Why regionals and nationals?

[Stan Clayton]

Do you think national drivers want to deal with even larger fields including regional cars, reducing the already minimal quality and quantity of track time? We already get restricted regional groups at nationals. Part of the reason those classes are thin is the existence of similar alternatives. T3, SSC, SSB? All too similar. Add in SM. GP, FP, HP, EP (more miatas!)... some of those classes have the exact same cars with slightly different engine displacements. Weren't BP and DP just added? What the hell is ST? I don't even know. They can't find anything to like out of all those choices? Come on... they built their cars knowing the rules, and they chose regional racing.

Have you paused to think about why Regions have to add restricted Regionals to National weekends, Matt? It's because not enough National cars show up to pay the bills. Regions and Divisions have been shedding National races because they can't pay their own way. Four of 9 Division are now down to the absolute minimum of National races permitted in the GCR. San Francisco Region would drop its only National if it were permitted to, since Nationals barely break even and attract only half the entries of our typical Regional.

Please spare the me the "they knew it was a Regional class when they bought it" argument. From your own comments below it is clear that folks generally start off ignorant of the finer points of road racing, doing PDXs, track days, etc. Right now our rules arbitrarily forbid them bringing that car to Nationals to fill out grids that can't pay their own way. Furthermore, what possible harm to your track time does a guy do who brings his IT Bimmer to fill out the small-bore race group? Wouldn't you rather have him in the National small-bore race group than forcing the Region to create another race group because the GCR forbids mixing National and Regional classes? It seems to me that permitting him to race in Nationals is HELPING free up more time for everyone...not taking away from it!

I completely disagree with shoehorning regional classes into the national program. Why with stagnant participation have more and more national classes been introduced (ad hoc, no less)? It's been clear for some time that the strategy simply dilutes the existing classes by letting whiners / excuse makers get their own "dream class of the week." FE and FM, for example... TWO spec formula classes, both with Mazda engines, both national classes. SEVEN open wheel classes total in a country that could, at present and under ideal conditions, barely sustain ONE legitimate, professional open wheel road racing series. Completely absurd.

The Bod have kept adding classes because every class starts to fall off in participation within a handful of years of its introduction. Had they not continued adding classes we would not even have a National racing program.

Don't hate on FM and FE, Matt. Each of those classes brings twice as many racers to the Club each year as does S2. And don't forget...we are a club...here to provide for a wide variety of road racing experiences to our participating members - NOT provide entertainment for anybody else. Wishing all those "other guys" would just go away reminds me of the guy who came to this year's Runoffs. He attended the Town Hall and nearly all Tent Meetings asking the same question at each, "What is the name of our club?" When someone would dutifully answer him he would make an impassioned plea to get rid of all those open wheel cars, all the sports racers, the GT abominations, IT, Touring, Showroom Stock and everything else that was not a 2-seat open top (preferably British) proper "sports car" in the Production category. It was not a pretty sight.

If you want to make a distinction between nationals and regionals, then make national racing more like it used to be instead of an extension of regional racing. Less class glut, higher quality fields, more difficult Runoffs qualification, etc. It's supposed to be limited appeal, serious stuff. Modernize existing classes and eliminate or merge dead ones. Tighten up the program. It's unwieldy as it is. Over 80% of the 30 (!) existing national classes averaged LESS than 6 cars per race nation wide in 2007. Sorry, but that's pathetic and incredibly frustrating.

Matt, you seem to have lost touch with the fact that we are a participatory membership club, not some dictatorship where the big kahuna tells folks what car to buy if they want to play in his sandbox. We have a mechanism in place (the 24 class rule) that is both the carrot and the stick to keep class bifurcation from getting too far out of hand. We could argue about whether that is the right number, but it would be just quibbling over detail.

As for getting new people involved... in my experience, the vast majority of people get started in track days now. I did, actually. Many of those organizations (BMW Club, PCA) have their own single marque racing series. Why those people tend to stay away from the SCCA, I'm not entirely sure. They have their own message boards, and whenever SCCA comes up, Spec Racer Ford and Spec Miata receive the most interest. I find that uninspired and unimaginative, but if that's what they like, fair enough.

Ah, so you do understand the diversity of interests in road racing. Now please extend some of that understanding to your fellow SCCA members.

As for young people, road racing has experienced a precipitous decline in popularity over the last 10-15 years. Blame the awful "pro" landscape for this mass extinction. Unless they're part of a road racing family, most young people have probably never heard of SCCA.

