FF car counts?

[cdona]

Why do you suppose the FF participation numbers are down so much so far this year.Sebring and Moroso only had 7-8 cars.The Phoenix Double Nat.typically has 16-20 cars this year only 13 cars.The Texas Double National typically has 16-20 cars and we only had 6 cars show up.I see a lean year for FF participation.I know at all these races the participation numbers were down for FF and FC but I don't have any info on other classes or total number of entries.Is it the economy,gas prices,spec cars or what?We sure need to work together to get FF people to participate.This last weekend CSR had as many cars as FF.

[zcar72]

Mike:
In Vintage the car counts are still holding up pretty well. That said we are seeing some reduced numbers and I think the economy has a great deal to do with it. This last weekend we had 22 vintage FF and running in a different run group we have a Club Ford class (1973 to 1983) and had five of them running at Phoenix International Raceway for our season opener. There were about four more Club Fords who are running with us this year who were not able to make PIR. The cars are out there, the trick is to make the weekend interesting enough so they want to come out and play.

[John Walko]

who won?

[cdona]

Robbie-Results as follows
Sat.King H.Sauce,M.Bowen,W.Renna,J.Luxon,M.Sauce dnf
Sun.King,Fayer,Bowen,H.Sauce,J.Luxon,M.Sauce
It was 37 degrees all day on Sunday.Fastest race lap was M.Sauce 1:46.6 but I only ran 9 laps-header broke.Greg basically had his way with us.My car had some problems-I couldn't get the brakes to work all weekend.I guess I focused on the brakes and did not pay enough attention to the headers.But I will be back.When are you gonna get a FF.My Euroswift is for sale cheap if you are interested.

[cdona]

Oh by the way,Congratulations to Greg King on two solid wins.

[cdona]

Does anyone know what the car counts were at Willow Springs and Carolina Motorsports Park for FF?It would be great to know.

[Donatob]

There were only six cars at Kershaw, SC this past weekend, but the whole event count was down. The thought was that people were afraid of the weather which turned out to be fairly nice (60's and dry for the most part). I personally knew of another couple of FF's that were snowbound in the north. There were only 4 FC's as well.

[will]

While I've a Vee guy, I personally think a lot of the problem has to do with the mixing of classes. A mirror watching contest isn't much fun if you have to spend your race watching out for FA's or Spec Racers. The regions are getting the entries from the IT guys so the other classes get thrown together.

Just an opinion ...

Veek

[Jerry Sloot]

Sebring SARRC/regional weekend Feb 22-23.....CF two cars.... JR wins, FF three cars Swanson wins, eye 2nd. It's the economy stupid....the SCCA just doesn't get it and contingency awards don't really motivate.....at least if you drag race you can choose cups or bucks...we just get a piece of wood with a decorative metal plate on it ... WOW - like that motivates anyone with experience anymore...eye no eye no ...the response is if you start awarding $ then you just encourage cheating...well it just might motivate someone to show up too. Mr. Johnson of the SCCA wants to run it like a business these days...well i'm already convinced he doesn't get it either but he is willing to pocket personally all he can while he's president. pronounce scca > SUCKA as in that's what was the last echo i heard after talking with Mr. J

[kea]

I race because I have no choice. I have to get the thrill of driving, trying to beat the other guy and trying to improve myself and the car. If the trophy was a slap in the groin I would still show up. Improved trophies and contingecy prizes are nice, but I still do it for personal satisfaction, the multilevel challenge that comes from this sport. If we are losing drivers to other sanctioning bodies because of their rewards package being better, then we have a problem. I am not planning on selling the CF to get into a sprint car or stock car just because they give out some money at the end of the night. I want to race raodcourses in a FF. If funding is extremely tight (as it is for some right now) then you put the racing on hold until your bank account heals. I think that is what we are observing.

just my thoughts

[knollmotorsports]

I sat down to reply to this a few days back and stopped. I believe Eye is correct. I don't know if it is simply a matter of the economy though or just the fact that this (SCCA) is not giving us (drivers/car owners) the bang for the buck we should be getting. The prize money or awards are not a major motivating factor for me personally.

