Formula Vee Meeting during the Runoffs

[FV80]

Just in case some of you still aren't signed up in the FV Registry and you don't read the Committee minutes, I am posting this message here. The response has been even lower than I expected.

Code: Select all

To *ALL* persons interested in Formula Vee as a class within SCCA… (members of the FV Registry on this emailing)

From “the FV Ad Hoc Committee”,

Please be advised that SCCA has seen fit to provide a minimum 2 hour time slot starting at 4 PM on Friday, Sept 25, 2009 at the Turn 8 Pavilion (at Road America) for discussions surrounding a number of issues related to the FV class.  Please make every effort to attend – if you cannot attend, try to find someone that can be there to represent your thoughts on the various subjects. This meeting will discuss topics related to FORMULA VEE *ONLY*.

The primary topics are

1).  An *END* to the escalation of intake manifold issues.  SCCA feels that we should be able to write a rule that will eliminate further “interpretations” of the rules in the future – whether it be a spec manifold or a 10 page description… whether it means a TIGHTENING of the current rules or a LOOSENING of them … whatever it takes, they would like to see it happen.  

2). SCCA would *LIKE* to see a set of rules that would stabilize the class for the near term future.  If you are aware of any loopholes, or have thoughts that might apply, please let us know.  The idea is that the class would return to its early roots of ‘arrive and drive’ rather than the ‘gotta have it’ latest tweak deciding many of the results.

3).  Errors and Omissions – If you are aware of any rules that were previously in the FV rule set that SHOULD still be there and are not, please bring them to our attention.  It also follows that if you are aware of any rules that are in error in any manner – measurements, tolerances, etc – or maybe got changed erroneously in the rewrite 2 years ago, let us know about them.

4).  SCCA would like to see a PLAN … or NOT … for the future of the class.  That would include alternative engine sources (with a reasonable future) or alternates for other parts as well.  This is WIDE OPEN and they would like to have your thoughts. 

Recognizing that many of you might like to attend but just cannot swing the trip, we request that you send email comments on any or all of the above topics back to me (Steve@WedgeRacing.com) as a member of the Committee.  I will share your responses with the other members of the Committee and with the ‘powers that be’ in SCCA so that they can be hashed out (hopefully) during the meeting.

Several previous attempts to get ideas and/or consensus on changing or modifying the class for the long term have come to naught.  Please think openly about the problems and issues and pour out any ideas you might have.  SCCA and the Committee will attempt to sort through them all and come up with a plan that we can all live with.  Keep in mind that one of the possible outcomes is that NOTHING changes and the class eventually dies.

It’s not lost on us that items #1,2 and 3 are in direct opposition to item #4 – the first ones are for the near term – 2 years or more – the 4th item is for further down the road.

*PLEASE* either attend the meeting, or find a rep, and/or send your emails back to me on these subjects.  Actually, even if you do plan to attend, if you have any thoughts or ideas that you would like to bring up, it would be helpful if you could send an email with a brief description so that we can do some research and put some prior thought into it before the meeting.

Please pass this to ANYONE who you know who is interested in FV as an SCCA class.

Thanks for your time and …. LONG LIVE FORMULA VEE!! 

Stevan Davis, FV80 and the FV Ad Hoc Committee
Steve Oseth
Bruce Livermore
Mike Kochanski
Dietmar Bauerle

see http://www.FormulaVee.us

Steve

[Doug Carter]

Please do realize, though, that the SCCA members attending the RunOffs is a very small percentage of any class overall, and a terrible cross section of the racers or opinions in that class. They are merely the racers who made an effort to qualify for the National Championships. You are excluding all Regional opinions, as well as racers that don't have the budgets or time to maintain a National Championship effort.

I understand that the most influential names and faces of the respective classes will be in attendance, but you are only talking to the top 10% of any class—or less. Don't accept any consensus from a "RunOffs meeting" as the feelings of the class as a whole.

And people have shown that e-mails will not be sent in advance, but most certainly individuals will have opinions after the fact. It's the nature of a club.

[Dietmar]

Doug:

Please notice that in every posting we have asked for member input: "if you are not attending the Runoffs, please send us your ideas, and even if you are attending, send them ahead of time."

Dietmar

[Doug Carter]

I did, but we both know that most SCCA racers are reactive and not proactive. It's tough to ask for input on discussions that haven't happened yet. Or maybe, most racers don't care about $1200 manifolds. Input on "control tires" may generate more feedback, or maybe there is just more apathy than interest in class progression.

