Letter to BOD

[R. Pare]

Rather than all this nonsense about changing car specs for either class - FA and F1000 - how about something simple that costs no one anything, can be implemented in a heartbeat, and would give the on-the-fence car owners a reason to come back and race?

Have F1000 remain as it's own class, as is, according to the F1000 rules, and just run as a separate class within the FA on-track sessions?

Unless the goal of the BOD is to get the class to collapse and disappear, there is no reason that this cannot be done.

[jchracer]

Rather than all this nonsense about changing car specs for either class - FA and F1000 - how about something simple that costs no one anything, can be implemented in a heartbeat, and would give the on-the-fence car owners a reason to come back and race?

Have F1000 remain as it's own class, as is, according to the F1000 rules, and just run as a separate class within the FA on-track sessions?

Unless the goal of the BOD is to get the class to collapse and disappear, there is no reason that this cannot be done.

Please don't interject logic and common sense into this argument....

[Mike B]

Have F1000 remain as it's own class, as is, according to the F1000 rules, and just run as a separate class within the FA on-track sessions?

That was suggested by someone moments after the Fastrak came out. Unfortunately, the F1000 community was not given the opportunity to suggest it BEFORE the rule change.

It could still happen but would require everyone to agree to follow the old rules and not the current FA spec line.

[Daryl DeArman]

Unless the goal of the BOD is to get the class to collapse and disappear, there is no reason that this cannot be done.

Or, unless the goal of the BOD is to ensure that FA does NOT collapse and disappear...

[S Lathrop]

Or, unless the goal of the BOD is to ensure that FA does NOT collapse and disappear...

When F1000 was combined into FA, there were 2 options on the table for the F1000 class. One was to move it to FS as a regional class only, The other was to move it to FA as a sub-class as it is today. Those were the only to options because F1000 did not meet the participation requirements to remain a stand alone class. Those were the only 2 options!!!!

What would your call have been if you were sitting at the table? No equivocation, you only have 2 options.

[jchracer]

you only have 2 options.

And that right there is the problem!

The whole system is set up to make bad decisions....I know, write a letter.....been there, done that, not wasting my time anymore.

[Daryl DeArman]

What would your call have been if you were sitting at the table? No equivocation, you only have 2 options.

Easy, relegate the class to Regional status. Not a fan of making rules I don't intend to enforce.

[John Mosteller]

If they cared about F1000 having a competitive place to run they would have put us back where we came from FC.

With F1000 required to run the same tire and wheel combination .
Either require F1000 to reduce maximum body with to 95cm or allow FC to go to 150cm ( same downforce level )
Either require F1000 to use flat plate restrictors or allow FC to dial their power levels up to F1000 levels ( same power level )
Then there would probably need to be some modifications to weight to fine tune .

At this point I don't see a 1 Liter motor competing in FA without the engine budget being extremely high to the point that very few would dare to go there.

Personally at this point I would like to see the rules opened up to allow other engines to something like any engine from the P2 list. Then there would be some larger displacement options that may be less fragile but would need to be allowed to alter modifications ,weight , restrictor plate size etc. to get us into a competitive range with the true FA's. FA can use multiple engines so I am not seeing why F1000 chassis shouldn't have some more appropriate engines unless the the point is to give us a place to run but never be competitive .

[Thomas Copeland]

I don't see anything coming from the current regime at SCCA that'll be useful for F1000 in club racing. They are going to protect their own formula car class (FE) at the expense of all the others. The other formula car classes are expendable. What happen to F1000 was just the first shoe dropping. Look what they are doing to the others: combining them into these catch-all classes. This is the fate that eventually awaits the remaining ones that still have their own class. So don't get too comfortable FF, FV, whatever....

Meanwhile, the classes for tin tops and sedans keeps expanding. Some of those sedan classes have less entries than F1000 had yet no one in the SCCA is talking about merging any of them. Probably because this is where they see most of their future earnings coming from.

Best thing probably for F1000 is to keep doing what we are doing. Which is to ignore SCCA Club Racing as much as possible and go our own way.

[Stan Clayton]

I don't see anything coming from the current regime at SCCA that'll be useful for F1000 in club racing. They are going to protect their own formula car class (FE) at the expense of all the others. The other formula car classes are expendable. What happen to F1000 was just the first shoe dropping. Look what they are doing to the others: combining them into these catch-all classes. This is the fate that eventually awaits the remaining ones that still have their own class. So don't get too comfortable FF, FV, whatever....

