New formula and prototype classes

[bill gillespie]

Yes, I'm well aware there will be push back from those in FA. I'd be pushing back too. But if there is going to be real consolidation of classes then there has to be parity, which means probably everyone has to take some hit somewhere. We've taken ours. They took our class away.

Maybe there's a meeting in the middle place somewhere. But the idea that the onus should be strictly on the the F1000 cars to meet parity is just plain wrong. The SCCA put us in this situation, now they need to fix it, somehow.

I like the idea of FA1 and FA2. If that's workable. But then again, if they are going to do that why not just give us our class back?

there are many older FA’s that would fit in nicely with an FA2 class, and FB/ F1000 would be competitive with no changes required. Potential win/ win for total numbers and owners of older FA cars....we have to do something different....Pi/P2 seems pretty healthy from what Ive seen.

[Thomas Copeland]

-deleted my original post, decide this instead instead..

How would FA2 actually look? Wouldn't that be a different class? How's that different that just having FB?

[John Nesbitt]

-deleted my original post, decide this instead instead..

How would FA2 actually look? Wouldn't that be a different class? How's that different that just having FB?

Exactly.

[bill gillespie]

-deleted my original post, decide this instead instead..

How would FA2 actually look? Wouldn't that be a different class? How's that different that just having FB?

In my small mind, I see the difference being FA2 would not be Former FB cars only....FA2 cars could include older FA cars that no longer come out because they are 2nd, or 3rd tier performance.

ie: Ralt RT4, 40, 41...Swift DB4, 008, Reynard, etc. plus FB cars

FA1 could include:
Swift 014, 016, 014/MZR,....F3, Tatuus PFM18

Bob Corliss has a registry of current FA owners that is around 200 cars. Most don’t race for various reasons , but I believe many parked their cars because they aren’t competitive against a current top tier FA....if only 10 came out for FA2 that would be a numbers boost and give FB cars a good race without money to upgrade , or requiring FA to dial back.

Bob Wright, what say you ?

Bill

[reidhazelton]

It's interesting - the common theme here. It's been seen in other classes - FA/FB, FC, FF, F500, S2 etc.

Some new wizzy deal comes along. A sizable portion of the class objects. SCCA ignores those objections and implements it in the worst way imaginable. The new wizzy bit then jacks up the costs to compete. In short order the long time entrants stop going to races. The class is left with the few people who can afford the new rules change. Those few people all stand around scratching their heads about where everyone went and how they can get the "old" cars back.

Answer; you don't. They are gone. By the time SCCA realizes they have a participation problem it's too late. Those entrants have either aged out, stopped racing and found other things to do, or found other places to race. Look at the places these classes have had success. FF out west in Arizona and Colorado, FC in Averill's organized events, S2 in vintage. What's the common thread? None of the rules changes that forced them out in the first place.

People say SCCA shouldn't be club racing with what is basically vintage cars. Rules must change and you can't live on the Pinto and Kent forever. I feel that's true, but the opposite doesn't seem to work either.

[EricP]

How about just doing SCCA1 and SCCA2? SCCA1 = 2010 to present (or whatever cutoff makes "sense") and SCCA2 = 2010 GCR, period.

I'm kinda sorta kidding but it seems like this is an issue for about every other class in SCCA. Never ending issue...

[M.Sauce]

I have seen no mention of PRO FM in FA. There are probably more of those cars out there than anything else that is in FA.In SW Division we have 12-14 cars and we average 5-6 cars a race weekend. The reason these cars run is because there are no real FA's running. I know it is almost impossible to performance level all these different cars especially when you throw in FB cars and various F3 F4 cars.No one buys a car to race in a class thinking the class will be disenfranchised in a few years when numbers drop. Although a perfect solution is probably not possible a workable one should be considered to allow all these cars to race.