By the way, I did post this in the FV section on ApexSpeed for more exposure. Hopefully, it helps generate more needed response.

[brian]

Doug, usaully there are a lot of regional guys who come to spectate and will join in at the meeting. You're complelety right, if you don't participate in some way, you can't sit back and bitch.

[wroché29]

Dietmar;
I may, or may not have, sent you an e-mail through this forum... but because of the PM / outbox hostage scenario; I've also sent it to your website e-mail address.

Thanks-

[FV80]

Please do realize, though, that the SCCA members attending the RunOffs is a very small percentage of any class overall...

Of course, we DO realize that - however, there are VERY FEW opportunities to get more than 8 or 10 Vee racers together at one time - this just happens to be one of those times. It is also possible that we will get together with a few "regional racers" at the SEDIV regional championships - but SCCA has set up THIS meeting and we are just doing what we can to get input from anyone who cares.

As an aside, it would appear that THE VAST MAJORITY of Vee racers either
1). Have no opinion.
2). Don't really CARE if/what/when/why - they just want to race.
3). Can't read or write - or are computer illiterate

I cannot come up with any better reasons for the lack of response unless a WHOLE LOT more people than I think, have nothing to do with computers these days. I (WE) just can't think of any better way to reach the participants. We are open to ideas....

It also happens, that the 'small percentage' might not be as small as most think. We can expect some 50 - 60 (AT LEAST) active national/regional Vee racers to be in attendance (at the Runoffs ... not necessarily at the meeting) - based on the info that I have (limited - but the best we've been able to put together over the course of the last 4 years or so) there are only about 200 or so active **SCCA** Vee racers in the country - both regional and national (I'm extrapolating ...we have less than that signed up in the registry) - 50 or 60 of 200 is not a bad percentage...

Steve

[rstackjd]

I've got it on my calendar to attend, but I didn't think we needed to RVSP.

Assuming I can take the time off work, I'll be there, probably mostly to listen and learn, but I plan to be there

[Doug Carter]

The total Nationals participation over the last 5 years from FV has ranged from 500 to 700 cars over the course of the season nation-wide. Obviously not all from different entrants, but even 50 cars in one location is only 10% of the class overall—and that's just from National events.

My only original point was that asking a small cross section of guys who can afford the time and money to be at the RunOffs for a couple of weeks, is like asking Warren Buffet if he wants the minimum wage raised. It seems as though some decisions in the past in other classes have been made with input from a small, vocal minority at the RunOffs, because it was convenient.

I agree that it's always good to ask people (read: club members) what they want and get input, but at some point, the people in charge need to make educated decisions about what is best for the class as a whole—not just what a select few with a loud voice want.


Obviously, I'm not a vested member of the FV community yet, but I have been around the SCCA long enough to have seen how slow and dysfunctional the SCCA decision-making process can be. Hopefully, this meeting can spawn some positive changes in this class and can help grow FV.



doug

[hardingfv32-1]

Does anyone know if Wisconsin has an exposed side arm carry law?

This Friday meeting is going to be about as informative as the current health care town hall meetings. Those who have bothered to listen know all the options at this point. What we need is some consensus building. That can't happen in a two hour meeting with a bunch of unfocused banter.

We haven't elected anyone to be in charge of this class, so we must as a group make the decisions.

Brian

[Thomas Galuardi]

I agree with Doug's response and was going to write the crb to express this. I have said this before, but not all Vee drivers can spend there time keeping track of the rules. If you bowl, play golf, play softball, etc. you don't have to check on any new changes to the rules every month. I am not that computer literate, but that is not in the GCR as a requirement to drive a formula vee. I am registered, but never got an e-mail. So I registered again and found I was there with the correct e-mail. I have written to crb many times, only to fall on deaf ears. I have talked to members of the committee, and verbally they agree, but when you see a new rule, they must fall for peer pressure. So as Doug stated only a vocal minortity will be at the meeting. Most drivers are not indifferent, but just can't afford the time to be even more involved. So just enforce and use the rules we have. No more changes.

[Doug Carter]

As a side, I don't believe there are efforts to change rules drastically at this point, only to sew up loopholes that may already exist allowing some gray area maneuvering that seems to be costing some racers a lot of extra cash.

At some point, though, a class that has had 45 years of relative rules "stability" will suffer greatly without some evolution to more contemporary options or more open parts supplies.

[hardingfv32-1]

Don't worry about the "vocal minority" at the Friday meeting. Without doubt ALL views will be represented.

It is the FV Committees job to draft rules that the majority want and try to restrict the influence of their personal views.