I think we need to look at how we increase the return on our investment. We spend money to get one primary thing TRACK TIME. In my experience I spend at a minimum 2 1/2 days away from home and work to get ~70 minutes of track time. This is a PROBLEM. All other sanctioning organizations do better. A NASCAR, CART, IRL and other events run their programs in 3 days. We take 2 days minimum to run off a regional event. 7 days for Runoffs. This is crazy.

I don't have all of the answers, but think that we could make great strides by running more double weekends and creatively structuring practice. I.E. Group FC, FF, F500 together for practice. In Cen Div these classes would most likely comprise 2 race groups. Instead of giving a 25 minute practice session with a 5-10 minute break in between, give these classes one hour of track time. While there would be the possibility for more cars on track at one time, there would be more time for making adjustments and track time. I doubt that the track would be heavily populated throughout the entire session. For the race break it back out into the proper groups.

Perhaps instead of qualifying by time we draw for starting position and then run a qualifying race. Line up for the "feature" by the qualifying race results. While this would not increase track time, it would make it more important and meaningful.

The other and continuing problem is operating costs. We need to focus on that as well and I think the engine is where it starts. Tires will always be an expense and there simply is no good way to tackle that monster.

Just some rambling thoughts. We need something to decrease the amount of time away from home vs. track time. That is the appeal of the competing series - decreased travel time and increased track time.

Any other ideas??

John

[Ken Lawrence]

Eyerace is right for the most part. It's true, the dollars only go one way in this CLUB! This is nuts. SCCA makes a gobs of money from the racers and events. That's why there are SO MANY EVENTS. The more events they can sanction, the more dollars they make. I think this is the primary cause for our dwindling fields in class. The GREEDY SCCA keeps approving more and more classes to maximize the amount of participant dollars coming into them. As a result, they are watering down our fields. TOO MANY EVENTS, TOO MANY CLASSES and TOO MANY CHOICES, it's just that simple. We know they are NOT going to change the classes. So I propose that we SPLIT the massive number of weekends up into "purpose built" and "door slammers". The number of potential race weekends needs to be substancially decreased in order to bring the "per race" participation numbers back up. "SPLIT WEEKENDS" are the best solution to better quality racing, track time, and resource management FOR ALL. The SCCA included! I have NO connections nor the first inkling of how to put forth such a proposal to National, nor for a membership vote. Does anybody have any thoughts on this? Maybe this could become a new topic? See my post on "MARRS in Danger" on 2/24/03 for more on this. Maybe I am missing something. Pros/Cons anybody?

[Ken Lawrence]

John is absolutely right. My thoughts exactly! This is exactly what I am getting at with "SPLIT WEEKENDS". And "Qualifying/HEAT RACE" idea sounds like boat load of fun. Great post John.

[DENIS]

I don't think I'd go that far. I'm on the local BOD and see the numbers. Yes we make some money on it and yes, the AZ region has decent cushion in the bank. But the expenses of running the events continue to go up every year. Track rental, safety upgrades, promo, rentals, etc. etc. all cost us money.

I feel one of the biggest strikes against us here locally is the value of what we offer. I've pushed for a revised schedule of sorts for the new race next weekend at AMP and got part way. (That's anothe story)

Since I got out of the schools and into the club thing back in '93 we have cut our track time for our CUSTOMERS and it has hurt. For your entry fee (varies by region) you get 15/15/22 lap race on Saturday and the same on Sunday. I really feel this is too little time. We USED to get more time and I'm trying to make it work better for everyone here.

Why the reduction of about 15min per day? Classes and parings. Many of you complain openly of the mixing of classes and how it effects you. Well, it effects you this way too. We used to run four run groups and now it's six. As most tracks won't let you on until 8am or later and off by 4:30 or 5 what do we do? The only option becomes a single event regional with much more time per session, but only ONE race. And I always hear of everyone wanting more race time... It's a nasty cycle.

As for the car counts I say it's more the economy than anything else but we need to keep the folks we DO HAVE happy also.

[Michial Shumate]

Great discussion!! I have no idea why FF numbers are dropping either. Still the best development class and best wheel to wheel experience if you can run with the big dogs....if there is a value loss, I don't see how you are more effected that anyone else...

