little confused? FC-FX

[problemchild]

I do not understand why we must continue to go around and around in circles, asking the same questions over and over again. FRP has been working with QSRE and Elite for over a decade to develop a rule package to bring the USF2000 Van Deimens into their Series. This process has included fine-tuning the complete package and has evolved to include aero and chassis parts. All of Paul and Matt's questions, and many more, were asked many times and have been addressed. Let's not forget that Steve Jenks won the F2000 Championship with a USF car in the days when, arguably, the Series was more competitive. I believe the rules then were more restrictive to aero and suspension updates. All this info is available to SCCA and of course, competitors.

As always in this class, there is such a wide variation in the preparation and driving standards, it is way too easy for people to complain about parity. But for every MZR owner I have heard complain that they cannot keep up with the best Zetec cars, I hear someone with a good Zetec program complain about a MZR car blasting by them on the straights. There are good and better MZR engines, as there are Zetec engines. Some tracks favor one or the other. Generally, the USF cars are less expensive, often significantly. I feel comfortable that enough money and time has been spent by FRP with QSRE and Elite, in addition to hundreds of hours of tracktime, that we and SCCA have all the technical info is there for the FC community to move forward. As mentioned on Apexspeed here many times, why would the FC community care about the car count numbers in FX and whether FX can maintain its status? F2000 cars have been the basis for the FC class for more than 35 years. How old is the FX class and why does it exist? FX is not our problem. Our problem is sustaining our numbers and growing our FC class. It would be nice if we had people at the SCCA level who were prioritizing FC. The key to the "old boys club" governing process is having some "old boys" looking out for you

[Robins Ken]

I do not understand why we must continue to go around and around in circles, asking the same questions over and over again. FRP has been working with QSRE and Elite for over a decade to develop a rule package to bring the USF2000 Van Deimens into their Series. This process has included fine-tuning the complete package and has evolved to include aero and chassis parts. All of Paul and Matt's questions, and many more, were asked many times and have been addressed. Let's not forget that Steve Jenks won the F2000 Championship with a USF car in the days when, arguably, the Series was more competitive. I believe the rules then were more restrictive to aero and suspension updates. All this info is available to SCCA and of course, competitors.

As always in this class, there is such a wide variation in the preparation and driving standards, it is way too easy for people to complain about parity. But for every MZR owner I have heard complain that they cannot keep up with the best Zetec cars, I hear someone with a good Zetec program complain about a MZR car blasting by them on the straights. There are good and better MZR engines, as there are Zetec engines. Some tracks favor one or the other. Generally, the USF cars are less expensive, often significantly. I feel comfortable that enough money and time has been spent by FRP with QSRE and Elite, in addition to hundreds of hours of tracktime, that we and SCCA have all the technical info is there for the FC community to move forward. As mentioned on Apexspeed here many times, why would the FC community care about the car count numbers in FX and whether FX can maintain its status? F2000 cars have been the basis for the FC class for more than 35 years. How old is the FX class and why does it exist? FX is not our problem. Our problem is sustaining our numbers and growing our FC class. It would be nice if we had people at the SCCA level who were prioritizing FC. The key to the "old boys club" governing process is having some "old boys" looking out for you

The perfect package. Greed spoiled it and now we are all confused. Divide and conquer. Most likely not.

[TexasDad]

SCCA announced today that FX is not a Runoffs or Hoosier/US Majors points championship class any longer:

https://www.scca.com/articles/201687...nvited-classes

[Bob Wright]

Gee Whiz.... I wonder if they're going to dis-invite the other 8 or 9 classes that didn't meet minimum participation?

[BrianT1]

This was in the notification about the FX class from SCCA - "The Club Racing Board [CRB] is looking into alternate classification opportunities for some FX cars.”

This ought to be interesting.

Brian

[rockbeau25]

Golden opportunity to get a few dozen cars in FC that should’ve been there all along. Let’s get it done.

[Lotus7]

SCCA announced today that FX is not a Runoffs or Hoosier/US Majors points championship class any longer:

https://www.scca.com/articles/201687...nvited-classes

I was briefly excited to read above that the SCCA had actually done something logical, but then read the full article and I see that FX is still a SuperTour/Majors class.

Wait, what?

If they aren't runoffs eligible, why are they going to be mixed in with, and affecting the outcome of, races for runoffs qualification?
Shouldn't they be a regional-events class?