[bill gillespie]

I have seen no mention of PRO FM in FA. There are probably more of those cars out there than anything else that is in FA.In SW Division we have 12-14 cars and we average 5-6 cars a race weekend. The reason these cars run is because there are no real FA's running. I know it is almost impossible to performance level all these different cars especially when you throw in FB cars and various F3 F4 cars.No one buys a car to race in a class thinking the class will be disenfranchised in a few years when numbers drop. Although a perfect solution is probably not possible a workable one should be considered to allow all these cars to race.

Hi Mike,
I was just spitballing when I mentioned a possible grouping of cars for FA1 and FA2. I mentioned the PFM18 for FA1 but forgot about the PFM...it would be a good fit in FA2 with the other cars mentioned....win/win ?
Regards,
Bill

[Bob Wright]

Hi, Bill...You called me out...:-)

There are so many different lines of thought going on this thread. What I see: The Swift 016 is still the over dog in the class from all the data we see, but not as much as you might think. A properly driven 014 or RT41 can compete on certain tracks, not so much on others. Properly driven is a key phrase, and I'm reluctant to mention most club drivers don't meet that criteria.

What we see in the FRP results (available for all to see on our websites) is the 014, RT41 etc. cars are about 2 seconds shy of the 016's. The front FB cars are maybe 1 second behind the 014's, with the mid pack sliding into the lap times of the front FC's, all track dependent. The PFM is somewhere around the front FB cars. A well driven PM18 will challenge a 016, while the F3 has the HP but is too heavy. The rest of the currently allowed cars in the FA class are all slower

So, how does one make any sense of this? To address the issue of why there are "200" older FA's (defined as using the 4AGE or older motor) not racing, I point to the cost, longevity and lack of availability of the Toyota motor. Mr. Corliss has stated he's working on modernizing that motor but until it can be bought I don't think anything will happen. I might mention that all of the Toyota powered cars are at least 15 years old. The 016 was first built in 2006.

Is there enough interest in a FA performance level OW car that someone would design and build a new one? There are modern motors available that have both the HP and longevity to be viable. The resurgence of the P1 class says there are drivers interested in the performance level and are willing spend the money.

So, if I want to buy a new FA, what are my choices? I might be able to get someone to build me a Swift 016, but it will be a one-off and very expensive, not to mention I haven't solved any of the issues of operating cost and longevity. I can order a PM18 or F3 tomorrow and feel comfortable that I have a production car and factory support. That is a key ingredient to the future of the class (or really any class). At the end of the day its about supply and demand.

A modern FA class needs to have a set of rules compatible with modern design and production if its going to thrive. If an older car can compete, great, but if the older car is both unavailable and an over dog, the class will eventually die. I think this is part of the rise of spec classes- it takes part of the issue out of the equation.

The Club has a history of trying not to disenfranchise older cars- sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

[bill gillespie]

Hi Bob,
Thanks for your informed reply.....do you see any merit to the FA1/FA2 structure, similar to the C1/C2 used in the old Pro series ?
as an aside, I believe the Club turned down the request for the PM18 request for FA entry. Too much competition for F3 ?
Regards,
Bill

[Jnovak]

It's interesting - the common theme here. It's been seen in other classes - FA/FB, FC, FF, F500, S2 etc.

Some new wizzy deal comes along. A sizable portion of the class objects. SCCA ignores those objections and implements it in the worst way imaginable. The new wizzy bit then jacks up the costs to compete. In short order the long time entrants stop going to races. The class is left with the few people who can afford the new rules change. Those few people all stand around scratching their heads about where everyone went and how they can get the "old" cars back.

Answer; you don't. They are gone. By the time SCCA realizes they have a participation problem it's too late. Those entrants have either aged out, stopped racing and found other things to do, or found other places to race. Look at the places these classes have had success. FF out west in Arizona and Colorado, FC in Averill's organized events, S2 in vintage. What's the common thread? None of the rules changes that forced them out in the first place.

People say SCCA shouldn't be club racing with what is basically vintage cars. Rules must change and you can't live on the Pinto and Kent forever. I feel that's true, but the opposite doesn't seem to work either.