I don't want to be a downer, but let me ask you to ponder two questions as you go through this season and offer suggested improvements for the future:
1. What exactly has changed in the last 20 years at an SCCA National (track time is very close in Cendiv)? Why has this affected FF more than the others?
2. Why is FF dropping faster than any other class in Cendiv (the only division I have the data for)? (I have the graph if you want to see it)

If overall entries are relatively stable, why is FF being hit so hard? I don't know...maybe you can figure that out.

Greed of the SCCA is (now) a joke. There is a balance between the incoming and outgoing. The regions may choose to make profits but that is your local business to deal with.

Here's an excerpt from my BOD update on the Cendiv website ([url]http://www.cendiv-scca.org/[/url]):
-----------------------------
General Financial Comments
Our club will always operate relatively near the edge for one good reason. What it takes in from the members, sponsors, and other income streams (including Pro and Enterprises, theoretically) it will spend on the members. If it seems like you are always hearing we are making a small profit or loosing a small amount on money, things are operating correctly for a non-profit organization. If you wish the money were spent differently, tell us how. If you are pissed off at historical loans of your money (SCCA Inc. is your club and therefore has your money) you should be. Has the bleeding of Pro and Enterprises stopped affecting the clubs future? One way or the other it has; it’s not me that is making this a reality. It’s everyone: Steve Johnson, the entire BOD, but mostly YOU! You won’t elect anyone who wants to give away your money.
-------------------------
Also, I posted something on the related topic of competition on another board the other day, some of you may find it relevant:
-------------------------
Today's SCCA is not your fathers SCCA (I should know), and the increased investment in the technical staff and new marketing programs are something you will all see, hear and FEEL the effects of this year. Vent away, it's healthy and we are all passionate people. Have an opinion, and share it appropriately. But know things are changing.

Let me toss a few comments out:
1. The SCCA spends (my estimate) over $50,000 of your money just reimbursing the volunteer boards/ committee's for expenses every year. Yet the volunteers still spend a lot of out of pocket (I'm out almost $750 in two months). This is your money! Then we have a technical staff which has to cost say...a couple hundred thousand a year with bene's. Then we publish the rules and send out copies and have people trying to enforce them. This has cost associated also. Now, multiply this times the number of years the SCCA has been doing it and you see the investment, with YOUR money. Should we protect some of that from national FOR profit competing organizations? Or should we just hand it over to those that will cherry pick a small group of racers away from the SCCA? It's easy for them to do now; shouldn't we make it harder?

I know how easy it is to get caught up in the "things will never change attitude", but over the course of one topic, which is discussed for say... a week..they won't. But over the year, over the next 5, the SCCA will address real issues and lay out strategic plans that will kick the crap out of all our competition. The work has started, come to next year’s convention to see the plans. Category by category, even class by class the future will be laid out based on member input. Not every member will see their specific input, but there will be no doubt who came up with most of the ideas...YOU!! (Some people will bitch, because they have caused so much ear bleeding with their constant whining that their input is now so diluted it is ineffective.)

One other point, you have no idea how much all of the SCCA racing classes, and types need each other. Try developing the best worker force IN THE MOTORSPORTS WORLD..without IT, without formula cars, without GT cars, without Bugeye Sprites, without Solo, without Rally...it takes that variety to get to 66,000 members. That strength and our emphasis on safety are what give us true leadership. Copying our rules book is cheating the SCCA members, but actively coming after our members and volunteers is definitely not OK. They will have to earn each and everyone they get. The irony is that very few of these other groups has ANY strength at all. They are propped up organizations that could tumble any minute. Remember, YOU run the SCCA and it is not for profit...these other groups have people who want to make a living at taking your money to race. Sure they will promise each and every competitor the world.
------------------------
This last section might cover the issue of split weekends some. At your next race, go to the beer party and ask the workers how many races they want to work, and if the classes split which way they would go (or would they stay home becuase they like them both)? Too many Regionals is a fact, but unless Regions loose money they will all keep putting them on. Nationals are usually controlled on a divisional level, and the quantity is controlled. Doubling these would not fly, nor would cutting the number that each class could compete at in half. A split Runoffs is one of many ideas I have already heard...but again, check with the workers.

