Tom Feller said "Get the Runoffs away from RA and back to a normal track...not the outlier that is RA." Weather it is "Right ON", BINGO!!! or DUUHH!! The issue is the RunOffs current location.
I always believed if one is going to complain......one should also offer a remedy. During the first three year contract with RA it became obvious of the disparity issue. Prior to moving to RA, the best Midgets, Miata's, Honda's/Acura's etc would run nose to tail. At RA, a top notch LEGAL Midget can not come within 2 seconds of a 2.32. Letters were written to SCCA about this issue and I hoped that SCCA would recognise and fix the problem by moving to a more balanced track. But the contract was renewed and the falloff in FP Midget participation really began.
I really do not think that SCCA wants to get rid of ANY marque. Is the car count so high that they can toss out or, through the rules process, intentionally make a car unable to compete? To remain viable, SCCA needs CARS. Yes we need to attract newer cars but I suggest having 700-800 cars of various makes and model years is far better than 500-600 cars of newer ones.
OK, how about this to think about. If RA is in SCCA's extended future and you do not like the RunOffs or RA Spec idea what about this. As a racer, NO ONE WANTS TO GO SLOWER. So if the FP Miatas, Honda's and Acura's are so much faster than the previously classed FP cars, what do you have to GIVE those faster ones to go even FASTER and move them into EP. Same size cars, same weight, safer for the smaller cars. Geez, what a thought. I can here it now, OMG, what would the car count be in FP with these cars gone? HMMMM wonder where all the old GP cars went?? There are close to 200 replies dealing with ex-GP cars. Can they get a spec that would make them viable in FP? Not a chump spec but one with a real viable chance? One that would heal their disappointment and allow them to race what they have with (hopefully) not to large of a re-investment. I do not know if this really is a viable option but it may be worth consideration.
In a prior post on this current subject the following was said. I have held off on a responce in the hopes someone else might reply but since I am on a roll, here goes. The following was posted on 14 Aug:
"In a second private message this official states that the SCCA's current low entries is because SCCA is not attracting more new drivers. New drivers can now choose from a number of sanctioning bodies. He goes on to say that owners of old cars should do has Kent has done and build new modern cars. Our old cars belong in vintage racing. SCCA's woes are not caused by the BOD, CRB, or staff. We, the owners of old cars are to blame.... We are supposed to build new cars if we want to be competitive."
IF the above was verbatim, "sorry in advance for the profanity" but WHAT A CROCK OF SHIT. So the owners of cars that finished 2nd in both FP and HP in the 2007 RunOffs at HPT are to blame for the current SCCA woes! We are letting SCCA down by not building new cars? Whoever uttered those words to us deserves a reply from us.........F@#% YOU TOO. I am proud to be friends of the Prather family. Kent and Jesse deserve all they have attained. While the Prather's run a racing business, the majority of folks that race in SCCA do not. It is not their lively hood and building new cars every three or four years is not viable for most.
