FE and FM combined in 2013

[Kilroy Kinloch]

GREAT to see feed-back on this forum and CRB follow up by so many. Next step, show them what works. We had a 10+ showing for the VIR dbl. Even with the rain.

Next up, the ATLANTA RATIONAL. Hope to see many FE's there. It wouldn't hurt to meet face to face with any CRB members that may be in attendance.

"Do anything you want, as long as we all stay the same"

NO to impossible equalization!

Later,

TK

[RDRACING]

Poor timing or good timing. I was going to get back into the FE class and was looking for a FE to buy. Guess I will hold off and see what SCCA decides If the merge, I may look for another class

[Erik Skirmants]

No thank yousent ! #8078...also sent a note to Obama, pre-applying for a bail out if it goes through! We may have to require solar battery chargers be mounted on all FE's to make that part a reality!

[mousecatcher]

I believe the logic that you are failing to follow is that people choose to buy FE or FM now because one class/car is more appealing to them. IF the classes are combined and FM is made competitive (I don't think they'll allow it to be) who'd buy a FE?

By that logic (attractive because 1 class/1 car -- ie, because it's a spec class), who'd buy an FM either? The argument I was refuting wasn't that folks would stay out of the class altogther, which I believe they would, it's that they'd gravitate towards FM. I find that to be baloney because if you're interested in FM, you already have the opportunity today to do that and be quite happy. Combining the classes isn't going to make FM any more attractive than it already is today; it isn't going to steal FE drivers.

That particular reasoning is the same kind of reasoning that results in protectionist economics.

Anyway, it's just a regional but instead of FA I'm racing FE this weekend! Hopefully the CRB/BOD follows popular opinion in this case and keeps the classes separate.

[Zambo]

Tracking #8096 Against the proposal.


"The intention behind a spec series is that an individual's ability (driving, set-up, or strategic) will determine the outcome of the event. A difference in equipment will not determine will not determine the outcome. The proposal which is set forth not only alters that premise but also eviscerates the basis of a spec series through the use of "competition adjustments". "

"If I, or others like me, desired to race against a multitude of different makes and models of vehicles, we would have chosen a different class which permits such."

[Dan Aleckson]

sent mine Dan #8101

[oppermann]

My NO reply is number 8173.

[SStadel]

Do you suppose we'd get black flagged for this?

[Darryl Wills]

with a U and there's your sign....

[Matthew Inge]

with a U and there's your sign....

[La Scuderia Raggi]

Have any of you ever had spec racer fords added to your run group?

[Drew 13]

Have any of you ever had spec racer fords added to your run group?

Gonna happen for test day at Rd Atl in May.

[jcorsico]

Have any of you ever had spec racer fords added to your run group?

Never at an SCCA event. Happened to me once at a promoter's test day at Lime Rock. It actually wasn't that big of a deal, because they were so much slower than us, you could pass them at will wherever you were on the track.

[Matthew Inge]

They've done this at Sebring before. Not too big of a deal. Better than FV in my opinion.

[Bruce Allen FSCCA #82]

Had an SRF T bone me at 100 mph four years ago at NJMP-Lightning on the SCCA test day before a race weekend. I had just passed one SRF on front straight at +30 mph and then was about to pass another on the right when he decided to turn right from the left side of the track into the pits right in front of me. I jammed on the brakes to avoid hitting him, started spinning and the previous SRF T boned me (not his fault). Then they separated us to separate groups..

[Terry Hanushek]

Bruce

Had an SRF T bone me at 100 mph four years ago at NJMP-Lightning on the SCCA test day before a race weekend. I had just passed one SRF on front straight at +30 mph and then was about to pass another on the right when he decided to turn right from the left side of the track into the pits right in front of me. I jammed on the brakes to avoid hitting him, started spinning and the previous SRF T boned me (not his fault). Then they separated us to separate groups..

Was that in 2008? If so, the was an NJMP Prompter Test Day. I believe that all of our SCCA Test Days at NJMP have SRF in their own separate group. It maks SRF happy and everybody else happy.

Terry

[Bruce Allen FSCCA #82]

I think it was 2008. With $2,500 of spares from the FE CSR and ten hours of wrenching I was able to go on to win the next day.

[mmi16]

I sent my vote against in. How many F-500's do you see? FE and FM should remain two classes. Split starts at the Run-offs is the most logical inconvience for any of us. Nationals and Regionals would have the huge additional expense of those three trophies.....

Later,

TK

F500 ranked 10th in Participation of all the SCCA Classes in 2011.

FM was 9th and FE was 12th

Just the facts!

[Marshall Mauney]

F500 ranked 10th in Participation of all the SCCA Classes in 2011.

FM was 9th and FE was 12th

Just the facts!

Exactly the point that needs to be made - aren't the classes at 20th and below more in need of attention than those that are healthy and in the top 15?

FWIW, everyone who wrote or is writing a letter needs to be certain that it's going to the BOD, not the F/SR committee. From the looks of the June Fastrack, it would appear that an awful lot of letters regard the recent F500 change sat in queue until after the BOD had already voted - we don't want a repeat of that situation.

[Richard EVO]

I am new to FM, having just bought the car a few months ago, and ran my first SCCA race weekend at Buttonwillow 2 weeks ago. Most of the race group was SRFs and there was only one other FM. There would have been 3 FMs in the races, but the other guy broke his gearbox during the Friday open test.

I voted against combining with FE a while back.

I have a good friend on the Board of Governors of CalClub, which is the Southern California region of SCCA. Maybe he can help get the message to the National Office.

[cooleyjb]

Exactly the point that needs to be made - aren't the classes at 20th and below more in need of attention than those that are healthy and in the top 15?

FWIW, everyone who wrote or is writing a letter needs to be certain that it's going to the BOD, not the F/SR committee. From the looks of the June Fastrack, it would appear that an awful lot of letters regard the recent F500 change sat in queue until after the BOD had already voted - we don't want a repeat of that situation.

Just remember that National numbers are not the only numbers in SCCA. You add in regional numbers and you'd see that open wheel numbers are far from 'healthy'.

[mmi16]

Just remember that National numbers are not the only numbers in SCCA. You add in regional numbers and you'd see that open wheel numbers are far from 'healthy'.

Unfortunately, there is no published count of Regional Participation for any class.

[Marshall Mauney]

Just remember that National numbers are not the only numbers in SCCA. You add in regional numbers and you'd see that open wheel numbers are far from 'healthy'.

I'm not sure how this is relevant, when the point under discussion is national class status.

[cooleyjb]

I'm not sure how this is relevant, when the point under discussion is national class status.

A combining of classes would affect all levels.

[MAC Racing]

Actually the combination was only at the national level. The regions would have the choice as they do now to decide on regional classes. They could continue with the classes as they are now and offer FE and FM as separate classes, offer the combined classes only or any mix of both. In the same way some regions run ITE, club formula ford, club DSR whatever.

Mat

[stonebridge20]

Looks like you guys got saved! Per the SCCA site. No combo of FE and FM.

[Keith Carter]

Looks like you guys got saved! Per the SCCA site. No combo of FE and FM.

Yep!!! Soooo glad they listened to 100% opposition of this proposal.

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52439