Anyway, I have taken enough of your time. Make sure that you give your input to the formula car Ad Hoc members and Comp. Board this year (lists on the SCCA.org site). The future of your class is changeable, and it is in your hands. After two months on the BOD I can't seem to find the evil forces sitting in the corner with their thumps up there ___es...deciding your fate in a vacuum.

[USF2000]

[quote]2. Why is FF dropping faster than any other class in Cendiv (the only division I have the data for)? (I have the graph if you want to see it)
[/quote][url="http://home.att.net/~m.waggoner/files/qualifiers2002.htm"]http://home.att.net/~m.waggoner/files/qualifiers2002.htm[/url]
Erik, with all due respect, your not being totally correct on that statement, FM,SSC and GT-2 having a higher percentage loss vs 01' and 10 of 24 classes having a double digit loss percentage.

Here's a couple of my opinons on [i]why[/i] the numbers have dropped.(Cen-Div)not in any order.

1. We lost two long time Formula Ford Cen-Div particpants, Bruce May and Paul Bonansinga both would run a lot a races in a year.

2.Economy, the stock market has been down three straight years, the last time it did that, was pre-WWII during the depression years.

3.Competition, it takes a serious effort to beat Larue,Winkler,Byers and Pritchard.I'm not saying that is bad, but you need your "A" game to run with that crowd.

4.Too many races maybe, how many of the other DIV have 11-12 Nationals in a year? In the Cen-Div you have many weekends which have a National and at another track a double regional and a DS/Reg at another track.
I keep reading how the club is growing, but at the last race I raced at (EWC race at RD AM which by the way, we had 30+ FF's) on the cool off lap I noticed there are not as many Corner Workers as there used to be.

6.Track Time or quality track time vs. money/effort being spent , I have to agree with Mr.Larue on this issue.

Sorry for the rant, but it's been awhile since I last posted :D

-Dave

[Joe Bass]

I would encourage everyone to get more involved in their region's race organization. Every region needs driver representatives within their planning process. It would also provide you with the details about operations that will answer a lot of the questions and resolve many of the apparent contradictions raised in this discussion. The situation is different from region to region which is why the SCCA's "federalist" approach to events has endured while still providing a National Championship caliber program.

[cdona]

I must say I thought I asked a simple question.I was wrong ,it was a very complicated question.I see that there is some common ground from several different posts.The most important part of this whole discussion is that the responsibility rests firmly with us the competitors.SCCA is made up of 66,000 people with varied interests but I think the health of SCCA as a whole is health of those individual interests.I am glad that a racers perspective has been brought to the BOD's.Thank you Eric for donating your time and energy.As for the amount of track time we get.It is in dire need of attention.The number of workers we have or don't have I think is a huge problem as well.In the SW Division we are working at recruiting workers but still can't get enough to run the 2.9 mile track at TWS every time we are scheduled to.If I had to prioritise the issues we face it would be as follows.
1.Worker programs to help recruit more workers.
2.Decrease in classes so to optomise track time
3.Format change for the Runoffs to increase track time(split weekends so fewer classes run)I drew up a proposal 2 years ago with multiple heat races with 2 30 minute sessions a day.The whole program was done in 4 days.(Thurs.-Sunday)with twice the amount of track time from the current program.
4.Individual classes that have particpation issues should bring possible changes to the BOD and Comp Board and each should listen and act to make changes to enhance participation.
The above are only some of the important issues we
need to address.Hopefully we can work together to accomplish all the issues that threaten the quality and the future of our sport.

