Low turnouts

[SR Racing]

As for their rules... I don't think dividing our already shrinking group into 1200 and 1600 factions is the right choice. The 1200cc folks have too much already invested to make the switch. We would likely lose even more drivers to other classes or they would leave racing entirely. I think our focus needs to be on growing what we already have, not diluting things further.

I don't want to get into the FV/FST discussion but,... We currently have about 20 FST cars running. Only about 5 of those drivers were from the active FV ranks. So about 15 are new drivers to entry level open wheel, or "came out of retirement" to race FST. So the "split" seems not to be a big issue.

And as the Aussies did, we HAVE to adjust FV soon. Someone accused me of crying "the sky is falling", a couple years ago over this issue.
Parts are getting harder to get and more costly. Manufactures are giving up on the 60's vintage VW parts production. Most items are now coming from junkyards. Everytime I place an order with the importer, I find more items not available, or with 20-30% price increases.
As FST is spec'ed, all parts are readily available at cheaper prices.

We have to not only find drivers, but parts too.

I know we all think our Vee's are good looking, but show a FV and an FST to a potential newby and ask for his reaction.

[twofoot]

Jim, I do agree with you to a degree. But... Can you convince a large percentage of the folks here to make the switch? I bet it would be a tough sell, irregardless of whether or not it is a "smart" move. Old habits die hard, and are the toughest to change. For many, I can see giving up 1200cc FV in the same light of a 20 year smoker giving up 2 packs a day.

I do think that the next two or three years will be crucial for us all. With the current rate of decline, I can see the group being forced out of many events or being combined into something unrecognizable and unwanted by the current members. The wind of change is blowing...

C.

[Bill_Bonow]

As for their rules... I don't think dividing our already shrinking group into 1200 and 1600 factions is the right choice. The 1200cc folks have too much already invested to make the switch. We would likely lose even more drivers to other classes or they would leave racing entirely. I think our focus needs to be on growing what we already have, not diluting things further.

Chris,

Disclaimer: I have no dog in the “FV low turnouts” fight.

As a separate SCCA class, FST has not and will not cause anyone to go to another class or leave racing all together any more than FC, FF, F5 or any other SCCA class would cause anyone to change or quit. In fact, FST conversions help FV by re-introducing hard to find 1200 parts back into circulation on FV cars that have become “garage queens”.

If Formula Vee in SCCA club racing has anything they should guard against, it is the vintage FV group. The Lynx B and Zink Z-5 (C-4) cars that are monoposto legal are being bought up, restored to original condition and will never see SCCA competition again. These are the starter cars that bring people into SCCA club racing in FV (see fvkartguy above). Don’t get me wrong, the vintage guys are not wearing black capes, top hats and handlebar moustaches, but the topic of this thread is about low turn out in FV at SCCA club racing events. If the pool of available FV starter cars is being bought up by people who will no longer use it at SCCA club races, then you have to acknowledge them as a threat to FV in SCCA club racing. As for the quantity of FV conversions to FST, that number is 12 cars of which most were parked for many years before conversion. I would bet that the vintage guys have bought up more than 50 FV that will no longer enter an SCCA club race.

This is my personal opinion, but the long term future for FV growth will be in vintage.

Bill

[twofoot]

Bill, I'm one of those guys you mention. But I don't mind coming out to play with a "modern" car either.

I will admit, the simplicity and affordability of a vintage FV is what pushed me to make a purchase. You get to play with the champagne set on a beer budget.

That being said, is there a need for an affordable entry level car that can hold its own on track? Will the lack of competitiveness and/or high price drive off a future FV driver? Racing certainly isn't a cheap hobby, and I know a lot of local kids that take their daily drivers to track days. Are we not looking in the right direction to grow our favorite past time?

Hmmm... I wonder if the missus would like me with a handlebar mustache...

Best,

Chris

[Bill_Bonow]

Can you convince a large percentage of the folks here to make the switch?

Chris,

Why the need to switch?

Yes, I knew you have a vintage Beach, but what current era FV do you have/race in SCCA?

