Quote:
Originally Posted by Jnovak
Money needed to win, and money needed to obtain and campaign a no-excuse effort can be worlds apart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bamford
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jnovak
Money needed to win, and money needed to obtain and campaign a no-excuse effort can be worlds apart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bamford
You can race in FF on the lower cost side of things but if you want to win you need a new car and a prep shop to win at the big races.
Your right in that Reid was very competitive in an older car thru MUCH TALENT and HARD WORK! But for him to compete at the front today would require a newer car imo. Hopefully Reid can chime in with his opinion.
What would be great is if everyone would quit complaining about what is wrong in OW racing on the internet and get their cars out of their garages and go race. SCCA, FRP and others will continue to work to make things better, but there is no magic bullet or answer that is going to make everyone rush to the track; you have to want to race. We have all become very good at making excuses for not going to the track, myself included.
A very interesting discussion was held concerning rotating the Runoffs venues. The point was made that when the venue was moved to the west coast many of the east coast participants did not make the trip. When the Runoffs returned east some of those who had participated for years did not resume participation; the move "broke" the tradition. I do not intend to derail this discussion with one about Runoffs, but it seems that as people (again including myself) lay out for a race or two it is easier to justify not coming back.
As noted elsewhere, B-Spec has built a community around their racing and it has flourished. The participants are all very active in communicating as to what events they will be racing and make it a point to paddock together. The regularly post and communicate about their car builds and share information about set ups and performance that the OW community would be appalled over. If we are to resurrect junior OW racing it is going to have to happen from the grassroots. SCCA, FRP nor any other promoter will be able to do this on their own. I strongly suggest that once the schedules are finalized a discussion be initiated so that we can focus on a few events where everyone will make an attempt to attend. Success breeds success.
John
Another important place to race is regionals! For instance there are several very well attended regional race series for OW classes such as FST, FC, F600 ETC! And this is just on my end of the country!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Grau
What happens when one prevents the other? What is wrong with SCCA and racing in general, is exactly what is keeping people away. That's the cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by John LaRue
"It costs to much!"
"Shut up and race!"
"Uh....we can't. Because it cos....."
"Where is everyone??"
Thank you both. I very much appreciate the praise, especially considering the source. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jnovak
For me, there is ZERO chance I would have been able to run at the front, or even get in the game, if the current state as we see it was around in 2007. I bought a car out of college for $14k. After a few years and a ton of homework I made it work, and was able to drive it. Entry fees were about $300 Runoffs entry was $500. Each time I said "uh..you can't keep raising the price" people said that a hundred bucks was nothing in the grand scheme of things. Well, for one, it is. And two, say that ten or fifteen times and see how many people get priced out.
The entry costs are prohibitive for 99% of the population. I could afford $1,500 a year for engine expenses, I could not have afforded $30k+ for a Honda car that costs maybe $300 a year in engine expenses. That is the barrier. People then said "Oh, just sit out a year, save the money, and convert to a Honda." Uh, really? That's the solution? Stop being an income for SCCA, so you can later come back to SCCA? And, to make up the difference I would have had to sit out about three years. Bad sales pitch if you ask me.
Just as Jay and many others have said, it doesn't matter how cheap the car is to run - if it costs $80K people can't afford to enter. It could be free to run, but how many people can drop eighty large in one hit? Not many. The more expensive it is, the fewer people there are who can afford it. Period.
Just compare what a competitive used car cost in 2007. You could get a 98 VD for around $20k, or $14k in my case. Now, you can't touch a competitive car for under $30k.
Man, the truth may hurt but at least it's true.
I don't know if or how this can be fixed, but I sure hope so. One beneficiary could well be you, or your friend that can't afford to race anymore, or me who's wanted to my whole life.
