Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 81 to 120 of 160

Thread: Letter to BOD

  1. #81
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JEREMY HILL View Post
    Good question Stan, I don't think the CRB would ever do it but IMO the class should have stayed part of FC where it started, with suitable restrictors,
    FC aero rules and no assisted shifters.

    Jeremy
    Do you think that the FC community would accept this? I do not.
    Thanks ... Jay Novak
    313-445-4047
    On my 54th year as an SCCA member
    with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)

  2. #82
    Member Teuobk's Avatar
    Join Date
    08.04.18
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    97
    Liked: 94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 99sh View Post
    I may be the lone sheep here but I vote keeping everything as is. I like my revs and I like my Geartronics. I'm not interested in downgrading my car to run with a slower run group. Remove the 25 lb penalty, or heck drop the min to below 1000 lbs. With the eventual graduation to newer moto engines, the disparity to FAs will diminish.

    Note - I'm not racing for trophies; just enjoying club racing for what it is.
    I agree 100% with everything you said, Arax: I want to keep everything as it is; I like my revs; I like my Geartronics; I'm not interested at all in downgrading my car to run with a slower run group; the 25 lb penalty should be removed; and I'm not racing for trophies but rather just to enjoy club racing.

    Jeff

  3. The following members LIKED this post:


  4. #83
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teuobk View Post
    I agree 100% with everything you said, Arax: I want to keep everything as it is; I like my revs; I like my Geartronics; I'm not interested at all in downgrading my car to run with a slower run group; the 25 lb penalty should be removed; and I'm not racing for trophies but rather just to enjoy club racing.

    Jeff

    Ok this is different than upgrading the engine to run head to head with FA cars. Who is looking to upgrade their engine so they can run faster right alongside FA? I'm not talking about maybe being able match lap times at a few tracks. I'm talking engine power and raw speed. Because that is what it will take to competitive with real FA cars. Who wants to do this?
    Firman F1000

  5. #84
    Contributing Member lowside67's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.06.08
    Location
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts
    461
    Liked: 224

    Default

    Based on the reports I’ve seen, adopting a stock new generation GSXR or Zx10R at approx 200whp would certainly add some pace.

    -Mark
    Mark Uhlmann
    Vancouver, Canada
    '12 Stohr WF1

  6. The following members LIKED this post:


  7. #85
    Senior Member Stan Clayton's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.14.03
    Location
    Mooresville NC area
    Posts
    4,157
    Liked: 309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowside67 View Post
    Based on the reports I’ve seen, adopting a stock new generation GSXR or Zx10R at approx 200whp would certainly add some pace. -Mark
    True, but of course there is no requirement in FA to run stock engines, so combining a newer engine with FA-level prep would seem to be an even more potent package.
    Stan Clayton
    Stohr Cars

  8. #86
    Banned
    Join Date
    02.04.02
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,399
    Liked: 1116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan Clayton View Post
    True, but of course there is no requirement in FA to run stock engines, so combining a newer engine with FA-level prep would seem to be an even more potent package.
    Yes.

    However these packages are pretty developed from the factory so there's not a ton of meat left on the bone. There's about a 10% bump in CR available, exhaust improvements, more aggressive cams when you don't have to worry about emissions or idle quality. A tune and springs that will allow it to twist a bit tighter (14,500rpm limit still has a 12month unlimited mile factory warranty).
    Last edited by Daryl DeArman; 12.22.20 at 1:00 PM.

  9. #87
    Senior Member Stan Clayton's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.14.03
    Location
    Mooresville NC area
    Posts
    4,157
    Liked: 309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland View Post
    As you stated earlier the F1000 group are voting with their feet. There are not showing up in numbers. That should tell you something about how many want to go in that direction.
    Two counterpoints. First, NAF1000 prohibits engines prepared to FA specs, which discouraged anyone wanting to go the built-engine route. Especially since last year it was a half-hearted spec change and the F1000 folks knew they didn't stand a real chance in FA. Second, it takes a while for big changes to filter down to cars on track. The CRB only just recently (last month?) actually changed the F1000-in-FA spec to allow FA-level prep. When those cars hit the track we will see what they're capable of and how many actually make the jump.

    Is there a way to accommodate both?
    Potentially, yes. Take a look at the Prod rules. Numerous cars are classed as 'Full prep' in one class...say, FP, and as 'Limited prep' in another...say, HP. This mean just what you'd think it does...the cars in HP are the rough equivalent of a restricted F1000 in FX, while those same cars/engines prepped to FP rules are the rough equivalent of a fully prepped F1000 in FA.

    SCCA took this route a decade+ ago to accommodate Prod competitors who wanted to upgrade/dumb down their car to a faster/slower class without having to buy a new car. You can move your car back and forth, but there is no plan ever to force, say, all the Full prep guys to go back to Limited prep, or the reverse.