Reid, as an example I made 2 very serious trys at making F600 a separate class from F500 but the CRB told me NO WAY! Imo if they had approved either of my proposals F500 would still be healthy and we would have a lot more cars racing and zero animosity between racers!

[GrahamLoughead35]

I made 2 very serious trys at making F600 a separate class from F500 but the CRB told me NO WAY! Imo if they had approved either of my proposals F500 would still be healthy and we would have a lot more cars racing and zero animosity between racers!

Now the class may be in jeopardy

[Jnovak]

Now the class may be in jeopardy

Imo the class will not survive without changes!

[Mike42]

Has anyone taken the time to check out the new FMzR at
https://www.formulamazda.com/
No other class in SCCA has a Driver Advancement Program like what they are prepared to offer.
Every class evolves with upgrades or new chassis. There hasn't been a new FM built for decades. This is the new generation FM

[Matt Clark]

Has anyone taken the time to check out the new FMzR at
https://www.formulamazda.com/
No other class in SCCA has a Driver Advancement Program like what they are prepared to offer.
Every class evolves with upgrades or new chassis. There hasn't been a new FM built for decades. This is the new generation FM

is this to replace the older Star Mazda in SCCA that have been around for a long time now?
it doesn't appear to be the Tatuus PM-18 that shares bits with the USF-17, and that website doesn't really give any info about who makes it or where it races... but I am guessing this is from Moses Smith?

[Lyngengr]

FRP offers us an excellent place to run and an unmatched experience for the time and money. Now FRP participation can be used towards a Runoffs invitation. Be reminded however that the FRP entries do not count toward SCCA's class totals. I routinely remind everyone on the BOD and CRB to not ignore those entries even though they are not included in the totals - they are after all still SCCA entries even if through PRO. I hope we will see more and more cross-over as was common years ago which will serve both SCCA and FRP in the long run.

John, FRP runs a great series and there are equivalents on the West Coast in PF2k. What the FX class allows are USF2k cars with the MZR engine a place to run in SCCA (otherwise those cars were FA and hopelessly outclassed). What would have made more sense, and was being heavily requested, was to allow the MZR cars to run in FC with appropriate restrictions. Bob Wright has told me he knows exactly how to even the playing field, so it definitely could be done.

To bring up the 2 liter formula car fields, I think the SCCA will need to combine a few classes eventually. For instance, combine FC, USF2k, and FE2 into a single class running either Zetecs or MZR engines. Get rid of the old FE class. These cars are close on performance now, it wouldn't take much to equalize the three and come up with a single class. That would also give people with Zetecs (like me) an option for a different engine and gearbox. I would also think a spec tire should be used in this combined class, no more open tires and associated costs.

If the BoD really wanted a home for F4 cars, they could figure out how to include those in the FC/USF2k/FE2 class, probably thru restrictor and tire sizes. But to create a new class as this FX group makes no sense in the long run and just adds more confusion to the already fragmented small-bore formula classes.

[Mike42]

is this to replace the older Star Mazda in SCCA that have been around for a long time now?
it doesn't appear to be the Tatuus PM-18 that shares bits with the USF-17, and that website doesn't really give any info about who makes it or where it races... but I am guessing this is from Moses Smith?

Yes Matt, this new car will replace the original FM and is being built by Moses Smith.
The official launch for the car will be in December so stay tuned for more details.

[SStadel]

This thread got hijacked a bit, but some clarification after I spoke to my Board Rep. FM will no longer be a stand-alone class. It will be in the new FX class. FE is done as a Majors class, which was planned. FB as we all know is gone as a stand alone class as well. The board minutes that were the start of this thread were a bit misleading as it still had FM as a class and did not mention FX until later. My point being, we have eliminated three formula car classes and brought in one new one. The formula car class lineup will be as follows (this is my understanding): FA, FE2, FC, FX, FF, F5 and FV. Seven classes, down from nine

[E1pix]

Yes Matt, this new car will replace the original FM and is being built by Moses Smith.
The official launch for the car will be in December so stay tuned for more details.