Well stated as always, Fella. :thumbsup:
Reid, I don't disagree that costs are up significantly from when you jumped in years ago, but it is the same across the board in everything related to motorsports. As Bob Wright has pointed out above, there are lots of people spending lots of money in motorsports and other grids are doing well despite the costs. LMP3 and even the upper levels of karting are doing well. (I just returned from SKUSA Supernats where most everyone I spoke to was spending north of $15k for that one event.) I think Bob has it correct in that it is the experience that makes the difference; It speaks to the early success of FRP.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
To build on your point though I believe that the immediate answer is right in front of us; it is the low hanging fruit. We don't need to sell FF/F1600 and FC/F2K to new people, we simply need to get those who have these cars sitting in their garages to roll them out and go racing. The number of additional entries necessary to turn these marginal grids into strong grids is not that many. We had 10 entries at VIR Runoffs in FC and 14 in FF. An additional 5-10 cars would have made those showcase races.
We all know that new cars are not necessary to compete in either of these classes. The technology has been steady for many years; the positive to this is that these cars are on the extreme end of the maturation curve as it concerns development. Regardless of how much effort and money one throws at these the gains will be extremely small. Any recent generation car that is well driven, assembled and set up has potential to be on the podium. Rob laid down a blistering pole lap at VIR in a VanDIemen besting Minor in a well developed Citation which many think is the must have car today. The Mygales are nothing special, they are fast because the kids that drive them are phenomenal and the set ups are well developed. I drove one of K-Hill's excellent Mygale1600 cars at Sebring in January; its all about the laps.
New cars and engines bring new development cycles which require testing and that doesn't come cheap. That is a major selling point for what we have in these classes: solid cars at bargain prices, reliable engines, steady rule sets, well developed and widely known set-ups and an absence of cutting edge development.
With few exceptions racing is not going to be cheap, but looking at the big picture these two classes in particular are bargains for what you get to experience.
John
I think there is a mixing the target markets here. SCCA's target is not the $15k/weekend karter or the guy going out and buying an LMP3 car. It's the guy with the DB6 who builds his own engines and preps his car. Those are the people that are gone. That is the majority of SCCA. All that is left is the arrive and drive guys, and people with prod cars. Multiple $100 increases and major rules changes pushed those people out. I think this is one reason FV is still as successful as it is - decades of stable rules.Quote:
Reid, I don't disagree that costs are up significantly from when you jumped in years ago, but it is the same across the board in everything related to motorsports. As Bob Wright has pointed out above, there are lots of people spending lots of money in motorsports and other grids are doing well despite the costs. LMP3 and even the upper levels of karting are doing well. (I just returned from SKUSA Supernats where most everyone I spoke to was spending north of $15k for that one event.) I think Bob has it correct in that it is the experience that makes the difference; It speaks to the early success of FRP.
What I always thought was misguided about SCCA's marketing is who they target. Think of the market they are going for - someone who has enough resources to go racing, but not enough money to afford the better values of FRP or other pro series. That is a very, very small group of people who have resources to run SCCA but nothing else. Series that are showing success are either much lower price points (ChumpCar, FF Toyo tire Arizona deal, local vintage groups) or much better values (FRP). SCCA's product is the mix of the worst parts - higher price and lesser value.
While it may sound simple, in application it is not. Those people have parked cars for various reasons, and lack of desire or passion likely isn't one of them. Overcoming those reasons (lack of time, affordability, or competitiveness) is a really hard sell. I know five good friends of mine that used to run a ton of events a year. Now, zero. It will be very, very hard to get them back. Racing is like any addictive drug. In the beginning, life is good. Then you realize how much it's affecting your work, family, and finances so you quit. Then you realize there is more to life and going back to the racing crack pipe is a tough sell. For me, running the 50th was like main-lining a case of cocaine laced Marboros. I loved seeing all my track friends and new faces, as well as getting in a car again. Even that was not enough for me to overcome why I don't race anymore.Quote:
To build on your point though I believe that the immediate answer is right in front of us; it is the low hanging fruit. We don't need to sell FF/F1600 and FC/F2K to new people, we simply need to get those who have these cars sitting in their garages to roll them out and go racing. The number of additional entries necessary to turn these marginal grids into strong grids is not that many. We had 10 entries at VIR Runoffs in FC and 14 in FF. An additional 5-10 cars would have made those showcase races.
I have a friend who is in sales. He usually tells me a price he puts on something and I tell him he is nuts. His reply is the same. "In the world of nearly a 8 billion, I just need to find one person." While simple, in application it's still tough to find that one person willing to pay $50k for that 125k mile, 2002 Ford Taurus.