    Conceivably, if F1000 were to be permitted in both FA and FX, this means you could prep your F1000 to FX spec if economical racing is your prime objective, then upgrade it to FA spec when and if circumstances change, or the reverse. But it is NOT really a prescription for rebuilding F1000 as a stand alone class.

    OTOH, if say, the FX version got really healthy and SCCA decided to reclassify it as its own National class, the cars remaining in FA would have a choice of staying in FA or dropping down to F1000 spec. As one can see this is all very speculative and only potentially conceivable, but there IS a route to accommodating both with precedence in the Club.
    Stan Clayton
    Stohr Cars

  10. The following members LIKED this post:


  11. #88
    Banned
    Join Date
    02.04.02
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,399
    Liked: 1116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan Clayton View Post
    SCCA took this route a decade+ ago to accommodate Prod competitors who wanted to upgrade/dumb down their car to a faster/slower class without having to buy a new car. You can move your car back and forth, but there is no plan ever to force, say, all the Full prep guys to go back to Limited prep, or the reverse.

    Conceivably, if F1000 were to be permitted in both FA and FX, this means you could prep your F1000 to FX spec if economical racing is your prime objective, then upgrade it to FA spec when and if circumstances change, or the reverse. But it is NOT really a prescription for rebuilding F1000 as a stand alone class.

    OTOH, if say, the FX version got really healthy and SCCA decided to reclassify it as its own National class, the cars remaining in FA would have a choice of staying in FA or dropping down to F1000 spec. As one can see this is all very speculative and only potentially conceivable, but there IS a route to accommodating both with precedence in the Club.
    Now all the F1000 group needs to do is get an active F1000 racer on the BoD and the CRB.

  12. The following members LIKED this post:


  13. #89
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan Clayton View Post
    Conceivably, if F1000 were to be permitted in both FA and FX, this means you could prep your F1000 to FX spec if economical racing is your prime objective, then upgrade it to FA spec when and if circumstances change, or the reverse. But it is NOT really a prescription for rebuilding F1000 as a stand alone class.

    OTOH, if say, the FX version got really healthy and SCCA decided to reclassify it as its own National class, the cars remaining in FA would have a choice of staying in FA or dropping down to F1000 spec. As one can see this is all very speculative and only potentially conceivable, but there IS a route to accommodating both with precedence in the Club.

    I was wondering if there was a way to keep F1000 in FA and at the same time be allowed in FX.

    But no, I don't think F1000 will ever have it's own class again. I think that boat has sailed (and has sunk in the deepest part of ocean).
    Firman F1000

  14. #90
    Senior Member Stan Clayton's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.14.03
    Location
    Mooresville NC area
    Posts
    4,157
    Liked: 309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland View Post
    I was wondering if there was a way to keep F1000 in FA and at the same time be allowed in FX.
    An even better analogy is with P1/2. The very same car is free to switch back and forth between P1 and P2 so long as the car meets the technical specs of the destination class. I don't have an inside track to the thinking of the CRB, but you might have better luck with this track than with trying to move the cars wholesale from FA to FX.
    Stan Clayton
    Stohr Cars

  15. The following members LIKED this post:


  16. #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    03.06.16
    Location
    colorado
    Posts
    166
    Liked: 48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan Clayton View Post
    An even better analogy is with P1/2. The very same car is free to switch back and forth between P1 and P2 so long as the car meets the technical specs of the destination class. I don't have an inside track to the thinking of the CRB, but you might have better luck with this track than with trying to move the cars wholesale from FA to FX.
    I like that thought Stan and even more to your previous comment. Give the driver the option to downgrade to FX if he/she chooses or take the 'risk' continuing to run against FA. I truly see this as a win win.

    Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

  17. #92
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan Clayton View Post
    Two counterpoints. First, NAF1000 prohibits engines prepared to FA specs, which discouraged anyone wanting to go the built-engine route. Especially since last year it was a half-hearted spec change and the F1000 folks knew they didn't stand a real chance in FA. Second, it takes a while for big changes to filter down to cars on track. The CRB only just recently (last month?) actually changed the F1000-in-FA spec to allow FA-level prep. When those cars hit the track we will see what they're capable of and how many actually make the jump.

    Potentially, yes. Take a look at the Prod rules. Numerous cars are classed as 'Full prep' in one class...say, FP, and as 'Limited prep' in another...say, HP. This mean just what you'd think it does...the cars in HP are the rough equivalent of a restricted F1000 in FX, while those same cars/engines prepped to FP rules are the rough equivalent of a fully prepped F1000 in FA.

