Cost of Majors

[Steve Demeter]

Am I the only person out there that wonders why the entry fee for a majors, that gives you two qualifying sessions on Friday, a race on Saturday and a race on Sunday is $600 when a double regional with about the same track time, same number of sessions, in two days costs only about $400.

How much are we paying for the "Majors Stuff". I realize that there is increased cost for track rental going from 2 to 3 days, but why not do it in two days instead.

That would make it a whole lot more affordable.

[Dale Carter]

I thought the same thing last year. It sure seemed that we were getting less track time for dollar spent and not quality track time. Sometimes 6 or 7 classes in our race group . Must not make a difference for most. Is everybody happy with this format? I'm not. Makes you wonder.

[fv9]

Am I the only person out there that wonders why the entry fee for a majors, that gives you two qualifying sessions on Friday, a race on Saturday and a race on Sunday is $600 when a double regional with about the same track time, same number of sessions, in two days costs only about $400.

How much are we paying for the "Majors Stuff". I realize that there is increased cost for track rental going from 2 to 3 days, but why not do it in two days instead.

That would make it a whole lot more affordable.

COnsider yourself lucky with that schedule. The Thunderhill Major this weekend has one qualifying session, two races and a warm up with combined groups (FV is mixed in with FA). They are also charging for Fri test day. This event used to be 3 days. No longer as SF Region continues to try and bilk everyone on the west coast.

[Marshall Mauney]

Am I the only person out there that wonders why the entry fee for a majors, that gives you two qualifying sessions on Friday, a race on Saturday and a race on Sunday is $600 when a double regional with about the same track time, same number of sessions, in two days costs only about $400.

How much are we paying for the "Majors Stuff". I realize that there is increased cost for track rental going from 2 to 3 days, but why not do it in two days instead.

That would make it a whole lot more affordable.

It seems that if you tried to compress the schedule into two days, something would have to give. We'd either have shorter sessions or fewer race groups. If paying a few more $$$ for the event means that we don't have a single group with all open-wheel and sports racers together, I'm all for it.

In the end, the entry fee isn't that large a portion of a total race budget, is it?

[Keith Carter]

For us it is. Tires and entry fee are the two biggest cost factors in our weekends. We're just a two man camping weekend warrior type of racer though. We're no longer the norm... I would rather have a 10 or 15 minute qualifying group (depending on track) of just our class than a 25 minute qualifying group of alphabet soup cluster f@#$ of a session. I'm more than happy that One Formula has come up with this FE championship to utilize the Divisional weekends as opposed to just Majors for our group. I wouldn't be heart broken in the slightest if we were to go to an all Divisional format. It would be a win win for our group.

[dalz]

I think you'll see a lot of racers continue to vote with their feet.

[Ralph Z.]

Alphabet soup in SCCA is why I moved to SVRA vintage racing.

[cooleyjb]

Getting all wound up over the cost of 26 of the 150ish? races (Many of which are quite well attended by the way) and saying that is why people are leaving? I don't buy it.

[Hardingfv32]

No, it certainly is not the only reason, but it is an easy reason to focus on when making the decision to quit SCCA. The cost/benefit of the Majors Program is the worse in SCCA amateur club racing history.

Brian

[cooleyjb]

For most people running the majors the difference to 200 bucks is a rounding error on the weekend.

[Max Power]

I've been doing random checks of entry fees of SCCA events and found that Cen-Div events (using the upcoming $495 double divisional at Blackhawk as a baseline) are anywhere from 32% to 53% higher per minute of track time than other regions/divisions.

I'd love to know the reason for this. I had no idea Blackhawk was such a premium venue.

[reidhazelton]

For most people running the majors the difference to 200 bucks is a rounding error on the weekend.

That's exactly the problem. The people who are left, or 'most' of who are left are the ones it doesn't matter to. Those where $200 does make a difference have left. Soon it will be 'those at Majors events don't care about $1,000 entry fees - it's a rounding error, no one is complaining at the events'...say the 50 people at a venue.

