Printable View
Reid, as an example I made 2 very serious trys at making F600 a separate class from F500 but the CRB told me NO WAY! Imo if they had approved either of my proposals F500 would still be healthy and we would have a lot more cars racing and zero animosity between racers!Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Now the class may be in jeopardy :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Jnovak
Imo the class will not survive without changes!Quote:
Originally Posted by GrahamLoughead35
Has anyone taken the time to check out the new FMzR at
https://www.formulamazda.com/
No other class in SCCA has a Driver Advancement Program like what they are prepared to offer.
Every class evolves with upgrades or new chassis. There hasn't been a new FM built for decades. This is the new generation FM
is this to replace the older Star Mazda in SCCA that have been around for a long time now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike42
it doesn't appear to be the Tatuus PM-18 that shares bits with the USF-17, and that website doesn't really give any info about who makes it or where it races... but I am guessing this is from Moses Smith?
John, FRP runs a great series and there are equivalents on the West Coast in PF2k. What the FX class allows are USF2k cars with the MZR engine a place to run in SCCA (otherwise those cars were FA and hopelessly outclassed). What would have made more sense, and was being heavily requested, was to allow the MZR cars to run in FC with appropriate restrictions. Bob Wright has told me he knows exactly how to even the playing field, so it definitely could be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by John LaRue
To bring up the 2 liter formula car fields, I think the SCCA will need to combine a few classes eventually. For instance, combine FC, USF2k, and FE2 into a single class running either Zetecs or MZR engines. Get rid of the old FE class. These cars are close on performance now, it wouldn't take much to equalize the three and come up with a single class. That would also give people with Zetecs (like me) an option for a different engine and gearbox. I would also think a spec tire should be used in this combined class, no more open tires and associated costs.
If the BoD really wanted a home for F4 cars, they could figure out how to include those in the FC/USF2k/FE2 class, probably thru restrictor and tire sizes. But to create a new class as this FX group makes no sense in the long run and just adds more confusion to the already fragmented small-bore formula classes.
Yes Matt, this new car will replace the original FM and is being built by Moses Smith.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Clark
The official launch for the car will be in December so stay tuned for more details.
This thread got hijacked a bit, but some clarification after I spoke to my Board Rep. FM will no longer be a stand-alone class. It will be in the new FX class. FE is done as a Majors class, which was planned. FB as we all know is gone as a stand alone class as well. The board minutes that were the start of this thread were a bit misleading as it still had FM as a class and did not mention FX until later. My point being, we have eliminated three formula car classes and brought in one new one. The formula car class lineup will be as follows (this is my understanding): FA, FE2, FC, FX, FF, F5 and FV. Seven classes, down from nine
That new car and concept seems to have real potential!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike42
All the best to you, to Moses, and to all FM racers. Hope it spits flames like the others. :-)
So the new FM will be an MZR with a Sadev sequential. Sounds very similar to FE2. With the classes that SStadel pointed out, would the new FM run in the FE2 class ??
No it will not run with FE2Quote:
Originally Posted by CGOffroad
This is a much better car and has a contingency program that is second to none. Anyone that wants to win some serious money to move up will want to be in the new FM
Ok. Out of the 7 classes that were listed, I didn't see an FM class. So, was wondering what class a new FM will run in.
And the exact same number of OW race groups. And the exact same problems of mixed class racing. The on-track experience will be exactly the same for the competitor. The only thing this accomplishes is saving the cost of a few trophies, and the time spent in impound watching the podium ceremonies.Quote:
Originally Posted by SStadel
Why does the "rearranging the chairs on the Titanic" analogy come to mind? Is this supposed to be reform?
Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Let's pretend there was a whopping 9 OW cars at an event, evenly spread amongst the 9 classes. Now there's the same number of race groups but 7 classes for those same 9 cars. I'd wager at least 3 people had a better/different race experience as they actually had somebody in class to race against.
Fewer classes with same number of entrants usually equates to better racing for more people, even if the number of race groups must stay the same.
So...I can't help myself...Who's actually designing and building the car, who's funding the 'driver advancement', and where is it going to race? Oh, yea...what's it going to cost?
Ok, now they need to start combining the following classes:
FP
HP
GTL
B-SPEC
SM
GT1
GT2
GTX
AS
T1
EP
STL
T3
T2
STU
T4
GT3
There are way too many sedan classes!!!
