Future of FB Poll

[crowe motorsports]

Some general observations:
I was looking at some old threads that were not specific, but I would guestimate there are over 60 F1000 cars.
Runoffs location does affect car count.
Sonoma Runoffs did cause Eastern cars to sit on the sidelines. As did Daytona for some Western cars.
Car count should improve in 2019 with VIR Runoffs. But VIR could still be a little far for some Western friends.
It’s a real shame 2019 is the death of F1000 with the Runoffs at Road America in 2020. As I recall we had very good F1000 car count at the multiple Road America Runoffs held.
I think Road America or COTA or Indy are a good mid America solutions for all Runoffs. Rotating tracks if possible.
Many F1000’s are Regional competitors that may run a few Nationals in their local travel range.

So let’s get a car count:

I see we could have over a 20 car potential at the VIR Runoffs.

3-Crowe Motorsports will have up to 3 F1000 cars on track in 2019. Maybe 4. 1 being refreshed. All 3 of these cars have had very limited use since 2015. Crowe/Copeland/TBA renter
2-Mayer has 2 JDR’s. Alex/Jose
5-JDR’s should have another 4 or 5?
1-Harris in Mantac development car
1-Piper
3?-Phoenix
3?-Firman’s
3?-Stohr’s
-Van Diemens
-Astra’s
-etc.

[Zcurves]

I was quoting sprockets statement of 4+ builders actively building cars - not just 4 cars.
"FB has at least 4 active builders - Firman, JDR, Griip, Philly Motorsports, as well as Phoenix, Citation, and others I am leaving out."

He's saying there are 6 active builders. Are you suggesting only 3 cars were built?
You are also implying that cars are being run not in the same series. How can that build national grids?

Why did you need a new car? And what happen to your old car?

Just trying to make sense of this.

I don’t know how many total cars were built, but I know of 5 new cars by three manufacturers (JDR, Firman, Griip).

I’m not implying anything, other than two drivers with cars didn’t run with SCCA.. The two drivers participated with their other cars with different organizations. Agreed, it didn’t help numbers.

Why is my reasoning for buying a new car relevant to this discussion? I wanted it. Do we ever need a new race car?

My old car went to Thomas, which will be actively campaigned in 2019.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Why is my reasoning for buying a new car relevant to this discussion? I wanted it. Do we ever need a new race car?

My old car went to Thomas, which will be actively campaigned in 2019.

Relevant if the new car is more advanced and inherently gives you an edge.
Need? Yes, if the car is at the bleeding edge and gets worn out fast.

Good that the old car found a home.

I always question statistics because 30% of all statistics are made up.

[Heel-and-toe]

I agree the class participation numbers were abysmal. However, the FA counts weren't anything to write home about and certainly weren't trending positive.

Actually, they were. According to the SCCA's participation data, FA had 3.80 cars per Majors in 2017 and 4.56 cars per Majors in 2018; FB, by contrast, had 2.89 cars per Majors in 2017 and 1.15 cars per Majors in 2018.

[Daryl DeArman]

Actually, they were. According to the SCCA's participation data, FA had 3.80 cars per Majors in 2017 and 4.56 cars per Majors in 2018.

I stand corrected, their numbers, while abysmal, did trend positive.

[JerryH]

COMBINING FB AND FA IS BAD FOR BOTH SCCA AND THE FB CLASS. HERE IS WHY:

1. FA IS SEVERAL SECONDS FASTER THAN FB AT MOST TRACKS. SONOMA WAS (IS?) AN ANOMALY. MIRL SWAN (FA) DIDN'T SHOW HIS POTENTIAL FOR SOME REASON.......AND FB HAD SEVERAL OF THE FASTEST DRIVERS IN THE COUNTRY THERE.

UNFORTUNATELY FEW FAs ARE DRIVEN TO THEIR POTENTIAL THESE DAYS.....BUT WHEN A FAST DRIVER SHOWS UP IT IS WAY FASTER THAN THE FASTEST FB. LOOK AT MID OHIO RUNOFS IN 2016. SEVERAL OF THE FASTEST FBs IN THE COUNTRY GOT BLOWN AWAY BY THE FASTEST FA. FAs POLES ARE ON AVERAGE ABOUT TWO SECONDS SLOWER THAN 10 TO 15 YEARS AGO WHEN THE CARS WERE NEW.

2. WHY IS FA FASTER THAN FB?
FA HAS WAY MORE DOWNFORCE. FB WINGS AND DIFFUSER ARE THE SAME SIZE AS FC. FLOORS ARE WIDER THAN FC, BUT DO NOT COME CLOSE TO MAKING AS MUCH DOWNFORCE AS THE TUNNELS ON AN FA.

FA HAS MORE TIRE PER POUND OF CAR WEIGHT.

SINCE IT HAS MORE DOWNFORCE AND MORE TIRE, THE CORNERING POTENTIAL IS GREATER.

3. SCCA WILL LOSE ENTRIES AND MONEY IF FB IS FORCED INTO FA. SCCA NEEDS ALL THE ENTRIES IT CAN GET.... AT ALL IT'S EVENTS.....INCLUDING THE RUNOFFS.....TO PAY THE BILLS.
FORCING FB INTO FA WILL RESULT IN REDUCED ENTRIES AND REDUCED REVENUE.

