Scca eliminated classes

Back when I lived in Minnesota I remember going to Brainerd for the CanAM. McLaren used to show up with two pick-up trucks and open trailers.
So, when I finished my homebuilt DSR in the early aughts i used to pull it on a homebuilt open trailer and I liked to park right next to the largest motorhome in the "wings and things" class. They were generally happy to share their electricity and unhappy when they weren't substantially faster than we were. We were hardly ever invited over for their steak BBQ on Saturday night.
Didn't stop us from attending, however.
Ah, nostalgia!
M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Larry H

I doubt that feeling like a peasant is keeping folks away from the race track. The big rigs are likely a symptom and not a cause.

Larry

---

Therefore the paddock is thin on entries.

You are correct, Ken. The paddock is thin on entries! I have no idea what the therefore means. In today's world there are many people who have the funds to go racing, but may not have the talent, time, tools, space, etc to take care of a racecar. In addition the race weekend is family time for many. In my case, I prepare customer cars, take care of them at the track, coach them on their driving and stay at the track in moderate comfort instead of using a Hotel. I am too damn old to sleep on the ground. Work hard at getting rid of these people and see how many competitors you have to race with. I sometimes even have the funds to drive myself. We need to work on getting rid of some of the stupid rules requiring people to spend extra money to race. Seat belts, 2 Year fire system service, one weekend tires come to mind off the top.

Post of the Year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robins Ken

Last paragraph nails it Tony. The tractor trailer/toterhome teams have pushed the average pickup/20ft trailer guys away.

The missing link is to help a newbie not to feel like a peasant when he shows up. We all knew diddly squat when we started.

Ken.

---

I show up with a pickup and open trailer and have NEVER felt unwelcomed by the guys with the big rigs that I race with, even when I am sometimes in their way.
The problem is the ever increasing costs due to absolutely stupid, poorly thought out rule changes being made by the BOD who only care about appeasing Miatas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roland V. Johnson

You are correct, Ken. The paddock is thin on entries! I have no idea what the therefore means. In today's world there are many people who have the funds to go racing, but may not have the talent, time, tools, space, etc to take care of a racecar. In addition the race weekend is family time for many. In my case, I prepare customer cars, take care of them at the track, coach them on their driving and stay at the track in moderate comfort instead of using a Hotel. I am too damn old to sleep on the ground. Work hard at getting rid of these people and see how many competitors you have to race with. I sometimes even have the funds to drive myself. We need to work on getting rid of some of the stupid rules requiring people to spend extra money to race. Seat belts, 2 Year fire system service, one weekend tires come to mind off the top.

---

I agree 100% Roland. The arrive and drive format has evolved well over the years and attracts some great customers that become lifelong friends. Some very young and others perhaps not so young, in years anyway.

Let's say a series has 3 multi car teams. I am talking SCCA regional ,FRP,Toyo F1600(Canada) as examples. Club Racing. Not USF pro or whatever. 4 cars per team so give or take 12 cars in the paddock so far. The other dozen or so entries we need for a decent grid are simply not there in numbers. I am not chucking at these guys. I am simply trying to figure why.

Stupid rules and poor track time. Mindless schedules. I know there has to be a 'rotate' among groups but a 5 hour wait between sessions is the cause of many FCY's during late in the day races. Too many snacks (sodium/sugar) and lack of focus come race time. How many times have you been on pitwall for 3 green flag laps? If you are like me way too many. Make races 10 laps green minimum regardless of circumstance.

To finish with a smile Roland, you forgot FIA rain lights and megabuck transponders on the 'stupid rules' list. Just sayin.

Cheers. Ken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robins Ken

The other dozen or so entries we need for a decent grid are simply not there in numbers. I am not chucking at these guys. I am simply trying to figure why.

---

Too many options of slightly varied classes & series, all aimed at essentially the same limited target market, although the Road to Indy ladder grabs almost all the young kids (aka Dad) thinking they are the next Indy & F1 star.
SCCA FF / FC, FRP F1600 / F2000, USF2000, USF4, FMzR etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robins Ken

Make races 10 laps green minimum regardless of circumstance.