    SCCA took this route a decade+ ago to accommodate Prod competitors who wanted to upgrade/dumb down their car to a faster/slower class without having to buy a new car. You can move your car back and forth, but there is no plan ever to force, say, all the Full prep guys to go back to Limited prep, or the reverse.

    Conceivably, if F1000 were to be permitted in both FA and FX, this means you could prep your F1000 to FX spec if economical racing is your prime objective, then upgrade it to FA spec when and if circumstances change, or the reverse. But it is NOT really a prescription for rebuilding F1000 as a stand alone class.

    OTOH, if say, the FX version got really healthy and SCCA decided to reclassify it as its own National class, the cars remaining in FA would have a choice of staying in FA or dropping down to F1000 spec. As one can see this is all very speculative and only potentially conceivable, but there IS a route to accommodating both with precedence in the Club.
    Great concept Stan, perhap we can get the best of both worlds!

    FA, get the best if both worlds
    A. Allow Fa Cars with FA chassis to run fully prepped MC engines up to 1450cc at some specified weight TBD

    B. Allow current FB rules FB cars to have much modified 1000cc max disp xengines at a min weight tbd or specified engines of larger disp @ a weight tbd

    C. Allow current FB chassis rules cars to run FX class using restricted engine rules to slow the the cars to a target level. Use a limited number of stock spec engines to keep the costs in line

    Now i know that this sounds crazy but it essentially makes a lot of racers happy

    PS to current FA racers, you guys are pretty much out of Toyota engines and parts like blocks etc. I propose to design an MC, powered ejngine install 0kit for any Toyota powered chassis. This is technically very doable as i was going to build one but the budget for me was not possible. If someone is interested and has a suitable chassis i can do this project!
    Last edited by Jnovak; 12.22.20 at 7:53 PM.
    Thanks ... Jay Novak
    313-445-4047
    On my 54th year as an SCCA member
    with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)

  18. #93
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    01.11.05
    Location
    Zionsville, Indiana
    Posts
    3,164
    Liked: 1391

    Default

    Maybe we should think about how you make a F1000 perform at FX levels. You only have to talk to the FC people who have to deal with the FM on the track. A FC is faster lap times than a FM but only because they are much faster in the corners. The FM will blow by the FC, if the FC doesn't get a good jump out of the corners.

    The F1000 will be an even worse situation. If you restrict the power of a F1000 so it turns the same lap times as a FM, you will be even slower in a straight line than a FC. and your frustration with the FMs will be even worse than the FC guys. The only way I see any workable parity between the F1000 and the FM is to increase the the minimum weight of a F1000 by as much as 200 pounds, maybe 300, and keep the top speeds close to the same.

    In short, I think moving F1000 to FX is not doable and have a car that anyone will want to race. At least in FA, you can run you car right to its natural limits and with the restrictions that have been placed on some of the FA cars, you might be more competitive than many think..

  19. The following members LIKED this post:


  20. #94
    Senior Member Farrout48's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.22.17
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    241
    Liked: 133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 99sh View Post
    I like that thought Stan and even more to your previous comment. Give the driver the option to downgrade to FX if he/she chooses or take the 'risk' continuing to run against FA. I truly see this as a win win.

    Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk
    For a Stohr WF1, the differences between P1 and P2 are mostly weight, restrictor, diffuser design, and wing/end plate size. Reasonably easy to change from one class to the other.
    Craig Farr
    Stohr WF1 P2

  21. #95
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 99sh View Post
    I like that thought Stan and even more to your previous comment. Give the driver the option to downgrade to FX if he/she chooses or take the 'risk' continuing to run against FA. I truly see this as a win win.

    Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

    This would be the idea solution. I would like (I'm not going to speak for others even though they've told me the same) to run both FRP races and SCCA club races. But not in FA as a souped up F1000. But we should give those that want to go in the direction of changing their motors to run in FA what they want to. I wouldn't want to paint everybody into one single box.

    I want to keep my motor stock so I can race in both (FRP and SCCA club). Can't do that now (well, I can but it's useless...might as well just do track days. Cheaper and less hassle). I have no interest in spending the time, money or effort to get the motor in my car up to FA speed. I would be interested in spending the time, money and effort to get it into FX, because I think there is value there and won't be that hard. If people really have that much of a hard on for restrictor plates then fine, ok, then lets do that. I just think it's going to be a lot easier to manage with a rev limiter.