Tangent - I had a BoD member tell me something similar. They claimed they don't need one person who wants to run ten events, they just need ten people to run one event a year. That showed me SCCA, or at least that BoD member has no concept of what it costs the do-it-yourselfer. To run one race a year is insanely expensive. Recerts on belts, helmets, HANS, trailer reg, tow vehicle reg, insurance, medical, licenses, physicals etc.
Totally agree the tech has been stable for a while. Chassis to chassis, I don't think an 01+ VD gives up much to a Mygale. I've driven both. But, that's not really the comparison. It's a DB1 (or a 92 VD), to a Mygale, and that is a noticeable difference. It's the DB-1s that need to come out and many have gone to vintage because they are not felt to be competitive. A competitive car is still double what it cost in 2007 though. For many, that's the issue. No matter how cheap it is to run, $30k makes that a nonstarter. I think FC is a good sign of the issue. You can scoop a real nice VD Zetec for under $25k. That is a great deal. So the question is, why is FC not flourishing? My guess is the cost to run the car in SCCA is the barrier.Quote:
We all know that new cars are not necessary to compete in either of these classes. The technology has been steady for many years; the positive to this is that these cars are on the extreme end of the maturation curve as it concerns development. Regardless of how much effort and money one throws at these the gains will be extremely small. Any recent generation car that is well driven, assembled and set up has potential to be on the podium. Rob laid down a blistering pole lap at VIR in a VanDIemen besting Minor in a well developed Citation which many think is the must have car today. The Mygales are nothing special, they are fast because the kids that drive them are phenomenal and the set ups are well developed. I drove one of K-Hill's excellent Mygale1600 cars at Sebring in January; its all about the laps.
A bargain to one person, may still be cost prohibitive to another. If someone were selling an Ferrari FXX for $125k, that would be the best bargain on the planet. Doesn't mean they could afford it. This ties back to my target market issue. The SCCA product is marketed to the person who wants to, but can't afford the better bargain. They are selling over priced, used Ford Tauruses to people who can't afford the new Toyota Avalons.Quote:
With few exceptions racing is not going to be cheap, but looking at the big picture these two classes in particular are bargains for what you get to experience. John
Sorry for the lengthy rant, and thank you for your thoughts. It's pretty clear you're putting in significant effort to solve these issues and I certainly hope you succeed. You're definitely pushing a boulder uphill.
I think the best bet, as John seemed to focus on, was bringing out existing cars - not finding new entrants. Here is why as I see it:
I have a group of friends that are die hard car guys. One has racing and car inspired tattoos. All of these friends are friends through cars. We go to car movies. We talk about cars. We meet up at car cruises. They all have good jobs - Volvo master tech, Crown Lift Truck senior tech, and even a computer science nerd. The all wrench on their cars and spend the weened in the shop with a kerosene jet heater. Three autocross. Usually, when I come to watch an autox event, the conversation usually turns to racing when someone says I used to wheel to wheel. The first comment is literally always "Oh man! I'd love to do that!!" Then someone asks "yeah, but what does an entry fee cost?" When I say $500 that entirely kills the conversation on the spot. Instant death. That doesn't even take into account the trailer, tow vehicle, safety gear, time off work, etc.
These are friends who have very good middle class jobs. Most are duel income, no kids. And yet, the affordability of SCCA is still seen as well out of reach. That's an issue.
Missing so far in this discussion is a component of the growth of FF that created the opportunity for people to get into the class at a very low price point. Cars purchased new filtered down to 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc., owners with a purchase price reduction at each step. In that sense, the race car market is exactly like the street car market. Each sale enabled the previous owner to upgrade at less total cost than if they'd started at the cost of that next purchase.
Cars are sitting in garages not just because the owner lost interest or considers the lack of value. Thanks to the insanity of vintage car market pricing, a belief that race cars are investments has infected the entire sport. Now, instead of selling a car for purchase - n, owners seem to think they should be able to sell for purchase + n. That has effectively eliminated one of the driver replenishment markets and is the principle reason there are so few new cars being built/sold.
