Printable View
Im an old-timer and I am dreading the day I have to quit F1200,I would go along with anything to keep my class going as long as the majority wanted it that way,F1200/FV will be around for years to come as it always has,maybe up and down some years but it will last.F1200 is proving it,we have mostly young drivers,and Karting youngsters seems to be the place to find/get drivers,its certainly happened in F1200.
FACT: Lowering operating costs does not keep FV's on the track. I know it is hard for you to accept with your simplistic view of this issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam Bam
The SFR region is perfect proof that 'attainable' cost reduction is not keeping FV's entries from falling. There are only a few 'significant' costs that the membership can control. SFR has done something about two of the biggest items. They have a very cost effective spec tire program AND they own their a TRACK. What better way to control your entry cost? Entry costs are about $90 cheaper at Thunderhill compared to Sears and Laguna.
So here you have a test case with a spec tire and low entry fees, still the FV entries are falling. MY CASE IS MADE.
You must have a hard time at funerals. Get us to it, SCCA and FV are slowly dying and there is nothing you can do to change that.
Brian
You mean except FST, F5, F6, and possibly even CFF?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiago Santos
Frankly, I think anyone seriously "dreaming of driving an F1 car" is not looking at any of the above. But if you mean those younger people who want to try road raceing and imagine themselves the nest Senna or Vettle or Franchitti (actually I suspect that also includes the guys like me who are over 30, or 40, or 50 and imagine that in a different life they could have been), hen we HAVE to realize that there are other classes we are competing against to attract those drivers.
IMHO, with the same acquisition budget (assuming it's realistic) you could find cars in any of those classes. Operating costs of the three will be different but similar depending on track damage, engine management/rebuilds, tires choices, etc etc, but I'd suspect that except for track damage (I hear tearing off a corner on a FF is very painful) the operating budget for the run of the mill regional racer wouldn't be to vastly different from one to the other.
I really don't have an opinion on spec tires - I think the arguments can be made either way. Will it save costs? I don't know - at the regional level maybe, at the National level, probably not - for all the reasons stated.
We can continue to proclaim "FV is the best bang for the buck" as we whistle past the graveyard, or we can seriously explore what FV needs to attract new blood and retain old blood. Like it or not, all of the above named classes proclaim they are the best bang for the buck, and probably have better arguments to support the position.
lawyerbob,
Well said and right on. A lowering of overall costs will help current racers to a small degree. (maybe 5-10% of the full budget?) Saving FV is only going to happen with PROMOTION. I have said this before; Probably 1/2 of the guys that come in this store that spend $1000's on stuff for track days, Kart suits etc. have never heard of FV and only a little about SCCA. There is a huge market out there that has to be tapped. Tires, weights, etc, may be a good thing to discuss/implement, but it will NOT save FV.
If I tell everyone that comes into this shop that FV is now heavier and has longer lasting tires, their comment will be: "Great, what is FV?"
So how is SCCA/FV promotion going? :D
Lowering costs sure does help keep cars on the track, if our region didn't make better efforts then the SCCA has over the years it is much more likely our participation numbers would be much poorer as I know some who wouldn't be able to afford it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
You say your "CASE IS MADE" but you can not confirm that because how can you tell me how many more or less drivers you would have without a spec tire? You can't conclusivily answer that so I argue your "CASE".
Promotion of the sport is by far one of things that will help bring NEW drivers in & you always need to be replacing racers as they leave for many reasons. I agree that will be a huge help to attracting new members. The more new members you have turn up to race & the bigger fields you have then more & more of the people sitting out will be likely to join in as well.
Spec tires I believe will help slow the decline, promotion will help bring in new blood, weight allowances (increase) can help as well.
I hope this post can get this thread back on track. Issue I see is how do you promote FV. The things I took into account in tring to decide where i want to start my racing "hobby" in no specific order are cool factor, cost, performance, society, stabilty.Quote:
Originally Posted by sracing
fst and f6 are much cooler looking cars imo due to the tire width:height ratios.
fst is cheaper in the long run and only marginally more expensive to get into. I am more concerned with reoccuring costs. If i have to save for another 6 months to afford a car it isnt a big deal. But it isnt any fun if i can only run it every other year.
FV is the slowest of all the cars at a regional level of tune.
FV society seemed really nice till this thread started. Though i assume some of the arguments are between a regional and national objective so not really relivant to me as nationals aren't something I am currently interested in. Due to where I live fields are simmilar sized it seems for fv or fst so lets call it a tie as far as, I will have a few guys to race either way. After emailing a few people seems the mentality of the fst people is more friendly and helpful. They want to have people to race with, not have people that they can just outspend to beat. So in my area at least fst society has a slight advantage. Not that my sampleing was the biggest just my take on it so far.