---

I think that would be a bad idea, considering some of the races I have seen (looking at you, USF4). A simple race could draw out into a huge headache that screws the entire day if you depend on them getting 10 green flag laps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roland V. Johnson

You are correct, Ken. The paddock is thin on entries! I have no idea what the therefore means. In today's world there are many people who have the funds to go racing, but may not have the talent, time, tools, space, etc to take care of a racecar. In addition the race weekend is family time for many. In my case, I prepare customer cars, take care of them at the track, coach them on their driving and stay at the track in moderate comfort instead of using a Hotel. I am too damn old to sleep on the ground. Work hard at getting rid of these people and see how many competitors you have to race with. I sometimes even have the funds to drive myself. We need to work on getting rid of some of the stupid rules requiring people to spend extra money to race. Seat belts, 2 Year fire system service, one weekend tires come to mind off the top.

---

Roland hit the nail on the head. Control cost is a must.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fred Michael

I show up with a pickup and open trailer and have NEVER felt unwelcomed by the guys with the big rigs that I race with, even when I am sometimes in their way.
The problem is the ever increasing costs due to absolutely stupid, poorly thought out rule changes being made by the BOD who only care about appeasing Miatas

---

How can a Mazda Miata be called a race car? Even the 'high foreheads' at IMSA have been conned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt Clark

Too many options of slightly varied classes & series, all aimed at essentially the same limited target market, although the Road to Indy ladder grabs almost all the young kids (aka Dad) thinking they are the next Indy & F1 star.
SCCA FF / FC, FRP F1600 / F2000, USF2000, USF4, FMzR etc.



I think that would be a bad idea, considering some of the races I have seen (looking at you, USF4). A simple race could draw out into a huge headache that screws the entire day if you depend on them getting 10 green flag laps.

---

Hi Matt. My idea was to ease the pain. You could be right but circumstances vary. My thought pattern was 1.50 seconds a lap x 10. 15 mins added time. Unless Billy Bob wads it up at lap 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robins Ken

How can a Mazda Miata be called a race car? Even the 'high foreheads' at IMSA have been conned.

---

;) Not that I race one, but a Miata would have beat the pants off of every type of car that started SCCA racing. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

;) Not that I race one, but a Miata would have beat the pants off of every type of car that started SCCA racing. :D

---

XK 140 Jaguar ?:o

Cheers Ken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robins Ken

XK 140 Jaguar ?:o

Cheers Ken.

---

Dig out the records, but I'm with Dave on this.

General question, what does it take to impeach the vice president of the club?

The regions aren't happy with what has taken place and stand to lose money this year. Also entry level formula car racing stands to lose a lot and in our eyes is under attack.

All from someone that last raced a Miata and is clearly in bed with Mazda.

So Brian is this question in response to Roland's post above? His last two sentences are what I think is the demise of racing in America. I wish there was a way to find out the REAL reason for most of these stupid rules that seem to just increase costs but not safety. If you ask why they seem to shrug their shoulders and say that is what it is but seem unwilling to explain.

If safety is really that bad, then why are us older racers still alive? Excuse me, I now fall into the ex racer since that rain light rule was enough to push me over the top and stop racing. That and it's ridiculous implementation requiring a CERTIFIED light was way out of line. The seat belt rule was just as bad and a terrible waste of the budget racers yearly updates.

I have had talks with other racers and most seem to thin that us older guys might see the end of club racing. The thought that they can keep enough young people coming to climb the ladder will do it, is foolish thinking.

Ed

Agree on all counts, Ed.

But in some cases, even older guys wanting to do this for decades had a change of heart in competing under so many unnecessary new expenses — and with endless uncertainties like “What’s next after this” and “Am I buying a car with no future class?”

The appearance is grave, as if considerations are only given to people coming in and blowing a ton of excess dough for a few years, then moving on to “higher pursuits” like flying their own planes to country clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Womer

Excuse me, I now fall into the ex racer since that rain light rule was enough to push me over the top and stop racing.

---

Honestly, this irritates and saddens me on your behalf.

When a longtime, downright Legend in any class says this, I sincerely hope someone giving a damn is listening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Womer

So Brian is this question in response to Roland's post above? His last two sentences are what I think is the demise of racing in America. I wish there was a way to find out the REAL reason for most of these stupid rules that seem to just increase costs but not safety. If you ask why they seem to shrug their shoulders and say that is what it is but seem unwilling to explain.