Contrary to your statement, road racing has exploded in popularity over the past 10-15 years, with more avenues of entry every year. Our challenge is to capture the right mix of that influx. Adopting elitist postures and forcing thousands of our members to sit in the back of the bus is not, in my opinion, a successful strategy.

Stan

[Matthew DiRenzo]

I'm completely aware of why restricted regionals are added to national events (this is rare in NE Div btw). What I'm suggesting is that permanently adding more regional racers to national events is not the correct way to increase national participation in the long term, and it makes for unmanageable race groups. I also suggested that adding classes is fine, just get rid of or combine outmoded classes to compensate. This has been done (GT Lite) recently and many times in the past. Cars can always be raced in regionals... regional cars can always be sold to new regional racers. It's great racing for the reduced time and money invested, nothing wrong with that. I started in regionals for that reason. Obviously the membership has to propose these things, but that's not the whole story....

You appeal to the rules process, but CSR has already been given a bye once. Its continued existence was due mainly to 1) arbitrary intervention, 2) the get-out-of-jail-free card of DSRs being allowed to run in the class, and 3) various homeless and hopelessly uncompetitive field filler cars being added (no offense to the people running them, which is admirable; it's not their fault). Nevermind that the 24 class rule was implemented within the last year, and THAT came about due to the ad hoc creation of several national classes in complete disregard of the existing GCR procedures. Part of my distaste for the situation is that I simply don't feel there's any consistent "process" being followed... I don't remember getting a vote... and as a member, I'd like to see that improve, or at least be made more transparent. I am hoping the new rules sort things out eventually, but for that to happen, those rules must be enforced.

The notion that I'm "hating" on any of the classes is simply not true. It's nothing personal, and the amount of numbers they contribute has nothing to do with my argument. In the long view, there's simply no need for both classes (FE/FM) at a national level. It would be far better to have 800 entries in a single class than 400 split into two redundant classes. That's the whole point I'm trying to make. Unfortunately, the decision making process has led us in the opposite direction... I don't expect FM to be abolished tomorrow in favor of FE, nor do I expect FM owners to set their cars on fire and go buy FE cars, etc. etc. I'm suggesting that future solutions need to avoid this scenario and encourage new participants to get involved in existing classes, rather than satisfy "dream class of the week" scenarios or please the marketing men. I do not even own an S2 car and have run two classes in the last 4 years, going to the Runoffs all 4 times. Faced with doing something else I start looking hard at things like the F2000 series. A lot of people have cast their vote on that one, and I think we'd like to see those people come back. I personally would like to continue racing w/SCCA, and I'd like to see the national program head in the direction I've described.

While I'll acknowledge that amateur road racing has increased and diversified overall (and greyed), the same simply can't be said for big time pro racing. Road racing is a blip on the greater public's radar compared to NASCAR, and I simply don't see how you can think otherwise. I don't know about you, but when I explain to the non-enthusiast what I race, I usually say something that starts with "not like NASCAR." Those people need to be tapped at some point. You seriously believe that's not the case?

[Jim Garry]

I am a bit annoyed that it is the only point that you felt worthy to bring up in a response.

I left my response short because I didn't want to hijack the thread, just make a brief comment about the bias.

For the past 15 years I autocrossed and this is the problem that I had with many autocrossers. The us versus them attitude towards road racing that comes off with a response like that is just getting old. You read way too much into that sentence

You talk about an us vs them attitude but you think it's autocrosser attacking road racing. That lacks perspective. Fact is, members of both sides attack the other. On apexspeed I see no reason to continue that by statements such as "... even autocrossing ...".

I'd like to suggest if this sub-thread is to continue, the next person begin a new thread.

Respectfully,
Jim

[cooleyjb]

I left my response short because I didn't want to hijack the thread, just make a brief comment about the bias.



You talk about an us vs them attitude but you think it's autocrosser attacking road racing. That lacks perspective. Fact is, members of both sides attack the other. On apexspeed I see no reason to continue that by statements such as "... even autocrossing ...".

I'd like to suggest if this sub-thread is to continue, the next person begin a new thread.

Respectfully,
Jim

PM sent

[malexand]

Whew! As I have read this thread, it has occured to me that I must be the oldest active member reading Apexspeed! When I first joined (1967) there was no such thing as Regional and National races. In fatc, there was no distinction between Pro and Club races. there were only SCCA races. They were advertised in the media, and the public was actively asked to attend. That's how I became involved. I was invited by a friend to go to a place called Green Valley Raceway outside of Fort Worth, Texas to watch Ken Miles drive one of the new Shelby GT 350's. I think that that's how most folks of my age (none of your business what my age is) got involved. Later, in the late 60's and early 70's, SCCA road racing enjoyed a huge growth (about the time SCCA won the road racing war with USAC and AAA). This is when the club split Pro Racing away from Club Racing, and started running regional and national races(which I agree with).