[harshda]

In CalClub we've been seeing the FF/CF/SF numbers
be really low for the past three years. There's
a few of us that have been discussing and trying
to address the issue for a couple of years now.
Most regional weekends here are double weekends.
Even though run group combinations have been a
serious issue, we run 5 run groups, instead of 6.
So we get 20/20/30 minutes per day, 140min/weekend.
Here are a few of the issues that I have gathered
from other racers which reduce our numbers:
1) Cost per weekend. Last year only one car ran
every regional race. One car was out due to
personal reasons. Another 4-6 cars that used to
run regionals either stopped showing up or run
only one weekend due to cost. Main source of
the cost complaint was tires. So, we're trying
to implement a spec tire for regional FF
(GY R-600) to control cost.
2) Running with SRF. Our current grouping runs all
small-bore open wheel with SRF. Most small-bore
drivers are very unhappy about it, and a few
are not running regionals because of it.
3) Too many other options, more affordable, and
with better competition (numbers). Pro-7, SRF,
and now Spec Miata, are fairly affordable to
run, and the fields are quite large (15+ cars),
so everybody has somebody to race with.

The other issue I see with open-wheel racing is
that there are way too many options out there,
and SCCA has nothing to offer a driver with
aspirations of growing in the sport. The Barber
series has three classes. Russell, Derek Daily
have a series. Does Bondurant have one? Two
Fran-Am classes. Star Mazda series. FF-2000.
Add SCCS-Spec Formula, and all the other SCCA
open-wheel classes. What am I forgetting? Oh,
yeah, the Vintage groups. What else? Well, right
there we have 17+ options to run an open-wheel
car...and, sorry to say, SCCA does not offer the
best bang-for-the-money. Particularly if you have
money to spend racing, don't have a lot of time,
and/or are not mecanically inclined.

Gerry
CalClub FF#7...stored due to lack of budget.

[PRSCHMN]

as with some other posts above, one major issue is track time. Roebling Road (Savannah) has a test day prior to each race weekend. The entry fee is $125.00. There are 3 groups: open wheel, small closed, big closed. for the test day i get at least 4 30-minute sessions and often 5 sessions. I am more concerned about improving my personal driving skills and set-up skills than actually racing, so the test days are the best way for me to get the most enjoyment (read: 'track time') for my money. I only need 2 actual race events a year to keep my license in order to do the test days. Over a year, I can wind up with more actual racing experience than if I run the events. With small entry fields, cars get strung out after a couple of laps, so you are running against the clock anyway. I can run the road atlanta test days for $200, but only get 4 30-minute sessions. However, they don't require an scca license since the test day is run by rd atl and not scca. imagine what that could lead to if the word gets out (all kinds of yo-yos with no training). even at $200 for 2 hours, I dont have the travel expense, living expense etc that I have by travel ing to other tracks, so the $200 at rd atl is a good buy.

The paddock is not as crowded with SM, IT7 etc on test days either, so I can get a good space easily too. and don't lose track time while they clean up the wrecks at turn 1 from the door-bangers in the first lap.

Rhetorical question: why should I go to a sanctioned race when I can get more track time at 'test' days?

[JR Pringle]

The answer to the question of test days versus race days is in the body of your post. What if every one only did test days and not expend the effort attending the club race events? There would be no races in your area to maintain your SCCA license. The argument centers around each person's perception of themselves. Am I a racer or a driver? Racers enjoy competing against other racers in order to guage there own progress. Drivers are content with running against a clock for their measure of progress.
Racers will spend whatever it takes to get to the track. The competition, the sounds, the sights and the smells of a race day are reasons for all of the sacrifice. Support the SCCA events and let the class numbers speak for themselves. People are listening....
Darryl

[Chuck Gillis]

Mike, it's a really complicated issue as you say.

Eye: I'm with you. Mr. Johnson is full of uhhhh...pasture paddies.

Eric: Well stated position, and totally in line with Mr. J, and his well chosen staff.

Unfortunately, like mainstream media, it's only part of the story.

In the SCCA's quest to "kick the crap" out of other organizations, it has lost sight of its identity, its roots, and its members. When the economy take a dump, SCCA Corporate increases staff, increases dues, and increases membership, which in turn increases revenues. Unfortunately, the memberships net gain is what? In my experience, a MUCH lower level of service than before, and a MUCH, MUCH lower level of response to member input. Did anyone get their license without issues this year? I'm still waiting after 2 weeks. Used to come in 5 days.

As a Chief in the SF Region, I have a real problem with PR staff pronouncements advising me what a great SCCA we are building. Recruiting help is non-existent. Instead we are treated with a staff trainer building SCCA Universtiy. I expect she will be adding staff as well. How corporate indeed.

