How do we attract new racers?
- Thread starter kgobey
- Start date
American Endurance Racing AER - 180TW tires
Champ Car Endurance Racing - 180TW tires
24 Hours of Lemons - 190TW tires
NASA PT, SE30, 944 and SM Classes - Significant penalty for 40TW tires/Toyo spec tires/Toyo spec Tires/Mandated Hoosier tires but the price is significantly subsidized and their contingency is good
<crickets, crickets, crickets, crickets, crickets, crickets...>
(Probably just coincidence)
Champ Car Endurance Racing - 180TW tires
24 Hours of Lemons - 190TW tires
NASA PT, SE30, 944 and SM Classes - Significant penalty for 40TW tires/Toyo spec tires/Toyo spec Tires/Mandated Hoosier tires but the price is significantly subsidized and their contingency is good
<crickets, crickets, crickets, crickets, crickets, crickets...>
(Probably just coincidence)
kgobey
New member
Agree... that is part of the story isn't it. But it that it? You feel that it's a one dimensional issue? It's not about the run-what-you-brung, easy to understand rules? The bracket-racing? I agree with you on the Spec and PT tire rules completely, but do you think 944, Spec E30, and SM are only successful due to tire rules?
Absolutely not. But I think the cost aspect - or even the impression of a cost aspect - certainly can be a significant factor.
kgobey
New member
Yeah that's it exactly. The notion that "I can be guaranteed a level playing field", combined with the notion that the rules are super easy for a lay-person to understand and build to and a simple formula for legitimacy in licensing are what drives them to these other series.
We can never compete on outright track time, but we can compete on ease of use. But how... ?
We can never compete on outright track time, but we can compete on ease of use. But how... ?
Brand identity definitely seems to be part of the problem. The very popular classes can be (and are) described in a succinct, attractive way.
If someone asked me to describe Improved Touring racing, I'm not confident that I can give them a short, interesting elevator speech.
If someone asked me to describe Improved Touring racing, I'm not confident that I can give them a short, interesting elevator speech.
Very good point.
I've only done LeMons and it was great!
Some of the most interesting cars ever seen on track. Think spreedycop or 5 cylinder radial aircraft engine, etc.
No license but for $$ so some team members that had never raced joined. One now has a SCCA license.
Team environment so that was fun. And some just tried it and said enough and bailed and do track days.
I don't think the typical SCCA racer really exists any more. Most younger folks think something looks interesting and try it and then decide something else looks interesting and moves on.
Sticking with the same car or class for years or decades is not the way of the world any more.
Not good or bad, just different.
Some of the most interesting cars ever seen on track. Think spreedycop or 5 cylinder radial aircraft engine, etc.
No license but for $$ so some team members that had never raced joined. One now has a SCCA license.
Team environment so that was fun. And some just tried it and said enough and bailed and do track days.
I don't think the typical SCCA racer really exists any more. Most younger folks think something looks interesting and try it and then decide something else looks interesting and moves on.
Sticking with the same car or class for years or decades is not the way of the world any more.
Not good or bad, just different.
kgobey
New member
I like both of these points. It's about branding and about the notion of "fun" and the whole team aspect of cheap racing means a lot. I do love the low effort required of participation, but I think you're right, we don't have that, the SCCA is more structured than that (which I personally appreciate)
What if the SCCA (maybe as part of this 200TW effort) at a national level introduced the ITLB classes, IT Low-Buck (1,2,3 etc.) and bracket cars built for Low-Buck endurance series like they do at champ, lemons etc. ?
What if the SCCA (maybe as part of this 200TW effort) at a national level introduced the ITLB classes, IT Low-Buck (1,2,3 etc.) and bracket cars built for Low-Buck endurance series like they do at champ, lemons etc. ?
No, no, no.
It goes “All right then. Other then the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system and public health...”
It is the run what you brung mentality. It is the $/track time ratio. It’s long-stints in the car. It’s the go ahead and spend gobs if money to win your class, but we just bumped you up two classes so why did you spend the money?
200TW tires? Not it.
Topeka ensured our demise when they screwed over the Regions to save their own nut vis-a-vis The Runoffs.
downingracing
New member
I've had pretty good luck attracting/helping/working with new people and bringing them to IT (and beyond) over my time club racing. I've run Chump and the early days of NASA. I've got a good handle on most organizations running everything from track days to race weekends. The doom and gloom conversation about the SCCA and club racing/IT are the same old tune I've heard over the past ~20 years. The ups and downs of participation happen for many reasons. Everything you can think of would be a reason someone runs with group X or class Y. Some areas are doing GREAT while others struggle. The solution is NOT a one size fits all. Club racing with the SCCA in my neck of the woods is alive and well. Of course it could be better, but it's never enough...
My elevator pitch for SCCA club racing (and the classes offered) seems to work pretty well. I'm happy to give it in person to anyone - anytime.
My elevator pitch for SCCA club racing (and the classes offered) seems to work pretty well. I'm happy to give it in person to anyone - anytime.