4. WHY?
IN ORDER FOR FB CARS TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH FA, EITHER FB WILL HAVE TO OPEN UP THE ENGINE RULES TO GO FASTER......OR..... FA CARS WILL HAVE TO BE SLOWED DOWN.

SLOWING DOWN FAs WILL NOT BE RECEIVED WELL. THEY BOUGHT THE CAR FOR IT'S SPEED.

OPENING UP ENGINE RULES IN FB WILL RESULT IN DSR STYLE ENGINES..... WHICH WILL COST MORE AND NOT LIVE AS LONG.......OR.....BIGGER ENGINES...... WHICH WILL REQUIRE NOT ONLY A NEW ENGINE, BUT NEW EXHAUST, COOLING SYSTEM, OIL SYSTEM, AND POSSIBLE EXPENSIVE CHASSIS MODS.

I HAVE SPOKEN TO 23 F1000 OWNERS ABOUT THIS, AND FEW IF ANY WILL SPEND THE MONEY IN AN ATTEMPT TO COMPETE WITH FA. THEY WILL SIMPLY GO ELSEWHERE.......REDUCING ENTRIES AND REVENUE TO THE CLUB.

5. SCCA WILL GAIN NOTHING BY THIS MOVE. FB ALREADY RUNS WITH MIXED CLASSES IN THEIR RUN GROUP AT ALL EVENTS..... INCLUDING THE RUNOFFS. COMBINING THEM WILL NOT CHANGE THAT. IT WILL NOT FREE UP ANY TRACK TIME.

6. FB IS NOT DYING;
FIVE NEW CARS WERE SOLD IN 2018. (2 JDRs, 1 FIRMAN, 2 GRIIPs)
MORE THAN 18 NEW CARS WERE SOLD SINCE 2013. (8 JDRs, 3 FIRMANS, 2 GRIIPs, A FEW PHOENIX, ASTRAS, AND CITATIONS. ONE GALMER, AND SEVERAL CONVERTED FC CARS.

7,. APPROX 30 CARS WENT TO AUSTRALIA. THAT REALLY HURT THE CLASS NUMBERS.....BUT THE CAR COUNT IS GROWING.

8. . 2018 PARTICIPATION NUMBERS ARE AN ANOMALY........MAINLY BECAUSE THE NORTH AMERICAN FORMULA 1000 CHAMPIONSHIP RAN REGIONALS......THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A REGIONAL PATH TO RUNOFFS......AND THEY WERE ABLE TO GET THEIR OWN RUN GROUP AT SOME OF THE REGIONS....AND GET MORE TRACK TIME FOR LESS MONEY.

HOWEVER, SINCE SCCA ONLY COUNTS MAJORS PARTICIPATION (dumb), THEY WILL RUN MAJORS IN 2019.

THEY AVERAGED 11 CARS PER EVENT IN 2017....BUT THE REGIONAL THING DIDN'T SEEM APPEALING TO SOME, SO THEY ONLY AVERAGED 6 CARS PER EVENT IN 2018.

RUNNING A SPEC TIRE THAT MANY DIDN'T LIKE HURT THEIR TURNOUT IN BOTH 17 AND 18. THAT IS CHANGING IN 2019. THE SERIES WILL BE BACK ON HOOSIERS.....AND SEVERAL MORE DRIVERS ARE COMING ON BOARD FOR 2019.

9. RUNOFFS PARTICIPATION HAS VARIED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS....BUT IT SEEMS MORE RELATED TO THE DRAW OF THE TRACK THAN THE HEALTH OF THE CLASS:
2010......12 ENTRIES
2011......10 ENTRIES
2012......15 ENTRIES
2013......23 ENTRIES
2014......16 ENTRIES
2015......20 ENTRIES
2016......10 ENTRIES
2017......18 ENTRIES
2018........7 ENTRIES

NOW SOME OTHER THINGS:

1. WHILE GOOD INTENDED, KNOWLEDGEABLE INPUT FROM ALL PARTIES, IS ALWAYS GOOD TO HAVE IN ANY DISCUSSION......WHEN IT COMES TIME TO MAKE DECISIONS ON WHAT HAPPENS TO A CLASS, ONLY PEOPLE WITH SKIN IN THE GAME SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO VOTE. TO DO THAT EACH VOTE NEEDS TO BE FROM A F1000 CAR OWNER.....AND THE POLL RESULTS SHOULD SHOW THE NAME OF THE VOTER. OTHERWISE IT IS QUESTIONABLE DATA.

2. DESIGNERS (LIKE STEVE LATHROP AND ME) WOULD ENJOY REDESIGNING OUR CARS TO TRY AND COMPETE WITH FAs......BUT.....IT IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CLASS AS A WHOLE.

3. STAN CLAYTON......I RESPECT YOU A LOT.......BUT YOU HAVE ALWAYS FELT FB SHOULD BE MORE HI TECH. YOU EVEN ADVOCATED FOR CARBON TUBS WHEN THE CLASS RULES WERE FIRST BEING DISCUSSED. THE MAJORITY DIDN'T WANT TO GO HI TECH......AND STILL DON'T......BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBLE COST INVOLVED. GEARTRONICS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THE INCREASED COST OF GOING IN THAT DIRECTION.