In SW Div., we have traditionally run Regional/National races with the regional race on Sat. and the National race on Sun. This is basically because we've never had enough members to run totally separate regional and national series. As such, we've enjoyed large fields, if a somewhat frenzied race experience. Most of our Nationally licensed drivers, myself included, run both the regional and national race each weekend. Therefore, at least in SW Div., I don't think there's too much difference between the quality of the field in regional versus national races. I understand that could be entirely different in divisiona with more members.

This longwinded story all leads up to the point that we now have a new and very real problem. With the rising cost of fuel. Many of our drivers (and workers) are opting out. They apparently simply can't justify the cost of going to the races. We have a regional/national race on the 21st and 22nd of June at Houston, and, I'm told, we currently have 40 drivers pre-registered. This is drastically down from the norm. In light of the increased difficulity of getting even committed racers to the track, I would submitt that all of us in the SCCA family have to take a fresh look at any option open to the club and its various divisions to get people out. If this means combining regionals and nationals again, or whatever, so be it. This may get a lot worse before it gets any better, and we need to be flexible!

Michael Alexander

[rickb99]

Whew! As I have read this thread, it has occured to me that I must be the oldest active member reading Apexspeed! When I first joined (1967) there was no such thing as Regional and National races. In fatc, there was no distinction between Pro and Club races. there were only SCCA races. They were advertised in the media, and the public was actively asked to attend. That's how I became involved. I was invited by a friend to go to a place called Green Valley Raceway outside of Fort Worth, Texas to watch Ken Miles drive one of the new Shelby GT 350's. I think that that's how most folks of my age (none of your business what my age is) got involved. Later, in the late 60's and early 70's, SCCA road racing enjoyed a huge growth (about the time SCCA won the road racing war with USAC and AAA). Michael Alexander

Michael,

Cycle back 10 years before you and you have my story. Invited by a high school buddy's father to come out and watch SCCA amateur road racing with Jim Hall, Max Balchowsky and Bob Bondurant racing. HOOKED me for a life time.

But, unless we can get the SCCA BACK to the 'old days' of inviting the public to come WATCH all levels of club ROAD racing (yes, even solo) it may be a 'hobby' that's destined for the "Politically Correct" dung pile. Other then family/friends and lovers, FEW of the public are being introduced to the wonders of road racing at the amateur level.

All they see on TV is the Mega-Zillion dollar pro racers and few realize what a wonderful thing is happening at the amateur level for many to enjoy.

[kea]

Michael,
Did you ever see the road races which were part of the River City Festival, that were in downtown Austin each summer, that the Green Valley club put on?
Keith

[Charles Warner]

Whew! As I have read this thread, it has occured to me that I must be the oldest active member reading Apexspeed! When I first joined (1967) there was no such thing as Regional and National races. . . . . I was invited by a friend to go to a place called Green Valley Raceway outside of Fort Worth, Texas to watch Ken Miles drive one of the new Shelby GT 350's.

Sorry, Michael. I was a corner worker at Green Valley in 1966. You are right about the races. We also had the Trans Am series with Gurney, Jones, Donahue, et al.

[jwr914]

I'm actively involved with MSRHouston to instruct their members and clients as part of my commitment to them for race sponsorship. In that capacity I give thrill rides, instructional thrill rides, basic driving instruction and competition licensing instruction. In those capacities I have the opportunity to meet young and old car enthusiasts that wish they were racers to those that could care less about racing. We get exotic supercars to grocery getter Hondas and the most consistent thing is the SCCA doesn't serve their wants or needs. The list is pretty long but the major ones are:
1) Few modern affordable street cars.
2) If the cars are modern they are crippled to run slower than antiques
3) Most young people can use a computer in their sleep and find it crazy that the SCCA is so paper oriented and computer phobic. (Look at the GCR on timing and scoring or registration)

Examples:
1) Production is just now recognizing that FI is cheaper than Webers and stock wings and air dams or not generally accepted. Honda S2k CR
2) Most people have never seen a "Spridget" before attending an SCCA club race and then see them only as loud novelties. Talk about slammers with fart cans.
3) The solo folks understand the benefits of online registration and payment. What business model doesn't want you to pay six months in advance, use your money and then charge a late withdrawal fee.