    Only reason I get into a car these days is for fun. In the early '80's when I was trying to make it a profession I did all kinds of reckless things in the pursuit a professional racing career. That's not where my head is today. I'm not going in the FA motor in a F1000 car direction because I consider those speeds to be completely reckless for that type of car as well as being in the pursuit of absolutely nothing of value. I get the same buzz high going normal F1000 speed (or FM speed). The fix really isn't that much higher. Others can disagree.
    Firman F1000

  22. #96
    Contributing Member problemchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.22.02
    Location
    Ransomville, NY
    Posts
    5,714
    Liked: 4285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman View Post
    Now all the F1000 group needs to do is get an active F1000 racer on the BoD and the CRB.
    They cannot even get an active F1000 driver in this discussion
    Greg Rice, RICERACEPREP.com
    F1600 Arrive-N-Drive for FRP and SCCA, FC SCCA also. Including Runoffs
    2020 & 2022 F1600 Champion, 2020 SCCA FF Champion, 2021 SCCA FC Champion,
    2016 F2000 Champion, Follow RiceRacePrep on Instagram.

  23. #97
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    I have been giving this a lot of thought and imo the only thing that will save this class is some variation on the following:

    1. Tidy up the rules to slighty modify the current combination of modified FB rules to fit the FB cars into FA, don't get me wrong but the CRB has already started what i am suggesting with the curent adjustments I am certain that the CRB understands this and they can make additional changes as appropriate. To even things up i think that further adjustments will be made as necessary.

    2 after a lot of thought i think that a class of restricted FB cars should be created to race within the current FX class and then adjust performance as necessary! Perhaps also limit the number of available engines to 2 or 3 brands and years etc

    Thañks ... Jay Novak
    Last edited by Jnovak; 12.23.20 at 4:30 PM.
    Thanks ... Jay Novak
    313-445-4047
    On my 54th year as an SCCA member
    with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)

  24. #98
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    09.07.05
    Location
    TORONTO
    Posts
    292
    Liked: 80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by problemchild View Post
    They cannot even get an active F1000 driver in this discussion
    Greg,

    What do you consider active?

    Jeremy

  25. The following 2 users liked this post:


  26. #99
    Member Teuobk's Avatar
    Join Date
    08.04.18
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    97
    Liked: 94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by problemchild View Post
    They cannot even get an active F1000 driver in this discussion
    Greg,

    Arax and I both raced last season and have been in this discussion.

    Jeff

  27. #100
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default Decision

    Pretty soon the FB community will have to make a decision about what the future of F1000 needs to be! If this is not done then the CRB will be happy to make the decision for you so someone will have to figure out what the rules need to be! Give it some thought and start to figure this out!
    Last edited by Jnovak; 12.23.20 at 10:59 PM.
    Thanks ... Jay Novak
    313-445-4047
    On my 54th year as an SCCA member
    with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)

  28. #101
    Contributing Member problemchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.22.02
    Location
    Ransomville, NY
    Posts
    5,714
    Liked: 4285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teuobk View Post
    Greg,

    Arax and I both raced last season and have been in this discussion.

    Jeff
    I stand corrected. There are a handful of active drivers participating in this thread.

    Elvis has left the building.
    Greg Rice, RICERACEPREP.com
    F1600 Arrive-N-Drive for FRP and SCCA, FC SCCA also. Including Runoffs
    2020 & 2022 F1600 Champion, 2020 SCCA FF Champion, 2021 SCCA FC Champion,
    2016 F2000 Champion, Follow RiceRacePrep on Instagram.

  29. #102
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Never saw a reply to my letter in Fastrak (maybe they are too scared to reply), but another letter requesting F1000 move into FX was turned down.

    In recent days I've been talking to the lawyer again about this whole Car Count Criteria and how it went down. (I stopped doing it after someone requested I do so to see how they treated F1000. Well, we do see how they do now).

    He's says maybe. It does appear to be fraudulent in the way they implemented it, backdating the rules the way they did, and without notice. Rule changing in the interest of competition is one thing, arbitrarily making wholesale rule changes that devalue the investments in our cars and equipment is another.

    They (the SCCA) broke their their own rule making process. They used their positions of power to backdate the rules to benefit themselves at the expense of others. This is the very definition of fraud.

    fraud

    1. A deception practiced in order to induce another to give up possession of property or surrender a right.
    2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
    3.a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
    b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.

    I invite anybody to convince me I'm wrong. Because I don't think I am.

    I'm open minded. How's what they did anything but wrong? How? Just make up rules as you go along? So that's how it works now? I was a paying member of the SCCA. I followed the rules. I expect them to follow the rules as they are written too, and they didn't. Not only didn't they follow the rules they back dated them. To benefit who? Themselves? Who else benefits from backdating the rules? Who?

    Backdating rules is a deceptive practice to induce another to surrender a right. Isn't it?
    Firman F1000

  30. The following members LIKED this post:


  31. #103
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    10.29.12
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    486
    Liked: 247

    Default

    The club is a private entity that can do as it pleases. You can sue them but at the end of the day there aren't enough F1000 cars running for it to be its own class.