If safety is really that bad, then why are us older racers still alive? Excuse me, I now fall into the ex racer since that rain light rule was enough to push me over the top and stop racing. That and it's ridiculous implementation requiring a CERTIFIED light was way out of line. The seat belt rule was just as bad and a terrible waste of the budget racers yearly updates.

I have had talks with other racers and most seem to thin that us older guys might see the end of club racing. The thought that they can keep enough young people coming to climb the ladder will do it, is foolish thinking.

Ed

---

Ed,

We can complain about the SCCA all we want - but most of the blame belongs to us. In FV did we say no to the tire wars in the 80's and 90's? No - Did we say no to the $1000 manifold and now $2000 exhaust wars in FV - no. Did we say no to the $1000 shocks and $500 brakes? No. Everyone was so drunk on going faster and paying the engine builders more and more that we forgot the rule in FV that says "emphasizes driver ability rather than technological development of the car." So let's not use the rain light as an excuse - technology was the drug and we were the users.

If you put a Majors car next to a average Regional car - all the parts look alike, but when you add up the cost of the parts, and the development, you would faint. Maybe that will always be, but we cannot set the standard that every car has to be able to win the Runoffs. That is a bar too high to meet.

ChrisZ

I presume you’re being presumptive.

Or maybe we both are. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt Clark

I think that would be a bad idea, considering some of the races I have seen (looking at you, USF4). A simple race could draw out into a huge headache that screws the entire day if you depend on them getting 10 green flag laps.

---

Funny, this reminds me of a race at Lime Rock. Bob Wright was in this so maybe he remembers it. The FFs were the last group and you had to be off the track at 6pm sharp. It was about 15 minutes to 6 when the cars rolled out for only a ten lap race. 30+ cars went into the first turn and we did not expect any to come out. 10 laps later - it was one of the cleanest races they had all year.

Compare that to this race https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLRoY8NzrYE

Go to 10:25

ChrisZ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robins Ken

How can a Mazda Miata be called a race car? Even the 'high foreheads' at IMSA have been conned.

---

It meets Stroker Ace's notion of a "sporty car." The foundation of SCCA was that you can race just about anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Womer

I have had talks with other racers and most seem to thin that us older guys might see the end of club racing.

---

As noted elsewhere in this thread, "club racing" is no longer synonymous with SCCA. The proliferation of alternatives has thinned the car counts for each.

"Analytics" is the new buzzword in sports.

Lets pretend there is a master analytic study being done in Topeka. The analysis would point out that a lot of old folks aren't racing because it requires more than a 1975 budget to do so. Those oldsters are complaining about seatbelt expiration dates, transponders, fire bottles, tire costs, etc., etc. Meanwhile folks that drive Miatas don't seem to be bothered by those issues and keep showing up in larger numbers.

Analytics would steer Topeka to market to their growing market. Just saying.

For 20 years I kept a running spreadsheet of all my costs of racing. I was the self-proclaimed "King o' Cheap". I was racing cars I purchased for about $10K, doing all my own wrenching, sleeping in the paddock, running tires to the cords almost. All that calculated 10 years ago it worked out to about $2,000 per weekend. That was at 10 year ago prices, I'm sure it has climbed since then. e.g. 2014 $4 dollar VP110 is now costing me $14.75.

So, at some point I just said the juice wasn't worth the squeeze. It grew beyond my budget. All that said you won't hear me complaining about the current costs. There are valid reasons why things cost as they do. If some of the costs folks are complaining about on this forum are taken out of the yearly calculation it really doesn't effect the average weekend cost all that much if you are doing 4 to 5 weekends per year.

I'm just thankful this day before Thanksgiving that I got to do it for as long as I did.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

That it costs more than 1975, that everything else does, too, make it all the clearer that *any possible way* to race for less will improve car counts.

You are indeed lucky to have raced when you could, but that also means those who haven’t have a polar opposite take on everything expenses-related. It’s not a matter of being cheap, or incessantly whining while combing a white beard, it’s about listening to *everyone* and being on a similar page in how to move forward.

Yes, seems we all agree there are too many classes. But there’s also a ton of dormant cars begging their owners to run.

I talk to lots of vintage racers yearning for real competition again, since it’s pretty apparent that vintage isn’t about rabid racing here as it is in England.