That new car and concept seems to have real potential!

All the best to you, to Moses, and to all FM racers. Hope it spits flames like the others. :-)

[CGOffroad]

So the new FM will be an MZR with a Sadev sequential. Sounds very similar to FE2. With the classes that SStadel pointed out, would the new FM run in the FE2 class ??

[Mike42]

So the new FM will be an MZR with a Sadev sequential. Sounds very similar to FE2. With the classes that SStadel pointed out, would the new FM run in the FE2 class ??

No it will not run with FE2
This is a much better car and has a contingency program that is second to none. Anyone that wants to win some serious money to move up will want to be in the new FM

[CGOffroad]

Ok. Out of the 7 classes that were listed, I didn't see an FM class. So, was wondering what class a new FM will run in.

[problemchild]

we have eliminated three formula car classes and brought in one new one. The formula car class lineup will be as follows (this is my understanding): FA, FE2, FC, FX, FF, F5 and FV. Seven classes, down from nine

And the exact same number of OW race groups. And the exact same problems of mixed class racing. The on-track experience will be exactly the same for the competitor. The only thing this accomplishes is saving the cost of a few trophies, and the time spent in impound watching the podium ceremonies.

Why does the "rearranging the chairs on the Titanic" analogy come to mind? Is this supposed to be reform?

[Daryl DeArman]

And the exact same number of OW race groups. And the exact same problems of mixed class racing. The on-track experience will be exactly the same for the competitor.

Let's pretend there was a whopping 9 OW cars at an event, evenly spread amongst the 9 classes. Now there's the same number of race groups but 7 classes for those same 9 cars. I'd wager at least 3 people had a better/different race experience as they actually had somebody in class to race against.

Fewer classes with same number of entrants usually equates to better racing for more people, even if the number of race groups must stay the same.

[Bob Wright]

So...I can't help myself...Who's actually designing and building the car, who's funding the 'driver advancement', and where is it going to race? Oh, yea...what's it going to cost?

[Thomas Copeland]

Ok, now they need to start combining the following classes:

FP
HP
GTL
B-SPEC
SM
GT1
GT2
GTX
AS
T1
EP
STL
T3
T2
STU
T4
GT3

There are way too many sedan classes!!!

[problemchild]

Let's pretend there was a whopping 9 OW cars at an event, evenly spread amongst the 9 classes. Now there's the same number of race groups but 7 classes for those same 9 cars. I'd wager at least 3 people had a better/different race experience as they actually had somebody in class to race against.

Fewer classes with same number of entrants usually equates to better racing for more people, even if the number of race groups must stay the same.

There may be some validity to that theory, until you consider that this is supposed to facilitate rogue "spec cars" and disenfranchised current cars. Am I going to enjoy my racing more by putting a 50 hp restricter on my FA car so I can battle with a F? car for a class win.All these guys race with each other anyway ..... regardless of what class they are in. That is part of the mindset of the drivers who race very fast cars in SCCA. They want to fast and beat the other guy.

[John Nesbitt]

Ok, now they need to start combining the following classes:

FP
HP
GTL
B-SPEC
SM
GT1
GT2
GTX
AS
T1
EP
STL
T3
T2
STU
T4
GT3

There are way too many sedan classes!!!

I assume that was tongue-in-cheek.

For a rough cut at a reality check, consider entries (not turned a wheel) at this year's Runoffs (and assuming all FEs become FE2s):

SM - 60
SRF3 - 55
STL - 36
EP - 30
FE + FE2 - 29
HP - 29
B-Spec - 26
FV - 26
GT2 - 26
STU - 25
T4 - 25
GTL - 20
T1 - 20
T3 - 20
T2 - 19
FP - 18
AS - 17
GT3 - 17
P1 - 16
F5 - 15
FF - 14
P2 - 14
GT1 - 13
FC - 10
FA + FB - 9
FM - 8

Be careful what you ask for. You might get it.

[Thomas Copeland]

I assume that was tongue-in-cheek.