    From the outside looking in the rules weren't kept in check and the costs and complexity escalated to a point where few wanted to participate.

    It's a shame too as the class did have a great concept.

    Brian

  32. #104
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B Farnham View Post
    The club is a private entity that can do as it pleases. You can sue them but at the end of the day there aren't enough F1000 cars running for it to be its own class.

    From the outside looking in the rules weren't kept in check and the costs and complexity escalated to a point where few wanted to participate.

    It's a shame too as the class did have a great concept.

    Brian
    Understand what you are saying. Not sure I'm going to either (sue). Even if I can.

    My point is, I was a paying member of the club (SCCA). By accepting my membership we (The SCCA and I) entered into a contract. That contract specified that there are rules of operation. They broke those rules, and it's costing me money (the value on my car and equipment). If they had followed the rules and went through the proper process that's perfectly fine. But they didn't. They gave no notice or warning, and they back dated the rule. That's not part of the rules we agreed to when we entered into our contract.

    I was sold a bad bill of goods. Don't you think I'm entitled to compensation? Just like there are lemon laws, same here. A contract is a contract. I lived up to my side of the contract. They didn't.
    Firman F1000

  33. The following members LIKED this post:


  34. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    10.29.12
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    486
    Liked: 247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland View Post
    Understand what you are saying. Not sure I'm going to either (sue). Even if I can.

    My point is, I was a paying member of the club (SCCA). By accepting my membership we (The SCCA and I) entered into a contract. That contract specified that there are rules of operation. They broke those rules, and it's costing me money (the value on my car and equipment). If they had followed the rules and went through the proper process that's perfectly fine. But they didn't. They gave no notice or warning, and they back dated the rule. That's not part of the rules we agreed to when we entered into our contract.

    I was sold a bad bill of goods. Don't you think I'm entitled to compensation? Just like there are lemon laws, same here. A contract is a contract. I lived up to my side of the contract. They didn't.
    What contract did you sign? Paying them your membership fee doesn't mean that you're entitled to have a class that suits your car.

    I think the class you chose unfortunately failed and doesn't have the numbers to be its own class. Had enough cars been running do you think that they would have axed the class? No, they wouldn't have.

    Formula Mazda had way more cars than F1000 and yet you don't see those guys causing a fuss. If I owned an F1000 I would be happy that SCCA allowed us to continue racing by joining the FA class.

    It's a shame in our society if something doesn't go your way the first option is to sue.

    Brian

  35. The following members LIKED this post:


  36. #106
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B Farnham View Post
    What contract did you sign? Paying them your membership fee doesn't mean that you're entitled to have a class that suits your car.

    I think the class you chose unfortunately failed and doesn't have the numbers to be its own class. Had enough cars been running do you think that they would have axed the class? No, they wouldn't have.

    Formula Mazda had way more cars than F1000 and yet you don't see those guys causing a fuss. If I owned an F1000 I would be happy that SCCA allowed us to continue racing by joining the FA class.

    It's a shame in our society if something doesn't go your way the first option is to sue.

    Brian

    You obviously don't understand what a contract is. The minute they took my money, that was a "contract."

    There were rules for participation. They broke those rules.

    Besides, we had enough cars to keep the status. A lot of the cars were racing in a path to the runoffs at the regional level, which was a valid path. If we had been told we had to race at the Majors to keep our status then we would have. Then they changed the rules in the middle of the season, and then backdated that rule by one year and a half, and then told us we had to be racing in Majors all during that backdated year and a half, and all the racing we had been doing in the regionals didn't count.

    This is an example of a contract broken.

    They took my money, Changed the rules (with extreme prejudice - by doing so without notice and by backdating the rule) Devalued my investment. This a classic example of when damages are owed.
    Last edited by Thomas Copeland; 01.22.21 at 12:33 PM.
    Firman F1000

  37. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    10.29.12
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    486
    Liked: 247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland View Post
    You obviously don't understand what a contract is. The minute they took my money, that was a "contract."

    There were rules for participation. They broke those rules.

    Besides, we had enough cars to keep the status. A lot of the cars were racing in a path to the runoffs at the regional level, which was a valid path. If we had been told we had to race at the Majors to keep our status then we would have. Then they changed the rules in the middle of the season, and then backdated that rule by one year and a half, and then told us we had to be racing in Majors and all the racing we did in the regionals didn't count.

    This is an example of a contract broken.

    They took my money, Changed the rules (with extrema prejudice - by doing so without notice and by backdating the rule) Devalued my investment. This a classic example of when damages are owed.
    I completely understand what a contract is, can you show me in the fine print where SCCA violated it policies? It being a private entity can do what it pleases with the classes it offers. You paying your money makes you a member, not a decision maker.