They consistently report they left SCCA strictly because of politics, their car or engine being fazed out without respectful warning to respond to, and for expenses doing nothing for them but gaining a few tenths for a few thousand dollars and demanded if wanting to win.

Steve Lathrop’s idea is *very interesting*. His Zink Z10 with a 600cc bike engine is curious in many regards, why couldn’t an older FF chassis be run with stickier tires or more intake or whatever to find parity? Wouldn’t a massive Formula Ford or Vee grid at the June Sprints again be worth it regardless of class merge?

What do the 22 F600 guys at this year’s Runoffs do now? A little intake restriction or a stock and blueprinted engine and they could pay entry fees with FF and make for grids of the past.

But what I mostly hear is that one doesn’t wanna play with their neighbors and dwindling comrades.

I think what’s often forgotten in the Formula and Sports Racing categories is a willingness to blend in as many different cars as possible, Example: Kent Prather raced the same MGA in GP for probably 40 years, and went to vintage when G Prod died out. It happens, but begs the question of alternative.

Imagine how awesome and affordable that was, and the paid entry fees over probably 200+ races helping the Club all along… Does the Club not need money?

I also think we also forget there’s probably more people with high liquid income more than ever. They can afford it all, but they’re clearly not exposed. The average income guy certainly teeters on the wrong side of the edge these days more than ever maybe, add having to plunk down several Grand a year to pass Tech at a race or two and at some point it becomes stupid money. Gone racer, not coming back, and not for a second being too cheap to do it.

More money and more population today *should* equal more (cars), like in so many other sports — but only if they know about it.

That’s a huge part of this problem, for example how many of those 30,000 spectators at Road Atlanta in the ‘70s to ‘90s went on to race ONLY because of being inspired LIVE and IN LIVING COLOR?

When I talk to karters with family budget about “moving up,” they mention a lot of goals but barely know what SCCA even is. That’s bewildering if not shameful for a Club turning 100 in a couple decades.

The fact that SCCA is willing to kick aside its 8th most populated class speaks volumes.

Glenn

I'm not sure being restricted from 4 or 5 Super Tour events out of the mass of races on the yearly schedule is exactly being "kicked aside".

But, I can appreciate the FV guys that usually run the Sebring Super Tour are upset. The FC folks should have seen this coming since 2006. For a few years I entered an old Reynard with a homebuilt motor in Major events just to help the FC numbers. Once or twice I didn't get lapped. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple Frog

I'm not sure being restricted from 4 or 5 Super Tour events out of the mass of races on the yearly schedule is exactly being "kicked aside".

But, I can appreciate the FV guys that usually run the Sebring Super Tour are upset. The FC folks should have seen this coming since 2006. For a few years I entered an old Reynard with a homebuilt motor in Major events just to help the FC numbers. Once or twice I didn't get lapped. LOL

---

While it *might* be only "4 or 5 Super Tour events", it is being kicked aside. The small formula cars are being kicked aside so that more miata's can be on the track.

And what comes next year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLS

While it *might* be only "4 or 5 Super Tour events", it is being kicked aside. The small formula cars are being kicked aside so that more miata's can be on the track.

And what comes next year?

---

That's entirely in the hands of competitors. Bring the number up and there won't be a problem. That might mean having to bring them up higher than one of the Miata groups. In the mean time, I see the club responding to changes in competitor preference. We no longer have exclusive FF fields. We no longer have exclusive FV fields. We do have exclusive Miata fields. To a great extent it's a numbers game. I hate to see a classes I love disintegrating, but every class has a finite life, some longer than others (FV,) but sunset is inevitable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Olivola

That's entirely in the hands of competitors. Bring the number up and there won't be a problem. That might mean having to bring them up higher than one of the Miata groups. In the mean time, I see the club responding to changes in competitor preference. We no longer have exclusive FF fields. We no longer have exclusive FV fields. We do have exclusive Miata fields. To a great extent it's a numbers game. I hate to see a classes I love disintegrating, but every class has a finite life, some longer than others (FV,) but sunset is inevitable.

---

If FV is set to go away then good luck to the rest of the open wheel groups. The 8th largest majors class and the 3rd largest at the runoffs this past year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B Farnham

If FV is set to go away then good luck to the rest of the open wheel groups. The 8th largest majors class and the 3rd largest at the runoffs this past year.