Stability I think FV has an edge here and its the only promotable aspect of FV atm imo. Possibly this is the best argument to not change anything. But Changing to a spec tire doesn't effect stability either way. If you have to change tires every year or 2 even if you don't want to be compedative and don't run a 10 races a season. There isn't a huge amatorized cost in buying a set of tires and replacing your year old tires.
I realize in some places in the country it works out differently as there is no fst society locally. But how do you promote something that has no upside? You can't really. So clearly a number of people don't want to make fv the cheapest formula class or the fastest or the coolest looking why would anyone join it vs f6 or fst? It's a tough sell imo.
I came to these forums to learn about FV and get the info I needed to buy a car 5 months ago. More or less in finding the forums and reading I realized FST is likely a better fit for me. SO even after the 15+ years of being passionate about driving it took me to stumble onto FV, in a few months I decided FST is likely a better fit.
I certainly won't agree that Brian has won his case, but to an extent I do agree with the premise. Incremental operating costs are not the only factor driving participation, or even the most significant issues when it comes to attracting new participants. Time to devote to racing is a much scarcer commodity for most amateur racers. This is an expensive and time consuming hobby and that will never change. Increasing minimum weight or instituting a spec tire will have zero impact on my or anyone else's ability to make the lifestyle commitment to go racing instead of devoting that time to the myriad other activities competing for it.
We can and should promote the class and take advantage of whatever opportunities there may be to make it more accessible, but SCCA club racing faces many challenges that go far beyond FV.
First you have to convince a person they want to go wheel to wheel racing in an open wheel car with the SCCA--not track days in their Porsche, BMW or motorcyle, not go karting, not driving a ministock at the local dirt track, not racing a tin top in NASA or PCA or BMWCCA, or not playing GT4 on Xbox--then you can start selling them on FV vs. all the other classes.
Brian - SFR is hardly a test bed for low cost racing lol. Sure, Thunderhill is $90 cheaper than Laguna - they're still $200 more than most other places! If we had $500 entry fees up here, you can be damn sure a lot of people would stay home.
We have two series that run at our local track - CACC weekends cost about $240 for a two day, two race weekend. ICSCC is about the same price for a 2 day, one race weekend and $350 for a three day, two race weekend. A lot of the vees stay home for the ICSCC weekends cause they say the entry fee is too expensive for the track time you get.
Thank you for confirming my point. Fortunately not all of the "ol' timers" share your selfish viewpoint.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
Brian,
I'm still waiting for YOUR solution! You've done nothing but make
durogatory statements towards others who have listed possible
solutions, but again nothing from you in the form of solutions?
So where are they????...It's easy to tear down others but trying
to provide a solution appears to be not so easy for you?
Mark
WHY DID THE FV RACER CROSS THE ROAD?
TO GET TO THE ONTARIO SIDE:rolleyes:
ITS GETTING A BIT SERIOUS IN HERE SO TRYING TO LIGHTEN IT UP.........OK!OK! I'll stop;)
Guys, we've almost made it to 500 posts on this thread. It has been very cordial with only a few minor flair ups. Overall everyone has been good on a subject matter that can be volital. It's getting intense again, so let's all relax for a moment and keep the posting civil.
Thanks Bill. I'd like to say that no matter what happens, like I've said before, I'll be racing as long as I can afford to - spec tires or not. No matter which side of the argument you support, I'll race you just as hard and just as cleanly, and I'll do whatever I can to get you back on track. Heated arguments are what Winter is for, save on the heating costs!
So instead of bashing everyone's ideas, or saying that "something is not going to work". Why doesn't everyone put forth what THEY think will work to promote Vee's for the furture? Split it up National / Regional.
Say that it will be dead in 10 years and no one is going to care, is not the helping the situation, and could be a deciding factor for someone that is racing or going to race vee's.
Does anyone here have the gut's to contact a tire manufacturer and atleast inquire about a spec tire? Radial, slick, what ever. For all we know one of them might be reading the thread now. The feedback from this alone would help in the decision making.
Maybe the furture does hold a 1600cc, wings, side pods, new beams.. Whatever. Let's get it there and breath new life into a great North American series.
Actions will be noticed by others. So far it is all talk.
BTW, does anyone know or are there numbers to how many VEE's raced in the US last year, by region or nationally.