There may be some validity to that theory, until you consider that this is supposed to facilitate rogue "spec cars" and disenfranchised current cars. Am I going to enjoy my racing more by putting a 50 hp restricter on my FA car so I can battle with a F? car for a class win.All these guys race with each other anyway ..... regardless of what class they are in. That is part of the mindset of the drivers who race very fast cars in SCCA. They want to fast and beat the other guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland
I assume that was tongue-in-cheek.
For a rough cut at a reality check, consider entries (not turned a wheel) at this year's Runoffs (and assuming all FEs become FE2s):
SM - 60
SRF3 - 55
STL - 36
EP - 30
FE + FE2 - 29
HP - 29
B-Spec - 26
FV - 26
GT2 - 26
STU - 25
T4 - 25
GTL - 20
T1 - 20
T3 - 20
T2 - 19
FP - 18
AS - 17
GT3 - 17
P1 - 16
F5 - 15
FF - 14
P2 - 14
GT1 - 13
FC - 10
FA + FB - 9
FM - 8
Be careful what you ask for. You might get it. ;)
Only partly...Quote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
But if they are really serious about there being too many classes....why are all their missiles aimed at just OW classes?
True, if that's the real goal. I'm thinking the goal is class consolidation/elimination with this being the idea to replace entries of those who felt disenfranchised.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
I don't know if you would. I will tell you that if it meant the difference between putting around by myself or having somebody to race against, I'lll take the restrictor and have somebody to battle.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
I understand that nobody wants to volunteer to make their cars slower.
If it was all about speed and not the competition nobody would be racing FV, FF, SM or SRF. I can race a faster car at the RunOffs for less money than I can win in any of those four classes if I'm not concerned about having somebody in class to battle. As to battling people in other classes, the faster car guy is a wanker and needs to find another hobby and not meddle in other class battles.
Don't confuse missiles aimed with missiles fired. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland
For the sake of discussion, let's assume that non-sedan classes do have missiles aimed at them. The reason for that would be obvious. If you look at the 10 lowest-entry classes from that list I posted, and disaggregate FA and FB, eight of the 10 are open-wheel or sports racer classes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland
I do not like it, but that is the reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
But that is typical SCCA thinking ..... as if the Runoffs are the only barometer to judge the health of the class. That is equally a barometer of how SCCA is not providing value to some classes, which are now working to organize their own racing at regional levels, or with other organizations and promoters (SVRA, VRC, FRP, etc). Rather than providing better value, "we will make sure we provide worse value and hope they go away." It is not even a conspiracy but an obvious blatant agenda!
Grag
John quoted the Runoffs statistics because their are easier to acquire and are a reasonable proxy for the state of Club Racing. For this discussion, I have added the Total Participation in the 2019 Majors. Discarding GTX as an artificial class, the bottom 4 and 7 of the bottom 13 are open wheel classes. FF and FV are the only two open wheel class in the top half of participation.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Many classes (both open wheel and closed wheel) are encountering declining particpation and seeking alternatives within and outside of SCCA. Each is addressing their problems in different ways.
I don't like it either and I am not advocating any particular course of action. I'm just supporting John's statement of reality.
Terry
2019 Majors Participation
SRF3 791 SM 747 STL 311 GT2 239 EP 203 FV 201 FF 177 FP 170 T2 169 HP 165 STU 164 T4 160 T3 152 T1 150 GT1 141 B-Spec 127 FA 126 FC 118 P1 116 AS 115 FE2 111 P2 108 GT3 105 GTL 103 F5 100 FM 89 FE 56 FB 23 GTX 12
I will agree that Runoffs stats are easier to acquire, but I will not agree that they are a reasonable proxy. Just the opposite. Look at how FF, GT1, and GTL move for example Participation values are more applicable, but only looking at Majors participation does not tell all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Hanushek
FM is in trouble and needs to find a place to race. FE is being absorbed into FE2.
But as I mentioned in another earlier post, FA, FB, F5 and F6, all suffer big time from a lack of common agenda within their community, which has in some cases, been increased by SCCA's misguided attempts to herd them. In 3 of those classes, one particular member has been instrumental in fueling the discord. What SCCA did to FB, based on the skewed participation numbers was shameful, which when combined with the whole engine restrictor fiasco, has been devastating to that class.