IF FB HAD GONE THAT ROUTE, IT MIGHT BE CLOSER TO FA.....BUT MOST OF US WANT TO KEEP IT AS A LOWER COST ALTERNATIVE.....WHICH IS WHAT IT HAS BEEN UP TO NOW.....AND WAS INTENDED TO BE.

4. IS GEARTRONICS AN ADVANTAGE? MAYBE...........BUT.........FOUR OF THE FASTEST FBs IN THE COUNTRY HAVE MANUAL SHIFTING SYSTEMS WITH ACTUAL SHIFT LEVERS. THEY ARE:
JEREMY HILL
ALEX MAYER
NICHO VARDIS
RANDY COOK (SECOND FASTEST AT SONOMA)

IT WAS WRONG TO ALLOW IT IN MY OPINION, BUT IT IS HERE, , SO NOT OPEN TO DEBATE AT THIS POINT......AND IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A MUST HAVE FOR SOME CAR/DRIVER/ENGINE COMBINATIONS.

5. THE NORTH AMERICAN FORMULA 1000 CHAMPIONSHIP WILL DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THEIR SERIES......REGARDLESS WHAT SCCA DOES. THAT WILL BE STOCK 1000CC ENGINES WITH THE THROTTLE BODY THE ENGINE CAME WITH.....JUST LIKE FB HAS BEEN LIMITED TO SINCE THE BEGINNING......PLUS WHAT EVER RESTRICTIONS AND/OR ADDED WEIGHT IS NEEDED TO ALLOW NEW ENGINES INTO THE CLASS.......WHILE KEEPING OLDER ENGINES COMPETITIVE. HOPEFULLY SCCA WILL FOLLOW THEIR LEAD.

THEY WILL HAVE THEIR SEPARATE CHAMPIONSHIP WITHIN SCCA RACES.....JUST AS THEY DID IN 2017 AND 2018. IF THE CLASS IS FORCED INTO FA, THAT CAN STILL BE DONE.....BUT AT THAT POINT OTHER VENUES WILL LOOK MORE ATTRACTIVE. THEIR DRIVERS GET TO VOTE ON SUCH THINGS.....AND WILL MAKE THAT DECISION. (GOOD IDEA FOR SCCA).

6. THE REQUIRED PARTICIPATION NUMBER TO BE A RUNOFFS CLASS SHOULD ONLY APPLY TO THE RUNOFFS.......NOT TO MAJORS OR REGIONALS........SO ELIMINATING A CLASS ENTIRELY FOR NOT MEEETING THOSE NUMBERS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

WHEN A CLASS DOESN'T MEET THAT NUMBER THE NORM IS TO PLACE THE CLASS ON PROBATION (FOR THE RUNOFFS) AND GIVEN TIME TO BRING UP ITS NUMBERS.

FB WAS PLACED ON PROBATION FOR 2019.......WHICH WOULD HAVE GIVEN THE CLASS A YEAR TO BUILD ITS NUMBERS.

THE RECCOMMENDED RULE CHANGE WHICH ELIMINATES THE CLASS EFFECTIVE 1/1/20 REMOVES THAT OPPORTUNITY.

NO MATTER HOW MANY FBs SHOW UP AT MAJORS IN 2019 THIS RULE WOULD ELIMINATE THE CLASS.(FOR ALL RACES NOT JUST THE RUNOFFS). THAT IS SIMPLY WRONG. SURELY THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT. THE CLASS SHOULD BE GIVEN TIME TO ADJUST THEIR BEHAVIOR TO MEET THE NEW PARTICIPATION NUMBER REQUIREMENTS.

7. IF FB DOESN'T GET TO THE MAGIC 4 AVERAGE TO BE A RUNOFFS CLASS, THERE IS STILL NO REASON TO ELIMINATE IT FROM MAJORS COMPETITION.

8 IF FB ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE COMBINED WITH ANOTHER CLASS, IT WOULD CLEARLY FIT BETTER IN FC THAN FA. BOTH ARE TUBE FRAMED CARS. THEY HAVE THE SAME WINGS AND DIFFUSER. THEY SHARE MANY OTHER CHASSIS RULES.. FB COULD EASILY BE SLOWED DOWN TO FC LAP TIMES......WITH NO COST INCREASE TO THE FB OWNERS.

SCCA WOULDN'T LOSE NEARLY AS MANY CARS WITH THAT MOVE AS THEY WILL WITH A MOVE TO FA.

9. HOWEVER........ THERE IS STILL NO REAL BENEFIT TO SCCA. WITH EITHER MOVE..... NO TRACK TIME IS FREED UP......THEY ALREADY RUN IN THE SAME WINGS AND THINGS RACE GROUP AT MAJORS.....AND BOTH ALREADY SHARE RUNOFFS RACES WITH OTHER CLASSES.

JERRY HODGES
MEMBER #7484
MEMBER SINCE 1967

[Daryl DeArman]

I always question statistics because 30% of all statistics are made up.

https://youtu.be/IUK6zjtUj00

[LenFC11]

Jerry

Writing in all caps is akin to yelling. People don't want to get yelled at.