    If they wanted to eliminate SM tomorrow they could.

    The last two years of entries around the country have verified the lack of a need for its own class. There have been 2-3 F1000 cars showing up at the majority of the FRP events with 1 guy winning everything.

    The ship has sailed on this class unfortunately.

    Brian

  38. #108
    Banned
    Join Date
    02.04.02
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,399
    Liked: 1116

    Default

    I hate the fact that our society is so litigious.

    I also hate seeing people getting screwed.

    That being said, if I were "judge and/or jury" I would have two major issues:

    (1) your contract with the SCCA was membership, not the right to race your vehicle to a stable set of rules. In fact, the rules are subject to change on a monthly basis by simply changing them in the next version of the GCR.

    (2) proving "damages". Race cars depreciate rapidly, especially in classes where there is rapid development. How much did your car go down in value because of SCCA's actions beyond what it would have gone down if they just eliminated the class the following month?

  39. #109
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman View Post
    I hate the fact that our society is so litigious.

    I also hate seeing people getting screwed.

    That being said, if I were "judge and/or jury" I would have two major issues:

    (1) your contract with the SCCA was membership, not the right to race your vehicle to a stable set of rules. In fact, the rules are subject to change on a monthly basis by simply changing them in the next version of the GCR.

    (2) proving "damages". Race cars depreciate rapidly, especially in classes where there is rapid development. How much did your car go down in value because of SCCA's actions beyond what it would have gone down if they just eliminated the class the following month?
    Good points.

    But a membership, especially one where money passes, is still a contract. We both entered into this membership based on an agreement. One in writing.

    I don't believe changing rules includes deceptive practices that include back dating them. This is my point. Change the rules all you want. But when you back date those rules to the detriment of others. Now you're talking damages.
    Firman F1000

  40. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    02.04.02
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,399
    Liked: 1116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Copeland View Post
    Good points.

    But a membership, especially one where money passes, is still a contract. We both entered into this membership based on an agreement. One in writing.

    Agreed. The contract was in exchange for your money they were providing you membership in their club. They honored that.

    I don't believe changing rules includes deceptive practices that include back dating them. This is my point. Change the rules all you want. But when you back date those rules to the detriment of others. Now you're talking damages.
    Agreed again. Their practices were screwed up. Just don't know how you prove damages when you were subject to them changing the rules at any time to begin with. You were vulnerable to total loss at any time you participated through no fault of your own.

    They should have just said in the next GCR, "screw all that stuff you read before. We don't give a rats' ass about any of that. These classes no longer exist as stand alone classes because not enough of you, whatever we decide that means, participated this season. No big dance for you." Wouldn't have created many fans, but that doesn't seem to be a concern anyway.

  41. #111
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    01.11.05
    Location
    Zionsville, Indiana
    Posts
    3,164
    Liked: 1391

    Default

    Thomas,

    Instead of gripping, why don't you do something positive to get the F1000 numbers back up the where the class can stand on its own.

    Trying to have F1000 become a part of FX is not going to happen. FX and F1000 are totally incompatible. The performance of all the cars in FX are strictly controlled while F1000 is a development class and F1000 will become faster over time as people continue to develop the F1000.

    You might put your energy into getting more F1000 on the tracks and make it attractive for people to enter the class.

    I was talking to George Dan some time ago and he said that he felt the current Suzuki 1000 cc bike would make a really good engine for the class. Maybe the current Suzuki engine will be a source of engines that can revive the class with engines that are available and easy to make work in a formula car. A replacement for the old Suzuki engines that were around when the class was new would help revive the class. Also maybe that engine might need some restraints so it does not out perform the existing cars in the class. Maybe F1000 needs some rule changes to make the class even better. That is a conversation that might be very productive.

    Maybe you could lead an effort to raise a prize fund for F1000 cars at the run offs this year. I help do something similar to get F2000 up and running years ago. F2000 had to race against the water cooled Super Vees back then, and were out performed by a similar amount that F1000 is out performed in FA today.

    I would like to see some interest from people wanting new cars or components that they can use to convert existing cars to F1000. I did some design work on another formula car project that would allow me to offer a rear drive housing at a significantly reduced cost of what I did for the original Citation F1000 cars.

    Bottom line, I think that F1000 is the only formula car, at this performance level, that really has a future in the long term. A new FA is very unlikely as I see it. But I might be blind.

  42. #112
    Contributing Member John Nesbitt's Avatar
    Join Date
    07.04.03
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    1,727
    Liked: 870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daryl DeArman View Post
    I hate the fact that our society is so litigious.

    I also hate seeing people getting screwed.