Meanwhile, the classes for tin tops and sedans keeps expanding. Some of those sedan classes have less entries than F1000 had yet no one in the SCCA is talking about merging any of them. Probably because this is where they see most of their future earnings coming from.

Best thing probably for F1000 is to keep doing what we are doing. Which is to ignore SCCA Club Racing as much as possible and go our own way.

We can argue the pros and cons of a particular course of action, but unless I am severely mistaken this post is absolute rubbish.

First, SCCA does not have a 'current regime'. It is a representative democracy, and ad hominens only make you look like a QAnon politician spreading weird tinfoil conspiracies about pizza shops butchering children. You're smarter than that, Thomas, so give it a break.

Second, SCCA has made room for a grab bag of orphaned formula classes, with each of them free to grow into their own potentially National class. Yes, they're corraled into one class (FX), but it isn't to protect FE. Meanwhile, FV, FF, and FC remain healthy and safe from potential consolidation. At least FB has been given the chance to surplant the traditional FA cars on the top rung of the Formula category instead of being castrated to fit into FX. Personally, I could live with either outcome, but it strikes me that FB has been treated more than fairly.

Third, IMO your smear of the tin top and sedan classes is completely unwarranted. They have not prolifereated in any demonstrable way. Yes, the BoD have created GTX, but it serves the same role as FX and PX ... giving room to potential classes to run in Nationals without creating a grab bag of problematic new classes. What other new tin top classes have been promulgated in the past decade?

Yes, FB can 'go its own way' outside SCCA, but that seems counterproductive to me.

[Thomas Copeland]

We can argue the pros and cons of a particular course of action, but unless I am severely mistaken this post is absolute rubbish.

First, SCCA does not have a 'current regime'. It is a representative democracy, and ad hominens only make you look like a QAnon politician spreading weird tinfoil conspiracies about pizza shops butchering children. You're smarter than that, Thomas, so give it a break.

Second, SCCA has made room for a grab bag of orphaned formula classes, with each of them free to grow into their own potentially National class. Yes, they're corraled into one class (FX), but it isn't to protect FE. Meanwhile, FV, FF, and FC remain healthy and safe from potential consolidation. At least FB has been given the chance to surplant the traditional FA cars on the top rung of the Formula category instead of being castrated to fit into FX. Personally, I could live with either outcome, but it strikes me that FB has been treated more than fairly.

Third, IMO your smear of the tin top and sedan classes is completely unwarranted. They have not prolifereated in any demonstrable way. Yes, the BoD have created GTX, but it serves the same role as FX and PX ... giving room to potential classes to run in Nationals without creating a grab bag of problematic new classes. What other new tin top classes have been promulgated in the past decade?

Yes, FB can 'go its own way' outside SCCA, but that seems counterproductive to me.

Oh, so we're orphans now? Who's idea was that?

17 Stan. 17 Sedan classes. And they want to create more. Let's get those pizza boxes warmed up. I'll bring my tin-foil hat.

Thanks for cracking me up. Best laugh I've had in a while.

[jchracer]

Yes, FB can 'go its own way' outside SCCA, but that seems counterproductive to me.

SCCA Club Racing also drove out S2000. Likely the best thing to happen to S2000. Fairly large fields with happy racers as far as I can tell. Also likely the best thing for F1000 given the mismanagement by SCCA Club Racing.

[Purple Frog]

Over 5300 views... all I can say is it must still be snowing up north.

I sort of see both sides of this story having lived through much of it. The truth of the matter is that there would have been no action to debate if FB would have just shown up at Majors with good car counts. Looking back you can see the loss of S2 and FM for the same reason. i have railed on for nearly 20 years on this site about the simple fact that the GCR is written solely for national/majors/ runoffs participants.

I was an early supporter of FB and sat on the committee that drafted the original rule set. Of course the CRB modified it a bit... That said there was clause in the original rules to allow SCCA to implement restrictors. IMHO, that should have been done. Yet I understand the competitors wish to go as fast as they could. That said, in the early years engines exploding and setting cars on fire did not promote the class well... That was solved...then there was major leaps of good engineering that wiped out the FC based cars. The numbers just never grew. It was like 2008 was the banner year.