Same issue in Canada. Auto-x is $30cdn so $20usdQuote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Race weekend is 450cdn, or 350 usd or our evening races are $250cdn or 200ish usd. Still way too much for most people.
Hpde days are $400ish still out of reach for a lot of people.
$500usd is crazy even to me and I do about 8 events a year here.
Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk
I agree. But, the people buying the pre-90 VDs, DB-1s, and Reynards, are not going to SCCA. These cheap cars could be a substantial factor for the success of the local race orgs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Yes the issue is that is "seen" as well out of reach. Their perception is what the SCCA is fighting. They are spending $500/mo on a daily driver car payment, or their cell phone plan and latte habit. Those things are worth it.
As to 1 driver x 10 events = 1 membership, 10 drivers x 1 event = 10 memberships. SCCA wins. ;) That's also 9 additional cars bought/sold and maintained.
Lest we forget the origins that creates nearly every racer...
As long as there continues to be no new fans coming to the track, there'll be nobody to replace current racers. Haven't we seen this coming?
The idea of Club members only being at most races is exclusionary and serves nobody. People want to feel welcome, not discounted as in so many other things these days.
Sometimes it seems the entire sport — at least in Club racing — hasn't given this any thought at all. Charge a nominal fee to cover insurance, tie in the sport with kids again, and watch big eyes turn into a bigger priority of what they'll spend money on.
A new street car? The SCCA guys I spent my childhood with couldn't have cared less about that. Somewhere, somehow, passion has largely left the circuit and I am convinced that said passion starts as a kid, not a wealthy guy who isn't likely to stay around like so very many I know, and have known for coming onto fifty years.
But specific to Formula and Prototype classes, I agree wholeheartedly in letting older Atlantic cars run in FB. Two issues solved with that.
Yup speaking as a younger person (relatively) and having dealt with younger people at the track. They just want to drive, joining a club is not something they want to do, all the older guys keep pushing for club memberships that we couldn't care less about.
Can of worms but the entire license process also feels like an old boy's club and costs a fortune. That is part of the success of chump and others. Prove you aren't an idiot and let you on track.
Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk
No, there is a fundamental misunderstanding of my generation. None of us have $500 car payments. Not. Even. Close. Only one of us (me) even has a car payment. None of us have iPhone Xs, I have a five year old Samsung S7. No latte habit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman
This is where it turns to "priorities". From experience I can tell you what a college grad has to give up to race SCCA. When the choice is to go racing, or have a girlfriend or wife, start a family, social time with friends, financial stability, a new car, own a house, or even eat normal food like a human being, it's a really hard sell. To go racing, I drove a 15 year old Dodge Neon my folks sold me in college for super cheap, rarely went out with friends, rarely ate out, constantly irritated my girlfriend, borrowed a truck to tow my 20 year old trailer I bartered for. I remember a winter that I even stopped on the way home from work to collect wood on the side of the road to burn in my fireplace to save on heating costs. At the track and night, by Dad and I would go to the Hoosier tent, ask for the used wheel weights, and spend the night cleaning the tape and sticky stuff off so we could reuse them or melt them down to make ballast.
That was what it took to race on an above average recent grad salary. Even at that, I was barely hanging on.
Pitch that to someone who wants to race and see how many takers you get.
PS. Member dues don't keep the lights on if no one shows up at the track. They could have a million membership, but if no one goes to the track, so what?
Hey my man -Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesbe
What brings you to the track? Or, what would bring you to the track? What keeps you away? In my book, it's pretty important target market research to ask the people you want to attract to see what they think. Crazy, I know.
Funny - I once sat in on a meeting at the Runoffs where a bunch of older males sat around a table scratching their heads about where all the "new blood" was. I was literally, half their age and the only person under 50 years old. Not one asked me how or why I came there.
Listen up SCCA. Hear this RACER!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
That's a great point Reid, and consistent with part of what I eluded to.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Question:
— What's the average age of Club racers today vs. the 1970s?
— Same question about everyone at the track who isn't driving?
I'd put money on the average age being +15 years by comparison to "my day" as a kid who would have spent it all to race instead of care about any other trappings. In fact I did, but in karting.