    That being said, if I were "judge and/or jury" I would have two major issues:

    (1) your contract with the SCCA was membership, not the right to race your vehicle to a stable set of rules. In fact, the rules are subject to change on a monthly basis by simply changing them in the next version of the GCR.

    (2) proving "damages". Race cars depreciate rapidly, especially in classes where there is rapid development. How much did your car go down in value because of SCCA's actions beyond what it would have gone down if they just eliminated the class the following month?

    I tend to agree with Daryl on this one. For information, I attach the SCCA membership form. No mention of rules stability or rules-making process. The GCR (section 1.2.4.) explicitly requires one to renounce litigation as a condition of entering an event.

    In the US, I suppose that anybody can sue anybody. Whether a lawsuit prospers is another question.

    That said, backdated rules-making is not a member-friendly way to proceed.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    John Nesbitt
    ex-Swift DB-1

  43. #113
    Contributing Member Thomas Copeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.19.00
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    1,499
    Liked: 165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S Lathrop View Post
    Thomas,

    Instead of gripping, why don't you do something positive to get the F1000 numbers back up the where the class can stand on its own.

    Trying to have F1000 become a part of FX is not going to happen. FX and F1000 are totally incompatible. The performance of all the cars in FX are strictly controlled while F1000 is a development class and F1000 will become faster over time as people continue to develop the F1000.

    You might put your energy into getting more F1000 on the tracks and make it attractive for people to enter the class.

    I was talking to George Dan some time ago and he said that he felt the current Suzuki 1000 cc bike would make a really good engine for the class. Maybe the current Suzuki engine will be a source of engines that can revive the class with engines that are available and easy to make work in a formula car. A replacement for the old Suzuki engines that were around when the class was new would help revive the class. Also maybe that engine might need some restraints so it does not out perform the existing cars in the class. Maybe F1000 needs some rule changes to make the class even better. That is a conversation that might be very productive.

    Maybe you could lead an effort to raise a prize fund for F1000 cars at the run offs this year. I help do something similar to get F2000 up and running years ago. F2000 had to race against the water cooled Super Vees back then, and were out performed by a similar amount that F1000 is out performed in FA today.

    I would like to see some interest from people wanting new cars or components that they can use to convert existing cars to F1000. I did some design work on another formula car project that would allow me to offer a rear drive housing at a significantly reduced cost of what I did for the original Citation F1000 cars.

    Bottom line, I think that F1000 is the only formula car, at this performance level, that really has a future in the long term. A new FA is very unlikely as I see it. But I might be blind.

    It wouldn't make an difference if we had 10,000 F1000 entries. I don't believe the SCCA will ever give F1000 back its own class. And those numbers if they existed, would only go towards boosting FA and not getting F1000 its own class back. So that's a fools errand.

    I will be working on boosting F1000 numbers this year, that's my plan, has been since last year, if I can get to a point where I can travel again. But neither of those two efforts has anything to do with SCCA Club Racing or Runoffs status. That's because my trust in the top level management of the SCCA is over. Over and out and over and done.

    The class still does have great potential. But I don't believe it does with the SCCA. Only when operating with a trustworthy organization can anyone be successful.

    I wish every day it didn't come to this. Man, do I wish it. But they shouldn't have done what they did. To screw people over like that. Where is written in the GCR they are allowed to back date rules and screw people over? Please point that section out to me.

    Either way, this entire thing would make an interesting argument in a courtroom. Hard to predict which way it would go. Or maybe it isn't.
    Firman F1000

  44. The following members LIKED this post:


  45. #114
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    10.31.07
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,522
    Liked: 1412

    Default

    Nevermind.
    Last edited by reidhazelton; 01.22.21 at 3:21 PM. Reason: Post deleted. Carry on!

  46. The following members LIKED this post:


  47. #115
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    10.31.07
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,522
    Liked: 1412

    Default

    .

  48. #116
    Contributing Member RussMcB's Avatar
    Join Date
    03.19.02
    Location
    Palm Coast, FL
    Posts
    6,669
    Liked: 544

    Default

    I wonder if F1000 cars might "take over" FA, kind of like F2000 cars took over FC years ago.

    Like Steve said,it doesn't look like any new FA cars are going to be built, maybe ever. While, on the other hand, it is much more likely for new F1000 cars to be built.

    Just thinking out loud.
    Racer Russ
    Palm Coast, FL

  49. The following members LIKED this post:


  50. #117
    Contributing Member
    Join Date
    09.15.01
    Location
    Tulsa,Ok
    Posts
    439
    Liked: 60

    Default

    IIRC the F2000 cars took over FC after the FSV cars were moved to FA because they were almost as fast. Hmmm. And where are those FSV cars/drivers now except for the two with Hayabusa motors in them? Is that what SCCA intends that we will just go away?