Also, it's not just the $200. It's the substantially longer tows for much of the country. CenDiv is very lucky, their longest tow is Pittsburgh. If you live in Colorado, you're towing to NOLA. What's that? 14 hours?

From what I see, vintage groups are growing. NASA is growing. LeMons is growing. ChumpCar is growing. SCCA is not growing.

Majors Program = Higher entry fees. Longer Tows. Less track time. More mixed run groups.

Dump the Majors program, dump Divisional programs. Combine the two, get rid of the 'podium' stuff. Give value, not fluff. We go to race, for track time - not to stand on a milk crate and spray sparkling grapefruit juice.

[fv9]

That's exactly the problem. The people who are left, or 'most' of who are left are the ones it doesn't matter to. Those where $200 does make a difference have left. Soon it will be 'those at Majors events don't care about $1,000 entry fees - it's a rounding error, no one is complaining at the events'...say the 50 people at a venue.

Also, it's not just the $200. It's the substantially longer tows for much of the country. CenDiv is very lucky, their longest tow is Pittsburgh. If you live in Colorado, you're towing to NOLA. What's that? 14 hours?

From what I see, vintage groups are growing. NASA is growing. LeMons is growing. ChumpCar is growing. SCCA is not growing.

Majors Program = Higher entry fees. Longer Tows. Less track time. More mixed run groups.

Dump the Majors program, dump Divisional programs. Combine the two, get rid of the 'podium' stuff. Give value, not fluff. We go to race, for track time - not to stand on a milk crate and spray sparkling grapefruit juice.

This. Right here. Well said. And after 20 years of riunning the spring national/Major at Thunderhill, Im not going. For these reasons exactly. I will, however, be running a Crossle 32f at the May SOVREN race.

[cooleyjb]

You're still complaining about a small part of the pie and that 12% of the races are causing people to race elsewhere.

And where does towing come into this discussion? That's not what this is about, this is about the entry fee. The distance towed is a red herring in this debate.

You wanna know why SCCA FF and FC numbers and in turn all open wheel numbers are down.

Mike Rand.

I love his series but IMO opinion ,and a number of others I have talked to, it has been the top reason open wheel numbers are in the crapper. The loss of the numbers of the regular guys have cut run groups down for the open wheel guys. From 3 to 2 in some places and from 2 to 1 in others.

But back to my original point. The cost of the Majors program is not holding most of the people back. Yes there will be some, but others are taking the places of them. The first 3 in the south east have averaged over 250 I believe with VIR sitting at 275. West coast is a tough one since most of those people don't have runoffs on the radar so those numbers won't go up unless the RO is on the west coast.



And then the other problem people are talking about. I want more track time. I want run groups with less classes. You can't have both.

[fv9]

You're still complaining about a small part of the pie and that 12% of the races are causing people to race elsewhere.

And where does towing come into this discussion? That's not what this is about, this is about the entry fee. The distance towed is a red herring in this debate.

You wanna know why SCCA FF and FC numbers and in turn all open wheel numbers are down.

Mike Rand.

I love his series but IMO opinion ,and a number of others I have talked to, it has been the top reason open wheel numbers are in the crapper. The loss of the numbers of the regular guys have cut run groups down for the open wheel guys. From 3 to 2 in some places and from 2 to 1 in others.

But back to my original point. The cost of the Majors program is not holding most of the people back. Yes there will be some, but others are taking the places of them. The first 3 in the south east have averaged over 250 I believe with VIR sitting at 275. West coast is a tough one since most of those people don't have runoffs on the radar so those numbers won't go up unless the RO is on the west coast.



And then the other problem people are talking about. I want more track time. I want run groups with less classes. You can't have both.

Not sure who your comment is directed at. Perhaps all of us. Anyhow, my chief complaint is scheduling. Tow 8-10 hours for a two day event, that was always three, to get two races and one qualifying session? And pay $600 to do it? Nope. Looks like plenty of vintage FF for me this year.

BTW - SF Region owns Thunderhill. We all paid for it in entry fees, etc for decades. And now they are gouging us for test days.