With all due respect to Mr. Novak, the SCCA needs to listen to the people who aren't on the grid every bit as much as they should to those that are. At least, if they care about new blood — even if that blood is coursing through old guys who'd be out there with just a few more reasons to be.
If by "us" you are speaking of your friends, I can't argue that, I don't know them. If "none of us" is your generation, I couldn't disagree more. For example, marketing research shows that millennials spend more on food, alcohol, apparel and transportation categories than any other generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
My wife had a "bake sale" at my work, and I sold ahem, "vintage" denim to pay some racing in my early 20's. I also raced back then out of a pick up truck with a conduit and harbor freight canopy. So I hear you when it comes to what you and I were willing to do. I also understand there won't be a lot of takers, but it's because of the sacrifices required that most aren't willing to make.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
If no one shows up at the track, no need for lights. ;) Million memberships with no product you need to deliver? The club would be in much better financial shape. Kind of like the 90+% of gym memberships that get used less than once a month. You think those gym owners want more people using/abusing their equipment and facilities? Heck no, they want just enough activity to entice new members to join.
Man, that had to be a **** ton of cookies! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman
And that is my whole point - there are very few people willing to make that type of effort. If SCCA wants more customers, SCCA needs to make it require less sacrifice. It's an elastic relationship; the easier it is the more people who will participate. It's become difficult to the point due to cost that less people can afford to do it. It's not a good business model to require or assume people will go to extreme lengths to buy SCCA's product.
The costs need to come down. Significantly.
I have to assume you mean loosen the safety regs because SCCA only gets $62.50 for a Majors entry and less than $50 for a Regional entry. Entry fees have already been discussed and track rental identified as the major driving item.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
$60 wouldn't be my definition of significant, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
More than entry fees need to be reduced. $80k cars for a new FF is not sustainable. With all the genies out of the bottle, I don't think you can save it. What Jay and Steve Lathrop describe as a modern FF with a motorcycle drivetrain is what's needed. Price cap shocks at $800ea, stock bike engines means bone stock, FST type wheel rules (13x6, min weight). For an FF, you have about $25k between just the engine and transmission. Unlimited shocks, super trick gearboxes, crazy light wheels, etc all made it so if you want the last 5% you need to spend crazy money.
It's really not rocket surgery, and I don't mean that as an insult. It's just basic high school econ. The more it costs the fewer people there are who can afford it. How many people have $80k street cars? Those who don't, do we think they could swing an $80k race car? If we want fields like there were in the 80s, then the costs need to be proportionate to mean income at the time. Steve Lathrop had a great analysis many years ago that showed mean income in relation to the cost of a new car, broken down by decade. He showed that a new car would have to be something like $30k to keep pace with wages. it would be very interesting to see that analysis applied to today's numbers. I'm sure it would not be pretty.
Having read the above...Is it all of SCCA or just OWR that has this issue? I see SRF, SM, not to mention autocross, as being quite healthy, or is that a false reading? I know a bunch of my son's friends spend a lot of money on their street cars; enough to go FF racing if they chose. Look at the attendance of the Chin Driving experience, or Hooked on Driving or the various car clubs; they draw hundreds of entries to their weekends.
Reid, I did everything you did when I first started racing at age 21. I was totally addicted and had no social life outside the sport. I could only afford to race 3-4 times a year, if that and ate peanut butter, scarfed used tires off the discard pile, slept in a tent. When I couldn't afford to race, I flagged. I was not alone doing that. I dragged friends into the sport, some still go to the track with me 45 years later, a couple made a career in motorsports, others didn't. I don't think that passion is lost, I think it is directed other places in this culture. How do you learn how to work on a race car? Time, trial and error, observation unless you grow up in a family that did it. My father never even had a driver's license and I grew up in NYC without any family car- I'm completely self taught so that's not an excuse either. I pursue my day job so I can go racing. If you're sufficiently motivated you'll figure it out- question is how to motivate the next generation to sample OWR.