Because SCCA has spent hundreds of thousands, or millions, of our money, to bring F4 and F3 to the US, SCCA has fueled the decline of its existing OW classes. Just think if that money had been invested into the current SCCA OW classes. FX is a just platform to help get F4 into club racing. USF2000 cars should be in FC. Other spec OW cars can run in the FA/FB class. There is no need for FX, just as there is no need to reclass existing cars that were and will be running in the same race group anyway. It is just a shell game that will not change the on-track experience of the competitors.
Objection - assumes facts not in evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
I would be delighted to know the facts of how much SCCA has spent on F4 and F3. Please share.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Walsh
Surely, you are not suggesting that F4 and F3 are not in direct competition with FF, FC, FE, FB, and FA, and that SCCA leadership has chosen to invest in the new classes, rather than the existing classes. Five years later, and they are consolidating and eliminating those existing classes. The BOD has clearly taken this course with no challenge from membership. I do not understand why nobody cares.
Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
We could, and likely shall, spend all winter unpacking the various causes and individual per class weights for the relative decline of FF, FC, FB, and FA. (I am not so sure that FE is in decline. It got off to a slow start, but seems to be picking up steam with the introduction of FE2.)
However, it is laughable to suggest that F3/F4 had anything to do with that decline. For one thing, that decline had taken hold long before the advent of these classes.
^^^This, +1^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
If you two think that is laughable, then you are totally out of touch with junior open wheel racing and trying to do business in the real world. How many prospective OW racers have you talked to in the last year? Rather than laughing, perhaps you should try talking to any prep shop or junior OW shop who is trying to recruit drivers to race in FF, FC, FE, or FA. Introducing F4 has had a very adverse effect on the SCCA OW classes. Perhaps, you would listen to someone who earns their living in the business and brought 8 different drivers as 16 entries to 8 different SCCA club racing events in 2019.
Yes there had been a decline, but all that money and energy, could have totally turned around our exiting OW classes.
I am sure I am not the only one that noticed you ignored the financial numbers involved. If the total number is a million, or even half that ..... what could that investment (plus from their corporate partners) have done to turn around the decline of those 4 classes?
Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Open wheel entries started their fall over a decade ago. To suggest that, back in 2008, someone thinking of going open wheel held off because F3 would be available in 10 years' time is risible.
I suspect that the leading reasons for the drop in SCCA open wheel new participants and entries overall are:
1. Folks decided that classes like SM or SRF(3) offered more competition, greater comfort level and perceived safety (covered wheels), less effort, and less expense.
2. FRP and similar 'semi-pro' series siphoned off FF/FC/FA entries. You can track the decline of those classes, especially in the eastern half of SCCA, with the advent of FRP races. This is not a slam on FRP. Bob Wright and his team offer an excellent product and deserve their success. I take nothing away from them.
3. People ran the numbers and realized that they could not afford the time and money compared to the other commitments in their life.
F3/F4 ranks way down the list.
As for the financials, it is equally risible to suppose that the money SCCA lost on Pro would have otherwise been spent promoting FF/FC/etc. It would very likely not have been spent at all. Any promotional spending would have been spread over Road Racing (or Majors racing) as a whole. Imagine the uproar if SCCA spent a million promoting some faltering formula classes.
I appreciate the difficulties of running a prep business, but you are barking the wrong tree here.
I stated that the Runoff stats were a reasonable (not perfect) proxy for the Majors participation numbers and pointed out that they show the same trend with several open wheel classes at the bottom of the participation ladder. Using the Majors participation is probably the best measure since those are the numbers which have been used to recognize National classes and determine Runoff eligibility. I also believe that looking past the Majors participation to regional participation will paint an even more dismal picture for open wheel racing.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
I agree with the problems which you cite for the endangered classes. These problems are almost all internally inflicted ... and predate the introduction of F3 / F4 in this country. SCCA (on the Club Racing side) is a sanctioning body; it does not 'invest' in classes. I understand the impact of the rules making process and that seems to be the focus of many of your concerns.Quote:
FM is in trouble and needs to find a place to race. FE is being absorbed into FE2.
But as I mentioned in another earlier post, FA, FB, F5 and F6, all suffer big time from a lack of common agenda within their community, which has in some cases, been increased by SCCA's misguided attempts to herd them. In 3 of those classes, one particular member has been instrumental in fueling the discord. What SCCA did to FB, based on the skewed participation numbers was shameful, which when combined with the whole engine restrictor fiasco, has been devastating to that class.