Bill

[SR Racing]

Jim, I do agree with you to a degree. But... Can you convince a large percentage of the folks here to make the switch? I bet it would be a tough sell, irregardless of whether or not it is a "smart" move. Old habits die hard, and are the toughest to change. For many, I can see giving up 1200cc FV in the same light of a 20 year smoker giving up 2 packs a day..

You are totally correct. For whatever reason, many don't want to switch. (and many for good reason. EG. They have an adequate, relatvely cheap to maintain, setup car. They can take it out 3 or 4 times a year and if they don't break the motor or bend a wheel, it's pretty cheap racing.) A new FST or conversion is going to require new investment.
But for someone getting into a new/used car and looking to the next 5 to 10 years, an FST is certainly a better choice. (In the case of a NEW car, there is no doubt. Depending upon what the final prices are on the newly manufactured FST' come out to be and the current EVO.. They are much cheaper than a FV. (assuming you can find a new FV that fits you. )

[Mark_Silverberg]

Bill,

I beg to differ on Vintage Formula Vee stealing entries. Yes there may be 50-60 vintage formula vees running throughout the country - but many of them do not meet modern SCCA requirments for front roll hoops, side intrusion, front impact attenuation and other factors. Many had no engines and had not been raced in years.

My Zink sat in a field for years before it was restored in the mid 90's. After the second restoration in 2005 probably the only original component was the instrment panel and the trapezoid.

My Lynx B was long removed from its glory days when it sat on the pole for the Runoffs in 1975 when Warren Mockler was driving it. It had been cast away because it did not have a front hoop and it was easier to transfer the parts to a new speedsport frame than to do the updatework required on the car. If I had not rescued the frame from a garage in Cedar Rapids it probably would have been washed away in the recent flood. The past owner had to give the frame away!

Yes there probably a few Lynx B's being converted back to vintage - but by the time you revise the rear frame back to zero roll configuration and get the correct body work you have basically jacked up the log book and place a new car underneath.

The reason the vintage vee group is growing in the midwest is simple - participants who actively promote the class and organize their own race series. There is as much depth and talent in the field as most national races - and certainly more entries.

There are a few vintage vee members who cross over to scca - but very few and always in a different car. Almost all our participants are new to racing (but did not consider SCCA) or coming from a different vintage class. We did have one driver come from midwest council club ford - but he was not running scca events.

Vintage Vee is recycling old cars that no one wants - perhaps with better promotion on the part of scca participants there would have been more demand

[OhioMark]

The purpose of my original post wasn't to create a pissing match between the FV & FST drivers, many who are one in the same. But
rather take a look at increasing the FV fields by attempting to get older cars back on the track. The FST concept in tires has worked
very well with 25+ heat cycles the norm, and I hope that FV drivers take a serious look at their concept that appears to be a major
reason ( not only) why new drivers head towards the FST class rather than the FV class. If an individual only has so much to spend,
then reducing the tire budget will allow for more race weekends and other purchases not normally made because the money would be
going to tires. I hope the two sister classes can work together and not against each other because in the end, it's the SM & SSM
crowd who should be your major concern, and not another open wheel group. Thanks!

Mark

[24b4Jeff]

I think it is necessary to analyze the difference between turnouts at the regional and national levels. Here in the mid-Atlantic area, regional turnouts are quite good - 17 Vees already for the regional at Summit Point at the (sweltering) August 2 regional. I don't think there were 17 Vees altogether for the four national weekends I ran this year. Why is that? IMO there are two main reasons, which I list in no particular order of importance:

1. Regionals are cheaper to run. If one has no desire to go to the runoffs and doesn't like running a lot of different tracks then one can stay close to home and save on tow costs, hotel costs, and entry fees. (Speaking of which, why is it that WDCR charges $225 for a Regional and $315 for a National?);

2. The runoffs suck in the opinions of many, YT included. I can go to Europe and eat in Michelin star-rated restaurants for the same price as getting one lousy session per day a mickey mouse track and eating McGrease in Podunk. Also there is no honor in going. Last year one of the guys from my division who I routinely lap every time we race got invited. This is a different thread, you say. But to me everything is related.