Garrett Mudd spoke eloquently and knowingly about branding a the NorPac Round Table. Branding is what GM/FOrd/Chrysler do to compete with each other. Branding for a club? Gimme a stroke, or beam me up Scotty. Building the SCCA brand? How bloody corporate.

Building the best workers in the world? Of course we are, and we ask them to give up a substantial portion of their weekends, and every single vacation day they earn at their jobs, we pay them in grins 'n' giggles, and then make them pay for SCCA logo wear to advertise for the coprporate office. See any worker retention issues with that?

Puhleeeease spare me the corporate line of what a great organzation we are building. It's just not any different from any other for-profit, greed driven, egomaniac managed corporate entity in the USA. The SCCA is Mr. J's steping stone into a really cool job someday, like maybe when Bernie Ecclestone retires, or Chris Pook retires, or whatever. The damage will be done long before he leaves.

Unfortunately, I also like to race, I like to Chief, and until something better comes along, I'll continue to try to motivate and retain every volunteer, ASK them to donate their time, THANK them at every opportunity for giving so generously to an organization that treats them like property instead of the priceless assets they are.

And I will continue to let my feelings be known in Topeka.

End of sermon.

gm

[Joe Bass]

Sorry to hear you glass is half full, Greg.

[Dennis Cleary]

I see two camps here - increased track time vs. cost containment. Without lowering operating costs, both goals cannot be met. If you double our track time, then the tire, fuel, and engine costs accellerate. But the added track time would keep more drivers out because of cost. (Or worse yet, cause them to move to a cheaper class). If a guy feels that he doesn't have an equal chance to earn points, then his goals will obviously degrade to the pure pleasure of driving, not racing, not the championship and most importantly not making the effort to make EVERY race possible.

There are too many choices in the open wheel classes and I haven't a clue how to fix it without sacrificing car counts in the near future to strengthen the long term outlook.

[roggie93]

I remember that when I started the cost of a MARRS weekend was about $150. That was in 1990. I think I was paying $180 to $190 last year. Same track time as ever. Of course we could argue the formats that have been tried all day long, but the fact remains that the track time has been about the same.
I feel, and I'm sure some folks will think I've been brain washed by the big Johnson, that we get a hell of a bargain when considering the costs involved. I like the idea of the 1 million dollar insurance coverage, as I don't get that from my employer. I also enjoy the added security of having the best corner workers, adequately supplied, and there to save my ass in the event they might have to.
I've raced with a couple of other organizations and can say that I never really felt safe on the track. Sub-standard everything.
More track time? You bet!!
Level of competition? Not much.
Corner workers? Where?
Fun? I guess if your idea of fun is just driving around trying to beat your last lap time and hoping you don't fall off the track, you might be there awhile.
I don't have the answers, but I'm glad we have a forum like this to share ideas. I just wish we could turn the belly-aching into more constructive idea building.

I sit on the Tri-Region BoD and can tell you there aren't many easy solutions to anything. You have the track management, local Medical personnel, recovery vehicles, timing and scoring, etc., etc., etc., to deal with.
It is easy to sit on the fence and see everything that is wrong with a club, but so much harder to get in there and try to guide it in the direction that pleases the masses, either with your own efforts or ideas contribution.

Take pot-shots at the payed employees, but never, ever, under any circumstances, or fit of temporary insanity, take a cheap shot at a volunteer.

Don't even try to compare open wheel, open cockpit cars to those door slammers with fenders. Most of those guys don't care if they run into each other and never fear for their safety like we might. And comparing costs of racing? Depends on whose lies or selected memory you believe.

Enough for now.

[cdona]

In a perfect world workers would volunteer in abundance and there would be no shortage.They would be happy and come to our events again and again.In a perfect world SCCA could sell cars at a sub market price and not dilute the existing classes,shorten the amount of track time and generally not be sensitive to it's membershp.In a perfect world Mr. Johnson would see the benefits of sevicing existing members and not just be interested in new memberships that I suppose are tied to the incentives of his contract.In a perfect world all 24 or 26 classes would have at least 25 cars in every race.We don't live in a perfect world.I don't have all the answers but we need to pick issues one at a time and start working on them.Workers,too many classes,Runoffs issues and track time and the cost of it seem to be the most important issues.