---

And FV will be at the 2025 Runoffs.

I understand the frustration. My introduction to SCCA was crewing a FV co-owned by two car salesmen from Red Bank, NJ. When I raced I moved from production to CSR to FF and it was a wonder to compete in a run group with nothing but same class cars. That was a long time ago and competitor preferences have shifted elsewhere.

At the same time, there is pressure from competitors to shorten the Runoffs which means fewer race groups which actually returns the event to its multi-class origins.

There is a very real challenge in combining FV with any other open wheel class. Small events can pull it off because they don't run into the Brian Holtz Rule effect (the number of on track incidents is exponentially related to the number of cars on track.) At the request of the FV competitors it has become common practice to implement a gapped start, i.e., separation of classes but only a single green flag from S/F. This keeps the Vees from tangling with other cars in turn one for reasons I'm sure I don't have to explain to anyone.

Now comes the growing Miata participation. As a closed wheel car there are more options for combining them with other classes (not to mention the size of SM fields alone.) Those participants have also shown an interest in running in multiple classes at an event, an option not open to FV, F600 or FF. Add in the constant calls for SCCA to be run more like a business and when they look at the numbers and try to adjust someone's inevitably going to find themselves on the wrong side of the ledger.

I understand. It's your class. It's your investment. It hurts.

As much as I've come to understand the ability of stewards to function as Time Lords and squeeze things into an increasingly rigid schedule, we've hit the wall on that.

My personal opinion on how to deal with all this is radically different from almost anyone else's in the club: Eliminate the Runoffs and return the National Championship to Its original form of accumulated points in events with more for Super Tours, less for Majors and the least for Regionals.

That would complete Bill Kephart's observation that there are two main types of competitors in SCCA Road Racing: Those with the means and desire to seek out the best competition and those who primarily run local events. Divisions already have locally based championships that serve the latter. The Runoffs has had a good run, but like any given class in the club, it's reached a point of diminishing returns.

Going back to Brian's question about impeachment, I guess if there is such a vehicle available, it would be in the bylaws. I remember the days when you purchase of a competition license the club would send out the rule book to all of us. I think it stopped in the late 90's not sure.

If, and I did not renew my competition license this year for I think $125, that if I could navigate the scca website and look in the right place I could find if the powers that be even though about having that option for the times when the bod and comp board did things the majority of the racers didn't like. I dislike the website since in my opinion, is like most things in the club, you need to know the secrets in order to find anything.

When I complained after the fact, about the rain light rule, I keep hearing that it was my fault for not paying attention.
Really? That sounds just like most governments who basically approach rule making the same way. It should be the club's responsibility to inform everyone about what they want and NOT our responsibility to search the bs to find what they want to impose on us. In the information age this shouldn't be an issue but it follows the old saying of the secret car club.

I hope everyone is enjoying a good Thanksgiving. Ed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Olivola

My personal opinion on how to deal with all this is radically different from almost anyone else's in the club: Eliminate the Runoffs and return the National Championship to Its original form of accumulated points in events with more for Super Tours, less for Majors and the least for Regionals.

That would complete Bill Kephart's observation that there are two main types of competitors in SCCA Road Racing: Those with the means and desire to seek out the best competition and those who primarily run local events. Divisions already have locally based championships that serve the latter. The Runoffs has had a good run, but like any given class in the club, it's reached a point of diminishing returns.

---

This.
We don't always agree but I've been saying this for years. It will always fall on dead ears until it's too late and NASA or Gridlife or some other club that is willing to listen to all their members has taken the market share. The SCCA is not too big to fail and the Mazda bubble will pop one day, likely due to poor decisions by "leadership".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E1pix

...

Imagine how awesome and affordable that was, and the paid entry fees over probably 200+ races helping the Club all along… Does the Club not need money?

....

---

I am very aware that I am snipping out a small part of your post, but I think it is important to understand that there is an incorrect assumption here. Specifically, except for the Runoffs, entry fees have nothing to do with how well "The Club" fares financially. The Regions take the fiscal responsibility for every event (Regional, Divisional, HST, Majors) that they host. That means if the event fails to draw the minimum entries for the Region to at least break even (for whatever reasons), then the Region eats the deficit. Topeka (The Club) does not take a hit (nor to be fair, do they participate in any surplus). Yes, membership and license fees go to Topeka, but they are a small part of the overall budget. The Road Racing part of Topeka needs to "soak the rich" at the Runoffs or that part of the Topeka operation goes over the falls financially.