The bottom line is that as far as I can tell FV racing at the regional level ain't broke. For the life of me I can't figure why anybody would seriously suggest rule changes that slow us down, like adding weight or going to hard compound tires. The idea of racing is to go fast. If we have to spend money to modify our cars, at least have them be faster as a result! If you change the rules so my national car can't race regionally, or so I need to buy yet more tires to race regionally, I won't. And what then will you have accomplished?

[OhioMark]

Jeff:

I have been watching the Fv count in your area and the SF area and both are good. However, many other regions of the
country are experiencing lower turnouts and would like to increase their car count. If reduction in tire or other costs can
be achieved then why wouldn't a region try to reduce costs if it will increase turnout? Your area of the country maybe fine
but you might be able to increase those numbers if you reduce or slow down the rising cost to race. I know of 5-6 FV's that
aren't being raced due to costs and the fact that they're older and perceived to be uncompetitive with today's cars. If you
deal with the tire costs now and the uncompetitiveness in the near future ( ie: CFV ) then you'll increase the chance of getting
these cars back on the track. The current status quo isn't going to work across the board and/or country. If you don't believe
me then review the FV car count over the last 10-12 years as provided by the SCCA. I'm glad to see the SE Region FV drivers
attempting to raise the car count and wish them well. Doing nothing or advocating nothing will guarantee one thing........
the continued decline in participation of the class..guaranteed!!!!!

Mark

[lee]

I don't mean to pile on but Mark got his post in before me and I was going to express the same. I tallied the SARRC (SEDiv regional series) results so far for the 2008 season and after 19 events we are averaging under 5 cars/event. I included all DNF and DNS so this wasn't just finishers. I'm glad you guys have strong fields in hte Mid-Atlantic and it's one of the reasons I'd like to tow up to Summit one of these days. We had 2 events last year with double digit entries and NONE so far this year.

We're looking at cutting the consummable costs where we can and doing it without requiring people an upfront cost to save money down the road. I think the current ideas are about as inclusive as possible. By creating a separate class it doesn't force ANYONE to do ANYTHING.

I agree that we all want to go faster and if anyone can come up with suggestions that have us going faster AND reducing costs then bring it on as I'm sure we're all ears! FST probably does that but at the prepaid cost of conversion. Changing current FV rules of course brings with it the wrath of God.

Lee

[OhioMark]

Lee:

The consequences of low turnouts will force the Vee's to run with SRF's, CF, FF and even FC's if the numbers aren't raised.
I do remember the regions near Summit Pt. even discussing the exclusion of certain formula car groups if they didn't increase their numbers due to the SM/SSM drivers
complaining about 5-7 car race groups. This agreement was originally implemented and then placed on hold after several open wheel drivers got involved, but don't expect
the numbers (ie: power ) of the SM/SSM group to be silenced for too long in any region if your numbers are low. They want and are starting to demand more track time
so the time to act is NOW!!! Also, don't blame the FST group for seeing a void and filling it by introducing their cars and creating another open wheel class. They felt their
voice ( right or wrong) wasn't being heard so the rest is history. I know I'm going to butcher this saying, " we have found the enemy and they are us", clearly describes
this class in many ways!

Thanks!

Mark

[Frank]

I think a spec tire is a good idea. I know I can't afford new tires for my car. I also think we need more people like Bob Tupper who has a prize raffle every race and everyone wins something at least $25 or more, most are gift cirtificates for vee parts but people donate cash too. Its like getting a discount on your entry fee. The low $225 entry fee helps a lot too, and the workers at summit point are top notch. Jeff was wrong about the car count for the race. There are 19 Vees not 17!!