For a rough cut at a reality check, consider entries (not turned a wheel) at this year's Runoffs (and assuming all FEs become FE2s):

SM - 60
SRF3 - 55
STL - 36
EP - 30
FE + FE2 - 29
HP - 29
B-Spec - 26
FV - 26
GT2 - 26
STU - 25
T4 - 25
GTL - 20
T1 - 20
T3 - 20
T2 - 19
FP - 18
AS - 17
GT3 - 17
P1 - 16
F5 - 15
FF - 14
P2 - 14
GT1 - 13
FC - 10
FA + FB - 9
FM - 8

Be careful what you ask for. You might get it.

Only partly...

But if they are really serious about there being too many classes....why are all their missiles aimed at just OW classes?

[Daryl DeArman]

There may be some validity to that theory, until you consider that this is supposed to facilitate rogue "spec cars" and disenfranchised current cars.

True, if that's the real goal. I'm thinking the goal is class consolidation/elimination with this being the idea to replace entries of those who felt disenfranchised.

Am I going to enjoy my racing more by putting a 50 hp restricter on my FA car so I can battle with a F? car for a class win.

I don't know if you would. I will tell you that if it meant the difference between putting around by myself or having somebody to race against, I'lll take the restrictor and have somebody to battle.

I understand that nobody wants to volunteer to make their cars slower.

If it was all about speed and not the competition nobody would be racing FV, FF, SM or SRF. I can race a faster car at the RunOffs for less money than I can win in any of those four classes if I'm not concerned about having somebody in class to battle. As to battling people in other classes, the faster car guy is a wanker and needs to find another hobby and not meddle in other class battles.

[Daryl DeArman]

Only partly...

But if they are really serious about there being too many classes....why are all their missiles aimed at just OW classes?

Don't confuse missiles aimed with missiles fired.

[John Nesbitt]

Only partly...

But if they are really serious about there being too many classes....why are all their missiles aimed at just OW classes?

For the sake of discussion, let's assume that non-sedan classes do have missiles aimed at them. The reason for that would be obvious. If you look at the 10 lowest-entry classes from that list I posted, and disaggregate FA and FB, eight of the 10 are open-wheel or sports racer classes.

I do not like it, but that is the reality.

[problemchild]

Be careful what you ask for. You might get it.

But that is typical SCCA thinking ..... as if the Runoffs are the only barometer to judge the health of the class. That is equally a barometer of how SCCA is not providing value to some classes, which are now working to organize their own racing at regional levels, or with other organizations and promoters (SVRA, VRC, FRP, etc). Rather than providing better value, "we will make sure we provide worse value and hope they go away." It is not even a conspiracy but an obvious blatant agenda!

[Terry Hanushek]

Grag

But that is typical SCCA thinking ..... as if the Runoffs are the only barometer to judge the health of the class. That is equally a barometer of how SCCA is not providing value to some classes, which are now working to organize their own racing at regional levels, or with other organizations and promoters (SVRA, VRC, FRP, etc). Rather than providing better value, "we will make sure we provide worse value and hope they go away." It is not even a conspiracy but an obvious blatant agenda!

John quoted the Runoffs statistics because their are easier to acquire and are a reasonable proxy for the state of Club Racing. For this discussion, I have added the Total Participation in the 2019 Majors. Discarding GTX as an artificial class, the bottom 4 and 7 of the bottom 13 are open wheel classes. FF and FV are the only two open wheel class in the top half of participation.

Many classes (both open wheel and closed wheel) are encountering declining particpation and seeking alternatives within and outside of SCCA. Each is addressing their problems in different ways.

I don't like it either and I am not advocating any particular course of action. I'm just supporting John's statement of reality.