I wrote this before Reid's last post...Race cars cost what they cost. $80K for a new FF is what it is. Can you buy one for half that? Yes. Do you think a front running SM is any less? This kind of racing is not for everybody, but I submit there are plenty of people in this world who can afford it, but are motivated elsewhere (have you seen the price of boats recently? They make race cars look cheap and there are plenty of them sold every year)
The natural progression used to be FV-FF-FC-FA but you dont see too many FV guys jumping up the ladder anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
I'd love to run in FF over the FV I currently drive but being a younger guy there is no way that I could afford to be competitive. In some ways I think the prep shops showing up to the runoffs have hurt peoples ambitions. Why spend all that money on the runoffs and the majors leading up to it knowing you have no chance if you're not with a team?
With FF if you dont show up with Pelfrey, K-Hill or Rice there is no way that you're going to win without spending a boat load of cash. The same can be said for FC and FA.
At least with FV you can still build your own car and be competitive without having to pay someone else to set it up. I think that along with the cost of entry and rules stability is why FV hasn't declined as much as the other classes.
Not sure I agree you have to be with (KHill, Pelfrey or Rice) to be competitive. We see other FF drivers with no big team behind them (a couple of father/son pairs come to mind) who can be competitive on any given weekend. The big teams have plenty of skill and experience, but that's not the be all end all to making a FF go fast.
FC- our series champion sleeps in his trailer, has one volunteer crew with him most weekends and does all his own prep work. FA is a different animal, as it probably should be.
Just trying to cover entry fee and a set of tires. Yep, lots of rice crispy treats too ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Agreed to the first statement. Your solution is to make it cheaper, my solution is to improve the experience. I don't care how cheap you make a crap sandwich, I'm not buying. On the other hand, there's a whole lot people willing to spend on a nice steak dinner.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Having run both our own car and with a pro team, the car isn't what makes the pro teams so fast (unfortunately lol).Quote:
Originally Posted by B Farnham
From looking through the results out of the 2019 season out of 7 weekends the three big teams grabbed 60 out of 63 podium positions. Which is understandable as it's the pro series. The Runoffs however have been dominated by the pro teams since K-Hill showed up at Mid-Ohio in 2016.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Wright
It's not impossible to be competitive but you're not going to get it done with a 30K car that you're prepping yourself. I'm just speaking from an outsider looking in that those are the reasons why I wont be making the jump to FF anytime soon.
I'm not picking on you, but I'm beating a dead horse here. This is a generational disconnect and that's not meant as an insult or a dig. I ask again, how many people will go to the lengths you did when you were getting started? Very few - then, or now. However, make incomes stagnant for 40 years, increase the cost or racing significantly, strap yourself with insane student loan debt (4-year or 2-year, it's still a lot), realize you have to start saving day one out of college if you want any hope of retiring, pay your own healthcare as many employers have kicked the can on that one, and that makes what you did in your 20's impossible today with what people in their 20s and 30s face. There is no amount of motivation that will allow most recent college grads to drop $80k for a new car, or even $30k on a decent used one. We all know buying the car is the cheap part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Wright
Or, ask this. How many people from 2005 to current, under the age of 25 have come into SCCA FC/FF on their own dime?
I know of two, maybe three.
Now, how many go run Chumpcar where they can split the expenses on a very cheap car between three or four people? What's the average age in Chump? Average age in SCCA? I'd bet there is a near identical trend line between average age and costs to run the events.
My generation is motivated, they are just going elsewhere to do it. Which - like in business and nearly everywhere else, there is more competition. Autox, Chump, LeMons, or even other sports like wind surfing, rock climbing, extreme mountain biking, trials bikes, etc. All other activities adrenaline junkies can get their fix that cost way, way less than racing.
Things that are impossible are not made possible by increasing motivation. They are made possible by changing the factors that made them impossible.
Another thought - send someone from SCCA to a ChumpCar event and survey the entrants. Those who know about SCCA, why did they choose Chump over SCCA? I have one guess.
Cost.
Small sample I know, but I know of two groups of people who run Chump and they did that over SM SCCA because it was literally 20% of the cost.