You are assuming the CRB did not hear you, when it is more accurate to state they did not agree with you.

This is a club of volunteers. We all have to make time for the politics. If you can't then you have to go with the flow when things change. Wish all you want, but nothing stays the same for long.

Brian

[FV80]

... never got an e-mail. So I registered again and found I was there with the correct e-mail. ...

Thomas,
You were sent an email to 'tgaluardi @ comcast.net' as that was what was in the registry at the time I emailed it. If you did not receive it, it is most likely because you have activated some SPAM control or such that prohibits emails from ... ??? ... me - or places them into a spam folder somewhere.
I get a number of responses from those who chose not to put me on their whitelist, and require me to fill out a FORM to be approved to send email to them... sorry - I don't have the time to do that for so many people.

Don't know specifically why you did not receive yours, but ... it was sent ...
Did Nick get his?? Sent at the same time ... (SURELY, you are related ?? )
Steve

[Ed Womer]

Barring any unseen last minute issues I will be at the meeting. I like many have no real response until I hear what the issues are that everyone (know idea how many that might be) is worried about. A lot of the big buck items in racing are not really associated with the car but are travel, entries etc. Yes some things like the intake issue are anoying but if you have been racing as long as I have it really is just the latest thing to come along and really not that bad since the latest head mods, carb mods etc. have been happening for years.

I don't know about elsewhere but the cost of entries has been going up very fast lately here in the NE. That and gas to get there is a large cost for the weekend. Yes I have a motorhome but I also don't have to spend $100 a night for 2-3 nights and the agrivation of driving to and from the track every day which probably balance out. Yes it would probably be nice to have tires and engines that last for ever but unless we go to a different motor and some hard street tire it just don't see it happening.

Ed Womer

[SR Racing]

I agree with Ed. Due to the way the club works (good or bad), change is very slow and unless some very high concensus is reached by the active letter writers and the CRB, nothing will happen (except maybe a deeper sump or a color change. <g>)

For anything to happen in a club this large a benevolent dictator is needed. Changes are made and then people bitch and move on. It seems to work for other sanctioning bodies. The only other thing that works is a small grass roots effort by a few people that can reach concensus. (FST). The FF Honda Fit issue is going to pass for sure. A concensus will not be reached by the masses (although it generally is in favor), but the Honda proposal and support will for all practical purposes make the board the dictator and it will happen.

FV has no commercial champion and given the process, it will remain as is. I am not saying that is bad or good, but that is the club.

Frankly, I think a AdHoc committee with proper representation (vendors, builders, National and Regional Drivers (low and high budget) with dictatorship powers should be running the class as far as future rules. We might not like all the decisions, but we would probably get valid decisions with the class and it's members in mind. And SOMETHING would happen.

While it would be nice to make everyone happy, the guy who pulls his car out once a year to race and the guy who races 15 times a year are on the far end of the spectrum and may not like every decision.

[Doug Carter]

Frankly, I think a AdHoc committee with proper representation (vendors, builders, National and Regional Drivers (low and high budget) with dictatorship powers should be running the class as far as future rules. We might not like all the decisions, but we would probably get valid decisions with the class and it's members in mind. And SOMETHING would happen.

Agreed, 100%. I was thinking about this very thing last night. It should be done for all major National classes, too. Let the people who actually are the CORE of the class make the decisions that are in the best interest of each class (hopefully with full participation and suggestions from the class membership).

[brian]

I think the advisory committees perform the job Jim is mentioning. Granted, we have our own committee and the advisory committees are structured around car types, but classes are directly represented now. The CRB tries to reflect the committees desires and will approve most rule changes. Things get complicated when things go through the CRB and the BOD. Politics come in to play and since the CRB serves at the pleasure of the BOD, the rule makers sometimes get overturned. I think the CRB and the committees should be elected and independent of the BOD.

We can blame politics, but usually the BOD tends to listen to their friends for input and the idea pool is very limited.

One thing SCCA should do is to expand the use of the very expensive membership software we have to include class indentification and two way communtications capaiblity. The biggest hurdle the CRB and committees face is a lack of feedback. An automated way to accomplish this with the software would be very helpful.

[CitationFV21]

Just to throw an idea out there. Racing has progressed just like the housing bubble. Increased housing value and free credit have allowed prices to spiral out of control. When people are selling GT1 cars for $150,000. and new Formula Fords are estimated to be on the other side of $60,000. then the world is upside down. Even F1 realizes this and is attempting to reduce running costs to 1/3 to 1/5 of current costs. FST new at $20,000 is hard to believe when you can buy a street car with airbags, anti-lock brakes, fuel injection etc for $15,000 or less - Spec Hyundai anyone? No -Spec Fiat 500 - wait for it.....