[CheckeredFlag]

<snip>
Wait, what?

If they aren't runoffs eligible, why are they going to be mixed in with, and affecting the outcome of, races for runoffs qualification?
Shouldn't they be a regional-events class?

Great point!!!

[CheckeredFlag]

Gee Whiz.... I wonder if they're going to dis-invite the other 8 or 9 classes that didn't meet minimum participation?

Another great point! Why just give FX the boot?

[Teuobk]

Based on the 2022 participation data, the following classes had lower average entry counts per Majors weekend than FX did (which had 2.7 entries on average):

PX (0.1)
GTX (1.4)
P1 (2.0)
F500 (2.1)
T1 (2.2)
P2 (2.4)
GT3 (2.4)
AS (2.6)

For the curious, the other formula class entry averages were 3.4 for FA, 3.6 for FC, 3.9 for FF, 5.5 for FE2, and 6.3 for FV.

Jeff

[problemchild]

As a FC team owner, I have absolutely no interest in saving FX. I want the USF cars in FC and I want FX gone.
There were 4 running FX cars at the Runoffs last year. There is nothing to save!

[Steve Davis]

...If they aren't runoffs eligible, why are they going to be mixed in with, and affecting the outcome of, races for runoffs qualification?
Shouldn't they be a regional-events class?

I would THINK that the reason is to wait until SCCA has 'enough time' to find a place for the "classes" that were in FX. So they can at least RACE this season. That seems reasonable to me... and allowing them to have 'that' class this year keeps them from 'taking points away' from the other classes.
?maybe?
Steve

[Terry Hanushek]

As a FC team owner, I have absolutely no interest in saving FX. I want the USF cars in FC and I want FX gone. There were 4 running FX cars at the Runoffs last year. There is nothing to save!

I agree that the USF cars should be in FC. The irony is that If they had been moved a couple of years ago when it was first suggested, many of the old FM cars which made up a bulk of the FX entries would not have felt outclassed and dropped out. Its clear that the **X catch-all classes aren't working out. Most racers, particularly at the Runoffs level, want at least a chance to win, something that most don't get in a catch-all class.

[Lotus7]

I would THINK that the reason is to wait until SCCA has 'enough time' to find a place for the "classes" that were in FX. So they can at least RACE this season. That seems reasonable to me... and allowing them to have 'that' class this year keeps them from 'taking points away' from the other classes.
?maybe?
Steve

I'm going to sound mercenary, but why do they need a place to race if so few of them show up? 4 at the runoffs, and as of yesterday, a single FX is entered for Homestead and Sebring. The club creates participation guidelines and rules, then seemingly spends its time finding exceptions to them...

[Djorgy20]

There is a big thread talking about this on the FC facebook page. (20+) FC Racing Group | Facebook

There are solutions to this if people want there to be solutions. The VD MZR should be in FC. See some lap times from 2018 Road Atlanta with a good car mix and some recognized drivers:

Steve Jenks / 1:25.914 Elan/Mazda
Brandon Dixon / 1:25.991 Citation/Zetec
Davis Durrett / 1:25.981 VanDiemen/Mazda
Simon Sikes / 1:26.164 Elan/Mazda
Reece Everard / 1:26.169 Van Diemen/Zetec
James Roe / 1:27.252 Van Diemen /Mazda

We have data on these cars all through the FRP website that shows virtual parity. Are they exact? No. Is a VD exactly the same as a Citation or a Firmen? No. But they can all race together.

Move the MZR and the FMs will come back to FX along with all the soon to be orphaned F4 cars

what is happening that will cause the f4 cars being orphaned?

[rockbeau25]

what is happening that will cause the f4 cars being orphaned?

Believe the series is moving to a new car which will obsolete the current one.

[Lotus7]

Believe the series is moving to a new car which will obsolete the current one.

The FIA series now run by Parella is coming out with a revised Crawford/Ligier car with a halo, but with many common parts to the current car. We were told back last winter that it would be possible to update the current cars, but at a pretty eye watering cost. I suspect most teams will just buy new cars. Proposal back then was that the current cars would still be welcome in the Parella series during the transition.

USF Juniors, who used the current FIA F4 car this past season, have switched to an entirely new car from Tatuus. I'm not sure there's a 'both are welcome' transition year this season though.

[Djorgy20]

Believe the series is moving to a new car which will obsolete the current one.

Ok now I’m following. Do you think FX will soon have more participants than FC?