[rob66x]

I started racing in scca in 1968, As a 21 year old with a job in a body shop, it was very affordable. Well things have really changed ,motorhomes,toters, doubledeck trailers,and on and on. in those days even Penske came with an open trailer. Now days it costs a lot to run ive got a f 600 , the car is not expensive , but everything else is . my last race at laguna two weeks ago cost me $ 1000.00 for tires $ 600.00 entry, $ $300.00 gas, $90.00 race gas $ 100.00 food. 2 GRAND for a weekend. the last couple of years ive been running a 600 micro sprint. the cars are about the same price as my f 600 , but the entry fee for saturday nite is $50.00 , unless the track is dry slick I will still have tires left methanol costs me $ 25.00 for the nite and I can win $ 100.00 to $ 500.00 or more . Th car counts have gone up ,up, up at the tulsa shootout this year there were over 1000 entrants the class is growing like crazy. the only problem I have with this type of racing is a lot of the people are a little to agressive ( they like to fight as much or more than they like to race). and at 68 years old im sorta over that .

[reidhazelton]

You're still complaining about a small part of the pie and that 12% of the races are causing people to race elsewhere.

And where does towing come into this discussion? That's not what this is about, this is about the entry fee. The distance towed is a red herring in this debate.

There are 'costs' that exceed a monetary definition and the entry fee. This thread is about 'cost of majors'. The cost of an entry fee is one cost. The cost of fuel and time off work is another. That's opportunity cost. That is the issue. Majors have made racing more expensive for what is received and people seem to be not finding the value in it. Again, what racing organizations are growing and what organizations are stagnant or decreasing? When a working guy/lady sits down to enter a race and sees $600 entry fee and considers the tow involved to participate in the Majors program, it's enough to make people think twice. $600 and a whole lot of tow....or $300ish and run at my local tracks and do it with no time off? Same track time, half the cost in many cases.

Distance is a huge factor. Not only the cost to get there in fuel and wear-and-tear, but in time. If someone has to make an 11 hour tow. or even a 7 hour tow, that is a day off work, each way. If you want to race 5 times a year, that's 2 weeks vacation in just towing. The family will love that when the kids want to go to Disney Land. The Majors were a result of SCCA dumping the 2.5 rule and still attempting to have larger groups by drawing entries from a larger geographic area - creating longer tows. Factor in $200+ entry fees, and many will walk away - and they have.

And yes you can have more track time and less run groups. It's called the 2.5 rule. Or keep the large number of classes with similar cars (FE/FM for example) and 1 entry.

[Craig71188]

That's exactly the problem. The people who are left, or 'most' of who are left are the ones it doesn't matter to. Those where $200 does make a difference have left. Soon it will be 'those at Majors events don't care about $1,000 entry fees - it's a rounding error, no one is complaining at the events'...say the 50 people at a venue.

Also, it's not just the $200. It's the substantially longer tows for much of the country. CenDiv is very lucky, their longest tow is Pittsburgh. If you live in Colorado, you're towing to NOLA. What's that? 14 hours?

From what I see, vintage groups are growing. NASA is growing. LeMons is growing. ChumpCar is growing. SCCA is not growing.

Majors Program = Higher entry fees. Longer Tows. Less track time. More mixed run groups.

Dump the Majors program, dump Divisional programs. Combine the two, get rid of the 'podium' stuff. Give value, not fluff. We go to race, for track time - not to stand on a milk crate and spray sparkling grapefruit juice.

I just spoke to a good friend who was in Charlotte for the SCCA convention.
The numbers he heard:

10,000 licensed road racing drivers a few years ago, now 6,000 licensed drivers and falling.

SCCA "management" is concerned, but he still heard folks saying "Why would folks go to "insert name here" (NASA, Chump, Lemons, etc)? We still have the best program".

LeMons & Chump have destroyed SCCA endurance racing. NASA has simplified classes. Heck, SCCA SOLO II couldn't even add the CAM class without turning it into three classes!!!

Management has got to get a clue - no more "write a check - get a spec class". Combine A LOT of classes and reduce costs or there may be no one left to turn out the lights in the end.

There are a small group with big bucks that won't/don't care - but is that group big enough to sustain SCCA road racing?