I tried reading your post but gave up. If you have anything important to say it got lost.

[JerryH]

No yelling intended.
Caps just make it easier for my old eyes.
Jerry

Jerry

Writing in all caps is akin to yelling. People don't want to get yelled at.

I tried reading your post but gave up. If you have anything important to say it got lost.

[LarryWinkelman]

I'm an interested bystander... currently running FE, but let's say FB/F1000 is aspirational for me. And, I didn't vote in the poll.

[Update - what I wrote below is apparently not accurate; the BoD has approved the change effective 1/1/2020. I still think there is a possibility to have them reverse course, although maybe more of an uphill battle. Surprising (or maybe not surprising) that this wasn't put out there first by the Comp Board as a "what do you think" item or a "recommended change".]

Curiously, the link to the preliminary minutes is no longer available on SCCA's website. But, as I recall, the 2019 change (you CAN run your car in FA) was a Comp Board change... meaning, it's a done deal and effective next week. The 2020 change (move ALL FB/F1000 cars to FA), is a recommendation to the Board of Directors. It is a different process, and there is time to convince the BoD not to approve the change. Direct contact with as many directors as possible would be a start. Having a consensus among all the active competitors and builders and series organizers would also help, although I realize that's probably not going to happen. Still, using logical, and especially data-driven information to help inform their opinion may yield the best results. Conspiracy theories and threats probably less convincing.

[Jnovak]

A lot of classes in trouble numbers wise in 2018. I think that the runoffs location was a major factor and i understand that this can alway be a factor.


https://www.scca.com/pages/majors-participation-2

[Jnovak]

When FB first started we built a total of 7 FC to FB conversuons for FB .at that time Glenn Cooper won the first pro series Championship as well a the June Sprints with one of these conversions. That said, not a single one of those cars is still racing in FB. Now admitedly these cars have all seen better days but it is still important to remember that these cars are all gone from FB racing.

Imo this is simply because the rules have changed very significantly in the time since they were built. I bet that those 7 cars would still be racing in FB without the MANY rules changes that dramatically increased the cost to compete. High tech is cool and fun untill it kills a class.

Now this is simply my opinion and thus carries no more weight than anyone elses comments

[Heel-and-toe]

Curiously, the link to the preliminary minutes is no longer available on SCCA's website. But, as I recall, the 2019 change (you CAN run your car in FA) was a Comp Board change... meaning, it's a done deal and effective next week. The 2020 change (move ALL FB/F1000 cars to FA), is a recommendation to the Board of Directors. It is a different process, and there is time to convince the BoD not to approve the change. Direct contact with as many directors as possible would be a start. Having a consensus among all the active competitors and builders and series organizers would also help, although I realize that's probably not going to happen. Still, using logical, and especially data-driven information to help inform their opinion may yield the best results. Conspiracy theories and threats probably less convincing.

No, according to the 2019 GCR, the recommendation was approved by the Board of Directors at their December 2018 meeting.

[John Mosteller]

COMBINING FB AND FA IS BAD FOR BOTH SCCA AND THE FB CLASS. HERE IS WHY:

1. FA IS SEVERAL SECONDS FASTER THAN FB AT MOST TRACKS. SONOMA WAS (IS?) AN ANOMALY. MIRL SWAN (FA) DIDN'T SHOW HIS POTENTIAL FOR SOME REASON.......AND FB HAD SEVERAL OF THE FASTEST DRIVERS IN THE COUNTRY THERE.

UNFORTUNATELY FEW FAs ARE DRIVEN TO THEIR POTENTIAL THESE DAYS.....BUT WHEN A FAST DRIVER SHOWS UP IT IS WAY FASTER THAN THE FASTEST FB. LOOK AT MID OHIO RUNOFS IN 2016. SEVERAL OF THE FASTEST FBs IN THE COUNTRY GOT BLOWN AWAY BY THE FASTEST FA. FAs POLES ARE ON AVERAGE ABOUT TWO SECONDS SLOWER THAN 10 TO 15 YEARS AGO WHEN THE CARS WERE NEW.

2. WHY IS FA FASTER THAN FB?
FA HAS WAY MORE DOWNFORCE. FB WINGS AND DIFFUSER ARE THE SAME SIZE AS FC. FLOORS ARE WIDER THAN FC, BUT DO NOT COME CLOSE TO MAKING AS MUCH DOWNFORCE AS THE TUNNELS ON AN FA.

FA HAS MORE TIRE PER POUND OF CAR WEIGHT.

SINCE IT HAS MORE DOWNFORCE AND MORE TIRE, THE CORNERING POTENTIAL IS GREATER.

3. SCCA WILL LOSE ENTRIES AND MONEY IF FB IS FORCED INTO FA. SCCA NEEDS ALL THE ENTRIES IT CAN GET.... AT ALL IT'S EVENTS.....INCLUDING THE RUNOFFS.....TO PAY THE BILLS.
FORCING FB INTO FA WILL RESULT IN REDUCED ENTRIES AND REDUCED REVENUE.