Dave

P.S. I will acknowledge that I have oversimplified some of the above, but I don't have all day or all week to get this precisely right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Olivola

And FV will be at the 2025 Runoffs.

I understand the frustration. My introduction to SCCA was crewing a FV co-owned by two car salesmen from Red Bank, NJ. When I raced I moved from production to CSR to FF and it was a wonder to compete in a run group with nothing but same class cars. That was a long time ago and competitor preferences have shifted elsewhere.

At the same time, there is pressure from competitors to shorten the Runoffs which means fewer race groups which actually returns the event to its multi-class origins.

There is a very real challenge in combining FV with any other open wheel class. Small events can pull it off because they don't run into the Brian Holtz Rule effect (the number of on track incidents is exponentially related to the number of cars on track.) At the request of the FV competitors it has become common practice to implement a gapped start, i.e., separation of classes but only a single green flag from S/F. This keeps the Vees from tangling with other cars in turn one for reasons I'm sure I don't have to explain to anyone.

Now comes the growing Miata participation. As a closed wheel car there are more options for combining them with other classes (not to mention the size of SM fields alone.) Those participants have also shown an interest in running in multiple classes at an event, an option not open to FV, F600 or FF. Add in the constant calls for SCCA to be run more like a business and when they look at the numbers and try to adjust someone's inevitably going to find themselves on the wrong side of the ledger.

I understand. It's your class. It's your investment. It hurts.

As much as I've come to understand the ability of stewards to function as Time Lords and squeeze things into an increasingly rigid schedule, we've hit the wall on that.

My personal opinion on how to deal with all this is radically different from almost anyone else's in the club: Eliminate the Runoffs and return the National Championship to Its original form of accumulated points in events with more for Super Tours, less for Majors and the least for Regionals.

That would complete Bill Kephart's observation that there are two main types of competitors in SCCA Road Racing: Those with the means and desire to seek out the best competition and those who primarily run local events. Divisions already have locally based championships that serve the latter. The Runoffs has had a good run, but like any given class in the club, it's reached a point of diminishing returns.

---

I'm aware of the reasoning for some things but I'll respond with many reasons why I feel that someone should lose their job over how this was handled

First there were rumors of FV, FF and F6 not being allowed at Super Tours in 2025 before the runoffs. All of those in positions of power denied it as they didn't want to deal with it with everyone together in person.

When the decision was made public they didn't have a schedule out for the "bonus majors" or have any idea what that was going to look like. Also speaking for FV specifically 13 of 26 drivers qualified through the super tour, eliminating that makes it much more challenging for people to qualify and is one less option. Did they think any of that through? No.

Its funny how they cite participation numbers nationally with Super Tours, especially when we all know the participation numbers outside of the northeast and central are far lower. They're fine with keeping FV, FF and F6 at the west coast events to make the numbers. What they stand to lose is 20+ entries at the Watkins, Mid Ohio and Road America super tour events.

What does all this mean for the regions and why are they upset? They're losing all of those entries from the open wheel group and what are they being replaced by? Nothing. This move won't bring about added entries from SMX so they stand to lose in many cases $20,000-40,000 in entry fees from eliminating our group. For the regions that can be the difference from them making money or losing money on an event.

Oh but they'll make it up with the "bonus majors" right? No. The regions are being forced to add an additional run group over what they normally have to put this on. That means paying for an extra hour of track time at $5,000+/hour. They are going to run a separate motorsportreg sign in and will give the "bonus majors" group a longer run time. The dates are also an issue as the Watkins Glen "Bonus major" conflicts with an FRP event so lets see how few cars go to that.

Then there's the decision of making P1 and P2 into the same class. First how can you do that when one class is a flat bottom class and the other has tunnels? Why make that change when they run in the same run group? Why not just have them race together as separate classes at the Runoffs in the same race with a split start?

I can go on with all of the tin top classes that were combined against their will.