I have given up on SCCA road racing. I will run with Chump when I want to go road racing. I have (what is likely) my last Solo vehicle (in B-Mod), if they manage to screw that up, I will likely be done with that as well. It pains me to say this as a 35+ year member, but I have petitioned for change and been told they know better in each and every case, and my "participation" is less enthusiastic than it has been in a long time.

OK, enough ranting, back to my "happy place" in the garage!

[cooleyjb]

There are 'costs' that exceed a monetary definition and the entry fee. This thread is about 'cost of majors'. The cost of an entry fee is one cost. The cost of fuel and time off work is another. That's opportunity cost. That is the issue. Majors have made racing more expensive for what is received and people seem to be not finding the value in it. Again, what racing organizations are growing and what organizations are stagnant or decreasing? When a working guy/lady sits down to enter a race and sees $600 entry fee and considers the tow involved to participate in the Majors program, it's enough to make people think twice. $600 and a whole lot of tow....or $300ish and run at my local tracks and do it with no time off? Same track time, half the cost in many cases.

Distance is a huge factor. Not only the cost to get there in fuel and wear-and-tear, but in time. If someone has to make an 11 hour tow. or even a 7 hour tow, that is a day off work, each way. If you want to race 5 times a year, that's 2 weeks vacation in just towing. The family will love that when the kids want to go to Disney Land. The Majors were a result of SCCA dumping the 2.5 rule and still attempting to have larger groups by drawing entries from a larger geographic area - creating longer tows. Factor in $200+ entry fees, and many will walk away - and they have.

And yes you can have more track time and less run groups. It's called the 2.5 rule. Or keep the large number of classes with similar cars (FE/FM for example) and 1 entry.

Like I said in my first post, you are complaining about 26 races across the country where the entry fee is 2-300 bucks higher.

Theres a reason most of SCCA racing is done at local races. It's cheaper and closer. But there is a decent number of people that want to race with more people and the Majors is bringing decent talent together that you don't see at the local races.

[butch deer]

It,s been a while since I got a $200-$300 raise in my social security check. Seriously the majors program was supposed to take a few highly subscribed race groups and give them the opportunity to have a few special weekends with good run groups and a special experience. It turned into another national with multiple class races,longer tows and added cost. In the meantime it devastated regional racing in large areas of the country. This weekend the Hallet majors has 126 entries while people in Tulsa with regional only cars don't have a single event at their home track. My region has a great track right inside their town and they don't race there because nobody comes to regionals. There are not enough drivers left to sustain two levels of club racing.

butch

[dalz]

The Midwestern Council is looking more interesting the more races I do with them. Their October 100mi. Long Race at BHF is a blast. Might hit the Milwaukee Mile with them. Had more fun with them last year than standing on the June Sprints podium like a fool with my winning trophy because I was the only finisher. If NASA ever throws together a FC/FE/FM group I'd check it out purely on principle. There are other increasingly attractive options out there.

[Ian Lenhart]

Like I said in my first post, you are complaining about 26 races across the country where the entry fee is 2-300 bucks higher.

Theres a reason most of SCCA racing is done at local races. It's cheaper and closer. But there is a decent number of people that want to race with more people and the Majors is bringing decent talent together that you don't see at the local races.

I know this topic specifically mentions "Majors", however CenDiv double Divisionals are $500 for 110 minutes. $30 less then June Sprints. Not really cheaper in CenDiv. Talk about value Joe, you race in the South East Division where you could run the early March Sebring Regional. (a 2 race regional ~ 110 minutes) for $230.

[cooleyjb]

I know this topic specifically mentions "Majors", however CenDiv double Divisionals are $500 for 110 minutes. $30 less then June Sprints. Not really cheaper in CenDiv. Talk about value Joe, you race in the South East Division where you could run the early March Sebring Regional. (a 2 race regional ~ 110 minutes) for $230.

That sucks. Has road America jacked up the track rental that much? Ugh. The regionals here are very geared to run top too with short enduros and such as well. For another 200 bucks you can run another 60-70 minutes with those as well.

As dalz said. Sure makes council more interesting. I loved running with them when I was in Madison.