Being older than Mike I too remember when DKW sports racers ran with big sedans and the field included local mechanics to P. Jones, M. Donohue, AJ Foyt and the like. And he is 100% right about the good sense it would make in our Division to run everyone with similar cars at the same time once again.

Keeping to the thought that we have to have only National CARS on track at one time lends poor worker turnout to comment, "Why did I sit through a six car race? Can't anything be done to get more cars on track?" If we must segregate between regional and national it should perhaps be by license and not what car we own. Personally I think people that complain about having to pass slower cars poor sportsmen and snobs. Part of racing and car control is adjusting for all race conditions while staying on track and not hitting anyone or anything.

James Rogerson
CSR 32 (Thanks to David Koller) past SM #46
Houston Region RE

[msbacola]

jwr914 said

[quote][/The list is pretty long but the major ones are:
1) Few modern affordable street cars.
2) If the cars are modern they are crippled to run slower than antiques
3) Most young people can use a computer in their sleep and find it crazy that the SCCA is so paper oriented and computer phobic. (Look at the GCR on timing and scoring or registration)

Examples:
1) Production is just now recognizing that FI is cheaper than Webers and stock wings and air dams or not generally accepted. Honda S2k CR
2) Most people have never seen a "Spridget" before attending an SCCA club race and then see them only as loud novelties. Talk about slammers with fart cans.
3) The solo folks understand the benefits of online registration and payment. What business model doesn't want you to pay six months in advance, use your money and then charge a late withdrawal fee.
QUOTE]


Thank you, I'm 34 and have been to over 100 SCCA race weekends in the past 4.5 years, just over 40 Nationals the rest were regionals. I have talked to many people around my age
about getting started in racing and you are right the SCCA doesn't serve their wants or needs.

Last year at a Road Atlanta National, a New possible racer(just did a skippy school) was interested in Formula Ford but was disheartened(after purchasing a rule book) that the motor was a carbureted Cortina 1600 GT. He asked me if I had ever seen a Ford Cortina but I never have because I am only 34 years old. I like Formula Fords and I am not knocking them but it is easy for a New/younger/uninformed person to get turned off.


As far as Nationals and Regionals;

I dislike Nationals and think that any combination would hurt Regionals.

Perception becomes Reality

The Nationals are full of big money operations that pull up in rigs that have canopies costing more than some of the cars competing in regionals. If people perceive that they need to spend that kind of money to go racing when they first check out the SCCA, the reality is that they will probably go in another direction.

Look at NASA, the mid-atlantic division gets 200+/- racers(not including HPDE) in IT/Production and GT style cars. No formula cars and just a handful of sports racers. NASA was formed in 1991 according to their website, and seem to have started from a modern clean slate. I joined in 2002 via the internet and registered for my first event at the same time.

The SCCA needs a major overhall, or Maybe we can do like MTV or ESPN and just come up with SCCA2.

Just remember SCCA2 was my idea first, all the original classes could have SCCA and all new classes could be in SCCA2, sure beats consolidation.

Michael

[iamuwere]

I also am in the "new driver" mold at 32 and my sister at 29.
The big factor in starting young drivers? Money. Family. Time.
Solo drivers? Money. Many do not want to go club racing, but a bunch do.

I agree with the above comment about the need for a cheap formula class. NO, not another formula class. I do think we have too many, but a cheap, competitive chassis in an existing class/class to be combined/folded together.

The other factor in choosing a formula class is finding a chassis BIG ENOUGH for younger drivers. The average height of a 20 something or younger is substantially taller than of 20 years ago. Chassis need to be updated to fit bigger drivers. I have tried on several FF/FC chassis and have not found one yet I will fit in. Apparently a new Piper or Citation will fit, but see above on "money". Luckily my F5 was easy to modify to fit my height. I did try on an FE recently and with the seat removed, I could maybe just drive the car. (Wheel in my legs and very hard to get through to the shifter). And I am not that big. 6'3" and 230. Many of my friends are bigger and my sisters friends bigger yet. Formula classes are just not an option for many.

Just some random thoughts. Not in any particular order or relevance.

jim

[rickb99]

I agree with you completely, Jim.

My son is about your age and I recall when he was in high school he and ALL of his friends were over 6' tall. He has topped out at 6' 2" broad shouldered and slim but solid build.

While young men get bigger, cockpits get smaller. If he hadn't be absolutely committed to formula car racing there's no way a person of that build would fold themselves into todays cockpits as a 'beginner'. We finally found he could double up enough to drive older Swift's or Reynard's and ended up with Reynard FC and "modified" front hoop structure to allow an acceptable safety clearance for his knees. There's still some fit and comfort issues but he's making it work.