[JR Pringle]

There is one person listening to the drivers. Tim McGrath, owner of Texas Autosports and promoter of the Southwest Formula Mazda series, listened to our request for more track time and longer races. He has negotiated to have a practice, qualifier and a 40 minute race for both Saturday and Sunday at the NASA event held at Motorsports Ranch. This is a series race but is open to all open wheel race cars. In addition, we will run a 45 minute race at No Problem Raceway in Baton Rouge, most likely 40 or 45 minutes at Hallett and maybe a 2 hour race at MSR similar to last year's event. Running extended races present no problems for the FM and enhance the enjoyment we receive from the series. None of these races are SCCA sanctioned but could prove to be an example for the local BOD.
...Better products through better competition...
Darryl

[cdona]

Daryl with all due respect,Tim has done a great job with a local series with 12-15 enties at local tracks.It is not like a National race or the Runoffs or any event with a large number of competitors.It gets so much more complicated when you have 100's of entries.Track time costs money because it is not just track time you are paying for on test days.We need to concentrate on the problems we have with workers shortages and the number of classes we have in our National racing program.This season may have an economic curve thrown in that may give us participation numbers not necessarily that accurate.This economy will effect the workers too.We have many issues to deal with and I appreciate all the comments on this board as all perspectives and insight are needed to find solutions to the issues that face us.Keep those comments coming.

[daveh]

The reason track time is down in the SW is that entries are up.

5 years ago we averaged 130-140 cars for a National race and could run them in 4 or 5 groups. Now we average 180-200 (high was 260 last year) which means 6 or 7 groups.

Divide the number of groups in the avalible hours and you see the problem. How many classes are in each group really doesn't matter.

[rox]

I know I am a FV guy but I spent a few years working for Skip Barber as the importer for Crossle and Mondiale. Also have 5 years in his cars when they were FFs.

Some things I see missing in this thread are:

1. There are no more "new" FFs being made,
2. The Pro Schools do not use FF anymore,
3. The media does not push FF as a "must" class (for example Autoweek, On Track, Formula and SportsCar in the 70's - when was the last FF special issue?....)

FF is a mature class. With no new cars, you have a decreasing pool (as drivers AND cars age) of entrants.

How do you reverse the trend? Like FV, two groups have to get together:
1. The people who have a monitary stake
2. The people who just love the class.

On a regional and national level contact all the FF owners (who are not necessarily drivers), start doing some promotion, start working together, do things to get people to go to races. Maybe it means lending an engine or set of tires. Yes the economy is a BIG player right now. Find out why people are not coming to races and fix it (if possible). Get publicity - sell the class!

The SCCA (National) will not do this for you. Locally, a FF series like is happening in the NE is the right idea (John M, I would have started it between NHIS and LR first year and then branched out - beside that, hope you are sucessful)

Once there is some interest, then the cars start getting built again. (Compare FV constructors to FF, 20 years ago it was the opposite - there were only 3 FV constructors!)

BTW, this forum is great, but only part of the solution.

Chris Z

[cdona]

Chris you bring up good points.But as far as new cars go,there are many constructors that have built new cars in the last few years.Van Diemen,Stohr,Piper,ICP Citation,Sauce and Kodiak is building the Fox FF.The problems are many but not that constuctors are willing to build cars.FF is still the best training ground for new drivers.This message has been lost and the price of a new FF is close to that of a F2000 and the F2000 has the curb appeal because it has wings.Right now you can buy a Nationally competitive used FF for the same price as a competitive FV.I don't understand why that fact alone does not attract more drivers to FF.

[PRSCHMN]

One main reason to stay in FV is the cost/availability of parts for crash damage. A Lybarger gearbox (acknowledged as the best available) can be had for about $1200, drum-to-drum; just bolt it in. A used hewland Mk 9 is around $2500, then you have to add suspension pieces, I generally figure about $1000 per corner for cv axle, shock, spring, trailing arms, a-arms, misc.

engines are about the same; a national motor for 6000, rebuild around 1800-2000.