With the economy said to be in limbo for as much as 3 years, any changes should keep in consideration cost containment, while allowing suppliers to provide a service that they can make a profit on. So rather than selling the trick part of the week, the focus should be on helping more people race more often. For example, If I could cut my tire bill in half, maybe I could afford more engine work or newer shocks, items that would have long term use, not throw away parts.

BTW - this goes for tracks and sanctioning bodies - $500 entry fees are crazy - if this keeps up it will lead to the rebirth of the school rental series (on a simpler scale) - look how well indoor karting is doing.

Nothing will be perfect. Formula Ford, in the interest of having exact copies of parts made, has seen costs escalate. At some point they will level off, but if they keep allowing technology to dominate, they will price themselves out - hence the recent talk of a spec Formula Ford tire. Once you limit one parameter, it slows down develpoment of others.

ChrisZ


edited to correct last sentance that got chopped off.

[Doug Carter]

So what was discussed, and how did the meeting go? Where is the report for those of us who could not attend? Were the potential, regional and national racers that were not able to attend represented well or at all? Was anything solved? Were parts shortages discussed? What became of the manifold issues, considering the winner of the event was using one of the debated manifolds?



I'm guessing that with 4 days since this meeting took place, having heard nothing publicly either here or on ApexSpeed.com, the status quo was a popular subject, and nothing really was served by this ad hoc meeting.

[qposner]

So what was discussed, and how did the meeting go? Where is the report for those of us who could not attend? Were the potential, regional and national racers that were not able to attend represented well or at all? Was anything solved? Were parts shortages discussed? What became of the manifold issues, considering the winner of the event was using one of the debated manifolds?



I'm guessing that with 4 days since this meeting took place, having heard nothing publicly either here or on ApexSpeed.com, the status quo was a popular subject, and nothing really was served by this ad hoc meeting.

http://norcalfv.proboards.com/index.cgi ... thread=853

[P-2 Mark]

Dietmar,

In regards to the manifold issue, why not require a "spec" manifold that is used in other parts
of the world, or a "restrictor plate" similiar to those used by the FST gang. We used them in
karting and they were easy to police and based on the FST costs, not too expensive. As an
engine builder, what are your thoughts?

Thanks!

Mark Farnham

92' Protoform P-2/5 ( under construction)

[cendiv37]

Hey guys,

I made the mistake of taking notes at the meeting so getting some official minutes out will go through me. After getting my injured car back from the "boneyard" and into the trailer Saturday night, I chose to actually watch a few races Sunday rather than drive straight home. I just got unpacked last night. I will make every effort to quickly get my "minutes" to Fred Clark who ran this SCCA sanctioned meeting. I assume Fred will publish the official minutes.

Bruce's summary on the left coast board is pretty good.
Bill B's comments are, well, as predictable as maybe was the meeting

I'm not entirely sure, but I think what Fred is looking for is to identify a few specific ideas to propose as "goals" or rules changes/clarifications that need to be made (or not made) and then ask for member input on each.

I will also try to include in my minutes at least a summary of the input we received by mail or phone before the meeting. There was really no time to read each letter at the meeting and my laptop battery went dead before I was asked too, so I couldn't have done it anyway. Maybe I need to see if 3M will provide me with a new battery

[Dietmar]

Mark:

Been a long time!
First, I am glad to hear that you are working on a car.

I have to admit that I was not at RA- I was in Europe and just returned so I do not know exactly what was discussed other than what is posted on the Left Coast FV site.

I'm sure that other people share in your suggestions and they will be discussed by the FV Ad Hoc Committee. Although we asked for input from the membership, very few responded unfortunately. What we did receive will also be discussed in length.

Do I think it ( restrictor plate) to be a viable answer to the manifold issues? My (personal) response would have to be "yes". But, just like you, I am just one voice.

I would be happy to discuss this further if you wish- you know my number.
(Now get back to work on your car!)
Dietmar
http://www.QuixoteRacing.com

(Also, after losing this reply somewhere in cyberspace I noticed that Bruce has posted more information about the meeting results)

[Bill_Bonow]

Do I think it ( restrictor plate) to be a viable answer to the manifold issues? My (personal) response would have to be "yes".

Dietmar,

Lucky thing you were in Europe, your "yes" would have yielded you some very interesting replies. Put it this way, we learned all about how the NASCAR boys deal with plate racin'