peter, I'm sure you love racing and the club. I'm sure you work hard to create a good experience for the club racer, worker, administrator, and other members. So, to be clear, I have no issue with your opinion.You get to decide that every time your director is up for election.
If you wish to have club members understand the decisions, and given it is a club made up of the members, just make the RFP public. This will end the endless speculation about what the response is based upon. There is simply no reason to keep it secret.
I got my selective, incomplete and distorted data from the SCCA site right here:
http://cdn.growassets.net/user_files...pdf?1440685361
Yes, Greg, you are a bully. You've been given a path to achieve your goal and you still refuse to address it, insisting, instead, that your way should be imposed because you say so and then you march out an internet poll and proven invalid data points to justify your intransigent position.
I have no preference in what tires get used by FV or any other class. What I do have a preference for is the integrity of the process that determines what those tires will be. You continue to pound out your version of things and attack anyone who disagrees with you as this thread demonstrates. At it's most benign, that's corrosive. I think it could easily be viewed as a form of intimidation, the very definition of bullying.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
Hmmm....so we get chastised for using the term majority, when a decent sample size was used to reach a comfortable confidence level, yet you say "Everyone" keeps talking about....
Everyone: every person
Then you go to say what the majority of the FV community wants...
I don't know why the RFP hasn't been released. Not having an interest in the outcome, I haven't bothered my director to find out. Have you tried to talk to yours?
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
Incomplete. While Rocky Mountain Division is the smallest in the club, it has run more than one event in 2015.
Peter Olivola
(polivola@gmail.com)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