Terry


2019 Majors Participation

SRF3	791
SM	747
STL	311
GT2	239
EP	203
FV	201
FF	177
FP	170
T2	169
HP	165
STU	164
T4	160
T3	152
T1	150
GT1	141
B-Spec	127
FA	126
FC	118
P1	116
AS	115
FE2	111
P2	108
GT3	105
GTL	103
F5	100
FM	89
FE	56
FB	23
GTX	12

[problemchild]

Grag



John quoted the Runoffs statistics because their are easier to acquire and are a reasonable proxy for the state of Club Racing. For this discussion,

I will agree that Runoffs stats are easier to acquire, but I will not agree that they are a reasonable proxy. Just the opposite. Look at how FF, GT1, and GTL move for example Participation values are more applicable, but only looking at Majors participation does not tell all.

FM is in trouble and needs to find a place to race. FE is being absorbed into FE2.
But as I mentioned in another earlier post, FA, FB, F5 and F6, all suffer big time from a lack of common agenda within their community, which has in some cases, been increased by SCCA's misguided attempts to herd them. In 3 of those classes, one particular member has been instrumental in fueling the discord. What SCCA did to FB, based on the skewed participation numbers was shameful, which when combined with the whole engine restrictor fiasco, has been devastating to that class.

Because SCCA has spent hundreds of thousands, or millions, of our money, to bring F4 and F3 to the US, SCCA has fueled the decline of its existing OW classes. Just think if that money had been invested into the current SCCA OW classes. FX is a just platform to help get F4 into club racing. USF2000 cars should be in FC. Other spec OW cars can run in the FA/FB class. There is no need for FX, just as there is no need to reclass existing cars that were and will be running in the same race group anyway. It is just a shell game that will not change the on-track experience of the competitors.

[John Walsh]

Because SCCA has spent hundreds of thousands, or millions, of our money, to bring F4 and F3 to the US, SCCA has fueled the decline of its existing OW classes.

Objection - assumes facts not in evidence.

[problemchild]

Objection - assumes facts not in evidence.

I would be delighted to know the facts of how much SCCA has spent on F4 and F3. Please share.

Surely, you are not suggesting that F4 and F3 are not in direct competition with FF, FC, FE, FB, and FA, and that SCCA leadership has chosen to invest in the new classes, rather than the existing classes. Five years later, and they are consolidating and eliminating those existing classes. The BOD has clearly taken this course with no challenge from membership. I do not understand why nobody cares.

[John Nesbitt]

I would be delighted to know the facts of how much SCCA has spent on F4 and F3. Please share.

Surely, you are not suggesting that F4 and F3 are not in direct competition with FF, FC, FE, FB, and FA, and that SCCA leadership has chosen to invest in the new classes, rather than the existing classes. Five years later, and they are consolidating and eliminating those existing classes. The BOD has clearly taken this course with no challenge from membership. I do not understand why nobody cares.

We could, and likely shall, spend all winter unpacking the various causes and individual per class weights for the relative decline of FF, FC, FB, and FA. (I am not so sure that FE is in decline. It got off to a slow start, but seems to be picking up steam with the introduction of FE2.)

However, it is laughable to suggest that F3/F4 had anything to do with that decline. For one thing, that decline had taken hold long before the advent of these classes.

[John Walsh]

However, it is laughable to suggest that F3/F4 had anything to do with that decline. For one thing, that decline had taken hold long before the advent of these classes.

^^^This, +1^^^

[problemchild]

If you two think that is laughable, then you are totally out of touch with junior open wheel racing and trying to do business in the real world. How many prospective OW racers have you talked to in the last year? Rather than laughing, perhaps you should try talking to any prep shop or junior OW shop who is trying to recruit drivers to race in FF, FC, FE, or FA. Introducing F4 has had a very adverse effect on the SCCA OW classes. Perhaps, you would listen to someone who earns their living in the business and brought 8 different drivers as 16 entries to 8 different SCCA club racing events in 2019.

Yes there had been a decline, but all that money and energy, could have totally turned around our exiting OW classes.

I am sure I am not the only one that noticed you ignored the financial numbers involved. If the total number is a million, or even half that ..... what could that investment (plus from their corporate partners) have done to turn around the decline of those 4 classes?