[FV94]

The number of vees pre-entered for this weekend's race is now 21.
That brings the average FV entry for the 4 MARRS regional races at Summit Point to 17.5 vees per event so far this season (our 2007 season average was 16 vees per SP event).
The MARRS FV Rewards program (using a random drawing to insure rewarding anyone who enters, not just the fast guys) is definitely one of the reasons for our increase in entry level the last two seasons (and I have to get this in - thanks to all our sponsors - Bill Scott Racing, Hoosier Tire, SKI Motorsports, Autowerks Race Engines, Noble Race Engines, Quicksilver Race Engines, Veetech, Maloney Racing, Meathead Racing, LRE, SR Racing, Vee Sport Racing, Quixote Racing, Womer Race Cars, and Ashley Racing).
But that is not the only reason.
As part of the Washington DC Region paddock program, we have a FV reserved paddock area. The paddock program requires that each group average 1.5 cars per marked space in the paved paddock, and to do that we must crowd everyone in, but it creates a real community atmosphere with everyone talking and working together throughout the weekend. Lots of support for everyone, whether seasoned racer or newbie.
So fun off the track as well as on the track.
With such a high entry level, the on-track racing is more fun - usually someone to race with wherever you are in the field.
We maintain an egroup to stay in touch between races.
Also the WDCR provides Sat night dinner for everyone.
What more can a vee racer ask for -prizes, lots of fun on and off the track, and a free dinner!

[Rickydel]

For the life of me I can't figure why anybody would seriously suggest rule changes that slow us down, like adding weight or going to hard compound tires. The idea of racing is to go fast. If we have to spend money to modify our cars, at least have them be faster as a result! If you change the rules so my national car can't race regionally, or so I need to buy yet more tires to race regionally, I won't. And what then will you have accomplished?

Jeff,
I don't mean this as rude, but you are wrong, and it is not my opinion. The "idea of racing" is to be faster than the other racers, competing with the same set of rules. If the idea of racing is strictly to go fast, then how can anyone call any form of FV racing, "Racing". With HP in the 50s, who is really going fast? We should then have a class called FV8 instead.

WIth regard to your national car racing regionally, it is only a set of spec. tires, that #1, will not impact your national effort by running a regional. That is, the GY or Hoosier softies that you have slated for the next National can stay in the garage. #2, the spec tire will not age that fast, so the "extra" set you will have bought for regionals will be ready to go when called upon.

[24b4Jeff]

So by your irrefutable logic we could cut costs in FV and alleviate the shortage in parts by replacing our VW 1200s with lawn mower engines - say 50 cc. That would make the risk management folks happy too.
As far as the tire thing goes, why not just go to street tires? That is what Skippy does. Again, we'd save lots of cash by not ever needing rain tires. And if we were really smart about it, ti could be incredibly cheap!
So that's the formula for cheap FV: lawn mower engines, a 1300 pound minimum weight (or should we make it 1400 pounds, so that our fellow competitors who weigh over 300 won't feel discriminated against), and Pep Boys 560 x 15 tires run at greater than 50% tread depth.
I challenge anyone to come up with a cheaper alternative. And, as you argue so persuasively, this is a formula for a race car.
No, wait. We could just go to Game Boys. :-}

[jpetillo]

For the life of me I can't figure why anybody would seriously suggest rule changes that slow us down, like adding weight or going to hard compound tires. The idea of racing is to go fast. If we have to spend money to modify our cars, at least have them be faster as a result! If you change the rules so my national car can't race regionally, or so I need to buy yet more tires to race regionally, I won't. And what then will you have accomplished?

Jeff,
I don't mean this as rude, but you are wrong, and it is not my opinion. The "idea of racing" is to be faster than the other racers, competing with the same set of rules. If the idea of racing is strictly to go fast, then how can anyone call any form of FV racing, "Racing". With HP in the 50s, who is really going fast? We should then have a class called FV8 instead.

The main problem I see with slowing us down is with regard to racing with other classes. I think the speed differential between the FV's and other classes is the most dangerous part of racing. Having just one year of racing under my belt, this is what concerns me most, like when we're mixed with FF's. The last time we raced at LRP, the FF's were outright dangerous. If we're slower I'd simply not attend that race again. Right now we can hold our own in the corners against other classes, but get killed in the straights. I'd hate to give the corners up too.

If we're going to slow the cars down in braking/cornering due to spec tires, then we should consider a performance increase to offset it. I have no idea what that would be, but maybe a spec intake/carb or something that everyone could do for cheap money. I think it would never happen, but I think it should be discussed. I realize that it brings up that we should consider FST, but that's a financial outlay that I'm not willing to make at this time. We'd just need something to hold our lap times roughly where they are.

