Nice paint, K.
Every time we have waxed the Golf, it has gotten wacked.
The basic marketing/econ 101 is premised on the cost per return.
Most cost- less sales. If the cost to race the amateur endurance races, includes a fuel rig, you will have less racers, simple math.
As soon as you remove the time limit for fuel stops, you up the tech wars for fueling speed, more cost= less racing.
That simple rule will remove the three ITC guys from saying, "hey, lets go run the 12 hr, you bring tires, you bring fuel , I'll bring the car"
I race and respect all of my venues for what they are. I have cars that race SCCA, NASA, Chumpcar,track days. All have some redeeming value. somewhere.
Evey where tho, less rules equate to less racing and more cost.
SCCA Pro, used to Run Trans Am. The series cost a lot . The racing was poor inthe 2001 -2002years. The front guys drove off for the most part.
Most teams could be a few as 3 guys., No pit stops, 1 hr on track( to fit the TV slots).
Pro came up with new rules that required pit stops for fuel. Now you need 4 guys, fuel rigs, fresh tires, Tires/ wheels and fuel systems that can be serviced fast.
The cost per weekend doubled. The cost outlay per car was about 5-6k for improvements. For the same win cash. GT1 Teams stayed home.
I am pretty sure ,That was the last year for SCCA/ TA.
When I say to copy success, I mean to copy the stuff known to work. Upping the cost , does not increase racers. KISS and reasonable cost.
Pick the best points that have made something successful.
Chumpcar does just that. Chumpcar is running the best endurance series right now. One class , great trophies, good tracks. it is not perfect at all . The 500$ car thing is BS.
SCCA runs pretty good value sprint races.