Brink back ProVee or come up with a sponsored series and watch the grid grow. I remember Pro Vee grids numbering in the 30s and 40s. When Washington DC region offered cash prizes as well as other enticements the grids grew... just sayin...
Brian,Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
Your data is completely incorrect and false.
FACT:
The Northeast region averaged 7.61 entries per NE regional in 2011. They averaged 10.11 entries per national.
FACT:
The NorPac region averaged 6.57 entries per national. (open tire)
FACT:
However, the San Francisco region averaged 10.45 entries per regional (with their spec tire). It would therefiore appear that they are indeed gaining entries by lowering costs.
YOUR CASE IS WRONG. :-)
A summary and some ideas:
1. Entry fees do affect FV participation. Lime Rock $375 and NHIS $275 - where do you think drivers will go?
2. Spec tires - FV community split 50/50. I still believe it is almost impossible to do on a National basis - can be done Regionally - get together and work on it.
3. Promotion will get more drivers in the class - car shows, bring handouts, tow your car to karting events - heck - if you have an open trailer - just take it down to the local shopping mall or community event and see the attention it stirs up.
4. Minimum weight - again - Regionally or gentleman's agreement work right now. In the meantime make sure you are not your own worst enemy - get a lighter car or make sure you are doing your best to run as light as possible. Ask people for help.
5. Tires too expensive? set up a Craig's list type of exchange for tires. Buy and sell regionally. Someone needs a set of tires - lend them some.
6. Paddock together - help your fellow drivers - especially the new ones.
7. You are the salesman for FV - always be selling the class - the person you tell to move on at a race - might just move to the next class. Best response - "I am busy getting ready for my race, but I would be glad to answer any questions if you can come back." And say it with a big smile.
8. Get involved with your region - get together and put on a special race like the VeeFest in the NE.
PS - FV is kid friendly - just the right size - kids love to sit in FVs - just remember the fire extinguisher lock!
ChrisZ
Now the next big question, is how to pull some of this off? Manpower, at the end of the day, nothing will happen of no one does anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by FVRacer21
Yes, you will need to push all those that are sitting on the sidelines, waiting for "whatever".
Everyone must realize, that of a group like Vee(1200) goes down, so does all the business that are around to support the series. My be 5 engine builders now becomes 1, Who is going to build and support vee chassis, if there is no money in it. Yes many do it for the love, but at the end of the day, they cannot do it for free.
So, yes, it does come down to money, everywhere you turn.
No one point on these lists and these group of ideas if going to be the "saving grace" but a well thought out combination of all these ideas will be a great start and the building block for the future.
Once the little stuff is done, then a discussion on what the future holds can start.. How will the car look for 2017.
Greg Rice
"FV gets spec tires for 50th Birthday
I spend alot more time on recycling and responsible garbage disposal than my 20 yr old kids. While frustrating, knowing that my efforts are more for them than myself, I certainly don't stop, but work twice as hard to compensate. Sitting on the couch and saying "why bother?" is not an option."
Mark
"No matter what side you're on regarding the tire issue, we all want FV to continue another 45 years or longer! But the trend over the past 15+ years shows a clear pattern of decline that can't continue forever. Eventually, if the declining numbers aren't addressed then my son and other's his age won't have the same luxery we've had to race in one of the best classes around! We need everyone's involvement in an effort to turn this around and grow the class. It's stagnant at best at the moment."
These are just a few of the examples from the most vocal that are for a spec tire and insinuate that it is the magic bullet.
"
"How was the survey flawed and what additional question would you have asked?"
Mark
A proper survey will ask the opposing sides without distinction. To do otherwise makes it biased. Each side can then give their reasons. It does not influence either side with conditions. Questions for how changes and what conditions comes only after a change is voted for. If it fails, then it is presumptuous and unnecessary.
I have given my vote, nothing said here has changed my opinion.
Citing one regions efforts at reducing costs certainly doesn't make the case. As you said, it's not that simple of a situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
Lets figure out what we can do to increase numbers. Could someone put together a survey of FV drivers. Ask how many races you participated in last year. What reasons for not racing more at all. And try to gather some real reasons people aren't racing.
Bruce:
No insinuation, just the facts based on the trends for the past 20 years. Since you have alluded to the flawed survey, how would you have worded it and what are
your recommendations to turn around the direction this class is headed. You and
Harding seem to want to be negative without any solutions, and I'm still waiting
for his list as well!!!
FVracer21:
I agree with most of your post except the 50/50 split. I believe it was Steve Oseth
who mentioned that a clear majority of those who responded to the survey wanted
a spec-tire, but we're still waiting for the finalized tally.