[jhenn4716]

I've been doing random checks of entry fees of SCCA events and found that Cen-Div events (using the upcoming $495 double divisional at Blackhawk as a baseline) are anywhere from 32% to 53% higher per minute of track time than other regions/divisions.

I'd love to know the reason for this. I had no idea Blackhawk was such a premium venue.

A lot depends on what the track charges and insurance costs.

[cooleyjb]

A lot depends on what the track charges and insurance costs.

I am under the impression that SCCA insurance is not track dependant.

[jhenn4716]

I am under the impression that SCCA insurance is not track dependant.

The insurance is just one part of what you're paying for. The rest if track rental, and the rest of the services for the weekend.

[GAC]

The cost of the Dvisional at BHF this month is due to the low turnout last year. The cost per driver is a function of the number of drivers attending. They had a lower entry cost last year, but not enough people entered, so the cost this year is higher based on predicted entry numbers from last year. If more people entered, the cost would be lower the following year. If you want to race in the SCCA in CENDIV and see entry costs lower, enter the races.

[Marshall Mauney]

I would rather have a 10 or 15 minute qualifying group (depending on track) of just our class than a 25 minute qualifying group of alphabet soup cluster f@#$ of a session.

Good point. One of the most fun qualifying formats I've ever been involved in was in karts. We went out in single-class groups individually spaced by 15-20 seconds, with each person getting 5 laps - a warm-up, 3 hot laps and a cool-down. With 4 laps to run and a 15-second gap, catching someone on a hot lap was pretty rare, and generally meant that they had a problem and would give space. I don't know if it would work for us, but it ended the "balking" and "clustering" that makes multi-class qualifying such a pain.

[Marshall Mauney]

You wanna know why SCCA FF and FC numbers and in turn all open wheel numbers are down.

Mike Rand.

I love his series but IMO opinion ,and a number of others I have talked to, it has been the top reason open wheel numbers are in the crapper. The loss of the numbers of the regular guys have cut run groups down for the open wheel guys. From 3 to 2 in some places and from 2 to 1 in others.

OK, so why is that? Why can't SCCA compete?

It would seem that there are two different arguments here. One is the quality of the event, single-class track time, etc. - and Rand's series wins there. The other, though, is cost and distance, and it would seem that the "low-end" groups are winning that debate.

Is SCCA getting lost in the shuffle from trying to be all things to all people?

[Marshall Mauney]

SCCA "management" is concerned, but he still heard folks saying "Why would folks go to "insert name here" (NASA, Chump, Lemons, etc)? We still have the best program".

LeMons & Chump have destroyed SCCA endurance racing. NASA has simplified classes. Heck, SCCA SOLO II couldn't even add the CAM class without turning it into three classes!!!

Which one of those groups is relevant to open-wheel racing?

[budawe]

Insurance is the same for most road race weekends, $27 a car. Folks who double dip in two class get to pay twice.

Sanction fees that pay for costs incurred by the national office to manage road racing, are $12.25 per car. A typical example of a Topeka cost would be producing the GCR.

There is a volunteer incentive program that costs $6 per car that is used to discount membership for workers It is based on weekends worked. I believe one has to work 12 weekends to get a free membership.

Majors weekends are slightly higher, about $10 more for the above fees.

As you can see, these fees are not the elephant in the room. Track rental is and there's not much we can do about that.

Individual regions have costs as well and they vary considerably around the county.

As I have said before, Regions set entry fees based on their own formulas and conditions.

[Ian Lenhart]

The cost of the Dvisional at BHF this month is due to the low turnout last year. The cost per driver is a function of the number of drivers attending. They had a lower entry cost last year, but not enough people entered, so the cost this year is higher based on predicted entry numbers from last year. If more people entered, the cost would be lower the following year. If you want to race in the SCCA in CENDIV and see entry costs lower, enter the races.

Yes, the old business model. Let's charge more to make up the difference, offer the same amount of track time (55 minutes a day which is a 25 minute qualifying session and and a 30 minute race), and not change or offer anything different to help attract more racers.