4. WHY?
IN ORDER FOR FB CARS TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH FA, EITHER FB WILL HAVE TO OPEN UP THE ENGINE RULES TO GO FASTER......OR..... FA CARS WILL HAVE TO BE SLOWED DOWN.

SLOWING DOWN FAs WILL NOT BE RECEIVED WELL. THEY BOUGHT THE CAR FOR IT'S SPEED.

OPENING UP ENGINE RULES IN FB WILL RESULT IN DSR STYLE ENGINES..... WHICH WILL COST MORE AND NOT LIVE AS LONG.......OR.....BIGGER ENGINES...... WHICH WILL REQUIRE NOT ONLY A NEW ENGINE, BUT NEW EXHAUST, COOLING SYSTEM, OIL SYSTEM, AND POSSIBLE EXPENSIVE CHASSIS MODS.

I HAVE SPOKEN TO 23 F1000 OWNERS ABOUT THIS, AND FEW IF ANY WILL SPEND THE MONEY IN AN ATTEMPT TO COMPETE WITH FA. THEY WILL SIMPLY GO ELSEWHERE.......REDUCING ENTRIES AND REVENUE TO THE CLUB.

5. SCCA WILL GAIN NOTHING BY THIS MOVE. FB ALREADY RUNS WITH MIXED CLASSES IN THEIR RUN GROUP AT ALL EVENTS..... INCLUDING THE RUNOFFS. COMBINING THEM WILL NOT CHANGE THAT. IT WILL NOT FREE UP ANY TRACK TIME.

There is no requirement for all the cars to be competitive .Fb's numbers have reached the point it should no longer be a runoffs class . The path to a Runoffs class is not new only the name has changed. They were called Nationals and you had to keep your car count 2.5 or more to remain a National Runoffs Class. The only difference is they are now calling them Majors and have increased the number to 4 or more to maintain a Runoffs class. Most of the cars put in FA are not competitive with real FAs,nor will they ever be.When we are put in FA it gives a way to still run Majors. Then if the F1000s even though running as FAs get their numbers up to above 4 they can reapply for a Runoffs class.

8. . 2018 PARTICIPATION NUMBERS ARE AN ANOMALY........MAINLY BECAUSE THE NORTH AMERICAN FORMULA 1000 CHAMPIONSHIP RAN REGIONALS......THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A REGIONAL PATH TO RUNOFFS......AND THEY WERE ABLE TO GET THEIR OWN RUN GROUP AT SOME OF THE REGIONS....AND GET MORE TRACK TIME FOR LESS MONEY.

If the NAF1000 would have ran 6 Majors instead of Regionals it would have only added 36 to the participation numbers.So 39 that were earned plus 36 plus the 7 for the Runoffs would be 82 when 140 was the number needed .

4. IS GEARTRONICS AN ADVANTAGE? MAYBE...........BUT.........FOUR OF THE FASTEST FBs IN THE COUNTRY HAVE MANUAL SHIFTING SYSTEMS WITH ACTUAL SHIFT LEVERS. THEY ARE:
JEREMY HILL
ALEX MAYER
NICHO VARDIS
RANDY COOK (SECOND FASTEST AT SONOMA)

Geartronics may or may not make a difference but the perception for someone looking to enter the class would be that in order to be on the same level as those with it it would add app.$7000 to the cost of entry.

NO MATTER HOW MANY FBs SHOW UP AT MAJORS IN 2019 THIS RULE WOULD ELIMINATE THE CLASS.(FOR ALL RACES NOT JUST THE RUNOFFS). THAT IS SIMPLY WRONG. SURELY THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT. THE CLASS SHOULD BE GIVEN TIME TO ADJUST THEIR BEHAVIOR TO MEET THE NEW PARTICIPATION NUMBER REQUIREMENTS.

If we got the numbers required to get invited to the 2020 Runoffs by the rule we would be invited . But in order to do that we will need about 290 by the end of 2019 and we have 46 now. So around 240 in 38 Majors.

[Stan Clayton]

6. FB IS NOT DYING;
FIVE NEW CARS WERE SOLD IN 2018. (2 JDRs, 1 FIRMAN, 2 GRIIPs)
MORE THAN 18 NEW CARS WERE SOLD SINCE 2013. (8 JDRs, 3 FIRMANS, 2 GRIIPs, A FEW PHOENIX, ASTRAS, AND CITATIONS. ONE GALMER, AND SEVERAL CONVERTED FC CARS.

If we're counting since 2013 add 5 Stohrs...1 in 2013, 1 in 2014, 1 in 2016 & 2 in 2017, for a total of 38 new FBs.

3. STAN CLAYTON......I RESPECT YOU A LOT.......BUT YOU HAVE ALWAYS FELT FB SHOULD BE MORE HI TECH. YOU EVEN ADVOCATED FOR CARBON TUBS WHEN THE CLASS RULES WERE FIRST BEING DISCUSSED. THE MAJORITY DIDN'T WANT TO GO HI TECH......AND STILL DON'T......BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBLE COST INVOLVED. GEARTRONICS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THE INCREASED COST OF GOING IN THAT DIRECTION.

IF FB HAD GONE THAT ROUTE, IT MIGHT BE CLOSER TO FA.....BUT MOST OF US WANT TO KEEP IT AS A LOWER COST ALTERNATIVE.....WHICH IS WHAT IT HAS BEEN UP TO NOW.....AND WAS INTENDED TO BE.