Mark
Magic bullet?
We need to reduce costs so that people can race more. If every FV driver did just 1 more race per year, the rate of decline would change significantly. Spec tires would help that. What other cost saving tools are there?
If by changing the minimum weight, we retained 5 drivers per year, and gained 5 per year, each averaging 4 races per year, in 5 yrs there will have been a significant positive change to car count. This is without the positive effects of those racing anyway.
These concepts certainly are modest. Whether they can balance out the number of FV drivers who are retiring, dying, or just unable to pass their physical, I don't know.
I wish I had a magic bullet!
Greg - you also have to throw in there the people that would leave or not come in because of the instability of the rules.
Craigs:
If they leave because of a "spec-tire" and minor weight change then they're
looking for a reason to leave, and would eventually find a reson to do so. The
rules within FV have changed alot over the past 50 years and I believe it was
Butch Deer who illustrated those changes earlier. So rules instability doesn't
fly regarding a reason to leave or not join FV....
Mark
Mark:
Maybe people are looking for a reason to leave or maybe it's like how I feel where a stable ruleset allows me to prep to the fullest extent allowed. The precedent of changing rules to fit the masses and not those fully committed gets me looking at other classes.
Spec tires isn't as big of an issue for me - what gets me is raising the weight. My opinion is that it sets the precendent that it is ok to dumb down the ruleset to accomodate those that are not committed enough to make the sacrifices to make weight.
Right or wrong these are my opinions. The potential instability of the ruleset and the precedent raising the weight sets has caused me to look at another class for the future.
Craig
The reality is that changing classes is far more work and expense .... and that the threats and whining will evolve into "no big deaL". You're losing more people now who are too big for the class. Very few people would consider a 2.4% increase of minimum weight or spec ties that fit existing wheels to be violating the concept of rules stability.Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs
Thanks, btw, for starting the day off by calling people larger than you dumb.
Craig,
I understand your feelings, but the FV class has been evolving since it's inception
and will continue regardless of whether or not we adopt the spec-tire or weight
increase. Moving to another class won't spare you from rules changes because
every class currently makes them and will continue to do so as needed. The only
way to get away from the constant evolution of ALL classes is to run a vintage
race car, and even the vintage classes add and subtract rules as needed.
Mark
Mark,
"No insinuation, just the facts based on the trends for the past 20 years. Since you have alluded to the flawed survey, how would you have worded it and what are
your recommendations to turn around the direction this class is headed. You and
Harding seem to want to be negative without any solutions, and I'm still waiting
for his list as well!!!"
Your facts, as you put them do not relate. I see them very differently. I have seen a fluctuation in participation. During the time we have had the spec tire rule here in the SF Region, the participation level has been as great as 25 cars for a special event to as low as 3 cars. I do not see a correlation of a spec tire to maintaining, increasing or decreasing participation. The participation level before and after the spec tire rule was implemented had an initial increase of 1 or 2. There was a savings, but there was no correlation to participation and the spec tire. We have experienced the same levels of participation as we have in the past, before spec tires. Lose some, gained some.
People leave the sport for many reasons. Cost savings that a spec tire had provided, were not enough of an incentive, to keep some very loyal racers.
Had you taken the time to comprehend my previous post, you would have realized I answered you.
Just because someone is against your suggestions, does not make that person negative, that is your biased problem.
The solution of consistency has a proven record, until recently there have not been many changes and the ones that were, most have been for parts or clarification of rules. Again, you have seen our suggestion, you just do not like them.
Greg,
You have stated you do not care what other people's opinion are, so I reserve the right to treat you the same.
Example: "I must confess that I have no concern for the tire companies profit or sponsored drivers who get their feathers ruffled because they will have to buy tires now."
Please continue, your thoughts will not change my mind and I have already voted, where it matters.
Some of us are just taller with larger bone structures than you. I suppose we could have a limb or two amputated to put us at your weight. Pretending that only those who are overweight want an increase in the minimum weight is just ignorance. I am for an increase in the minimum even though at 6'4 and 220 I could make it. But it would be difficult in any available car, requiring a custom. Not very many people are going to come to FV if they have to design and build their own car to make minimum weight. I know for a fact we lost drivers years ago due to the weight issue. Will it increase current participation? Maybe, maybe not. For every driver we gain, we may lose a small driver that now finds he is not competitive when racing at equal weight. It happened when the weight rules went from min weight for car to min weight for car and driver.Quote:
dumb down the ruleset to accomodate those that are not committed enough to make the sacrifices to make weight.