Formula racing (and car manufacturers) are missing a part of the market by NOT accommodating the larger (as in taller) drivers of today at the amateur level. I appreciate the engineering issues of weight distribution and CG associated with attacking this problem but it would be nice if somebody did it in a 'reasonably priced' chassis. Then we'd be able to buy one in 20 years when the price came down.

[msbacola]

Size wise I am in the same boat, 6'1" with shoulders that are to wide, sitting in an FE(less the seat) my shoulders are pinched so tight I have trouble taking a breath.


There are many unforseen advantages of racing a formula car. The big advantage cost wise is being able to have a much smaller tow rig and hauling less weight to the track compared to other cars. SM's weigh 2200bs wo/driver, a person should be able to get their formula car, spares, extra wheels w tires, and tools, and still be under that weight.


Jim,
Formula first is big in the Cendiv, and I thought someone was building cars for sale that would fit larger drivers. I have to wait till the off season to take a better look at them as I have only seen 1 in the SEDIV. Last I heard they had over 250entries just in regionals last year and were trying to keep the class regional only for the time being. SRF's have a ton of room and I think that has led to their popularity among certain size drivers.

I guess size does matter.


Michael

[Stan Clayton]

Last I heard they had over 250entries just in regionals last year and were trying to keep the class regional only for the time being. Michael

Last year FST had 142 total entries. So far this year they've had 48, and are just coming into the prime racing season in their strongest Divisions (upper MidWest). Stan

[GT1Vette]

I haven't tried one on lately, but back in '96 I actually fit into the Formula Mazda that Star Mazda brought to the National Convention that year. They had to cut the car apart to get me out, but...

I'm 6'6" and probably weighed 260 back then. I have no desire to watch my wheels while racing, but if I did I'd have to consider FM. Toss in the relatively low maintenance aspect and I'd think it's a natural for entry level drivers with room for expansion (pun intended) for those with higher goals.

[Bill Bonow]

Butch, we had a guy 6' 5" and 280 lbs in one of our cars and we didn't have to cut it apart for his exit. I'm not going to say he was very comfortable in the car, but he was in it
Maybe we should get you set up in a car for the ARRC?

Stan has the official SCCA entry numbers and we kept our own (less official) numbers that totaled 171. We did get 237 total FST entries last year that included non-SCCA events. Either way, there are plenty of cars going to multiple Regional events. Actually, we like Regionals and want to stay there and help grow that part of the club. I sort of wish the BoD would recognize the importance of a strong Regional racing program as the starting point for the majority in SCCA club racing members rather than focusing all their energy on the Runoffs. But then again, what do I know.

[Stan Clayton]

Bill makes a good point ... SCCA's official records count FST entries only from those Regions and Divisions which recognize FST as a class separate to FS, so it is entirely possible that there were really 171 entries, plus non-SCCA participation. In any case, they look like great cars! Stan

[Rick Kirchner]

What we need are realistic future goals for car designs that fit a wide segment of the population, not expatriate europeans or the just the smallest and fittest of the US population. Yeah, we're bigger. The rest of the world needs to get over that. It really does no good to put Butch in a FST and have him be 100lb over minimum, even if he can get in and out safely.

Spec a foot box that allows 4 qty size 13E dogs in width and height and a min weight with a 190lb driver to start.

It's a matter of demographics. Size the cars for where the money is.

[Bill Bonow]

Rick,

Couldn't have said it better myself. I'm 200 lbs in my drivers gear and need 50 lbs of ballast to make minimum in our class. Lead is much cheaper than titainium and that type of thinking is a great way to set up club racing rules that will attract the "common man" who wants to go hobby/Regional racing on the weekend.

[Larry]

At 5'8" and 265, I managed to fit in numerous formula cars. First, take the seat out and throw it away. Second, forget about the comparative comfort of your Lexus (Lincoln) and get used to the idea that it's a race car, and it will fit snugly. Sometimes you may need to widen the roll hoop braces, but a 6' 200-pounder isn't exactly Schwarzeneggar! If you want to fit, you can!

Larry Oliver
International Racing Products

BTW, I'm now down to a svelte 230!

[Rick Kirchner]

I would agree at the top of the chassis Larry, The only real complaint I have there is lack of room under my right elbow and it has been tough to make a seat that truly holds me side to side since my shoulders stick out between the chassis bars on the Van Diemen.

But in the footbox, the lack of room is pretty stupid.

I have to wonder how much the small footbox contributed to Harry Sauce's injuries.

Sorry for the thread hijack!