Thank you for the kind words. The respect is mutual. And yes, I did support composite tubs back then, albeit with an appropriate weight penalty (25 lbs...same as in FA). That didn't happen, though, and I am fairly comfortable with the current chassis rules, though I'd like to see better side protection mandated with an appropriate weight gain (we all know racers won't volunteer to add 10-15 lbs to their cars if that puts them at a weight disadvantage.)

8 IF FB ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE COMBINED WITH ANOTHER CLASS, IT WOULD CLEARLY FIT BETTER IN FC THAN FA. BOTH ARE TUBE FRAMED CARS. THEY HAVE THE SAME WINGS AND DIFFUSER. THEY SHARE MANY OTHER CHASSIS RULES.. FB COULD EASILY BE SLOWED DOWN TO FC LAP TIMES......WITH NO COST INCREASE TO THE FB OWNERS.

SCCA WOULDN'T LOSE NEARLY AS MANY CARS WITH THAT MOVE AS THEY WILL WITH A MOVE TO FA.

9. HOWEVER........ THERE IS STILL NO REAL BENEFIT TO SCCA. WITH EITHER MOVE..... NO TRACK TIME IS FREED UP......THEY ALREADY RUN IN THE SAME WINGS AND THINGS RACE GROUP AT MAJORS.....AND BOTH ALREADY SHARE RUNOFFS RACES WITH OTHER CLASSES.

JERRY HODGES
MEMBER #7484
MEMBER SINCE 1967

Moving FB back into FC is NEVER going to happen, and everyone here knows it. FB was kicked out of FC because of its inherent advantages, so the only place it has to go is into FA if it is to be merged. And make no mistake, it WILL be merged if it can't pull its numbers up, and maybe even then. This isn't just some family squabble...the pressure is on the CRB and BoD to reduce the number of Runoffs eligible glasses to make more time for other run groups on track. When the classes are 'racked & stacked' by participation the winged formula classes are all grouped down near the bottom, and the bottom is where the culling happens.

So you need to figure out where you're going to run in FA; up front, mid-pack, or tail-end-Charlie, just as you do currently in FB. Just don't fall for the "we're gonna sue SCCA into protecting FB from all comers, forever!" crowd.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer and don't play one on the internet.

[Jnovak]

I suspect that to keep FB as a seperate Majors class will require rules that will slow the class down. I also suspect that many of the current members of the class do not want to go slower.
Thoughts please?

[Zcurves]

It’s becoming obvious to me that this is a losing battle. It is only because of my loyalty to the class that I am willing to fight this change. However, FB WILL SURVIVE IN NAF1000. Only time will tell if it’s in SCCA or elsewhere on the east coast. I will write my letter and encourage actual participants to do the same. At the end of the day, there are options and enough east coast cars to field a successful series. I don’t want to abandon my brothers in FB, but I don’t see many fighting alongside.

It seems the central and west coast guys have the most to lose here because they have fewer options. Unfortunately, very few have spoken.

Apparently John has an FB, anyone else? I wish more would put their affiliation in their signature to differentiate interested bystanders from drivers. What are the legacy FA guys saying about this?

[Zcurves]

I suspect that to keep FB as a seperate Majors class will require rules that will slow the class down. I also suspect that many of the current members of the class do not want to go slower.
Thoughts please?

From my conversation with a certain BOD member, it’s a pure numbers play. Therefore, there is no change to the rules that will prevent this. If you know more please share.

In our conversation last night, there was no recollection or priority given to safety issues regarding the speeds of tube frame chassis.

[Heel-and-toe]

The 2019 GCR says: "As recommended by the Club Racing Board and approved by the Board of Directors at the December 2018 BoD meeting, Formula 1000 will be removed from the GCR on 12/31/2019."

Not "Formula 1000 will be removed from the GCR on 12/31/2019 unless the class pulls its numbers up," or "Formula 1000 will be removed from the GCR on 12/31/2019 unless new rules are adopted to slow the class down."

YMMV.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

From my conversation with a certain BOD member, it’s a pure numbers play. Therefore, there is no change to the rules that will prevent this.

Maybe since the class is "doomed" they will allow rule changes during 2019 by a vote of interested parties.

Certain rule changes MAY attract drivers and increase car counts.

But that's your choice.

[Stan Clayton]

I suspect that to keep FB as a seperate Majors class will require rules that will slow the class down. I also suspect that many of the current members of the class do not want to go slower.
Thoughts please?

Thoughts? You've perfectly described the conundrum FB finds itself in.

To survive as a separate class FB must slow down to someplace between FA and FC, BUT! the competitors won't agree to any changes that slow the cars. Examples abound, but here are two:

1. Geartronics. Nearly everyone agrees they're expensive and add to the cost of the class, but those same people refuse to give them up because they've already spent the money for them. Sunk cost fallacy, anyone?

2. Inlet restrictors. For the cost of a few gallons of racing fuel one can purchase a set of inlet restrictors that smoothly squeeze off the top end of the RPM band, slightly slowing the cars to between FA and FC (with a bit of fiddling to get it right.) One would think this a no-brainer, but one would be wrong. The competitors have rabidly howled down the idea every time it's been presented.