John

[problemchild]

There seems to be so much misinformation about spec tire use. I have raced with spec tires in FV and FF in Canada. Both classes were "saved" after approaching extinction levels. The FST spec tire (Hoosier 60A) that is also used by many CFF groups is just an outstanding tire that has unnoticable degradation over 20+ cycles. I cannot imagine ever racing again in a series without spec tires.

There is no doubt that Hoosier could build a modern "Vrock" tire than would have 2% less new performance than their current tire but would last 20+ cycles with minimal degradation. If Hoosier can, Goodyear certainly can too .... insert Nascar joke here .... if they wanted to. I agree with Jeff that FVs do not need to be slower ..... but you are only talking about the good FV drivers going 2% slower and for how many laps? The majority of the FV crowd will be going the same speed ..... but spending much less to do it. Those new spec tires would be like those 5 session takeoffs bought from the local FV hotshoe. When those new spec tires have 10 sessions on them, they will be like the hotshot FV tires with 6 sessions, etc.

With the right spec tire, the average FV racer could buy 1 set of tires per season and have rubber capable of winning races through that season. Unless you really like buying tires, there is absolutely nothing to fear from spec tires!

[twofoot]

Is there any possibility of having some "real world" testing done for a spec tire? Would someone (cough... SR... cough...) be willing to put up a few sets of tires to help the cause?

It's certainly worth considering, and not just dismissing it offhand as many are prone to do.

Chris

[SR Racing]

Would someone (cough... SR... cough...) be willing to put up a few sets of tires to help the cause?

Since I am a Hoosier dealer, that is the only tire manufacturer that I could help much with. Once it is decided on what will be tested, where and how, I would be willing to assist.

[Rickydel]

Chris,

I think there is more than enough data from series that have used spec tires to be able to make an informed decision.
That includes the use of "street" tires too!

[twofoot]

Ricky, I agree. But... It still seems like there are those out there that need a "head to head" before even considering the idea.

It still makes you wonder what the true "problem" is with FV and its stagnated growth. Lots of questions, few real answers.

C.

[OhioMark]

I have to agree with Greg that the so called spec tires won't slow down the drivers by that much! I feel everyone
is reading too much into this subject and there are those who believe the loss of performance is greater than it really is. I fail to
understand how you wouldn't give up a half second per lap to double your tire life and obviously reduce your
expenses. If you don't like the spec tire, attend nationals and race with drivers who aren't as concerned about
tire costs as the average regional driver. just a thought!

Mark

[jpetillo]

Since the point here is to deal with low turnouts, and some are concerned with lower lap times from a spec tire, and they would want a head-to-head with the current crop of tires before committing, then that's probably what needs to happen or else nothing will change. We don't want to steer the current crop of racers away from regionals or nationals. I'd like to see a comparison between the current crop happen - things might be different than they were a few years ago and we'd definitely learn something - always good! I have to admit that I really don't know some of you folks enough to know that 1/2 second per lap is really the number. For me, I might not even notice a difference in lap time since I'm still learning how to drive and not making the most of my tires. I'd also be willing to send some dollars in to SR to help fund a tire benchmarking.
John

[kps]

There are some problems with what you are suggesting. Some of us choose not to chase points in any series but select the races we attend based on other criteria. I race nationals, regionals ,and some SARRC races and vintage. Introducing a spec tire means one more set of tires I will need to have available. While not opposed to a spec tire what you are recommending in no longer Fromula V. What we don't need is another formula something to further split the small numbers we see at most races. I would oppose giving the SARRC business to a supplier who has done nothing to help formula v in our area. For example, it was Hoosier that paid for the free practice day at the Birthday Party not anyone from AR. As to tire wear unless I cut a tire I run three weekends and sometimes four on my 55 Hoosiers. While I am not up there with Davis I am running with the group right behind him. The key is to get your car set up so that you do not wear a grouve in the front tires. If you can achieve a flat wear pattern they seem to be good for quite a few sessions. While you may reduce cost for some with a spec tire you may actually reduce the formula v turn out. John