None of that does anything for parked cars. We don't have the luxury of starting from a clean slate. When FF started there were many manufacturers, dealers and prep shops. The market was literally flooded overnight with cars to meet the demand. As good as Steve is, there's no way he can supply sufficient equipment to duplicate that situation. Then there's the problem of creating yet another new class.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
As Bob pointed out, is this a universal problem or something unique to formula cars? Other classes are still healthy. What's unique about formula cars? In my opinion, 1996 was the watershed year. The CART/IRL split has had a serious and ongoing negative impact on all formula car racing in the U.S. Nothing said so far seems willing to acknowledge that the biggest problem was and remains outside SCCA's control. It's outside competitor's control. The effort to try an blame SCCA for any of this is misplaced and isn't just counter productive, it creates an environment where we're eating ourselves. Between the Indy car split and the 2008 economic meltdown it's time to recognize that the problem is external and my not be fixable without an improving middle class economy and growth in popularity of Indycar.
It's not but if you have two drivers of the same calibur and you stick one in a Mygale and the other in a Swift it's not a straight up battle. The guy in the Swift may be able to hang on for a bit but the car wont be as consistent nor as easy to drive and all it takes is a tenth here and a tenth there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zach Rivard
The top teams do their homework and are phenomenal at car prep, your average joe just cant match that. That may be a reason why some cars are sitting.
All true. But I don't see a solution with the current class structure. If you want the old cars to come back and play, they need to be competitive. Mine is parked because it's no longer competitive. Time marches on, I get that. But so does cost, and fewer people can afford to pay to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
FP and EP did a great job in creating a Prep Level 1 and Prep Level 2 rule structures to allow the Triumphs to be competitive with the Miatas. No one felt they had to go buy a new car to be competitive. The formula class structure doesn't have that luxury.
I know your question was rhetorical, and likely posed believing you were making a point. However, I believe you would be surprised to learn the answer. According to some sales figures from an US Car sales database, about 918,000+/- were sold in the USA just last year. So, I'd venture to guess at least 5,000,000 of them are currently driven/registered in the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Are you seriously suggesting abandoning existing cars to start a new class? Are you seriously suggesting applying production car thinking to formula cars? How would you envision a limited prep FF?Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
No. But, as it is trending that will happen anyway. Look at FC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
No.
And, I don't. Just showing one way it worked to make the old stuff play nice with the new stuff.
Now compare that quantity to how many people bought new cars that cost $30k or less. I'm going to take a wild guess and say more. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman
I know you agree - the more it costs, the less who will buy. That's the point. More people buy $30k daily drivers than $80k daily drivers.
Incomes are not stagnant, and certainly haven't been stagnant for the last 40 years, that's a myth. Look to the CBO or Department of Labor for stats if interested. Have they kept up with the cost of racing? Perhaps not. Some things are much cheaper in 2019 dollars than they were adjusted for 1980 dollars, other things not so much.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Insane student loan debt is a choice.
We put a man on the moon because we were motivated.Quote:
Originally Posted by redihazelton
Reid, seriously, you need to get out more, i.e., listen to the prod community's back and forth about the perceived failure of the attempt to equalize old British sports cars with modern machinery. The current gnawing point is brakes.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
One of the formula classes real problems is people making rules with little or no formula car background and a surfeit of production car experience. The club has been trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. We barely have formula classes at all. The current GCR is full of examples. When formula classes have spec lines it's no longer racing to a formula.
But didn't you win or finish on the podium of some pretty big races in the last 3 or so years? Didn't you lead many pretty big races over the last 6-7 years when the Honda was well established with the same car you paid 14 k for?Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
My point is no matter how you did it, you actually did it without a 30 K plus car or large prep team. The point is weren't with a large prep team or spend more $'s then what you did is my point. You are proof it can be done. Yes costs have continued to increase for SCCA racing faster then inflation rate however that is due to many factors. Back to the point you proved it can be done, you are not the only one who has proved this either.
It is much easier to think of reasons why you can't be competitive rather then do the work required to actually be competitive. The car is only piece of puzzle.