Raising the price is driving people away. I know a few guys that are going to sit this one out due to the lack of value. Same guys sat out the fall sprints for the same reason.

Why do regions combine groups due to low participation, and not offer additional minutes to the all groups? If the track is rented, why not use it.

[budawe]

Many times there are constraints that restrict the length of day. At most of the West coast tracks there are noise controls that prevent early and late sessions. Road Atlanta has a two hour silence period on Sundays for worship. I know that standing out on a turn flagging for 8 hours is another constraint.

These are issues that effect all regions and the BOD is well aware of the problem. I chair the planning committee and this issue is at the top of our concerns. Solutions may mean that our concept of a race weekend may change. Combining different kinds of events like road racing and time trials, is likely to happen in under subscribed regions. Giving classes the option to have less costly spec tires is another idea.

Track Night in America, presented by Tire Rack, is another example of new ideas. We plan to reach out to non members and introducing them to the track experience. There is a lot of info in this month's Sports Car.

[Craig71188]

Originally Posted by Craig71188
SCCA "management" is concerned, but he still heard folks saying "Why would folks go to "insert name here" (NASA, Chump, Lemons, etc)? We still have the best program".

LeMons & Chump have destroyed SCCA endurance racing. NASA has simplified classes. Heck, SCCA SOLO II couldn't even add the CAM class without turning it into three classes!!!

Which one of those groups is relevant to open-wheel racing?

As to your questions regarding the quote above, it is simple really. If other competing groups are attracting drivers away from SCCA, participation in SCCA events drops and the cost per driver still competing goes up (track rental being the largest cot to a region to put on an event).

A secondary systemic issue is the addition of new classes diluting the pool of drivers across more classes, hence the "alphabet soup" groups of one or two driver classes. The reality is if your driver pool I shrinking, classes will need to be consolidated if you want competition.

Just thinking "if we fix open wheel racing it will be OK" is a bit short sighted in the overall health of SCCA.

[Jnovak]

Every racer who wanted their "own" class to race in now has their wish. You wanted it and YOU NOW OWN IT.

Now the comments below are simply my own and no one else's. I am just tired of the low entries and the constant reduction in track time and races with 5 or 6 classes together with dramatically different lap times.

IMO there is simply no answer other than class consolidation. This MUST BE FIXED or the SCCA will be out of business.

There should be an absolute limit on the number of classes, particularly in the Majors (Nationals). Combine classes that have similar lap time and are similar cars and get the Majors down to no more than 16 classes. Then perhaps racing will mean something.
Here is the majors class participation numbers for 2014. There are only 12 out of the 27 majors classes that averaged over 5 entrants per race. Now all of the Majors classes are over 2.5 entrants per race but the numbers are pretty pitiful imo.

http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/...ion%20Info.pdf

The SCCA needs to combine classes that have very similar types of cars that have lap times within + or - 1 second and then adjust rules so that parity can be achieved.

Please reduce the number of classes so that we can have better racing.

Flame away.

[Marshall Mauney]

The SCCA needs to combine classes that have very similar types of cars that have lap times within + or - 1 second and then adjust rules so that parity can be achieved.

Please reduce the number of classes so that we can have better racing.

Flame away.

Not trying to flame, but how do you think a combination of FF/F500/F600 into a single class would go over? Take off the restrictors from the 600s and the equalization of FF/F600 should be pretty easy, right?

How do you think this would sit with the guys who have spent $$$ on a Formula Fit when they get beaten by one of your cars with an e-bay motorcycle engine?

[FWIW, I think it would be pretty cool to see racing between cars using totally different approaches, but I may be in the minority.]

To add to the point, though, isn't the larger class count issue in sedans? When you have guys showing up with a single Miata and racing it legally in three different groups, is there maybe an issue with overlap? I've actually seen this done in a MARRS race, so it's not just a hypothetical. This same region has been reducing the open-wheel groups' track time for years, at the expense of more and more different ways to run the same bunch of Miatas......I just don't see the number of open wheel classes being the problem.