From what I was told they want to eventually replace SM with SMX at the national level and phase the older cars out. That is being pushed by Mazda who don't want to keep making parts for the old SM cars. And when Mazda is writing checks they get what they want no matter the cost.

We're talking thousands and thousands of dollars in race cars and all of the time and effort that are being thrown aside. For what? A class that's existed for 2 years that most of the drivers are kids that just arrive and drive. What happened to the club being about grass roots racers that work on, build and modify their own cars?

Nationally the regions aren't happy with Topika as well as countless competitors that have had their investment threatened. I want to know who is responsible and start looking into how we remove them from their position. Also to start tracking when those currently on the BOD are up for reelection and work to get them out. Ive been around the club almost 30 years now and I can't remember a time where such big unpopular moves were made .

FV, FF and F6 put on the best shows at the runoffs, we want that to continue not to go away.

-Brian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Womer

...I dislike the website since in my opinion, is like most things in the club, you need to know the secrets in order to find anything.

When I complained after the fact, about the rain light rule, I keep hearing that it was my fault for not paying attention.
Really? That sounds just like most governments who basically approach rule making the same way. It should be the club's responsibility to inform everyone about what they want and NOT our responsibility to search the bs to find what they want to impose on us. In the information age this shouldn't be an issue but it follows the old saying of the secret car club...

---

Major decisions like the HST & majors class eligibility revisions, FIA rain light, and Flagtronics should be (have been) HEADLINED in Kerry Speed's weekly email to all members. IIRC, I don't think they were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Womer

...I dislike the website since in my opinion, is like most things in the club, you need to know the secrets in order to find anything...

---

As long as it has existed the SCCA web site has never been easy or logically laid out to navigate. I still fumble around trying to find stuff even though I've bookmarked a lot of places I often visit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

As long as it has existed the SCCA web site has never been easy or logically laid out to navigate. I still fumble around trying to find stuff even though I've bookmarked a lot of places I often visit.

---

Reminds me of the arguments we used to have with an ad agency Art Director about the newspaper ads he wanted to clutter up with lots of cute graphics that would obscure the actual text messaging. I'm convinced the SCCA website is being held hostage to the whims of some graphic designer who has no idea what the actual club does or how the national office serves the membership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B Farnham

...IWhat does all this mean for the regions and why are they upset? They're losing all of those entries from the open wheel group and what are they being replaced by? Nothing.

The regions are being forced to add an additional run group over what they normally have to put this on. That means paying for an extra hour of track time at $5,000+/hour. ...Brian

---

1) There are no Regions upset. If they were they would simply not signup for the HST event. The Regions are in control.

2) Bonus races: There will not be any additional run groups. The Bonus race runs within the normal regional grouping which will include regional only classes.

Brian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hardingfv32

1) There are no Regions upset. If they were they would simply not signup for the HST event. The Regions are in control.

2) Bonus races: There will not be any additional run groups. The Bonus race runs within the normal regional grouping which will include regional only classes.

Brian

---

Brian,

Have you actually spoken to anyone?

Did you not actually read what was put about the Financials and processes?

This information is directly from region leaders.

If you have actual factual information then feel free to share your sources. Otherwise your thoughts and feelings aren't fact.

-Brian

Correct me if I'm wrong...........RunOffs is like any other Event in that there are a couple of days of Practice for the various Classes......then a couple of days of Qualy for the various Classes,,,,,and then a few days of Racing. The implication being necessity to spend many days there.
How about overlapping (no pun intended) Classes and the schedule. Example: some Classes need not be there the first few days because other Classes are having a Practice / Qualy the first day or two.....while others yet are only Practice on the 2nd or 3rd days.....followed by those of the first day Racing on day 2 or 3 - and then going home..... with the final Classes showing up for a Practice / Qualy day........and that 2nd group Racing on the day that last group Qualys - and then going home......and the last Classes Racing on the last day.
The attempt is to have every Class only being there 2 or 3 days.....and saving people some money by not stretching things out for days on end.

Please keep some things in mind. You can have a class in the top ten and yet not be compatible with other classes. The ones in the teens can be grouped with other cars in a single race group.

There are other groups in the wings who could jump over existing groups. The Radicals come to mind, and also the new Club Spec classes. There is always the chance that another manufacture can jump in with either a spec series, either pure race or street modified.

Don’t assume the existing groups are static.

ChrisZ