The above was not an SCCA sales pitch. It was a path to continue to race. The club would not have missed your income. People come and go all the time. Looking at FF, if you had sat out 3 years you can see its still going. Granted there seems to be some sarcasm in there but I am not sure if the sarcasm related to the "sales pitch" or you providing the SCCA with "income" or both.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
Using your logic the SCCA must have said you needed to "give up a girlfriend or wife, starting a family, social time with friends, financial stability, a new car, owning a house,or even eating food like a normal human being" as their sales pitch. You bought that one right? Well, there was no sales pitch. You did that on your own. You wanted to go racing and that was the path you needed to take. Maybe you have different priorities now. That happens in life.
Blaming the SCCA, road racing specifically, like it is some kind of well funded corporation or government entity that has an obligation to make things affordable for recent college grads in their 20s is a waste of time. Come to think of it, if it was a corporation it probably would have dropped out of the formula car business a long time ago. Soaks up too many resources than it is worth and likely harms the closed wheel businesses.
Jim
Pulling this out to quote again for more emphasis - this is exactly right, and needs to be highlighted as central to the problem of growing formula car racing.Quote:
Originally Posted by reidhazelton
The attitude that "you can make it happen if you're motivated enough" is the surest way to close the book on amateur formula car racing. Sure, it's possible - but if I wanna bake a cake, why in the name of all that's holy would I choose to start by planting a field of wheat?!? Only stupid or obstinate people choose that path.
Which is why I decided to build my own prototype - but I NEVER try to recruit others to Prototypes. If you don't want it enough to become a massive pain in my backside wanting to know how to do it - there's better, easier places to go play, starting with a Miata.
But formula cars aren't, and shouldn't, be that way. FF/F500/F600 should be as easy to get into as SM's; currently, seems like only FV is. I guess that explains why it's still doing well - to paint with broad strokes.
Is it really that accessible? Shouldn't we be pointing that out to potential drivers, as much as making it accessible?
(and yes, I do wish there were a prototypes class in a similar state, but that's another ignored thread...)
I seem to recall an exchange a couple of years ago about 'choices', so I won't go there again. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman
Certainly incomes and prices have moved over the years. So, also, has income distribution. TVs and telecoms cost less in inflation-adjusted dollars than 50 years ago. However, health care and education costs have far exceeded the general growth of the consumer price index (CPI), as has housing in many markets. Those land heavily on the sort of middle-class families from whom SCCA recruited its members. Since 1982, the distribution of income and wealth has skewed heavily toward the 1%, again limiting the number of people with the discretionary income to go racing.
Motivation and choice certainly factor in. Racing is about as discretionary as discretionary spending gets. Reid was willing to forego the trappings of middle class life, including family, but he is an outlier. Few people would be willing to make those sacrifices. I certainly would not have. We cannot rebuild open wheel racing by demanding that level of sacrifice.
Incomes, prices, and distribution have all changed over the years.
Consider this. In 1968, a first-generation FF (Lotus 51, Renault 'box, Cortina engine, steel wheels) cost about Corvette money. Today, a new FF costs about Corvette money. Factor in the qualitative improvements in race cars (shocks, data, wheels, engine, gearbox), and today's new FF arguably costs 'less' than 50 years ago.
On edit: Of course, Corvettes have seen similar qualitative improvements in that time. Plus, they don't cost $1K or $2K to run each weekend. :)
Hey Steve -Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bamford
It's been many years since I've run my car in SCCA. The last season I did was the last Runoffs at RA. I won't get into the Honda/Ford can of worms. Not the point of this thread.
And yes, I did. It can be done, but I could not do it now with the current state of things. My whole point is that the more barrier to entry, the fewer people there will be who can play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Nash
You missed my point. Every winter the "where is the new blood" debate comes up. I've avoided it the last few years because this is how it goes.
Again, if that is the pitch SCCA makes - how many takers are there? The whole point is making entry to racing easier and more achievable to more people. SCCA is solely in charge of the factors that raise the cost.
If making it affordable for someone in their 20s is a waste of time, they don't even count on seeing anyone under the age of 50 at an SCCA event.
My man.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
Preach!
Yeah, it was a total failure for the prod groups. They failed themselves right into 50 car fields. What a bunch of morons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
It's not perfect, but who has 50 cars at the June Sprints, and who has 5?