Also, FV guys don't have to worry about being run over by FM newbies since they generally race in separate groups.

despite having said this, I opted for Crossle FF rather than FV like I ran in early 70's.

[rox]

[quote]Originally posted by Mike Sauce:
[b] Chris you bring up good points.But as far as new cars go,there are many constructors that have built new cars in the last few years.Van Diemen,Stohr,Piper,ICP Citation,Sauce and Kodiak is building the Fox FF.The problems are many but not that constuctors are willing to build cars.FF is still the best training ground for new drivers.This message has been lost and the price of a new FF is close to that of a F2000 and the F2000 has the curb appeal because it has wings.Right now you can buy a Nationally competitive used FF for the same price as a competitive FV.I don't understand why that fact alone does not attract more drivers to FF. [/b][/quote]Mike,

In the heyday of FF, I would guess 100 + cars were being introduced to the mix every year. Right now, I would bet there are more F2000 cars being built than FF, not to mention FM and Fran Am, etc. FF might be a victim of it's own sucess. When FF drivers were looking for something to move up to (remember, it used to be FV - FF - FB - FA) that's when F2000 came in. You could go faster, look better, and not spend much more than FF.

Your comparison of FF and FV might be a little off. I would think a used Nationally competitive FF is around $20,000, same FV could be had for less tham $10,000. FV is still cheaper to maintain, cheaper to crash (hopefully not), and easier for someone to get in and go fast on a fixed budget, and with not a big investment in tools. (also no radiator, dry sump or trick gearbox) That said, and with all the time I have in FV, FV is like diet soda. It quenches your thirst, but the taste is missing something. I keep wanting to get back in FF, but with two kids approaching college age, FV will have to do. (along with the great racing, friends, etc.)

From watching this forum, it seems like FF has priced itself a little high. Maybe they were brilliant or just lucky, the FV rules makers have kept technology in check. You can still win Nationals with a car built 25 to 30 years ago. Not saying you will, but you could. Most of the rules changes have made it cheaper to run.

Which leads to another problem. Since FV is an end in itself, most don't want to move up to FF. So where do you get your new drivers from? Maybe the Chris Pook interest will spark a renewal in Formula Racing in the SCCA.....

BTW - For those who are interested - Yes there are only 800 something Spec Racer Fords out there, but most are owned by companies renting them out. Like airline seats, they don't generate income sitting in the garage. I do belive they are direct competition to FF and part of the problem.

[cdona]

Chris- I think you are right about Spec Racers.But I do think alot of the potential drivers for Spec Racers want fenders and that is understandible.Right now there are many Nationally competitive Swift Db-1 and DB-6 for 15-20k.The ads I have seen for FV's are pretty close to the same price.Tires cost more and motor expense may be a little more.The one thing that is much more expensive with FF is the crash damage.The FV people have had someone in place on the Comp Board for years and that has really helped get parts approved to keep the motor costs down and parts readily available.FF has not had as much success in the past with that because the FF people were not as organized as the FV people.But we are gaining ground all the time.The motor builders have helped alot in that respect.Hopefully other parts will become available to bring the rebuild costs down some and increase the longevity as well.The future is going to be what we make it.Hopefully car counts will increase as we get further into the season .

[pkr]

[quote]Mike Writes: [b]FF is still the best training ground for new drivers.This message has been lost and the price of a new FF is close to that of a F2000 and the F2000 has the curb appeal because it has wings.[/b] [/quote]And the price of a decent used F2000 is not much higher than a used FF1600. And if the relative ages of the chassis are factored into the sell price, the F2000 can be a better value. (See Curb Appeal from above). With the chassis turnover from the pro series and the relative lack of production of FF1600, this becomes a major factor in the sales of chassis. I can't think of anyone who would dream of paying the same price of a Swift FF1600 and a same year F2000 anything.

FF1600's heyday had very little "liked priced" competition as the pro series was for Volkswagon engined chassis. With the advent of the "FC" using the 2L those manufacturers designed the chassis to use both engines (1600 & 2L), the price structure was then "modified" to reflect the F2000 pricing.