This vociferous resistance to change has not gone unnoticed by the CRB and BoD, along with the class' failure to grow its numbers. They appear to have arrived at the unavoidable conclusion that the class will not change on its own, and that it's time for them to take action. The BoD and CRB are under intense and unrelenting pressure to reduce the number of classes at the Runoffs to somewhere in the 20-25 range, and they would much rather fold one class into another than simply cut one off, so here we are.

To those still screaming "I don't care about FB!", you can still have your NAF1000 Championship. It'll just involve changing one letter on the side of your car.

[Farrout48]

I suspect that to keep FB as a separate Majors class will require rules that will slow the class down. I also suspect that many of the current members of the class do not want to go slower.
Thoughts please?

Maybe a bit of a tangent, but SCCA just adopted rules (effective March 2019) which are intended to slow the P2 class down.

Rationale was that P2 was getting too close to P1 and needed more separation if it was to remain a separate class.

T

he motorcycle engine cars get a 25# penalty and the restrictor openings have been reduced yet again. At least this time, it was a graduated reduction in another attempt to normalize the engines/cars. Other engines/cars got similar changes.

The P2 drivers did not get a vote or a "What do you think?" or even advance notification until the Dec Prelims came out.

Like Jay said,

I also suspect that many of the current members of the class do not want to go slower.

At the Homestead Majors, I hope to be able to "quantify" the impact of the new restrictors (8% reduction in opening) on my stock GSXR car.

[JerryH]

John Mosteller........NAF1000 ran 11 regional races in 2018....not the 6 you stated.

Running regionals and an unpopular spec tire ddn't work.....both hurt our numbers significantly. The tire hurt 2017 numbers.....and going to regionals hurt even more. Average in 17 was 11 per race. Average in 18 was 6.

Had we gotten 11 in 2018, the numbers would have still been close.......but as Tim Pierce (area 81) pointed out, we know many who didn't run with us who have indicated an interest in doing so In 2019. I am confident we will average more than 11 in 2019.

FB was put on probation for the 2019 runoffs....due to the low numbers......which gave us the warning to bring up our numbers. All we are asking is to be given to chance to do that. If we can't, then we do not have a runoffs invitation.....but to eliminate the class entirely doesn't help the club in any way. The cars will still run in the same run group. No track time is freed up. All the club saves Is a few cheap trophies.. Many will choose to go elsewhere.....and the regions wlll lose entries and entry fees.
We all know that is a negative for the club. I see no positive for the club in this.

Stan Clayton......thanks for the stohr sales numbers. So at least 38 new FB cars have been sold since 2013.....and 5 in 2018
That sounds like a healthy class to me.

Stan......my board member tells me there is no longer a drive by the BOD to reduce the number of classes.
I think you were right when you said the crb was tired of the bitching from the class in past attempts to limit the speed.....and this Is the result. it points out the need for a better communication system between the club and its members. That bitching was only a few very loud car owners.

Those few very loud voices got the restrictors stopped......and restrictors were not anyones first choice....but the vast majority would rather limit the engines in some way than have to face serious increases in cost (or deal with the added safety issues) trying to compete with FAs. I have personally spoken with 23 drivers regarding this very thing......so I have pretty good handle on the subject.

For anyone considering the class.......a geartronics is not needed to be competitive.. Four of the fastest cars in the country (based on runoffs qualifying positions over the last few years) have manual shift systems. Jeremy Hill, Alex Mayer, Nicho Vardis, Randy Cook.

Until the weird ruling at Sonoma regarding Osbornes throttle body......the engine rules have not changed.....still pure stock,....but misinformed talk about spiraling engine cost has and does scare some people away.

Jerry Hodges
member #7484
member since 1967

[John Mosteller]

John Mosteller........NAF1000 ran 11 regional races in 2018....not the 6 you stated.

Jerry you only get 1 per entry for a Major so if the NAF1000 were to have ran Majors last and did 6 with an average of 6 entries they would have received 36 towards class participation . In order to have had 11 races count they would have had to have done 11 separate Major weekends . We fell short by 119 so if they would have done 6 Major weekends last year we would have still fell 83 short . We would have still finished 27 out of 28 classes .

[Stan Clayton]

I have been wondering if John is correct. Thoughts?

[Peter Olivola]

I have been wondering if John is correct. Thoughts?

How many sanction numbers were there for each weekend and how many car/driver combinations?

[Heel-and-toe]

I have been wondering if John is correct. Thoughts?

Yes, he is.

The SCCA determines Majors participation by counting weekends, not races run on those weekends, i.e., 34 weekends in 2018, not 68 races. So, to correlate what might have been, if the handful of people who ran NAF1000 had instead run Majors events, one has to look at the six regional weekends NAF1000 ran, not the 11 races on those six weekends.

FB had 101 Majors entries in 2017 and 18 entries at the Indianapolis Runoffs, for a total of 119 entries. In 2018, FB had 39 Majors entries and seven entries at the Sonoma Runoffs, for a total of 46. So, FB had a total of 165 entries in 2017-2018, while 284 entries were needed for an automatic invitation to the 2019 Runoffs. If one assumes six cars for six weekends in 2018, that would have made 201 entries over the two-year period – still 83 entries short of an automatic invitation.