Everyone should remember that FB for a while was the "golden child". It was able to gain Runoffs/National status without going through the process of proving adequate participation numbers. Many of us thought, "allow it in, and they will come." Looking back maybe that was the first mistake. Maybe they should have had to go through the proof of concept that FM had to do in the 90s.

I for one think that SCCA's recent decision was wrong, and was arrived at without going through many of the normal process we have become accustomed. There were no agonizing long drawn out member surveys and requests for input. For example, FV was treated much differently when faced with spec tires and disc brakes. In that respect I understand Tom's complaint.
Flip the record over and maybe FV was treated differently because they had car count?

I personally don't think FB should be in FA. The FB cars don't need to be any faster, nor be any heavier. Its a safety thing based on pure physics and tube frames. The class should be in FX running under the previous FB rules. My opinion. If they get counts back up, they could petition for a return to national status.

Unfortunately the only solution at this time is to enter FBs in FA. Have a gentleman's agreement to run under previous rules. Get your numbers up, then petition again with strong data.

Tom has some legit complaints. But I fear his shotgun blasts are unfortunately hitting folks that would otherwise be on his side.

FC owners should look at this recent CRB action as to what they could face in the future without adequate car counts.

[Daryl DeArman]

ad hominens[sic] only make you look like a QAnon politician spreading weird tinfoil conspiracies about pizza shops butchering children. You're smarter than that.

Irony.

Are political attacks/statements now acceptable on ApexSpeed or only the ones with which the mods agree?

[Thomas Copeland]

Tom has some legit complaints. But I fear his shotgun blasts are unfortunately hitting folks that would otherwise be on his side.

Ok. maybe I did go a little too Charles Bronson on them. But I have an issue with dishonesty. (as in they (SCCA) should have been more honest and not played games). Has to do with trust. Dunno, maybe I need counselling. Stan, your last post is still making me laugh even after reading 10 times over. Next time I see ya at the track I'll buy ya a drink. That one was good.

[E1pix]

Maybe a little, but if anyone needs counseling it’s the dishonest.

I freaking despise liars, as should we all.

[Farrout48]

Removed.

[John Nesbitt]

This thread has meandered around a bit and I am afraid that I will take it further astray.

Froggy, you said: i have railed on for nearly 20 years on this site about the simple fact that the GCR is written solely for national/majors/ runoffs participants.

I believe that the CRB/BoD are too focused on the national/majors/runoffs and tend to forget the large number of racers who run Regionals.

...

The data easily demonstrates that the strength of the SCCA Road Racing Program exists in the Regional races and entries.

There really are two SCCAs: the National (Super Tour/Runoffs) program, and the various Regional programs.

While the GCR largely focuses on Runoffs classes, it does make ample provision for Regions to tailor their particular programs for their particular local markets. Regions have much latitude to structure their run groups and classes, including defining Regional-only classes, to suit their market. For example, there is nothing to stop a Region from establishing a dedicated run group for FB or FM. All it requires is sufficient entries to justify the allocation of track time.

As you write, the backbone of Road Racing is Regional racing. That is most closely attuned to local markets.

On a wider focus, what this thread and the parallel one about FM/FX illustrate is that classing and group composition is a numbers game. Classes that make their numbers get more consideration. PF was right: The Club may not have done FB any favors by leapfrogging it straight into Runoffs status. It might have done better to let FB evolve and grow and perhaps succeed organically.

[VSeaber]

I'd like to offer a little perspective to some of the previous discussions and proposals, specifically comparing FM to FB and allowing modifications to speed up FM.

I am in the unique position to have driven both a FM and a FS car based on a FM. I am currently driving a FB (F1000 Pro) car as of very recently

There have been a lot of proposals, several of them regarding slowing down FB to FM times as FM is by far the prevalent car in the FX class. Unfortunately based on the current rules although FM cars are most of the entries they are not the yardstick to be comparing against- rather FR 2.0 cars, US F2000 Zetec and Super Vees. Significantly faster than FM all.

I do have a good feel for the concept and cost of speeding up the FM cars. Unfortunately just raising the rev limiter will do little to make the cars faster, the power drops off quickly past the current rev limiter. Allowing open tires instead of the rock hard Goodyear R470s, on the other hand, would go a long way. Beyond that it gets more difficult.

I ran a FX car with a 'big' streetport, E85 on test days, MoTeC fuel injection and active aero- at my home track of VIR it would run a 1:52- could have run a 1:51. The current lap record is a 1:55.5 or so. My Stohr F1000 car with the 'old' j2008 GXSR-1000 engine the first time I ran it with a bad setup ran a 1:50 other cars have run a 1:48.... I put a tremendous amount off time and money into the FM turned FX car. Like a lot...I could go into detail but it would be easier to buy another car than drop 5 seconds of the standard FM lap time.

All that being said I think the F1000 AS IS would fit well in the FX class IF compared to the Super Vee and US F2000 Zetec cars. The current rule set has made the FM obsolete in what was intended to be its home.

Victor Seaber
VIPER

[Thomas Copeland]

I for one think that SCCA's recent decision was wrong, and was arrived at without going through many of the normal process we have become accustomed. There were no agonizing long drawn out member surveys and requests for input. For example, FV was treated much differently when faced with spec tires and disc brakes. In that respect I understand Tom's complaint.
Flip the record over and maybe FV was treated differently because they had car count?

There is one thing everyone should keep in mind. My main issue with the SCCA isn't so much that they came out with this car count criteria or the fact that they did it without going through the "normal "process as you call it. My main issue is:

THEY BACKDATED IT BY A YEAR AND A HALF

Think about that for a minute. Just stop and think about that.

A rule that invalidates at least some of your participation (in the case of FB a majority of it) going back a year and a half.

A YEAR AND A HALF!!

It's one thing to say you're coming out with a rule saying from this point forward. That's fine. Change the rules in the middle of a season or on the fly if you want. But the car counting didn't start from May 2018 they released it, it started from January 2017, a full year and half prior to releasing it.

If you're going to count cars at least start counting them from when you say you are going to start counting them from.


.
(Guess I'm back in my Charles Bronson mode....at least for today. One more Mr. Majestyk repeat).

[Jnovak]

Iets get real. I personally love OW Racing the most but the reality is that the entry numbers are way down in the last decade or more! Figure out how to fix this!

Imo there shoulld be a max of 3 OW classes 3 majors classes as follows

1. SLOWEST AND LOWEST COST. this one is easy and could happen without too much fighting IMO
2. MEDIUM SPEED AND MEDIUM COST. Tougher solution but almost existing
3. FASTEST SPEED AND GUESS WHAT this is easy


All other existing QW classes are regional only and the OW CLASSES MUST BE WHAT THE RACERS WANT TO DRIVE.

[problemchild]

Iets get real. I personally love OW Racing the most but the reality is that the entry numbers are way down in the last decade or more! Figure out how to fix this!

Imo there shoulld be a max of 3 OW classes 3 majors classes as follows

1. SLOWEST AND LOWEST COST. this one is easy and could happen without too much fighting IMO
2. MEDIUM SPEED AND MEDIUM COST. Tougher solution but almost existing
3. FASTEST SPEED AND GUESS WHAT this is easy


All other existing QW classes are regional only and the OW CLASSES MUST BE WHAT THE RACERS WANT TO DRIVE.

Lets get real! There are currently 3 OW run groups. At some events there is only 2. Changing class structures within those groups accomplishes absolutely NOTHING! As a perfect example, FB and FA shared the same run group before FB was killed. FB and FA still share the same group, but the FB racers were disenfranchised and went elsewhere. We can afford enough plastic trophies for the extra classes. Consolidating classes will just kill OW racing that much sooner!

[jchracer]

Lets get real! There are currently 3 OW run groups. At some events there is only 2. Changing class structures within those groups accomplishes absolutely NOTHING! As a perfect example, FB and FA shared the same run group before FB was killed. FB and FA still share the same group, but the FB racers were disenfranchised and went elsewhere. We can afford enough plastic trophies for the extra classes. Consolidating classes will just kill OW racing that much sooner!

The truth has just been spoken!

[Jnovak]

The truth has just been spoken!

Ok perha I have made it easy to misunderstand my position so let me try again.


My goal is to reduce costs to compete in 3 main open wheel classes and nothiñg else. It is not my intent to eliminate any existing classes I have been an SCCA racer for over 50 years and i am very saddened to see this happening


Classes as follows: it is not my intention to eliminate any existing classes just trying tomreduce the costs to compete!

1. The lowest cost OW class. This class would be based on current formula vee classes with the intent to reduce costs. Currently you can spend over $10,000 on a 1200cc VW engine. This is nuts imo. Something needs to be done to reduce the costs ro compete. I have heard lots of good ideas!

2 the 2nd class should be imo a formula Ford based class with rules to keep the cost down. Right now you need to spend about $100k to be a front runner, this is madness imo!

3. The 3rd class is easy and should be based on current rules with some simple rules.

Other winged classes can fit within existing classes!

Look. At the decline in SCCA OPEN WHEEL RACING IF YOU WANT TO SEE WASUP WITH OW RACING. I AM WILLING TO SERVE ON A COMMITTEE OR NOT BUT I AM VERY SADDENED TO SEE THE HUGE REDUCTION IN OW ENTRIES .

LETS TRY TO DO SOMETHING ASAP

[John Nesbitt]

Ok perha I have made it easy to misunderstand my position so let me try again.


My goal is to reduce costs to compete in 3 main open wheel classes and nothiñg else. It is not my intent to eliminate any existing classes I have been an SCCA racer for over 50 years and i am very saddened to see this happening


Classes as follows: it is not my intention to eliminate any existing classes just trying tomreduce the costs to compete!

1. The lowest cost OW class. This class would be based on current formula vee classes with the intent to reduce costs. Currently you can spend over $10,000 on a 1200cc VW engine. This is nuts imo. Something needs to be done to reduce the costs ro compete. I have heard lots of good ideas!

2 the 2nd class should be imo a formula Ford based class with rules to keep the cost down. Right now you need to spend about $100k to be a front runner, this is madness imo!

3. The 3rd class is easy and should be based on current rules with some simple rules.

Other winged classes can fit within existing classes!

Look. At the decline in SCCA OPEN WHEEL RACING IF YOU WANT TO SEE WASUP WITH OW RACING. I AM WILLING TO SERVE ON A COMMITTEE OR NOT BUT I AM VERY SADDENED TO SEE THE HUGE REDUCTION IN OW ENTRIES .

LETS TRY TO DO SOMETHING ASAP

With respect, your post is self-contradictory. On the one hand, you write, "It is not my intent to eliminate any existing classes."

But on the other hand, you list three future, compendium classes, none of which map to an existing class. You write, ".. 3 main open wheel classes and nothiñg else."

Which is it?

[Thomas Copeland]

Think I stated this a few times already:

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, preventing the SCCA from having 100 open wheel classes if they so desired. Only thing standing in the way is their lack of desire to do it and this useless BS matrix called the Car Count Criteria they seemed in an abusive marriage to at the moment.

As Greg mentioned, we're all in the same run group.

All of of this nonsense could end today they wanted it. Just reinstate the OW classes. It's literally that EASY!!

There's no need to consolidate classes. There's never been any need to consolidate classes. You can have a class with one car if you want. They practically have that with GTX now. This is all just some lame BS they came up with on their own.

[problemchild]

I consider myself an optimist and problem solver, but also a realist, and declining OW participation is not a problem we can solve, even by reforming the SCCA system. As the world reduces its carbon footprint, club racing with internal combustion engines, has a limited future. I cannot tell you whether that is 10 years or 20, but I expect 20 would be the maximum.

We need to manage what we have. FF, FC, FE, SRF may have one more engine replacement cycle left, but that is it (so lets make sure we get it right). The bottom line is that making any car change its configuration to fit into a consolidated class structure, is costing money, and is hurting OW racing. Other than limiting consumables (fuel, tires), leave the classes alone and let any existing class continue as long as it wants, or as long as there are places for us to race.

[John Nesbitt]

...
We need to manage what we have. FF, FC, FE, SRF may have one more engine replacement cycle left, but that is it (so lets make sure we get it right). The bottom line is that making any car change its configuration to fit into a consolidated class structure, is costing money, and is hurting OW racing. Other than limiting consumables (fuel, tires), leave the classes alone and let any existing class continue as long as it wants, or as long as there are places for us to race.

This is it in a nutshell. The very last thing that SCCA needs is another open wheel class or changes to existing classes to shoehorn them into some new compendium class.

As Greg and others point out, the critical factor in event logistics is the number of run groups, not the number of classes. Twenty cars in one class in one run group take the same amount of track time as twenty single-class cars in a run group.

Virtually every Regional/Majors/Super Tour has two, sometimes three, open wheel groups, regardless of the number of open wheel classes. The only place where the number of classes matters is at the Runoffs, and only if we want single-class racing at the Runoffs.

[patman]

Gents,

I used to race in FC. My plan was to convert the car to FB eventually, but this exact discussion and the merge into FA convinced me that it wasn't worth the money. I own a shop, but I don't have a lot of racing budget usually.

So I switched to P2. I have had a P2 car for one year, and am enjoying it immensely. I like the P1/P2 rules, as to me they make sense and they provide simple ways for the club to adjust performance, which seems to provide a stable future for the class to me. I took a 20 year old P2 car and have brought it to competitive levels of performance, and if all goes well intend to take it to the runoffs this year. One of the things that allowed me to do this is the flexibility within the rules which leaves more room for 'poor but talented' people like I consider myself. Someday if I ever become 'rich but talented', I like the fact that my car car be engineered into P1 should I chose that challenge.

I have many customers in a range of OW and SR classes. I have seen and participated in these arguments for years. I am 35 years old and rarely race against anyone younger than myself. I like new technology and cars that go fast today and faster next year, but I continue to worry about having people to race against. In my view, losing OW cars hurts my class just as it does all of yours. These are the cars I enjoy building, with the freedom to build them as I see fit much more compared with a production- based car.

IMO the best way to make this happen in the long term is for the OW classes to restructure into something similar to P1/P2, where the current and historic cars can be made to fit into whichever class you please regardless of what they used to be, so long as they fit the general rule set. Keep in mind that you are about to have lots of F4 and other cars coming into the second hand market, and they don't fit FA perfectly either.

Perhaps many of you guys with obvious knowledge of the parity of all these classes could come up with a formula for such a future, which at least in my opinion would be more productive than fighting over the messes of the past. I would love to race in such a class some day when I need a change from P2, and I would love for my customers to have the opportunity to invest in cars with a window to the future.

Just another .02 from another dummy....

Pat

[Jnovak]

With respect, your post is self-contradictory. On the one hand, you write, "It is not my intent to eliminate any existing classes."

But on the other hand, you list three future, compendium classes, none of which map to an existing class. You write, ".. 3 main open wheel classes and nothiñg else."

Which is it?

John I have tried to make myself clear but i have obviously not done that so here is 1 last try but first my goal is very simple and that goal is to increase OW ENTRIES. MY APOLOGIES FOR NOT MAKEING MY INTENT CLEARLY STATED.

OW racing in scca had been numbers dominated by 3 classes as follows:
1 FV
2. FF
3. FC

Now it is not my intent to denigrate any of the current OW classes but IMO FC IS A GONER OF THE 3 LISTED. the reality is that the future is very dim imo. When i say future i mean 7 to 10 years.

Right now a competitive FV engine is over $10,000 and the races are lucky to get 10 entries

For all intents and purposes FF costs about $100,000 to be competitive and this class is effectively dead.

Now my apologies for my earlier posts where my goals were not at all stated.

Statement: create a solid class structure so that there is a future for OW racing for the future within the SCCA. Now how ro best achieve this?

1. Restructure the rules for FV to reduce the costs ro compete!
2. Pick a 2nd non winged class for class #2. I originally chose FF as the best candidate because the class used to be huge from an entries perspective and perhaps a rewrite of the rules might be able to get the cost down, if not there is already a great very low cost class out there right now that is doing well and it could easily fit in the slot too,
3 have 2 separate winged classes that appears to be the direction that the SÇCA is headed with FX & FA

SO THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT IS 3 OR 4 OW CLASSES

IMO IF THE CLUB DOES NOT MAKE AN EFFORT OW RACING WILL BE EFFECTIVELY GONE IN 5 to 10 years.

My apologies if I have missed the mark. I just love ow racing and want it to survive.

My very first SCCA OW race was an SCCA reg. race with 66 FV entries. I qualified 6th but DNFd while in 5th

[BeerBudgetRacing]

1. Restructure the rules for FV to reduce the costs ro compete!
2. Pick a 2nd non winged class for class #2. I originally chose FF as the best candidate because the class used to be huge from an entries perspective and perhaps a rewrite of the rules might be able to get the cost down, if not there is already a great very low cost class out there right now that is doing well and it could easily fit in the slot too,
3 have 2 separate winged classes that appears to be the direction that the SÇCA is headed with FX & FA

Where does FE2 fit into your vision?

The problem with suggesting FX ad FA be the winged classes is the lack of BOP. They are dumping grounds. Sure, you have your 'real' FAs - which very few run. But with PFMs and F3s it all over the place.
FX same thing.

So FE2 would be the only real winged OW class.

IMO IF THE CLUB DOES NOT MAKE AN EFFORT OW RACING WILL BE EFFECTIVELY GONE IN 5 to 10 years.

When you say CLUB, are you suggesting the CRB do something, or us drivers ( we re the club ) do something?

[B Farnham]

Right now a competitive FV engine is over $10,000 and the races are lucky to get 10 entries.

This isn't correct in the least, I'm unsure why people quote this. One engine was sold for $10,000 years ago that had tremendous history.

It's misinformation like this that scares people away. I bought my whole car with spares that had multiple runoffs podiums for $10,000. You can buy a top engine for $4000-5000, sometimes less if you get lucky.

FV continues to prosper because the cars from the late 80's and 90's are still competitive today, I dont think any other class can say that.

Brian

[John Nesbitt]

...

1. Restructure the rules for FV to reduce the costs ro compete!
2. Pick a 2nd non winged class for class #2. I originally chose FF as the best candidate because the class used to be huge from an entries perspective and perhaps a rewrite of the rules might be able to get the cost down, if not there is already a great very low cost class out there right now that is doing well and it could easily fit in the slot too,
3 have 2 separate winged classes that appears to be the direction that the SÇCA is headed with FX & FA

SO THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT IS 3 OR 4 OW CLASSES

IMO IF THE CLUB DOES NOT MAKE AN EFFORT OW RACING WILL BE EFFECTIVELY GONE IN 5 to 10 years.

...

If we had a clean sheet of paper (i.e. no existing cars and classes), this would be an excellent starting point. Three classes - created from scratch - would just about do it.

Realistically, we have a large existing base of cars and entrants. Any attempt to shoehorn them into some arbitrary compendium classes will surely fail, and bring about the demise of SCCA open wheel racing even sooner than you forecast.

In terms of cost, while your numbers are a little overstated, there are some hard realities. Aside from FV, which has its own culture and history, the only open wheel class with reasonable cost containment is FE2. Which, not coincidentally, is prospering. Why? It is a single-make, sealed class. All other classes are formula classes, with rules envelopes within which you can innovate (and spend unlimited money).

At the Majors/Runoffs level, I would not be surprised to see a four-class lineup in your timeframe: FV, FF, FE2, and FA.

[Stan Clayton]

Aside from FV, which has its own culture and history, the only open wheel class with reasonable cost containment is FE2. Which, not coincidentally, is prospering. Why? It is a single-make, sealed class. All other classes are formula classes, with rules envelopes within which you can innovate (and spend unlimited money).

I agree with you 100%, and I go one step further...there are two predominant types in formula (and other categories of) racing: those who want cost containment and close racing first and foremost, and those who want to be free to tinker to find the 'unfair advantage' within a formula.

I love Jay like a brother, but I substantially disagree with him on this issue. As you note, "WE" are the Club, and WE will determine the class structure with our entry fees. IMO, trying to plan the future with a circumscribed set of classes fixed in perpetuity is a fool's errand. SCCA knows this and simply shuffles the deck every few years to create a structure that accommodates the greatest number of entries in the fewest practical number of race groups.

Winter is over in a few weeks and it's time to get back to racing. :^)

[S Lathrop]

Jay has done a good job of laying out the basic 4 performance levels of OW racing as it exists today. 2 classes with out wings, FV and FF. Then 2 classes with wings FC and FA.

The cost of building a car for FA is so high that I don't see the class as anything other than a place for the very top open wheel cars to play, the newest of which is F3.

The other 3 classes have a fatal flaw and that is the power plants are all out of production or as in the case of FF the manufacturer is no longer supporting the engine. Yes there are ways to deal with the parts issue but at what cost?

A few years back, I came up with a formula car design and some rules for construction that would have produced a car with FF performance but at the cost of a FV. Bottom line, there are solutions to have fun toys in the form of OW race cars and get the costs back into line with what people can afford to play with and in line with the money they earn. Something like the cost structure of the mid 1970's when we were adding 50 to 100 cars a year to the FF and FV inventory.

The thread started out as a F1000 gripe. F1000 may be the future of OW racing but in a significantly revised form.

[Jnovak]

Thanks guys for the many comments, in particular my forgetting to include FE2!



My only goal is to help OW racing in the SCCA survive and prosper. I know that many of you are thinking that my comments were carved in stone but my real intent is t I get a discussion started with a focus on the future of OW RACING IN THE SCCA. I THINK I SHOULD START A NEW DISCUSSION WITH THE SUBJECT OF THE FUTURE OF OW RACING AS THE SUBJECT UNDER DISCUSSION.

[Jnovak]

Deleted see above

[Thomas Copeland]

F1000 may be the future of OW racing but in a significantly revised form.

This is exactly my belief. A belief I've had since 2009 when I first got into the class. It is exactly why I'm no longer in FF, FM, or FC and have no interest in FA. Those classes are from a different era. They were relevant when I first started racing back in the 1980's, but today they seem to exist for nostalgic enthusiasts only. They are still good classes, but what future relevance do they have?

F1000 is not only one of the newest formula classes it has a powerplant that literally will never get old or run out of supply as long as we keep updating what/which years 1000cc engines are allowed to be in the class (and we have a multitude of different makes from Suzuki, to BMW, to Kawi). Eventually of course, everyone has to update their engine/specs but the cost to do so in F1000 is so ridiculously low, unlike FE's update to FE2. Today it seems you can't touch an FE2 car for less than $60K. You can get a state of the art competitive F1000 car for around half that (most of the time that includes some kind of spares package).

Do I believe that in some way some of us in F1000 have been somewhat self destructive? No. Absolutely not. Every action we have ever taken as a group or as individuals has been as a direct result of a direct action taken against F1000 by the SCCA. I'm having a very hard time figuring out how we could have made the situation better by being more humble about it.

I have a belief that in despite of the current situation in SCCA Club that F1000 finds itself in today it will eventually prevail. In some form, and in some organization or racing club somewhere. It simply has too much going for it not to. Hopefully, it will find it's future success in a more benevolent setting than it has been subjected to in the last few years.

[lowside67]

F1000 is not only one of the newest formula classes it has a powerplant that literally will never get old or run out of supply as long as we keep updating what/which years 1000cc engines are allowed to be in the class (and we have a multitude of different makes from Suzuki, to BMW, to Kawi). Eventually of course, everyone has to update their engine/specs but the cost to do so in F1000 is so ridiculously low, unlike FE's update to FE2. Today it seems you can't touch an FE2 car for less than $60K. You can get a state of the art competitive F1000 car for around half that (most of the time that includes some kind of spares package).

Just as a data point - many of the front running motorcycle-powered P2 sports racers are going through an engine update from the "standard" 2007-2008 GSXR1000 to the newest 2016+. I have spoken with two people who have done it and their total bills were ~$15k. I priced it out trying to do a bunch of fabrication myself and what not and still got to $10k in a heartbeat. The new motors are a leap forward in performance but the process to update to them is not insignificant from a work or cost perspective.

-Mark

[Thomas Copeland]

Just as a data point - many of the front running motorcycle-powered P2 sports racers are going through an engine update from the "standard" 2007-2008 GSXR1000 to the newest 2016+. I have spoken with two people who have done it and their total bills were ~$15k. I priced it out trying to do a bunch of fabrication myself and what not and still got to $10k in a heartbeat. The new motors are a leap forward in performance but the process to update to them is not insignificant from a work or cost perspective.

-Mark

That's about what I expected. I was thinking around 10K-12K. Updating isn't insignificant, true, but that's pretty reasonable, and low considering its a entirely new engine, wiring, plumbing, etc.

F1000 also allows paddle shifters if you want to use them. Just like they have in F4, F3, F2, F1. So technically, F1000 is a cheaper alterative to these more expensive pro classes and makes it more relevant than some of these older formula car classes that are still stuck with the old style manual shifting levers. I even got rid of my old manual shifter E46 (and I loved that car!) and got one with paddle shifters instead.