Because SCCA has spent hundreds of thousands, or millions, of our money, to bring F4 and F3 to the US, SCCA has fueled the decline of its existing OW classes. Just think if that money had been invested into the current SCCA OW classes. FX is a just platform to help get F4 into club racing. USF2000 cars should be in FC. Other spec OW cars can run in the FA/FB class. There is no need for FX, just as there is no need to reclass existing cars that were and will be running in the same race group anyway. It is just a shell game that will not change the on-track experience of the competitors.
But you are good with SCCA spending a million dollars promoting new formula classes ...... even before noting that they are in direct competition with existing formula classes.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
It is interesting that SCCA middle-management types are so content with the BOD supporting the F4-F3 endeavor. It is certainly a typical middle management play to support upper management while ignoring input from the people on the floor, who are living the issues. Thanks for your help!
It is inescapable that a very large part of the decline of Road Racing entries in general, and likely open wheel in particular, is due to external factors beyond SCCA's control. The great recession swept away a great deal of discretionary spending, for example.
In the early part of this decade, the Club tried to address the declining entry problem. The very first Majors plan (presented at the 2011 Runoffs) shared a fair bit of DNA with the FRP concept. The plan was to reduce the number of Nationals (now called Majors), and to concentrate classes into events (i.e. stage events for a limited number of classes, offering more track time and competition).
The plan might well have worked on the coasts, but the sparse demographics in the middle of the country made the concept uneconomic far large stretches of the Club. What we ended up with was basically a watered-down Majors concept, with Nationals renamed Majors, with every class welcome, and even Regional run groups at some events. Super Tour is kinda-sorta like the original concept, but without the concentration of classes that would have made events more attractive for entrants.
FRP came out with a similar concept - dedicated events - and scooped the table in the East.
Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Let me be very clear: SCCA should not be subsidizing Pro. I have made this clear forever, and to suggest otherwise is mischievous.
And neither am I 'middle management'. I am not an employee. I am a member just like everybody else, and free to agree or disagree with the Club's direction.
What I am saying is that the Pro losses did not come at the cost of any hypothetical open wheel promotion. They came out of general funds, and those funds were never going to be dedicated to open wheel. There was never any 'Save Open Wheel' fund to get wasted on Pro.
What we need is a reality-based discussion, and less magical thinking.
There's a lot of information in the last dozen or so posts, also some speculation and opinion. My 2 cents:
FRP started in 2006 with only F2000. Those participation numbers peaked in 2009, then suffered some as USF2000 came onto the scene. The real decline started in about 2014 (the start of F4 coincidently) and accelerated to an almost bankrupt class in 2019. Club numbers paralleled FRP's to a great extent. F1600 (anecdotally as I don't have the stats before 2011) was in deep trouble prior to the introduction of the FIT in 2009 and the success of the 40th reunion which I believe kick started new interest in the class. It has since seen a 'reasonable' resurgence, but nothing like its numbers in the 1980's. There is no question F3/F4 wounded FRP by sucking away new drivers, new and existing teams, just as RTI did. Have these hurt Club OWR? Its not as clear cut or prove-able. FRP certainly has affected Club, I will admit.
There are other reasons as well. I mentioned in an earlier post the lack of availability of production built cars. I believe there is a direct connection between the health of a class and the ability to buy a new car (order it today). It barely exists in F2000 or Atlantic. F1600 has multiple manufacturers offering cars (Mygale, Spectrum, and Piper are the top three). You can order a FE2, F3, F4, USF17, PM18 with a single phone call. They have dealers, parts support and a factory behind them. Given the number of these cars purchased, I don't 'buy' the argument that they cost too much (the LMP3 car costs over $200K and look how many of them have been purchased in the last few years).
Now we get to what I refer to as "life gets in the way of racing". A number of the OW classes require a lot of skill, time and dedication to succeed. Some of that is being lost as drivers move on to whatever new life pursuit awaits. Others go buy a spec car (FE, SRF...) with limited adjustability and less need to spend the time on setup. Those classes grow, the racing gets better so more people gravitate to them and the losing classes get mixed into alphabet soup which makes the experience worse, so more move to SRF, etc.