I didn't intend to say that. There are people skinnier than me that are dumb too.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
By saying "dumbing down" I meant a lowering of the bar to accommodate people not committed to hitting 1025 for the car and driver. I said nothing about body weight.
But you did get me started thinking. And you know what - maybe you are onto something!
October 2006 Neurology Journal published an article showing as body mass index went up cognitive function went down. March 2006 International Journal of Obesity published a similar article - the line that jumped out to me in the conclusion was: "A lower IQ score in childhood is associated with obesity and weight gain in adulthood."
I'm sure you wouldn't want to isolate this argument to just the chunky folks though. Well neither did Dr. Mirowsky. He went after the old folks too! The heart and soul of FV! His article in The Journals of Gerontology reported "The growing fraction of the population that is either old or obese may further lower physical activity norms and requirements and substitute medical intervention for health, accelerating a trend toward cognitive impairment."
Thanks Greg for taking post about my opinions on rule set stability and helping to prove that people who can't make weight or are old are just basically dumb. I look forward to the things we can accomplish together in the future with you twisting my words and me doing a bit of internet searching.
Craig
When you boil it all down what FV needs most is more entries. When I look at my past 48 years involved with FV one of the things I enjoyed almost as much as driving was helping out young drivers. It,s great to be part of a team evn if your not the driver. So with so many cars sitting around why not find a young driver who may not be able to get into compitition because of the huge start up costs(new car-tow vehicle-trailer- spares,etc.) and form a sharing arangement where you supply these things that you already have sitting in your garage doing nothing and let some deserving younger person who can share the expences-provide labor to prep the car etc. This will get more cars back on track and can be very satisfying for both the car owner and the driver.
Some of the best times I had was when Jeff Salcedo drove my mysterian. He was a young kid with a recognizeable talent struggling with an old car on a limited budget in the MCSSC. The years he drove my car led to a Pro Vee championship,an June Sprints win,a 2nd at the runoffs. Being part of that team was lots of fun and led to life long friendships for all involved. It let us do things in racing none of us could have done on our own.
If you love racing but can,t afford to race right now think of sharing your car. You will be suprised how much you will get out of being an owner. This could get more cars out of storaqge and more competition on the track.
Bruce,
Your basing your assumptions on a narrow area (SFR), and not the entire class
as a whole. You can't support your facts when you look at the entire class and
not just one region. You still have failed to provide any solutions and I suspect
neither you nor Brian will provide any, but you will continue to shoot down any
idea's that may change this sacred class we call FV.
Mark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amon
It is not required to have or state solutions to be opposed to the ideas of others.
I guess it is just the opinion of some that doing something & trying is better then doing nothing at all or at least that is how I understand it. I would imagine that this is where the questions come from.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Sport Engineering
I guess I would have to agree with you Michael that it is not required to have or state a solution to be opposed to any new ideas...I guess those who don't never made the debate team in school. Seems like an easy way out of actually having to do something for those who choose it but again that is just my opinion.
Mike,
Maybe so, but if you're constantly having you're idea's shot down and dismissed
out of hand, then you start to ask those who oppose to provide solutions. It's easy
to dismiss idea's, it's much harder to provide solutions and that's what I'm trying
to convey.
Mark
92' Protoform P-2/05'
SFR is the PERFECT test case, PERIOD. They have a very good spec tire program and own their own track. The other two tracks in the area are in the top 8 of all tracks in the US. They also have a major FV engine builder and service shop to support the FV racers. This is as go as it gets. YET their FV entries have dropped.Quote:
Originally Posted by Amon
You demonstrate some logic that proves these statements do not prove my position. What facts are we not supporting?
I can not suggest anything that will increase participation, because there is NOTHING. If all the people in SCCA have not solved the problem in 20-30 years, then I say there is no solution.
Brian
Brian, where did those SFR FV racers go? Where was the grass greener? Did they move onto another class? Did they get a taste of the FV racing with VARA and travel a bit south?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
FV participation in VARA is growing.
Just because you are upset about FV slowly dying, does not mean there is a thing you can do about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam Bam
Nothing you have suggested has been PROVEN to increase class participation in SCCA. That is where you fail in this discussion.
Brian
Brian,
That's it everyone, Brian has spoken and deemed there's NO hope for our
class. Long live the King!
Mark
Mark might be better we don't get ideas from some.
I guess if I was one of the ones who pushed for thousand dollar intakes I wouldn't be offering any new suggestions either.