    How long will it take for those carbon tub cars to wear out where they quit racing them unless they are restricted down so far that they are not fun anymore?
    Then what happens to those drivers?

  51. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    02.04.02
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,399
    Liked: 1116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RussMcB View Post
    I wonder if F1000 cars might "take over" FA, kind of like F2000 cars took over FC years ago.

    Like Steve said,it doesn't look like any new FA cars are going to be built, maybe ever. While, on the other hand, it is much more likely for new F1000 cars to be built.

    Just thinking out loud.
    "Take over" in the sense that they are 75%-90% of the grid? Sure. "Take over" as in winning the big one? Not as long as people in traditional FA cars find the big one important.

  52. #119
    Senior Member Stan Clayton's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.14.03
    Location
    Mooresville NC area
    Posts
    4,157
    Liked: 309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Holland View Post
    IIRC the F2000 cars took over FC after the FSV cars were moved to FA because they were almost as fast. Hmmm. And where are those FSV cars/drivers now except for the two with Hayabusa motors in them? Is that what SCCA intends that we will just go away?

    How long will it take for those carbon tub cars to wear out where they quit racing them unless they are restricted down so far that they are not fun anymore?
    Then what happens to those drivers?
    Concern trolling much?

    Back in (IIRC) 1983 FA cars had small-block V8s (SCCA's version of Formula 5000). When that class died out SCCA rolled the then-1600cc FB cars into the class and put the V8s out to vintage...and retired the FB class moniker for decades. I'm not suggesting SCCA do that to the current FA cars, but new purpose-built FAs haven't been built in what, a dozen years? If nobody can affordably make and sell new ones the F1000 cars will take over by weight of numbers. We can lament the loss, but in actuality it has happened over and over in non-spec SCCA classes, and likely will never go away.

    If it does come to pass, all those old FA cars will be welcomed in vintage.
    Stan Clayton
    Stohr Cars

  53. The following 2 users liked this post:


  54. #120
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan Clayton View Post
    Two counterpoints. First, NAF1000 prohibits engines prepared to FA specs, which discouraged anyone wanting to go the built-engine route. Especially since last year it was a half-hearted spec change and the F1000 folks knew they didn't stand a real chance in FA. Second, it takes a while for big changes to filter down to cars on track. The CRB only just recently (last month?) actually changed the F1000-in-FA spec to allow FA-level prep. When those cars hit the track we will see what they're capable of and how many actually make the jump.

    Potentially, yes. Take a look at the Prod rules. Numerous cars are classed as 'Full prep' in one class...say, FP, and as 'Limited prep' in another...say, HP. This mean just what you'd think it does...the cars in HP are the rough equivalent of a restricted F1000 in FX, while those same cars/engines prepped to FP rules are the rough equivalent of a fully prepped F1000 in FA.

    SCCA took this route a decade+ ago to accommodate Prod competitors who wanted to upgrade/dumb down their car to a faster/slower class without having to buy a new car. You can move your car back and forth, but there is no plan ever to force, say, all the Full prep guys to go back to Limited prep, or the reverse.

    Conceivably, if F1000 were to be permitted in both FA and FX, this means you could prep your F1000 to FX spec if economical racing is your prime objective, then upgrade it to FA spec when and if circumstances change, or the reverse. But it is NOT really a prescription for rebuilding F1000 as a stand alone class.

    OTOH, if say, the FX version got really healthy and SCCA decided to reclassify it as its own National class, the cars remaining in FA would have a choice of staying in FA or dropping down to F1000 spec. As one can see this is all very speculative and only potentially conceivable, but there IS a route to accommodating both with precedence in the Club.

    While i am not a fan of Stans position i think that it may be the best future for FB. IMO THOUGH 1000CC ENGINES will not ever cut the mustard in IMO. PERHAPS bigger MC engines at higher weights is a better solution? Perhaps as a starter:
    1000cc at 1000 lbs
    1200cc at 1200 lbs
    1400cc at 1400 lbs

    The above is intended solely as a thought starter although i just might design /build a car if something like this comes to pass!
    Thanks ... Jay Novak
    313-445-4047
    On my 54th year as an SCCA member
    with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




About Us
Since 2000, ApexSpeed.com has been the go-to place for amateur road racing enthusiasts, bringing together a friendly community of racers, fans, and industry professionals. We're all about creating a space where people can connect, share knowledge, and exchange parts and vehicles, with a focus on specific race cars, classes, series, and events. Our community includes all major purpose-built road racing classes, like the Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) and various pro series across North America and beyond. At ApexSpeed, we're passionate about amateur motorsports and are dedicated to helping our community have fun and grow while creating lasting memories on and off the track.
Social