How do you fix the issue? One way is to Make the experience worth it. Focus on the classes that meet a specific set of criteria, support them with favorable rules and marginalize the rest (let them go vintage, or to other organizations such as Southern Series or GLC. They will find a home). Stop the dilution. FF has been around for 50 years, FC for 30+. There's a reason for it, but lets make sure its still valid. Don't ignore the F4 concept as it is a modern world car, much like FF was and is. FX is a good way to get F4 in the mix with some other orphans, but it will have to be the dominant car to survive and it currently is not (The VD MZR will wax it). To be dominant, it needs to be fun to drive and the current iteration is a slug with too much tire, too little HP, and very little adjustment (my personal observation only). Give it some decent wings and about 210 HP and I think you have a winner! FE2 seems to have solved most of the FE shortcomings and is really the new FC with factory support.
No matter how you cut it, you have to break some eggs to make the new omelet.
:thumbsup::thumbsup: Well put Bob. Best explanation I have heard of the dilemma of decreasing participation in a l9ong long time.
John thanks for your many rational posts. Based on your comments I am sure that you have some interesting ideas.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
I have been a member for over 50 years and have been heavily involved is multiple OW classes. I , and others I have spoken to , would be very interested in learning more.
Perhaps we can start a discussion on ideas to save OW racing in the SCCA. I, personally, would appreciate hearing your ideas.
What fun is that when you can speculate about millions of misappropriated funds? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
How many open wheel classes should the SCCA have?
Here is my start of a list
1. FV
FF
FA OR similar even though I am a big fan! Does the club need FA
I am of the opinion that the slowest class should continue to be FV and that the fastest should be some sort of a winged beast of a car. But perhaps not the current FA rules.
How many classes can the club support? Please make your comments!
I think 4 classes.
FV
FF
FX
FA
By explanation,FA should be a real race car- a serious beast.FX should be a winged car of medium HP and performance in the FC speed range. I point to the F4 as it is a modern tub car being built by many manufacturers around the world with parts and technical support, at a relatively decent price point. It could just as easily be the FE2. FF and FV should stay as they are.
Did anybody answer this question?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Wright
Hey Bob,Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Wright
Ok, I’ll play.,,,, take the Swift 016 back to 1420 #, remove the restrictor, allow the 2.5 Mazda built to the same rules as the 2.3, minus the restrictor...,if thats not enough, open it to any 2.5 , 4 cylinder.. beast enough ?
That would be in the ballpark. I think the 016 unfettered meets the criteria of ‘real race car’.
I also think 4 OW classes is right. Maybe 5. You absolutley have to fit FE2 in there too.
How about an FA as the top class with a modern 3 to 3.5 L V6. Bullet proof 275-300 hp at 1400 to 1450 lbs min weight. Sponsorship of the engine development program from ????
I understand putting FF in there but the cost to purchase and race a modern FF car with spares is insane imo. There must be a better faster and lower priced solution! That is actually easy to do imo, but I get it!
There most certainly is, however given the sheer volume of FF's out there and their current participation level I don't see any "replacement" being embraced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jnovak
There are 2 healthy SCCA majors classes period. There are another 8-10 that have decent enough numbers that you can pretty much guarantee you can at least fill a podium +1. Yep, a class average of 4+ puts you in the top half.
No reason to have 14 of those Majors classes, except for the fact that it's a club and people with those cars want the class more than they want to race in larger fields.
I get and totally understand your comments about FF Daryl but the $$$$ required to compete for the win is crazy!
Double post
Hasn't Reid proven your statement wrong in the past?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jnovak
I can say the crash damage in an FF is better as you don't have to add the costs of the wings. Change to a street tire & your number one consumable cost will drop huge making it much more affordable saving over a grand a weekend.
Budgets to race F1600 are less then F2000, which is less then F4 which is less then USF...
It would be great if we could get to 4 OW classes. Simpler would be much better. However, one challenge with getting to 4 is to please both the people who want “spec” classes vs those that want “Formula” classes. Maybe a dual path in OW is needed:
Formula classes: FV, FF, FC, FA <= the traditional - maybe get to 3 here?
Spec classes: not sure how many are needed - 2 that would be based on speed? F4 seems like a good basis for the slower. Like Bob Wright said - factory support, plenty of cars already built, etc. I agree that would have been a good path for FE2 but it might be difficult to change direction now.
Spec seems to be the most popular choice of most today. That is was got me back into road racing. Knowing the car is the same for everyone and limited development costs year to year. However, the engineer in me would love to play in the Formula classes and develop also. There just isn’t a lot of people to run with there today.
This is a healthy discussion that is needed to get OW racing more health at the club level again.
Tony Grau
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk