A simple plan for the SCCA (especially Club Racing)

[David Dewhurst]

You guys do realize that not all of us (Production or otherwise) want to, or can afford to do the Runoffs, right?

Even the drivers in the fastest growing SCCA class of the last 10 years have figured out the Runoffs & even national racing is throwing good money down a dark hole. When Spec Miata was a regional only class we had 60-70 entries at the Cat National at Road America, then the class became national & the first couple years the national & Runoffs entrie numbers were very good. This year to date appro 30 Runoff entries. The drivers in Spec Miata are quick learners & see no sense in getting their asses handed to them by the check book teams. < I'm taking nothing away from their driving abilities, many of then are fantastic drivers. The 2002 pro cars started out at $15,000.00, today a 2012 pro car is $40,000.00.

Even Spec Miata drivers don't make racing a life long activity.

 

[KDENNIS]

A Top national racer will spend not a lot less than a World C team.

I do not believe that is the case.

Spec racing is huge

Look around, the SRF is the best class of pure racing there is. Rentals are way down,car count is down. SM is down.

Which is it?

Our IT cars now run HP so that we can use the SRF tires and worry less about rules. HP is up here , to about 6-8cars per event , some old, some new. It was a major cost reduction to enter HP, no need to buy the R6 tires, I can use good(4130) axles, etc. We would entertain running the runons ,if they were not during school, if we could run with a regional ticket, if they were @ MO. VRI, WGI,Or Sebring.

So you have converted cars from a Regional class to a national class becasue of tire costs and the rules set. Great. Your issues with the national program (runoffs), the scheduled date of the runoffs, the licensing required, and the location. All good points and items that perhaps could be addressed. None of those issues are solved by scrapping the national program and runoffs. Those issues effect everybody regardless of what your car is.
Just look at the runoff schedule. Topeka did that hoakie survey about the schedule, changed it and look at the numbers. My guess is, it chased away more than it attracted. But thats just a guess, no data to back that up. The issues for the most part are organizational and have very little to do with the actual cars we race.
I have never heard anybody say that they don't go to the runoffs becasue its not on SPEED anymore. I have however been told there is no way I am goin to the Runoffs as long as they charge me to park my trailer. We don't need a different program, we just need to do the one we got better. I am not talkin about how it was 30 years ago. I am talkin about 6 or 7 years ago. The time and effort and dollars spent on Super Tour, Invitational, majors, etc etc, could have been applied to the existing divisional championships and national program. There are some good ideas being tried, but they are going it alone. Why weren't they injected into the existing program?

 

[cluelessmale]

**From a novice permit person**

To me the only difference between a regional and national is who can go. There is no real perk to getting the national unless you want to go the runoffs, or is that the idea?

The only reason I want to get my national is to I can do the double double national down in Florida.

 

[KDENNIS]

To me the only difference between a regional and national is who can go. There is no real perk to getting the national unless you want to go the runoffs, or is that the idea?

I would love to see the National program and Regional program more aligned. Way back in the day, a regional had the exact same classes as the National program. The regional guys, ran the local track. When the big show came to town the regional guys would run the national and test their metal against the best. When you got good enough you joined the big show ran the tour of the division and tried to achieve the next step which was an invite to the Runoffs to then test your metal against the best in the country. This concept has gone by the wayside, with soo many regional only classes and variations of national classes (ie SM, SSM, SM1, SM2, SM5). I think that is one of the concepts that needs to be looked at again. We had an opportunity to bring IT national years ago, without a major realignment.....it probably couldn't happen now. I think it should.......how we can have one of our most popular categories excluded from what we call our "big" show doesn't make much sense. I am fine with regional only classes by the way, Regionals should have classes like CF, ASR, GT-Pinto etc. But there should be a natural progression up for what we recognize as our best classes. We talk about getting new guys, but give them nowhere to go up once we got them. They better be happy with their first descision because alot of times they get stuck there.

 

[jdh]

Why should I go to the runons? So I can meet John Heinricy in person on the grid just before he laps me three times. Cost is part of the issue. Having a shot at a podium finish is a stronger draw. That is not going to happen when pro drivers with full factory support are populating the front third of the field in some classes.

Cost, are you guys willing to pay $800 (maybe even a little more) for a three day double at COTA? Even if I have to run it on the short course instead of the F1 course? Or would you rather I keep the event at TWS and have the entry fee be about $475?

All due respect to the drivers of the LBCs, have you considered a newer car that is easier to find parts for and requires less work between sessions to get you back on the track? Which brings me to the issue of age. Age of both the cars and the drivers/workers. What ever track the club takes it will all be moot if "we" do not find a way to attract and retain new and younger members as both workers and drivers. We are not going to be able to put on safe events with three 70 yo workers on each corner. Not to leave drivers out of this, at some point a process has to be but in the mix to monitor both beginning and older drivers performance on track to prevent the perception that they are becoming a hazard to others on the track either from a lack of experience or loss of abilities. Believe me this is not something I take lightly as my day is coming sooner than I care to admit. We also need to work on getting the young-uns to step up leadership positions in the club at all levels.

We proved regional and national drivers can be on the track at the same time with the "rationals". Rationals were a good way to be more inclusive. They worked and entries, in my events, were up. Then the powers that be decided we needed to be exclusive instead of inclusive and forced the "Majors" on us immediately alienating the drivers of two thirds of the clubs classes. If those classes are so under subscribed as to be relegated to second class status do the right thing and remove them from the GCR and force those who want to continue to compete to buy new cars for one of the chosen classes. So what if they cannot afford to buy a new car. We don't need them po' folks in the club anyway. However if the car is in a GCR listed class then treat everyone the same and welcome them to compete. The regions hosting the races can use every entry we can get. (You may infer from this that if the RE has his say Lone Star will not be hosting a majors event next season.)

Yes I have more peeves but I'll stop there for now.

 

[disquek]

ClulessMale:

The idea behind national versus regional racing is that the nationals should be a step up in competition. Meaning you race regionals until you're ready for nationals.

This isn't always the case. I've seen guys at nationals that would finish last at any half decent regional, and I've seen guys at regionals that would mop the floor at a national.

IMHO: Fixing that would make things work again.

-Kyle

 

[disquek]

... and force those who want to continue to compete to buy new cars for one of the chosen classes. So what if they cannot afford to buy a new car. We don't need them po' folks in the club anyway.

Please tell me this was tounge-in-cheek. Please. Otherwise this thread is going to get ugly.

-Kyle

 

[Don Walsh]

Speaking from my own experience:
I first joined SCCA in 1972 only to find that my car had ben dropped from classification because no one had run one at a National the previous year ( Honda S600). This was the first of a number of times I quit the club. I raced with EMRA until 1988, moving up to an FP Turner in 1977. In 1988 I rejoined SCCA because I wanted to race at the National level and attend the Runoffs. In spite of over 12,000 miles of road race experience, I was required to do 2 races on a logbook and 4 regionals to get my National license. I did this and first raced in the Runoffs at Road Atlanta in that same year. I gues my point is that drivers who want to race at the top level will find a way to do that. We should not diminish the value of the National program or the Runoffs to attract this unidentified group of drivers that the powers that be seem to think are waiting for the sun, moon, stars and right class to magically appear. I will be attending my 14th Runoffs this year and one of the highlights for me was earning the EP Hard Charger in 2010. I may never make the podium, but I know that I'm competing with some of the best in the country. Just my .02.

 

[KDENNIS]

Why should I go to the runons? So I can meet John Heinricy in person on the grid just before he laps me three times. Cost is part of the issue. Having a shot at a podium finish is a stronger draw. That is not going to happen when pro drivers with full factory support are populating the front third of the field in some classes.

Competing under the same rules? Absolutely he should be welcomed. John Heinricy is no different than Bob Tullius, or Paul Newman or Joe Huffaker. If you don't want to race against the best then your in the wrong game. Go to your local trophy store and pick yourself up a nice big one.

All due respect to the drivers of the LBCs, have you considered a newer car that is easier to find parts for and requires less work between sessions to get you back on the track?

Less work....maybe. Available parts? Not even close, I can pick up the phone to any number of guys who will sell me race ready parts for a LBC. Race prepped Engine or suspension parts for Yaris? Fit? not so.

We also need to work on getting the young-uns to step up leadership positions in the club at all levels.

If those classes are so under subscribed as to be relegated to second class status do the right thing and remove them from the GCR and force those who want to continue to compete to buy new cars for one of the chosen classes. So what if they cannot afford to buy a new car. We don't need them po' folks in the club anyway.

Yes we do need the Po' folks. Who would you rather have in your club. Somebody with every dime they have invested in a car, or a rich guy that will go as quickly as he came. Where do you think volunteers come from? The Po' folks who live and breathe SCCA. You don't want the Po' folks and you don't want the John Heinricy's. You talk about Rationals being a success because they were inclusive. All I hear is exclusivity.

 

[S. Henry]

**From a novice permit person**

To me the only difference between a regional and national is who can go. There is no real perk to getting the national unless you want to go the runoffs, or is that the idea?

i agree... IMO time for this regional/national thing to be combined... Just SCCA club racing with all classes that have some level of interest... top 24 (or whatever) go to runoffs.

 

[zChris]

IMO time for this regional/national thing to be combined... Just SCCA club racing with all classes that have some level of interest... top 24 (or whatever) go to runoffs

So your saying you would like ITJ(Lemons cars) to be the face of your club at the Runoffs. Because they would be in the top 24. Be careful what you wish for.
Chris

 

[cluelessmale]

Is ITJ like ITE is in the north east. Improved Touring Everything

 

[James Rogerson]

At least we wouldn't have to lend cars to people to try and make a 10 car field. ;-)

James

 

[jdh]

... and force those who want to continue to compete to buy new cars for one of the chosen classes. So what if they cannot afford to buy a new car. We don't need them po' folks in the club anyway.

Please tell me this was tounge-in-cheek. Please. Otherwise this thread is going to get ugly.

-Kyle

Tongue firmly planted in cheek.

 

[S. Henry]

IMO time for this regional/national thing to be combined... Just SCCA club racing with all classes that have some level of interest... top 24 (or whatever) go to runoffs

So your saying you would like ITJ(Lemons cars) to be the face of your club at the Runoffs. Because they would be in the top 24. Be careful what you wish for.
Chris

sounds like fun... I'd rather watch a field full of those than 4 T1 cars (and I love those T1 cars)... Top 24 nation wide. I don't know anything about ITJ, so I'm going to reference IT# I'd still expect that IT# would have to meet the GCR and their rule set with tech and all... I bet the pointed end of IT# would be some clean and interesting cars... Top drivers would flock to popular classes so they could go to the runoffs maybe... that would raise the competition and quality of the cars in that class... People line the fences when a big class hits the track... We poke fun of SM sometimes, but those front cars are great build quality (i'm biased) and the stands were full to watch last years race...

 

[jdh]

Why should I go to the runons? So I can meet John Heinricy in person on the grid just before he laps me three times. Cost is part of the issue. Having a shot at a podium finish is a stronger draw. That is not going to happen when pro drivers with full factory support are populating the front third of the field in some classes.

Competing under the same rules? Absolutely he should be welcomed. John Heinricy is no different than Bob Tullius, or Paul Newman or Joe Huffaker. If you don't want to race against the best then your in the wrong game. Go to your local trophy store and pick yourself up a nice big one.

All due respect to the drivers of the LBCs, have you considered a newer car that is easier to find parts for and requires less work between sessions to get you back on the track?

Less work....maybe. Available parts? Not even close, I can pick up the phone to any number of guys who will sell me race ready parts for a LBC. Race prepped Engine or suspension parts for Yaris? Fit? not so.

We also need to work on getting the young-uns to step up leadership positions in the club at all levels.

If those classes are so under subscribed as to be relegated to second class status do the right thing and remove them from the GCR and force those who want to continue to compete to buy new cars for one of the chosen classes. So what if they cannot afford to buy a new car. We don't need them po' folks in the club anyway.

Yes we do need the Po' folks. Who would you rather have in your club. Somebody with every dime they have invested in a car, or a rich guy that will go as quickly as he came. Where do you think volunteers come from? The Po' folks who live and breathe SCCA. You don't want the Po' folks and you don't want the John Heinricy's. You talk about Rationals being a success because they were inclusive. All I hear is exclusivity.

Kevin,
Look up. There goes my post sailing right over.

 

[JasonIsley99]

Glad you all agree.

Further, each current National class continues to go to the runoffs. Nationally recognized regional classes (IT) don't initially, though they may petition to change that if the competitors wish. Classes such as club ford and club continental would not be allowed to petition as they already have entree through the national class for those cars (FF or FC).

Under your plan CF/CC cars don't get an invite because there are already National classes for those cars. OK. You do realize that nearly every IT car can fit into the current National structure we have in place now via ST and Prod? If IT guys want to go they already can.

 

[James Rogerson]

What some folks seem to forget is the singular fact that the buyer sets value, not the seller. If you want to sell a product, you have to produce what the buyer desires.

The SCCA doesn't appear to be doing that as well as the other sellers.

James Rogerson
posted as I watch 40 cars run around track on a rainy Thursday afternoon. 10 SM's built strictly for track days without logbooks. Not interested in getting hit.

 

[Karl McColl]

Jason, I don't really care what classes go or don't go. CF and CC eligibility for runoffs is fine with me. I was just throwing out ideas.
My main points were:
1)National CTT program organized and supported similarly as Solo and Club Racing.
2) No more regional/National just SCCA Club Racing.

The fact that IT cars fit in other classes doesn't matter. IT(R,S,A,B,C) are Nationally recognized regional classes. In a world of no national/regional distinction if they wanted to be runoffs eligible in our brave new world they should have that choice. A class like spec 7, S-7 Spec rx-7 that isn't nationally recognized would have to go through the process of coming up with a homogenous rule just set like SM did.

This notion that we need 2 levels, so that one level (National) can feel superior is silly. How does having less drivers competing together make the racing better? The idea that it makes us distinct from our competition (NASA) equally silly. To me that thinking implies a fear that head to head we are not as good. I don't buy it.

 

[hoffman900]

I don't have a dog in this fight, other than I like seeing a good friend of mine have a good time out on the track and his class is dying.

Has anyone considered this:

What's the average "career" for a club racer? From 1970-1980, 1980-1990... etc. Has it gone up or down?

How many people are participating in motorsports? Look at BMWCCA, Grand Am, all the vintage sanctioning bodies, PCA, etc. Add all those people up. How does that relate to years past? It might not be as large as say 2006, but I bet it's a lot more than it was in the 90's and before. If there are more, then where the *bleep* are they and why aren't they racing with the SCCA? (I guess that's what's being discussed)

How many new racers are attracted to the club each year? Obviously, the people who leave have a hole to be filled. How does this number compare over the same period for the average "career" length? I'm guessing the average club racer "career" is about the same as it was 20-30 years ago. It seems people give it a real go for about 5 years or so and then fade away. Whether that's because of rules or just because of the time/money commitment that racing always has had.

Is racing really that much more expensive than it use to be? Accounting for inflation, it doesn't really seem so. It's always been expensive the best I can tell. Doing some quick research, in 1970 "last years model" of MGB cost about 14-15k in today's dollars. That's even before the suspension was developed and a full prep engine built! By the later '70s and '80s the donor cars were probably as cheap as they would ever be, just like the '90s import stuff is now. The problem is that most of that '90s stuff seems to be built for IT, not Prod or GT.

As a fan of history, a quick google search showed how the club was. The regional / national distinction worked because the same classes populated both. As far as I know there were no regional only classes with their own culture and championships. Where is the upward movement for an IT racer? The racing isn't better in Prod, it's just a higher prep level. Also, the club classes could run in pro races, hence the locals populating races when they rolled into town.

FA - F5000
AS - Trans Am
BS/CS - Trans Am
ASR - Can Am.

Once you hit SCCA National, that's about the end of the line for someone looking to move up. At that point, they have to change cars/sanctioning bodies/licenses/ etc. A team like Speedsource is a perfect example. They went from IT racing to where they're at currently without ever having to "graduate" to Nationals.

Just food for thought. Maybe someone can take something from this.