[Jnovak]

I have no problem with a merge of f500/600 with FF. I cannot image that the FF guys would go for that and I do not blame them. There is one issue here and that is that if you combined FF with F500/600 you would be combining the 4th most popular class with the 9th most popular class probably creating the 3rd most popular class. The biggest issue is that you would have $80k car getting beat by $25k cars, (sometimes).

Now I do think that FF and F500/600 should be one of the combined class race groups and that the FVs should have their own group. If FV had their own group the class entries would grow immediately IMO. No one wants to race an FV against cars that are 10 seconds a lap faster. NOT FAIR IMO.

When I discussed merging of classes it was not just pointed at formula cars. I think there is some opportunity in open wheel but even more opportunity in sedans and othe closed wheel cars.

For an open wheel example, (now the grenades and flame throwers will start), I think that there is a good possibility that FC (5.6), FM (4.8), FE (3.8) might be combined to produce a combined class that had entries totaling 13.7 resulting in the 4th most populous class given the 2014 numbers. The reality is that these 3 classes have their lap times within about +- 1 second of lap time. Let the FC rules stay the same and allow the FE and the FM car some minor changes to their specs and bam, you will have 30 car races with lots of different cars racing hammer and tongs. Will it be perfect out of the box? No but very soon the top 3 or 4 cars in each class with be fighting for the wins.

There is tons of opportunity in the closed wheel ranks too. So many cars have very similar lap times. Combine and adjust rules as needed.

[Steve Demeter]

Interesting to note in Jay's entry breakdown that the East and West Conferences usually had the highest number of entries across most classes. The West makes sense given the location of the Runoffs, but can someone explain the high numbers in the East?

Maybe they are doing something the rest of the Conferences can learn from.

[Brian C in Az]

Interesting to note in Jay's entry breakdown that the East and West Conferences usually had the highest number of entries across most classes. The West makes sense given the location of the Runoffs, but can someone explain the high numbers in the East?.

High population density and high median incomes compared to the mid west and south.

[Marshall Mauney]

I think there is some opportunity in open wheel but even more opportunity in sedans and the closed wheel cars.

That's the elephant in the living room.

How many classes include Miatas in nearly identical configurations?

Why do we need Touring, Improved Touring, Super Touring, Production, American Sedan.....? GT certainly makes sense as a group in the same way as the Formula and Prototype classes do, but the rest of the stock-derived classes just seem to be a mess.

Here's a "modest proposal" for divisionals that would allow a LOT more track time:

6 run groups:

Open large (wings)
Open small (wingless)
Prototype Large
Prototype Small (including SRF)
Sedan Large
Sedan Small (including Spec Miata)

This would level-load the track time and reduce the total number of sessions per segment - thus you can have either more sessions or run them longer. Yes, we would all have to drive clean and learn to play nice.

For an open wheel example, (now the grenades and flame throwers will start), I think that there is a good possibility that FC (5.6), FM (4.8), FE (3.8) might be combined to produce a combined class that had entries totaling 13.7 resulting in the 4th most populous class given the 2014 numbers. The reality is that these 3 classes have their lap times within about +- 1 second of lap time. Let the FC rules stay the same and allow the FE and the FM car some minor changes to their specs

The issue there is that the guys who bought into FE and FM did so because they didn't want to have to change the cars every time a new widget comes out in order to be competitive. Spec classes are intentionally managed differently from open-rule classes. If they can't live on their own, fine - but once you try to mix spec cars, their basic reason for existence has been destroyed. I'd also suggest that there is no way to ever make FE or FM equivalent to FC track-to-track unless you open up spring, wing and gearing options - and that's a big can of worms. In the end, mashing those cars together wouldn't change the number of run groups (nor would FF/F500/F600), so I don't think it helps solve the scheduling and track time issues.

Imagine, for example, that you let an open-rules car in to combine with SRF in a single class - would that be OK?

The question I would ask regarding spec cars is this: If the two largest classes are a spec sedan (Miata) and a spec sports racer (SRF), why have neither FE nor FM achieved the numbers they should? The cost/performance is definitely there in comparison to open classes, but they just can't seem to get enough traction to generate numbers like FF or FC.....? What have we missed?