As for 2018 Majors participation, if those 36 hypothetical entries were added to the 39 Majors entries, FB would have had only 75 Majors entries and would have finished ahead of only FE2 (27th out of 28 classes). If one were to assume seven entries (instead of six) on six weekends, FB would have barely finished ahead GT3 for 26th out of 28 classes. Even if one were to assume eight entries on six weekends, FB still would have finished only 25th out of 28 classes (barely ahead of B-Spec).

[Zcurves]

I get it, participation numbers sucked. But why eliminate the class altogether? I’d rather not be invited to the Runoffs than the class be eliminated.

The F1000 is not going to get much faster without significant investment in development. Many here already think Geartronics is an investment that is discouraging growth. How much is it going to cost to compete with a decently driven Swift 016? Other than the top few drivers in FB, most of us know we can’t compete with FA at most tracks. Why spend the time and money in FA when you know you aren’t going to be competitive. F1000s will become a rare sight, if not extinct. How does that benefit SCCA? Our 200 entries will be gone.

The safety concerns are another ball of wax.

[Heel-and-toe]

How much is it going to cost to compete with a decently driven Swift 016? Other than the top few drivers in FB, most of us know we can’t compete with FA at most tracks. Why spend the time and money in FA when you know you aren’t going to be competitive.

If you look at the points tables in the various conferences, Swift 016 participation is not all that strong, numbers-wise. Also, Swift 014 participation has declined dramatically, presumably because of complaints about 016 dominance and the now astronomical expense of running the Toyota 4A-GE engine. With the incorporation of F1000 into FA, it wouldn't be that surprising to see adjustments made. Seems like things could get really interesting in FA. Time will tell.

[John Mosteller]

The real problem with participation numbers now is it is a rolling 2 year count. We got that 119 in 2017 which was an anomaly because the Runoffs were at Indy. 2016 we had 74 plus 10 from the Runoffs for 84 so 119 was a big jump. But our situation now is the 119 from 2017 drops off . So we have 39 from 2018 Majors plus 7 from the Runoffs for 46.There were 34 Majors in 2018 and it looks like 2019 has 38 scheduled. That means we will need 288 for 2018 plus 2019 to get invited to 2020 Runoffs.So 242 is the number we will have to get in 2019. There are only 3 or 4 classes that have achieved that many per year in the last 3 years.

[John Mosteller]

The safety concerns are another ball of wax.

We already run most places including the Runoffs with FA so there is no change in safety .

[Zcurves]

We already run most places including the Runoffs with FA so there is no change in safety .

Theres a big difference between running in a group WITH FA and competing AGAINST FA.

[Heel-and-toe]

Theres a big difference between running in a group WITH FA and competing AGAINST FA.

Most people are trying to do their best lap, every corner of every lap, regardless of who they're on track with. They don't do things differently because another car that's on track with them might be in a different class, and changing the letter on the side of their own car wouldn't alter their approach. YMMV.

[Zcurves]

Most people are trying to do their best lap, every corner of every lap, regardless of who they're on track with. They don't do things differently because another car that's on track with them might be in a different class, and changing the letter on the side of their own car wouldn't alter their approach. YMMV.

You’re entitled to your opinion, as I am mine. I don’t know who you are or what you race, but every FB competitor I’ve spoken with feels the same. The reality is that most of us mortal FB racers give way to the Atlantics. We don’t want to mix it up with those guys and until now, there was no reason to. That will change if this rule goes into effect.

[Heel-and-toe]

Minimum weights currently range from 1160 lbs. to 1475 lbs. in FA, from 1000 lbs. to 1475 lbs. in P1, and from 950 lbs. to 1500 lbs. in P2. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

[Northwind]

You’re entitled to your opinion, as I am mine. I don’t know who you are or what you race, but every FB competitor I’ve spoken with feels the same. The reality is that most of us mortal FB racers give way to the Atlantics. We don’t want to mix it up with those guys and until now, there was no reason to. That will change if this rule goes into effect.

Agreed.

I have always yielded to the FA cars if they have been following closely behind.

If there is contact between an FA and FB, the FA will win every time. Just the mass of the spinning tires/wheels and increased size in the bodywork/wings in the FA cars is equal to putting a heavyweight fighter against a lightweight fighter. The FB is not going to win any intimidation battles for track position that is for sure.

[Zcurves]

Doesn't seem to be a problem.

Sure, there’s no problem if you’re in the FA, P1, or P2 because you weigh up to 50% more than an FB.

Northwind put it much more eloquently and I agree with him 110%.

[Heel-and-toe]

Sure, there’s no problem if you’re in the FA, P1, or P2 because you weigh up to 50% more than an FB.

Guess you overlooked the part about the P1s that weigh 1000 lbs. and the P2s that weigh 950 lbs.

[Zcurves]

Guess you overlooked the part about the P1s that weigh 1000 lbs. and the P2s that weigh 950 lbs.

Guess you overlooked that I said UP TO 50%. By my limited math skills, that includes your defined range.

[Heel-and-toe]

Sorry you missed my point.